Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:37 PM
 
1,518 posts, read 2,761,059 times
Reputation: 336

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Where did you gather that?

Global U.S. Troop Deployment, 1950-2005
U.S. to Withdraw 70,000 Troops Based Overseas - Los Angeles Times

Bush pulled back more troops than ever before excluding Iraq and Afghanistan of course.
That's like saying I was a decent guy before I was a crook.

You do realize that troop levels are not the end all to military spending to overseas. Go find me a report that shows how much we SPEND (obviously taking inflation into account) now as opposed to before.

So your contention is what exactly? Our Gov't spends less on the Military Complex than before? Your 1st statement is asinine. Paul would do anything but put MORE tax $ into the military (then what is already spend). He was the only candidate on the GOP trail that called for a complete and immediate military withdrawal from Iraq and also currently doesn't buy into this 'sphere of influence' garbage in Russo/Georgia conflict.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:37 PM
 
Location: in a house
124 posts, read 506,951 times
Reputation: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by 58robbo View Post
i've kinda swung back and forth on the whole Mccain Obama thing for sometime now and have almost decided on Obama. As a Ron Paul fan i would describe myself as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal and my priorities are in that order. believe me i am not delighted by the choices but i suppose i have to deal the hand i've been dealt.

fiscally i see no difference between the two. they are both going to squander my hard earned dollars, the difference i believe is that obama actually means to do something useful with it(even though he is creating another layer of entitlements which is scary) rather than hand it to haliburton execs, georgia(the russian one who dubya just handed $10 billion to) et al. i also think obama wants to wind down the war. mccain is just being naive if he believes that the temporary easing in fighting means that the surge is working.

so i don't really see much difference fiscally, i have to swing my vote over to social issues. it is here where the dems win my vote. mccain palin want to teach their kids creationism that's fine, i'll teach my kids something else thanks. although i would be more than happy to teach my kids about the birds and the bees i'd be just as happy for the school to do it. evidently palin's little chat fell on deaf ears. i don't really think that the abortion issue has a place on the presidents list of agendas but i am strictly opposed to palin's hardcore stance (this is one area where i disagree with Ron Paul). as for the whole war on drugs. i feel that the dems have a slightly firmer grip on reality where this topic is concerned. personally i'd welcome an outright legalisation but i'm not going to get that with either candidate so i'll choose the dems to be a bit more accommodating. hopefully by selecting a half black half white president we can ease all this racial bitching. also while i don't buy into this whole global warming thing i feel that palin's flagrant dismissal of environmental issues is troubling and highly irresponsible.

another thing i'd like to say is that the only reason we still have some sway with opec is because we still have reserves in dakota, california, the gulf and alaska. if we drill there like there's no tommorrow we'll be in a much weaker position in 20 years time. strategically i think we should use theirs first.

there's my thinking. welcoming some quality debate

i nearly forgot the most important thing, THE PATRIOT ACT! mccain voted for it and Obama against. Habeas corpus has been around for several hundred years and it's inexcusable that in "The Land Of The Free" we no longer subscribe!
Listen, not for nothing but McCain/Palin is the only reasonable way to vote.
Obama will raise taxes on corporations and they will just pass it on to us. If you work for or buy from a corporation then you will be the one paying for it. If the company can't afford the tax increase then they might cut back by firing you and or moving out of the country but one way or another your going to pay. Voting for Bob Barr is just a waste but better him than Obama. I just heard of a poll taken in Europe
that said they would like Obama to win. Why, you might ask? Another resent poll in Europe ask if they would love to see the America weaker and less of an influence in the world. WOW! Personal I like America being the most powerful country on earth! Other wise we would all be speaking a different language like German, Japanese, Chinese or Russian and not very happy ether!
This planet is a dangerous place to live and the best and safest place is America!
Speak softly and carry a big stick!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:41 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,967,105 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by o boy View Post
Listen, not for nothing but McCain/Palin is the only reasonable way to vote.
Obama will raise taxes on corporations and they will just pass it on to us. If you work for or buy from a corporation then you will be the one paying for it. If the company can't afford the tax increase then they might cut back by firing you and or moving out of the country but one way or another your going to pay. Voting for Bob Barr is just a waste but better him than Obama. I just heard of a poll taken in Europe
that said they would like Obama to win. Why, you might ask? Another resent poll in Europe ask if they would love to see the America weaker and less of an influence in the world. WOW! Personal I like America being the most powerful country on earth! Other wise we would all be speaking a different language like German, Japanese, Chinese or Russian and not very happy ether!
This planet is a dangerous place to live and the best and safest place is America!
Speak softly and carry a big stick!
Comrade Commissar McCain supported the nationalization of Fraudie Mac and Phoney Mae.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:41 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,450,111 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by tekka-maki View Post
That's like saying I was a decent guy before I was a crook.

