Presidential Election: 2008 [Archive]

02-13-2008, 09:38 PM

It's difficult to give my opinions why and reasons for it without going into detail that would probably be too complicated, so putting it simply I voted Democrat since I don't ever see myself assisting to vote in another Republican to office after the last 7 years, though truthfully I'm not thrilled with either of the Dem candidates either. The only reason we didn't vote Independent was that I can't remember if an Independent candidate actually made it into office, or when it was if it has happened, so I thought voting Independent would have been about as productive as not voting at all....so, I went with the lesser of the two evils in the Democratic party, IMO. Ultimately, I wish we could get another Democratic candidate that did the country as much good as FDR did, but I have doubts on how likely this is to happen http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/icons/more/sad.gif.

Hubby and I were discussing this very thing tonight and how the Democrats and Republicans are *all* missing the boat re: fixing the economy, but again I think getting into the details of the discussion might not be suited for this forum and might only serve to get the thread locked, so I won't for now LOL.

02-13-2008, 10:06 PM

I think it would be more fun to predict who would say what...guess how they'd vote...

Or predict how many posts this thread will have before it gets locked lol

All I'm gonna say is I didn't vote for him the last time, so why start now? http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/cool.gif

You'll have to figure that out on your own...

02-13-2008, 10:07 PM

<blockquote><hr>

All I'm gonna say is I didn't vote for her the last time, so why start now?

[/ QUOTE ]fixed.

(and me neither)

02-13-2008, 10:09 PM

<blockquote><hr>

It's difficult to give my opinions why and reasons for it without going into detail that would probably be too complicated, so putting it simply I voted Democrat since I don't ever see myself assisting to vote in another Republican to office after the last 7 years, though truthfully I'm not thrilled with either of the Dem candidates either. The only reason we didn't vote Independent was that I can't remember if an Independent candidate actually made it into office, or when it was if it has happened, so I thought voting Independent would have been about as productive as not voting at all....so, I went with the lesser of the two evils in the Democratic party, IMO. Ultimately, I wish we could get another Democratic candidate that did the country as much good as FDR did, but I have doubts on how likely this is to happen http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/icons/more/sad.gif.

Hubby and I were discussing this very thing tonight and how the Democrats and Republicans are *all* missing the boat re: fixing the economy, but again I think getting into the details of the discussion might not be suited for this forum and might only serve to get the thread locked, so I won't for now LOL.

[/ QUOTE ]

What about saying something like FDR was evil? Will that get the ball rolling?

Lock 'n' Lolz http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

02-13-2008, 11:32 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

It's difficult to give my opinions why and reasons for it without going into detail that would probably be too complicated, so putting it simply I voted Democrat since I don't ever see myself assisting to vote in another Republican to office after the last 7 years, though truthfully I'm not thrilled with either of the Dem candidates either. The only reason we didn't vote Independent was that I can't remember if an Independent candidate actually made it into office, or when it was if it has happened, so I thought voting Independent would have been about as productive as not voting at all....so, I went with the lesser of the two evils in the Democratic party, IMO. Ultimately, I wish we could get another Democratic candidate that did the country as much good as FDR did, but I have doubts on how likely this is to happen http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/icons/more/sad.gif.

Hubby and I were discussing this very thing tonight and how the Democrats and Republicans are *all* missing the boat re: fixing the economy, but again I think getting into the details of the discussion might not be suited for this forum and might only serve to get the thread locked, so I won't for now LOL.

[/ QUOTE ]

What about saying something like FDR was evil? Will that get the ball rolling?

Lock 'n' Lolz http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice try, but too much an obviously total troll remark not based on anything legitimate at all, so nope, not gonna bite......though my curiosity is piqued as to why it is coming across that you *want* this thread to be locked. http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/confused.gif

02-14-2008, 02:55 AM

Ive mostly run Democrat in my voting days... but Im not fond of the Democrat candidates now. McCain seems like the lesser of the evils... sad we have to think who will do the least amt of damage to our lives.
No matter who the candidate is and which party they belong to, Im pissed that none of them are giving actual ideas on what to do to fix the economy and get us safely out of Iraq. I want to hear details instead of the pat statement, "We want change" Tell me what you are going to do to change things. Give me lots of details! I think at this point we have a right to know.

02-14-2008, 06:51 AM

<blockquote><hr>

Ive mostly run Democrat in my voting days... but Im not fond of the Democrat candidates now. McCain seems like the lesser of the evils... sad we have to think who will do the least amt of damage to our lives.
No matter who the candidate is and which party they belong to, Im pissed that none of them are giving actual ideas on what to do to fix the economy and get us safely out of Iraq. I want to hear details instead of the pat statement, "We want change" Tell me what you are going to do to change things. Give me lots of details! I think at this point we have a right to know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really it seems like the only two 'real' candidates as far as the Dems go are Clinton and Obama.....each with their own issues that make them not the best candidates either on their own merits, or in the case of Hillary the issue becomes not so much that she herself will fubar the country, but how it will look to our Middle Eastern enemies that we have a female in office....with the way some of those guys view women and what a woman's place really is, I'm sure they will view this as a sign of weakness, regardless of the fact of whether it really *is* a sign of weakness. Still though, since the other candidates really aren't likely to get in, she's the lesser of the two evils between herself and Obama, so that's had a major influence on our vote. McCain from everything I've read has got some reeeeeeally odd views on a few things, and doesn't have much of a backing so throwing a vote to him would be almost as much of a sure *waste* as throwing it over to the Independent party.

Point of interest: Heard on the news that Bill Clinton's former campaign manager tossed his hat in, not with Hillary but with Obama....LOL. Not sure what the significance of that is or the reasoning behind it, but I found it kind of ironic myself....might not matter to anybody else http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

02-14-2008, 01:12 PM

<blockquote><hr>

Hubby and I were discussing this very thing tonight and how the Democrats and Republicans are *all* missing the boat re: fixing the economy, but again I think getting into the

[/ QUOTE ]
they just need to put Luc in office he could do to our economy like he did for tso.

Raise proprty prices
cut wages
raise cost of living
eliminate jobs
introduce a newer better closed economy.

http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

imported_TheCookieFamily

02-14-2008, 01:21 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Hubby and I were discussing this very thing tonight and how the Democrats and Republicans are *all* missing the boat re: fixing the economy, but again I think getting into the

[/ QUOTE ]
they just need to put Luc in office he could do to our economy like he did for tso.

Raise proprty prices
cut wages
raise cost of living
eliminate jobs
introduce a newer better closed economy.

http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/laughing002.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)
Luc for president! Luc for president!

If I could vote, I would defintely go democrat. We need a change of pace. The direction we are currently going, well, we're not even the world's super power anymore. I believe that position is currently Britain, China, or Superman. Definetly not us.

