What does my sig mean to you?

[LittleClarkie]

I've gotten some good comments, and some not so good.

Makes me wonder. If you have a favorable reaction, what is it about the sig pic that makes you react that way?

If you have a negative reaction, what is it about the sig that bothers you?

It will be on my car soon if I can get a replacement (car wash ate the last one).

I'm just curious mostly. I'm finding it stirs more emotion sometimes that I'd thought it would. I hadn't thought about it that deeply, personally. And I still think the image is up for interpretation.

So what is your interpretation?

[TK421]

1. Chelsea is next?

:shrug:

[LittleClarkie]

17. And then Neil...

Who else is there? A sperm to be named later?

[TK421]

31. Maybe I was way off on that one, but it seemed like the logical choice

:crazy:

[LittleClarkie]

40. No, I've heard that before. Then Chelsea, then Neil, then whoever is next

Not off at all.

[HughMoran]

24. Yeah, Chelsea next!!

WOOHOO! Maybe we can have Clinush for all eternity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!11

[waiting for hope]

2. That I Hate dynasties. Period.

[Rosemary2205]

3. My reaction is strongly negative.

Not toward you OR the image - but toward the whole idea of BUSH CLINTON BUSH CLINTON BUSH.

The image. IMHO is FABULOUS.

[dogman]

4. You need another layer of foil?

[MonkeyFunk]

5. I think

that of all the arguments against electing Hillary Clinton, the "dynasty" one is the dumbest.

The Clintons have nothing to do with who was President before and after Bill, so we can drop the Bushes out of the equation.

Then, we have to consider that two people related by marriage being elected is NOT a dynasty in any way.

As I said, it's the dumbest argument against Clinton I've seen. And I've seen a lot of dumb arguments.

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. To hell with the 'dynasty' argument.

What bothers me is I am a progressive, and there is no progress in making the same mistakes as we have made for the past 20 years. Hillary is looking back at the DLC 90s, not forward to a progressive 21st century. We don't need more NAFTA, more war, more corporate malfeasance, more lobbyists, more 'centrists'. That's what gave us Bush.

[BootinUp]

6. It implies we do not live in

a democracy. Some will now pipe up to say "Exactly!"

[MrMickeysMom]

9. I'll go with this interetation...

:bounce: Exactly!
:bounce: Exactly!
:bounce: Exactly!
:bounce: Exactly!
:bounce: Exactly!
:bounce: Exactly!
:bounce: Exactly!
:bounce: Exactly!
:bounce: Exactly!

[BootinUp]

10. :-)

[Generator]

7. I actually think most people would laugh

if they saw that as your bumpersticker. Of course being on DU-I've seen that or the concept for a long time.

I honestly think there should be a law (after we fix the four million other problems wrong with this country but you know maybe this is a big part of it-too much power concentrated in too few hands) that no one can be a president if they have a direct link to president. Yes, Michelle Obama doesn't get eight years in the White House after her husband had eight. Or Jenna Bush doesn't get to be the Republican nominee in 2050. Because it's too damn close. No first relations-no children of presidents, no wives, no husbands. I know we have Teddy Kennedy-but I'm talking the presidency here. People think it's being sexist to say Hillary Clinton already had eight years in the White House? Well she did. According to some things I've read she had as much power or MORE than Al Gore. I think it's a matter of fairness. Maybe it should extend to grandchildren-or brothers too-no more Kennedy's or Roosevelts.

But they can be senators and the like. But the presidency should not belong to two families for a hundred years!

[BootinUp]

8. Fairness? hmmm

sounds like a good way to pick the most powerful executive in the world. /sarcasm

[Generator]

14. Why?

Because your hero, Wes Clark endorsed Clinton therfore to have the idea that ONE Family should not have all the power in the world for generations is a bad idea? Fairness is a BAD idea?

Really the hero worship of any one candidate is damn creepy. They are all politicans and they are all flawed. And that's right it would be FAIR-a horrible idea in America-fairness-to have someone besides a CLINTON in the White House.

Ever hear that old myth anyone can grow up and be President. NO not unless you are born to one or marry one.

