Official Political (Republican/Democrat) Debate Thread

[Kayxero]

Good thing.... vbporgjoe probably has more experience.

Lol I wish I could text obama's blackberry, send him dafly's quote, and then remark "BURN!"

[catzrthecoolest]

So what do you all think of this article...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...9010101780.html

[vbprogjoe]

Just curious, has anybody changed their mind one way or another on the Obama administration. I haven't, especially considering how he and the liberals "shoved" the health care bill down the pipeline without much review period (not to mention the C-SPAN promise never came to fruition). I trust him less now than I did before, and I really didn't think that WAS POSSIBLE. Lord knows I tried to understand and follow his logic and "audacity of hopelessness," but all I'm left with is the desire to throw my remote at my television.

His administration's reluctance to use the term "terror" or "terrorism" (instead using colloquialisms like "man made disasters"), up until rather recently, befuddles me, and makes us look like we can't define the threat remotely. I can't remember the last time he has really made me feel he understands the true hatred radical Islamic jihadists have for us. If he is trying to convince us and the rest of the world that regular, moderate, everyday Islamic people (Muslim followers, if you will) are peaceful and well-meaning individuals - he need not do so. Any logical, educated, and (dare I say) sane person knows that, and has no qualms with Muslim believers or anybody of Arab descent. The only people that we are truly suspicious of, are dingbats like the idiot that tried to take down the airliner over Detroit or whatever.

I just want him to QUIT campaigning, and START governing, or make it look like he can comprehend the meaning of the two words. On the upside, he loves himself and he thinks he is so swell and popular, that he probably will win a Grammy & Oscar next year (he does method acting so well). Al Franken and him should have a show when they are out of office, and call it "Frankly Audacious"

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.)

[andy82]

If he is trying to convince us and the rest of the world that regular, moderate, everyday Islamic people (Muslim followers, if you will) are peaceful and well-meaning individuals - he need not do so. Any logical, educated, and (dare I say) sane person knows that, and has no qualms with Muslim believers or anybody of Arab descent.

To be fair, about 80% of Republicans are uneducated and are clueless about the world outside of their house, and the other 20% are rich and love the benefits that can be reaped with a Republican in the White House.

I do agree that Obama needs to stop this constant campaigning though. He's in the White House now, just shut and do the job on hand.

[Gordo]

Just curious, has anybody changed their mind one way or another on the Obama administration. etc., etc.

I haven't changed one bit. Actually, that's not the truth. If anything, I am even more fervently opposed to this numbskull and all associated idiocy that not just administration, but this new liberal ideology has espoused. And before you youngsters jump all over the 2K conservatives cases about how greedy, unbending and intolerant we are, keep in mind that the 2K liberal mentality is not what liberalism had set out to do.

Joe, you're not confused. There is no chance this faker will govern, because that is apparently not the agenda he/they had set out to do when planning this national takeover. It's never been about environmental principles (please, people, EVERYONE wants clean water), economic stability (please, people, EVERYONE wants to have a comfortable life style), affordable health care (please, people, EVERYONE wants proper medical treatment). It's been about power base.

Think about it. Why in the world is my, excuse me, your, President talking to you about your car loans security, your housing needs, your medical bills? These are industries. In a free market society....one that has generally served us fairly well through the decades when done properly, these commodities and services are best utilized when a very important factor is in place. Competition.

It's funny. People who come to this site because of video gaming know damn well that some of the best product we've seen in this particular part of the market is because companies were competing to make the very best to gain your business. Yet, these incredibly important pockets of our lives: housing, transportation, wellness..... these need government regulation to be maximized? How's that working out for the school systems.... or even the Post Office??

One aspect where I am encouraged is having had some conversations with young adults and their tolerance levels already being tapped. Perhaps, a bit ironically, in this era of I must have my burger, movie and text communication right this second (literally), the near future business leaders will not wait years, let alone months, for a President, and an ideology, to come through. That's simply not instantaneous enough.

I for one am looking forward to the 2010 mid-term elections.

[vbprogjoe]

To be fair, about 80% of Republicans are uneducated and are clueless about the world outside of their house, and the other 20% are rich and love the benefits that can be reaped with a Republican in the White House.

I do agree that Obama needs to stop this constant campaigning though. He's in the White House now, just shut and do the job on hand.

As opposed to the 98% of liberals who are badly uneducated (well undereducated), and like to spend money because it is NOT theirs. If more liberals would restrain their spending of tax dollars the way we civilians have to, it would be a better country. Conservative ideals, like those of Ronald Reagan are the key. If more colleges/universities had a diversity of thought on campus, and weren't predominantly liberal, maybe I'd buy your assertion of how filthily uneducated we were as Repubs/Conservatives. However, to compare that, is like comparing a college referee to a NFL referee in terms of rules. The games might have similar rules, but they also have so many different ones, it is like two different planets you are querying.

