Discussion on Obama's trip

[Buster]

The first loser to mess with it should be shot, seriously. That is one of the most amazing things I've seen involving patriotism in this country for quite a while. It seems that everyone has decided to oppose everything involving the United States in the last few years. Our own citizens hardly support this country any more and its sad.

Hear Obama's speech in Germany yesterday (or day before)?

He trashed the country and focused on negatives and said we're torturers, then said he loves it. He claimed he wasn't there as a candidate or an American, but as a "citizen of the world".

He also canceled a visit with our troops at a German base because they said he couldn't bring a photographer (military can't be a part of a political campaign). Shows his true colors, doesn't it...the troops don't matter to him, they're only convenient for photo ops to him.

His campaign is practically a mirror image of Kerry's unsuccessful run.

When people hear this drivel over and over, they begin to believe it. Sort of like his views from his racist, anti-American pastor of 20 years.

[capitalcrew]

Hear Obama's speech in Germany yesterday (or day before)?

He trashed the country and focused on negatives and said we're torturers, then said he loves it. He claimed he wasn't there as a candidate or an American, but as a "citizen of the world".

He also canceled a visit with our troops at a German base because they said he couldn't bring a photographer (military can't be a part of a political campaign). Shows his true colors, doesn't it...the troops don't matter to him, they're only convenient for photo ops to him.

His campaign is practically a mirror image of Kerry's unsuccessful run.

When people hear this drivel over and over, they begin to believe it. Sort of like his views from his racist, anti-American pastor of 20 years.

No I missed it.. from what you just said it would have been a waste of my time to hear anyways.

If McCain ever canceled a visit to a base because of the denial of is wishes to bring a photographer.. it would have been eaten alive by the media.

Go liberal endorsed media.! Reporting the news. :eyes:

[SoCalZX2]

Interesting talk about obama's speech. Any links? I'd love to have more reasons not to vote for him. lol

[Buster]

You're right. He tried to blame the Pentagon and it wasn't a scheduling issue because he went sightseeing in Berlin that evening. He chose not to visit wounded soldiers on his own...all because he couldn't bring photographers. Sickening.

Also, there's reports of another "huge" crowd of 200,000. That's a lot of people, sure...but what they're AGAIN not reporting is that there were two very popular German bands putting on concerts on the same stage before he spoke, one reggae and one rock band. :D

It's May in Oregon all over again.

He's sabotaging his own campaign. I thank him for it. :D

[capitalcrew]

No doubt. Remember.. we're trying to change the greatest nation in the history of the world.

[SoCalZX2]

He's not wrong though... This country does need change... Just not the change he's going to try and bring. lol

[Buster]

Interesting talk about obama's speech. Any links? I'd love to have more reasons not to vote for him. lol


Obama's week in review:



http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/23/beck.obama.media/index.html


http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=70454
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20080723/i/r3291133389.jpg?x=400&y=266&sig=RXiVKWce5HfxkcmO2IYOhg--
(source of photo: Reuters http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//080723/ids_photos_wl/r3291133389.jpg/ )

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/25/opinion/25brooks.html?_r=3&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/obama-whines-th.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/07/media_messing_itself_in_descri.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121685849692379323.html?mod=opinion_main_comment aries

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/obama_faking_it.html

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/07/_reply_reply_reply_to.php

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2008/07/24/lets-fact-check-obama/



Text of speech to 200,000 German teenage concert-goers:


BARACK OBAMA BERLIN SPEECH: 'A WORLD THAT STANDS AS ONE'
THURS JULY 24 2008 12:58:02

Thank you to the citizens of Berlin and to the people of Germany. Let me thank Chancellor Merkel and Foreign Minister Steinmeier for welcoming me earlier today. Thank you Mayor Wowereit, the Berlin Senate, the police, and most of all thank you for this welcome.

I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before. Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen -- a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.

I know that I don't look like the Americans who've previously spoken in this great city. The journey that led me here is improbable. My mother was born in the heartland of America, but my father grew up herding goats in Kenya. His father -- my grandfather -- was a cook, a domestic servant to the British.

At the height of the Cold War, my father decided, like so many others in the forgotten corners of the world, that his yearning -- his dream -- required the freedom and opportunity promised by the West. And so he wrote letter after letter to universities all across America until somebody, somewhere answered his prayer for a better life.

That is why I'm here. And you are here because you too know that yearning. This city, of all cities, knows the dream of freedom. And you know that the only reason we stand here tonight is because men and women from both of our nations came together to work, and struggle, and sacrifice for that better life.

Ours is a partnership that truly began sixty years ago this summer, on the day when the first American plane touched down at Templehof.

On that day, much of this continent still lay in ruin.Ê The rubble of this city had yet to be built into a wall. The Soviet shadow had swept across Eastern Europe, while in the West, America, Britain, and France took stock of their losses, and pondered how the world might be remade.

This is where the two sides met.Ê And on the twenty-fourth of June, 1948, the Communists chose to blockade the western part of the city. They cut off food and supplies to more than two million Germans in an effort to extinguish the last flame of freedom in Berlin.

The size of our forces was no match for the much larger Soviet Army. And yet retreat would have allowed Communism to march across Europe. Where the last war had ended, another World War could have easily begun. All that stood in the way was Berlin.

Ê And that's when the airlift began -- when the largest and most unlikely rescue in history brought food and hope to the people of this city.

The odds were stacked against success. In the winter, a heavy fog filled the sky above, and many planes were forced to turn back without dropping off the needed supplies. The streets where we stand were filled with hungry families who had no comfort from the cold.Ê

(factually inaccurate, it has been stated by some historians that the planes would not have taken off in conditions they could not land safely in. This must be like his story when his Grandfather helped free Auchwtiz...but history says it was the POLISH army that did so)

But in the darkest hours, the people of Berlin kept the flame of hope burning. The people of Berlin refused to give up. And on one fall day, hundreds of thousands of Berliners came here, to the Tiergarten, and heard the city's mayor implore the world not to give up on freedom. "There is only one possibility," he said. "For us to stand together united until this battle is wonÉThe people of Berlin have spoken. We have done our duty, and we will keep on doing our duty. People of the world: now do your dutyÉPeople of the world, look at Berlin!"

People of the world -- look at Berlin!

Look at Berlin, where Germans and Americans learned to work together and trust each other less than three years after facing each other on the field of battle.

Look at Berlin, where the determination of a people met the generosity of the Marshall Plan and created a German miracle; where a victory over tyranny gave rise to NATO, the greatest alliance ever formed to defend our common security.Ê

Look at Berlin, where the bullet holes in the buildings and the somber stones and pillars near the Brandenburg Gate insist that we never forget our common humanity.Ê

People of the world -- look at Berlin, where a wall came down, a continent came together, and history proved that there is no challenge too great for a world that stands as one.ÊÊ

Sixty years after the airlift, we are called upon again. History has led us to a new crossroad, with new promise and new peril. When you, the German people, tore down that wall -- a wall that divided East and West; freedom and tyranny; fear and hope -- walls came tumbling down around the world. From Kiev to Cape Town, prison camps were closed, and the doors of democracy were opened. Markets opened too, and the spread of information and technology reduced barriers to opportunity and prosperity. While the 20th century taught us that we share a common destiny, the 21st has revealed a world more intertwined than at any time in human history.

The fall of the Berlin Wall brought new hope. But that very closeness has given rise to new dangers -- dangers that cannot be contained within the borders of a country or by the distance of an ocean.ÊÊ

The terrorists of September 11th plotted in Hamburg and trained in Kandahar and Karachi before killing thousands from all over the globe on American soil.Ê

As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic, and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya.

Poorly secured nuclear material in the former Soviet Union, or secrets from a scientist in Pakistan could help build a bomb that detonates in Paris. The poppies in Afghanistan become the heroin in Berlin. The poverty and violence in Somalia breeds the terror of tomorrow. The genocide in Darfur shames the conscience of us all.

In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone. None of us can deny these threats, or escape responsibility in meeting them. Yet, in the absence of Soviet tanks and a terrible wall, it has become easy to forget this truth. And if we're honest with each other, we know that sometimes, on both sides of the Atlantic, we have drifted apart, and forgotten our shared destiny.

