Which president?

[What the Heck]

We're talking about both. Neither candidate offers any advantage in this regard. They both suck. Both parties suck. Both will screw up the economy. Neither will screw it up any less than the other. Both have tax policies that will hurt many people. Clearly McCain is favoring more affluent people more, and Obama is favoring less affluent people more -- your own financial situation and your own morality will dictate which you prefer. But that's all just money. If money is all your care about -- if money is all you think is of value in your life -- then that's perhaps all you need to consider. However, many people believe that there are other considerations that are much more important, such as personal freedom and civil liberties. Also, people should see a very clear difference between how each man will approach the rest of the world, and judge the ramifiations of each approach: McCain with his "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran": strength instead of peace; versus Obama with his willingness to have American rejoin the community of nations and pursue strength with peace.

Except - the personal freedom and liberties part? Both candidates have history's with that (one of the few places that Obama has any experience in). And what happened? John McCain treated the press that was speaking out against him with dignity and fairness. Barack Obama's plan? He twice attempted to shut down a major radio station who was interviewing someone he didn't like.

How about the ramifications of their war/peace policy? Remember "peace in our time"? Of, of course, this isn't relevant, even though we could compare 2 leaders who are outspoken about what they want to do (Hitler wanted to take over Eastern Europe and Imanutjob wants to destory Israel) and both have their OWN preconditions to meet with the other world leaders. The difference is the British system allows for the removal of a PM who is an extremely poor leader and we would still have to put up with 2 or 3 more years of an Obama presidency.

 

[What the Heck]

Uh, no. Much much much more irrelevant. You're mistaken.

No he's not. Your litany of assertions are distortions and fabrications.

No they aren't.

Yes they are.

No they aren't.

Yes they are.

No they aren't times infinity. I win.

 

[ntsammy5]

Before casting a vote for Obama, Americans must consider the likelihood that he will follow the path of Jimmy Carter

And that McCain will follow in the foot steps of W. Sorry, that dog don't hunt

 

[bicker]

Barack Obama's plan? He twice attempted to shut down a major radio station who was interviewing someone he didn't like.

No he didn't. That's a fabrication. Why are you even going down this path? It discredits you and the thread.

Here's a responsible article about what you're trying to refer to:

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/wgnam_again_target_of_obama_ca.html

"The Tribune-owned station was flooded with calls and e-mails..." Americans exercising their right to complain about the content of programming of a public broadcaster -- a right that is codified in FCC regulations.

How about the ramifications of their war/peace policy?

Gosh. You mean where the Democrats will actually consider peace before Bomb, bomb, bombing Iran? Bush has made the United State a significantly more isolated pariah nation, and McCain has expressed intentions to just continue Bush's arrogant policy of actively and carelessly antagonizing the world -- both enemies and friends.

Obama is not Carter. If anything, he's learned the lesson of history, and is ready to respond in strength, but only if there is provocation, not just because it is good for Republican political strategy.

 

[c4a]

Once again, as I said on another thread- OS supporters only want to hear about O's "hope, change, issues he is saying he will deal with". Everything else is irrelevant. Forget the links to actual factual sites (not blogs or wikki's)-most won't read them. Repeatedly, people have said go to the voting sites-see if the votes match the words. It doesn't matter. Some are voting for Obama because they agree with him. Some are voting for him because they don't like McCain or Palin. Some are only voting for him because he is a Democrat & the don't like the job that the current Republican Pres. is doing (of course, they are blaming it ALL on only one of the three branches & ignoring the branch that truly is to blame...)

As for Carter, I remember VERY well. Good man, HORRIBLE President. Horrible...doesn't even begin to describe. His ideas of "Preserve the Peace" was to cave and hand off chunks of the U.S. to anyone & everyone who came a bullying. That isn't my idea of peace. We had the USSR (Russia) aiming supposed missles at us, US citizens being kidnapped, tortured, and killed... and President Carter caving every time. How long did it take for Reagan to get the hostages? After Carter "talking" for how many years? Civil rights? PUH-LEEESSSE! Instead of bringing all schools UP to the same standards-he brought the good ones down. Instead of fixing inner city problems...they were compounded. Unemployment was at an all time high. Trying to get a house, go to school...pay bills, our country was considered a joke. Our President was considered a joke.

