The Official American Election 2008 Thread

[randomspot555]

Never said I couldn't find a source, just the poverty in this type of situation isn't something that is covered usually. People don't want to see that their money is going to some one who refuses to work. The media tends to focus on those that are poor and try their best to work, as you mention below, and who need Government help to keep afloat. Again look back at Hurricane Katrina, which saw a mass influx of people who live on Government hand outs, and do not work into neighboring states around Louisiana. That single event opened many eyes as to the sheer laziness that many of these socialized programs are breeding.

True, you never said you couldn't find a source. But for four posts, you haven't even tried to find one, or you're keeping it to yourself. Along with the again unbacked, unsourced claim that Hurricane Katrina showed tons of people living on government hand outs.

Media sources aren't the only ones out there. I dug stuff from state's web sites and a not-for-profit. You can find reports from organizations too. Of course, CATO is going to have a bias, but they can still be a good source as long as they don't twist the facts around and provide the places where they get their facts from. I'd be more quick to dismiss something that was sourced from the Huffington Post or Blogs For Bush rather than a think tank.

And there you go, Average Income. People that are working low paying jobs, and can barely keep afloat need help, which is fine. But that does not stop the millions out there who do not work and live on Government hand outs. Which is who we were talking about.

I'm trying to find out if these millions of people living off government handouts (and you imply living quite well) actually exist.

Never said THIS discussion was, as in a discussion on Health Care. Discussing if people are living in near Middle Class situations while living only off the Government hand outs for them and their children isn't really a discussion for the American Election Thread.

Certainly we're allowed to discuss issues such as health care since they are directly involved with the current campaigns. If a new thread is needed, I'm sure a mod will direct us to do so.

EDIT: I checked the rules, and they say nothing about banning anything that isn't the topic of the post. Off-topic posting seems to be about stuff that should go into miscellaneous, not something that evolves naturally from the thread's topic.

After all, if we can't discuss the issues, then all we're allowed to say is stuff about the actual campaigns, like "Good speech [more words]" or "New campaign commercial from this guy: my thoughts"

 

[BigLutz]

True, you never said you couldn't find a source. But for four posts, you haven't even tried to find one, or you're keeping it to yourself. Along with the again unbacked, unsourced claim that Hurricane Katrina showed tons of people living on government hand outs.

Well for one the reason why I havnt devoted any time to finding a source is due to my very low attention on this. With a major work project due by Friday I have very little time to go source hunting. And having lived in Texas, and one of the biggest cities that received said refugees, this "unsourced" claim is something we heard about time and time again.

Media sources aren't the only ones out there. I dug stuff from state's web sites and a not-for-profit. You can find reports from organizations too. Of course, CATO is going to have a bias, but they can still be a good source as long as they don't twist the facts around and provide the places where they get their facts from. I'd be more quick to dismiss something that was sourced from the Huffington Post or Blogs For Bush rather than a think tank.

Obviously, as the Huffington Post is basically in the same league now as Democrat Underground, and Daily Kos in terms of biasness. But as I have said, I do not have time to source hunt right now. Possibly this weekend.

Certainly we're allowed to discuss issues such as health care since they are directly involved with the current campaigns. If a new thread is needed, I'm sure a mod will direct us to do so.

Never said they weren't, but discussing the living conditions of those living on hand outs does not really go with the topic of the American Election thread. Discussing Medicare as well as other issues that are actually a part of this election on the other hand is relevant.

EDIT: I checked the rules, and they say nothing about banning anything that isn't the topic of the post. Off-topic posting seems to be about stuff that should go into miscellaneous, not something that evolves naturally from the thread's topic.

After all, if we can't discuss the issues, then all we're allowed to say is stuff about the actual campaigns, like "Good speech [more words]" or "New campaign commercial from this guy: my thoughts"

Except as pointed out, there are some things that we can discuss that are issues, such as Medicare, while there are other nit pick stupid things such as the living status of the leaches of our society, which are truly off topic and really have nothing to do with this election. If you want to do issues that is perfectly fine, but the "Living Situation of those that Leach off Government Programs" isn't a issue in this election, nor is going to be something that really ever changes.

