[OFFICIAL] Hillary Clinton running for 2008 President!

[archibaldcrane]

EDIT: If you really think selling GTA to a 12 year old is "contributing to the delinquency of minors", contact your local DA office and have them press charges against your local retailers.

Why aren't you raging against the theater chains for not allowing 12 year olds to watch R-rated movies, if you're so convinced that it's their right to see such material?

Simple. Because the theater chains choose to do that.

Laws should only be passed for stuff that is absolutely necessary. The federal government should only pass laws in situations the states can't enforce on their own (like interstate business).

If the local game retailers decide on their own to not sell games to minors than that is ok with me. I'll be damned if Hilary is going to use this is an excuse to create more laws, regulation, and waste of my hard earned money to solve a problem that we can't even prove exists.

Do you feel that laws prohibiting the sale of pornography to minors are valid? If so, what is the "problem" there that this law prevents?

I've taken enough film history to know that the opt-in self-regulation by theater chains is only to prevent government involvement. If movie theaters were the same free-for-all that many video game retailers are, there would've been extremely similar legislation passed a long time ago.

[Pamelita]

If the local game retailers decide on their own to not sell games to minors than that is ok with me. I'll be damned if Hilary is going to use this is an excuse to create more laws, regulation, and waste of my hard earned money to solve a problem that we can't even prove exists.

There you go. Stop using her view on video game legislature as an excuse for a personal problem with her.

[Jimmayus]

The only real, genuine reason to not support enforcement of previously existing ratings that I could support logically, is that like some have said, we don't really have a large focus funding wise.

I first heard this from Lewis Black, and later had to find the information (the UN database is a fascinating and frustrating tool), but, at the beginning of our war on a battle strategy, we didn't actually have money. We have been running what can only be described as a stupidly large level of debt in the country for several years.

I said this in another thread, but, since the lame duck house of last year was unable to establish a new budget plan, most of the departments in the government were without new funds to spend, as they had to work on the previous years' budget. What that means is that, a large majority of the government is unable to start any serious projects because they don't have any funds. It should be noted, slightly despairingly, that Homeland Security (whatever that means in reality) was actually unrestricted by this lack of re-budgeting, and even they can't do major operations.

To be honest, like I said before, I don't think Hillarys' bill to enforce ESRB ratings will accomplish much if passed; I think a more fascinating thing will be to watch the dance between the Executive and Legislative branches to A) get us out of the precarious situation we're in globally in terms of money, and B) 'get us out of Iraq', which is a quaint way of saying withdrawl over the course of years.

This side issue (video game enforcement), which should be a non-issue, is both detracting from the main issues facing the country, and at worst extremely annoying at point. As an above post said, it is laughable to suggest that the government would destroy a massive market like video games. An oversight committee at worst would be able to increase the ratings of a video game, any restriction of it would be an infringement of freedom of speech, and would be argued to death in courts.

In all honesty, the biggest problem with a representative government where people in the same tent have differing opinions, is that none of your representatives will ever completely encompass your point of view. Generally speaking, your point of view is probably under-researched, but even if it is not, you'll never find somebody with the same solution to what you deem to be issues.

So, if your biggest issue is this laugable ratings enforcement bill, you should really compromise on the issue and focus on whether or not she represents you on relevant topics.

By the way, I highly doubt Bill and Hillary cuddle.

[Damen]

hmm as much as I don't want another Republican(lolbush) in the office, I surely will be voting against Clinton if she makes the prime candidate.

I lost all respect for her when the President's wife of the United States says "Hi little girls, if your husband cheats on you, it's OK and you should stick with him." Is essentially the message she sent to thousands of girls who would look up to someone like oh em-gee the president's wife?

Unless Rudy Giuliani runs for the Republicans, I'm going to regret my vote either way. It's really IS fucking sad that everytime I vote I'm voting for who i DON'T want, and even then it's still a snake or a scumbag you're voting for.

Hmm... You have no respect for Hilary for sticking with her husband who cheated on her, yet you would vote for the thrice married Rudolph Giuliani who cheated on his first two wives with the next two wives, and his first wife was his second cousin.

Fascinating.

Owned. Wow.

Seriously.

It's not an "owned" situation. I just think that most people don't realize the huge double standard going on. That or people don't know what kind of a sleazeball Giuliani is.

Late reply (late classes) but I'd like to add a few things. Firstly, cheating on someone and staying with someone who cheated on you are two different things. It's pretty apparent that Hillary stayed with Bill for the obvious political position she was in (hello there first lady). Do you really expect me to believe that any woman with a rational mind is going to stay with a man who cheated on her with multiple women? (Lewinsky and Jones case.)

