posted September 05, 2008 08:49 PM            

A fighter pilot.

posted September 05, 2008 10:50 PM            

---he wanted to reach out to people and hence was less aggressive they say.

I myself hate it when people tell me how to speak. If you p1ss of people so be it. I like spontaneity. But sometimes I compromise.

posted September 06, 2008 12:36 PM            

Palin said she fought big oil.....she wants to increase drilling to make more contracts and more money for big oil...

Republicans say that democrats will raise taxes......democrats will raise taxes for the richest 1% and lower taxes for the rest of us.......I don't see why anyone would vote republican unless they are very rich..

Everyone who votes republican on the basis of social issues is duped and is caught in their lies. The point of the republican party is to continue the oil/war machine to make a very small select group of people richer.

I'm not surprised that the republican party is the part of white hicks.....you'd have to be uneducated to vote against yourself.

Sometimes I think the reason that conservatives are so vocal and fervent is that they intuitively know they are wrong, that they are voting against their, and their neighbors livelihood...but they're so thoroughly brainwashed they bark all the louder to reinforce their beliefs.

Republicans seem to believe that they are better at managing the economy: then why does the economy always do better under democrats? Why do we have such bad unemployment after 8 years of Bush?

The republican party is no longer economically conservative, they function only as a puppet of the war/oil machine...it's all about greed, and everything else is just a front to get people to vote for them.

If people don't wake up and see this soon we're in deep poo poo.

I don't see why we'd want to have someone hot-headed at the helm. Do we really want someone hot-headed to be in charge of firing nukes?

Do we really want a soccer mom with virtually no experience given the opportunity to run this country?

Yes let's drill our way to oil independence, because we have a limitless supply of oil and it will solve the problem forever. Don't people see that drilling will just make the people in control richer? It won't make gas prices cheaper for the average American....why are people so ignorant and duped?

Pid, why do you think that the world by and large supports Barack Obama?

Do you think it's because they are all leftist commies? Or do you think it's an objective assessment of the havoc wreaked by George Bush on the world?

I could never understand why the republicans have become the party of national security. They were the ones in power when the worst attacks on the US were allowed to come through, how does this make them tough on security?

You'll always hear republicans trying to blame the previous administrations for problems with the economy, security, but that is an incredibly weak argument. Especially when you see the country doing worse under republicans, time and time again.

posted September 06, 2008 03:33 PM              

quote:

---

I don't really understand.....the delivery of what goods?

---

BR - my argument was not necessarily in favor of McCain's positions. I was only stating the obvious - that we should be more concerned with what he's saying than how he's saying it. A good delivery only goes so far.

quote:

---

I don't see why we'd want to have someone hot-headed at the helm. Do we really want someone hot-headed to be in charge of firing nukes?

---

Well, for what it's worth, Truman was a bit of a hothead too. But I think just as importantly, if not more so, he was naive and very easily manipulated by the Washington military elite.

It does always seem to be about oil, doesn't it? It's tiresome. I agree that the Republicans are overly invested in the military-industrial complex (yeah I know it's an old term. I still like it), but they are also, just like the liberal Democrats, hellbent on social engineering.

Was that "white hick" comment fair?

posted September 06, 2008 03:55 PM            

BR,
I did make the following assertion before to your "democrats do better": The neo con actions taken in the previous term catches up in the current term. So the troughs you see in the graph is because of the actions in the previous term. Even in nature, the day gets shorter and shorter after June 21 (but summer stays until july and august) . Day is shortest on Dec 21 and rises gradually. But winter is severe in jan and feb.

Bush did inherit a recession economy from Clinton. The internet bubble already exploded at end of his term and sept 11 worsened it.

Palin is correct why wait for technology to show up, lets drill and atleast get what we can. That is the here now. Pelosi is a jerk, she does not even know the current price per gallon of gas and she is a speaker of the house who promised she will do something about it if she is elected.

Don't get me wrong. Liberal principles are important as well. But their economic sense is poor. And they only believe in filling their own pockets. John Kerrys networth is 200 million or more. Al Gore is 100 million, same as Clintons. all these people capitalize on poor people and get rich. Obama is no different and will not be different. He will run on ideas of revolution and forget about revolution after he achieves his goal of becoming a president. His net worth is now 0.5 million , note it down and see what happens to it after 4 years. Get real. Why make the politicians rich at peoples expense?

But please note that I do agree with the liberals on several issues. I have been very vocal about it:

- abortion rights for woman (with some conditions)
- same sex partner benefits including health insurance should be recognized by state government (no conditions)
- active euthanasia rights at state level (with some conditions). Note that passive euthanasia is already supported by the constitution (14th amendment)
- stem cell research/other drugs research

I live in a liberal state so I could check each one save active euthanasia. Though i am not sure if it does support one today. However let me tell you that our economy is not doing good. They don't have budget surplus like Alaska LOL. Most of the liberal states in this country's economy are screwed up I believe. I am not trying to point my fingers at them. But may be some one interested can investigate at lengths.

I do not agree with them on raising taxes. Enterpreneurship must be rewarded. Why tax them and jeopardize their businesses? More business means more employment.

Hope I conveyed what I wanted to say.

Found this interesting quote on previous thread:

quote:

---

the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.

---

Before I go, I will share my principle on conclusions: Even if you have failed 2 times in love. Don't give up. The 3rd one must be the one you have been waiting for. Your true love. Similarly even if you have concluded communists are bad after meeting 100s of them. The 101st one can be different and quite unlike whom you have ever met before. So I never conclude. We can never pigeon hole any body.

posted September 06, 2008 05:29 PM            

quote:

---

And those arguments that carried forward died its own death as it had no objective truth in them.

---

That's false.

You think that because Bush inherited a recession from Clinton that the Democrats are bad economically? Why don't you have a look at the budget under Clinton? Why don't you look at the debt under Clinton? Why don't you look at the amount of poverty-income-level people under Clinton and under Bush? Get some perspective.

BR's tax point was the truth.

posted September 06, 2008 05:37 PM            

No need to hyperventilate.

BR's horses has already left the barns.
And he is bent on going reverse gears. Perhaps you missed his other thread. Too slow in catching up with that last left (as in remaining) brain cell

posted September 06, 2008 08:23 PM            

quote:

---

Folks...im takin a break from GU for a while. Too many other things needs my attention. Cheers.

---

We can forever argue and create frictions eternally. I don't have time for that. In the end people only believe what their own eyes sees. So why waste a single moment here? And I am a lover on the inside.

If its considered arrogant and egoistic, so be it. To each its own. Take care.

posted September 07, 2008 02:11 PM            

quote:

---

Before I go, I will share my principle on conclusions: Even if you have failed 2 times in love. Don't give up. The 3rd one must be the one you have been waiting for. Your true love. Similarly even if you have concluded communists are bad after meeting 100s of them. The 101st one can be different and quite unlike whom you have ever met before. So I never conclude. We can never pigeon hole any body.

---

posted September 07, 2008 02:53 PM            

quote:

---

Pid, why do you think that the world by and large supports Barack Obama?

Do you think it's because they are all leftist commies? Or do you think it's an objective assessment of the havoc wreaked by George Bush on the world?

---

Forgive my butting in and answering a question that wasn't addressed to me, specifically, but I cannot resist.

I think the perspective that the "world by and large supports Obama" is probably based on the fact that the world, by and large, are not Americans. I only bring that up as evidence of their general inability to empathize with the American people and the issues at stake. Coming from an unAmerican perspective, one might find it easy to logically deduce that the "solution"/effect/end result of the recent events that have transpired as causalities of our governments' policies is to vote for the other party in the Presidential election. That's the simplest take on it and that's why there is this generalized "world perspective". Unfortunately, it just isn't that simple.

There are so many issues at stake in this election and much of these issues are stemming from (what are perceived to be) globally influential, politically unprecedented events. The world also seems to be paying even more attention to our politics this year because of these events, though that is not evidence of a deep understanding within their perspectives. Just because they aren't Americans doesn't mean their views are absolutely objective. On the contrary, their views are often on the other end of the spectrum.

posted September 07, 2008 03:18 PM            

quote:

---

Voting for the other political party isn't a solution. It's trite, reactionary and a result of sensational thinking based on absolute materiality.

---

Independents do this whenever they get displeased with a party. It's their most common reaction. You saw it when Carter was elected. You saw it when Reagan was elected.

quote:

---

There are so many issues at stake in this election and much of these issues are stemming from (what are perceived to be) globally influential, politically unprecedented events.

---