great quote "My personal opinion, we don't even have a candidate that I can support as the les
Posted By: mtstudent on 2008-08-29
In Reply to: Obama vs McCain - gourdpainterg
I agree with you 100%! Why doesn't a retired general run or someone who knows what he is doing. It's like all the real men have disappeared from politics.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Out of curiousity...which candidate do you support for the...
nomination?
My personal opinion
FWIW, by definition civil is: "of or relating to or befitting citizens as individuals" and "of or occurring within the state or between or among citizens of the state" (per wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn), which to me is the one the government should sanction, be it gay or straight, and thereby entitle one to the legal and financial 'benefits'. Marriage, on the other hand, in my opinion could/should then be viewed as more a religious construct.
Great quote
"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble opinion, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."
-- John Adams
I agree, great quote! I am amazed that for the 2+ days ...sm
that this has been posted, you did not get a single response. The only way we are going to get anything accomplished is to work together as Americans. I guess some just don't get it.
Great! YOU support it. Here's hoping McCain...
gets elected and yanks federal funding for abortions. There are certainly enough of you pro choicers to pay for it. Pro lifers shouldn't have to. Keep sending those checks. See how long Planned Parenthood hawks abortion if they aren't making a killing while they are killing. But, as one of the posters said to me...all of your pro choicers put your money where your mouth is and support the choice financially. Works for me. Send two checks. Send a check every week. Heck, put them in your will. lol.
A drunk womanizer gave his support. GREAT.
x
Facts are facts - sorry you don't like it cos it doesn't support your candidate
You can't change facts. That's what makes them facts. You may not like it but that's the way it is.
Great....don't give a rip about your opinion. :)
nm
Is Obama losing support or winning support?
John Clodfelter of Mechanicsville, Va., whose son was among the 17 sailors killed in the Cole bombing, said he arrived at the meeting with apprehension over the decision to close the prison. But after listening to the president and being assured that the terrorism suspects would not be released, Mr. Clodfelter said his opinion changed.
“I did not vote for the man,” Mr. Clodfelter said, “but the way he talks to you, you can’t help but believe in him. He left me with a very positive feeling that he’s going to get this done right.”
You really don't know who "my campain" is
and you are only assuming from some of my posts that I am a Democrat. One would assume by your posts that you are a Republican but you have claimed ad nauseum that you are an independent. I'm not a dem actually, but a pub. But, I don't believe all the garbage the pubs are putting forth.
I also don't hear McCain say much about what the GOP is doing, or trying to do in Michigan and a few other states about voter suppression to people who are in or have undergone foreclosure. That is disgusting to me too.
I have looked at "my" guy
and I've looked at McCain. I wouldn't vote for McCain if you paid me. Did you not HEAR him say he's the biggest free trader ever?
<groan" only 1 more day.
Okay "my friends"
Signed Joe the (not) Plumber.
He's not "my boy". I only catch him
a couple times a week early in the morning if I can't sleep.
I don't have stocks or bonds, so it's really a moot point. I just need some laughs once in a while over how upset he gets over some things.
Has nothing to do with "humoring you" or "my" definitions.
It's important for you to discover the complexities for yourself (Google is all you need), and "my" definitions don't matter unless I am the one doing the analysis.
But I'll start the ball rolling.
1. "Prenatal care" starting at what point in the gestation (1st trimester? 2nd? etc.)?
2. Involving what different features or services?
3. Does the study adequately filter out other coincidental factors that tend to characterize some populations that do not receive prenatal care, but which also might impact infant survival, such as poor nutrition, smoking, alcohol and drug use, squalid living conditions and even low educational levels?
4. What time period after delivery will be used to define a relevant "infant death"?
5. What causes of infant demise will be considered relevant to the question?
6. Will all "modes" of delivery be included?
7. Will "high-risk" pregnancies be included or excluded?
8. Will premature deliveries be included or excluded?
The list of problems that have been identified in the design of studies that look very scientific and conclusive, and have been published in respected journals, has proven to be considerable.
Some have tried to get around these problems using a technique called "meta-analysis", which tries to reconcile and synthesize the findings from multiple studies, but this hasn't been very successful either.
