[quote]wirewound wrote:
…
You guys are just so pissed he’s gonna win, aren’t you?
[/quote]
Super pissed. America deserves better.
[quote]wirewound wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
"Just how much Senate experience does Barack Obama have in terms of actual work days? Not much.
From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That’s how many days the Senate was actually in session and working.
After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World, and fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Ronald Reagan.
143 days – I keep leftovers in my refrigerator longer than that.
In contrast, John McCain’s 26 years in Congress, 22 years of military service including 1,966 days in captivity as a POW in Hanoi now seem more impressive than ever. At 71, John McCain may just be hitting his stride."
Thunderbolt said it best: the guy is a naif.
Wait until this yo-yo actually gets in office! He’ll make Curly Joe look brilliant by comparison!
You guys are just so pissed he’s gonna win, aren’t you?
[/quote]
I’m not pissed, just realistic. Neither one can really do much of anything. We are held hostage by our debts — trillions, literally trillions, of unfunded liabilities.
How would increasing these trillions in debts help anything? Let’s look at Obama: Obama wants to spend money. Where’s it coming from? Higher taxes, from people who are losing their homes and jobs? Borrowing? More? From who, the Chinese? Printing money…by the bushel basket?
It just can’t be done. Neither Obama nor McCain can get blood out of a turnip.
“You’ve drained it dry. Of all the magnificense of this country…this great country…you’ve drained it dry.”
— Atlas Shrugged
[quote]dhickey wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
McCain does have 22 years of experience in the Sentate; I won’t get in to the mistakes he has made. I fail to understand how his military experience or the days in captivity does anything to prepare him to be President. I hear fifty percent of 70 year olds have symptoms of dementia. I think he has made som emistakes that may suggest he is prone to dementia.
As far as Obama not having much experience you can not expect different results if you go about it the same way things have always been done.
Agreed on McCain. I am pissed I am going to have vote for him. I don’t get your argument on Obama. I had a problem with a mechanic once but I didn’t take my car to a plumber the next time it needed service. We need qualified individuals that will take a differnet approach, not some idiot off the street.
What’s funny is that Obama is neither experienced nor different. Guess who the largest employer in the country is. Guess who has the larger budget in the country. Guess who has the larges pension fund in country. Guess who is the largest purshasing power in the country. Guess who the largest lender in the country is. Guess who the largest medical insurer is. Guess who is the largest bank in the country. Guess who the largest educator in the country is. Guess who the larges litigator is in the county. The answer to all of these is the federal gov’t.
Is Obama looking to shrink the size of Gov’t? No, he’s looking to do exactly what we’ve been doing for the last 70 some years. Expand gov’t, take resourses and capital out of the free market where does all of us the most good. He critizes washington out of one side of his mouth and proposes more programs run by guess who…washington bureaucrats. He is looking to take more of our freedoms and money. His ideals and propaganda are as old as Carl Marx.[/quote]
Your analogy is not good for your defense; we have all been screwed by mechanics. I had a high pressure pump fixed by a lawn mower mechanic when the high pressure mechanic only managed to lighten my wallet.
There is a movement to vote out all incumbents, I am not sure I totally agree with it, but it would send a message to our politicians that we are not happy,
I think the name of this thread says it all, Obama is lacking the experience that we all hate. I know he is going to have to become one of them but I hope he remembers why he got where is going.
When I listen to these threads I wonder does everybody think the job of the politician is so difficult I doubt it. I would think the ability to read would be paramount. Other than that it has to be common sense. And when we see our government does something that is not the result of common sense. I say it has to be corruption or ignorance. Those are the only reasons common sense would not prevail.
Our government is huge I agree with you our Gov. does not need to be any bigger, but you are acting like the Dems. are the only one guilty of complicating our life�??s with Government. You have to admit you have the Democratic agenda and you have the Republican Agenda. I think the Republican agenda is (WAR) the war on drugs, the war on terrorism, and the war on crime you could go on forever
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Obama has no experience.
McCain has bad experience.
I’ve said it before: we’re choosing between a douche and a turd sandwich. Pick the one that tastes the least like death and you’re golden.
Not that I’m head over heals for McCain, But what about his experience do you consider “bad”? Or were you simply regarding his track record as a RINO?
Uhh…Iraq? Boy, he was dead wrong about that one, and naive little Obama was svengali like in his judgement.
You mean when McCain pushed for the Surge and Obama said it would never work?
It is amazing how your view is exactly the opposite of reality.[/quote]
So it has created the space needed for political reconciliation to happen which has caused our troops to come home already?