In Europe, the view that America is part of what has gone wrong in our world, rather than a force to help make it right, has become all too common. In America, there are voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe's role in our security and our future. Both views miss the truth -- that Europeans today are bearing new burdens and taking more responsibility in critical parts of the world; and that just as American bases built in the last century still help to defend the security of this continent, so does our country still sacrifice greatly for freedom around the globe.

Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more -- not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.Ê

That is why the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another. The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down.Ê

We know they have fallen before. After centuries of strife, the people of Europe have formed a Union of promise and prosperity. Here, at the base of a column built to mark victory in war, we meet in the center of a Europe at peace. Not only have walls come down in Berlin, but they have come down in Belfast, where Protestant and Catholic found a way to live together; in the Balkans, where our Atlantic alliance ended wars and brought savage war criminals to justice; and in South Africa, where the struggle of a courageous people defeated apartheid. Ê So history reminds us that walls can be torn down. But the task is never easy. True partnership and true progress requires constant work and sustained sacrifice. They require sharing the burdens of development and diplomacy; of progress and peace. They require allies who will listen to each other, learn from each other and, most of all, trust each other.Ê

That is why America cannot turn inward. That is why Europe cannot turn inward. America has no better partner than Europe. (What about Japan, Australia, South Korea, Israel..?)Now is the time to build new bridges across the globe as strong as the one that bound us across the Atlantic. Now is the time to join together, through constant cooperation, strong institutions, shared sacrifice, and a global commitment to progress, to meet the challenges of the 21st century. It was this spirit that led airlift planes to appear in the sky above our heads, and people to assemble where we stand today. And this is the moment when our nations -- and all nations -- must summon that spirit anew.

This is the moment when we must defeat terror and dry up the well of extremism that supports it. This threat is real and we cannot shrink from our responsibility to combat it. If we could create NATO to face down the Soviet Union, we can join in a new and global partnership to dismantle the networks that have struck in Madrid and Amman; in London and Bali; in Washington and New York. If we could win a battle of ideas against the communists, we can stand with the vast majority of Muslims who reject the extremism that leads to hate instead of hope.

This is the moment when we must renew our resolve to rout the terrorists who threaten our security in Afghanistan, and the traffickers who sell drugs on your streets. No one welcomes war. I recognize the enormous difficulties in Afghanistan. But my country and yours have a stake in seeing that NATO's first mission beyond Europe's borders is a success. For the people of Afghanistan, and for our shared security, the work must be done. America cannot do this alone. The Afghan people need our troops and your troops; our support and your support to defeat the Taliban and al Qaeda, to develop their economy, and to help them rebuild their nation. We have too much at stake to turn back now.

This is the moment when we must renew the goal of a world without nuclear weapons. The two superpowers that faced each other across the wall of this city came too close too often to destroying all we have built and all that we love. With that wall gone, we need not stand idly by and watch the further spread of the deadly atom. It is time to secure all loose nuclear materials; to stop the spread of nuclear weapons; and to reduce the arsenals from another era. This is the moment to begin the work of seeking the peace of a world without nuclear weapons.

This is the moment when every nation in Europe must have the chance to choose its own tomorrow free from the shadows of yesterday. In this century, we need a strong European Union that deepens the security and prosperity of this continent, while extending a hand abroad. In this century -- in this city of all cities -- we must reject the Cold War mind-set of the past, and resolve to work with Russia when we can HUH?, to stand up for our values when we must, and to seek a partnership that extends across this entire continent.

This is the moment when we must build on the wealth that open markets have created, and share its benefits more equitably. Trade has been a cornerstone of our growth and global development. But we will not be able to sustain this growth if it favors the few, and not the many. Together, we must forge trade that truly rewards the work that creates wealth, with meaningful protections for our people and our planet. This is the moment for trade that is free and fair for all. (Translation: steal from the working rich, babysit the poor who don't work)

This is the moment we must help answer the call for a new dawn in the Middle East. My country must stand with yours and with Europe in sending a direct message to Iran that it must abandon its nuclear ambitions. We must support the Lebanese who have marched and bled for democracy, and the Israelis and Palestinians who seek a secure and lasting peace. And despite past differences, this is the moment when the world should support the millions of Iraqis who seek to rebuild their lives, even as we pass responsibility to the Iraqi government and finally bring this war to a close.

This is the moment when we must come together to save this planet. Let us resolve that we will not leave our children a world where the oceans rise and famine spreads and terrible storms devastate our lands. Let us resolve that all nations -- including my own -- will act with the same seriousness of purpose as has your nation, and reduce the carbon we send into our atmosphere. This is the moment to give our children back their future. (I guess you don't mean the ones you voted to kill with abortions) This is the moment to stand as one.

And this is the moment when we must give hope to those left behind in a globalized world. We must remember that the Cold War born in this city was not a battle for land or treasure. Sixty years ago, the planes that flew over Berlin did not drop bombs; instead they delivered food, and coal, and candy to grateful children. And in that show of solidarity, those pilots won more than a military victory. They won hearts and minds; love and loyalty and trust -- not just from the people in this city, but from all those who heard the story of what they did here.

Now the world will watch and remember what we do here -- what we do with this moment. Will we extend our hand to the people in the forgotten corners of this world who yearn for lives marked by dignity and opportunity; by security and justice? Will we lift the child in Bangladesh from poverty, shelter the refugee in Chad, and banish the scourge of AIDS in our time?

Will we stand for the human rights of the dissident in Burma, the blogger in Iran, or the voter in Zimbabwe? Will we give meaning to the words "never again" in Darfur?Ê

Will we acknowledge that there is no more powerful example than the one each of our nations projects to the world? Will we reject torture (we already do, Mr. Obama...what are you trying to say?)and stand for the rule of law? Will we welcome immigrants from different lands, and shun discrimination against those who don't look like us or worship like we do, and keep the promise of equality and opportunity for all of our people?

People of Berlin -- people of the world -- this is our moment. This is our time.Ê

I know my country has not perfected itself. (Leaders do NOT apologize for their nation, sir.) At times, we've struggled to keep the promise of liberty and equality for all of our people. We've made our share of mistakes, and there are times when our actions around the world have not lived up to our best intentions.

But I also know how much I love America. :lol: (which is why I want to change everything about it) I know that for more than two centuries, we have strived -- at great cost and great sacrifice -- to form a more perfect union; to seek, with other nations, a more hopeful world. Our allegiance has never been to any particular tribe or kingdom -- indeed, every language is spoken in our country; every culture has left its imprint on ours; every point of view is expressed in our public squares. What has always united us -- what has always driven our people; what drew my father to America's shores -- is a set of ideals that speak to aspirations shared by all people: that we can live free from fear and free from want; that we can speak our minds and assemble with whomever we choose and worship as we please.

Those are the aspirations that joined the fates of all nations in this city. Those aspirations are bigger than anything that drives us apart. It is because of those aspirations that the airlift began. It is because of those aspirations that all free people -- everywhere -- became citizens of Berlin. It is in pursuit of those aspirations that a new generation -- our generation -- must make our mark on history.

People of Berlin -- and people of the world -- the scale of our challenge is great. The road ahead will be long. But I come before you to say that we are heirs to a struggle for freedom. We are a people of improbable hope. Let us build on our common history, and seize our common destiny, and once again engage in that noble struggle to bring justice and peace to our world.




Short version: "This is the moment we need to sing Kumbaya. I apologize for America."



Wait a second...last week you said, Mr. Obama that it is embarrassing that Americans can only say "Merci beaucoup" when they visit Europe? Why didn't you deliver this speech in German? It was obviously written for them and not for the people of the nation you're running for. :puke:

Funny, despite this media tour and countless photo ops along with his rendition of "We are the World" in Germany...McCain has gained in the polls this week. It's now a dead heat. Last week, Obama was up by 5-6 points.

Democrats usually have giant leads this early before the election, then it is close by November. I smell a landslide for McCain.

[Buster]

He's not wrong though... This country does need change... Just not the change he's going to try and bring. lol

Correct. We do NOT need to become a member of the EU.