I'd also make the contention that the majority of Democrats/liberals are the rich, spoiled heathen that barter their ideals away when one of theirs is in office at 1600 Pennsylvania. They can't run fast enough to socialist ideals, like it was "Black Friday" everyday of the year. Makes Enron and Morgan-Stearn look like high school Glee Club.

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.)

[emath2432]

I don't claim either party. I am somewhere in the middle, and tend to lean the way that benefits me most.

Having said that, I find it humorous how people who support the party of the last "President" can sit here and talk about this current regime as being power hungry, when THEIR president did whatever he wanted (even if it was not always really constitutional), regardless of what the citizens thought, or the leaders of our allies. He didn't always follow the path that our constitution/government has set up for things. Doing things without congressional approval, under the guise of "protecting" the citizens, bypassing the checks and balances that all previous presidents have been held to.

Kinda sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.

It's also the reason I believe my kids will not be living in a United States of America by the time they are elderly. Bot parties have found their way to the opposite ends of the conservative/liberal lines, and are so far apart, that neither party can put someone in office that anyone in the country will like. ALL of our leaders are worthless, power hungry *** holes, who really don't have our best interests in mind.

I will say this though. Obama is the closest thing I have seen in about a decade. The way he is going about it isn't really always the best way, but at least he seems to be doing it to fix all the things our last "president" fu**ed up

[MarkB]

[emath2432]

Not sure I could have said it any better myself.

[Ace152]

I don't claim either party. I am somewhere in the middle, and tend to lean the way that benefits me most.

Having said that, I find it humorous how people who support the party of the last "President" can sit here and talk about this current regime as being power hungry, when THEIR president did whatever he wanted (even if it was not always really constitutional), regardless of what the citizens thought, or the leaders of our allies. He didn't always follow the path that our constitution/government has set up for things. Doing things without congressional approval, under the guise of "protecting" the citizens, bypassing the checks and balances that all previous presidents have been held to.

Kinda sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.

It's also the reason I believe my kids will not be living in a United States of America by the time they are elderly. Bot parties have found their way to the opposite ends of the conservative/liberal lines, and are so far apart, that neither party can put someone in office that anyone in the country will like. ALL of our leaders are worthless, power hungry *** holes, who really don't have our best interests in mind.

I will say this though. Obama is the closest thing I have seen in about a decade. The way he is going about it isn't really always the best way, but at least he seems to be doing it to fix all the things our last "president" fu**ed up

Agree 100%

[vbprogjoe]

Having said that, I find it humorous how people who support the party of the last "President" can sit here and talk about this current regime as being power hungry, when THEIR president did whatever he wanted (even if it was not always really constitutional), regardless of what the citizens thought, or the leaders of our allies. He didn't always follow the path that our constitution/government has set up for things. Doing things without congressional approval, under the guise of "protecting" the citizens, bypassing the checks and balances that all previous presidents have been held to.

Kinda sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.

The problem with your thesis is, it really doesn't apply specifically to my point idealogically or aesthetically. I'm not really a Republican in terms of a few ideals, like abortion (which I support mostly, within reason) and gay marriage (which I support; let everyone be as happy or depressed as the rest of us). I'm what you would call a Reagan-conservative, which means I'm for fiscal restraint and responsibility, an aggressive and serious national security platform (which means we use the terms "terrorism" and "terrorists" freely and openly & refuse to treat terrorists as common criminals or thugs), and most of all - we let capitalism reign (it works, it rewards competition and innovation & penalizes disorganization and stale ideas). The government should NOT be involved in health care; instead we should bring in competitive tenets (insurance companies should vie for business in ALL 50 states), we need lawsuit reform (torte reform) to prevent frivolous claims, medical savings accounts that are like 401k's, and no incentives for the government to reduce innovation and cause rationing of care (European models are full of examples of this malady).

As for the argument that Republicans did the same half-baked legislation as this current group of Dems (liberals), you are partially right. In light of this fact, I'll make this very clear - I have absolutely NO use for any politician who swindles and adds "pork" or buckles to special interests needlessly and irresponsibly (Democrats OR Republicans). Most of those liberal or non-conservative Republicans are gone now. Sure there are still some within the GOP that have given us coal this holiday season, but they are only 2 to 4 percent of the party (as the rest lost their seats in 2008).

As for unconstitutionality and all that largess you mentioned, while you may think the war in Iraq was unconstitutional, us conservatives feel not ONLY was it constitutional - but necessary. Rational beings can disagree on that point, I will concede though. As for keeping these terrorists at Gitmo and the like without lawyers, I say "boulderdash" to that. If they were Americans who went and became Al Qaida overnight like John Walker Lynn or Padilla, fine since they are American give them a lawyer and all their constitutional rights. However, for the rest who are NOT Americans (98% of these <fill in your favorite insult>), I say aggressively interrogate them, lock them away and throw away the key, and most of all, if you do put them on trial, make it a military tribunal. I also don't want them anywhere in the United States, even Hawaii, and DEFINITELY NOT in Illinois - since I live in Wisconsin (if they ever were to break out, that would really make me feel safe). They are not Americans, they don't deserve anything, except to meet their maker and suffer pain endlessly. Obama, on the other hand, as you see below can't even come close to being constitutional or truthful on the important things we entrusted to him.

