View Full Version : ... Wyclef [censored] Jean?
Matt1
12-02-2003, 01:01 AM
So, I was just watching Hardball. Howard Dean was on it and Chris Matthews threw him the mother of all softballs: favorite musician. Dean's response: WYCLEF [censored] JEAN.
Jesus Christ.
If any of you guys ever run for any kind of public office, please, take my advice: don't be so obvious when you pander to the youth of the nation. The kids will still like you if you're not into hip-hop. Subtlety is good.
Wyclef [censored] Jean. Jesus Christ.
Efexeye
12-02-2003, 10:26 AM
Well, he can't say Eminem, right?
Droogan_Leader
12-02-2003, 11:12 AM
It's actually the perfect choice--he's PC--he's got a Jamaican-ish accent (he's multiculturally-inclined), he's black (he loves black people), he's a hip-hop artist (as Matt1 pointed out, he relates to America's youth).
So many subtleties, how does Howard Dean find the time to think up how we will subconsciously react to his decision to choose Jean? Simple--he's a genius, and deserves to be president. Sssssyyyke!
Razorback
12-02-2003, 11:31 AM
I hope that Howard Dean takes the nomination... that way my boy Dubya will have no problem winning. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif
RB
Well, you've got to be feeling pretty good about the economic uptick RB. That's one less thing for your political opponents to attack little Bush with.
Efexeye
12-02-2003, 12:00 PM
I don't think Dubya will have any problem at all getting reelected- the Democrats are putting forth a pretty weak field of candidates to compete with an incumbent president in a wartime situation. Anyone think Hillary is still entertaining thoughts of running?
karmattack
12-02-2003, 12:02 PM
Regardless, I have a gleaming ray of hope in my soul that Bush has this poster (http://us.st5.yimg.com/store4.yimg.com/I/demotivators_1764_740439) somewhere in his bedroom.
Efexeye
12-02-2003, 12:04 PM
Hee hee, I wish I didn't teach school, or I could post that on the wall somewhere.....
jjcourtright
12-02-2003, 04:20 PM
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
WYCLEF [censored] JEAN.
[/ QUOTE ] Ok, I got a question. Did he answer "WYCLEF [censored] JEAN", or just "Wyclef Jean"? If he said [censored] on Hardball, I might have to start looking his direction. Pretty bold.
ILovePapaSmurf
12-02-2003, 04:56 PM
<font color="purple">Can someone tell me what is wrong with Wyclef Jean? </font color>
Efexeye
12-02-2003, 05:10 PM
Nothing is wrong with him, it is just that the answer was so obviously calculated, and not sincere....
jjcourtright
12-02-2003, 05:18 PM
I don't think anybody has too much off a problem with Wyclef; it is more a problem with Maple Powered Howard pandering to the "street".
The follow up question should have been, "Really, and what is your favorite song of his?" We all know he wouldn't have been able to name one.
jjcourtright
12-02-2003, 06:04 PM
Der...yah...well...ya see...
ILovePapaSmurf
12-02-2003, 06:44 PM
<font color="purple">I don't think Wycelf is very street. But, that is what I think. I think if he would have said Jay Z or Tupac, then I could see you all having a problem. </font color>
No he's just street enough, if he had said, "oh man, i Loooove Tupac." he would have been laffed out of the studio.
Droogan_Leader
12-02-2003, 08:02 PM
I left out one important thing that Matt1 touched on--Dean couldn't use a gangster rapper like Snoop or Tupac. He would've gotten a lot of bad press for being pro-pot and all the other trappings of being a dizzle from the strizzle. Ergo, he made the 'safe' yet 'streetwise' choice, which we all recognize was manufactured, and dumb.
After all, who from the street would be swayed by an episode of Hardball hosted at Harvard by a bunch of rich white people? Maybe that's just me, but if I was from the hood, I wouldn't care what all those honkeys thought.
And that's why I don't like a lot of Democrats--they pander to black constituents as if they are stupid, easily-persuaded children. I personally find it degrading and insulting, and I'm white.
Matt1
12-03-2003, 12:32 AM
I would only vote for Hillary if Ted Kennedy was her runningmate. That way I could be absolutely certain I was throwing my vote away.
ILovePapaSmurf
12-03-2003, 01:20 AM
<font color="purple">Hillary wore the pants for 8 years in the white house, lets just let her go on her monica lewinsky hating ways. </font color>
I fell out of my seat laughing when I read that!
Could you imagine if he said he has some Biggie and Tupac on his ipod?!
Yeah, I agree with you all. He's such a bad "showman" that Dean...
That bit about Hillary running, she's definitely running for some type of office in the future, if not now.
I still don't know how that carpet bagger took office in New York state...
Oh wait... I do know... most of my fellow New Yorkers are morons and fools! /forums/images/icons/smirk.gif
From what I read she was/is against the war, yet is paying a visit to our troops in the current theatres of operation!?
She's probably one of the last people they want to see right now.
Ugghhh... /forums/images/icons/mad.gif
Matt1
12-03-2003, 08:38 PM
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
From what I read she was/is against the war, yet is paying a visit to our troops in the current theatres of operation!?
[/ QUOTE ]
Not to start a thing, but you can be against the war and for the troops. I was vehemently opposed to going in, mainly because I didn't see why our troops had to die needlessly. Now that we are in there, there is a reason for them to die, unfortunately.
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
but you can be against the war and for the troops
[/ QUOTE ]
I did'nt say one can't be.
I guess you missed the point(s) of my post.
One of the points I'm making is that she is blatantly sniffing around for votes and support. Her stances have hurt her in some circles, and she's "trying to make up for it". Her visit is'nt coming from the heart.
Add to that, Troops don't want someone of her ilk coming over for a "visit".
Our fighting Men and Women see through her B.S. and don't want her sorry ass over there.
She's not with them, She's not one of them, and she should stop tyring to act like it. It's a [censored] insult.
As for Bush's trip to Iraq, I believe He really did it from the heart. Only time will tell if we see trip footage popping up in the re-election campaign.
ratm1966
12-03-2003, 09:10 PM
Okay, how come when I mentioned a few weeks ago that the economy was turning around for the good, all of you liberal bastards out there kind of jumped my ass, and here Dave says it and there are no comments?
Oh that is right. It is okay for a Democrat (I am assuming you are one Dave by the way you posted your message) to say something and no one complain, but if a Republican previously said the same thing, it is bad.
Matt1
12-03-2003, 09:15 PM
I don't recall any ass-jumping on my part, but maybe my memory is a little fuzzy. I think the economy's improvement is a good thing, as I hope all people would. I question whether or not it will sustain itself until next November or if working voters will see any real benefit from it by that time though.
jjcourtright
12-04-2003, 02:12 PM
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
She's not one of them
[/ QUOTE ] And Bush is?
ILovePapaSmurf
12-04-2003, 02:15 PM
<font color="purple">As president, Bush should have but no choice to go visit the troops. He is the one that sent them there, he is the one that is making them fight for a cause that probably wont benefit us all that much. He has a lot of 'blood' on his hands.</font color>
jjcourtright
12-04-2003, 02:36 PM
I agree. I think that it was good for him to go, not only as a political move, but also as an all-around good thing to do.
I was just taking Jim to task about saying that Hilary is not one of them, so she shouldn't go there. If you believe that, you should believe the same goes for Bush.
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
And Bush is?
[/ QUOTE ]
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I was just taking Jim to task about saying that Hilary is not one of them, so she shouldn't go there. If you believe that, you should believe the same goes for Bush.
[/ QUOTE ]
He's a hell of a lot more than she is.
You've got it all ass-backwards there JJ.
If you take a look at their track records, Bush has been constantly pro-military. She has not.
True, Bush did not serve in Vietnam, but at least he did something. She however, was involved in the anti-war and anti-troop movement in the sixties.
She also aligned herself with some communists in the U.S. who backed those same rallies, etc. In turn, it was found out "they" had backing from N. Vietnam.
Only when an election is coming, Does she pull this "I support you" crap.
jjcourtright
12-04-2003, 02:44 PM
How so? Because he's Republican, and they are too...?
Droogan_Leader
12-04-2003, 02:47 PM
Alright, now I'll be Devil's Advocate--if Hillary has just as much reason/right to be over there 'showing her support' and 'raising morale', why was she bashing Bush while she was there?
jjcourtright
12-04-2003, 02:51 PM
What she said while there is irrelavent to my argument. I am just saying that compared to the average soldier, Bush and Hilary are probably pretty similar.
ILovePapaSmurf
12-04-2003, 02:53 PM
<font color="purple">She wants to be in the news. Bad publicity is good publicity and vice versa. The girl is power hungry. She had eight years to feel the power of being president thanks to her husband, and had a hand probably in everything he did. I didn't think she had any reason to go over there, but to get political support because there might be a slight chance she will run for the president's seat. But, to me it wasn't sincere at all, and I hope people realize. </font color>
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I am just saying that compared to the average soldier, Bush and Hilary are probably pretty similar.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whoa.. hold on there.
They are not "pretty similar". What's with this "probably" stuff?
I'm getting my info from hard fact due to their past and current actions.
