Does anybody think Gen. Wesley Clark has a chance to win. I thought everyone would jump on his bandwagon...

Maybe the endorsement of the Clintons isn't worth very much these days.

Madonna supports him. That about says it all. :D

dont forget Micheal Moore! Oh ya, plus the fact that he makes totally stupid claims, like "If I were Prez, there would have been no 9-11" and "If I were prez, I would have already caught Bin Laden" and the ever popular " John Kerry was only a Lt., I was a general, I made real decisions", which pretty much belittled everyone who ever served below the rank of general, which is pretty much everybody.

The guy is not very impressive. He wrote news articles praising Bush & the war on Iraq and now he's suddenly against it - yeah sure - whatever floats his boat.

Then he says dumb stuff like - Kerry was a lutienant but I was a general - yeah big deal, like that is going to impress the voters. What a dumbass.

General shelton who is apparently very well respected in the military said the guy was an idiot & was removed from NATO due to integrity issues - that's quite a statement.

Anybody who is licking the ass of Michael moore doesn't have a chance. 95% of the population view Moore is a crackpot fool.

Wesley would be better off giving the money he raised to charity - at least then it would actually do something good because he has a 0% chance of winning the nomination

He was klinton's general - need I say Moore?

I would prefer Wesley Crusher. :D

Is he of sufficient age to run for POTUS?

Originally posted by es347fan
He was klinton's general - need I say Moore?
Clinton was a good president. He eliminated our debt, deflated a real estate bubble and if he took office again we would not have this big old screwup with the economy and with the ever popular excuse of an internet bubble. Your picking the wrong person to use to make fun of wesley.

Originally posted by WindWip
Clinton was a good president. He eliminated our debt, deflated a real estate bubble and if he took office again we would not have this big old screwup with the economy and with the ever popular excuse of an internet bubble. Your picking the wrong person to use to make fun of wesley.
Such things will never convince the rabid Clinton-haters, WindWip. Some just believe that getting a blowjob makes one an incarnation of Satan himself.

klinton was a lousy president. Allowing that amoral lackey into the White House was a mistake long before he ever took advantage of Monica Lewinski and sexually abused her. History will make note only of his countless legal problems while in office and the fact that to date he was but the 2d sitting POTUS to actually face impeachment by the entire Senate.
One may argue that the sex was consensual. Not so. When a "boss" uses their position to gain sexual favors from a subordinate, it is sexual harassment. klinton had the power & position to directly affect Lewinski's further employment & career. As such, it can be argued that she was coerced into engaging in sexual acts with him.
Throughout klinton's political career, this same behavior has frequently set the tone of his sexual conquests. As such, klinton can easily be viewed as a sexual predator.

Apart from the sex thing, is there anything that makes you hate Clinton so much, ES 347 ?

The overall character of the individual brings about my intense dislike of him. Even when klinton was working his way up through state politics in Arkansas, he exhibited the same amoral, sleazy behavior and personality.

How about blowing up those people at Waco, putting a gun in the face of a boy and forcing him to go back to the Dictator in cuba, sexual assault, seual harrasment mysteriously ignored by the radical mad dog feminist who would devour anyone else for so much as looking at a woman the wrong way, how about sending his boys to get campign money from chicoms and foreign countries in return for favors and missle technology? Or kissing the ass of that lunatic in N korea who put on a big show for that gas bag Allbright? How about the long list of people whe expired mysteriously and who were all linked to the clintons, and how about all those shady real estate deals, or all those shady last minute pardons? The TOP SECRET, more top secret than the Soviet Politburo health care task foce run by a non elected official named Hillary? Lies to America, Lies to his family, lies to himself, need I go on? You got nothing on bush compared to whats been compiled on Slick Willy.

Originally posted by es347fan
klinton was a lousy president. Allowing that amoral lackey into the White House was a mistake long before he ever took advantage of Monica Lewinski and sexually abused her.
Sexually abused her? Damn man, what newspaper do you read? I never heard a lawsuit against him for sexual abuse. What the hell are you talking about. That incident makes him a less than worthy husband, but it should not deter from his previous accomplishments. You have a one track mind, you need to think of the country as a whole and the effect that he had on our country! He helped our country, I dont care if you spew hellfire at me about the scandal, that did not harm our country so get it straight.

putting a gun in the face of a boy and forcing him to go back to the Dictator in cuba
Travh, your just lowering yourself again. He did not stick a gun in the boys face. Our laws did not allow ellian to stay. Do you care about our laws, or will you allow them to slide at every chance there is a sappy story. Our supreme court did not allow him to stay. Get your facts straight and stop spewing lies alright? Clinton cannot overrule the supreme court

How about the long list of people whe expired mysteriously and who were all linked to the clintons, and how about all those shady real estate deals, or all those shady last minute pardons
We're not talking about Bush here. And it was his shady oil company deals not real estate.

But seriously, people disappearing? Did you just recite that out of your republican handbook or something? I've never heard anyone ever say that before. Maybe from Star tabloids?

One more thing, why do you have to put a respectible person like Thomas Jefferson after your writings? It's a real discrace to our forefathers.

You were about 7 when that flaming asshole took office. Don't try to tell me about anything that clown did for the country. I saw that S.O.B. with clear enough eyes to vote against him twice. Sure, klinton wasn't ever charged with sexual harassment - he was the President - not some low level supervisor who would have been unceremoniously fired for the same behavior. klinton was an absolute embarassment to this great nation.

Tell me how he hurt our country. I can tell you the many ways which he made it prosper. He hurt his marrage and he hurt his image because of the people who do not care to look at what was done to the country, but rather what the media tells them to think.
Don't pull the age card with me. I have researched our presidents and our American history thoroughly. Just because you've lived 34 years more than me doesn't necessarily mean you know more than me and definitely doesn't mean your more mature than me, given your nonstop cursing. So be considerate and don't talk down to me.
I will admit that he did a bad thing. His behavior was not acceptible in that instance, that does not mean he was a bad president.

Originally posted by WindWip
One more thing, why do you have to put a respectible person like Thomas Jefferson after your writings? It's a real discrace to our forefathers.

ya, and your a shining beacon to their memory, I am sure someone like you would fit right in with them windwip.

I have our countries intrests at heart, not our presidents. Big difference. You seem to have not found that discrepency yet.

Originally posted by WindWip

But seriously, people disappearing? Did you just recite that out of your republican handbook or something? I've never heard anyone ever say that before. Maybe from Star tabloids?


check it out (http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Clinton_Scandals/dead_friends.htm)

Research provides a lot of facts in a rather sterile fashion. Not quite the same as having been there. Suffice it to say that I have absolutely no use for the klinton klan. It will be a sad day for this country if another one makes it into the White House.

Your information is coming from a religious extremist paranoia site...
They also have something on your site about Bush;

"George W. Bush was Complicit with the 911 Attack on America - Charge of high treason with documentation, including his deceptive response about what he knew at Booker Elementary school and a creepy convergence of finance bigwigs at SAC. (Document presented at press conference Oct. 13, 2004, Utah State Capital.) "

and

"Social Security Number (SSN) and the Mark of the Beast (666) - How the U.S. Social Security System prepares society for the tyrannical mark of the beast, both because of its socialist nature as well as the conditioning it engenders for a Big Brother numbering system. "

Your 'evidence' is pathetic. Is it sites like these where you get all your information? You need to learn to be a critical reader and check to make sure that the crap your spewing is more than just that.

windwip, you have the interest of getting the president out of office, not the interest of the country, big difference.

Originally posted by WindWip
Your information is coming from a religious extremist paranoia site...
They also have something on your site about Bush;

"George W. Bush was Complicit with the 911 Attack on America - Charge of high treason with documentation, including his deceptive response about what he knew at Booker Elementary school and a creepy convergence of finance bigwigs at SAC. (Document presented at press conference Oct. 13, 2004, Utah State Capital.) "

and

"Social Security Number (SSN) and the Mark of the Beast (666) - How the U.S. Social Security System prepares society for the tyrannical mark of the beast, both because of its socialist nature as well as the conditioning it engenders for a Big Brother numbering system. "

Your 'evidence' is pathetic. Is it sites like these where you get all your information? You need to learn to be a critical reader and check to make sure that the crap your spewing is more than just that.

LOL, man you need to relax. I know its a buch of crap, thats why I posted it. Maybe you should look at some of the links by a guy named Mr Shaman and jump his shit too.

Let me spell this out for you;
The president does not have the intrest of the country at heart
THEREFORE;
In intrest of our country, having him out of office will be a benefit to our country.
I have our countries' intrest at heart, which at this time is getting that liar out of office.

Tell me how attacking Iraq is in our countries' intrest?

Shaman spews a lot of crap, ill give him that. But he does every now and then put up a legitimate article. I don't really bother to read his posts because he doesn't do much more than put a link up. Not really the point of a forum

Alright, your right. Im getting a little heated. Ill try being nice now :)

look man, we disagree, live with it. you think getting the president out of office is in the pcountries best interest, and I dont. I think cleaning out that rats nest of terrorism inthe middle east where all of our enemys seem to call home is in our countries best interest, and Iraq was as good a place to start as any. I would like to see Saudi Arabia, Iran and syria go down next. This would be in our countries best interest. Replacing one liar with another wont do crap.

lol, this is what every political post turns into. This started off with wesley I think

Here you go, WindWip:

bubba klinton's legacy (http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/1221/wjc_lgcy.htm)
"We've seen the president's "wife" try to nationalize 17% of the nation's private economy through her heavy-handed plan for socialized medicine.
We've seen major Democratic campaign contributors sell, and transfer vital American nuclear, missile, and satellite technology to avowed enemies of freedom, and of the United States.
We've seen wholesale violations of basic campaign finance laws. Then we saw the Democrats, and the Clintonistas engage in a concerted effort to make sure that none of these campaign finance law violations were subject to a serious criminal investigation.
We've seen five members of Clinton's Cabinet come under criminal investigation.
We've seen 33 people connected to the Clinton administration convicted of crimes.
We've seen the Lincoln bedroom in the White House turned into a high-priced five-star hotel almost 600 times, with the basic rate being a huge campaign donation to the Democrats.
We've seen seats on government overseas trade missions sold to the highest bidders --- sold for campaign donations.
We've seen a president dropping his trousers in the Oval Office to receive oral sexual favors from an intern barely older than his daughter.
We've seen the president grope, and fondle a woman who came to him for help in securing a White House job --- wrapping up the sordid episode by taking her hand, and forcing it into his crotch.
We've seen 45 witnesses in criminal investigations or critics of the Clinton administration subjected to IRS audits.
We've seen five women who were said to have been associated with Bill Clinton complain publicly of physical threats having been made against them.
We've seen Hillary Clinton issue a 42 paragraph sworn statement to a House investigating committee investigating Clinton wrongdoings. And in those 42 paragraphs we saw Hillary use the phrase "I don't recall" or its equivalent no less than 50 times.
We've seen Bill Clinton say "I don't recall" or its equivalent in portions of his testimony about Paula Jones 271 times.
And when it comes to failed memories, we've seen other Clinton administration friends, and officials say the words "I don't recall" or its equivalent a total of 6,125 times before various investigating committees --- for a grand forgetfulness average of 235 times per person. In other words .. we've seen the most forgetful group of political operatives in the history of this country.
We've seen a president lie under oath - several times.
We've seen a president use the powers of his office to obstruct justice and to deny a private American citizen her constitutionally guaranteed right to a day in court.
We've seen American servicemen scattered to nearly 100 foreign nations to serve as glorified cops, and cafeteria workers in various international "meals on wheels" schemes.
We've seen aspirin factories in foreign countries bombed to divert attention from presidential scandals.
We've seen the bodies of dead American servicemen dragged through the streets of half-assed inconsequential foreign dog-patch nations by mobs of people who aren't fit to utter "would you like french fries with that".
We've seen a president agonize over what the definition of "is" is.
We've seen a president refuse to personally respond to a very credible accusation of a violent rape.
We've seen almost one thousand confidential FBI files of those not friendly to the president's political agenda gathered by former barbouncers working in White House security positions --- with absolutely no consequences.
We watched in 1996 as the Democrats rushed to naturalize tens of thousands of illegal aliens in time for them to vote Democratic in the election, and, in the process, including thousands of violent felons ... all for a few votes.
We've seen all of this - and we've seen so much more. All of this... and the Democrats are telling us "you ain't seen nothing yet?"
If they're right, WE NEED TO BUILD A LOT MORE JAILS."
***
Now I realize this is not an unimpeachable source, however, the author does sum things up fairly well.

For myself, klinton's negative attitude and disrespect toward the men & women serving in the military was enough to completely cancel out anything positive that may be said about him. klinton was, and is unfit to command such a force.

yes, wesley clark, the metrosexual poster boy for Clintons vaunted "dont ask, dont tell" policy

Well the link isn't working for me. Says it's temporarily unavaliable. I'll get back to you on the whole Clinton thing when I can get to it.

Do you mean the issue over gays in the military?

There had always been gays in the military. The ones bringing overt attention to themselves got discharges. A great many served lengthy successful careers without bringing their sexuality to the forefront.

I do not agree with that. In that respect I do not think Clinton made a good move, but the sad thing is that no other president will stand for gay rights either. Bush is against gay marrages as well. I am not sure of the new democratic hopefuls, but I would not be surprized if they were against it too.

To put it in perspective, if you went around saying you like to have sex with chickens, they wouldn't fire you. I think it's sick and wrong, but they shouldnt be able to fire you if you are a good marine. Sexual prefrence should not have anything to do with whether you get to keep your job or not. I know it is only if you show it, but if you are straight you don't need to hide it.
The issue is protection, just keeping it at "don't ask" would be sufficient. The "don't ask don't tell" is not a just solution.

wasnt this started about Wesley Clark?

We hardly ever stay on topic for any lengthened period of time.

Es, explain "overt attention". I'm not too knowledgable on gay rights in the military.

The Army, as well as the other armed services had specific guidelines (regulations) that spelled out to the Commander how to handle incidents of homosexual behavior. Now, things have changed somewhat during the past 15 + years since I was in, but probably not much.
If an incident of homosexual behavior came to the attention of the Commander, he was to investigate. The regulations made provisions for those young soldiers who might experiment, as well as those who exhibited a pattern of homosexuality. Anyone suspected of, or admitting to homosexuality was sent to the mental health clinic where a formal psychiatric evaluation would be conducted (clinical intake, psychological testing, and psychiatric interview at a minimum) and a written report provided to the Commander. Now, there's no test, psychological or otherwise that will prove or disprove homosexuality. It's not like taking an X-ray of a broken leg. We would write the report saying the soldier exhibited no indications of mental defect or disease, and that they (did/did not) admit to being homosexual. If the soldier admitted to being homosexual, they would be processed for discharge. Now, at the discretion of the first level Commander, this could go easily, and result in a discharge that would not place much of a blight upon the soldier, or things could get fairly ugly. This all depended upon both the Commander and the individual concerned. Typically, the discharge was for "inability to adapt", and the certificate awarded was a General Discharge, or 1 step below an Honorable Discharge.

es347fan, have you read Bush's resume? It's a utterly warped and biased piece of crap. It has truths in it, but since the author was so overly biased and actually warped many facts the entire paper is worthless. I'm tending to lean that way towards this paper you showed me as well.
I read through it and noticed quite a few instances where the author chose to put his opinion ahead of the facts.
You probably know me well enough to know that I am very critical when it comes to internet sources and media. Now I do not know for sure the truth of the matter on most of the issues because of biases in the papers everywhere, but you can rest assured if that paper was completely true you would have a convert.

Thanks for clearing up the military issue. So where do you stand on all of this now? Would you agree with simply leaving it at "don't ask"?

As I said when I attempted to post only the link, it was not unimpeachable. Yes, the author put some of his own opinions in there. That said, it's not far off the mark. No, I've not checked each individual sentence for accuracy, but do remember hearing/reading/watching a good portion of it during those years.
Don't get me wrong - I don't wear blinders where Bush is concerned either. I've said before that if Bush had not been confronted with 9/11 - an event that changed the path America follows with much the same impact as December 7th 1941 - he would have been a 1 term, rather mediocre, President.

Originally posted by es347fan
I've said before that if Bush had not been confronted with 9/11 - an event that changed the path America follows with much the same impact as December 7th 1941 - he would have been a 1 term, rather mediocre, President. I think without 9/11 he would be a rather poor pres. Although, if he can stimulate the economy he can bring his rating up to mediocre IMO.

Though Bush has the WMD confession, the environment and the economy against him, the population likes to see a strong leader. Though he may not be a good leader, he definitely can pull off being a powerful leader and he will bring the information they got from Saddam out right when the elections start.

By the way, whats IMO mean?

In My Opinion. Sometimes written as IMHO, the H for humble.

If a Democrat were in office on 9-11, the nation would lay in ruins under more attacks, a depression, and it would all be blamed on 9-11. GW has not allowed another attack, cleaned house on AL Queada, the Taliban and Saddam, actually raised the economy following the worst attack on the US ever. I know, the haters cant see anything positive in anything, but thats just what has happened.