aps said:There is a difference between the two situations. .................................
Stinger said:Yeah, the mainstream media will say nothing.
Resign as what? She's not senate majority leader, she's a senator. Since Lott didn't resign as a senator, why would she?Stinger said:any demands she resign? NO
aps said:Stinger, what did Hillary say about Byrd at his birthday party that would make anyone think she supported his past stances?
What would be interesting about this party that it should even make the news?
shuamort said:Resign as what? She's not senate majority leader, she's a senator. Since Lott didn't resign as a senator, why would she?
And before we go further down this road, Lott stepped down on his own accord:
:shock:Stinger said:Challenger Pirro is rightfully questioning why and especially why do it at the former home of Fredrick Douglas. Clearly this is an insult to blacks and the entire Civil Rights movement.
I'd get behind that, but mostly because I really don't want her to run.Stinger said:Well then perhaps she should refrain from running for the Presidency since she is just as much a racist as Lott.
Exactly. There should be a hell of a lot more outrage, especially about the Frederick Douglas thing. That's just insane.Stinger said:But again where are the same calls against her that the media put out against Lott?
Actually, both sides of the aisle were asking for Lott to step down.Stinger said:At the vehement urging of the Democrats.
Stinger said::rofl you think she threw him a party so she could put him down? She was honoring him and his life just like Lott.
About as interesting as Thurmond's party, do you see the same coverage in the mainstream press?
I almost got whiplash from the extreme subject change there.ANAV said:It's simple. The Democrats get a free pass because they are perceived as the party who supports minorities and the poor (note there is a difference between the two, just because you are a minority don't mean your poor). But the Democrats support system comes out of every taxpayers pocket in the form of the corrupt welfare system. We need to get out of a welfare state if we expect people to work for there own money and not work so they get mine.
aps said:So what if she was honoring him?
As I stated above, are you saying that Byrd should forever be black-balled because of his past?
No one was black-balling Thurmond during his time in the Senate.
Why should Bryd be treated any differently?
It would be one thing if he did not apologize for his stance and remarks. He provided unconditional apologies.
Also, Hillary did not give a speech saying anything that would indicate she supported his past racism.
The fact that you see these two instances as being equal indicates to me that you aren't very insightful.
Stinger said:So what if Lott was honoring Thurmond?
That was the media and Democrat position vis-a-vis Thrumond and Lott.
Since there is no such black-balling in the Senate I have no idea what you are talking about. I am talking about Lott honoring Thurmond and Clinton honoring Byrd and doing so in the home of FREDRICK DOUGLAS. Will the media treat Clinton as they did Lott?
I don't think there should be any difference in how all the party's are treated. Hillary should immediately announce that she will not attempt to gain the Presidency.
Lott that is, and then step aside from any leadership position. So should Hillary on both accounts.
How do you know what she said? She was honoring no different from Lott Honoring Thurmond. Are you trying to say that she gave a speech denouncing Byrd and his past?
The fact that you don't shows your partisianship. The mere fact that she insulted all those who fought for Civil Rights (Byrd led the filibusters against) by throwing this man a party in the home of Fredrick Douglas is an outrage. She owes an appology and should immediately announce that she will not seek a higher office or leadership position. Fair is fair isn't it?
Stinger said:Well then perhaps she should refrain from running for the Presidency since she is just as much a racist as Lott. But again where are the same calls against her that the media put out against Lott?
Stinger said:At the vehement urging of the Democrats, so perhaps Hillary should announce she will not run for President since she is such a racist.
ANAV said:It's simple. The Democrats get a free pass because they are perceived as the party who supports minorities and the poor (note there is a difference between the two, just because you are a minority don't mean your poor). But the Democrats support system comes out of every taxpayers pocket in the form of the corrupt welfare system. We need to get out of a welfare state if we expect people to work for there own money and not work so they get mine.
Stinger said:How do you know what she said? She was honoring no different from Lott Honoring Thurmond. Are you trying to say that she gave a speech denouncing Byrd and his past?
aps said:In fact, I honestly do not think that we are ready for any female president
aps said:First of all, Stinger, if you look at my first post in this thread, I said I thought that the whole thing with what Lott said was stupid. I really did. Certain people put meaning into his words that I know he did not intend, even subliminally.
