2008 American Presidential Elections

[Babbo]

it was a big IF discussion about hiding stuff in general, it got so deep into semantics that the whole point behind it was lost.

maybe there should be a thread about china? all things china. the milk scandal, the tibetian opression, the children sweatshops and general problems. maybe that will redirect some spam away from these threads?

Nah. In his mind every thread is about China. That one would just happen to have it in the title <.<

[CeriaHalcyon]

Is this election over yet?

the popular polls say obama would win today,

and to be honest i don't care, cause another four years of McCain bashing im not sure if i could handle.

I hope that obama is different from pelosi and actually able to deliver the change he promises.

[Rain]

I hope that obama is different from pelosi and actually able to deliver the change he promises.

QFT my friend, QFT

the bulk of the appeal Obama has is the idea that he can bring change, take that away and he doesn't really have anything to stand on.



I almost feel bad for both parties though, if either of them fall even slightly short of their promises I don't think either of them would be given a second chance

[CeriaHalcyon]

QFT my friend, QFT

the bulk of the appeal Obama has is the idea that he can bring change, take that away and he doesn't really have anything to stand on.

I almost feel bad for both parties though, if either of them fall even slightly short of their promises I don't think either of them would be given a second chance

I think at this point people must be voting out of spite for the republican party. It's clear that to some extent the media backs the democratic side, first Hillary then Obama. regardless of whether or not you believe in the percieved faults of obama, like the lack of experience ( political and military), funds disclosure, one would think it would at least raise an eyebrow, to make people look beyond the slogan and yet they don't. The media doesn't seem to want to make light of any of his faults also. It's like the light shines out of every hole and any attempt by McCain to point them out and it's immediately branded as hate tactics and mudslinging.

Like you said rain, i don't think he has much to stand on, and it surprises me that the bulk of the american society and media doesnt care.

[Shdo]

its like in that show, the view?, they interviewd both men and to mccain they asked tough questions and tried to make him look bad and obama...they said he is very cute and something about babies or gene pool...they just gave him puppy eyes.


america seems to follow him to hte extent of falling in love, and the more you blindly follow the more you will feel the hit on the floor.

[cornflakes]

you keep saying that it shouldnt matter, and so does clinton cheating on his wife, its not anyone buisness but it still lying and hiding the truth (that shouldnt matter but it DOES). there is a big difference between how to world should be and how it really is. obama say he is a christian, now lets say that a year from now he is the president and he comes out and say, that he converted to christianity only at the age of 20 or something, some people would say, 'hey, it does bother me, you said one thing and actually lied about it!' and some will say 'i didnt wanted to vote for a muslim' maybe it would have cost obama the elections, who knows.

so by hiding, even lying about something he won the elections, this is not the way to elect a leader, where he chose what info to share with the public and what to hide and lie about only to win, its exactly like frauding financial reports.


ill give some examples. candidate A B and C run for presedancy.

there are many people in the country and each looking for something different.

it found out that A cheated on his wife, voters leave him, not because he is a bad candidate but because to those people family values are important and they dont want to have a president who cheated on his wife.

candidate B is gay, can you say it wont affect some of the voters?

candidate C is a strickt christian in his household, many atheists dont like it.

all those candidates had some problem, nothing that will actually affect their preformance, they have good ideas and its just small things that make people to avoid voting for them. so they hide it, and when you think about it, it shouldnt matter if A cheated, B is gay and C is christian, but to some people it will and there are so many reasons not to like a candidate. now this hiding of the truth might cause one candidate to win when he shouldnt if the cards would have been on the table.
tl;dr: "it shouldn't, but it DOES" (amirite?)

I think I do understand the point you're making, but
[...] if some people do take it into account, he isn't obligated to indulge these people, though he may choose to if he so wishes. There's a difference.
You say "it shouldn't matter but it DOES" by way of justifying labelling Obama a fraud..... and then you say, "he should reveal the color of his panties for all the world to marvel". Can't I use your reasoning to refute you with "he should, but he DOESN'T", and claim that that makes it alright?

"I think cornflakes is an asshole because he comes from Malaysia. The fact that he comes from Malaysia shouldn't affect my judgement of him, but the reality is that it DOES. Therefore cornflakes is an asshole."
See, perfect reasoning. :learn


About your Clinton example, I think him cheating on his wife and getting head from an intern isn't a problem, but lying under oath about it ("I did not have sexual relations with that woman" et cetera) certainly is. If he merely had said "I don't feel comfortable discussing my personal life" I would not think it's wrong at all.



lets look on a more real scenerio, lets say that mccain win the elections, after a year we learn that he actually had a terminal cancer and is about to die. not only that, he knew about it and the health reports he gave were fake, you think that he would have got the same amount of votes if he told that 'yea, ill be dead in a year and a half'?
McCain dying has a very real effect on the country (namely the presidency being passed onto Palin). The same can hardly be said of his preferred brand of boxers, favourite band, or religion. :)


Yes, it has devolved into semantics (again), so apologies to the other participants in this thread. If you guys think it belongs in the Free-Form Debate Discussion thread, I'll post there in the future to avoid clogging up the thread.




maybe there should be a thread about china? all things china. the milk scandal, the tibetian opression, the children sweatshops and general problems. maybe that will redirect some spam away from these threads?
Now don't be hatin' China and the Chinese just because of one person. :(





I think at this point people must be voting out of spite for the republican party. It's clear that to some extent the media backs the democratic side, first Hillary then Obama. regardless of whether or not you believe in the percieved faults of obama, like the lack of experience ( political and military), funds disclosure, one would think it would at least raise an eyebrow, to make people look beyond the slogan and yet they don't. The media doesn't seem to want to make light of any of his faults also. It's like the light shines out of every hole and any attempt by McCain to point them out and it's immediately branded as hate tactics and mudslinging.

Like you said rain, i don't think he has much to stand on, and it surprises me that the bulk of the american society and media doesnt care.
its like in that show, the view?, they interviewd both men and to mccain they asked tough questions and tried to make him look bad and obama...they said he is very cute and something about babies or gene pool...they just gave him puppy eyes.


america seems to follow him to hte extent of falling in love, and the more you blindly follow the more you will feel the hit on the floor.
I'll admit that he's a media darling. Even overseas (like for example in my country) public opinion is very much with him. The fawning is a little disgusting, yes.

But also irrelevant to his ability (or lack thereof) to lead the sole superpower in the world.

CeriaHalcyon: Yes, Obama's platform is pretty flimsy, but then so is McCain's. As many people support Obama blindly because of "change", many people also support McCain because he is a "not-Obama".

[bradc]

I think it has become a political farce for both Obama and McCain. McCain seems to be having issues of flip-flops being 100% behind Bush and rooting for Obama at the same time. Obama is still in the lead of popular votes, which means voting evidently becomes pointless and spot for president; the people are still voting until end of the election either way.

Colin Powell announced that he endorses Obama :XD

[Shdo]

cornflakes, the asshole malaysian example was close but not it...it should be "i wont vote for cornflakes because he is malaysian, i know i shouldn't but i will" for example.

now, where Obama comes from is free for all to see, so the malaysian example is actually good, some wont vote for Obama because he is an 'Arab' (i loled at that) or came from Indonesia or wasnt born on US soil or whatever...legitimate that someone wont vote for him because of his background, after all maybe someone wont want to vote for McCain because he is white\served in the army\came from an established family.

now if there was a poll about "is cornflakes an asshole?" and someone would write 'yes cuz he is a malaysian' its stupid, but when America need to chose a president for the most powerful country in the world...you want to make sure you are voting for the best candidate you can get, the one who is right for you.

also, we all know that if he would show his shorts he will jump ahead in the polls.

and as for Clinton, many would have, religion, family morals, faithfulness, those are important to many people around the world and they want to see them in their leaders, to some its more important than if the elected leader would die or not (if he dies, he will be replaced but if he is not of my religion? oh lord! saves us now).

[bradc]

Shdo please do not forget former President Bill Clinton is the forefather of democracy presidency since 1993 - 1997. He was mostly being attacked by the media and about his relationship with his intern with Monica. I could careless what religion he believes in and his personal life is none of my business; he still made surpluses for the economy for the U.S of A in the long run.

Now that he and his with wife Hilary both endorses Obama.

Change is still on the way... Whether one likes it or not.

[balladbird]

A part of the disparity is the fact that McCain was a strange choice for the Republican nomination.

This was a strange year, as far as potential candidates go, for both parties. The Republican party's choices didn't seem as revolutionary as the Dems, mainly because the differences were more subtle, but this election season saw a lot of people in the serious running whom no one would have expected just a few terms ago.

Seeing now what was unknown then, I stand by what I was saying during the primary seasons this time last year: It was a tad of a long shot, but Mike Huckabee would have been the best choice for the Republican nomination.

He had the most steady background of the pack, and his history as a pastor would have served to strengthen his standing in the traditional "values" red-states that McCain is now struggling desperately to hold. More to the point, though, he was the only candidate in the Elephant camp this year who could possibly hope to compete with Obama when it came to charisma, Albiet, his was a differnt kind of charm. (Obama has the kind of "charming stranger from down the street" charisma, as opposed to Huckabee's "witty uncle the kids are always happy to see" disposition.)

McCain was better known, as he's been running for years, and his status as an honest to god veteran of war was extremely hard to come by in the party of the wealthy elite. By all rights, he seemed to make the most sense during the primary season.

However, his political platform's uneven edges isolated him from more hardcore members of the party. It granted him cross-party appeal, which balanced his numbers. At the time of his official selection, the majority of the Republican party believed his final opponent would be Hillary Clinton. To be fair, if that were the case, he would have been her perfect foil, as she has very little appeal to conservatives. Against Obama, however, he's beaten in his best suit.

Then there was his selection of Palin for VP, which gave him a lot of female support, to say nothing of the head-slappingly ignorant ex-Hillary supporters who jumped ship because they're voting for a vagina regardles of issues. She would have been a strong choice, but her eccentricies, couples with the kinds of crowds she draws, further divided McCain from casual conservatives and moderate voters.

It would have been interesting to see how differently this election turned out had the Republicans better approached their strategy.

[crystalflash]

www.ctj.org/pdf/mccain.pdf (mccain.pdf)

very interesting paper. I recommend to anyone who gives a flying purple pelican shit about what might become of America, to read this. and let it drill baby, drill into your brain.

[Shdo]

cant see it

[crystalflash]

www.ctj.org/pdf/mccain.pdf

that should work right there. if not, just put the link into your web browser.

to elaborate on my interpretation of this link, like I said, if you give a damn about what might become of America, you'd want to read the paper the URL (it is a *pdf file you can view in Foxit reader/photoshop) is a link to.
I've learned in the past few weeks how god damn ignorant a lot of Americans are, and tend to vote because of someones character they happen to like better. wtf. the question "who would you rather have a beer with?", might sound foxymiliar.

you cannot and mustn' t base thou vote on these.

seriously.

I believe that most voters, and I'm talking about people who are voting mccain with big smiles plastered on their faces, pumping their fist with pride, have made their decision on who is worth their vote, after having looked at a series of facts first. this also goes for a group of people who vote for obama. but I'd like to focus on mccain now. I just believe people should take voting as something serious, and not without being fully aware who it is they're voting for. so the link pasted above should really help anyone who gives a rats ass about their country really. let it educate you.

[Babbo]

Now don't be hatin' China and the Chinese just because of one person. :(



Babbo doesn't hate china. He hates having to see it brought up in EVERY SINGLE DEBATE THREAD WHETHER OR NOT IT IS RELEVANT o,o Though babbo does have to wonder why the milk scandal hasn't gotten a thread yet. Kind of annoying; babbo liked getting stuff from the chinese grocery store every now and then <.<

Back on topic. who here thinks Colin Powell's endorsement will have any affect whatsoever? Most of the discussion on TV and radios seem to think it will mostly be useless. The scary thing was that some of them said it was because many Americans don't know who he is @.@

Babbo wants to believe that such a thing could not be true. But ... but. AGGGGGGGHHHHHH!

Or how about the early voters in west virginia who are saying that touch screen voting Machines are switching votes? Kind scary when the republican officials overseeing the voting process. Wtf is any state having it overseen by a single party btw?

check it out : http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/22/votes

www.ctj.org/pdf/mccain.pdf

that should work right there. if not, just put the link into your web browser.

to elaborate on my interpretation of this link, like I said, if you give a damn about what might become of America, you'd want to read the paper the URL (it is a *pdf file you can view in Foxit reader/photoshop) is a link to.
I've learned in the past few weeks how god damn ignorant a lot of Americans are, and tend to vote because of someones character they happen to like better. wtf. the question "who would you rather have a beer with?", might sound foxymiliar.

you cannot and mustn' t base thou vote on these.

seriously.

I believe that most voters, and I'm talking about people who are voting mccain with big smiles plastered on their faces, pumping their fist with pride, have made their decision on who is worth their vote, after having looked at a series of facts first. this also goes for a group of people who vote for obama. but I'd like to focus on mccain now. I just believe people should take voting as something serious, and not without being fully aware who it is they're voting for. so the link pasted above should really help anyone who gives a rats ass about their country really. let it educate you.



The whole "who would you like to have a beer with" thing always annoyed babbo. Babbo's not EVER going to have one with the President (nor would he want to regardless of who he/she is) so wtf should it matter to him o,o?

[Rain]

Back on topic. who here thinks Colin Powell's endorsement will have any affect whatsoever? Most of the discussion on TV and radios seem to think it will mostly be useless. The scary thing was that some of them said it was because many Americans don't know who he is @.@

It will just make both sides bitch more

republicans will say its because Colin Powell is black and turning on the republicans, democrats will say that the repubs are stupid for thinking that

I just wnat the bitching to end really

I heard Rush Limbaugh (dont care enough to spell his name right :hmph) and damn, that dude is just angry at obama

he acts like Obama is a terrorist :-_-

[Babbo]

It will just make both sides bitch more

republicans will say its because Colin Powell is black and turning on the republicans, democrats will say that the repubs are stupid for thinking that

I just wnat the bitching to end really

I heard Rush Limbaugh (dont care enough to spell his name right :hmph) and damn, that dude is just angry at obama

he acts like Obama is a terrorist :-_-

Rush is a funny funny guy ;D It's like watching Bill O'reilly. Or a horrible horrible B movie. You watch/listen to it not because it's so amazing but because it's so very, very bad <.<

[balladbird]

By this point in the election season, Powell's reccomendation will serve as an almost insignificant lubricant under Obama's already fast-moving wheels. At this point the lines are so firmly drawn that nothing barring a super-scandal can change the outcome, it seems.

I'm glad to hear that Powell finally voiced an opinion on the election, though.


on an unrelated note, I finally finished processing my absentee ballot today. @_@

[Babbo]

By this point in the election season, Powell's reccomendation will serve as an almost insignificant lubricant under Obama's already fast-moving wheels. At this point the lines are so firmly drawn that nothing barring a super-scandal can change the outcome, it seems.

I'm glad to hear that Powell finally voiced an opinion on the election, though.


on an unrelated note, I finally finished processing my absentee ballot today. @_@
That, or republican voter fraud/scare tactics <.< Not that the democrats aren't guilty of that in any way.

[CeriaHalcyon]

A part of the disparity is the fact that McCain was a strange choice for the Republican nomination.

This was a strange year, as far as potential candidates go, for both parties. The Republican party's choices didn't seem as revolutionary as the Dems, mainly because the differences were more subtle, but this election season saw a lot of people in the serious running whom no one would have expected just a few terms ago.

Seeing now what was unknown then, I stand by what I was saying during the primary seasons this time last year: It was a tad of a long shot, but Mike Huckabee would have been the best choice for the Republican nomination.

He had the most steady background of the pack, and his history as a pastor would have served to strengthen his standing in the traditional "values" red-states that McCain is now struggling desperately to hold. More to the point, though, he was the only candidate in the Elephant camp this year who could possibly hope to compete with Obama when it came to charisma, Albiet, his was a differnt kind of charm. (Obama has the kind of "charming stranger from down the street" charisma, as opposed to Huckabee's "witty uncle the kids are always happy to see" disposition.)

McCain was better known, as he's been running for years, and his status as an honest to god veteran of war was extremely hard to come by in the party of the wealthy elite. By all rights, he seemed to make the most sense during the primary season.

However, his political platform's uneven edges isolated him from more hardcore members of the party. It granted him cross-party appeal, which balanced his numbers. At the time of his official selection, the majority of the Republican party believed his final opponent would be Hillary Clinton. To be fair, if that were the case, he would have been her perfect foil, as she has very little appeal to conservatives. Against Obama, however, he's beaten in his best suit.

Then there was his selection of Palin for VP, which gave him a lot of female support, to say nothing of the head-slappingly ignorant ex-Hillary supporters who jumped ship because they're voting for a vagina regardles of issues. She would have been a strong choice, but her eccentricies, couples with the kinds of crowds she draws, further divided McCain from casual conservatives and moderate voters.

It would have been interesting to see how differently this election turned out had the Republicans better approached their strategy.

A strange year... yes indeed, in that neither party had a strong candidate.

I think Huckabee being a pastor might've harmed him, it would've drawn all the loonie atheists out of the woodworks branding him with their fake sword called the separation of church and state :laugh and ultimately he would've lost. Bush had traditional values, and the american people hated him, just like all the flack Palin has gotten since her nomination, it's because of her traditional values.

I think they see Obama as a man with an aura of Intrique, and anyone with the slightest bit of visible morality and they strike them down without mercy.

*I'm not saying Obama isnt moral, i'm just saying that openly moral candidates like bush and Palin aren't mainstream popular right now.

What confuses me is that if you throw out everything that's may or may not be true in either candidate and come down to just experience alone, there shouldnt even be a contest.

We're in a time of war, we need an honest to god veteran of vietnam, someone who knows war first hand and knows how to deal with it. Not a young man whose never worn a uniform in his life. Not a man whose never fought for our freedom.

But we've become so fed up with war that we don't want someone of vast military experience as our president, and with McCain mentioning that there may be other wars to fight * like Iran* he's not making any friends.

I guess what i don't understand is how these people get elected, why aren't there any normal people as senators, normal people running for president?

I hate to go all Mr. Smith goes to washington :laugh but i think if we flushed all the deadbeats in the congress and senate and put some hardworking middle class people in their place, we might just be able to get some things fixed around here.

[bradc]

It will just make both sides bitch more

republicans will say its because Colin Powell is black and turning on the republicans, democrats will say that the repubs are stupid for thinking that

I just wnat the bitching to end really

I heard Rush Limbaugh (dont care enough to spell his name right :hmph) and damn, that dude is just angry at obama

he acts like Obama is a terrorist :-_-

I am not sure this video from McCain even helps at all: McCain Proud Of Brochure Linking Obama To Islamic Terrorism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbEPmh7iS7E) and http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/22/1002/1365/647/638031 :facepalm

The old McCain used to be a Socialist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8EyGpOU3qM) :scared

[EX|pada #0]

I am not sure this video from McCain even helps at all: McCain Proud Of Brochure Linking Obama To Islamic Terrorism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbEPmh7iS7E) and http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/22/1002/1365/647/638031 :facepalm

The old McCain used to be a Socialist (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8EyGpOU3qM) :scared

I'm laughing my ass off. Those republicans are already desperate? I'm not american, but I'm hoping to see Obama winning. THANKS FROM THE WORLD. The republicans paranoid on terrorism pisses me off.

[balladbird]

I think Huckabee being a pastor might've harmed him, it would've drawn all the loonie atheists out of the woodworks branding him with their fake sword called the separation of church and state :laugh and ultimately he would've lost. Bush had traditional values, and the american people hated him, just like all the flack Palin has gotten since her nomination, it's because of her traditional values.



I'm one of those loonie atheists you speak of, and I adored Huckabee. I wouldn't have voted for him this year, as the country desperately needs a democratic president, but I would likely support his candidacy in a later election.

Seperation of church and state isn't a "fake sword" it's a quote from Thomas Jefferson when describing why the Establishment and free exercise clause was added to the constitution. since the aforementioned clause is indeed a part of the constitution, it's as far from fake as you can get.

To delve further into that, the "seperation of church and state" has nothing to do with restricting a pastor from running for president. All it states is that the Government may never have the power to declare an official religion for America, nor to disrupt the practice of any religion, regardless how small the population that follows it.

Saying Palin has "traditional morals" is a stretch at best. Look at the home life she keeps. I know I know. *gasp* I'm not supposed to go there, but come on! If she were a democratic nominee the Repubs would have eaten her alive. She has a pregnant teenage daughter with a redneck boyfriend, she's tied to the handful of scandals that Alaska has been privy to, and her husband loves America so much that he's STILL a member of an seperatist movement. Sure, she SAYS she's moral and whathave you, and she'd probably enjoy holding the rest of America to such a double standard, but ultimately she's nothing more than a case of "As I say, not as I do."