ALL of our leaders are worthless, power hungry *** holes, who really don't have our best interests in mind.

I will say this though. Obama is the closest thing I have seen in about a decade. The way he is going about it isn't really always the best way, but at least he seems to be doing it to fix all the things our last "president" fu**ed up

Obama is the one who is <fill in your favorite zinger> up, and can't keep promises or tell the truth remotely when it comes to policy. His health care plan punishes those who don't buy health insurance, which is blatantly and patently UNCONSTITUTIONAL. You can argue that it is dumb to not buy health insurance, and you might indeed be right, but you can't constitutionally punish someone for not buying something or force them to do so because you think you know better than them. Obama promised that he would not allow special interest groups and lobbyists to run his administration, but that is all I see who are running it. The "Little O" promised C-SPAN coverage of his talks with Congress representatives and the like, but instead he and Pelosi and Reid have hush hush (SUPER DUPER secret) meetings with themselves. He appoints and allows Napolitano to make us look weak over and over again, she might be worse as HSS than Reno was as AG!!! We have radicals writing and negotiating bills for Obama and the liberals, and big surprise, we are getting more socialist by the day (meaning we are getting more European). Which is another story for another time, but suffice to say if I wanted to be European, I'd move there.

Sincerely,

*** vbprogjoe (Joe W.)

P.S. In the interest of being positive for a second, the one good thing about the Obama brigade is Robert Gibbs. He is so incompetent as the Press Secretary that you can't help but laugh when the dork sits there and tries to figure out his next sentence. The man should become the next administrations "joker" to entertain, he is better than George Carlin and provides plenty of material to obfuscate the truth of what they are truly doing. Which is probably why he is the Press Secretary in the first place, to help perform Obama's magic trick.

[vbprogjoe]

Couldn't disagree any MORE, but then again you can figure that out by my previous posts. So I'll say I disagree 150%, but then again, there is only 100 percentile points to give.

As an aside, thereby response to your second political cartoon, it seems liberals always forget the two or three times Bush was called a liar by Democrats during official events. Then again, that wouldn't fit your whole skewed opinion of such. Not that I'm defending Obama being called a liar during that address to Congress, because I'm not. Wilson should NOT have done so, and he was right and polite in apologizing afterwards. If Joe Wilson wanted to voice what we already know about Obama (he lies frequently), then he should have waited until after the address, and voiced it when the Republicans held their response news conference. Then he could have expounded upon what Obama lied about, and why it made him a dirty liar in Wilson's opinion.

Thank You,

--- vbprogjoe <_<

[MarkB]

"Couldn't disagree any MORE"...with what? I purposefully didn't make any textual points, and the ideas and thoughts represented in the images speak for themselves, are factual and are backed up, as opposed to a lot of the opinion based hyperbole that's being spewed.

If you "Couldn't disagree any MORE" with the fact that Obama best represents the average American citizen in that he owns 1 house, 1 car and a bicycle, as opposed to the 7 houses, 13 cars and a corporate jet than McCain owns, then I'd suggest you might be ever-so-slightly overestimating the wealth and prosperity of the average American citizen.

I really don't know what there is to disagree with in the second image.

I don't even think the rest of the post deserves a response. With all due respect, I have better things to do with my time...like watching paint dry.

[vbprogjoe]

"Couldn't disagree any MORE"...with what? I purposefully didn't make any textual points, and the ideas and thoughts represented in the images speak for themselves, are factual and are backed up, as opposed to a lot of the opinion based hyperbole that's being spewed.

If you "Couldn't disagree any MORE" with the fact that Obama best represents the average American citizen in that he owns 1 house, 1 car and a bicycle, as opposed to the 7 houses, 13 cars and a corporate jet than McCain owns, then I'd suggest you might be ever-so-slightly overestimating the wealth and prosperity of the average American citizen.

I really don't know what there is to disagree with in the second image.

I don't even think the rest of the post deserves a response. With all due respect, I have better things to do with my time...like watching paint dry.

Well, the post of the image(s), specifically the second implies (thus allows assumption) that you believe what it portrays or conveys. Now, if you are one of those nutty dopes that likes to post the opposite of what you believe, well then, by ALL means - SORRY! However, you made it quite clear in this post you do support the idea that liberalism is the "norm" of this country. Liberals always forget when Bush was attacked and called a liar in public at official events, which was the main reason I posted my response to you, but I'll address a few of your other points below.

