2008 U.S. Presidential Campaign Discussion Thread-Part 10.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
they're not booing. they're saying buuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrnnns!

See, I was torn between whether they were booing or saying "Manuuuuuuuute" in honor of former basketball behemoth Manute Bol. :hmm:

ng0606-605-I1.jpg
 
I really, really, really hate this ultra divisive "this is where people love their country" crap that the McCain campaign is peddling. As if those in big towns don't love their country/work hard for their families/serve their communities/etc. It's pathetic, it's insulting, and in an ideal world should pretty much put the final nail in the coffin of anyone seeking to hold the office of President of the United States of America.

Is this the kind of tenor people want from the President? Someone who freely questions the patriotism of millions of Americans? Someone who all but directly calls his opponent a terrorist, and is proud of that message? I was going to say that John McCain is better than that, but I'm not so sure anymore. I'd like to say that at one point he was better than this.

This country deserves better than the John McCain of today.
 
So if Republicans are not small government and what are Democrats?
You make an artform of missing points. The point is Republicans are claiming to be small government attack Dems by comparing them to communists and socialists but then turn around and play big government themselves.

Yes there are big government Republicans but that's what McCain and Palin want to change.
Then you haven't been paying attention to their platform.

Big spending republicans also reflects the American voter.
:lol:


Yeah when I read Symposium it was exactly what I thought. There's an entire section where a general is trying hard to screw Socrates. You have to read it to believe it. At least Plato focused on the goal of looking at love being in different levels and love of the forms being the best, the next best love of character, and the least a love of the flesh.
No, I know what it says, I was just appalled at the stretch you were trying to make... but I guess it's another one of those bigotries you are unable to recognise.


No contradiction. I was talking about what an individual should do in regards to savings.
I give up... That is not what you said, and I wasn't the only one that called you out on it.

I'm not going to comment on your mixture of personal economy with national and global economy...


All democracies have lobbyists that compete for tax payers money. They all vote for parties that support their funding. Why do you think McCain and Palin are scary to those people? It's their jobs. If a person has a useless job in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac they will donate money and vote for parties that protect them. If special interests get their way most of the time people who vote (and aren't part of a special interest group) feel that politicians never do what they are supposed to and follow lobbyists first. This adds to voter apathy.
:huh: WHAT?

McCain is scared of lobbyists? He has very very close ties to lobbyists. You do realize that oil, tabacco, and many others have lobbyists as well, right?

But none of this has to do with "redistributionist policies" which was your whole premise.
 
To be fair, I think in that particular case McCain was specifically responding to Murtha's publically characterizing Western Pennsylvania as "redneck."
 
You make an artform of missing points. The point is Republicans are claiming to be small government attack Dems by comparing them to communists and socialists but then turn around and play big government themselves.

Then you haven't been paying attention to their platform.

:lol:

It's not an artform. There are 2 sets of conservatives. In fact Rush could probably tell you more about the divide. Conservatives who want small government do exist. Some are trying to move to the left and some even support Obama now. Others are not. The public was supporting big spending in the Republicans because they were demanding entitlements. Conservatives in the Republican party were always against it.

The Future of Conservatism

No, I know what it says, I was just appalled at the stretch you were trying to make... but I guess it's another one of those bigotries you are unable to recognise.

So you approve of targeting young boys? You should be embarrased. The abuse in ancient Greece was institutional. Even parents were okay with their boy having men call on them and bring gifts. I'd rather be called a bigot and protect minors than feed them to the perverted wolves.

I give up... That is not what you said, and I wasn't the only one that called you out on it.

I'm not going to comment on your mixture of personal economy with national and global economy...

Don't misunderestimate me!!!!:angry::sexywink:

:huh: WHAT?

McCain is scared of lobbyists? He has very very close ties to lobbyists. You do realize that oil, tabacco, and many others have lobbyists as well, right?

But none of this has to do with "redistributionist policies" which was your whole premise.

