president 2008

[comander zao]

i dont follow politics that much. but just curous for any of you with strong ideas. Barak obama vs John mccain. post your ideas and believes.

[agapooka]

People with "strong ideas" may not settle for an either-or scenario.

Of course, what difference does it make? Yes, one of those will be the President in 2008, simply because not too many people refuse to settle for such a fallacy.

[Acronon]

It doesn't really matter which one wins or loses mate, they both suck, lol.

We no longer get qualified candidates these days we just get those that want to be in office so that they can have their name in the history book.

[Evilevi777]

can either be worse than bush? i really hope not

[Iƒrit]

bah they have the same foreign policy.

[comander zao]

if obama wins he'll be remembered for being the 1st black. not for what he does in office. not like the president has any big impact in politics anymore. our government is so huge that they do all the work.

[Juliette]

Which is pretty much why Obama won't win.
- Inexperienced.
- Black.
- Young, could be most people's brother.
- PR-wise not a good investment.
- Hillary as sidekick.
- Spent from fighting Democrats.
- Months of campaigning for his own group.


McCain
- Experienced Senator.
- White as can be, but with appreciation for the 'other races'.
- Over 50, this is good for presidents, as they can actually appeal to large portions of the population as a father figure. Could be most people's father.
- PR-wise growing to be more and more of a profitable investment.
- No memorable sidekick, all focus on Teh John.
- Ready to start fighting Democrats.
- Reasonably comfortably elected within Republicans.




And oh.. amusement abounds:
[spoiler][/spoiler]

[Iƒrit]

funny thing is Ron Paul has most of the republican votes, and if the republician party would realize that Ron Paul is acually taking more of Obamas voters, when voters realize that there is no difference between voting McCain or Ombama, then McCain could possibly do on his own. And like Auriel said, IMO McCain would be the better choice between the two, EXPERIENCE.

Americans are waking up slowly and realizing that the constitution need to be restored, that goverment needs to loose most of its power (essenicially what they call, localized goverment), that voting any other canidate that isnt willing to restore the America Idealogy of our found fathers is going to destory the nation we are. Ron Paul has the American concerns in his campaign, he is the true patriot. Join the campaign for liberity, and help restore the nation.

[Haka]

Well as I sit reading this, I of course have to throw my 2 cents in...even if its 2 cents. I hope my response doesn't invoke the wrath of the moderators to close this topic, but here is MY opinion.

We as Americans today, have very few choices when it comes to selecting candidates. This is mainly because we breed an individual called a "career politician". Essentially this person knows nothing but politics, and generally for the most part, only gets their information about what the working class does and has to deal with is through advisors. Before, we had presidents who were soldiers, business men, people who had an understanding of how things worked down in the muck and grime with the working man. Now days, the only dirt politicians see is the mud flinging during campaigning.

Another thing that makes the political process bad is the hard core Republicans and Democrats who vote primarily due to their party affiliation. Who cares whether the candidate is qualified or not, they just vote cause they won't vote anything else other than their party. <-- That is what i call "Sheeple"

K...now on to the current Candidates:

All I can say is, whomever should win the Whitehouse, needs to think this whole War on Terrorism through...and im not talking about trying to appeal to the Democrats, or the people, but what is the logical course of action to pursue, whether its the popular choice or not. That is the problem, too many politicians want to base choices on what will get them the most votes next election year, not what the right choice or course of action is.

Now on to current administration:

I am not going to bash Bush because of the choices he has made. Why, and i know it comes easy for everyone to armchair quarterback the situation, but until you are placed into the position to have to make those choices, you will have no clue of what you would have done at that point in time. Now some of his choices or courses of action, i don't agree with either, but to be honest with you, I would have much rather have him sitting in the whitehouse when the WTC towers were hit, than the John Kerry's, Al Gore's, or the Clintons. I didn't mention Obama, because i really do believe he probably would have responded with force. The others are questionable.

We all new the war on Terrorism was going to be long, we usually fight conventionally while, while terrorists fight a guerrilla war. Whether we were right or wrong in invading Iraq, I can careless, the whole middle east is infested with a disease called "Extremism". All the "extremist" can care about is how many innocent people can they take out to get to Allah and have all the virgins they can have.

Now, how the American, British, and European people fit into this, is the fueling of the Terrorist Motivation. By protesting, wanting to pull out, claiming that we are responsible for the innocent lives lost, this just fuels their need to create more destruction, to fuel the anti-war protest, to therefore place pressure on politicians to make choices based upon Liberal cowards threats, yes i said it, or be forced to be removed from office.