Kerry tried to sell this unsuccessfully.

[JonsZX2SR]

Since the discussion on the rock painting was derailed, I had the option of splitting the thread or telling people to get back on topic and giving Buster a 2 day timeout for derailment. This time I elected to split the discusssions, next time I might not be so tolerant.

People if you have a political or social axe to grind start a new topic, don't take over someone else's discussion.

[Gregersonke]

A) I don't see him as apologizing. I saw his words as saying we could do better. There is room for improvement.

B) I see a lot of going to the gym. While one could consider that time wasting. Alan greenspan made most of his decisions dealing with the financial world in his bathtub. It could very well be that Obama needs his down time to make choices and deal with stress.

I'm sure McCain does similar things with his time. It wouldn't surprise me at all.

As for not using the military for campaigning. One could argue that McCain is using that canceled visit for campaigning. Since he did make a statement about it. There could have been a million reasons why the visit was canceled.

Actually, a quick look at google pulls up something. dated 7-25

http://www.americablog.com/2008/07/pentagon-blocks-obama-from-visiting.html

Sounds like it was a Pentagon thing more than anything else. I think someone screwed up at the pentagon.

[af3ll]

Yeah that was definitely not a smart move not making it over to the military hospital. Most of us in the military don't think he has what it takes military wise. I just hate his lack of experience.

[Gregersonke]

Yeah that was definitely not a smart move not making it over to the military hospital. Most of us in the military don't think he has what it takes military wise. I just hate his lack of experience.

According to reports, the pentagon was responsible for canceling visit. They thought that it would be political and where trying to avoid that. In an election year, everything is political so I don't know why they denied him?

[af3ll]

Yeah I don't get it either. He's a senator so he should be allowed to go visit the troops there.

[phosphite]

Reading the speech, even with Buster's editorializing, Obama > McSame. (Look up McCain in the media if you think it's a liberal media, CBS is actually editing his blunders on TV interviews so he doesn't look like an old forgetful man).

The U.S. does need to apologize to the world for torturing innocent people at Gitmo, amongst other things such as invading Iraq for illegal reasons.

And the U.S. does need to change. If you like the current state of things with gas > $4, more wars ready in the making, and an economy down the pooper (amongst other things), then definitely don't vote Obama, he might actually change that. It's always amusing how proud people can be when standing on fastly sinking ship, some people would rather go out all guns blazing than swallow their pride.

[SoCalZX2]

Umm please enlighten us on how the mighty Obama will change gas prices and "fix" the economy...

Higher taxes and socialized programs are not a fix to the economy and will do more harm than good. Also, Obama has no power over price of gas, so I'm not sure how he's going to fix that for you either.

How about you realize that Gov't isn't the answer, and the changes this country needs start with you. Personal responsibility and proper money management and self sufficiency are the changes this country needs.

Not a president that wants to raise taxes and impose another socialized program to make life fair for others... Guess what, life isn't fair... but do you see me bitching that people are making 6 figure incomes and I'm not? It's called having the drive and determination to better yourself.

Those things aren't determined by the color of your skin, but by the attitude with which you attack life. If you want a "fair" life, get off your ass and work hard like everyone else, don't rely on the Government to bail you out.

Get an education, and don't become an ultra consumer (which has been sold to this country for decades). Learn about money and how it works, how to keep more of it in your pockets and how to get PAID interest instead of PAYING it.

I'll swallow my "pride" as soon as people stop looking to Washington to solve their own personal problems.

(Note, I'm not saying you as in you phosphite, I don't know your situation or your life... my comments with "you" in them are directed at all the lazy fucks that think the Government is here to help them, they're not and haven't been for a very long time)

Of the two, I'll vote for the one who will keep taxes down, defend our borders and not look at taxing the rich (who most of them have EARNED all their money) to pay for the lazy to live. Yes, there are those that DO need gov't help, and I sympathize with those people. I don't disagree with programs like welfare, food stamps, SSI. But those programs are all very poorly executed, and I'm paying into programs that I'll never get to see (SSI won't be around when I retire), or they're being abused (welfare).

Of those running, McCain may not have the best answers, but I'd rather vote for an experienced less verbally educated man then a snake with a silver tongue.

[JonsZX2SR]

The problem I see with a lot of these discussions is they ignore the need for America to change to compete globally and to be more successful in the future.

In the past we were the most successful nation. Right now we are NOT the most competitive nation. We have allowed ourselves to become dependent on foreign oil and we deplete our economy and the military by trying to play the world's policeman.

Despite having few resources, paying over $9 per gallion for fuel and paying higher taxes, European economies are stronger than the US economy. China is using an excess of dollars taken in trade to buy oil futures to guarantee they are 1st in line. This drives up oil prices.

We need to figure out what Europe and China are doing to be more successful than the US. That doesn't mean we need to become like Europeans but it does mean we need to make tough choices to be more successful than Europeans.

We can't just rest on the past and say we had the greatest economy on the planet. that's yesterday's news. GM was the greatest car company 30 years ago and much of their management didn't think they needed to change. look where GM is today. that is exactly what is going to happen to the US economy unless we collectively think and act on what it means to be successful and stop thinking how competitive we once were.

The US has the tools, population, resources, etc. to succeed globally. I work for a US multinational corporation and I can tell you there are a lot of American based companies (not GM or Ford, Chrysler is more or less canadian owned) who are going to succeed.

The problem is the portion of the American people who refuse to see the need to change, who have no idea what it means to be competitive and who want to go back to the 50's or 60's.

It ain't gonna happen. The world is engaged in an economic war. The goal is to become #1 and a lot of competitive nations only see that happening if they can drag down the US. the best way to do that is shut off the supply of energy.

American people need to wake up, understand this and stop whining. It's 1941 all over agian. This time we need to pull together and pound the rest of the world economically. Two ways we could do that is to be stop being dependent on the world for energy, developing sources from coal, wind and nuclear sources.

The second is to stop wasting resources policing the rest of the world. If we cut our relianace on foreign oil we could stop sending troops overseas. Let the rest of the world fight over the oil and kill each other. In the meanwhile we'll deal with the peaceful nations and inflict heavy pain only if attacked by others.

I don't necessarily agree with all the content of Obama's messages, but he is right America needs to change. Compared to the positions taken by McCain nationally or by a few in this forum Obama's path has a greater chance of succeeding than other approaches.

Rather than just attcak and tear down ideas that promote change without offering other suggestions, why not propose alternatives to Obama's ideas (with more detail than just that we need to drill ofshore and the gov't needs to guarantee $2/gal gasoline) as part of this debate.

I think a majority of Americans understand we need to change our economy and society to succeed in the 21st century, but many of us are faraid to face the challenge.

[phosphite]

(Note, I'm not saying you as in you phosphite, I don't know your situation or your life... my comments with "you" in them are directed at all the lazy fucks that think the Government is here to help them, they're not and haven't been for a very long time)
Of course. I work for my money, spend it when I can and have it, and am personally responsible for all my debt. Good response btw; however the only possible fallacy that I see (and it may not be a fallacy, depending on if the democrats get in) is that you can't always assume the democrats will just increase taxes and spending, just as you can't assume the republicans are all about smaller government and less spending. The current GOP is robbing the U.S. of it's riches to line the pockets of the already rich; the need to lose this election badly so they can regroup, and the neo-cons can be booted from office. Hell, the current GOP believes the Constitution is just a bunch of loop-holes for terrorists!

Of the two, I'll vote for the one who will keep taxes down, defend our borders and not look at taxing the rich (who most of them have EARNED all their money) to pay for the lazy to live. Yes, there are those that DO need gov't help, and I sympathize with those people. I don't disagree with programs like welfare, food stamps, SSI. But those programs are all very poorly executed, and I'm paying into programs that I'll never get to see (SSI won't be around when I retire), or they're being abused (welfare).
A few rotten apples may seem to spoil the whole bunch, but there are many people that are legitimately on social assistance programs, and find themselves stuck and can't get out of their rut. If you cut social programs, you will drive these people into crime and into gangs to survive, causing more chaos and social problems for the future.