The problems worsen when you simply use empirical evidence - say, by comparing birth/mortality rates in different countries with different "levels" of prenatal care. One study "showed" that the mortality rate in the US was higher than that in one of the Baltic states (I've forgotten now which one), but failed to take into account that in the US we try to deliver and save infants who are much more premature than they try to salvage in the other country - so naturally, our "failure" rate would look worse.
The other problem is really more or less endemic. "Prenatal care", however defined, will represent some set of services and characteristics. We may assume that all of them do not contribute equally (and some, perhaps not at all) to infant survival. This means that even if you can resolve all of the study design problems and show that prenatal care contributes to survival, you haven't said very much that's useful. It might be, for instance, that a simple regimen of multiple vitamins has as much impact on survival as all of the other factors combined. If so, have we presented a case for purchasing "prenatal care" as a constellation of services (from the standpoint of healthcare economics), or should we focus on finding ways to see that pregnant women get the multiple vitamins?
When we see "studies" of complex issues - especially those involving an interplay between myriad scientific and social or cultural factors - we should always put on the brakes and find out more about how the study was done, what assumptions it made, and keep a sharp eye out for flaws in the design of the study (which, I am sad to say, crop up more frequently than you might suspect), even or perhaps especially in the field of medicine. People who study things do have agendas, and sometimes the agenda amounts to grants of $millions in research funds, or sponsorship of the study by an organization that has a "mission", etc. A lot of what masquerades as "scientific proof" in the field of medicine, unfortunately, is nothing of the sort. Let's see now - are eggs good for us or bad for us?
Make that "my analogy refers to
nm
That "my friends" phrase, so oft-repeated, made him
"my Muslim faith" -- oops meant Christian
nm
Great post, great insight, great analysis, thanks!..nm
nm
Your opinion of torture is your opinion. Tough
nm
O's votes support his claims. JM's votes support Bush.
Believe what you like. Voting records tell the tale. Could use a few more details on that budget. Just what programs will he slash and and how many tax dollars will be directed away from middle class and in the direction of the rich? How much longer can the infrastructure afford to crumble?
JM adopted O's withdrawal plan when he saw how well it went over with the public in an election year. He flipped on the war once. What's to stop him from flipping again once elected? The nation is war weary. Some prefer a surge in diplomacy, not military answers to diplomatic failures. Ask the Iraqis who have lost more than 100,000 among them how sucessful the war has been. Obama has always understood that the OBL/Taliban live in Afganistan, not Iraq. JM, a little slow on the draw there.
I see nothing in JMs platform that backs his claims about transparency. I see specific plan on the O side under technology initiatives, continued initiatives which originated under Clinton and were reversed during the undercover Bush administration. Pork barrel spending for pubs means something different than it does to dems. Slash the poor to give to the rich? Hard seel in the current economic frefall. Also find nothing in JM's plan to address runaway contract corruption in Iraq. Having Halliburton and companies there props up those struggling American corporations. Show me the plan.
Antiglobal/antidiplomacy. No surprise there. This is about the futureworld, not American imperial delusions of grandeur. So much data on the drilling scam being an immediate relief for gas problems out there it is not worth addressing. Can you say T-Bone Pickens, i.e., we can't drill our way out of this one. He should know. Been an oil man all his life.
Since these are just a few, what else do you have up your sleeve?
History is history and opinion is opinion. You need to learn the difference.
x
I am an independent....neither party is "my" party.
THis election cycle I believe the best man is a Republican. Do your research. John McCain warned about this in 2005, named Fannie and freddie by name, co-sponsored legislation to control them. Blocked by Democrats, led by Chris Dodd..same guy now trying to fix what he and the Dems broke. Chris Dodd, #1 on contributions list from fannie/freddie, followed closely by #2, your shining knight Mr. Obama. The chickens have come home to roost all right...or should I say the donkeys. :)
Great, great post. Thank you, Marmann! nm
x
Each candidate has to have a
minimum of 15% in the opinion polls to be invited to participate in the presidential debate. That is why it is usually just the republican nominee and democratic nominee. I don't know that I agree with this, but if you actually look at ALL the candidates....you have so many parties who nominate a runner and most of the time you don't even hear about them. We have Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Barry Obama, McCain and that doesn't include the green party, etc. If they just automatically included all of them in the debate......we wouldn't get anywhere.
