Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm voting for obama although he might be inexperienced (however you want to define that), he's educated enough to handle the position..what determines experience anyway? having your grubby hands on taxpayer money for 2 decades?? washington IS broken.. therefore why on earth would we want to elect a career politician? they're part of the problem... Its America, we tell our kids that anyone can be president.. we don't tell them to start a career in politics wait it out a few decades learn the "ropes" so you can be president.. you don't have to be in office to know whats going on and how to handle it.. being in office just means you know about the perks, lobyists and special interests...
Obama wasn't my first pic.. and I don't really think McCain is a terrible choice either.. but I'm going with new blood...
It's not only his inexperience but his poor judgement. Wright, Rezko, etc. etc. He's the consumate politician, though he claims to be different. I don't trust him OR his judgement. But, I do know he'll raise taxes, on everyone who pays taxes, regardless of what he claims.
Trust, experience, ability to make quick and good decisions, successful background counts a ton, and McCain has them all.
I cannot trust Obama, he cannot make a good decision and has to many skeletons in his closet that we have yet found out about.
.
So if we haven't found out about these skeleton, how do YOU know they exist? You know something we don't or are you making a hasty generalization?
IMO Obama appears to be the lesser of two evils. Obama has at least been in crappy neighborhoods to have a slightly better opinion of how to fix them. McCain is a seventy something year old pro war crooner. I don't care how smart you are or how qualified you are I don't want a 70 something man driving a car much less running the country.
No to offshore drilling
Yes to funding public schools
No to rebuilding Iraq with crooked American contractors
Yes to rebuilding this nations infrastructure
Yes to alternative fuel techonology
If we take care of our problems at home and learn to protect ourselves at home we won't need to show the world how bad we are by invading every country we don't like.
You right wing nut jobs need some of Cindy's stash.Is Ambassador Ed Peck anti American? How about Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson? Because a black man said it he is labeled anti-American by you and those warmongering cowards who choose to "sit out this one" when being drafted yet they are so patriotic with their unabated hatred of anything different of their "ideal society"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmonellie
Awe...that's cute. Low info voter. Get that from the Dailykooks?
So, to follow your logic...To call Lee Harvey Oswald anti-american when he murdered served the country just like McCain?
Oh, the outrage on the left. Pathetic. Your boy is going down.
And, now it's official. We can call anyone a "boy". It's not racist! Because your All American Hero Jimmy Carter called the Messiah a boy!
You absolutely may, especially since you did so without being a jerk, which seems to be a common problem here, so thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queens2QueenCity
If I may offer a counterpoint to your bold
1. Obama does want to spend domestically by fixing our crumbling infrastructure.How can the gov't take our tax dollars and rebuild Iraq when we have bridges falling apart and levees being breached? I understand that he wants to spend domestically, but my point is that he cant say that "instead of" spending $10B a month on the war he would spend it on bridges and roads. Its just borrowed money, we need to stop spending it. To accomplish the goals he wants (which I agree with) he needs to drastically cut other spending and waste, including the war. I get the impression that he thinks its ok to just stop spending on the war and spend it here, its just not that easy.
2.Everyone hates paying taxes because we all feel they are too high.Yet businesses can whine and pay nothing?They already are shipping American jobs overseas so how exactly are those tax breaks benefiting the averge American? I agree, nobody likes taxes, but even more so we hate to see the money wasted. However, what I said was that we need to lower AND enforce the taxes for business. There are also plenty of economists who have given evidence to show that lowering tax rates for all (business and individuals) you actually generate more tax revenues because more spending and more investment activity happens.
3.SS has become a huge liability because this administration hasn't kept its fat, crooked fingers out of the cookie jar.Now only the crumbs are left and Bush whines about it being insolvent and wants us to privatize it. Most Americans probably don't pay much attention to their 401k's as it is. I cant get behind creating a giant social program that isnt sustainable just because "people dont pay attention" I hate to say it, but if you are that lazy, you dont deserve it. I do however think we need a system for people who are not CAPABLE of doing it...those are two different things. As Americans, one of our biggest problems is our economy and the complete lack of financial understanding of the majority of the population. That is the root of our problems...teach basic finance in all K-12 public schools. People are much more capable of planning for their own needs rather than relying for a one size fits all national program.
4.What kind of marriage is the one where one allows their partner to buy a multi-million dollar home/investment property and not allow you to know. Pair of shoes? Yes. A new car radio? Maybe. But that is not the life of the ordinary American. If these are investment properties, which I think is the case for most, then I dont see an issue. I'm sure most husbands/wives couldnt tell you the names or number of stocks in their spouses 401k. But again, I just dont see this as an issue...there are so many other things we can worry about, this is just a distraction that doesnt move us towards solutions for the real problems..
Since you are so clear on my candidates energy policy can you please explain your candidate's?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmonellie
Why are you "of the belief that he is pro nuclear"?
His sticking point is disposal. Which makes the opiton unavailable. Which makes his silly replies about "considering" nulear power null and void. Which makes him ANTI NUCLEAR. Which he doesn't have the nerve to say, as he tries to pander to EVERYONE and have no real beliefs.
It's not only his inexperience but his poor judgement. Wright, Rezko, etc. etc. He's the consumate politician, though he claims to be different. I don't trust him OR his judgement. But, I do know he'll raise taxes, on everyone who pays taxes, regardless of what he claims.
All politician's raise taxes. Why doesn't Senator McCain tell the US taxpayer he will raise taxes?
The scandal will cost the American taxpayer around 1.4trillion dollars in the end. - S & L
Location: Just East of the Southern Portion of the Western Part of PA
1,272 posts, read 3,707,644 times
Reputation: 1511
Quote:
Originally Posted by kuvopolis
Obama's platform states that those making $200,000 or less will not be taxed more heavily.
I never remember him mentioning rainbows, unicorns, and pixie dust. Nice try, though. He wants to invest heavily in alternative, clean energy.
So does McCain, but he is at least reasonable enough to understand that we need to tap our own oil supplies NOW to ease the price of gasoline for the next 10-20 years until we can actually determine what those "alternative, clean" energy sources actually are.
Oil isn't going away anytime soon, so we should do everything we can to utilize our own oil supplies while we research the "clean" fuels.
Dems talk about plans of "clean" and "renewable" energy, but usually have nothing of any real substance to add. Hence the funny reference to rainbows, unicorns, and pixie dust.
So does McCain, but he is at least reasonable enough to understand that we need to tap our own oil supplies NOW to ease the price of gasoline for the next 10-20 years until we can actually determine what those "alternative, clean" energy sources actually are.
Oil isn't going away anytime soon, so we should do everything we can to utilize our own oil supplies while we research the "clean" fuels.
Dems talk about plans of "clean" and "renewable" energy, but usually have nothing of any real substance to add. Hence the funny reference to rainbows, unicorns, and pixie dust.
There aren'ty many viable options for clean or renewable fuels because this lazy a*s administration won't put any money into it. Trust me, offer the auto industry in America a 100 million dollar prize for the first company to produce a 100 mile per gallon car and it will be done in less than 6 months.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