Of those running, McCain may not have the best answers, but I'd rather vote for an experienced less verbally educated man then a snake with a silver tongue.
Obama has changed his stories a couple times, and his true colors are showing, losing some of the glimmer where people first thought he was infalliable. However the "liberal" media is hiding McSame's mistakes by editing out things he gets wrong in debates (CBS news). McCain seems to forget everything (he blasted Obama for speaking at a foreign conference, when only a couple weeks before he was in Canada speaking before a group himself!), and has flip-flopped about what he actually knows (he knows the economy, he knows it not...he knows the economy, etc) more times than I don't know what. Go watch the youtube videos of McCain ("liberal media" clips) if you need more examples.

If you're a hard-core republican, you'll be trying desperately to find anything wrong with Obama to justify voting for a forgetful old-timer that can't remember what he ate for breakfast; it's natural you want to support your own party. But besides a few issues with Obama and the wording of what he says, he's still a much better candidate in comparison. I have to say I'm very surprised in this election that the media is trying to make it look so close by ignoring the many McCain blunders and errors.

[SoCalZX2]

It's not that I'm hard core republican, because I'm a lot less conservative than most. I'm not opposed to the government spending money. As long as it's not blown on BS (and dont get started in Iraq, because there are far more costly issues. It is however the only one sending a large portion of our troops outside our borderse).

I am totally NOT against the programs I mentioned, but they need to be so much more regulated then they are. I love helping people out, and I'm glad the government tries to help those who really need it. I have no factual numbers, but I wouldn't at all be surprised if it was 50/50 split or more in favor of the programs being abused. I just want them reformed and working properly so my tax dollars (which I'm not opposed to) go to help those who really need it, not those that are just too lazy to get off their ass.

You're correct though, it's a large assumption that REP will be smaller gov / fiscal responsibility and DEM will be higher taxes and socialist programs. Fact is, NEITHER party is really great for us, and I try to land somewhere in the middle of the two.

I'm all about smaller government that is fiscally responsible. Which is neither Liberal nor republican. Each candidate will talk a good talk during the race for the white house. Each will slam the other as has been the way of elections for many years now. I don't really care who is in washington, so long as taxes are kept low, social programs are reformed and made more stringent (why get off a rut if you don't have to...) and as long as no more rights get trampled on.

I just don't think thats Obama IMHO. It's not that I'm sitting there looking for faults in the man. I'm just not on board with him.

[JonsZX2SR]

We need a gov't that learns to live within finances. If that means higher taxes and larger gov't or less taxes and less gov't, so be it. What we don't need is the folly of the Bush years, less taxation, more gov't spending and borrowing against the future..

If we cannot afford something, be it social programs or sending the military overseas, then either a) we need to figure out how to fund what needs to be done or b) don't do it. Personally I think we would have been better off committing more military to stabilizing Afghanistan and more spending at home on energy.

If we send the military overseas, they need to be very well equipped, not hurting for equipment. Delays in getting vehicle and body armor to troops sent to the fron lines in Iraq are unconscionable. So is the political haggling that has put troops in the line of fire with a confused mission.

Others may feel differently and should voice well thought out opinions. Regardless I think the fiscal policies during the Bush adminstration were poorly thought out. The whole housing/mortgage mess undermined the economies ability to support taxes and spending.

If I knew Mccain would return to his more moderate policies of the past I could find him more palatable. My concern is we are going to get Bush 3 rather than a moderate thinker. Is mccain so far past his prime that he cannot be an effective leader ?? Perhaps what we need the most is McCain, a younger moderate VP plus a significant Democratic majority in both the House and Senate.

Regardless the policies of the last 8 years have been a fiscal disaster. Independent of Iraq the financial policy of the next adminstration needs to be sorted out.

[SoCalZX2]

I thought the house and senate was already DEM? lol

Also, I'm curious how Bush had anything to do with the housing and mortgage crises (besides the stupid 300 billion dollar relief plan that he's said he won't veto when it hits his desk) (Edit: btw, I'm not saying he wasn't, but I'm not sure what the president did to assist w/ the subprime mortgage debacle...)

[JonsZX2SR]

The gov't allowed flawed lending policies to make mortgages to people who couldn't afford to pay. It was all driven by green, with the lenders expecting to make a quick profit and package the loans to investotrs.

Everyone needs to take responsibility, congress, the executive branch, the appointees and Mr. Bush himself. The lending crisis was caused by complete lack of oversight by the gov't. No one is excused. Besides Bush, this includes Cheney, those at the fed and HRC, Obama and McCain. No one gets a free pass on this.

Same thing goes for poor planning and execution in Iraq, including how we are going to pay for this mess.

[SoCalZX2]

Ok that sounds better... As long as you're not hanging the entire mortgage crisis on Bush I'm ok with that lol.

hopefully some strict regulations will come of this and getting a home will be harder to do as it used to be.

[JonsZX2SR]

My point is everyone in gov't has some level of responsibility. If we just attack people then no one is left standing to make a change. Everyone and anyone can and does mistakes.

What I want are people looking forward to cleaning up the mess. At this point the 'finger pointers' (pun intended) are part of the problem, not the solution.

Whining about the old days and wanting to go back to the 20th century is no solution.

What has happened has happened, we need to clean up the mess, figure out how to interact diffferently with the rest of the world, develop a better energy, economic and military policy and most importantly figure out how to run the new economy so people in their 20's and 30's don't have to pay for this mess over the rest of thier working lives.

My question to everyone is do you want the US to have a healthy and successful economy in 2020 or do you want to whine about trying to go back to the 1990s, the 80's, 50's, etc. ???

[SoCalZX2]

My point is that the Government isn't a solution for the American population. The only part of the past I'd like to see brought back, is people using their heads. This country has been sold consumerism and spend spend spend for decades now.

With the onslaught of credit, and the dumbing down of Americans as a whole, people can't take responsibility for their own actions.

Yes, the government f'd up when they didn't have any regulations of sub prime lending. I just think that we can't excuse the people of the country and throw the blame squarely on the government. They didn't sell the crap loans to people who couldn't afford it. When people saw a 2-3k mortgage on a 4-5k/mo take home (and sometimes LESS) income... why sign for that? Is THAT the governments fault?

Is it the responsibility of the government to pick up the pieces for everyones mistakes? I don't think it should be, but I'm sure a lot of people do... It gives them a way out... "Well the Gov't didn't have sanctions and regulations", "Well the gov't caused this problem" The gov't this, the gov't that... THEY DIDN'T FORCE ANYONE TO SIGN ANYTHING. That part ISN'T the governments fault.

Yes, I'd love this country to have a healthy economy... since I plan on retiring about 15yrs after the date you mentioned. But do you really think that it will if we keep the general population stretched so thin financially? Besides the governments own fiscal responsibility, I truly believe that personal fiscal responsibility will go just as far to assist in the uprising of the economy. Just as much as fixing our global economical outlook.

Do I have any solutions? Yeah, pay cash for things, dump all your consumer debt... Have money in savings of 3-6 months of expenses as an untouched emergency fund. Have money in investments for retirement, quit living paycheck to paycheck and start living on a budget of less than you make. Lets start teaching the children of today how money works, what the importance of being financially capable and responsible...

Lets start teaching people of this generation how to not be ultra consumers, but how to be responsible to themselves and their families. Teach people the importance of giving, and helping your neighbor out.

Those are ideas of the past, those are the things from the past that need to be brought back. Not the financial policies of that time frame, but just the way we as people act. Be more educated on purchases you make whether large items like a home or a car... or smaller items like insurance.

(Of course w/ the comments of you and your, I'm not pointing a finger @ your finances Jon lol ;))

[JonsZX2SR]

The population is already stretched from past mistakes. We can't fix that. Both the population and the gov't have lived on excessive borrowing.

We can't fix the past. the best we can do is try to make the economy as healthy as possible. A few good starts are to recognize the gov't can't go on running a deficit, to recognize that energy autonomy and home grown sources of energy are a good thing and to recognize we should stop taxing our citizens to play world policeman.