I think they see Obama as a man with an aura of Intrique, and anyone with the slightest bit of visible morality and they strike them down without mercy.

*I'm not saying Obama isnt moral, i'm just saying that openly moral candidates like bush and Palin aren't mainstream popular right now.

What confuses me is that if you throw out everything that's may or may not be true in either candidate and come down to just experience alone, there shouldnt even be a contest.



What is "visible morality"? Is it spouting hail marys every few moments? Is it attending church every sunday?

I like to think that organizing community programs so kids have something to do after school and to deter urban gangs is a pretty "moral" thing to do. The very same with becoming a beacon of hope for a portion of society that has, historically, been spit upon and opressed.

You seem to quantify morality in purely religious terms, which is a grievous over-simplification. Any act that bennefits one's fellow man, whether it's done in the name of God, Allah, Brahma, Yahweh, or Mud, is a moral act.



We're in a time of war, we need an honest to god veteran of vietnam, someone who knows war first hand and knows how to deal with it. Not a young man whose never worn a uniform in his life. Not a man whose never fought for our freedom.

But we've become so fed up with war that we don't want someone of vast military experience as our president, and with McCain mentioning that there may be other wars to fight * like Iran* he's not making any friends.



Being a soldier doesn't necessarily make someone more qualified to be commander in chief. Just because you understand how the orders affect the people in the trenches, doesn't mean you were ever in a position to comprehend the strategy that went into them beforehand. Even if we assume it was so, Obama has shown himself to be just as knowledgeable as McCain in terms of Foreign policy, and skill at diplomacy must ALWAYS be given priority to talent for war.

A war with Iran right now would be 350% totally unnecessary, just like Iraq turned out to be. America doesn't have the right to choose how the rest of the world will live its life. Right now we can seem moral with our "spread of democracy" faux reason for fighting, but if we attacked another middle-eastern country without at least valid intelligence that they could be a serious threat to us at the time, it'll look like we just randomly destroyed another muslim nation. The ramifications of this would be many and rancourous.

Every time we engage in a war "just 'cuz we're kick-ass mavericks and that's what we do!" we isolate the entire world, including our allies. America may be the strongest nation on earth, but even we cannot hope to thrive if we turn everyone against us in the name of vainglorious pride.



I guess what i don't understand is how these people get elected, why aren't there any normal people as senators, normal people running for president?

I hate to go all Mr. Smith goes to washington :laugh but i think if we flushed all the deadbeats in the congress and senate and put some hardworking middle class people in their place, we might just be able to get some things fixed around here.


Because every man whose become a president, at least since the assent of the Baby-boom generation, but to lesser extents for a century prior, is already in the pocket of the extremely wealthy. Democrat and Republican alike. Nowadays, with TV and internet ad space being the only way anyone even knows you're planning to run, pretty much the only people who can become well-known enough to claim presidency are those who have already sold their soul to big business.

[bradc]

I'm laughing my ass off. Those republicans are already desperate? I'm not american, but I'm hoping to see Obama winning. THANKS FROM THE WORLD. The republicans paranoid on terrorism pisses me off.

Too desperate...

Despite the fact I am in Hong Kong, and also Chinese Canadian; they still report and broadcast the U.S. elections here. So stop the hate of racism!

They recently reported about Sarah Palin's Expense spending too. Mainly on Republicans spending on Palin's clothing and make-up (http://sarahpalinexposed.com/?p=1330#more-1330). This Barbie doll needs to go...

[ookami]

I'm glad that there are a lot of people from countries that arent the USA, But yeah if I was old enough and In america Obama would get my vote anyday mainly because he hasn't hit the mortality rate yet. I also think that Palin should not be let into government, because she always resorts to being bitchy releasing propaganda (Obama could be a terrorist).

[Babbo]

A strange year... yes indeed, in that neither party had a strong candidate.

I think Huckabee being a pastor might've harmed him, it would've drawn all the loonie atheists out of the woodworks branding him with their fake sword called the separation of church and state :laugh and ultimately he would've lost. Bush had traditional values, and the american people hated him, just like all the flack Palin has gotten since her nomination, it's because of her traditional values.

I think they see Obama as a man with an aura of Intrique, and anyone with the slightest bit of visible morality and they strike them down without mercy.

*I'm not saying Obama isnt moral, i'm just saying that openly moral candidates like bush and Palin aren't mainstream popular right now.

What confuses me is that if you throw out everything that's may or may not be true in either candidate and come down to just experience alone, there shouldnt even be a contest.

We're in a time of war, we need an honest to god veteran of vietnam, someone who knows war first hand and knows how to deal with it. Not a young man whose never worn a uniform in his life. Not a man whose never fought for our freedom.

But we've become so fed up with war that we don't want someone of vast military experience as our president, and with McCain mentioning that there may be other wars to fight * like Iran* he's not making any friends.

I guess what i don't understand is how these people get elected, why aren't there any normal people as senators, normal people running for president?

I hate to go all Mr. Smith goes to washington :laugh but i think if we flushed all the deadbeats in the congress and senate and put some hardworking middle class people in their place, we might just be able to get some things fixed around here.

Ugh. Let me guess. You probably heard from a govt&law/history teacher that it's not specifically stated in the constitution? Guess what? Neither is the right to a fair trial. But it does everything but say it outright. That's what the establishment clause is and that is what every single interpretation on the matter has concluded <.<

And this lack of differentiation between traditional and christian values annoys the crap out of Babbo. That it is implied that they must be right is even more annoying. And lets not confuse ourselves here. Bush's "traditional values" and "I'd have a beer with that guy character" were very much a part of the reason people voted for him. It's all complete BS though, and anyone who buys it this time round is completely delusional. The flack Palin has recieved is because she is a flake that can't even make through an interview with Catie Couric. Even the Republican party knows that. They'd be lining a hell of alot more interviews with her if they thought she had the knowledge and the qualifications to be where she is.

Wow. It just boggles the mind that you can actually believe what you're saying o,o

Wave that bloody flag man and wave it good. Wilson and FDR had no veteran experience whatsoever. Hrrm....

Oh and on Iran (since it was brought up). Every single expert out there says that it would be incredibly stupid to go to war with them. They would set the freaking gulf on fire. Think $4 a gallon was bad? Strangely enough I believe I can think of a certain vietnam vet who has expressed support of a war with them. Hell Iran wouldn't even benefit from having nukes even. They already have the biggest army in the area. Getting nukes would just start a arms race that would force other countries in the area to acquire an equalizing power that they have not yet seen the need for.

[CeriaHalcyon]

I'm one of those loonie atheists you speak of, and I adored Huckabee. I wouldn't have voted for him this year, as the country desperately needs a democratic president, but I would likely support his candidacy in a later election.

Seperation of church and state isn't a "fake sword" it's a quote from Thomas Jefferson when describing why the Establishment and free exercise clause was added to the constitution. since the aforementioned clause is indeed a part of the constitution, it's as far from fake as you can get.

To delve further into that, the "seperation of church and state" has nothing to do with restricting a pastor from running for president. All it states is that the Government may never have the power to declare an official religion for America, nor to disrupt the practice of any religion, regardless how small the population that follows it.

Saying Palin has "traditional morals" is a stretch at best. Look at the home life she keeps. I know I know. *gasp* I'm not supposed to go there, but come on! If she were a democratic nominee the Repubs would have eaten her alive. She has a pregnant teenage daughter with a redneck boyfriend, she's tied to the handful of scandals that Alaska has been privy to, and her husband loves America so much that he's STILL a member of an seperatist movement. Sure, she SAYS she's moral and whathave you, and she'd probably enjoy holding the rest of America to such a double standard, but ultimately she's nothing more than a case of "As I say, not as I do."

What is "visible morality"? Is it spouting hail marys every few moments? Is it attending church every sunday?

I like to think that organizing community programs so kids have something to do after school and to deter urban gangs is a pretty "moral" thing to do. The very same with becoming a beacon of hope for a portion of society that has, historically, been spit upon and opressed.

You seem to quantify morality in purely religious terms, which is a grievous over-simplification. Any act that bennefits one's fellow man, whether it's done in the name of God, Allah, Brahma, Yahweh, or Mud, is a moral act.

Being a soldier doesn't necessarily make someone more qualified to be commander in chief. Just because you understand how the orders affect the people in the trenches, doesn't mean you were ever in a position to comprehend the strategy that went into them beforehand. Even if we assume it was so, Obama has shown himself to be just as knowledgeable as McCain in terms of Foreign policy, and skill at diplomacy must ALWAYS be given priority to talent for war.

A war with Iran right now would be 350% totally unnecessary, just like Iraq turned out to be. America doesn't have the right to choose how the rest of the world will live its life. Right now we can seem moral with our "spread of democracy" faux reason for fighting, but if we attacked another middle-eastern country without at least valid intelligence that they could be a serious threat to us at the time, it'll look like we just randomly destroyed another muslim nation. The ramifications of this would be many and rancourous.

Every time we engage in a war "just 'cuz we're kick-ass mavericks and that's what we do!" we isolate the entire world, including our allies. America may be the strongest nation on earth, but even we cannot hope to thrive if we turn everyone against us in the name of vainglorious pride.

Because every man whose become a president, at least since the assent of the Baby-boom generation, but to lesser extents for a century prior, is already in the pocket of the extremely wealthy. Democrat and Republican alike. Nowadays, with TV and internet ad space being the only way anyone even knows you're planning to run, pretty much the only people who can become well-known enough to claim presidency are those who have already sold their soul to big business.

What i am saying is that the seperation of church and state is wielded by the ignorant like it's a mandated law.

you're right Thomas Jefferson did speak of the need for a separation of church and state. But he did so in a letter to the danberry Baptists, It has never been an implied right of any legal american document.

and i apologize if i offended you it was not my intent, and my regards about Huckabee being a pastor would've harmed him in the long run of a political race because of the fact the popular culture disproves of anything related to god. We live in a humanistic society, so anything god related is immediately discredited and purged, as we are attempting to do with the god labels on our money and laws.

What i mean by visible morality is that Bush is a believer in god, just as is Palin. Religion is the basis of his moral views, and at the end of the day that's who i would want running this country, someone with a christian background. Someone who is tolerant of others and other religions, someone who doesnt convert another by the sword.

But that being said, i don't like the christian view on the gay community, but that's neither here nor there.

