Obama!

[booya]

so with all the hype surrounding this man, how do the smokers from south of the 49th feel?

[ams]

so with all the hype surrounding this man, how do the smokers from south of the 49th feel?

according to the polls, there has been alot activity around him. I think he would be a great president, and he stands a very very very good shot, on paper and based on polls it seems so. But the question is...Is america ready to have an african american president????? I dunno, but all I know is I am voting for him.

Another question...Is america ready to have a Lady president????

[socr4life22]

I dont think the problem with obama is that he is black the problem is he has so little expernce in politics. the little time in office is why i will most likly vote for him, to bad i live in a red state and it is not up to me. Hopefully those in the swing states will vote for him.

[TheScotsman]

The choices for the '08 fiasco... I mean election are pretty much all jokes. Obama and Hillary go on about change, yet say nothing (seemingly without any plan.) WTF was that hillary speech? I though she was going in for a full blown nervous breakdown, or some such silliness. That 's what we need running the place, someone skirling about how rough life/campaigning is. (besides, aren't you sick of the bush/clinton biarchy?)

Before you can vote for him, you have to know what he is about, and so far Mr. Obama has talked allot, but said absolutely nothing.


It's not looking good on the other side either. Maybe it's just time to stay home, and save the trouble.

[ams]

agreed completely, both sides arent looking to great...but I feel we are better off voting in a democratic president. I'd rather it be obama... anything but hilary

[Bulldog_916]

There is a lot of air surrounding Ron Paul. I know it's like "yea I've heard his name over and over but he doesnt stand a chance." That's the attitude that got us into this 2 party stump joke anyway. Yea, Paul is a republican, but really only by name. This guy is a true man, down to the bone. Never made a vote in Congress that he been disputed. He's really dedicated to us and it isnt just a speech. If he doesnt win a couple of primaries, I'm gonna have to put my vote with Obama. Scotsman, America works on votes, whether or not it looks that way. If you dont use the system, dont complain about the players or the outcome. It's each one of us that makes this country great. It isnt money, it's people.

[gaia.plateau]

There is a lot of air surrounding Ron Paul. I know it's like "yea I've heard his name over and over but he doesnt stand a chance." That's the attitude that got us into this 2 party stump joke anyway. Yea, Paul is a republican, but really only by name. This guy is a true man, down to the bone. Never made a vote in Congress that he been disputed. He's really dedicated to us and it isnt just a speech. If he doesnt win a couple of primaries, I'm gonna have to put my vote with Obama. Scotsman, America works on votes, whether or not it looks that way. If you dont use the system, dont complain about the players or the outcome. It's each one of us that makes this country great. It isnt money, it's people.

To be more accurate, 95% of the Republican party is really only Republican in name. It is a word meant to be synonymous with conservative, and now the Republican party has become a hodgepodge of neoliberalism and neoconservatism (which can also be considered neoimperialism and neocrusadism). Arguably, Ron Paul is the only actual Republican running, and incontestably the only one running who is concentrating on conservative economic issues.

That having been said, and because I'm too lazy to describe RP from scratch right now...

Ron Paul is the best candidate for the well-being of America, but at the same time he's probably the worst candidate for the well-being of the world.

So I think it comes down to whether you're a nationalist or an internationalist, in regard to your support for him.

Ron Paul is the best candidate for the well-being of America, because he is a fiscally responsible mega-conservative with absolute faith in the free market and who adheres to neoliberal imperatives. He has said on numerous occasions that he will withdraw America from its ties to the World Bank, WTO and the IMF, as well as the UN, and take a more subtle role in NATO. This basically equates to a policy of isolation, which would give the US the opportunity to rebuild politically, socially and economically.

Ron Paul is the worst candidate for the well-being of the world, for all the same reasons. With the US outside of the UN, what semblance of international order that does exist will collapse into chaos. Complete US devotion to neoliberal principles such as the ruthless economic development of the Global South will exacerbate conflicts in vulnerable states like Sri Lanka and Darfur exponentially. The only good thing to come about would be the decreased ability of the US to abuse NATO as a [tool for illegal operations like Kosovo].

I really hope he remains in obscurity, but I couldn't begrudge anyone that voted for him in the interest of their own nation's benefit. Apart from considering you a candidate for social cleansing, anyway.

[HookahDude831]

Do a line for Dave!

that fucker will never get my vote.

[jayson]

Obama doesn't have enough experience in my opinion. Neither does Hillary for that matter.

We need to take a good long look at our nation and realize a few things: we are bogged down in a war on boogeymen that has cost us between $1.6 and $3.5 trillion dollars. Our nation is $9 trillion in debt. The current welfare systems in the US are going bankrupt, our dollar is tanking because of rampant spending. The federal reserve prints the money then loans it to the government AT INTEREST, when the government should be printing it themselves like the Constitution mandates. Though they really shouldn't be printing any more money, because that causes inflation. Inflation reduces the value of the dollar... which in turn leads me to the next point that.....

