The world famous unmoderated thread

Considering her stance on gaming I wouldn't vote on her.

 

For me, it's a toss up between Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney. Right now I'm leaning a little more towards Romney, because I think he has a better plan for the economy than Giuliani.

 

Thanks Asembler,

Not that I'am overly interested in politics but at least it has its own place. = politics :banghead:

 

I think my family's going to vote for Hilary because they miss Bill.

 

If you mean the middle east, they dont respect anyone who isnt muslim, so woman or not the only way they are going to respect the president is with the usual bombing here and there.

Seriously, most muslims still want to reconquer spain, which they lost like 600 years ago. They arent that open to negotiations...

Word, bros before hoes:rambo:

 

MOST MUSLIMS?!?!?
have you actually ever met a one?

 

I have met many, and well it looks like Shadowlayer is maybe a male chauvinist too.
Well, I think if I were an American I would vote for Hillary, not because she is a cracker, but because she perhaps be the first female president of the United States of America, and I fear for Barack Obamas life, if he becomes the president of The United States of America. Because the world is ready for a black American president, but not USA as such.

 

Guys, keep in mind there have been several female heads of government , some of which who've been (somewhat) successfull or are at least well known... Angela Merkel, Thatcher, Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, Megawati Sukarnoputri, Kirchner, Bachelet, Arroyo, Timoshenko, heck, even Liberia has one at the moment with Johnson-Sirleaf.
At least four of their countries had sizeable muslim populations and a considerable number are second- or third-world countries.
In that regard, I don't think I would oppose a woman president in the United States solely on gender-related issues, however, I don't think Hillary's the right person. Obama would get my vote. I think Huckabee's very sympathetic and I respect him for climbing so fast with so little campaign funding, I don't really agree with him on many political issues though.

Not that I get a say, evne though I am a citizen I've never been a resident so I'm not allowed to vote.

 

Voting for someone because they would be the "first female" president, or "first black" president is never a good idea. You should vote for someone because of their policies, principles, and abilities to govern. I'm not going to vote for Romney because he would be the "first mormon" president, I'm giving him my vote because he has proven himself to be a fiscal conservative and at this point the economy is my number one concern. Also, saying that the US isn't ready for a black president isn't really fair. I don't know how much time you've spent in the US first hand, but racism isn't as rampant as you might think it is. There are some crazies on "both sides", but it isn't like it was fifty years ago. And this is coming from someone who lives in rural Arkansas...

Anyway, Hillary scares the shit out of me. If she becomes president, she'll bankrupt us worse than Bush has (anyone who thinks Bush is a true conservative is dead wrong), especially when she says she'll give $5000 to the families of every child born in the United States, then when she was asked how she would pay for all of her plans (socialized medicine, etc) she straight up says "I don't know"! I mean, it doesn't take much to realize that the money is going to have to come from somewhere. Taxes will be raised, people will start spending EVEN LESS than we do now, and our economy will collapse. People need to wake up. There were far better Democratic candidates than Hillary or Obama, Joe Biden for example, but everyone was getting so caught up in Hillary being the first woman president (that, and every Democrat in the nation seems to get giggly at the thought of another Clinton being in office, despite the fact that Bill was a horrible president who compromised the US's national security for political ambitions and gets credit for the sound economy of the 90's that the Republican Congress and Newt Gingrich were responsible for) or Obama being the first black president. It's a shame really, because the Democratic party has now been reduced to the "party that panders to the left." A good, moderate Democrat hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected president, not anymore anyway.

 

AWS: since there are only two political fractions in USA, then I would vote for the democrats. Since I am a democrat in your eyes. Even though the word gives me a bad taste in my mouth, since I am not per say a democrat. I am probably a true social democrat, and to the next election around here, I will vote for the so cia listic Peoples Party, which is more like the true social democrats, compared to the party which is called The Social democratic Party now a days. But it looks like those people I regret voting for, has gone too much to the right side of the road, and they are becoming attention whores. So I am going to vote in about 4 years time for the so ci listic Peoples Party, which is still social compared to SDP. Whether SPP are for or against EU, since I am against the God damn EU. And well, no I have never been in the USA. But when I payed my taxes, then I knew that my bacterial pneunomia was taken care off. But thanks to my Bush ass kissing prime minister and government, then they will try to get everybody into paying for their doctors visits. So if you aren´t rich, then you are either economically ruined or fucking dead ! ! ! so raising the taxes is a good thing. But that, you know sweet F.A. about.

So even if Obama becomes the president candidate for the democrats, then I would vote for him. Or if it was Hillary, then I would vote for her.

 

Test, SPAMSPAMSPAMSPAMSPAMSPAM

Edit: ah, apparently someone configured the board software to replace names of drugs such as "c_ialis" ;P

 

Yup, I know. Since that is possibly not the coolest thing, since a so-ci-a-list has nothing to do with the drugs such as the v-i-a-gra or any other erectile medicine.

 

Lots, and only a few were moderate enough as to actually talk to them.

Hell, have you ever gone to spain? lots of muslims there say it is their right to do whatever they want there, becos its isnt Spain, but Al-Andalus, and we (me, and ever spaniard and non-muslim there) were the immigrants, not them.

