ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

2008 Al Gore And Hillary Clinton

I think Al Gore and Hillary Clinton will make a great team for the 2008 Democratic ticket. What do you think?

Join Our Christian Dating and Take The Leadership Bible Quiz
 ---Sally on 6/8/06
     Helpful Blog Vote (9)

Post a New Blog

I hope that they do not run, I like to own my hunting firearms! Al Gore and Hillary Clinton are both very much against ALL firearms! By outlawing firarms they would be just handing our nation over to terrorists! Terrorists fear the honest gun owning American people!
---Jim on 11/15/08

I don't really care. I have no faith in anyone who wants that office, and I don't believe the interests of the American people are being served by that office.
---Pharisee on 9/23/07

for the "democratic" ticket---yes.
---shira on 3/20/07

What we desparately need is an environmental candidate. The current administration is bent on destroying the earth for our (read America's) short term gain. We are supposed to be watching over the planet, not hording everything and abusing the planet. Hillary and/or likely any democrat running will be far more pro-environment, and will get my vote.

we need to think about our global family

teach love
---frank_cos on 7/27/06

Amen daphn8897. I couldnt seem to articulate what I meant. You said it perfectly. Thank you!
---tofurabby on 7/6/06

Nurse Robert, I think tofu's point is that 5 justices can, by how they choose to interpret, in effect end up creating law - which is what some more radical lower level judges have been doing for years. They rule, which sets precedent (which is what Roe v Wade did), which can (and does), in essence, create law - without having to go through the appropriate checks and balances of the legislative branch of the government - which is where "laws" are supposed to come from in the first place.
---daphn8897 on 7/6/06

2. (remember this is hypothetical) A vs. B is seen by the supreme court. A was called fat by B. A claims the constitution provides protection against this insult. If the supreme court goes 5-4 in favor of A, we have a new precedent that no one can be called fat based on a loose interpretation of the constitution by 5 people. The rest of the nation will be subject to the opinion of 5 people. It is not a written law, but to me is still a law. (its a bad example, I know, but I think you may get my point)
---tofurabby on 7/6/06

I think you are missing my point. They do not just interpret laws, they govern every little detail that gets accused of being unconstitutional. I say they create law... not in the sense of a traditional "law" but their rulings force the citizens and states to do what they say. Written law or not, they must be obeyed. Here is a hypothetical example. cont.
---tofurabby on 7/6/06

Tofu, you are completely missing the point. SCOTUS does not write laws, they intrepret laws. Thats their job, thats how it was set up when the Constitution was written.
---NurseRobert on 7/6/06

Thank you NurseRobert, that helps to prove my point that 5 justices can create law when that power is supposed to be reserved for the legislature. Not the executive or judicial branches of government. The justices can rule something is constitutional or not (even if it is not actually written in the constitution and based on opinion) and the country has to follow it. That is establishing law in my mind.
---tofurabby on 7/6/06

Yes I do!!-Hillary for Prez; Al Gore as the bonafide VP--keeps him free to do his eco-thing. Clinton & Gore again--they win in a landslide, restoring hope for the future!!
---Doug on 7/6/06

Actually, Tofu, the president can only pass laws that come to him from Congress. He cannot introduce any bills in the hopes of them becomeing law.

Congress can pass a law with a simple majority, but the must be signed off or vetoed by the president. If vetoed, then it requires 2/3rds of both Houses of congress to become a law..

Sorry, off my podium now.
---NurseRobert on 7/5/06

tofu: That zealot has a lot of cronies in the Senate and the House, and they have tried to pass more than their share of stuff that is questionable. Then there is his military tribunals, which those 9 Constitution experts decided were UNConstitutional.

BTW, it is my opinion that all lawyers are experts on the Constitution, since that is the basis for their law studies.
---Madison1101 on 7/5/06

Funny, I thought that the 1 zealot president could only pass laws provided two thirds of the Senators concur. Senators that are appointed by the people to represent them, in essence becoming the peoples voice.
---tofurabby on 7/5/06

Al & Hillary? Whatever... certainly a matter for prayer. As far as Hillary being a "christian hater"... don't think so, at least not consciously. Personally, I think we need to stop getting sucked into ill-tempered arguments over things that are temporary. I am grateful to live in the USA, warts and all. Sometimes I'm saddeded by the direction of things, but alas, this is ultimately not my home. And regardless of flawed men and women, God is still in control and is still good.
---daphn8897 on 7/5/06

tofu: You may bemoan the republic, but it is set up with the system of checks and balances, giving the 9 or 5 justices power to determine the Constitutionality of a law to prevent a power hungry president from making laws that might not be Constitutional in the first place. Better 9 justices than 1 zealot president.
---Madison1101 on 7/5/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce

NurseRobert, that is something we can agree upon... my (and your) opinions mean little. Very true statement.

