Republicans: Are You Happy About McCain? Options

[blaarg]

Just seeing what you four or five people on the board who would classify themselves as "Republican" think about McCain getting the nomination.

[Hartmann]

I'm mixed on him... I think he is a better choice than Romney but he's going to have to work extremely hard to get elected.

As an aside, after reading the NYT article about this supposed lobbyist, I have to wonder, when did Dan Rather start working for them?

[impala454]

Fine by me really. He was my second choice after Thompson.

[James]

Wasn't my first choice as I didn't like the way he acted during some of the debates, but all the mature people are pretty much gone and I'd definitely rather have him over Hillary or Obama.

[pysex]

I tend to be more conservative but I don't really want McCain as a president.


I'm just glad Hillary no longer has a chance and I'd be ok if Obama was president...

[Dogmeat]

I really don't care who the president is as long as they aren't a socialist or a communist....

[pebkac]

So when you say socialist or communist, are you talking about people that are really socialist or communist or do you mean people that are "socialists" or "communists" (ie. Democrats)?

[Dogmeat]

So when you say socialist or communist, are you talking about people that are really socialist or communist or do you mean people that are "socialists" or "communists" (ie. Democrats)?

They _ARE_ socialists and communists.

That's the basis for the current crop of "Democrats".

[Psykopath]

They _ARE_ socialists and communists.

That's the basis for the current crop of "Democrats".

If they are "socialists and communists," then by your re-defining of political extremes...Republicans = fascists.

[Hartmann]

If they are "socialists and communists," then by your re-defining of political extremes...Republicans = fascists.

Well, that would be comparing apples to oranges. Socialism and Communism are socio-economic while Fascism is based loosely on racism and unity as far as class goes (sounds more Democratic anyway).

Anyway, my basic idea of a good government is one that understands people. People want to make money, they want to succeed, and they want to be happy. If companies are forced to support the society (therefore taking significant money out of their pockets), they will stop doing business.

[Dogmeat]

If they are "socialists and communists," then by your re-defining of political extremes...Republicans = fascists.

No, Republicans are Capitalists ...

[Testm0nkey]

so if a society didnt want to help people at all and were racists, sexists, jerkoffs, conservatives yada yada then the government should just be like okey dokey lets make our policies totally centered around that! the government DOES have an obligation to protect, serve, and help people. that usually doesnt fall right in line with letting 1% of the population make as much money as they want. the government has the obligation to support its citizens AND if there are people in society who are against they, they are the ones that have the problem and need to be changed. imho

this is in regards to hartmanns statement about the basic idea of government

[The Fanatic]

Side note:

Totalitarianism can exist on both sides of the political spectrum.

[Hartmann]

so if a society didnt want to help people at all and were racists, sexists, jerkoffs, conservatives yada yada then the government should just be like okey dokey lets make our policies totally centered around that! the government DOES have an obligation to protect, serve, and help people. that usually doesnt fall right in line with letting 1% of the population make as much money as they want. the government has the obligation to support its citizens AND if there are people in society who are against they, they are the ones that have the problem and need to be changed. imho

this is in regards to hartmanns statement about the basic idea of government

I mistyped but the basic premise is there. You're correct, the government does have an obligation to protect the people and to protect the rights of the people, even if that means 1% of the population makes an insane amount of money, that's their right to strive to do so.

Government's (a republic or democracy) purpose is to ensure the availability of such freedoms, not to give freedom to all then yank it back because others struggle. This isn't utopia and it never will be, that's a pipe dream.

Holding government to take care of everyone is inconsistent with how and why we were founded. It was the oppression of one group that led them here, and it was the taxation and land rights of that population that ultimately led to war. The British taxed everyone, even if for the benefit of the king, and it did not stand well.

I hate to say it but you cannot force people to "want" to help others, it just doesn't work that way. Cuba is a great example of this, everything is for the greater good right, because it's Communism? Not really. The elites (military) get rich and everyone else gets rations. If instead you tax evenly and allow people who work for it to succeed, good will come of it.

In my experience, the people who are poor but make an effort, eventually start making a living. The ones who ask for a break, get it, then squander it, and ask for another, continue on the same cycle, always wanting more but doing nothing to improve themselves.

I have no qualm agreeing with the idea that we should help each other, but I can only help so much. It takes each person doing their part.

[Dogmeat]

so if a society didnt want to help people at all and were racists, sexists, jerkoffs, conservatives yada yada then the government should just be like okey dokey lets make our policies totally centered around that! the government DOES have an obligation to protect, serve, and help people. that usually doesnt fall right in line with letting 1% of the population make as much money as they want. the government has the obligation to support its citizens AND if there are people in society who are against they, they are the ones that have the problem and need to be changed. imho

this is in regards to hartmanns statement about the basic idea of government

Racism, sexism, whatever have no place in a capitalist society.

You're rewarded for how you do for yourself. This is completley independent of race or sex.

If a black guy out works me and figures out how to make more money than I do, then more power to him.

By and large, the harder you work the better you do.