Even from a historic standpoint that remark is completelly fake: arabs invaded and occupied most of the iberian peninsula, converting some christian and slaving the rest. Then they were expelled in 1492 after more than 200 years of war with the catholics in what was known as the reconquista.

Seriously, you have to be a real backwards fundamentalist idiot to claim a land that was never yours, and that your forefathers lost almost 600 years ago.

Let's just cut the politically correct crap, K? for most muslim countries blamming the west for pretty much anything that troubles them is an excellent way to prevent the destruction of their internal status-quo (wealth distribution and such arent that popular there you know...) and to dissuade the public from their real problems that need to be fixed ASAP.

On the other hand almost the same happens in america with the war on terror, but thank god most people is finally looking beyond that neocon smoke screen...

Beyond pakistan and turkey I dont many other muslim countries that really want to change for the best (as in real democracy, rights for everyone, and a more equal distribution of wealth).

Dude have you read the news? that kirchner woman was actually put in government by his husband becos the constitution there didnt allow him to be president again. The asshole even used the country's money to pay for his bitch's election campaign.

Now that country argentina has the same awful economy, backwards exterior policy (a member of the senate and close friend of the government recently said argentine jews were conspirators and should be drove out of the country) and the biggest corruption scandals in all of the americas, mostly becos as far as I know the government of mrs.kirchner kept the same corrupt bastards from his hunband's administration.

Plus I heard she blatantly stole the election by sending thugs into voting rooms and stealing all the ballots from rival parties...

 

I've always wondered....you guys are open minded enough to accept gays (I accept them as well, but read on but you guys defend a religion and group of people that thinks its ok to behead someone for being gay.

Just thought it was a little interesting.

If one of you were to talk to a Muslim and say "I have nothing against gays, and your religion shouldn't behead them because they aren't doing anything wrong" OR "I have nothing against gays, but I also respect your religion in which you behead them"?

I'm not demonising them all or saying they all do that, of course, but its something I wonder about sometimes.

Notice that I bolded this part, because I thought some of you would stop reading afterwards and ASSume everything in the world.

I may sound biased and bigoted, but I'm very uneasy around Muslim people. Mainly because their religion promotes violence, death, and force, rather than peace and love. I'm aware that there may be Christians who kill for God, but they're nutcases, plain and simple. Unless you count Cow killings and a few crazies, even Satanists have killed less people than Muslims have. But I digress, since its Satanism is a small new "Church", but even still, I imagine Sept. 11 alone totally blankets the amounts of deaths that whole Church might have done alone.

 

one could claim the same heads of brutality under most religions - a brilliant example being the crussades for example.

Extremests of any group are scary, be it a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew or an Atheist. The injection of "love" in Christianity is a product of many centuries later really, as the so known Jesus never wrote anything - others did for him, and you know how that can change over history.

Organized religion has always been a grand political power and a motivator for all sorts of weird shit in history. I say do away with heads and let everyone just believe whatever the fuck makes them tick.

 

Yeah yeah, but the different here is that the last crussade of the west was 500 years ago, while the muslim are still living in that time, with the same crazy laws, order and objectives.

For muslims the crussades are still going on, like the korean war between north and south korea.

 

i agree with this statement. it seems like the only religious extremists killing people are muslims. i can't say that other religious extremists aren't, but believe me, you wouldn't hear the end of it if Christian extremists were killing people today, or Bhuddist extremists, or Jewish extremists.

 

Well I know from a jewish friend who used to live on israel that some illegal settlements in palestine territory are inhabited by extremist jews that sometimes go into muslims lands and attack them.

But on the other hand muslims do the same to the jews, so at least at this level (of the settlements) is kinda like the chicken and the egg since these raids have been coming and going from each side since the six day war.

 

the whole situation over there just kinda makes me sick... i don't know when or how things will change, and if there's ever going to be peace. i don't think there's much our government can do or should do... i don't know... i'm just sort of rambling now... xD

 

Well, I seriously doubt this. Where did you find these people? What questions did you ask them? I'm not going as far as calling you an all-out liar, but for a fact my country has a much larger muslim population (by percentage) and I've lived in a sharia-governed country for a month, and I have yet to hear ANYBODY mention Spain as belonging to the Umma, caliphate or other (currently) non-extant muslim "empire".

Have you? Once again I find this very hard to believe. Immigration issues with muslims in the EU are the media's current favorite subject and I have yet to hear of such sentiments. On a slightly related note, do bear in mind that Morocco is only miles away AND Spain "occupies" two enclaves in North-Africa. This might be the source of anti-Spanish sentiment though I can hardly believe it's as bad as you state.

I'm with you on this.

Well, mebbe, that was hardly my point though was it? She is just one in a pretty long list of female presidents in countries with (parliamentary) democracies. Most if not all of the others in my list (save for maybe Timoshenko) are free of blame in this regard, if you will.

EDIT: Gee, reading this I am surprised to sound like a multiculturalist
Usually I am critical of immigrants, in fact to be honest I think Holland would be better off with (much) less non-Western immigrants. Whatever, colour me racist.
That's not to say I dislike muslims, which I don't, that's why I am defending them.