John Edwards's Address to the Teamsters

[diesel96]

No, I am not happy with how this administration has handled itself regarding fiscal responsiblity, but I'm certain we would be in worse shape if either of Bush's two opponents had won.

------------------------------------------------- Your certain..huh...Lets see Bush approval rate 30-35 %
Clinton approval rate when left office 65-68% even with a sex scandel.(Would have been higher without it)
Only using Clinton as an example because of similar political beliefs of Bush's last two opponents.
-------------------------------------------------

Also, you say I should try free thinking, and I believe it would help you if you looked in the mirror once in a while when you say that. I don't look to the previous administration when considering who to vote for in the future elections. I look at all the candidates and what they stand for on current events during my consideration process. The fact remains that the $5 trillion you mentioned earlier is a drop in the bucket when compared to all the government programs Satan...er Hillary is promising. Nationalized Healthcare, $5000 for every baby born, government sponsored 401k match. We can't afford all this plus take care of other business. Atleast not without raising taxes and putting a serious burden on every American. A future President needs to have a clear stance on how to win the war on terror, fix social security and medicare, and free up our healthcare system so the free market can do what it does best.
-----------------------------------------------

Take care of other business, you mean start Wars overseas and neglect our own borders , peolple and enviroment. No Thx. Don't think for a moment majority of Americans want THEIR tax dollars going towards mismanaged wars and rebuilding nations and paying off high interest debts to foreign nations.The only clear serious burden on Americans is their sons and daughters coming home in a flag draped coffin or maimed on a stretcher for what, a metaphor "Win the War on Terror".

----------------------------------------------

When you start talking about WWIII maybe you shouldn't look at our current president, but look to Jimmy Carter who let Iran fall into the islamo facist cessepool that it currently is. No president has contributed more to a possible WWIII than Jimmy Carter.

-------------------------------------------------

Wow..lol..your really reaching calling out President Carter as the precipitater of WWIII
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2002/press.html



Contrary to your amusing Carter analysis, I'm looking at our current president as the main contributer to the possible start of WWIII. The only standing president to ever suggest such a scenario.

US President George W. Bush speaks at a press conference in the White House briefing room in Washington, DC. Bush Wednesday warned Iran must be barred from nuclear weapons to avoid the prospect of “World War III,” and dismissed suggestions of a US-Russia rift on the crisis.
Question. How much damage can one lame-duck president cause in just over a year? Answer. Just wait and see, because Bush is promising to show us.

 

[brett636]

------------------------------------------------- Your certain..huh...Lets see Bush approval rate 30-35 %
Clinton approval rate when left office 65-68% even with a sex scandel.(Would have been higher without it)
Only using Clinton as an example because of similar political beliefs of Bush's last two opponents.

The democratic controlled congress currently has an approval rating of 11%. An all time low. I guess the President is still doing three times better than the democrats that think they are going to be running things after 2008.

Take care of other business, you mean start Wars overseas and neglect our own borders , peolple and enviroment. No Thx. Don't think for a moment majority of Americans want THEIR tax dollars going towards mismanaged wars and rebuilding nations and paying off high interest debts to foreign nations.The only clear serious burden on Americans is their sons and daughters coming home in a flag draped coffin or maimed on a stretcher for what, a metaphor "Win the War on Terror".

In case you haven't noticed, none of the democratic nominees have stated how or when they plan to end the war. Hillary has even gone as far as saying she doesn't know what she will have until she gets there, which is obvious BS. The consitution gives the congress the power to end the war today, but why aren't they? Also, its the democrats who keep trying to push the dream act through congress when they think we aren't looking. In case you don't know what that is its an act that will grant amnesty to all illegal immigrants in this country who came here before they turned 16. I would like to know who is keeping track of what age these people are when they enter our country illegally. The sad truth is Bush would probably sign it, but if those in the know have anything to say about it it won't make it to the president's desk.

Your previous statement also shows your ignorance on why we are fighting and the enemy we face. The war on terror was declared not by us, but by islamo facists many years ago. We just chose to do nothing about it, and this is especially true of the Clinton administration where they covered their ears, closed their eyes, and screamed "LALALALALALA". After Bush gets into office does something actually occur that causes us to wake up and do something about it. Bush gets all the blame that should be placed on his predecessors.

Wow..lol..your really reaching calling out President Carter as the precipitater of WWIII
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2002/press.html



Contrary to your amusing Carter analysis, I'm looking at our current president as the main contributer to the possible start of WWIII. The only standing president to ever suggest such a scenario.

US President George W. Bush speaks at a press conference in the White House briefing room in Washington, DC. Bush Wednesday warned Iran must be barred from nuclear weapons to avoid the prospect of “World War III,” and dismissed suggestions of a US-Russia rift on the crisis.
Question. How much damage can one lame-duck president cause in just over a year? Answer. Just wait and see, because Bush is promising to show us.

Unfortuantly the Nobel Peace prize has lost all meaning since it has been given to Al Gore. If you can recieve it based on an pushing an unproven theory as fact then it really does mean nothing. Carter allowed Iran to fall to a small group of islamo facist thugs who are now threatening the world with nuclear weapons they are working feverishly to create. You must put blinders on to be able to claim Bush is the most dangerous world leader when it is Bush who is trying to prevent a nation from getting weapons that could drastically change our current way of life. Iran's president has no respect for the same principles that kept the cold war from becoming a nuclear one. We can't afford to have a president who's foriegn policy is to appease these people. It will only weaken us in the long run.

