Democratic debate

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

For those that are watching the dabate what do you think about it right now? If you are not watching it then turn to the Fox News Channel.

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

YO! LIBERMAN JUST GOT CHUMPED BY SHARPTEN!!!! :lol:

I think Al Sharpten is doing better than anybody else. He gots everybody all up on there feet when he talks and he chumped Liberman. THAT SHIT WAS FUNNY!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Bradyman]

That Sharpten is quite the character. I personally would want none of those guys as president, but if I had to chose, I'd pick Sharpten.

[Jesus Christ]

watching a US political debate is like watching a beauty pageant
"Hi, my name is Joe Lieberman, and when I become president, I want world peace."
there is no actual debate going on lol
and its sad because politicians in the US are joking around during debates

[Al Creed]

Did the candidates know the questions before the debate? Or do they not share the same fear of knowing things that Governator *Shudder* Ah-nuld has?

[Marxist in Nebraska]

I missed the debate... Am I the only one who finds it odd that Fox News--the most unabashedly right-wing propagandist in the media--is the only network covering the Democratic debates?

I like Al Sharpton. I think he is one of the best candidates the Dems are offering. How about Dennis Kucinich? Did he say or do anything memorable? Is Gen. Clark continuing to struggle when challenged?

[Jesus Christ]

i say its time that Nader got elected

[RebeldePorLaPAZ]

Al Sharpton gets my vote, well that would be if I could vote. The media and most right wing politics keep saying that these democrates are really left and they keep pointing at Howard Dean. I don't know but I don't like Dean that much. Sharpton talked like he knows what he's talking about and he gets people to listen. Thats whats good about him.

[Marxist in Nebraska]

The media does seem to fixated on Dean. It is sad to see all of the liberals who are supporting him so enthusiastically, because he is a centrist who runs right on several issues. I am entirely unimpressed with him. If I were to rank the nine Democratic candidates for president, Dean only places fourth on my list--behind Kucinich, Sharpton, and the retired General Clark.

[SonofRage]

Originally posted by Marxist in [email protected] 27 2003, 12:49 PM
I missed the debate... Am I the only one who finds it odd that Fox News--the most unabashedly right-wing propagandist in the media--is the only network covering the Democratic debates?

I like Al Sharpton. I think he is one of the best candidates the Dems are offering. How about Dennis Kucinich? Did he say or do anything memorable? Is Gen. Clark continuing to struggle when challenged?
The different news networks have each gotten an exclusive shot at one of the many Democratic debates. That's why it was only on Fox News (although it was repeated on C-Span). Al Sharpton has been great at the debates. He is by far the best speaker of the bunch. If one of the Democrats wins, I'd love to see him as Press Secretary :D

[Sabocat]

The media loves Dean because there's no fear of him changing anything. MiN is right...he's a centrist Democrat or Clinton Democrat (whichever you'd prefer).

Clark scares me. This is a guy that was all for the war in Kosovo, committed who knows what kind of attrocities and is now trying to put himself out there as a dove. I don't buy it. In my paranoid mind, I fear that he may be in there to dilute the votes from the others. It's been done before in U$ politics. Bottom line, I'd never vote for a general. Retired or not.

A killer ticket would be a Kucinich/Sharpton ticket. They both ignite the left, and are by far the most progressive. If they joined forces, I can't see how they couldn't capture the primaries and party nomination. Of course, there is no chance of either of them being around after the first few primaries.

If the two of them looked like they were pulling ahead in the polls, and were on an airplane together, I'm sure they would meet a fate like Paul Wellstone.

[Marxist in Nebraska]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2003, 05:23 AM
Clark scares me. This is a guy that was all for the war in Kosovo, committed who knows what kind of attrocities and is now trying to put himself out there as a dove. I don't buy it. In my paranoid mind, I fear that he may be in there to dilute the votes from the others. It's been done before in U$ politics. Bottom line, I'd never vote for a general. Retired or not.
Disgustapated,

Michael Moore has been defending Clark's record lately. He claims, among other things, that Clark was not enthusiastic about bombing Kosovo. I am not saying Moore is absolutely right, but his is the only progressive voice I have heard talk seriously about Clark. Do you have any sources for what you are suggesting?