Second of all, I would LOVE for Hillary to say she won't run for president. I don't like her.
But you should like her because if she ran, your party would win.
She is not a winnable candidate for president.
In fact, I honestly do not think that we are ready for any female president (well, I am not ready, as I know of no female I would want to be president).
BWG said:Got proof?
I apply the same standard as applied to Lott.
Stinger said:I'm glad you did, my comments have been directed at those that didn't and in particular the Democrats.
This is a good reason she shouldn't, support me.
I have no party, I vote Rep Dep Lib and Ind.
OH don't you think so. She has an excellent chance of getting the Democrat nomination. And if she does she has a huge vote just based on emotion.
Why would you think that? I can think of many women for whom I would vote.
This is the exact quote from Sen. Lott:aps said:First of all, Stinger, if you look at my first post in this thread, I said I thought that the whole thing with what Lott said was stupid. I really did. Certain people put meaning into his words that I know he did not intend, even subliminally.
Since Thurmond had explicitly supported racial segregation Lott's remarks were explosive. Trying to make Hillary out as someone who wrote that she was proud of Sen. Byrd when he was in the KKK is a lie. It's not a lie that Lott said he was proud of Thurmond when he ran as a racist."I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."
Sorry Warner's ONLY chance is to be Hillary's Veep. Warner has ZERO foreign policy experience among other shortcomings that will prevent him from winning the nomination.aps said:I do not agree that she has an excellent chance of getting the nomination. I believe that Mark Warner, the former governor of Virginia, will seek the nomination. He is incredibly popular here in Virginia (80%).
I completely and thoroughly disagree. Hillary is a lock to get the nomination, and I think she's got as good a chance as anyone in America of being elected our 44th President.aps said:Hillary is out.
I'm not understanding why you would use gender as a litmus test? With all due respect I find it degrading to women to blanketly state that "America's nt ready for a woman President." Shocking, actually...aps said:I am just not interested in having a woman president right now. I don't even know if I can articulate why--it just doesn't remotely appeal to me.
26 X World Champs said:Sorry Warner's ONLY chance is to be Hillary's Veep. Warner has ZERO foreign policy experience among other shortcomings that will prevent him from winning the nomination.
Think of it this way? If Warner is the Veep for Hillary and then the Dems carry VA in the '08 election and Hillary only wins the same states as Kerry did she's elected...Interesting scenario, don't you think?
I completely and thoroughly disagree. Hillary is a lock to get the nomination, and I think she's got as good a chance as anyone in America of being elected our 44th President.
I'm not understanding why you would use gender as a litmus test? With all due respect I find it degrading to women to blanketly state that "America's nt ready for a woman President." Shocking, actually...
aps said:But I dont want her as president! *Throwing self on ground and kicking*
What foreign policy experience does she have?Her guy was President for 8 years...lots of osmosis.
One's gender has nothing to do with being wrong, sorry, or anything to do with eliminating anyone from consideration because of their gender, or color, or religion etc.aps said:But I am a fellow chick, so I can say those kinds of things.
Stinger said:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Well then perhaps she should refrain from running for the Presidency since she is just as much a racist as Lott. But again where are the same calls against her that the media put out against Lott?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
At the vehement urging of the Democrats, so perhaps Hillary should announce she will not run for President since she is such a racist.
Stinger said:I apply the same standard as applied to Lott.
26 X World Champs said:aps said:But I dont want her as president! *Throwing self on ground and kicking*
What foreign policy experience does she have?Her guy was President for 8 years...lots of osmosis.
One's gender has nothing to do with being wrong, sorry, or anything to do with eliminating anyone from consideration because of their gender, or color, or religion etc.
Osmosis? I highly doubt that anyone would believe that such causes her to have foreign policy experience.
I cannot help how I feel, and I stand by what I said.
Agreed...aps said:Osmosis? I highly doubt that anyone would believe that such causes her to have foreign policy experience.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?