I think we should be setting the example, being as powerful as we are (or WERE) for these other, not-so-developed countries. America is running amuck with problem that lie in itself, not to mention it's problems with other countries.

So I'd go with Hilary. Although I'd have to research into the republicans a bit more (I've only read about McCain, who seems like George Bush 3.0 And you thought the first two were bad!)

02-14-2008, 03:50 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Hubby and I were discussing this very thing tonight and how the Democrats and Republicans are *all* missing the boat re: fixing the economy, but again I think getting into the

[/ QUOTE ]
they just need to put Luc in office he could do to our economy like he did for tso.

Raise proprty prices
cut wages
raise cost of living
eliminate jobs
introduce a newer better closed economy.

http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

*mutters* That sounds damn near like the 7 years we just had

*cough* Nobody heard that right? Civilized debates and all......http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

In all seriousness this country is in serious need of another FDR's 'New Deal'. The economy is an area where both the Dems and the Reps are missing the boat actually. The Republicans take it all from the bottom and put it on the top, the Dems take it all from the top and put it to the bottom......one leads to a Depression, one leads to a Recession. There's got to be some kind of balance where things can be circular instead of being top-heavy or bottom heavy....otherwise, no matter whether the Dems or the Reps take office we'll be economically fubared within 10 years. http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

02-14-2008, 06:10 PM

I'm thinking Hillary. I think we need a break from Republicans in charge and Obama rubs me the wrong way.

02-14-2008, 06:19 PM

I'd hoped Joe Biden would have gone further. He was the most qualified for the job of everyone running. But he wasn't a big name, so he didn't get very far.

At this point, it's looking like I'm going to get what I've been hoping for since Biden dropped out. An Obama-McCain election. With that, I'll have the wonderful problem of deciding who to vote for. In the previous two elections, it'd been who to vote against.

I'm much happier choosing between two candidates that I like than choosing between two that I hate.

imported_TheCookieFamily

02-14-2008, 06:20 PM

I heard rumors that Obama is Muslim and that he doesn't salute the American flag...wonders if this is true http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

02-14-2008, 06:23 PM

<blockquote><hr>

I heard rumors that Obama is Muslim and that he doesn't salute the American flag...wonders if this is true http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not. He's a Christian, as if it actually matters.

02-14-2008, 08:50 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

What about saying something like FDR was evil? Will that get the ball rolling?

Lock 'n' Lolz http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice try, but too much an obviously total troll remark not based on anything legitimate at all, so nope, not gonna bite......though my curiosity is piqued as to why it is coming across that you *want* this thread to be locked. http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Trying to get the thread locked?

No...

Trying to make a JOKE about the thread getting locked?

Yes...

Succeeding with the joke?

As usual, no...

Serious about FDR being evil?

You bet a million lives I am. (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&ci d=1199964898697)

And that's not counting the people on The St. Louis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_St._Louis) , the folks in the Japanese internment camps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment) , or his excuses to the NAACP of not supporting anti-lynching legislation.

So, yeah: FDR was evil. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt's_record_on_civil_rights)

(Billy's Magic Segue To Get This Back On Topic) Do we need another New Deal?

That's debatable.

But we certainly don't need another FDR.

And I think, especially remembering what happened to the folks on The St. Louis, the above is very relevant to the current immigration hysteria. I'm relieved that the neo-cons failed in their attempts to make Juan Valdez the new Willie Horton. But they're still pretty pissed that a "RINO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_In_Name_Only)" has the nomination in the bag. (THEIR appellation for McCain, not mine...)

02-15-2008, 01:06 AM

<blockquote><hr>

I'm thinking Hillary. I think we need a break from Republicans in charge and Obama rubs me the wrong way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too. I like Hillary's platform. She's more moderate.

Barack seems to be all about change. I think that's a really easy platform to run off of, but is he really that qualified? It's easy to run off of people's emotions. Right now the economy is bad, and many Americans are upset with the Republican party. To just preach change is too easy to do. What are you actually going to do about it? And with our economy going to pot, I want a candidate who will be ready on Day 1 - not someone who is going to take time to adjust.

02-15-2008, 03:17 AM

I think it sucks that its mostly about the money. If you have the money you can run longer and harder and get the nod. I think the money that has been spent so far on this election is obscene.

imported_Juniper Skye

02-15-2008, 06:21 AM

The person I was voting for is no longer running, that makes me sad because between the 2 I can't decide because I don't want either. Although it looks like Hillary may be out soon.

As for locking this up tight >>>>>>>> I have all hopes in the world that we can talk politics and respect the opinions of others. But if the topic strays to locks and bashing and not future presidents........

02-15-2008, 09:56 AM

<blockquote><hr>

Although it looks like Hillary may be out soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you say that? Part of me hopes you're right, and part of me hopes you're wrong. With Barack or Hillary we're going to be sending the wrong message to our enemies *sigh* but the alternative is another 4-8 years of a Republican government......I hate to think what would happen if we had that just as much as I fear what message having Barrack or Hillary in the White House will pose. Blech.

imported_Mavric

02-15-2008, 11:39 AM

<blockquote><hr>

The person I was voting for is no longer running, that makes me sad because between the 2 I can't decide because I don't want either.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's about the way it is for me also. Come November I'll vote on all the issues and stuff, but as for President, I just don't know, kind of hate the idea of my vote helping one of them into office, might just write mysef in.

Mavric

02-15-2008, 12:18 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Although it looks like Hillary may be out soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you say that? Part of me hopes you're right, and part of me hopes you're wrong. With Barack or Hillary we're going to be sending the wrong message to our enemies *sigh* but the alternative is another 4-8 years of a Republican government......I hate to think what would happen if we had that just as much as I fear what message having Barrack or Hillary in the White House will pose. Blech.

[/ QUOTE ]I'm kinda with you there. I hope to God that Hillary loses. I am a Republican, but Obama seems like the best candidate right now.

But, if it came down to continued Republican "rule", let me remind you that the country enjoyed great prosperity and peace under the two-term "rule" of one prominent Republican: Ronald Reagan. Although we have no candidates running who can even remotely measure up to Reagan, it would be unwise to judge a person solely on political alignment.

02-15-2008, 12:50 PM

I feel like Obama is a great proponent of change, but doesn't really give us solid ways he's going to make that change... Hilary does a better job of that.

I'd be ok with McCain, but I would have preferred Edwards above all the rest. I hope he throws in with Hillary so she can rise above Obama. I don't want him to be president.

02-15-2008, 01:13 PM

<blockquote><hr>

I feel like Obama is a great proponent of change, but doesn't really give us solid ways he's going to make that change... Hilary does a better job of that.

I'd be ok with McCain, but I would have preferred Edwards above all the rest. I hope he throws in with Hillary so she can rise above Obama. I don't want him to be president.