And mind you this was never even really brought up to debate. I was asked by Ghost Anime for what was a comprehensive Conservative Perspective on Fiscal issues, or Economic issues as I understood it.

 

[randomspot555]

Except as pointed out, there are some things that we can discuss that are issues, such as Medicare, while there are other nit pick stupid things such as the living status of the leaches of our society, which are truly off topic and really have nothing to do with this election. If you want to do issues that is perfectly fine, but the "Living Situation of those that Leach off Government Programs" isn't a issue in this election, nor is going to be something that really ever changes.

I really have no desire to discuss the issue either. However, if you aren't able to back your claim (or don't have time to dig up a claim, and that's perfectly understandable), I'd think it's best not to bring up the topic. Or at least come clean in saying you don't have time earlier (like you did now) in your earlier post.

It certainly isn't unreasonable of someone to request a source after several repeated claims that go unsourced, no matter what the topic is.

 

[Scizito_92]

I just got this in an email, but it seems to fit nicely in this thread. I'll answer to any responses about it, seeing as how the original poster, well... isn't here right now.

Let me see if I get this straight...

- If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're 'exotic, different.'
- Grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, a quintessential American story.

- If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
- Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

- Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
- Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

- If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
- If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

- If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
- If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian. (McCain)

- If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
- If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

- If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
- If you're husband is nicknamed 'First Dude', with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.


OK, much clearer now.

 

[BigLutz]

Okay lets break the stupidity of this email down, and mind you none of this criticism is directed toward Scizito_92 but the idiot that wrote this email.

- If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're 'exotic, different.'
- Grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, a quintessential American story.

Well for one Obama grew up much for much of his young life overseas in Indonesia, which is where people get the whole "Exotic/Different" thing.

- If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
- Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

Here is one of the absolutely stupidest parts of the email. They are taking names, and applying them to the person's political history/stance in the case of Palin, and some things that Obama has done in the past that has people asking questions.

- Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
- Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

And another stupid part comes up. So far I have heard no one say Obama is unstable, nor would I ever have attributed that to Harvard Law School.

As for Palin's College, I myself have attended three colleges in my life, all of them small colleges. Should that diminish my accomplishments? No. Things happen and they cause you to switch colleges, not to mention you some times go to a college to get certain courses cheaper before moving on to more expensive colleges.

- If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
- If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

And more mis statements here, for one saying that Obama was a "brilliant" Community Organizer, is just absolute stupidity and dishonesty. Even Obama himself admitted that was a dead end profession, and the area that Obama was organizing pretty much remains in poverty and as bad as it was before he came. Obama failed as a Community Organizer. And becoming the first Black man on the Harvard Law Review is called into question due to Affirmative Action, but really that doesn't matter. As for Obama's time in the US Senate, he spent 3 and a half years there, not 4, of that time he represented his state for less than two years before going off onto the Presidential Circuit. And really as poor of a record Obama has had in committees, not even calling one into session in the year and a half he has been there. Its pretty silly to try and bring that up.

- If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
- If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian. (McCain)

Well to start off no one in their right mind would say Obama is not really a Christian. But then again the church he attended, which teaches Black Liberation Theology, is a very violent and twisted form of Christianity.

Here is a quote from Black Liberation Theology.

"All white men are responsible for white oppression. It is much too easy to say, "Racism is not my fault," or "I am not responsible for the country's inhumanity to the black man...But insofar as white do-gooders tolerate and sponsor racism in their educational institutions, their political, economic and social structures, their churches, and in every other aspect of American life, they are directly responsible for racism...Racism is possible because whites are indifferent to suffering and patient with cruelty. Karl Jaspers' description of metaphysical guilt is pertinent here. 'There exists among men, because they are men, a solidarity through which each shares responsibility for every injustice and every wrong committed in the world, and especially for crimes that are committed in his presence or of which he cannot be ignorant.' " [Black Theology and Black Power, p. 24]

As for McCain, he comes back from 5 years of being tortured and ends up leaving his wife. No one knows what happened there, nor should it be held against him. He had just been through a horrendous ordeal, was most likely experiencing PTS, and people do break up because of that.

