Not that it matters much, but I did watch. I don't think it matters because Bush didn't set up a dictatorship to PASS IT OFF to someone else.
When HE DECLARES a "national emergency" the Dems will cave (just like they did on FISA) and THAT'S THAT!
The democraPs just want to SHARE the SPOILS of RULE, and they truly disgust me.
I must tell you, reader, that my approach to the "debates" is different. I do not see the candidates speaking to Americans despite the rhetoric. I view it not through my interests and lens, but through how AIPAC and the Zionists would respond.
Think about it, readers. When Edwards said there was no "War on Terror," down in the polls he went. Hillary reaffirmed the nuke option on Iran, and she has been surging ahead ever since. As for Obama, his anti-Iraq and taking nukes off the table remarks have seen him drop in the polls.
Here are my impressions of the candidates last night:
Bill Richardson: He once again had to wait nearly 20 minutes before getting a question. Richardson sounds good, but the moving out of Iraq plan, and the fact that the MSM has really not elevated him, proves he is more likely bucking for a VP slot. The guy has credentials, but he's going nowhere.
Barak Obama: The get-out-of-Iraq thing is driving his polls down, plus he seems more focused on Pakistan and "Al-CIA-Duh" than Iran. That accounts for the (rigged) polls dip! I think he is a generally well-meaning man, but the top-tier has already been preselected and his comments regarding the wars are the wrong ones for AIPAC. Bye-bye, Barak!
Hillary Clinton: Other than Bush and his crowd, I don't know if I have ever seen a more duplicitous pair than Bill and Hill! Wowee! She did win the debate, and did look presidential and "in-charge," that's for sure; however, the WHOLE PRESENTATION was FALSE!
She truly looked evil to me for the first time last night. She admitted (and was booed for it) that she WOULD NOT SAY what she would do as president while running as candidate! In other words, I'M LYING TO YOU!
Hillary is just a FALSE CHOICE in terms of being separate from Bush's policies. The fact is, she looked good last night because she has been GROOMED for the job by the Globalists!
Think about it, folks. We are going to have 28 years of Bush-Clintons? Bill got through NAFTA and GATT for the Globalists, got welfare "reform" through, and set the stage for Bush and his minions by not getting Osama (they never intended to get that creature, since he was WORKING FOR THEM)!!!
She kept saying she was going to change things, and I just kept thinking "No, you're not!" But SHE WILL BE the NOMINEE!
Whether she takes over the presidency or not, I just don't see it. Maybe, though. Maybe a woman with a change-of-direction can implement the "state-of-emergency" better than the hated Bush. The game can continue, and they can fool the Amurkn people again by pretending there are differences between the "left" and "right." It's not that anymore; the choice now is "freedom" or enslavement -- and despite the talk, Hillary is a Globalist Enslaver!!!
That plan DOVETAILS NICELY with the Neo-Con Likudnik agenda, so HERE IS YOUR DEM NOMINEE, folks.
She looks good to you, huh, Amurka?
Have you forgotten Oklahoma City (about 16 minutes in, run time 30 mins), Waco and first WTC attack in 1993?
Chris Dodd: Fiery, a member of the Bilderbergers, etc., so he really isn't a choice. And what's with the Islamist scare in Pakistan? I was told CONSTANTLY (even though reading the stuff day-after-day, I realized they were lying) that the Islamists don't do well in elections, that the pro-democracy forces are stronger. Yet, people spill out on the streets after the Red Mosque crisis. I have some really great pictures from the paper.
Anyhow, how SOFT-SOLD was the MILITARY DICTATORSHIP of Musharaff (oh, we gotta work with 'em, even if we don't like 'em)? I got one word for ya: IRAN!!!
And Iran has SIGNED the NPT and is ABIDING by it -- UNLIKE our FRIENDS Pakistan, India, and ISRAEL!
Oh, and he is for "national service" -- translation: A DRAFT!!!!!
So, pfffffttttt to Dodd!
John Edwards: He was off his "game" -- hate that term. Lives not a game! -- for some reason. Just hammered home the lobbying and labor stuff, which was pandering to the crowd, I guess. Yet Kucinich got the better applause on the issues Johnny was supposed to score well.
My belief is that Edwards is cooked, anyway. No "War on Terror?" Yeah, WE ALL KNOW THAT OUT HERE, but that pisses off AIPAC so HE'S DONE!
Joe Biden: Biden would have a shot if it weren't for Hillary. He has the cut Iraq up/Clean Break strategy, so maybe he'll be a VP choice. The guy does have passion and intellect; however, the crowd booed him (and others) when they DIDN'T ANSWER the audience's questions!
I know why that was; not about pleasing them, it's about PLEASING AIPAC (why do you think Rudy is leading the Repugs, when the real choice of the people is Ron Paul -- mired at 2-3%? -- as is reflected in the on-line polls)!!!
That's an aside, too, folks! Think about this. The frikkin' NY Times cuts its size and ups its costs, then tells me to go to the web for more. Yet they DISMISS what they want to dismiss off the web. That's why I didn't purchase again today (but more on that later).
Dennis Kucinich: This guy WON HANDS DOWN!!!! I don't agree with everything he said, but he was right about being out in front on all this. Sure does cosponsor a lot of bills. Congress should be working on only one, however: IMPEACHING CHENEY, H. Res 333!!!
Of course, that's why Denny's at 1%! AIPAC-driven polls put out as propaganda (remember, now 10% more of the public thinks the surge is working and Iraq was NOT a "mistake" -- it's MURDER, but -- according to MSM), so he'll never climb.
But the guy was RIGHT ON with GETTING OUT of NAFTA, getting out of the WTO! Plus the anti-war plan may not be perfect, but LOOK at the other available candidates! Puke!
Conclusion: So if the primaries were fair and elected who the American people really wanted, we would have a Kucinich-Paul race in November 2008.
Think that will happen, reader?
