KOOL-AID + ANTIQUITY = PATHETIC !
Need Your Presidential Candidates! And those cannot be what we have now! Here is the sad reality:
KOOL-AID + ANTIQUITY = PATHETIC !
A ZERO SUBSTANCE CANDIDACY THAT RUNS ON ONLY BLIND EMOTION ...
And ..... A CANDIDACY THAT RUNS ONLY ON AN ANTIQUITY OF IDEAS ...
Make for one of the most absurd presidential election of all time.
Our (non) choices are Obama and McCain?????
Where is THAT CANDIDATE who will “call it the way it is rather than "this will get me elected?”
Where is that Teddy Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and some others who HAS THE BRAINS, THE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, STATURE AND WHEREWITHAL to propel the GREATEST COUNTRY ON EARTH back to greatness. And a genuine and huge measure of altruism to go with that?
To show the world that we are indeed the most altruistic nation on earth. That our people readily shed blood for the benefit of the world.
To channel our political process to social service to all our people. Nothing to do with checkbooks they may readily brandish to cause executive action.
To instill both fear and respect in our enemies.
To make our “friends” see clearly the benefits and benevolence of our friendships. And make certain that we are just that: genuine and benevolent friends.
To preserve those institutions that ARE of fundamental value and create options to those institutions that are no longer relevant or just have become irreparably broken.
To bring ultimate class and unselfish purpose to the office.
Where is that candidate WHO DOES NOT EVER THINK OF RE-ELECTION?
Not the two PATHETIC, DEFAULT CANDIDATES WE ALL HAVE TO VOTE FOR: One 100% TELEPROMPTER, KOOL-AID FUELED EMPTY SUIT and one FORMER “MAVERICK,” NOW A 100% POLITICAL ANIMAL??
Tell us who YOU think should run for this office. Please give us YOUR BIG PICTURE WISH AND WHY.
What Say You?
-
rachee ( 91 posts / 2 fights ) from London, London (United Kingdom) on 07/01 at 08:25AM PT
You on your side of the pond are not the only ones with weightless choices. Maybe a one term limit of 4 to 6 years will serve you better. Maybe you should have a pre-election to pick candidates you want to run. I would fancy a write in system for many candidates the people want. Then have a primary system to pick from the choices the people fancy.
SOUND OFF ON THIS POST! Start Fight
-
harvard ( 30 posts / 0 fights ) from Boston, Massachusetts (United States) on 07/01 at 08:27AM PT
So we can send in our choices like Brad Pitt, Tom Brady, Kobe Bryant and Joe Lieberman?
SOUND OFF ON THIS POST! Start Fight
-
Backbiter ( 136 posts / 1 fights ) from West Hollywood, California (United States) on 07/01 at 09:37AM PT
I oppose term limits. We should have the right to vote for whomever we feel is fit to run the government. Would it have served the US right if Roosevelt was barred from running in 1940 or 1944? (hint - no) Would we be better off now if Bill Clinton had run and been re-elected in 2000 instead of W? (hint - yes)
SOUND OFF ON THIS POST! Start Fight
-
-
Backbiter ( 136 posts / 1 fights ) from West Hollywood, California (United States) on 06/30 at 03:18PM PT
Bill Clinton. Balanced Budget, Budget Surplus, worked with a Republican Congress and still got stuff done, economy was great, the world liked him.
SOUND OFF ON THIS POST! Start Fight
-
Harm ( 127 posts / 0 fights ) from Alexandria, Virginia (United States) on 06/30 at 03:55PM PT
And had more fun than anybody since U.S. Grant.
SOUND OFF ON THIS POST! Start Fight
-
cac ( 40 posts / 0 fights ) from LA, California (United States) on 07/02 at 12:16PM PT
And also neglected brewing terrorist threats around the world that one could argue led to 9/11. But let's face it, no one is good enough to be president. We need more political parties and a broader conversation. We need dialogue, period. Instead, we get talking heads that never have to complete the discussion on any given topic. Instead they offer one sliver of the big picture and pass it off as a solution.
-