|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
posted September 07, 2008 11:32 AM |
|
Edited by Mytical at 11:35, 07 Sep 2008.
|
What gets me is that everything negative that McCain and crew used when talking about Hillary they are turning around and making the same positive about Palin. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. McCain will probably get elected, sadly.
Even though he is convinced that anybody who makes under 5 million is 'middle class', and that the economy is healthy. He voted with Bush 95% of the time, but is all about 'change'...yeah ... ok.
Edit : if 5 million a year is middle class..I don't even qualify as dirt poor. Heck I don't even qualify as Dirt Dirt Poor.
____________
Message received.
|
|
Vexon
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted September 07, 2008 12:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
"Because governor of Alaska doesn't count."
Wow. Just wow.
Wasilla, where she was Mayor, has 7,025 citizens. Gee, that's a big responsibility! Alaska in full has less than 700,000 and she hasn't even been Governer for more than 2 years (November 2006). So what she's done doesn't count.
|
|
Aquaman333
Famous Hero
of the seven seas
|
|
posted September 07, 2008 07:08 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
"Because governor of Alaska doesn't count."
Wow. Just wow.
Wasilla, where she was Mayor, has 7,025 citizens. Gee, that's a big responsibility! Alaska in full has less than 700,000 and she hasn't even been Governer for more than 2 years (November 2006). So what she's done doesn't count.
This is just such an ignorant statement. Alaska is the absolute most difficult state in the union to run. It is historically in the bottom five states to live in, has the worst education system in our country, it has a migratory workforce therefore a seasonal economy, more than half the towns have no roads leading to them making them completely isolated except by plane, and those 700,000 people are spread across a state the size of some countries from Anchorage to Barrow. It's so isolated that the governor of Alaska actually has extra rights regarding the national guard because the federal government knows they won't be able to react to problems in a timely matter because it's so far away and isolated. You try running Alaska for a week. It's almost like running your own country. So yeah, it counts.
____________
"Brian, look! There's a message in my Alphabits! It says,
"OOOOOOO!"."
"Peter, those are Cheerios."-Family Guy
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted September 07, 2008 08:05 PM |
|
|
Quote:
What gets me is that everything negative that McCain and crew used when talking about Hillary they are turning around and making the same positive about Palin. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. McCain will probably get elected, sadly.
There's no way on God's green earth will McCain win this election. I guarantee it.
Quote:
Even though he is convinced that anybody who makes under 5 million is 'middle class', and that the economy is healthy. He voted with Bush 95% of the time, but is all about 'change'...yeah ... ok.
Edit : if 5 million a year is middle class..I don't even qualify as dirt poor. Heck I don't even qualify as Dirt Dirt Poor.
That's what Obama's campaign ad says. Not what McCain said.
As to the whole "change" thing, what is really going to change with this election aside from having a new president? All Obama brings is he's the first African American presidential candidate. All McCain brings to the table is the first woman vice president pick. Nothing will drastically change if either is elected. It will only change if Congres finally grows a pair of testicles and stops being afraid to act.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Aquaman333
Famous Hero
of the seven seas
|
|
posted September 07, 2008 08:39 PM |
|
|
I disagree, certain things will change. I mean '92-'99 America is drastically different from '00-'07 America (namely the national debt) so a president can change things. That's why I'm really liking McCain. He knows things can change and has exact and specific things he plans on doing differently in the next four years. Obama is just a demogogue who can rally his zombie-like supporters with empty rhetoric that sounds nice but has no real substance. Both understand that there can be change, but McCain knows what to do to get that change. Obama just knows that it's possible. McCain has the means to accomplish it.
____________
"Brian, look! There's a message in my Alphabits! It says,
"OOOOOOO!"."
"Peter, those are Cheerios."-Family Guy
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 10:03 AM |
|
|
Republican John McCain heads into the final stretch of the U.S. presidential campaign with a 4-point lead over Democrat Barack Obama, a USA Today/Gallup poll released on Sunday showed.
The lead was McCain's biggest since January and a turnaround from a USA Today poll taken just before last week's Republican Party convention opened, when the veteran Arizona senator trailed Obama by 7 percentage points.
The new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, showed McCain leading Obama, a first-term senator from Illinois, by 50 percent to 46 percent among registered voters with less than two months before the November 4 election.
USA Today said McCain got a significant boost from the Republican convention and the selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate. McCain also narrowed Obama's wide advantage on handling the economy, the top issue in the campaign, the newspaper said.
