Hillary clinton was ass raped by obamas big american dick

wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh my name is Hillary i am my husbands bitch. he just makes all decisions not me i am going to cry wahhhhhhhhh

lets hear it for ron paul
 
This is exactly why she won't, and shouldn't get elected. If a woman is going to be president, they have to have balls, like Margaret Thatcher in England. Hillary is just a bitch in every sense of the word.
 
Ron Paul is rediciulous. He got raped in the debate. He claims that ending the war is the solution to every problem. But he denies the fact that militant islamists have sworn war on the US. The world is not the same anymore, it is no longer the fact that an army attacks and then we can defend. With nuclear or biological weapons, terrorists can strike without any warning and kill thousands of innocent people. So we need to use our power to prevent the militant islamists before they attack us.

its not the case that Al Quaedia and others in Iraq hate us becuase we have bases there. They've commited terrorist attacks before we went there and made bases. They have committed attacks in countries that don't have bases either.

Yes, it would be nice if we could spend our money elsewhere, but you can't just ignore the fact that we are at war.

My predcition is that if Ron Paul becomes president, he will pull out all military troops and other foreign affairs and we will be attacked by terrorists who hate us and then we will have thousands dead and Ron Paul will be clueless.
 
Hillary is a great candidate, she does have ambition, sincerity and passion. The worst has to be Ron Paul, another Bush hoping for power, telling anything he needs to persuade people who dont really care about politics.

I am hoping Obama wins, he seems like an honest guy

 
No one in Iraq committed a terrorist attack against the United States or any of its allies until after the war began. Secondly, even Osama bin Ladin says that the reason for september 11th was because of US bases in Saudi Arabia. The countries that have been attacked since 9/11 (ie Madrid, London) were both countries that supported the United States' invasion of Iraq, and at the time had troops in Iraq.
 
douche! 'another bush hoping for power'? whats that even mean? obama isn't hoping for power? hilaey isnt hoping for power? obama is too young an inexperiences i think he may get raped once the pressure starts coming. also i just dont see any feasible way he would get elected. idk i just cant see him winning, even as a democratic canidat i think whoever runs against him will win as long as they aren't a total boob
 
i agree who wants a dumbass republican president again?

who wants to see more people die in Iraq because of the new president

i sure dont
 
idk how pulling troops out will fuck us over

we will save shit loads of money and people will hate us less

we are going no where in iraq, no where. 
 
i think his inexperience in washington isn't a bad thing at all. look at the people who have spent a long time in a seat in washington, i.e. ted kennedy. i don't want to generalize, but i think a fresh leader in washington who isn't one to give in to typical shit head sketchiness would be great. plus, while he hasn't been in washington for very long, he was a state senator for 7 years, as well as having a long history of numerous community services and actions.
 
I really hate it when people say shit like this. Do you really know that? Or are you just eating up everything the media shows you. Just because news channels haven't mentioned something doesn't mean that it hasn't happened. Progress HAS been made.
 
50 american dollars says she faked that to prove that shes human and has emotions seeing as shes acted like a rock for the past 6 months, that was the prime time to pull that shit, right before new hampshire voted
 
because he is, and even if he isnt, he and romney wont be ass raping anybody, look at the results, he got like 1 percent
 
Huckabee's a bad one ... he said homosexuality was a "health risk" ... and couples who were living together before marriage was a "sin"... enough said.

Ealier in his presidency Bush Jr was reported speaking to a president in S. America and I quote, "Ya'll got black people here?"

*speechless at the stupidity*
 
Come on, guys do you even know the candidates' stances on the issues? All the democrats run their campaign on "change" and anti-war, anti-Bush slogans. They all (the ones that have half a chance, anyway) supported the war at one time or another, most of them voted to use force in the first place. First of all, the war is going a LOT better. Yes, 2007 was the deadliest year for American troops, but look at the second half, after the troop surge. Violence is WAY down, things have turned around. To back down from the war in Iraq now would be extremely foolish.

The democrats all gain their support from anti-war supporters, but look at Obama's foreign policy. When asked what he would do if there was a possible threat from Pakistan, he said that he would use force if diplomatic negotiations fail. Gee, that sounds really familiar. Almost exactly the situation in Iraq 5 years ago, right? These people are hypocrites, who say what their audience wants to hear. Obama has never once sat down for an interview with a real reporter who will ask the tough questions because he doesn't need people to know his ideas, he gets enough support without them.

