Originally Posted by deanb
Dean, for me at least, Obama's suport for gay rights, abortion and his stance AGAINST the Iraqi war keeps me voting democratic this time. I do understand your concern about Obama's lack of experience. But compared to McCain, who has the experience and would do MASSIVE harm to this country, especially with his support of the Iraqi war, keeps me from ever thinking of voting for him.
I understand what you are saying. But since this is an election year, and the stakes seem to be higher than ever before, the chances of keeping politics out of the main discussion board will be VERY difficult.
i wrote a long winded reply but then i saw this
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...s_n_87493.html
my boyfriend was joking last night about some moron on tv
that supports obama and says, with conviction and certainty, what exactly obama will do and how he'll react as president
what?
but of course he makes me feel good and he inspires us
bla bla bla
Back to reality
the president of the united states can only veto laws
he can't pass those laws
congress does, made up of senators and local representatives
they can extinguish all his ideas with a simple fuck you by
passing everything with a 2/3 majority and tell him to stick it
on the oval office chair and sit on it
and whoever thinks obama as president will end the iraq war immediately?
dream on
there's a reason they're building that huge embassy over there
and everything has been decided anyway
Dean, I think you and I pretty damn close on this election. I still have my fingers crossed for a backroom deal. But if Obama is the democratic candidate, I will vote for him. McCain simply can not be trusted to appoint the right judges to the supreme court. In my eyes this is the number one issue this year. There are a few liberal justices that would like to retire but won't because they would be replaced by some gawd aweful right winger. Stevens doesn't hasn't have that much longer to live. I think Ginsburg wants to call it quits too.
ICQ: 69711443
Email: joe@pridestudios.com
Earn $30 per signup or 60% Recurring promoting Gay Reality Sites
Buy or Sell Gay Traffic at GayAdPros.com
Remember that episode of The Simpsons, when the two aliens, Kang and Kodos, kidnapped presidential candidates Bill Clinton and Bob Dole and assimilated their bodies in order to run in their place? The day before the election, Homer exposed them and the American public discovered that the presidential candidates were both cycloptic, reptilian aliens with long slimy green tentacles.
"You foolish earthlings forget," said Kodos, "This is a two party system. You have to vote for one of us!"
"But what if we vote for a third party candidate?" says a faceless voice in the crowd.
"Oh, sure, you can do that," the Kang replies, "and throw your vote away!" At this point both aliens laugh maniacally.
In the end, Kang wins and the human race is enslaved and forced to build a giant death ray.
People shouldn't vote out of fear. Keeping the U.S. a two party system will never move us towards a more fair democracy. But we're stuck in a Catch-22: the third party candidates never get votes because everyone thinks they'll never win, but they'll never win because they don't get votes. It doesn't seem like people will ever get out of the habit of voting for the lesser of two evils, be them Democrats and Republicans, or slimy space aliens.
The bottom line is that if you don't have the balls to vote for whose right, then you should not vote at all.
So, who would you vote for if the republican was Pro-Life and anti-gay, and the democrats had a pro-life and anti-gay candidate as well? It's not as far fetched as you think. The democrats have started courting the right wing...and there are plenty of democrats who think that gay rights is what is hurting the party. Democrats for Life continue to grow every day...Would you still choose to vote for one of them?
TropixxxCash.com is a CCBill affiliate program for the male spanking and punishment site TropixxxVIP.com.
:whip:
Sorry, but he was a former POW who was all anti-torture until he saw the the hardline Conservatives wanted a pro-torture president. Now he's all about the waterboarding.. sold himself out.. that to me is spineless and corrupt. It's also stupid considering how transparent the decision was.
As far as senile, sorry.. he's a dottering old man who's probably not going to live for the 8 years it'll take for him to run the country into the ground.
Meh.. if he became president, he'd probably have the world destroyed in about 3... so maybe he'd live for that.
He'd be a HORRIBLE president who would cave on just about everything. He'd be worse than Nancy Pelosi and he'd be in the back pocket of the Conservative right in about 3 minutes.
I'd much rather roll the dice and take the chance with Barrack Obama than allow a man like him to just sell us out for support from the Moral Majority.
Jasun Mark. Crass of the Titans.
Run the country into the ground? Baby, we done been driven and run out of gas.
Don Mike
DonMikeCali@gmail.com
McCain is nothing like Bush, and he wouldn't make appointments like Bush. He is the most liberal republican to get the nomination in years!
ICQ# 200-385-093
Amen, so good of a post it needs to be quoted and repeated!
ICQ# 200-385-093
I am getting the idea that Obamas opinion of the war has something to do with his elect ability. At this point, does anyone really want a committed withdrawal date? I don't think that would be possible or wise. I am glad Obama thinks it okay, but that again shows his lack of experience and knowledge. Hillary's plan doesn't have a set day, but it does get troops out. I think if you just took them all out, you would not only see a collapse of the government there, but you would also see it become an Afghanistan of terrorism. Regardless of the support of the war or not, the job has to be finished up, and for the record, I am against the war.
ICQ# 200-385-093
And what are you basing that on? He says he would make EXACTLY the same appointments as Bush.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-k...m_b_87101.html
A close look at John McCain's Senate voting record on judicial confirmations makes it painfully clear that progressives need to ignore the rantings of the Ann Coulter crowd and believe John McCain when he says he will listen to Sam Brownback and appoint judges like Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia. On judges, McCain's no moderate: if given the chance, he will appoint justices that move an already conservative Supreme Court sharply to the right.
So he votes with his party, that doesn't mean that is what he will do, after all, you have him trying to get every ounce of support he can get from his party. He has voted against Bush on several issues. Have you seen Barack Obama's voting record? Oh way, its mostly filled with non votes.
ICQ# 200-385-093
Almost every Senator's record is full of NV's.
McCain... http://www.votesmart.org/voting_cate...an_id=S0061103
Obama... http://www.votesmart.org/voting_cate...hp?can_id=9490
Clinton... http://www.votesmart.org/voting_cate...p?can_id=55463
I'll admit that I didn't count the non-votes on each of the above pages but it looks like Obama and McCain have more non-votes that Clinton. It looks like McCain NV's as often as Obama and Clinton votes more often. Sure, I can see why this would be a factor (depending on what the votes were for) in choosing Clinton over Obama. But why would this make any liberal vote for McCain over Obama?
Btw Dean, I really like you.
But I'm having a hard time being civil,. My original post did not at all resemble what I actually posted above. I don't want to make any more enemies.
Clinton is getting totally shafted this election cycle! The press has fucked her inside out and the slick talker is getting all the votes. She's given all of her adult life to public service and now Obama steals it from her. Like he couldn't wait his turn and give her what she's earned. ego ego ego
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks