This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - kmpnj
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62  64
« on: November 11, 2005, 09:04:04 AM »
The thing with Hillary running for President is that, as stated in a previous post, her negatives are way, way too high. I've gotta think that her unfavorability ratings, nationally, are high as well. Since everything there is to know about her is out there for public consumption, she really doesn't have the ability to change people's minds. In other words, her poll #'s aren't really going to change because people have pretty much made their minds up about her.While I agree, her 30m in the bank is an asset, I still think she's going to have a hard time.
In Presidential politics, its better to be sort of unknown. This way, a candidate can cast themselves in whatever light they want. Then its up to the opposition to damage that image. Whereas with Hillary, she has to fight against a lot of negative perceptions that people already have about her. That's a lot to overcome in a Presidential race, where everything one does is examined with the proverbial fine tooth comb.
Finally, while it is true that the majority of Americans believe that a woman could be President, I don't think that would necessarily be her. I think someone like Dr. Rice would garner many more votes than a Hillary would because she is not nearly as divisive as Sen Clinton.
« on: November 11, 2005, 08:52:27 AM »
I'm just hopeful that the Repubs do the right thing and not nominate an arch-conservative like Sam Brownback. Not only would he lose nationally, but he'd probably lose us the House and Senate.
Giuliani, McCain, Hagel would all be decent choices who would give us a great shot nationally.
« on: November 11, 2005, 08:47:22 AM »
the only time I have ever voted Dem, and prolly will ever vote Dem was '96...Clinton had spunk, and I dug that about him
Didn't Clinton leave his spunk on Monica's dress?
« on: November 11, 2005, 08:42:15 AM »
1. i just think they're funny, but hey if you're so predisposed, go for it.
2. good lord i would rather be fighting the iraqis than the iranians. there are like 3 times as many of them in a country four times as big and far more treacherous in terms of terrain. the syrians? eh, why?
3. i agree, but don't forget rove. hate hate hate rove.
To answer your post:
The reason I would rather have fought Iran is because they're internal opposition groups are much, much stronger than anything in pre-war Iraq. I think the United States would have had much more popular support, in country, in Iran. We could have gone in, defeated the mullahs and armed the student resistance. It would not have been nearly as costly, in lives and treasure, to do Iran first.
I would also have preferred Syria because that is the home base of Hamas and Hezbollah. Plus, it is the gateway for foriegn fighters into Iraq. Taking out Syria would have disposed of a major state-sponsor of Terrorism. Not to say that Saddam wasn't a supporter of terror groups, but Syria is/was much more open and blatant about it. Plus, we've had business to settle up with them since 1983. I also think that it would have been easier to remove Assad from power.
I dislike Karl Rove also, but Cheney is the dark overlord of the empire. Regardless, I wish the President was more of an A-hole, so that he would fire Rove and ask Cheney to resign. If he did, his poll #'s would shoot up exponentially and we'd have a better chance to retain the House and Senate, which are in real jeopardy now.
« on: November 11, 2005, 08:30:15 AM »
Joe Lieberman, Tom Vilsack and Bill Richardson
They seem to be not as whacko as some others on the left. If Lieberman would have survived the primaries, I probably would have voted for him. I've actually had a chance to meet Lieberman and he is a really decent, down to earth guy. I wish he played for our team.
Bill Richardson is also, seemingly, a decent guy. I don't know anything about New Mexico, but if I were the dems, I would nominate this guy in 2008. I think he'd be a much better candidate than Hillary, with far fewer negatives.
« on: November 11, 2005, 08:24:12 AM »
male private part Cheney
1) Predisposed to hate anyone who willingly calls themselves male private part
2) His bull@#%$ got us into a war in Iraq when Iran or Syria would
have made more sense.
3) He and his boy Libby are going to tear down a decent guy who is
too loyal to dump this garbage on the curb, like he should.
« on: November 10, 2005, 03:14:59 PM »
I'm not sure that this is the appropriate place to ask this, but I didn't know where else to put it. Anyway, I just received an unsolicited mailer from U of Minnesota. Anyway, the reason I'm asking is because my LSAC #'s aren't that good. My LSAC GPA is 2.38 (although my current GPA is a 3.67 and the bad grades are from ten years ago) and my LSAT is only a 152. So why would they have selected me from the Candidate Referral Service and "invited" me to apply? My #'s are way below the standards, according to the LSAC.
Any thoughts, ideas or suggestions would be appreciated.
« on: November 09, 2005, 09:21:35 PM »
Those Ivy people will probably say that they can spell it any darn way they want because their the ivy leagues and you're not, or something equally as pompous. Then again, President Bush went to Yale and Harvard and he's an ESL student if I ever saw one.
« on: November 09, 2005, 09:18:07 PM »
I just got home from visiting Albany. All I can say is WOW!!! What a class act that school is. I had visited Widener before and, while it was OK, Albany blew it out of the water. I got to sit in on a Civil Procedure class and the prof. was awesome too. I actually knew a bit of the material from one of my undergrad classes, so that was encouraging. I actually got lost once I got off of the NY Thruway, but I called the Admissions Office and they stayed on the phone with me till I got to the school...Who does that?
Anyway, I don't need a T14 or even a T100 school, not that that is an issue with my #'s. If I can finagle my way into ALS, then I'm done with this whole application process.
Anyone want to see pics, let me know.
« on: November 09, 2005, 09:13:15 PM »
If I may be permitted a moment of insensitivity, one thing I've noticed about Cooley's viewbook is how ugly the people in there are. Granted, no one's perfect, and law students can be somewhat pasty-looking after spending hours under fluorescent lights studying, but the people at Cooley are FUGLY. If those are the people they're putting in the viewbook to promote the school, imagine how ugly everyone else is.
On the plus side, ugly chicks are easy, if you're into that kind of stuff.
On that topic, have you seen Syracuse's viewbook? Very nice talent in that publication, I have to say. Thank God they don't make you go to the board to do math problems in law school. I'd fail for sure.
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62  64