he hung up faster than anyone i have seen who have got pranked with arnold soundboards. I have seen between 10-20 arnold prank calls and Romney figured it out faster than them all... he's got my vote ;)
I got prank called one time, from "Howard Stern". at my job. Took me a minute actually, to figure it out. When he just kept going and didn't respond to my questions or answers, it clicked in to me. But at first, I was taken in. Yes, I'm a blonde! LOL.
Canuck...you've had much to say about the US presidential race. But it's all been negatively critical (unless I've missed something...entirely possible).
What is the Canadian (or at least your) opinion as to who is the best candidate? Us folks down here actually have to make a choice...and it is not a comfortable set of options that present....so....your pick....?
Thank you for asking me some reasonable questions, instead of coming at me with the ol' "HOW-DARE-YOU-HAVE-AN-OPINION-ABOUT-MY-COUNTRYS-AFFAIRS-AS-AN-OUTSIDER" tact.
Glad to see we're all starting to think INTERNATIONALLY, instead of "nationallly", given what I've said about ANYONE sitting in the Oval Office capable of affecting the scope of issues, beyond your borders. Bravo. Now then....to the answer at-hand:
The Republican candidates (and party as a whole) have already demonstrated to be corrupt, incompetent, dangerously ignorant/clueless and lacking in trustworthiness. Most, if not all, if the candidates are driven either by theological beliefs, or are pandering to those that have them. The only exception would probably be Ron Paul, but because he represents something the U.S. infrastructure badly needs, i.e. genuine change.....he won't get very far, simply because the electorate is way too skittish about embracing that kind of shift. But on the Republican side, he'd get my nod.
On the Democrat side, Hillary is pretty well the one who rivals any hard-core Republican, in terms of being crooked. She has no concrete policies, no genuine blueprint for change and she WILL ride on Bill's coattails, to get whatever she wants. Obama sounds pretty decent, but I think unless he finally decides to take off the kid-gloves, and simply say "enough's enough", and REALLY start to hammer the spineless dopes in his party....then he might fail, and would give the perception that he lacks the resolve to be a strong statesman/leader. As it stands, my personal favourite is Edwards. He's articulate, passionate, genuine-sounding and you know what? I imagines myself as whatever-foreign leader sitting down with a meeting with him, and asked myself "Could I take this guy seriously? Could I believe him?" And I thought, "Yeah.....I could."
So Edwards gets the nod from me on the Dems side....and Paul gets it on the Dummy Partys side.
Is his poor showing a direct result of the "Dog on the Car Roof" expose, or is it just because he is an arrogant, vacuous, forked-tongued, leering Mormon idiot?
Hey arse....interesting to see such emotional views from across the pond. One might find many who agree with your opinion over here, but I wonder why feelings run as dramatically extreme (as your posting indicates) over there (?).
cause the US manages to influence other countries UK Australia (coalition of the willing i think they call it) so when a moron invades another country and other morons follow, it affects a lot of people who have the right to comment wether they are from the US or not. PS were is your posse CHAT.
Chaz - I don't think feelings do run that high over here on the candidates. But when I see a prick like this Romney it just irritates me. So do Huckabee (barking mad), Clinton (ruthless and devious), Giuliani (ruthless, devious and psychotic).
None of my business how US citizens vote, but given that the winner is going to be the "most powerful man/woman in the world", I think I'd be odd not to take an interest. No offence.
The most powerful man in the world bit depends on perspective.
Take the Dachsund stance for instance. To them, I WEINERDOG, LORD AND MASTER, happen to be the most powerful being in the world!!! BWAH, HAH, HAH, HAH!!!!!!!
I reign supreme over Potty time, Snausages, and Belly Rubs, not to mention the dreaded....................Bath Time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But who, then, would our friends in our mother country prefer?
As has been noted, criticizing is a fun sport...but what does one do when one must actually choose. Pretend you're choosing....who ... ?
Chaz, as it looks now you can only go for the least crap. canuck summed it up pretty good. With most of the rep candidates we will see even more of the war on terror bullshit and Ron Paul is not likely to make it.
The democratic candidates are not a nice picture either. Clinton would be really bad, I would not expect her to extend the wars but she is a genuine opportunist and will get nothing done. My favourite would be Obama, but as canuck pointed out he is too soft.
Chaz -
I posted elsewhere that I was most impressed by the little I have seen of Ron Paul. Very refreshing I thought. But no doubt he has skeletons in his closet too? I don't know - I just thought he seemed very different in his approach from the usual suspects. Maybe not the kind of man to stride the international stage?
To most average Europeans like me, the US electoral system is very confusing and seems to be almost totally money driven. Ours is pretty shit too by the way!
Ron Paul would be a wonderful option if only he had "stage presence", a deeper voice, fewer "deer-in-the-headlights" expressions, was less strident under pressure, and such. I am somewhat abashed at the electorate, which seems most driven by appearances (hence the wave of popularity building around the Obama campaign - he is, after all, "charismatic", if nothing else.)
Superficial, one might say....and that would be correct. But I think the electorate tries to picture our president in the presence of international personnae....how will he/she stack up alongside Putin, Ahmadinejad, Kohler/Merkel/Steinmeier, Gordon Brown, Stephen Harper, and the rest of the movers and shakers in the international stage. Ron does not impress, though I'd like to see him in that position...I think.
Have you any opinion re: John McCain (talk about the opposite to "charisma")...he is serious, honest, speaks without dancing around the subject...etc. He is also 72, and harbors thoughts not totally in line with some mainstream notions (e.g., re: abortion, illegal immigration - two inflammatory topics).
watching this again I wonder, Mitt happens as we say in mass. When he was elected in mass I was hope'ng to have the olympics and meeting all his wives, that never happen, why?
I will look more closely at your postings in the future.
Mitt, BTW, has only one wife, as you must have known. Not a Mitt, backer, but not a Mitt slayer either. This crop of candidates is so disappointing...I mean, Mitt, in the long view, is not such a bad option as so many others. And the Mormon label, I think, is like the Catholic label...significant only as a hammer during the campaign, and irrelevant during the actual period in office.
Comments (40)
To post a comment, you need to login or signup.