mccain's vp

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

We just spent all this money n' lives on a war in Iraq that the majority of citizens didn't want to have us involved in. How does that happen? It happened because people voted for somebody that did something they didn't want done. It happens. You want creationism taught in schools? You want no abortions allowed even for rape victims? You're voting for it. When somebody is 72 years old, then their V.P.'s views are very important. You don't want people to know what her views are? That's what's going on here. Her views are being listed. I don't think people know enough about the views of people they vote for. That's how that war keeps going on when the majority of Americans don't want it going on. When you vote for President you're voting for their possible replacement. Our next election for President is in 4 years(not like we are gunna vote for his replacement is some special election.) If he has a heart attack next summer, then we are gunna have this lady as President for three and a half years. This would be the oldest guy I can remember going in as president. That's why the 2nd in command's views need to be clear. Now is the time to worry about it. Not then. If you vote for her, then you need to take responsibility for what she does. Same as the people who voted for Bush need to take responsibility for those 4100 Americans that he got killed in Iraq.

i voted for bush. who would have known at the time what would happen after? that 911 would occur, that bush would decide to upset the whole middle east apple cart and do what everyone didn't want done in gulf one-to whit, give iran free reign by removing the one moron keeping them in check?
besides, congress has just as much responsibility-at least those who voted for the second iraq war-many of the dems at the time disagreed with the war, but didn't want to lose their next election. way to stand up for your principles congress! hell, we wanted revenge. now with the surge it looks as tho we may be out of iraq soon, which is a good thing--and something that mccain had right.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i voted for bush. who would have known at the time what would happen after? that 911 would occur, that bush would decide to upset the whole middle east apple cart and do what everyone didn't want done in gulf one-to whit, give iran free reign by removing the one moron keeping them in check?
besides, congress has just as much responsibility-at least those who voted for the second iraq war-many of the dems at the time disagreed with the war, but didn't want to lose their next election. way to stand up for your principles congress! hell, we wanted revenge. now with the surge it looks as tho we may be out of iraq soon, which is a good thing--and something that mccain had right.

Wouldn't have taken place if Gore had gotten in. To be honest with you, that f'n Ralph Nader got 4100 killed by running. Forget Florida, Gore would have won another state, too. New Hampshire(I think.) How would you know? Well, you're buying into that surge crap. Doesn't surprise me you bought into electing Bush.

[Danzig]

i don't think it's buying into a candidate. i remember standing in the voting booth looking at the choices and wondering how the hell we got to the point of bush vs gore...and then bush and kerry-with that dipshit edwards as his running mate. you'd think we could get better people than that to choose from. i mean, look at this go 'round. huckabee seemingly had a shot for a while, and that's just sad.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't think it's buying into a candidate. i remember standing in the voting booth looking at the choices and wondering how the hell we got to the point of bush vs gore...and then bush and kerry-with that dipshit edwards as his running mate. you'd think we could get better people than that to choose from. i mean, look at this go 'round. huckabee seemingly had a shot for a while, and that's just sad.

Good point. F*ck it, I'll run for President when I'm 50.

Seriously- I've been trying to get my father into politics for years. He'd be an absolute stud- a NYS public servant for 30 years, son of an immigrant, went to Harvard, incredible public speaker, etc. The problem is the media does everything they can to destroy you, and he's not the personality that would handle that well.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't think it's buying into a candidate. i remember standing in the voting booth looking at the choices and wondering how the hell we got to the point of bush vs gore...and then bush and kerry-with that dipshit edwards as his running mate. you'd think we could get better people than that to choose from. i mean, look at this go 'round. huckabee seemingly had a shot for a while, and that's just sad.

What I don't get(at all) is voting for Bush in 2004(when he said in 2000 that he was against nation building. ) Remember the debate with Gore? Bush said he was against nation building, and then he went right out and has been nation building in Iraq from 2003 to today. Believe me, that is nation building. It will not look like it does unless we stay there. For the surge to be a success, we would have to be getting out of there. See, we are throwing away 350 million bucks a day there. That's not(to me) a success for American People. Like you said, our nation's infrastructure is badly in need of repair. Instead, we are using the money in that country. They want us to leave. Bush won't leave, because he knows they are gunna fight as soon as we go. When that happens, people are gunna wonder what we really accomplished there(what we really "won" there.) This is an artificial Democracy. They don't want. We want it. Therefore it can only exist if we stay there, and that's why we keep staying there. If the surge is a success, then why can't we leave? It really is like spilling a half gallon of milk, and claiming success when you've cleaned it up(still out of milk.)

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't think it's buying into a candidate. i remember standing in the voting booth looking at the choices and wondering how the hell we got to the point of bush vs gore...and then bush and kerry-with that dipshit edwards as his running mate. you'd think we could get better people than that to choose from. i mean, look at this go 'round. huckabee seemingly had a shot for a while, and that's just sad.

You're unsatisfied each time with the candidates, and it's mainly because you aren't ever gunna get a candidate for President with your desired views on the issues. You're liberal socially, but don't believe in any kind of economic justice whatsoever. Then, you add in that you're against gun control. You seem to be a believer in keeping insurance companies involved in healthcare. I would say you're a Republican that's too liberal socially to ever be happy with their candidates. You're close to being an Orange County Republican, but they are still too conservative socially for you. You usually seem to go with the Republican candidate, because you love them guns so dearly.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

You're unsatisfied each time with the candidates, and it's mainly because you aren't ever gunna get a candidate for President with your desired views on the issues. You're liberal socially, but don't believe in any kind of economic justice whatsoever. Then, you add in that you're against gun control. You seem to be a believer in keeping insurance companies involved in healthcare. I would say you're a Republican that's too liberal socially to ever be happy with their candidates. You're close to being an Orange County Republican, but they are still too conservative socially for you. You usually seem to go with the Republican candidate, because you love them guns so dearly.

actually, i've probably voted for more democrats over the years than republicans, since you have to consider state and local levels as well. i'm not quite sure what you mean about any kind of economic justice whatsoever-that could gover a myriad of topics. as for healthcare, i have no idea what system would work best. it's funny regarding healthcare in that when i hire people and mention the benefits package, they're gung ho about it. then when it's time at 90 days to fill out all the paperwork, the insurance is invariably turned down. why? it's not required, and they pay part of it. so, those who have it pay more (the more in the pool, the cheaper per person) and those who don't end up wishing they'd gotten it when they had the chance. because if you get it at 90 days, no waiting period, no preexisting conditions apply. i had a girl just toss the whole packet, which also includes short term disability. a few months later she found out she was pregnant, that part of the coverage would have paid her while she was off work once she had to take off, and until she came back.

i don't know why the employers ever became the ones to pick up most of the coverage. not sure how the system ever got to the point it has-but when you see the fraud, waste and abuse in our current govt handled programs, just how well would universal healthcare work?

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Put it to ya in a very basic way. If there was more economic justice(especially in your area of the country,) then they would gladly participate in getting the medical insurance they need. I would like this to be treated as a necessity, and not as something like a cable bill, or car insurance. You don't need cable or a car to survive, but medical care is a necessity. Notice how you don't complain about people not paying their police bill, their fire bill, or their national defense bill? To me it's a necessity like the police dept., the fire dept., and national defense. Most other countries treat medical care that way. We are unique in wanting a person's level of medical care to be linked to income. I think most things in life should be determined by ones income(type of housing, owning a car, the city you live in, whether you eat steak or not etc., etc. etc.) I just don't agree that one's level of medical care should have anything to do with their income or economic situation. That's one of the reasons I think it's so important to limit illegal immigration. The Democratic Party is dead wrong to encourage illegal immigration while demanding better healthcare for all citizens. We all know that the better healthcare won't be limited to just American Citizens. Their inconsistent on this. Do you think countries that have national healthcare just let anybody act as if they are citizens? They don't. It's not wrong or racist to control who is in our country. To me, medical care is one of the best investments a country can make. It's something people badly need, but they don't like to go use unless they have to. Most people don't enjoy going to get medical care. So, the abuse would be on the provider side, and that's a lot easier to control than on the user side.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Put it to ya in a very basic way. If there was more economic justice(especially in your area of the country,) then they would gladly participate in getting the medical insurance they need. I would like this to be treated as a necessity, and not as something like a cable bill, or car insurance. You don't need cable or a car to survive, but medical care is a necessity. Notice how you don't complain about people not paying their police bill, their fire bill, or their national defense bill? To me it's a necessity like the police dept., the fire dept., and national defense. Most other countries treat medical care that way. We are unique in wanting a person's level of medical care to be linked to income. I think most things in life should be determined by ones income(type of housing, owning a car, the city you live in, whether you eat steak or not etc., etc. etc.) I just don't agree that one's level of medical care should have anything to do with their income or economic situation. That's one of the reasons I think it's so important to limit illegal immigration. The Democratic Party is dead wrong to encourage illegal immigration while demanding better healthcare for all citizens. We all know that the better healthcare won't be limited to just American Citizens. Their inconsistent on this. Do you think countries that have national healthcare just let anybody act as if they are citizens? They don't. It's not wrong or racist to control who is in our country. To me, medical care is one of the best investments a country can make. It's something people badly need, but they don't like to go use unless they have to. Most people don't enjoy going to get medical care. So, the abuse would be on the provider side, and that's a lot easier to control than on the user side.