[/ QUOTE ]
amen to that!
If I was told I had to vote Democrat.. Id want Hillary and Edwards over Obama.
Obama has yet to tell anyone just what change he would bring. We all know we need change.. tell me your platform pal.
Im more Republican than Democrat lately.. and would love to see someone dynamic running w/ McCain!

02-15-2008, 04:02 PM

Life dream is McCain/Edwards, but I'm really not expecting that.

I was a big Edwards fan before he dropped out.

02-15-2008, 05:10 PM

<blockquote><hr>

With Barack or Hillary we're going to be sending the wrong message to our enemies *sigh*

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what the Republicans are trying to push, but it's not true in the least.

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton intend on keeping airport security top-notch, and our border safe. We don't need innocent soldiers in Iraq trying to change a country that doesn't want to change.

We used preemptive force on a country that posed no threat to begin with, so why are we keeping our soldiers there? In my opinion, we have no right to change their government.

Let's say China invades, us, the UK steps in to the point where the war is ended, but they stay here and try to put a constitutional monarchy in place here. Fair, I think not.

McCain knows nothing (admittedly) about the economy, which is why I would never support him. He is a genuine American hero but has no place in the White House, because the presidential position is held to lead the country for the greater good not for the sole purpose of making the United States the self proclaimed moderator of any country who doesn't agree with out system of government.

Now, onto why I do not support Hillary.

- She wants a 60-day withdrawal from Iraq. While we need to leave Iraq, we can't do such an immediate withdrawal. It's pretty obvious here that she's desperate for votes and not pushing her own ideals.

- She's trying to get the delegates she "won" in Florida in Michigan, which she knew wouldn't be counted in the first place due to the fact that the states moved their primary dates.

Do you know how many people didn't vote knowing their vote didn't count? A lot.

Do you know how many people voted for Barack Obama in Michigan? None. His name wasn't even on the ballot.

One more example of why she and Bill Clinton play dirty.

- I've never been a huge fan of her husband. He was an okay president, but now he's been campaigning pushing racist remarks towards Barack Obama which is something I cannot support - also, who saw the video of him falling asleep at a church on Martin Luther King Day while the preacher was speaking about him?

- Last but not least, Barack Obama's campaign slogan - change, is effectively shown through his campaign.

He is an African-American who was unheard of, and is now leading a political powerhouse in delegates. What an accomplishment.

20-years of the same two families holding the White House isn't change, and I don't believe the founding fathers intended for us to keep the same leaders in office for this long.

princessofsh

02-15-2008, 08:58 PM

<blockquote><hr>

I'm kinda with you there. I hope to God that Hillary loses. I am a Republican, but Obama seems like the best candidate right now.

But, if it came down to continued Republican "rule", let me remind you that the country enjoyed great prosperity and peace under the two-term "rule" of one prominent Republican: Ronald Reagan. Although we have no candidates running who can even remotely measure up to Reagan, it would be unwise to judge a person solely on political alignment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. I have nothing against women running for president...But I hope to god she doesn't win. Just something about her rubs me the wrong way. Obama seems to be a very good candidate =3 So I'm for him!!

02-16-2008, 03:42 AM

NOIP:

My first choice dropped out. Then my third choice dropped out. Then my second choice dropped out. Now I'm lost. I've voted in every presidential election since turning 18 - even by absentee ballet when necessary - and I cannot imagine not voting this year. One time I strayed away from my party and have regretted it ever since. Even if I don't vote for president this time, I will be there on election day voting for my congressional representatives and for the local elections.

I have problems with all 3 of the "front runners."
McCain - great American hero; no question about that. Passed up on a chance to leave the Hanoi Hilton. Five and half years in a place that makes Gitmo look like Club Med. Five and a half years of torture - real tortue - not the stuff everyone freaked out about like having pictures taken with underwear on the head. Talk about 'aid and comfort to the enemy'. That whole media episode was shameful. Anyway, he was offered release after less than one year, but refused. He wouldn't leave until every POW that arrived before him was release. Granted, it's Wikipedia, but even if half of the details of his torture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain#Prisoner_of_war) is true, then you get the idea of why he's a hero. And have you seen the video footage of him sitting in his jet on the deck of the carrier Forrestal when his jet was struck by a rocket? Wow!
But a hero doesn't necessarily make a good leader. During this campaign cycle, he hasn't led. He's taken up a position in the middle and expected both sides to come to him. The base of his party is yet to come. And just in the past year, he's sponsored legislation that I have a big problem with. Mainly the so-called "Amnesty Bill." Do we really want to give amnesty to the members of MS-13 and Al Qaeda who have crossed our southern border? Not me.

Billary. Where to begin with this one. The "smartest woman in America" is also the "most cheated on woman in America". If she's so smart, why didn't she know Bill was, well, we all know.
Her so-called experience is "35 years as an advocate for change." So what. Being an advocate for something is easy. It's not experience. And proof of her role (experience) as co-president is locked up in the Clinton Presidential Library and Massage Parlor in Little Rock until when? You guessed it, after the 2008 elections. Coincidence? Nothing with the Clintons is coincidence!
Her big "job", the big thing on her resume, during Bills administration was to socialize healthcare. American said no. Now that we want to see her proof of her experience in the White House, we hear 2 things: Bill says it was all him, not her; Hill says those documents are where? The Clinton Presidential Library and Massage Parlor. Is this one lie or 2? It was recently announced that certain members of her campaign staff were working without pay (does that make them interns). A reporter directly asked Hillary if those staff members were receiving health insurance. She dodged the question! She didn't address it much less answer it. What's good for the goose isn't good for the gander.
The absolute worst thing about her though is the way her campaign is going to pit one race against another. After it was clear she was going to lose South Carolina, she went straight for the Hispanic states and is still attempting to use Baracks popularity among African-American voters to drum up support with Hispanic voters.

The only thing scarier than what Billary is saying is what Barack is saying: nothing!
His commercials ran in my state recently and I must say, they were damn good! After decades of negative attack ads, it was hugely uplifting to hear ads (there were 2 or 3 different ones) that really had a good, heartwarming message. But after a few days of seeing them it hit me: he's not saying anything. Nothing. No policy positions, no road map for "hope" and "change". Just a positive message. So I have to put his ads in the same category as the Coco-cola "I'd like to teach the world to sing" commercial. Except at least with the Coke, you get some fiz.

Has anyone else noticed that Iraq has almost disappeared from the news lately? The candidates aren't talking about it. Especially the Democrat candidates. Where's Cindy Sheehan? Didn't Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid say they would get us out in their first 100 hours? 18 months ago they were falling over themselves trying to be the loudest "advocate" (word choice intentional) of raising the white flag, surrendering to the enemy, quiting, pulling all the military out. Why isn't anyone talking about it now? Oh sure, it still comes up from time to time, but not like before. I'll tell you why: 18 months ago all the wanted to do was saddle Bush with the defeat. Now that it their own name would be associated with it, they want nothing to do with it. For all their talk, they are no more interested in leading the withdrawl than Bush is.