Oh, I didn’t think so.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
Joking of course?
(please be joking)
Dead serious. What exactly do consider poor judgment with regard to Iraq? This is much too broad to guess what you mean here. Trusting the intellegence from our intellegence agencies? Buying into Saddam’s deliberate ploys to make us think he had WMD? Considering Saddam’s previous actions? Being a little sensative to instability and possible threats in the middle east after 9/11?
Hindsight is 20/20. If you are going to attack someone’s judgment you have to do so in the context this judgement was acted on. Not with information the judgee never had.
What do consider to be good judgment on the part of Obama? Meaning that he actually acted on something, not just being an armchair quarterback.
Obama wasn’t even in the Senate at the time of the vote on the Iraq war and he wasn’t privy to any of the intelligence McCain was.
I suspect if he was in the Senate at the time he would have voted yes just like the other Democratic Senators did. [/quote]
Yes, he had access to the intel, he just didn’t read it.
McCain pre-AUMF:
“Saddam Hussein continues to acquire, amass,
and improve on his arsenal of weapons
of mass destruction. He continues to
attempt to acquire a nuclear weapon.
These are all well-known facts.”
vs.
NIE:
“The activities we have detected do not add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what [the INR] would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons.” The INR added that it “[l]ack[ed] persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program.”
My point was he had terrible judgement, you are supposed to make the opposite claim. Citing he had access to intel (and ignored it) doesn’t really change the fact he exercised “bad” judgement.
(makes it seem worse to thinking folks actually)
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
Joking of course?
(please be joking)
Dead serious. What exactly do consider poor judgment with regard to Iraq? This is much too broad to guess what you mean here. Trusting the intellegence from our intellegence agencies? Buying into Saddam’s deliberate ploys to make us think he had WMD? Considering Saddam’s previous actions? Being a little sensative to instability and possible threats in the middle east after 9/11?
Hindsight is 20/20. If you are going to attack someone’s judgment you have to do so in the context this judgement was acted on. Not with information the judgee never had.
What do consider to be good judgment on the part of Obama? Meaning that he actually acted on something, not just being an armchair quarterback.
Obama wasn’t even in the Senate at the time of the vote on the Iraq war and he wasn’t privy to any of the intelligence McCain was.
I suspect if he was in the Senate at the time he would have voted yes just like the other Democratic Senators did. [/quote]
ding ding ding… you win the prize.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
dhickey wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Your analogy is not good for your defense; we have all been screwed by mechanics. I had a high pressure pump fixed by a lawn mower mechanic when the high pressure mechanic only managed to lighten my wallet.
[/quote]
Fine. If your dentist doesn’t take care of your toothache, would you go to a carpenter next?
I’m all for doing that but how about we start at state elections or even the House. Electing a dipshit president to send a message is just assanine.
He already is one of them. Just an unexperienced one of them. He is proving this almost everday. I see now way that he is any different other than experience.
I don’t even think they need to be able to read. Senetors have, on average, 65 staffers. I think the House is 15. We are paying these idiots $200k for part time work and for there 65 staffers. All of this to send the ecomony and this country into the shitter. Actually, who is really the idiot. The guy making $200k to fleace us or the content little sheep that would rather watch Dancing With The Stars or The Bachelor than pay attention to what happening to their freedoms and hard earned money. Fucking ridiculous.
I think most repulicans are terrible people and far from conservatives. Interested in only their own political aspirations. I just happen to think that Liberals are same with half the intellect. You either have to be dishonest or stupid to say some of things the liberals are saying these days. Definately not the party of JFK or Harry Truman. Jesus, even FDR would blush at some of the shit these guys are pulling.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Of course, someone needs to point out to the people that, with 10 trillion in debt, its too late for any POTUS or Congress to save this system. Can anyone here imagine Obama or McCain starting something like LBJ’s Great Society Program, or Ike’s Interstate System? We are not governed by people anymore but by our debt. No government can initiate ANYTHING in the face of such massive debts and deficits.
Eventually, the value of the dollar collapses, the economy collapses, and the feds must inflate like crazy to pay all the bills. This’ll require draconian price controls and a police state to enforce it all. We’re screwed.[/quote]
You got it brother. It’s scary just how close we are to the precursors of major revolution. Things are going to have to get much worse for people to wake up. Once people do take notice it will far too late to do anything in short term. We are going to be screwed for a very long time. We are at a real tipping point here and we will need a fricken miricle to get back to some sense of stabilty.
Open free trade to ANY peaceful nation for ANY products.
Kill subsidies to protected industries.