Speaking of hyperbole, it would seem you can deftly produce it too. Which is fine, it is the main ingredient in ANY meaningful political debate or conversation, otherwise politics would be dreary and boring (like you insist my posts are). Which, in fact, I might be (I openly admit), I have never said I'm an exciting person or "poster," just passionate about my ideals and values of conservatism. As for Obama best representing America, that actually makes me laugh quite hard. Thanks for the comic relief MarkB. Obama, the radical-loving, probable radical himself, naive of the true danger among us, and to boot "mythical" and "enchanting" inspiring to the media "cult" leader of this country. I would say most people are unhappy with the leftist direction he is taking the United States in, the socialist brigade of advisors he surrounds himself with, and lack of spontaneous leadership he exudes (without his teleprompter he is like a "meth head"). His useless pandemonium about whoever disagrees with him, and attack on them, I doubt, inspires any bit of American pride. I doubt the average American citizen enjoys how he constantly sticks and pokes bamboo sticks at us, as Americans, when he travels abroad. He is the least like us as Americans, because he wants to be European. If so, run to head the U.N., heaven knows they need all the socialist fodder producers they can wrangle. You might be right about McCain, I don't know, but I wasn't comparing "the messiah" to McCain.

Now you can go back to watching paint dry, as I suppose if you took the time to read my post, you are a big fan of that pastime. Supposedly that is what my posts inspire, according to you. Which, again, is perfectly fine. We can't all be Mark Twain like you...

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.) :hi:

[Gordo]

Listening to Mark Steyn the other day, I think he said it best. It was so simple... which actually makes it so clear.

Paraphrasing.....

Think about it. Take anything that you enjoy. Take your Netflix subscription. Do you want the government coming in and regulating what you watch and how much your rent and basically controlling what your movie viewing habits are. Of course not. So why in the world would we want them regulating anything in our lives.

It is simple, and yet profound. We have clearly lost the original intent of why we came to this country ... to escape government overlording and control. Democrat, Republican, liberal, moderate, independent, conservative... it doesn't matter what party or ideology. The notion was to have minimal government invasiveness in our lives. So ask yourselves what you really believe as an AMERICAN is your just due.

[jorodedo]

Well put...very simple.

[DJEagles]

As a Canadian, it amazes me that any AVERAGE American, can defend the polices of the Bush Administration. I can't understand why anyone would believe that the previous 8 years, will be looked at as better then any under Obama.

Maybe it's because I am an outsider, but seems to me that the Bush regime, spent 8 long years, soiling the name of the United States of America. They took a party, that was once governed by the great Ronald Regan, and made all Republicans, look like fear-mongering jerk-offs. They spent 8 years spreading the word of terror, even more-so then the terrorists themselves. All Bin Laden had to do, was sit in his cave, and watch the Fox Network on his 52 Inch, LCD television. If he had done that, he would have seen a different Bush lackey, daily, constantly spreading their fears of an impending terrorist attack, or that the terrorists are still a HUGE threat, etc...Bin Laden had to do nothing, because Bush had the country believing that they should be living in constant fear for their lives.

Again, I like Americans,I turn to your country for my sources of entertainment, sports, etc...but I do not understand the HUGE divide in politics. I know people have their differences, but my God, the **** your country lived under for eight years, I would be embracing Obama, at least he isn't a trigger happy, 12 year old, stuck in a presidents body, being told what to do by his crazy Uncle Cheney.

...and on top of that, you have Rush Limbaugh...The king of all that is wrong with the Republican Party.

That's my rant.

[timay]

All I have to say here is...2010 elections cant come soon enough, Dems are expected to lose a mass number of seats in the senate, as they should, they had 4 years, time for REAL change.

Then 2012 comes, and Obama will be all done. He has already proven he is another asstard, bowing to other countries leaders and what not. By 2012 though, I fear it will be to late. This socialist will have done more damage to this country than can be fixed in a 4 or 8 year stint in office.

[tywiggins]

Listening to Mark Steyn the other day, I think he said it best. It was so simple... which actually makes it so clear.

Paraphrasing.....

Think about it. Take anything that you enjoy. Take your Netflix subscription. Do you want the government coming in and regulating what you watch and how much your rent and basically controlling what your movie viewing habits are. Of course not. So why in the world would we want them regulating anything in our lives.

It is simple, and yet profound. We have clearly lost the original intent of why we came to this country ... to escape government overlording and control. Democrat, Republican, liberal, moderate, independent, conservative... it doesn't matter what party or ideology. The notion was to have minimal government invasiveness in our lives. So ask yourselves what you really believe as an AMERICAN is your just due.

It's actually too simple. Really think about it.

1. Netflix is already "regulated" by existing laws. (Prohibitions against snuff films and child porn, copyright laws, employee protection laws, etc.)