To someone like yourself, an atheist, what is the foundation for your sense of morality? your feelings? So you think it's alright not to kill, not to steal? i hate to say it but the problem with humanistic thoughts is that it varies from person to person, jim down the street might think it's alright to kill, alright to steal, but a person of true christian background will not kill or steal in fear of god's wrath.

I am not a christian believer, i believe there is a god, due to the complexity of life but i do not hold myself accountable to any particular sect. But as someone standing from the outside i see their moral views for the most part (except for their gay views) as the best possible way to run our country.

And we need a leader like that who holds to a truer since of morality (moral tenets which our laws were based on!) rather than just on feelings.

The perceived faults of Palin are nothing compared to Obama, please.

Obama's the least qualified presidential candidate i've ever seen. Even more so than Kerry, and i would've thought the democratic party would've gotten their act together after the embarrassment he was. But not surprisingly they've gotten worse.

Once more, i love how the media and the general public don't care about Obama's faults, from there view he has none and anyone who tries to say anything about it is a muckraker and wasting time.

Obama has no experience? we don't care... possible links to terrorism... we don't care...gonna tax the shit out of us under the guise of change... do it now... might be funded by the devil himself... who's the devil? Those are just a few of the issues which may or may not be true, but it has to raise just a little bit of doubt and yet it doesnt. It disappoints me that no one wants to take their horseblinders off and see Obama for what he really is, and not just "a guy that's not like bush".

So i take it you're trusting Obama's naivety to get us through the war? Let's see how long that lasts. It's like we're electing a president for Pizza hut who has never made a pizza in his life.

As far as everyone hating us goes, we support Israel, people are going to hate us, they see the godlessness in our own country which is our own fault, the allah fearing peoples are going to hate us, there's noting we can do about that.

But, we needed to go into Iraq to save the people of Iraq, and our allies, like france and Russia were pocketing money off of the oil for food program... so it's no wonder they didnt want to help us.

But people have become so apathetic to war these days that we can't see beyond our own borders to realize that Iraq needed outside help to achieve a political climate change. During the revolutionary war it was the french who came to our aid against the british, without whom we might've lost. The Iraqi people needed our help, and thankfully Bush was acting from a strong moral background when he made that call.

But then again it was our fault for not ending it years ago during desert storm.

that's enough for now :zomg

[ookami]

No were actually trusting him to get us out of the war and not waste more lives, sending troops into battlezone where you need sphere vision to stay alive is pointless. It also causes a lot of suicide bombings.

[CeriaHalcyon]

I really didnt want to go back into this stuff,

But it surprises me that so many people can openly vote for Obama without a care in the world about his flaws, like he's the lesser of two evils or something immature like that.

Even if everything that's negative about McCain turns out to be true he is still ten times the better choice than Obama.

This time that's it, i am so fricken sick of all of this, the people not caring about his serious flaws. If we elect Obama we are going to pay in more ways than one.

[Inevitable.Exit]

I really didnt want to go back into this stuff,

But it surprises me that so many people can openly vote for Obama without a care in the world about his flaws, like he's the lesser of two evils or something immature like that.Isn't that what voting is always about? Seeing the flaws in the candidates but voting for the one who you most strongly believe in? To Obama supporters he is the lesser of two evils. Neither candidate is overly strong and there hasn't been a strong presidential candidate nor president for an exceedingly long time. I support parts of McCain's policy, but I don't support parts of it either. Same with Obama. It just so happens I support more of Obama's than McCain's. Thus, lesser of two evils.

Even if everything that's negative about McCain turns out to be true he is still ten times the better choice than Obama.Opinion.

This time that's it, i am so fricken sick of all of this, the people not caring about his serious flaws. If we elect Obama we are going to pay in more ways than one.If we elect McCain we are going to pay in more ways than one.

See what I did there?

Something I noticed you say however, is that we needed to go into Iraq to save the people of Iraq. Lol? Then why don't we go into Sudan? Why don't we go into Burma? Why don't we go into Iran? Hell why don't we go into any country that oppresses their people (men, women, children, gays, ethnic groups, religions etc)? Exactly. Iraq had NOTHING to do with people and I find it funny that the last small group of people holding onto Iraq war justification are the same people who think Governor Palin is qualified as president and think George Bush is the best president since Roosevelt.

Oh and my morals are not defined by Religion. I am not religious. Morality is in the eye of the beholder. Some of the most amoral people are the most religious. Priests molesting children? Christians who enslaved blacks and considered it right? Christians who harassed/maimed/killed minorities in this country for ages? Persecution of Jews. The Spanish Inquisition. Muslim extremists. Shall I continue?

Morals are relative and subjective.

[Shdo]

actually, there is no real reason not to invade sudan for example, both the genocide reason and they also have oil :D anyways, america cant really invade everyone at this time, one dictatorship at a time.

[CeriaHalcyon]

I guess what it comes down to is that Obama's plan to increase taxes on small businesses will threaten my job security. because in this economy no business can be expected to absorb yet another rise in cost. We've already had to adjust to fuel surcharges and we can't take it anymore. It'll have to be passed onto the consumers, which means the cost of goods and services will increase and jobs are likely to be lost.

My field of employment deals with disgressionary income, and our key customer base is wealthy to somewhat wealthy, so we certainly don't want to see them taxed which would in turn threaten our business also.

As far as i can see it, McCain isnt going to tax me, isnt going to threaten my means of employment. and unlike obama he actually has a plan to identify and wipe out a great deal of federal waste.
-----------

As i mentioned about war, we've grown apathetic to it, we no longer care if we're helping those who need it. Those are all valid points, i want to know why aren't we doing anything to stop the radical muslims in africa that are committing genocide?

because we as a culture do not care so long as the genocide is out of our own backyards. It's sad to say but it's right.

and if Iraq wasnt about the people then what was it, oil? If it was about the oil don't you think that the cost of a gallon would've plummetted cause we'd be getting it from Iraq and could tell those bastards in opec to pound sand?

I'm not saying all religious people are without sin or fallacy, but the god fearing people who made this country created a free paradise which we've been burning away since the sixties. We need people of upstanding morality in our government, but at the same time are able to discern that all people gays minorities have the right to exist just as we do. but with religion that's kind of contradictory huh :laugh

I hate that things are so complicated these days, and yes, i agree that neither side has a solid strong candidate. Then if that's the case, why doesnt the public gather around a third or fourth party candidate like Ron Paul just to name one?

From my point of view i thought that Bush was an excellent president that got too much grief for things that were not his doing. 9/11 wasnt his fault, Hurricane Katrina wasnt either. I don't know enough about Palin to make that call with her, but that's all speculation on whether or not McCain lives throughout a term.

[Shdo]

as for the oil, it wasnt meant to give money to teh people by lowering taxes but to the people who would control those oil fields, they will get rich, dont worry for them.


as for africa and the genocide, its funny how people ignore it and say 'its not our buisness, when only 60 years ago millions paid the price for the same policy.
just 20 years ago there was another genocide in africa, back then they said, 'never again' for the 2nd time...as of now the genocide in darfur continue.

but here i have more problem with europe than america, since america is currently in two fronts and lead the war on terror while europe who claim to be more moral and so on allow a genocide to happen for 3rd or 4th time in less than a century to happen in their back yard.

[Inevitable.Exit]

[B]I guess what it comes down to is that Obama's plan to increase taxes on small businesses will threaten my job security.There are many, MANY exemptions. Also, there is a difference between $250,000 and $250,000 Profit. And the tax for that small of a business is so ridiculously minute that it nears insignificance.

It'll have to be passed onto the consumers, which means the cost of goods and services will increase and jobs are likely to be lost.Ohh you mean like how your boy John McCain supports tax breaks for companies that ship American jobs overseas thus creating a huge drop-off in American hirings, thus taking capital out of the markets, thus meaning people spend less, thus meaning the economy goes to shit. :rolleyes:. Oh ya, tax breaks to oil companies as well.

As far as i can see it, McCain isnt going to tax me, isnt going to threaten my means of employment. and unlike obama he actually has a plan to identify and wipe out a great deal of federal waste.And what is this plan? At least Obama has outlined his. All John McCain says is "My friends, I can cut spending. I know how to do it. I can do it ! I won't tell you how...but I can friends! Good friends!" Do you know how catastrophic it would be to freeze government spending for a year besides defense? It would be horrible. Add in the fact that it really wouldn't matter since the biggest hit is the BILLIONS pouring into the Middle East constantly.

and if Iraq wasnt about the people then what was it, oil? If it was about the oil don't you think that the cost of a gallon would've plummetted cause we'd be getting it from Iraq and could tell those bastards in opec to pound sand?No. It was about Oil in the long run. Partly about Bush wanting to fulfill his legacy. Partly I would agree because it was the right thing to do. In the end it is probably better (Possibly. This could be a major destabilizing factor in the Middle East). But, the means of how we got to War was absolutely disgusting and the people accountable should be held for Treason. It's common knowledge that the American people were lied to, documents and intelligence were falsified.

And Oil would not be made cheaper. If we went into Iraq and said "OK SADDAM IS GONE LETS GET SOME OIL" how terrible would we look? Exactly. Worse than we do now.

I'm not saying all religious people are without sin or fallacy, but the god fearing people who made this country created a free paradise which we've been burning away since the sixties. The same god fearing people who condoned slavery, segregation, misogyny. Those were the people who founded the country.
We need people of upstanding morality in our government, but at the same time are able to discern that all people gays minorities have the right to exist just as we do. but with religion that's kind of contradictory huh :laughIt is. We agree again.

I hate that things are so complicated these days, and yes, i agree that neither side has a solid strong candidate. Then if that's the case, why doesnt the public gather around a third or fourth party candidate like Ron Paul just to name one?Because we have evolved into a two party system through our election system. I can't remember who (Washington or Jefferson?) but one of them warned against the dangers of a two-party system. All the independents do these days is take votes away from either party.

From my point of view i thought that Bush was an excellent president that got too much grief for things that were not his doing. 9/11 wasnt his fault, Hurricane Katrina wasnt either. I don't know enough about Palin to make that call with her, but that's all speculation on whether or not McCain lives throughout a term.I'm not a big Bush fan. But I do believe at times he got way more grief than he deserved. And I do think a large part of that is the rage people feel for the Wars and they generally blame him for the economy (It was actually the bubble bursting from the Clinton administration). But I think he will go down as one of the worst presidents ever, but one of the ones who framed the direction this country will go in; Good or bad.

