# Political Views Cont. (note parental advisory may be needed)



## Guest

Here's the new thread gil_ong requested. Sorry I couldn't just move the posts, I don't mod this section, but thought I'd go ahead and get it vaguely organized.

This will _probably_ end up being closed. So don't bash people's views and be polite as long as you can. Most of us are adults, so please act like that, and if you're not, try  Thanks

Referring to a political comment...


> Asully70 posted
> 
> not needed COM that just pisses me off. if you need to see a link that the media wolnt show because they are 100% in favor of the democratic party here it is.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDJSVPAx8xc turns out obama cant speak either. i would say miss south carolina is a minature obama
> 
> 
> just incase you didnt watch the VP debate palin tore up biden





> COM posted
> 
> Not sure what debate you were watching...
> 
> She continued the embarrassing Couric interview to the debate. She speaks lots of words but says nothing. Same as W.
> 
> Women, feminists in particular, should be insulted that this is the best woman that the Republicans could find. Jody Rell, maybe? I'm certainly not a democrat and definitely not an Obama fan but the choice of this dummie has certainly lost my vote. Good job McCain. You have now prove that you're a scenile old man. Or possibly the Manchurian Candidate.





> Asully70 posted
> 
> Well in the least amount of words I will disagree with you simple as that but i'm just tired of people and the media publicly bashing things I believe in. You can only take so much then you just get pissed. People openly bash george bush and im not saying he is perfect but you HAVE to support the president no matter what he is doing. I have heard so many people openly bash stuff that doesnt matter its just getting rediclous. I cant wait untill this election is over and I hope who ever the next president is, I hope he is supported and I hope we dont hve another 8 years of people crapping on the president. You can't have a strong nation unless everyone is united.





> emc7 posted
> 
> Wow that trumpet is painful. I agree its about a half step off. Maybe the tape was stretched or noone bothered to transcribe the music.
> 
> The Bush bashers I can't stand are the ones who didn't bother to vote. From the way everyone talks, you'ld think we'd have 100% turn out, but we're never even close.
> 
> It is cool we can bash our pres and not get arrested like a lot of other places.
> 
> I can't really blame Biden et. al. for bashing Bush & McCain to try to get elected, but its getting pretty old. I would like to hear some actual plans. If you could still duel someone who called you a liar, politics would get a lot more interesting.
> 
> Palin was spouting prepared remarks instead of answering the questions, but she did less opponent bashing.
> 
> I don't think a really bright woman would have the right wing pull of someone who "shares the values" of our homegrown willfully ignorant.
> 
> And yes I am bashing the people who think
> "intelligent design" belongs in science class and "abstinance only" is an effective strategy against teen motherhood. These people are shown propagada videos that are marketed to their churches. They then believe what the see because they trust their authority figures. Sheep, we need to think for ourselves. There is a place for faith and a place for data. If we don't teach our children math and to use the scientific method and trust the results we will end up last place in the world economy.





> Asully70 posted
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by emc7
> 
> Palin was spouting prepared remarks instead of answering the questions, but she did less opponent bashing.
> 
> 
> 
> This is very true. But when you spend days apon days of studying forign policys and plans and basically cramming for all the questions she is going to be forced to answer thats what happens. I'm guessing that these answers were rehearsed in every possible way thus coming out sounding like "prepared remarks" rather than her actual ideas and thoughts. Try repeating somthing in an arguement 30 times over and over and listen to see if you sound more convinsing the first time your say it to the last. You will sound more "computer like" the last time you say it compared to the first time when you were in the heat of the argument. I respect all the people running and their running mates. I hope to see the American people rally behind who ever is president and get us out of this economic problem, finish both wars going on and get this country back on track. I would have to agree on the one statment you said 100% of the bush bashers dont vote. I wouldnt say 100% but I see this all the time. I'm a student and I see this on campus all the time. People speaking up for Obama and how great he is and I ask them if they are registered to vote and they say no. Oregons elecortal votes most likely will go to Obama unless some freak of nature happens but I would rather have a 75% or higher turn out for voting rather than a 30%. Dissapointing the government forces you to go to jury duty but not to vote.
Click to expand...




> emc7 posted
> 
> they only send you to jury duty if you register, that why many people say they don't register. But usually only 30% of registered voters vote, so the real number (counting the unregistered) is even lower.





> Ichthius posted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Asully70
> you HAVE to support the president no matter what he is doing.
> 
> 
> 
> That statement just scares me. Doesn't that defy the point of a democracy? Might as well live in North Korea.
Click to expand...




> COM posted
> 
> Agreed, Leah.
> 
> The great thing about America (and it might actually be down to just the one these days) is that you don't have to support the president or any other slimeball politico. I despise Bush. I always will. I will likely despise the next crook in the White House. I also despise the Governor of New York (Paterson - ugh). Despised Spitzer before then as a whiny rich kid.
> 
> We as a people need to revolt and demand better leadership. It's about time.





> emc7 posted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> need to revolt
> 
> 
> 
> We need to vote. We have a mechanism for change of leadership. Thats what makes a democracy. If you don't like the status quo, run for office.
> 
> Thats the one point I gave Gov. Palin in the debate, she said that what comes next is more important that fixing the blame for the past. Both side have been doing the "my oppenent said this then and it was wrong" thing enough to make me tune out.
Click to expand...




> Asully70 posted
> 
> I know off topic again but the county I live in and most the countys in Oregon select jury duty off of whos registered to vote and DMV records (who has a registered liscense or address). But saying that you must support the president to me means the mass media shouldnt talk poorly about him (believe it or not there are people who dont follow politics who just go off whats said on TV and ill assure you majority of stuff heard on TV is overexadurated or just completly wrong) and you just need to respect what he does because majority of people in the US couldnt do a better job. If you think you can do a better job go run for office. You dont have to agree to respect him and you can still disagree in a respectful and mature way. Don't just go out and buy a sticker 1-8-09 Bushs last day or what ever the date is.





> mrmoby posted
> 
> That is the beauty of the free society we live in. Whether you like how the administration is treated or not, the media's job is not to be cheerleaders for the government. Otherwise you may as well live in North Korea, Russia, China, etc. where the media is controlled by the government and you only get one point of view. Here, despite the cries of liberal media bias, there is a wide array of media to choose from, so you are bound to find some outlet that suits your needs.
> 
> Should Obama be elected, Fox News will become the bashers, and NBC, CBS, etc. will once again love the White House. Still, you will have differeing voices, and the opportunities to draw your own conclusions.





> Asully70 posted
> 
> you are totally missing what I am saying. you can agree or disagree with the president. just do it with some class and respect. what is happening to bush is just horrible for a country.


----------



## crazyfishlady

After watching the last couple of debates I would have to say that it doesn't look good for the middle class if the Republicans make it in again.


----------



## TheOldSalt

Oh, like the Dems are gonna be one bit better.


----------



## Ghost Knife

I just wanted to remind everyone here that the all of the major cities in the U.S. that have had increasing criminal activity over the last 30 years have been mainly ran by Democrats. If you folks don't believe me look up Chicago's, Detroit's, and Jackson's history.


----------



## COM

Well, back to Bush bashing.

Bush is an incompetent weasel. He failed at everything he ever did in his silver-spoon life. He's been the worst leader our nation has ever had. We'll be lucky if we can ever recover from the tailspin that he put us into.

Now I realize I shouldn't blame Bush completely. He's too stupid to have done this on his own. He's a puppet who let himself get surrounded by the worst bunch of greedy and corrupt people on the planet. Yet, under his watch, Rome began burning and instead of trying to put it out, he just said, "What fire?" and earmarked a few billion more to his cronies at Halliburton.

Under no circumstances do I find any reason to show respect or class to people like W. He and his lot have made it their business to take a dump on the people (and environment) of our planet. I am not impressed by titles. If I met him in a diner I would gladly say all of this to his face and ask him to apologize for genocide, destruction of natural habitats, allowing the entire infrastructure of nation to deteriorate, and profiting grossly off of the death of thousands of people.

BTW I'm not a liberal or a Democrat. Just stating the facts as I see them.


----------



## mrmoby

Respect, in my mind is something that is earned, not simply by title, but by action. Bush has not done anything to gain my respect. As far as I am concerned, a bumpersticker with the date he leaves office is the least of the disrespect he has earned himself.


----------



## guppyart

I vote we all make katie,leah and I presidents and get it over with


----------



## gil_ong

LOL. the SNL skit is HILARIOUS! almost as hilarious as the real debate.


----------



## mesapod

The one with Tina Fey playing Palin was so hilarious ans she looked a lot like Palin too.


----------



## gil_ong

tina fey got lucky with looking like palin.

the mannerisms and speech..... now that's skill.


----------



## COM

All comedians got lucky with McCain picking Palin. She's a sure source of entertainment fodder for years to come... if they win.

If you live in Ohio call me and I'll give you five thousand reasons to vote for Obama.


----------



## mrmoby

I lost rack of time and missed that skit by 5 minutes. Guess I'll have to track it down on line. Tina Fey does a great job with the impersonation....but I don't know if I can deal with four years of that voice!*lol*


----------



## Fishfirst

First off... I would like to say that I am a conservative and I was not in the boat with McCain until demecrates picked obama. obama has no experience what so ever, period. And whoever disagrees with me, is welcome to tell me what he has done over his tiny tiny period of being a US senator. Name one bill he has written that has made it through congress. Even with the dems in control of the house and the senate, obama is so far left he hasn't done anything of significance except write about himself. obama not only is against the surge and the war (something we are winning and will have a huge ally in when its said and done with as well as incoming money from that government for what we did) but he can't even admit that he was wrong about the surge. This is the kind of elitist you want in the white house . obama on abortion pro choice right? well what if I told you he voted against protecting born babies of botched abortions. Yes living, breathing, human beings. These human beings have been left to die in linen closets, and that my friends is murder. He voted several times against a bill that would protect these babies, and very few demecrates did. He claimed that he "thought the bill was worded differently," well obama I'm glad that you can't read. The economy is another pile of crap that obama has put forth. He plans on giving you all a tax break right? Well with the current situation he said "some of our plans need to be cut" which will it be? His spending on health care? or your taxes? Given his record of raising taxes 96 times in the last 3 years, I would say tax break is probably out the window. Also this "trickle up" economy as he calls it, has no way of benefiting the american people. His taxes on corporations WILL make them go out of the country, his taxes on small businesses WILL make prices higher, his taxes on the wealthy WILL increase unemployment. And on top of that 95% of americans WILL NOT get their tax break. These are truths that is the basics of the economy. And I would like to also point out that obama has been the #2 beneficiary in three years of Freddy Mac and Fanny May. 2nd to senator dodds. 

Under the McCain plan, everyone is still getting a tax break (just not as big as obamas proposal) and he is going to cut government spending (just look at Sarah Palins record on cutting government spending in Alaska). He is going to end the war in a responsible mannor because he's actually had military expereince. He's got a lot of experience in washington and knows how to get things done. Yes McCain isn't squeeky clean, but he doesn't have connections and close ties with KNOWN AND CONVICTED TERRORISTS, CRIMINALS, and KNOWN EXTERMISTS AGAINST AMERICA.


----------



## BV77

HOW TRUE!!!! 


You couldn't get a job at McDonalds and become district manager after 143 
days of experience. 

You couldn't become chief of surgery after 143 days of experience of being a surgeon. 

You couldn't get a job as a teacher and be the superintendent after 143 
days of experience. 

You couldn't join the military and become a colonel after a 143 days of 
experience. 

You couldn't get a job as a reporter and become the nightly news anchor 
after 143 days of experience. 


BUT.... 


From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he 
logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That's how many days the 
Senate was actually in session and working. After 143 days of work 
experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader 
of the Free World .... 143 days. 

We all have to start somewhere. The senate is a good start, but after 143 
days, that's all it is - a start. 

AND, strangely, a large sector of the American public is okay with this 
and campaigning for him. We wouldn't accept this in our own line of work, yet 
some are okay with this for the President of the United States of America? 

Come on folks, we are not voting for the next American Idol!


----------



## Guest

this is true, its not american idol...but its very much the same. Our elections have become so based on popularity, and party...that the real issues dont matter. We pick and pick at the small stupid stuff that shouldnt matter..and literally destroy the lives of the candidates... i know i wouldnt want to go through that, and im willing to bet its one major factor that is keeping people who really should be running for office from running. 

Its just funny to me how divided people become over a party, to the point where people use that as in insult. oh...well he is democrat...... rofl. the whole thing is sad, and with how the system is now, we wont have a great president...period. Instead we will have contestants who are willing to go through all the BS...and for what? more BS.

Im not in agreement that we should always support our president no matter what, but its pretty sad that when our pres chokes a on pretzel...its on every channel and in every paper. Whats next? "Pres insert name here passed gas earlier today".. i mean...seriously.

Now, in all honesty i havent paid as much attention to this election..simply cause the whole thing makes me sick . But from what i have seen, its no different. None of the candidate are perfect by any means... some of them talk themselves into a hole...which they then try and dig themselves out of next interview, others promise the world and explain how the other party is to blame.... etc. its the same crap....new election year.


----------



## fish_doc

I dont trust anyone in Illinois politics. 
George Ryan last governor is in prison and the current governor is currently undergoing many court cases due to the way he is running the state government. Illinois politicians is nothing but a bunch of thugs and mofia backed "leaders"

If you want your vote to count watch the following video.
http://www.tsgnet.com/pres.php?id=46832&altf=Ebwf1Bmfyboefs&altl=blb:1gjti_epd

I know who Ill be voting for

Dave Alexander
AKA FISH_DOC


----------



## gil_ong

you know what sucks?

you cannot fully believe ANYTHING you see, hear, read. how do you get reliable, accurate information? when someone claims someone else did or said something..... do you know the context?


----------



## Fishfirst

Obama has a ton of shady affiliations.


----------



## gil_ong

Fishfirst said:


> Obama has a ton of shady affiliations.


see what i mean??

source?


----------



## gil_ong

still nothing? were you referring to palin allegations that obama hung out with bill ayers? nothing seems out of the ordinary to me there. where're the rest of this "a ton?"

but while we're at it..... can anyone show "shady dealings" on mccain's part?


----------



## Fishfirst

well lemmie think here, Fox news reported on his affiliations a while ago. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL_BkIG9RNI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBfdPLWuHb8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hch7YPZKWno&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-syNFDDzwbc&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQSduV-KynA&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmEmRbRJFLU&feature=related


Also he is the second biggest congressman and senator to get money from fanny mae the last three years
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html


----------



## Fishfirst

I'm sorry I'm not online 24hrs a day for stuff you can look up yourself btw. But that would be exactly what obama wants. For at least 50% of americans to not be informed, and to overlook everything he has done in the past 20 years (or what he hasn't done).


----------



## gil_ong

ah right. FAUX News. everything you need to know.

please spare me. FOX news and CNN can hardly be considered as unbiased reporting.


----------



## Fishfirst

You wanted sources... I gave them to you... Fox is one of americas least biased networks... Yes it is a conservative show that is reporting it, however, there are tons of facts in these clips that would be too easy to exploit if they weren't true. It seems you didn't even bother to watch them. CNN and CNBC can hardly be termed "news" much less biased news.


----------



## gil_ong

Fishfirst said:


> You wanted sources... I gave them to you... Fox is one of americas least biased networks...


you lost me right there.


----------



## Fishfirst

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/ri...ama-bill-ayers-stanley-kurtz-makes-connection
Like I said, CNN and CNBC are in the tank with obama, and so it seems so are you. I'm sorry to disappoint but Obama IS associated and friends with many many criminals terrorists, and extermists. I doubt you can put any evidence to the contrary!


----------



## gil_ong

Fishfirst said:


> http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/ri...ama-bill-ayers-stanley-kurtz-makes-connection
> Like I said, CNN and CNBC are in the tank with obama, and so it seems so are you. I'm sorry to disappoint but Obama IS associated and friends with many many criminals terrorists, and extermists. I doubt you can put any evidence to the contrary!


sorry mate. i cannot take that article completely seriously. www.newsbusters.org is obviously a conservative website. again, you're quoting a biased source. i read the article and skimmed a few others, some interesting points that i will have to mull over and do more research on, but i simply cannot accept it as the complete truth when the stories are all so one-sided.

and i agree with you about CNN and CNBC. lots of fluff that cannot even be considered news.

and for what's it worth, i really could no care less about this election because i cannot vote. i'm doing this as an academic exercise for my own education.


