PDA

View Full Version : Match-Cut General Election Thread



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Benny Profane
06-09-2008, 12:47 PM
The primaries are over, so let's start fresh, shall we? Finally, we can talk about the real issues concerning the nominees:

McCain:
- Old and probably wouldn't make it out of his first term alive.
- Doesn't understand middle Eastern politics.
- Doesn't have any domestic plan, whatsoever.
- Very short, very elderly, and likely to have ass kicked by most nations leaders.
- Held a microphone upside down during a speech.
- Seriously, hasn't even consider a domestic plan of any kind.
- Is the mastermind behind cap and trade, universally hated by everyone.
- Just liberal enough to be hated by his own party and just right-wing enough to be frightening to the rest of the known world.

Barack Hussein Osama:
- Probably Muslim AND shares radical beliefs of his Christian minister.
- With less than 40 years in politics, he's under-qualified.
- Did somebody say Farrakhan?
- Loves fanboys, hates haters.
- Holy shit...Farrakhan!!!
- Hates America.
- Even more important than hating America, he hates ISRAEL.
- Can't dance, bowled a 37, and smokes...he also may have trouble defeating foreign leaders in hand-to-hand combat.
- He's a socialist and will destroy the great country Bush has built over the last 8 years.
- He's willing to meet with foreign leaders in an attempt to iron things diplomatically/appease terrorists.


In all seriousness, both parties seem less than united regarding their respective nominee. Either one is better than Bush, though.

Ezee E
06-09-2008, 01:30 PM
But what movies do they like. That's how I decide.

Mysterious Dude
06-09-2008, 01:57 PM
Barack Hussein Osama:
...he also may have trouble defeating foreign leaders in hand-to-hand combat.
I'm pretty sure he could kick Nicolas Sarkozy's ass.

Skitch
06-09-2008, 03:26 PM
Wow do I hate politicians.

Sycophant
06-09-2008, 04:41 PM
But what movies do they like. That's how I decide.I haven't heard them say much about movies, so I judge on television show. Obama is on the record as loving The Wire. McCain is old and white, so I can only assume he watches Matlock, Diagnosis Murder and Hallmark Hall of Fame special presentation reruns.

DavidSeven
06-09-2008, 04:59 PM
If the media could just spend a little more time analyzing the "fist pump," I'm pretty sure I'd be able to make an informed decision.

http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2008/06/4a8de172515255204a8632a02359aa 20-1.jpg

Sycophant
06-09-2008, 05:05 PM
If the media could just spend a little more time analyzing the "fist pump," I'm pretty sure I'd be able to make an informed decision.

http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2008/06/4a8de172515255204a8632a02359aa 20-1.jpgAwwww! That picture is too sweet! Eat that, Al and Tipper!

I did not know about this. A quick glance at media coverage actually kind of makes me sick.

But I've been wondering what exactly to call this gesture. I see "fist bump" might be the most popular term. My friends and I call it a "rock."

ledfloyd
06-09-2008, 05:10 PM
I haven't heard them say much about movies, so I judge on television show. Obama is on the record as loving The Wire. McCain is old and white, so I can only assume he watches Matlock, Diagnosis Murder and Hallmark Hall of Fame special presentation reruns.
Obama recently said he liked The Fountain. On slashfilm it says he likes The Godfather Parts I & II and Lawrence of Arabia.

McCain: The Bourne Supremacy, The Bourne Identity, Mission: Impossible, (”I like those kinds of things, the car chases”) The Departed, (”It’s pretty rough, but I kind of liked it. Nicholson plays too much Nicholson”) and Syriana (”I enjoyed ‘Syriana,’ although a lot of people didn’t”).

Benny Profane
06-09-2008, 05:11 PM
I always refer to it as a "fist knock".

When I want someone to give me a fist knock, I say "gimme some knuckles" as I extend my fist.

Spinal
06-09-2008, 05:37 PM
The Democratic primaries in 8 minutes. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/09/everything-you-need-to-kn_n_106056.html)

Not crazy funny, but has a few moments that make it worth while.

shaun
06-09-2008, 06:07 PM
Wake me for the debates. And then again when it's time to vote. Or when a candidate gets caught in a $30 hotel room with an underage Indonesian boywhore.

The rest I've stopped caring about.
Let's get out and vote!
Let's make our voices heard.
We've been given the right to choose,
between a douche and a turd.

Spinal
06-09-2008, 06:49 PM
Cynicism about the electoral process is soooo 8 years ago.