It burns me that American lives and taxpayers money are wasted trying to save a bunch of animals from killing each other in foreign lands. I'd rather let them kill themselves. If we didn't need the oil we wouldn't bother.

[mechtech]

Hussein Obama only has 143 days of 'working' in the Senate to qualify for his running for President.
He is full of over the top language.
He is not working out for me, and is proving himself startlingly unqualified.
"Change! Change!" Is the Mantra. No substance, however.
He does not know what the chain of command is or what buttons to press to effect his edicts. This part is truly scary - his lack of knowledge of what the Joint Chiefs do is one huge example.
We will change anyway with Bush, McCain, or Mickey Mouse .
One man is not our saviour or the key to solving ours or the world's problem's.
At least McCain does not make a pretense of this.

[koihoshi]

Well said, Mechtech.

[JonsZX2SR]

Say what you want. Those of you who don't think the US needs a change in policies to thrive in the 21st century are part of the problem.

I consider those who resist change, who have less experience than Obama and who tear down ideas without offering coherent alternatives to be part of the problem.

Live in the past, embrace the 20th century. You'll wind up like American Motors or in the direction GM and other organizations that can't accept change are heading. In the meanwhile the rest of us will try to change the companies we work for to be successful in the future and try to change the US to compete globally.

If not Obama then who...??? All the whiners who complain about change but who cannot discuss rational alternatives ??? Sureley you guys are joking.

[Buster]

Ha...the people who blindly want "change" are no solution either.

Obama keeps most of what we'd be "changing" to quiet, but if you examine his voting record, you'll see what he will be offering us and it IS NOT CHANGE. He's rated the most liberal Senator. When he doesn't vote "present" without taking a stance on a bill, he votes with the extremists in the Democrat Party (Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy, Byrd, etc.) 99.9% of the time. He's not going to offer anything that the Congress with a 7% approval rating could offer. He opposes drilling. He can't honestly give the military any credit for their successes. He does nothing but parrot talking points fed to him by speech writers, donors and teleprompters. Plus, his socialist and globalist views are dangerous for our nation right now. In a time when we need to curb illegal immigration, end dependence on foreign oil and continue to battle terrorism, our nation needs to stand strong from within, not sell off its sovereignty to become basically another member of the EU.

The only change he really offers would be the skin color of the President and that's not enough to qualify him for the Presidency. He's an empty suit. Ever hear him in a candid interview or a debate? He stutters and has more "UHHHHHH"s than actual words. If not reading a teleprompter or reciting a memorized speech, he can't deliver a message. He's a complete fraud with ZERO experience. His resume shows 143 days of Senate experience before running for President, with very little votes. Oh yes, he was also a "Community Organizer".

His speech and tour in Europe are exposing his true anti-American feelings. Yes I said it. He'd be a better fit for President of the EU than USA. He can take John Kerry as his VP.

A cult of personality will not carry him to victory.

[JonsZX2SR]

If anyone is in DENIAL about the need for change, read about the Record $490 billion budget deficit (http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/28/news/economy/budget_record.ap/index.htm?postversion=2008072810) for 2008.

Buster you're great at tearing people down but I haven't read one constructive idea from you about how to make the US great again. You're living in the past and people with your attitude are part of the problem. Negativity is not going to resolve the US issues with our economy.

Consider that Obama has said more about how we need to change than anything you have presented. it's easy for the "Busters' of the world to tear down people they don't like, but you never get poitive solutions from these people.

Obama isn't perfect or completely informed, but he's a lot better than those who are clueless, who live in the past and don't think the US has a lot of difficulties to overcome.

I challenge you to stop the tearing down for one post and present a few rational, well thought out ideas how the US can get out of our current budget and trade imbalance problems, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and overcome the inability of many Americans to rationally manage their finances.

[SoCalZX2]

I love how you're saying that we are living in the past... I highly doubt anyone here is looking to relive any of the past Jon. It's about learning from the mistakes of the population and the government. For that, you do have to "relive" the past so you can make an objective comment about how to move forward.

No one is disagreeing that this country needs change... so please, quit beating that drum, because it's tired and not true.

The rest of us aren't as well educated as you are apparently Jon, so just because we don't offer some great solution, doesn't mean we don't see the problem and agree that it needs to be changed.

WE JUST DON'T BELIEVE OBAMA IS THE MAN TO DO IT. Can you figure that out w/o tearing us down and saying we're part of the problem? Or can you not take your own advice on the topic?

[Buster]

Anyone who goes overseas and apologizes for America (while making some accusations) is unfit to lead the nation. Period.

We need more change in Congress than on top in my opinion. The President has tried to do a lot that would benefit the nation greatly: Social Security Privatization (voted down by Democrats), Domestic Oil (voted down by Democrats), building a border wall (Congress voted to allow but won't appropriate funds to do the work), etc.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121685595088379073.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

THIS is not the type of politicians we need in office. However, if we "change" to Obama, this is exactly the type of person we'll have signing bills into law. Pelosi is not allowing drilling to come to vote because she knows some Democrats will vote for it, it will pass and her environmentalist donors will be angry at her. The President lifted the ban, it will pass the Senate, only the House needs to vote, but she is not allowing it to even come to the floor. Pure corruption. Senator Obama is more of the same. The number of facts he has either lied or been wrong about in his speeches is astounding. He's not qualified in any way to lead this nation: No experience, can't think on his own, does not know history, has far too many corrupt relationships, has socialistic views that focus on relationships with foreign nations more than our own good, etc.

[MellowedZX2]

Jon I have to give you some credit, I have been gaining more and more respect for you. You have many valid points and have helped to give me insight into the other side (something that I truly beleive you need to know to pose a credible argument), however, I still find myself not educated enough in the matter to pose and answer I think would work.
I do agree we need change, but from reading what has been said I think there are two different changes people are talking about. They are related but not the same. We DO need to be a self sufficient country, this will harm us in no way at all. It may be taken out of context when Obama say's "My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it." I do think that statement could have been reworded to make it sound much less harsh towards our country. As the man in charge of this country you need to have pride in it, or what do you care about its state. I am not saying you have to agree with some of the things that have gone on, but you can't go around saying some of the things Obama, and the candidate for first lady have said. The answer should be if you don't like the way things are going do some thing to change it, if you aren't willing to change, and just want to complain, then get out.

I have said that McCain is a lesser of two evils, and I still beleive that. I don't feel that a candidate for our Commander in Charge should be in other countries campaigning. I also feel that part of being our president you need to have some sort of military experience. It only makes sense. How can some one who has had no vested interest in the military make a decision about using the greatest fighting force in the world (that will probably be argued but I am biased, I am a Marine).

In the end I am young, still learning, and will vote for the man that seems to have the best interest for my family in mind.

Our economy will not be able to support much higher gas prices, it will soon be a situation where people will stop working due to the fact they will be spending more in gas to work then they will bring home.

Joel

[Buster]

I believe gas prices will end up being a deciding factor, even though there ARE more important issues. This is one that affects everyone directly though, while issues like national security and immigration may not have as blatant effects in the daily lives of voters.

McCain is open to drilling. He has opposed ANWR in the past but we do have different and more dire conditions now and said he has listened to his constituents and is now supporting drilling. A politician who actually listens and votes the will of the people is becoming an endangered species, so that's a great attribute to have in a candidate for President. He still maintains we must be careful for environmental reasons, but realizes the necessity of having domestically-produced fuel.

Obama -
His view can be summed up with a quote from him where he said that high gas prices don’t really constitute a problem for Americans. He stated that the reason for our anger is the rapid increase in prices, not the prices themselves. Obama claimed that Americans would have accepted a “gradual adjustment” to the current cost:

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=Gehaf7_TBAs&eurl=http://hotair.com/archives/2008/06/11/obama-id-like-higher-gas-prices-just-not-so-quickly/

[mechtech]

There is no denial about change occurring.
I clearly stated that it is inevitable.

[JonsZX2SR]

I love how you're saying that we are living in the past... I highly doubt anyone here is looking to relive any of the past Jon. It's about learning from the mistakes of the population and the government. For that, you do have to "relive" the past so you can make an objective comment about how to move forward.