Quit printing money.
REDUCE spending and scale back the federal gov’t to release capital and resourses back into the free market.
Quite fucking with the heart beat of our nation. Lift restritions on Nueclear, drilling, importation of sugar ethenol (see first point). And for God sake quit with the global warming shit.
Any one wanna put odds on any of this happening? Scary thing is all of these would need to be addressed for any sizable correction. Then we can work on :
Gut the education department and all of the bureaucrats that are screwing are children and making us look like idiots.
Gut the fed and all the Keynesians that are screwing us.
Major reform of social programs.
Major tort law reform. Loser pays. caps for fees on class action law suits.
Kill regulation in the medical industry that protects the salaries of doctors,providers, and insurance companies and give power back to the market. So essentially, get out of the way.
Kill unions for any gov’t job.
And on and on and on.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Is Obama looking to shrink the size of Gov’t? No, he’s looking to do exactly what we’ve been doing for the last 70 some years. Expand gov’t, take resourses and capital out of the free market where does all of us the most good. He critizes washington out of one side of his mouth and proposes more programs run by guess who…washington bureaucrats. He is looking to take more of our freedoms and money. His ideals and propaganda are as old as Carl Marx.[/quote]
Uh, lots of things are as old, or older than Carl Marx.
The choice though is a candidate with ideas, some of which could really work, or a candidate who is running on ideas that actually haven’t worked. (Note: who also believes islamic extremism is the most pressing issue facing us…)
pretty simple choice.
[quote]100meters wrote:
NIE:
“The activities we have detected do not add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what [the INR] would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons.” The INR added that it “[l]ack[ed] persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program.”
[/quote]
Which estimate did this come from? I don’t recall reading this part.
[quote]100meters wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Uh, lots of things are as old, or older than Carl Marx.
The choice though is a candidate with ideas, some of which could really work, or a candidate who is running on ideas that actually haven’t worked. (Note: who also believes islamic extremism is the most pressing issue facing us…)
pretty simple choice.[/quote]
Wich ideas could work? I haven’t heard any from Obama. Not a single one.
It has been proven time and time again throughout history. More freedom and less gov’t = better quality of life and prosperity. Less freedom and more gov’t = squallor and bloodshed. Remind me again who is running on ideas that don’t work?
Colletivism and Socialism = bad.
Freedom and Capitalism = good.
half way in between doesn’t = better.
I don’t know how much easier this can be but people still clammer over this emty suit.
Yay…more gov’t control of my life.
Yay…take more of my money, I want to work harder to support those that don’t feel like working.
Yay…raise and educate my children, I’m too lazy to take any interest.
Yay…regulate and tax jobs out of this country.
Yay…I want to pay for my neighbors health insurance so he has more money for cigarettes and to gorge himself on twinkies.
Seriously, what is so hard to figure out about this guy and rest of the liberals?
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
100meters wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Obama has no experience.
McCain has bad experience.
… Obama was svengali like in his judgement.
“The word “Svengali” has entered the language meaning a person who, with evil intent, manipulates another into doing what is desired.”
How true.
One little speech, in Chicago, from naive little Obama, with no responsibility, and the gullible fall right in line.
The man with responsibility (and experience!) was dead wrong. over and over again. no need to reward his horrible, horrible judgement, right?
Good grief man, aren’t you tired of bealting this dead horse? [/quote]
What’s tiresome is the stupidity of rehashing the “experience” requirement. Obviously one could look at our history, see that yes quite a few presidents had TONS experience and did quite poorly, or not. The same can be said with those with much less “experience”.
But clearly the person with the least experience in this race had better judgement on one of the most important issues facing voters today. Combine that with the fact the person wrong on the war is being advised by the folks who advocated the horrible idea in the first place, and well, it’s easy to see that “experience” isn’t everything.
[quote]100meters wrote:
What’s tiresome is the stupidity of rehashing the “experience” requirement. Obviously one could look at our history, see that yes quite a few presidents had TONS experience and did quite poorly, or not. The same can be said with those with much less “experience”.
But clearly the person with the least experience in this race had better judgement on one of the most important issues facing voters today. Combine that with the fact the person wrong on the war is being advised by the folks who advocated the horrible idea in the first place, and well, it’s easy to see that “experience” isn’t everything.
[/quote]
I’m out dude. You’re not listening or making any sense. Good chatting with you.
[quote]100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Obama has no experience.
McCain has bad experience.
I’ve said it before: we’re choosing between a douche and a turd sandwich. Pick the one that tastes the least like death and you’re golden.