Her excuse? That it was a and I quote a "vast right-wing conspiracy" for political gain by the republicans. Maybe I'm an asshole, but if my wife was out giving blowjobs to the next door neighbor I'd tell her to GTFO.

It reminds me of that song called High School Never Ends by Bowling for Soup honestly.

You're right though, I had no clue about Giuliani's affairs because it wasn't so blown out of proportion like the Lewinski 'scandal' was (seriously who cares that Bill got some head). Despite all of this, I personally don't care about the personal lives of politicians. I care about how they run our god damn country. I respect Giuliani as a leader and how he handled the 9/11 crisis in NYC. I would want someone with that kind of leadership to run for presidency. Hillary hasn't done a god damn thing that has made me go "Wow I really wish she would run for president." She's certainly not a leader and is just your average run-of-the-mill phoney politician.

Point being, Hillary has bad PR whereas Giuliani has (relatively) good PR. The first woman president is ground-breaking history for the United States and it sure as hell should go to someone with a little more respect from the public than friggen Hillary Clinton.

[Damen]

To be honest, like I said before, I don't think Hillarys' bill to enforce ESRB ratings will accomplish much if passed;

I agree with this 100%. If some kid reallllly wants some rated M game they'll get it in some way or another. Hell, I was at a gamespot with my little brother and his friend not too long ago. He was trying to buy Gears of War(?) for Xbox360 and I was playing the demo of Sonic the Hedgehog they had up. While I was playing his friend yelled over at me (right in front of the cashier) and said "Hey I need you to buy this for me because it's rated M." The game was already on the cashier's table, the kid handed me the money, and I handed the money to the cashier, and then I handed the game to the kid and said 'have fun.' and then just sorta starred at the cashier for a few seconds and then walked out.

It was the most retarded crap I've ever seen. Like it really matters who hands the cashier the money. Sure for liability reasons it makes sense, I guess, but good god.

[Palin]

So giving your spouse a second chance is morally worse than cheating on your spouse. Right.

Besides, we all know the reason Hillary stayed with Bill was political, her leaving in the middle of the scandal would be a huge hit to his already shot credibility and make the whole situation 10x more dramatic than it needed to be. It was in the best interest of the country to stay with him, or to handle their marriage privately, than to openly leave him and make the situation worse. That would have been childish.

Edit: You people are also naive if you think something as trivial as the video game ratings is going to come up during the elections or even her Presidency. There's much bigger issues for her platform, that was an issue in her Senator platform, and for making a stance and a name for herself by appealing to all the middle class parents. I highly highly doubt we'll see it even brought up in the future.

[Damen]

So giving your spouse a second chance is morally worse than cheating on your spouse. Right.

If you truely love someone, the moment you start having any desire to 'sleep around' with others you should confront it with your partner and try to figure out why you're having these thoughts in the first place and why your marriage sucks so much ass.

Once a cheater, always a cheater.

[Devek]

I'm going to have to side against "America's Mayor" here too.

It isn't hard to not cheat on your wife.. my penis has never accidentally fallen out of my pants and into the mouth of some random chick.

If you can't keep an oath to someone you supposedly love how can you keep any other promise to anyone else?

[Metah]

It isn't hard to not cheat on your wife.. my penis has never accidentally fallen out of my mouth and into the mouth of some random chick.

What? Auto-fellatio?

Edit: Your ninja edit has no effect

[Devek]

I deny everything!

I'm not a crook!

[Devek]

Maybe another thread would be more appropriate..

But what do you people think about John Edwards?

http://johnedwards.com/

He seems to be anti-war (duh) pro-stem cell(a solution to healthcare costs he says), seems to have more concerns with issues at home. I haven't had time to do much research on him but my boss seems pretty sold on the guy, idk.

[Erebus]

This discussion about violent videgames and kids is very interesting even if it is off-topic.

On one side it seems that people think the government should be responsible for the welfare of our children. The other side seems to think that they, meaning the parents, should be responsible for the welfare of their own children.

Whatever happened to caring, involved parents? What is this world we live in that we need the government to control what our own kids can or can't do?

You want to make it illegal for children under a certain age to play games with mature content. Is there such a law that does the same for television, music and art? Do those forms of media contain no mature content that our kids must be shielded from?

Will we allow the government to control what our kids can or can't do? When we are gone what will our OWN kids believe is ok for the government to control: Our young children, our teenagers.. ourselves?

This whole issue may seem insignificant, but it can have very long and dire repercussions, I think. How will we leave this world... calmly.. coolly..entirely without incident?

P.S. A cookie for you if you get that last line. :wink: And sorry if that came out like some philisophical jargon.