2. Existing laws (including the Constitution) prohibit your hypothetical government regulation of netflix.

Who are you speaking for when you say "We have clearly lost the original intent of why we came to this country"?

People came to live in America for many different reasons, and over a span of hundreds of years. Some came to find jobs. Some came for free land. Some were escaping persecution. Some were slaves that had no choice. It is ridiculous to say that the original intent of all of these people was to escape government overlording and control.

[MarkB]

Well, the post of the image(s), specifically the second implies (thus allows assumption) that you believe what it portrays or conveys. Now, if you are one of those nutty dopes that likes to post the opposite of what you believe, well then, by ALL means - SORRY! However, you made it quite clear in this post you do support the idea that liberalism is the "norm" of this country. Liberals always forget when Bush was attacked and called a liar in public at official events, which was the main reason I posted my response to you, but I'll address a few of your other points below.

"Well, the post of the image(s), specifically the second implies (thus allows assumption) that you believe what it portrays or conveys."

No offence man, but, you know, this is the internet you're posting on. Have you ever seen the Caturday thread around this joint? A large percentage of the stuff posted in that thread makes absolutely no sense to anyone who's not mentally challenged, but it can still be funny. Just because someone posts an image on teh intarwebs doesn't mean they agree or disagree with it - it means they're posting an image on teh intarwebs. Using that logic, Trues is a Cardinals and Yankees fan, and his 2 favourite baseball stadiums are Fenway Park and PNC Park - after all, they're what he's posted on the banner image for MVPMods.

So, I did all that with 2 posts, one of which was purely images, and the other where I didn't use the words "liberal" or "liberalism" or mention anything about Bush? I might suggest you're interpreting my thoughts based on something else, or perhaps my previous posts, rather than simply the last 2 posts I've made in this thread, as you indicated.

Speaking of hyperbole, it would seem you can deftly produce it too.

I take that as a compliment. One has to be able to use various writing standards and styles in order to be able to convey an appropriate message in alternate contexts. Hyperbole can be used well, but not when it's very basis is in poor taste.

Which is fine, it is the main ingredient in ANY meaningful political debate or conversation, otherwise politics would be dreary and boring (like you insist my posts are). Which, in fact, I might be (I openly admit), I have never said I'm an exciting person or "poster," just passionate about my ideals and values of conservatism.

I have no problem with that at all, we're all passionate and strong-willed about our own things.

As for Obama best representing America, that actually makes me laugh quite hard. Thanks for the comic relief MarkB. Obama, the radical-loving, probable radical himself, naive of the true danger among us, and to boot "mythical" and "enchanting" inspiring to the media "cult" leader of this country. I would say most people are unhappy with the leftist direction he is taking the United States in, the socialist brigade of advisors he surrounds himself with, and lack of spontaneous leadership he exudes (without his teleprompter he is like a "meth head").

First of all, I didn't say Obama "best represent[ed] America", my exact quote was;

If you "Couldn't disagree any MORE" with the fact that Obama best represents the average American citizen in that he owns 1 house, 1 car and a bicycle, as opposed to the 7 houses, 13 cars and a corporate jet than McCain owns, then I'd suggest you might be ever-so-slightly overestimating the wealth and prosperity of the average American citizen.

My apologies for the typo - "than McCain owns" should have been "that McCain owns".

So, how about a pop quiz?

Everyone, Joe included (), think of the people around you, your family, friends, co-workers and school friends. Roughly, which percentage own 1 house, 1 car and a bicycle, and which percentage own 7 houses, 13 cars and a jet, or other flying machine, corporate or not?

Please, feel free to post your results. Average them out, too.

Now, I'd be willing to bet that the greater percentage of American citizens would relate their personal ownership more to 1 car, 1 house and 1 bicycle than 7 houses, 13 cars and a corporate jet, regardless of the names, parties and opinions one can attach to them.

Obama won, what, about 69 million votes? That's a hell of a big "cult", don't you think? Why, next people will be saying they actually agreed with his policies and what he had to say! The cheek of them! How dare they?

As for the leftist direction he's taking the U.S. in, I think most level-headed people would think it's actually overdue, considering how far right his predecessor, George W. Bush, took the country and its laws during his term in office. The most that can be said is that Obama is balancing out the quite extreme right-wing attitudes and policies enacted and enforced by George W. Bush. All those who love the Patriot Act, put your hands up!

Also, there's no ignoring the fact that George W. Bush broke, simply ignored, quietly removed, or publicly ridiculed a hell of a lot of actual laws that were in place during his term in office, often under the guise of "National Security" or stating that they conflicted with his interpretation of the Constitution. Of course, every president has the right and the means to remove laws, and most do, often removing hundreds, however he seemed to take it to a new high - or should that be low? - with his blatant disregard of laws condemning torture of criminal suspects, military rules and regulations, safeguards against political interference on research and his disregard for financial laws with regard to the diversion of money from authorised programs to create new, "secret" operations, such as the ones used in cases where suspected terrorists were detained and often tortured. For someone who proclaims to be a devout Christian, he sure loves him some good, old-fashioned torture, don't he?