Sycophant
06-09-2008, 06:53 PM
That episode of South Park may have been the death knell in my enjoyment of the show in its current state.

shaun
06-09-2008, 07:20 PM
Cynicism about the electoral process is soooo 8 years ago.I think people were fairly energized on both sides about the election 8 years ago. The cynicism didn't really set in until 03.

In any case, I'm fine with Obama. I'll vote for him provided he doesn't retardedly propose something that lessens the enjoyment of my life, like a hard ban on poker or something (I'm looking at you, Bill Frist). Five more months of finding out McCain once ate in the same restaurant as Pol Pot or Obama's bathtowels are a shade red, the color of pinko commie marxist whores everywhere.... that's gotten very old. Burn out has set in.

Benny Profane
06-09-2008, 08:26 PM
If you had told me on 9/12/01 that a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama would be one of the two nominees for the President I would have never believed you in a million years.

NickGlass
06-09-2008, 10:04 PM
If the media could just spend a little more time analyzing the "fist pump," I'm pretty sure I'd be able to make an informed decision.

http://www.bestweekever.tv/bwe/images/2008/06/4a8de172515255204a8632a02359aa 20-1.jpg

My friend is still holding out hope that an ignorant newspaper prints "Democratic nominee Obama was seen onstage fisting his wife, Michelle, after an important victory."

DavidSeven
06-09-2008, 10:17 PM
But I've been wondering what exactly to call this gesture. I see "fist bump" might be the most popular term. My friends and I call it a "rock."

I believe the kids like to call it "giving DAPS."

Ezee E
06-09-2008, 10:27 PM
I've never even had a name for it now that I think about it.

NickGlass
06-09-2008, 10:33 PM
I believe it is called the "pound."

Kurosawa Fan
06-09-2008, 10:43 PM
I believe the kids like to call it "giving DAPS."

That's a terrible name. I'd rather call it "the fist bump thing" than refer to it by that name.

Sycophant
06-09-2008, 10:55 PM
Is DAPS an acronym? The first thing that sprung to my mind was Da Amish Person Signal. Which doesn't strike me as being what it actually is.

DavidSeven
06-09-2008, 11:10 PM
Is DAPS an acronym? The first thing that sprung to my mind was Da Amish Person Signal. Which doesn't strike me as being what it actually is.

Dap greeting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dap_greeting)

Spinal
06-09-2008, 11:40 PM
The Fox News breakdown. (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/9/10455/96312/237/532689)

Be warned. It might be 'a terrorist fist jab'.

Ezee E
06-10-2008, 12:18 AM
The Fox News breakdown. (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/9/10455/96312/237/532689)

Be warned. It might be 'a terrorist fist jab'.
Good Lord.

DavidSeven
06-10-2008, 12:40 AM
Good Lord.

Yeah, that about sums it up.

Mysterious Dude
06-10-2008, 02:47 AM
Hey, they have 24 hours to fill. What else is there to talk about?

Ezee E
06-10-2008, 03:37 AM
Hey, they have 24 hours to fill. What else is there to talk about?
Sell that time for infomercials and not having to pay crew and cast.

Anything but that.

Benny Profane
06-10-2008, 04:14 PM
Presidential Hopefuls Eye the Economy (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/10/campaign.economy/index.html)

Here's a good link for the comparisons between the ever developing economic policies of the two candidates.




"Obama proposes creating a $10 billion fund to help prevent foreclosures and eliminating some taxes and fees for families who must sell their homes. He would also provide tax credits to 10 million middle class homeowners who struggle with mortgage costs."

Frightening.

Raiders
06-10-2008, 04:21 PM
Frightening.

Well, what do you suggest?

That entire article makes me remember why I am not conservative. All it is seems to be less taxes = more money, which you learn ain't true in Economics 101.

Benny Profane
06-10-2008, 04:28 PM
Well, what do you suggest?



Sell your home and find a new one that you can afford.

Raiders
06-10-2008, 04:32 PM
Sell your home

To whom? Who's buying homes? The market ain't moving right now. I have seen houses for sale in my neighborhood for more than six months.

shaun
06-10-2008, 04:33 PM
Well, what do you suggest?I suggest the government not getting into the business of subsidizing poor financial decisions.

Sycophant
06-10-2008, 04:41 PM
I don't think it's really in the interest of the nation or its economy for its people to have their homes foreclosed on.

I find McCain's gas tax holiday much more absurd.

