« Even When He's Trying To Do the Right Thing, He Does the Wrong Thing | Main | Well, At Least This Is One Study That Didn't Cost American Taxpayers Anything »

08/31/2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Gee Tom, who's your candidate? I have no unearthly idea who it could be.

I haven't actually chosen my candidate for President yet. It will certainly be the Democrat, unless Hillary is nominated. I'm on the record as opposing the election of Hillary Clinton, since I think we need to get this whole Clinton-Bush period of American history over with. So if she's the nominee I'm not sure what I'll do. Maybe vote Republican, especially if it's clear the Dems are going to keep the Congress. I like divided government.

I kind of like Bill Richardson, since he's 1) not a Senator and 2) has no chance of getting elected. (I like governors for President more than I like Senators, and I have a history of picking losers that goes back to John Anderson, who I voted for because I thought the live version of "Starship Trooper" was so good to listen to with headphones.)

So, Lee, if you've got it figured out who I'm supporting, I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know.

Why are you picking on Jimmy Carter after all these years?

He does this to bait me Conrad, so I can't let him down. I vote for America's Number One Nail Pounder.

Wow, Tom! I just read your comment. You actually voted for a man who at least three separate times tried to get a constitutional amendment going that would make America a Christian country?

Christianist!

Tom,
He meant who is your candidate for worst President. Remember, those of us who are obtuse don't need to be purposefully obtuse for humorous effect.

I would have gone for John Tyler, being that he actually supported the Confederate cause as an ex-prez. That easily trumps James Buchanan, who simply was apathetic towards the impending crisis.

Bill "Hildago" Richardson (or whatever "Hispanic"* name he's using) is playing the race card. Since he's neither black nor a woman, and since obesity doesn't generate quite the same oomph as other minority/victim states do, he's gone with the one card he can play.

Repulsive.

Let's look at substance. He's tainted by his association with Clinton, serving as both Sec. of Energy and Ambassador to the UN. Good resume, but the Clintons have a history of sleaze. I worry how much of that may have rubbed off on to him.

How about his deeds as Governor? Given that New Mexico is at or near the bottom for economic and academic achievement, maybe not so great. He supports the death penalty and gun rights (good), but also supports Affirmative Action and classified sexual orientation as a "civil right" (bad).

Still, I'd rather he be the Democratic candidate than Clinton v.2 or Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. His election would be less of a disaster than either of those two.

*How can a "race" be defined by language?

"How can a 'race' be defined by language?"

I dunno, the "Indianapolis 500" works pretty well. You know, it's 500 miles and it's in Indianapolis.

I dunno, the "Indianapolis 500" works pretty well. You know, it's 500 miles and it's in Indianapolis.

It's lines like that which make me regret never having read Conrad's blog. That was beautiful.

Yeah, it was a thing of beauty. He can write well--very rare in a lawyer, the training for which requires one to abandon good writing for legalese--and covered a broad range of interesting topics. He also featured boobies!

But the thing I will always be eternally grateful for is Conrad's role in turning me conservative after all my years in the liberal wilderness.

The comments to this entry are closed.