[dopediana]

i've been watching this debate in government class. it's quite a joke except for sharpton and kucinich. i've only seen the first half hour so far. but really, those two men are absolute beasts. unfortunately, my assignment in to follow lieberman's campaign and support him. it's absurd. he's a numbskull. clark is too appeasing for the right. and i can't remember who it was which is bad of me but someone was pushing for the 87 billion dollars on the basis that troops were out in the desert without basic items for survival such as toothpaste, etc. i thought that was absurd though. it's only appeasing bush, giving in, not voting for the war and then voting for the 87 billion.

[Sabocat]

Disgustapated,

Michael Moore has been defending Clark's record lately. He claims, among other things, that Clark was not enthusiastic about bombing Kosovo. I am not saying Moore is absolutely right, but his is the only progressive voice I have heard talk seriously about Clark. Do you have any sources for what you are suggesting?

This is a link to some discussion about the general's handling of troops in Kosovo. Some odd stuff here. Scroll down to the Kosovo questions about midway down in the article.

http://www.muslimwakeup.com/mainarchive/000202.html

Another interesting article going back a bit further into his past.

http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen09182003.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/GOW309A.html

Wasn't it in the 20's when the Progressive Party was set up and really did nothing more than dilute election results? Didn't Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, start and/or run later on under the Progressive ticket? I believe the Dixiecrats of Strom Thurmond were nothing more than a diluting factor either. Just conjecture on my part, but the bourgeois politics here in the U$ has been planned, operated and run by Industrialists and the rest of the Wall Street ruling class since the beginning. I don't think they're gonna allow Bush to be defeated in '04, and I see Clarke as being nothing more than a means to an end.

[Exploited Class]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2003, 07:04 AM
watching a US political debate is like watching a beauty pageant
"Hi, my name is Joe Lieberman, and when I become president, I want world peace."
there is no actual debate going on lol
and its sad because politicians in the US are joking around during debates
This is what "debates" look like when you have 9 people on the stage. It isn't really a debate at this point but stumping and a meet the canidates. You can't have debating when 9 people are on the stage, there won't be debating till they are down to about 3 canidates.

[Marxist in Nebraska]

Originally posted by Exploited [email protected] 30 2003, 04:46 PM
This is what "debates" look like when you have 9 people on the stage. It isn't really a debate at this point but stumping and a meet the canidates. You can't have debating when 9 people are on the stage, there won't be debating till they are down to about 3 canidates.
And by the time we are down to three candidates, Sharpton and or Kucinich will be long gone... the most interesting, compelling candidates are losing their only real chance to appeal to the voters.

[rebel with a cause]

IN regards to Wesley Clark, if he's coming to the left, then lets just take him.

How the fuck is Bush gonna challenge him on security issues.

It would just be great in the debate to hear Bush when refering to him,

"Yes, General...I agree General...I'm sorry general"

*sigh*

Why don't all the deomcrats just vote green instead?

[Sabocat]

I say if Wesley Clark the warmonger is coming to the left, we tell him to fuck off.

[Marxist in Nebraska]

Originally posted by rebel with a [email protected] 31 2003, 01:39 AM
IN regards to Wesley Clark, if he's coming to the left, then lets just take him.

How the fuck is Bush gonna challenge him on security issues.
I agree... this is Michael Moore's point.

One of Bush's primary bases of support is with people who hide behind him because they are afraid of terrorism. He is promoted as our great protector, our savior. It would be nice to see him in debate on national security issues with Clark...

Candidate #1: Retired former four star general, former supreme commander of NATO... (impressive military credentials)

Candidate #2: Ducked the Vietnam War when his father got him into the Texas Air National Guard, but even deserted from that... (and there are not enough photo opps in flight jackets to make that inconvenient fact go away!)

Who are YOU more likely to trust on matters of national security?

(This should not be seen as an enthusiastic endorsement on my part for Wes Clark. I just love the contrast in that picture.)