Official Political (Republican/Democrat) Debate Thread

[Sean O]

when in the hell is this thread going to get off the abortion bit and back to actual discussions on the candidates

Newsflash junior, I think the admins can control what goes in the thread. If we want you to act like you control this place, we'll ask.

[Kayxero]

Um everyone is allowed their say here. I would think so it being a community of members and this being a thread for debate(supposedly respectfuly debate, even though some slect few have been borderline rude randies lately). And we have been on that issue a bit long and Sean youre getting to carried away about this. And have been for several posts my man.

Why dont we all just drop it and move on to other issues. Becuase when it comes to abortion, everyone just states their opinion and noones mind ever changes.

Its useless heated debate. Theres no point in communication when both sides are trying to make the other think as they do, and it fails.

How about that energy plan for both sides?

Or how Palin flip flopped on the bridge to nowhere issue.

[RaptorQuiz]

Newsflash junior, I think the admins can control what goes in the thread. If we want you to act like you control this place, we'll ask.

rahh-rrww.

hisss.

[piratesmvp04]

when in the hell is this thread going to get off the abortion bit and back to actual discussions on the candidates

Well, this thread actually isn't only about McCain vs. Obama. If you read the title, it also says (Republican/Democrat). So, we can also debate political issues here as well.

[DeuceBlades]

Ok, I have just one question to ask of anyone who has a brain, and has seen this country ran into the ground over the last 8 years.

With an approval rating that is the lowest in history, for any president (Im speaking about Bush), and failing policies, failing alliances, failing economy, why do you want to support someone who shares these views? Do you seriously want to continue paying 4.00 a gallon for gas? Are you serious, that you would rather have 4 more years of Bush? Most Republicans dont even know what McCain stands for, because he doesnt even know what he stands for. He brings along this woman to steal votes away from democratic women who are suppose to be Hilary backers that supported Hilary. Truth is, the women who supported Hilary and turned to Palin, never really supported her anyway. They supported women in politics, whomever it was gonna be. As long as there is a woman on any ticket, thats who women would vote for, and thats why I find it hard to understand why women are allowed to vote. They dont look at the issues at hand, and they dont look at anything of any importance, because they dont care who is running. They would rather have the country stay status quo, as is, and not change anything, than to have a guy like Obama, who is very capable of doing everything.

The definition of a leader? Here it is in black and white - (no racial intent)

#One who can motivate

# The ability to affect human behavior so as to accomplish a mission.

# Influencing a group of people to move towards its goal setting or goal achievement

Doesnt those credentials fit Obama? I think so, and being a leader takes a guy who can ralley people to take on any task we need to take on. McCain cant motivate squat, and I dont know what Palin is trying to do. She doesnt motivate me at all. She can speak, sure, but she is not a motivator. Palin gets those crowds of women, because she is new, and the nostalgia hasnt worn off yet. Thats only because all the dirty laundry has yet to be aired out. You wait and see within 2 or 3 weeks, what kind of support she will have, after she keeps repeating the same lines over and over and over and over and over and over again. She is a McCain robot told to say only certain things. Media has tried to get her to open up, and she remains silenced on where she stands in public forums, except for right to life and her right to own a gun....oooohhhhh big time stuff there.

I for one, cant wait for her first debate with Biden. The Lion will eat her for lunch.

Im sick of this election being about the lesser of two evils. There is no evils here. Its simple politics. 8 years of B F'n S, and people wanting 4 more years of it. Its insanity and I really think people need to wake up and realize it!!!

There was a poll done in other countries. There was something like 22 countries from different parts of the world. All 22 countries polled, favored Obama over McCain, because there was a trust factor involved. They simply dont trust McCain, and with rightful discord. Dont you see? The world gets it, so why doesnt the American people get it? Its because of his Maverick attitude and his disgust for Iran and their nuclear ability. He even sang a song about it. Bomb Iran (barbara ann from the beach boys) If you know the song, you know how the chorus goes.

