Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[paigetheoracle]

Originally Posted by 7DSUSYstrings

I only caught part of Palin's speech, but other than Juliani giving Obama some overkill negativity, I have been impressed by the repubs approach. Palin will come in unexperienced, just as Obama would, but she'll be trained by a former vet. If once a POW that made it back, I find it tough to criticize McCain.

Obama is very intelligent and I disagree with Juliani that he never led anything. He has made some lives better in Illinois, but I don't see enough to vote for him.

McCain will keep us involved in the Middle East wars and now with Russia getting itchy trigger fingers and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists kicking the clock up two more minutes to 11:55pm, I'd want a military mind in office.

The innovations will flourish more in times of war than in times of US peace. This is a tough recommendation for me to make because I'm an old hippy and flower child promoting peace. I'm also a democrat. Even with alternative energy sources, one of which I'm exploring, we will still need oil. I prefer a person who will continue to fight for American oil supplies along with the innovations.

I reiterate that Obama is talented, but I don't feel comfortable with the idea of him being in the oval office. We need someone who can rid the country of the KKK, the Weathermen, the Black Panthers, the Latin Kings, etc. before ethnic differences will survive in so much absolute power. It's bad enough that nuclear war could be brewing, I don't waqnt to allow the possibility of a racial civil war here in America.

Dr. C.

Sorry to come back at you after such a long break but if I lived in America, I would want somebody in power during a political crisis, not who was used to war but could handle peace. McCain has been charged with being erratic and George Bush is clearly insane (Power mad with no concern for the consequences upon others because he's not doing the actual fighting himself, just expecting others to) and with Palin behind him, I can only see dire trouble ahead if they get in (Obama may be too soft, compared to Hillary Clinton but she's gone and Palin just wants to make a name for herself like Bush did, no matter the body count in Iraq or elsewhere).

[Grains]

Originally Posted by freeztar

Please explain (with factual references).

No. Sorry I WILL post facts for things that are unusual or would draw a curious eye but if you don't know this for yourself your going to have to go do a little research for yourself. How long have we had a deficit????

Originally Posted by freeztar

What do you not buy into?

I don't buy into the crap like neo-liberal or neo-conservative. It's crap. It is liberal and its conservative. It was not a personal remark towards Reason or anyone else, a lot of these terms like this (neo-hippie, western world, neo-marxism, BARF!!!. I just hate all this crap the world comes out with. Liberal and Conservative are what defines it today. No reason to ADD the word NEO and wrap it in a pretty package. It's just so stupid. Sorry just an issue I hate and am dealing with through therapy!!! Sorry this really is something I just hate and has nothing to do with anything so just let it go. Ill start a thread on this one day when I have the patience! It's personal !!!!

Originally Posted by freeztar

It seems that you are basing this solely on the last 8 years. Even so, the president can propose war actions, being the Commander in Chief. That's a pretty big power that's been used by the present administration.

i would like to clarify something. I was wrong. Veto's have been used much more than I thought. I guess I was viewing major issues. Thank god for you and me he did in regards to war actions. One day you will see. I guarantee it (You will get the humor of this when you read below) And by the way, congress did to.

As well, people, please don't respond to me about this war stuff. I don't care about your opinion on Bush and the war just as well as you don't care about mine so just don't touch this. I refuse to have 8 pages worth of argument on war which segues away from the topic and moderators have to come in and break people apart and possibly (me saying something really stupid ) and all that crap. It's not going to happen. Or at least with me its not. If you try to connect war to McCain/Palin/Republican and being Bush in panties or something I will not respond as well.

Logic tied to Whoopie Goldberg/female clothing/strippers/ and other things of that nature will not be touched by me as well. Simply for that old rule. I am bad with quotes. I saw Modest help somebody earlier so maybe he can help me to because I am bad at this quote stuff. Something about be careful arguing with a fool because it is hard to tell who the fool is. Modest, please help

Presidential Vetoes

Originally Posted by freeztar

Obama might be considered inexperienced, but at least he's been on Capitol Hill for a little while. Reagen, the actor president, would receive the same criticism today. Why can actors get elected under the Republican platform without much resistance, but democratic Senators are imediately trumped as inexperienced?

