DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Cynthia on October 17, 2008, 01:12:41 AM
-
I hate to be a bad news bear...but he is going to win over McCain.
McCain just doesn't have enough to pull him through this critical mass event.
I don't know what Obama will do for this nation of ours, but it better be what he has promised so far.
I can see it all now......McCain is going to go down, just like the vietnam war went down.
Good men die in a bad war....A good man will die in this crazy election.
These debates and the pressure to make a new world from the ashes of Bush will bring the Phoenix of Obama to the front.
So, let's just see if he can step up to the plate with all his promises and hopes/dreams for the country.
But, as I see it and I am only making a prediction, Obama will pull this one off.
Every politcal sign in my city hails for OBAMA. Not one sign post for McCain as I drive to work.
So, that's my polling system, folks.
Rude as it is. We shall see. Youth is wasted on the young, as they say.
God bless this country.
-
How do you feel about Dewey?
(http://www.gallerym.com/images/work/big/associated%20press_dewey_defeats_truman_L.jpg)
After 16 years of Democratic administration , everyone knew that there was no hope for a Truman victory.
-
McCain is the past. Vietnam was a lost cause from the git-go: there was nothing to win there, it should never have been fought. It benefited only the arms industry and the officer corps, because it made for lotr os promotions.
McCain will serve out his term, maybe run again. He's not a bad senator from Arizona, but he does not belong in the White House, and Palin is abysmally unqualified to be president. We already have managed to make it through seven years with a hideously poorly chosen clown as VP. No reason to test our luck.
Obama will inspire confidence, put racism behind us, and at last the country will be run by a grown up and not by a stubborn doofus working out issues with his father or a has-been self-proclaimed 'maverick' vet trying to crown his life with the triple crown of Hero, Trophy Wife and the White House.
Obama has shown that he has the demeanor to be president. McCain has shown that he likes to pull stunts. Republican stunts have bankrupted this country. Time to move on.
-
<<After 16 years of Democratic administration , everyone knew that there was no hope for a Truman victory.>>
EVERYONE? Get real - - that was the Chicago Tribune, the most right-wing reactionary major metropolitan daily in the whole country at the time. Known to play fast and loose with the facts.
-
The past repeats itself in the future.
Except when it doesn't.
Parmenides said, "You can never put the same foot in the same river twice". The river changes, and so does the foot.
Events do not repeat themselves. It's more like a kaleidoscope: the same elements reoccur, but in a different relationship to one another.
Anyone think Dewey would have prevented the Korean War? The recession after WWII?
-
We are indeed lucky that no vet of Viet Nam will ever have become Pres now. They were not all at fault, but they all were badly brain damaged by fighting in an evil cause. Some of the real dumbfucks like McCain still believe in it.
-
Don't believe it.
There's no way North Carolina goes for Barry. And, if you're looking at recent polling the gap in within four points. Oh Barry, we hardly knew ya.
-
There's no way North Carolina goes for Barry. And, if you're looking at recent polling the gap in within four points. Oh Barry, we hardly knew ya.
Yes way.
Libbie Dole's goin' down with McCain.
The annoying Mitch McConnell may be retiring soon as well.
You will have plenty of tie to misinform yourself about Obama. Rush will be ranting against him for the next eight years.
If you want to prove you are not a racist, I think Alan Keyes is running for president...apparently he has forsaken the GOP, just like the rest of the country.
http://www.americasrevival.com/ (http://www.americasrevival.com/)
-
>>You will have plenty of tie ... <<
I'll have plenty of tie? Huh? Neck tie? What?
Is the foam coming out of your mouth confusing you? Wipe your mouth and start over Yoda.
-
Plenty of TIME, silly person. Rush stands ever ready to misinform you are to restoke your paranoia, ignorance and hate.
McCain's going DOWN.
Those six golf carts are gonna get a workout, and the moose of Matanuska-Sisisitna need to be afraid, very afraid. Sarah's coming to getcha', and she's one frustrated hunter!
I've heard that November is when you want to shoot that moose. That way, you just plop him in the yard, and chainsaw frozen moosebits off as required, for mooseburgers, moose steak, moose stew, moose chops, moose scrapple, moose soup filet de moose and moose au jus. So after her defeat, Sarah will get back hoe in time to shoot the 2008-09 moose.
-
The issue isn't whether Obama wins North Carolina, the issue is that it is even being discussed. McCain has to win North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Colorado, Virginia - and then needs more.
I don't doubt that McCain can still win, but the fact that Saxby Chambliss and Elizabeth Dole are in trouble speaks volumes right now. These two should be 10-15% ahead right now with no worries. McCain should be fighting Obama over New Mexico and Colorado not Florida and Ohio.
If you want the honest truth (and I doubt that you do) the McCain campaign screwed up in a number of ways:
1. Sarah Palin - awful, awful choice. The base needed energizing? For a presidential campaign in Summer? That's practically conceding defeat. GOP strategists on TV stated that she wasn't ready for the oval office. Senator Shelby was a far superior choice...or why not Linda Lingle for a woman, she has far more experience and won in a Democratic state. The base was going to vote McCain anyway - let them hold their noses and do it.