[vbprogjoe]

Every poll has Bush around 28%, and Cheney far worse. The Democrats have picked up 3 major congressional seats in deep-red districts (even if at least one of them was a blue dog). The chairman of the RNC and other top brass are saying how they must "rebrand". Twice in the past week McCain/Bush fundraisers have been moved because of lack of demand. Major evangelical organizations are telling their people to sit this election out. The DNC has dramatically more money on hand for this year. Even when there was republican competition, democratic registration and voting tallies far outpaced republican.

Obama is definitely far to the left, but the difference is, he's still shown a better ability to work across the aisle on important matters than the other pansies in the democratic party. Whether it's nuclear non-proliferation in the senate or on civil rights (in the police videotaping matter) back in Illinois.

I don't know where you get the idea he (Obama) has shown any ability to work in a bipartisan effort, as he has shown nil on that. That nuclear proliferation "jazz" is a bunch of "bunk," and all the Obama backers know it. McCain has shown more maverick-like intentions, more courage to go against the Republican party, and more bipartisanship than Obama in the past four years Barack has been in office (added to those years of service before). You add Sarah Palin to the ticket, and it is a grand slam for the Republicans. I'm not saying for sure McCain-Palin will win, but I'm thinking it has moved to a 51% to 49% margin, advantage McCain-Palin (to borrow a term from tennis).

I'm a Republican-leaning independent, but I've voted for a total of 29 Democrats in my voting history. That is mainly because the Democrats changed drastically since JFK (starting with Carter). Yes, even the GOP has changed a moderate bit for the worse, and like many Republican consultants have said, they need to renovate or "rebrand," and that is what they have begun to do. The Democrats have turned and become beholden to the far left liberals, like MoveOn.org and the DailyKos (George Soros organizations), and very rarely allow different thinking people to stay in the party (ie. Joe Lieberman). In short, they are corrupt, elite happy and don't realize there is a Midwestern POV (think the left and East Coast are the only regions), and most importantly, want BIG government. That is what did the GOP in when 2004 rolled around, and they paid royally! It turns out it was for the good of the GOP, as they have realized that change was necessary and required. You will never get a perfect party, never, but the Republicans have learned from their mistakes, while the Dems haven't! For example, I voted for Russ Feingold my first election year, and have rued the day I did, as he has turned into a useless politician, and represents hardly anything I believe in. Yes, he keeps getting re-elected, because Wisconsin got more liberal every year, until the past few. I figure by 2010, he may get a serious challenge from the GOP, and by 2016, he will get defeated! The reason is because the GOP has learned that there are more conservative-minded people in Wisconsin than they originally thought. However, you have to be "down to earth" and relatable with the blue-collar work ethic of us Wisconsinites, which the GOP has never had for an opposing candidate to Feingold. The candidates they are discussing for 2010 are ones that are able to relate to people, and have had previous experience and success all over Wisconsin (like Mark Green for one).

In conclusion, I like Obama personally, and would like to have a beverage with him and talk sports and politics. He doesn't make me feel like he hates me because he is a liberal and I'm a conservative, and he is a kickin' dancer. However, I don't trust his foreign policy decision making, nor do I think his health care or economic policy plans are legitimately realistic. Thus, I'm going with the ticket I know I can trust, because I know his trustworthy history, courage to fight for our country and against the recent corruption of his party, not to mention he is an independent thinker. In turn, I trust the conservative record and political potential that Palin brings as the VP, as she too is a "fighter" for the middle and low income families of the country and she has the ability to relate to us on a multiple level of issues that are important to me. Plus, she is funny and can talk positively to the other parties. McCain-Palin in 2008!!!

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.) :D

[vbprogjoe]

Absolutely hilarious (especially the MSNBC dorks)... :wink: :lmao: :hail:

[duckdodger215]

Newsflash junior, I think the admins can control what goes in the thread. If we want you to act like you control this place, we'll ask.

here you go again on another 'power' trip. this time it would be awesome if you didn't threaten to ban me for simply making a rebutal to a discussion

[duckdodger215]

Why dont we all just drop it and move on to other issues. Becuase when it comes to abortion, everyone just states their opinion and noones mind ever changes.

exactly what i was getting at

How about that energy plan for both sides?

yes i would love to hear about these 'plans'

pirate, i'm aware of what this thread is about, but Kayxero is right... the past 8-10 pages or so have been about this and it's the same thing on every page.

[duckdodger215]

Ok, I have just one question to ask of anyone who has a brain, and has seen this country ran into the ground over the last 8 years.

With an approval rating that is the lowest in history, for any president (Im speaking about Bush)

If you're going to bring up approval ratings, why don't you mention The Congressional approval rating as well and how even lower it is. That's great if you would have rather had Al Gore and/or John Kerry the past 8-4 years.

The definition of a leader? Here it is in black and white - (no racial intent)

#One who can motivate

# The ability to affect human behavior so as to accomplish a mission.

# Influencing a group of people to move towards its goal setting or goal achievement

Doesnt those credentials fit Obama? I think so, and being a leader takes a guy who can ralley people to take on any task we need to take on. McCain cant motivate squat, and I dont know what Palin is trying to do. She doesnt motivate me at all. She can speak, sure, but she is not a motivator.

What exactly has he done? Do those credentials really fit Obama? How is he going to influence people when hasn't even been in Washington long enough to figure out how to? McCain can't motivate squat? That's an ignorant statement. Palin doesn't motivate you? That's nice, you're one person... she'll motivate others.

I can't believe you just said "She can speak, sure...". What is the one thing Obama does well?!?!? Speak... that's it. Good luck actually getting 10% of what he wants accomplished.

[vbprogjoe]

That might be so and you are true but I doubt the average American will realize that clip was taken out of context and come to the conclusion we came to about mccann's stance on the draft

No the typical American will be able to figure it out. Pretty much every logical American knows that MSNBC is "in the tank" for Obama and the Democrats, and thus won't watch very much of it. Especially Olbermann, Matthews, David Shuster (I think that is spelled right), and Rachel Maddow. In fact, other than Joe Scarborough, I can't name another unbiased person even related to NBC, so I guess they essentially are an extension of the Democratic Party. I know the far lefties on this site are going to hate me, but I only trust Fox News, for the most part, as they are equally represented among Republicans, Republican-leaning independents, Democrats, Democratic-leaning independents, Libertarians, Green Party, Reform Party, etc. They have very few, if any, outright "firecracker throwers," on their network. I even trust CNN and CBS or ABC more than MSNBC/NBC! You get fair and unbiased analysis on Fox News, while you get the DNC talking points on MSNBC, almost as if Howard Dean and George Soros run and own the channel.

Thanks,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.) 8)

[Kayxero]

Lol fox news equally represents noone. It has long been known, and even said by their own anchors that they lean a bit to the right.

Come on now.

[duckdodger215]

Lol fox news equally represents noone. It has long been known, and even said by their own anchors that they lean a bit to the right.

Come on now.

yeah fox is obviously right-oriented but msnbc is so far left it's pathetic and the regular CNN channel also easily left. the only anchor i've seen that seems to be a real moderate is Mike Galanos on CNN Headline News when he hosts Prime News, but they don't often get into politics... just views on current events.

[piratesmvp04]

Yeah, it's just human nature to lean towards one side. I always thought NBC was more moderate, but they're starting to lean towards the left now. But, that's why meteamo said you have to watch both sides to get the full news.

[vbprogjoe]

Is it me or do you argue every valid point Sean makes?

Not every point Sean makes is valid. Some are reasonable, and most definitely valid, but NOT every one. You seems to think piratesmvp's are ALL "bunk," and that is definitely FALSE!!! I can't comment on all the economic ones, because they are often getting into some highly technical economic theories, and since I'm not an ecomomist - I won't comment. However, I'm a Political Science/Enviromental Policy major (along with a Computer Science major to make it a double major), and piratesmvp's foreign policy retorts and arguments are often on the mark!!! So I'd say the debate is an equal fight, and I'd give pirate the advantage, due to the complexity of how often domestic policy differs from foreign policy...