He wants to change that. If you don't believe that he's changed you may have a point. He even flirted with joining the democratic party. I think he's changed a new leaf when he picked Sarah Palin. I trust them to handle the economy better than Obama/Biden who love lobbyists and want to expand government.

Now answer this question. Would Obama be better at dealing with lobbyists?

Unless the democratic party moves right and the republicans move left I really see the future of good economics coming from the small government conservatives in the Republican party. Whether you think they exist or not.

With the "fairness" doctrine maybe they won't exist:

today.parcoltop11.7188.ImageFile.jpg


Eyeblast.tv - Joy Behar: 'Rush Limbaugh Is A Terrorist'
 
heres a better vid:

:happy:


Once again----John McCain had his arms broken and was tortured, therefore he has everything it takes to be President of the United States! :happy:


And please, don't misconstrue this as belittling McCain's experience, as you and others have done repeatedly when people make this argument. What I'm doing instead is belittling the fact that McCain and his supporters peddle his POW experience as the be-all, end-all qualification for the Presidency. I get it. He was a fucking POW. I have a great deal of respect for that. I still think he'll be a shitty President. Give it a rest.
 
Seriously though, who in the hell with half a brain is going to support McCain's latest ad linking Obama to terrorists hijacking airplaines?

Who?

I'm looking at YOU purple, diamond, sting2..........


THAT's American???????


Please, answer me with something that will convince me McCain is not a complete shithead.
 
Seriously though, who in the hell with half a brain is going to support McCain's latest ad linking Obama to terrorists hijacking airplaines?

Who?

I'm looking at YOU purple, diamond, sting2..........


THAT's American???????


Please, answer me with something that will convince me McCain is not a complete shithead.


Who ? A lot of easily-swayed not too smart REAL Americans yee-hah

The next 2 weeks will be a relentless diet of Muslim/Un-American/Rhymes with Osama/Dirty tricks brigade, and all the morons who deserve what they get. I have a bad feeling about this........
 
Most people are willing to overlook quite a bit in the interests of seeing someone from their party elected.
 
i guess we're all dumb.

<>

With all due respect Diamond, if anyone condones this, they're not dumb, they're outright assholes.

How can anyone, ANYONE, make such an outlandish connection?

HOW?


I'm sorry, but if McCain's strategy works and Americans vote him iinto office based on these kinds of ads, I'm. fuckin.out.of.here.

The hell with this bullshit.
 

There were billboards will pictures of babies with Bible verses railing on about abortion. As I saw these all over the place, I realized how conservative parts of America are and how they want the exact kind of president Diemen is describing. There was still a restaurant serving "freedom fries."

They do question people's patriotism the same way McCain and Palin are.
 
It's not an artform. There are 2 sets of conservatives. In fact Rush could probably tell you more about the divide.
I know all about the divide, I even created a thread about it awhile back called "the fractured party" or something like that... I'm just telling you where the party mainly stands right now, and McCain may not be as neo-con as Bush, he's pretty damn close.


So you approve of targeting young boys? You should be embarrased. The abuse in ancient Greece was institutional. Even parents were okay with their boy having men call on them and bring gifts. I'd rather be called a bigot and protect minors than feed them to the perverted wolves.
Are you serious? Are you this full of ignorance and bigotry to think homosexuals shouldn't adopt because they will target children? So by this logic straight men shouldn't have daughters, because if you are attracted to women you must be attracted to little girls. Don't tell me I should be embarassed, you sir should be ashamed...



He wants to change that. If you don't believe that he's changed you may have a point.
I'm glad you have that much faith in him, I don't neither does the majority. The man is 72 and the only changes he's made recently are turning to and embracing the tactics he's attacked over the past decade, so if he's so quick to do that, I don't believe he's going to change this one bit.

Now answer this question. Would Obama be better at dealing with lobbyists?
Well you are making a very complexed issue a very black and white issue, so your question doesn't really work. Lobbyists aren't necessarilly "evil", many do speak for the people and have done some good for this country.