I was watching Glenn Beck a couple of days ago, and he raised the point that supporting Obama says more about the voter than the candidate. It shows that the voter is "open minded" because they support a black candidate, and that they want change because, really, that is the only promise that Obama has made to anyone. I can't tell you how many people I've met that support Obama, but have no reason when I ask them why. What are some ideas of his that you support? What makes him better than the rest of the field? No Answers.

The same goes for Hillary. What does she have to offer? How will she enforce national security? Will she close the borders? Will she pursue the fight on terrorism (that doesn't necessarily mean the war)? Well, no not really, but lets see what she can do... she promises universal health care. Great! But she has to raise $115,000,000,000 from taxes to do it. Not so great. We all know how well her health care plan worked out in the 1990s. When she first proposed that, there was a nationwide poll that concluded that 87% of Americans were satisfied with their current health care. 87%!! You can't get get 87% of people to agree on anything! I swear people are more concerned with the minority than they are with 87%. Once that 13% becomes the deciding factor in public policy, it is a slippery slope to a full on socialist welfare state. These politicians honestly scare me for the future of this nation.

So many of these candidates get so much support based solely on name recognition. The real problem with our democracy is that the votes of uninformed citizens count just as much as the votes of the informed. If you know the policies of these candidates, have thought about the implications of those policies, and still support the candidate, then great. I have no problem with voters that have done their research.

I think i took this a lot farther than i had intended, but there is my rant for the day. Moral of the story: go out and really look into your candidate. Watch some really tough interviews with them and if you believe that their ideas will really work then keep on supporting them.

P.S. I do have problems with most of the republican candidates too, but the democratic candidates piss me off more (plus they were the original focus of this thread anyway), but that is a rant for another day, for I have to get back to work now.
 
The benefits of leaving Iraq and scaling back our military presence abroad has MUCH more benefits than drawbacks. Everyone I talk to about Ron Paul think it's totally implausible to get rid of the income tax, but few people realize that cutting back unnecessary war funding and scaling back the budget in other wasteful areas will provide the government with all the money it needs to run without the need to take mmoey from the people of America to fund facets of the government they don't support (i.e the war)
 
4 years senate i thought. and thats plus community service!?!? is not the kind of experience u need to be president. the senate just sits on their asses and complans. being president is a lot different.
 
i agree. imo the STUPIDEST thing we could do is immediatley withdraaw from iraq. area is gonna be so important for the next ten years its crucial we get at least some kind of democracy up.
 
If that fucks elected Ill probably end up moving to Canada or France or New Zealand with my family. For the time being I enjoy living in the states and travelling out of it a lot but callling it my home. DOn't let Romney get electd...
 
if marijuana was legallized in the united states, it could be sold as a cash crop and pay off the debt of the war in two years. TWO FUCKIN YEARS!!!!!!
 
That is an excellent point. But why wait TWO FUCKIN YEARS? We could legalize - nay mandate- child labor and prostitution and pay off the debt of the war in 6 months.
 
I don't know where you got 87 percent, but not even close to that number of people even have health care in the first place. Cancel your health insurance, and then get really really sick... and see how much fun that is for you.

 
TOTALLY the same thing dude. Very astute observation on your part. Honestly, where do you people COME from?
 
Clearly they are not the same. I merely point out the slippery slope that emerges when marijuana is legalized (to pay off the debt, of all reasons), and the flaw in that logic. Most who push for marijuana argue that they should be allowed to do what they choose with their own bodies. The child labor part was extreme, but prostitution is not far off.
 
I can't remember where I heard 87% either, but take the situation right now. There are 47 million uninsured currently (as we have heard countless times from various presidential candidates), with roughly 305 million living in the US. That means that 85% are insured currently. I would say that those numbers are pretty close.

As for how I would like to get sick without health care, surely I wouldn't. But I do not believe that it is the responsibility of the government to provide (or mandate or whatever word the cnadidate associates with universal health care) insurance to all of its citizens. Besides, to insure everyone just means that the quality of care declines. Is it justifiable to detract from the majority (85%) to benefit the minority (15%)? I would say no.
 
i'm so glad everyone automatically assumes that if its a republican president elected we are going into world war 3 and everyone is going to die.
 
You do realize 85% of all the "War on Drugs" arrests are people just charged with simple possesion of marijuana right?

Now think (I know it's hard... but you can do it!) about how much of our resources are spent prosecuting, and jailing these unviolent offenders for marijuana. Don't you think that money could be better spent (i.e. meth, heroine, ect.) towards actually stopping production of these extremely harmful substances instead of prosecuting stoners?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top