Scar
06-10-2008, 04:42 PM
There are soooo many houses around here that are going to have to be demo'ed because the owners destroyed the insides. We've seen houses where the entire ceilings were black with mold.

Time for a major correction.....

Benny Profane
06-10-2008, 05:28 PM
To whom? Who's buying homes? The market ain't moving right now. I have seen houses for sale in my neighborhood for more than six months.


I have seen houses on my block that have sold in a matter of days. Hooray for anecdotal evidence.

Maybe they could sell it to another family from a higher income bracket who just sold their house and are looking to move down.

If they can't sell, then boo hoo, they'll have to foreclose. Why should a person who made a better decision be responsible for those that didn't?

Benny Profane
06-10-2008, 05:29 PM
Time for a major correction.....

No way, let's keep taking money out of smarter people's pockets because retards don't clean their house.

Scar
06-10-2008, 05:46 PM
No way, let's keep taking money out of smarter people's pockets because retards don't clean their house.

I remember for years listening to people talking about buying these houses, and saying how they'll flip 'em and make a huge profit before their mortgages reset.

Guess what, time to take it up the ass side ways without lube.

Ezee E
06-10-2008, 05:47 PM
Sell your home and find a new one that you can afford.
novel concept.

Someone at my work was dumb enough to notice how small payments were for the first several years, not really thinking about the future. They had to foreclose their house.

This one I do disagree on with Barack. If anything, people need to be educated more on the consequences of buying a house, and the long term details.

Ezee E
06-10-2008, 05:50 PM
I remember for years listening to people talking about buying these houses, and saying how they'll flip 'em and make a huge profit before their mortgages reset.

Guess what, time to take it up the ass side ways without lube.
Yep. The first place I lived in was doing that. They had a hard time getting people to move in because I was there, and they could only get girls that wanted to live with girls.

They decided to boot me out.

The girls didn't move in anyways.

Nobody rented from them for five months. Turned out there was a leak in another bedroom's bathroom. CRASH, kitchen collapsed.

The family ended up selling the other house they were in, and have moved into the smaller one, and are fixing it up.

shaun
06-10-2008, 06:41 PM
"I will veto every beer!"

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/06/10/sot.mccain.veto.beer.cnn

A dagger through the heart of his campaign if I ever saw one.

Sycophant
06-10-2008, 06:45 PM
"I will veto every beer!"

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/06/10/sot.mccain.veto.beer.cnn

A dagger through the heart of his campaign if I ever saw one.I understand that Bush is the one every red-blooded American wanted to have a beer with, but I think McCain's going too far in the opposite direction. McCain's efforts to distance himself from Bush have got to find a limit.

DavidSeven
06-10-2008, 06:59 PM
Yeah... I'm opposed to Obama's mortgage/idiot bailout policy as well.

Raiders
06-10-2008, 07:12 PM
If they can't sell, then boo hoo, they'll have to foreclose. Why should a person who made a better decision be responsible for those that didn't?

Because I live in the same country, feed off the same economy and care if the rate of foreclosures spills over and affects the economy at large.

I'm not endorsing Obama's idea, just asking what you would do. And I don't think expecting everyone to sell their home is very realistic. Regardless if people were buying, the value has decreased and these homes they bought for such a high price are likely not to sell for as much, and in the end they could come out owing the bank money. Not an easy way to go about buying your next house, now in a credit crunch no less.

I don't feel sorry for them, they could have thought it through and done the math, but I do empathize with poor people wanting to live the "American Dream" being sought after by banks looking for an easy way to foreclose.

Benny Profane
06-10-2008, 07:34 PM
Because I live in the same country, feed off the same economy and care if the rate of foreclosures spills over and affects the economy at large.



This sets up a dangerous moral hazard. It shows that you can be as dumb as you wish and reap the same benefits that smarter people reap. This isn't little league where everyone gets a trophy at the end. These are important decisions with consequences. Also, do you really expect the definition of "victim" in these cases not to expand like a mushroom? The more people see others getting assistance, the more they will ask for it themselves.

Money is a finite resource. Bailing people out for being stupid will divert money my pocket and your pocket and from other, more worthwhile social programs.

As for the banks, the blame game just doesn't hold water for me.

MadMan
06-17-2008, 06:29 PM
I don't think it's really in the interest of the nation or its economy for its people to have their homes foreclosed on.

I find McCain's gas tax holiday much more absurd.I agree on both counts. And the gas tax holiday idea just pisses me off.

