mccain's vp

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Economic justice is a fancy way of saying that the rich make too much and should be taxed to pay for the less fortunate. Socialism basically. It is always laughable when a Democrat talks about health care when they are so beholden to the trial lawyers who create far more damage to the country and the common person than any oil company does. Malpractice suits and excessive damage awards do as much damage to our health care system as anything. That is not saying that the other side has done much better either but certainly the Dems have little incentive to change the system.

i take it you were as much a fan of edwards as me??

revenue redistribution is definitely one thing i don't go for on the liberal side of things. just a fancy way of saying taxes...or you have too much, that guy has too little, we're taking your stuff and give it to the other guy-you don't need it all, you greedy little thing, you. smile and be glad your govt is helping.

[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

[nebrady]

If Gore would have been such a good president, why did his home state not even vote for him? Bush took it. Can you explain to me what is obama's plan. I know its tax everyone and lets go talk to the crazy guy in iran. Yeah lets be nice thats whats chamberlain tried to do with hitler. As for iraq, that country is in better shape than when we weren't there. Those people have freedom now. Hussein would kill or worse torture them if they opposed him or talk against him. We as americans seem to take our freedom as it was nothing. He killed many people, even people in his own party. Just something to ponder. Also i love the palin pick. Don't be surprised if she is what turns women to voter for mccain.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by nebrady

If Gore would have been such a good president, why did his home state not even vote for him? Bush took it. Can you explain to me what is obama's plan. I know its tax everyone and lets go talk to the crazy guy in iran. Yeah lets be nice thats whats chamberlain tried to do with hitler. As for iraq, that country is in better shape than when we weren't there. Those people have freedom now. Hussein would kill or worse torture them if they opposed him or talk against him. We as americans seem to take our freedom as it was nothing. He killed many people, even people in his own party. Just something to ponder. Also i love the palin pick. Don't be surprised if she is what turns women to voter for mccain.

Where do I start

and how's your knee..

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Don't waste your time.

Don't miss my effort in the AJ thread..it's one of my better 5 letter posts

[nebrady]

start anytime i up for a good debate.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by nebrady

start anytime i up for a good debate.

Its a shame you arent up for your GED.

[nebrady]

OHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! TTTTTTTTTTTHHaaaaaaaattttttttttsssssssssssssss LLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!! good teams can overcome it. but it does hurt. By the way congrats on how you did the other day.

[nebrady]

Your wrong I have a degree in Social Studies! How about you?

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by nebrady

Your wrong I have a degree in Social Studies! How about you?

Congrats on your degree. I'm glad it wasn't in English.

[nebrady]

Whats yours liberal arts with a minor in gym!

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Danzig

that's the thing...i don't believe or fall into the whole 'it's the end of the world if the reps/dems (depending on which side you're speaking of) win the thing. hopefully there are enough sane people to balance out the ultra lefts and rights in each party.

that is realllly stretching it Zig. Sane people in government? Balance? Yeah I have a better chance of meeting Santa Claus.

[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.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Danzig

actually, i've probably voted for more democrats over the years than republicans, since you have to consider state and local levels as well. i'm not quite sure what you mean about any kind of economic justice whatsoever-that could gover a myriad of topics. as for healthcare, i have no idea what system would work best. it's funny regarding healthcare in that when i hire people and mention the benefits package, they're gung ho about it. then when it's time at 90 days to fill out all the paperwork, the insurance is invariably turned down. why? it's not required, and they pay part of it. so, those who have it pay more (the more in the pool, the cheaper per person) and those who don't end up wishing they'd gotten it when they had the chance. because if you get it at 90 days, no waiting period, no preexisting conditions apply. i had a girl just toss the whole packet, which also includes short term disability. a few months later she found out she was pregnant, that part of the coverage would have paid her while she was off work once she had to take off, and until she came back.

i don't know why the employers ever became the ones to pick up most of the coverage. not sure how the system ever got to the point it has-but when you see the fraud, waste and abuse in our current govt handled programs, just how well would universal healthcare work?

Universal healthcare would be the worse possible thing that our govnt could pass. It would be so bad I dont even want to think about it.. How would we pay for it.. only way to would be to raise taxes, significantly.

I've lived in two countries with socialized medicine... both places had the worst healthcare I've ever seen. I almost died in New Zealand cause my doc's were not that good. ALL the best doc's come to the great U S of A, because of the way our healthcare is set up.

Both countries also, (Ireland and New Zealand) tax them a WAY higher % of your salary compared to the US... and one of the main reason taxes are that high is because of socialized medicine.

Now I'm not saying that changes shouldnt be made... but Universal Healthcare would be very very bad.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Economic justice is a fancy way of saying that the rich make too much and should be taxed to pay for the less fortunate. Socialism basically. It is always laughable when a Democrat talks about health care when they are so beholden to the trial lawyers who create far more damage to the country and the common person than any oil company does. Malpractice suits and excessive damage awards do as much damage to our health care system as anything. That is not saying that the other side has done much better either but certainly the Dems have little incentive to change the system.

[Mortimer]

I've lived in two countries with socialized medicine... both places had the worst healthcare I've ever seen. I almost died in New Zealand cause my doc's were not that good.

You're riding this one for all it's worth.

Really...we get it by now.

[jwkniska]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

and who's the head of the trial lawyers against the medical companies/personnel that drove up the prices due to the ridiculous prices that medical personnel have to pay to have the insurance needed to work? ....... JOHN EDWARDS.

[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.