Potential Democratic Presidential Nominees in 2012

[whottt]

I was just trying to come up with a list of likely Demoractic Presidential Nominees for 2012 basing the selections upon the stances and backgrounds of recent Presidential candidates produced by the party.



1. Usama Bin Laden
Reasons:
Wants us out of Iraq - check
Is sworn to destroy America - check
Hates Israel - check
Blames America for all the world's problems - check

Obviously Usama is the favorite...if he's not their nomineee, I could easily see him leading the party....or at least being their chief speech writer....I mean, he does say the exact same things they do.

And who better to make suicide bombing terrorists like us than Usama? And isn't that really what's it's all about?


2. Rosie O'donnel - It's not easier to find a candidate uglier and more obnoxious than Hilliary..then again, it was next to impossible to find a worse candidate than Bush in 04 and they did just that.



3. Louis Farrakhan - Why nominate Obama when you can have the real deal?


4. Hitler - No not that Hitler you idiots. Dewey Hitler Moore...Stop judging by his name However he is an aryan who was born to Nazi parents, was married by the head of the American Neo Nazis and attends his church regularly frequently listening to sermons about how badly minorities are fucking the country up(and whites)...and no, he's not a nazi now because he says he isn't...idiots. And btw, any ethnic or racial minorities that won't vote for this guy are clearly racists.






Thoughts?

[MaNuMaNiAc]

http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/2787/fail2it9.jpg

[smeagol]

Mildly funny

[xrayzebra]

Mildly funny

But extremely true. Sadly. I'm sure Pelosi would endorse
him.

[Don Quixote]

No ... Osama isn't pro-abortion, so that would pretty much rule him out for a presidential bid. He might, however, have some hope in Congress.

[AFBlue]

A good one...

The incumbent.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Just because a candidate says garbling Israel's balls in all middle eastern foreign policy might be a mistake, does not mean they hate Israel. That's just what the bastard american jews want you to think.

[mrsmaalox]

:rolleyes

[smeagol]

Just because a candidate says garbling Israel's balls in all middle eastern foreign policy might be a mistake, does not mean they hate Israel. That's just what the bastard american jews want you to think.

I take it you are against the US supporting Israel. I think even boutons disaggrees with you on this one.

[Wild Cobra]

Who ever it is, they will need the approval of liberal radicals and Islamic radicals.

If you believe in the future decoding of "The Bible Code," (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_code) it doesn't matter anyway. Not only does some experts predict a major earthquake in the Los Angeles area in 2010, but that a comet will strike the Earth in 2012.

There is a controversy over the theory and books, I have the second book published in 2002 and find it rather interesting. The debunkers of the book may or may not be right. They created similar items from word structures, but they are not as elegant as what comes from the Bible, nor are the related words found as closely grouped together.

Any one who believes in divine power probably has the faith to believe it is the work of God.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I was just trying to come up with a list of likely Demoractic Presidential Nominees for 2012 basing the selections upon the stances and backgrounds of recent Presidential candidates produced by the party.



1. Usama Bin Laden
Reasons:
Wants us out of Iraq - check
Is sworn to destroy America - check
Hates Israel - check
Blames America for all the world's problems - check

Obviously Usama is the favorite...if he's not their nomineee, I could easily see him leading the party....or at least being their chief speech writer....I mean, he does say the exact same things they do.

And who better to make suicide bombing terrorists like us than Usama? And isn't that really what's it's all about?


2. Rosie O'donnel - It's not easier to find a candidate uglier and more obnoxious than Hilliary..then again, it was next to impossible to find a worse candidate than Bush in 04 and they did just that.



3. Louis Farrakhan - Why nominate Obama when you can have the real deal?


4. Hitler - No not that Hitler you idiots. Dewey Hitler Moore...Stop judging by his name However he is an aryan who was born to Nazi parents, was married by the head of the American Neo Nazis and attends his church regularly frequently listening to sermons about how badly minorities are fucking the country up(and whites)...and no, he's not a nazi now because he says he isn't...idiots. And btw, any ethnic or racial minorities that won't vote for this guy are clearly racists.






Thoughts?


:sleep

[Don Quixote]

If you believe in the future decoding of "The Bible Code," (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_code) it doesn't matter anyway. Not only does some experts predict a major earthquake in the Los Angeles area in 2010, but that a comet will strike the Earth in 2012.

There is a controversy over the theory and books, I have the second book published in 2002 and find it rather interesting. The debunkers of the book may or may not be right.

