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've come to the conclusion that Sanganista is really Bill Gates in disguise. Think about. Ever read a Microsoft help file? Lots of fancy technical words and terminology but it never really tells you anything useful.
Gates went to Harvard and is a smart guy. Saggy is clearly articulate, which I appreciate. Gates dropped out. Gates is a liberal. Gates fancies himself an economist. Gates never answers the hard questions in any interview. Hmm. That you Bill?
I am not a Democrat nor an Obama supporter but based on the crap I heard on FOX News Radio today, I could NEVER vote for the Republican party. I have heard more than a few idiots say that Sarah Palin is a great candidate, that she is a very qualified, etc. How ABSURD is this? The woman has a Journalism degree from U of Idaho, no understanding of International Affairs, Economics or even simple World Geography. As much as I don't agree with Obama and his policies, I heard a local talk show host say that Palin's qualifications are better than Obama's. Hmm, U of Idaho vs Harvard Law School. How dumb can these people be? Anyways, Obama has done a terrible job so far but I could never support a simpleton, anti-intellectual idiot like Palin.
Anyone who thinks Sarah Palin is more qualified than anyone in politics is an IDIOT!!
Who is "we"? Would that be the same "we" that has been waiting oh so long now for right-wingers to stop behaving like a bunch of whiny spoiled brats and six-year old sore losers? Is that the "we" you mean to refer to? Or is it rather the "we" who slog daily through the slurry of idiotic lies, distortions, and misrepresentations posted here after being pumped into the heads of the pliant by the right-wing disinformation media? It's sort of hard to know just which "we" you might be thinking of here.
As for McCain, let's start with his pro-life stance, including his narrow support for stem-cell research, but also his support for the death penalty. Then, under the circumstancs, it might have been well to think about his economic acumen, as reflected by his own self-criticism perhaps, but also in his calling for the Bushie tax cuts for the rich to be made permanent while opposing any additional funding for Social Security. Then there was his health care plan which called for the abolition of state insurance requirements among other bad ideas. And there was always his insistence on ratcheting up the war in Iraq, and his support for federal school vouchers. Then of course there were the matters of his running mate and the degree of wisdom demonstrated in that choice.
On the plus side, he did favor cap-and-trade, and had at least at one time had some half-way sensible ideas on immigration. But that was hardly anywhere close to being enough to offset the downside baggage. 2008 was an easy decision. Obama simply outclassed McCain across the board.
All of those are ideological positions. You did not answer the question, Bill.
LOL. I don't know McCain's position on whether 2 plus 2 equals 4. Would that have been a non-ideological enough position for you?
Oh, by the way, your usual insincerity is showing...
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.
