Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

Started by Todd, April 07, 2015, 10:07:58 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

28Orot

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 10, 2016, 08:05:48 AM
Umm.. Bill isn't running for office. There IS a schmuck running, but it isn't him. As I say, it is a non-issue. You really need to get past that and let your mind ripen a little bit. :)

8)

Oh so if the thief's wife was running that should be ok?

$:) Throw the ball I'm ready for a homerun....

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: Brian on June 10, 2016, 07:58:57 AM
I wouldn't. Maybe it's cuz I'm younger, but really, if Hillary was getting some hot action, who cares? Good for her. Don't lie about it, or whisper state secrets to your lover a la Petraeus, or legislate against your secret kinks. But if you can have some bedroom fun times without influencing your ability to do your job, I really don't care.

P.S. Somebody tell Saul to never move to France...

No, I meant I would reconsider whether he was at least arguing a point worth talking about. As for if it would change my mind about her, no, not really. I am a grownup.

Yes, France or any other European country, where apparently there are grownups too. Don't forget, we live in the last bastion of religious fundamentalism. Puritanism is not confined to Xtians you know.

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

Gurn Blanston

Quote from: 28Orot on June 10, 2016, 08:07:49 AM
Oh so if the thief's wife was running that should be ok?

$:) Throw the ball I'm ready for a homerun....

Well, if that is your issue for this election, good luck with it. I simply don't care enough about it to type any longer...

8)
Visit my Haydn blog: HaydnSeek

Haydn: that genius of vulgar music who induces an inordinate thirst for beer - Mily Balakirev (1860)

28Orot

Quote from: Gurn Blanston on June 10, 2016, 08:10:40 AM
Well, if that is your issue for this election, good luck with it. I simply don't care enough about it to type any longer...

8)

Its the only issue. The president should have fine qualities and principals, should have the fear of God upon him/her, and should be modest, humble, and moral.

Not Hillary and not Trump fit this description, that is why in my opinion they don't qualify.

Brian

Quote from: 28Orot on June 10, 2016, 08:15:33 AM
Its the only issue. The president should have fine qualities and principals, should have the fear of God upon him/her, and should be modest, humble, and moral.
Um, has America ever had a president like that? Most likely Jimmy Carter - but he wasn't a great president.

Brian

Quote from: 28Orot on June 10, 2016, 07:59:05 AM
If you are a decent individual who doesn't want to be the talk of the country and the world, you will not continue to have a public life. But if cheating, sexual promiscuity and indecent behavior is something that you can tolerate just like the clintons then by all means you wouldn't mind becoming the president.

Catch my drift?
Your drift is insanely stupid. You're saying that Hillary should have given up her career because of shame of somebody else?

Karl Henning

Quote from: Brian on June 10, 2016, 08:25:27 AM
Um, has America ever had a president like that? Most likely Jimmy Carter - but he wasn't a great president.

Anyway, fear of God as a requirement is neither enforceable, nor Constitutional.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

The new erato

Quote from: 28Orot on June 10, 2016, 08:15:33 AM
Its the only issue. The president should have fine qualities and principals, should have the fear of God upon him/her, and should be modest, humble, and moral.

I thought your whole point was that Hillary had a principal instead of acting on her own principles?

28Orot

Quote from: Brian on June 10, 2016, 08:26:16 AM
Your drift is insanely stupid. You're saying that Hillary should have given up her career because of shame of somebody else?


Husband is not a synonym for 'somebody else'.

28Orot

Quote from: Brian on June 10, 2016, 08:25:27 AM
Um, has America ever had a president like that? Most likely Jimmy Carter - but he wasn't a great president.

I think John Adams.
Carter?

LOL, you can't be serious.

28Orot

Quote from: karlhenning on June 10, 2016, 08:37:11 AM
Anyway, fear of God as a requirement is neither enforceable, nor Constitutional.

But that's what I prefer. Since the world doesn't run according to my liking, we shall sit this one at home... didn't I say that already?

Ken B

Let me summarize.
People who object to Trump based on his character object to Saul objecting to Hillary based on her character.

28Orot

Quote from: Ken B on June 10, 2016, 08:48:20 AM
Let me summarize.
People who object to Trump based on his character object to Saul objecting to Hillary based on her character.

:) good point

Brian

Quote from: 28Orot on June 10, 2016, 08:38:55 AM
I think John Adams.
Carter?

LOL, you can't be serious.
Carter is a modest, humble man who has devoted the last 35 years to charitable and diplomatic endeavors around the globe. He's a man of well-known, deep religious faith. He has never had any sex scandals or obvious "immoral" acts. He fits your description perfectly - although anybody who runs for president will have some ego.

Ken B

Quote from: karlhenning on June 10, 2016, 08:37:11 AM
Anyway, fear of God as a requirement is neither enforceable, nor Constitutional.
You mentioned ethics. Are those enforceable or constitutional?

I wonder at those missing Saul's point. Hillary's behavior in regard to Bill's philandering IS revealing of character. This is undeniable I think. Whether you argue it shows

  • a disregard of decorum and morality
  • a kind and forgiving nature
  • a cynical decision to keep her wagon hitched to his
it does provide clues about Hillary's character. Saul objects to the kind of character he sees revealed. You don't have to agree either with his inference or his judgment to understand it.

28Orot

Quote from: Brian on June 10, 2016, 08:52:24 AM
Carter is a modest, humble man who has devoted the last 35 years to charitable and diplomatic endeavors around the globe. He's a man of well-known, deep religious faith. He has never had any sex scandals or obvious "immoral" acts. He fits your description perfectly - although anybody who runs for president will have some ego.

But he supports Hamas over Israel. You need to be monster to do that.

The new erato

Quote from: 28Orot on June 10, 2016, 08:59:43 AM
But he supports Hamas over Israel. You need to be monster to do that.
Not really.

Karl Henning

Quote from: Ken B on June 10, 2016, 08:57:55 AM
You mentioned ethics. Are those enforceable or constitutional?

No, and a perfectly good point.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Ken B

Quote from: 28Orot on June 10, 2016, 08:59:43 AM
But he supports Hamas over Israel. You need to be monster to do that.

I think Brian was showing up a flaw in your argument. According to the criterion you stated
Quote from: 28Orot on June 10, 2016, 08:15:33 AM
Its the only issue. The president should have fine qualities and principals, should have the fear of God upon him/her, and should be modest, humble, and moral.
James Earl Carter III should be your man. He's a god-fearing, god-talking, whirling dervish of piety.

28Orot

Quote from: The new erato on June 10, 2016, 09:01:35 AM
Not really.

Well if someone sides with a terrorist organization that has written on its charter to murder every single Jew on the planet, over a free and a democratic country is a monster.