- If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
- If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

Well for one the whole problem with Obama's "Age Appropriate Sex Education" is the question as to what is Age Appropriate.

Second it is absolutely sick and disgusting to bring Palin's daughter into this, some one who she had absolutely no control over. To bring it in truly sinks to a new level of scum.

- If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.

Again no one in their right mind would say Obama's family does not represent family values.

- If you're husband is nicknamed 'First Dude', with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

And just when I thought this email couldn't sink any lower. Yes lets criticize him for a nickname given to him. If you want to bring up his DWI, then lets also bring up Obama's Cocaine use around the same time.

OK, much clearer now.

Again a absolutely stupid email, which is no better than the trash being spread around saying Obama is a closet Muslim who supports Al Qaeda. People who send this crap around seriously need to be castrated and not allowed to breed for the betterment of our society.

 

[Carlisle]

Wow, that is SO not filled with bias at all! Lets not bring in Obama's racist and discriminatory comments.

 

[randomspot555]

I just got this in an email, but it seems to fit nicely in this thread. I'll answer to any responses about it, seeing as how the original poster, well... isn't here right now.

If all you have to contribute to this thread is some crappy forward e-mail, I don't think you belong in the Debate forum.

 

[Scizito_92]

Here is one of the absolutely stupidest parts of the email. They are taking names, and applying them to the person's political history/stance in the case of Palin, and some things that Obama has done in the past that has people asking questions.

Because I did not write the email I'm assuming that this part is in response to the stupid people who do use Obama's name against him.

And another stupid part comes up. So far I have heard no one say Obama is unstable, nor would I ever have attributed that to Harvard Law School.

As for Palin's College, I myself have attended three colleges in my life, all of them small colleges. Should that diminish my accomplishments? No. Things happen and they cause you to switch colleges, not to mention you some times go to a college to get certain courses cheaper before moving on to more expensive colleges.

The point I think it's trying to put across is that Obama has more experience than Palin, and is, more well grounded. I don't think, and I hope it isn't, trying to diminish the accomplishments of Palin (just compare hers to Obama's). That's not what I got from reading the email.

And more mis statements here, for one saying that Obama was a "brilliant" Community Organizer, is just absolute stupidity and dishonesty. Even Obama himself admitted that was a dead end profession, and the area that Obama was organizing pretty much remains in poverty and as bad as it was before he came. Obama failed as a Community Organizer. And becoming the first Black man on the Harvard Law Review is called into question due to Affirmative Action, but really that doesn't matter. As for Obama's time in the US Senate, he spent 3 and a half years there, not 4, of that time he represented his state for less than two years before going off onto the Presidential Circuit. And really as poor of a record Obama has had in committees, not even calling one into session in the year and a half he has been there. Its pretty silly to try and bring that up.

It still beats Sarah Palin's record.

Well to start off no one in their right mind would say Obama is really a question. But then again the church he attended, which teaches Black Liberation Theology, is a very violent and twisted form of Christianity.

Here is a quote from Black Liberation Theology.

"All white men are responsible for white oppression. It is much too easy to say, "Racism is not my fault," or "I am not responsible for the country's inhumanity to the black man...But insofar as white do-gooders tolerate and sponsor racism in their educational institutions, their political, economic and social structures, their churches, and in every other aspect of American life, they are directly responsible for racism...Racism is possible because whites are indifferent to suffering and patient with cruelty. Karl Jaspers' description of metaphysical guilt is pertinent here. 'There exists among men, because they are men, a solidarity through which each shares responsibility for every injustice and every wrong committed in the world, and especially for crimes that are committed in his presence or of which he cannot be ignorant.' " [Black Theology and Black Power, p. 24]

Could you tell me what exactly Obama participated in while he was at that church? Is there anything he is doing now that reflects what happened at his church? ...only if you believe that the church he attended is currently affecting his policies now.