02-16-2008, 11:52 AM

<blockquote><hr>

I feel like Obama is a great proponent of change, but doesn't really give us solid ways he's going to make that change... Hilary does a better job of that.

[/ QUOTE ]Hillary can talk the talk, but keep in mind that she's a highly-accomplished spinster, and has already had well over eight years in the White House as First Lady and as Senator to hone her skills. She could spin four more years of the same to look like the most revolutionary change to hit the country, and actually be believable! She's already done two terms in Senate. Where are the changes?

Obama can't talk the talk like Hillary can; he just doesn't have that kind of experience. But he's also far less laden down by all the political networking and special-interest-schmoozing, and is thus in a far better position than Hillary to effect real change.

imported_sedusa

02-16-2008, 12:23 PM

I dont know enough about any of the candidates to wisely pick one, but I do know I dont want Bill Clinton as first lady.

imported_MARCIN2006

02-16-2008, 12:35 PM

<blockquote><hr>

but I do know I dont want Bill Clinton as first lady.

[/ QUOTE ]
LOL!!!!

02-16-2008, 12:38 PM

<blockquote><hr>

I dont know enough about any of the candidates to wisely pick one, but I do know I dont want Bill Clinton as first lady.

[/ QUOTE ]http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/artists/just_cuz/JC-ROFL.gif

Wow! There's enough double entendres in that statement to keep people busy for years!

imported_Mavric

02-16-2008, 01:51 PM

<blockquote><hr>

but I do know I dont want Bill Clinton as first lady.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAO, hmmmmm, http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/icons/more/pint.gif

02-16-2008, 05:00 PM

Say what you will about Bill Clinton.. but other than getting caught and having Linda Tripp be an uber-biotch, backstabbing jerk.... he was a good President. Bill didnt do anything different from what most other Presidents have done while in office. The scandals go all the way back to the early years of America. Some got caught.. some didnt.
As far as Obama having a lack of scandal in his repetoire... eh.. nope. Some of his staff are lobbyists.. he says its fine cuz they are only State lobbyists.. but they all lobby ulitimately to the same place.. DC. They put money in pockets at the state level which in turn gets put in pockets at the federal level.
None of the candidates are perfect.. by far. But what I want to hear more of is actual policies. Obama has said squat.. yet he has this following that I dont understand. He may be a dynamic speaker.. but where is the substance behind the words?
http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/confused.gif

02-16-2008, 05:41 PM

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=24pDGQF6UW8

02-16-2008, 06:20 PM

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=lQK84pmCfBY&NR=1

02-16-2008, 08:04 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I heard rumors that Obama is Muslim and that he doesn't salute the American flag...wonders if this is true http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not. He's a Christian, as if it actually matters.


[/ QUOTE ]

WHAT? I thought he was a *gasp!* Mormon!

(wondering if anyone will get that)

As a proud citizen of The Lincoln State, I find it somewhat intriguing that these rumors didn't come out during his bid for Senator. Indeed, I remember his debates with Alan Keyes as actually focusing on the issues, for a change. Got very low ratings due to being rather highbrow, and not the usual mudslinging so prevalent in politics today. Of course, no one watched because Obama was a shoo-in after the um...Seven of Nine scandal *smirk* They knew who they were gonna vote for, so why watch? Hell, the Illinois Republican Party could have resurrected Ronald Regan and had The Gipper run against him, and Obama STILL would have won.

That is, if you believe in resurrection. (lol sorry wrong thread)

You never heard a word about this rumor back then. So why is it out there now?

Sounds to me like the Clinton's are up to their old tricks.

But even so, I didn't vote for him last time, ain't gonna vote for him now. http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/cool.gif

I think a more interesting discussion...or side discussion...is who ya think's gonna be the running mates. Obama-Clinton? Clinton-Obama? Clinton-Edwards? Obama-Oprah? McCain-Romney? McCain-Giuliani (oh please...oh please...)? A McCain-Lieberman surprise ("oh please" number two)? McCain-Huckabee (time to move to Canada lol)? McCain-TED NUGET?!?!?!

02-16-2008, 09:34 PM

A McCain-Giuliani ticket would be further proof that our system of government does not work and it needs to be reformed.

If anyone is desperate for votes it's Rudy Giuliani. You made changes in New York? Wow, terrific! Aside from the fact that every other candidate has made some change, how about focusing on your change instead of further pushing the fact that you were the mayor of NYC during 9/11 to the American people.

We get it. We honestly don't care. George Bush was the president during 9/11, and he couldn't be doing a crappier job than he is now.

My reason for not supporting McCain or any Republican for that matter is that it seems that they make a majority of their decisions based around the fact that every American follows the cult that is Christianity.

I hate to break it to you, but we all don't. I, for one, want stem cell research to progress. I also believe that a woman has a right to an abortion, especially if the pregnancy was due to rape.

Huckabee pushes it one step further, and wants CREATIONISM to be taught in public school. Sorry, but are you forgetting that most schools are culturally diverse.

That's not something I can support; sorry.

02-16-2008, 11:18 PM

<blockquote><hr>

My reason for not supporting McCain or any Republican for that matter is that it seems that they make a majority of their decisions based around the fact that every American follows the cult that is Christianity.

[/ QUOTE ]<blockquote>cult (kult) n.
A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
The followers of such a religion or sect.
Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
The object of such devotion.

cult. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult
</blockquote>You may not believe in Christianity. You may not believe in God, or any other deity or divine being for that matter. That's fine; that is your right. However, do be careful what sort of labels you affix on widely-recognized religions and those who follow them. If you want people to respect your beliefs, you need to show respect yourself.
<blockquote><hr>

Huckabee pushes it one step further, and wants CREATIONISM to be taught in public school. Sorry, but are you forgetting that most schools are culturally diverse.

[/ QUOTE ]What does cultural diversity have to do with creationism? And, if you're against the teaching of creationism, then what is your alternative? That we don't teach anything at all? Personally, I do not understand why creationism cannot be taught alongside evolutionism. Just because you may not subscribe to a certain belief does not mean it should be completely repressed from society.

Edit: It seems the forum software cannot handle unicode well

02-17-2008, 04:27 AM

<blockquote><hr>

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=lQK84pmCfBY&NR=1

[/ QUOTE ]

She must have been hungry by dinner time because Obama ate her lunch!

02-17-2008, 04:38 AM

<blockquote><hr>

A McCain-Giuliani ticket would be further proof that our system of government does not work and it needs to be reformed.