Not that I’m head over heals for McCain, But what about his experience do you consider “bad”? Or were you simply regarding his track record as a RINO?
Uhh…Iraq? Boy, he was dead wrong about that one, and naive little Obama was svengali like in his judgement.
You mean when McCain pushed for the Surge and Obama said it would never work?
It is amazing how your view is exactly the opposite of reality.
So it has created the space needed for political reconciliation to happen which has caused our troops to come home already?
Oh, I didn’t think so.
[/quote]
“Space for political reconciliation” What a bunch of meaningless blather.
McCain was 100% correct about the surge. Obama was 100% wrong.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
NIE:
“The activities we have detected do not add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what [the INR] would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons.” The INR added that it “[l]ack[ed] persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program.”
Which estimate did this come from? I don’t recall reading this part.[/quote]
When there are 1000 briefs saying one thing and one brief saying the opposite 100meters will post the same.
I am not going to bother digging up and posting all the Democratic quotes supporting the notion that Saddam wanted WMD’s, was a danger and should be removed from power.
It has been done countless times and he just ignores them.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
dhickey wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Your analogy is not good for your defense; we have all been screwed by mechanics. I had a high pressure pump fixed by a lawn mower mechanic when the high pressure mechanic only managed to lighten my wallet.
Fine. If your dentist doesn’t take care of your toothache, would you go to a carpenter next?
There is a movement to vote out all incumbents, I am not sure I totally agree with it, but it would send a message to our politicians that we are not happy,
I’m all for doing that but how about we start at state elections or even the House. Electing a dipshit president to send a message is just assanine.
I think the name of this thread says it all, Obama is lacking the experience that we all hate. I know he is going to have to become one of them but I hope he remembers why he got where is going.
He already is one of them. Just an unexperienced one of them. He is proving this almost everday. I see now way that he is any different other than experience.
When I listen to these threads I wonder does everybody think the job of the politician is so difficult I doubt it. I would think the ability to read would be paramount. Other than that it has to be common sense. And when we see our government does something that is not the result of common sense. I say it has to be corruption or ignorance. Those are the only reasons common sense would not prevail.
I don’t even think they need to be able to read. Senetors have, on average, 65 staffers. I think the House is 15. We are paying these idiots $200k for part time work and for there 65 staffers. All of this to send the ecomony and this country into the shitter. Actually, who is really the idiot. The guy making $200k to fleace us or the content little sheep that would rather watch Dancing With The Stars or The Bachelor than pay attention to what happening to their freedoms and hard earned money. Fucking ridiculous.
Our government is huge I agree with you our Gov. does not need to be any bigger, but you are acting like the Dems. are the only one guilty of complicating our life�??s with Government.
You have to admit you have the Democratic agenda and you have the Republican Agenda. I think the Republican agenda is (WAR) the war on drugs, the war on terrorism, and the war on crime you could go on forever
I think most repulicans are terrible people and far from conservatives. Interested in only their own political aspirations. I just happen to think that Liberals are same with half the intellect.
You either have to be dishonest or stupid to say some of things the liberals are saying these days. Definately not the party of JFK or Harry Truman. Jesus, even FDR would blush at some of the shit these guys are pulling.
[/quote]
I am a carpenter and I have pulled teeth. I have also given stitches. Not because I can do these things better than a Dentist or Doctor but there were none available at the time.
About electing a DIPSHIT president that is why I am voting for Obama instead of McCain:)
You got me, Obama is looking more and more like them.
I agree with everything you are saying in the end except Dems being half their intellect.
The Republican agenda says let�??s treat Corporate America better than we treat people because if we do that Corporate America will heap their blessing on the masses. When in actuality Corporate America is exploiting people�??s good work ethics with no intention helping anything except their profits. And the average Republican thinks this is just fine
I think the Democrats agenda is reward people that do not want to work, that does not sit well with me either, but it does not matter what kind of government we have. We are going to have lazy people, and some one will have to take care of them.
I think it is time to swing things back a little towards favoring people over corporate profits. We give big corporations tax breaks and they move their operations over seas where they can exploit some one at a cheaper rate
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
dhickey wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
dhickey wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
I am a carpenter and I have pulled teeth. I have also given stitches. Not because I can do these things better than a Dentist or Doctor but there were none available at the time.
[/quote]
you guys are killing me here. Ok, one more. I had a steak tonight. The knife I had was a little dull. I didn’t go get a spoon. I’m sure I can come up with another on but let’s just leave this one alone.
Common misconception. Instead of just taking this at face value let’s explore this a bit.
First, Repulicans are in the hip pocket of corporate america. Someone needs to explain to me what this means. Who is corporate America? Are they in the hip pocket of hard working americans that work for a corporation? Are they in the hip pocket of middle management? Are they in the hip pocket of the executives? How so?
Are they in hip pocket of the owners of the corporations? How many americans have stocks or a 401k? These are your owners. We want them in the hip pocket of corporate america. That means they are in our hip pockets. That is of course if you work for corporation, have stocks, have a 401k, or build houses for or sell services or products to any of the above.
Who is for higher minimum wages, unfair union practices (your lucky, carpenters union actually provides some value), increased capital gains taxes, and massive regulation?
The lines are a bit blurred these days but most would say Democrats. This is fantastic for large corporations. It absolutely kill the little guy that owns the small business and thus eliminates competition for the large corporations.
Minimum Wage Increase - Tells people that are worth less than the new minimum wage that they can’t offer their services or can’t work. It also deprives society of the services that could have been provided.
Who do you think will fair better, Walmart that has millions of products that they can raise by 1 cent or the small business struggling on very tight margins? How about the big company with millions of employees that can cut a few or the small business who may lose half their work force if they have to cut one?
Unfair Union Practices - Big companies that hire hundreds, thousands, or millions have much more negotiating power. How about the small shop that has a few employees? Do they have much bargaining power against a union that already has the deck stacked?
Capital Gains Tax - Again, who can absorb this better Walmart or the little guy. Hell, this is why we are losing jobs to other contries. What if we had no corporate income tax? Companies would come here and forein companies would have little advantage over domestics.
Massive Regulation - Walmart has teams of people to deal with this. How about the small shop?
What happened to them before the 60s? They weren’t dying in the streets before welfare. There were huge private organizations that would help the misfortunate. Communities and neighbors used to help each other.
No one asked of his neighbor what he could work for himself. What more embarassing, asking your neighbor for charity or going down to some gov’t office to talk to someone who’s job is to hand out money. If you reward bad behaivior what do think will happen?
You should read the books that Charles Murray has written. The Bell Curve, In our Hands, and What it Means to be a Libertarian. Something like that. Very easy reads and chalk full of common sense.
corporate taxes increase the cost of goods, lower income of workers, and encourage companies to move overseas.
Jobs that can be done cheaper overseas are better off over there. Goods that can be purchased cheaper overseas should be.
Should we protect one industry or job at the expense of every consumer in the country. Should we all pay more for cars to save the job of an autoworker? The answer is no. The county is better off buying the products of best value regardless of where the come from.
What’s going to be better in the long run for me. Quit my job and build my own house or hire you? I can make more at something I’m more effecient at, hire you to build my house, and have money left over to buy other things I need. It’s called division of labor and it works no different accross borders.
The inefficient auto worker will be redeployed at something that provides more value. It has always worked this way and always will. If not we would still have carriage builders out of work because people are driving cars.
I do, however, support the extension of unemployment insurance. We need to provide for our resourses while they are redeployed.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Obama has no experience.
McCain has bad experience.
I’ve said it before: we’re choosing between a douche and a turd sandwich. Pick the one that tastes the least like death and you’re golden.
Not that I’m head over heals for McCain, But what about his experience do you consider “bad”? Or were you simply regarding his track record as a RINO?
Uhh…Iraq? Boy, he was dead wrong about that one, and naive little Obama was svengali like in his judgement.
You mean when McCain pushed for the Surge and Obama said it would never work?
It is amazing how your view is exactly the opposite of reality.[/quote]
You mean the reality that while this administration has committed so much of our military to Iraq we no longer have the resources to combat al qaida in Afghanistan where they are as strong as ever? People like Bush and McCain heve done exactly what Bin Ladin wanted since 9/11 and we ,the American people, and the rest of the world really, are paying the price.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
100meters wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
“Space for political reconciliation” What a bunch of meaningless blather.
McCain was 100% correct about the surge. Obama was 100% wrong.[/quote]
big words…not understanding… must respond with insult, arghhh!
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
“Space for political reconciliation” What a bunch of meaningless blather.
McCain was 100% correct about the surge. Obama was 100% wrong.[/quote]
Do you really believe that the goal of the surge was simply improved security in the areas receiving additional soldiers and that said security gains were only accomplished by the additional troops and were in no way helped by the mass killings, cleansed neighborhoods, city segregation, shia cease-fire agreements, and sunni’s decision to join with americans to eliminate AQI while receiving bribes and weapons?
Of course you don’t, so why pretend in here?