USA - Obama's Newest Burden

[beentheredonethatagain]

remember Ross Perot? He took the race away from George H. Bush and gave it to Bill " bj" Clinton.

[truth]

i really cannot see any of these puppets running our country. I agree with metomni.I also believe this country is ran off fear and deception. Its sad to see people flock to the media for everything. But thats how most americans like it... to have everyone do the thinking for them. The media is only here to help us accept our fucked up country. I believe the government is setting up anyways towards the north american union, the federal id act, and new world order. These puppets are only here to push the divine plan that was made hundreds of years ago for us. wake up. in my opinion

[FuBai]

Certainly, from a European point of view, American News is very much right of centre, with some exceptions. From an American point of view it may appear left-wing, but I would argue that this can tell you allot about how far right the average stand point is in America. In any case we have a false delineation - liberal does not mean left, I'm a right-wing liberal - true blue Conservatism should be about small government, lower taxes, a greater emphasis on charities rather than welfare and about getting the tendrils of government control right out of our private lives. In short, real Conservatives should be Libertarians. I'm not sure what you really mean by liberal, but it seems a long way away from what I mean by it. I would argue that, whether Left or Right, American and, indeed, the European press show a strong bias towards Authoritarianism, to the extent where, every time an even minor event occurs, legislation is demanded to resolve it.

[beentheredonethatagain]

Originally Posted by FuBai

Certainly, from a European point of view, American News is very much right of centre, with some exceptions. From an American point of view it may appear left-wing, but I would argue that this can tell you allot about how far right the average stand point is in America. In any case we have a false delineation - liberal does not mean left, I'm a right-wing liberal - true blue Conservatism should be about small government, lower taxes, a greater emphasis on charities rather than welfare and about getting the tendrils of government control right out of our private lives. In short, real Conservatives should be Libertarians. I'm not sure what you really mean by liberal, but it seems a long way away from what I mean by it. I would argue that, whether Left or Right, American and, indeed, the European press show a strong bias towards Authoritarianism, to the extent where, every time an even minor event occurs, legislation is demanded to resolve it.

that makes little sense , in the u.s. the left wing is liberal and the right wing is conservative ( smaller government) any way I am done here.

[FuBai]

Originally Posted by beentheredonethatagain

that makes little sense , in the u.s. the left wing is liberal and the right wing is conservative ( smaller government) any way I am done here.

All that means is you/America either do not understand what the word "liberal" means or what the phrase "left-wing" means.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Ding! We have a winner!

[saorsa.elegy]

I have to say that I agree with Metomni, I would stab my eyes out as well before voting for John McCain. But I don't think that America really cares if Barack was having gay sex. John McCain having an affair is non of our bees wax either.
Let's get someone in office that will unite our country, educate our children, end the war, feed the hungry, be green.
Love Peace and Happiness

[beentheredonethatagain]

Originally Posted by saorsa.elegy

I have to say that I agree with Metomni, I would stab my eyes out as well before voting for John McCain. But I don't think that America really cares if Barack was having gay sex. John McCain having an affair is non of our bees wax either.
Let's get someone in office that will unite our country, educate our children, end the war, feed the hungry, be green.
Love Peace and Happiness

this country will prolly not elect a Muslim who will not put his hand on the bible or say the pledge of allegence. this is not my fault, I am just stating the views of peeps I know.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Sad commentary on American

[Metomni]

You think that McCain would beat Obama? Have you seen the polls? Obama will rape him if that is the match-up. And you think Hillary can pull herself out of this hole? I don't. I think she's finished, and while there's still a LONG way to go, at this point Obama looks like the most likely choice.

[beentheredonethatagain]

Originally Posted by Metomni

Obama will rape him if that is the match-up. .

funny choice of words.

[enquirewithin]

Originally Posted by beentheredonethatagain

this country will not elect a Muslim who will not put his hand on the bible or say the pledge of allegence

What is that supposed to mean? Hopefully the next president will be able to speak in coherent sentences-- and spell potato!

[beentheredonethatagain]

Originally Posted by enquirewithin

What is that supposed to mean? Hopefully the next president will be able to speak in coherent sentences-- and spell potato!

It means obamma is a Muslim.

Dan Quayle or however you spell his name wasnt president.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Obama is not a Muslim - this is both incorrect and comes across as quite intolerant -- why wouldn't a Muslim be allowed ...

[Paracelsus]

He was raised by non-religious parents and belongs to a Christian Church. Although the latter doesn't make him a Christian, he isn't a Muslim either. Not that it would matter if he would be, but many voters still equal muslim with radical.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

[Woodman]

Well, folks, Nader just threw his hat into the ring and has entered the race.

Now, I'm seriously thinking to vote Nader if only to send a message to established political parties to go fuck themselves!


BTW, does anyone know Nader's position on drugs?

[El Calico Loco]

The American MSM is not liberal or conservative, in my opinion - it is simply pro-authority. Looking past the fact that intelligence agencies have worked to infiltrate major news organizations (I have no idea how successful this project was), one can simply consider two things: the major news outlets are owned by a handful of huge corporations, and reporters are terrified of losing "access" to important muckity-mucks because they ran the wrong story. It's a recipe for bland journalism and toeing the party line(s).

The only difference between Faux News and the others is the group of lunatics it wants in power. I don't consider them conservative - creating a Federal military dictatorship and police state* is not conservative at all, least not in the traditional American meaning, yet they seem to be all for it (because their boy is in charge...won't they be disappointed when the Democrats take over). I tend to refer to NPR as Nationalist Propaganda Radio, because their solution to every problem, no matter how small or insignificant**, is a Federal Agency.

That's why I love the Internet. Most sites state their bias up front. Sites like progress.org, freeliberal.com, lewrockwell.com, antiwar.com, counterpunch.com, commondreams.org, worldnetdaily.com - none of these make any attempt to disguise their ideology. I even like the sites of National Review and The New Republic, though I can only stomach them so often - at least I know whose dicks they're sucking.

And, just for the record, I think that both HillBilly and the McBomber are certifiable psychopaths, or at least NPD. I'm not sure about Obama; he seems like a harmless opportunist. At least he has some charisma. And he'll CHANGE!!

Sigh...I'm praying for the sudden withdrawal*** of Huckabee and McCain before the Republican convention so that Ron Paul - the only consistent anti-war and anti-wod candidate, now that Kucinich is out of the race - can yoink the nomination. I'm not holding my breath.


ECL

(* Don't believe me? Read the Military Commissions Act. Read it carefully.)

(** Last week I heard a report on how horrible it was that some people didn't know that the US was switching to digital television in a couple of years - why wasn't the government doing more to get the word out? It was reported in the same urgent, hushed tones as everything else. Give me a break.)

(*** Okay, I lied...I'm praying for McMurder's death. I hope that fat sack of crap chokes on his own vicious bile. Watching someone sing cute songs about mass murder does not amuse me.)

[High_Roller]

Nader ruined this country in 2000. He got 97,000 votes in Florida, where Bush won the popular vote over gore by 527. Most, if not all of Nader's votes would have gone to Gore had he not been on the ballot. So we can blame Ralph Nader for stealing the votes that would've saved this country from our monkey of a president and his administration of baboons.

Reputation Comments on this post:

FLAMING IS NOT ALLOWED

[RaverHippie]

I'd rather thank Ralph Nader for being probably the most consumer rights activist in America in times when Businesses were regulated less and less.

[High_Roller]

yes that's just who we need as a president. A consumer rights activist!! Sure he's great at that but what reason on earth could he have to run for President again and again? His long political career? Or maybe his history as a businessman? ROFL

He honestly has no good reason for running for president other than to take away votes from other QUALIFIED candidates.

Reputation Comments on this post:

I feel I was too hard on you, here are some of your points back.

[FuBai]

Originally Posted by High_Roller

yes that's just who we need as a president. A consumer rights activist!! Sure he's great at that but what reason on earth could he have to run for President again and again? His long political career? Or maybe his history as a businessman? ROFL

He honestly has no good reason for running for president other than to take away votes from other QUALIFIED candidates.

I'm afraid that's just pure and utter rubbish. He's running because he believes he can make a difference and an important one at that. He is not "stealing" votes, he is democratically taking them from those who willingly give them to a cause they see as just. If people want to vote for him; that's democracy, that's how it's meant to work. It is, if anything, the Democrats who are to blame for not being able to keep those votes. It doesn't matter what he stands for, it doesn't matter what he does, he is running as a candidate and that is his right, just as it is perfectly right that people should vote for him. He shouldn't have to consider who he's taking votes away from, he only needs to think about the best way in which to get as many votes as possible.

[Desertfox]

I know this has been said before but to correct beentheredonethatagain:

Obama is NOT Muslim. you really should educate yourself on other candidates instead of making a bunch of assumptions about them.

[El Calico Loco]

The "wasted vote" issue has plagued third parties since forever. It begs a question: how does anyone know that Green votes would go to Democrats instead, or LIbertarian votes to Republicans? It's just as possible that those votes wouldn't have been counted at all because those who placed them felt that neither major party represented their viewpoints and stayed home on election day. There are those of us who think there's not a dime's difference between the two, in most cases.