As one poster put it-studying history & living it are two very different things. It was a much different time. There was no factcheck.com. (Shoot-a lot of tv's still had 3 channels and were black and white. There wasn't internet. Period.) And even though many of the younger generation may wish to think that GWB is the worst President we have ever had...not even close. But then, to be fair, their reality has been Bush SR., Clinton, and Bush JR. That is their frame of reference. Some are willing to listen to us "old codger's" & a lot aren't. A lot view us as "Out of Touch" & "Ignorant". Funny thing (Ironic) is they are usually the same voices talking about the importance of experience.
And a lot of our problems started back with Clinton and the Congress that was in office then...chickens are just finally coming home to roost.
Don't even get me going on the Panama Canal...
Please forgive the long ramblings of an older lady.

 

[What the Heck]

No he didn't. That's a fabrication. Why are you even going down this path? It discredits you and the thread.

Here's a responsible article about what you're trying to refer to:

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/wgnam_again_target_of_obama_ca.html

"The Tribune-owned station was flooded with calls and e-mails..." Americans exercising their right to complain about the content of programming of a public broadcaster -- a right that is codified in FCC regulations.

Gosh. You mean where the Democrats will actually consider peace before Bomb, bomb, bombing Iran? Bush has made the United State a significantly more isolated pariah nation, and McCain has expressed intentions to just continue Bush's arrogant policy of actively and carelessly antagonizing the world -- both enemies and friends.

Obama is not Carter. If anything, he's learned the lesson of history, and is ready to respond in strength, but only if there is provocation, not just because it is good for Republican political strategy.

Sorry, but a presidential candidate asking it's supporters to protest outside the facility so noone can get through, to shut down their phone system by flooding them with phone calls and to flood their emails to shut down their internet, that is a first. And it isn't free speech in operation, it's an attempt to shut down free speech.

The only way Obama is not Carter is that Carter was an honest man. Obama isn't. He's a Chicago politician who would lie to his grandmother if it would win him votes.

As for giving peace a chance, is he going to sit down with Al Queda? Or is he going to treat them as a crimininal gang like Bill Clinton did, guaranteeing an attack on US soil or against US forces each and every year while in office?
After all, you did say Bill Clinton was relevant. Al Queda declared war on us in 1993. We didn't declare war on them until 2001.

 

[Goofycampers]

No he didn't. That's a fabrication. Why are you even going down this path? It discredits you and the thread.

Here's a responsible article about what you're trying to refer to:

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/wgnam_again_target_of_obama_ca.html

"The Tribune-owned station was flooded with calls and e-mails..." Americans exercising their right to complain about the content of programming of a public broadcaster -- a right that is codified in FCC regulations.

Gosh. You mean where the Democrats will actually consider peace before Bomb, bomb, bombing Iran? Bush has made the United State a significantly more isolated pariah nation, and McCain has expressed intentions to just continue Bush's arrogant policy of actively and carelessly antagonizing the world -- both enemies and friends.

Obama is not Carter. If anything, he's learned the lesson of history, and is ready to respond in strength, but only if there is provocation, not just because it is good for Republican political strategy.

The comment below the article you link talks about BO talking to the Iraqi government in order to prolong the war for political purposes. Is that the peace you/he talks about?

 

[rayelias]

There always that "I have to see it to believe it" group. Unfortunately many have to learn the hard way . I just hope their life lesson doesn't destroy our country.

Tina

The same people think the only reason socialism didn't work everywhere else it was tried was because it wasn't tried HERE.

 

[bicker]

Once again, as I said on another thread- OS supporters only want to hear about O's "hope, change, issues he is saying he will deal with".

This is a pointless statement: Anyone could easily write something equally pointless and disparaging about McCain/Palin supporters. Such statements don't illuminate anything, but rather simply serve to distract and derail.

Some are voting for <InsertCandidateHere> because they agree with him. Some are voting for him because they don't like <InsertCandidateHere>. Some are only voting for him because he is a <InsertPoliticalPartyHere>& the don't like the job that <PreviousPresident> [did]

We could play Mad Libs with some of these paragraphs.