The Chinese and Japanese hold most of the $9 trillion in debt. If they dropped those notes because the value is falling (dollars are traded as any other commodity: wheat, oil, gold, steel, etc.), our economy would drop to its knees in a matter of days.

Our citizens currently work until approximately June of every year just to pay taxes. We cannot tax them any further unless we want to break the middle class and turn into a nation of extremely wealthy and extremely poor.

So, how do you suggest we pay for National Health care as Hillary and Obama are proposing? All of these social programs are very nice gestures and good intentions... but we have to realize that we just can't afford it.

FWIW. Edited January 9, 2008 by jayson

[boulderkid303]

[quote name='jayson' date='Jan 9 2008, 01:07 AM' post='189729']
Obama doesn't have enough experience in my opinion. Neither does Hillary for that matter.

Hillary no experience? Are you kidding me? Only around the white house for 8 years....

As for experience....What does it matter? Look at what experience has gotten us today.

Go OBAMA!!!! You got my vote!

[gaia.plateau]

Our citizens currently work until approximately June of every year just to pay taxes. We cannot tax them any further unless we want to break the middle class and turn into a nation of extremely wealthy and extremely poor.

The US already has a Gini coefficient of .82 which puts it among the 10 or 15 worst countries in the world for wealth divide... it's already a nation of extremely wealthy and extremely poor.

So, how do you suggest we pay for National Health care as Hillary and Obama are proposing? All of these social programs are very nice gestures and good intentions... but we have to realize that we just can't afford it.

An economy cannot recover without education and healthcare for the people who are driving it. Edited January 9, 2008 by gaia.plateau

[Seanij]

Obama is an ass kisser.

[TheScotsman]

The US already has a Gini coefficient of .82 which puts it among the 10 or 15 worst countries in the world for wealth divide... it's already a nation of extremely wealthy and extremely poor.

So, how do you suggest we pay for National Health care as Hillary and Obama are proposing? All of these social programs are very nice gestures and good intentions... but we have to realize that we just can't afford it.

An economy cannot recover without education and healthcare for the people who are driving it.

As for wealth distribution in the USA, You get what you work for! I have hired people I couldn't get to move if I took a cattle prod to their balls, Why should there be any expectations of wealth for such? On the other hand I have had some people that were ambitious, and motivated, and their pocketbook was the happier for it. I agree the USA has found a strange point where the wealthy get wealthier, and the broke get broker, but the cure lies in correcting the cause, not off-loading money on people in a willie-nillie govt controlled system. American workers have a nasty habit of using absolutely any excuse to not come to work, then they bitch about pay... If you need 4 people min, hire at least 5, because 1 of 4 will be coming up with some jackass excuse for staying home. The payroll feeds 4 extremely well, but that 5th comes out of the pockets of the other 4. It is a simple concept, but they never get it. I often wonder just why they get a job when all they want to do is not come in. The world may never know!

I have lived both under a socialized medicine, and this pay-for-services system. Give me the USA any day! (socialized medicine is great... as long as you never need it.)

Don't get me going on what passes for "education" in the USA. It's only product is inability to cope with life's daily challenges on your own, and a generation of people that think some great authority (the govt) must intervene in all aspects of daily life. An American HS diploma simply means you could stand in line without drooling on yourself, and put up with exorbitant amounts of complete stupidity while keeping your logic, opinion, and masculinity suppressed.



In the end, Hillary is going to beat Obama in a resounding fashion.
G*d help us if we get a democrap president with a democrap legislature. It would be just like having Jimmy Carter back.

[gaia.plateau]

As for wealth distribution in the USA, You get what you work for! I have hired people I couldn't get to move if I took a cattle prod to their balls, Why should there be any expectations of wealth for such? On the other hand I have had some people that were ambitious, and motivated, and their pocketbook was the happier for it.

I won't argue that this is the way a capitalist society should operate, but it just isn't the reality today. There's a big difference between being lazy and being born into a situation without opportunities, and this distinction isn't one that is recognized by Western socioecomic systems - I think that the reasons for America being the worst off in this regard, in comparison to Canada, Australia, Britain and France, for examples, are mainly the decades-cultivated fear of socialism among the general populace, and the exemplary fervour for privatization and deregulation among policy makers.

I agree the USA has found a strange point where the wealthy get wealthier, and the broke get broker, but the cure lies in correcting the cause, not off-loading money on people in a willie-nillie govt controlled system.

Correcting it is theoretically simple... improve education, universalize healthcare, propagate political awareness. In other words, try this democracy thing, it's not too bad.