----------



## Fishfirst

like I said though, no evidence to the contrary, and what network would you consider to be unbiased? I really can't think of one, and most leaning to the left. Also I would like any obama supporter to name one legitiamate thing he has done in congress, or how he has more experience on forgien policy, the economy, or for that matter anything. I have asked this to dozens of obama supporters and I still have not heard anything but "he is for change" I ask, what change? you mean his record for saying one thing and then doing another? Look at taxes, 96 times he's voted for a tax increase, and yet he now wants a tax decrease. Basically he is "buying" the middle classes votes and I'm not confident that he'll do 1/1000th of what he says he'll do because his record shows otherwise.


----------



## k-dawg-

Fishfirst said:


> I gave them to you... Fox is one of americas least biased networks...


I've been avoiding this thread until this :chair: lol I'm sorry but you can't honestly believe that. I'll admit it there are some very leftist news networks, but to say fox is not biased is laughable.


----------



## fish_doc

Somthing to think about. 

I'd like to say something to you Democrats and independents who have not yet made up your minds (and I know that you are out there) especially those of you who are leaning toward Obama. I want to ask you a question. I want you to ask yourselves a simple question. Apart from wanting a new party in place -- apart from wanting a fresh face in the White House, apart from wanting somebody you think speaks well -- you need to take deep, deep, deep look inside yourselves and ask this: "What exactly has Obama ever done in his life? What has he done as a state senator, what has he done as a United States senator, that proves leadership? Why is it that Joe Biden has been rejected time and again in the Democrat primaries, receiving less than 1% in the Iowa caucuses? What suddenly makes either of these men leaders? What suddenly makes them qualified? Simply because Obama got the nomination and he chose Biden?" When you examine Obama's career, you basically see two things, and only two things. You see a man (a man-child) who has spent his life both as a college and law student and as an adult, working hand-in-hand with domestic terrorists. 

Now, I know you know this, and I know you want to sweep it under the rug because I know you just don't want to believe it, even though you know it. But do you not think that this is truly extraordinary? William Ayers and others from the Weather Underground are responsible for being a part of a terrorist wave in this country that murdered police officers. To downplay this or dismiss it as "guilt by association" is to be shortsighted and make a mistake. I don't believe most Democrats or independents find this kind of thing acceptable behavior. What kind of man sits in the pews of a church where his preacher spews hate about his own country -- hate for Jews, hate for whites, hate for blacks who don't agree with him -- and then says he had no idea his preacher was saying any of these things? Again, I ask you to look deep inside yourselves, ask yourselves if you see such a man representing your country as president of the United States

You see, folks, the Obama campaign has done a wonderful job (they really have) of silencing and intimidating anybody who dares to speak these things. His radicalness, the associations he has with fellow radicals. Again, what kind of man sits in the pews of a church where the preacher spews hate about his own country, hate for the Jews, hate for whites, hate for blacks who don't agree with him -- and then says he has no idea what his preacher is saying? Any of these things. You have gotta look deep inside yourselves, especially if you're a Democrat or independent, ask yourselves if you really see such a man representing your country as president. They've done a great job of silencing anybody and intimidating people who dare to speak these things. 

They have directed the media to attack those of us who have raised these hugely important facts. They call us McCarthyites. But you know this is nonsense, you moderate Democrats, independents. We choose our friends. We choose our associates. We choose our churches. We choose our pastors. This is a matter of Obama's free will and voluntary association. Obama's campaign and the media have done a terrific job of trying to take a radical and persuade you that he is a mainstream, centrist Democrat. He is no such thing. He's part of the old guard, the socialist left, the appeasement left. There's nothing new, there's nothing fresh about anything to do with Obama. Radicalism comes dressed in many ways. This time it's dressed up as Barack Obama, and he's doing his best to hide who he really is from you as all extreme leftist radicals do. 

Obama does not represent moderate or conservative Democrats. He makes fun of them! He laughs at them. He condescends to you. You moderate and conservative Democrats, he was talking about you when he talked about the bitter clingers at the San Francisco fundraiser. He does not represent Reagan Democrats. I would dare say he doesn't actually even represent FDR-type liberals. He goes it Europe and he dumps on his own country. He gives speech after speech tearing down all that has been built in this nation by our parents and our grandparents. He constantly criticizes the things that have made this country great. He arrogantly insists that despite his lack of success anywhere in the private sector or even as a state senator or US senator, that he possesses all the wisdom necessary to manage the entire economy, to determine how much each of us should make, how much each of us should give up to people who he decides deserve more. 

There's nothing new about this, there's nothing hopeful about it, and it is not change that we want or need. It is change, though. Obama wants to change the American system for another system, a system that is foreign to you and me but which has been talked about and written about for 150 years. It's promoted in colleges and universities among far-left professors. It has been pounded into Obama's head by the likes of Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright his entire adult life. If somebody tells you, for example, they want the federal government to take over the health care system lock, stock, and barrel, what do you call that? If somebody tells you they want the federal government to run the human resources departments of every private entity in this country, deciding who should get paid what and what benefits they should receive, what do you call that? 








By that I mean one that requires you to get up every morning, go to work, make a profit for yourself or for your employer. He has been paid by foundations and the taxpayer most of his life to promote a socialist agenda that will destroy everything that you have worked for and your parents and their parents worked for. He's out to destroy it. Let me put it this way. How smart...? All of the people who think this guy is brilliant because of the way he speaks, could you snap out of that for a second? I understand the idea that you want to be proud of the president, you want people around the world to be proud, and you think a bumbling, stumbling, stuttering president embarrasses you. Get past that. You're looking at a bumbling, stumbling, embarrassing guy, if he gets anywhere near the Oval Office. 

How smart do you have to be to raise taxes and spend other people's money? That's what we're talking about here. How smart do you have to be? This is a man, Barack Obama, who has authored a bill (one of the few, by the way) that would require you, the hard-working people of this country, to pony up $85 billion per year to give to other countries to fight global poverty through the United Nations! In other words, he would take the New Deal and the Great Society and export them to the Third World where you will be responsible for paying for it. Does this sound like a moderate or a centrist Democrat to you? Does it sound like a centrist independent moderate anything to you? These debates are all well and good, folks, but the truth is we know all we need to know about Obama, do we not? 

I would ask those of you who have served in the military or are serving in the military, "Can you name anything -- anything -- Obama has done prior to running for president to show his support for you? Did he speak to veterans groups? Did he do interviews with veteran and military-related media? Did he visit military hospitals and shake hands with the wounded?" No. In Berlin, he specifically canceled such things. What's he done for you? What's he done for you? He hasn't done anything for you. What he has done is impugn you. What he has done is impugn your mission. What he has done is attempt to block your success on the battlefield and around the world. This man, Barack Obama, was invested -- along with Harry Reid and **************** Durbin -- in the defeat of the United States and the United States Military. 

He believes, along with his brother from Illinois, Senator Durbin, that American interrogators and soldiers are no different than Pol Pot's thugs, the people that ran the Soviet gulags, and Nazi commandants. Durbin said it while they were attempting to secure defeat in the Iraq war. Barack Obama believes the same things. He didn't start wearing the American flag lapel pin until a few months ago, and he didn't start putting his hand over his heart during the National Anthem until a few months ago. Did he support the surge in Iraq? No. Did he vote to fund the troops, to send them the armor and the bullets and reinforcement they needed while they were on the battlefield? No. He spoke out against it, all of it! Once again, Obama's frame of reference is the far left. 

He spent his years in Chicago working with radical, pro-Palestinian elements, although today he says he's pro-Israel. But again, where's the evidence for this? There is none. Our allies have much to fear in an Obama presidency. Our enemies have nothing to fear. Yet the Drive-By Media continually tell us that polls they take of citizens of the world, desperately want Barack Obama. Nobody who understands what's at stake -- nobody who has taken the time to delve into who Obama is -- wants him anywhere near the presidency of the United States, except our enemies. Let me be blunt about this. Not only is the appeasement left in Europe thrilled about the prospect of an Obama presidency, but so, too, are our enemies. Our enemies tremble at the thought of a McCain-Palin victory. Our enemies will celebrate an Obama-Biden win. Our enemies parrot Democrat Party talking points. 

Obama says that we wouldn't have the financial crisis if we had saved all this money by not going to Iraq. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the supreme leader, president of Iran, says the same thing. The Iranians will immediately send Obama an invitation to meet with them because they heard what he said about no preconditions, and Obama will go, as a citizen of the world, to show that his presence on the scene can make a big difference. Just as Neville Chamberlain went back in the 1930s to meet with Hitler, Obama will also declare some kind of diplomatic victory just as Chamberlain did in the thirties. And Iran will take it all to mean that they can act with impunity and Obama won't do a thing about it -- and they're right, he won't. What do you think the little democrat countries around Russia think about this election? What do you think they're hoping? Who do you think they hope will win? Obama's first words after Russia invaded Georgia, was to urge both sides to stand down! Let me tell you: Vladimir Putin is wetting his pants in excitement over the prospects of an Obama presidency. So, too, are the ChiComs. So, too, is Hugo Chavez. So, too, is Raul Castro. So, too, is Kim Jong Il.


----------



## fish_doc

Those were not my words but still somthing I found thought provoking.


----------



## emc7

The debate is on now. Obama is doing far better than I expected. McCain said Obama like 100 times.


----------



## gil_ong

hey fish_doc, where'd you find that article?


----------



## TheOldSalt

Wherever it came from, it needs to be cut, pasted, and emailed all over the country to everyone, everywhere, and immediately.


----------



## gil_ong

TheOldSalt said:


> Wherever it came from, it needs to be cut, pasted, and emailed all over the country to everyone, everywhere, and immediately.


that's exactly what this guy i work with does.

see the dude's profile here: http://www.fishforums.com/forum/188459-post54.html


----------



## fish_doc

I got it off of - 

http://www.gather.com/posts.action

Here is a article you need to check out gil it explains the media and their bias.
Specifically the Assiocated Press, and they are who give the news to most radio and newspapers in the country.

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977471449


----------



## gil_ong

thanks, fish_doc. looks like an interesting site with articles that i will have to read.


----------



## gil_ong

no matter who you support, this sucks.



> October 9, 2008
> States’ Actions to Block Voters Appear Illegal
> By IAN URBINA
> 
> Tens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law, according to a review of state records and Social Security data by The New York Times.
> 
> The actions do not seem to be coordinated by one party or the other, nor do they appear to be the result of election officials intentionally breaking rules, but are apparently the result of mistakes in the handling of the registrations and voter files as the states tried to comply with a 2002 federal law, intended to overhaul the way elections are run.
> 
> Still, because Democrats have been more aggressive at registering new voters this year, according to state election officials, any heightened screening of new applications may affect their party’s supporters disproportionately. The screening or trimming of voter registration lists in the six states — Colorado, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan, Nevada and North Carolina — could also result in problems at the polls on Election Day: people who have been removed from the rolls are likely to show up only to be challenged by political party officials or election workers, resulting in confusion, long lines and heated tempers.
> 
> Some states allow such voters to cast provisional ballots. But they are often not counted because they require added verification.
> 
> Although much attention this year has been focused on the millions of new voters being added to the rolls by the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama, there has been far less notice given to the number of voters being dropped from those same rolls.
> 
> States have been trying to follow the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and remove the names of voters who should no longer be listed; but for every voter added to the rolls in the past two months in some states, election officials have removed two, a review of the records shows.
> 
> The six swing states seem to be in violation of federal law in two ways. Michigan and Colorado are removing voters from the rolls within 90 days of a federal election, which is not allowed except when voters die, notify the authorities that they have moved out of state, or have been declared unfit to vote.
> 
> Indiana, Nevada, North Carolina and Ohio seem to be improperly using Social Security data to verify registration applications for new voters.
> 
> In addition to the six swing states, three more states appear to be violating federal law. Alabama and Georgia seem to be improperly using Social Security information to screen registration applications from new voters. And Louisiana appears to have removed thousands of voters after the federal deadline for taking such action.
> 
> Under federal law, election officials are supposed to use the Social Security database to check a registration application only as a last resort, if no record of the applicant is found on state databases, like those for driver’s licenses or identification cards.
> 
> The requirement exists because using the federal database is less reliable than the state lists, and is more likely to incorrectly flag applications as invalid. Many state officials seem to be using the Social Security lists first.
> 
> In the year ending Sept. 30, election officials in Nevada, for example, used the Social Security database more than 740,000 times to check voter files or registration applications and found more than 715,000 nonmatches, federal records show. Election officials in Georgia ran more than 1.9 million checks on voter files or voter registration applications and found more than 260,000 nonmatches.
> 
> Officials of the Social Security Administration, presented with those numbers, said they were far too high to be cases where names were not in state databases. They said the data seem to represent a violation of federal law and the contract the states signed with the agency to use the database.
> 
> Last week, after the inquiry by The Times, Michael J. Astrue, the commissioner of the Social Security Administration, alerted the Justice Department to the problem and sent letters to election officials in Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Nevada, North Carolina and Ohio. The letters ask the officials to ensure that they are complying with federal law.
> 
> “It is absolutely essential that people entitled to register to vote are allowed to do so,” Mr. Astrue said in a press release.
> 
> In three states — Colorado, Louisiana and Michigan — the number of people purged from the election rolls since Aug. 1 far exceeds the number who may have died or relocated during that period.
> 
> States may be improperly removing voters who have moved within the state, election experts said, or who are considered inactive because they have failed to vote in two consecutive federal elections. For example, major voter registration drives have been held this year in Colorado, which has also had a significant population increase since the last presidential election, but the state has recorded a net loss of nearly 100,000 voters from its rolls since 2004.
> 
> Asked about the appearance of voter law violations, Rosemary E. Rodriguez, the chairwoman of the federal Election Assistance Commission, which oversees elections, said they could present “extremely serious problems.”
> 
> “The law is pretty clear about how states can use Social Security information to screen registrations and when states can purge their rolls,” Ms. Rodriguez said.
> 
> Nevada officials said the large number of Social Security checks had resulted from county clerks entering Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers in the wrong fields before records were sent to the state. They could not estimate how many records might have been affected by the problem, but they said it was corrected several weeks ago.
> 
> Other states described similar problems in entering data.
> 
> Under the Help America Vote Act, all states were required to build statewide electronic voter registration lists to standardize and centralize voter records that had been kept on the local level. To prevent ineligible voters from casting a ballot, states were also required to clear the electronic lists of duplicates, people who had died or moved out of state, or who had become ineligible for other reasons.
> 
> Voting rights groups and federal election officials have raised concerns that the methods used to add or remove names vary by state and are conducted with little oversight or transparency. Many states are purging their lists for the first time and appear to be unfamiliar with the 2002 federal law.
> 
> “Just as voting machines were the major issue that came out of the 2000 presidential election and provisional ballots were the big issue from 2004, voter registration and these statewide lists will be the top concern this year,” said Daniel P. Tokaji, a law professor at Ohio State University.
> 
> Voting rights groups have urged voters to check their registrations with local officials.
> 
> In Michigan, some 33,000 voters were removed from the rolls in August, a figure that is far higher than the number of deaths in the state during the same period — about 7,100 — or the number of people who moved out of the state — about 4,400, according to data from the Postal Service.
> 
> In Colorado, some 37,000 people were removed from the rolls in the three weeks after July 21. During that time, about 5,100 people moved out of the state and about 2,400 died, according to postal data and death records.
> 
> In Louisiana, at least 18,000 people were dropped from the rolls in the five weeks after July 23. Over the same period, at least 1,600 people moved out of state and at least 3,300 died.
> 
> The secretaries of state in Michigan and Colorado did not respond to requests for comment. A spokesman for the Louisiana secretary of state said that about half of the numbers of the voters removed from the rolls were people who moved within the state or who died. The remaining 11,000 or so people seem to have been removed by local officials for other reasons that were not clear, the spokesman said.
> 
> The purge estimates were calculated using data from state election officials, who produce a snapshot every month or so of the voter rolls with details about each registered voter on record, making it possible to determine how many have been removed.
> 
> The Times’s methodology for calculating the purge estimates was reviewed by two voting experts, Kimball Brace, the director of Election Data Services, a Washington consulting firm that tracks voting trends, and R. Michael Alvarez, a political science professor at the California Institute of Technology.
> 
> By using the Social Security database so extensively, states are flagging extra registrations and creating extra work for local officials who are already struggling to process all the registration applications by Election Day.
> 
> “I simply don’t have the staff to keep up,” said Ann McFall, the supervisor of elections in Volusia County, Fla.
> 
> It takes 10 minutes to process a normal registration and up to a week to deal with a flagged one, said Ms. McFall, a Republican, adding that she was receiving 100 or so flagged registrations a week.
> 
> Usually, when state election officials check a registration and find that it does not match a database entry, they alert local election officials to contact the voter and request further proof of identification. If that is not possible, most states flag the voter file and require identification from the voter at the polling place.
> 
> In Florida, Iowa, Louisiana and South Dakota, the problem is more serious because voters are not added to the rolls until the states remove the flags.
> 
> Ms. McFall said she was angry to learn from the state recently that it was her responsibility to contact each flagged voter to clear up the discrepancies before Election Day. “This situation with voter registrations is going to land us in court,” she said.
> 
> In fact, it already has.
> 
> In Michigan and Florida, rights groups are suing state officials, accusing them of being too aggressive in purging voter rolls and of preventing people from registering.
> 
> In Georgia, the Justice Department is considering legal action against the state because officials in Cobb and Cherokee Counties sent letters to hundreds of voters stating that their voter registrations had been flagged and telling them they cannot vote until they clear up the discrepancy.
> 
> On Monday, the Ohio Republican Party filed a motion in federal court against the secretary of state to get the list of all names that have been flagged by the Social Security database since Jan. 1. The motion seeks to require that any voter who does not clear up a discrepancy be required to vote using a provisional ballot.
> 
> Republicans said in the motion that it is central to American democracy that nonqualified voters be forbidden from voting.
> 
> The Ohio secretary of state, Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, said in court papers that she believes the Republicans are seeking grounds to challenge voters and get them removed from the rolls.
> 
> Considering that in the past year the state received nearly 290,000 nonmatches, such a plan could have significant impact at the polls.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/us/politics/09voting.html