Droogan_Leader
12-04-2003, 03:12 PM
Well I think JIM's point is that Bush is Commander in Chief--and that means he belongs there. Hillary* is nothing, and has no place there. Hillary has no connection to any branch of the military. And although Bush never served a tour of duty, at least he's not married to a [censored] coward draft-dodging SOB, making him automatically cooler to the majority of the military serving in Iraq.
*Hillary is the embodiment of evil.
jjcourtright
12-04-2003, 03:14 PM
I'm just saying that their life paths have both been much easier than those of the typical soldiers. I will say that I honestly know very little about both of their lifes. My point though, is that I think neither of them have anyway to relate to the troops.
That's one of My points, kind of.
I explained some of the other ones in my post(s) above.
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I will say that I honestly know very little about both of their lifes. My point though, is that I think neither of them have anyway to relate to the troops
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, that's it.
All bets are off.
With that admission from you, I can't continue this thread with you JJ.
Go read up on both of them, then make an informed comment.
jjcourtright
12-04-2003, 03:21 PM
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And Bush is?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was just taking Jim to task about saying that Hilary is not one of them, so she shouldn't go there. If you believe that, you should believe the same goes for Bush.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He's a hell of a lot more than she is.
You've got it all ass-backwards there JJ.
If you take a look at their track records, Bush has been constantly pro-military. She has not.
True, Bush did not serve in Vietnam, but at least he did something. She however, was involved in the anti-war and anti-troop movement in the sixties.
She also aligned herself with some communists in the U.S. who backed those same rallies, etc. In turn, it was found out "they" had backing from N. Vietnam.
Only when an election is coming, Does she pull this "I support you" crap.
[/ QUOTE ]
Did you edit this post? The first time I read it, I didn't see any of that. All of that certainly makes sense. Droog's Commander in Chief idea certainly makes sense too. At the same time I stand by my statement that I don't think that there is much that either of them can relate to the troops with.
jjcourtright
12-04-2003, 03:24 PM
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Ok, that's it.
All bets are off.
With that admission from you, I can't continue this thread with you JJ.
Go read up on both of them, then make an informed comment.
[/ QUOTE ] Bah. I hate when people have two posts in a row. Sorry to be that guy. But, I am making the point that I don't think that the average soldier can relate to somebody who went to Yale. Putting aside all political beliefs, do you think that an enlistee can relate well to somebody who went to an Ivy league school.
Matt1
12-04-2003, 05:33 PM
JJ don't you know anything? Of course the average guy can relate to George Bush. Who can't relate to a guy who went to Yale, is a millionaire, his father was a fromer Ambassador to China, Director of the CIA, and President of the United States. He's just one of the guys. /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif
jjcourtright
12-04-2003, 05:36 PM
Man, it got kind of quiet in here after I said that. I was beginning to think that nobody agreed with me.
"Okay, how come when I mentioned a few weeks ago that the economy was turning around for the good, all of you liberal bastards out there kind of jumped my ass, and here Dave says it and there are no comments?
Oh that is right. It is okay for a Democrat (I am assuming you are one Dave by the way you posted your message) to say something and no one complain, but if a Republican previously said the same thing, it is bad. "
Well, i'm not a Democrat (although I have some liberal tendencies), i was simply referring to RB's Well documented pro-Bush/war stance. And how the economy will not be something that the Dem's can get him on. They do still have the war though, the more solders that are killed the more ammunition the Dems have in their anti-war platform. That, I believe was part of the point of Hillary going to Iraq. She wasn't their for the troops at all, she was there to show the Americans at home that "Hey, here I am in Iraq, whilst the Pres is safe and sound in Texas." But it didn't work out that way, Did it.
I edited about thirty seconds after I made the inital post, realizing I did'nt have some of the info included.
The issue is'nt about where people went to school or how much money they have by the way.
If you remember from my past posts, I'm not a big fan of Bush or Hillary. But at least I somewhat know where He's coming from in reguards to the troops and the war. That carpetbagger Hillary however, is trying to pull a fast one yet again, on the voting public.
Shit, the woman is married to "slick willie" after all.
ratm1966
12-06-2003, 01:21 AM
Okay, I can't believe I am gonna defend someone the likes of Hillary Clinton, but I think I have to side with Bill O'Reilly. Yes, he actually defended her trip. Hillary is a member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services. She has every right to go visit the troops that are deployed. Me, if I were deployed right now, I would prefer to see the President, but I wouldn't disrespect her if she were to visit.
Lastly, she didn't go spewing off a lot of Anti-Bush stuff in front of the troops. Yeah, she did say a few things I didn't think were all that great for morale, but most of her comments were actually to the reporters (away from the troops).
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.