Yea, that's it....he's the best candidate... we all know
xx
another candidate
If we could get the parties (I'm also one of those not to thrilled by either candidate) to come together and choose ANOTHER candidate and vote him in we may seem some change. As it stands now, I feel like Obama is the kid running for class president in high school promising the extra days off and more soda machines and when he wins (because he's cute and popular) he won't be able to deliver. Mccain on the other hand, I believe he will try and make some changes, but he isn't going to completely revamp Washington, which is basically what we need.
We need someone who can go in with NO ties, not owing anything to anyone, and who will throw out all the dirty crooks in the congress. A no-name guy (or girl!) who is middle to lower class, smart, and bipartisan. Who has no agenda other than to fix what is wrong. I don't believe anyone can say that either of these candidates is like that.
Obama owes some people for getting where he has gotten. NO ONE climbs the ladder that quickly without a little help. And Mccain, well he's frugal, and he may not make enough change for us down here on the ladder to see the difference. And I'm sure he has people and interest groups he is particular to also.
But, instead of us all getting out, banding together, and trying to make some real change in Washington, we will just sit back and let it be politics as usual. The fact is, America is to lazy to do anything but whine and complain about how bad we've got it. But we sure aren't going to get up and fix it!
We are slowly imploding on ourselves and we don't even realize it. We look at third world countries and think "that can never happen to us" but it can and more than likely will if we continue down this road of overspending and living by the moment.
He's VP candidate.
That's why the hoopla. Sen. Biden may have had some health issues, but he's the VP (could possibly need to step in), but Obama is young, healthy, good looking, and seems popular amongst the voters who do want to see change, and not the same old grampa running our country into the ground with the "rich" buddies getting richer.
Biden had a problem with stuttering. I'd much rather have Biden misspeak and accept his experience on foreign policy (especially as an MT and what we deal with) then Palin who has no idea what she's doing being a heartbeat away from the Presidency.
Get it now?
Yes, because he is the only candidate
and we are all fellow prisoners.
Who is your top democratic candidate?
Barack Obama is who I am rooting for, but I'd like to know what democrats are thinking about the other candidates.
No enthusiasm for their candidate. sm
I am not an Obama supporter, but go ahead and post what you like about him. I am conservative, but find McCain as the nominee unacceptable.
Could it be that Candidate #5's "emissary"
was one who was bugged? Has anybody heard anything about who blew the whistle on the senate seat sale?
What does it say about a candidate's character
1. Dumps his crippled wife and mother of his children to have affair with wealthy heiress, then turns around to apply for marriage license before his divorce is final.
2. Calls his wife C-word.
3. While speaking at a biker's rally, volunteers his wife as a contestant in the "Miss Buffalo Chips" topless modeling contest, including it's legendary banana competition.
4. Tries to blame his wife for the Keating 5 scandal when it becomes public.
5. Screams at and thoroughly humiliates a young pub volunteer who set up his podium at a rally.
6. Jokes about ape rape and killing off Iranians with cigarettes and "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb."
7. Describes Arizona's elderly as "seizure world."
8. Throws temper tantrums, punctuated with the casual use of the F-word.
9. Calls fellow senators Aholes and sh-heads.
10. Ignites a culture war to get elected.
11. Questions the patriotism of his opponent and fails to renounce his supporters who question his faith, endlessly insinuate he lies about it and portray his wife as a militant with hidden agendas to stage a socialist/Black Power takeover of the country.
12. Embraces endorsement from a pastor who disparages Catholics, women, African Americans, Muslims and LGBT Americans, believes that Hurricane Katrina was punishment from God because "New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were recipients of the judgment of God," announced a "slave sale" at the church to raise funds and believes that "the coming nuclear showdown with Iran is a certainty,"
13. Overlooks the Bush-Rove campaign strategy of unleashing a landslide of racist attacks on him, including calling his own daughter an illegitimate half-black love child, turns around in 2004 to campaign for W's second term, throughout it all supported 9 out of 10 of his disastrous policies that has brought the nation to it knees and then embraces Rove as senior campaign adviser in 2008.
14. Stood silently by while fellow war hero/veteran John Kerry was swift-boated without mercy.
Before any rebuttal ensues that would seek to deny, dodge and deflect, keep in mind that character assassination has been a benchmark of JM's campaign and of his supporters, so no whining allowed. Finally, this is legitimate inquiry, given that 90% is striving so diligently not to be 90% and has hawked character as his main qualification for presidential leadership.
You know your candidate....look up his earmarks...
A million to the hospital his wife works for after they nearly doubled her salary. Yep, he is against those pesky earmarks. The bridge to nowhere was a huge one. He is Washington politics as usual. There is no change there.
Yes, he is careful with his votes. Voted against the Infants Born Alive act twice. Managed, with the 130 presents, to show up for what was important to him..denying medical care for an infant who managed to survive an abortion. yeah, there's something to be real proud of.
New VP candidate allowed to appear
for 30 seconds - no talking - for news cameras with world leaders. Now, let's hear you say she doesn't have any foreign experience -- here look at this picture.
What possible write-in candidate has all the necessary
exists, then why were they not nominated?
Whatever. But I think your candidate was losing
Sometimes he actually looked a little confused. Petit mal, perhaps?
McCain the best candidate
I agree
The candidate who ran from the economy...
Obama voted for the bailout and that is ALL he did. That is not running from it? He still wants to spend trillions, won't say he is willing to cut spending, and wants to RAISE taxes in an economic downturn. You can't turn around the markets by raising taxes on corporations and the so-called "rich." Common sense should tell you that.
McCain has run from nothing. All Obama does is repeat the same old vagaries and NEVER gets specific about anything, but why should he? You obviously don't care. lol.
That's easy. Because he is the best candidate
x
Absolutely he would not be a candidate right now. nm
x
Hello. Obama is not the war without end candidate.
2 + 2 = what now? The endorsement is logical and makes perfect sense. After you read it, then YOU think about it.
Sorry to hear there is no candidate who you
Better luck next time around. Seriuosly.
Oh so you are like your candidate - a cheater?
Of course, a republican would think of a way to get 200 votes in there by cheating; not uncommon in the republican party at all. 
So...you are FOR anyone asking a Presidential candidate...
a question be subject to a law enforcement background check and the findings made public? Bye bye civil rights. Unreal.
I don't think you can blame in on either candidate (sm)
It is merely by virtue of the fact that they are different races that the the hidden racism in our country has risen up to such extremes, in both directions. It has become a battle of the races. It is almost a matter of pride at this point. And pride is the root of so many bad things.
Unfortunately, neither candidate encompasses everything I believe (sm)
I can't have it both ways, whether I want to or not. I have to pick one. And I cannot pick Obama. I cannot support someone who will allow babies who have been developing for 9 months to be murdered. I don't mind giving more to welfare actually. But again, I can't have both ideals in one candidate.
Maybe you should listen to what your own candidate said about
him when he was pressed. He said 'he is NOT a socialist, he is NOT a Marist, he IS a good man." With that from McCain's own mouth, looks like you could at least agree with your own candidate and get over it.
does that mean you are a puppet? or is your candidate one? nm.
//
I had no candidate, but O had NOT shown his
nm
2012 candidate
A possible candidate. I hope so.
http://draftsanford2012.com/
Don't get too excited.... my candidate
At least my candidate wasn't buying his votes through ACORN and offering a pint of whiskey or a pack of cigarettes JUST to register to vote and to top that off folks, "we'll give you a free ride from your corner crack dealership right to the front door of the voting center; better yet, we'll even TELL you who to vote for so ya don't even have to think for yourself, since you didn't in the first place..... just let ACORN do all the work for ya you dimwitted little souls".
Is that what you meant by beating the streets? ROFL!!!!!
|