As for the housing market, in the end it will play out like the tech bubble that busted around 2000: lots of people losing their shirt, and the market readjusting itself. In the end letting the market simply correct itself and riding out the economic problems that will result may be the best, (and harshest for those involved) policy. But I'm sure that's either too obvious an answer or not politically correct.

Dead & Messed Up
06-18-2008, 03:33 AM
I agree on both counts. And the gas tax holiday idea just pisses me off.

As for the housing market, in the end it will play out like the tech bubble that busted around 2000: lots of people losing their shirt, and the market readjusting itself. In the end letting the market simply correct itself and riding out the economic problems that will result may be the best, (and harshest for those involved) policy. But I'm sure that's either too obvious an answer or not politically correct.

That implies that some people will simply have to suffer through their bad mistakes, and, good sir, I will not hear it! This is the USA damn it!

We pride ourselves on stupid mistakes!

Benny Profane
06-19-2008, 05:07 PM
The general election always brings out the best in the candidates.

McCain, once opposed to offshore drilling, now favors states deciding (http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/elections/article630094.ece) whether it's OK.

Obama, once declaring in no uncertain terms, that he would have a publicly funded campaign, has now backed out (http://http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/06/obama-to-break.html) of that pledge.

Also, Obama says
NAFTA not so bad (http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/18/magazines/fortune/easton_obama.fortune/index.htm?postversion=20080618 10%22) after all.

Milky Joe
06-19-2008, 05:17 PM
Meanwhile... (http://rawstory.com/news08/2008/06/18/ron-paul-osama-bin-laden-loves-what-we-have-done/)

Spinal
06-19-2008, 08:21 PM
Obama, once declaring in no uncertain terms, that he would have a publicly funded campaign, has now backed out (http://http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/06/obama-to-break.html) of that pledge.


I don't understand why I should care about this.

Ezee E
06-19-2008, 11:33 PM
I don't understand why I should care about this.
I don't completely understand it myself, but he promised to stay with a publicly funded campaign and has now broken that promise. In a nutshell, that will be exposed to people as him being a liar.

Whether that actually means anything for what he'll do is probably moot, but well, people will use that against him.

Spinal
06-19-2008, 11:43 PM
I don't completely understand it myself, but he promised to stay with a publicly funded campaign and has now broken that promise. In a nutshell, that will be exposed to people as him being a liar.

That's silly. If you receive new information and decide to alter your strategy based on those facts, that's just sound judgment. It's what normal human beings do every day of their lives.

We already have a president who sticks steadfastly to his 'principles' regardless of what happens. It kind of makes you look foolish.

Ezee E
06-19-2008, 11:51 PM
It didn't take long to spark a reaction.


UPDATE: McCain campaign communications director Jill Hazelbaker emails: “Today, Barack Obama has revealed himself to be just another typical politician who will do and say whatever is most expedient for Barack Obama. The true test of a candidate for President is whether he will stand on principle and keep his word to the American people. Barack Obama has failed that test today, and his reversal of his promise to participate in the public finance system undermines his call for a new type of politics. Barack Obama is now the first presidential candidate since Watergate to run a campaign entirely on private funds. This decision will have far-reaching and extraordinary consequences that will weaken and undermine the public financing system.”

It obviously works. Look at the amusing comments on the blog that Benny posted.

Spinal
06-20-2008, 12:09 AM
I like how they throw the word Watergate in there even though it doesn't really have anything to do with the issue.

Sycophant
06-20-2008, 12:44 AM
Today, Jill Hazelbaker has revealed herself to be just another typical campaign communications director who will do and say whatever is most expedient for John McCain, &c., &c., &c.

Spinal
06-20-2008, 12:49 AM
Today, Sycophant has revealed himself to be just another typical internet poster who will do and say whatever is most expedient for Sycophant.

Hey, this is fun!

Benny Profane
06-20-2008, 03:52 PM
I don't understand why I should care about this.

I think this quote from 2008central.net sums it up best.


"My issue isn’t with Obama refusing to take public funds. Rather, my issue is with Obama spending most of 2007 arguing in favor of the public financing system and promising to support it should he become the party’s nominee, only to disregard those previous statements when he actually became the party’s nominee.

Further, I think it is a political miscalculation for the campaign to assume that people will not care about Obama’s changed position on the issue. Here’s why: The Obama campaign is based largely on the promise of change, on doing things differently, on real and tangible results. Yet, when given the opportunity to change things now (like the public financing system or engaging the GOP nominee in several joint campaign events), the Obama campaign consistently comes up with excuses on why that change isn’t proper at the moment. Obviously, these kinds of moves are not going to hurt Obama with current supporters; however, it may hurt him with independents and Republicans that want to believe in him, but see these kinds of isuses (albeit small in the grand scheme of things) as signals that Obama may not deliver on the promises of his campaign. This could very well be a problem for the Obama campaign and they should be ever mindful of it."

