Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Pleasant Valley
    Posts
    639
    Quote Originally Posted by Radix View Post
    Do you get help from your parents with all of this sophisticated Internet posting stuff?
    Oh, a poster in pastel (sweetie) green. You could be fun! Trust me, I'll remember you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member AlmostThere's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    A Great Red State
    Posts
    1,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Water Closet View Post
    They're correct in that there is a large group of moderate Republicans who voted for Obama due to Palin's nomination as VP, c.f., Christopher Buckley. Moreover, a large group of Independents who were formerly Republican would probably vote third party or not vote at all if Palin is the 2012 nominee. I, for example, had every intention of voting for McCain and was a strong supporter of him on this board. However, after the VP selection, I ended up doing a write-in for my Senator.
    If I may ask, what do you think of your write-in vote now? Personally I can't think of any candidate who would have been worse than Obama. But I knew that even before Iowa.
    Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Pleasant Valley
    Posts
    639
    Quote Originally Posted by AlmostThere View Post
    If I may ask, what do you think of your write-in vote now? Personally I can't think of any candidate who would have been worse than Obama. But I knew that even before Iowa.
    I'm quite comfortable with it, thanks. I happen to agree with a number of things Obama has done on the social front, i.e., reversing the federal funding ban on stem cell research, reversing the Mexico City policy On the economic front, he's continued the Bush/Paulson policies of bailouts and interference in the business operations of affected institutions (see Paulson and BoA's purchase of ML). I'm pretty confident that McCain, given his fundamental ignorance of economics, would not have done better. His rapprochement with Europe, our natural allies, is a good thing in the area of foreign policy (better than Donny's extremely stupid "old Europe," "new Europe" comment).

    However, all is not flowers and smiles. Obama's preliminary thoughts regarding universal health care concern me. He's also going to raise my taxes (and that will severely affect both my girlfriend and me). I'm not happy with his vacillation on the missle defense shield.

    So, it's a mixed bag -- social issues good, foreign policy mixed, economics (including taxes) bad. Do I think McCain/Palin would have done better? Absolutely not. And, as people here know my feelings regarding Palin and as they can get extremely emotional about the subject, I think that's about all I'll say concerning her.
    Last edited by Water Closet; 04-25-2009 at 09:43 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member AlmostThere's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    A Great Red State
    Posts
    1,920
    Quote Originally Posted by Water Closet View Post
    I'm quite comfortable with it, thanks. I happen to agree with a number of things Obama has done on the social front, i.e., reversing the federal funding ban on stem cell research, reversing the Mexico City policy On the economic front, he's continued the Bush/Paulson policies of bailouts and interference in the business operations of affected institutions (see Paulson and BoA's purchase of ML). I'm pretty confident that McCain, given his fundamental ignorance of economics, would not have done better. His rapprochement with Europe, our natural allies, is a good thing in the area of foreign policy (better than Donny's extremely stupid "old Europe," "new Europe" comment).

    However, all is not flowers and smiles. Obama's preliminary thoughts regarding universal health care concern me. He's also going to raise my taxes (and that will severely affect both my girlfriend and me). I'm not happy with his vacillation on the missle defense shield.

    So, it's a mixed bag -- social issues good, foreign policy mixed, economics (including taxes) bad. Do I think McCain/Palin would have done better? Absolutely not. And, as people here know my feelings regarding Palin and as they can get extremely emotional about the subject, I think that's about all I'll say concerning her.
    What do you base your opinion of Palin on? Have you done research into her time as Governor of Alaska? I think I can safely say you could not have formed an informed opinion relying only on press coverage prior to the election. A blind man could see that the news media was determined that Obama was going to be elected. When McCain chose Palin, a huge new energy was brought to his campaign. Palin electrified the crowds. This was a threat to an Obama victory so she had to be destroyed and the news media happily acted the assassin. If you look at the first election Obama ever ran in, you'll see he succeeded in getting elected by having the other candidates removed from the ballot. This man was brought up in Chicago politics. Nuff said on that point.

    What had Obama accomplished prior to being selected President? His time as a U.S. Senator was primarily spent running for President. His only record we can actually see is as a state Senator. But considering he cast 130 votes 'Present', not Yes or No, but Present, we still don't have a clear picture. Everyone seems to gush about what an intelligent man he is. How can anyone say that considering we have absolutely no clue as to how well he did in school? Isn't that the usual barometer? Good grades + good school = intelligent and educated person. Do you happen to know if he was an 'A' student or did he squeak by the skin of his teeth? I have no idea nor do I know anyone who knows the answer to that question. People say what a wonderful speaker he is. My take would be that he is a wonderful reader. The very few times I've seen him speaking off the cuff, he did not impress me at all. While I have zero respect for Bill Clinton, that hick from Hope could blow Obama away in public speaking (not reading, but speaking).

    You claim he has brought a rapprochement with our natural allies. What do you base that on? As I recall, he came home from Europe with absolutely no concessions or commitment from our 'natural allies' in out fight against man-made disasters, or in recovering from this economic crisis. All I have seen or heard is 1) he wants to basically disarm this country and remove our superpower status so everyone will like us, 2) redistribute the wealth which would destroy the economic engine which makes us the envy of the world.

    I will concede this; Sept 2008, when Paulson and Bernake told Congress and Bush that unless they acted the world was going to come to an end, I wish to God Bush had said, "We'll just have to start from scratch then". There were things I REALLY did not like about Bush. That is one I don't think I would ever forgive him for blowing.
    Better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Pleasant Valley
    Posts
    639
    Quote Originally Posted by AlmostThere View Post
    What do you base your opinion of Palin on? Have you done research into her time as Governor of Alaska? I think I can safely say you could not have formed an informed opinion relying only on press coverage prior to the election. A blind man could see that the news media was determined that Obama was going to be elected. When McCain chose Palin, a huge new energy was brought to his campaign. Palin electrified the crowds. This was a threat to an Obama victory so she had to be destroyed and the news media happily acted the assassin. If you look at the first election Obama ever ran in, you'll see he succeeded in getting elected by having the other candidates removed from the ballot. This man was brought up in Chicago politics. Nuff said on that point.

    What had Obama accomplished prior to being selected President? His time as a U.S. Senator was primarily spent running for President. His only record we can actually see is as a state Senator. But considering he cast 130 votes 'Present', not Yes or No, but Present, we still don't have a clear picture. Everyone seems to gush about what an intelligent man he is. How can anyone say that considering we have absolutely no clue as to how well he did in school? Isn't that the usual barometer? Good grades + good school = intelligent and educated person. Do you happen to know if he was an 'A' student or did he squeak by the skin of his teeth? I have no idea nor do I know anyone who knows the answer to that question. People say what a wonderful speaker he is. My take would be that he is a wonderful reader. The very few times I've seen him speaking off the cuff, he did not impress me at all. While I have zero respect for Bill Clinton, that hick from Hope could blow Obama away in public speaking (not reading, but speaking).

    You claim he has brought a rapprochement with our natural allies. What do you base that on? As I recall, he came home from Europe with absolutely no concessions or commitment from our 'natural allies' in out fight against man-made disasters, or in recovering from this economic crisis. All I have seen or heard is 1) he wants to basically disarm this country and remove our superpower status so everyone will like us, 2) redistribute the wealth which would destroy the economic engine which makes us the envy of the world.

    I will concede this; Sept 2008, when Paulson and Bernake told Congress and Bush that unless they acted the world was going to come to an end, I wish to God Bush had said, "We'll just have to start from scratch then". There were things I REALLY did not like about Bush. That is one I don't think I would ever forgive him for blowing.
    Regarding Palin, I'm very aware of her views and her record. As I noted, people become far too emotional discussing her, so I'll only say this. I really hope that the Rs nominate her in 2012, not because I support Obama (I think he'll win re-election barring any economic and/or foreign policy disaster), but because it will demonstrate the lack of appeal extremists have to the centrists in America (who ultimately control the elections).

    Regarding Obama, in response to your specific question, I listed those things he's done with which I agree (social policy), those things with which I agree and disagree (foreign policy), and those things with which I disagree (taxes). I will not be put into a position of supporting Obama, because I do not. However, I don't think he's the anti-Christ (a view which the DUmmies held of Bush and which, appearently, many here hold of Obama). To hold such views is the pure definition of a partisan extremist, a type which has been derided on this board for its existence in the "Best/Worst" forum and which is now, unfortunately, being exhibited in the other forums.

    And, btw, in response to two of your points. My reference to Bush/Paulson was not just for starting the bailouts, it was specifically aimed at government interference in business decisions as evidenced by the memos that are coming out at the Cuomo hearings. Secondly, the mood in Europe is much more postitive towards the US and this will set the stage for future cooperation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Water Closet View Post
    Wasn't me. While I know who Michael Scheuer is, I've never read his main work (Imperial Hubris) and have never put forward the view that our involvement in the ME, particularly in Isreal and Saudi Arabia, is the primary reason for the conflict between Islam and the West. I do think it's a contributing factor, specifically in that it gives the Bin Ladens of the world a rallying cry with which to convince particularly uneducated Muslims to willingly kill themselves.
    I've read both of his first works. He's one of the few that actually gets the GWOT. That is exactly his premise that what little power the extremists have in recruiting for jihad is given a robust boost because they can point to occupation. Don't try to tell anyone differently that believes they hate us for our freedom.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member Constitutionally Speaking's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Molon Labe View Post
    I've read both of his first works. He's one of the few that actually gets the GWOT. That is exactly his premise that what little power the extremists have in recruiting for jihad is given a robust boost because they can point to occupation. Don't try to tell anyone differently that believes they hate us for our freedom.
    That "occupation" ONLY matters because we are not Muslims. How dare a kafir set foot on Arab soil.

    Do you really think we should be second class citizens - or as this implies - far lower???

    Scheuer is right on most of his analysis, but he doesn't seem to be bothered by that little fact. He also ignores the part where in the radical Islamist mind, ALL lands are Muslim lands.
    Last edited by Constitutionally Speaking; 04-28-2009 at 06:18 AM.
    I long for the days when our President actually liked our country.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •