TheBig3

thank god you've refuted him. I tried and I was getting too unbelievably angry. He cited the worst president of the 20th century as the barometer for how we should conduct ourselves.

He somehow says that paying the executive more money will stop lobbiests from lobbying the legislative. How he made that jump I have no idea.
Studying the problem of the world and complaining about them is the way to fix them. Usedtool is a bumpersticker talking point machine who has to expose you to this “truth” he’s decried as absolute. You can never refute him or he’s just blind.

You can say Carter buried us in economic crisis. You can say Regean’s tax cuts gave us jobs and stimulation again. But its wrong because he says so. Ignore him until he can tell you honestly three things conservatives did.
And somehow we’re the worst country in history, where George Bush is Satan sitting atop some God-fueled empire.

__________________
I've moved to a new address

riseagainstrocks

It really sucks choosing between the two. Both are undesirable as far as I'm concerned.

I hope that a vote for Obama would be a vote for a new beginning with someone relatively untainted from the "old boys club" that runs Washington. However the cynic in me points to his inexperiance and how that will effectively doom any chance of a strong Executive.

McCain is simply an embodiment of the GOP that I've grown to loathe.

****...

__________________
One note timeless, came out of nowhere...

SATCHMO

Obama seems to be the lesser of the two evils, but i don't quite trust him. I really wish that there was a better republican candidate than McCain. How did that happen?

lucifer_sam

I don't think you can actively use the "lesser of two evils" card in pulling for one over the other. There is a much wider disparity this election between the candidates' social and economic platforms. McCain's fortuitous candidacy was the result of a mixed number of issues, not all of which were necessarily politically oriented. First, consider the religious issue: while Romney was invariably the family man, he was disregarded by MANY Christians for his Mormon background. And Huckabee, despite his strong religious background, carried little experience in his economic plan. I find it extremely disappointing that Americans were unable to overlook (or even embrace) Mitt Romney's religious background.

I admit I have shortcomings in placing my prejudices aside when choosing a candidate, but I will do my best come November to objectively pull for whom I believe is the better candidate.

__________________
first.am

sleepy jack

I don't understand why you'd want someone who thinks freedom can't exist without religion. That's almost as bad as Huckabee's bible + constitution = <3 crap.

__________________

Expletive Deleted

I think more people were unable to embrace his Republican nutjob background.

To answer SATCHMO's question about why there were no better candidates than McCain, it's because they were pretty much all crazy.

Miltamec Soundsquinaez

I wish we could be a little more constructive.
You don't just have to automatically attack everything I say. You happen to disagree that we should raise the president's pay. OK. You didn't say anything about my idea that the candidates could willingly submit to an I.Q. test to make themselves more attractive.
Here's some interesting facts about conservatives.
-Reagan fought against unions
-Reagan dropped corporations tax rates from 31% down to 7%
-to refute L.S.'s claim that we're not like China whose top 5% make up 75% of GDP, well, no we're not quite like that. Our top .1% makes up 50% of our GDP. (Yes, that's point 1, as in decimal point, then a 1.)

Also, I'm not going to buy your guy's idea that all politicians are essentially good at heart, and some just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when:
a) Prescott Bush, while not a politician was father and grandfather to future presidents, funded Nazi regimes.
b) George H.W. Bush was scheduled to have a dinner meeting with Scott Hinckley, brother of John Hinckley on the day of Reagan's attempted assassination(hmm, that's some bad luck).
He also met with Omar Bin Laden (Osama's brother) on the morning of 9/11. (hmm, that's some bad luck).
c) George W. Bush has allegedly committed over 30 types of felonies while in office. (hmm, that's some bad luck. I guess his tongue must have slipped when he gave the go ahead to illegally wire-tap Americans, and approve torture techniques by our military on Iraqi's.)

So please, stop posing as a liberal moderate, your right wing talking points are really beginning to wear thin.

Double X

Lobbyists aren't bad as long as they are a non-profit organization, it's fine if the prez candidates takes money from the right organizations as long as he (or she) doesn't fall into corporate owner's pockets.

I would (if I could) vote for Obama. I always go with the liberal anyways, even McCain seems to be the most moderate conservative in awhile so I don't really mind who wins.

That's what you get when at least 1/3 of our country are bible-thumpers out west. I really do not want a president who makes his decision partially based on his religion, I don't prejudice against certain religions but take into consideration their blind devotion to it.

lucifer_sam

Bible Belt = southeast and midwest. Not west. =/

I don't think God is allowed in California. At least not this time of year.

__________________
first.am

TheBig3

Whats I.Q. got to do with anything? Theres 7 potential I.Q. tests, do you think they should take all 7? Do you think their at all accurate. Do you think intelligent presidents like Carter make good presidents?

Why is this good? Unionized Labor was more dismantled under Clinton and the WTO than it was under Reagan.

-Reagan dropped corporations tax rates from 31% down to 7%
-to refute L.S.'s claim that we're not like China whose top 5% make up 75% of GDP, well, no we're not quite like that. Our top .1% makes up 50% of our GDP. (Yes, that's point 1, as in decimal point, then a 1.)

Also, I'm not going to buy your guy's idea that all politicians are essentially good at heart, and some just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when:


He was a Senator, would you read something? I mean even if you wikipedia'd the ****ing guy you'd have known this.

Where did you find any credible source on that? Secondly, you're attempt to say the 41 attempted to have the president assassinated? This is why I attack you. You present things as true and it would be thrown out of court by any judge in america. Same goes for this Osama comment.


Are they wearing thin?

How about you learn something instead of using these word-of-mouth conspiracy theories as fact. Your problem is that you think you know everything and than no one else has the right opinion because they don't know what you know.

I constantly vote for liberals, in fact I've never voted republican in my life. The difference between you and I is that I go find out about things I've heard or want to know more on, you just strut around like some omnipotent pea****
who in truth doesn't really know much, and you get refuted everytime you open your mouth.

__________________
I've moved to a new address