As for the "meth head" comment, considering George W. Bush's...well, let's say his penchant for some Tony Montana action, as well as his flaky alcohol history and his past experiences with the law, now it's my turn to thank you for the comic relief, Joe. After a long day at work, I appreciate it.

His useless pandemonium about whoever disagrees with him, and attack on them, I doubt, inspires any bit of American pride. I doubt the average American citizen enjoys how he constantly sticks and pokes bamboo sticks at us, as Americans, when he travels abroad.

By pointing our flaws that can be improved and using an opportunity to build bridges with other countries, bridges that have been damn near destroyed over the past 8 years, he's poking bamboo sticks at American citizens? Sounds to me like he's attempting to instate his campaign promise - change. Changing the poor relations with other countries, changing the many, many flaws that every country has, and attempting to bring them to the light, rather than keep them hidden, as certain others did. I'd rather have a president (or prime minister, or [insert other name of head of state here]) who is open to criticism and is honest about things needing fixed, rather than one who digs his head in the sand.

He is the least like us as Americans, because he wants to be European.

With all due respect, do you speak for all Americans with that statement? Also, given his rich cultural background, I see little need for him to want to be anything other than what he is.

If so, run to head the U.N., heaven knows they need all the socialist fodder producers they can wrangle. You might be right about McCain, I don't know, but I wasn't comparing "the messiah" to McCain.

And neither was I. I fully accept that I may be wrong about Obama and McCain, and anything else. However, we live and learn. We can only agree to disagree.

Now you can go back to watching paint dry, as I suppose if you took the time to read my post, you are a big fan of that pastime. Supposedly that is what my posts inspire, according to you. Which, again, is perfectly fine. We can't all be Mark Twain like you...

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.)

Not at all, I enjoy good natured, cultural debate, whether I agree or disagree with the person I'm debating with. It allows us all to see sides that we perhaps never thought of previously, to see the viewpoint of others, and perhaps change our own opinion, change someone else's, or enlighten them, or ourselves, to information we didn't know previously.

I just wish I had more time in the day for it. :)

[Yankee4Life]

Game, set and match goes to my good friend MarkbTheYankee.

[vbprogjoe]

Game, set and match goes to my good friend MarkbTheYankee.

Maybe if we were living in Timbuktu, but I see nothing that MarkB said that made me feel like he had won anything other than a possible seat to the Nobel Peace Prize committee. He's obviously liberal (or leans there), and I'm obviously conservative (or lean there). Nobody is completely in one camp or another, because we are all individuals, so I make my last statement as a generality - rather than an absolute.

Just to address a few of MarkB's issues, as there was way too much bloviating to really address ALL of it. Nor, do I care to compare and contrast Bush versus Obama. It is unnecessary, as Bush was a social conservative (mostly), who did many things that I agreed with (national security & educational initiatives preeminently); while conversely, he was a fiscal moderate that did some things I hugely disagreed with (Bailout #1 & TARP succinctly). He also did one thing that kind of irked my "motherboard," so to speak, by considering "virtual" amnesty back a couple years ago for the illegal aliens. Don't get me wrong, I'm for LEGAL immigration 150%, but if you break the law (which you are doing federally by coming here illegally), you should be punished. Just like if I went to Germany (which I would NEVER do) illegally, they should kick me out and send me back. Heck, I should kick myself out, and send myself home - just for considering the hypothetical. Obama, on the other hand, is an outright liberal socialist who essentially has shown his true colors, as he wants to redistribute wealth and increase the vice of the government controls over all of us. Him and Bush are two worlds apart, you will naturally support one, and disavow the other. I need say no more about that issue.

With all due respect, do you speak for all Americans with that statement? Also, given his rich cultural background, I see little need for him to want to be anything other than what he is.

I really wasn't trying to speak for Americans, or trying to be a spokesperson for ANYBODY, in general, in whatever terms you may such refer. I simply was stating that 75% to 80% of what he has done over the past year (the stuff I mentioned in my last post), was not what would typically represent anything Americans would want. I know for darn sure, they don't want to be constantly hearing how we are or were less than some Utopian standard he just mysteriously assumes we all want to attribute to societal and American excellence. I define what it means to me to be American, not him (or anyone else). If many of you do feel the way he does, fine, that is your prerogative, but don't assume you are in the majority. You might be, but it isn't as clear cut as you might think. I also feel that every day we are getting more socialist and "European" than before, which I doubt many of the people that voted for the lil' "O" envisioned last November. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt it, judging by some of the comments of the Democrats and liberals I know here in Wisconsin. I have a friend that blew me away, by saying he regretted his vote last year for Obama. This is a man who has been a Democrat from birth, a liberal when it comes to all the fine things, and he will remain a loyal Dem. However, he is literally beside himself about who he voted for, and thus what he voted to enact indirectly. I've rarely regretted my vote, but I know his pain - I voted Feingold into office his first term, and I've been kicking myself EVER SINCE.