As for McCain, he comes back from 5 years of being tortured and ends up leaving his wife. No one knows what happened there, nor should it be held against him. He had just been through a horrendous ordeal, was most likely experiencing PTS, and people do break up because of that.

My problem is McCain talks about being a POW way too much, and focuses less on the issues at hand.

Well for one the whole problem with Obama's "Age Appropriate Sex Education" is the question as to what is Age Appropriate.

What do you consider "Age Appropriate"?

Second it is absolutely sick and disgusting to bring Palin's daughter into this, some one who she had absolutely no control over. To bring it in truly sinks to a new level of scum.

William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Kwame Kilipratick... the list goes on.

And just when I thought this email couldn't sink any lower. Yes lets criticize him for a nickname given to him. If you want to bring up his DWI, then lets also bring up Obama's Cocaine use around the same time.

...Obama on cocaine? What?

Again a absolutely stupid email, which is no better than the trash being spread around saying Obama is a closet Muslim who supports Al Qaeda. People who send this crap around seriously need to be castrated and not allowed to breed for the betterment of our society.

I truely do not believe that this email was as bad as the ones saying Obama is a closet Muslim. Those are flat out lies, these aren't. What makes this as bad as those?

If all you have to contribute to this thread is some crappy forward e-mail, I don't think you belong in the Debate forum.

The email is relevant to the thread and isn't throwing out proposterous lies, so i don't see what is so bad about it. If you could tell me why it's so bad, I will try not to do it again in the future.

 

[Kikas123]

I just got this in an email, but it seems to fit nicely in this thread. I'll answer to any responses about it, seeing as how the original poster, well... isn't here right now.

How does that answer questions? It just used underhanded facts about people private lives, while putting intense (in some case falsifying) spin on some facts about Obama. The creator of that email is seriously an idiot.

 

[BigLutz]

Because I did not write the email I'm assuming that this part is in response to the stupid people who do use Obama's name against him.

You will notice in the first sentence that I said the rest of my post is not applied to you.

The point I think it's trying to put across is that Obama has more experience than Palin, and is, more well grounded. I don't think, and I hope it isn't, trying to diminish the accomplishments of Palin (just compare hers to Obama's). That's not what I got from reading the email.

What kind of college you attended in your youth, something that happened nearly 20 years ago with these people, has absolutely nothing to do with their experience. Again people have different reasons for leaving colleges. I left mine because of a abusive instructor that presided over the entire degree. Just throwing out that she went to multiple colleges with out any context applied to it is sheer political bigotry.

It still beats Sarah Palin's record.

Not really, and you are comparing two different types of experience, Legislative versus Executive. Getting Executive experience is much more valuable in the White House, while Legislative experience would be better if you were trying to be say the Speaker of the House.

Could you tell me what exactly Obama participated in while he was at that church? Is there anything he is doing now that reflects what happened at his church? ...only if you believe that the church he attended is currently affecting his policies now.

Seeing how he continues to believe the Republicans are attacking him for his race, does mirror in many ways the thoughts of Black Liberation Theology. As for the church he attended a place that spewed hatred for twenty years, he was there on day one and did not leave, and make no mistake, the White Hatred was there on day one. You cannot sit there for twenty years, and not only stay there but become close to the Pastor with out getting your own self wrapped up in it.

My problem is McCain talks about being a POW way too much, and focuses less on the issues at hand.