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe 8)

[piratesmvp04]

Not every point Sean makes is valid. Some are reasonable, and most definitely valid, but NOT every one. You seems to think piratesmvp's are ALL "bunk," and that is definitely FALSE!!! I can't comment on all the economic ones, because they are often getting into some highly technical economic theories, and since I'm not an ecomomist - I won't comment. However, I'm a Political Science/Enviromental Policy major (along with a Computer Science major to make it a double major), and piratesmvp's foreign policy retorts and arguments are often on the mark!!! So I'd say the debate is an equal fight, and I'd give pirate the advantage, due to the complexity of how often domestic policy differs from foreign policy...

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe

Thanks! It's good to know I'm not the only one with an educated conservative mind.

[Sean O]

Not every point Sean makes is valid. Some are reasonable, and most definitely valid, but NOT every one. You seems to think piratesmvp's are ALL "bunk," and that is definitely FALSE!!! I can't comment on all the economic ones, because they are often getting into some highly technical economic theories, and since I'm not an ecomomist - I won't comment. However, I'm a Political Science/Enviromental Policy major (along with a Computer Science major to make it a double major), and piratesmvp's foreign policy retorts and arguments are often on the mark!!! So I'd say the debate is an equal fight, and I'd give pirate the advantage, due to the complexity of how often domestic policy differs from foreign policy...

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe

typing in ALL caps and screwing WITH the FONTS makes things all true !!!!!!

[vbprogjoe]

???

When in the world did I even imply that the war was over? Or, for that matter, even close to over?

I stated that the U.S. effort was winning the war - not that it had won the war.

As for why our troops should still be there, despite the fact that the original "regime" has fallen?

Because you cannot leave a power vaccuum, or it becomes filled by the lowest common denominator.

Some people (I'm not saying YOU, or even anyone on this board) seem to think that any Republican or anyone that argues for continuing the military effort in Iraq (etc) is "pro-war" and is somehow perfectly alright with the idea of the young men (and women) of the armed services coming home in boxes or wounded. That somehow Republicans like to watch all the killing and suffering, and think it's just wonderful.

No.

Of course not.

That's outrageous.

War is a terrible thing. People dying is a terrible thing. I wish it wasn't like this. I wish the forces that were still fighting against the U.S. had simply thrown up their hands and said "thank goodness you're here" and welcomed the U.S. soldiers as liberators - not invaders.

Sadly, that is not how it went. That entire part of the world has never, and will never (likely) lend itself to being kind to outsiders on their soil.

Even those middle-Eastern nations that were our allies during the first (and second) gulf wars were reluctant to allow our soldiers to base their operations from their soil, and even more reluctant to allow women soliders (in or out of uniform) in their countries at all.

That part of the world is very different from ours - and it means that the type of war being fought there is very different from the wars we have fought in the past.

You have to win more than just the physical battles. That part we have and can continue to do. But winning the support of a nation takes time - lots of it, sadly. There isn't even an effective nation to speak of at this point.

Iraq is shattered and splintered. There is no denying that. And U.S. forces did that. It's true. Debate the motivations for going there in the first place all you want - at this point, it's too late to matter.

U.S. forces removed the previous Iraqi regime. What's currently in place is, at best, feeble. Nothing currently installed could really hope to lead that nation if left to its own devices.

THAT is why I (and most Republicans) support NOT withdrawing troops on some aribtrary time scale.

Just because the American public has tired of hearing about young men and women dying (of any nationality) in the news, does not mean the correct decision is to abandon the effort in Iraq, and leave all those people (both the innocent public and the supposed 'enemy' as well) to their own devices.

The point of the U.S. military is not to entertain the public. It might've been interesting to watch the 24-hour coverage during the major combat operations - but clearly the public has grown weary now that there's less excitement to talk about. This American ideal of instant gratification does not mesh with how a military goes about its business.