The first-past-the-post plurality voting system used in the US guarantees that third parties can't compete. If we want more options, we have to change that system - which is an incredible task, because those who would have to make the change are the same people who benefit from it.

IRV and proportional representation are popular ideas on the left. I'm not fond of them. In my mind, IRV introduces complexity without really solving the problem, and I don't like any system that requires one to vote for the party rather than the person. I would much rather see approval voting take the place of the current system.


ECL

[beentheredonethatagain]

check this out. I can not believe this is coming out of my mouth, but I would rather see hillary get it before oh'bama , I truely would rather see a Republican, but if I had to pick on from the other side it would be her, why ? because obama isnt the man who people think he is. and yes he is a stealth muslim. Imho.

[zera]

Originally Posted by El Calico Loco

IRV and proportional representation are popular ideas on the left. I'm not fond of them. In my mind, IRV introduces complexity without really solving the problem, and I don't like any system that requires one to vote for the party rather than the person. I would much rather see approval voting take the place of the current system.

According to Arrow's theorem there is no system of voting that doesn't "fail" in one way or another. Have you heard of futarchy?

Anyway even though I think McCain is a maniac I might prefer him over Obama, because if Obama is elected it is very conceivable that my future taxes could possibly more than double.

Also for those who are concerned about government abuse of power (which pretty much everyone in this community should be) Obama is very dangerous because he's so charismatic. I don't think a politician has received this much adoration before entering office since Adolf.


Okay so that was below the belt to make the Hitler comparison. But what I'm trying to say is that the most dangerous president is the one the people fall in love with. As bad as George Bush and Bill Clinton were they were restricted in many ways because a very sizeable proportion of Americans hated their guts and criticized everything they did. Elected officials should be jeered, criticized, scrutinized and examined in the smallest detail at all times, not lauded and fawned over. Obama is too charismatic to be president.

Reputation Comments on this post:

you are a smart person, it shows.

[truth]

beentheredonethat you would rather have McCain then Obama? Why? so he can run our country more into debt, not lower taxes, stay in the war, promote lies and propaganda about drugs, promote fear throughout the country, and steal our money? most votes aren't based off fact but how you were raised. What I Find funny being 18 years old and voting for my first time(voted Ron Paul), is the media persuades half of the votes, the other half vote how they were raised, others based off past presidents who were republican or democrat that they liked. Its not about a label its about the person. No one running has the potential to run this country. NOBODY. Its gonna be another 8 years in hell with McCain. When history is written the americans will see how stupid we were. Worshiping books, believing lies, killing many, corrupt government. The USA has some of the most ignorent evil people in the world, spoiled, closed minded, one sided people. Yes there are many enlightened, but no matter who gets elected we are corrupt and the years will only get worse, the war worse, economy worse. For the first time in the world technology rules the world. Tv, Lies, deception.



For McCain beentheredonethat you should really read up about how many times his opinion changes withen the past 2 years. Or even 8 months.

Here are some facts about McCain, and for you being a republican you should believe in what our founding fathers believed in...staying out of other peoples buisness.

"President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years." McCain responded, "Make it a hundred. We've been in Japan for 60 years, we've been in South Korea for 50 years or so. That'd be fine with me as long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed. That's fine with me. I hope it will be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world where Al Qaeda is training, recruiting, equipping, and motivating people every single day."

McCain has been a lead sponsor of gun control legislation as well as what organizations including Gun Owners of America argue are restrictions on the free speech of pro-Second Amendment organizations even earning an F- rating from Gun Owners of America. Yet in the past McCain had voted against the passage and renewal of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban and the Brady Bill.

^^ is mccain a little confused? Also, a man that wants to take away the 2nd amendment? Why? for a more policed state obviously

Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keating_Five

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI

sorry if i rambled, I just feel strongly about how stupid the usa is.

Watch that youtube video then tell me to vote mccain?

[Alfa]

I wonder about the situation that the next US president will land into. It looks to me like the US is heading for both financial and political disaster. It seems a pretty good reason for a good candidate to pass on this run and take the next train. It may even be a valid idea to give this job to the competition and watch the crash and burn.

Reputation Comments on this post:

	true words
	why would you like to wish that. crash and burn. thanx

[truth]

Originally Posted by Alfa

I wonder about the situation that the next US president will land into. It looks to me like the US is heading for both financial and political disaster. It seems a pretty good reason for a good candidate to pass on this run and take the next train. It may even be a valid idea to give this job to the competition and watch the crash and burn.

I agree, I think we are about to be very surprised in the states in the next years. I really hope i live to see a revolution. We are close to collapsing. Oh and getting bombed