Athol wrote:
>
> Neil Fisher <neil@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > **** he's good, isn't he? If you doubt his word, it's because you have
> > a financial interest in the outcome. Of course, his own financial
> > interest in the outcome is because he cares about the environment -
> > that he stands to make a fortune from any carbon trading scheme is
> > just a bonus, right? And he's happy to lie to you about how bad it is
> > because he wants to protect the environment and it has absolutely
> > nothing to do with any financial interests he may have, right? Sure...
>
> Consider that the USA has never elected a president who isn't a while
> male.
>
> Now consider that the Democrats are having a competition between a
> non-white male and non-male white to be their candidate for president
> at the next presidential election.
>
> There are people who believe that, even if the Republicans are totally
> on the nose, if there is a choice between a white male republican and
> a democrat who is not a white male, the white male will win. It is
> about racial and gender discrimination that is ingrained into the US
> psyche to the extent that even people who are not white males believe
> that the president should be a white male...
OR perhaps more accurately that's the belief amongst those who actually
participate in the voting at all.
> So, after sabotaging the next presidential elections by standing a
> candidate that will drop about 20 to 25% of the vote simply due to
> underlying discrimination, the democrats will need a champion to stand
> in the next presidential election. That champion will, of course,
> have to be a white male...
I'm curious as to why anyone would vote for hilary or barack, honestly I
don't know which one of them scares me more (and ironically, I suspect
them being front runners to the democrats is all about the fact that
they aren't white males, rather than anything either of them brings to
the table.)
>
> Yes, there are really people in the USA and elsewhere that have
> suggested that the Obama vs Clinton thing this time around has been
> orchestrated to improve the chance of electing Gore next time around.
String theory help us (since there's clearly no god) if that **** gets
in. Look at the track record (and of course tis the topic of discussion)
'I lost that last run at the presidency, **** it, we're all going to
die, the planet is on fire etc, if I don't get what I want, we all
suffer' . Then to justify the 'mandate' he gets elected under (rather
than concede it's the lesser of two evils, at optimistic best, there'll
be a complete ****over of the economy (which will by proxy affect our
ex****t earnings a lot) to 'save the world' . A bit like communism saves
the world. I don't wonder about Al Gore saving the planet, I wonder who
will save the planet from him.
--
John McKenzie
tosspam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
vice.president@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
president@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
uce@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
admin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
world's #1 sardine whisperer root@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
$USER@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
$LOGNAME@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-h1024@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fraudinfo@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
abuse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