[BootinUp]

19. good grief

you assume too much. I was not advocating with that comment friend.

Just saying I would rather use a higher standard than fairness. Things like Integrity, Intelligence, Compassion, Leadership.

[mr_hat]

11. My first thought was bacon.

Not sure why.

[onehandle]

12. Jeb is history. His brother blew it for him.

No fucking way the Bush family falls back into the White House.

[LittleClarkie]

16. I'm aware also that he hates Washington and would never want to BE President anyway

He didn't even show up for his brother's second inaugural.

I see it as a sarcastic comment, but not one to be taken so seriously that I'm literally saying that a vote for Hillary will eventually be a vote for Jeb. Just that we've got a pattern going, and there are young people in this country who don't know what it's like to be governed by anyone but a Bush and a Clinton. Surely these aren't the only two families who can get their butts elected in this country.

Some have suggested we could add Chelsea and Neil to the end there.

[GrantDem]

13. Hmmm???

[tandot]

15. You can't decide which one you like more?

:shrug:

[Crunchy Frog]

18. I miss your old sig.

:(

[BootinUp]

21. hey crunch.

:hi:

[Crunchy Frog]

25. Hey Jim!

[LittleClarkie]

22. You mean the John Kerry painting?

Yeah, I do too.

I'll probably switch back pretty soon.

Having this image on my bumper is enough.

But it expresses how I feel at the moment, candidate-less person that I am.

But yeah, I'm still a Kerrycrat at heart.

[Crunchy Frog]

26. Yeah, that's a really beautiful painting.

I'm candidate-less myself. Just nobody running this time that I can feel excited about. My biggest concern with Hillary is that I just don't think she's electable. :(

[LittleClarkie]

27. I wish our guys hadn't decided not to run. Part of me keeps hoping Gore will jump in

my problem would be solved then. I lean toward Obama. But nobody's lighting a fire under me yet.

I guess we have time.

But it sucks, doesn't it :-(

[Crunchy Frog]

29. Actually, I think I've found my candidate. Check out my new sig.

:)

[Mz Pip]

20. Dumb, Smart, Dumb, Smart, Dumb

When will we ever learn.

We get lured into a false sense of complacency with smart people at the helm. Then we let our guard down and vote in a moron. :shrug:

Mz Pip
:dem:

[orleans]

23. it means you're a kindergarten teacher who enjoys teaching children

about the concept of a "pattern" ??

[Harper_is_Bush]

28. It equates Hillary to the Bush's. Also implies another Bush will result from a Hillary Presidency.

Quite ignorant and fear-mongering.

I have no doubt you've gotten some "good comments". There's a segment of people here who are rabid in their hatred of Hillary, and have adopted Coulter-ish/Malkin-ish behaviors.

What did Coulter call Edwards? A fag? That's the same kind of thing the people who would appreciate your sig are doing to Hillary here.

[TK421]

32. Excuse me, but this sig line has changed since I posted my original reply

What the fuck is that about? Now, I see a picture ( portrait ) of John Kerry

[LittleClarkie]

33. Well, actually, I was waiting for the thread to slip quietly off the front page

because I wanted to restore my original sig, which is a nice portrait of Kerry in 1971.. Now it's been kicked back up, dagnabit!

Hadn't thought of that.

I'd better post a pic of the sig this refers to or people will be confused.

[TK421]

34. otherwise the response I posted is quite redundant

[LittleClarkie]

37. I know, I'm sorry. I thought people were done with the thread

I can change it back again I suppose.

[TK421]

36. Still...I like that portrait of him

:thumbsup:

[LittleClarkie]

38. So do I. And someone in this thread said they missed it. Which made ME miss it.

So once the thread had sunk, I thought I could get away with changing it. Eh. Slight miscalculation.

[TK421]

39. No problem-o

:D

[LittleClarkie]

35. Okay, as you can see, I've changed my sig. Here is the original picture this thread refers to:

I thought this thread was done, so I went ahead and switched my sig. Oops. Sorry for any confusion.

[Harper_is_Bush]

41. Given the fact that so many found your sig to be offensive you should have known...

...the thread wasn't done.