----------



## TheOldSalt

On the other hand, the DEMs have been signing up voters and somehow getting them to vote right now instead of on election day. I'm a little fuzzy on this one, but what I gather is that scores of people are heavily canvassing black neighborhoods in Ohio and registering the folks to vote, and then letting them vote ( vote democrat, that is ) right on the spot. I don't know why anyone thinks that's okay, but if the DEMS win Ohio, then I'd say the Repubs have a very good case for making all of Ohio's votes not count. This process very effectively steals votes in that it takes away a whole month of campaigning, a month that would have swayed some voters to vote differently than they did at registration. The same argument can be used if the Dems lose, too, so this just can't be a good thing for anyone.
No, this is just wrong. I don't know what they're trying to pull, but it has to be stopped.

Hmm.. for all I know, these two things are linked, with one in response to the other. If so, then good; they should be.


----------



## gil_ong

is there anything about not allowing them to vote independent or republican?


----------



## emc7

Early voting is going on here now. I like it because it means shorter lines on election day. 

Did you here about the 5000 bad voter registration apps in Indiana? I think what happened was someone was paying temp help by the app, so they got people like "Mr. Jimmy John" registered at his sandwich shop. When confronted with the fraud, the group responsible said it was a conspiracy to disenfranchise poor people.

Georgia is one of the states that got bashed for purging voters but I think it is mostly an artifact of motor voter law that was passed a few years ago. People go renew their license and they get asked "do you want to register to vote?" and say yes even if they are already registered. Then the voter rolls end up with 2 names for same voter and needs to purge 1. The computers don't catch them all. A lot of women are on the rolls by first name, maiden name, married name and they have driver's license as first name, middle name, last name. They end up on the rolls both ways. The statewide databases are a big improvement over county lists and eliminate the duplicates where people have moved. But it is still possible to be on multiple state's voter's rolls. Its 6 years before inactive voters are purged.

The Palm beach county in FL where they are having so many problems counting votes is supposed to be full of snowbirds who also cast absentee ballots in their summer home states in the North.

Its really sad that in the day and of technology where we can track a box of aspirin from China to an old lady's trash can, we can't keep track of the old lady. Another census is coming and they will again "statistically adjust" for uncounted people, this makes no sense. It changes the incentive from counting every head to not counting groups of people you think you can estimate larger.


----------



## emc7

The newest mess in Palm Beach County is a result of good intentions gone wrong. A new state law requiring a "paper trail" on votes forced county officials to toss their new touch-screen voting machine and go back to the drawing board. They bought the low bid "optical scan" machines. Any of you who has ever dealt with "scantron" in schools knows how unreliable those things can be, esp, if you don't follow directions about "bubbling". Now they can count all day and not get the same results twice. Pray the election isn't a close one or this thing could be in court until February.


----------



## emc7

How often should the rolls be purged? Should you get to vote every 20 years without doing any more paperwork?


----------



## gil_ong

emc7 said:


> The newest mess in Palm Beach County is a result of good intentions gone wrong. A new state law requiring a "paper trail" on votes forced county officials to toss their new touch-screen voting machine and go back to the drawing board. They bought the low bid "optical scan" machines. Any of you who has ever dealt with "scantron" in schools knows how unreliable those things can be, esp, if you don't follow directions about "bubbling". Now they can count all day and not get the same results twice. Pray the election isn't a close one or this thing could be in court until February.


but seriously, how difficult can it possibly be to color within the lines?  possibly a problem for some folks with medical problems with causes shaky hands, but i cannot see how it would be a daunting tasks for the vast majority of the population.

maybe it's because there are so many retirees in FL?


----------



## Georgia Peach

emc7 said:


> Early voting is going on here now. I like it because it means shorter lines on election day.
> 
> Did you here about the 5000 bad voter registration apps in Indiana? I think what happened was someone was paying temp help by the app, so they got people like "Mr. Jimmy John" registered at his sandwich shop. When confronted with the fraud, the group responsible said it was a conspiracy to disenfranchise poor people.
> 
> Georgia is one of the states that got bashed for purging voters but I think it is mostly an artifact of motor voter law that was passed a few years ago. People go renew their license and they get asked "do you want to register to vote?" and say yes even if they are already registered. Then the voter rolls end up with 2 names for same voter and needs to purge 1. The computers don't catch them all. A lot of women are on the rolls by first name, maiden name, married name and they have driver's license as first name, middle name, last name. They end up on the rolls both ways. The statewide databases are a big improvement over county lists and eliminate the duplicates where people have moved. But it is still possible to be on multiple state's voter's rolls. Its 6 years before inactive voters are purged.
> 
> The Palm beach county in FL where they are having so many problems counting votes is supposed to be full of snowbirds who also cast absentee ballots in their summer home states in the North.
> 
> Its really sad that in the day and of technology where we can track a box of aspirin from China to an old lady's trash can, we can't keep track of the old lady. Another census is coming and they will again "statistically adjust" for uncounted people, this makes no sense. It changes the incentive from counting every head to not counting groups of people you think you can estimate larger.


 I love the early voting too! Im going next week:fish:


----------



## Fishfirst

Just so people know, the organization that has committed voter fraud has also been a contributer to obama's campaign as well as I believe obama worked closely with them when he was a "community organizer" ACORN must be stopped.


----------



## gil_ong

yeah. i just recently heard about ACORN. i'm surprised they weren't shut down from when they pulled a stunt like this in 2006.


----------



## Kyoberr

I too have heard about ACORN and read their story, or skimmed through it. If Obama is voted to be president I will be very depressed and hopeless.

John McCain obviously isn't the perfect candidate either, but he's tons better than Obama in my opinion.

For instance, when Obama said 'if [my daughters] make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby'. So are his kids punishments? That made me sad, I can't believe he could even think about saying something so wrong.


----------



## fish_doc

I tried to get my parents taken off registration here since they moved to another state 4 years ago. The voting office here wouldnt let me. They told me they had to have their signatures to prove they didnt live there. Then they mailed the forms to the house we bought from them so they could sign them. 

It was like HELLO, how can they sign these saying they no longer live here if they dont live where you mailed them? Even if they thought I would forward it to them to have them sign them and mail them back it wouldnt work. They gave me 5 days from the date they printed the forms. You figure 2 days to get them to me 2 to 3 days to get to my parents and 2 to 3 more for them to mail them back to the office. So 6 days would have been the minimium amount of time. 

You would think for honest elections they would have wanted the best and most accurate voter regrestration possible. They could have eailsy checked who owns the house and beleved that the owner knows who lives there.

By making it that hard to pull old voter registration makes it that much eaiser to create voter fraud in elections. 

For instance how would you get their signature for removal from the list if they were dead?


----------



## emc7

> their signature for removal from the list if they were dead?


 In Georgia, you have to get the signature of the next of kin, you can't take someone off because, say, his obituary was in the paper or social security considers him dead. They do eventually remove people who don't vote or do jury duty, but even that is being questioned as unfair to senior citizens who might want to vote once a decade. 

The flap here about motor-voter was the illegals. People were/are getting valid driver's licenses with fake documents and being registered to vote. I'm actually for letting illegals get driver's licenses if they can pass a test in English. I'd rather deal with non-citizen good drivers than drunken, hit-and-run, uninsured who can't read street signs. Let them get a license with a proven-US-citizen box left unchecked and lock up anyone who drives without a license. 

One weird thing about voting in GA is the photo ID requirement. Most people need to show photo ID issued by the US or a state (other than GA is ok, which is weird, you can vote in GA with a FL driver's license). But first time voters need only show a current utility bill or bank statement. Now you know an e-bank or gas company will open an account for you pet Oscar if it gives them money. This seems to be a compromise designed to make the fraudsters have to get new names for each election or perhaps to make them spring for the fake birth certificates to get their driver's licenses.


----------



## emc7

> but seriously, how difficult can it possibly be to color within the lines?


Apparently, people can't follow directions (I wonder what size font the instructions are in), and a judge ruled that even if the voter didn't follow instructions, if his preference was clear, the vote should count. I don't agree with this, I think a low-intelligence-voter filter is appropriate. So now they are looking at every ballot manually to see whether someone circled or x-ed or otherwise indicated a choice the machine couldn't read. Shades of hanging chads, eh? Of course, the purpose of mechanical vote counting is to speed it up and remove the humans who could influence the outcome. Suddenly, we go back 50 years (before punch cards, to manual vote counting).


----------



## emc7

> For instance, when Obama said 'if [my daughters] make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby'. So are his kids punishments? That made me sad, I can't believe he could even think about saying something so wrong


I actually go with Obama on this one. If Obama's daughter sleeps around, she can use a condom and a morning-after pill. If Palin's daughter, Bristol, has sex with her boyfriend, shes not allowed to learn what a condom is, she has to marry the boy, have a baby and go on TV as an example of family values. The missing little girl, Caylee? who everyone thinks her crazy, lying, addict, mother Cayse? killed, was born at the grandmother's insistence. Without parental consent, her minor mother could neither have an abortion nor give the child up for adoption. An unwanted child is not just a punishment for a parent, though, its a punishment for an innocent child.


----------



## COM

FYI, early votes and absentee ballots make up for a very small portion of the total vote. They get lumped into a classification called the "paper ballot." The election authority in the state will have the county (or Parish in backwards Louisiana) count the total number of 'paper' ballots received by election day and then forecast how many more are coming back within the published deadline. If the number is close to the difference in standard ballots, it will then and only then be activated. Otherwise it is moot.

Basically the Dems are playing a no-decision strategy by convincing people to submit absentee ballots early for Obama, in case there is a standoff in some of the contested stats. Most likely the Republicans are playing the same dirty politics.

You may have noticed tons of purportedly 'unbiased' ads encouraging people to vote. These are very strategically run on certain programs based on the demos for the show. And if you've never dealt with advertising, the demos available for TV are detailed to the nth degree.


----------



## emc7

The whole thing would be moot if everyone voted. Election strategy now is less about getting voters to choose your candidate and more about getting your candidate's voters to actually vote. If voter registration and turnout were close to 100%, then finding names and addresses of people to use for fraud would be far more difficult.

COM is right that in GA they only count the Provisional, & Absentee ballots if they could make a difference in the outcome. In Palm Beach County, though, all the ballots are paper. They take the same stack of ballots, run it through the same machine 3 times and get 3 different counts. If I were the county election supervisor there I would set the elections supplies warehouse on fire and flee the country.


----------



## COM

I seem to remember hearing voter turnout is like 62%? Anyone know the real number?


----------



## emc7

Normal elections in my precinct, which is consider fairly politically active, are down around 30%, special elections and runoffs more like 10%. This presidential election they are preparing for around 85% of registered voters, but I don't know what percentage of eligible voters actually register. I do know that the % of registered, eligible 18-21 year-olds is very low. The registration deadline in GA is already past. I predict Obama won't do as well on election day as polls indicate he will, because many who say they support him aren't registered.


----------



## COM

Some people don't register to avoid jury duty. (Doh- I have to go on Tuesday) Some people just don't care.

Since I have been eligible to vote (2001), the candidates have been so bad that I couldn't care less. I voted for lack of anything else to do.


----------



## Asully70

I think i mentioned this before but in my state they do jury duty both off of DMV records and who registers to vote. The deadline to register in washington state is the 14th so you may still have time to register. oregon was the 4th and last I heard it was about 1/3 of people vote who are eligible


----------



## emc7

Looks like historically 65-75% of eligible voter register (nationwide, one internet source).


----------



## Pac-Man

You guys hear about the palin report?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/us_elections_2008/7662820.stm

This dosen't really bode well for mccain.

The people calling obama a terrorist and "the antichrist" are the same die-hard rightwingers that voted bush another term in '04. I don't see those claims as legitimate.


----------



## Fishfirst

"However, the report said that the actual sacking of Mr Monegan was not beyond Mrs Palin's legal powers."
So it was legal, but "illegal" hah. This is all about a state trooper that tazored Governor Palins Nefew (age: 9) Any legal authority that does that to a kid should be fired.


----------



## Pac-Man

It's about ethics and whether she had the right to actually do that. She probably did have the power to do that but that doesn't mean it can't be put in a bad light.




TheOldSalt said:


> but if the DEMS win Ohio, then I'd say the Repubs have a very good case for making *all of Ohio's votes not count*


This will crazy and will never happen. Even in the election of 1876 they did not disregard any states' votes, they merely recounted. That was the craziest election in our history.


----------



## emc7

> the actual sacking of Mr Monegan was not beyond Mrs Palin's legal powers


 This is what I don't get. Even before the report it was clear that Mr Monegan's position was appointed by the gov. and she could remove or replace him at will for no reason. So why investigate? I get that the native Alaskans felt disrespected when she canned the only one in the office, but that's another issue.


----------



## Fishfirst

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,433314,00.html
hahahahahah


----------



## COM

None of what Biden says is really wrong. He just didn't really make a point, as usual.

FYI, you're citing an opinion-piece on a right-wing news network's website. This is not a 'reliable source' for facts on the candidates, IMO.

By the way I think that Joe Biden is the worst kind of scum politician that there is. He is nearly single-handedly responsible for the terrible debt position that many Americans are facing right now due to his incessant lobbying for his home-town bank, MBIA. Biden was behind changes to bankruptcy laws that have resulted in the loss of a last-hope alternative for people.


----------



## Guest

I don't put much weight on "right" or "left wing" "news" programs like FOX and CNN have. They aren't reliable sources, as many here have said. But people can believe the sources they want to.


----------



## TheOldSalt

I honestly believe that a truly neutral, honest, unbiased news & commentary show or channel would never have a chance. The real truth hurts too much, and everyone would be out to stop it.


----------



## gil_ong

remmeber how i said there is so much disinformation out there?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/us_elections_2008/7665238.stm


----------



## Guest

Ahh, good old BBC. Interesting clip, thanks for posting, gil.


----------



## emc7

Obama gave another great debate. He came off as reasonable, intelligent and even "presidential". McCains attack ads come off as a smoke screen, smear campaign. So Obama associates with "terrorists" and idiots who pay for false voter restristations. Who cares. All the McCain ads should say is that if we get a democratic senate, house, and white house, your taxes will go up and the higher taxes will drive the economy into recession. Thats the only point he needs to make. All the other attacks read as politics as usual and that the last thing voter's want.


----------



## emc7

Obama is a Democrat from Chicago. Associating with low-life scum is a given, not news.


----------



## akangelfood

Post removed


----------



## gil_ong

emc7 said:


> So Obama associates with "terrorists" and idiots who pay for false voter restristations.


i think that this statement i might even be stretching the truth.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html

so if this is fair game, what about mccain's associations with singlaub?

yeah. this "guilt by association" deal that the mccain's campaign almost seems like an act of desperation.


----------



## Asully70

akangelfood said:


> I agree wholeheartedly that the current economic situation can be attributed not to Bush alone, but also to those who surround him and influence his choices. In my opinion, McCain is part of this group, and that scares me.


You realize the reason banks are failing is because clinton jacked up our economy so much that he allowed for low income folk to take out loans they couldnt afford. now 10-12 years later its coming back to bite us in the butt. He did a great job making our economy boom but what happens when all the lower income people have to pay back the money they borrowed from the clinton admin. the money is no longer there cause they shouldnt have taken out the loan in the first place. and everyone is trying to blame bush.


----------



## Pac-Man

Baby_Baby said:


> Uh, anyone with half a brain?


Anyone with half a brain can see that those accusations of Obama being "associated with terrorists" are just desperate attempts by McCain to shift the current trends in his favor.

To the above, if the disaster was 10-12 years coming as you say Bush should've had plenty of time to try to impose some regulations on these banks instead of letting them run rampant.


----------



## Fishfirst

Baby Baby is right... Anyone against terrorism in this country WOULD NOT and COULD NOT launch their political career in the home of Bill Ayers. I don't care if it was meerely a meet and greet and they didn't even TALK! This man should be in JAIL! I don't associate myself with people who HURT OTHER PEOPLE! AND I EXPECT THAT OUT OF MY PRESIDENT! 

This economic crisis is complex... so maby I have to explain this again for all you dems. Both parties are to blame for it... however some need more blame than others. Republicans are not in control of the house, nor the senate. IT WAS NOT DEREGULATION that put us in this mess... WHY would banks clearly put themselves into jepardy and take on loans for people who CAN'T PAY THEM BACK???????? Because banks were TERRORIZED by a little organization called ACORN! And the ACORN doesn't fall far from the DEMOCRATE TREE! It was people such as Sen. Frank, Sen. Dodds, Sen. Kerry, and Sen. Obama who gave power to this organization and to REGULATE the banks into giving poor loans! 

Just because McCain's Campaign has been negative does NOT mean it isn't JUSTIFIED! This is a man that served our country both politicaly and with his life!


----------



## gil_ong

i thought one of the ideals of the republican party was fiscal responsibility? mccain's tax policy proposal (tax cuts for everyone) don't seem to make much sense. how is the gov't going to fund the wars, reform education and medical, and the myriad of other programmes?

maybe i'm being overly generous, but isn't it more important to support the "little guys?" especially at a time like this? and from what i understand, the tax hikes for the "rich" under obama's plan isn't really a tax hike in the traditional sense, but rather the closure of loopholes so that that demographic pays what they're actually due.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html


----------



## emc7

Is that link for real? Tax cuts for all. Who gets hit? Business? Or do we keep running a trillion dollar deficit?


----------



## gil_ong

it's a wonderful little thing called magic.


----------



## Pac-Man

Fishfirst said:


> Baby Baby is right... Anyone against terrorism in this country WOULD NOT and COULD NOT launch their political career in the home of Bill Ayers. I don't care if it was meerely a meet and greet and they didn't even TALK! This man should be in JAIL! I don't associate myself with people who HURT OTHER PEOPLE! AND I EXPECT THAT OUT OF MY PRESIDENT!
> 
> This economic crisis is complex... so maby I have to explain this again for all you dems. Both parties are to blame for it... however some need more blame than others. Republicans are not in control of the house, nor the senate. IT WAS NOT DEREGULATION that put us in this mess...* WHY would banks clearly put themselves into jepardy and take on loans for people who CAN'T PAY THEM BACK????????* Because banks were TERRORIZED by a little organization called ACORN! And the ACORN doesn't fall far from the DEMOCRATE TREE! It was people such as Sen. Frank, Sen. Dodds, Sen. Kerry, and Sen. Obama who gave power to this organization and to REGULATE the banks into giving poor loans!
> 
> Just because McCain's Campaign has been negative does NOT mean it isn't JUSTIFIED! This is a man that served our country both politicaly and with his life!


I normally do not do all caps but...ARE YOU REALLY TRYING TO TELL ME THAT ACORN GOT US INTO THIS MESS? REALLY??!?! NO, SERIOUSLY?! Why would banks give out more loans...?? Oh, I don't know, MAYBE BECAUSE THEY GET MORE MONEY? People are greedy, the banks were greedy, they were making tons of money, and it only recently came back to haunt them. The banks were allowed to run wild, THATS what caused this mess. Not stupid ACORN and a few democratic senators. That sounds like something straight out of Fox News.

Oh and "banks were terrorized", sure. Your making these billion dollar corporations sound like victims.


----------



## emc7

The banks took loans from people who couldn't pay them back because they weren't getting paid back by the borrowers. They got their money back when the loans were "packaged" and sold as investment securities. The banks went from caring about a person's earning potential for the next 30 years to caring about a person's earning potential for the next 30 days. The banks got stuck with a bunch of bad mortgages when the cat (the fact that borrowers couldn't pay) got out of the bag before they could sell them all. IMO the worst offenders in this mess were the rating agencies. They just assumed all mortgage-backed securities were equal. They rated securities that should have been rated like a low-quality junk bond the same as a money market account. IMO the rating agencies were the people with the responsibility to identify the risk and they failed. IMO a lot of the current chaos in economy is because everyone suddenly realizes that the ratings are useless. If the ratings are useless, you don't know the risk in your portfolio. If you don't know the risk, you don't really know the value of what you own or how much money you have. So you hoard all the cash you have, which causes a credit crunch. 

I don't doubt ACORN and others were encouraging banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods, even strong-arming them with stuff like the 'fair-lending" act. But low-income lending really took off once banks started finding a market for mortgage-based securities. Once the market was established, lending in low-income neighborhoods took off because that's where the growth was. Everyone in the higher-income areas already had first and second mortgages. Only the areas that banks had red-lined (no mortgages or exorbitant rates only) in the past had room for a lot of new loans.


----------



## emc7

Obama associates with Ayers, McCain associates with Karl Rove. Its called ambition. If we really want someone who hasn't ever rubbed elbows with nasty people just to further their career, we need to pick a president like we do jury duty, randomly from the voter's list. 

I'll admit it shows short-sightedness on Obama's part. If he had planned on running for President back then he's have vetted his associates better.

That Obama has a past with ACORN bothers me less than the fact that his campaign is funding ACORN. It makes sense to try to register potential voters who would probably vote for you. But when you start paying "per voter" you create a financial motive for fraud.


----------



## Fishfirst

First off: I would like to comment on the Bill Ayers issue. I don't know about any of you, but I would not be associating myself with a known terrorist no matter how old I was when they committed CRIMES and HURT PEOPLE. I would not launch my political nor any career in their home no matter how involved they were, nor put myself on committees or boards with them. AND I EXPECT THE SAME OUT OF MY PRESIDENT! 
The McCain adds are legitamately negative, Obama has NOT explained his relationship in great detail, and has lied about it in the past. A negative campaign against character is JUSTIFIED in this case because it isn't just one person or group. Its several. A repeating pattern that keeps coming up no matter how much the Obama camp lies and distances itself from these people.

Secondly Taxes: Obama says he's going to cut taxes on 95% of americans (when his record clearly shows a history of NOT supporting tax cuts) doesn't sound like a bad deal right??? Well lets look at it from a very REAL perspective. First off 100 economists say his plan is going to drive us into a deeper recession. Secondly lets take that figure of 95% of Americans getting tax cuts. Now we've got to consider the 40% who DON'T pay taxes in the end, so that cuts us down to 55% of Americans getting tax breaks... now take into account the MASSIVE taxes on small businesses and corporations that give these 55% of Americans jobs. Businesses cut their expenses (unnecessary employees) to account for the tax hike. Say 10% lose their jobs (a underestimated figure I believe), that brings 10% of people that were in that 55% class down to that 40% class who DON'T pay taxes because they don't make anything. That equals 45% of Americans who are getting an actual tax break. Now subtract another 10% because of corporations leaving America for countries like Ireland with a lower corporate tax rate. Now 35% of Americans get a tax break. Now subtract the jobs that are created by the banking industry that are affected by the corporations moving their money to offshore accounts (another 5%) and you get 30% of Americans getting a tax break. Finally Obama has to dip into his pool of wealth to "spread it" evenly because his corporate gains tax plan failed (no corporate gains to tax!) and increase taxes to the top 15% of wealthy Americans. Meaning 15% of Americans will actually get a tax break. AND THEN THIS CYCLE REPEATES ITSELF!
But don't worry... socialist programs will keep you and I above the poverty level. And don't worry about health care... we'll get to wait in line for days for treatment (just like canada) but at least it'll be a little more affordable. (of coarse a tax credit would have solved the problem of affordability in the first place) But things like appliances, electronics, cars, boats, building materials, fish supplies, grocieres, gas... those prices will go through the roof because CORPORATIONS DON'T REALLY PAY TAXES.

Sigh...


Under McCain, you get smaller government, less spending, and a nice tax break for all of us. Yeah its not proposed as being a tax break for all... but in the end thats what we get.

Lastly: Foreign Policy

Did you Know: Ackmedenighad has said he WILL NOT negotiate with the President of the US without HIS preconditions. HAH! This is exactly what you get when you start saying that you are willing to talk to them without preconditions. Obama supports this, and also the bombing of Pakastan, our Ally, without their permission... this would hurt our friendship with the Pakastanese... and ultimately betray their trust. I can't believe someone would be so naive. I mean... I want to get to Bin Laden too... but I don't want to start a war with our Ally in the middle east. 
Obama STILL has to admit that he was WRONG about the surge... even though he claims it has worked beyond his wildest dreams. Gen. Patrious has said that giving a time table is a white flag of surrender... why would you go against a General who has virtually single handedly won the war in Iraq? But I guess Obama, who has no military, forgien policy, or diplomatic experience what so ever KNOWS MORE than our commanding General. This is LUDICRIS! 

Personally I see no reason to vote for obama/biden except on the very concept that you want a Black person for president. Personally I would want someone with more experience, who doesn't lie every 2 minutes, and far less arogant.


----------



## emc7

Well I stand corrected. The anti-Obama ads are working on a few of you and not backfiring like I expected. I really though McCain spouting Karl Rove's words made him sound like Bush which is not the way to get him elected. But were any of you who care about Ayers undecided before this? 

I kind of assume that the early Obama was a product of the Chicago political machine and that he was told where to go and who to meet and greet to raise money. If he loses the election over Ayers, I won't blame a personal failing, but a failure of the Democratic party to "clean house". For someone who is about "change" and claims to be an outsider, Obama has spent a lot of time inside the machine. 

Its the Republicans that claim to be Christian, but the Democrats that are forgiving. They have adulterers, drug addicts, and drunk drivers that keep getting elected. I don't doubt there are plenty of other associates of Obama that won't look good on his resume, and I bet he needed them to get to this place in his career. 

Its not that the Republicans don't have scum, but they seem better at keeping them out of sight.


----------



## emc7

I like McCain, I don't like Republicans. They have proven to be too much in the pocket of business lobbyists and the Religious Right's agenda of legislating morality is both intrusive and a waste of resources. I don't like Democrats either. Redistribution of wealth only causes those with wealth to hide it or take it where it won't be taxed. Entitlements are how we got 1 trillion dollars in debt. The Democrats in the legislation got $ from the same lobbyists and passed the same deregulation the Republicans did. I like Sarah Palin, shes funny, sweet, and hard-working, but she spouts Religious Right slogans, so I don't want her in the White house. Biden lost me years ago when he kept talking about himself in the third person. Obama is really impressive to watch. He's like a first-tier debate club leader. He has an answer for everything and it sound reasonable when he says it.


----------



## mrmoby

I love hearing talk about Obama and his associations. What about McCain and his association with the Keating five. Maybe someone who was associated with the largest soaking of the american taxpayer kind at the time, 1.5-2 billion, shouldn't be overseeing banking, it's regulation, or lack thereof.

And saying a group like ACORN, and not deruglation of the banking industry is cause for the mess we have now is absurd. Greed and a lack of regulation caused the S&L failures, as well the current mortgage market fiasco. ACORN, if anything, lobbied against predatory lending practices.


----------



## Fishfirst

ACORN forced banks to give loans to people who couldn't afford them, they have committed voter fraud, and pick up homeless people telling them to vote for obama. That isn't what ACORN is supposed to do... but I guess we can overlook that and say yeah its been deregulation, and it doesn't matter because republicans are suppressing voters (I have never been supressed, but mickey mouse has a vote in florida hmmmm) 

Paying taxes isn't patriotic when your money is going to slush funds and pork barrel spending

"Spreading the wealth" isn't democracy, its socialism, and I'm poor, but I can't vote for obama because his economic plan is going to destroy us.


----------



## mrmoby

Tell me exactly how ACORN forced banks to make these loans.

Republicans are just as bad as Democrats when it comes to misspending and pork barrell projects. How about no bid Haliburton contraxcts in Iraq? How is that the proper spending of taxpayer money?

Spreading the wealth may be socialist, but trickle down economics is elitist B.S. . I'm not paying any less in taxes over the last 8 years, or even over the last 10 with Republicans having control in congress. But I am sure GM, American Airlines, and Paris Hilton did.

However, my 401k certainly did it's best ever during the Clinton administration.

And by the way, I am still wondering how a man in the center of the Savings and Loan melldown is fit to be overseeing the budget and banking.


----------



## emc7

> Obama Sides with Florida in 'Water War'


Here another point against Obama. The lake I drink from is going dry because we send the water down stream for FA to cool its nuclear power plants with. If florida wins, GA is going to have to invade Tenessee to connect to the TN river.


----------



## COM

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Atlanta drying up b/c we send the water downriver to protect some sort of clam harvesting or something?

Not to be unsympathetic to the drought situation and the problems it is causing, Greater Atlanta really boomed over the last 20 or so years (take a gorgeous city and put it in a nice climate, build up the airport, go figure...). Didn't the municipal planners think to do a little somethin' somethin' about the drinking water supply? New York City has one of most extensive reservoir systems in the world. It was designed and built starting in the mid 1800s yet continually expanded mostly along the same plans. It uses no pumps at all and due to its incredibly-well protected reservoirs, requires absolutely minimal treatment.

My point? The Democrats and Republicans have really failed us as a nation. They're all a bunch of crooks. All the money goes to pork, none goes into improving the nation's infrastructure. That's going to be a problem for my generation and if we prove as inept as our parents, we'll have no usable highway system, water will only come in bottles, and we'll be sitting in the dark because we haven't invested a dime in alternative energy and the oil ran out. Oops.

As for the Bill Ayers issue, oh come on. He wasn't even good at being a terrorist. Plus this is taken completely out of context. And, people change. Ayer's behavior isn't really laudable, but it was a horrible period in American history. In 1969 an armed radical group took over the student union building at Cornell University. The leader of the group is now a top executive at Citibank and on Cornell's board. People change dramatically.


----------



## emc7

Florida uses the endangered species to sue the Army Corp for more water. But they only care because when the water level gets low they have to turn off their cheap electricity and burn natural gas. Yes, Atlanta is a stupid boomtown with no long-term planning. Its a major transportation center (3 expressways, airport) without a port or major waterway. The Chattahoochee is really small and shallow. Most major cities grew up where rivers met lakes or oceans or other rivers. Lake Lanier has a tiny drainage basin and every major storm for 3 years has missed it entirely. To build a city without knowing where the water would come from was pretty stupid. But no single government controls the area, if one place said no to growth, the developers just moved out a bit. Now we have traffic and smog to rival L.A.


----------



## COM

Yeah I've seen the ATL traffic. Took me about an hour to get across some strip in Alpharetta last time I was there.


----------



## Ringo

I've only read a few threads... Noticed a few saying that Obama is running on people to vote for him that are uniformed about the elections... Here are a few of them in this clip a friend of mine sent me from the Hoawrd Stern show on 10/14. I don't care for Howard Stern, but I like what he did with this....

http://www.bpmdeejays.com/upload/hs_sal_in_Harlem_100108.mp3




"""As for the Bill Ayers issue, oh come on. He wasn't even good at being a terrorist. Plus this is taken completely out of context. And, people change. Ayer's behavior isn't really laudable, but it was a horrible period in American history. In 1969 an armed radical group took over the student union building at Cornell University. The leader of the group is now a top executive at Citibank and on Cornell's board. People change dramatically. """ Quoted from COM

COM, I don't know about you... But that William Ayer, whether or not he was any "good" at bombing, carried out with the organization "Weather Underground" that, this organzitions' targets was that of bombing America. Sen. Obamas capaign was launched at Ayer's house. It makes no differance if people can "change" (like that of Obama's constant promise) that dude comitted treason and he should have been hung when they got him. Unpatriotic by all means, and Obama launches his campaign with him...


----------



## fish_doc

If you reasearch into the "weather underground" what you find will astonish you. In 1970 the group issued a "Declaration of a State of War" against the United States government. They were also a break off group from the "Students of the Democratic party" Considence??? 
Since then have they really broken up and no longer exist or As they say if you cant beat them join them. Did they break up in public but continue to run "underground" growing up running local governments now trying to take the presidency? 

Do you want to risk potentially handing the country over to a group that declared war on the US government less than 40 years ago. Just because "people change" He did start his campaign bid in the home of one of those men. Could it have been a celebration of some type?


----------



## TheOldSalt

Colin Powell actually endorsed Obama today. I just can't believe it.

I do have to say that I also side with Florida on the war. I'm in Alabama, and Atlanta has been cutting off OUR water as well.
Honestly, I think that maybe 2/3'rds of the people of Atlanta should be loaded onto buses and trains and forcibly relocated. That city was nice once, but now it's nothing but a problem, not only collapsing under it's own weight but annoying surrounding states.

( besides, when you cram that many people into one area, they tend to go insane and turn liberal, and then turn Democrat. This has to be stopped before all of georgia becomes a blue state just because of a huge glob of water-wasting wackos in one spot ) LOL!

On another hand, I learned today that Sarah is against protection of Polar bears and Belugas. Very disturbing.

I would like to mention, though, that I figured out something HUGE last night and dicovered one of the biggest conspiracies ever perpetrated upon the people of the U S of A. It's brilliant. It's genius. It's ever so marvellously, diabolically, inspirationally evil, and even if everyone everywhere had the complete details revealed to them today, almost nobody would even dare to believe it. ( THAT's the hallmark of a really great conspiracy, you know ) I can't decide whether to spill the beans now and be hailed as a genius later, or just be silent and let them get away with it. All I'll say now is this:
Obama will win this election. We might as well get used to it; it's gonna happen.
It's _supposed_ to happen.
Everything _depends_ on it happening.
After that, the republicans will have a firm, solid, completely controlling and nearly unstoppable reign for the next 30 years. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Somebody read his Machiavelli, oh yes...


----------



## Fishfirst

I just want to know is when are Americans going to get sick of Obama putting down other Americans? Attacking "Joe the plummer" when he really just stands for all small businesses is rediculous.


----------



## Fishfirst

COM said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Atlanta drying up b/c we send the water downriver to protect some sort of clam harvesting or something?
> 
> Not to be unsympathetic to the drought situation and the problems it is causing, Greater Atlanta really boomed over the last 20 or so years (take a gorgeous city and put it in a nice climate, build up the airport, go figure...). Didn't the municipal planners think to do a little somethin' somethin' about the drinking water supply? New York City has one of most extensive reservoir systems in the world. It was designed and built starting in the mid 1800s yet continually expanded mostly along the same plans. It uses no pumps at all and due to its incredibly-well protected reservoirs, requires absolutely minimal treatment.
> 
> My point? The Democrats and Republicans have really failed us as a nation. They're all a bunch of crooks. All the money goes to pork, none goes into improving the nation's infrastructure. That's going to be a problem for my generation and if we prove as inept as our parents, we'll have no usable highway system, water will only come in bottles, and we'll be sitting in the dark because we haven't invested a dime in alternative energy and the oil ran out. Oops.
> 
> As for the Bill Ayers issue, oh come on. He wasn't even good at being a terrorist. Plus this is taken completely out of context. And, people change. Ayer's behavior isn't really laudable, but it was a horrible period in American history. In 1969 an armed radical group took over the student union building at Cornell University. The leader of the group is now a top executive at Citibank and on Cornell's board. People change dramatically.


People don't change when the DON'T admit they were WRONG... and said they should have done more bombings. This isn't a person who's changed... he's just gotten smarter. Your right about Dems and Republicans failing us... so lets get someone fresh in there to cut a bunch of stupid spending. Sarah Palin has done that... and she's an outsider... she's not corrupt and she's not from chicago politics.


----------



## Fishfirst

It is also sad that even though obama has literally raised 4X the campaign money in this electon as McCain... that he is still only 5 points ahead in the polls. This "spending" in the campaign only reflects how he's going to spends if he gets into the white house... his campaign after all is his only "executive" experience and he uses that as an arguement against his lack of experience.


----------



## Fishfirst

Now the obama campaign wants a special prosicuter for ACORN... hmmm... not tied to voter fraud at all.


----------



## Cory Lover

I hope Obama wins, personally. I was a Hillary fan, but when she lost then I started hoping McCain would win. But after "let's drill in wildlife refuges" gun holding Palin stepped on board, I am hoping for a Democrat win.


----------



## emc7

I would love a third choice. I don't like either party. 

TOS is right that metro-atlanta would be improved by "thinning the herd". The cost of housing here was at the low end of national for twenty years. You can't blame people for coming here the midwest and northeast when they could buy twice as much house with the same money and not have to shovel snow. But we shouldn't have issued building permits when we don't have water and sewer for all that growth. 

HUD under cisneros did make rule changes to make housing more affordable. The stupidest one I was was the one allowing the mortgage sellers to hire the appraisers. Now one company could build a house and sell it to you, tell you whats its worth, and sign you to a mortgage, then sell the mortgage to a 'bundler', all the way being in control of telling everyone what the house is worth and what the buyer can pay. Meanwhile, the FBI almost stopped prosecuting white-collar fraud as they concentrated on "homeland security".


----------



## Kyoberr

I kind of wonder why my post was deleted, it wasn't offensive or even very interesting.

I think most people would like a third choice, but oh well. I think a lot of places can be drilled with no harm done. Take for instance here in utah where former president Clinton declared I think 1.7 million acres as the Grand Staircase without bothering to inform congress or the governor. I mean I like national monuments, but... whatever.

Of course, rather than spending money on drilling we should continue to look for alternative fuels, but usually when one comes up the gas companies buy them out, or so I've heard. It's a frustratingly greedy world, most people are greedy, I'm greedy to some degree, sigh.

Yay post 400, hahaha!


----------



## emc7

The problem with drilling is its only a temporary fix. I'm not saying we shouldn't drill, but even if we drill everywhere we will still run out of cheap oil in our lifetime. Renewable energy tech exists largely in labs and demos. It isn't cheap enough to compete with cheap oil yet . So who pays the start up costs to commercialize solar, wind, etc.? Do you tax oil or carbon emissions and spend it fund university research or do you just let the price of energy rise to the point that entrepreneurs and venture capitalists fund it?

Has anyone tried duckweed as a fuel stock?


----------



## COM

Cory Lover said:


> I hope Obama wins, personally. I was a Hillary fan


Boy am I glad that you're a Canadian. I'm embarassed to say that she is my Senator, carpet bagger.



emc7 said:


> The problem with drilling is its only a temporary fix. I'm not saying we shouldn't drill, but even if we drill everywhere we will still run out of cheap oil in our lifetime. Renewable energy tech exists largely in labs and demos. It isn't cheap enough to compete with cheap oil yet . So who pays the start up costs to commercialize solar, wind, etc.? Do you tax oil or carbon emissions and spend it fund university research or do you just let the price of energy rise to the point that entrepreneurs and venture capitalists fund it?
> 
> Has anyone tried duckweed as a fuel stock?


Drilling solves nothing. We'll eventually run out of oil. Go duckweed!

BTW- Ringo- I heard that bit on Stern. I'm an avid fan. I think he is just proving the point that lots of people don't really know anything about either candidate, as usual.


----------



## mrmoby

There is another problem with drilling. Everyone is drill happy, which I can understand. But what a lot of people dont see to realize is that even if all restricitions on off shore drilling were lifted this second, it would be 10-20 years before we see a drop. I think there is a mentality that if we start drilling we will be swimming in oil right off, that we will bring in lots of money, get off foriegn oil, and be able to drive gas guzzlers without a care. It isn't going to work that way. Ultimately, it will just be another boon for the oil companies, that in turn won't do squat for the general public. And even then, it is still a limited resource.


----------



## s13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM2xHggg7Uk

^scares me


----------



## gil_ong

lol. that howard stern clip is a riot.

check this one out from the other end of the spectrum. IBsourcesucks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0


----------



## Cory Lover

Kyoberr said:


> I think a lot of places can be drilled with no harm done.


But what are wildlife refuges for? Drilling? No. They are meant for animals to have peace and quiet and enjoy life, without constant human interruption like most other animals face.



COM said:


> Boy am I glad that you're a Canadian. I'm embarassed to say that she is my Senator, carpet bagger.


Hehe, at least you don't have Stephen Harper 



> Drilling solves nothing. We'll eventually run out of oil. Go duckweed!


Exactley.


----------



## akangelfood

Post removed


----------



## Cory Lover

akangelfood said:


> As an Alaskan, I have a hard time swallowing this point of view from anyone who hasn't been here. Wilderness is not somethin we're lacking.


As a British Columbian, I get what you are saying ;-) But if all places are treated like 'resources', then soon Alaska will become the next California in a couple hundred years. Secondly, once animals were all over Alaska. They have been somewhat disrupted and have been pushed into fewer areas. Therefore, wildlife refuges should be vehemently protected since the animals need their space.


----------



## COM

Cory Lover said:


> Asoon Alaska will become the next California


No it won't. Too daned cold.


----------



## Cory Lover

COM said:


> No it won't. Too daned cold.


But with humans becoming overpopulated and wanting more 'space', people are bound to head up to Alaska. Not to mention, global warming will make it warmer.

I think I'm off topic though....sorry.


----------



## s13

gil_ong said:


> lol. that howard stern clip is a riot.
> 
> check this one out from the other end of the spectrum. IBsourcesucks.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0


Alright, just look at the people that they are interviewing. Total religious/racist crowd of people.


----------



## gil_ong

s13 said:


> Alright, just look at the people that they are interviewing. Total religious/racist crowd of people.


agreed. and thus my comment about "the other end of the spectrum." similarly, the people who were interviewed in the howard stern clip are probably a sample to show how misinformed SOME people are.

it's just a video showing a unique demographic that does not especially fit in with the rest of "civilized society."


----------



## emc7

I don't know CL, seems like people/oil vs. wildlife is a political issue. Not really off track. 

I wasn't alone in thinking the Obama bashing from the McCain camp could hurt McCain more than Obama. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/20/poll.crisis/index.html?eref=rss_topstories It's backfiring because McCain claimed not to be like the rest of the "blame the Democrats" Republicans. It doesn't matter if its fair or not, it matters because hes not supposed to be so partisan and hateful.


----------



## BV77

Alaska is 2.4 times the size of Texas. Where else can you drive for over 8 hours and not see ONE single vehicle? And that's where there is a road. As far as drilling is concerned, one should check out Prudhoe Bay. There is NOT a single spot of oil on the ground....it is not accepted. How many drops of oil are on the streets of New York, Chicago etc?????
Cory Lover....where and what animals in Alaska have been displaced? Back that up with facts, please.


----------



## COM

There isn't enough oil up there anyway to make it worth it. Once you subtract the immense amount of energy needed to drill and transport that oil, we net to only a few days global supply. Why destroy a pristine environment and waste billions of dollars for that?


----------



## Cory Lover

BV77 said:


> Alaska is 2.4 times the size of Texas. Where else can you drive for over 8 hours and not see ONE single vehicle? And that's where there is a road. As far as drilling is concerned, one should check out Prudhoe Bay. There is NOT a single spot of oil on the ground....it is not accepted. How many drops of oil are on the streets of New York, Chicago etc?????
> Cory Lover....where and what animals in Alaska have been displaced? Back that up with facts, please.


When all the towns and cities were built (and expanding like now), do you think that in the places people built/are building no animals existed? If you agree with me animals existed in those areas, then you will agree they are/were being displaced.


----------



## Asully70

not saying there arnt mccain voters out there like this. but seriously shouldnt you have to pass a test or soemthing before you vote?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyvqhdllXgU&feature=related

this is truthfully supposed to be a neutral post but i want to see peoples reactions to this


----------



## emc7

lol, its like watching jay-walking on the tonight show. People are willfully ignorant. I'm always accusing the religious right that home-school their kids so they can ignore science as being willfully ignorant, but I guess they don't have a monopoly on ignorance. You don't have to be stupid to know nothing, you just have to not care enough to learn or remember. Unfortunately, we have the government we deserve. Some of the founding fathers wanted only men with property to vote, they feared the "proletariat" (many of whom couldn't read) would not make the best choices.


----------



## IAN

I don't think we can blame the leader of the nation entirely for the mess we're in. I think it has to do with our own greed, going of the gold standard, and having our things made in other countries.


----------



## emc7

Oh I blame the feds. When a few states tried to reign in the worst offenders, the feds wouldn't let them regulate in the same areas the feds were regulating. The do the same thing in environmental areas too. Don't blame the gold standard, go back further. Blame the loss of the articles of confederation.


----------



## gil_ong

wouldn't it be great if we could choose bits and pieces from each candidate?


----------



## COM

IAN said:


> I don't think we can blame the leader of the nation entirely for the mess we're in. I think it has to do with our own greed, going of the gold standard, and having our things made in other countries.


The gold standard??? We went off of the gold standard in 1971. So did every other relevant economy in the world.


----------



## Cory Lover

Baby_Baby said:


> So basically you're saying that we should have never built any towns or cities in any part of the world at any time to begin with because we might piss off a couple of squirrels? Animals usually exist in all areas where humans expand and grow as a species. There was probably even a tree or two cut down when they laid out the plans for your house, leaving a family of sparrows or some other species without a home (if you live in one).
> 
> As much as I love the environment and animals, it would take a lot more than someone's opinion on the displacement of animals for me to completely change me entire vote and opinion of them.
> 
> Pro Life or Pro Choice?
> Ah well, I don't know, but they're eco friendly so that's great.


Beki, you must have not understood what I said. I am not saying those places shouldn't have been built, I was simply out to prove my point animals have been displaced. Therefore, the wildlife refuges, which are set aside for animals, not humans, should be left alone. I'm not asking much, I'm just asking the government and the people to not back track on their decisions out of greed.


----------



## emc7

We always go back on our word when enough voters want more space. We broke every non-expansion treaty with the native Americans whenever the east got crowded or something valuable was discovered in the "worthless land" we let them keep. Why should animals be any different. Even conservation easements and attempts to write contracts and deeds to keep land undeveloped "forever" fall victim to the needs of future neighbors for schools and roads. Democracies can't be trusted. Thats why the CIA likes to prop up dictators, at least they stay bought. The places that will be wild in the future will be those where nature punishes us for building in them. Like those hills in CA with the fires and mudslides and places that flood regularly. But they won't stay wild, they will get built up first and then abandoned after we have destroyed the lives of animals and people both.


----------



## Guest

Fishfirst said:


> First off: I would like to comment on the Bill Ayers issue. I don't know about any of you, but I would not be associating myself with a known terrorist no matter how old I was when they committed CRIMES and HURT PEOPLE. I would not launch my political nor any career in their home no matter how involved they were, nor put myself on committees or boards with them. AND I EXPECT THE SAME OUT OF MY PRESIDENT!
> The McCain adds are legitamately negative, Obama has NOT explained his relationship in great detail, and has lied about it in the past. A negative campaign against character is JUSTIFIED in this case because it isn't just one person or group. Its several. A repeating pattern that keeps coming up no matter how much the Obama camp lies and distances itself from these people.
> 
> Secondly Taxes: Obama says he's going to cut taxes on 95% of americans (when his record clearly shows a history of NOT supporting tax cuts) doesn't sound like a bad deal right??? Well lets look at it from a very REAL perspective. First off 100 economists say his plan is going to drive us into a deeper recession. Secondly lets take that figure of 95% of Americans getting tax cuts. Now we've got to consider the 40% who DON'T pay taxes in the end, so that cuts us down to 55% of Americans getting tax breaks... now take into account the MASSIVE taxes on small businesses and corporations that give these 55% of Americans jobs. Businesses cut their expenses (unnecessary employees) to account for the tax hike. Say 10% lose their jobs (a underestimated figure I believe), that brings 10% of people that were in that 55% class down to that 40% class who DON'T pay taxes because they don't make anything. That equals 45% of Americans who are getting an actual tax break. Now subtract another 10% because of corporations leaving America for countries like Ireland with a lower corporate tax rate. Now 35% of Americans get a tax break. Now subtract the jobs that are created by the banking industry that are affected by the corporations moving their money to offshore accounts (another 5%) and you get 30% of Americans getting a tax break. Finally Obama has to dip into his pool of wealth to "spread it" evenly because his corporate gains tax plan failed (no corporate gains to tax!) and increase taxes to the top 15% of wealthy Americans. Meaning 15% of Americans will actually get a tax break. AND THEN THIS CYCLE REPEATES ITSELF!
> But don't worry... socialist programs will keep you and I above the poverty level. And don't worry about health care... we'll get to wait in line for days for treatment (just like canada) but at least it'll be a little more affordable. (of coarse a tax credit would have solved the problem of affordability in the first place) But things like appliances, electronics, cars, boats, building materials, fish supplies, grocieres, gas... those prices will go through the roof because CORPORATIONS DON'T REALLY PAY TAXES.
> 
> Sigh...
> 
> 
> Under McCain, you get smaller government, less spending, and a nice tax break for all of us. Yeah its not proposed as being a tax break for all... but in the end thats what we get.
> 
> Lastly: Foreign Policy
> 
> Did you Know: Ackmedenighad has said he WILL NOT negotiate with the President of the US without HIS preconditions. HAH! This is exactly what you get when you start saying that you are willing to talk to them without preconditions. Obama supports this, and also the bombing of Pakastan, our Ally, without their permission... this would hurt our friendship with the Pakastanese... and ultimately betray their trust. I can't believe someone would be so naive. I mean... I want to get to Bin Laden too... but I don't want to start a war with our Ally in the middle east.
> Obama STILL has to admit that he was WRONG about the surge... even though he claims it has worked beyond his wildest dreams. Gen. Patrious has said that giving a time table is a white flag of surrender... why would you go against a General who has virtually single handedly won the war in Iraq? But I guess Obama, who has no military, forgien policy, or diplomatic experience what so ever KNOWS MORE than our commanding General. This is LUDICRIS!
> 
> Personally I see no reason to vote for obama/biden except on the very concept that you want a Black person for president. Personally I would want someone with more experience, who doesn't lie every 2 minutes, and far less arogant.


*That's just more bull crap . 

All you are doing is adding on to the original bull that was posted.

Again, the problem with your argument is Obama wasn't there when Ayers was blowing anything up. Obama did not condone what Ayers did.

99% of the folks I know have smoked dope. Does that mean I condone it? Am I a bad person because I associate with them? 

None of that is relevant. That's why folks consider it a non issue. McCain's wife had a drug problem and stole to feed her habit. Does that make him a bad person? No. That doesn't even make her a bad person. Is that a reason to not vote for him? 

The answer is no it is not a reason to not vote for John McCain.

This is all pointless bull crap. 

I get that feeling every time McCain says he is the change candidate and he somehow tries to blame everyone including his own Party for our problems.

That doesn't add up. 

The simple fact that The House and the Senate are going to be under Democratic control should tell anyone watching this play out he will never be able to screw us with his failed Republican plat form even if he was to win this election.

The Republicans are finished for now. They dropped the ball and nearly bankrupt us both morally and financially. 

They will be back eventually but it's time for them to regroup and let someone else lead for a while. * 

My name is Lotsoffish and I approve of this message.


----------



## Guest

Baby_Baby said:


> Hey, chill pills: get some.
> Bull crap or not, no reason to be slightly flaming!


Slightly flaming? LOL!

Baby, you will know when I go flame on trust me on that one.


----------



## PoptartShop

I know I'm only 17 soo I can't vote, but I definitely like Obama more. One, because he's younger & new; 2 because of his views & opinions (for example, pro-choice), & he's not old-fashioned. PLUS, Biden (reppin' DE! lol!) is much better than Sarah. She's so...inexperienced & she might blow up the country if McCain ever were to die (he is 72! healthy, yes...but you never know)- I could NOT see her as Pres, lol! Not much experience at all. & she's not very professional, unlike Biden. He's awesome, & knows his stuff. I can tell she was struggling at those debates! 
McCain is too old-fashioned, & he really reminds me of Bush! Ugh; he's too liberal. & not in the present. There ARE gay people in this world, & he needs to realize that (I'm not gay, but c'mon- they deserve rights too). OBAMA '08! Plus, I found McCain VERY rude at the debates. Least Obama can look his opponent in the eye! He's so professional.
I like Obama, & that's where I stand.


----------



## Fishfirst

Thanks Baby Baby, Palin has more experience of being president as one day as governor than all of senator bidens and obamas terms combined as senators.


----------



## Osiris

anyone else cant wait for this crap to be all over? so can get onto our lives and how britney spears is in the news again instead of presidency stuff?`


----------



## mrmoby

Yes, and Palin is charging her kids travel and lodging to the state of Alaska. As well as using her position to try and get her brother in law fired. If that doesn't sound like politician as usual antics, I don't know what does.


----------



## Asully70

PoptartShop said:


> I know I'm only 17 soo I can't vote, but I definitely like Obama more. One, because he's younger & new; 2 because of his views & opinions (for example, pro-choice), & he's not old-fashioned. PLUS, Biden (reppin' DE! lol!) is much better than Sarah. She's so...inexperienced & she might blow up the country if McCain ever were to die (he is 72! healthy, yes...but you never know)- I could NOT see her as Pres, lol! Not much experience at all. & she's not very professional, unlike Biden. He's awesome, & knows his stuff. I can tell she was struggling at those debates!
> McCain is too old-fashioned, & he really reminds me of Bush! Ugh; he's too liberal. & not in the present. There ARE gay people in this world, & he needs to realize that (I'm not gay, but c'mon- they deserve rights too). OBAMA '08! Plus, I found McCain VERY rude at the debates. Least Obama can look his opponent in the eye! He's so professional.
> I like Obama, & that's where I stand.



First of all the past 7 presidents have lived to 93 OR are still currently living so you shoudl have no problem with mccains old age. And all i have to say is typical obabma voter. voting for how he looks and acts at debates. If you have ever seen a real "debate" you will see 300 times the rude behavior that you would at a presidentail debate. And mccain being a liberal wow, yes i see your 17 but please do your research before you post. Or actually just know what words mean before you start talking. Liberal means...1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. "*favorable to progress*" means creating new ideals and moving forward. Mccain says there should be rights for gay people but not "marriage" No need to pull out the dictionary again but here is what marriage means...the social institution under which a *man and woman* establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. So pelase learn some facts before you talk or type.


----------



## COM

Well, Poptart is not the first to label McCain as a liberal. He's been called that before. To use the favored word of his campaign, he has been something of a "maverick" throughout his political career. This guy is not a rubber-stamp Republican hard liner. He

As for Palin, come on now. She has been governor for what, a year? And in Alaska no less? No offense to the Alaskans on the board, but how does that experience translate to being qualified to be Pres? It is a huge state with a tiny population half a world away from the rest of us. The economics of Alaska as compared to the rest of us are apples to basketballs.

I agree with the characterization of Obama as, "The Audacity of Hype," but I just can't see supporting a war-mongering geezer and his smexy moose-skinning racist sidekick. Once again we're forced to the lesser of two evils, and I've decided that Obama at least will give us something a little different and maybe knock our nation out of the W funk.


----------



## Fishfirst

wow COM I didn't expect a blantant misguided SMEAR like that. Gov. Palin is not a "racist" and she has been governor for two years, and a mayor for six. She was in charge of Alaska's national guard and an a $800,000,000 budget. 

McCain is not a LIBRERAL in its literal sense but he does differ from conservatives in certain issues and is a Maverick because he actually has stuck up for what he believes in.

Unlike obama, McCain will stand up to Nancy Polosi (sp) and the dem majority (which is scarey they'll want spend our tax dollars so fruitlessly you won't see a tax break... you'll see a tax hike) obama will not... he's a puppet, and he's been a puppet his entire life.


----------



## COM

Palin is a complete and total racist. She openly characterizes Obama as a terrorist simply because he has a Muslim heritage.

How much of that $800M is Federal Pork?

I do happen to agree with you on Nancy Pelosi and her agenda, btw.


----------



## Cory Lover

Asully70 said:


> And mccain being a liberal wow, yes i see your 17 but please do your research before you post. Or actually just know what words mean before you start talking. Liberal means...1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. "*favorable to progress*" means creating new ideals and moving forward. Mccain says there should be rights for gay people but not "marriage" No need to pull out the dictionary again but here is what marriage means...the social institution under which a *man and woman* establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. So pelase learn some facts before you talk or type.


No offense, but how does him being 17 have anything to do with this? 17 year olds can be just as educated on politics has older people (or more so). And you're profile says you are 19, not a big difference ;-)

I see you also picked out only the first definition of marriage, here is another one for marriage:

_the state of being a married couple voluntarily joined for life (or until divorce)_

So married can refer to a same-sex couple, as this dictionary has shown.



Fishfirst said:


> Unlike obama, McCain will stand up to Nancy Polosi (sp) and the dem majority (which is scarey they'll want spend our tax dollars so fruitlessly you won't see a tax break... you'll see a tax hike) obama will not... he's a puppet, and he's been a puppet his entire life.


And what is so bad about a tax hike when your country is in trillions of dollars of dept? Higher taxes=better health care, better services, more policing, more help for people in poverty, etc. In Canada, we have high taxes, but we get pretty well done services. Compared to the USA health care system, we look pretty good, even if we aren't perfect by any means.

Secondly, how is Palin so qualified? The biggest thing (like it or not) that is facing us is the environment. Sure, the economy seems like the biggest issue, but it is not. Without our environment, there is nothing. We need to protect our environment, it is the building blocks for everything. And I clearly see that the Republicans haven't done a good job at it, and Palin and McCain certainly don't seem so concerned about it. Not saying Obama will do a much better job, but I'm sure it will be an improvement.


----------



## Cory Lover

Baby_Baby said:


> The tax hike is taking away money from a lot of people who have WORKED HARD for it and giving it to some people (not all) who sit on their butts all day and suck the life out of the country.
> 
> That isn't fair at all to the people like my parents who are both doctors who went to school for years and went through residency, worked on a phd, etc, with hardly anything to their names and now have a great amount of wealth because of their hard work and persistence.
> 
> Now Obama wants to tax them because its patriotic?
> Give me a stinking break. If you want to be patriotic, wear a flipping flag pin.


This is the difference between Canadians and Americans: Canadians believe in more so 'equality for all' while Americans believe in 'fight for yourself'. Different strokes for different folks. I do agree I don't like seeing my money go to someone who has chosen not to get a job, yet what about the single mom trying to do two jobs yet not making ends meet and is on the street? A grand amount of people who are struggling are the 'working poor'. The thing is, we can't be choosy, so overall in my opinion we should help others. Also, what happens if you needed surgery, and could not afford it, and either ended up with living painfully for the rest of your life or dying? Also wouldn't you like to see more police around, keeping your area safe?


----------



## gil_ong

Baby_Baby said:


> ...and giving it to some people (not all) who sit on their butts all day and suck the life out of the country.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008...ain4537739.shtml?tag=rightRail;rightRailInner


----------



## COM

Cory Lover;194846
And what is so bad about a tax hike when your country is in trillions of dollars of dept? Higher taxes=better health care said:


> What is so bad about a tax hike? Everything.
> 
> $2,518,680,000,000 - that's an estimate of federal revenues. That works out to roughly $8,400 from every American. The issue, as I see it, is not on the revenue side of the business. The issue is how the money is spent.
> 
> I've heard the whole rap on Canada having high taxes but providing more services like health care, etc. I've spent a lot of time in Canada and had interaction with both provincial and federal government offices. All interactions that I've had have been professional and efficient. In the United States, our federal and state governments function quite differently. I blame this on the Civil Service system that attracts lots of incompetent people and work rules that make it impossible to get rid of incumbents. I don't know how you all do it up there, but the clerks in the government offices seem to actually care.


----------



## gil_ong

well, the money has to come from somewhere. reducing frivolous gov't spending is a start, but not nearly enough.

tax the rich and they get pissed off.
tax the poor and they end up in adjunct poverty if they're not already there.
tax businesses and they relocate.

pick your poison.

i'm not poor, but neither am i swinging in money. maybe it's just me, but i'd be willing to give up a portion of my paycheck if it means a higher standard of living for a portion of our society. with these decent lives come increased education, lower crime, a happier community. call me naive, but i think it's an attainable goal if there's oversight on how the money is spent.


----------



## emc7

Its a matter of trust. Do you trust your elected officials not to squader/steal your tax money. If you don't, you want to reduce taxes and try to find another way to solve societies ills, such as private charities. IMO the federal government is too large. They are wasting money duplicating functions that should be done on a state or local level. If we handled education and health care and welfare and all the rest at a state level only, we could dismantle an expensive federal bureaucracy. In the way the merging companies save money by eliminating duplicate functions. The federal government drives me nuts, because it spends a fortune, doesn't solve the problems, and prevents to the states from trying their own solutions. There is a huge amount of federal tax that is then sent to the states as "matching funds" that are earmarked for specific stuff and causes the states to tax more to get the matching funds. There is a huge system for collecting and allocating and tracking the money. Its inefficient. Just cut the federal tax, stop sending the money and mandates and let the states take up the slack if they want to. CA and NY are bigger and more populous than many countries, surely they are big enough to handle their own money.


----------



## gil_ong

i agree with, but then you have also to consider the various functions that can be handled only at the federal level. so totally doing away with federal taxes is not possible. but it can be reduced.


----------



## emc7

I've read both good and bad about Canada's national heath care. That they have good care but months long waits. I've read horror stories about England's. Hospital acquired antibiotic resistant infections that were covered up. I'd rather see state-based health care and have the feds as the cop who audits the states for fraud and sets basic standards. When you do basic services at the highest level, there is no one to appeal to, no one to police it. Who's watching the VA to keep it from mistreating our veterans?


----------



## emc7

There are good federal functions, and they are the same they were 200 years ago. International commerce, national security, and settling disputes between the states. They could also be the database keeper, to keep track of the population that moves and make sure what a person did in one state is known to all states. Other than that, I don't see the point. We have "local control" of schools, but they spend a fortune complying with state and federal rules and proving compliance with paperwork. All of government is like that, so much useless paper-pushing. 

I think we need to take a business's approach to government and look at the "value added" of everything it does vs. what it costs. I'm not for wholesale deregulation, but I think we need to pick our battles. Make fewer rules and really enforce the ones we keep. Have a 90 mile an hour speed limit, but ticket everyone who goes 91. Not this random taxation lottery on the 95 percent of drivers going over 55.


----------



## emc7

That's what ticks me off about the right's agenda. Its not a good use of resources. Abortion, gay marriage, flag burning, stopping these won't have any affect on the quality of live of most Americans, so why should we (collectively) spend the necessary effort. Wouldn't all of us be better served using our resources to keep the air and water clean, or to prosecute businesses that rip of thousands of people at once. Separation of church and state is fiscally responsible.


----------



## Cory Lover

COM said:


> What is so bad about a tax hike? Everything.
> 
> $2,518,680,000,000 - that's an estimate of federal revenues. That works out to roughly $8,400 from every American. The issue, as I see it, is not on the revenue side of the business. The issue is how the money is spent.
> 
> I've heard the whole rap on Canada having high taxes but providing more services like health care, etc. I've spent a lot of time in Canada and had interaction with both provincial and federal government offices. All interactions that I've had have been professional and efficient. In the United States, our federal and state governments function quite differently. I blame this on the Civil Service system that attracts lots of incompetent people and work rules that make it impossible to get rid of incumbents. I don't know how you all do it up there, but the clerks in the government offices seem to actually care.


What percent of taxes do you guys have? Anyhow, that is a lot of money. They do seem to squander it, so maybe the money should be tried to spent better, and then re-evaluate the taxes. Either increase them or leave them be. Whatever works best. Sometimes governments have to do unpopular things to help the people. They think in the long run.

Hehe, you must be getting the sugar coat line of defense from the Canadian Government 



Baby_Baby said:


> Woah, hold up. I have NOTHING wrong with helping out the single moms and people who actually NEED the money because they can't get attain it. I am in NO way saying that single parents are sucking the economy dry. No freaking way.
> 
> My boyfriend's father has alzheimers and his mom had an aneurism when he was five, leaving her retarded and hardly able to function. He has to take care of them both at age 18 in a very poor neighborhood and a house that is falling apart. Those people are the ones that need the check.
> 
> I don't have an answer for everything, but taxing the rich isn't going to help. It's just not fair.


Yes, and I would rather support a single mom then someone who has decided not to work. But as I said, with the tax system, that would be impossible to only give it to the 'worthy' people. Since, it is too hard for the system to determine who is worthy and it could cause massive problems if they did that. So either it has to be A) Not giving money to people, and the good people fall through the cracks and suffer or B) Support everyone, even if some of that money goes to lazy people, so the good people get help. I pick option B, and I don't know what you would pick. What one would you pick?



emc7 said:


> I've read both good and bad about Canada's national heath care. That they have good care but months long waits. I've read horror stories about England's. Hospital acquired antibiotic resistant infections that were covered up. I'd rather see state-based health care and have the feds as the cop who audits the states for fraud and sets basic standards. When you do basic services at the highest level, there is no one to appeal to, no one to police it. Who's watching the VA to keep it from mistreating our veterans?


Yes, like I said Canada's system is not perfect. But it is better then a system which people are suffering in because they can't afford medical bills.


----------



## Fishfirst

All of the $800,000 of the money given to ACORN is from Obama's Campaign themselves... not pork, but an actual investment into the "non" partisan organization... although the "non" part is a complete joke.


----------



## COM

You know, all of you Republicans are screaming about ACORN. None of us have any idea what that is or what it stands for.

This has been the Republican tactic for the last ten years or so. Find some point, any point, and scream about it over and over again. Get people frightened and riled up. Then they vote for you like lemmings. Move on.


----------



## BV77

Palin is a complete and total racist. She openly characterizes Obama as a terrorist simply because he has a Muslim heritage.
Com, you probably know nothing of Sarah Palin prior to her running for vp, so how can you say that she is a racist?
You also say she has no experience....hell, she's only running for vp. Obama has 134 days in congress before he deciced to run for president.....Where's his experience?????
IMO if Obama is elected he will knuckle under to any third world country that confronts him....We , as the most powerful nation on earth, need a person who's got the courage to stand up to third world countries and tell them HOW it's gonna be, not negotiate with them. As circumstances dictate, of course.
Who better than McCain knows the sacrifices of sending men and women off to war? He's been there, done that, got the tee shirt and a chip in the coffee mug. Obama never wore an American uniform. 
Back to Sarah.....she lives less than 10 miles from me in a home that is valued at around 500k. She is closer to understanding the lives of "normal" Americans than anyone I can think of. You can see her in the local grocery stores shopping for her own groceries.. Governors of N.Y. Penna. Ill, etc do not do that. They have maids etc do it. She flies on commercial airlines , Does the governor of N.Y. do that????? I think not.
Back to the racist issue.....if you ever come to Alaska, you'll see a whole different breed of people. We here are not racist....We are ALL Alaskans. We have whites, blacks, orientals, Samoans, and native Alaskans here, and everyone has different attitudes here. I was raised in Pgh, Pa. and know the predjudices I had to grow up with , and had to grow out of when I moved up here years and years ago. So before you call people you know little of a racist.....clean up your own house first.
Just a side note.....Sarah as governor got every Alaskan a $1200 rebate for high fuel costs.....Has the governor of N.Y. done that? Think not
Where did Obama get all his money from for all the colleges he went to? Why won't he produce a birth certificate? He is a flake IMO


----------



## COM

BV77 said:


> Just a side note.....Sarah as governor got every Alaskan a $1200 rebate for high fuel costs.....Has the governor of N.Y. done that? Think not


BV- Last winter the Governor of New York was a man named Eliot Spitzer. He was too busy fooling around with hookers (literally) to get anyone a rebate for anything. The guy we got after he resigned in shame is an Albany (capitol of New York) politician who has never done a thing in his life other than have affairs in cheap motels. Maybe that news didn't make it up to you guys in Alaska. He also is legally blind, which is neither here nor there, and a useless pile of human flesh. He has no thoughts, no ambition, no hope for our state and he's an African-American Democrat just like Barack Obama. Again, neither here nor there.

Sarah Palin brought a disgusting tone to the Republican race. At rallies, horrible things were said about Obama. This produced even more inappropriate jeers from the crowd, and she didn't take a moment to say, "Hold on now." Hitleresque. As for her record, she loves to point out that Obama is buddies with Ayers. Spiffy. How about she's married to a well-known secessionist? How about her 2006 statements that she fully supported a secessionist movement? Yeah, that's way less bad than 'terrorism' that never went anywhere.


----------



## emc7

ACORN is stupid. They give people (temporary employees) a bunch of voter registration applications and tell them to go out and get them filled out. So the lazy employees fill the apps. out themselves and turn the in. Others try going around as getting people to fil them out, but some people fill them out incompletely or falsely because they wisely don't trust strangers with their personal info. They send the whole lot (even the donald duck's) back the to the registrar to sort through because they are required to. This makes a huge amount of work for the county, with a relatively small number of voters added. They are voters who likely won't vote anyway because the same issue (usually lack of car) that kept them for going to register will keep them from going to the polls. Of course, Acorn may run buses to the polls. Acorn is a little scary, because Obama is indirectly paying for votes, but its not the evil conspiracy the ads make it out to be. And the counties who want to clean out the voter roles of dead and duplicate voters aren't trying to disenfranchise the poor. The rhetoric on the whole issue has gotten out of hand. We should have a discussion about the role of 3rd parties in the voting system, not a shouting match.


----------



## BV77

Well, Sarah's not alone in the secession idea. Lots of us up here feel we might be better off as our own country. We are , for the most part , ignored by the rest of the contiguous states. We have our own economy, and could be way richer a state than we are if we were "allowed" to utilize our resources as all the other states have been able to do. We want to mine, drill, and log some of our resources. No Alaskan is in favor of destroying our pristine envoirnment. We want responsible, drilling, mining, fishing, etc. Too many enviornmentalists who have never seen the vastness of Alaska are holding that up.
I don't think being in favor of secession is a negative view. Besides, even if EVERY Alaskan voted to suceede, the US wouldn't let us. They make money from us too.
LOL Alaskans are all for global warming, too


----------



## emc7

I guess I'm bored with the election already. Nothing new since the debate, just more repeating of the same attacks. 



> well-known secessionist


what secede from what? How about a link? Alaska from the US, they wouldn't, they get a better $ return on their taxes then most other states. And the US wouldn't let them go for the same reason we went into Iraq. Got to keep the oil flowing. 

The difference between a secessionist and a terrorist is the use of force. You could theoretically be a pacifist secessionist and advocate buying your independence or lobbying for law changes. Holding sit-ins on the border, that sort of thing.


----------



## BV77

I advocate 100% tax rebates for all those who can prove they keep tropical fish !!!


----------



## akangelfood

BV77 said:


> I advocate 100% tax rebates for all those who can prove they keep tropical fish !!!


Woot! And a $10k credit, to boot!


----------



## Fishfirst

Wow... ignorance is bliss... and bad info is bad arguementation...


----------



## emc7

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/us/politics/23palin.html

What do you think of the RNC spending $150k to buy Gov. Palin clothes for the campaign? Its apparently legal and if she keeps the clothes, she will have to pay taxes on them.  Bet shes glad the top marginal rate is only 35% now.


----------



## mrmoby

COM said:


> You know, all of you Republicans are screaming about ACORN. None of us have any idea what that is or what it stands for.
> 
> This has been the Republican tactic for the last ten years or so. Find some point, any point, and scream about it over and over again. Get people frightened and riled up. Then they vote for you like lemmings. Move on.



ACORN is Fox Noise hot button scare tactic of the week. They are responsible for everything from the mortgage meltdown to Sean Hannity's hemorroids.

Basically, ACORN is a community action group that is involved in minority issues. The big gripe the republicans have with them is concerning voter registration drives. ACORN has gone into minority communities in swing states to conduct voter registration. They have had a large number of theses registrations come back as fraudulent, basically, "John Does" filling out cards.

The republicans, or at least their media friends, are making this out to be a widespread push for Obama. The thing is, it is fraudulent REGISTRATIONS, not VOTES. Many can be rejected outright by election officials, and even if they weren't, in most places you need some form of ID in order to vote, and that includes obtaining an absentee ballott.

The people conducting these drives are paid, in some cases, by the number of registrations they gather. So if you really look at the issue, it seems more to be a case of people trying to make themsleves an extra buck, rather than influence the election.


----------



## Fishfirst

the pawns are in place my friend.


----------



## COM

On Palin's secessionist ties:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/10/07/palins_unamerican/

And here:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-brooks4-2008sep04,0,5675222.column
I do realize that these are opinion pieces, but they are still subject to fact checking, at least at reputable newspapers which the LA Times sorta is.


----------



## gil_ong

so..... who here is still undecided?

also, for those of you who ahve decided.... are you voting for the party, the person of the person's stance on issues?


----------



## emc7

Thanks for the links. I didn't even know we had secessionist movements in the USA other than puerto rico.


----------



## COM

We have a lot of them, actually. Alaska Independence Party is probably one of the noisiest and best organized.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_autonomist_and_secessionist_movements#United_States_.28North_America.29


----------



## Fishfirst

Palin's wardrobe will be going to charity. Which would surpass Biden in his charity contributions for his entire life. Also on the successionist party... I'd love to hear the full context on her quotes considering any of those could be completely out of context and I am sure they are... considering CNN in an interview with Palin took quotes completely out of context as well.


----------



## Fishfirst

also Palin didn't buy the wardrobe herself.


----------



## trashion

Wardrobe going to charity, eh? I doubt that the poor really care whether their clothes are designer-label...


----------



## emc7

Nope, a consultant in NY went to Saks and the RNC reimbursed him. I don't know if it matters, specifically. I just think its more evidence that candidates are packaged like cereal and marketed like any other product.


----------



## emc7

Maybe they could auction the clothes like some celebs do. The tax angle interests me because its so huge. If she accepts the "gift", she has to pay tax on the value, which I imagine is the sticker price. It reminds of the poor people who end up bankrupt because they win a trip on the Price is Right.


----------



## Fishfirst

Obama spent $140,000 on his outfit for his nomination... this is stupid... it will be auctioned off of coarse... some designer clothes couldn't be donated to charity... its the money made from the sale of the designer clothes... jezz people get some common sense.


----------



## gil_ong

damn fishfirst. where do you find info like this?


----------



## COM

Uh, no, Fishfirst. Obama didn't spend nearly that much. He wears fairly ordinary, somewhat expensive suits. I don't think that it would be unreasonable for a man running for President to have some custom-cut suits, do you?

http://gawker.com/5067474/fancy-obama-clothes-cost-literally-hundreds-of-dollars


----------



## Fishfirst

lol... you act like his suit could never be $140,000... Its just a figure I've heard over the last few days on various programs. Oh an I bet that didn't go to charity. Funny how there is such a double standard. Sarah is a good person, no matter how much you dems demonize her. Don't let the media brainwash you... this is really what is going on. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/camp_followers.html This is all about a double standard... almost all of the media is in the tank with obama and they are the real enemy of the American people


----------



## gil_ong

Fishfirst said:


> lol... you act like his suit could never be $140,000... Its just a figure I've heard over the last few days on various programs. Oh an I bet that didn't go to charity. Funny how there is such a double standard. Sarah is a good person, no matter how much you dems demonize her. Don't let the media brainwash you... this is really what is going on. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/camp_followers.html This is all about a double standard... almost all of the media is in the tank with obama and they are the real enemy of the American people


alright. slow down here.

the same can be said for obama. he's a good person and "you republicans" shoouldn't demonize him. and don't let the conservative media brainwash YOU.

FF, you're obviously very passionate about this, but looks at your posts compared to most others. most people who have posted in here (IMHO) at least attempt to have a decent discussion. you seem only interested in "OBAMA SUCKS!!"

you're protraying yourself to be as that "ranting guy at a party." really, not doing yourself any favours.

just my 2 cents. take it as you will.


----------



## Cory Lover

Fishfirst said:


> lol... you act like his suit could never be $140,000... Its just a figure I've heard over the last few days on various programs. Oh an I bet that didn't go to charity. Funny how there is such a double standard. Sarah is a good person, no matter how much you dems demonize her. Don't let the media brainwash you... this is really what is going on. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/camp_followers.html This is all about a double standard... almost all of the media is in the tank with obama and they are the real enemy of the American people


And you act as if McCain doesn't have 10 mansions and is a multi millionaire....I'm sure he could auction a couple away for charity.... And I bet none have went to charity yet.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-greenwald/mccains-mansions-the-hous_b_119573.html


----------



## Osiris

Personally i woulda liked to see Obama team up with Palin


----------



## Fishfirst

1) I think obama is a good person, but he is the most unqualified candidate in history. 
2) Obama doesn't suck and i've never said he sucks... I have however shown ways in which his policies will bring this economy to its knees, and how he has no executive experience or foriegn policy experience.
3) I am not brainwashed... I have watched all major networks this election, and I have made my own conclusions based on what I've seen and facts I've heard.
4) this is a forum, and I'm sorry I don't agree with you and have come up with a million different reasons not to agree with you, but I'm intitled to that granted I don't personally attack you
5) Biden has contributed .5% of his millions of dollars of income the last 8 years http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2008/09/bidens-charity-aversion.html
6) McCain has contributed 15-30% of his earnings http://philanthropy.com/news/updates/index.php?id=4437
7) Obama has contributed 1-5% of his earnings to charity http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/25/obama-tax-returns-low-on_n_93353.html
most notible was his church... you know, the one who is anti-american and anti-white.
8) Palin has contributed more than Biden, but makes a lot less than him http://thehill.com/leading-the-news...han-biden-despite-less-income-2008-10-03.html

So if you really want to know who is more generous, its not Obama/Biden... but that really wouldn't matter if you looked at the real issues...


----------



## Osiris

Thing about Obama that most people i think get, is that he seems more down to earth. Today on the news they had footage of him at his grandma's house, seemed like any other regular guy, which I think is helping him big time for the average voter


----------



## COM

That actually isn't a lot of money for a private school these days, Babe.

As for the "brainwashing" claim, I've resisted referring to some of the conservative voices (Fishy) as having been brainwashed. I'm sort of disgusted with the conservative sentiment of so many young people I meet. I'm 24 as well (will be 25 next week) and I really hoped that our generation could get past the garbage politics of our parents and move on to a new progressive movement, but the comments posted here show me that might not really be possible, if the United States remains as it is. Personally I'd love to see the coast states hook up with Canada and ditch much of the interior (and Alaska). That would be a way better country.


----------



## Fishfirst

COM the only garbage in politics is Obama's policies and his claimed experience. Also I'd like to know a young person besides beki being the wonderful smart person she is, is actually backing McCain? I've been campaigning against all of my friends trying to stem the onslaught McCain is getting there... the injustice McCain is facing with young people today is amazing. One thing is for sure... young america has a lot of growing up to do.


----------



## Fishfirst

Oh and now fraudulant votes have been found in ohio.


----------



## BV77

Why shouldn't they buy Sarah some clothes? Did you all expect her to show up on tv in carharts? Although she'd be perfectly comfortable in them.


----------



## emc7

I never said they shouldn't do it. But having a consultant pick up clothes specifically to craft an 'image' is packaging, like picking the color of a cereal box. Its not real. Nothing we see in this TV world election is real. Its all filtered, scripted, processed to evoke the response (voting for their candidate) that is desired by the sponsor.


----------



## BV77

From Sunday's Televised 'Meet the Press' Senator Obama was asked 

about his stance on the American Flag. Obama Explains National Anthem Stance 

Sun, 07 Sept. 2008 11:48:04 EST, General Bill Ginn' USAF (ret.) asked Obama 
to explain why he doesn't follow protocol when the National Anthem is played. 