Frankly, I do agree with one thing about being in those middle eastern countries and that is we dump way too much money in those blackholes of corruption. We should pull out, and with Russian, and the Nuclear Proliferation, Dump every Nuke we have into that sand pit. The rest of the Muslims living in the foreign countries, give them ultimatums, either assimilate into the countries they are living in, or leave and return to the radiated waste pit they call Mecca. They can carry their Sharia Law back there and they can quit trying to make their own laws in other countries. (A big problem in the UK and France).

Ladies and Gentlemen, be proud of the countries you live in no matter what. If you want the country to change, then you have to make that step to try and change it...don't sit around and wait for it to happen. Go into organizations with fresh ideas, don't point out whats wrong and say its screwed up....tell them how its wrong and offer ideas to correct it.

I am proud to be serving in the military, whether the protester that i protect supports me or not. All I ask is remember those soldiers who fight for you freedoms to ensure that you can have a say in what goes on in your country.

I support the war, I support my government, even though the choices made I may not agree with, I will still be standing there to defend. And remember everyone, just because you have talked with a couple of soldiers who don't want to be there, that doesn't constitute the opinion of everyone else. Plus, if they joined for the college money, then they were wrong in the first place! In America, you sign on a dotted line, volunteering yourself to protect this country from enemies foreign or domestic, you get called you go. There should be no question. you agreed to it. Quit complaining.

One last note,

Why all the dissent in America, cause we are fat, lazy, selfish, and self righteous people. We want things right now and at this moment, and if we don't get it, we complain. Bunch of whine babies. ie Liberals and some Republicans. We don't work for things anymore, we want them handed to us, like this war, we want it over as soon as it starts and that won't ever happen. Make a difference people, be a solution, not a problem!

The Redeemer

*Sorry if i dragged this out or if I offended you*
*If i offended you, suck it up! Quit trying to have everything politically correct and enjoy the fact that you have someone telling you their opinion as opposed to sugar coating things!"

[Iƒrit]

Well as I sit reading this, I of course have to throw my 2 cents in...even if its 2 cents. I hope my response doesn't invoke the wrath of the moderators to close this topic, but here is MY opinion.

We as Americans today, have very few choices when it comes to selecting candidates. This is mainly because we breed an individual called a "career politician". Essentially this person knows nothing but politics, and generally for the most part, only gets their information about what the working class does and has to deal with is through advisors. Before, we had presidents who were soldiers, business men, people who had an understanding of how things worked down in the muck and grime with the working man. Now days, the only dirt politicians see is the mud flinging during campaigning.

Another thing that makes the political process bad is the hard core Republicans and Democrats who vote primarily due to their party affiliation. Who cares whether the candidate is qualified or not, they just vote cause they won't vote anything else other than their party. <-- That is what i call "Sheeple"

K...now on to the current Candidates:

All I can say is, whomever should win the Whitehouse, needs to think this whole War on Terrorism through...and im not talking about trying to appeal to the Democrats, or the people, but what is the logical course of action to pursue, whether its the popular choice or not. That is the problem, too many politicians want to base choices on what will get them the most votes next election year, not what the right choice or course of action is.

Now on to current administration:

I am not going to bash Bush because of the choices he has made. Why, and i know it comes easy for everyone to armchair quarterback the situation, but until you are placed into the position to have to make those choices, you will have no clue of what you would have done at that point in time. Now some of his choices or courses of action, i don't agree with either, but to be honest with you, I would have much rather have him sitting in the whitehouse when the WTC towers were hit, than the John Kerry's, Al Gore's, or the Clintons. I didn't mention Obama, because i really do believe he probably would have responded with force. The others are questionable.

We all new the war on Terrorism was going to be long, we usually fight conventionally while, while terrorists fight a guerrilla war. Whether we were right or wrong in invading Iraq, I can careless, the whole middle east is infested with a disease called "Extremism". All the "extremist" can care about is how many innocent people can they take out to get to Allah and have all the virgins they can have.

Now, how the American, British, and European people fit into this, is the fueling of the Terrorist Motivation. By protesting, wanting to pull out, claiming that we are responsible for the innocent lives lost, this just fuels their need to create more destruction, to fuel the anti-war protest, to therefore place pressure on politicians to make choices based upon Liberal cowards threats, yes i said it, or be forced to be removed from office.