I support most of McCain's foreign policy. I disagree with his stance on Iraq and I think he is a tad too militaristic (Irony. You think a man that has been through what he has wouldn't use our men and women to bully people).

But I disagree with his financial and domestic policies as well as his fiscal conservity. I also feel that his pick of Sarah Palin was irresponsible. Sarah Palin will be a great potential important figure in Washington. She is a passing of the torch from Old Conservatives to younger more exuberant conservatives. But as of right now, people can argue her experience v. Obama's but it is quite different.

[Shdo]

usually when someone was in war he tend to see it in a more realistic light, but actually i do understand part of his view on iraq, and leaving iraq just because its hard will come to bite you in the future.

in the middle east, you can either come up with your head high or prepare to fight again in a few years later...actually, it will happen either way :/

[Babbo]

I guess what it comes down to is that Obama's plan to increase taxes on small businesses will threaten my job security. because in this economy no business can be expected to absorb yet another rise in cost. We've already had to adjust to fuel surcharges and we can't take it anymore. It'll have to be passed onto the consumers, which means the cost of goods and services will increase and jobs are likely to be lost.

Inevitable.exit hit the nail on the head here. A tiny percentage (babbo can't recall the exact number but it's something 2-5%) of small business will be taxed any more than before under the obama plan. Heck, most of the people I hear on the radio that are in the upper brackets are actually willing to pay increased taxes. Most people buy this "spreading wealth" and socialism attack themes from the McCain campaign because they don't want to be taxed on the off chance that they do becaome rich. At the same time many people have seen the richest people Babbo has heard on the radio and the like are actually willing to pay higher taxes. Oh, and just in case you start blathering about the health plan: SMALL BUSINESSES WILL PAY NO FINE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT MANDATED TO PROVIDE HEALTH CARE AND EVEN IF THEY DO THEY WILL GET A 50% TAX CREDIT ON PREMIUMS.

My field of employment deals with disgressionary income, and our key customer base is wealthy to somewhat wealthy, so we certainly don't want to see them taxed which would in turn threaten our business also.

As far as i can see it, McCain isnt going to tax me, isnt going to threaten my means of employment. and unlike obama he actually has a plan to identify and wipe out a great deal of federal waste.

That puts you vastly in the minority.


As i mentioned about war, we've grown apathetic to it, we no longer care if we're helping those who need it. Those are all valid points, i want to know why aren't we doing anything to stop the radical muslims in africa that are committing genocide?

because it's been thoroughly discussed and both camps have entirely disparate opinions on the matter? But lets discuss it. Is babbo the only one who finds McCain's claim that the surge was a success so incredibly ridiculous in face of the actual goals put forth when it was put into action? He doesn't want to withdraw from iraq. But the entire purpose of the surge was to allow the Iraqi government to start taking over. They are nowhere near doing so. We're looking at another three years in there and in the meantime all the radical muslim terrorists? The worst of them are in Afghanistan in pakistan.


because we as a culture do not care so long as the genocide is out of our own backyards. It's sad to say but it's right.
More like our own government doesn't care <.<

and if Iraq wasnt about the people then what was it, oil? If it was about the oil don't you think that the cost of a gallon would've plummetted cause we'd be getting it from Iraq and could tell those bastards in opec to pound sand? That and a foothold and military prescesne in the middle east. Babbo would like to think that's every bit as obvious as oil but perhaps it isn't.


I'm not saying all religious people are without sin or fallacy, but the god fearing people who made this country created a free paradise which we've been burning away since the sixties. We need people of upstanding morality in our government, but at the same time are able to discern that all people gays minorities have the right to exist just as we do. but with religion that's kind of contradictory huh :laugh

you don't need to tell Babbo that. Go read a couple history books. Religion+politics = WAR. Why do you think that the world's theocracies are so scary?


I hate that things are so complicated these days, and yes, i agree that neither side has a solid strong candidate. Then if that's the case, why doesnt the public gather around a third or fourth party candidate like Ron Paul just to name one?

Because libertarians are just as free market as republicans? Deregualtion has done us so much good hasn't it?


From my point of view i thought that Bush was an excellent president that got too much grief for things that were not his doing. 9/11 wasnt his fault, Hurricane Katrina wasnt either. I don't know enough about Palin to make that call with her, but that's all speculation on whether or not McCain lives throughout a term. [/B]

But the way he and his adminstration acted in the aftermath was.

He appointed the bloody head of FEMA (Michael Brown). How was it not his fault?

And? Why should we take the chance on that?

[Inevitable.Exit]

usually when someone was in war he tend to see it in a more realistic light, but actually i do understand part of his view on iraq, and leaving iraq just because its hard will come to bite you in the future.

in the middle east, you can either come up with your head high or prepare to fight again in a few years later...actually, it will happen either way :/I agree somewhat. We are in way too deep to just hop out. But when a government is starting to not want you there, the people don't want you there etc you risk looking like an occupier and not a liberator. The huge schism comes from a large majority of the American population not understanding why our economy is going to shit and yet we can spend Billions in some foreign country. We have grown apathetic to the war. There have been no results and most people need that.

And lol Shdo it will happen either way. Maybe I'll meet you someday...sadly it won't be for very good circumstances : (

[Shdo]

yea...this is why the idea of taking control in the middle east is to get someone else do it for you in their little pockets, everyone do that since someone will have to die ( :( ) so its better not being you.

for example iran vs israel, the result? second lebanon war, lebannese died and not iranians. the same goes to iraq, the idea is to improve the iraqi enough so they can die on their own without pulling other to it...sad but this is a sad part of the world.

as for the iraqi not wanting you there, it depends who you are talking about, for example the shiite dont want you, they want iran in, the kurds wants you there, they like the prosparity, and the sunni just dont want to give the country to the shiite.

[ookami]

you know the amount of money America will get back from pulling out of the middle east it would probablys solve the whole taxing small businesses problem, John McCain would be forced to increase taxes anyway if he continues the war and who likes taxes, probablys no one even presidents and priministers don't like increasing tax but to be realistic it has to be done.

CeriaHalcyon: This is a debate you can't have debate if there is no argument that everyone would be on the same side so get real.

[bradc]

The financial crisis has reach the bottom of the pit.

Global economics is complete crap right now, even over here in Asia.

America spent all the money on war and no country wants to do business with America until they have a steady president. Obama has stated whoever becomes president will have to clean up Bush and co's Administration mess. Want another war? Think twice about it before invading another country. The voting is also held early too in the U.S. from the news report.

[Shdo]

as for the money on dresses and hair, i understand its about $150,000 right? but from what i hear it seems that the cloths dont even belong to her, it something she was given by the republican party since she herself dont have them, and from what i hear is the only candidate who ISNT a milioner, so can you blame the party for paying for her cloths and hair? how much money the other candidates spent on clothing? you cant run the race without wearing fancy cloths (as sad as it is) and the party know it.

and since the cloths belong to the party they will return to the party, most likely be sold off in auction so that in the end they will earn more.


now back to obama, he might say that he wants to pull from iraq (in a year or so) but that dosnt mean the end of the war on terror, since iraq got nothing to do with terror in the past (not the one that attacked america at least).
obama actually said that more troops need to be shifted to afganistan, so the war and expendature will continue either way. regardless of iraq, america was attacked on 9/11, its citizen slain in the name of radical islam, this mean war and this war wont end anytime soon. its not like pulling out of iraq will stop the attacks, which began before iraq!

in other words, both sides are commited to continue the war, the only question is if iraq got anything to do with the war. obama might seems like he will return the troops and the war would be over...no...only the iraqi stage would be over, the war is still raging on.



EDIT: bradc, this is a complete bull**** do you even know where the crisis came from? it got little to do with the war actually. what happend was that some greedy investors started to sell mortgages without considering that the people wont be able to pay them back. those empty assests were then traded again and again in packages between the banks of the world (not just america) packages and packages of shares and insurance and what not but at the base there was nothing.

its not about the war, the war cost money that for sure but it dosnt created the current crisis, and as evidance look at the crisis, its global, not effecting america only...actually america is barely affected compared to russia or argentina or iran.

a more serious reason to the crisis is the increase of demand for oil and food, mostly from india and CHINA(!) which cause strain on the food sources of the world because of the biofuel thing.

the world was also hit by disaster after disaster in the last year or so, this wasnt helpful by any means.

and finally, investors panic, by fearing a drop in the market, investors pull out, the result? a drop in the market. a domino effect.

but make one thing clear,the war in iraq couldnt affect the entire world economy like this, the problem is elsewhere.

[bradc]

There's not much Palin... She is just a hot library chick to look at, nothing else. I am very sure I can see Alaska from my house. But seriously, you have got be friggin' kidding to have this woman a heartbeat away to be President. McCain VP choice is a joke of the century.

:cookie Lipstick on Pig.

Iraq war has nothing to do with 9/11 either. Is ignorance. The troops can't get out Afghanistan, the sandpit they dug a hole in is too deep. But if they were to get out, things take time which is a give or take another 2-3 years. It has been near 20 years, they are still stuck in the sandbox.

[Shdo]

and are you kidding about biddan? 'we will have an international crisis in 6 months because obama would be elected'? 'there are others who are more suitable than me'?

yea...a great choice...



and what 20 years? they are in afganistan for 7 and the situation there isnt bad at all when compared to any other war.

[bradc]

Biden at least know his economics... What does Palin know? All this woman is talk about her small town in Alaska being viewed under a microscope. Does she know anything about foreign policy? Zilch. Surely keeping an eye on Russia is going to solve the world problems.

Obama is still being backed by COLIN POWELL, if that's not powerful, I surely don't know what is.

7 years to 10 years... the years are adding up the longer they try to fix the pointless war in Middle East that can't be won no matter how you look at it.

[Shdo]

does he? he voted in favor of the war in iraq, he is inviting crisis to america with his words, makeing it seems like america under obama would be weak, he dosnt seems to even want the job.

and there is the deal with what he said about the troops.

as for palin, you forget that she was elected as govrenor of a state, that mean she got some menagement expiriance and some economic as well, even if you prefer disregard it.



oh, about colin powel, you know he gave money to mccain 2007 campaign? the maximum amount as it seems. and his reasons to support obama werent because he support his stands but more because: "his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities"

or in other words, because he is charismatic and aslo becaue powel dosnt like palin as VC.

in reality he supports obama not because he think his stands are right but because the republican stands are seen as narrow and they chose the wrong people (Palin).
things would have been different if another VC or even powel himself had been asked to take the job.