No one is disagreeing that this country needs change... so please, quit beating that drum, because it's tired and not true.

The rest of us aren't as well educated as you are apparently Jon, so just because we don't offer some great solution, doesn't mean we don't see the problem and agree that it needs to be changed.

WE JUST DON'T BELIEVE OBAMA IS THE MAN TO DO IT. Can you figure that out w/o tearing us down and saying we're part of the problem? Or can you not take your own advice on the topic?

The reason I say too many people are living in the past is we keep making the same mistakes (savings and loan crisis, mortgage lending crisis) (oil importation crisis, next oil importation crisis, etc.) (balance of trade crisis, next balance of trade crisis, etc.) We keep going back to past behaviors. we don't learn.

When someone brings up the point we need to change and to examine what other nations (such as Europe have done) some peoiple resort the the ame litany, we're the greatest nation on earth, blah, blah, blah. we don't make changes, then we stumble into the next crisis.

We can't keep on shooting ourselves in the foot, which we have done again and again. I'll stop making the point that we need change when real change starts happening, and it isn't going to happen under the Bush/Cheney plus Democratic congress administration.

If anyone doesn't think Obama is the man for change that is certainly an opinion they are entitled to. My concern is there is even less evidence that McCain will bring real change.

What does it take to elect a slate of politicians who will try to manage the economy in a decent manner ?? People hate it when I bring up the European examples, but despite their many flaws the Europeans seem to be doing a better job right now.

The best thing we could do is develop a plan where we could manage our economy if oil went to $250 per barrel. This includes multiple alternate energy sources. If the price of oil drops that plan would give us a competitive advantage.

The reason I say this is many global corporations and foreign nations already have contigency plans in the case of very expensive oil.

If the US only plans for cheap oil and everyone else plans for expensive oil then everyone else holds a competitive advantage against us. This is exactly what out lack of foresight has brought us.

If oil goes to $250 a barrel were screwed without a plan. Howeever, if oil drops to $60 a barrel, everybody breathes a sigh of relief until they realize we are still at an economic disadvantage vs. the rest of the world.

GM did this 30 years ago, figuring they would always be #1 and underestimated the Japanese carmakers. look what happened. it happened to US steel makers, in the electronics industry and in financial markets. What's next.

the reason I say all this isn't to tear the US down. the reason I say it is I want to see a renewed attitude where the Americans want to pound the snot out of foreign economies and have a take no prisoners attitude. the corporation i work for has this attitude and they have certainly made mistakes in the past. One guy here works for Caterpillar which is another globally competitive company. Boeing has made mistakes but learned to compete.

What I am looking for is an America with an attitude that can afford rising fuel costs, because we know we are that much better than the rest of the world. If we figure out how to pay for fuel at $9-10 per gallon like Europeans but prices only rise to $6 per gallon that gives us a competitive advantage.

Crying for cheap fuel just leads to a defeatis position, because you make yourself dependent on the rest of the world. You'll always be last in line.

Our parents and grandparents built a competitive America, the Germans and Japanese found out the hard way in the 1940's.

There is an economic war for resources going on in the world right now. What concerns me the most is our government and the average American doesn't understand this, and politicians can't speak the true. i don't want americans to find out the hard way.

What good does it do us if we win the war in Iraq but lose the global economic war because too many Americans are soft, can't compete, want cheap fuel, and think they are entitled to what their parents and grandparents earned ??

Hate me for bringing this up. Debate me if you wish. My job is global and I work in the US, in Europe and in asia. What i see in the US right now isn't a pretty picture.

Wake up America...

[SoCalZX2]

I'm sorry to say this Jon, but you keep bringing the same things up over and over. You're a broken record when it comes to this subject.

We know the America needs changes, but it's more than political changes that need to be made. Neither will succeed without the other, but to say that just the political side of things need to change won't fix it.

Yes, the economy needs to be stronger, yes, we need other resources for energy. You're not getting any argument on these points. So, if we all agree with you that these changes need to be made, why keep bringing them up?

Fact is, the government needs to come together, because one man will not make too many lasting changes in 8 years (if he were to get reelected). There is no good or bad party, there is only good and bad government. There has to be a nationwide change in thought process about what our government is doing, and that doesn't start with the government. That starts with the general population.

People need to start looking at life differently, and stop being media sheep / super consumers. People need to be willing to make sacrifices to make the government change... because do you really think the government will stop importing oil if the citizens don't make their own lifestyle changes?

Everyone here is out for self... not out to help anyone else. Not out to make great changes. Not out to make America better as long as they are getting theirs. That is where the real change is needed. A nationwide change in how the population works / thinks / consumes / saves... Once those changes are made (if ever), people can stop relying on the government to solve their problems, and start thinking on their own again.

When that happens, we can make a great political shift, unite the parties in a common goal for border control / safety, fiscal responsibility, global economic shifts... But until the people of this country become personal problem solvers, we'll never see any good changes in washington.

That may be an oversimplification of things, but it's not necessarily wrong.

[Gregersonke]

So, I decided to look up obama's supposedly liberal voting record.


I notice a couple of things.

1. He's not really had the chance to establish himself one direction or another on a voting record. If you go just by a system that says liberal, conservative etc. you aren't going to see the real data.

The votes he did take seem to work towards minimizing costs for programs rather than increasing them.

It almost seems as if he's taking a step in the direction but staying lean in his givings for it. Most non-profit organizations run a very lean ship anyways.

As for the votes I do see.

He supports bringing the troops home

Supports cutting costs on overfunded Government programs like farm subsidies.

Also, you can read all of Obama's statements, voting record, etc.

right here http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=9490

McCain's positions you can see right here http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53270

[JonsZX2SR]

I'm sorry to say this Jon, but you keep bringing the same things up over and over. You're a broken record when it comes to this subject.

...and you keep resorting to the same childish response. If you don't like what I have to say then too bad, get over it because you are going to keep hearing it. There are too many brain dead Americans who need to hear something over and over.

Perhaps what makes a few of you nervous is recognizing America needs change and Obama is more likely to bring change than McCain. Obama isn't the ideal candidate (and I certainly feel this way) but when faced with the choice of an unknown change (Obama) vs. the likelihood of little or no change (McCain), Americans may very well vote for the unknown.

McCain could do himself and the U.S. a big favor and come out in a stronger direction (if he is capable of this and if the Republicans let him) for change and take some risk. Obama could better quantify the direction of change he wants to implement. As I see it right now, Obama has some directions such as bringing the troops home and McCain is more of a stay the course type of guy. I think a lot of people support McCain because they fear the unknown at a time when we need change.

What both of these guys need to do is start speaking about major economic change. I don't think this debate is going to happen, but if thousands of people keep asking it might sake both of this guys up enough to come forward with more details.

I favor Obama, because I see McCain's policies being just more of the same, stuck in the past. I'd rather take risks than remain stuck where we are now. I continue to urge people to vote for Obama. If that makes other people nervous, then that means I am doing a good job making people think. I want to make people nervous.

I'm going to continue along these lines. If you don't like it then don't read my posts but stop with the broken record routine. You sound like a broken record. (pun intended.) All Amricans need to keep bringing up the need for change until it actually starts to happen. Right now America is in talking mode. We need more than talk.

That is all...

[Buster]

I'm sorry to say this Jon, but you keep bringing the same things up over and over. You're a broken record when it comes to this subject.


Yeah, you noticed too. :p

[SoCalZX2]

...and you keep resorting to the same childish response.

What about my responses have been childish? I've not called anyone names, I've not yelled at anyone, I've not put anyone down...

I've been VERY clean and clear in my responses Jon. How dare you call them childish. You on the other hand, think we're all just a bunch of stupid people that can't read or understand. You're the one that needs to stop being condescending.

I'll thank you kindly to swing your judgmental pendulum back your way, and look at your own words just the same. Because if you think that the people here need to be told things over and over... until we agree with you, then you don't really want to debate. You just want to be right.

I just lost a lot of respect for you Jon. You're not the great debater you once looked to be.

[af3ll]

You on the other hand, think we're all just a bunch of stupid people that can't read or understand.
That's been going on for years.