Reuters
Just lol, Palin has obviously been just what the conservative base has been looking for. "Down down down, down down the drain, goes USA..." (to the tune of Beach Boys)
____________
"These friends probably started using condoms after having produced the most optimum amount of offsprings. Kudos to them for showing at least some restraint" - Tsar-ivor
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 11:31 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I disagree, certain things will change. I mean '92-'99 America is drastically different from '00-'07 America (namely the national debt) so a president can change things. That's why I'm really liking McCain. He knows things can change and has exact and specific things he plans on doing differently in the next four years. Obama is just a demogogue who can rally his zombie-like supporters with empty rhetoric that sounds nice but has no real substance. Both understand that there can be change, but McCain knows what to do to get that change. Obama just knows that it's possible. McCain has the means to accomplish it.
What means?
He attacks Obama for making empty promises yet he makes the most outlandish statements for his aims with no explanation for how he exactly plans to do this.
The Iraq war won by 2013 but he won't say how for fear that the Iraqis are watching US television and will counter him 
"Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance"
-2000
"We believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life, personal responsibility, the rule of law, and judges who dispense justice impartially and don't legislate from the bench. We believe in the values of families, neighborhoods and communities."
-2008
"if we repeal Roe v Wade tomorrow, thousands of young american women will be performing illegal and dangerous operations"
-2000
"I do not support Roe v Wade it should be overturned."
-2008
"I would clearly support NOT extending those tax cuts."
-2004
"I will be making the Bush tax cuts permanent."
-2008
"I am very certain that this military engagement will not be very difficult."
-2002
"Many of us understood from the beginning that this would be a very difficult undertaking."
-2006
Obama is the change that America needs.
Less guns. No unconstitional and internationally illegal war without nations approval. Less nuclear weapons and space weapon development. Political process to Iraq war and Darfur. HEALTHCARE. Lessen the economic gap. Less oil use without adding to the food crisis. Development of more environmentally friendly transport.
It's really black and white. No pun intended.
As for Palin's experience:
As with the video on the past page: Palin was the mayor of the "second largest city in Alaska". The republican on FOX very impressed with her being mayor of a city with 9000 people in it...
Then when it comes to Tim Kaine, former mayor of Richmond (pop.200,000) largest city in America and current Governor of Virginia...
Goes on to list a bunch of places it's smaller than
"105th largest city in America [...] it's not a big town [...] is this person capable of being president of the United States?"
... 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMiUAcEJY98
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 02:41 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Less oil use without adding to the food crisis.
Obama supports ethanol subsidies.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 02:58 PM |
|
|
I have heard McPain leads now! 
Please americans, vote for Obama - the world BEGS you!!!!!!
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 06:52 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Obama is the change that America needs.
Less guns. No unconstitional and internationally illegal war without nations approval. Less nuclear weapons and space weapon development. Political process to Iraq war and Darfur. HEALTHCARE. Lessen the economic gap. Less oil use without adding to the food crisis. Development of more environmentally friendly transport.
1) The President has 0 power to modify the Constitution and can't touch the gun issue. It would not be wise to challange the authority of the Surpeme Court right out the gate either. What I really want to know is why other countries care about the United State's gun policies?
2) Declaration of war is a plenary power of Congress, not the president. Since Congress hasn't stopped the president from acting, they must approve. We are a system of checks and balances after all. If Congress had really wanted to stop the conflict, they would have cut the funding years ago.
3) Less nuclear weapons huh? Do you think we'll give up our ability to destroy any nation on the planet? It will never happen.
4) How exactly is the President going to use the political process to help Iraq? And why the Hell should we help in Darfur? Everyone wants us to stay out of their business right? Why don't we let Australia or Sweden do something about it instead?
5) How exactly are you going to provide universal healthcare? Jack up taxes on everything? People vote down school millages in this country because spending an extra $5 of local taxes on education is a waste in their eyes. Do you honestly believe people will want to pay more so somebody they don't know can get their head examined?
6) Lessen the economic gap. For some reason, people are convinced the president controls the economy in this country. Lessening the economic gap falls on Congress's and the State's shoulders, not the president's.
7) Less oil use without adding to the food crisis. I hear nuclear reactors are a great source of power. If only people were for building them.
8) Yet again, the president has nothing to do with the economy and therefore, can't do squat about the development of environmentally safe cars. That falls on Congres to create new standards and the auto industry to conform to them.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 07:48 PM |
|
|
Nice post, O_D.
The problem is that most people in this country - let alone the rest of the world - don't really understand how this country's government works. They seem to think that the president has ultimate say and control over almost every issue facing the nation, when in reality, congress holds almost all the power. We whine and complain about the president, and go on and on about how important change is - and then re-elect the same dopey Senators and Congressman term after term after term.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 08:25 PM |
|
|
To be honest, I didn't found that a "nice post". In my eyes, it exactly shows in some points, why america is "disliked" in so many parts of the world.
Example:
Quote:
What I really want to know is why other countries care about the United State's gun policies?
Why do the U.S. care about human right policy of China?
Quote:
Do you think we'll give up our ability to destroy any nation on the planet?
This just sounds pure arrogant.
Quote:
And why the Hell should we help in Darfur?
Because you care about Georgia and Kosovo and Afghanistan, where the pain and awfullness towards innocent people isn't even half that much.
Quote:
Do you honestly believe people will want to pay more so somebody they don't know can get their head examined?
Yeah..f*ck of my neighbour, ME is important.
Quote:
I hear nuclear reactors are a great source of power. If only people were for building them.
Tchernobyl rings a bell maybe?
Just my 2 cents...now kick me 
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 08:40 PM |
|
|
@angelito
Quote:
Why do the U.S. care about human right policy of China?
Not a fair analogy. A better one would be: why does the U.S. care about gun control in Australia? Oh, right. We don't.
Quote:
Quote:
Do you think we'll give up our ability to destroy any nation on the planet?
This just sounds pure arrogant.
Why would any nation willingly give up a clear military and political advantage?
Quote:
Quote:
Do you honestly believe people will want to pay more so somebody they don't know can get their head examined?
Yeah..f*ck of my neighbour, ME is important.
I work hard for my money and for my health coverage. Why should I pay so that someone who sits on their ass and does nothing also gets health coverage? Rhetorical question, btw.
Quote:
Tchernobyl rings a bell maybe?
You don't think nuclear technology has changed since 1986? Do you know much about why the Chernobyl incident happened? Do you know that it didn't happen in the United States and that, just maybe, we have different regulations governing safety than the former USSR had? Do you not believe that people can learn from mistakes? Because the Exxon Valdez sank, should we no longer transport oil by boat?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 08:42 PM |
|
|
The truth hurts.
1) We care, because we are supposed to be the nation that cares. Yet I bet most Americans could care less about how some workers are treated in China. We keep buying their products after all. If we really cared about how people in China were treated, wouldn't we display such disgust openly and do something about it? How about we raise some awareness? That way we can protest and not do anything about it.
2) Pure arrogance? No. That's reality. It would be stupid to get rid of our most powerful weapons in hopes that other countries would follow our example. Do you think Russia would give up its nuclear weapons? No. So why do you want us to do the same? It would just leave us at the mercy of those with such capabilities.
3) We care about Georgia because of our history with the Russian empire. Letting it expand is not good for Americans. Afghanistan was a message: Don't !@#$ with us. As to Darfur, what do they do for us? I honestly don't know. People want it both ways. They want us to stay out of everyone's business yet when there are problems, we are supposed to help out. Basically people just want our money to help rebuild and then tell us to go home. Why bother?
4) Yeah, I'm sure people care so much about their neighbors. How many times have you walked past a person begging on the street with cold indifference, thinking why don't they get a job? It's not much different with healthcare really. Why should I pay for someone to receive treatment that I don't know, who won't get a job with health insurance? We like to say "let's help our neighbors" yet most of us only have time for "me."
5) I enjoy your statement about the reactors. People want alternate forms of energy but are afraid of what might happen if we employ them. Meanwhile, the oil reserves keep on dwindling. Make up your minds. Like it matters. You have any idea how long it will take our especially impotent Congress to actually approve the construction of alternative energy platforms? My guess is 2015. Remember, by acting Congress opens themselves to be criticism and we can't have that.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 09:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Remember, by acting Congress opens themselves to be criticism and we can't have that.
Their approval rating right now is what, 0.1%? I'm not sure what Congress has to be afraid of at this point...
(And I just love how Pelosi constantly jabs at Bush's low approval rating...)
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 09:29 PM |
|
Edited by angelito at 21:30, 08 Sep 2008.
|
Quote:
Not a fair analogy. A better one would be: why does the U.S. care about gun control in Australia? Oh, right. We don't.
I found it fair because I just wanted to find a different "inner political" topic of a different country the US cares about. Why does any country care about other countries at all?
Quote:
Why would any nation willingly give up a clear military and political advantage?
This sentence may have the same idea as Omega's had, but don't you think yours sounds quite more reasonable than his'...and less "arrogant"?
Quote:
I work hard for my money and for my health coverage. Why should I pay so that someone who sits on their ass and does nothing also gets health coverage? Rhetorical question, btw.
We all work hard for our money, but u will never know what happens in your life. You may end up losing your job, your family and your mobility one day (I hope NOT of course!). And what then? A society only works if everybody is willingly to give...and not only to recieve. This may sound a bit communistic/socialistic, but every form of government has/had its good parts also...
Quote:
You don't think nuclear technology has changed since 1986? Do you know much about why the Chernobyl incident happened?
Yes, I know pretty much all details about this accident, because it is also a bit of a part of my job. But there are many different ways of gaining energy which are much more safer than nuclear power.
Quote:
Do you not believe that people can learn from mistakes?
After George W. Bush got re-elected, I stopped believing in this
Quote:
Because the Exxon Valdez sank, should we no longer transport oil by boat?
Not a "fair analogy (), because it ruined / killed mostly nature (animals), and not people. But I remember the big electricity breakdown in the US 1 or 2 years ago (region of New York iirc), which was quite unusual for such a "modern" country like the USA. It just showed how old and rusty many of those stations and cables were (or still are?).
The problem with the states is, you have regions which are the most modern regions of the world, while you on the other hand have regions where people live like life was 50 years ago.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 08, 2008 10:51 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 22:59, 08 Sep 2008.
|
Quote:
This sentence may have the same idea as Omega's had, but don't you think yours sounds quite more reasonable than his'...and less "arrogant"?
Fair enough.. but, while it's not always possible to do so, I always make my best attempt to understand what a person is trying to say rather than focusing on how they say it. I happen to know for a fact that there are only a few countries that Omega wants to nuke.
Quote:
We all work hard for our money, but u will never know what happens in your life. You may end up losing your job, your family and your mobility one day (I hope NOT of course!). And what then? A society only works if everybody is willingly to give...and not only to recieve. This may sound a bit communistic/socialistic, but every form of government has/had its good parts also...
I also hope that I do not lose my job some day, but I also happen to believe that if I do, it's my responsibility - not the government's - to make sure that I can take care of myself and my family. If I lose my job, I go and get another one, even if it's not one I really want. We can't go around thinking someone else is always going to be there to solve our problems. Sometimes life deals you a bad hand. I fix my own problems, and let other people fix theirs.
Besides the philosophical aspect of this belief, I don't believe for one second that the Government is in any way capable of handling an efficient, GOOD (meaning, quality of care) healthcare system without mucking the whole thing up. Like any other capitalist venture, quality comes through competition. A socialist health care system will only devolve into mediocrity IMHO. That's not to say our current system is ideal - but whatever replaces the current system (if anything does), it needs to be at least partially competition based.
Quote:
But there are many different ways of gaining energy which are much more safer than nuclear power.
Maybe, but nuclear power can be extremely safe if it's handled correctly. There are going to be dangers with ANY energy source. The goal is to manage them responsibly, and nuclear power has WAY too much of an unfounded, negative stigma arrayed against it. It is certainly much cleaner, and much better than any fossil-fuel based technology.
Quote:
Not a "fair analogy (), because it ruined / killed mostly nature (animals), and not people. But I remember the big electricity breakdown in the US 1 or 2 years ago (region of New York iirc), which was quite unusual for such a "modern" country like the USA. It just showed how old and rusty many of those stations and cables were (or still are?).
Right - my point was that when there is a disaster, it happens because something went wrong. When we analyze what that was, we can take steps to make sure it doesn't happen again. The world didn't stop transporting oil in tankers after the Valdez sank. Rather, we looked into why it sank, and improved technology (and procedure) so that it doesn't happen again. You don't just abandon an energy source with as much potential as nuclear because one powerplant halfway across the world melted down due to a bunch of reasons that had little intrinsically to do with nuclear power in the first place. You look at what happened, and then take steps to make sure it doesn't happen again. I mean, look at the Three Mile Island incident. Thankfully it wasn't the disaster that Chernobyl was, but it could have been. And when the problem was investigated, a lot of things were learned, and there hasn't been a major incident of note at a nuclear power plant anywhere in the US since.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted September 09, 2008 02:08 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I don't believe for one second that the Government is in any way capable of handling an efficient, GOOD (meaning, quality of care) healthcare system without mucking the whole thing up. Like any other capitalist venture, quality comes through competition.
Here in holland, we USED to have a government run universal healthcare system. It was fine as far as I was concerned, but what we saw when it was actually delivered into private hands, was an increase in monthly insurance costs, and a decrease in actual healthcare quality. At the same time, we saw an increase in PROFITS for those that ran the healthcare insurance companies. These are facts, regardless of what you want to believe.
Quality does not come through competition; PROFITS come through competition. And profits do not aid the one thing healthcare is meant for : CARING for people.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted September 09, 2008 03:23 AM |
|
|
Moonlith, I am not familiar with what happened in Holland, but I can venture a few guesses as to why it got worse: first, because the privatization wasn't done in a good way (in other words, cronyism), and because there isn't enough competition. Competition is supposed to reduce profits, not increase them.
But part of the problem is the concept of insurance, whether public or private.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted September 09, 2008 08:58 AM |
|
|
Quote:
1) The President has 0 power to modify the Constitution and can't touch the gun issue. It would not be wise to challange the authority of the Surpeme Court right out the gate either. What I really want to know is why other countries care about the United State's gun policies?
It's not modifying the constitution but rather supporting stricter gun control.
He supports banning semi-automatics, purchase restrictions and other laws such as outlawing concealed firearms.
"I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to commonsense regulation."
-Obama, 2008.
Why do I care about gun policies in USA? Because I'm not a fan of innocent people getting shot when it could be avoided.
Quote:
2) Declaration of war is a plenary power of Congress, not the president. Since Congress hasn't stopped the president from acting, they must approve. We are a system of checks and balances after all. If Congress had really wanted to stop the conflict, they would have cut the funding years ago.
But the President is still involved in the declaration.
Quote:
3) Less nuclear weapons huh? Do you think we'll give up our ability to destroy any nation on the planet? It will never happen.
Certainly not with McCain.
But it's not just US nuclear weapons, but a press for worldwide disarmament.
Quote:
4) How exactly is the President going to use the political process to help Iraq? And why the Hell should we help in Darfur? Everyone wants us to stay out of their business right? Why don't we let Australia or Sweden do something about it instead?
Why shouldn't the USA goverment try to help fight the human rights atrocities and international law violations in Darfur. Or do you think it should continue?
As for Iraq, I'm not going to pretend I'm an expert, but change is needed, involving negotiations with neighbours such as Syria and Iran rather than just violating the UN's authority.
"The days of using the war on terror as a political football are over. [...] It is time to give Iraqis their country back, and it is time to refocus America's efforts on the wider struggle yet to be won."
-Obama, 2006.
Quote:
5) How exactly are you going to provide universal healthcare? Jack up taxes on everything? People vote down school millages in this country because spending an extra $5 of local taxes on education is a waste in their eyes. Do you honestly believe people will want to pay more so somebody they don't know can get their head examined?
Plenty of other nations have universal healthcare.
Taxpayers in the US already pay billions to care for those who do not have health insurance.
'Obama's health care plan includes implementing guaranteed eligibility for affordable health care for all Americans, paid for by insurance reform, reducing costs, removing patent protection for pharmaceuticals, and required employer contributions.' (www.barackobama.com)
As for the cost, this is the main reason alot of the population doesn't have health insurance in the first place.
Quote:
6) Lessen the economic gap. For some reason, people are convinced the president controls the economy in this country. Lessening the economic gap falls on Congress's and the State's shoulders, not the president's.
It's not so much where the power of final word lies but the position of the president and his/her support and lobbying that counts in this situation.
Quote:
7) Less oil use without adding to the food crisis. I hear nuclear reactors are a great source of power. If only people were for building them.
Nuclear reactors are good sources of power but aren't a sustainable solution to the US energy crisis.
Innovation and improved energy efficiency and less dependency on oil are stressed, rather than having a running mate who denies climate change and promotes oil drilling and vouchers to ease the oil problem 
Quote:
8) Yet again, the president has nothing to do with the economy and therefore, can't do squat about the development of environmentally safe cars. That falls on Congres to create new standards and the auto industry to conform to them.
In 2007 Obama introduced a bill promoting the development of much needed plug-in electric cars and hybrids.
These cars are the future.
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