Don't have the time to go into detail about the Bible code, but count me as one who has grave doubts about the scholarship. In fact, it is probably one of the poorest examples of hermeneutics that I have ever seen. Not only does it not take into account the flexibility in Hebrew spelling, but it operates from the presupposition that the Bible is a codebook full of hidden, secret knowledge that only a select few can decipher and interpret. However, such thinking cuts against the whole motif of the Bible, in which God has revealed himself, not exhaustively but truly, to man. Anybody can go to it and learn truth about God, man, how to be saved, etc. To say that it contains hidden messages is reminiscient of the Gnostic heresy.

Furthermore, I challenge the notion that one can find important "truths" and prophecies by using the Bible code methodology. If I am not mistaken, one can do the same with Moby Dick. If truth and prophecy is what you are looking for, then just give the Bible a straight reading, and forget this code nonsense.

[Holt's Cat]

So we send Israel "aid" and we send its Arab "neighbors" aid. Great idea.

[Extra Stout]

Just because a candidate says garbling Israel's balls in all middle eastern foreign policy might be a mistake, does not mean they hate Israel. That's just what the bastard american jews want you to think.
Damn perfidious Jews. Did you know they kidnap children and sacrifice the children's blood to their god? Also, they have a secret conspiracy to take over the world. Somebody swiped a copy of their membership manual or something.

There was an Austrian guy once who had a plan to take care of them once and for all, but some Zionist puppets named Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin thwarted him. How sad that was.

[Extra Stout]

Don't have the time to go into detail about the Bible code, but count me as one who has grave doubts about the scholarship. In fact, it is probably one of the poorest examples of hermeneutics that I have ever seen. Not only does it not take into account the flexibility in Hebrew spelling, but it operates from the presupposition that the Bible is a codebook full of hidden, secret knowledge that only a select few can decipher and interpret. However, such thinking cuts against the whole motif of the Bible, in which God has revealed himself, not exhaustively but truly, to man. Anybody can go to it and learn truth about God, man, how to be saved, etc. To say that it contains hidden messages is reminiscient of the Gnostic heresy.

Furthermore, I challenge the notion that one can find important "truths" and prophecies by using the Bible code methodology. If I am not mistaken, one can do the same with Moby Dick. If truth and prophecy is what you are looking for, then just give the Bible a straight reading, and forget this code nonsense.
I was skeptical until I discovered that the Bible Code names all four Beatles and Pete Best. That is a clear message from God that the Beatles are the greatest!

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Damn perfidious Jews. Did you know they kidnap children and sacrifice the children's blood to their god? Also, they have a secret conspiracy to take over the world. Somebody swiped a copy of their membership manual or something.

There was an Austrian guy once who had a plan to take care of them once and for all, but some Zionist puppets named Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin thwarted him. How sad that was.

hahahaha
see
any mention of deviating from full israeli support automatically means I'm a hitler sympathizer...this is such a lame right wing tactic. Because after decades of israeli support, we have sooo much to show for in middle eastern affairs.

You are capable of better, extra stout.

[PixelPusher]

I was skeptical until I discovered that the Bible Code names all four Beatles and Pete Best. That is a clear message from God that the Beatles are the greatest!
Did the Bible code fortell the coming of Yoko? Or the sellout to Michael Jackson? Will it tell us if the Beatles will ever get on iTunes?

[Ignignokt]

Whott would have his list for potential republican nominees for 2012, but he has to wait on the results of the next Battle Royale of the upcoming WWe Payperview to see who are the strong finalist.

[peewee's lovechild]

Who gives a shit about Israel?

I say, let them do whatever they want as long as they do it without us.

As for the Bible Code, fuck that.
I'm more worried about the Mayan Katuns.

However, the Mayan calendar doesn end in the year 2012 with devastation. But, then the calendar resets itself.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Methinks ExtraStout is part of the jewish lobby. In fact, after realizing this, all his other posts fit perfectly into place.

Fascinating.

[fyatuk]

I take it you are against the US supporting Israel. I think even boutons disaggrees with you on this one.

I think we should back of our support. Israel has done some rather impressive human rights violations over the last decade, and they've caused more problems with the "roadmap" than the Palestinians have.

A world without consequences is a world in chaos.

[gtownspur]

i just don't get where the part that Palestinians orchestrate the deaths of civilians ever sinks into the minds of anti israeli politicos.

[smeagol]

I think we should back of our support. Israel has done some rather impressive human rights violations over the last decade, and they've caused more problems with the "roadmap" than the Palestinians have.

A world without consequences is a world in chaos.

How's the US record on human rights?

He who is free of guilt shall cast the first stone . . . or something like that

[fyatuk]

How's the US record on human rights?

He who is free of guilt shall cast the first stone . . . or something like that

Didn't say we had a good record.

But by continuing blind support of Israel, we are complicit in their violations as well as our own. We suffer the consequences of our own violations in places like X-Ray and Abu Ghraib, but then act as a shield for the atrocities that Israel commits.

It's idiotic. Every action has a reaction. Why should we try and shield Israel from the reaction to their actions?

[Don Quixote]

I'd say, comparatively speaking, the U.S. scores rather well on human rights. We have freedom of worship, or not to worship. We have the freedom to criticize the government and society, even with hearsay and half-truths. We have freedom of the press -- they can say pretty much whatever they want.

Shoot ... there are people in the U.S. that want to give terrorists a bill of rights! The Supreme Court found the right to an abortion in the Constitution in 1973, which I am sure counts as a human right by many. (Of course, you can make the case that it is also a rather egregious human-rights violation). If anything, our human rights are too generous!

So, compared to most of the world, I'd say the U.S. fares pretty well.

[JoeChalupa]

I love the USA!! Wouldn't want to live anywhere else in the world.

[gtownspur]

I love the USA!! Wouldn't want to live anywhere else in the world.


That's as substantive as obama girls get.

[RandomGuy]

I was just trying to come up with a list of likely Demoractic Presidential Nominees for 2012 basing the selections upon the stances and backgrounds of recent Presidential candidates produced by the party.



1. Usama Bin Laden
Reasons:
Wants us out of Iraq - check
Is sworn to destroy America - check
Hates Israel - check
Blames America for all the world's problems - check

Obviously Usama is the favorite...if he's not their nomineee, I could easily see him leading the party....or at least being their chief speech writer....I mean, he does say the exact same things they do.

And who better to make suicide bombing terrorists like us than Usama? And isn't that really what's it's all about?


2. Rosie O'donnel - It's not easier to find a candidate uglier and more obnoxious than Hilliary..then again, it was next to impossible to find a worse candidate than Bush in 04 and they did just that.



3. Louis Farrakhan - Why nominate Obama when you can have the real deal?


4. Hitler - No not that Hitler you idiots. Dewey Hitler Moore...Stop judging by his name However he is an aryan who was born to Nazi parents, was married by the head of the American Neo Nazis and attends his church regularly frequently listening to sermons about how badly minorities are fucking the country up(and whites)...and no, he's not a nazi now because he says he isn't...idiots. And btw, any ethnic or racial minorities that won't vote for this guy are clearly racists.






Thoughts?

:sleep

Smeagol was being generous. ("mildly funny")

This post is sure to win you a cabinet-level position at the Department of Fail, though.

[xrayzebra]

I love the USA!! Wouldn't want to live anywhere else in the world.

Yes, but would you wear a flag pin in your lapel?
Obama wont.

Had to throw that in there....LOL

[RandomGuy]

Yes, but would you wear a flag pin in your lapel?
Obama wont.

Had to throw that in there....LOL

Meh.

After 9-11, I didn't post any flags, or wear flag pins, or have any silly bumper stickers.

I have always deeply loved my country, and such things seemed... inadequate and a bit pretentious.

I kept a pin stuck into a seam in my dashboard, and that was about it. It was for me alone to see and look at. I didn't feel the need to simply go with the crowd on this, although I shared the sentiment.

Honestly, I think such things are a bit fake-y when politicians do it, because it looks an awful lot like pandering.

Obama has expressed his thoughts and feelings about our country in his own words, and that is good enough for me. I understand where he is coming from on this. God forbid our politicians stop treating us like children who need obvious signs of affection for reassurance. :rolleyes

[xrayzebra]

Meh.

After 9-11, I didn't post any flags, or wear flag pins, or have any silly bumper stickers.

I have always deeply loved my country, and such things seemed... inadequate and a bit pretentious.

I kept a pin stuck into a seam in my dashboard, and that was about it. It was for me alone to see and look at. I didn't feel the need to simply go with the crowd on this, although I shared the sentiment.

Honestly, I think such things are a bit fake-y when politicians do it, because it looks an awful lot like pandering.

Obama has expressed his thoughts and feelings about our country in his own words, and that is good enough for me. I understand where he is coming from on this. God forbid our politicians stop treating us like children who need obvious signs of affection for reassurance. :rolleyes

Sorry old friend. But I trust Obama about like I do
Hillary, about as far as I could pick him up and throw
him. He is as phony as a three dollar bill.

[JoeChalupa]

Yes, but would you wear a flag pin in your lapel?
Obama wont.

Had to throw that in there....LOL

I noticed McCain wasn't wearing one the other day. How could I possibly vote for him?

You don't have to wear a patch on your sleeve or a pin on your lapel to have honor.

Damn I love that movie!!

[JoeChalupa]

Sorry old friend. But I trust Obama about like I do
Hillary, about as far as I could pick him up and throw
him. He is as phony as a three dollar bill.

Yet you trust Bush?

I wouldn't trust him to mow my lawn.

[JoeChalupa]

Oh, and I fly the Ameican flag every day!!

Semper Fi!!


Yeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!

[fyatuk]

I'd say, comparatively speaking, the U.S. scores rather well on human rights. We have freedom of worship, or not to worship. We have the freedom to criticize the government and society, even with hearsay and half-truths. We have freedom of the press -- they can say pretty much whatever they want.

Shoot ... there are people in the U.S. that want to give terrorists a bill of rights! The Supreme Court found the right to an abortion in the Constitution in 1973, which I am sure counts as a human right by many. (Of course, you can make the case that it is also a rather egregious human-rights violation). If anything, our human rights are too generous!

So, compared to most of the world, I'd say the U.S. fares pretty well.

No argument that we're better in terms of respecting human rights than most of the world, but we do however fall short of our own ideal levels, occassionally. We have our black marks, quite a few since 9-11, but over all we do pretty well.

[Don Quixote]

Yes, American history does have some black marks on it -- slavery and the inability of women to vote until 1920 are 2 example. The shameful treatment of native people is another one. But, it is due to our very tradition of freedom and the inherent God-given value of every person (absent in Islam, BTW!) that America can even have discussions about these things and fix them. Without the Western notion of individual freedom and value, we would NEVER have even discussion about these things, let alone remedy them.

Now ... for these human-rights abuses that have occured since 9-11. Have political dissidents been imprisoned? Are there public executions of people? Are we not free to worship as we choose? If there are, please inform the rest of us, with links from reputable sources. Because if human rights abuses are still endemic to the U.S., then I will be proud to stand with you to fight them.

[fyatuk]

Now ... for these human-rights abuses that have occured since 9-11. Have political dissidents been imprisoned? Are there public executions of people? Are we not free to worship as we choose? If there are, please inform the rest of us, with links from reputable sources. Because if human rights abuses are still endemic to the U.S., then I will be proud to stand with you to fight them.

Gee, and here I was thinking the well documented offenses at X-Ray (early on), Abu Ghraib, and the shameless CIA detention procedures were admitted to be violations of human rights.

Or do human rights only extend to citizens?

[Don Quixote]

Okay ... I would agree that Abu Ghraib was a human-rights issue. But the military and the press roundly condemned this behavior, and those responsible were ultimately reprimanded. As far as X-Ray and Gitmo are concerned, we are aware that these are POW camps for enemy combatants and we ought not to expect the Hilton here.

Either way, citing prisoner abuses, alleged or real, is not the same thing as pointing out systematic American human-rights violations on her own people, or at least friendly foreigners.

Can you perhaps give examples of the U.S. imprisoning Arabs, or executing people for their religious or political beliefs? Is someone out there still practicing slavery and people are looking the other way? Or forced polygamy? (Actually, there are a few of those clowns, but the vast majority are in favor of locking those guys up).

[fyatuk]

Can you perhaps give examples of the U.S. imprisoning Arabs, or executing people for their religious or political beliefs? Is someone out there still practicing slavery and people are looking the other way? Or forced polygamy? (Actually, there are a few of those clowns, but the vast majority are in favor of locking those guys up).

Apparently we have vastly different threshholds.

[Don Quixote]

Fine. But can you share any examples of American human rights abuses that have either been ignored or not reprimanded?

[fyatuk]

Fine. But can you share any examples of American human rights abuses that have either been ignored or not reprimanded?

reprimand does not mitigate.

[smeagol]

America's human rights track record is pretty good. Probably one of the best is the world.

But it is not perfect, as some are led to believe.

[Wild Cobra]

America's human rights track record is pretty good. Probably one of the best is the world.

But it is not perfect, as some are led to believe.
Well, I'll bet that "some" are actually "very few."

We do have allot of sins as a nation. There is no denying that.

Any one see the roundup of Muslims in the 6th season of 24? We did worse to the Japanese durin WWII. The show exposed a few reasons besides morality why it was wrong. Mainly that you are making the community that can help the most, not trust you.

It should have never been done, but fear during war is a powerful thing.

[GaryJohnston]

But extremely true. Sadly. I'm sure Pelosi would endorse
him.

+1