Your comparing Reagen to Obama now....wow.

Actors without much resistance.....HAH!!!

Democratic senator imdeiately trumped as inexperienced. Freeztar, Obama has less experience then any presidential candidate we have had. Yes, that constitutes a trump! Really, are you arguing this one! Really!

Originally Posted by freeztar

If Obama is elected, he will have to forge connections - same with McCain. Corruption is inherent in Us politics as far as I can tell, regardless of party affiliation.

McCain has bipartisan relationships and a history. Obama does not, well ok, 1.

"While the senator's rhetoric certainly speaks of post-partisan unity, his record lacks the supporting substance. This is well demonstrated by a recent appearance on Fox News. When Chris Wallace challenged him to name an example of reaching across party lines, Obama could only name his February 2005 vote for the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), which passed the Senate 72-26. But if this is his example of bipartisan support, it leaves much to be desired."

The rest of the article is great read on.

AEI - Short Publications - How Bipartisan Is Obama?

Originally Posted by freeztar

You're kidding right?
Obama is very eloquent in his speaking. Bush is so bad that there's even a phrase invented for it, bushism.

Seriously! Bush might look like a deer in headlights and stutter but at least he can get through his speech without wasting time and not even knowing what to say.

YouTube - Obama can't talk without reading a...

Originally Posted by freeztar

As far as the environment goes, I think we will be MUCH better off with whichever candidate gets elected.

Well it wasn't better off with Clinton!

Clinton Environmental Record Justifies Criticism - The Tech

The environmentalist swing to the liberal side for reasons unapparent except for "Big Oil" and the media. Many conservatives are doing great things with the environment. Just like not all liberals want to tax people or not all liberals are evil blood hounds sent from hell (). All of you please look into Republican Environmental Contributions. All I am asking is for a look. The media has painted a pretty picture but don't let it manipulate your thought. You don't have to like it and you can come up with a hundred reasons not to like it but just know it is there and it is happening it just wouldn't be fair to give attention to it, or at least the media feels that way. You are correct though. Both parties suck at it. That is why it needs to be in private hands!!!

Republicans for Environmental Protection

Do I hear CNN on your channels!!!

I know you can find a thousand things against republicans and environment just like I can democrats and environment. Just please do some research. There is some good out there.

Originally Posted by freeztar

I can guarantee you that Palin doesn't have the cahones.
Bush doesn't Either. I'd take a firm Obama over a stammering McCain anyday in this regard.

ROFL

Even democrats have come out and said it is a sad day for the democrats because of Russia. I welcome your gurantee and accept it. I now hold the Freeztar personal gurantee. A gurantee should not be use loosely. We shall see come debate time if your gurantee is guaranteed! I will hold you to this one.

Originally Posted by freeztar

Jealousy should not be a demerit.

I just hate that he fist bumps and looks good in a speedo!
(People who don't understand me, I am just trying to lighten up heated issues after a debate/post/whatever and I hope you play along. Freeztar understands this and it is good to maintain compassion, laughter and fellowship if we want to get through this.) Or at least I think so.

[7DSUSYstrings]

To some degree, I wonder why I get involved with political discussions and on a science forum to boot. The BOTAS has kicked the nuclear clock up 2 more minutes since we first invaded Iraq. I don't think it matters too much who gets elected, we have war to deal with. If McCain is in the war is in the M.E.; If Obama is in, the war is on our doorsteps, if not a civil war because the KKK shot the guy, then the M.E. war comes back to us while we're entertaining the illusion of fixing an economy that isn't broken. What's broken is American motivation. Unmotivated people will be our undoing. Everyone looks for handouts while the remaining few motivated of us look for work. Work isn't that hard to find; good workers are...

[Zythryn]

Originally Posted by grains

No. Sorry I WILL post facts for things that are unusual or would draw a curious eye but if you don't know this for yourself your going to have to go do a little research for yourself. How long have we had a deficit????

The confusion may come over the term 'deficit'.
There was no ANNUAL deficit when Bush came to office. As a matter of fact, there was an annual surplus.
While there was a long term deficit when Bush came to office is was shrinking at that time. Since then it has grown, by a lot.

[questor]

To Modest.. how much science is involved in subjective discussions? How can the same rules apply to something scientifically proveable with mathematical
equations and a view that evolves from many conversations, observations, and reading over the years? How can one provide links to prove everthing he has read or observed on television or radio? If you are going to have free speech, is everything that isn't compatible with your views to be considered inflammatory? If this site is to be just a science site, the rules can be restrictive. If one cannot express views that may be argumentive so that different perspectives can be aired, then the non-scientific portions of the site should be closed to all but those that have the same view. I notice that some people continually demand links to prove certain points and will not avail themselves of public information to learn more about the subject at hand. We are not all of equal age and life experience. We have not all walked in the same path or possess the same powers of observation. We are not robots, we have different opinions. There is a difference in inflammatory rhetoric and vigorous debate. I would hope the moderators of this site understand the benefits of free speech.

[Zythryn]

Questor, when asked for clarification you refuse to provide it.
What is wrong with asking you WHY you believe some of your points are the liberal viewpoint? I am not looking for scientific 'proof' I just wanted to know why you are under that impression.
I would appreciate it, since this is off topic, if you would resubmit your points in a new thread. Or perhaps one of our moderators could split it off into a thread of its own.

[questor]

Z, why does anyone believe anything? I am considerably older than you and have had considerably more experience. I have had many varieties of jobs and have traveled extensively. I have lived through many presidencies and have observed the consequences of ther policies. I have observed different people with different personalities and how their attitudes impacted their lives.
I strongly believe a person's future is in his own hands, and is not a function of government. As you get older and have more life experiences, you may alter your currently held beliefs also most people do.

[questor]

I do not want to beat a dead horse, but in answer to some questions on my post # 106 about Liberal Logic I would like to speak to one of the statements:
''It is OK for Clinton to have sex in the oval office because Larry Craig solicited sex in a toilet stall.''
President Bill Clinton had a sexual encounter in the Oval office. He lied about it before a national TV audience. He remained in office and finished his term.
Repub. Rep. Mark Foley sent sexually suggestive emails to interns. He was forced to resign his seat.
Repub. Sen. Larry Craig made sexual overtures in an airport bathroom, was convicted of disorderly conduct and lost his committee seat and is shunned by his fellow senators.
Democrat Sen. Barney Frank paid for sex with Gobie and Gobie moved in with him to run a male prostitution ring from Frank's townhouse.
Neither Frank nor Clinton lost their job or suffered great censure from the liberals, while the much lesser crimes of the two Republicans have been severely punished. Where is the fairness here ? Does this show that Democrats do not believe in punishing their own?
As far as the rest of the statements in post #106, people can only speak for themselves. I do not believe every liberal or conservative believes exactly alike on all subjects, but I invite anyone to comment on a specific in the post.

[Moontanman]

I think that all Conservatives are small minded, selfish, vindictive, ignorant people who would rather assume they are always correct and will ignore any and all evidence to the contrary to uphold their belief in their superiority.

Why can I say this, because it's what I believe and evidently in this thread I am not required to justify anything I say with any supporting information at all.

Someone needs to get their collective shit together, this thread has degenerated into a shit slinging fest with no real connecting with reality. If you claim something you need to be able to back it up with some sort of supporting information. If not my post belongs here just as much as anyone else's.

[Zythryn]

Last comment on this thread addressing this.

Originally Posted by questor

...but I invite anyone to comment on a specific in the post.

Except me, right?
I have already commented on a specific in your post, yet you continue to ignore it. Lets start that in another thread, as it is off topic in this one.