With the "fairness" doctrine maybe they won't exist:

today.parcoltop11.7188.ImageFile.jpg
What exactly is your argument against the fairness doctrine? Is it the same as Rush's which is his show wouldn't be the same because he couldn't dump every opposing voice that calls in? Rush doesn't like it because he says it will make his show "boring", but he's really scared that his audience will see his vulnerbilities...
 
What conservatives should be more worried about is gay adoption and influence on children. Just read Plato's Symposium, and you'll know what I mean about fear of the older influencing the younger in relationships. They believed that young teenage boys were real sexy. There was no political correctness when Plato was around to censor that book.


um, what the FUCK?

(sorry i missed this earlier)
 
I know all about the divide, I even created a thread about it awhile back called "the fractured party" or something like that... I'm just telling you where the party mainly stands right now, and McCain may not be as neo-con as Bush, he's pretty damn close.

Well a spending freeze certainly is not what Bush did. Unless you think he won't carry it out.

Are you serious? Are you this full of ignorance and bigotry to think homosexuals shouldn't adopt because they will target children? So by this logic straight men shouldn't have daughters, because if you are attracted to women you must be attracted to little girls. Don't tell me I should be embarassed, you sir should be ashamed....

Actually I was talking about the abuse of children, not adoption. Symposium is very clear and historians are very clear about how they looked at minors. If it's consenting adults then I don't care. What happened in Greece is not related to gay adoption. Not all gays have sex with minors but they do on a higher rate than heterosexuals do. I'm pretty sure that the ones who adopt aren't looking for quick sexual satisfaction but are trying to raise kids. I'm talking about predators, and the idea being pushed to lower the age of consent. The entire culture of western gays going to Thailand to screw minors is disgusting and I wish the gay community would be more outspoken against it. Laws should apply equally to gays and heterosexuals. If there's going to be equality for gays then they will have to stop advertising sex with minors.

http://www.mega.nu/ampp/baldwin_pedophilia_homosexuality.pdf


Washington's Other Sex Scandal: - Reason Magazine

This gay guy thinks we should not name all under age sex as pedophillia. This is insane. You have to admit that there is a problem.

I'm glad you have that much faith in him, I don't neither does the majority. The man is 72 and the only changes he's made recently are turning to and embracing the tactics he's attacked over the past decade, so if he's so quick to do that, I don't believe he's going to change this one bit.

That's not a good enough reason to support Obama. Especially after Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The main critics of those institutions were Republican.

Well you are making a very complexed issue a very black and white issue, so your question doesn't really work. Lobbyists aren't necessarilly "evil", many do speak for the people and have done some good for this country.

Any president that wants to balance the budget will have to say no to a lot of them if they want progress.

What exactly is your argument against the fairness doctrine? Is it the same as Rush's which is his show wouldn't be the same because he couldn't dump every opposing voice that calls in? Rush doesn't like it because he says it will make his show "boring", but he's really scared that his audience will see his vulnerbilities...

That's not his assertion. It's that by using the fairness doctrine the conservative point of view wouldn't get it's fair shake from bombardment from phone calls, and listenership chewing up air time. There are liberal talk shows and a largely liberal bias in the media even as it is so it's really just a veiled way for stifling the conservative media. I mean there is no way I could not know what the left thinks. With movies, TV, music, university, and books it's very easy to see. I'm okay with Oprah supporting Barack Obama. It's her show and she can do what she wants. If conservatives want to boycott it they can go ahead. I'm actually mistified that conservatives were surprised of her leanings. Isn't it obvious? Look at her "New Earth" campaign. It's the Oprah show. Will Oprah be forced under the fairness doctrine to give equal time to conservative views on all her points of view? I would love to see that. Maybe Rush can be a panelist for Oprah.

That's why we have televised debates. It's also up to people to compare views. Political views of both sides need lots of time to flesh out their opinions. Rush would be out of a job if the mainstream media did their job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom