TREKS IN SCI-FI FORUM

Crew Lounge => Conversations => Topic started by: Geekyfanboy on August 29, 2008, 10:30:42 AM

Title: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on August 29, 2008, 10:30:42 AM
Okay I started a thread a few months back and for the most part it was a fairly calm and constructive conversation. Now that we have President and VP elects for both the Democrates and Republican I thought we could try again. Please be aware that these are just opinions of the individual posters. Everyone has the right to express their views.

With that said...

Democrates have Barack Obama and Joe Biden

Republicans have John McCain and Sarah Palin

Let's discuss...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on August 29, 2008, 11:01:54 AM
I am pretty conservative, but I don't feel that I am well represented on either ticket.  It's my opinion that the best presidents govern from the center.  I voted for Huckabee in the primary.  Really I feel like both sides picked duds.  And they both picked duds for running mates.  I think the Republicans should have nominated someone like Romney or Huckabee.  And the Democrats should have nominated someone like Governor Brad Henry of Oklahoma or Sen Evan Byah of Indiana.  Both would have been solid middle of the road candidates.

Just say McCain wins and serves 2 terms, could he govern until he is 80?  I was hoping he would pick someone with more experience as a running mate.  Palin has served one and one half years as governor and she has also been a city council member.  Shouldn't he have picked a more experienced VP? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on August 29, 2008, 11:07:50 AM
I was listening to Palins' speech.  She's a firecracker and - not to be sexist - might throw some curves at the dems.   I hope these debates will the most interesting in awHile.  If McCain wins, it will be close and if its too close, the dems will challenge it (of course).  If Obama wins, it will be a landslide.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on August 29, 2008, 11:47:11 AM
Guess it's too late for Obama to rethink Hillary as a V.P. :(

I like Sarah Palin. She seems very capable to assume the office of V.P. and will be a great roll model for young women everywhere!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on August 29, 2008, 07:44:23 PM
I'm going to be blunt.  I do NOT see the appeal of Obama.  His relations, his questionable past, and his inexperience.  Also, he stands for change.  What the heck kind of change??!!  I'm sorry, but "change" could be anything.  I could say "I'm going to change my ways!" and all I do is go to bed at 11:00pm instead of 10:00pm.  Even his best supporters can't tell me what kind of change he'll bring.  So shouldn't I be concerned just a little?!  I'm sorry, but I'm not clairvoyant.  Tell me what you plan on doing Obama and MAYBE I'll vote for you.  Even my best friend who is a conservative Democrat isn't voting for him.  (And he highly dislikes Bush). 

Now, McCain, you plan on being a man who has no backbone?  You've gone from Conservative to Liberal and now back to Conservative. Which tells me absolutely nothing.  Your choice for running mate isn't appealing to me either.  I mean, heck, with Bush at least I KNEW what he was going to do. 

To be honest, I'm sick of this election already.  I've got a choice between two candidates who say a lot yet nothing.  I have no idea on what they plan on doing in office.  The ONLY comfort I have in this election is that it will be impossible for them to screw up our nation in 4 years.  Thank you checks and balances. 

Time to vote for the independent.  At least I know what he plans on doing.

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jen on August 29, 2008, 07:58:43 PM
I'm staying out of the debate.  I enjoy the friendships I've made here too much to screw it all up with my arguments about politics. 

Just a reminder to try to be respectful when you debate politics here. Democrat, Republican, independents, communists, socialists, anarchists or any other 'ists'. People like visiting these boards because of the friendly environment we maintain here. Just letting you know, before anything becomes heated that bashing will not be tolerated. Please be humble in your stance and respectful of other's opinions.  :)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: moyer777 on August 29, 2008, 08:06:24 PM
I seriously think that Picard would make an excellent president.

Here is why--

First he is a compassionate guy with great leadership skills.
second he is a great diplomat and works well with negotiating.
Third, if he needs to he kicks butt.
Fourth- he's not afraid of strong women, why he even makes cucumber sandwiches for them.

Ok for Vice President, I think Data would be best.

here is what we know--
He is fascinated with humanity and works hard not to kill.
He isn't ruled by his emotions, well at least for some time he wasn't. :)
He get's along with everyone except for people who want to dismantle him and screw up his posotronic brain.
He has an off switch.

There you go.  That's who I'm voting for.

What star trek characters do you think would be a good president and vice and why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on August 29, 2008, 08:15:00 PM
Wow. I'm gone for a day and look what happens. I agree that Jen and Kenny and Rico need to keep this a friendly place, but NOTHING said so far comes even close to crossing that line. Everybody chill out. If someone doesn't care for a candidate, that's fine. We are all adults and realize that opinions should not change our feelings about PEOPLE. We have had many open and frank discussions on this board to it's betterment. Mod's need to relax a bit, you all seem a little to hair trigger suddenly and I say that as a memeber of this community with a right to voice an opinion.

Now having said my peace on that, I like Palin. She's a breath of fresh air and a very bold choice for the McCain campaign, although I think he had to be sold on her at first. Obama is a remarkable man and I respect him very much. My wife may vote for him, however after this VP pick, I'm even more for McCain. I am a social liberal and a fiscal conservative.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jen on August 29, 2008, 08:25:02 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on August 29, 2008, 08:15:00 PM
Wow. I'm gone for a day and look what happens. I agree that Jen and Kenny and Rico need to keep this a friendly place, but NOTHING said so far comes even close to crossing that line. Everybody chill out. If someone doesn't care for a candidate, that's fine. We are all adults and realize that opinions should not change our feelings about PEOPLE. We have had many open and frank discussions on this board to it's betterment. Mod's need to relax a bit, you all seem a little to hair trigger suddenly and I say that as a memeber of this community with a right to voice an opinion.

Now having said my peace on that, I like Palin. She's a breath of fresh air and a very bold choice for the McCain campaign, although I think he had to be sold on her at first. Obama is a remarkable man and I respect him very much. My wife may vote for him, however after this VP pick, I;m even more for McCain.

Bryan... Nothing has been said yet that would be deemed inappropriate. But there have been one or two fly-ins (people who aren't frequent posters) who have said inflammatory things in the past.  I'm just heading off those who may or may not decide to start a fire in our house. You guys have always been respectful and I did not say you could not voice your opinions. I asked people to be respectful and humble. Politics is a VERY touchy subject.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on August 29, 2008, 08:31:48 PM
That's fine Jen, but don't moderate in advance. :) Somehow we have discussed politics, even gay marriage, in the past with no issues.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Lexii Lane on August 29, 2008, 08:33:03 PM
Oh my god you people are CRAZY if you think that.....


Just kidding. No flame posts here dont worry.

I have yet to pay close attention to McCain, but Obama caught my attention with the acceptance speech, and seeing his family there holding hands brought a tear to my eye. I just had this feeling that he did keep talking about change, and we dont know what kind of change that would mean exactly because he hasnt written it down in stone, but I generally feel he cares about his country, and I think he has a good head on his shoulders.

I was blown away when he spoke of how its not all the government behind americas failings, as the government cant "go turn off the TV and make your child do homework" ...  and "cant force a father to take responsibility for his children and raise them right.." He said things to me that hit close to home. And I am totally digging him at this moment. However before Obamas speech, I was a Mccain fan... I cant wait to hear the debates coming in September, I am sure they will be enlightening and gloves off.

But all in all, may the best man (or woman) for the job, and to lead our futures in a good way, be victorious on election day! Godbless America!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jen on August 29, 2008, 08:42:02 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on August 29, 2008, 08:31:48 PM
That's fine Jen, but don't moderate in advance. :) Somehow we have discussed politics, even gay marriage, in the past with no issues.

It was intended as a general heads up for newbies who may pop in on this topic. Yes, we have all been civil and I am proud of the way we all handle sensitive topics. You are all very intelligent and respectful. I did not mean to insult anyone.  ;)
Carry on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Lexii Lane on August 29, 2008, 08:56:18 PM
 :offtopic

We're losing focus people!

Obama?

McCain?

YOU decide :)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on August 29, 2008, 09:23:55 PM
Along with the current global concerns, it appears the old Soviet Bear is stirring from hibernation.

And McCain does have the best foreign policy experience of the lot.
I doubt that the former head of the KGB is going to negotiate because of world opinion.

Even President Kennedy had to take drastic actions to get tough with Khrushchev before he blinked first and removed his military from Cuba.

Putin to re-station Russian nukes/military in Cuba?
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/index.php?topic=78668.0

"Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is calling for Russia to regain its influential position in former Cold War ally Cuba, Russian news reports said Monday.

The statement comes amid persistent speculation about whether Russia is seeking a military presence in a country just 90 miles (150 kilometers) from the United States in response to U.S. plans to place missile-defense elements in Poland and the Czech Republic.

'We should restore our position in Cuba and other countries,' Putin was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency."

---------------------------------------------------

But if we're going to nominate the best Trek character - I don't see how we could do better than the future President "Captian Trips"! Best qualified because he has already "Done that and been there" with the Klingons.

This cats got a great laid back look. When ever I see him in The Undiscovered Country - I can almost smell incense and hear sitar music :)


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on August 30, 2008, 04:20:53 AM
Quote from: moyer777 on August 29, 2008, 08:06:24 PM
I seriously think that Picard would make an excellent president.

Here is why--

First he is a compassionate guy with great leadership skills.
second he is a great diplomat and works well with negotiating.
Third, if he needs to he kicks butt.
Fourth- he's not afraid of strong women, why he even makes cucumber sandwiches for them.

Ok for Vice President, I think Data would be best.

here is what we know--
He is fascinated with humanity and works hard not to kill.
He isn't ruled by his emotions, well at least for some time he wasn't. :)
He get's along with everyone except for people who want to dismantle him and screw up his posotronic brain.
He has an off switch.

There you go.  That's who I'm voting for.

What star trek characters do you think would be a good president and vice and why?


But he was BORG !!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on August 30, 2008, 04:25:00 AM
Quote from: davekill on August 29, 2008, 09:23:55 PM
Along with the current global concerns, it appears the old Soviet Bear is stirring from hibernation.

And McCain does have the best foreign policy experience of the lot.
I doubt that the former head of the KGB is going to negotiate because of world opinion.

Even President Kennedy had to take drastic actions to get tough with Khrushchev before he blinked first and removed his military from Cuba.

Putin to re-station Russian nukes/military in Cuba?
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/index.php?topic=78668.0

"Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is calling for Russia to regain its influential position in former Cold War ally Cuba, Russian news reports said Monday.

The statement comes amid persistent speculation about whether Russia is seeking a military presence in a country just 90 miles (150 kilometers) from the United States in response to U.S. plans to place missile-defense elements in Poland and the Czech Republic.

'We should restore our position in Cuba and other countries,' Putin was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency."

---------------------------------------------------

But if we're going to nominate the best Trek character - I don't see how we could do better than the future President "Captian Trips"! Best qualified because he has already "Done that and been there" with the Klingons.

This cats got a great laid back look. When ever I see him in The Undiscovered Country - I can almost smell incense and hear sitar music :)




That will be interesting development but I think Putin will back off until after the elections.  Guess, we'll have to wait and see.  I also expect the RNC to be delayed by a week because of Gutav.   Again, wait and see.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: X on August 30, 2008, 07:42:22 AM
I think that both candidates used politics to decide their Veeps on some level.

You have your choice between the eldest president and a younger woman VP. For some people this means they could vote for a woman without voting for a woman.

Then you have the minority and the experienced politico. Some people might see that combination as more palatable because there is a status quo backup waiting in the wings.

I personally don't think that even if the Dems managed to heal the rift between the Clinton and Obama supporters, the dream ticket would have been too progressive for a lot of people to be comfortable with.

While we are growing up, it's in steps and that ticket would have been a huge leap.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on August 30, 2008, 08:15:26 AM
Picking a VP is a personal, professional and political decision.  Each of the VP's make sense for both Obama and McCain and each balances their respective tickets.  The neat thing is that we are guaranteed of getting either a woman or african-american in the white house.

I also hope this will encourage people to assume their constitutional responsibility and vote - yes, even if its RAINING.  :'( 
I get weary of 50-60% voter turnout for national election.

I know this will not happen and I can't recall if I mentioned this in another post.  This is maybe more directed at voters on the west coast.  I don't think the media should be allowed to publish election results until ALL polls are closed including AK and HI (considering how prominent these states will be for 2008).  Personally, I can wait until the next morning to find out who won.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on August 30, 2008, 10:26:46 AM
If there is anywhere online this can be civilly discussed, it is here.  I hate seeing the front page of digg anymore because people are two immature to enter this topic.  I think what we need to realize is that people are born to like different flavors of ice cream.  It doesn’t make someone a bad guy if they like he likes strawberry ice cream when I like vanilla.  I think to a degree it comes from birth or imprinted early on in life.  There are people in office who I really like but politically disagree with, and people who I agree with who I can’t stand!

All that being said, I registered republican so I could vote in my state’s republican primaries for governor and senate because the winners of those races tend to win the general election. But that means I get NO vote for sheriff, or any other city or county offices.  No republicans ever run for those offices so I have no vote, unless I give up voting in the big races to vote in the little ones.  Which I think is absolutely absurd.  I don’t care what party the county sheriff belongs to and I can’t see how that would matter.

I vote my personal convictions and would be willing to vote across party lines to do so.  I have voted for candidates who have no chance of winning because I thought they were best for the job.  I didn’t see anyone on either side who really made me look forward to this election.  Huckabee came closest so I did vote for him even though by that time he had very little chance of winning.

At this point of the race, I just try to hide from the news coverage.  I’m not at all looking forward to Election Day.  What I may do is write in “Rick A. Dostie” on the ballot because I really don’t want to vote for either Obama or McCain.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: moyer777 on August 30, 2008, 10:31:37 AM
What I may do is write in "Rick A. Dostie" on the ballot because I really don't want to vote for either Obama or McCain

That is a great idea!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on August 30, 2008, 10:43:23 AM
Not a good idea.  Rico's like Nathan - no room is big enough for his ego ;D
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: moyer777 on August 30, 2008, 10:46:32 AM
ouch.  Be nice Marky Mark.

:)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on August 30, 2008, 11:01:44 AM
Quote from: moyer777 on August 30, 2008, 10:46:32 AM
ouch.  Be nice Marky Mark.

:)

:rofl He know's I kid around too much.  In case anyone wants to see the Dayton event again.  Can't recall when I was this excited about an election.

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/163813.html (http://www.breitbart.tv/html/163813.html)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on August 30, 2008, 11:13:10 AM
I just wanted to add a bit of history to people questioning McCain selecting Palin after meeting her only once. I just think this is interesting since I enjoy history so much.

Did you know that the democratic party selected Truman to run as FDR's VP? It was not even FDR's choice nor did they even talk much at all when both were in power.