[bradc]

It just mean lesser of two evils. Meanwhile Al Qeada supports McCain: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/22/al-qaeda-supporters-endor_n_136779.html

So what she's a governor of a state? A town population of a high school. This woman hasn't has a clue what she is doing... Does she know about the financial crisis? Assuming more war on Middle East is going solve everything. The minute Palin opens her mouth, she probably start war with other countries.

[CeriaHalcyon]

you know the amount of money America will get back from pulling out of the middle east it would probablys solve the whole taxing small businesses problem, John McCain would be forced to increase taxes anyway if he continues the war and who likes taxes, probablys no one even presidents and priministers don't like increasing tax but to be realistic it has to be done.

CeriaHalcyon: This is a debate you can't have debate if there is no argument that everyone would be on the same side so get real.

Pulling out of the middle east would turn Iraq against us in addition to every other nation there. It would be a mistake of epic proportions, regardless of whatever small financial benefit it might achieve. It would hurt us in the long run, because we need a presence in that part of the world so that we can liberate the places that need it.

Even though there are many other places that need it, we're in iraq and afganistan now. we can't afford to go anywhere else at the moment.

Now, what gives us the right or why should we liberate others?

Because someone helped us a long time ago, so we should return the favor. The french helped us defeat the british, and while the enemies these days aren't clear cut, there's not a nation we're fighting against now, we've wittled them down to just insurgent forces... don't you see, we're almost there, Iraq is almost finished, we just need to finish the resistance and then the bleeding will stop for us.

Though it is unlikely for Iraq to become like Japan, with us providing military defenses as part of the alliance, we'll still have to be there on the ground for many years to come, to help protect their people until they can fend for themselves.

And if they then turn coat and attack us then this war would've been a mistake, but right now it's the right thing to do.

The liberal media doesn't show the progress that's been made in Iraq, only the negative sides of the story, and our opinions are formed from that negativity, that the war is failing when it's actually not failing in iraq.

--------
This presidential race may not have a strong candidate on either side, but with all the percieved faults of Palin and McCain, they pale in comparison to the faults of obama:

The failure to disclose who funds him
Avery a known terrorist, supporting his campaign
his connection to acorn
a criminal owns half of his home
he wants to tax the daylights out of us
he has no experience politically or military.


I find it so sad that we don't care about Obama's faults, there shouldn't even be a contest here and yet people continue to not think soberly about this election, they're intoxicated by the chance and hope of change, unaware of how much that change will cost, and or what that change really is.

I don't mean to disrespect anyone, that's not my intent, i just wish people could see the clear lesser of two evils, and compared to Obama, McCain isnt even evil, but that's simply my opinion. and i know this will be a fruitless gambit, but i can't help but try.

[Shdo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Huffington_Post#Controversy
again, you use news blogs as your source? nothing more hard? couldnt find something on CNN or any real news network so you went to liberal blogers? sloppy.


also, you must have a massive highschool to house 700,000 students lol.


and finally, as a govrenor of a state it means she knows a thing or two about menagment and economic included and like you and others used to say...it dosnt matter if she dosnt have expiriance since there are advisors, right?

if you can shrug off obama lack of expirience and then say that she is inexpirianced you are just shooting yourself in the leg.

[Inevitable.Exit]

Eh. My own personal issues with Iraq in general is that

A) It has never been a hotbed for terror. It is only right now, because American's are there. Meanwhile Afghanistan is rapidly deteriorating.

B) The Iraqi government is approaching a sizable surplus and yet, America is still footing the bill for just about everything. THEY should be paying for their infrastructure not us. It would allow them to train and acclimate a workforce while creating jobs and infusing more capital into their markets.

C) The Iraqi government needs to take a more active role. They have huge numbers of trained troops (we have done so personally), we have held their hands for far too long. They should be patrolling their streets not us. American's for the most part should be relegated to safe bases out of major cities and only used for major events. We need to stop having the Iraqi people feel like they are occupied. When you have foreign troops patrolling your streets telling you what to do, you don't feel liberated, you feel occupied.

And people need to stop saying this will be like Germany, Japan or Korea. They are extremely different and have no comparison. We will never be able to just chill in a country like Iraq or Afghanistan peacefully.

Shdo their experience is quite different.

She was governor of one of the smallest states(population) of the entire US, and before that Mayor of a town that is smaller than my University. She has 0 Washington experience has barely spent time as a governor. And yes, advisors do a large role of the president's job, especially in areas they are not familiar with. Not sure why you find that hilarious. Advisors give their thoughts and advice, then the president/governor etc pulls the trigger. Usually mixed with their own. Palins qualifications are completely different than Obama's and overall people feel Palin's lack of experience is worse than Obama's. Poll numbers show this. So that issue is dead.

[Shdo]

true, the iraqi should be doing those things, not american troops. patroling the streets and creating roadblocks shouldnt be their job. instead american troops should concentrate on beating the insurgents into a pulp, more like the model that is placed in other countries with US support where there are basses just in case.

if the iraqi will start working their ass off you can still stay there, keeping stability, while cutting the cost drasticly.


also, many ask how leaving would actually harm america, the reason is simple. there are already voices in teh middle east to cut the american support, because they are seems as weak, leaving iraq in a hurry will just make this idea a reality. it will also increase attacks on american basses in the middle east, so would you pull out from there as well? before you know it all those gulf states and dictatorships wont have any reason to be as friendly as they are now.

gas prices are high? you seen nothing. the middle east is a terror farm? you seen nothing! the moment america pulls out of the middle east the combat will move to asia, to europe and beyond.

[Shdo]

Shdo their experience is quite different.

She was governor of one of the smallest states(population) of the entire US, and before that Mayor of a town that is smaller than my University. She has 0 Washington experience has barely spent time as a governor. And yes, advisors do a large role of the president's job, especially in areas they are not familiar with. Not sure why you find that hilarious. Advisors give their thoughts and advice, then the president/governor etc pulls the trigger. Usually mixed with their own. Palins qualifications are completely different than Obama's and overall people feel Palin's lack of experience is worse than Obama's. Poll numbers show this. So that issue is dead.

its funny because bradc and others disregard obama lack of exp thanks to advisors while forgeting that republicans also got advisors, including palin!

as a whole i see the liberal media as massivly biased and unfair in so many ways more than the conservative media, how many times do i see them giving obama easy life while digging into palin life like oil drillers. and the followers of the democratic party are not any less hypocrite.

[ookami]

How is an ex domestic terrorist supporing his campain his fault hes not using some weird brain controll device. Your basically saying he choses who supports his campain if you continue making that statement. I Obama being of no clear religion is a good thing like a lot of people have said state over religion.
Sarah Palin has a bad history and a scandel in alaska, but she put her self first when she was governer used her own power improperly.

[bradc]

oh, about colin powel, you know he gave money to mccain 2007 campaign? the maximum amount as it seems. and his reasons to support obama werent because he support his stands but more because: "his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities"

or in other words, because he is charismatic and aslo becaue powel dosnt like palin as VC.

in reality he supports obama not because he think his stands are right but because the republican stands are seen as narrow and they chose the wrong people (Palin).
things would have been different if another VC or even powel himself had been asked to take the job.

The entire world to need get out the economical crisis now; the change with Obama would allow that stability. Allowing Palin to the be President would be a disastrous because she doesn't even know what her roles are, and who knows when McCain's cancer will return...

I wouldn't underestimate Powell judgment on Obama. If Powell's wife would let him run for President it would have been something of a fresh breath of air, but it likely wouldn't happen. Certainly, it's great to see him around again.

[Shdo]

obama change would do shit for this crisis, nothing will change because its more deep than taxing here and there. the problem is world wide. for example china and india growth, it causes strain on the world resources and as a result a rise in the prices of basic commodities. this wont be affected by obama being president.

[Inevitable.Exit]

its funny because bradc and others disregard obama lack of exp thanks to advisors while forgeting that republicans also got advisors, including palin!

as a whole i see the liberal media as massivly biased and unfair in so many ways more than the conservative media, how many times do i see them giving obama easy life while digging into palin life like oil drillers. and the followers of the democratic party are not any less hypocrite.The media has actually gone both ways on more than one occasion. Trust me. It's disgustingly obvious how partisan the media has gone and how quickly they've done it.

Obama has been ripped apart in the media. As has Sarah Palin. People who say it goes more one way than the other are completely losing it.

Balladbird, I encourage you to repost whatever you did just tone down the anger or something :D

[Babbo]

Pulling out of the middle east would turn Iraq against us in addition to every other nation there.

Iraq is not the entire Middle east last time Babbo checked.


It would be a mistake of epic proportions, regardless of whatever small financial benefit it might achieve. It would hurt us in the long run, because we need a presence in that part of the world so that we can liberate the places that need it.

Well yeah, but even the Bush administration is planning on it somewhere around 2011. Obama has been pushing 16 months unless his military advisers can convince otherwise.


Even though there are many other places that need it, we're in iraq and afganistan now. we can't afford to go anywhere else at the moment.

yup, Iran for instance is a good example of where we can't afford to go <.<


Now, what gives us the right or why should we liberate others?

Under International Law? Nothing, outside of a humanitarian crisis (which has been over in iraq for 12 years) or self defense (lol) or a mandate from the UN security council (hur?). Well to be accurate that's going to war. Nothing gives us the right to liberate the shit out of whoever we want to.


Because someone helped us a long time ago, so we should return the favor. The french helped us defeat the british, and while the enemies these days aren't clear cut, there's not a nation we're fighting against now, we've wittled them down to just insurgent forces... don't you see, we're almost there, Iraq is almost finished, we just need to finish the resistance and then the bleeding will stop for us.

LOL. We also renigged on out debts and treaties with the French after that. Even went to war with them for a bit during Adam's administration. AND ALLIED WITH GREAT BRITAIN. Such an incredibly bad analogy there.

Though it is unlikely for Iraq to become like Japan, with us providing military defenses as part of the alliance, we'll still have to be there on the ground for many years to come, to help protect their people until they can fend for themselves. Don't ever make the mistake of even coming close to comparing Iraq to Japan. We not only had bombed the shit of Japan and dropped the a bomb, but we had destroyed any chance of resistance as well. And let's not forget the incredibly uniform culture that is a complete contrast to the situation in Iraq. Or the fact that they had already at one point had a well developed manufacturing industry (even if we did bomb the crap out of it). Japan was broken and had evident potential. Iraq has oil and insurrgents.