If anyone is desperate for votes it's Rudy Giuliani. You made changes in New York? Wow, terrific! Aside from the fact that every other candidate has made some change, how about focusing on your change instead of further pushing the fact that you were the mayor of NYC during 9/11 to the American people.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have stumbled into a point I forgot to make earlier. For the first time in 48 years, we could elect someone as president who has never been a state governor or vice president before.

For whatever reasons, America hasn't chosen a Senator or Representative as President for nearly half a century.

02-17-2008, 05:04 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

My reason for not supporting McCain or any Republican for that matter is that it seems that they make a majority of their decisions based around the fact that every American follows the cult that is Christianity.

[/ QUOTE ]<blockquote>cult (kult) n.
A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader.
The followers of such a religion or sect.
Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing.
The object of such devotion.

cult. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved February 16, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cult
</blockquote>You may not believe in Christianity. You may not believe in God, or any other deity or divine being for that matter. That's fine; that is your right. However, do be careful what sort of labels you affix on widely-recognized religions and those who follow them. If you want people to respect your beliefs, you need to show respect yourself.
<blockquote><hr>

Huckabee pushes it one step further, and wants CREATIONISM to be taught in public school. Sorry, but are you forgetting that most schools are culturally diverse.

[/ QUOTE ]What does cultural diversity have to do with creationism? And, if you're against the teaching of creationism, then what is your alternative? That we don't teach anything at all? Personally, I do not understand why creationism cannot be taught alongside evolutionism. Just because you may not subscribe to a certain belief does not mean it should be completely repressed from society.

Edit: It seems the forum software cannot handle unicode well

[/ QUOTE ]

So your second definition of cult complies with Christianity, as do the other definitions in part.

A cult is basically in the eyes of each person. I consider Christianity a cult, so therefore it can't be considered wrong or right.

Now, onto creationism.

Cultural diversity has everything to do with creationism. You can't teach creationism based around all religions, because each religion has their own view of creationism.

In schools now, they teach science, which isn't that controversial because people can choose not to believe it, but if you teach creationism you're teaching them about a specific religion, and what Muslim wants to send their Muslim child to a public school that teaches creationism with God and Jesus?

calvinscreeksim

02-17-2008, 06:19 PM

<blockquote><hr>

Personally, I do not understand why creationism cannot be taught alongside evolutionism.

[/ QUOTE ]

It already is, its called religion class. I don't know about the states and how they oragnize their education programs but here in Canada if you go to a Catholic school (I was forced to) you are then forced, by the school and education board, to take 2 courses of religion class in order to receive your high school diploma. We were taught all the basics I guess you can say of Catholic religion, I dispised it and ended up taking the class through correspondance because I could not take an hour a day of listening to my teacher preach about the material when I more than clearly had the opposing viewpoint-so I bs'd my way on my own time through the correspondance lol. On the other side of things, if you do not go to a Catholic school you still get the option to take a religion class, which is fine if people want to take it and biology will still be optional if a student chooses so.

but I take it that Huckabee wants theories of evolution and anything relating to science abolished from schools? or does he mainly just want the concept of life to be strickly creationist, and allow any other material to be explored through science in schools.

02-17-2008, 06:57 PM

He wants it taught alongside the regular scientific curriculum in public schools, which is very different from it being taught in private schools that focus on a specific religion.

02-17-2008, 08:12 PM

<blockquote><hr>

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=lQK84pmCfBY&NR=1

[/ QUOTE ]

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=sr10h5-dO9c

http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

02-18-2008, 06:27 PM

<blockquote><hr>

A cult is basically in the eyes of each person. I consider Christianity a cult, so therefore it can't be considered wrong or right.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could "consider" the sky to be neon green, but that wouldn't make me right. There is a definition of a cult and that definition does not fit Christianity no matter what you want to think of it as.

calvinscreeksim

02-18-2008, 08:24 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

A cult is basically in the eyes of each person. I consider Christianity a cult, so therefore it can't be considered wrong or right.

[/ QUOTE ] <blockquote><hr>

There is a definition of a cult and that definition does not fit Christianity no matter what you want to think of it as.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Just my opinion here,

dictionary.com

'Cult'

1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

System: Christianity
Rites: Eucharistic service
Ceremonies: Church

2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.

body of admirers: Christians of Catholicism

3. the object of such devotion.

devotion: Christ/God

4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

Group: Christians and believeing God, Jesus, Christ ect.

5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.

Symbol: the cross

6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.

very extreme...hardly applies to average Christians.

7. the members of such a religion or sect.

Members: Christians

8. any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.

Unscientific methods: Faith healers

can correct me on anything at any point though, I'm just throwing ideas out there.

edited for easier viewing with colored text

02-19-2008, 03:54 AM

Scroll back up and re-read the definition I posted, which I also got from Dictionary.com (full APA citation noted). I realize dictionary.com carried other definitions from other dictionary sources, but I rejected them as being too broad. By those definitions, everything could be considered a cult.

calvinscreeksim

02-19-2008, 08:57 AM

<blockquote><hr>

By those definitions, everything could be considered a cult.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know everything could fall under the category, my post was how Christianity can fall under it even after lego said "it does not fit no matter what you want to think of it as."

02-19-2008, 05:48 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

A cult is basically in the eyes of each person. I consider Christianity a cult, so therefore it can't be considered wrong or right.

[/ QUOTE ] <blockquote><hr>

There is a definition of a cult and that definition does not fit Christianity no matter what you want to think of it as.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Just my opinion here,

dictionary.com

'Cult'

1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.

System: Christianity
Rites: Eucharistic service
Ceremonies: Church

2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.

body of admirers: Christians of Catholicism

3. the object of such devotion.

devotion: Christ/God

4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.

Group: Christians and believeing God, Jesus, Christ ect.

5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.

Symbol: the cross

6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.

very extreme...hardly applies to average Christians.

7. the members of such a religion or sect.

Members: Christians

8. any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.

Unscientific methods: Faith healers

can correct me on anything at any point though, I'm just throwing ideas out there.

edited for easier viewing with colored text

[/ QUOTE ]

My reseponse was mostly trying to meet what Billy said in that he could declare Christianity a cult just because he believed it.

Christianity does meet many of those characteristics, but I'd say that parts of it are in question.

Faith healings are much more common within the pentecostal church and are not widely accepted. I'm not really sure what I personally believe about them. If I see one happen then cool, I'll stop questioning, but from past experience many of the examples I've seen have been BS. (televangelists faking healings) I've heard stories of them being real though and I'd love to see it.

02-21-2008, 09:27 PM

<blockquote><hr>

My response was mostly trying to meet what Billy said in that he could declare Christianity a cult just because he believed it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong poster. I think you mean Buzzkillington. I'm not him, he's not me, and if he's not really a new dude but a sock puppet I ain't the one pulling the strings...