Benny Profane
06-20-2008, 04:17 PM
I like how they throw the word Watergate in there even though it doesn't really have anything to do with the issue.

They made a number of campaign finance reform changes after 1974. That's where the Watergate reference is coming from.

Benny Profane
06-24-2008, 05:40 PM
Barack Hussein Obama-yo-mama, 1/2 Muslim, 1/2 infidel, gets called out on the carpet by Evangelicals for his "attack" on religion.

Click here (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/24/evangelical.vote/index.html)

bac0n
06-24-2008, 08:46 PM
A thumbs-down from Dobson is a sign of quality in my book.

Sycophant
06-24-2008, 08:56 PM
Do you think it requires some sort of jagged oral appliance to write an article like that about James Dobson and keep your tongue out of your cheek?

MadMan
06-25-2008, 01:57 AM
A thumbs-down from Dobson is a sign of quality in my book.I really hate that man. And I can't stand the evangelicals. I like to think that they are the modern day version of the holy men who pretty much attacked Jesus on a regular basis (I can't remember what they're called). The self-righteous are usually the ones who end up getting what's really coming to them anyways.

Spinal
07-02-2008, 08:05 PM
Dear god, no. Just ... no. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnews/20080702/ts_usnews/gopenvisionsgephardtaspossible obamarunningmate)

Benny Profane
07-11-2008, 02:35 PM
Obama and his new plan to help the immigration issue..."Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English, they will learn English. You need to make sure your child can speak Spanish."


Please tell me this was taken out of context.

Sycophant
07-11-2008, 02:53 PM
NYT article on that quote (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/us/politics/11checkpoint.html?ref=politics ).

The quote with more context:

"I don't understand when people are going around saying, 'We need to have English only.' They want to pass a law 'We want English only.' Now I agree that immigrants should learn English. I agree with that. But understand this. Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English. They'll learn English. You need to make sure your child can speak Spanish. You should be thinking about how can your child become bilingual. We should have every child speaking more than one language. It's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe and all we can say is merci beaucoup, right?"

Benny Profane
07-11-2008, 03:18 PM
NYT article on that quote (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/us/politics/11checkpoint.html?ref=politics ).

The quote with more context:

It's all part of his master plan to take this country away from its roots.

"Para Espanol, press numero uno"




(joking)

Thanks for the clarification.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 03:22 PM
Chinese (probably Mandarin) and Spanish should be taught along side English from day one.

If I ever have kids, they will learn all three.

Benny Profane
07-11-2008, 03:56 PM
Chinese (probably Mandarin) and Spanish should be taught along side English from day one.

If I ever have kids, they will learn all three.

Obama would prefer they learn Farsi, thank you.

Ezee E
07-11-2008, 04:38 PM
I learned enough Italian to at least make it by in Italy for three weeks. It ain't hard people.

Sycophant
07-11-2008, 04:47 PM
I keep meaning to pick up at least enough Spanish to be functional in the present tense. Actually picked up some Pimsleur stuff a while back, but realized it was European Spain Spanish, and decided not to proceed with it.

These days, it only makes sense to learn at least a little.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 05:09 PM
I am going to order the Pimsleur Mandarin program and look into taking a class or two at the city college.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 05:10 PM
Obama would prefer they learn Farsi, thank you.

First I need to learn Pinko Commie, then I was thinking of learning Terroristian.

Sycophant
07-11-2008, 05:15 PM
I am going to order the Pimsleur Mandarin program and look into taking a class or two at the city college.Tried the Pimsleur Cantonese class once. Realized I was pretty much tone deaf. Gave up.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 05:17 PM
Tried the Pimsleur Cantonese class once. Realized I was pretty much tone deaf. Gave up.

I'm pretty much a genius, so I expect to be speaking Mandarin within the first week of instruction.

:|

Sycophant
07-11-2008, 05:23 PM
Do you know what's irritating? Stereotypical nonsense Chinese in popular culture doesn't really sound much like any dialect I'm familiar with.

Spinal
07-11-2008, 05:34 PM
My kid is learning Spanish at school. Don't think that's too crazy.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 05:39 PM
Do you know what's irritating? Stereotypical nonsense Chinese in popular culture doesn't really sound much like any dialect I'm familiar with.

