Hillary Clinton is officially a moron.

[Kaak]

woooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaah......Did you read that before you posted it???

While decriminalized acts are no longer crimes, ...

[Imran Siddiqui]

He was far more right than wrong. He was, after all, responding to your idiotic impliation that all illegal activity is criminal.

And yes, since decriminalization of, say, marijuana means moving it from felony to misdemenor in many cases, it isn't all that wrong to define the term the way he did (felony as opposed to civil offense). If anything he may be guilty of a simplication.

All I see is that you have basically conceeded you have lost the original point and are going after tiny nits hoping to score a point so, in your mind, you may save some face, somehow.

[Imran Siddiqui]

woooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaah......Did you read that before you posted it???

Yes. Though I fail to see what nit you've picked out of that statement which is so incredibly shocking.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
He was far more right than wrong. He was, after all, responding to your idiotic impliation that all illegal activity is criminal.

And yes, since decriminalization of, say, marijuana means moving it from felony to misdemenor in many cases, it isn't all that wrong to define the term the way he did (felony as opposed to civil offense). If anything he may be guilty of a simplication.

All I see is that you have basically conceeded you have lost the original point and are going after tiny nits hoping to score a point so, in your mind, you may save some face, somehow.

I'll cheerfully plead guilty to simplification. After all, I'm not a lawyer...though I do have a basic grasp of legal concepts. Like "criminalization," for example.

[Kaak]

Imram, I selected that phrase because the posts that were refering to me as a moron were doing so because they said decriminalizing something didn't mean to make it not a crime, only to make it not a felony, or some variation thereof.

Your post is contrary to that, claiming that things that have been decriminalized are no longer crimes.

[DRoseDARs]

That said, when do we get back to ragging on Hillary Clinton?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Kaak
Imram, I selected that phrase because the posts that were refering to me as a moron were doing so because they said decriminalizing something didn't mean to make it not a crime, only to make it not a felony, or some variation thereof.

Your post is contrary to that, claiming that things that have been decriminalized are no longer crimes.

Hence the term 'simplification' (which I misspelled in the early post, but never mind that). However, decriminalization can mean moving it from a felony to criminal misdeamenor, where only a fine is assesed.

The basic point is that illegal does not equal crime.

Oh, and the only one calling anyone 'moron' was you with the Senator. KH called you a doofus because you mixed up illegal and crime, which isn't what you are arguing against here.

[Smellycowsquid]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I sooo want to see Hillary! versus Gore for the Democratic nomination in 2008.

You want a communist?

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Smellycowsquid


You want a communist?

I'm confused. Are you insulting Clinton and Gore. or insulting communists?

[Vince278]

Anyone care to speculate on who Hillary would pick as a running mate? Let me toss a name out: Barak Obama.

[Dis]

the only way I could see her running is if the republicans ran Condoleeza Rice at the same time. That would mean they would have to coordinate this. As one would not risk running one woman, if they weren't sure the other side would run a woman. both candidates are long shots by themselves.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Vince278
Anyone care to speculate on who Hillary would pick as a running mate? Let me toss a name out: Barak Obama.

Absolutely not. Hilary will be fighting being tarred as a liberal, and fighting for blue-collar white guy "Reagan Democrat" votes. Plus, two senator on one ticket is a very, very bad idea, as 2004 illustrated, because it makes it harder to run against the GOP as the party of out-of-touch Washington. Obama wouldn't play, even if he had more experience. Obvious choices:

Gov. Mark Warner - moderate, from a red state in the South, not a Senator.

Gov. Bill Richardson - moderate, from a battleground state in the West, Hispanic, served in the last Clinton Administration.

Gov. Tom Vilsack - moderate, from a battleground state on the Plains, well-respected within the party.

My money's on Richardson. The Dems aren't going to play very well in the South with Hillary at the top of the ticket, no matter what. But the Dems could actually play in the West, particularly by emphasizing environmental and privacy issues, where they're much more credible than the GOP. Vilsack would be the fallback if the wisdom was that a woman+hispanic ticket would lose more white male votes than it would gain Hispanic votes.

[Vince278]

Of the three you list I'd agree on Richardson. But then I wouldn't vote Dem with Hillary on the ticket. (Now if Edwards were on it instead... )

[Rufus T. Firefly]

A less obvious, but more intriguing, choice would be Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana. Schweitzer's a farmer/rancher turned public servant who appears to be the kind of down-to-earth, regular-guy liberal the Dems haven't managed to produce since Harry Truman. As far as I can tell, he's both anti-big-government and anti-big-business, while being a fiece proponent of alternative fuels and eco-friendly government policy. He's the popular Democrat governor of a traditionally conservative state, rides a horse well, and has advocated alternative fuels by arguing:

"Why wouldn’t we create an economic engine that will take us into the next century, and let those sheiks and dictators and rats and crooks from all over the world boil in their own oil?" Schweitzer said at a press conference.

Schweitzer has called them rats and crooks and hasn't held back on bit. "Hugo Chavez, the Saudi royal family, the leaders of Iran," he said. "How about the countries that end with 'stan'? Nigeria? You tell me. Sheiks, rats, crooks, dictators, sure."

Still, he's an obscure figure politically, so the big question is whether he'd bring enough to the ticket. But he'd sure be fun.

[DaShi]

Richardson has some liability. This is a guy who has private meetings with Castro and Kim Jong-il. Republicans will definitely try to use that on the national security platform that both sides will be running on.