No he really doesn't, I mean hell Obama puts out a Ad attacking McCain for not being able to Email, and the reason he cant is because of wounds he sustained in the POW camp. When this was realized the McCain camp told reporters NOT to tell the story. McCain does not like to open up too much about his POW experience, the only time he has truly opened up about it was during the RNC Convention, and even then was just a glimpse. To say he does that too much and focuses less on the issues shows how little you follow McCain.

What do you consider "Age Appropriate"?

I would think anything below 5th grade there needs to be little discussion of it except for dividing the kids up in groups and telling them where people cant touch you. Anything beyond that before they hit puberty isnt Age Appropriate.

William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Kwame Kilipratick... the list goes on.

Are associations and friends Obama has, in which in many times he seeked out those people. The same cannot be said about some one's daughter. To think otherwise is well... really disgusting.

...Obama on cocaine? What?

Yeah it was reported in Obama's own book. That he indulging in marijuana, alcohol and occasionally cocaine while he was in high school and college. So if you want to talk about Mark Palin's DWI, lets talk about how Obama was a Coke head.

I truely do not believe that this email was as bad as the ones saying Obama is a closet Muslim. Those are flat out lies, these aren't. What makes this as bad as those?

Yeah these are just as bad, because not only are these horrible twists of the truth, but they are absolutely pathetic. Just as the Obama Muslim connections are horrible twists of the truth.

Remember these Obama Muslim emails are many times just twists and distortions of facts about Obama. The EXACT same thing is happening in this email, and it is absolutely horrible.

The email is relevant to the thread and isn't throwing out proposterous lies, so i don't see what is so bad about it. If you could tell me why it's so bad, I will try not to do it again in the future.

No this email really isn't relevant, it is just hate spewn by a partisan idiot, and really I hope no one on Serebii is that dumb to write it. I tend to hope that the people here are at least above this kind of filth.

 

[Ethan]

If all you have to contribute to this thread is some crappy forward e-mail, I don't think you belong in the Debate forum.

Um, you aren't in a place to say who belongs where, or which topics should or shouldn't be brought up. Thankyou very much.

 

[randomspot555]

Um, you aren't in a place to say who belongs where, or which topics should or shouldn't be brought up. Thankyou very much.

So you think more of these FWD FWD FWD: OMZERS HE's a MUZLIM (read inside!!!!) or FWFWDFWD: Hillary loves Palin/McCain should be added to the thread?

I'm not saying he shouldn't post here, but that kind of material doesn't further any discussion in a constructive way.

I also never said what topics aren't to be bought up. The CONTEXT of the topics, however, is extremely relevant, especially the sources one uses to back such far out claims. Surely the more ludicrous the claim, the better the source should be used. It doesn't help that the e-mail doesn't cite any source, and the author is unknown.

 

[Ipwnyou]

I like how bigLutz completely dodged the fact that sarah palins husband wanted to secede from America.
I also like the way everyone is getting mad at Obama for that pig-lipstick thing saying it was sexism towards sarah palin when the statement was directed towards McCain.
If there is anything that they SHOULD be mad about is that he stole it from mccain

 

[BigLutz]

I like how bigLutz completely dodged the fact that sarah palins husband wanted to secede from America.

Because that isn't the only platform of the Group, not to mention it happened twenty years ago when he was in his early twenties. Not to mention that he clearly does not support those policies now nor does it affect Palin.

I mean my God during the same time it was said that Obama dived head first into Radical Black Literature. By your logic we should continue to believe that the extreme black literature Obama read in college is his beliefs today.

I also like the way everyone is getting mad at Obama for that pig-lipstick thing saying it was sexism towards sarah palin when the statement was directed towards McCain.
If there is anything that they SHOULD be mad about is that he stole it from mccain

Soooo McCain made a lipstick statement the week before? No the statement directed to McCain was the "Old Fish" statement that followed.

Edit: Soooo, in other matters, Obama seems to be getting his economic advice from Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson who are they? Well Franklin Raines was the CEO of Fannie Mae, who committed extensive fraud until he was forced out in 2005. A man who just this year had to give up 28 Million Dollars in future payouts to avoid being prosecuted. A man who helped in major ways to the collapse of Fannie Mae, something that did massive damage to this country.