In the case of the Supreme Court's rulings, their opinions are what matter. Sadly we get the opinions of 9 individuals verses true constitutional law. Then our nation becomes affected and changed based on the majority of those 9 opinions, so actually 5 opinions can control the country... some republic.
---tofurabby on 7/5/06

Tofu, in the end, your opinion means little. Their job is to intrepret the Constitution. It is made up of 9 individuals, each with their own ideas of what the Constitution says. They are a check and balance on a Legislature and a Presidency that make laws that may go against what was written in the Constitution. I dont always agree with their intrepretation, but I do agree with the process.
---NurseRobert on 7/3/06

Tofurabby--YES!! I wish I could have said it as well as you have.
---Donna2277 on 7/3/06

NurseRobert, "the parties fight tooth and nail when a new justice seat opens for the same reason you fight tooth and nail when George Bush is running against John Kerry." I disagree, the liberal may take that view because they want the judicial branch establishing law. I, as a conservative, fight that way in the legistative because they are the law makers. I expect the judicial system to inforce those laws, not to makeup their own. If they did their appointed jobs, it wouldnt be such an issue.
---tofurabby on 7/3/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry

what a bunch of nonsense. the supreme court are constitution experts? maybe... but I dont value half of what comes from them... why? because they split 5-4 on the majority of their decisions. That tells me they are interpreting squat, but rather interjecting their own political agendas into their rulings. Now, the day that the supreme court starts making decisions with more unity will be the day I believe they are truly trying to interpret our constitution.
---tofurabby on 7/3/06

Nurse--Yes, the 1st Amendment ALWAYS has been a GREAT Document! (IMO, however, it was greater before SCOTUS started applying the Lemon law so narrowly)

I'm about the only one in my family that HASN'T been to law school (my niece was appointed by Bush as a judge on the U.S. 10th Circuit Court...Heaven help them!)
But the 1st Amendment allows me to speak my opinion about SCOTUS even if I'm NOT even a lawyer.
---Donna2277 on 7/2/06

I'm truly glad that they are in the demoncratic party. Birds of a feather flock together and the tares all need a place to go. Its not meant for sheep and Goats to dwell together.
---exzucuh on 7/2/06

Donna, I lived in Texas for about 3 years in the 80s (small town - 3000 population - north of Dallas). Friday Night football IS a religion in Texas.
---NurseRobert on 7/2/06

Send a Free Appreciation Ecard

Donna, SCOTUS ruled that the SCHOOL DISTRICT could not be the ones to sponsor the prayer. There is NOTHING in the law that would stop a group of people from getting together before a football game and have a prayer.

And yes, the 1st Amendment of the Constitution gives you that right. Isn't it a wonderful document?!
---NurseRobert on 7/2/06

Nurse and Madison- In Santa Fe Independent School District vs. Doe, the Supreme Court ruled that Texas public schools may not begin football games with organized prayer, even when recited by a student..
If SCOTUS understood that high school football in Texas IS a SACRED .
ritual, theyd probably outlaw FOOTBALL!
Now, groups of students organize themselves and, bless 'em, spontaneously sing or pray in unison from the stands and nobody can stop them. (I hope).
---Donna2277 on 7/1/06

Madison-- I understand the purpose of Scotus and that "right to privacy" is recognized by them in case law, though not specifically spelled out in the Constitution.
That's good because individual cases differ so much. Case law establishes precedent upon which future decisions may be based.

Nurse- I'm not complaining about SCOTUS this time. (I'm even glad of their Gitmo decision.) ACLU are the ones that irritate me. And lawyer or not, I AM entitled express an OPINION about THEM.
---Donna2277 on 7/1/06

Will Austrailia let a US Veteran move in?
---JP on 7/1/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture

When I was studying and teaching the US government, I learned there are several different ways that laws are passed. One is through legislation. One is through having laws overturned or amended by the courts. SCOTUS's job is to ensure that the Executive and Legislative branches NOT violate the rights of the citizens. SCOTUS also interprets the Constitution for today. SCOTUS, being law experts and Constitution experts, determined that the Constitution guarantees a right to privacy.
---Madison1101 on 7/1/06

Tofu, what you call a "joke" I call a check and balance on the other two branches of goverment running ramshod over individual rights.

"the parties fight tooth and nail when a new justice seat opens" for the same reason you fight tooth and nail when George Bush is running against John Kerry.