[SoCalZX2]

That's been going on for years.

I know... but it doesn't make it right.

[LiveWire]

I noticed something else about the speech in Germany. Obama says we need to prevent the spread of atomic bombs. Does that mean he plans to invade Iran? I doubt it since he wants to pull out of Iraq. He is more guilty of stating a problem without stating a solution since he is the one who is supposed to come up with the solution.

[JonsZX2SR]

What about my responses have been childish? I've not called anyone names, I've not yelled at anyone, I've not put anyone down...

I've been VERY clean and clear in my responses Jon. How dare you call them childish. You on the other hand, think we're all just a bunch of stupid people that can't read or understand. You're the one that needs to stop being condescending.

I'll thank you kindly to swing your judgmental pendulum back your way, and look at your own words just the same. Because if you think that the people here need to be told things over and over... until we agree with you, then you don't really want to debate. You just want to be right.

I just lost a lot of respect for you Jon. You're not the great debater you once looked to be.

Whether of not you respect me is irrelevant. It's not going to sway me either way with regard to try to make my points. Bring that up is just another chilish response, similar to the business about saying someone sounds like abroken record. if you cannot or unwilling to debate or refute my points, you respond with a flip comment.

Comments such as 'judgemental pendulum' provide absolutely no merit to an argument. Since you are unable to refute my points do you need make personal attacks such as these ? Explain.

My question to you is how can I have a debate with someone who resorts to flip comments, trite retorts and personal attacks rather than well worded responses ?? If you want to debate me it is up to you to hold up your end of the deal. There are others here not worth responding to, but in the past you have made some good points.

We have one candidate who talks about change and the other one seems to want to stay the course. The problem for some people with Obama is while they see the need for change they don't trust the direction where he is going so you get the response that he isn't the right one for the job. many of them support McCain, recognizing his limitations.

There are the strong Mccain supporters and the strong Obama supporters. No one is going to change either group significantly. The election is probably going to be influenced by three groups of voters: 1) those who support McCain because they oppose Obama despite recognizing the need for change, 2) those who support Obama despite not fully understanding where he is going and 3) those who don't catre or anre not sure but are going to vote anyway.

The first group (1) is probably hoping McCain will win the election, we'll survive 4 more years of economic mismanagement and a better candidate will come along in 2012.

The send group (2) believes that time is running out for the US and we won't survive 4 more years. Alomost any change, especially regarding the economy is better than what we have now and the Obama administration will learn along the way and do a better job than the Bush administrations.

The third (3) is a wild card and you get these in any election. usually they cancel each other out.

An unknown is how the makeup of the House and Senate after 2008 and after 2010. Tey haven't exactly inspired confidence in the American public either.

My personal belief is that we simply cannot survive another 4 years of economic mismanagement. I prefer change, even if it requires 4 years of on the job training. Therefore I support Obama. If my arguments make others uncomfortable that is what they are supposed to do.

Unless something monumental happens, either Obama or Mccain is going to be elected president in November. When that happens supporters of the losing side are going to have to deal with it, and we will find out how well americans can pull togther.

[Buster]

"Childish, childish, blah blah blah"


You're right, you WON'T sway anyone's opinion with your Holier-than-thou talking down to people. This attitude so many liberals have helped Kerry lose the election and it will contribute to Obama's downfall.

You're so insistent that we need 'change', which no one can argue with, that you follow your new God-like candidate blindly and ignore all of the evidence that's he's not a change from the politicians we already have, but you fail to recognize all of his dangerous views, relationships and lack of both plans and experience.

You said "we simply cannot survive another 4 years of economic mismanagement" but fail to notice that a Democrat majority in Congress gets every bill passed that we do not need, or blocks any bills we DO need.

If you opened your partisan eyes and paid attention, you'd realize that McCain has taken countless oppositions to President Bush.

On-the-job training is both unacceptable AND dangerous, especially when Obama is proving to be completely naive or stupid when it comes to National Security. His comments on the successful surge in Iraq, denial of its success and insistence to STILL oppose it after success are inexcusable for someone wanting to be the Commander-In-Chief.

You seem to be a lot like Senator Obama...a lot of words are used in an attempt to look intelligent, but you don't really say anything.

[Buster]

I noticed something else about the speech in Germany. Obama says we need to prevent the spread of atomic bombs. Does that mean he plans to invade Iran? I doubt it since he wants to pull out of Iraq. He is more guilty of stating a problem without stating a solution since he is the one who is supposed to come up with the solution.

He has previously stated he's sit down at a table with the terrorist-supporting dictator of Iran and negotiate "without preconditions".

Of course, he changes his stances on everything every day, but that's what is in the record.

You can't negotiate with leaders like this and if you do, as the UN found out with Hussein, you will give something up and they will take more than you thought they would, then you'll still end up needing to take military action anyways and the enemy will only be stronger because you granted them time to build up while you negotiated.

Iran needs to be taken care of with force. I'm not saying military force, but we can't let them be in any position to negotiate and dictate anything.

[af3ll]

They both change their minds on things.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080729/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_taxes_2

[SoCalZX2]

Whether of not you respect me is irrelevant. It's not going to sway me either way with regard to try to make my points. Bring that up is just another chidlish response, similar to the business about saying someone sounds like a broken record. if you cannot or unwilling to debate or refute my points, you respond with a flip comment.

Jon, I really don't get you. I'm not trying to sway you from your opinion, all I've been trying to do is get you to acknowledge that there is more need for personal change before real governmental change can occur. Saying you're a broken record wasn't childish... because you are. You only see your argument and no one else can say anything.

Comments such as 'judgemental pendulum' provide absolutely no merit to an argument. Since you are unable to refute my points do you need make personal attacks such as these ? Explain.

If you think that was a personal attack, you need to reexamine it. A personal attack would have been calling you stupid, or saying your discussion has no merit. What that comment was intended for, was for you to take a deeper look in how you communicate to others on this website. You are NOT all knowing, and you don't have all the answers. You need to learn to read other peoples posts and not find just faults. Heck, you need to actually learn to respond to peoples ideas that aren't yours. You've completely IGNORED all of my posts, and come back to the need for governmental change (which btw, no one is arguing against... so why you keep arguing for it, I'm nto sure)

My question to you is how can I have a debate with someone who resorts to flip comments, trite retorts and personal attacks rather than well worded responses ?? If you want to debate me it is up to you to hold up your end of the deal. There are others here not worth responding to, but in the past you have made some good points.

I haven't made flip comments, trite retorts or personal attacks. You view them that way because you're unwilling to look at my posts and see that I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm merely pointing out the fallacy that Washington is our savior. There needs to be great personal changes before any change in Washington will have any real effect. I don't understand how you can ignore that. Change won't start happening in Washington until it happens in ourselves. (I do appreciate you noting I've made good points in the past)

We have one candidate who talks about change and the other one seems to want to stay the course. The problem for some people with Obama is while they see the need for change they don't trust the direction where he is going so you get the response that he isn't the right one for the job. many of them support McCain, recognizing his limitations.

There are the strong Mccain supporters and the strong Obama supporters. No one is going to change either group significantly. The election is probably going to be influenced by three groups of voters: 1) those who support McCain because they oppose Obama despite recognizing the need for change, 2) those who support Obama despite not fully understanding where he is going and 3) those who don't care or are not sure but are going to vote anyway.

The first group (1) is probably hoping McCain will win the election, we'll survive 4 more years of economic mismanagement and a better candidate will come along in 2012.

The send group (2) believes that time is running out for the US and we won't survive 4 more years. Almost any change, especially regarding the economy is better than what we have now and the Obama administration will learn along the way and do a better job than the Bush administrations.

The third (3) is a wild card and you get these in any election. usually they cancel each other out.

An unknown is how the makeup of the House and Senate after 2008 and after 2010. They haven't exactly inspired confidence in the American public either.

My personal belief is that we simply cannot survive another 4 years of economic mismanagement. I prefer change, even if it requires 4 years of on the job training. Therefore I support Obama. If my arguments make others uncomfortable that is what they are supposed to do.

Unless something monumental happens, either Obama or Mccain is going to be elected president in November. When that happens supporters of the losing side are going to have to deal with it, and we will find out how well americans can pull together.

You are totally entitled to your opinion, and I don't disagree with your portrayal of how this election will play out. I don't believe the Presidency is a place for "on the job training". This isn't McDonalds. As for "staying the course", about the only thing I've seen McCain say that about is Iraq. Which I believe is the correct thing to do. I don't know how many times I've said that just pulling out the troops without thinking how it will affect our future is the WRONG course of action. There are far more problems with performing that act than people are thinking about. As for economic changes, neither have really put out there a plan that will save us. I agree that we need great economic change, and part of that change will come from the government. Again though, I think the bulk of that change will come from the American population that need to rethink how they handle their pesonal finances. How can we ask anyone in Congress or the Presidency to be accountable without being accountable ourselves? That's hypocritical no?


Obviously my responses are in red. I'm REALLY not trying to be argumentative about this, but some of that needs to be said.

[Buster]

They both change their minds on things.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080729/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_taxes_2

Nice digging.

Yes, McCain has changed on issues as conditions change. He tends to stand behind what he says and when he does change, cites reasons and sticks with his decision.

Obama has "changed" on nearly every issue from the primaries to the general election and is inconsistent based on what audience he's in front of. He has no core values from what we can tell and EVERY word he speaks is politically calculated.

[af3ll]

I saw it the other day and I thought of you.

[Buster]

How sweet.

[Buster]

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/413/3375ma4.jpg

[krux]

Hussein Obama only has 143 days of 'working' in the Senate to qualify for his running for President.
He is full of over the top language.
He is not working out for me, and is proving himself startlingly unqualified.
"Change! Change!" Is the Mantra. No substance, however.
He does not know what the chain of command is or what buttons to press to effect his edicts. This part is truly scary - his lack of knowledge of what the Joint Chiefs do is one huge example.
We will change anyway with Bush, McCain, or Mickey Mouse .
One man is not our saviour or the key to solving ours or the world's problem's.
At least McCain does not make a pretense of this.


I clap for you. That is how i feel right there

[5whiskey]

I've got to jump in here. I'm new to the forum, and don't want to piss anyone off, but I was reading a few posts back and something caught my eye.

Someone was talking about President Bush, and basically pinning the sub-prime mortgage crisis on the government. Upon further reading, it turned into being the fault of Fannie mae, Freddie Mac, Bush, Congress, the FRB, and everyone in between. One of the most IMPORTANT people in the link was left out...

THE PEOPLE THAT SIGNED THEIR NAME ON THE LOAN. Tell me you get a house by budgeting first to understand how much you can afford. Please say that you read those papers that you're asked to sign in the most important financial trasnaction in your life. Let's definately not forget to place the most responsibility where it truly belongs... on the individual. Government and banks have played the game, and deserve the crap storm that is coming down. You will not convince me, however, that all of the homeowners were confronted with "predators" who went door to door threatening to kill them if they didn't buy a home on the banks terms.

BTW, I'm conservative but I don't really want to get into the cussing matches that often derives from political conversations. I will say that a two party system is usually the best way, but I don't like the way either party is swinging right now. I just thank the mods and supporters of this sight for hosting all of us poor dimwits.

Anyway, I had to get that off of my chest. I'll probably be little more than a spectator on the political board mostly. God bless gents...

[SoCalZX2]

/sarcasm

You can't possibly expect people to be personally responsible can you? I mean, people trying hard not to F themselves... how can we put the blame on anyone but the Gov't...

/sarcasm

You'll find I'm probably the biggest advocate of personal fiscal responsibility here, so I agree, while the lenders should be reprimanded, the Gov't shouldn't be trying to bail out those that were too stupid to get into a mortgage that was more than 1/2 their income monthly.

Oh well, it is what it is, and just like a good little Gov't, it's using dollars from everyones pockets (including those of us that didn't screw themselves) to bail everyone out (including the lenders)...

Yay for socialism.. err democracy ;)

[Buster]

I've got to jump in here. I'm new to the forum, and don't want to piss anyone off, but I was reading a few posts back and something caught my eye.

Someone was talking about President Bush, and basically pinning the sub-prime mortgage crisis on the government. Upon further reading, it turned into being the fault of Fannie mae, Freddie Mac, Bush, Congress, the FRB, and everyone in between. One of the most IMPORTANT people in the link was left out...

THE PEOPLE THAT SIGNED THEIR NAME ON THE LOAN. Tell me you get a house by budgeting first to understand how much you can afford. Please say that you read those papers that you're asked to sign in the most important financial trasnaction in your life. Let's definately not forget to place the most responsibility where it truly belongs... on the individual. Government and banks have played the game, and deserve the crap storm that is coming down. You will not convince me, however, that all of the homeowners were confronted with "predators" who went door to door threatening to kill them if they didn't buy a home on the banks terms.

BTW, I'm conservative but I don't really want to get into the cussing matches that often derives from political conversations. I will say that a two party system is usually the best way, but I don't like the way either party is swinging right now. I just thank the mods and supporters of this sight for hosting all of us poor dimwits.

Anyway, I had to get that off of my chest. I'll probably be little more than a spectator on the political board mostly. God bless gents...

:beernana:

[LiveWire]

Many of the lenders have already paid the price for their practices since they are out of business. They could no longer get financial backing for their loans due to the high number of defaulted ones. Most people do ultimately pay the price for their decisions despite how many others they try to blame for them. If you accept responsibility for the decisions you make, you are more likely to learn from your mistakes make better decisions in the future.

[TheCrazyGuy]

I've seen nothing wrong with jon's arguments. His best points seem to go unaddressed which I think is the reason he keeps repeating them. He has noticed, as I have, that domestic auto manufacturers have lost out huge compared to import auto manufacturers due to laziness and complacency.

In addition, we are viewing low gas prices as a right and not a highly undeserved privelege. If we were saudis, pulling fuel out of the ground like it was dirt, we may be more justified in our thinking that. But thinking that 60$ a barrel oil would last forever? How arrogant.

I'm glad that this little scare happened this summer because maybe it will change some things, at least as far as fuel goes. Conservation is in the winds and that is a good thing overall. I sure do see a lot more Priuses and Yarises on the road. I'll keep chugging along in my full-sized truck and my 20mpg subcompact.

[TheCrazyGuy]

Might I add that I have not yet decided whom I will be voting for so all of our more partisan individuals can hold off on jumping on that bandwagon for a while.

[dareall]

the best reason not to vote for Obama, two words: Cindy McCain. She is friggin hot :hitnana:

WOOT, for some older lady action

[LiveWire]

Gas prices are not a major concern for me in my vote. I would rather not see any artificial means for lower gas prices. What I mean by artificial are things that would lower the price at the pump by taking the money from somewhere else. There has been talk of pulling the gas tax temporarily. That makes no sense to me. The tax money will have to come from somewhere. I'd rather pay it at the pump than in my income tax. If at the pump, then people will make a conscious effort to conserve. Artificial means benefit those who are wasteful the most.

Obama will raise my income tax and that will be on top of the high cost gas so I won't vote for him.

[JonsZX2SR]

Two things I want to see from the next adminstration is a reducytion of oil imports and a reduction of balance of trade.

The dollars we are sending overseas come back to buy US businesses and resources. We have become our own worst enemy and the current trend keeps up, America won't be owned by Americans in the future. The last thing i want to see is the US become like a 3rd world nation where most of the worthwhile resources and industries are owned by foreigners.

-> When Americans No Longer Own America (http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0227-20.htm)

[Buster]

Two things I want to see from the next adminstration is a reducytion of oil imports and a reduction of balance of trade.

The dollars we are sending overseas come back to buy US businesses and resources. We have become our own worst enemy and the current trend keeps up, America won't be owned by Americans in the future. The last thing i want to see is the US become like a 3rd world nation where most of the worthwhile resources and industries are owned by foreigners.

-> When Americans No Longer Own America (http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0227-20.htm)


There's no way you can vote for Obama/Biden then. They both oppose all domestic drilling.