With that being said I really like Palin. If anyone is closest to us (middle class) in this whole thing, it's her. Her story is awesome and a joy to hear. She still has to prove herself against Biden during the VP debate, but if she does the Democrats are going to have more problems than they originally thought. For right now she is like a Redbull standing on the podium but she still needs to carry that for a fe months.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on August 30, 2008, 11:18:32 AM
Here is the only news I can stand to watch!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W5IAPK0hbU
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on August 30, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
I love those guys - and they made a few good points to boot!

1. Sarah Palin is not a crooked politician who has worked in Washington for years.
She didn't use a tele-Prom Ter at her acceptance speech - her comments where more sincere.

2.No friend of President Bush. She was a whistle blower in her own party due to political corruption involving the oil industry and the Republican legislator. As a result she has received no support from our current Prez.

3. She administers over one of the largest energy reserves of any state in the union and works to eleminate her states gas tax for the consumer

4. It's possible that after a four year term as V.P., she could be running against Hillary Clinton in an all woman race for President.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on August 30, 2008, 01:29:32 PM
Quote from: davekill on August 30, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
I love those guys - and they made a few good points to boot!

1. Sarah Palin is not a crooked politician who has worked in Washington for years.
She didn't use a tele-Prom Ter at her acceptance speech - her comments where more sincere.

2.No friend of President Bush. She was a whistle blower in her own party due to political corruption involving the oil industry and the Republican legislator. As a result she has received no support from our current Prez.

3. She administers over one of the largest energy reserves of any state in the union and works to eleminate her states gas tax for the consumer

4. It's possible that after a four year term as V.P., she could be running against Hillary Clinton in an all woman race for President.

ALRIGHT !!  Female Mud Slinging is BACK !!! :D
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on August 30, 2008, 03:22:41 PM
I think she's a breath of fresh air. I think McCain is going to have a hard time stumping with her as they are so.....different. But it will very interesting to watch. Same with Obama. Biden was a reasonable choice but I think he's going to look VERY "Washington" next to her in the debates and it will be a crap shoot how the American voters respond. All in all, this will be a great election season and if any Presidential election should bring out the vote, it will be this one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on August 30, 2008, 05:11:09 PM
Quote from: Metron07 on August 30, 2008, 04:01:18 PM
I will cast my vote here and now. I will quote the late Ronald Regan “Are you better off now than you where four years ago?

My postion on social issues does not change every 4 - 8 years. I am with a certain party based on my views on these social issues. If I switch parties when they are down I do so at the risk of my own values. Just my opinion.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on August 30, 2008, 05:15:58 PM
Quote from: davekill on August 30, 2008, 12:31:01 PM
I love those guys - and they made a few good points to boot!

1. Sarah Palin is not a crooked politician who has worked in Washington for years.
She didn't use a tele-Prom Ter at her acceptance speech - her comments where more sincere.

2.No friend of President Bush. She was a whistle blower in her own party due to political corruption involving the oil industry and the Republican legislator. As a result she has received no support from our current Prez.

3. She administers over one of the largest energy reserves of any state in the union and works to eleminate her states gas tax for the consumer

4. It's possible that after a four year term as V.P., she could be running against Hillary Clinton in an all woman race for President.

and Obama's people even veted her....(*Note: Hillary was not considered)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on August 30, 2008, 06:04:42 PM
I will be voting for McCain, my wife was on the fence but she likes the Palin pick and is now leaning McCain. I believe the fiscal disaster we find ourselves in is a result of Bush's prosecution of the war at all cost, which may or may not have been a mistake. The thing is, we will never know. Did his spending and absurd "Patriot Act" actually save us from furhter attacks? We will never know. Given a Republican willing to exercise fiscal discipline, that is more representative of my position. I don't like the Federal Govt. very much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on August 30, 2008, 06:22:50 PM
Quote from: Metron07 on August 30, 2008, 04:01:18 PM
I will cast my vote here and now. I will quote the late Ronald Regan "Are you better off now than you where four years ago?"

Good Question - Yes.
Not because of the government, you and I are just a source of revenue to them.

I'm better off now than four years ago because I work hard at my job (7 years) and it pays off.

I guess the best thing I can expect from our government is that they lower my taxes.
The worse would be if they raise them - or worse yet, not provide highway repair, police protection, national defense or the Post Office. (On second thought, I could prolly live without the postal service)

What do you expect from the government?
I've heard campaign promises of change for the better lately, What kind of change do you need?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on August 30, 2008, 08:02:59 PM
I have a different view on things.. you choose your presidents bases on revenue, financial gains, and taxes among other things.. I have to look at it as my way of living. I'm a gay man living in a country where 21 of the States have laws banning me for getting married to the person I love. And currently only two state allow it.
Over 75% of the country treat me as a second class citizen just because I don't love like they do.

I will always vote Democrat, I may agree with many of the Republicans views (fiscally) but the majority of the Republican Presidential nominees will take away my rights to live the way I was born to live.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Trekkygeek on August 31, 2008, 03:33:36 AM
When I saw Sarah Palin, I was struck by how much she reminded me of Roslin in BSG. Anyone else see that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on August 31, 2008, 04:40:15 AM
When Obama says that people should be "rescued" from buying those cars and houses that they can't afford it makes me nuts.

Americans need to accept more responsibility. JFK once said "Ask Not what your country can do for you". The main reason we are where we are in the economic state is due to Americans buying everything on credit and not being able to pay their bills. The housing problem is due to people buying a house that they should not have bought in the first place. People need to step up and take responsibility for their actions and not blame the govt when they don't come and rescue them. So now that I planned accordingly , and don't buy things on credit and live in a house that we can afford, I have to pay for all those people that just thinks that the govt should figure out ways to fix their mistakes?

This is why I have never voted democrat and never will.

My dad once told me to wake up every morning and look in the mirror and say, " I am NOT a victim".

Just my hard line thoughts.....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on August 31, 2008, 04:50:45 AM
I forgot to say in my last post that I do not agree with every decision Bush or his father has made. To me it's impossible to agree with a party on everything. In fact I think Bush has done things that the democrats would have done like rebate checks and increased federal spending which I dont agree with either...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on August 31, 2008, 01:24:40 PM
Quote from: Metron07 on August 30, 2008, 10:42:10 PM
DaveKill, I very happy to hear you are doing better and that your hard worked paid off.

Metron07 - I'm sorry to hear your feeling the bite and I hope better opportunities come your way soon. I know how unfair life can be sometimes, I've had my share of bad luck too.
One thing you have going is a strong background in computers. On-site system administrators, programmers, content developers will always be needed. Sometimes you have to relocate - but that is just part of the job. Your experience and hard work can pay off in unexpected ways. I know that doesn't help you right now - but it's something you can't learn in school and no one can take it away from you.
as far as the gay community, I feel that "folks are folks". We should all be recognized and respectfull of each other. I can't say I've had many gay friends except my two lesbian roomates that I shared a house with in Tahoe one year.
We had a ball working at the resorts and riding motorcycles around the lake because we respected each other.

I try to live within my means and keep my bills paid.
Yes I work hard because I know what it's like not to have work.

I believe we pay enough government taxes and our leaders should be more responsible.
Example:
My state Governor Schwarzenegger threatened to cut our state employee's salaries to minimum wage due to another Budjet impass. typical political thinking - he should have cut the legislatures salaries to minimum wage and denied any summer recess till they play nice and agree on a budjet.

At least we can post these little rants and stay civil. I appreciate the chance to hear everyones opinion :)

Dave
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on September 05, 2008, 05:59:05 PM
Here we go....
It's Time for Some Campaignin'

Full size playback
http://www.peteyandpetunia.com/VoteHere/VoteHere.htm

or
http://www.youtube.com/v/adc3MSS5Ydc&hl=en&fs=1
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on September 05, 2008, 06:08:09 PM
I love Jib Jab.. that was great.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 05, 2008, 07:23:18 PM
Jib Jab is awesome. That was super. I l though McCain did a good job last night. I thought Palin's speech was great. She is a real firecracker!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 05, 2008, 11:26:42 PM
To be honest, it seems like McCain shot himself in the foot for winning the election easily.  From what I've been hearing, ppl are very much against Palin being the VP.  They would have much rather of had the other choices for VP. But then he went and picked this VP and to some, it was political suicide.  He was trying to cash in on Hillary voters but they won't vote for him (at least the extremists) just because he has a woman running mate.  They only want Hillary.  "Its Hillary or Bust!".  And now he's annoyed some conservatives because they don't want her and her pregnant unmarried daughter.  (Not conservative at all....)

Or so I hear.....

Oh and Jib Jab is awesome. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 05:58:41 AM
Had he picked Romney or another more conservative Republican, the race would have been lost. Obama has too much momentum. I think Biden was a terible choice for him. Palin has a lot of people excited, some people annoyed, but no one is ignoring her. The question is can she win them all over in time? I think she just might.

My wife was leaning towards Obama but now is changing her vote because she really likes Palin.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on September 06, 2008, 07:08:45 AM
What surprises me is how right down the middle this country is divided.  I like a close race but I don't want a repeat of the chaos from 2000 again.  Also think we should have a national standard voting system.   I remember when I would go vote with my dad and get to pull the lever.  Come on !!  Those things were the COOLEST !!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Yeoman Mara on September 06, 2008, 07:17:32 AM
I don't actually think it will be that close.  And I don't think Palin was a good choice.  I just can't agree with McCain and his views on certain woman's issues and other items.  I'll definitely be voting OBama.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on September 06, 2008, 09:01:24 AM
Quote from: Yeoman Mara on September 06, 2008, 07:17:32 AM
I don't actually think it will be that close.  And I don't think Palin was a good choice.  I just can't agree with McCain and his views on certain woman's issues and other items.  I'll definitely be voting OBama.

Whoo hoo another ally.. Thanks Mara. :)

I felt like the lone Obama supporter on this forum.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 09:20:36 AM
Quote from: Yeoman Mara on September 06, 2008, 07:17:32 AM
I don't actually think it will be that close.  And I don't think Palin was a good choice.  I just can't agree with McCain and his views on certain woman's issues and other items.  I'll definitely be voting OBama.

It's going to be VERY close, a real barn burner! At the very least, it certainly offers some fascinating choices!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on September 06, 2008, 09:40:17 AM
I do not understand how people think Palin is a bad choice. You may not like her which is fine but the choice was perfect. I say this because McCain was in trouble with the base and she was the only choice that could have saved the base vote. If people think that picking somone else would have been productive they just want McCain to loose......

The "change" that McCain made during his speech and the combo of picking Palin was the only path that could be choosen if they still expected to compete.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on September 06, 2008, 09:42:05 AM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on September 05, 2008, 11:26:42 PM
To be honest, it seems like McCain shot himself in the foot for winning the election easily.  From what I've been hearing, ppl are very much against Palin being the VP. 

Who? The Democrats? All the polls show they closed the gap with this choice. Without her as the VP , Obama would be running away with it....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 06, 2008, 09:52:21 AM
Quote from: Blackride on September 06, 2008, 09:42:05 AM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on September 05, 2008, 11:26:42 PM
To be honest, it seems like McCain shot himself in the foot for winning the election easily.  From what I've been hearing, ppl are very much against Palin being the VP. 

Who? The Democrats? All the polls show they closed the gap with this choice. Without her as the VP , Obama would be running away with it....

No, I'm talking about the conservatives.  He had a good chance of securing his party with his choice of VP, but he goes for a woman.  Many conservatives were going to vote McCain outright, but then he went and took this person, who's daughter is pregnant and not married, who is currently being investigated....some ppl are just like, "Congrats McCain, your an idiot".  Its what I've been hearing.  I personally am against this choice.  I probably would have voted for McCain outright, but now I've got this choice that isn't.....great...

Some even suspect that McCain is being sabotaged.  Every time he's been in the "lead", he does something really stupid that puts him below Obama. 

*sigh*.  Oh well, at least neither of them can screw up the country in 4 years. 

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on September 06, 2008, 10:52:39 AM
Wanna bet ?  Watch if Obama wins and he does his tax increase, increases min wage (another tax increase) and nationalizes health care (hmmm sounds like a another tax).  The economy is not strong enough.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on September 06, 2008, 10:56:37 AM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on September 06, 2008, 09:52:21 AM
No, I'm talking about the conservatives.  He had a good chance of securing his party with his choice of VP, but he goes for a woman.  Many conservatives were going to vote McCain outright, but then he went and took this person, who's daughter is pregnant and not married, who is currently being investigated....some ppl are just like, "Congrats McCain, your an idiot".  Its what I've been hearing.  I personally am against this choice.  I probably would have voted for McCain outright, but now I've got this choice that isn't.....great...

McCain is known for NOT having the base of the party. He has gone against the party numerous times. That was always his biggest liability. This is why in 2000 he did not fair well.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on September 06, 2008, 11:36:04 AM
I think it was a very smart move on McCain's part to select a woman as VP. Now , whether Palin should have been that choice I don't know. I think Condaleeza Rice would have been a far better choice and probably would have guaranteed him the election but that's just my thinking. I was quite interested in Obama early on but the farther down the road we have gotten the less attractive he is to me. I think we do need "change" and that has been his credo but change can be good or bad and I have not heard Obama say anything at all about how he will change things. All he does is complain about the current administration and the direction it has taken but he has offered no valid or viable options to bring about positive change. The changes I do hear of will cost the American public severely and place an even larger tax burden on the middle class. He has offered no viable solutions to improve the economy and get us back on track, is supportive of larger and bigger government, and giving free handouts. I think we do need change but I am not convinced in the least that Obama is the kind of change that will move this country forward. I suspect that his policies will actually have an opposite effect if allowed to run their course.

Kevin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on September 06, 2008, 01:00:40 PM
Today if Obama represents the left and McCain the right, then the middle has slid far left since the days of JFK and Barry Goldwater.

McCain's national defense, open trade and illegal alien amnesty policies are much like John F. Kennedy's agenda.
Goldwater or even Regan couldn't get elected now days.

The Democrates have a good and experienced candidate running who embodies the Democratic spirit but don't recognize that it is "today's Republican" John McCain.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 01:01:12 PM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on September 06, 2008, 09:52:21 AM
Quote from: Blackride on September 06, 2008, 09:42:05 AM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on September 05, 2008, 11:26:42 PM
To be honest, it seems like McCain shot himself in the foot for winning the election easily.  From what I've been hearing, ppl are very much against Palin being the VP. 

Who? The Democrats? All the polls show they closed the gap with this choice. Without her as the VP , Obama would be running away with it....

No, I'm talking about the conservatives.  He had a good chance of securing his party with his choice of VP, but he goes for a woman.  Many conservatives were going to vote McCain outright, but then he went and took this person, who's daughter is pregnant and not married, who is currently being investigated....some ppl are just like, "Congrats McCain, your an idiot".  Its what I've been hearing.  I personally am against this choice.  I probably would have voted for McCain outright, but now I've got this choice that isn't.....great...

Some even suspect that McCain is being sabotaged.  Every time he's been in the "lead", he does something really stupid that puts him below Obama. 

*sigh*.  Oh well, at least neither of them can screw up the country in 4 years. 

King

I just don't see how fronting a more traditional conservative ticket would have been a better option, King. Conservative Republican's, who ironically enough should be more receptive to a teenager wanting to actaully have her baby, are still going to vote MCain. They may not like Palin, but there is no way they will vote for Obama and they will not stay home. They are stuck, they had 8 years and no way a conservative ticket win's this election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 06, 2008, 01:07:01 PM
Quote from: Ktrek on September 06, 2008, 11:36:04 AM
I think it was a very smart move on McCain's part to select a woman as VP. Now , whether Palin should have been that choice I don't know. I think Condaleeza Rice would have been a far better choice and probably would have guaranteed him the election but that's just my thinking. I was quite interested in Obama early on but the farther down the road we have gotten the less attractive he is to me. I think we do need "change" and that has been his credo but change can be good or bad and I have not heard Obama say anything at all about how he will change things. All he does is complain about the current administration and the direction it has taken but he has offered no valid or viable options to bring about positive change. The changes I do hear of will cost the American public severely and place an even larger tax burden on the middle class. He has offered no viable solutions to improve the economy and get us back on track, is supportive of larger and bigger government, and giving free handouts. I think we do need change but I am not convinced in the least that Obama is the kind of change that will move this country forward. I suspect that his policies will actually have an opposite effect if allowed to run their course.

Kevin

You've stated my problem with Obama.  WHAT CHANGE ARE YOU GOING TO DO??!!  I mean, you can talk and talk and talk about change, but I haven't heard one solid thing that you are going to change.  Please state your case or get off my ballot.  Damnit!  lol ;)

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 06, 2008, 01:08:18 PM
Quote from: Blackride on September 06, 2008, 10:56:37 AM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on September 06, 2008, 09:52:21 AM
No, I'm talking about the conservatives.  He had a good chance of securing his party with his choice of VP, but he goes for a woman.  Many conservatives were going to vote McCain outright, but then he went and took this person, who's daughter is pregnant and not married, who is currently being investigated....some ppl are just like, "Congrats McCain, your an idiot".  Its what I've been hearing.  I personally am against this choice.  I probably would have voted for McCain outright, but now I've got this choice that isn't.....great...

McCain is known for NOT having the base of the party. He has gone against the party numerous times. That was always his biggest liability. This is why in 2000 he did not fair well.



An excellent point. 

I don't suppose we could just elect to have a new election in the fall?  You know, just completely scrap the ballot and start over?  Its a mess.....

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 06, 2008, 01:10:29 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 01:01:12 PM

I just don't see how fronting a more traditional conservative ticket would have been a better option, King. Conservative Republican's, who ironically enough should be more receptive to a teenager wanting to actaully have her baby, are still going to vote MCain. They may not like Palin, but there is no way they will vote for Obama and they will not stay home. They are stuck, they had 8 years and no way a conservative ticket win's this election.

Our problem with Palin's daughter is not that she wants to have it.  Its that she is having it and she's not married.....or am I just an "old fart" and Republican's no longer make a big deal about pre-marital sex?   
Otherwise yes, she does seem to be pro-life which we will accept. 

King

P.S.  Yes, I made three posts.  Rawr!!  ;)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on September 06, 2008, 01:23:00 PM
Do you think that Obama will replace Joe Bidden and with a more popular running mate? Nancy Pelosi?

Maybe he should have gone with the logical choice at the time - Hillary Clinton.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: wraith1701 on September 06, 2008, 01:24:06 PM
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on September 06, 2008, 09:01:24 AM
Quote from: Yeoman Mara on September 06, 2008, 07:17:32 AM
I don't actually think it will be that close.  And I don't think Palin was a good choice.  I just can't agree with McCain and his views on certain woman's issues and other items.  I'll definitely be voting OBama.

Whoo hoo another ally.. Thanks Mara. :)

I felt like the lone Obama supporter on this forum.

Y'all aren't alone. ;)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 01:27:18 PM
Quote from: davekill on September 06, 2008, 01:23:00 PM
Do you think that Obama will replace Joe Bidden and with a more popular running mate? Nancy Pelosi?

Maybe he should have gone with the logical choice at the time - Hillary Clinton.

Oh God, please not Pelosi, I really don't like her. I don't know if Hilary would have taken the VP. I think she runs again in 4 or 8 years depending on how this election play's out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 01:31:29 PM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on September 06, 2008, 01:10:29 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 01:01:12 PM

I just don't see how fronting a more traditional conservative ticket would have been a better option, King. Conservative Republican's, who ironically enough should be more receptive to a teenager wanting to actaully have her baby, are still going to vote MCain. They may not like Palin, but there is no way they will vote for Obama and they will not stay home. They are stuck, they had 8 years and no way a conservative ticket win's this election.

Our problem with Palin's daughter is not that she wants to have it.  Its that she is having it and she's not married.....or am I just an "old fart" and Republican's no longer make a big deal about pre-marital sex?  
Otherwise yes, she does seem to be pro-life which we will accept. 

King

P.S.  Yes, I made three posts.  Rawr!!  ;)

OK, King, I can understand that but as a conservative Republican, are you just going to stay home on Nov. 5th because of Palin's daughter? I say there is zero chance conservative Republican's still don't support the ticket, a ticket that may draw in moderates in sufficient numbers to win the election. A conservative VP pick and this game would have been over.

I also want to go on record saying that I like Obama a great deal. He's a very interesting public servant and I look forward to seeing him continue to grow and eveolve. I won't vote for him but he has my respect.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: davekill on September 06, 2008, 01:46:05 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 01:27:18 PM
Quote from: davekill on September 06, 2008, 01:23:00 PM
Do you think that Obama will replace Joe Bidden and with a more popular running mate? Nancy Pelosi?

Maybe he should have gone with the logical choice at the time - Hillary Clinton.

Oh God, please not Pelosi, I really don't like her. I don't know if Hilary would have taken the VP. I think she runs again in 4 or 8 years depending on how this election play's out.

Yeah, I kind of thought that Hillary was too politically ambitious for Obama. He wouldn't want to have someone taste his food or start his car everyday :)

I wouldn't be too hard on Palin's daughter, this isn't the first teenager to get pregnant.
Black, White, rich and poor kids make mistakes - always have and always will.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 06, 2008, 01:59:56 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 01:31:29 PM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on September 06, 2008, 01:10:29 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on September 06, 2008, 01:01:12 PM

I just don't see how fronting a more traditional conservative ticket would have been a better option, King. Conservative Republican's, who ironically enough should be more receptive to a teenager wanting to actaully have her baby, are still going to vote MCain. They may not like Palin, but there is no way they will vote for Obama and they will not stay home. They are stuck, they had 8 years and no way a conservative ticket win's this election.

Our problem with Palin's daughter is not that she wants to have it.  Its that she is having it and she's not married.....or am I just an "old fart" and Republican's no longer make a big deal about pre-marital sex?  
Otherwise yes, she does seem to be pro-life which we will accept. 

King

P.S.  Yes, I made three posts.  Rawr!!  ;)

OK, King, I can understand that but as a conservative Republican, are you just going to stay home on Nov. 5th because of Palin's daughter? I say there is zero chance conservative Republican's still don't support the ticket, a ticket that may draw in moderates in sufficient numbers to win the election. A conservative VP pick and this game would have been over.

I also want to go on record saying that I like Obama a great deal. He's a very interesting public servant and I look forward to seeing him continue to grow and eveolve. I won't vote for him but he has my respect.

That is probably true.  If he had chosen other than Palin, it might be over for him......we'll just have to see. 

Yes, everyone makes mistakes.  We just don't like being reminded that.  ;)

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 06, 2008, 02:01:54 PM
Quote from: davekill on September 06, 2008, 01:23:00 PM
Do you think that Obama will replace Joe Bidden and with a more popular running mate? Nancy Pelosi?

Maybe he should have gone with the logical choice at the time - Hillary Clinton.

If he had done that.....I doubt he would be in such a great position.  To be honest, I wouldn't have given him another thought.  And although I've been against him, at least with his current choice, he is an option.  If he had chosen Hillary.....uhh...no ty. 

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on September 06, 2008, 09:04:04 PM
Quote from: Metron07 on September 06, 2008, 08:18:39 PM
Just something to think about. If anyone saw Bill Maher on Friday night, they did a piece on how there was barely no mention of George Bush during the convention. There where no buttons, no signs, and he didn't even come in person. He has been our president elected for eight years! Eight years! And now he is persona non Grata! Now you would over look those eight years and give that party a pass and elect yet another from the same party?

When Nixon goofed, he resigned, when Ford tripped Carter beat him, when Carter goofed he got beat by Regan, when Bush 1 and the Republicans goofed, they got beat by Clinton twice, when Clinton, Gore, and the other dems goofed, they got beat by Bush 2 twice!, now he have Bush 2 who beats them all out in goofs and you want more?

This failed leader, his party, and their candidate need to cool their heels for at least the next four years and give someone else a equal chance to goof or succeed. This is after all the land of opportunity and the Republicans have had enough opportunity to be in the Executive Branch of this Government for at least the short term.

Overly simplistic? Maybe, but this is one time history needs to repeat itself.  :2cents

Bush isn't running for president.  I didn't expect a speech any longer then what we heard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on September 06, 2008, 09:08:54 PM
Quote from: davekill on September 06, 2008, 01:23:00 PM
Do you think that Obama will replace Joe Bidden and with a more popular running mate? Nancy Pelosi?

Maybe he should have gone with the logical choice at the time - Hillary Clinton.

When Obama didn't pick Hillary, I KNEW McCain would take advantage of this.  Seriously, I had expected the senator from Texas (name escapes me).  I wouldn't doubt that Obama cut a deal with Clintons.  Maybe they offered to help in the campaign in exchange for a cabinet seat/ambassador/etc.  We'll see.  I think the country is tired of Bill Clinton and now that we have Palin, this may threaten Hillary running in 2012.

PELOSI !!??  She's a bit of a - in Harry Reids words - a shrill.  :D
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 06, 2008, 10:32:31 PM
Quote from: Metron07 on September 06, 2008, 08:18:39 PM
Just something to think about. If anyone saw Bill Maher on Friday night, they did a piece on how there was barely no mention of George Bush during the convention. There where no buttons, no signs, and he didn't even come in person. He has been our president elected for eight years! Eight years! And now he is persona non Grata! Now you would over look those eight years and give that party a pass and elect yet another from the same party?

When Nixon goofed, he resigned, when Ford tripped Carter beat him, when Carter goofed he got beat by Regan, when Bush 1 and the Republicans goofed, they got beat by Clinton twice, when Clinton, Gore, and the other dems goofed, they got beat by Bush 2 twice!, now he have Bush 2 who beats them all out in goofs and you want more?

This failed leader, his party, and their candidate need to cool their heels for at least the next four years and give someone else a equal chance to goof or succeed. This is after all the land of opportunity and the Republicans have had enough opportunity to be in the Executive Branch of this Government for at least the short term.

Overly simplistic? Maybe, but this is one time history needs to repeat itself.  :2cents

You know what's depressing?  Your absolutely correct.  Its almost depressing we can't find a suitable candidate for the presidency.  People revere Regen so much because even though he had his faults, we knew where he stand, he didn't backstab us and didn't embarrass us.  Now these joke-of-a-candidate people want to try and get the crown.  It saddens me that out of all of America, we chose these two. 

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on September 07, 2008, 04:43:08 AM
There is way to much at risks for Republicans or Americans to sit back. For example:

- 2 supreme court judges at a min will be elected to the bench by the next president. Those appointments last LONG after the sitting president leaves office.

- Some of the changes Obamas presenting are a HUGE ideologically change to America. There are a lot of social programs that have to be paid for somehow. I stress to people look at Holland if you want to know how the policies will affect America or could make America look like.

- Taxes on the people that create jobs is not a good thing. 95% of America who will get tax breaks do NOT create jobs. The idea of giving tax breaks to people that do not create jobs would be to simple stimulate the economy but this is not sustaining long term growth. Under both Clinton and Reagan this country did well, and this was because jobs were created! Jobs are a long term solution while giving lowering taxes on someone is not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on September 07, 2008, 06:04:53 AM
Can hardly wait for the debates to begin.  I hope the moderators take it as seriously as the rest of America - ask them some TOUGH questions.  For once, I may have to watch the VP debates also.  I think Biden will drop his guard and be speechless -- FINALLY !! :D
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Darth Gaos on September 07, 2008, 02:01:27 PM
Well it will be a refreshing for someone to actually ask a tough question of Obama.  More to the point it will be interesting to see Obama actually have to answer a tough question.  We'll see.  I, like many, am looking forward to the debates for a change....even the VP debates.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on September 08, 2008, 11:57:28 AM
Do you really want a president like the American public?

I sure don’t.  There is so much pressure for candidates to prove how they are like us.  And the other side wants to show how his opponent and the people differ.  Such as what’s on their ipod, what do they eat, read, watch, etc.  All things I really don’t care about.  Reporters try to get to the bottom of who is in and out of touch…….  But with what?

In 1967, the media spent hours upon hours on Christiaan Barnard, who preformed the first human heart transplant. 40 years later, the American people couldn’t get enough coverage of Anna Nicole’s death, Paris Hilton, and Kim Kardashian.  And just how many shows do we need on VH1 or E! letting us know who is jumping into bed with who?  Yes, we have become a strange culture.  So why would being in touch a good thing and out of touch a bad thing?

Personally, I think we should just have a basic federal government for defense, to deliver the mail, coin money, foreign relations, etc.  Not to try to fix my problems or to take care of me.  I think issues like education, transportation, law enforcement (most of it anyway), etc, are responsibility of the states, counties, and townships.  Why should a locally built school, with a board of parents, ran by a local administration, taught by local teachers have to be regulated down to what kind of cookies the kids get to eat by George Bush?

I don’t think it’s likely that the fixes to America’s problems will come from Washington DC.  It’s much more likely to me that private citizens will put forth the ideas that will do so.  For example, T. Boone Pickens (born in the same small town that I was) has proposed solar, wind, and natural gas energy plan that could break America of it’s foreign oil addiction.  It may not be the best plan but it is a huge step in the right direction of private citizens offering fixes to what government can not and will not do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on September 09, 2008, 12:42:40 PM
Could this be the compromise that solves same sex marriage questions?

There was a post about same sex marriage on this thread but I didn’t have anything to contribute that would be new or interesting until this morning.  Like most on my side of the political isle, I have never been in favor of same sex marriage until something crossed my mind making me rethink it.  When two sides can’t agree often the best thing for the situation is a compromise. 

Same sex marriage is a left of center position strongly opposed by the right.  Now the issue is, should Washington step in and force the other 48 states to honor the controversial marriage licenses issued by Massachusetts and California?   Normally I’m not in favor of that kind of forced dictation to the states.  Now here is where compromise comes in.  And it might be the most interesting since the Missouri compromise.   

Here is something to think about: are there any licenses issued in the red states not honored elsewhere?  There are.  In fact, I have one.  My state issues concealed weapons licenses to persons 21 years old or older with a clean background.  But it’s only good for Oklahoma and a few other states.  So I couldn’t legally travel to San Francisco or Boston with a pistol under my jacket. But if no other state could invalidate the Oklahoma license, I could be packing everywhere! Could this give and take negotiation be the way to go?  Perhaps it should read, no state may invalidate another state’s marriage license or issues concealed weapons license.  Then both sides could tolerate a change they would otherwise feel uncomfortable with because of what they had gained. Would I change my position on same sex marriage if it means I get to carry a gun in all 50 states?  I really had to stop and think about this one!  I’m still not sure but it’s the only thing thus far forcing me to open my mind to it.


Could I have just brought GLAAD and the NRA together?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 09, 2008, 01:23:41 PM
That is not a bad Idea AlanP.  But I seem to remember something akin to this argument a while ago....

The problem is...well, would people accept this?  I mean to me, it would make it so if I wanted to get a concealed weapon, all I would have to do is state hop.  Go to California or something then return to Oregon.  Seems like this would be abused pretty heavily.  Especially with ID Fraud nowadays. 

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on September 09, 2008, 02:54:03 PM
Quote from: AlanP on September 09, 2008, 12:42:40 PM
Could this be the compromise that solves same sex marriage questions?

There was a post about same sex marriage on this thread but I didn't have anything to contribute that would be new or interesting until this morning.  Like most on my side of the political isle, I have never been in favor of same sex marriage until something crossed my mind making me rethink it.  When two sides can't agree often the best thing for the situation is a compromise. 

Same sex marriage is a left of center position strongly opposed by the right.  Now the issue is, should Washington step in and force the other 48 states to honor the controversial marriage licenses issued by Massachusetts and California?   Normally I'm not in favor of that kind of forced dictation to the states.  Now here is where compromise comes in.  And it might be the most interesting since the Missouri compromise.   

Here is something to think about: are there any licenses issued in the red states not honored elsewhere?  There are.  In fact, I have one.  My state issues concealed weapons licenses to persons 21 years old or older with a clean background.  But it's only good for Oklahoma and a few other states.  So I couldn't legally travel to San Francisco or Boston with a pistol under my jacket. But if no other state could invalidate the Oklahoma license, I could be packing everywhere! Could this give and take negotiation be the way to go?  Perhaps it should read, no state may invalidate another state's marriage license or issues concealed weapons license.  Then both sides could tolerate a change they would otherwise feel uncomfortable with because of what they had gained. Would I change my position on same sex marriage if it means I get to carry a gun in all 50 states?  I really had to stop and think about this one!  I'm still not sure but it's the only thing thus far forcing me to open my mind to it.


Could I have just brought GLAAD and the NRA together?


Wow.. I'm totally speechless here..
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: X on September 09, 2008, 03:41:19 PM
I would like to respectfully disagree with your position. You are comparing apples to bricks.

1) A concealed permit allows you to carry a loaded and dangerous weapon undetected. There is the potential for public harm when in places that don't also allow all residents the same right to carry.

2) Same sex marriage is nothing like a concealed weapon.


While some people might not agree over same sex marriage, ignoring the fundimental rights of any consenting adults to marry is just plain silly.

If you are drunk in another state with a concealed weapon and permit, you have the potential to kill someone.

Same sex marriage isn't going to kill anyone even if they are drunk.

Here is another thing.

Let's break down the sanctity of marriage for a woman.

In it's humble beginning in the deep past marriage was a contract between a father and the husband to be and the man could marry as many as he wanted in some places. The woman had no choice.

Still further in the past. Men were allowed to marry both sexes, but women couldn't, they were still property at this point.

Jump to the middle ages and women are still being forced into marriages. A woman who was raped by a man in the English control areas had no options. Either her rapist married her or he went to jail. Some men used this to rape wealthy women and then join the families of the powerful. Women were still property then and had no choice in it.

Look a 10 different cultures and you'll find 100 different ways for a man to be wed and most of them still considered the women property of their husbands.

Marriage isn't something that was great, grand, and mythic in the past that would be destroyed if same sex marriages were allowed. They are allowed and it hasn't happened.

Here is the litmus test that I go by.

If somehow two people of the same sex getting married destroys someone else's marriage, MAYBE just maybe it was really the two people that were married that was the problem and same sex marriage is nothing more than an excuse.

How can something someone else does really affect your own personal life and vows?

If marriage is some fragile thing that needs PROTECTING, maybe the best course of action would be to ban the heteros from getting married because OBVIOUSLY a huge percentage of them are failing at it. So let's protect marriage and ban heteros and see if the homosexuals can produce better odds in staying together for the long haul.


Here is a little more food for thought. All marriages in in pain. 100% of all marriages to date, in all of history, has ended in either death or divorce! ( Annulled doesn't count because that means the marriage never existed)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Dan M on September 10, 2008, 04:02:53 AM
Quote from: Metron07 on September 09, 2008, 08:22:04 PM
The right is now making noises that they may ease up on this issue as it may serve their political agenda.

Speaking of not being fooled again, don't think that every liberal politician who votes "correctly" really supports your position.  However, it serves their political agenda.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 10, 2008, 05:39:59 AM
Quote from: pickard on September 10, 2008, 04:02:53 AM
Quote from: Metron07 on September 09, 2008, 08:22:04 PM
The right is now making noises that they may ease up on this issue as it may serve their political agenda.

Speaking of not being fooled again, don't think that every liberal politician who votes "correctly" really supports your position.  However, it serves their political agenda.

x2, but if it moves Federal policy towards a more accomodative and reasonable postion on same sex marriages, then I'll take it anyway we can. Political expediency or a genuine belief, as long as the results are for the good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: billybob476 on September 10, 2008, 05:59:37 AM
Quote from: AlanP on September 09, 2008, 12:42:40 PM
Could this be the compromise that solves same sex marriage questions?

There was a post about same sex marriage on this thread but I didn't have anything to contribute that would be new or interesting until this morning.  Like most on my side of the political isle, I have never been in favor of same sex marriage until something crossed my mind making me rethink it.  When two sides can't agree often the best thing for the situation is a compromise. 

Same sex marriage is a left of center position strongly opposed by the right.  Now the issue is, should Washington step in and force the other 48 states to honor the controversial marriage licenses issued by Massachusetts and California?   Normally I'm not in favor of that kind of forced dictation to the states.  Now here is where compromise comes in.  And it might be the most interesting since the Missouri compromise.  

Here is something to think about: are there any licenses issued in the red states not honored elsewhere?  There are.  In fact, I have one.  My state issues concealed weapons licenses to persons 21 years old or older with a clean background.  But it's only good for Oklahoma and a few other states.  So I couldn't legally travel to San Francisco or Boston with a pistol under my jacket. But if no other state could invalidate the Oklahoma license, I could be packing everywhere! Could this give and take negotiation be the way to go?  Perhaps it should read, no state may invalidate another state's marriage license or issues concealed weapons license.  Then both sides could tolerate a change they would otherwise feel uncomfortable with because of what they had gained. Would I change my position on same sex marriage if it means I get to carry a gun in all 50 states?  I really had to stop and think about this one!  I'm still not sure but it's the only thing thus far forcing me to open my mind to it.


Could I have just brought GLAAD and the NRA together?


You DO realize you are making out same-sex couples who want to get married seem like criminals with this idea, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 10, 2008, 11:43:45 AM
That's just a reflection of my general disgust/disappointment with our current political system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on September 10, 2008, 02:00:21 PM
Let the states decide what to do not the federal govt..... It's what the founders (and I ) wanted anyway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on September 10, 2008, 02:10:14 PM
Quote from: Blackride on September 10, 2008, 02:00:21 PM
Let the states decide what to do not the federal govt..... It's what the founders (and I ) wanted anyway.

So what you are saying is let the states decided about gay marriage. So me being a gay man can marry my partner in California but if I get into an accident while in Utah let's say and I'm in the ICU of a hospital my husband can't visit me because in that state we are not married and therefore he is not related to me.

Please tell me how this is fair...or even right...

I don't understand how people can honestly say this is fair. I'm a human being just like you, why can't I have the same rights as everyone else.. I mean we are in the year 2008 now.

Please understand..  I'm not attacking anyone's beliefs, it's just hard to listen to folks compare the love between two people to the ownership of a gun to allowing some states to ban a human right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on September 10, 2008, 03:11:11 PM
Quote from: Blackride on September 10, 2008, 02:00:21 PM
Let the states decide what to do not the federal govt..... It's what the founders (and I ) wanted anyway.

I'm actually going to mildly agree with Blackride.  I'm sick and tired of the feds dictating rule for all the states.  This is the United STATES of America.  Not the United Federals of America.  (Sorry to step on you Kenny).  But some people get cranky when they dictate what the National average should be when each state is different and unique in its own way.  I'm sick of it myself.  (No Child Left Behind anyone?) 

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on September 10, 2008, 03:21:21 PM
I could not have said this any better as I tried to originally:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/06/the_importance_of_protecting_m.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: X on September 10, 2008, 03:47:20 PM
Quote from: Blackride on September 10, 2008, 03:21:21 PM
I could not have said this any better as I tried to originally:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/06/the_importance_of_protecting_m.html

I can't disagree with this more.

I have one question for those against same sex marriages.

Is there ANY arguments against same sex marriages that WASN'T used on interracial marriages?

Mitt Romney is a pandering idiot. (I'm in the state that he formerly governed)

he says that history favored Hetero marriage, but if anyone actually decided to look it up, it's not true.

It also dismisses people that get married because they love each other and never want to have kids. Should we ban them from being married too? What about the ones that want kids but can't have them? Should they get banned?

Children are NOT the reason to get married, but merely a result of SOME marriage.

If someone thinks that marriage NEEDS protecting maybe they shouldn't be married? Maybe the problem isn't with marriage, but with them thinking that marriage is some sort of magical cure all to society's woes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on September 10, 2008, 03:49:19 PM
I to am not a big fan of the Federal government and wish that this country was governed more like the Republic under which it was founded. There is an obvious need for the Federal government and any legislation regarding gay marriage should come from he Federal government to ensure it is applied uniformly across the States. Or at the very least, if a State population chooses to deny gay marriage, the basic rights and privileges accorded to married couples should still apply even if the State doesn't have laws allowing for gay unions. Just a suggestion, we have an old thread regarding same sex unions and maybe this discussion should be moved over there. This thread was more about the current election initially.

But I do feel that the Fedreal government has usurped excessive power form the States and that is contrary to what the founding fathers; intended. I'm more Libertarian than anything else.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Blackride on September 10, 2008, 04:00:46 PM
I agree this is not the thread for this discussion. I usually try to stay away from this discussion because there is nothing said that is going to change my mind or my families and I do not like to upset others either...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on October 07, 2008, 09:20:17 AM
Hadn't posted in a while and before I started posting again I thought I'd better try to settle everything down that I seemed to have unintentionally stirred up on this thread.

First of all, I don't care what goes in anyone else's house other than my own.

Second, I never even addressed the reason that I said I hadn't been a supporter of same sex marriage.  So here is the reason.  I see marriage as a religious arrangement not a secular one.  Should government step in try to sort out who is baptized and who isn't?  In my religion and in most around the world it is the clergy who decide what marriage is.  That being said I have feared the government taking that right away.  I mean, I feel that it's a tough pill to swallow that government should step in and say it's no longer for your clearly or a private citizen to decide what will be called a marriage.  Just my opinion and I hope we can all agree to disagree on this one.

I do think in America, people should be allowed to live how ever they want without interference from the government as long as they  aren't hurting anyone.  And I think the rights that come with marriage should be available to those who aren't married.  Including hospital visitation and I'll get to that one in a sec.  I think the government should say, "OK, we've been treating a 'religious institution' one way, so now we have to make a similar arrangement  where property can be owned, hospital visitation is possible, etc. that mirrors how the government treats marriage."  This is all my opinion and I hope we can agree to disagree.

Now the morning I wrote the post I had thought about how I wish my concealed weapons license would be valid in other states just as many same sex couples who have marriage license, would be recognized in all 50 states.  And the point to what I had written about was how ironic that was.  I did feel more than a little hypocritical that up until that morning I wanted my permit recognized by all 50 states but at the same time didn't support someone else's of a very different type.  Just a few random thoughts I put to text because I had some time to kill.  I wasn't trying to make an apples to apples comparison between the two unrelated items.  Nor was I equating those same sex couples to criminals.  That one surprised me.  Who brought up crime?  I was talking about lawfully caring guns for personal defense with the approval of the government.

Now Kenny is right that in the ICU units of many hospitals only allow family back there. I totally feel this is a bogus practice. I think the patient should be allowed to specify who may visit not the hospital.  What if I wanted my accountant right there with me after a plane crash?  Shouldn't I be allowed to make that happen without marring her? If I was a wall street day trader this would be a big deal to me.  The way we got around this when this happened in my own life was through a process called lying.  My best friend wanted to come see my grandma after her stroke.  When asked if he was related, he said he was her grandson!  It does work, but I don't think we should have to resort to that....  In this world of digital medical records, we ought to be able to make a list of people who may come in if something happens to me.

So I hope we can agree to disagree on a few things and you guys don't think I'm a hate-monger from the first posting!  And if you do disagree with me, keep in mind that I am a live and let live guy who wouldn't change your mind if I could.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Darth Gaos on October 07, 2008, 12:26:29 PM
Tis a slippery slope we walk here but I did want to point out an observation.  During the Vice-Presidential debates BOTH candidates said they were in favor of ways to ensure that gay couples had more rights (ie visitation, insurance benefits etc)....not just the Democrat, BOTH candidates.  BOTH candidates also said they were opposed to gay marriage and/or redfining marriage as anything other than between a man and a woman.  Not just the Republican candidate...BOTH candidates.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on October 07, 2008, 12:36:57 PM
Quote from: Darth Gaos on October 07, 2008, 12:26:29 PM
Tis a slippery slope we walk here but I did want to point out an observation.  During the Vice-Presidential debates BOTH candidates said they were in favor of ways to ensure that gay couples had more rights (ie visitation, insurance benefits etc)....not just the Democrat, BOTH candidates.  BOTH candidates also said they were opposed to gay marriage and/or redfining marriage as anything other than between a man and a woman.  Not just the Republican candidate...BOTH candidates.



Either way..................................we're screwed.  I'm not saying just the whole gay issue its just that there is nothing these candidates won't say to get elected.  Its why I think we're sooo............fu-barred.  No one stands for issues anymore, they stand for "WHATEVER is needed to say to win even if I'm lying through my own teeth to win it"

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on October 07, 2008, 12:55:59 PM
Quote from: Darth Gaos on October 07, 2008, 12:26:29 PM
Tis a slippery slope we walk here but I did want to point out an observation.  During the Vice-Presidential debates BOTH candidates said they were in favor of ways to ensure that gay couples had more rights (ie visitation, insurance benefits etc)....not just the Democrat, BOTH candidates.  BOTH candidates also said they were opposed to gay marriage and/or redfining marriage as anything other than between a man and a woman.  Not just the Republican candidate...BOTH candidates.

I thought this thread had died.. wishful thinking..

I found this article about about that topic and thought they brought up some good points.

Veeps Agree on Same-Sex Couples - Or Do They?
October 4, 11:19 AM
by Billy Thieme, Relationship Examiner

One undercurrent that has crept across the media spectrum from Thursday night's Vice Presidential debate is the observation that the Biden and Palin actually agree on civil rights for same-sex couples. Kudos to both of them! It's about time we removed the discussion from the government's table. After all, What business is it of theirs? The government needs to back away from attempts to define what relationship "is" or "is not" the right kind, right? Glad to see the candidates agree that it's up to us!

But wait - maybe we need to look a little more closely. In light of the decision we'll all be making in a few weeks, I think it makes sense that those of us who have a vested interest in allowing people to find, as Sarah Palin put it, " . . .relationships that they deem best for themselves" make sure that the messages the candidates are sending out are as clear as they can be. This way, we can be sure we're makeing the most informed decision in November.

Let's look closely at the candidates' views on the issue:

The question put forth in the debate was "Do you support granting benefits to same-sex couples?"

Senator Joe Biden, actually addressed the question directly, and replied directly with this answer:  " . . . in an Obama/Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction, from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint, between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple. . . . We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to property rights, rights of visitation, rights of insurance, the rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do."

Governor Palin's answer, however, was not quite so direct.

When asked if she would be willing to see Alaska's current regulations (which require granting equal benefits for same sex partners - a result of a ruling in the state's Supreme Court in 2006) spread out across the U.S., Palin responded: "Not if it goes closer and closer towards the redefining the traditional definition of marriage" as a union between one man and one woman.

She then spent some time explaining that her answer in no way should be taken to mean that she "would not be tolerant" of same sex couples, and that a McCain/Palin administration would never oppose " . . . visitations in a hospital, or contracts being signed, negotiated." She finally rested on the statement that she was being "as straight up as I can in my non-support of anything but a traditional definition of marriage." Very noble statements, to be sure.

But it's not agreement. Governor Palin, as she is now known to do quite often (and quite well), avoided ever answering the original question, and instead re-stated her and Senator McCain's intent to continue haggling over the definition of marriage. This only proves that the important questions in their administration would not include civil rights for same sex couples, but would include more discussions towards coming up with the definition of marriage, their definition, for all of us.

I'll say it again: the government has no place in attempting to define relationships for all of us, no place at all.

When asked directly, since Palin changed the course of the original question to the candidates' views on gay marriage, Biden replied: "  . . . Neither Barack Obama nor I support redefining, from a civil side, what constitutes marriage. That is basically a decision to be left to faith . . . ." What Biden is saying here is that it should not be up to the government to define what is, or is not, considered marriage. And he is correct.

Biden even attempted to help Palin clarify her position on the original question by stating that if Palin " . . . thinks there should be no civil rights distinction, none whatsoever, between a committed gay couple, and a committed heterosexual couple," then they basically agree.

And Palin again avoided answering directly - at all, really - by pointing out that the question debate moderator Gwen Ifill asked Biden was whether he supported gay marriage, and that no, she did not.

As noble as Governor Palin's views may have seemed to come across, it's obvious that her and John McCain will continue to encourage and argue that the government must define what constitutes marriage in our country, once and for all. In a McCain/Palin administration, it seems there will be little intent, if any, to allow same sex couples the same civil rights and benefits as heterosexual couples.

The government, therefore, should be able to potentially prohibit people from being able to find (again, as Sarah Palin put it) " . . .relationships that they deem best for themselves."

This is not an agreement on civil rights for gay couples - it's just another example of "spin", from a campaign that obviously has an agenda, not a viewpoint, on this issue.

As universal as they may seem, relationships are deeply personal quests that many of us spend the majority of our lives trying to find, grow, enjoy, and perfect. They influence, and are influenced by, nearly every level of our beings - spiritual, physical, psychological - and each and every one of them is unique. There can be no single definition of which one is "the right one," or follows "the right path." And our government has no place in attempting to define it for us.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: billybob476 on October 07, 2008, 01:24:27 PM
Honestly I think everyone has made their viewpoints known and we probably should let this thread fade away.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on October 07, 2008, 01:54:24 PM
Quote from: billybob476 on October 07, 2008, 01:24:27 PM
Honestly I think everyone has made their viewpoints known and we probably should let this thread fade away.

Sounds good to me.  Reading some of the responces had me scratching my head and I felt like you guys got stuff out of what I had posted that I didn't intend to convay.  And I missed you guys but before I started posting again I felt I should set the record straight about what I was really trying to say.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: billybob476 on October 07, 2008, 01:59:04 PM
No worries. We're all friends here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Darth Gaos on October 07, 2008, 02:00:29 PM
After I say this billybob...because until today I have avoided this discussion because...well politics is one of those things....so just let me add my 2 cents

While I agree with the point that the author of the article is getting at....namely the entire last paragraph of the article.  I must say that the rest is editorial conjecture. Statements like "What Biden was saying..." and "While Palins statements came across as noble, it's obvious that..." are, to me, completely speculative.   What Biden said is what Biden said.  What Palin said is what Palin said.  It strikes me as presumptuous to say that is obvious what any candidate would do should they be elected President.  Things change when someone sits behind the desk in the Oval Office.  President Clinton was bit too moderate for liberals on a lot of issues much like President Bush has drawn the ire of conservatives on a number of issues.

Much of this article comes across as the same tired tactic used by both sides with any sort of agenda... to either A) completely justify their position or B) point out some sort of real or imagined duplicity of the opposing view....or both.

I am not even really arguing the issue here either.  I was just pointing out what was said in the debate.  I am just tired of crap flingin from both sides and cannot wait until November 5th, when hopefully (lawyers notwithstanding, this will be over)

And though nobody asked for my opinion on the issue, I feel comfortable enough here in giving it.  I find it ludicrous in this nation that, regardless of anyone personal or religious beliefs, that two people who are in love and want to get married, form a union or whatever, would not be able to do so and not be extended the rights and benefits accorded to anyone else.   I also find it sickening that an amendment to the constitution was even brought up in relation to this issue. Regardless of MY own personal beliefs about ANY issue in the United States, I would NEVER...EVER support an amendment to the Constitution of the United States that would, in essence, make it constitutional to discriminate against a person or group of people.



OK sorry, off my own little soapbox. Now we can let it die if you wish although there is nothing wrong with discussing anything in a civil manner which I believe we did here in this thread.  It is, however, one of the things noticeably absent in our elected officials apparently.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on October 07, 2008, 02:31:09 PM
You guys can continue to discuss this topic.. things are always civil here and I believe that everyone has a right to believe and say what ever they want to...but I consider you all friends on this forum and it's hard to read some of the negative and intolerant things said towards gay marriage and homosexuality. It's hard for me to think that many of you feel I don't have the right to marriage under the law, same as heterosexual couples. It's just as hard for me to read that some of you feel that homosexuality is a sin and look negatively on my lifestyle that I was born into. That is why I have decided that I will no longer participate in this thread as I value my friendship with you all and don't want to feel negatively towards anyone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: celestialteapot on October 07, 2008, 03:48:06 PM
It's quite interesting as someone who is very much outside and doesn't know anything about US politics to follow this discussion. It seems strange to me that you have state laws that can be very different from each other, we have 'states' here too in the UK - except we call them counties and they do have all have a council but they only deal with local law & order and other local issues, the recycling rules might be different county to county but the law doesn't change from place to place.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Meds on October 25, 2008, 05:56:42 AM
The Fonze and Richie Cunninghams Obama election video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVm4oIKu-7E#noexternalembed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVm4oIKu-7E#noexternalembed)

Funny.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: wraith1701 on October 28, 2008, 01:52:51 PM
A friend sent me this link to an article about Palin's use of language when speaking to the press and to voters. 

http://dashes.com/anil/2008/10/what-sarah-palin-is-saying.html (http://dashes.com/anil/2008/10/what-sarah-palin-is-saying.html)

It seems to me that the effects of what she is saying are plain to see.  What I wonder is if she is deliberately misleading her audience, and intentionally playing on their fears?  Or are her word choices and associations simply innocent slips of the tongue?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on November 04, 2008, 03:02:26 PM
Well, this is it folks! Down to the wire. In about 6 hours we should all know who is the next President. Too bad neither of the two candidates were good choices in my opinion but one of them will be a winner anyway.

Kevin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: wraith1701 on November 04, 2008, 03:43:12 PM
I've been flipping back and forth between browser tabs, checking election results.  Watching the popular vote results, and reading all of the comments being posted has me swinging back and forth between hope and despair.  Not so much at the actual results, but at some of the trashy comments being left on a lot of sites out there.  :(

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 04, 2008, 03:54:02 PM
that's why I don't look.. I'll either be very happy tonight or majorly disappointed.

the waiting part is what is killing me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 04, 2008, 04:03:03 PM
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 04, 2008, 03:54:02 PM
that's why I don't look.. I'll either be very happy tonight or majorly disappointed.

the waiting part is what is killing me.
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 04, 2008, 03:54:02 PM
that's why I don't look.. I'll either be very happy tonight or majorly disappointed.

the waiting part is what is killing me.

...I think you are going to be very happy, my precious! I voted against the local prop 202 trying to define marriage as between a man and woman and I was thinking of you and Harry and my other gay  couple friends. :)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 04, 2008, 04:11:45 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on November 04, 2008, 04:03:03 PM
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 04, 2008, 03:54:02 PM
that's why I don't look.. I'll either be very happy tonight or majorly disappointed.

the waiting part is what is killing me.
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 04, 2008, 03:54:02 PM
that's why I don't look.. I'll either be very happy tonight or majorly disappointed.

the waiting part is what is killing me.

...I think you are going to be very happy, my precious! I voted against the local prop 202 trying to define marriage as between a man and woman and I was thinking of you and Harry and my other gay  couple friends. :)

Thanks Bryan... we need all the help we can get.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 04, 2008, 04:36:32 PM
I voted Libertarian across the board, they seem to be the only party that has actually READ the Constitution.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Darth Gaos on November 04, 2008, 08:04:56 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on November 04, 2008, 04:36:32 PM
I voted Libertarian across the board, they seem to be the only party that has actually READ the Constitution.

LOL...you  do make a point Bryan, no doubt.

I must say with CA and WA getting ready to close, I think it is abundantly clear who will be the next President.  While I did not vote for him, I do sincerely congratulate Senator (soon to be President-Elect) Obama.  Election day always reinforces my view of that, for all our faults, we are still the greatest country in the world (no offense to my colleagues and friends on this board from elsewhere) and I say that without malice or "typical American arrogance".  We are still a young country comparatively speaking, still experiencing growing pains.  Look no further than this particular election.  In this country 50 years ago, Barack Obama would not have been allowed to eat at the same table, drink from the same water fountain or use the same restroom that many of us could.  Tonight the people of the United States elected an African American to the Presidency.   We are a country with problems, of that there is no doubt but we do endeavor to do our best to solve them.  Sometimes it is not as fast or as well as we would like but we do seem to persevere.  We cannot give up hope or lose faith in the "heart" of the American people which is intrinsically good and fair when all is said and done.  I know one of these issues seems to have dominated this thread for a long time and to those affected by it I would simply say this:  Patience, we will solve the problem, we just need the right people in the right places to sit down and talk to each other and good things will happen.  To use the old cliche....Rome wasn't built in a day......but it was built.

Congrats President-Elect Obama.  It's going to be an exciting and interesting 4 years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 04, 2008, 08:08:21 PM
A very exciting time for America, an amazing achievement for Obama. I say well done.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 04, 2008, 08:11:34 PM
This is a proud day in US history.. it has elected not only a great man but it's first black president.. this is truly an historical moment and I'm so proud to be part of it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on November 04, 2008, 08:31:49 PM
Landslide....as I was afraid of.  Well, I guess we can find out what change will happen.  Good or bad. 

And yes, I'm not happy with the results, but neither am I bitter.  (What's the point of being bitter anyway?)  It will be a most interesting 4 years to come. 

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Dan M on November 04, 2008, 08:50:19 PM
A great man?  I see how people sense potential for greatness, but he's a one-term Senator.  How is he great?  What has he done to heap such praise on him?

His greatest accomplishment is getting elected president, and George W. Bush did that twice, so obviously that's not enough. :)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: X on November 04, 2008, 08:53:13 PM
Quote from: pickard on November 04, 2008, 08:50:19 PM
A great man?  I see how people sense potential for greatness, but he's a one-term Senator.  How is he great?  What has he done to heap such praise on him?

His greatest accomplishment is getting elected president, and George W. Bush did that twice, so obviously that's not enough. :)

What does he need to do to be a great man? There are many great men to me that didn't "do" anything.

MLK was a great man, but he personally didn't do anything but motivate people to change.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Dan M on November 04, 2008, 09:00:08 PM
Are you comparing Obama to MLK? 

MLK had an impact on society.  Obama  has the potential to have a great impact on society.   They're not equivalent.

Kenny said he was a great man.  I want to know by what criteria he thinks he's a great man.  What has he done, other than serving a few years in the Senate and being elected president, that warrants such a label?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 04, 2008, 09:28:33 PM
Quote from: pickard on November 04, 2008, 09:00:08 PM
Are you comparing Obama to MLK? 

MLK had an impact on society.  Obama  has the potential to have a great impact on society.   They're not equivalent.

Kenny said he was a great man.  I want to know by what criteria he thinks he's a great man.  What has he done, other than serving a few years in the Senate and being elected president, that warrants such a label?

Why do I have to justify why I think he is great... to me he is a great man. You don't have to agree with me and I certainly don't have to give you criteria on why I believe it...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on November 04, 2008, 10:04:53 PM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on November 04, 2008, 08:31:49 PM
Landslide....as I was afraid of.  Well, I guess we can find out what change will happen.  Good or bad. 


I wouldn't call, what as of this posting is less than a 4% popular vote lead a "landslide". It shows that this country is very very divided and Obama will not be able to unite us in my opinion. In fact I predict the very opposite will occur during the next four years. Socialism is a wrong direction for this country and I cannot agree with the taking of one man's hard earned wealth by the government and distributing as they see fit. The wealthy should be free to decide how and where their money goes. If it was not for the wealthy people of this country then many citizens of it would not be employed. Also, the idea of putting the coal industry into bankruptcy by government imposed fines is very scary. What's next? government imposed fines on gasoline consumption? Obama is opposed to capitalism and our whole way of life may be in danger.

I congratulate him on running a great campaign but I feel he is nowhere near qualified to run this country and he is in for a rude awakening in foreign policy too. I just hope that he's up to the challenge because if he's not we are all in for a rough ride!

Kevin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 04, 2008, 10:26:27 PM
Quote from: Ktrek on November 04, 2008, 10:04:53 PM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on November 04, 2008, 08:31:49 PM
Landslide....as I was afraid of.  Well, I guess we can find out what change will happen.  Good or bad. 



I wouldn't call, what as of this posting is less than a 4% popular vote lead a "landslide". It shows that this country is very very divided and Obama will not be able to unite us in my opinion. In fact I predict the very opposite will occur during the next four years. Socialism is a wrong direction for this country and I cannot agree with the taking of one man's hard earned wealth by the government and distributing as they see fit. The wealthy should be free to decide how and where their money goes. If it was not for the wealthy people of this country then many citizens of it would not be employed. Also, the idea of putting the coal industry into bankruptcy by government imposed fines is very scary. What's next? government imposed fines on gasoline consumption? Obama is opposed to capitalism and our whole way of life may be in danger.

I congratulate him on running a great campaign but I feel he is nowhere near qualified to run this country and he is in for a rude awakening in foreign policy too. I just hope that he's up to the challenge because if he's not we are all in for a rough ride!

Kevin


Yeah because the pass eight years have been a joy ride....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on November 04, 2008, 11:30:20 PM
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 04, 2008, 10:26:27 PM

Yeah because the pass eight years have been a joy ride....

I am no fan of Mr. Bush's presidency Kenny but I would have sooner voted him in for a 3rd term than move this country toward socialism. Capitalism has it's problems but it's still the best system in the entire world and you wouldn't even enjoy all your toys and possessions you are so proud of without it. I was an early backer of Obama many many months back (and if you don't believe me just ask and I will point you to posts I made that prove such) but as more came to light about his character and beliefs the less I could support him. I'm scared for him and even more scared for this country.

Kevin

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 04, 2008, 11:51:39 PM
Well I don't agree with you but that is what is great about our country.. we all have the right to express our beliefs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Feathers on November 05, 2008, 12:10:06 AM
Well this is the most heated topic I've ever seen on these boards!

I'm not joining in, I'm not American, but I just want to wish you all well for the next 4 years.

(I trust you all voted for your candidate of choice - turnouts in general elections over here are getting so low that every victory is a effectively a minority these days.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: X on November 05, 2008, 03:24:09 AM
Quote from: pickard on November 04, 2008, 09:00:08 PM
Are you comparing Obama to MLK? 

MLK had an impact on society.  Obama  has the potential to have a great impact on society.   They're not equivalent.

Kenny said he was a great man.  I want to know by what criteria he thinks he's a great man.  What has he done, other than serving a few years in the Senate and being elected president, that warrants such a label?

Was I comparing him to MLK? Sure why not? Both gave speeches that motivated people into action. Both have/had ideas of creating something better together.

MLK didn't get elected a senator. MLK didn't get elected president.

In fact. The only thing that MLK did was motivate people into wanting to make a change and let's be honest. It was less than half the country that he motivated.

There are a lot of great men out there that if you look at what they did, it really doesn't amount to much other than inspire people to want to change. Plato, Socrates, MLK, Gandhi, Mother Theresa and the list goes on.

I am not saying that Obama is any of these people or even in their league of greatness, but at the same time all any of these people did was be an agent of change and they earned their right to be called great. Not for what the did, but for what they inspired others to do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 05, 2008, 04:42:31 AM
Although I agree the idea of "a great man" for me conotates someone who has accomplished remarakable achievemments in their life, something Obama has yet to do beyond last night victory, I will say he is very charismatic, personable, intelligent, and as such has the "stuff" of potential greatness. I think a lot of voters feel like Kenny does, his personality and ability to communicate is very seductive and powerful. I'm sure many of his supporters aren't very familiar with his positions but are very charmed by the package. And that's ok, it's very much like John Kennedy's mystique. Although I don't agree with his economic plan at all, often it's less about policy and more about perception. If American's feel positive about him, that can have very real world influences.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: billybob476 on November 05, 2008, 04:44:19 AM
Well all I can add to this discussion is that I'm happy for all my American friends. Up to this point Obama has proven himself in theory. Now comes the hard part, proving himself through his actions and decisions.

Just keep in mind that pretty much every president is a great man before the start of their term, the difficult thing is remaining a great man by the end.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 05, 2008, 04:51:40 AM
Quote from: billybob476 on November 05, 2008, 04:44:19 AM
Well all I can add to this discussion is that I'm happy for all my American friends. Up to this point Obama has proven himself in theory. Now comes the hard part, proving himself through his actions and decisions.

Just keep in mind that pretty much every president is a great man before the start of their term, the difficult thing is remaining a great man by the end.

Maybe change "great" to "well intentioned". :)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: billybob476 on November 05, 2008, 04:56:11 AM
Quote from: Bryancd on November 05, 2008, 04:51:40 AM
Quote from: billybob476 on November 05, 2008, 04:44:19 AM
Well all I can add to this discussion is that I'm happy for all my American friends. Up to this point Obama has proven himself in theory. Now comes the hard part, proving himself through his actions and decisions.

Just keep in mind that pretty much every president is a great man before the start of their term, the difficult thing is remaining a great man by the end.

Maybe change "great" to "well intentioned". :)
Yeah that might be a bit more appropriate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: celestialteapot on November 05, 2008, 05:34:15 AM
I'm sorry but I fail to understand why socialism is a bad thing, might be because I'm British and we've got a semi-socialist thing going on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: billybob476 on November 05, 2008, 05:36:28 AM
Quote from: celestialteapot on November 05, 2008, 05:34:15 AM
I'm sorry but I fail to understand why socialism is a bad thing, might be because I'm British and we've got a semi-socialist thing going on.
I can second this question as a Canadian (especially being from Quebec which is by far the most socialist-leaning of the Canadian provinces). How is paying higher taxes for increased social services a bad thing, exactly?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 05:40:10 AM
Another thing about Obama that I can't understand is this...How can a man who says that the Constitution of the United States of America is "fundamentally flawed" (his words NOT mine) be able to take oath of office to uphold such constitution? And if you start changing the constitution you no longer have this United States but the Obama Nation. You also re-open every constitutional battleground to have to be fought again. It makes no sense to me that people would vote against the very thing that has given them their freedoms but they have if Obama has his way and is able to change the constitution.

Kevin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: celestialteapot on November 05, 2008, 05:50:59 AM
We have a constitution here in the UK, but it's an evolving thing (if you look how we've shifted from a outright monarchy to the constitutional monarchy, each time they curtailed the monarchs power it required a change in our constitution).

Considering when it was written, maybe it is time for your constitution to evolve?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Rico on November 05, 2008, 05:56:33 AM
What are you all talking about in this thread?  The Constitution has evolved and changed over the years. 

---  My first and last post here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 05, 2008, 06:00:50 AM
Quote from: celestialteapot on November 05, 2008, 05:34:15 AM
I'm sorry but I fail to understand why socialism is a bad thing, might be because I'm British and we've got a semi-socialist thing going on.

American democracy is based upon the concpet of individual rights first and the Constitution outlines the nature of our REPUBLIC. The founding fathers meant for the individual states to be the focal point of government, not a large federal system like we have now. American's believe individual freedom of choice and self direction is preferable to a state or government mandated one. Sociualism is a limiting form of government which tends to dictate from above. I would rather be free to make my own choices and abhore the concept that I require a government to take care of me or provide for me. That's what it means to be an American, IMO.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 05, 2008, 06:02:17 AM
Quote from: Rico on November 05, 2008, 05:56:33 AM
What are you all talking about in this thread?  The Constitution has evolved and changed over the years. 

---  My first and last post here.

Actually, only in so far as it's interpretted by the courts and the few amendments.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 06:03:37 AM
 Today, I'm amazed, and proud that I live in the greatest country on earth.  Considering the state of the nation just 50 years ago, I also have to admit that part of me is actually surprised that he won.  It seems as though America is truly living up to its promise.

As excited as I am, I'm a little scared as well.  Obama has a lot riding on his shoulders; not just his responsibility to the voters and to the country, but a responsibility to those whose hopes and fears are riding with him.

The people have turned the keys over to a black man.  I'm confident in his abilities, but as a black man, I'm also still hoping and praying that he doesn't scratch the car.  As illogical as it might seem, it feels as though though his performance will be taken by many as a representation of blacks in general.

Obama has a tough road ahead of him; I don't envy him the responsibility he's taken on.  But I believe in my heart that he will do a better job than his opponent would.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: celestialteapot on November 05, 2008, 07:05:58 AM
This is where I get confused because to me you're describing communism, which is different to socialism. I will never understand why things like health care are perceived as a privilege rather than a right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 05, 2008, 07:52:56 AM
Quote from: celestialteapot on November 05, 2008, 07:05:58 AM
This is where I get confused because to me you're describing communism, which is different to socialism. I will never understand why things like health care are perceived as a privilege rather than a right.

Curious. Why should it be a right? I look at Health Care as something I will provide for myself and my family and I wish to have 100% control over the who, what, and where.  I don't want the government dictating what I get in anything, I'll fend for myself, thanks. :)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Darth Gaos on November 05, 2008, 08:51:07 AM
Well said Bryan.

One of the problems many Americans have with any "redistribution of wealth", of which higher taxes is an example is the removal of choice as to where that money goes.  The United States is one of the most generous and charitable nations on earth.  People would much rather give their time and money to those who CAN'T help themselves.  Unfortunately many of the government programs that our tax dollars go to end up supporting those who WON'T help themselves.

There was actually a lady yesterday caught on tape saying "I am so excited.  I cannot believe this is happening.  Now I don't have to worry about puuting gas in my car anymore, I don't have to worry about paying mortgage either because I know if I help Obama, he will help me"   That is frightening to me in it's absolute ignorance.

Even more frightening was Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia who, in giving a speech to supporters, said that "For the past 8 years we have under Republicans who simplistically believe that
the wealthy are entitled to keep their money and show antipathy toward any redistribution on wealth".   This should be horrifying to those of us who believe in capitalism and the free market (which DOES work regardless of the current crisis.  We have come through worst than this).

Point being is I have no problem paying a certain amount of taxes for the government to do its business but I do have a problem with a government that feels the need to try and fix the ills of the country by dragging the top down rather than trying to bring poorest up.

Hope that made sense.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on November 05, 2008, 09:59:07 AM
Quote from: Ktrek on November 04, 2008, 10:04:53 PM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on November 04, 2008, 08:31:49 PM
Landslide....as I was afraid of.  Well, I guess we can find out what change will happen.  Good or bad. 


I wouldn't call, what as of this posting is less than a 4% popular vote lead a "landslide". It shows that this country is very very divided and Obama will not be able to unite us in my opinion. In fact I predict the very opposite will occur during the next four years. Socialism is a wrong direction for this country and I cannot agree with the taking of one man's hard earned wealth by the government and distributing as they see fit. The wealthy should be free to decide how and where their money goes. If it was not for the wealthy people of this country then many citizens of it would not be employed. Also, the idea of putting the coal industry into bankruptcy by government imposed fines is very scary. What's next? government imposed fines on gasoline consumption? Obama is opposed to capitalism and our whole way of life may be in danger.

I congratulate him on running a great campaign but I feel he is nowhere near qualified to run this country and he is in for a rude awakening in foreign policy too. I just hope that he's up to the challenge because if he's not we are all in for a rough ride!

Kevin

By landslide I meant that all democrats won.  It by no means are we unified. 

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on November 05, 2008, 10:00:26 AM
Quote from: Darth Gaos on November 05, 2008, 08:51:07 AM

There was actually a lady yesterday caught on tape saying "I am so excited.  I cannot believe this is happening.  Now I don't have to worry about puuting gas in my car anymore, I don't have to worry about paying mortgage either because I know if I help Obama, he will help me"   That is frightening to me in it's absolute ignorance

Actually, Obama wasn't lying.  He just meant we won't own either a car or house by the time he is done >_> 

Sorry sorry, bad humor.  But really, a lot of people are putting a lot of faith in one man.  To be really honest, we blame or praise WAY TOO MUCH on the presidency.  We blame Bush for the War.  Excuse me??!  CONGRESS WAS INVOLVED HERE.  Congress still has to vote yes/no on going to war and last I checked, they voted YES on the war.  If we must, we should be putting Congress on trial, not Pres. Bush.  We blame Bush for our current economical state.  What?!  I'm sorry, but I believe the BANKS and people who bought WAY TOO MUCH housing are to blame.  Not our presidency.  No, I don't mean that Bush is totally exempt from what has happened, but last I checked, he doesn't operate on his own.  He has his own council, he still has to check with Congress with things.  He is not a dictator but a President with checks and balances. 

Quit putting so much blame/faith in the Presidency.  He is one man.  He is not God. 

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ElfManDan on November 05, 2008, 11:55:32 AM
Quote from: Kinglinksr on November 05, 2008, 10:00:26 AM
Quote from: Darth Gaos on November 05, 2008, 08:51:07 AM

There was actually a lady yesterday caught on tape saying "I am so excited.  I cannot believe this is happening.  Now I don't have to worry about puuting gas in my car anymore, I don't have to worry about paying mortgage either because I know if I help Obama, he will help me"   That is frightening to me in it's absolute ignorance

Actually, Obama wasn't lying.  He just meant we won't own either a car or house by the time he is done >_> 

Sorry sorry, bad humor.  But really, a lot of people are putting a lot of faith in one man.  To be really honest, we blame or praise WAY TOO MUCH on the presidency.  We blame Bush for the War.  Excuse me??!  CONGRESS WAS INVOLVED HERE.  Congress still has to vote yes/no on going to war and last I checked, they voted YES on the war.  If we must, we should be putting Congress on trial, not Pres. Bush.  We blame Bush for our current economical state.  What?!  I'm sorry, but I believe the BANKS and people who bought WAY TOO MUCH housing are to blame.  Not our presidency.  No, I don't mean that Bush is totally exempt from what has happened, but last I checked, he doesn't operate on his own.  He has his own council, he still has to check with Congress with things.  He is not a dictator but a President with checks and balances. 

Quit putting so much blame/faith in the Presidency.  He is one man.  He is not God. 

King

Well said, I haven't been sure in most of this when I should post any of my opinions, but I think what you said was very well put and very close to my own belief of truth.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: WiseGuy43 on November 05, 2008, 12:43:47 PM
Quote from: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 05:40:10 AM
Another thing about Obama that I can't understand is this...How can a man who says that the Constitution of the United States of America is "fundamentally flawed" (his words NOT mine) be able to take oath of office to uphold such constitution? And if you start changing the constitution you no longer have this United States but the Obama Nation. You also re-open every constitutional battleground to have to be fought again. It makes no sense to me that people would vote against the very thing that has given them their freedoms but they have if Obama has his way and is able to change the constitution.

Kevin

OBAMA NATION say that five times fast


hint:(Abomination)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Feathers on November 05, 2008, 12:47:29 PM
Quote from: WiseGuy43 on November 05, 2008, 12:43:47 PM
OBAMA NATION say that five times fast
hint:(Abomination)

Ouch! I don't think I'll be checking this thread again today - I think it might get a bit warm.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 05, 2008, 02:23:54 PM
Quote from: WiseGuy43 on November 05, 2008, 12:43:47 PM

OBAMA NATION say that five times fast

hint:(Abomination)

This thread has remained fairly civil that is one thing I enjoy about his forum and group of people. I know Wiseguy you are new to us so I'll give you this warning. Please do not spew hate words on this forum. If you do not like President elect Obama you have every right to voice your opinion but please keep a civil tongue.

Thank you,
Kenny - Co-Moderator
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on November 05, 2008, 02:34:05 PM
Well, last night wasn't a fun night to be a conservative.  It's never fun to throw the keys to the car to the other side, but we had our turn and I guess it's time to let the other side have their turn.  I'm glad it's over and congratulations to all the winners.  And to those in my party, better luck next time...

Though I would like to think we have learned not to be as shrill as we have been the last 8 years.  We should hold a respect for our public officials and the offices they hold even when they are people we don't agree with.  Because at some point, we will need them.

At the university where I graduated; there was trouble recently.  A boy with epilepsy was being evicted for his condition.  I called all the key local and state level elected officials as well as our congressman and both senators.  Almost all of them called to let the school know they had been contacted about this issue.  The school quickly allowed him to move back in.  I had to rely on people who I have never supported nor voted for.  And you learn a lot about our public servants when in that situation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sheldor on November 05, 2008, 03:32:23 PM
Quote from: AlanP on November 05, 2008, 02:34:05 PM
Well, last night wasn't a fun night to be a conservative.  It's never fun to throw the keys to the car to the other side, but we had our turn and I guess it's time to let the other side have their turn.  I'm glad it's over and congratulations to all the winners.  And to those in my party, better luck next time...

Though I would like to think we have learned not to be as shrill as we have been the last 8 years.  We should hold a respect for our public officials and the offices they hold even when they are people we don't agree with.  Because at some point, we will need them.

At the university where I graduated; there was trouble recently.  A boy with epilepsy was being evicted for his condition.  I called all the key local and state level elected officials as well as our congressman and both senators.  Almost all of them called to let the school know they had been contacted about this issue.  The school quickly allowed him to move back in.  I had to rely on people who I have never supported nor voted for.  And you learn a lot about our public servants when in that situation.

The republicans had a golden opportunity a few years back and missed it BIG time.  The democrats have a similar - if not stronger position.  However, they are in a precarious position.  President-elect Barack Hussein Obama can either do what he has said during the campaign - ignore simple economics and apply socialist ideas - creating a tightening of credit OR he could not do what he stated in his campaign and risk alienating the very people who he said would get some relief.    I thought President Clinton was bad - this guy has the potential to be far worse then even Carter.
Time will tell.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Bryancd on November 05, 2008, 04:20:55 PM
Quote from: WiseGuy43 on November 05, 2008, 12:43:47 PM
Quote from: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 05:40:10 AM
Another thing about Obama that I can't understand is this...How can a man who says that the Constitution of the United States of America is "fundamentally flawed" (his words NOT mine) be able to take oath of office to uphold such constitution? And if you start changing the constitution you no longer have this United States but the Obama Nation. You also re-open every constitutional battleground to have to be fought again. It makes no sense to me that people would vote against the very thing that has given them their freedoms but they have if Obama has his way and is able to change the constitution.

Kevin

OBAMA NATION say that five times fast


hint:(Abomination)
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 05, 2008, 02:23:54 PM
Quote from: WiseGuy43 on November 05, 2008, 12:43:47 PM

OBAMA NATION say that five times fast

hint:(Abomination)

This thread has remained fairly civil that is one thing I enjoy about his forum and group of people. I know Wiseguy you are new to us so I'll give you this warning. Please do not spew hate words on this forum. If you do not like President elect Obama you have every right to voice your opinion but please keep a civil tongue.

Thank you,
Kenny - Co-Moderator

x2, and I wasn't an Obama supporter, just an admirer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: alanp on November 05, 2008, 05:02:17 PM
But I think there is much to be said for how well the right is taking this.  In 2004, there were suisides!  And a mass apology website called "sorry everybody" that expressed regret to the rest of the world that more was not done to prevent Bush's relelection.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 06:11:00 PM
Quote from: Darth Gaos on November 05, 2008, 08:51:07 AM

There was actually a lady yesterday caught on tape saying "I am so excited.  I cannot believe this is happening.  Now I don't have to worry about puuting gas in my car anymore, I don't have to worry about paying mortgage either because I know if I help Obama, he will help me"   That is frightening to me in it's absolute ignorance.

What's truly frightening is the number of people who don't realize that there are a few idiots on both sides of the political divide, and that ugly sound-bites are a dime a dozen.  I remember hearing one featuring a female McCain supporter saying that "If we elect a **gger, the country will fall apart."  Does this mean that I should assume that all McCain supporters share her views?  Of course not.  Nor should you assume that the majority of Obama supporters are a bunch of leeches looking for a free ride.

Remember; there are some journalists out there who are all about sensationalism; many rational quotes and interviews are often tossed out in favor of those that will evoke a strong emotional response in the viewer/reader.  Don't fall into the trap of assuming these clips represent the majority. 

Quote
Even more frightening was Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia who, in giving a speech to supporters, said that "For the past 8 years we have under Republicans who simplistically believe that
the wealthy are entitled to keep their money and show antipathy toward any redistribution on wealth".   This should be horrifying to those of us who believe in capitalism and the free market (which DOES work regardless of the current crisis.  We have come through worst than this).

Point being is I have no problem paying a certain amount of taxes for the government to do its business but I do have a problem with a government that feels the need to try and fix the ills of the country by dragging the top down rather than trying to bring poorest up.

Hope that made sense.

I understand what you are saying, but keep in mind that, either directly or indirectly, some of "The Top" got there by way of generations of exploitation.  The system that created the current distribution of wealth may have ended, but its effects, while waning, still exist. 

Despite what you might see on movies or TV, most poor don't think it's fun to be poor, nor do they desire to shirk their financial responsibilities.  Nearly everyone has a sense of pride, and most people aren't content to live off of handouts.  Some just need a hand to break out of the cycle of poverty. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 05, 2008, 06:14:37 PM
That was very well said Wraith.. and I agree with you 100%
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 08:13:12 PM
Quote from: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 06:11:00 PMDespite what you might see on movies or TV, most poor don't think it's fun to be poor, nor do they desire to shirk their financial responsibilities.  Nearly everyone has a sense of pride, and most people aren't content to live off of handouts.  Some just need a hand to break out of the cycle of poverty. 

I personally can't really speak about what I see on TV because I don't have cable TV and have not had for a while now but I can speak from my own personal experience of dealing with the poor on almost a daily basis for many years now in various jobs or situations I have been in, and I can say from my own personal experience that very few of the poor want to break out of the cycle. It's just too easy when we enable them to just accept the free handout. Sad but it's true. Yes...there are always the exceptions and I am glad there are such but they are just that...an EXCEPTION. It's time for people to get off the plantation and quit depending on others for a handout. And I mean that with no disrespect toward black people whatsoever because I know plenty of white people who live off the plantation too! I truly wish I could agree with you Wraith but I have been too close to the problem to take your side on this.

Kevin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 09:23:25 PM
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 05, 2008, 06:14:37 PM
That was very well said Wraith.. and I agree with you 100%

Thanks man. :)

Quote from: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 08:13:12 PM
Quote from: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 06:11:00 PMDespite what you might see on movies or TV, most poor don't think it's fun to be poor, nor do they desire to shirk their financial responsibilities.  Nearly everyone has a sense of pride, and most people aren't content to live off of handouts.  Some just need a hand to break out of the cycle of poverty. 

I personally can't really speak about what I see on TV because I don't have cable TV and have not had for a while now but I can speak from my own personal experience of dealing with the poor on almost a daily basis for many years now in various jobs or situations I have been in, and I can say from my own personal experience that very few of the poor want to break out of the cycle. It's just too easy when we enable them to just accept the free handout. Sad but it's true. Yes...there are always the exceptions and I am glad there are such but they are just that...an EXCEPTION. It's time for people to get off the plantation and quit depending on others for a handout. And I mean that with no disrespect toward black people whatsoever because I know plenty of white people who live off the plantation too! I truly wish I could agree with you Wraith but I have been too close to the problem to take your side on this.

Kevin



"Get off of the plantation?"

Easier said than done; especially if one hasn't inherited a spot on the plantation from ancestors who were forced there and held there, generation after generation, against their will.

Quote from: Ktrek...very few of the poor want to break out of the cycle. It's just too easy when we enable them to just accept the free handout.

I acknowledge that there are some poor folks out there who are content with living off of the system.  In my experience, many of the folks who fall into this category are substance addicts who have given up hope for a better life.  But I hesitate to say that most poor folks are content with being poor, or that "very few of the poor want to break out of the cycle".  I don't know all of the poor in the country, so I can't speak for them.  In fact, I'm not sure what jobs or situations you've found yourself in over the years, but I'm sorry that they have warped your perceptions to the point where you feel comfortable making sweeping generalizations.   

All I can speak on is what I've experienced. 

QuoteIt's time for people to get off the plantation and quit depending on others for a handout.

I've lived part of my life in what some might consider 'the ghetto', or 'the plantation'.  You know, that part of every city that is considered 'the bad side of town', the part where all of the poor people and minorities live. 

Growing up, I've seen many kids, some of them family members, who were very bright, but due to the neighborhood they were born into, had to attend some pretty crappy schools.  I don't care how bright you are; if you are brought up in a school system in which many of the teachers can hardly read or write, odds are you aren't going to make it into college.  And if by some chance you do make it in, the odds are strongly stacked against you earning a degree. 

So what happens?  You end up working a crap job on the same 'plantation' that your parents, and their parents, and their parent's parents worked on.  If you end up having kids, they will attend the same crap schools that you attended, and end up with the same prospects in life: none.

I count myself fortunate in the fact that my grandfather was a military man.  because of this, my father was able to attend school at the different military bases my grandfather was stationed at.  This prepared him to actually compete with the kids who weren't raised 'on the plantation'.  Following in his dad's footsteps, my father chose to sell himself to the military to fund his college education.  While my father was serving his term  in the military (which entailed quite a bit of relocating), I also had the advantage of attending different schools-- In fact, I went to 3 different elementary schools, 2 different junior high schools, and 2 different high schools.  My last two years of high school were spent back on the ol' 'plantation' on the east side of San Antonio Texas.  I can tell you from first hand experience-- there IS a difference between schools in richer neighborhoods and those in poorer areas.  I find it difficult to express how frustrating and heartwrenching it can be to find yourself looking down on your teachers, and how difficult it can be to hide the cringes when an instructor struggles to read to the class form his or her lesson plan.  I had to bite my tongue so many times to keep myself from correcting my teachers, I'm surprised that my tongue is still intact. 

To make a long story short,  because of the advantage I had from attending other schools, I graduated in the top percentile of my high school class.  This allowed me to attend one of the finest universities in Texas, and to leave the plantation for good. 

Many of my old friends and family members weren't so lucky.  Some are dead. Others have been in and out of jail,having tried and failed to find an alternate route out of poverty. And others are trying to make the best honest living that they can.  They raise their kids to study hard, so that they can go to college like my brother and I did.  The sad thing is, no matter how hard they study, the schools they attend aren't going to prepare them for life beyond the east side. 

And I can tell you for a fact; they DO want to break the cycle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 09:47:27 PM
All I can say Wraith is that if anyone can come from a broken home, living in or near poverty, press forward against odds and become president of the United States than ANYONE can succeed in life who really wants to. Mr. Obama should be an inspiration to anyone who has been born into adverse circumstances. He inspires me on that level.

And I might add that I came from very poor conditions as a child growing up. My father left my mother when I was two years old and she had to raise my brother and I alone for many years. My mother had no choice but to depend on welfare to get by but I still had a good upbringing and my mom encouraged me to do the best I could with what talents God has given me. I have done pretty well for myself considering my start in life. Mr. Obama would have been supportive of my mom aborting me at 17 years old but she was determined to keep her baby and am I sure glad she did. And I might add she is glad also because she has seen her son have a life better than she had. When I look at all the families from India, China, Japan and Muslim nations that come here and sacrifice to see their children have the best I cannot understand why Americans are so lazy? We want and believe we deserve a free handout! Anyone can break free of the cycle if they really want to. If not for themselves they can for their children but it takes self-sacrifice (sadly lacking today) and commitment. It means putting your children's future above all other considerations and if that means you doing with less so they can have more than so be it. That's called "parenting"!

Kevin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Dan M on November 05, 2008, 10:05:26 PM
Quote from: Just X on November 05, 2008, 03:24:09 AM
Was I comparing him to MLK? Sure why not? Both gave speeches that motivated people into action. Both have/had ideas of creating something better together.

MLK didn't get elected a senator. MLK didn't get elected president.

In fact. The only thing that MLK did was motivate people into wanting to make a change and let's be honest. It was less than half the country that he motivated.

There are a lot of great men out there that if you look at what they did, it really doesn't amount to much other than inspire people to want to change. Plato, Socrates, MLK, Gandhi, Mother Theresa and the list goes on.

I am not saying that Obama is any of these people or even in their league of greatness, but at the same time all any of these people did was be an agent of change and they earned their right to be called great. Not for what the did, but for what they inspired others to do.

MLK inspired social change that has lasted and grown over decades. 

Obama inspired people to vote yesterday.  That's it.  (And you can make a very good case that George Bush was much more of an inspiration for that than Barack was.)

Everyone you listed was each an inspiration for millions of people and their inspiration stood the test of time and had lasting impact.

Barack's inspiration extends, so far, to yesterday's election results.

Wait until Mr. Obama fulfills his promise and potential before you start making plans to add a fifth head to Mt. Rushmore.

A majority of the country came out yesterday and decided to give him a chance.  That's it.  A chance.  Now he has to deliver.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: KingIsaacLinksr on November 05, 2008, 10:31:44 PM
Quote from: pickard on November 05, 2008, 10:05:26 PM
Quote from: Just X on November 05, 2008, 03:24:09 AM
Was I comparing him to MLK? Sure why not? Both gave speeches that motivated people into action. Both have/had ideas of creating something better together.