The General also stated to the Senator that according to the United States Code, 

Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171... During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. At the very least, 'Stand and Face It' 

Senator Obama Live on Sunday states, 'As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as taking sides, Obama said. 'There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like To Teach the World To Sing.' If that were our anthem, then I might salute it.'We should consider to reinvent our National Anthem as well as to redesign our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It's my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we as a Nation of warring people, should conduct ourselves as the nations of Islam, whereas peace prevails. Perhaps a state or period of mutual concord between our governments. When I become President, I will seek a pact or agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from 
disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation have placed upon the nations of Islam an unfair injustice. My wife disre spects the Flag for many personal reasons. Together she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past, many years ago. She has her views and I have mine'. Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put aside my hatred. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path of hope. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country's First Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America . 


WHAAAAAAAT !!! 

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, you heard it right. This could possibly be our next President


----------



## shev

BV77 said:


> From Sunday's Televised 'Meet the Press' Senator Obama was asked
> 
> about his stance on the American Flag. Obama Explains National Anthem Stance
> 
> Sun, 07 Sept. 2008 11:48:04 EST, General Bill Ginn' USAF (ret.) asked Obama
> to explain why he doesn't follow protocol when the National Anthem is played.
> 
> The General also stated to the Senator that according to the United States Code,
> 
> Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171... During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. At the very least, 'Stand and Face It'
> 
> Senator Obama Live on Sunday states, 'As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as taking sides, Obama said. 'There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all. It should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like To Teach the World To Sing.' If that were our anthem, then I might salute it.'We should consider to reinvent our National Anthem as well as to redesign our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It's my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we as a Nation of warring people, should conduct ourselves as the nations of Islam, whereas peace prevails. Perhaps a state or period of mutual concord between our governments. When I become President, I will seek a pact or agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from
> disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation have placed upon the nations of Islam an unfair injustice. My wife disre spects the Flag for many personal reasons. Together she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past, many years ago. She has her views and I have mine'. Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put aside my hatred. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path of hope. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country's First Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America .
> 
> 
> WHAAAAAAAT !!!
> 
> Yes, ladies and gentlemen, you heard it right. This could possibly be our next President


You know, I remember arguing politics on this message board pretty long ago. Some didn't like it, and I could see where theyre coming from, but I like to think it helped me learn my own stances on things, and think a bit more critically talking to and hearing other people's opinions. Even if it didn't change anyone's minds in the end, I thought it was still pretty helpful. This was actually the first forum I was a member of, and as such I was pretty naive, most of my info came from teh intrawebs and questionable sites, I was also a bit younger. Since then, reading countless threads going in the same circles I went in debating on these boards. I've learned to take a lot of things with a grain of salt, and of course a little less personally.

Just take a step back, and look at what you're reading, and what the other person has to say. The article quoted is a joke, not a "haha joke", a pretty hateful, ignorant, misleading joke. Obama didn't even go to that. Red flags were SCREAMING in that article, and in a lot of other articles i've read so far in the thread. Very biased, and readily consumed by already biased readers, this is the questionable garbage that goes around on teh internets.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/stance.asp

I simply copy pasted it in google, and of course the first site to come up with it was "rumormillnews", at the top stating 
"[SIZE=-1]_Find UFOs, The Apocalypse, New World Order, Political Analysis,
Alternative Health, Armageddon, Conspiracies, Prophecies, Spirituality,
Home Schooling, Home Mortgages and more, in:"

_So yeah, I'm glad people participate in these kinds of threads, I still think they do more good than harm. I hope you all try to keep an open mind, but also not believe everything you read, especially off of the internet or from blogs and extremely biased news stations like msnbc and faux news.
[/SIZE]


----------



## mrmoby

Fishfirst said:


> Oh and now fraudulant votes have been found in ohio.


Show the evidence.


----------



## gil_ong

shev said:


> Just take a step back, and look at what you're reading, and what the other person has to say. The article quoted is a joke, not a "haha joke", a pretty hateful, ignorant, misleading joke. Obama didn't even go to that. Red flags were SCREAMING in that article, and in a lot of other articles i've read so far in the thread. Very biased, and readily consumed by already biased readers, this is the questionable garbage that goes around on teh internets.
> http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/stance.asp


and this is why i always ask for a source.

i do it as a matter of course when i post info. i know i should not hold everyone else to the same, but i think it's CRITICAL to quote your source. maybe i've written too many research papers for school and work?


----------



## Fishfirst

http://www.foxnews.com/video/index....3161217&referralPlaylistId=search|voter fraud


----------



## mrmoby

And the point is?


----------



## shev

Just because I like random analogies:

*in rebuttal* "Yeah well, pirate numbers off the cost of Somalia are already increasing."

You're picking a negative piece of news, and attributing it to one side, the democrats. Neither side is condoning these fraudulent votes. It can be assumed the English people are voting Obama, but to assume the party itself supports this, or attribute this to democrats as a whole is a bit rediculous. If you watch the clip immediately after the one you posted, still on faux news mind you, there is another case of voter fraud, and the expert gives the republican side of things as an example. This sort of fraud has been going on for a very very long time, from both sides of the fence. The fraud itself is pretty dispiccable, it's too bad they wont be getting prosecuted to the fullest extent, but it was a case of 13 individual votes, not something orchestrated by a public official. That would be a much larger scandal, and rightly so.


----------



## mrmoby

shev said:


> Just because I like random analogies:
> 
> *in rebuttal* "Yeah well, pirate numbers off the cost of Somalia are already increasing."
> 
> You're picking a negative piece of news, and attributing it to one side, the democrats. Neither side is condoning these fraudulent votes. It can be assumed the English people are voting Obama, but to assume the party itself supports this, or attribute this to democrats as a whole is a bit rediculous. If you watch the clip immediately after the one you posted, still on faux news mind you, there is another case of voter fraud, and the expert gives the republican side of things as an example. This sort of fraud has been going on for a very very long time, from both sides of the fence. The fraud itself is pretty dispiccable, it's too bad they wont be getting prosecuted to the fullest extent, but it was a case of 13 individual votes, not something orchestrated by a public official. That would be a much larger scandal, and rightly so.


That pretty much sums it up, something that really isn't news, which can't be atrributed to either side, but presented to look anti-democrat.

It can be labeled voter fraud, because technically it is. However, we are talking 13 votes which, in terms of influence, is hardly worth mentioning. I would be willing to bet more than that get thrown away for stray marks. The thing is, this situation goes on in every election, because people move, and don't remove themselves from voter lists. Surely every voter has, at one time or another, found themelves in a stiuation where they could have obtained a ballot in more than one municipality or state.

What I did find interesting is the way the clip was constructed. While it mentions the 13 votes, it does not mention who the votes were cast in favor of. The only name mentioned in that clip is Obama, but not in direct relation to these votes. If you have the ability to think critically that should give you the notion that maybe they are trying to put a negative Obama slant on it. The votes could have been for McCain, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Cynthia McKinney, or Lyndon Larouche. Based on the name dropping in the clip though, I am certain that the Fox Noise intent was to have this viewed as an anti Obama piece.


----------



## gil_ong

here's an article from the BBC that made me chuckle this morning.



> Alaska newspaper endorses Obama
> The top newspaper in the home state of Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has endorsed Democratic candidate Barack Obama for president.
> 
> Alaska's largest-circulation paper, the Anchorage Daily News, said state governor Mrs Palin was "too risky" to be one step away from the presidency.
> 
> In an editorial it says her nomination "captivated" Alaskans but that must not "overwhelm all other judgment".
> 
> The focus should be on John McCain, it said, calling him the "wrong choice".
> 
> 'Stumbled badly'
> 
> The newspaper said many Alaskans were "proud to see their governor, and their state, so prominent on the national stage".
> 
> It also described Mrs Palin as a "force to be reckoned with".
> 
> "Passionate, charismatic and indefatigable, she draws huge crowds and sows excitement in her wake," the editorial reads.
> 
> However, it says that Republican presidential candidate John McCain has "stumbled and fumbled badly" in dealing with the economic crisis.
> 
> "[John McCain] embraces the extreme Republican orthodoxy he once resisted and cynically asks Americans to buy for another four years", it says.
> 
> By contrast, the Daily News suggests, Mr Obama "brings far more promise to the office".
> 
> It says: "In a time of grave economic crisis, he displays thoughtful analysis, enlists wise counsel and operates with a cool, steady hand."
> 
> In other endorsements over the weekend the Times-Despatch in Richmond, Virginia, backed Mr McCain, saying he was "the clear and unambiguous choice" at a time when national security was the key issue.
> 
> The Grand Rapids Press in Michigan supported Mr McCain for his "sheer depth of experience, principled courage and unassailable independence".
> 
> But the Baltimore Sun said Mr Obama's "steadiness and thoughtful approach to issues show he has the judgment and depth of knowledge to lead the country".
> 
> Story from BBC NEWS:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/us_elections_2008/7692731.stm
> 
> Published: 2008/10/27 11:28:34 GMT
> 
> © BBC MMVIII



lies, you say??

Sure, it’s ONLY an op-ed piece. but when it’s listed under the title of "ADN Endorses," it's kinda saying something. Isn't it?











http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/567867.html



> Obama for president
> Palin's rise captivates us but nation needs a steady hand
> 
> Published: October 25th, 2008 07:37 PM
> Last Modified: October 25th, 2008 08:10 PM
> 
> Alaska enters its 50th-anniversary year in the glow of an improbable and highly memorable event: the nomination of Gov. Sarah Palin as the Republican vice presidential candidate. For the first time ever, an Alaskan is making a serious bid for national office, and in doing so she brings broad attention and recognition not only to herself, but also to the state she leads.
> 
> Alaska's founders were optimistic people, but even the most farsighted might have been stretched to imagine this scenario. No matter the outcome in November, this election will mark a signal moment in the history of the 49th state. Many Alaskans are proud to see their governor, and their state, so prominent on the national stage.
> 
> Gov. Palin's nomination clearly alters the landscape for Alaskans as we survey this race for the presidency -- but it does not overwhelm all other judgment. The election, after all is said and done, is not about Sarah Palin, and our sober view is that her running mate, Sen. John McCain, is the wrong choice for president at this critical time for our nation.
> 
> Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, brings far more promise to the office. In a time of grave economic crisis, he displays thoughtful analysis, enlists wise counsel and operates with a cool, steady hand. The same cannot be said of Sen. McCain.
> 
> Since his early acknowledgement that economic policy is not his strong suit, Sen. McCain has stumbled and fumbled badly in dealing with the accelerating crisis as it emerged. He declared that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong" at 9 a.m. one day and by 11 a.m. was describing an economy in crisis. He is both a longtime advocate of less market regulation and a supporter of the huge taxpayer-funded Wall Street bailout. His behavior in this crisis -- erratic is a kind description -- shows him to be ill-equipped to lead the essential effort of reining in a runaway financial system and setting an anxious nation on course to economic recovery.
> 
> Sen. Obama warned regulators and the nation 19 months ago that the subprime lending crisis was a disaster in the making. Sen. McCain backed tighter rules for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but didn't do much to advance that legislation. Of the two candidates, Sen. Obama better understands the mortgage meltdown's root causes and has the judgment and intelligence to shape a solution, as well as the leadership to rally the country behind it. It is easy to look at Sen. Obama and see a return to the smart, bipartisan economic policies of the last Democratic administration in Washington, which left the country with the momentum of growth and a budget surplus that President George Bush has squandered.
> 
> On the most important issue of the day, Sen. Obama is a clear choice.
> 
> Sen. McCain describes himself as a maverick, by which he seems to mean that he spent 25 years trying unsuccessfully to persuade his own party to follow his bipartisan, centrist lead. Sadly, maverick John McCain didn't show up for the campaign. Instead we have candidate McCain, who embraces the extreme Republican orthodoxy he once resisted and cynically asks Americans to buy for another four years.
> 
> It is Sen. Obama who truly promises fundamental change in Washington. You need look no further than the guilt-by-association lies and sound-bite distortions of the degenerating McCain campaign to see how readily he embraces the divisive, fear-mongering tactics of Karl Rove. And while Sen. McCain points to the fragile success of the troop surge in stabilizing conditions in Iraq, it is also plain that he was fundamentally wrong about the more crucial early decisions. Contrary to his assurances, we were not greeted as liberators; it was not a short, easy war; and Americans -- not Iraqi oil -- have had to pay for it. It was Sen. Obama who more clearly saw the danger ahead.
> 
> The unqualified endorsement of Sen. Obama by a seasoned, respected soldier and diplomat like Gen. Colin Powell, a Republican icon, should reassure all Americans that the Democratic candidate will pass muster as commander in chief.
> 
> On a matter of parochial interest, Sen. Obama opposes the opening of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but so does Sen. McCain. We think both are wrong, and hope a President Obama can be convinced to support environmentally responsible development of that resource.
> 
> Gov. Palin has shown the country why she has been so successful in her young political career. Passionate, charismatic and indefatigable, she draws huge crowds and sows excitement in her wake. She has made it clear she's a force to be reckoned with, and you can be sure politicians and political professionals across the country have taken note. Her future, in Alaska and on the national stage, seems certain to be played out in the limelight.
> 
> Yet despite her formidable gifts, few who have worked closely with the governor would argue she is truly ready to assume command of the most important, powerful nation on earth. To step in and juggle the demands of an economic meltdown, two deadly wars and a deteriorating climate crisis would stretch the governor beyond her range. Like picking Sen. McCain for president, putting her one 72-year-old heartbeat from the leadership of the free world is just too risky at this time.


so what about those arguments about how the rest of the country does not know Palin, what she has done and how good she is??


----------



## shev

[FONT=&quot]This is probably the worst election in terms of mud-slinging, something even Karl Rove is embarassed about. Incidentally, people are also saying it's "the most important election of our lives". I really do think this is only the case because both sides don't have enough large differences between them, resulting in inflating of differences and scaring the people into thinking one side is absolutely horrible. I'm pretty sure we'll live no matter who gets elected, we lived through Bush afterall (ZING, j/k j/k). 

Obama's ties with Acorn are probably the most noticable mud-slinging scare tactic that turned out to be a rediculous accusation. But there's also "palling around with terrorists(Ayers)" that (I think) mccain was even embarassed about. Now there is Palin accusing Obama's tax plan of socialism, ever since his discussion with Joe The Plumber about "spreading the wealth around", when it's just a regressive income tax, not having anything to do with socialism. It would actually be the closest thing to a flat income tax, which Obama explains in the video. If anything, it would be his healthcare plan that could be accused of socialism, and even that is a stretch since private healthcare is still available, and no one is *required* to use the national healthcare. using this logic of socialism (which is really ignorant of both Obama's tax plan and what socialism really is)Mccain's plan is the most socialist in that it would "redistribute" wealth disproportionally to the rich, instead of to the poor.

Anyway, both sides are actually pretty similar, but BOTH have pandered to their side of the aisle and side of the nation for votes, making them seem further appart than they really are. Mccain isn't a "second Bush", and I think he is at least somewhat embarassed about his campaign. In the 2000's primaries Bush and Rove used probably the most horrible campaign against Mccain ever, and easily manipulated the religious right to their advantage. So it seems Mccain mostly used Palin and smear-ads as an attack dog, but he keeps his hands clean. In the video I posted of Mccain on Letterman, when asked about Palin accusing Obama about Ayers, he first starts to say "I dont know", but then decides to fess up to it. This is why I find it funny Rove said Mccain's campaign went too far against Obama, and also of how Mccain now relies on the (somewhat crazy) religious right to get him elected. Some people say he chose Palin because she will get some angry Hillary-supporter votes, some think because she represents what Mccain stands for and her qualifications(lol j/k again), but I think it's to get votes from the religious right. 

So yeah, this video sums up partly why I think Mccain is embarassed by his campaign of scaring people against the other side, and he's actually a pretty decent guy as far as politicians go. http://www.sodahead.com/question/16...-respectful-man-has-he-won-your-respect-back/
"Well, he's an, an a-rab" "No mam, no mam" I lol'd at that part.


and here's an awesome video of how both sides poke fun at eachother and themselves. http://news.ionlinephilippines.com/2008/10/obama-mccain-roast-alfred-e-smith-dinner-video/


 
[/FONT]


----------



## shev

Gotta see this (humor)video, sums up a lot of what I said about dooms day scenarios from each party.

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1888086


----------



## lohachata

shev...you just gotta get rid of that avatar..it gives me the creeps..reminds me of my ex-wife..
the elections are over..Barak Obama it the new president of the united states.


----------



## Osiris

Congrats Obama. Thread is now closed.


----------