Like it or not, it's still the best form of government around.
---NurseRobert on 7/1/06

Donna, wrong as usual.. The law does NOT prohibit anyone from praying at a football game, in school, or at a Graduation, or anywhere else. It prevents the Government, ie. the school board, the principle from interjecting their religious beliefs on everyone else.
---NurseRobert on 7/1/06

Tofu and Donna, part II. Tell you what. Go to law school, spend years learning the law, get some President to nominate you to the Supreme Court, then YOU can decide what is constitutional or not.
---NurseRobert on 7/1/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Laptops

Tofu and Donna. The role of SCOTUS is to determine the constutionality of a law or a case before it. You can moan and groan all you want, you can wish it was not so, you can spout your opinion all you want. SCOTUS has ruled that we DO have a constitutional right to privacy and there is such a thing as constituitionally protected seperation of Church and state.
---NurseRobert on 7/1/06

#2 I'm personally familiar with Tattered Cover vs. City of Thornton. The Tattered Cover Book Store is a large bookstore in Denver. Their records were supenoed by the DEA to determine what books, besides those with instructions for making amphetamines, a suspect drug dealer had purchased. SCOTUS determined the book store could not be required to furnish records due to an "implied" right to privacy.
---Donna2277 on 7/1/06

#1 Tofurabby--You are correct. The ACLU likes to make people believe these are Constitutional rights, but they do not appear in either the Bill of Rights or Constitution. Actually both are quite CONTROVERSIAL..otherwise these cases would NEVER have gone to SCOTUS! These are examples of "case law". It's the final word only in these specific cases. The 1st Amendment that gives us freedom of religion is now used to prohibit prayer at football games and student prayer at graduation.
---Donna2277 on 7/1/06

The Supreme Court cases are not the constitution. They interpret it, most of the time to advance political agendas... if you dont believe that then please explain why the parties fight tooth and nail when a new justice seat opens. The Supreme Court is a joke... a very very powerful joke. Separation of Church and State is not in the constitution, but rather a protection for the church that the state will not establish an official church so we can have all our denominations like we do.
---tofurabby on 6/30/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer

Donna: Since I quoted the ACLU website, they would have to be the ones to document. I quoted them. NurserRobert was kind enough to cite the cases ruled by the Supreme Court as being right to privacy and separation of church and state.

The Supreme Court rules on the Law of the Land, the Consitutionality of decisions made in the lower courts.
---Madison1101 on 6/30/06

Donna: Separation of Church and State:
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602, 612-13,
Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, Allegheny County v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573,

Again, cases ruled on by SCOTUS.
---NurseRobert on 6/30/06

Donna: Right to privacy..
Stanley v. Georgia, 394 U.S. 55, 22 L. Ed. 2d 542, 89 S. Ct. 1243 (1969)
McIntyre v. Ohio Election Commission, 514 U.S. 334, 115 S.Ct. 1511, 131 L.Ed.2d. 426 (1995)
Time. Inc. v. Hill, 385 U.S. 374, 383 n.7 (1967); Tattered Cover, Inc. v. City of Thornton, 44 P.3d 1044 (Colo. Sup. Ct., 2002) and yes, Roe v. Wade.
In each of these cases, the SCOTUS ruled that the individuals have the right to privacy based on thier First Admendment rights.
---NurseRobert on 6/30/06

Madison-- You imply that "Right to Privacy" and "separation of church and state" are constitutional "protections and guarantees". Time for YOU to document YOUR statements (quoted from the ACLU) So, where in the Constitution do these appear?
---Donna2277 on 6/27/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting

Thanks. I am interested in this stuff.
---Madison1101 on 6/27/06

madison I will e-mail them to you on your home email address I can't list them here the list is way too long.
GOD bless you
---willow on 6/27/06

Willow: Please cite examples that support your thesis. Sources would be appreciated.
---Madison1101 on 6/27/06

madison the ACLU has its own agenda that is to have the law makers make policy not We The People! that means you only have one right that is what they want you to have. the only free speech th at the ACLU(Anti-Christ Liberal Union)allows is their own..or they will sue you.
---willow on 6/26/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing

cont: While one of the founders of the ACLU was a communist at the time it was started, he later denounced communism. Furthermore, the other three men who co-founded the ACLU with him were not part of the Communist Party.

Making generalizations shows a lack of research and knowledge about a subject.
---Madison1101 on 6/26/06

cont: From Wikipedia: "Baldwin's pro-Communist leanings lasted until 1939 when he was disillusioned by the Nazi-Soviet pact and broke off all radical ties; in 1927, he had visited the Soviet Union and wrote a book, Liberty Under the Soviets, which contained extensive praise for the country he denounced in a later book, A New Slavery, which condemned "the inhuman communist police state tyranny" [1]. In the 1940s, Baldwin led the campaign to purge the ACLU of Communist Party members."
---Madison1101 on 6/26/06

cont:Your right to due process - fair treatment by the government whenever the loss of your liberty or property is at stake.

Your right to privacy - freedom from unwarranted government intrusion into your personal and private affairs."

None of these things is anti-Christian. It has appeared that a lot of Christians are anti-Constitution.
---Madison1101 on 6/26/06

I do not see participation in the ACLU as anti-Christian.

"The mission of the ACLU is to preserve all of these protections and guarantees:

Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state.

Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.
---Madison1101 on 6/26/06

Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service

Hilary is NOT a Christian. It is written - you will be known by your works. The ACLU (she's an ACLU lawyer) was founded by communists and is making good on their statements they'd destroy the US from the inside. Everything Hilary stands for is based on these premises. Match it to her actions and statements. The ACLU does just enough good to be deceptive to people who don't research. Satan takes everything of GOD, perverts its making it attractive and believable with just enough truth to get by.
---Terry on 6/26/06

Yes, a great team for the 2008 Democratic ticket... I hope they run..because I don't think they would have a chance of winning.
---Donna2277 on 6/26/06

Mod: Thank you for answering Nurse's question about Hillary hating Christians. I do not have a problem with her agenda. I have spoken my beliefs on these blogs multiple times and have been accused of being an ubeliever multiple times because I don't take the hard line stand that other believers do on abortion and homosexual marriage.

It is quite possible that Hillary is a Christian, just like I am a Christian.
---Madison1101 on 6/26/06

It's not likely (though not impossible) that Al Gore will have the 2008 Dem. nomination.

Generally losing the presidential election spells the end of one's political carreer. Richard Nixon is a notable exception, but we know how he turned out.
---Jack on 6/26/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements

Moderator, there is a big difference between not being "Christian friendly" and "Hating Christians."

Your insinuation that she "hates Christians" because she believe in a persons right to choose is jumping to hugh conclusions.

Moderator - I agree. Non-Christian and Non-Family friendly would be more appropriate.
---NurseRobert on 6/26/06

Only if the rapture of the church comes before then.
---Paul on 6/26/06

Moderator, you made the statement on 6/9/06 - "Does it bother you that Hillary for all practical purposes hates Christians?" I have asked at least 3 times for you to back up this statement and each time (with the exception of this time) it was never posted. You have made a very strong statement and you should be able to back this up, or was this just your opinion?

Moderator - Opinion based upon the facts. Pro-Abortion and Pro-Gay politics are not family or Christian friendly.
---NruseRobert on 6/26/06

Moderator, You STILL have not backed up your statement. Do you plan on deleting this post AGAIN?

Moderator - What statement? Deleting again? Please be more clear.
---NurseRobert on 6/26/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services

Guns , knives , baseball bats they will find ways to kill you. Canada and the others also have jumped over 300% more rapes, home breakins, home invasions , carjackings and other crimes that put us to shame and all came about when they banned guns. We may have more numbered deaths but thats all deaths INCLUDING police shooting the bad guy .Democrates want this country to be like good ol England and that is exactly what the forfathers didn't want , that is what the revolution was about.
---rev._chris on 6/26/06

Alex De Toqueville Wrote that the greatness of America was to be found in its places of worship, Welfare, teaching of values and other social service's are best handled by private religious groups, not goverment, goverments 'values' are capricious at best. Hillery and Co. see goverment as where people should turn to, and that is socialism. In time a big goverment will be a threat to all religion, competing with private religious values, and that is communism. Russians tossed it out, we pick it up.
---MikeM on 6/10/06

Hillary is an elitist liberal who has no understanding of the essential role of religion in American life. When people do not have God, they find something else to make into their God. In the case of most liberals the 'state' becomes the repository of God like values. The purpose of goverment is not to 'do good' but to abide by its constitutional limitations. Hillary and Co. do not understand this, and the so-called conservative republicans are no better, being dictated to by parasitic corperate interest.
---MikeM on 6/10/06

I personally am no fan of Hilary Clinton. I have no problem with a women president, but I don't think she has much of a chance of winning the democratic ticket. She has too many enemies and almost no chance of winning the general election. Plus, there are some powerful democrats coming out (i.e. Joe Biden). Still, on a positive note, I do like her Iraq war stance over other dems. She wants a pheasible exit plan rather than just pull out like some are calling for.
---Casey on 6/10/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores

Automobiles kill far more people than guns. Let's get rid of them. That would also solve our foreign oil and global warming problems. Al Gore would be ecstatic. Knives kill a lot of people too. Better outlaw them. Baseball bats kill a fair number of people, so they should go. Maybe soccer will catch on so we can be just like Europe. Just remember, statistically one has a better chance of surviving a hunting trip with Dick Cheney than a car ride with a Kennedy.
---ralph7477 on 6/10/06

I heard a joke the other day referring to the church as the Bride of Christ: I like Jesus, its just his wife I cant stand.
Many people use their bad impression of Christians as the main reason why they dont want to become one, and unfortunately we have given this bad impression some legitimacy. If our fellowship was as it should be, we could at least eliminate one popular excuse people have for not accepting Christ
Maybe you set a bad example of a christian?
---calab on 6/10/06

Mod: What sources do you have saying Hillary hates Christians? I get e-mail from her press releases all the time and have never read such a thing. Please cite newspaper or television networks where it was said.

Moderator - Reversing the logic since you receive her press releases and would have more exacting information, does she show love toward Christians?
---Madison1101 on 6/9/06

I would not vote for either one of those men.
And you ain't seen terror until all firearms are taken from law abiding citizens.
I promise, I will throw my gun away when one of two things happens. First the Government protects us from crime. I just went through a robbery, the courts were worse to us than the criminals. Next I will throw it away when I run outta ammo.
---Elder on 6/9/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training

Mike: Some people believe that Socialism is good for the country. Forms of it work in Europe.
---Madison1101 on 6/9/06

More than 30,000 people are killed by guns in the U.S. every year. In 1998 the U.S. murdered more than 9,000 with guns, Canada had about 300, Japan: 15, Great Britain had less than 10. This Issue is an embarassment for the U.S. and yet we still fight every attempt to limit the free proliferation of guns in our country. I am in favor of preserving the second ammendment, but that ammendment never said the gov. can't restrict gun use.
---Casey on 6/9/06

No Democratic candidate is in favor of "BANNING" guns, they want restrictions. The NRA has so much money to lobbey over gun control laws that the U.S. has a humiliating record. Guns, swimming pools, and small toys can all kill little children, but guns are the only one without laws protecting children.
---Casey on 6/9/06

I am all for a Clinton/Gore ticket in 2008. I would prefer Hillary as president though.

Moderator - Does it bother you that Hillary for all practical purposes hates Christians?
---Madison1101 on 6/9/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Software

How has Canada managed to have less violence with stricter gun laws? Go figure.

We should have stricter gun laws. Otherwise, an Uzzi would not have been brought into my school last year.

I am not opposed to people having hunting rifles, if they hunt and eat the kill. But there is no reason why people should have to have a repeating rifle, unless they are serving in the military.
---Madison1101 on 6/9/06

Gun control to me means using both hands. I am not without feeling for those victims of gun violence, but bad people with guns are the problem, banning guns would mean nothing. Hillery would only increase the size of our socialist goverment, and attack the bill of rights, which protects us to have firearms, which serve protect us from a tyrannical goverment. The founders were wise in this.
---MikeM on 6/9/06

It does not matter whom wins because people are not perfect & this is still Satans world. Jesus will reign as King forever & kick Satan out bringing peace in the new Earh & new Heavens &I would rather be under his government, under his fathers kingdom. I vote for Jesus.
---Candice on 6/9/06

Well Jim, if firearms were outlawed, maybe my father wouldn't have pointed a gun in my face trying to murder me for merely having an argument outside his house where I lived in 1983. The argument was with my boyfriend at the time, not with my father, yet he came outside with a gun and stuck it in our faces, pulling the trigger. Then my ex-husband spent $444 on a gun and terrorized me with it for 8 months. SO I AM FOR HILARY AND AL GORE if they outlaw firearms and guns, etc.,
---Donna9759 on 6/9/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Advertising

Hillary and Al Gore? sounds like a re-run of the old planet of the apes movie. their logic is the same. humans can't have guns, they might shoot themselves in the foot.
---wayne on 6/9/06

What difference will it make unless they win the election and damage our country.
---Mikey on 6/9/06

Gore and Hillery, like Marx and Engals. Democratic party is now the socialist party of America.

For the other Ticket the only repulicans I would vote for would be a Condi Rice and Mitt Romney Ticket.

I would think that most conservative protestants would be against the socialist democrats, being the bigger the goverment, the more the need of the state there is, to fill areas of need where private organizations used to fill, like Church's.
---MikeM on 6/9/06

Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.