2. Let McCain be McCain. He visibly winces when he makes personal attacks on Obama. It isn't his style. He doesn't give a damn about Ayers - you can tell when he discusses it. A terribly run campaign where a relaxed McCain would have come across as so much more personable. He should stick with the high road.
3. I don't think that attacking your own party comes across well. The GOP brand may not be selling well, but do people really want someone who constantly talks about his being unpopular with his own party? It sounds petty and not very genuine from someone whose ran as a Republican for nearly 30 years. A candidate for President represents his or her party.
These three things have really sunk McCain in my opinion.
-
So looking forward to Carter II :-\
-
So looking forward to Carter II :-\
Far, far better than Bushidiot III. ;D
-
riiiiiight, with all those gas lines & rationing.....oh, that's right, that was Carter. But with all that rampant unemployment....oh wait, that was Carter too. Well, with out of control inflation......oh wait, that was Carter as well.
::)
-
riiiiiight, with all those gas lines & rationing.....oh, that's right, that was Carter. But with all that rampant unemployment....oh wait, that was Carter too. Well, with out of control inflation......oh wait, that was Carter as well.
::)
Far , far better than war , recession ,outrageous gas prices , almost universal underemployment and utter stupidity and incompetence in the White House.
-
Universal Underemployment?? oy, is it no wonder your class clown credentials are consistently redefined
-
So looking forward to Carter II :-\
I'm not sure how to put this tactfully.
Why should anyone here trust your judgment on this issue Sirs? It so happened that you voted for one of the worst presidents in the history of this nation - not once, but twice. You're a sharp guy and make many good points...but I'll take your views on presidential prognostication for what they're worth considering what you've supported for the last eight years - a complete and unequivocal disaster.
-
Jimmy Carter has surely been our greatest ex-presidents. If I were a betteing man, I would wager that Juniorbush will vie with Bob Dole for performing community service after he is out of the White House. Well, except for the Viagra commercials Dole made. They were sort ofd public service.
Not expecting much from Juniorbush. Maybe a prize for clearing brush on the Crawford Ranch. Maybe an article in the Texas Big Hat and No Cattle Rancher magazine.
-
What does it say about Jsov's judgment, who voted for Al Gore and John Kerry, two men who are so dumb they got outsmarted by George W. Bush?
-
What does it say about Jsov's judgment, who voted for Al Gore and John Kerry, two men who are so dumb they got outsmarted by George W. Bush?
It was really Rove , but who cares now. You are all disgraced by the retardinchiefbutnotforlong
-
>>Why should anyone here trust your judgment on this issue Sirs? It so happened that you voted for one of the worst presidents in the history of this nation - not once, but twice.<<
I'm always amused at liberals ability to see into the future. They are able to translate their delusions into future events. They think because they say Bush is the worst president ever, he is. Of course the left owns the worst president ever, Jimma Carter. It's not even close. Then there's president, "Kiss it," the serial adulterer, serial liar, and rapist Bill Clinton. Let's see, what other democrat presidents are there in the last 50 years ... oh, NONE. George Bush has fought America's enemy's despite the treasonous behavior of democrasts and their sycophants in the media. history will judge that treason much harsher than the man who put America ahead of the lies the trash on the left told about him.
-
So looking forward to Carter II :-\
I'm not sure how to put this tactfully. Why should anyone here trust your judgment on this issue Sirs?
They don't. Just my 2 cents. I see a hard core socialist liberal Democrat that wants to "redistribute" our money, to how he sees fit, screw success. I see an acutely naive foreign policy CnC, who wants to negotiate President to President, with no preconditions with terrorist nations in 1 breath, and ready to unilaterally bomb a different soverign allie, in the other. I see a Democrat majority congress that can't wait to raise taxes, and has no clue of what fiscal responsibility is, outside of decreasing the military budget. I see Carter II.
Only time will tell now, won't it
It so happened that you voted for one of the worst presidents in the history of this nation - not once, but twice.
That'd be your OPINION about him being one of the worst. during his hay day, Federal reserve was raking in the dollars, unemployment remained incredibly low, economy bounced back much faster after 911 than anyone could have imagined, no terrorist attacks on our soil, when if you asked nearly anyone, it wasn't a matter of if, but when they'd hit again.
I actually see him, all things considered a marginal thumbs' up, but by no means Reagan. Disastrously bad at allowing congress to spend like drunken sailors, and poor contingincies for the post Saddam era. But FAR better than Clinton, and we don't even have to mention Carter in the same breath. Remember, I'm one of those that understood the intel at the time of Bush going into Iraq, and that it was the RIGHT thing to do, with what we knew. I'm still expecting to see history view Bush to Iraqis as Lincoln was to the slaves.
-
I'm still expecting to see history view Bush to Iraqis as Lincoln was to the slaves.
Actually, it will record him in the same way the chickens view Colonel Sanders.
-
Yea, that's why we're seeing another Saddam-like dictator using WMD's on his own people......oh wait
-
<<Yea, that's why we're seeing another Saddam-like dictator using WMD's on his own people......oh wait>>
What you're actually seeing is a snapshot of a moment during which the secular Shi'a have the upper hand in the ongoing Iraqi Civil War, with the secular Sunni regrouping and the foreign Wahabbi Sunni on the run, the Iranians backing God knows who and the Americans and British on the cusp of getting the hell out before the shit really hits the fan.