I fail to see why my hard-earned dollars should go to reward mediocrity amongst those who are simply put, too fat, stupid, and lazy to better themselves.

[blaarg]

I fail to see why my hard-earned dollars should go to reward mediocrity amongst those who are simply put, too fat, stupid, and lazy to better themselves.

you act like all your tax money goes to solely helping the poor...

I really think you should look at this:

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/9366/th...hcom3000vu8.jpg

and see how the little is spent on social programs versus stuff on defense...

[The Fanatic]

Or how much is used to pay the interest on the federal debt which grew immensely under Reagan and Bush Jr.

[Hartmann]

Or how much is used to pay the interest on the federal debt which grew immensely under Reagan and Bush Jr.

This is huge to me. Get rid of the federal debt and we'll see a lot of problems and disagreements go away.

[Spectatrix]

you act like all your tax money goes to solely helping the poor...

I really think you should look at this:

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/9366/th...hcom3000vu8.jpg

and see how the little is spent on social programs versus stuff on defense...

That's just the discretionary budget. Check out this year's, which also shows the total budget (lower right corner): http://www.thebudgetgraph.com/site/index.p...p;products_id=1

Medicare: 386 billion
Medicaid: 202 billion
Interest on the national debt: 261 billion (truly disgusting)

[Psykopath]

Interest on the national debt: 261 billion (truly disgusting)

uggh

[impala454]

It's disgusting only if you get wowed by large numbers. I'd kill for 3% interest on a nine trillion dollar loan

[The Fanatic]

It's disgusting that we have 9 trillion dollars of debt.

[impala454]

Yeah so disgusting. Funny when the same people who bitch about the government not helping more people and spending money to get people out of poverty can also bitch about the national debt. Slightly ironic IMHO.

[The Fanatic]

well, I would rather we be in debt for helping people opposed to killing people. You can blame the majority of the national debt on the military industrial complex.


Definition of Irony: Reagon and Bush run up huge national debts maintaining American empire while Clinton left his presidency with a surplus....


hmmmmmmmmmmm

This post has been edited by The Fanatic: Feb 25 2008, 05:33 PM

[FORSAKENR320]

what is truly ironic is that we will never know how many innocent lives bush has saved by going through with this war...


and also ironic that we can look back and speculate that if clinton had taken action against attacks on american embassys more seriously, we prolly could have avoided this entire thing... when you let someone pick on you, it just tells them they can get away with it, and they keep digging a little harder.

i think bush is an idiot (didn't always believe that), but i am glad some towel head ass was stomped. fixed clintons fuck up

[impala454]

well, I would rather we be in debt for helping people opposed to killing people. You can blame the majority of the national debt on the military industrial complex.
Definition of Irony: Reagon and Bush run up huge national debts maintaining American empire while Clinton left his presidency with a surplus....
hmmmmmmmmmmm

Definition of irony? What's even more ironic is that without "killing people" as you describe it, you wouldn't even fucking be here in this country.

[The Fanatic]

Iraq did not attack America, in fact, Iraq has never attacked America. America ATTACKED Iraq when it invaded Kuwait and disrupted American imperial interests in the middle east. Originally Saddam Hussein was supported by the United States. We further supported Saddam by SUPPLYING him with weapons of mass destruction. These chemical and biological armaments were used to kill millions of Iranian soldiers and civilians in a war of aggression via Iraq. That is the problem with American foreign policy. It ends up biting us in the ass rather than help us. The more we stick our nose into the affairs of the middle east the more they are going to hate us and will probably attack us. All empires must fall. We intervened in Iran the first time when a democratically elected president, Dr. Mohamed Mossadeq decided to nationalize the oil industry because Britain was making more profit from the oil reserves through BP than the Iranian people. Yet America fights to preserve liberty and freedom for all people?

An excerpt from George Washington's farewell address:

Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty.

People did have to die to help preserve this country but they fought in wars that preserved America. Nazi Germany and Japan were nations that could have invaded America. Name one country since World War II that the United States directly engaged in combat with that could have attacked America. And no Iraq could not.

This post has been edited by The Fanatic: Feb 26 2008, 05:45 PM

[The Fanatic]

what is truly ironic is that we will never know how many innocent lives bush has saved by going through with this war...
and also ironic that we can look back and speculate that if clinton had taken action against attacks on american embassys more seriously, we prolly could have avoided this entire thing... when you let someone pick on you, it just tells them they can get away with it, and they keep digging a little harder.

i think bush is an idiot (didn't always believe that), but i am glad some towel head ass was stomped. fixed clintons fuck up

And if we would not have been addicted to foreign oil than maybe we would not have pissed off the entire world...


Ahhhh If only *sigh*

This post has been edited by The Fanatic: Feb 26 2008, 05:47 PM

[Dogmeat]

Well, if we didn't have to pay for a bunch of hippie loser crackheads or whoever we could buy even MORE bombs

[Spectatrix]

We don't need more bombs, man. And I say this even though I'm currently working as a Navy contractor.















(Maybe we need more TORPEDOS?!?!?!?)

[chook]

WE need more Standard Missiles!