Do you know the 'fung' language?

Dung oh yung oh you kung nung oh wung tung hung ee 'fung you nung gung' lung eh nung gung you eh gung ee?

Benny Profane
07-11-2008, 05:42 PM
My kid is learning Spanish at school. Don't think that's too crazy.

Not at all. He will have excellent career opportunities in social services, the "free clinic" aka the ER, gardening, or working on an orchard in California.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 05:44 PM
Not at all. He will have excellent career opportunities in social services, the "free clinic" aka the ER, gardening, or working on an orchard in California.

He could open up a taco truck, too. We need better Mexican food up here in the Pacific NW.

Benny Profane
07-11-2008, 05:46 PM
'fung you nung gung'

Sigged.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 05:48 PM
I like to cuss in fung.

Fung you cung kung yung oh you.

Sycophant
07-11-2008, 05:49 PM
cung kung
Is there a difference in the way these sound?

Spinal
07-11-2008, 05:51 PM
Yeah, you guys seem to be in denial about the number of jobs that now want you to be able to speak Spanish. My wife works for a Study Abroad provider. Makes a lot of money. Does not serve tacos or pick fruit as a part of her job responsibilities.

Benny Profane
07-11-2008, 05:52 PM
My remark was purely satirical. I thought that was obvious.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 05:53 PM
Is there a difference in the way these sound?

No - they are homonyms.

Both pronounced with a hard Kay sound.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 05:53 PM
My remark was purely satirical. I thought that was obvious.

This.

Spinal
07-11-2008, 05:55 PM
My remark was purely satirical. I thought that was obvious.

OK.

Benny Profane
07-11-2008, 06:01 PM
I actually speak fairly fluent Spanish. Other than traveling to Spain and Chile, the time it's helped me most has been in the restaurant business. But it could have helped in other areas had I chosen to go in a different direction.

Spinal
07-11-2008, 06:06 PM
More than career opportunities though, I like the idea of opening up new areas of the globe for my kid to visit and feel at ease.

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 06:14 PM
I worked at a Mexican fast food place (El Pollo Loco) for about 4 years, and picked up enough Spanish for light conversations. I've forgotten a lot of it now, but I can still get by. I need to get back into it, because I liked knowing as much as I did.

Ezee E
07-11-2008, 07:22 PM
What's the toughest language.

My guess is Russian or an African one.

Spinal
07-11-2008, 07:27 PM
What's the toughest language.

My guess is Russian or an African one.

Those tonal languages would be really difficult to pick up. Mandarin, etc.

Benny Profane
07-11-2008, 07:29 PM
Those tonal languages would be really difficult to pick up. Mandarin, etc.

Not to mention the zillion different characters you have to learn how to read and write. How they do that on a computer I have no idea. 26 letters fits nice and neat on a keyboard. But 10,000?

Ezee E
07-11-2008, 07:34 PM
Not to mention the zillion different characters you have to learn how to read and write. How they do that on a computer I have no idea. 26 letters fits nice and neat on a keyboard. But 10,000?
Probably something like SHIFT+ALT+K = letter 190

D_Davis
07-11-2008, 07:39 PM
Out of the more commonly spoken languages, I've heard that Mandarin and Cantonese are the hardest to learn to speak, and you can just about forget getting a solid grasp on the written language starting as an adult.

As far as typing goes, it's actually pretty cool. We had a foreign exchange student from Japan living with us, and she had a Japanese version of MS Word. Basically, the keyboard is the same as ours, but there are different keystroke combinations for the various kana:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/KB_Japanese.svg/540px-KB_Japanese.svg.png

As each kana is used, a kind of drop down menu appears showing the various complex characters that can then be chosen.

Chinese keyboard are similar, and they offer a simplified version of Chinese.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=mQ8t3dNW_6g

Hugh_Grant
07-11-2008, 07:45 PM
According to my ESL speakers, who come from all over the globe, English is the hardest language. :)

Ezee E
07-11-2008, 09:40 PM
I wish we had a "win key"

Sven
07-12-2008, 05:41 AM
What's the toughest language.

My guess is Russian or an African one.

Russian is remarkably easy. I took it for four to five years (can't remember, honestly), picked it up quickly, and retained enough of it to allow me to qualify it as "easy".

soitgoes...
07-12-2008, 09:43 AM
I like how a third of the General Election thread has become the Language thread. To keep in spirit, I took 2 semesters of Japanese in college, and it was by far tougher than the Spanish that I had learned in high school, work, being alive in the SW USA, etc. Having to learn how to read 4 different writing systems is a bitch. I'm proud to say that I've pretty much forgotten the majority what I've learned. Spanish though, I'm a champ at the cussing. Then again I guess I'm a champ at the Japanese cussing too, since baka and its varients are all I've ever heard.