-
No, what you're actually seeing is democracy taking root in a region with so many religious and secular conflicts, it would have been unimaginable to have reached this point, if it wasn't for our post-saddam efforts. Suuni, Shi'a, Kurd, all working together. Still with major disagreements, many that will likely never be resolved, many that'll still ignite violent outbursts, but using government and democratic elections to make decisions, vs that of a ruthless dictator
-
How is this rather puny result worth ten billion dollars a month?
-
Middle East Stability........Priceless
A Democratic Iraq........Priceless
Iran & Syria put on notice........Priceless
Greater security of the U.S.........Priceless
-
That'd be your OPINION about him being one of the worst. during his hay day, Federal reserve was raking in the dollars, unemployment remained incredibly low, economy bounced back much faster after 911 than anyone could have imagined, no terrorist attacks on our soil, when if you asked nearly anyone, it wasn't a matter of if, but when they'd hit again.
I actually see him, all things considered a marginal thumbs' up, but by no means Reagan. Disastrously bad at allowing congress to spend like drunken sailors, and poor contingincies for the post Saddam era. But FAR better than Clinton, and we don't even have to mention Carter in the same breath. Remember, I'm one of those that understood the intel at the time of Bush going into Iraq, and that it was the RIGHT thing to do, with what we knew. I'm still expecting to see history view Bush to Iraqis as Lincoln was to the slaves.
Actually, Carter and Bush had similar idealistic foreign policy views. It was an odd twist for the GOP.
It isn't just my opinion Sirs, the man has the record for lowest approval rating. And you talk about the economy as if he is no longer in office!! He is still the president. What is worse is that we will pay for his terrible leadership for the next two or three years at least.[/b] Not just the Federal Government, but states, and local governments as well. Whether or not Bush gets a thumbs up for Iraq, he will always be known (much as Carter) for getting the middle finger for the economy. He discouraged savings, rode the housing bubble even after it was well known that it was sunk. He'll forever be known for the $1 trillion credit bailout and disastrous inability to lead.
It is my opinion, but I've called it pretty well thus far.
-
>>Why should anyone here trust your judgment on this issue Sirs? It so happened that you voted for one of the worst presidents in the history of this nation - not once, but twice.<<
I'm always amused at liberals ability to see into the future. They are able to translate their delusions into future events. They think because they say Bush is the worst president ever, he is. Of course the left owns the worst president ever, Jimma Carter. It's not even close. Then there's president, "Kiss it," the serial adulterer, serial liar, and rapist Bill Clinton. Let's see, what other democrat presidents are there in the last 50 years ... oh, NONE. George Bush has fought America's enemy's despite the treasonous behavior of democrasts and their sycophants in the media. history will judge that treason much harsher than the man who put America ahead of the lies the trash on the left told about him.
Are you crying Rich? It isn't my fault that Bush is horrid.
-
Actually, Carter and Bush had similar idealistic foreign policy views. It was an odd twist for the GOP.
Yea, Carter was so forward in using the military and increasing its budget. That also explains the military interventions Carter imposed, to help support his foreign policy ::)
It isn't just my opinion Sirs, the man has the record for lowest approval rating.
Yes, it is, and YES, that's just poll taking. I'm referring to actual acts and results, not polling of other people's opinions. sorry, it's just your opinion he's one of the worst. It's my opinion he was marginally good, and that history will judge him even better.
And you talk about the economy as if he is no longer in office!! He is still the president.
And news flash Js.....CONGRESS has a much greater pull on the economy than the president has. They hold the pursestrings, and if you haven't also noticed, the economy started taking its nosedive when the Dems took over congress. That doesn't take Bush off the hook for going along with the insidious spending that congress put forth, but for those of us who know politics a little shrewder than the regular joe on the street, we know that the president and his party, are universally the targets when the economy goes bad, regardless of any effects they had. It's just what is. So you can claim that he has bad poll #'s. You can claim that the economy has tanked now at the end of the term. We both know there's FAR more involved in "laying blame", just much easier (and lazier) to point the finger at Bush
-
McCain's record is like a cat. He has had 8 lives. Could this be his last?
Or could he make this one a new life as our nation's leader? In so many ways, I hope he pulls it off.
I really do.
-
Or could he make this one a new life as our nation's leader? In so many ways, I hope he pulls it off.
He's an old fart who still thinks Vietnam was a great idea. This country has had too damn much of warmongering, warloving imperialist assholes.
He dies and we get Palin, an imbecile who knows less than my cat about the world.
-
>>Are you crying Rich? It isn't my fault that Bush is horrid.<<
I'm not sure how to respond to such creativity and insight.
::)
-
It is my opinion, but I've called it pretty well thus far.
You didn't call anything. You didn't once mention the impending credit meltdown caused mostly by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. You simply spout Democrat talking points after the fact. All you do is vote Democrat, and it doesn't take very much thought.
-
It is my opinion, but I've called it pretty well thus far.
You didn't call anything. You didn't once mention the impending credit meltdown caused mostly by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. You simply spout Democrat talking points after the fact. All you do is vote Democrat, and it doesn't take very much thought.
I most certainly did discuss both the credit crunch and the housing bubble. Go back and look.
I don't do Democrat talking points, as I'm not a Democrat.
-
You didn't call anything. You didn't once mention the impending credit meltdown caused mostly by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. =====================================
The housing credit meltdown was not caused by Frank and Dodd. The Republicans had a hand in it too.
The first error was that mortgages were bundled together and presumable "insured" against default by credit swap bondsw, which were supposed to have value, because they were based on the default rates of years gone by. Then banks began to lend money on what people said they earned, rather than what their W-2 statements said they earned.. Then not even that was required, they just looked up the borrower's occupation in a book or caled an 'expert', and granted the loan.
Both Juniorbush and the Democrats were all for this "Ownershop Society" thing, as Juniorbush called it. No banks were forced to accept any loans. but low interest rates encouraged them to approve tons of these thing, just to make up in numbers what these loans could not make them on the rates. Of course, the rates on these were higher than they were for more secure loans. In several months, the sh*t hit the fan, when these lenders began to default, and many more went into default when the teaser rates on the adjustable rate mortgages went up, and ther lenders could no longer pay their installments. The Credit swap arrangements turned out to not be insurance after all. The entire system was a house of cards based on the assumption that house prices would continue to go up forever, which was no longer the case when the number of foreclosed houses exceeded the demand of people who could get a mortgage.
The responsibility was everyone's and no one's, since there was no control on who could be issued loans. The banks formerly would not lend money to insolvent people, but when it became possible to bundle the loans up and peddle them to other banks, "insured" by credit swaps as secure investments, banks went ape lending money, speculators went ape flipping houses to people who could not afford houses, and builders went ape building houses. It was a perfect storm of activity based on the false assumption that house prices would go up forever.
-
>>The housing credit meltdown was not caused by Frank and Dodd. The Republicans had a hand in it too.<<
Interesting sentence.
First Frank and Dodd didn't cause the meltdown, then Republicans had a hand in it TOO. (?)
To deny Dodds and Franks culpability in this is to deny reality. Period.
-
That'd be your OPINION about him being one of the worst. during his hay day, Federal reserve was raking in the dollars, unemployment remained incredibly low, economy bounced back much faster after 911 than anyone could have imagined, no terrorist attacks on our soil, when if you asked nearly anyone, it wasn't a matter of if, but when they'd hit again.
I actually see him, all things considered a marginal thumbs' up, but by no means Reagan. Disastrously bad at allowing congress to spend like drunken sailors, and poor contingincies for the post Saddam era. But FAR better than Clinton, and we don't even have to mention Carter in the same breath. Remember, I'm one of those that understood the intel at the time of Bush going into Iraq, and that it was the RIGHT thing to do, with what we knew. I'm still expecting to see history view Bush to Iraqis as Lincoln was to the slaves.
Actually, Carter and Bush had similar idealistic foreign policy views. It was an odd twist for the GOP.
It isn't just my opinion Sirs, the man has the record for lowest approval rating. And you talk about the economy as if he is no longer in office!! He is still the president. What is worse is that we will pay for his terrible leadership for the next two or three years at least.[/b] Not just the Federal Government, but states, and local governments as well. Whether or not Bush gets a thumbs up for Iraq, he will always be known (much as Carter) for getting the middle finger for the economy. He discouraged savings, rode the housing bubble even after it was well known that it was sunk. He'll forever be known for the $1 trillion credit bailout and disastrous inability to lead.
It is my opinion, but I've called it pretty well thus far.
Actually, it is just your opinion because 'what Presidents are forever known as" changes.
I think that you are giving government as a whole a giant pass and hanging this on the President. I remember 8 years ago all the hoopla about Roe v. Wade and religion being taught in schools and that certainly didn't happen. Trust me, if it were so simple as to have one culprit in bad times the bad times would be much shorter.
I think you can hang a big ole " I helped" ribbon on the press. I have never seen so many liberal, multi orgasmic newscasters creamin their jeans over bad news.
-
To deny Dodds and Franks culpability in this is to deny reality. Period.
============
You know nothing but what Rush tells you, which is to say, nothing true.
-
>>You know nothing but what Rush tells you, which is to say, nothing true.<<
Creative? Insightful?
Naw. When they start in on Rush it's just the template. He can't argue the facts, so he insults.
It's the best he can do with limited skills.
-
YOur limited skills are what causes you to constantly quote Rush.
All you do is ape talkshow radio. It's pathetic.
-
>>YOur (sic) limited skills are what causes you to constantly quote Rush. All you do is ape talkshow radio. It's pathetic.<<
I suppose this is another one of your "facts."
Like I said, there's not much you can do besides throw out these petty little insults, or shouting, YOUR GOING DOWN! Uh oh, that really scares me ... I'm going down ... goodness me.
-
You know Xo, it gets really tiring and demonstrates a significant amout of debate weakness to constantly try to apply Rush to an answer you don't like. It's kinda like Tee's claming racism, where none exists in the conversation
-
<<It's kinda like Tee's claming racism, where none exists in the conversation>>
LOL - - Gotta learn to be more like sirs - - just pretend it doesn't exist.
When I claim racism, sirs, it's for a damned good reason. Even when you like to pretend it's not there. Especially when you like to pretend it's not there.
-
>>When I claim racism, sirs, it's for a damned good reason. Even when you like to pretend it's not there.<<
What would the left do without racism? It would put the poverty pimps out of business. Can't have that can we. No, I imagine we'll we hearing about racism a hundred years from now. Two hundred even. So many ism's, so little time.
-
<<What would the left do without racism? It would put the poverty pimps out of business. >>
I know America first-hand and I know America's a racist country. Anyone who says it's not is all fulla shit. Even Americans, if they're honest, will admit that it IS a racist country.
-
What would the right do without racism?
It would be less able for the wealthy that hire people to play one race off against the other to pay all their workers less money. It is always helpful to have a large unemployed underclass waiting for any miserable jobs that might become available. It is useful when the unemployed have less in common with the underpaid, as it makes union organization and other group actions less possible.
-
How many jobs have unions created?
-
What would the right do without racism?
It would be less able for the wealthy that hire people to play one race off against the other to pay all their workers less money. It is always helpful to have a large unemployed underclass waiting for any miserable jobs that might become available. It is useful when the unemployed have less in common with the underpaid, as it makes union organization and other group actions less possible.
What would the right do without racism?
--------------------------------------------------
Hmmm, Seems to me that your statement here is full of a bias (bordering on racism).
Everyone is racist in one way or another.
"The Right" is not solely responsible for falling into any sort of category of racism or for that matter, falling into the category of anti American.
"The Left" is equally not responsible for being anti newborn.
I hate to hear such a broad stroke judgement against any team, XO.
Come on now, isn't it time that we work together and find a way to make this nation fair, the earth cleaner and work on finding a way to rid the hate towards one another in this nation?
Simple response? Perhaps, but children can also come up with a simple answer and adults brush the stroke aside.
Just today I was listening to a program on NASA tv. The recent shuttle disaster in 2005 could have been prevented if the scientists had applied a bit of High School Physics to the problem of the styromfoam panel that blasted into the wing of the craft that eventually exploded across the State of Texas.
Simplicity is not something to take lightly.
We are never going to settle a problem with anger and disdain for the "other guy".
Not that I haven't expressed such sentiments, myself, mind you.
But, I do believe you will see eventually that to come to a place of common ground and logical settlement of the issues at hand, we will have to revisit the basics.
My goodness, we have had to revisit the basics in eduation as of late. Phonics/vs/ whole language education.
But it works.
Simple, cooperative resolutions to any problem will win any election in the end.
Bush was a wind fall winner as prez..... and his term did more harm than good.
That's not to say that these men will do any better....
or worse.
There is a new horizon of politicians on the docket. There has to be.
Perhaps Obama will change things around.
Lordie, I have to admit, he just might be the one to pull this off.
-
<<How many jobs have unions created?>>
You might not want to go there, BT.
If the idea is that unions by asking for higher wages and safer work conditions and more family-friendly working hours are discouraging businesses from expanding and taking on new help, the solution would be to place the means of production in the hands of the state, remove BOTH the profiteers and the profit motive and start to operate the business for the benefit of its workers and not its owners.
-
You might not want to go there, BT.
It was a simple question.
Other than organizational staffing are they a net job creator?
-
<<Other than organizational staffing are they a net job creator?>>
When the U.S. had a net positive trade balance, the conventional answer was "Yes," since they ensured that the American worker would have the funds to buy the products of America's families and the leisure time to enjoy them. Today that same reasoning would probably lead to the conclusion that they would be net creators of jobs in China.
-
Today that same reasoning would probably lead to the conclusion that they would be net creators of jobs in China.
So they really aren't doing much good domestically unless the employees are employed by the government.
-
<<So they really aren't doing much good domestically unless the employees are employed by the government.>>
No, unions can make all the difference between safe and unsafe work environments, fair and unfair labour practices, living wages and starvation wages etc.
Your question was limited to job creation.
My take on that aspect is, if there's potential for an industry to employ many more people but at higher wages than are presently being paid, if private industry can't do it, the means of production should be nationalized industry-by-industry till you have all factories operating at capacity with an appropriate workforce at appropriate wages. And no more corporate profits flying out the window in the form of $300 million golden parachutes.
-
No, unions can make all the difference between safe and unsafe work environments, fair and unfair labour practices, living wages and starvation wages etc.
Only in union shops. The government is really the first line of defense.
-
<<Only in union shops. The government is really the first line of defense. >>
The tort trial lawyer is probably the first line of defence, unions second and government third. Government only acts to co-opt the unions.
-
The tort trial lawyer is probably the first line of defence, unions second and government third. Government only acts to co-opt the unions.
All three make their livings off the sweat of others. The GOVT is the biggest gang in the hood.
-
Everyone is racist in one way or another.
I have to disagree completely with this notion Cindy. While everyone is subject to the constraints of their historical time period and to some degree the prominent intellectual schools of thought at those times...I would strongly disagree that "everyone is racist." Why would you believe this to be so?
-
<<It's kinda like Tee's claming racism, where none exists in the conversation>>
When I claim racism, sirs, it's for a damned good reason. Even when you like to pretend it's not there.