And if they then turn coat and attack us then this war would've been a mistake, but right now it's the right thing to do.

Lets not be mistaken here. The war was a mistake. We have gained zip out of it and have accomplished very little in the long term.


The liberal media doesn't show the progress that's been made in Iraq, only the negative sides of the story, and our opinions are formed from that negativity, that the war is failing when it's actually not failing in iraq.

Because there has been nothing more than a reduction of violence. And not in all areas.




The failure to disclose who funds him
He's receiving funds from millions of individuals across the country. People are voting with their wallets (to the tune of $150 million in september, this mostly in small donations ($50 and less)) anyone who brings up the point you have there is... um... Missing the point entirely.


Avery a known terrorist, supporting his campaign
At least get the name straight. It's Ayers. And Obama has no connection to him. This has been explained hundreds of times. It boggles the mind that anyone is so misinformed that they still buy that o,o

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/he_lied_about_bill_ayers.html


his connection to acorn


-.-;; McCain has supported ACORN as well. But in any case, here:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/acorn_accusations.html

a criminal owns half of his home


he wants to tax the daylights out of us


Come on now. cut the crap. You can be blind and deaf. Most people will get a tax cut. o,o;;


he has no experience politically or military.


Again, neither did FDR or Woodrow Wilson. They got us through WWI and WWII pretty admirably, especially compared to say, a certain national guardsman who has lead us through the "war" on terror.


I find it so sad that we don't care about Obama's faults, there shouldn't even be a contest here and yet people continue to not think soberly about this election, they're intoxicated by the chance and hope of change, unaware of how much that change will cost, and or what that change really is.

Only an idiot cares more about character than policy.


I don't mean to disrespect anyone, that's not my intent, i just wish people could see the clear lesser of two evils, and compared to Obama, McCain isnt even evil, but that's simply my opinion. and i know this will be a fruitless gambit, but i can't help but try. [/I]

And Babbo wishes that you would realize how ridiculous you sound.

[bradc]

obama change would do shit for this crisis, nothing will change because its more deep than taxing here and there. the problem is world wide. for example china and india growth, it causes strain on the world resources and as a result a rise in the prices of basic commodities. this wont be affected by obama being president.

China and India are facing the same Global Economical Crisis...

One empire falls, others will follow the suit... Because gambling of invisible air money has made millions lose their job. Factories are cutting back, some shops are closing up due lack of business and people are spending their money wisely due economical crisis. Only spending as much as they can...

Iraq is Near Middle East... Quite close to China: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkic_people

[CeriaHalcyon]

I'm past the point of anger in this election, it saddens me deeply that people refuse to see Obama's faults even if they prove to be partly false as i've said in the past should at least create a cloud of doubt. but his faults aren't false, and the problem is that the people in this country are so blinded by the anti-bush mentality that they can't see the forest for the trees.

would you, like every other democrat stop badgering Palin, she is not the presidential candidate, McCain is. and whether or not he'll live through a term and Palin becomes the president is irrelevant until the day he dies. He may not even die in four years, it's all worthless speculation.

And palin might not have been the best choice for vp, but that's also irrelevant at this point.

I don't understand why there is such a constant barrage of complaints against Palin, so what if her daughter had a kid out of wedlock, how many times does that happen every day in this country but no one bats an eyelash? and we give a shit about it just because it's palin's daughter... that sounds like bullshit to me. She unlike every other worthless senator and congressman of both sides has actually had to work for a living, she has a husband that works two of the most grueling jobs in this country, of which she has had a part in herself on her husband's fishing vessel. Unlike all the corrupt lawyers and lobbysts she's actually worked an honest days living. it's that kind of mentality that we need in washington, to stop the bullshit.

And McCain has faults of his own, but they're so inconsequential compared to Obama's that it doesnt make sense to me how anyone could not vote for him.

perhaps if i say it once more maybe the depth of the situation will sink in.

We're in a time of war, and we're electing a president with no military experience.

It's like building a ship and having someone construct the rudder who has only been building chairs his entire life. It's utter foolishness.

Obama has been a do nothing senator and a do nothing lawyer, what qualifications does he have to lead... None what so ever! but he can speak like no one else, and write checks with his mouth that we can't possibly afford to cash.
-----

No i do not make six figures a year, i barely make 30k a year but i work for a small business which grosses more than 250k a year, so Obama's plans to tax small businesses has me worried in a time when we're barely staying afloat, with fuel surcharges and prices of goods and services increasing we're at our limit right now. and there have been other businesses like ours that have closed because of this poor economy and people holding onto their money because of this damned election. and furthermore said taxes might cost me my job, so of course i'm concerned, how the hell could i not be?

and Babbo: Policy is irrelevant compared to Character, because character will dictate what his policies will be :learn

this is such a waste of time, obama's going to win and we're going to pay, but at least i'll be able to say at least i voted for McCain.

[ookami]

And atleast everyone else will be able to laugh at that, I mean McCain won't see the next election and Obama is the only candidate to bring change.

[Babbo]

I'm past the point of anger in this election, it saddens me deeply that people refuse to see Obama's faults even if they prove to be partly false as i've said in the past should at least create a cloud of doubt. but his faults aren't false, and the problem is that the people in this country are so blinded by the anti-bush mentality that they can't see the forest for the trees.

Translation: "Being wrong makes me emo ;.; In anycase I shall blindly charge ahead on the same talking point."

Every single fault you've brought up has been entirely false. live with it.


would you, like every other democrat stop badgering Palin, she is not the presidential candidate, McCain is. and whether or not he'll live through a term and Palin becomes the president is irrelevant until the day he dies. He may not even die in four years, it's all worthless speculation.

Why? Because she's a woman? Or perhaps because she has "traditional values?" Guess the #1 and #2 oldest presidents. Rhetorical question there. They were Ronald Regan and William Henry Harrison. Both of them were three years younger than McCain. Neither of them were POWs in vietnam for five years. . Neither of them appointed completely incompetent VPs. Oh... And William Henry Harrison died of a case of Pneumonia he caught three weeks after his inauguration. There is no such thing as worthless speculation. You're asking people to gamble on whether or not McCain will live through his term. This is exacerbated by the fact that he's unwilling to release his medical records, which is pretty scary ibo.

But that's not the worst of it. Everything up until that point had pointed towards Lieberman. Even his own campaign never saw it coming. It's highly likely that his hand was pushed by the GOP. Even worse than that is the way his platform is completely different from the maverick he used to be. Babbo's not interested in a president who can get his hand pushed so easily by his party; especially if it's the republican party we're talking about <.<


And palin might not have been the best choice for vp, but that's also irrelevant at this point.

Come on now, lets not fool ourselves here. It's INCREDIBLY relevant. You'd have to be completely delusional to think otherwise.


I don't understand why there is such a constant barrage of complaints against Palin, so what if her daughter had a kid out of wedlock, how many times does that happen every day in this country but no one bats an eyelash? and we give a shit about it just because it's palin's daughter... that sounds like bullshit to me. She unlike every other worthless senator and congressman of both sides has actually had to work for a living, she has a husband that works two of the most grueling jobs in this country, of which she has had a part in herself on her husband's fishing vessel. Unlike all the corrupt lawyers and lobbysts she's actually worked an honest days living. it's that kind of mentality that we need in washington, to stop the bullshit.

Yup and trying to get your former brother and law fired (lol she helped her husband there too) is an honest days work as well isn't it ;D? Same with calling yourself anti pork while you take in the most federal money per capita of any bloody state in the union too Babbo bets.


And McCain has faults of his own, but they're so inconsequential compared to Obama's that it doesnt make sense to me how anyone could not vote for him.

Hrrm

Would be the oldest president EVAR. History of skin cancer.

Wants to tax employer healthcare plans

Was considering Phillip Gramm (google him, it will scare the crap outta you) as a possible US secretary of the treasury.

Picked Sarah Palin



Babbo could go on if you want ;D


perhaps if i say it once more maybe the depth of the situation will sink in.

We're in a time of war, and we're electing a president with no military experience.

Perhaps babbo should repeat himself. In the two Largest wars in WORLD history neither of the American Presidents of the time had Military experience. Hell, even Abe Lincoln was just a militia captain.


It's like building a ship and having someone construct the rudder who has only been building chairs his entire life. It's utter foolishness.

-.-;;


Obama has been a do nothing senator and a do nothing lawyer, what qualifications does he have to lead...

Ugh... hasn't this already been addressed a million times in this thread o,o?

None what so ever! but he can speak like no one else, and write checks with his mouth that we can't possibly afford to cash.

Hm. Well Babbo will admit that McCain is certainly not nearly as good a speaker. But he had writes plenty of similiar checks. It's politics. Neither of the candidates is going to let go of their policies that were planned before the crisis.


No i do not make six figures a year, i barely make 30k a year but i work for a small business which grosses more than 250k a year, so Obama's plans to tax small businesses has me worried in a time when we're barely staying afloat, with fuel surcharges and prices of goods and services increasing we're at our limit right now. and there have been other businesses like ours that have closed because of this poor economy and people holding onto their money because of this damned election. and furthermore said taxes might cost me my job, so of course i'm concerned, how the hell could i not be?[/I]

Again, you are very much in the minority. In any case take a look at this to clear up any misconceptions you might have:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=96019316


and Babbo: Policy is irrelevant compared to Character, because character will dictate what his policies will be :learn

That's worked out so well for us the last 8 years hasn't it?


this is such a waste of time, obama's going to win and we're going to pay, but at least i'll be able to say at least i voted for McCain.[/B]

lol a complete reversal of the "don't blame me I voted for kerry" situation in both meaning and party XD

[Shdo]

oh come on, the media is so biased towards obama, they care more for palin getting dresses costing 150,000 dollar which she dosnt even own more than obama shady past. they digged deep into her past and family while leaving obama family out of it.

the view? can you say anything more? the covrage he recienved in his little trip to the middle east? plz, you know just like everyone else that the media love him and protect him, no one raise a eyebrow over his past relationships while they judge palin ability as a mother?


EDIT: and can you really say that if palin had said half the things biden said (i am not fitting to be president, there would be a crisis to test obama) the media wouldnt crucify her for that?

[Babbo]

oh come on, the media is so biased towards obama, they care more for palin getting dresses costing 150,000 dollar which she dosnt even own more than obama shady past. they digged deep into her past and family while leaving obama family out of it.

where have you been the last two years o,o? They've been trying to get dirt for two whole years and only managed to pull up weak sauce like Ayers, Jeremiah Wright (which even the McCain campaign has given up on) and ACORN. Fox news would be blasting out the dirt if they could find it. So would Mccain.


the view? can you say anything more? the covrage he recienved in his little trip to the middle east? plz, you know just like everyone else that the media love him and protect him, no one raise a eyebrow over his past relationships while they judge palin ability as a mother?

