Got this email earlier in the week from my Godfather. He writes:
Hey Mark,
I was catching up on the blogsphere and finally read you post of the 23rd re: Hillary and Rudy. I'm no fan of Hillary (Richardson is the most qualified of all the candidates) but Rudy, or any Republican, as President in '08 would guarantee the continued destruction of what I believe to be the best of American values and traditions.
Should the GOP continue to have the ability to pervert government structures by aggrandizing the executive branch's role and the power to diminish the judicial branch by swinging the courts further to the right, especially the Supreme Court, this country will be paying the awful price until your kids are great grandparents. Hillary may be a less than inspiring candidate to us but in a contest between her and any Republican, she is at least the lesser of the two evils.
Well, I see his point but I am still not ready to vote for her over Rudy. I just don't think Rudy is a party guy. He used to be a Democrat! I still maintain that he is lying about what he is going to do to get votes. And why do we have to be back to the lesser of two evils? Is there ever going to be a time when we have two very qualified candidates from each party?
10 comments:
What in the !@#$!@#$ is the matter with you, Mark? Have you lost your mind?
Can it you troll.
Heaven forbid somebody not toll that party line!!!
I'd be interested in what that guy (Godfather) thinks are the Values and Traditions of this country that are on the line.
Dick,
Take a look at what Rudy is saying. Read between the lines. He is most assuredly not George Bush nor do I think he will continue his policies. At this point, it seems more likely to me that Hillary would do that.
Obviously, the election is a year away so if she proves to me that she is not as bad as W and better than Rudy, I may vote for her. As it stands, I simply don't trust her.
"I still maintain that he is lying about what he is going to do to get votes."
I just have 1 observation about that right there. That is what you have accused GWB of doing so many times...and now it's ok to lie as long as the end result of the lying benefits causes that you support?
Let me see if I can explain this better. I don't think I am doing a very good job.
Giuliani knows that he is already behind the eight ball with the base. He is pro choice, pro gun control, and pro civil unions. If he comes out and says that George Bush is fuck up and a liar and things are terrible because of him, he is never going to get elected. Because there are still people who refuse to see, refuse to think, or are just simply far too trusting, Giuliani has to say what he is saying.
Bear in mind that this is just my opinion. It might not be true. There is a difference between lying while you are playing politics and lying about national security.
"refuse to think" ie anyone disagreeing with Mark. You do not have the market cornered on thinking or common sense. Kevin pointed that out.
No, I don't. What I am talking about is turning a blind eye to anything that is critical of the president and characterizing it as "liberal" so therefore not to be trusted or even heard.
Refusing to think means something like me showing a "non thinking" person the links between Haliburton and Cheney, pointing the documents that state their goals and comparing it to our current foreign policy, taking into account that in 2000 the Iraqi oil standard switched from dollars to Euros.
Then, the non thinker looks at Iraq and saying, "Well, we have to fight for our freedom. That's the only reason why we are there and all this information you have just showed me is liberal lunacy."
It has nothing to do with me at all.
I'm just glad George Bush has restored honor and dignity to the white house like he said he was going to do back in 2000.
*runs and hides from all the things being thrown at me right now*
har!
...and gave the Oval Office carpet a good scrubbing!!
She offered her honor
I honored her offer
and all through the night
it was honor and offer.
crab 2007
Post a Comment