Like in the Blonde video? Like in Bt's reference to throw out the ACORN registrations? In other words, crying racist, when THERE ISN'T ANY. Yea, we know the "damned good reason". It's to try and bully the debate, try to label the other person a racist, or nazi, or fascist, or whatever demeaning term (that has now lost all sense of significance, by your perseverative knee jerk application of it), to try and put them on the defensive
And news flash big fella, at no time has anyone here ever claimed that racism doesn't exist. But if you want to perpetuate that lie, by all means, continue
-
<<It's kinda like Tee's claming racism, where none exists in the conversation>>
LOL - - Gotta learn to be more like sirs - - just pretend it doesn't exist.
When I claim racism, sirs, it's for a damned good reason. Even when you like to pretend it's not there. Especially when you like to pretend it's not there.
I think sometimes the good reason is a paucity of other ideas.
Racism still causes the US problems but we work hard on it , where in the world are there more integrated neighborhoods ? More protections in law for minoritys? More tolerance in practice?
It does not good to cite a country with less diversity than we have , you don't need tolerance where love is natural, you need tolerance for the diffrent.
-
Racism still causes the US problems but we work hard on it , where in the world are there more integrated neighborhoods ? More protections in law for minoritys? More tolerance in practice?
You could name damn near anywhere in Latin America or Europe. You really need to get out more.
The new way to segregate neighborhoods is by zoning, in the event you were unaware.Zoning by price of home, number of bedrooms, banning rentals, there are dozens of ways.
The ONE BIGGEST THING you could ever do to battle racism is to vote for Obama, and you know this.
And yet you drone on about "strict constructionists" and nonexistent socialism and other crap like you were actually a ultimega zillionaire or the hack he hired for doing his PR.
-
<<Racism still causes the US problems but we work hard on it , where in the world are there more integrated neighborhoods ? >>
Easy. Brazil. Cuba.
<<More protections in law for minoritys? >>
Ya got me there, plane. I'm a big admirer of the U.S. Constitution. Greatest political document in the history of the human race. Too bad you don't live up to it.
<<More tolerance in practice?>>
In practice? Hard to say. I'd put the U.S. practices somewhere in the middle, maybe the more honest answer is, I just don't know and neither do you.
<<It does not good to cite a country with less diversity than we have >>
Brazil's probably MORE diverse than you are and Cuba is pretty diverse as well. So's Canada, especially if you factor in our West Coast.
-
I think sometimes the good reason is a paucity of other ideas.
Racism still causes the US problems but we work hard on it , where in the world are there more integrated neighborhoods ? More protections in law for minoritys? More tolerance in practice?
It does not good to cite a country with less diversity than we have , you don't need tolerance where love is natural, you need tolerance for the diffrent.
Toronto is a very diverse city and somewhat renowned for tolerance.
-
Cuba has abolished discrimination a lot more effectively than the US. Here in Miami, the old white Cubans discriminate more against Black Cubans than they did under Batista, and get away with it. Ask any Black Cuban.
-
Racism still causes the US problems but we work hard on it , where in the world are there more integrated neighborhoods ? More protections in law for minoritys? More tolerance in practice?
You could name damn near anywhere in Latin America or Europe. You really need to get out more.
The new way to segregate neighborhoods is by zoning, in the event you were unaware.Zoning by price of home, number of bedrooms, banning rentals, there are dozens of ways.
The ONE BIGGEST THING you could ever do to battle racism is to vote for Obama, and you know this.
And yet you drone on about "strict constructionists" and nonexistent socialism and other crap like you were actually a ultimega zillionaire or the hack he hired for doing his PR.
I would be very careful with Europe. While I'm a proponent of government systems such as Denmark's, and Europe is way ahead of the colonies in many ways - there are areas of Europe where racism is a massive problem. If you go to Northern Italy, parts of Austria, or find any BNP enthusiast in the UK and you'll find a racist every bit as nasty as anyone you can find in the Deep South, West Virginia, or some western militia group. In fact, I daresay the European racist is far more dangerous as they tend to live behind a curtain of European civility and enjoy the freedom of far-right electability in most of those nation's Parliaments.
-
The ONE BIGGEST THING you could ever do to battle racism is to vote for Obama, and you know this.
Yea, vote for a fella based on race is so not racist ::)
-
Yea, vote for a fella based on race is so not racist
The problem with this country is that we have so many twisted people like you that think that this is a clever remark.
-
I heard a figure the other day. 98% of Black folk are voting for Barry Hussien Obama.
98 percent! Can you imagine if 98 percent of White folks admitted to voting for McCain?
So vote for Barry and prove you're not a racist. Only a libtard would think that way.
-
Yea, vote for a fella based on race is so not racist
The problem with this country is that we have so many twisted people like you that think that this is a clever remark.
Great rebuttal, Xo. Simply brilliant in its depth ::)
-
Well, it is becoming clear that Obama is going to win. I can see four years ahead......Palin againt Obama.
Or, Hillary vs Palin.
That's the race I would like to see.
-
Hillary vs Palin.
That's the race I would like to see.
============================
Doubtful. Palin is a ditz. She'll fare worse than Geraldine Ferraro. They will blame her for McCain's defeat.
It's back to the Great White North for Pain. Get out the mukluks, feed the huskies, fire up the Iditarods.
-
Palin will sink into obscurity like Dan Quayle, Geraldine Ferraro and Walter E. Miller, only to resurface in late-night television ads for Depens or liquid age-spot removers twenty years hence. However, Levi 'n Bristol, their progeny and their next seven or eight spouses will continue to make supermarket tabloid history for many, many long years ahead, so Sarah's name won't be completely erased from our collective North American memory.