I am sure he is giving Obama sound Economic Advice....[/sarcasm]

As for Jim Johnson? He was another CEO of Fannie Mae, and was brought aboard the Obama Campaign to find a VP, and apparently has been kept on as a economic adviser.

Again Obama seeks out such strong economic advice...[/sarcasm again]

Edit Again: Because I hate Olbermann so much, here are last night Cable Numbers thanks to Drudge.

FOXNEWS HANNITY/COLMES 4,921,000
FOXNEWS O'REILLY 3,839,000
FOXNEWS GRETA 3,561,000
FOXNEWS SHEP SMITH 2,184,000
FOXNEWS HUME 2,108,000
MSNBC OLBERMANN 1,854,000 <- 6th Place PWNED

 

[Ethan]

So you think more of these FWD FWD FWD: OMZERS HE's a MUZLIM (read inside!!!!) or FWFWDFWD: Hillary loves Palin/McCain should be added to the thread?

I'm not saying he shouldn't post here, but that kind of material doesn't further any discussion in a constructive way.

I also never said what topics aren't to be bought up. The CONTEXT of the topics, however, is extremely relevant, especially the sources one uses to back such far out claims. Surely the more ludicrous the claim, the better the source should be used. It doesn't help that the e-mail doesn't cite any source, and the author is unknown.

No, you said that such claims with no concrete sources should not be used in regards to BigLutz. Also, that's not what you said in the previous post. You said that he didn't belong in the debate forum. The bottom line is, if you have an issue contact myself or Profesco and we'll see what we can do. Second, I don't think you have a say on whether it contributes to the discussion or not. It's relative. At any rate our debate is over now. PM if you wish.

 

[Kyogre35]

First look at my sig for a good quote....

Now as most of you know the US Economy is On the craziest rollar coaster..and the Treasery anounced a way to get out...I'm pretty sure it was going to pay off the bad morgages with tax payer money...ugh..but that's what they said.

So I watched Palin's interveiw on Hannity and Colmes...it was awsome..she looked very good in it. I like all of her answer...if I was old enough to vote..McCain/Palin all the way!

So naturally Obama is winning in the polls...which IMO will go down to a tie in the next week or so...because of the economy getting better and just people uncertain about Obama and who he is...then the debate's...wow I think McCain will trounce Obama...just because McCain is better on his feet and Obama just can't speak without a teleprompter...why who knows.

So I thought I sould get the thread going again...

Oh and Biglutz do you feel like the quote in my sig?

 

[Asaspades]

The economy is fast becoming a major issue int his election, so lets start heading in that direction.

What we've seen so far, is deregulation leading to dishonorable lending practices, and as a result, a recession requiring bailouts from the federal government, and socialist policies from a republican administration. Wow, we are on a roller coaster ride...

For McCain, it took a 1000 point drop in the DJIA in one week in order for him to admit that out economy is in a bit of trouble, even though we have seen dramatic swings, and the collapse of major banks even before then. He has also advocated for deregulation of the finance sector, which led to this awful condition we are in. For 26 years, McCain has subscibed to this economic philosophy, which has gotten us into quite a kerfuffle here. He has also disagreed with the bailout of AIG. Something I myself am not happy about, but i feel there was no other choise, as millions of people have thier retirment and insurance funds in AIG. Which means if they go under, these people now lose their investments because of an underregulated system, and the irresponsibility at the helm of AIG.

 

[BigLutz]

Oh and Biglutz do you feel like the quote in my sig?

Absolutely love it and shows how far the party of Clinton and Lieberman have fallen.

What we've seen so far, is deregulation leading to dishonorable lending practices, and as a result, a recession requiring bailouts from the federal government, and socialist policies from a republican administration. Wow, we are on a roller coaster ride...