[Jimmayus]

The enforcement of ratings only affects the sale and purchase of the game, not who plays it; the government isn't controlling anything, just making it a bit more clear that those little letters mean something.

[Kenai]

So giving your spouse a second chance is morally worse than cheating on your spouse. Right.

If you truely love someone, the moment you start having any desire to 'sleep around' with others you should confront it with your partner and try to figure out why you're having these thoughts in the first place and why your marriage sucks so much ass.

Once a cheater, always a cheater.

Your argument would be a lot more sound if Mayor Guliani didn't have 3 misconducts on Hilary's 1. If you are gonna bash one for something like that without bashing the other, you are just being ignorant. They really are a very similar situation, it just so happens that Clinton giving her marriage a customary "second chance", which is actually somewhat realistic to me vs Guliani's record. Then again, maybe you don't like either of them, I don't know.

This discussion about violent videgames and kids is very interesting even if it is off-topic.

On one side it seems that people think the government should be responsible for the welfare of our children. The other side seems to think that they, meaning the parents, should be responsible for the welfare of their own children.

Whatever happened to caring, involved parents? What is this world we live in that we need the government to control what our own kids can or can't do?

You want to make it illegal for children under a certain age to play games with mature content. Is there such a law that does the same for television, music and art? Do those forms of media contain no mature content that our kids must be shielded from?

Will we allow the government to control what our kids can or can't do? When we are gone what will our OWN kids believe is ok for the government to control: Our young children, our teenagers.. ourselves?

This whole issue may seem insignificant, but it can have very long and dire repercussions, I think. How will we leave this world... calmly.. coolly..entirely without incident?

P.S. A cookie for you if you get that last line. :wink: And sorry if that came out like some philisophical jargon.

It's really not as big a deal as all that, simply because there are already similar (the same?) types of deals in place for similar franchises (namely T.V. and movies). For movies, they are *usually*, not always, pretty strict about letting someone underage go in without a parent/guardian, and if they aren't they recieve similar sanctions. For T.V., there are now child-blocks on just about every new T.V. if a parent shows any concern, and the little letter codes after every commercial break. It was only a matter of time before videogames recieved something similar, and this seems like the most realistic approach possible. It really is about liability, this basically gets video game makers out of a lot more liability and places the blame more on the parents, because, well, you can just look around and see the blame they get for "everything that is wrong with today's youth", and such. Just because I agree with this particular area, doesn't mean I want the government telling me exactly what to do all the time, but I get kind of annoyed with people who keep acting like you can only have total control or no control at all (no offense)... it's obvious that a lot of parents do want and or need something like this in place, as much as they bitch about it, and it really is only affecting minors, who shouldn't be allowed to buy the games deemed too mature for them without parental consent anyway.

[Erebus]

I know it's not that bad, lol.

It just seems that for a country that believes so strongly in freedom and rights and all that good stuff, we sure like to whine about the government not controlling more stuff.

Well that's just how it seems to me sometimes.

[Xeno]

If retarded parents would stop buying kids M rated games this shit wouldn't be so bad, it's not the video game indrustry's fault, its the dumbfuck parents who buy their 10 year old kids GTA games to get them off their back.

On the subject, even if you're too retarded to ready the ESRB rating on the game...

IF ITS NAMED AFTER A CLASS THREE FELONY, YOUR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILD SHOULD NOT BE PLAYING IT, LAWL.

I have no clue if Grand Theft Auto is a class 3 felony, but it sounded cool.

[Raineer]

Obama in 2008

[SephYuyX]

I have no clue if Grand Theft Auto is a class 3 felony, but it sounded cool.

It can be three, but its most likely 1st degree. 1st is worse than 3rd btw.

[JoOeetheplatypuS]

Guys, Hillary doesn't really give a fuck about video games. Its just a good target to get people on her side.
My opinion of her is, on the surface, I like her in a lot of ways. She is smart and seems good at problem solving. The issue is she is also so damned political that I can't be sure exactly what she actually thinks. She seems to know exactly what she's doing and doesn't seem to make uncalculated statements, which are the best indicator of what somebody actually thinks and actually will do.

[TsingTao]

Hillary is three things:

- Politician
- Lawyer
- Woman

If that combination doesn't set off alarms I don't know what the fuck is wrong with you. Add in all the shady things from her first 8 years in the White House and I can't imagine why people would vote for her outside of the whole "Hurray, it's not GW!" factor.

No good can come of this. One can only hope that the unwashed masses go with the tried and true "I'll vote for whoever is younger and better looking" method of candidate selection and make Obama the Democratic choice.