You do realize that troop levels are not the end all to military spending to overseas. Go find me a report that shows how much we SPEND (obviously taking inflation into account) now as opposed to before.

So your contention is what exactly? Our Gov't spends less on the Military Complex than before?
Not at all....

I was replying mainly to: "this includes the continually growing military complex overseas."

I actually don't agree with it but in terms of money spent over seas it will lower it quiet a bit. Obviously excluding the wars. The troops will be leaving Iraq sooner than later thanks to the years flying by like never before (that's a shot at how life is flying by). Some will go to Afghanistan to help aid which I think both candidates will do.

It wasn't a shot at ya.....just a response. You got to start somewhere if your going to lower Military cost but still stay ahead in the game. Admittedly until we leave the wars we will probably be behind.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:46 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,967,105 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Where did you gather that?

Global U.S. Troop Deployment, 1950-2005
U.S. to Withdraw 70,000 Troops Based Overseas - Los Angeles Times

Bush pulled back more troops than ever before excluding Iraq and Afghanistan of course.
The military industrial complex runs bases in one hundred and change countries. Bush has declared a base be formed in Africa. The military is one of the biggest pork recipients in the country, and no one says boo so as to not appear unpatriotic.

Troops escalations (the term "surge" is politically correct nonsense) then pulling back is not considered cost cutting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:48 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,967,105 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
Not at all....

I was replying mainly to: "this includes the continually growing military complex overseas."

I actually don't agree with it but in terms of money spent over seas it will lower it quiet a bit. Obviously excluding the wars. The troops will be leaving Iraq sooner than later thanks to the years flying by like never before (that's a shot at how life is flying by). Some will go to Afghanistan to help aid which I think both candidates will do.

It wasn't a shot at ya.....just a response. You got to start somewhere if your going to lower Military cost but still stay ahead in the game. Admittedly until we leave the wars we will probably be behind.
Don't you get it? We've run out of money! We've blown our wad with the socialization of Fraudie and Phoney and have ballooned the deficit over 100%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:54 PM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
5,238 posts, read 8,788,937 times
Reputation: 2647
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak View Post
Quite right.

Our constitution calls for national defense. It doesn't not call for nation building.
It also allowed for only land-owning white guys to vote.

And slavery.

Times change. People get smarter.

Last edited by Art123; 09-10-2008 at 07:05 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:55 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,450,111 times
Reputation: 4799
2005



http://www.heritage.org/research/nat...y/cda06-02.cfm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,967,105 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art123 View Post
It also called for only land-owning white guys to vote.

And slavery.

Times change. People get smarter.
The constitution mandated slavery? WOW!!!

It also explicitly called for land owning whites ONLY to vote?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2008, 06:57 PM
 
1,867 posts, read 4,077,439 times
Reputation: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by o boy View Post
Listen, not for nothing but McCain/Palin is the only reasonable way to vote.
Obama will raise taxes on corporations and they will just pass it on to us. If you work for or buy from a corporation then you will be the one paying for it. If the company can't afford the tax increase then they might cut back by firing you and or moving out of the country but one way or another your going to pay. Voting for Bob Barr is just a waste but better him than Obama. I just heard of a poll taken in Europe
that said they would like Obama to win. Why, you might ask? Another resent poll in Europe ask if they would love to see the America weaker and less of an influence in the world. WOW! Personal I like America being the most powerful country on earth! Other wise we would all be speaking a different language like German, Japanese, Chinese or Russian and not very happy ether!
This planet is a dangerous place to live and the best and safest place is America!
Speak softly and carry a big stick!
Wow, you sound so ignorant and xenophobic, if you even know what that means.

That trickle down theory was debunked years ago as a total failure. Give me a break, corporations pass their profits onto their executives, directors and shareholders not to you in the form of lower prices. They charge what the market will bear and what they can get away with.

Like the oil companies, for example, sounds like you believe they would be forced to raise their prices even higher if they paid some taxes for the licenses they get to drill on public land..despite that their profits are in the billions while Americans are drowning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top