Gotta agree with it being a rollar coster ride, but lets not forget that it was Socialist Policies started in 95 that started all of this. Congress pushing for banks to give out loans to poor people in a effort to put more poor people in houses has absolutely back fired on us.

For McCain, it took a 1000 point drop in the DJIA in one week in order for him to admit that out economy is in a bit of trouble, even though we have seen dramatic swings, and the collapse of major banks even before then.

I believe that McCain has said the economy is in trouble before this, but has maintained that the Fundamentals of our Economy is strong, which is true, the Fundamentals aka the strength of our workers, have remained strong.

He has also advocated for deregulation of the finance sector, which led to this awful condition we are in. For 26 years, McCain has subscibed to this economic philosophy, which has gotten us into quite a kerfuffle here. He has also disagreed with the bailout of AIG. Something I myself am not happy about, but i feel there was no other choice, as millions of people have their retirement and insurance funds in AIG.

Gotta agree there was no other choice, and both Candidates seem to agree that it was a bad move but we had no other choice. But we cannot continue to bail out these companies. As for deregulation, having increasing regulation of these industries will just screw us more, we have to find a balance.

Lets also not forget that it is Obama who has these corrupt CEOs giving him advice, and it was McCain that foresaw these problems in 2005 and pushed for legislation to try to fix them. And really it is pretty hypocritical to go after the CEOs in your post and not to go after Obama for seeking advice by those same CEOs.

In Lighter news, Biden continues to make a *** of himself, saying that more taxation is not only patriotic but religious as well! And then now he was caught saying how Ohio State is going to get it's *** kicked. In a state in which Obama only has a 1 point lead, I wouldn't think it would be good policy to insult their College Football team.

 

[Ipwnyou]

Soooo McCain made a lipstick statement the week before? No the statement directed to McCain was the "Old Fish" statement that followed.

That doesn't even make sense...
McCain made the "lipstick" statement when hillary was still in the race.
Why wasn't it sexist then? why didn't anyone get mad it him for that?
Hillary clinton and her supporters constantly talked about sexism, and people made fun of them for complaining about it (and they were right to make fun of them for it).
Now McCain's campaign is doing the exact same thing.
Anytime someone talks about Palin just scream sexism.

 

[BigLutz]

That doesn't even make sense...
McCain made the "lipstick" statement when hillary was still in the race.
Why wasn't it sexist then? why didn't anyone get mad it him for that?

Because the Lip Stick Comment isnt inherently sexist, it is a comment about dressing up something but in reality it is the same bad thing.

Hillary clinton and her supporters constantly talked about sexism, and people made fun of them for complaining about it (and they were right to make fun of them for it).

Correction, Hillary Clinton and her supporters constantly talked about sexism made by Obama and Obama's supporters in the media.

And no they were not right to make fun of what was blatant sexism, just like now they are not right to make fun of the blatant sexism in the media against Sarah Palin.

I mean if the tables were turned and you had major media personalities talking about how a Black Man should not be running the country, and Obama was screaming racism (As he is now, although none exists this time). Should people be right to make fun of Obama for getting mad about people attacking him for his race?

Now McCain's campaign is doing the exact same thing.
Anytime someone talks about Palin just scream sexism.

Here is the thing, the comment alone isn't sexist, it has been used by many in the past, it is a usual comment to make.

The timing of the comment, coming off just six days after Palin compared herself to a animal through lipstick, and then using the words "Old Fish" in the following comment is why people truly think he was talking about Palin in the first comment and McCain in the second.

Listen, Obama isn't a idiot, he knew people would make the connection to Palin because everyone had seen her speech just 6 days before, they knew the line becuase it was being played over and over again. Obama added the comment, something that he had not used before to talk about McCain's policy, and even stopped half way through to make sure everyone got the joke.

Like I have said before, either Obama KNEW the comment would be linked to Palin and intentionally said it. Or he is the dumbest Candidate in modern American history. Take your pick.