again, not sure what you mean by economic justice. i know what my employees make, and i know what the company pays for their insurance, and frankly, there's no reason for them to turn it down. but they usually say 'i never get sick, why should i get it?' they don't see a need for it-then they have an illness or injury and the light comes on. then they get hit with a whopper of a bill, or hit with waiting 15 months because they opt down the road to get coverage, but pre-existing conditions come in to play. thing is, too many do treat it like it's just another bill-one that they can avoid. i've always treated it as an absolute necessity, and we've always had it. those in lower income familites, etc, already get coverage. between Arkids and the feds, people down here are fully covered. hell, those on the upper tier of arkids even get orthodontic treatment. i'm paying for other kids' braces, and my own insurance doesn't even cover it....

and i don't see how there wouldn't be abuse-look at your home state and the recent news about hospitals out there billing the state and federal medicaid and medical programs for health care that never happened. millions of dollars worth billed.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Danzig

actually, i've probably voted for more democrats over the years than republicans, since you have to consider state and local levels as well. i'm not quite sure what you mean about any kind of economic justice whatsoever-that could gover a myriad of topics. as for healthcare, i have no idea what system would work best. it's funny regarding healthcare in that when i hire people and mention the benefits package, they're gung ho about it. then when it's time at 90 days to fill out all the paperwork, the insurance is invariably turned down. why? it's not required, and they pay part of it. so, those who have it pay more (the more in the pool, the cheaper per person) and those who don't end up wishing they'd gotten it when they had the chance. because if you get it at 90 days, no waiting period, no preexisting conditions apply. i had a girl just toss the whole packet, which also includes short term disability. a few months later she found out she was pregnant, that part of the coverage would have paid her while she was off work once she had to take off, and until she came back.

i don't know why the employers ever became the ones to pick up most of the coverage. not sure how the system ever got to the point it has-but when you see the fraud, waste and abuse in our current govt handled programs, just how well would universal healthcare work?

Universal healthcare would be the worse possible thing that our govnt could pass. It would be so bad I dont even want to think about it.. How would we pay for it.. only way to would be to raise taxes, significantly.

I've lived in two countries with socialized medicine... both places had the worst healthcare I've ever seen. I almost died in New Zealand cause my doc's were not that good. ALL the best doc's come to the great U S of A, because of the way our healthcare is set up.

Both countries also, (Ireland and New Zealand) tax them a WAY higher % of your salary compared to the US... and one of the main reason taxes are that high is because of socialized medicine.

Now I'm not saying that changes shouldnt be made... but Universal Healthcare would be very very bad.

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Wouldn't have taken place if Gore had gotten in. To be honest with you, that f'n Ralph Nader got 4100 killed by running. Forget Florida, Gore would have won another state, too. New Hampshire(I think.) How would you know? Well, you're buying into that surge crap. Doesn't surprise me you bought into electing Bush.

Not true at all.
Gore was every bit as big a hawk as Bush.
Go back and look.
Now he might have gotten out quicker, or
he might have put more troops in to begin with,
like Bush and Cheney were told to do by a General
they got rid of.

But to say Gore would not have gone into Iraq is
very, very likely, dead wrong.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Not true at all.
Gore was every bit as big a hawk as Bush.
Go back and look.
Now he might have gotten out quicker, or
he might have put more troops in to begin with,
like Bush and Cheney were told to do by a General
they got rid of.

But to say Gore would not have gone into Iraq is
very, very likely, dead wrong.

That is a very interesting question..

Would he have gone on TV with his "Colin Powell" next to him circling WMD that was actually a warehouse full of Cheerios?...not sure about that

[nebrady]

If Gore would have been such a good president, why did his home state not even vote for him? Bush took it. Can you explain to me what is obama's plan. I know its tax everyone and lets go talk to the crazy guy in iran. Yeah lets be nice thats whats chamberlain tried to do with hitler. As for iraq, that country is in better shape than when we weren't there. Those people have freedom now. Hussein would kill or worse torture them if they opposed him or talk against him. We as americans seem to take our freedom as it was nothing. He killed many people, even people in his own party. Just something to ponder. Also i love the palin pick. Don't be surprised if she is what turns women to voter for mccain.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by nebrady

If Gore would have been such a good president, why did his home state not even vote for him? Bush took it. Can you explain to me what is obama's plan. I know its tax everyone and lets go talk to the crazy guy in iran. Yeah lets be nice thats whats chamberlain tried to do with hitler. As for iraq, that country is in better shape than when we weren't there. Those people have freedom now. Hussein would kill or worse torture them if they opposed him or talk against him. We as americans seem to take our freedom as it was nothing. He killed many people, even people in his own party. Just something to ponder. Also i love the palin pick. Don't be surprised if she is what turns women to voter for mccain.

Where do I start

and how's your knee..

[nebrady]

start anytime i up for a good debate.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Don't waste your time.

Don't miss my effort in the AJ thread..it's one of my better 5 letter posts