Back to the topic, last I checked Bush is not running in 2008, and it appears the democrats will vote Hillary as their nominee for president. I want you to name me three great accomplishments hillary has done in her time as first lady and as a senator. Being a woman is not an option, show me why she would be a great leader.

 

[Mystakilla]

This has gotten WAY off topic thread.

 

[Damok]

When you start talking about WWIII maybe you shouldn't look at our current president, ...

Actually our current President brought it up in a press conference :/ That was disturbing.

 

[diesel96]

The democratic controlled congress currently has an approval rating of 11%. An all time low. I guess the President is still doing three times better than the democrats that think they are going to be running things after 2008.

You forgot to mention the reps' are deadweight in congress as well, bogging down legislature. Their idea of a productive day is condeming a newspaper ad.
Look, I'm not dragging this out, this is labor relations, not current events. Someone had the courtesy of sharing a canidates positive message to the members and our union but those who share your neo rt wing views started ripping him. I question why some of you are members of a union since you support the politcal wing that lobbys for the end of their existense. Are you members for principle or are you in it just for greed ? It's comical when I hear from the right "Reagon is a God"..NO...Reagon is a union buster! And GW could care less about your union also..Who's the ignorant one?

 

[tieguy]

Good point, Companies are creating minimum wage jobs but sending better paying jobs overseas. Thats, IMO dwittling the middle class.

Not necessarily. You do have to go to school and get the sheepskin to get the better paying jobs.

Lord help us if any of these dimwits get into the whitehouse. I fear for this country's future if they do.


I suppose your perfectly comfortable with this Administration's legacy of 5 trillion dollar debt to foreign nations and possibly entering us into WWIII. But thats ok with you though, so I guess we'll all be fine.

I suppose you're comfortable with Edwards attack on big business, closing the borders and driving our cost of living through the roof to astronimical levels. But then if nafta really bothers you then you should thank Bill Clinton first and foremost.

 

[Damok]

[ But then if nafta really bothers you then you should thank Bill Clinton first and foremost.

Actually you'll want to thank Bush Sr. first when he signed it, along with Mexico and Canada, in 1992 subject to ratification. Clinton comes along and, like a knucklehead, gives it a go. He added The North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation and The North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation.

I personally blame any and every one who had a hand in its passage whichever side of the aisle they may be on.

 

[brett636]

The democratic controlled congress currently has an approval rating of 11%. An all time low. I guess the President is still doing three times better than the democrats that think they are going to be running things after 2008.

You forgot to mention the reps' are deadweight in congress as well, bogging down legislature. Their idea of a productive day is condeming a newspaper ad.
Look, I'm not dragging this out, this is labor relations, not current events. Someone had the courtesy of sharing a canidates positive message to the members and our union but those who share your neo rt wing views started ripping him. I question why some of you are members of a union since you support the politcal wing that lobbys for the end of their existense. Are you members for principle or are you in it just for greed ? It's comical when I hear from the right "Reagon is a God"..NO...Reagon is a union buster! And GW could care less about your union also..Who's the ignorant one?

To answer your last question, you would be the ignorant one.

I know quite well how anti-union republicans are, both past and present. You see, I am not a one issue voter. This country was founded on principles of freedom, and the democrats are hell bent on changing all of that. While they may be pro-labor, I can find another job. I can't find another country like this one.

 

[blue efficacy]

Looking through this thread I don't see the point being made yet so I guess I'll be the one. I'm not comfortable with Edwards because I believe He has taken his wifes illness and tried to benifit from the sympathy derived. Very tacky tactic on his part. Thus I don't believe Edwards has any principles he stands behind.

So how does this explain why I don't have a clue and get tagged with negative rep?

All politicians are deceptive. Some in malevolent ways (Bush) and some in harmless ways (Clinton, Edwards)


I'd take the tacky president over the president who lies to start a war where the profiteers are the only winners every time.

But I guess I don't have a clue. Tie guy said I don't so it must be true. Maybe someday I'll be in management or at least be a FT hourly so I can be right once in a while. Us PTers are always wrong it seems.

 

[blue efficacy]

Union Republicans truly baffle me. Being in a union is contrary to basically every conservative ideal. But since it gets ya your $28 an hour you'll look the other way on that issue.

But heaven forbid you pay taxes so the children of those who often work as hard as you do, and have no union, can actually have health care.

$28 an hour isn't enough and the Democrats are destroying this country! Their support of social justice and organized labor will be the death of us all.

 

[KTB]

Union Republicans truly baffle me. Being in a union is contrary to basically every conservative ideal. But since it gets ya your $28 an hour you'll look the other way on that issue.

I've never gotten it either. It takes some real self hate to sit there listening to some conservative call you a lazy, over paid communist that's bringing the entire country down and then agree with what he just said. Get some dignity, already!

 

[brett636]

Union Republicans truly baffle me. Being in a union is contrary to basically every conservative ideal. But since it gets ya your $28 an hour you'll look the other way on that issue.

But heaven forbid you pay taxes so the children of those who often work as hard as you do, and have no union, can actually have health care.

$28 an hour isn't enough and the Democrats are destroying this country! Their support of social justice and organized labor will be the death of us all.

We baffle you because you choose not to listen to us. There are so many issues that are more important to me than organized labor. All of which currently make this nation great.

They include:

Right to Free Speech
Right to Bear Arms
Protecting the borders
Winning the war on terror
Fixing Social security and medicare
Lowering taxes

And so many more. As I said I will give up my well paying union job in a heartbeat so long as these issues get taken care of.