-
I gotta disagree with my fellow lefties.
Bill Kristol personally recommended the Palin choice. I suspect the neo-cons pushed for her to get her name out there so that they could then treat as tabula rasa and embue her with all their craziness for running again in the future.
She may lose to someone with some common sense in the GOP primary but I don't think we've seen the last of Caribou Barbie.
-
Hillary vs Palin.
That's the race I would like to see.
============================
Doubtful. Palin is a ditz. She'll fare worse than Geraldine Ferraro. They will blame her for McCain's defeat.
It's back to the Great White North for Pain. Get out the mukluks, feed the huskies, fire up the Iditarods.
I really don't think she's a ditz. Bill Clinton was the country bumpkin Gov. who couldn't shut up once upon a time. He turned his Ditz and gift of over gabbing into the White House and the rest is bump-hump history.
Palin is strong, honest and damn good at what she does. But, I find it interesting that folks look at her as a woman first and a strong Governor 2nd.
-
Oh please.
Clinton was a Fullbright scholar and graduated at the top of his class.
Palin managed to barely get a BA degree from five colleges in six years.
She can see Russia from her porch, she says, and that makes her an expert.
The fact is that the only part of Alaska where you can see Russia from is thousands of miles from Juneau and over a thousand from Wasilla. It's way out on a forgotten island where only some Eskimos live.
Time will tell about Sarah Palin. But she is a whole lot higher on the ditz scale than anyone else who has ever run for any national office.
-
Racism still causes the US problems but we work hard on it , where in the world are there more integrated neighborhoods ? More protections in law for minoritys? More tolerance in practice?
You could name damn near anywhere in Latin America or Europe. You really need to get out more.
The new way to segregate neighborhoods is by zoning, in the event you were unaware.Zoning by price of home, number of bedrooms, banning rentals, there are dozens of ways.
The ONE BIGGEST THING you could ever do to battle racism is to vote for Obama, and you know this.
And yet you drone on about "strict constructionists" and nonexistent socialism and other crap like you were actually a ultimega zillionaire or the hack he hired for doing his PR.
Well I have been to Panama , a lot of Carribbian islands , Halifax, Spain , Italy , Sudan ,Dijoubuti,Jordan, Baharain, Scotia , Kenya . That is about all the other countrys I went to I don't want to claim because the visit was short.
However , I do read a lot of National Geographic.
The one biggest thing you could do to fight racism is to stop advocating voting by race , there are Mayors and Govenors all over the country that have received the vote of their citizens that don't share their race , but this works a lot better when the result is a good and capable fellow is therreby put in office. Atlanta has had some good luck with Mayors , Macon has had good and bad luck with its Mayors , Marshall was good , Ronnie Tomson was not and Jack Ellis was not , can you guess the race by whether I think they were good mayors?
-
Scotia? Do you mean Nova Scotia? Scotia is a Latinized name for Scotland, although the most common Latin name for it was Caledonia.
In Panama, neighborhoods are integrated. Families are integrated: Chinese, East Indians, West Indians, American Indians, Spanish, Colombians, Dutch, Jews, everyone. Most Caribbean Islands have integrated neighborhoods.
I have no idea which mayors have served Macon better. If I lived there, I would know. But the election of Obama would signify that racism is no longer a major factor in the US. Besides, McCain is just a rerun of Juniorbush. He croaks and we get true incompetence.
-
Scotia? Do you mean Nova Scotia? Scotia is a Latinized name for Scotland, although the most common Latin name for it was Caledonia.
In Panama, neighborhoods are integrated. Families are integrated: Chinese, East Indians, West Indians, American Indians, Spanish, Colombians, Dutch, Jews, everyone. Most Caribbean Islands have integrated neighborhoods.
I have no idea which mayors have served Macon better. If I lived there, I would know. But the election of Obama would signify that racism is no longer a major factor in the US. Besides, McCain is just a rerun of Juniorbush. He croaks and we get true incompetence.
I threw Scotia in just for fun , and I misspelled it wouldn't you know ,since you spotted it you deserve an explanation, so I looked it up ("SOCOTRA") it is an island and I didn't even meet its native permanant population ,but when we met the Soviet Fleet there it temporaily had a big population in its lee ,that was a big event for me but it would take a rediculously long explanation to explain why.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/ym.html (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/ym.html)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/2260938/CIA-World-Factbook-Reference-Map-middle-east (http://www.scribd.com/doc/2260938/CIA-World-Factbook-Reference-Map-middle-east)
Socotra is not Greek in origin, but derives from the Sanskrit dvipa sukhadhara ("island of bliss").
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socotra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socotra)
-
Scotia? Do you mean Nova Scotia? Scotia is a Latinized name for Scotland, although the most common Latin name for it was Caledonia.
In Panama, neighborhoods are integrated. Families are integrated: Chinese, East Indians, West Indians, American Indians, Spanish, Colombians, Dutch, Jews, everyone. Most Caribbean Islands have integrated neighborhoods.
I have no idea which mayors have served Macon better. If I lived there, I would know. But the election of Obama would signify that racism is no longer a major factor in the US. Besides, McCain is just a rerun of Juniorbush. He croaks and we get true incompetence.