02-22-2008, 12:31 AM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

My response was mostly trying to meet what Billy said in that he could declare Christianity a cult just because he believed it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong poster. I think you mean Buzzkillington. I'm not him, he's not me, and if he's not really a new dude but a sock puppet I ain't the one pulling the strings...

[/ QUOTE ]

Woops! Got the names starting with "B" confused! Sorry!

02-22-2008, 09:18 AM

<blockquote><hr>

Although it looks like Hillary may be out soon.

[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, this is true. Given Obama's increasing support and Hillary's swan song at the closing of last night's debate, I'm thinking we'll have our candidate (Obama) on the 4th.

Obama has accomplished quite a bit. Just listen to his supporters. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23261748#23256713)

As I've said elsewhere:
One of my favorite parts of the video: "I feel as though he can bring hope to America." Yes. That's what we need. Hope. Not results. Hope.

I hoped that John Edwards would be the nominee. I hope that people will stop being idiots and realize that we're all the same, so undeserved hate should stop. I hope that I'll be able to provide for my family once I become an educator - something that will be hard given the lackluster salary of a teacher. When I was little, I hoped to be a dinosaur. Hope only gets you so far.

Maybe things will be different once he's in office.

02-22-2008, 04:29 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Although it looks like Hillary may be out soon.

[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, this is true. Given Obama's increasing support and Hillary's swan song at the closing of last night's debate, I'm thinking we'll have our candidate (Obama) on the 4th.

Obama has accomplished quite a bit. Just listen to his supporters. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23261748#23256713)

As I've said elsewhere:
One of my favorite parts of the video: "I feel as though he can bring hope to America." Yes. That's what we need. Hope. Not results. Hope.

I hoped that John Edwards would be the nominee. I hope that people will stop being idiots and realize that we're all the same, so undeserved hate should stop. I hope that I'll be able to provide for my family once I become an educator - something that will be hard given the lackluster salary of a teacher. When I was little, I hoped to be a dinosaur. Hope only gets you so far.

Maybe things will be different once he's in office.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ha ha. Are you being serious?

That video proves nothing aside from that Hillary Clinton supporters are so dedicated to bring down Barack Obama, so they use someone who doesn't know about his accomplishments to represent all of his followers.

I'm sure plenty of people are voting for Hillary Clinton because she's a woman, and I'm sure there are plenty of democrats who supported John Edwards because they wanted a white man in office, even though they may not know anything about them.

Here are some accomplishments:

-Time in the Senate: 1,141 days
-Total bills sponsored: 129
-Total bills past committee: 9
-Total bills enacted: 1
-Total bills cosponsored: 545
-Example bills:
-Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006
-The 2007 Government Ethics Bill
-The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act
-The 2007 Government Ethics Bill

He was also a community organizer, and helped people regain their jobs after being fired when steel plants were closing down in Chicago.

He used his law degree to help people in need, not gain money.

If you want to know about his accomplishments go to his Wikipedia page...

Also, enough with this comparision of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's "experience".

She keeps saying she's ready to take office the first day on the job, but how much experience does she have at being president of the United States? None.

Aside from the fact that she's prove she can't get universal health care passed, they are basically neck-and-neck not considering the 6 to 4 year experience in senate.

02-22-2008, 05:18 PM

<blockquote><hr>

Ha ha. Are you being serious?

That video proves nothing aside from that Hillary Clinton supporters are so dedicated to bring down Barack Obama, so they use someone who doesn't know about his accomplishments to represent all of his followers.

I'm sure plenty of people are voting for Hillary Clinton because she's a woman, and I'm sure there are plenty of democrats who supported John Edwards because they wanted a white man in office, even though they may not know anything about them.

Here are some accomplishments:

-Time in the Senate: 1,141 days
-Total bills sponsored: 129
-Total bills past committee: 9
-Total bills enacted: 1
-Total bills cosponsored: 545
-Example bills:
-Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006
-The 2007 Government Ethics Bill
-The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act
-The 2007 Government Ethics Bill

He was also a community organizer, and helped people regain their jobs after being fired when steel plants were closing down in Chicago.

He used his law degree to help people in need, not gain money.

If you want to know about his accomplishments go to his Wikipedia page...

Also, enough with this comparision of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's "experience".

She keeps saying she's ready to take office the first day on the job, but how much experience does she have at being president of the United States? None.

Aside from the fact that she's prove she can't get universal health care passed, they are basically neck-and-neck not considering the 6 to 4 year experience in senate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just as Hillary Clinton is being supported for her gender so is Obama being supported for his race. If you're going to point it out as a reason for supporting one candidate please keep in mind that it's also a reason for supporting Obama.

As for experience. It's really not an argument. Hillary was 1st lady for 8 years. She probably knows more about being president than anyone who hasn't been president. She DOES have the experience.

02-23-2008, 01:19 PM

<blockquote><hr>

Hillary was 1st lady for 8 years. She probably knows more about being president than anyone who hasn't been president. She DOES have the experience.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you send an astronaut's wife into space?

Or let a surgeon's husband perform your operation?

An airline pilot's wife fly your plane?

This won't be decided until the convention in Denver. It's going to be better than 'reality TV'!

02-23-2008, 06:52 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Ha ha. Are you being serious?

That video proves nothing aside from that Hillary Clinton supporters are so dedicated to bring down Barack Obama, so they use someone who doesn't know about his accomplishments to represent all of his followers.

I'm sure plenty of people are voting for Hillary Clinton because she's a woman, and I'm sure there are plenty of democrats who supported John Edwards because they wanted a white man in office, even though they may not know anything about them.

Here are some accomplishments:

-Time in the Senate: 1,141 days
-Total bills sponsored: 129
-Total bills past committee: 9
-Total bills enacted: 1
-Total bills cosponsored: 545
-Example bills:
-Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006
-The 2007 Government Ethics Bill
-The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act
-The 2007 Government Ethics Bill

He was also a community organizer, and helped people regain their jobs after being fired when steel plants were closing down in Chicago.

He used his law degree to help people in need, not gain money.

If you want to know about his accomplishments go to his Wikipedia page...

Also, enough with this comparision of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's "experience".

She keeps saying she's ready to take office the first day on the job, but how much experience does she have at being president of the United States? None.

Aside from the fact that she's prove she can't get universal health care passed, they are basically neck-and-neck not considering the 6 to 4 year experience in senate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just as Hillary Clinton is being supported for her gender so is Obama being supported for his race. If you're going to point it out as a reason for supporting one candidate please keep in mind that it's also a reason for supporting Obama.

As for experience. It's really not an argument. Hillary was 1st lady for 8 years. She probably knows more about being president than anyone who hasn't been president. She DOES have the experience.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, god... http://www.forumspile.com/Blank-Picard_Facepalm.jpg

I wasn't even saying that people weren't voting for Obama because he's black, my point was that people make uninformed decisions all the time - such as decisions based on a candidate's race, gender, or nationality, which goes to show that there are plenty of Clinton supporters who are uninformed about her policies, but are voting for her due to other reasons; yet, they continue to center around one specific person who doesn't know about Obama to attempt to represent his entire fan base.

Also, I highly doubt Hillary Clinton was that involved in any actual business in the White House. If she has experience, it's knowing how not to establish health care and how to navigate the White House.

02-24-2008, 08:28 PM

<blockquote><hr>

I wasn't even saying that people weren't voting for Obama because he's black

[/ QUOTE ]

Part of me wants him to get the nomination just so I can get accused of this for not voting for him.

Yeah, that's why I voted for the other guy when Obama was running for senator.

(FYI -- The other guy:)
http://www.brokennewz.com/2008election/keyes.jpg

Yeah, I can't wait for those hippies that harass plain ol' workin' folk when they're getting off the trains, the ones in their tie-died Che Guevera t-shirts who stand in front of you and when you try to move around them they move to block your path, all the while demanding you sign their petition for the radical cause-of-the-week or come to their meeting of the Communist Student Coalition...who last time around were all running around trying to get us to vote for Howard Dean lol...yeah, I can't WAIT to lay that one on them, heh heh heh heh heh... <------ Evil Republican Laugh (Yes, they taught us how to do the Evil Republican Laugh at our College Republican meetings, all those years ago)

Seriously, though, I think Obama's gonna win the nomination.

(Not that all Democrats are tie-died Che Guevera t-shirt-wearing communists lolz Most are normal folk who just think a certain way...some of my best friends are Dems...and in local politics, *I* vote Dem, cuz the Republican Party in Chicago basically consists of three guys who get together at The Cubby Bear on two-for-one drink night)

02-24-2008, 08:41 PM

lol @ facepalm

I get what you are saying buzz...and pretty much agree.

02-24-2008, 09:46 PM

<blockquote><hr>

lol @ facepalm

I get what you are saying buzz...and pretty much agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol that's Captain Picard from Star Trek! LET'S START A WRITE-IN CAMPAIGN! lolz lolz lolz lolz lolz

Make way for real leadership. Picard/Janeway '08.

(because Riker would just spend four years chasing interns around, and we already had enough of that back in the nineties...)

02-25-2008, 04:35 AM

<blockquote><hr>

Seriously, though, I think Obama's gonna win the nomination.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think Obama is going to win the delegate count but Clinton will be the nominee.

02-25-2008, 12:41 PM

imported_Mavric

02-25-2008, 03:05 PM

<blockquote><hr>

I think Canada is starting to sound pretty attractive right about now...

[/ QUOTE ]
Yepper, eh.
But seriously, I like Obama, if he gets the nomination and picks a fairly good running mate, I could see me going against my partys [censored] and voting for him.

Mavric

imported_sedusa

02-25-2008, 03:14 PM

Frankly I worry that Obama being of mixed heritage may end up shot at if he was to win the Presidential election, and as for Hillary I just dont think the majority of the USA will vote her into office since she is a woman.

In US there is a history of people in public office or to open minded such as Martin Luther King, President Ford, JFK, just to name a few that have been shot, or killed.

I havent a clue whom I would vote for, and probably wont until I actually vote, but I worry that something bad will happen to Obama, and possibly even Hillary if they do get elected.

02-25-2008, 04:30 PM

<blockquote><hr>

Frankly I worry that Obama being of mixed heritage may end up shot at if he was to win the Presidential election, and as for Hillary I just dont think the majority of the USA will vote her into office since she is a woman.

In US there is a history of people in public office or to open minded such as Martin Luther King, President Ford, JFK, just to name a few that have been shot, or killed.

I havent a clue whom I would vote for, and probably wont until I actually vote, but I worry that something bad will happen to Obama, and possibly even Hillary if they do get elected.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you to a point. There are people out there who will become outraged, and perhaps even act out in a violent manner. You are not alone in your worries. Change, however, tends to not be peaceful. We, as a nation, will not overcome the stigma that a black man can't be President, nor the assumption that a woman is too weak for the job, until we have experience with such change.

Johnnie

02-25-2008, 04:35 PM

I'm curious as to who really think who is going to win the election. Me personally I support Hillary Clinton and I have since day respond back if you think otherwise or if you support her to.

02-25-2008, 08:51 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Seriously, though, I think Obama's gonna win the nomination.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think Obama is going to win the delegate count but Clinton will be the nominee.

[/ QUOTE ]I think Canada is starting to sound pretty attractive right about now...

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol you read my mind...

02-25-2008, 08:52 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Seriously, though, I think Obama's gonna win the nomination.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think Obama is going to win the delegate count but Clinton will be the nominee.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? God forbid you mean he'll get "Fosterized". http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

02-25-2008, 08:54 PM

02-25-2008, 08:55 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Frankly I worry that Obama being of mixed heritage may end up shot at if he was to win the Presidential election, and as for Hillary I just dont think the majority of the USA will vote her into office since she is a woman.

In US there is a history of people in public office or to open minded such as Martin Luther King, President Ford, JFK, just to name a few that have been shot, or killed.

I havent a clue whom I would vote for, and probably wont until I actually vote, but I worry that something bad will happen to Obama, and possibly even Hillary if they do get elected.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you to a point. There are people out there who will become outraged, and perhaps even act out in a violent manner. You are not alone in your worries. Change, however, tends to not be peaceful. We, as a nation, will not overcome the stigma that a black man can't be President, nor the assumption that a woman is too weak for the job, until we have experience with such change.

[/ QUOTE ]

And that's no reason TO vote for him...

02-26-2008, 10:33 AM

I can't get my head around US politics!

02-26-2008, 02:51 PM

<blockquote><hr>

And that's no reason TO vote for him...

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said it WAS a reason to vote for him OR her. I just meant...

<blockquote><hr>

That's no reason to not vote for him...

[/ QUOTE ]

02-26-2008, 06:19 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Seriously, though, I think Obama's gonna win the nomination.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think Obama is going to win the delegate count but Clinton will be the nominee.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt it. If Hillary doesn't drop out after she loses Texas (possibly Ohio), then my guess is that it will be close, but regardlessm most of the super delegates vote on behalf of their state's decision, and I've started to notice a trend of super delegates favoring Obama over Clinton.

02-26-2008, 06:22 PM

<blockquote><hr>

Frankly I worry that Obama being of mixed heritage may end up shot at if he was to win the Presidential election, and as for Hillary I just dont think the majority of the USA will vote her into office since she is a woman.

In US there is a history of people in public office or to open minded such as Martin Luther King, President Ford, JFK, just to name a few that have been shot, or killed.

I havent a clue whom I would vote for, and probably wont until I actually vote, but I worry that something bad will happen to Obama, and possibly even Hillary if they do get elected.