American workers have a nasty habit of using absolutely any excuse to not come to work, then they bitch about pay... If you need 4 people min, hire at least 5, because 1 of 4 will be coming up with some jackass excuse for staying home. The payroll feeds 4 extremely well, but that 5th comes out of the pockets of the other 4. It is a simple concept, but they never get it. I often wonder just why they get a job when all they want to do is not come in. The world may never know!

You're talking about the Middle Class, aren't you? When we say "poor" in the North American context, it means like, a family living on part-time minimum wage, without any healthcare, very little education, and no guaranteed access to drinkable water. By international standards, even this is living in the lap of luxury.

[ams]

ahh the clinton years were great...debt all time low, unemployment all time low, economy booming, the nation was doing great.

[Bulldog_916]

The US already has a Gini coefficient of .82 which puts it among the 10 or 15 worst countries in the world for wealth divide... it's already a nation of extremely wealthy and extremely poor.

So, how do you suggest we pay for National Health care as Hillary and Obama are proposing? All of these social programs are very nice gestures and good intentions... but we have to realize that we just can't afford it.

An economy cannot recover without education and healthcare for the people who are driving it.

As for wealth distribution in the USA, You get what you work for! I have hired people I couldn't get to move if I took a cattle prod to their balls, Why should there be any expectations of wealth for such? On the other hand I have had some people that were ambitious, and motivated, and their pocketbook was the happier for it. I agree the USA has found a strange point where the wealthy get wealthier, and the broke get broker, but the cure lies in correcting the cause, not off-loading money on people in a willie-nillie govt controlled system. American workers have a nasty habit of using absolutely any excuse to not come to work, then they bitch about pay... If you need 4 people min, hire at least 5, because 1 of 4 will be coming up with some jackass excuse for staying home. The payroll feeds 4 extremely well, but that 5th comes out of the pockets of the other 4. It is a simple concept, but they never get it. I often wonder just why they get a job when all they want to do is not come in. The world may never know!

I have lived both under a socialized medicine, and this pay-for-services system. Give me the USA any day! (socialized medicine is great... as long as you never need it.)

Don't get me going on what passes for "education" in the USA. It's only product is inability to cope with life's daily challenges on your own, and a generation of people that think some great authority (the govt) must intervene in all aspects of daily life. An American HS diploma simply means you could stand in line without drooling on yourself, and put up with exorbitant amounts of complete stupidity while keeping your logic, opinion, and masculinity suppressed.



In the end, Hillary is going to beat Obama in a resounding fashion.
G*d help us if we get a democrap president with a democrap legislature. It would be just like having Jimmy Carter back.

So far, the Republicans have done nothing but run us into the ground and keep cutting taxes. 8 years of Dubya, the "No Child Left Behind Act," the Iraq War, taxes at their lowest levels and literal stupidity on the environment have made America into a world laughing stock. Quite frankly, I'd rather have a democrat right about now. Even if I was a republican, I'd be voting for Obama just to say "WAKE THE FUCK UP AND PAY ATTENTION! YOUR APPROVAL RATING ISNT LOWER THAN NIXON'S FOR NOTHING!" The people of the U.S.A. are going to RESOUNDINGLY vote democrat this time around. It wont be this whisper of power change that the 2006 Mid Term vote was. It isnt because republicans are irresponsible jackasses. It isnt because democrats are any better. It's all W.

I long for the days when Clinton was getting flamed because he got a blow job! I just wanna play those tapes over and over and over just to say "man, those were the days, things were good, we were innocent."

[garykainz]

Sadly enough, the majority of voters don't really know the candidate's details/experiences/etc... so I think that a lot of people will base their decisions on stereotypes and whatnot.

I was talking about this the other day with a friend and she brought up a good point. This country is still too racist and sexist (at least passively/non-lynching-ly) for either Obama or Hilary to win.

Personally, I don't think either of them would be a good president anyway

[TheScotsman]

Sadly enough, the majority of voters don't really know the candidate's details/experiences/etc... so I think that a lot of people will base their decisions on stereotypes and whatnot.

I was talking about this the other day with a friend and she brought up a good point. This country is still too racist and sexist (at least passively/non-lynching-ly) for either Obama or Hilary to win.

Personally, I don't think either of them would be a good president anyway

I would have to agree, there are enough people that will just plain not vote for either, it is unfortunate, the end result is the possibility of another 4 years of a republicasaurus. One thing that will backfire is the mantra of "change" without actually a list/plan to go with that chant. What gave the Repubs power initially was Newt's "Contract with America". People want to know WHAT politicians are planning, not just that they are going to "change" things. Hell, when you see a dem controlled congress mandate a thermostat in your home that can be controled by the gov't... that's chance... but not what people want. If the Dems are going to relieve us of the Republico-facists they are going to have to tell us WHAT will change, then stick to it.

I had a Poly-Sci prof that said "if you are 25 and not a Liberal, then you have no heart, but if you are 45, and not a conservative you have no brains." At the time is sounded stupid. Amazing how true it has proved to be.