In Atlanta a succession of Black Mayors have served well mostly IN Macon there has been one and he was very divisive to the community , just being an elected Black man did nothing to unite Macon , Macon is almost exactly 50% black so it could use some unification across those lines , but don't depend on this unless the Mayor is interested in doing something about it.
In Atlanta I really admired the efforts of Andrew Young he did exactly as you hope BHO will do and served the whole community .
But will BHO reduce racial tention? We may have to find out ,but that he is likely to get 95% or better of the black vote will not help, John Murtha calling his own constituents Redneck racists won't help and threatening the USA with the worlds opprobrium for not electing BHO will not unite us much either.
All in all I think that his being Black is helping him get elected but won't help him govern , perhaps he has what it takes in his mind and heart , but you just can't convince me that he has what it takes in his skin.
-
Oh please.
Clinton was a Fullbright scholar and graduated at the top of his class.
Palin managed to barely get a BA degree from five colleges in six years.
She can see Russia from her porch, she says, and that makes her an expert.
The fact is that the only part of Alaska where you can see Russia from is thousands of miles from Juneau and over a thousand from Wasilla. It's way out on a forgotten island where only some Eskimos live.
Time will tell about Sarah Palin. But she is a whole lot higher on the ditz scale than anyone else who has ever run for any national office.
Is is not Clinton who started the ball in motion which brought this country in the financial mess we're in? ...Making it easy for people to attain loans...
HE wasn't LOOKING OUT of his own window to notice the slow burn of terrorism rolling into mainstreet.
He was too busy charming others. No amount of degrees or a personal accolades seemed to make any difference when it came to the job he didn't do for this nation. He used his "so called intelligence" to wiggle out of "sticky situations".
Oh yea, and Palin is THE ditz? ::)
Billy could have put more money into the military, but he apparently made MORE cuts securing this country. I have always said that the war in Iraq, albeit not a wise call, would not have dragged out as long as it has if we had had a better military plan. With what resources??
Clinton was a "nobody" before his name came up to center stage----Palin is at least wise, smart, passionate about the truth, and strong enough to say NO to the good old boys!
We shall see ....words to keep close to the vest not to be taken lightly. Keeps us on our toes in clear focus for the next time around. Woulda Coulda Shoulda...words to use wisely for furture reference.
Clinton might have been a scholar, but he is more like the Hare in the race against the Tortoise.
His cocky attitude almost brought him to his knees--on the verge of being kicked out of office. ....
Oh yea, he's someone to praise.
There are many strong, and intelligent women in the political world. I'm sure someday we shall see a woman change the course of this country at the highest level.
Palin is one to watch.
-
Aside from Cindy's personal tirade against Clinton, whom I have many problems with, but his sleeping partners are not one of them - she does begin a point I have always been fascinated with.
There are many strong, and intelligent women in the political world. I'm sure someday we shall see a woman change the course of this country at the highest level.
Of course we have already seen women change the course of not only American history, but world history. That is not in question. Will we see a female president of the United States? Of course.
What amazes me in the modern Republican Party is that the most keenly intelligent members are never presented on a national stage. Before the hateful replies begin, I don't mean that the Democrats are all smarter by any means. Both parties have their highly intelligent academics and both have their "who would you rather have a beer with?" candidates. And no, having a graduate degree is not an automatic qualification for being highly intelligent or intellectual.
Yet, if we look at the primary race we can see that someone like Mitt Romney shows a lot of intelligence (whether one agrees with him or not). Senator McCain is someone who is by no means an idiot, but is an average guy who had he not been shot down over Vietnam would likely have been a career captain in the Navy and eventually found to a desk job in Washington. Senator Obama, on the other hand, is an exceptionally intelligent individual who has shown a ruthlessness in his political acumen (read about his quick climb in the pugilist world of Chicago politics).
I wonder if some of that has to do with the anti-intellectualism and anti-elitism notions that prevail with Republican voters, especially amongst evangelicals. Sarah Palin is a lightweight. It has nothing to do with her gender, her hobbies, or her state of origin. It is her. She has a ruthless political side, but such little intelligence to back it up. And one has to ask, why didn't they select a Republican woman with much more intelligence and a better standing? Why not Lingle of Hawaii? She has more experience and in a Democratic state. How many GOP congresswomen are there? None of them are smarter, better candidates?
This idea of "executive experience" is justification after the fact. The GOP's first President was just a Congressman and he inherited a hell of a lot worse crisis than anything we've faced since. Running a business? Have you ever met some of these business owners? Have you sat down with some of them and really talked? Some are brilliant. Some are friggin' morons and you wouldn't want them running your local parks, let alone the country.
I'm not buying it. I have nothing against Palin personally, but politically she's a lightweight. And what really amazes me is that the GOP has this knack of electing and selecting sub-par candidates. Not that the Democrats are shining stars, but they did well in 2000 and I think they've done well this year.
-
anyone wonder if the kiss and make up for Hillary was instigated by Obama's deep pocket and her large campaign debts?
She is a savvy woman and me thinks that if she could stay married to Bill to keep her career on track, she sure as hell could take a campaign promise from her party.
-
I think being a senator from New York is a really good job for a politician.