Yeah, terrific. If it weren't for Nader Bush would never have been elected, and oh how different history would have been. This time around he's going to drain potentially decisive votes from Obama. Fuck Ralph Nader. Yet again he's willing to sacrifice the welfare of his country for the sake of his ego.
-
Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
-
FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!
Election 2008
- Thread starter Jason z
- Start date
I like Ralph a lot.I just worry that a vote for him is just a vote Obama doesn't get and aids McCain.
Actually you can blame that on gerrymandering, corruption and diebold! BOTH FUCKING TIMES!
There have been recent studies showing that voting for Nader actually pulls more votes from McCain than Obama, I'll try and look for them. I have a good feeling if Nader is allowed to debate on national television that he'll bring out a lot of those people to vote who just say "ah fuck it none of the candidates are worth a shit!" Plus he'll reach millions of people who don't even know who the hell he is. I strongly believe he has a shot if he's given the opportunity to be heard. I mean, how can someone vote for Obama? He has the same exact foreign policy as McCain and Bush. Going into Afghanistan and Pakistan will be a mass slaughter! It's an endless war that no military can take on. On top of that he has the same bullheaded attitude towards Iran, Russia, and the Central/South American countries. He supports the continued over funding of AIPAC, has no plan for healthcare, or our dependence on foreign oil, really I see nothing besides a smooth talking lawyer who knows how to put on a show.
This weekend ...
This weekend I remembered what was important.
I made love, repeatedly, to my wife and kept it up until I was sore.
I wasn't born with a silver spoon and she grew up dirt poor.
We lived through poverty early on together, we'll live there again.
Damn I love having a woman who is thrifty and loves the best things in life, which are free.
Fuck them all, I really don't care who gets in, I know what is important to me.
This weekend I remembered what was important.
I made love, repeatedly, to my wife and kept it up until I was sore.
I wasn't born with a silver spoon and she grew up dirt poor.
We lived through poverty early on together, we'll live there again.
Damn I love having a woman who is thrifty and loves the best things in life, which are free.
Fuck them all, I really don't care who gets in, I know what is important to me.
Facetious
Moderated
In principle, I kinda agree with you but I don't want the govt. to have regulatory powers over the private sectors' income. I don't want to further empower the govt period.
Philbert
Banned
Re: Barack McCain or John Obama?
I love the uninformed who claim Barak Hussein Obama grew up poor...when was that? Mother was a perpetual student, went for her PHD; married well off-Muslims and moved to foriegn countries; raised by his white grandmother who was a real big name in the Hawaiian banking structure; he went to the most exclusive prep school there and went to very upperclass exclusive Universities; was a professor at an Ivy League University and is a Lawyer, married to a Lawyer.
When was he not an elitist?
I love the uninformed who claim Barak Hussein Obama grew up poor...when was that? Mother was a perpetual student, went for her PHD; married well off-Muslims and moved to foriegn countries; raised by his white grandmother who was a real big name in the Hawaiian banking structure; he went to the most exclusive prep school there and went to very upperclass exclusive Universities; was a professor at an Ivy League University and is a Lawyer, married to a Lawyer.
When was he not an elitist?
Depends ...
So when a company is surviving on public funds, I'd say the executives are now accountable to taxpayers, and compensation is up for reduction, possibly heavy reduction.
Otherwise, no, if the government is not subsidizing, then the company can do what it wants.
If the government is funding a private company (facist/monopoly practice), then the executives of that private company are public servants.
So when a company is surviving on public funds, I'd say the executives are now accountable to taxpayers, and compensation is up for reduction, possibly heavy reduction.
Otherwise, no, if the government is not subsidizing, then the company can do what it wants.
Re: Barack McCain or John Obama?
Your agrument that he wasn't poor is solid, but an elitist?
The dictionary defines an elitist as one who believes that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
Maybe you meant among the elite, in terms of where he was educated and what he achieved? --- a very different thing, most often, than being an elitist.
Your agrument that he wasn't poor is solid, but an elitist?
The dictionary defines an elitist as one who believes that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.
Maybe you meant among the elite, in terms of where he was educated and what he achieved? --- a very different thing, most often, than being an elitist.
Philbert
Banned
Re: Barack McCain or John Obama?
As long as I have spellcheckers and a resident thesaurus like yourself, I can post with confidence that my message will be understood!:rofl:
You are quite right, though...I misused the term.
The point was B H Obama wasn't some poor street urchin and isn't the common man's hope; often put up as the antithesis of John McCain who was military, then public service; who married a women with her own wealth (there's a horrible thing!) and isn't computer literate (another major crock of shit-he's a tech issues expert, and can't type without difficulty due to injuries to his shoulders, so others do his emaling).
He came back from Nam a bit crazy, had problems readjusting, lost touch with his former wife and had an affair; now married for 30+ years, never had a problem since then, has grown children and is a great man. Yet, like Todd Palin's one DWI when he was 22 years old, I hear the crazies gleefully point to this event as evidence John McCain is unsuitable to be President...issues are never the issue here, only personal attacks.
I would like to learn the facts of Obama's acheivements, and McCain's, not the continuous gotcha's posted over and over.
That was my point...Obama is not a casual man, nor is his wife casual; his moves have been calculated for years to produce future results and he is NOT a common man. Nor humble...
As long as I have spellcheckers and a resident thesaurus like yourself, I can post with confidence that my message will be understood!:rofl:
You are quite right, though...I misused the term.