Because they've already looked into those relations and saw how weak they were. Palin abusing her power and the contrast between her claims of her maverickness (lol) and reality are completely relevant. The teenage pregancy slightly less so even if it does highlight the hypocrisy of the republican party's self projected image as a party of moral values.

EDIT: Biden's gaff has already made it through the machine (I heard discussion on it on NPR and they sure didn't treat him very well for it, predicting a drop in the polls). The problem is that those kinds of claims have already been addressed during the primaries and the campaign o,o

the current polls help a little bit too <,<

[Shdo]

fox news are surly on the republican side, but thats it.


but the rest are just licking his boot, look at the covrage he got while doing a little sidetrip in the middle east, look how the view anchors simply begged for his attention while they assualted mccain from all directions. and any foreign poster here can say that his media dosnt lick his boots?


the media is heavily biased in favor of obama. with the expetion of fox news who i criticized before as well.

[Babbo]

fox news are surly on the republican side, but thats it.[/qoute]

Eh? Well seeing as you're in Israel it doesn't surprise babbo that you haven't heard much of the talk radio, Rush Limbaugh was mentioned earlier for instance. And Fox news is part of a much larger conglomerate that owns many, many newspapers and magazines. You're mistaken if you think the entirety of the media is left leaning.

[quote]
but the rest are just licking his boot, look at the coverage he got while doing a little side trip in the middle east, look how the view anchors simply begged for his attention while they assaulted McCain from all directions. and any foreign poster here can say that his media doesn't lick his boots?

Babbo won't deny it. But that certainly doesn't mean they've missed all his flaws.

[gab00n]

Media, unless they have a personal agenda like Fox News, will always favor the candidate with the most money for ads. If McCain was raising more money than Obama then you would see a totally different picture. All the media cares about is money.

[kiera2]

Just thought this was rather amusing.

http://www.iftheworldcouldvote.com/results

Also an interesting editorial (the New York Times' endorsement of Obama):

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/opinion/24fri1.html?_r=3&pagewanted=1&hp&oref=slogin

[Shdo]

(What's up with Macedonia? xD)



nothing.





btw, if obama wont raise taxes but will do all those reforms and change the world around...where will he get the money for it? if he will stay in iraq for more 18 months and only then pull out, will he have money for all those big words about change? and even when he pull out, i dont think that its enough money for all what he promise, i doubt he will start half of what he says he would, he simply wont be able to.

[Rain]

btw, if obama wont raise taxes but will do all those reforms and change the world around...where will he get the money for it? if he will stay in iraq for more 18 months and only then pull out, will he have money for all those big words about change? and even when he pull out, i dont think that its enough money for all what he promise, i doubt he will start half of what he says he would, he simply wont be able to.

I don't know how well it will work, but I can say what he has said to justify this

he will go through all the useless governement programs, that do nothing for people but still get money

he will cut those out, and use that money to fund his spending

[Shdo]

lol...sound to me like checking the couch for small change to pay for something...assuming there are useless programs, enough of them and enough money spent on them.

[CeriaHalcyon]

I don't know how well it will work, but I can say what he has said to justify this

he will go through all the useless governement programs, that do nothing for people but still get money

he will cut those out, and use that money to fund his spending

If i'm not mistaken, john McCain said the same thing, but did it through the idea of freezing non essential spending, which given the state of the economy should've been implemented rather than the bailout.

I think that either candidate is going to have a hard time turning things around, because the value of our money is going to drop continually if we keep printing more of it. It's not backed by gold anymore so it really doesnt have any value to begin with :zomg

[gigantor21]

^ The whole goddamned economy is based on good faith and hope. It doesn't surprise me that it's getting it's ass kicked right now--the lack of currency backed by anything, coupled by the shift to service, has made the the whole system a house of (credit) cards. It doesn't take much to bring it down now.

I doubt we'll be much better off in the long term once this crisis ends. Not unless we make REAL change--fundamental changes to how the economy works and what drives it. Otherwise, we'll keep jumping from bubble to bubble, and these hyperdrive boom-bust cycles will become the norm.

Neither candidate is offering anything that dramatic IMO.

[kiera2]

btw, if obama wont raise taxes but will do all those reforms and change the world around...where will he get the money for it?
What? Most complaints with regards to Obama's tax policies are that he's going to raise them. Which is true to an extent:

There are significant differences between the two candidaes on tax policy. McCain would like to make the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 permanent, and has proposed a few more of his own. Obama, by contrast, favors allowing the tax cuts to expire as scheduled for Americans earning more than $250,000 a year. He would raise taxes on capital gains and dividends, but has also promised tax breaks for low and middle-income Americans.

[bradc]

fox news are surly on the republican side, but thats it.


but the rest are just licking his boot, look at the covrage he got while doing a little sidetrip in the middle east, look how the view anchors simply begged for his attention while they assualted mccain from all directions. and any foreign poster here can say that his media dosnt lick his boots?


the media is heavily biased in favor of obama. with the expetion of fox news who i criticized before as well.

What planet are you on sir? Media present both side and including documentary of both running candidates. The race is tight between the two. Obama knows it, and so does McCain.

The polling show Obama 44% and McCain 43%, both off by 1%. Obama is still in favourable votes, but McCain isn't far behind either with the Repulicians. But any voters would want vote for a president that's has the best qualification to lead the country, and the people.

[Shdo]

planet earth, and planet earth media is mostly in favor of obama.

[Rain]

Shdo- thats how Obama's plan sounds to me as well, but then again, there are supposed a crap-load of currently useless programs getting funding

I don't personally think it would amount to enough to cover what Obama wants to spend, but it sounds good, lol

ceria- yeah, McCain kind of wnats the same, he will just stop all spending. But, and yes I only have a very limited experience in economics, doesn't sound good to me.

the country needs to spend, but it also needs to have that money to spend it. Not spending isn't going to really help.

[bradc]

Media favours Obama because the economy is utter crap now.

The U.S. spend all their money on war. And with the financial meltdown it makes other countries harder to do business with America. All the banks worldwide pretty much closed up because the exchange rates continue fall, while Japn rates are soaring like crazy... :facepalm

If there's no change...

Welcome back to the Great Depression and everyone is dirt poor.

[CeriaHalcyon]

This may sound like a preposterous idea, but if one of these two can get the nonsense spending under control, why don't they then take that money and put it towards our debt? I know it's an every day commoner idea, but who knows, it might work :learn

[bradc]

U.S. is heavily in debt anyway, basically owing China the money...

Taking said amount money to increase the debt instead of paying off the negative numbers. The U.S. is already doomed no matter how you look at the situation, whether it be from War or Financial point of view. As Obama said and those already know, the next president have to clean up the mess, and carry the burden. Also fixing its relationship with its Allies.

[gigantor21]

^ That's why I doubt either of them will get to do much in office.

The shitstorm Bush and Congress have left them will take years to fix. At best, it will swamp most of their first term. I hate how dodgy they are about the way to pay for their proposals and tax cuts, let alone balance the budget along the way.

They'll either have to raise taxes, or make ENOURMOUS cuts to government expenditures. Cutting earmarks, contrary to McCain's claims, won't be good enough--his idea to cut all non-essential spending makes more sense, but not with all the rebates and tax cuts he wants. And he's gonna have a hell of a time telling people what's essential and what isn't.

Obama, iconic as he is, hasn't offered much of a plan at all. It didn't surprise me when he couldn't say where he'd make cuts during the debate. But I think both of them underestimate the sacrifices we'll have to make in order to turn things around--and it's likely they won't be able to convince us to put up with them when the time comes.

That's what I'm most worried about this year.

[bradc]

^ That's why I doubt either of them will get to do much in office.

The shitstorm Bush and Congress have left them will take years to fix. At best, it will swamp most of their first term. I hate how dodgy they are about the way to pay for their proposals and tax cuts, let alone balance the budget along the way.

They'll either have to raise taxes, or make ENOURMOUS cuts to government expenditures. Cutting earmarks, contrary to McCain's claims, won't be good enough--his idea to cut all non-essential spending makes more sense, but not with all the rebates and tax cuts he wants. And he's gonna have a hell of a time telling people what's essential and what isn't.

Obama, iconic as he is, hasn't offered much of a plan at all. It didn't surprise me when he couldn't say where he'd make cuts during the debate. But I think both of them underestimate the sacrifices we'll have to make in order to turn things around--and it's likely they won't be able to convince us to put up with them when the time comes.

That's what I'm most worried about this year.

The most worrisome and scariest part is Bush and Cheney Admin. pardoning themselves form their own crimes they caused for war and the finanical meltdown....

[CeriaHalcyon]

I'm hopeful that once we get through the election things will smooth out and my industry will improve,

no one wants to buy a boat during election times, and it sucks! :zomg

[Shdo]

the war cost between 4-7 billion a month according to:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15377059/

its about 80+ a year.

now some more data:
the us army cost almost 600 billion a year.
its still less than 5% of the budget.

if obama save this 80+ billion dollars do you think he will be able to do all the things he say he will?

people say 'CHANGE!' and dont think for a second if that change is even possiable.
they say 'lets leave iraq! we waste money there!' and dont think what will happen when the insurgents will start to strike on other basses in the middle east. 'then we can leave those places as well! change!' and when those countries will be ravaged by terror, and will fall into anarchy? who will supply you with oil?

'we dont need oil! obama will give us clean energy!' while not drilling offshore and not using nuclear power? 'we will use solar energy!' and what will give you power at night? 'there are solutions for this as well! change!' yes there are...and they are costly...and slightly ineffective...one day it will be the way, but till then you need OIL and you need NUCLEAR power and you dont even know how much power america need.

'but we will have the money! because he will fix the economy! change!' the economy is rotten in the whole world, food prices and energy prices rise as the worl population grow and the east become more industrial (wait till that 3000$ car would be in the market) taxing those coorporations wont save the world, europe is in decline and they are socialists for a long time. its called global crisis for a reason.



vote for obama, nothing wrong with that, but dont fool yourself that you will have a much better world because of that, he will get into office, pull out of iraq (which will cause more pain in the end) cut some programs down (just like mccain would've) and will find out its not enough...so start lowering your expectations, for your sake and for obama sake.