By pointing our flaws that can be improved and using an opportunity to build bridges with other countries, bridges that have been damn near destroyed over the past 8 years, he's poking bamboo sticks at American citizens? Sounds to me like he's attempting to instate his campaign promise - change. Changing the poor relations with other countries, changing the many, many flaws that every country has, and attempting to bring them to the light, rather than keep them hidden, as certain others did. I'd rather have a president (or prime minister, or [insert other name of head of state here]) who is open to criticism and is honest about things needing fixed, rather than one who digs his head in the sand.

I don't mind him pointing out flaws or myths, if they are INDEED flaws or myths, but he attacks everybody who disagrees with him like we personally attacked his family. His administration can't take criticism, instead they sit and obfuscate and try to dodge issues they know they can't explain or don't want to explain. Robert Gibbs isn't just their "spin doctor," but he is also our version of "Baghdad Bob," sitting there and boldface lying to us about things he just got done telling us the administration did or didn't do, that they didn't or did do. Remember during the Bush years, the liberals (some of you included) said that disagreement or conscience objection is the "greatest form of patriotism," but now that some of your policies are questioned, you treat us like fourth-class citizens and call us conservatives names you claimed you were offended by in past years. You need to hold yourselves to such higher moral standing than the rest of us, because that is how you best feel you can quash the dissent. I'm all for honest disagreement, and I've never thought any less of any of you just for disagreeing with myself or other Conservatives. I also have never questioned your patriotism either, but some of the liberal brethren may question mine on the simple fact I disagree with them. That is hypocrisy at its ugliest and most pervasive state. As for caring about what other countries think or say about us, I don't give a "flying Dutch monkey" what they think or say about us, if they like Obama or hate him, if they hated or liked Bush, if they believe in aliens or don't, and if they think our legal systems or policies are dumb or brilliant - I leave that to the ONLY people who do, LIBERALS (mostly, and some moderate Conservatives). Would I like to see us have a working, cordial, and effective relationship with our allies, YES. However, not at the risk of our national security, identity, and/or sanity.

Finally, on a lighter side, the idea that some people post pictures or images that they might NOT agree with or attribute to themselves is "like" foreign to me (avatars and banners aside, those fall under auxillary specimen), as I would imagine that most people post or include images that support their points/thesis or, at least, what they BELIEVE is the truth! Otherwise, it just seems like virtual graffitti that some neoclassician would post to be vanguard. If so, I really don't want to be part of that trippin' world, as we really have enough meth-induced nutballs in the world as it is. I'm a Brewers fan, thus there is NO freaking way I'm posting a Cubbies banner or avatar. No sir, there will be no such world, where that will EVER happen with me.

Sincerely,

--- vbprogjoe (Joe W.)

As a Canadian, it amazes me that any AVERAGE American, can defend the polices of the Bush Administration. I can't understand why anyone would believe that the previous 8 years, will be looked at as better then any under Obama.

Maybe it's because I am an outsider, but seems to me that the Bush regime, spent 8 long years, soiling the name of the United States of America. They took a party, that was once governed by the great Ronald Regan, and made all Republicans, look like fear-mongering jerk-offs. They spent 8 years spreading the word of terror, even more-so then the terrorists themselves. All Bin Laden had to do, was sit in his cave, and watch the Fox Network on his 52 Inch, LCD television. If he had done that, he would have seen a different Bush lackey, daily, constantly spreading their fears of an impending terrorist attack, or that the terrorists are still a HUGE threat, etc...Bin Laden had to do nothing, because Bush had the country believing that they should be living in constant fear for their lives.

Again, I like Americans,I turn to your country for my sources of entertainment, sports, etc...but I do not understand the HUGE divide in politics. I know people have their differences, but my God, the **** your country lived under for eight years, I would be embracing Obama, at least he isn't a trigger happy, 12 year old, stuck in a presidents body, being told what to do by his crazy Uncle Cheney.

...and on top of that, you have Rush Limbaugh...The king of all that is wrong with the Republican Party.

That's my rant.

That is because you are Canadian, you are used to socialist "barbarism," you don't have to see or watch Obama clog the airwaves 19 out of the 24 hours of the day, and most of all - You ARE CANADIAN (I felt I needed to stress this). Everything that is rational and logical is wrong to you and your brothers, and the insane and depraved are "embraced like Obama's enchanted and devine thoughts" by the mainstream media here is the U.S. Please don't take it personally, I'm using hyperbole to tease playfully, yet get across the point I don't like Canadians. Just kidding... Or am I..... You can ponder that while you remain enchanted by Obama's wiles and manly charms.