MLK didn't get elected a senator. MLK didn't get elected president.

In fact. The only thing that MLK did was motivate people into wanting to make a change and let's be honest. It was less than half the country that he motivated.

There are a lot of great men out there that if you look at what they did, it really doesn't amount to much other than inspire people to want to change. Plato, Socrates, MLK, Gandhi, Mother Theresa and the list goes on.

I am not saying that Obama is any of these people or even in their league of greatness, but at the same time all any of these people did was be an agent of change and they earned their right to be called great. Not for what the did, but for what they inspired others to do.

MLK inspired social change that has lasted and grown over decades. 

Obama inspired people to vote yesterday.  That's it.  (And you can make a very good case that George Bush was much more of an inspiration for that than Barack was.)

Everyone you listed was each an inspiration for millions of people and their inspiration stood the test of time and had lasting impact.

Barack's inspiration extends, so far, to yesterday's election results.

Wait until Mr. Obama fulfills his promise and potential before you start making plans to add a fifth head to Mt. Rushmore.

A majority of the country came out yesterday and decided to give him a chance.  That's it.  A chance.  Now he has to deliver.


Word.  :)

King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 10:40:26 PM
Quote from: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 09:47:27 PM
All I can say Wraith is that if anyone can come from a broken home, living in or near poverty, press forward against odds and become president of the United States than ANYONE can succeed in life who really wants to. Mr. Obama should be an inspiration to anyone who has been born into adverse circumstances. He inspires me on that level.

And I might add that I came from very poor conditions as a child growing up. My father left my mother when I was two years old and she had to raise my brother and I alone for many years. My mother had no choice but to depend on welfare to get by but I still had a good upbringing and my mom encouraged me to do the best I could with what talents God has given me. I have done pretty well for myself considering my start in life. Mr. Obama would have been supportive of my mom aborting me at 17 years old but she was determined to keep her baby and am I sure glad she did. And I might add she is glad also because she has seen her son have a life better than she had. When I look at all the families from India, China, Japan and Muslim nations that come here and sacrifice to see their children have the best I cannot understand why Americans are so lazy? We want and believe we deserve a free handout! Anyone can break free of the cycle if they really want to. If not for themselves they can for their children but it takes self-sacrifice (sadly lacking today) and commitment. It means putting your children's future above all other considerations and if that means you doing with less so they can have more than so be it. That's called "parenting"!

Kevin

I agree with the spirit of most of what your are saying, Kevin.  And Kudos to your mother for taking on the challenge of raising you and your brother on her own; my sister is a single mom, so I  understand how tough that can be.  

I might not agree with some of your opinions about the marginalized citizens in the country, but I respect your right to have and voice that opinion.

Quote from:  pickardObama inspired people to vote yesterday.  That's it.

Man; you couldn't be further from the truth! 

Obama did more than just inspire people to vote.  For many people, his successful campaign represents a renewed hope in the promise of America, a promise that many have feared might be an empty one.  America has always stood as The Land Of Opportunity, a land in which anyone, regardless of background or upbringing, can attain all that their talents will allow.  After yesterday, for the first time in my adult life, I actually believe it.

I feel that you are downplaying the incredible significance of yesterday's election.  The nation actually elected a Black man to the highest office in the country!  I'm not ashamed to admit that on several occasions today, as I contemplated the significance of this event, I found myself crying.  Partly out of joy in my renewed faith in the country and what it stands for, and partly out of sadness that my mother and many other family members didn't live to see this day. 

-Eric
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 10:51:23 PM
Quote from: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 10:40:26 PMI feel that you are downplaying the incredible significance of yesterday's election.  The nation actually elected a Black man to the highest office in the country!  I'm not ashamed to admit that on several occasions today, as I contemplated the significance of this event, I found myself crying.  Partly out of joy in my renewed faith in the country and what it stands for, and partly out of sadness that my mother and many other family members didn't live to see this day. 

-Eric

Eric,

Why is it that because Obama is "half" black he is now all of a sudden a "black" man? As far as I'm concerned he is as much a white man as a black man. In fact probably more white since his father was never there for him to influence him but his mother was. Now if he was a 100% black I would agree with you but when I look at Obama I do not see a black man and I think many whites who voted for him feel the same. I think it's very sad too that anyone would have voted for him based on color because the office requires experience, which for better or worse he will now have to get "on the job" because he has virtually no other qualifications or enough experience to be president. I think 2012 would have been a more reasonable time for him to become seasoned and I think he has a lot of personal charisma that has led to his election. For me as a Christian I can now see how easy it will be for the anti-Christ to come into power and how he will influence and manipulate the masses. I am not saying Obama is the anti-Christ as I do not in any way believe that. Only using his rise to power and influence as an example of how the world will come under the influence of the man of perdition when he does rise.

Kevin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 05, 2008, 11:11:58 PM
Wow Kevin I have never been so angry, what you said had to be the most vial thing I have read yet.. Barack Obama is a black man. It's an insult for you to suggest otherwise. As Eric said you are downplaying the incredible significance of yesterday's election. And don't get me started on the whole anti-christ/obama comment you made.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Geekyfanboy on November 05, 2008, 11:13:31 PM
Quote from: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 10:40:26 PM

Man; you couldn't be further from the truth! 

Obama did more than just inspire people to vote.  For many people, his successful campaign represents a renewed hope in the promise of America, a promise that many have feared might be an empty one.  America has always stood as The Land Of Opportunity, a land in which anyone, regardless of background or upbringing, can attain all that their talents will allow.  After yesterday, for the first time in my adult life, I actually believe it.

I feel that you are downplaying the incredible significance of yesterday's election.  The nation actually elected a Black man to the highest office in the country!  I'm not ashamed to admit that on several occasions today, as I contemplated the significance of this event, I found myself crying.  Partly out of joy in my renewed faith in the country and what it stands for, and partly out of sadness that my mother and many other family members didn't live to see this day. 

-Eric

Eric you so eloquently state my exact feelings... thank you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 11:33:30 PM
Quote from: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 10:51:23 PM

Eric,

Why is it that because Obama is "half" black he is now all of a sudden a "black" man?

LOL "All of a sudden"?

Good question. One that is better aimed at the folks who made the rule, i.e., Society as a whole.

You see, In the Bad Old Days, the tiniest bit of "black blood" would make someone black. This was back when being "black" was accepted by society as being a stigma. As hard as it is to believe, folks once thought that people with any African blood in them were somehow inferior to people of European decent. If you truly don't know what I'm talking about, here's a link-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadroon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadroon)


QuoteAs far as I'm concerned he is as much a white man as a black man. In fact probably more white since his father was never there for him to influence him but his mother was. Now if he was a 100% black I would agree with you but when I look at Obama I do not see a black man and I think many whites who voted for him feel the same.

Man; there is almost NO ONE in this country who is "100% Black". Society tells me that I'm black, it's on my birth certificate.  But my grandmother on my mother's side was Native American. And there is "white" blood in my family on both my mother and father's side of the family. So you tell me; what makes someone "Black"? Is it being 3/4 African? 7/8ths? In fact, your use of that phrase makes me question whether or not you subscribe to the racist beliefs you implied you had no knowledge of in the earlier quote. (Again, check out the link I posted earlier, or just Google "Quadroon". The word is from an old system of classifying people; you might find it handy  ;)).

QuoteI think it's very sad too that anyone would have voted for him based on color because the office requires experience, which for better or worse he will now have to get "on the job" because he has virtually no other qualifications or enough experience to be president.

Since neither of the candidates had experience being President of the U.S., both would have to learn "on the job". Just like Every single first term president in the history of the country. And as for your implication that people voted on Obama simply because of his perceived race, well, I find that both sad and insulting.

I also find it very telling.

I voted for Obama because of his platform. And the fact that the majority of the country did as well, regardless of his race, is what has me and many others so excited. Despite your attempts to pretend otherwise, we all know that the majority of the world sees Obama as a "black man". The fact that this didn't prevent the majority of the country for voting for the best candidate  fills me with both pride and hope.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 11:54:47 PM
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 05, 2008, 11:11:58 PM
Wow Kevin I have never been so angry, what you said had to be the most vial thing I have read yet.. Barack Obama is a black man. It's an insult for you to suggest otherwise. As Eric said you are downplaying the incredible significance of yesterday's election. And don't get me started on the whole anti-christ/obama comment you made.



Kenny,

I certainly had no intention of making you mad nor do I think what I said was vial. That is your own perception by reading into my comments what you want or think I am saying.

If a person has any black heritage does that make him black? If so then I guess I am black too. I don't look black but I have some black blood in my family. Would I vote for someone because he is black? Absolutley not and nor would I not for him because he was black. As far as I can tell Mr. Obama has done nothing in his career to qualify for the presidency other than inspiring people to believe in him. Now, that's not wrong in itself but I still think he does not have the resume that McCain has. And in saying that I am not a McCain supporter either as I have serious issues with him also but not near as much as with Obama's qualifications. Time will tell how good a president he will be or will we be back peddling like we did when we elected Jimmy Carter? And I was a supporter of Carter too and voted for him but his foreign policy was awful and he proved when it came down to the wire he didn't have the kahunas to be a president.

Kevin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Dan M on November 06, 2008, 04:18:17 AM
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 05, 2008, 11:13:31 PM
Quote from: wraith1701 on November 05, 2008, 10:40:26 PM

Man; you couldn't be further from the truth! 

Obama did more than just inspire people to vote.  For many people, his successful campaign represents a renewed hope in the promise of America, a promise that many have feared might be an empty one.  America has always stood as The Land Of Opportunity, a land in which anyone, regardless of background or upbringing, can attain all that their talents will allow.  After yesterday, for the first time in my adult life, I actually believe it.

I feel that you are downplaying the incredible significance of yesterday's election.  The nation actually elected a Black man to the highest office in the country!  I'm not ashamed to admit that on several occasions today, as I contemplated the significance of this event, I found myself crying.  Partly out of joy in my renewed faith in the country and what it stands for, and partly out of sadness that my mother and many other family members didn't live to see this day. 

-Eric

Eric you so eloquently state my exact feelings... thank you.

I think you overemphasize what his "accomplishment" means to the country. 

The greatness is not in the accomplishment.  It's a great milestone of where we have come as a nation.

I'm not downplaying the significance his election has to the black community and what it says about race in this country.  That's obvious.

However, Obama succeeded because we finally live in a country which would elect a black man president.  He didn't create that environment of racial equality.  He's the beneficiary of decades of struggle and accomplishment.  (And, if he hasn't already, I'm sure he'd say the same thing.)

And, please, don't overlook how many people would've voted for a potted plant rather than the Republican nominee.

Millions of people were motivated to vote on Tuesday by George W. Bush, the endless war in Iraq and the frightening economic conditions brought on, in their view, by eight years of failed Republican leadership.

To ignore that is absurd.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: X on November 06, 2008, 04:19:04 AM
Quote from: Ktrek on November 05, 2008, 11:54:47 PM
Quote from: StarTrekFanatic5 on November 05, 2008, 11:11:58 PM
Wow Kevin I have never been so angry, what you said had to be the most vial thing I have read yet.. Barack Obama is a black man. It's an insult for you to suggest otherwise. As Eric said you are downplaying the incredible significance of yesterday's election. And don't get me started on the whole anti-christ/obama comment you made.



Kenny,

I certainly had no intention of making you mad nor do I think what I said was vial. That is your own perception by reading into my comments what you want or think I am saying.

If a person has any black heritage does that make him black? If so then I guess I am black too. I don't look black but I have some black blood in my family. Would I vote for someone because he is black? Absolutley not and nor would I not for him because he was black. As far as I can tell Mr. Obama has done nothing in his career to qualify for the presidency other than inspiring people to believe in him. Now, that's not wrong in itself but I still think he does not have the resume that McCain has. And in saying that I am not a McCain supporter either as I have serious issues with him also but not near as much as with Obama's qualifications. Time will tell how good a president he will be or will we be back peddling like we did when we elected Jimmy Carter? And I was a supporter of Carter too and voted for him but his foreign policy was awful and he proved when it came down to the wire he didn't have the kahunas to be a president.

Kevin



i had this conversation with a friend yesterday and then my father.

In a nut shell several things happen. My friend voted McCain. We're both black. He asked others that voted Obama why they voted Obama because he felt that they didn't vote the positions.

I told him this. "I'm black, but it's not my job to elect a black man. It's my job to elect the best man."

For me that was Obama and him being percieved black is a boon and a curse. I didn't think I'd live to see the day that a minority would be president.

My father was happy because in his words. "Now we are out of excuses. Black people need to know that the same crap about being oppressed isn't going to work anymore."

Little minority children can now dream th big dreams and not be told by friends and family that it's not going to happen in their generation.

To address the issue of race. For a long time in this country, if you had any black in you, you were black. Now in the past few years that has been trending towards hispanic.

My ex wife is mexican, french, and a bunch of other stuff. She's hispanic on her birth certificate. Her mother, being born earlier is legally white because you were either white, black, asian, or Indian in those days.

In the last decade or so, the government has been trying to correct that little error of allowing hispanics to be legally white and now, they added White - Not of hispanic origin and Black - Not of hispanic Origin to the primary birth certificate choices.

Thus where my daughter is more black than any of the other things she got from both sides of her parents, she's legally hispanic, the new "dump everyone there" race.

My step son is half black and half white, but black on his birth certificate.

Now after you've just read all of that, you're probably wondering what the point is. The point is that because of when he was born Obama is black. I can ASSURE you that regardless of who raised him, the people that saw him in the time of his growing up saw him as black or what ever term they were using for us at the time.

This wasn't some attempt to claim one part of him and dismiss the other.

Granted some people might have voted because of his race, but I don't think that is confined to one single group.

We all want to live in a moment and the people of my generation have had several moments. The Challenger Accident, Bombing of Oklahoma city, Waco Texas, 9/11, and now this. All of these moments in history I know where I was.

For me, I missed the landing on the moon landing by a few years. Given the list that I named, I think it's about time my generation get a moment that I can see a positive. The moment when that glass ceiling in regards to race shattered.

I didn't think I'd live to see the day. I thought we'd have to get there in long slow steps. Senate president, VP, and all those other little steps to get there.

America made me proud on Nov 4, not because we got there. I knew that we would get there at some point. It was because we got there in my generation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Rico on November 06, 2008, 04:38:05 AM
Ok, folks the "fun" is over.  I don't see anything to be gained by keeping this thread open any longer.  I frankly never wanted a thread here related to politics.  I won't discuss this topic or religion on the internet - or in real life most of time.  The election is over and I think anyone that wanted to make their opinions known has done so.  Now lets move on.