Clinton Winning NH doesn’t mean that she will
clinch the Nomination. While I would like Billy boy back in the WH, I just can’t get behind HRC. I also believe that HRC getting the Nomination will effectively bring out EVERY WINGNUT imaginable and leave us stuck with the horror that is Huckabee. and Nothing—NOTHING could be worse than that fucking crazy bastard nutball. I honestly believe he will send out
“The Delta Force” to liberate Iran. Think about it…seriously. Uuuuhg.
January 8th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I’m worried about that (the wingnuts rising up), too, ’cause yeah…Huckabee scares the shit out of me. Eight years of a president who thinks he’s been Called By Tha Lawd! is really enough, kthxbai.
I wish we could have, like, co-presidents or something. Have several but only give each one or two areas to control. Until that happens, though, I’ll cross my fingers, toes, legs and eyes for Edwards, and take Obama as sloppy seconds. But I’ll totally own up to being a Ron Paul groupie of sorts.
January 9th, 2008 at 6:49 am
Oh god, no. Paul appeals to staunch Libertarians, but if you dig real deep, his libertarian stance has A LOT of holes in it—Especially on the subject of abortion. Personal liberties are a good thing, don’t get e wrong—I agree with most libertarians when it comes to such issues. However, Paulites are a strange lot. RP has an interesting history of being libertarian on economic issues but more conservative on social issues.
January 9th, 2008 at 6:54 am
Actually, Ron Paul is scarier than I originally thought…
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca
January 9th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Totally agree…that’s why I added “of sorts”. He’s one of the co-presidents I’d choose, maybe let him handle pieces of economic policy (income tax mess) and ending the pointless “war on drugs”. ONLY Obama would be allowed to handle social issues, because from what I’ve been able to dig up, he backs his pro-choice stance every step of the way.
Ah, a girl can dream…right?