The major fighting was over very quickly. Of course it was. Our soldiers, their training, and their equipment were all vastly superior to their enemy's. Now there is more work to do. It isn't as sexy, but it's just as dangerous, sadly - if not moreso.

I wish the job was done. I wish the Iraqi government, police force, and military was ready to stand on its own, and run that nation from top to bottom, so the U.S. could remove anything resembling a major combat force.

But it isn't.

Leaving those people on their own now would be tantamount to murder.

Our forces broke Iraq. It is their responsibility - their duty - to remain there and provide some form of stabilizing support, as long as it takes to make it as self-sufficient as it can be expected to be.

It's not easy, it's not entertaining, it's not fun to watch or hear about. It's all quite the opposite, really. There isn't even a well defined enemy to "attack" anymore. Hussein is gone - they dug him out of his humiliating hiding spot, and at that point - the war was over as far as the CNN-generation was concerned. But there is far more to be done. This is why all the pertinent decisions should be left to military commanders on the ground - and not be swayed by the ever-fickle court of American popular opinion.

Decisions that affect lives and the balance of world-power cannot be left to the same decision makers who choose America's Next Top Model or the new American Idol. Sadly - many people seem to expect the military to work in a similar fashion. "I don't like hearing about what's going on over there anymore, so it should change." It's not pleasant. It's horrible. But it's not done.

Well said Raptor, and I'll add this, which is sort of an extension to what you already said. There is NO person in this great country of the United States of America, that loves war or is in the slightest bit entertained with the theory of conflict. If it was up to me, and 99.99% of Americans, the war would have ended the minute we found that coward Saddam Hussein and his despicable band of loyalists like "Chemical Ali."

If it was a movie, we'd end with a great action scene where our faithful heroes would find that thug UBL and his moronic brood, and dispose of them like yesterday's trash. However, it is not a movie like "Behind Enemy Lines" or "Tears of the Sun," nor even the movie "Black Hawk Down" which chronicled the courage of Army Rangers or Delta Force in Somalia, despite bad planning and lack of support equipment. This is real life people, this is not some 24 episode season of "24" or a miniseries, or even WarGames drills, it is real life. I deplore war, and the resulting troubles and symptoms (like death, psychological damage, and rebuilding - to name a few) that accompany it, but sometimes it is necessary to fight evil and its "providers," even when we DON'T want to. I don't want to trivialize war with a relatively benign analogy, but I look at it as a sense of human pride and preservation. If you are being bullied, in addition to being scared, frightened, and emotionally scarred (which I know about, since I was bullied throughout grade school and high school, and freshman/sophomore years of college); you consequently, get mad, angry, and in general - tired of no one caring about your personal respect or pride. So in turn, you want to get even - or more importantly, get JUSTICE! Some people get into fights, some hope to get help from authorities or parents, some play pranks on the bullies, and some go further and do things like Columbine or Virginia Tech. The school violence, whether it is fights or the school shootings, are MOST DEFINITELY WRONG and INAPPROPRIATE (not to mention illegal and tragic), as well as some cruel pranks. You could argue some "innocent" pranks are healthy ways to handle the bullying, but you still might get punished with detention. Depending on your attitude, it might or might not be worth the trouble. Obviously, the best solution is to get help from the authorities or your parents. In any case, you end up dealing with it in some capacity, because being bullied gets to you, and it makes everything 20 times harder than it needs to be.

I view what happened on 9/11 and the Cole, and in other terrorist attacks on embassies and the such as "bullies" getting their jollies (except in a much larger, wider, and serious scale). I view the United States, Spain, and Great Britain (to name a few), as the "victims of bullying" for being beacons of freedom and democracy - and to a certain extent, differences in culture (again, on a much more serious and diverse scale). Yes, you could argue innocent Iraqis and Afghanis also paid a price in terms of death and injury, thus qualifying them as cursory "victims" of the "bullying." So we were forced to defend ourselves. Some may call it retaliation, but when you turn the cheek as many times as we did, it inevitably had to end in us getting fed up with being pushed around for our beliefs. Forget about WMDs, that is not the only reason (nor the main reason we went to Iraq), although Saddam himself, IMO, was a WMD in his existence. You can debate if we should have started the war or not, and it would be a valid debate, but in my opinion, it was UNFORTUNATELY necessary. I'd have preferred to not had to resort to the measure of war, all things being equal, but things were not equal. Our government made a decision that in response to the "bullying," we'd go and punish or remove the "bully" (or in this case one of the bullies, Saddam). I wish we could find the lead "bully," Bin Laden, but until Pakistan gives us full ability to search within their borders, we are sort of hamstrung (sovereignty). Every individual, as an American, has to decide whether it was worth it or NOT to go after the so called "bully" that attacked us and victimized us. In my opinion, yes, but it obviously seems to others it wasn't. I accept that as a valid opinion, and won't attack anyone for believing that course of thought. It is a free country, we all think very diverse things, and this is just one of them.

I want to quickly restate, I am in no way quantifying the act of bullying as being in any capacity, as serious as war, just as a benign analogy to my theory of why the action was unfortunately necessary to take and participate in.

Thanks,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.)

[DeuceBlades]

All I can say is that Im glad its a democratic majority in congress. I wonder how much bi-partisan reaching McCain will do, if he cant get nothing passed. We are gonna have 4 years of nothing but stalemates. I may not have the education and ability to speak on domestic policies, but I know a suckers bet when I see one, and we as a country are going down a road we will never be able to recover from. The rich will continue to get rich, while the poor and middle class will continue to suffer.

Im sick of this war we continue to fight in Iraq. The war is over, its been over, we have won, we have a government established their. Its time to get out. The Iraqis are dragging their feet, and its time to make them move them alot faster. Im sick of the BS spin you republicans keep putting on. You wont admit Bush as a failure, and you want to keep his policies in place. Typical arrogant Americans, the kind that the world critisises, as we stick our noses into every darn thing. I have considerable knowledge on foriegn affairs, because I like to travel. I do it often, but the last 4 years has me so aggrevated, I want to scream.

The Republicans have spent, spent, spent, whilst borrowing billions from the Chinese to buy oil from the Saudis. That is no way to run a government. Letting the deficit get to 11 trillion dollars is ridiculous, and I hope your proud of that. Democrats have to clean up after Republicans every single time, because they just dont care. The republicans talk a good game, but when they get into office, they dont do crap but run up the deficit, or start a damm war!!!

and I asked a question about the last 8 years, and not one person has answered it.

I cant wait until McCain gets into office, with his good buddy George Bush in tow. He can say he is backing away from Bush, but when he speaks on issues, they are all Bushs policies he speaks about. The same old BS I heard from Bush the last 8 years, and its sad to say I voted for him, his first term.

At least Im smart enough to know what has happened the last 8 years under Bush, and what will happen under 4 more years of Bush. Do not say McCain is not Bush, because he his. Its the good ol boy network, and its there as plain as day.

I dont have the elequent writing skills as most of you guys, nor the knowledge on certain issues as "vprog", but I know when Im being screwed over and when Im being fed a line of garbage. I didnt like Hilary much as a party candidate, because I thought she was arrogant. Truth be told, I wish Obama had picked her. Its going to go down as the worst decision he didnt make. I think the Clintons know something about how to run a country. At least then, everything was great, the value of the currency was high, jobless numbers were low, and we had a huge surplus. Now look at it one year under Bush. We went from having a surplus, to having a deficit in just 2 short years.

People who watch msnbc have it right, because its the only channel you can actually get people who talk fair about Obama. I watch fox-noise, and its a pile of crap. CNN is a load of crap as well, but msnbc has its faults too. None of them are fair and unbiased. I watch BBC news, because thats as fair as you get. They talk about everything, and get the facts straight. Not one country in the world wants McCain elected, and its a proven fact. They are afraid we will be at war again with somebody, just for the sake of going to war. Its the republican way, go to war first, ask questions later.