Frankly, I do agree with one thing about being in those middle eastern countries and that is we dump way too much money in those blackholes of corruption. We should pull out, and with Russian, and the Nuclear Proliferation, Dump every Nuke we have into that sand pit. The rest of the Muslims living in the foreign countries, give them ultimatums, either assimilate into the countries they are living in, or leave and return to the radiated waste pit they call Mecca. They can carry their Sharia Law back there and they can quit trying to make their own laws in other countries. (A big problem in the UK and France).

Ladies and Gentlemen, be proud of the countries you live in no matter what. If you want the country to change, then you have to make that step to try and change it...don't sit around and wait for it to happen. Go into organizations with fresh ideas, don't point out whats wrong and say its screwed up....tell them how its wrong and offer ideas to correct it.

I am proud to be serving in the military, whether the protester that i protect supports me or not. All I ask is remember those soldiers who fight for you freedoms to ensure that you can have a say in what goes on in your country.

I support the war, I support my government, even though the choices made I may not agree with, I will still be standing there to defend. And remember everyone, just because you have talked with a couple of soldiers who don't want to be there, that doesn't constitute the opinion of everyone else. Plus, if they joined for the college money, then they were wrong in the first place! In America, you sign on a dotted line, volunteering yourself to protect this country from enemies foreign or domestic, you get called you go. There should be no question. you agreed to it. Quit complaining.

One last note,

Why all the dissent in America, cause we are fat, lazy, selfish, and self righteous people. We want things right now and at this moment, and if we don't get it, we complain. Bunch of whine babies. ie Liberals and some Republicans. We don't work for things anymore, we want them handed to us, like this war, we want it over as soon as it starts and that won't ever happen. Make a difference people, be a solution, not a problem!

The Redeemer

*Sorry if i dragged this out or if I offended you*
*If i offended you, suck it up! Quit trying to have everything politically correct and enjoy the fact that you have someone telling you their opinion as opposed to sugar coating things!"

my biggest problem with the war is;
1.) is never ending, its a war on a illusinary force.
2.) The war was declare UNCONSTITUTIONALLY.

[Eternity]

my biggest problem with the war is;
1.) is never ending, its a war on a illusinary force.
2.) The war was declare UNCONSTITUTIONALLY.

1.) Is a nation any more non-illusionary as "terrorism"? Certainly the idea of a nation is as hard to fight as the idea of "terrorism"..
Take for example Israel. Let's keep one thing straight, I'm a huge pro-Israel lobbyist. But they're also THE example of how the idea of a nation cannot be killed. Ever since Titus and his torching of Jerusalem, heck, dating from the Assyrian Empire back, Jews have been longing for a nation of their own, even though they had one for 1500 years or so. Now, in our time, such a dream has become reality. Again, the IDEA of the nation is much older as the nation itself. The nation itself could be vanquished, again. But the idea will remain as it has for 4000 years.
The above to prove the point that the ideas of terrorism and nations are both hard to fight. A war against minds is always a nasty business.. but it has to be fought. Basic survival instincts dictate that all harmful influences need be removed. This primarily includes terrorists, terrorist thought and eventually the nations supporting these terrorists.
2.) History lesson.. so was WWII. War is unconstitutional in nature. But more to the point, you know this thing called presidential decree? Basically covers the whole "unconstitutional" angle. Whether that constitution was right to begin with is another debate entirely.


Haka! Brother! Wise words, spoken in an understandable and calm manner.
Valid arguments, harsh conclusions, but that is the price we pay for being clear in our thoughts.

[Iƒrit]

my biggest problem with the war is;
1.) is never ending, its a war on a illusinary force.
2.) The war was declare UNCONSTITUTIONALLY.

1.) Is a nation any more non-illusionary as "terrorism"? Certainly the idea of a nation is as hard to fight as the idea of "terrorism"..
Take for example Israel. Let's keep one thing straight, I'm a huge pro-Israel lobbyist. But they're also THE example of how the idea of a nation cannot be killed. Ever since Titus and his torching of Jerusalem, heck, dating from the Assyrian Empire back, Jews have been longing for a nation of their own, even though they had one for 1500 years or so. Now, in our time, such a dream has become reality. Again, the IDEA of the nation is much older as the nation itself. The nation itself could be vanquished, again. But the idea will remain as it has for 4000 years.
The above to prove the point that the ideas of terrorism and nations are both hard to fight. A war against minds is always a nasty business.. but it has to be fought. Basic survival instincts dictate that all harmful influences need be removed. This primarily includes terrorists, terrorist thought and eventually the nations supporting these terrorists.
2.) History lesson.. so was WWII. War is unconstitutional in nature. But more to the point, you know this thing called presidential decree? Basically covers the whole "unconstitutional" angle. Whether that constitution was right to begin with is another debate entirely.


Haka! Brother! Wise words, spoken in an understandable and calm manner.
Valid arguments, harsh conclusions, but that is the price we pay for being clear in our thoughts.

1.) Im not gonna arguee with peoples opinions, so lets agre to disagrre.
2.) NEW FLASH - presidants swear an oath to uphold the constitution.

[Haka]

Thank you,

And that is why I placed my opinion on here. I know both sides can argue some valid points, but i wanted to put it into a perspective that didn't cater to anyones feeling but my own.

[Eternity]

my biggest problem with the war is;
1.) is never ending, its a war on a illusinary force.
2.) The war was declare UNCONSTITUTIONALLY.

1.) Is a nation any more non-illusionary as "terrorism"? Certainly the idea of a nation is as hard to fight as the idea of "terrorism"..
Take for example Israel. Let's keep one thing straight, I'm a huge pro-Israel lobbyist. But they're also THE example of how the idea of a nation cannot be killed. Ever since Titus and his torching of Jerusalem, heck, dating from the Assyrian Empire back, Jews have been longing for a nation of their own, even though they had one for 1500 years or so. Now, in our time, such a dream has become reality. Again, the IDEA of the nation is much older as the nation itself. The nation itself could be vanquished, again. But the idea will remain as it has for 4000 years.
The above to prove the point that the ideas of terrorism and nations are both hard to fight. A war against minds is always a nasty business.. but it has to be fought. Basic survival instincts dictate that all harmful influences need be removed. This primarily includes terrorists, terrorist thought and eventually the nations supporting these terrorists.
2.) History lesson.. so was WWII. War is unconstitutional in nature. But more to the point, you know this thing called presidential decree? Basically covers the whole "unconstitutional" angle. Whether that constitution was right to begin with is another debate entirely.


Haka! Brother! Wise words, spoken in an understandable and calm manner.
Valid arguments, harsh conclusions, but that is the price we pay for being clear in our thoughts.

2.) NEW FLASH - presidece swear an oath to uphold the constitution.

2.) News flash - a presidential decree is always constitutional. The whole thing is a constitutional concept. Technically, the president could decree a change in the constitution. That would be immediately overturned by Senate, Congress and what not, followed by impeachment, but still, he could do it. And if he had proper reasons, obvious to everyone, that would not even be a given.

I hate to do this, but I resort to Wikipedia:

U.S. Presidents have issued executive orders since 1789. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution and the statement "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" in Article II, Section 3. Most executive orders are orders issued by the President to US executive officers to help direct their operation, the result of failing to comply being removal from office.

Wars have been fought upon executive order, including the 1999 Kosovo War during Bill Clinton's second term in office. However, all such wars have had authorizing resolutions from Congress. The extent to which the president may exercise military power independently of Congress and the scope of the War Powers Resolution remain unresolved constitutional issues, although all Presidents since its passage have complied with the terms of the Resolution while maintaining that they are not constitutionally required to do so.

So it is a long standing debate issue within the USGov. I think we can agree to disagree then, Ifrit?

Edit: 1.) lol.. uncanny simile. We're agreed.

[Haka]

[/quote]
1.) Im not gonna arguee with peoples opinions, so lets agre to disagrre.
2.) NEW FLASH - presidants swear an oath to uphold the constitution.[/quote]


I would like to think that Presidents will uphold the constitution by any means necessary.

As for rights, I believe they are a priviledge, while they are by Human nature something that we should all have without threat of losing them, we live in a world where people love power, and to have power is to deprive people of their rights. Therefore we have people employed to defend those rights, ready to die to ensure we hold those rights, never to lose them, that makes them a priviledge.

And I am sorry to throw movie quotes into this, but i couldn't think of anything else that best describes how i feel about this when people claim that their rights are violated:

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Whose gonna do it? You? I have more responsibility here than you could possibly fathom. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. And that my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. I know deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you don't want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then question the manner in which I provide it. I prefer you said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand to post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

This was edited to take out some of the movie aspects....but I believe it still proves the point.

If you want the whole quote...let me know...lol It came from the movie "A Few Good Men"