:hi:

[Yankee4Life]

That is because you are Canadian, you are used to socialist "barbarism," you don't have to see or watch Obama clog the airwaves 19 out of the 24 hours of the day, and most of all - You ARE CANADIAN (I felt I needed to stress this). Everything that is rational and logical is wrong to you and your brothers, and the insane and depraved are "embraced like Obama's enchanted and devine thoughts" by the mainstream media here is the U.S. Please don't take it personally, I'm using hyperbole to tease playfully, yet get across the point I don't like Canadians. Just kidding... Or am I..... You can ponder that while you remain enchanted by Obama's wiles and manly charms.

Let's get one thing cleared up. I don't care what your political views are and I never will. It's not my business. As far as I am concerned you can come in here and talk politics every day if you want to. I'm not going to tell you how to spend your time. But when you are here you are not going to go around saying what you did about Canadians. If you don't like Canadians for whatever reason then keep it to yourself.

Finally, on a lighter side, the idea that some people post pictures or images that they might NOT agree with or attribute to themselves is "like" foreign to me (avatars and banners aside, those fall under auxillary specimen), as I would imagine that most people post or include images that support their points/thesis or, at least, what they BELIEVE is the truth! Otherwise, it just seems like virtual graffitti that some neoclassician would post to be vanguard. If so, I really don't want to be part of that trippin' world, as we really have enough meth-induced nutballs in the world as it is. I'm a Brewers fan, thus there is NO freaking way I'm posting a Cubbies banner or avatar. No sir, there will be no such world, where that will EVER happen with me.

Like anyone here really gives a &*(&.

[Gordo]

It's actually too simple. Really think about it.

1. Netflix is already "regulated" by existing laws. (Prohibitions against snuff films and child porn, copyright laws, employee protection laws, etc.)

2. Existing laws (including the Constitution) prohibit your hypothetical government regulation of netflix.

Who are you speaking for when you say "We have clearly lost the original intent of why we came to this country"?

People came to live in America for many different reasons, and over a span of hundreds of years. Some came to find jobs. Some came for free land. Some were escaping persecution. Some were slaves that had no choice. It is ridiculous to say that the original intent of all of these people was to escape government overlording and control.

When speaking about Netflix as an example, clearly this is considering what main stream America is wanting for a product. Many of the sub-examples you site are fringe products or dealing with the proper treatment of business practices. While true that existing laws prohibit government regulation of netflix, the point is larger that government CONTROL, not just necessary legislation, would be the problem. Imagine now the Socialist Netflix Company automatically sending you certain genres of movies because it was deemed by some moron senator or legislator that we should be exposed to certain elements on behalf of assisting our understanding of multi-cultural sensitivity.

And how is it sensible to say that "the original intent of all of these people was to escape government control is ridiculous" when you point out in all of your examples (save for slavery) that government control in one way or another is involved in those very examples. Slavery is an entire other subject and, of course, was not supported by a vast amount of Americans at the time. We had a little war over that.

You guys can be as picayune as you want about these matters, but the bottom line is this: more government control on you and me will be our decline as an American nation. There are too many examples around us now and throughout history to bear this out.

[tywiggins]

When speaking about Netflix as an example, clearly this is considering what main stream America is wanting for a product. Many of the sub-examples you site are fringe products or dealing with the proper treatment of business practices. While true that existing laws prohibit government regulation of netflix, the point is larger that government CONTROL, not just necessary legislation, would be the problem. Imagine now the Socialist Netflix Company automatically sending you certain genres of movies because it was deemed by some moron senator or legislator that we should be exposed to certain elements on behalf of assisting our understanding of multi-cultural sensitivity.

And how is it sensible to say that "the original intent of all of these people was to escape government control is ridiculous" when you point out in all of your examples (save for slavery) that government control in one way or another is involved in those very examples. Slavery is an entire other subject and, of course, was not supported by a vast amount of Americans at the time. We had a little war over that.

You guys can be as picayune as you want about these matters, but the bottom line is this: more government control on you and me will be our decline as an American nation. There are too many examples around us now and throughout history to bear this out.

So, you concede that some government regulation is necessary.

Are you serious about the Socialist Netflix Company? To me, it makes you sound 150% crazy.

People came to America to find jobs -- In your mind, their original intent was to escape government overlording and control.

People came to America for free land -- In your mind, their original intent was to escape government overlording and control.

Why do people currently come here from Mexico? To escape government overlording and control? I don't think so.

Less government control could just as easily lead to a decline of the United States. I fear corporations controlling our lives much more than the government.

In the near term (say by 2020), what is the government actually going to take control of that you fear?

Is the government going to tell you what to eat, what to read, what to watch, what to say, what to buy, where to live, where to work, where to pray, who to love, who to hate, etc... ?