I want Obama elected, because I want the domestic problems fixed now. Im sick of the feet dragging by republicans on every darn issue. Do you think McCain is gonna do anything about oil dependancy? He11 no, because he has big oil in his back pocket. He wants to drill, drill, drill, and we dont have enough oil to fill our needs. We do not have the amounts of oil under our feet, like the Russians do, plain and simple. He has 179 lobbiests in his corner, and he has the right to talk about Obama, who has none.

Bush had 8 years to ween us off of oil from the Saudis, and we are still buying it in bulk. Obama is right, the more things try to change, the more they stay the same. I am one of those Americans that has had enough of the way the country has been ran into the ground. Ive had enough of Bush policies, and I have had enough of McCains pretending that he is a maverick. He isnt a maverick, and he needs to stop. He is attached to Bush's hip, and everyone knows it. Now he has Carl Rove in his corner? I think I rest my case.

[Sean O]

You can't be serious. I can't believe any school could teach, or at least not hammer out, such a grossly bizarre view of international relations.

IR doesn't exist in a vacuum. You are trying to make the case that the largest economic and military power in the world are being bullied by a poorly armed and trained band of fundamentalist nuts. We are being "bullied" because of 1). our continued support for the nation of Israel, 2). The presence of American military bases in Saudi Arabia, aka Islamic holy land, and 3). our manipulative, failed intervention into Bin Laden's muhajadeen in the Afghan-Soviet war.

Apart from that, Al Qaeda has nothing at all to do with Iraq, and Saddam Hussein. Hussein was never popular in the Middle East due to his government being secular rather than under shari'a law, and in waging a pointless war for resources against a nation that actually was under shari'a law. Why would the most extremist organization in Islam support a secular power?

Like with everything else over the last 8 decades, we're unfortunately bearing the brunt of short-sighted interventionism into foreign powers. By not reaching an equitable solution for a bipartite Israeli/Palestinian state, one of our staunchest allies is under constant attack from all sides. In continuing to prop up totalitarian governments, we led Cuba into Communism and Iran into radical fundamentalism. By only partially supporting immediately politically expedient organizations, we ended up selling chemical weapons to Saddam, turning Bin Laden fiercely anti-American in Afghanistan, and led to the brutal crackdown of the failed Kurdish uprising after Desert Storm.

IR is far more detailed than a blanket concept of "bullying."

[vbprogjoe]

Lol fox news equally represents noone. It has long been known, and even said by their own anchors that they lean a bit to the right.

Come on now.

Been reading the far left blogs a little too much I think, because they have many divergent views. If you ever watched the channel you would know...

Thanks,

--- vbprogjoe

[DeuceBlades]

Been reading the far left blogs a little too much I think, because they have many divergent views. If you ever watched the channel you would know...

Thanks,

--- vbprogjoe

actually hes right, because I too have been watching fox, and none of them have a favorable opinion on Obama. Its all Palin, like shes some kind of freak'n rockstar. She can do no wrong on Fox news.

[vbprogjoe]

typing in ALL caps and screwing WITH the FONTS makes things all true !!!!!!

I'm sorry if this offends you or any liberals on this site, but it got you to read it, didn't it?!!? My bolds, italics, and fonts (etc.) don't make things any more or less true, just part of my opinions. If you can't understand that, Sean O, you truly are more bitter, cruel, and clueless than I thought. I said you and piratesmvp's opinions are equally as legitimate or important, I just said, NOT all of your points are valid - as BigRog had stated. Sure a fair amount of your arguments are valid, and by proxy, reasonable, but NOT ALL of them!!! You have some skewed views that are based on an outdated view of the Republicans and GOP, and Republican-leaning independents. More so, you treat many conservative opinions as somewhat less than worthy of your "grand" eminence. We live in the United States, dude, every opinion has as much value as another (unless it is totally absurd and obtuse to a certain topic, like racism or sexism has no place). We don't live in Turkey, we all can believe what we want.