The point was B H Obama wasn't some poor street urchin and isn't the common man's hope; often put up as the antithesis of John McCain who was military, then public service; who married a women with her own wealth (there's a horrible thing!) and isn't computer literate (another major crock of shit-he's a tech issues expert, and can't type without difficulty due to injuries to his shoulders, so others do his emaling).
He came back from Nam a bit crazy, had problems readjusting, lost touch with his former wife and had an affair; now married for 30+ years, never had a problem since then, has grown children and is a great man. Yet, like Todd Palin's one DWI when he was 22 years old, I hear the crazies gleefully point to this event as evidence John McCain is unsuitable to be President...issues are never the issue here, only personal attacks.
I would like to learn the facts of Obama's acheivements, and McCain's, not the continuous gotcha's posted over and over.
That was my point...Obama is not a casual man, nor is his wife casual; his moves have been calculated for years to produce future results and he is NOT a common man. Nor humble...
^
I am not going to hold it against any politician that they aren't 'humble'.
Politics is where humble goes to die.
I believe that Obama, like all popular politicians, is not as good as he wants us to believe. And not as bad as his opponents want us to believe.
I do worry that people are so fed up and desperate that some maybe seeing more to him then perhaps is really there.
He strikes me as a better then average politician with some refreshing thoughts. But I still don't see a truly 'special' man. Though maybe the campaign does that to people.
I am not going to hold it against any politician that they aren't 'humble'.
Politics is where humble goes to die.
I believe that Obama, like all popular politicians, is not as good as he wants us to believe. And not as bad as his opponents want us to believe.
I do worry that people are so fed up and desperate that some maybe seeing more to him then perhaps is really there.
He strikes me as a better then average politician with some refreshing thoughts. But I still don't see a truly 'special' man. Though maybe the campaign does that to people.
I think John McCain is not intellectually superior to George Bush. McCain went to The U.S. Naval Academy, one of the most intellectually-challenging universities in the nation, and he barely graduated. Same with Dubya and Yale.
Barack Obama has demonstrated intellectual superiority given that he was on the Law Review during his time at HLS AND he went on to become a Constitutional Law Professor at UChicago. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, Oxford grad and Yale Law grad.
Aren't we negligent if we don't put the brightest people we can find in charge of the gov't?
Barack Obama has demonstrated intellectual superiority given that he was on the Law Review during his time at HLS AND he went on to become a Constitutional Law Professor at UChicago. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, Oxford grad and Yale Law grad.
Aren't we negligent if we don't put the brightest people we can find in charge of the gov't?
Intelligence is great if it's coupled with good intentions.
I can't believe so many people want a Democrat or Republican!
"Wake up people!"
God it never ceases to amaze me that people think Democrats are the answers to Republicans and vice-versa.
Ummm, isn't Obama basically giving the same answers as McCain these days?
I'm glad to see Obama finally backtracking on his prior energy policy though.
If there was one area where McCain "told it like it is" (e.g., Nuclear Power), it was there.
Anyone who is against Nuclear Power at this point is basically disagreeing with all ten (10) of the industrialized nations.
I'm glad everyone agrees Wind is key as well, although if people would stop fighting "not in my back yard," we could actually get things done.
Re: Depends ...
I'm not surprised you agree somewhat I have seen you rail against the insiders enough to beleive it.:thumbsup:
But as the prof says below these ones we bail out and take all their bad loans off there hands can not really be called private anymore.These companies and what they did can hardly even be called legitimate buisnesses eithier.Went and wrote mortgages they knew many would end up being defaulted on and then just bundled them into mortgage backed securities and sold them to each other making money with every transaction.Now they can't give them away and they are on their books as bad debt so we bail them out,sweet racket.
Private companies can do as they like but I wish shareholders did more to not allow such excessive salaries.Japan as an example does not have such a gap between workers and CEO's and I don't think they have laws that cover it eitheir ,it's just a part of their society that thinks that would be unseemly to have such a huge gap.
I'm not surprised you agree somewhat I have seen you rail against the insiders enough to beleive it.:thumbsup:
But as the prof says below these ones we bail out and take all their bad loans off there hands can not really be called private anymore.These companies and what they did can hardly even be called legitimate buisnesses eithier.Went and wrote mortgages they knew many would end up being defaulted on and then just bundled them into mortgage backed securities and sold them to each other making money with every transaction.Now they can't give them away and they are on their books as bad debt so we bail them out,sweet racket.
Private companies can do as they like but I wish shareholders did more to not allow such excessive salaries.Japan as an example does not have such a gap between workers and CEO's and I don't think they have laws that cover it eitheir ,it's just a part of their society that thinks that would be unseemly to have such a huge gap.
Re: Depends ...
I would argue the Japanese focus on [traditional] engineering management and the American focus on pure science/technology talent and pure business management. But I'm biased, I'm a [traditional] engineer, not a very popular degree these days.
The Japanese-American group-individual debate is always very interesting. Some would argue it's individualism that causes this.
I would argue the Japanese focus on [traditional] engineering management and the American focus on pure science/technology talent and pure business management. But I'm biased, I'm a [traditional] engineer, not a very popular degree these days.
Me. Seriously I’m running under the pseudonym Gimme anuthah Scotch under the slogan:
Vote early, vote often but keep it legal please.
Vote early, vote often but keep it legal please.
Similar threads
