mccain's vp

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by geeker2

Please god please..

You would think you discovered the cure for cancer - yeah - we all know she is conservative and her views represent the conservative view of many Americans - So what.

Why don't you spend your time talking about how great Obama is and how great Biden is - instead all you do is spew a bunch of personal attacks about people that have different views than you.

We get it - you are voting for Obama/Biden - good for you. Go to Gay rallies...Go have an abortion....Go stand outside of a church and don't pray...Good for you!!!

But the crap you spew on the thread is worthless nonsense - but you seem to think it is apocalyptic.

Hey Copernicus..get a life.

Geeker...come on man..Look at what you wrote. You're a funny dude, but god forbid someone disagrees with your politics. Read your first paragragh and read your second...and then your third

What's her name is Pat Buchanon with a bra and she can't play the chick/soccer Mom/etc, card forever

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Geeker...come on man..Look at what you wrote. You're a funny dude, but god forbid someone disagrees with your politics. Read your first paragragh and read your second...and then your third

What's her name is Pat Buchanon with a bra and she can't play the chick/soccer Mom/etc, card forever

Enough energy spent on this topic (at least by me) - you get 1 vote and so do I. No minds will be changed here nor do they need be

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by geeker2

Enough energy spent on this topic (at least by me) - you get 1 vote and so do I. No minds will be changed here nor do they need be

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by geeker2

Enough energy spent on this topic (at least by me) - you get 1 vote and so do I. No minds will be changed here nor do they need be

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.

[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.

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

[Antitrust32]

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.

No matter who wins, or who dies and their VP is now Prez.. nothing will change law wise about abortion, gay rights, creationism (you really think her possibly being president would have any impact on this).

Its all up to Congress to start bills on these issues.. and they will not be started nor won or lost.

I think there are much more important issues out there than abortion (roe vs wade aint going anywhere), gay rights (hey I'm all for them, but the national gov wont be making any decisions on this... and obama supports civil unions but not gay marriage (I BELIEVE) anyway.. this will be a state by state issue), creationism (get real.. aint gonna happen).

There are too many WAY more important issues out there (#1 being our safety) to decide a candidate based of those 3 issues SCUDS.

As for your last line, you're an idiot.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

No matter who wins, or who dies and their VP is now Prez.. nothing will change law wise about abortion, gay rights, creationism (you really think her possibly being president would have any impact on this).

Its all up to Congress to start bills on these issues.. and they will not be started nor won or lost.

Well, that's not entirely accurate. On abortion in particular, Congress can't really do much of anything. Any movement on the abortion issue will have to come from the courts, and since the executive is the primary branch responsible for filling any vacancies there, the next president is actually very important.

As for Palin, it doesn't bother me at all that she has just been a mayor and the governor of Alaska. The supposed "issues" with her family don't concern me either. What worries me is that she is about as far right as you can get. What bothers me is that she thinks people can "pray away the gay," and that she believes creationism should be taught in the schools along with evolution as if they were just two different "theories," and that she is about as staunchly anti-choice as a person could be. Those are my issues with her in particular (and with the Christian Right in general) and I think people should either accept her or reject her on issues such as these (along with economic philosophies) rather than blindly voting for the Republican ticket because she seems somehow "tough" or against the ticket because she is too "inexperienced."
Now, you are certainly right in suggesting that the election of McCain-Palin isn't going to mean that kids everywhere will be subjected to the moronic "intelligent design" crap, but a potential Palin presidency would seem to continue the general anti-science, anti-gay, anti-choice positions of the Bush administration.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Well, that's not entirely accurate. On abortion in particular, Congress can't really do much of anything. Any movement on the abortion issue will have to come from the courts, and since the executive is the primary branch responsible for filling any vacancies there, the next president is actually very important.

As for Palin, it doesn't bother me at all that she has just been a mayor and the governor of Alaska. The supposed "issues" with her family don't concern me either. What worries me is that she is about as far right as you can get. What bothers me is that she thinks people can "pray away the gay," and that she believes creationism should be taught in the schools along with evolution as if they were just two different "theories," and that she is about as staunchly anti-choice as a person could be. Those are my issues with her in particular (and with the Christian Right in general) and I think people should either accept her or reject her on issues such as these (along with economic philosophies) rather than blindly voting for the Republican ticket because she seems somehow "tough" or against the ticket because she is too "inexperienced."
Now, you are certainly right in suggesting that the election of McCain-Palin isn't going to mean that kids everywhere will be subjected to the moronic "intelligent design" crap, but a potential Palin presidency would seem to continue the general anti-science, anti-gay, anti-choice positions of the Bush administration.

well said

[dalakhani]

Are we still talking about Palin? Something i stumbled across:



Are we allowed to ask questions about her tenure as mayor of Wasilla? Here's a story from the Wall Street Journal, exposing just how fiscally and operationally reckless Palin's mayorship of Wasilla was:

The biggest project that Sarah Palin undertook as mayor of this small town was an indoor sports complex, where locals played hockey, soccer, and basketball, especially during the long, dark Alaskan winters.

The only catch was that the city began building roads and installing utilities for the project before it had unchallenged title to the land. The misstep led to years of litigation and at least $1.3 million in extra costs for a small municipality with a small budget. What was to be Ms. Palin's legacy has turned into a financial mess that continues to plague Wasilla...

"I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities," Ms. Palin said Wednesday in her acceptance speech at the Republican convention. Litigation resulting from the dispute over Ms. Palin's sports-complex project is still in the courts, with the land's former owner seeking hundreds of thousands of additional dollars from the city.
When Palin took over Wasilla, the town had no long-term debt. By the time she was done, debt service had increased by 69 percent, the town had close to $19 million in long-term debt, making the debt around $3000 per capita. And the Mccain campaign is asking us - seriously - to consider her a fiscal conservative.

She is a Bush-Cheney fiscal conservative: low taxes, unprecedented new spending, utter incompetence, endemic cronyism and massive debt.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

well said

ditto