I may not really like or agree with liberals and their thoughts and/or opinions, but I respect their right to have them. In some cases, I may actually agree with them - as surprise, I'm okay with abortion in certain circumstances (incest, rape, and certain health issues), but I can understand the position of those who are strictly pro-life. I look down upon no person or individual that can give me a well thought out and reasoned argument, even if I in principle disagree with it. However, you, Sean O, with every bitter and rude remark you make towards someone on this forum, earn less and less respect (and thus willingness of me to listen and take you seriously). I'm not judging you as a person, but it is my right to ignore your arguments with every smirky comment you make. You have your opinions, fine. Others have theirs, fine. I have mine, deal with it, or be like Ned Yost - and lose respect from others.

Sorry if I Offended Anyone,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.) :question: :?: :hmph: :nay:

[RaptorQuiz]

As long as there is a woman on any ticket, thats who women would vote for, and thats why I find it hard to understand why women are allowed to vote.

8O

actually hes right, because I too have been watching fox, and none of them have a favorable opinion on Obama. Its all Palin, like shes some kind of freak'n rockstar. She can do no wrong on Fox news.

The dude who says he doesn't think women should be able to vote, but still calls himself a Democrat, just said someone OTHER than Obama has the "rockstar" / "celebrity" tag in this election?

Hahahaha.

You could hardly say or do anything else to make yourself sound more out-of-touch and half-insane.

[duckdodger215]

All I can say is that Im glad its a democratic majority in congress. I wonder how much bi-partisan reaching McCain will do' date=' if he cant get nothing passed. We are gonna have 4 years of nothing but stalemates. [/quote']

stalemates because the senate and congress veto everything a republican preisdent tries to pass into legislation. it works both ways, bub... don't get piszed because dems don't get their way on everything they want, either.

i'm middle class and not suffering. anyone who is middle class and plans their future and balances their finances with some sense is not suffering.

what a load of contradicting crap. "it's time to get out"... "its time to make them move them a lot faster". you want the US out but you want us to make them move faster?!?! :?:

The only thing I'll admit is that it was a better option the Al 'Green' Gore and Kerry.

So because you travel, that makes you an expert on foreign affairs? BS. hey, I've been to Vegas 3 times... anyone want me to tell you how city council is doing out there?

Why don't you look at the disasters that have occured during the past 8 years. Two come to mind... Do you remember Katrina and that certain significant date that comes up tomorrow? If you want to blame someone for starting a war, blame Clinton for not doing a thing for national security while in office. We took out one of the biggest world threats and harborers to terrorism. 9/11 was planned well before Bush came into office, so don't give me any crap about that's why they did it.

Idiotic statement. McCain has never favored many of the things Bush has done. This was obvious 8 years ago when McCain tried running against him.

dumb

You're right... she at least would have had a clue. Obama has none.

You need to do some economics research before posting something like this. Look at the value of the dollar during the past 8 years and see how things were during his entire stay.

The dollar sucks because of Americans:

One thing too many of you people tend to forget is that the economical crisis was brought on by citizens of America spending beyond their means. The housing crisis is because you and your neighbors bought houses and other items you KNEW you couldn't afford. It's all of America's fault, not the president's.

Anyone who says a station like MSNBC has it right and listens to such crap that Keith Olbermann spits out is just kidding themselves. He's more left-wing than Sean Hannity is right.

tell your dem-controlled congress/senate what you want done, then.

And what exactly is Obama going to do about oil? Research new technology? WTF do you think we've been doing for the past 25 years?!? It's because of Jimmy Carter that new off-shore drilling was suspended. Now we have a 'crisis' and have no immediate (as in tomorrow, immediate) way of fixing it. The answer is drilling NOW to meet demands 2-3 years from now AND to put more of an emphasis on fuel cells/hydrogen/CNG power. Regardless of what you think, wind/solar is not a viable option for the amount of energy we will need 5-30 years from now. Thank God for someone who actually promotes Nuclear... 20 years behind schedule.

what case?