[/ QUOTE ]

I highly doubt it. The last successful presidential assassination was John F. Kennedy and their ignorance towards security is shown through them allowing him to ride in an open-top limousine.

Presidential security has come a long way since then. There have been multiple assassination attempts on President George W. Bush, but they've all been foiled, which is why they report one or two - at most.

02-26-2008, 06:37 PM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Frankly I worry that Obama being of mixed heritage may end up shot at if he was to win the Presidential election, and as for Hillary I just dont think the majority of the USA will vote her into office since she is a woman.

In US there is a history of people in public office or to open minded such as Martin Luther King, President Ford, JFK, just to name a few that have been shot, or killed.

I havent a clue whom I would vote for, and probably wont until I actually vote, but I worry that something bad will happen to Obama, and possibly even Hillary if they do get elected.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you to a point. There are people out there who will become outraged, and perhaps even act out in a violent manner. You are not alone in your worries. Change, however, tends to not be peaceful. We, as a nation, will not overcome the stigma that a black man can't be President, nor the assumption that a woman is too weak for the job, until we have experience with such change.

[/ QUOTE ]

And that's no reason TO vote for him...

[/ QUOTE ]

It's also not a reason to NOT vote for him...

First off, leave security to the secret service. They've handled numerous assasination attempts for the past fourty or so years, I believe they can handle security now, and will increase it if need be.

Second, I'm not supporting Obama because he's black and I'm not disapproving Hillary Clinton because she's a woman, and to be quite honest with you, I'd be happy with either one of them - as long as we can keep Republicans out of the White House...

It is a sign, however, that the Republican party is still sending up white men (despite Alan Keyes who can barely get on the ballot in most states) who stand firm on:

- Keeping Christian values, even though our nation wasn't built on Christian values, it was built on freedom of religion, which is why we are the only nation in the world without an official religion.

- Denying women the right to an abortion, without considering things like rape.

- Keeping soldiers in Iraq fighting a war that no longer serves a purpose.

- Know nothing about the economy and expect to bring it back to stability.

It's not something I can support, sorry.

The reason I hear Obama more from McCain and Clinton than I hear McCain or Clinton from Obama is because it's so hard for them to go negative on Barack Obama.

"His middle name's Hussein!", "He said I supported NAFTA! Even though I said I did in my book and have used the same tactic on him, is this someone you want as president?" are all pathetic attempts at bringing him down and trying to steer people away from what they've wanted for all this time. As I'm typing this, Hannity of Hannity & Colmes is ranting on about his Muslim heritage.

I'm sorry, since when are we a nation that decides on a person's ability to lead based on their middle name? When is it okay to publicly discriminate against someone's religion? How are we a nation of freedom of religion and freedom of speech when we publicly denounce a candidate based on uneducated rumors of him being part of another religion.

It's amazing how anti-Obama everyone is rather than pro their own candidate.

02-26-2008, 10:00 PM

<blockquote><hr>

I highly doubt it. The last successful presidential assassination was John F. Kennedy and their ignorance towards security is shown through them allowing him to ride in an open-top limousine.

Presidential security has come a long way since then. There have been multiple assassination attempts on President George W. Bush, but they've all been foiled, which is why they report one or two - at most.

[/ QUOTE ]President Reagan had a few near-successful assassination attempts. Security may have improved, but it's not impossible.

*waves Hiya to the FBI-bots that are no doubt now monitoring this thread*

02-27-2008, 03:19 AM

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I highly doubt it. The last successful presidential assassination was John F. Kennedy and their ignorance towards security is shown through them allowing him to ride in an open-top limousine.

Presidential security has come a long way since then. There have been multiple assassination attempts on President George W. Bush, but they've all been foiled, which is why they report one or two - at most.

[/ QUOTE ]President Reagan had a few near-successful assassination attempts. Security may have improved, but it's not impossible.

*waves Hiya to the FBI-bots that are no doubt now monitoring this thread*

[/ QUOTE ]

Waves hi to the G-Men too! Good one Katheryne. http://boards.stratics.com/php-bin/shared/images/graemlins/wink.gif

02-29-2008, 08:18 AM

<blockquote><hr>

It's also not a reason to NOT vote for him...

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. There are issues to this campaign.

<blockquote><hr>

It is a sign, however, that the Republican party is still sending up white men

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps the disproportionate amount in the lack of African American Republicans is due to the Democrats success at fooling African Americans into to thinking they're the only party that represents African American interests.

<blockquote><hr>

Keeping Christian values, even though our nation wasn't built on Christian values, it was built on freedom of religion, which is why we are the only nation in the world without an official religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

While there are often-vocal elements within the Republican Party that do indeed want to have a Christian revolution (and this time around they've even got a minister as a candidate), they are no more representative of the the party at large than the communist elements of the Democrat Party are.

<blockquote><hr>

abortion

[/ QUOTE ]

A dead issue. I'm Pro-Life, but I refuse to vote for a party based on that issue alone, if at all. They've had 35 years to overturn Roe v. Wade, milking fear of baby-killing for all it's worth. If they really wanted to change that law, they would have already done so. I've made a few waives on various YouTube channels by suggesting that overturning it would be a a bad thing for the party, as then they'd have to find a new issue to scare folks into voting for them. Sadly, there are folks who ARE doing this, once again, trying to turn the party into a one-issue-party with all the anti-immigrant baloney. Naturally, I get called a "liberal" for that, but this is from folks hurling the same slurs at McCain, so I take it with a grain of salt. I was canvasing for Reagan when many of these young "you liberal" neo-con whippersnappers weren't even BORN yet.

<blockquote><hr>

Keeping soldiers in Iraq

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that's why I'm voting Republican. Of all the limp-wristed responses to global islamofacism, the Republicans are the least limp-wristed.

<blockquote><hr>

As I'm typing this, Hannity of Hannity & Colmes is ranting on about his Muslim heritage.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not politics. I would contend that that's not even NEWS. Sadly, the media is not in the business of telling us the news -- they're in the business of selling newspapers. And whether they're part of the "Liberal Media" or the "Right Wing Conspiracy", the truth takes a back seat to sensationalism...with some good ol' fashioned character assassination thrown in to spice things up.

<blockquote><hr>

I'm sorry, since when are we a nation that decides on a person's ability to lead based on their middle name?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm...I think I've finally figured out how to seize power: Change my name to Oprah Reagan.

<blockquote><hr>

When is it okay to publicly discriminate against someone's religion?

[/ QUOTE ]

Never.

Well, unless they're a nut-job like Matt Hale or the Christian Identity movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Identity), but those "religions" are beyond the pale.

<blockquote><hr>

How are we a nation of freedom of religion and freedom of speech when we publicly denounce a candidate based on uneducated rumors of him being part of another religion?

[/ QUOTE ]

Romney was right (and he really IS a *gasp* Mormon!), and so are you.