Go Obama!

Spinal
07-12-2008, 07:00 PM
Apparently, Obama loves Wilco.


Later at a Lincoln Park nightclub, Obama spoke to a raucous crowd of music fans, who paid up to $500 per person to see a performance by Wilco lead singer Jeff Tweedy, and two other band members.

"Before these guys go, I want them to know that I had heard a rumor that they had suggested that I had nothing by them on my iPod," Obama said. "That is not true. I love Wilco."

The article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/12/bernie-mac-heckled-rebuke_n_112296.html) is actually about an off-color joke by Bernie Mac. The part I quote comes at the end.

DavidSeven
07-15-2008, 10:40 PM
The terrorist fist jab says hello to popular culture:

http://www.newyorker.com/images/covers/2008/2008_07_21_p323.jpg

Spinal
07-15-2008, 11:21 PM
Yes, one of the biggest 'what the hell were they thinking?' moments in recent memory.

Ezee E
07-15-2008, 11:34 PM
Yes, one of the biggest 'what the hell were they thinking?' moments in recent memory.
I never knew it was such a big deal.

Spinal
07-15-2008, 11:40 PM
I never knew it was such a big deal.

I'm talking about the editors of The New Yorker, not the Obamas.

Sven
07-16-2008, 12:26 AM
I don't get what the problem is. For political cartooning, I think it's pretty great.

Spinal
07-16-2008, 12:28 AM
I don't get what the problem is. For political cartooning, I think it's pretty great.

Really? You don't see the problem with reinforcing inflammatory and wildly inaccurate imagery even in the name of satire?

Sven
07-16-2008, 12:35 AM
Really? You don't see the problem with reinforcing inflammatory and wildly inaccurate imagery even in the name of satire?

The Daily Show is a worse criminal in this regard, I think, and because it is not being harassed, I do not feel compelled to be bothered by the illustration. I think it's effectively silly.

Spinal
07-16-2008, 12:38 AM
The Daily Show is a worse criminal in this regard, I think, and because it is not being harassed, I do not feel compelled to be bothered by the illustration. I think it's effectively silly.

The illustration does not have a laugh track and a heavy dose of Jon Stewart's sarcastic tone.

D_Davis
07-16-2008, 12:40 AM
I don't get what the problem is. For political cartooning, I think it's pretty great.

So do I.

Aren't we supposed to view this as "Obama viewed from an idiot's perspective?"

Sven
07-16-2008, 12:40 AM
The illustration does not have a laugh track and a heavy dose of Jon Stewart's sarcastic tone.

It's pretty stinkin' sarcastic, but I'll give you laugh track.

Spinal
07-16-2008, 12:46 AM
So do I.

Aren't we supposed to view this as "Obama viewed from an idiot's perspective?"

Well, yes, of course. But it also reinforces the negative stereotypes of the ill-informed by creating a striking visual image that will be remembered. Where there's smoke, there's fire sort of thing.

Sven
07-16-2008, 12:52 AM
Well, yes, of course. But it also reinforces the negative stereotypes of the ill-informed by creating a striking visual image that will be remembered. Where there's smoke, there's fire sort of thing.

Spinal:Liberals::megladon8:Bat man

:)

Kurosawa Fan
07-16-2008, 12:52 AM
The Daily Show is a worse criminal in this regard, I think, and because it is not being harassed, I do not feel compelled to be bothered by the illustration. I think it's effectively silly.

I've often worried about the effect that The Colbert Report has on the average viewer. Sometimes I think they can be guilty of doing some damage with their brand of humor.

Spinal
07-16-2008, 12:56 AM
Spinal:Liberals::megladon8:Bat man

:)

Uh no.

But anyway, I guess what I'm saying is that the satirical value is heavily outweighed by the potential damage the picture could do if not interpreted intelligently. I just envision this already on it's way to the inboxes of numerous swing voters.

Sven
07-16-2008, 12:59 AM
Uh no.

Absence of comma = gold


But anyway, I guess what I'm saying is that the satirical value is heavily outweighed by the potential damage the picture could do if not interpreted intelligently. I just envision this already on it's way to the inboxes of numerous swing voters.

I understand your response. However, I don't think it's going to be any more effective in influencing anyone than any political cartoon ever is.

Spinal
07-16-2008, 01:13 AM
I understand your response. However, I don't think it's going to be any more effective in influencing anyone than any political cartoon ever is.

I'm not saying it should be banned or anything. Just seems like the 'inviting trouble' to 'funny' ratio is all out of whack.

Winston*
07-16-2008, 01:49 AM
You'd have to be unbelievably stupid to not take that as satire, but it's not clever satire. Not as bad as that awful "I'm Voting Republican" video posted a while back though.

I think the main problem with The Daily Show these days is that it's not played straight enough btw.

Spinal
07-16-2008, 01:52 AM
You'd also have to be unbelievably stupid to vote for Bush twice.

D_Davis
07-16-2008, 01:57 AM
I don't think we should censor or limit satire and political humor because of how it might influence the uneducated and the stupid.

But then again, there are a lot of stupid people out there.

Benny Profane
07-16-2008, 02:03 AM
You'd also have to be unbelievably stupid to vote for Bush twice.

This kinda reminds me of something I was thinking about today.

I really think the Democrats need to quit if they lose. Give someone else a chance because they are massive failures.

An outgoing President with a 20ish% approval rating, an unpopular war, a tanking economy, and a Republican candidate who is 146 years old/less exciting than cold oatmeal.

You lose against that, you lose your right to ever try again. Shameful.

DavidSeven
07-16-2008, 03:09 AM
You'd have to be unbelievably stupid to not take that as satire

Most swing voters in America can be categorized as such. Joe Trailer-Park isn't going to get the joke when he sees the cover splashed all over CNN.

This is why fist pumps and the religious beliefs of a candidate's third cousin's boyfriend get heavy play. Because yes, people really are that stupid.

Ezee E
07-16-2008, 07:01 AM
I really regret signing up on Barack's website.

I was called earlier today to join some type of campaign to go door-to-door and get voters. I'm only thinking of going in hopes of meeting some chics.

Scar
07-16-2008, 01:56 PM
You'd also have to be unbelievably stupid to vote for Bush twice.

:|

shaun
07-16-2008, 02:28 PM
I really regret signing up on Barack's website.Same. I made the mistake of donating to his campaign and now his spam easily outnumbers the penile dysfunction and hot teen ass emails 5-1.

Benny Profane
07-16-2008, 02:53 PM
I've been on a hate binge with Obama recently. I think the FISA voting sunk his ass for me. He was very clear about accountability for any law violations by telecomm companies and reversed it outright.

MadMan
07-16-2008, 10:51 PM
This kinda reminds me of something I was thinking about today.

I really think the Democrats need to quit if they lose. Give someone else a chance because they are massive failures.

An outgoing President with a 20ish% approval rating, an unpopular war, a tanking economy, and a Republican candidate who is 146 years old/less exciting than cold oatmeal.

You lose against that, you lose your right to ever try again. Shameful.Well the Republican Party got their asses kicked quite a bit in the mid 20th century before they regrouped in the 1970s. Both parties have gone through periods where it appeared that their survival was highly unlikely. That said, I'm all in favor of third parties emerging. I'm sick of the two party system, and I think its led to a government that is failing this country. However the laws and the system that favors two parties has to be changed, and of course we all know who's in charge of that.


You'd also have to be unbelievably stupid to vote for Bush twice.Or a conservative. My dad is actually a pretty smart guy, and he voted for Bush twice. I hate Dubya and I've never voted for him, but blanket statements like that really don't help any general political discourse.

From the get go I liked Obama, but I've never been in awe of him like others, especially some liberal friends I know. Sure if he does manage to get elected he may do some things, but the status quo probably won't change much. After all he is a Democrat, and at times they make the Republicans seem in favor of lesser government. Will I vote for him because I believe he is a good choice? Yes. Do I think the world will end if McCain gets elected? Eh, probably not.

Spinal
07-21-2008, 01:30 AM
Or a conservative. My dad is actually a pretty smart guy, and he voted for Bush twice. I hate Dubya and I've never voted for him, but blanket statements like that really don't help any general political discourse.


Voting for Bush doesn't help general political discourse. I'd say people who have voted for Bush have done a lot more damage than I have.

Ezee E
07-21-2008, 05:06 AM
Spike Lee and Quentin Tarantino are going to be at the National Convention here in Denver.

Weird

origami_mustache
07-28-2008, 02:51 AM
I found this to be pretty profound and sums up my disinterest in politics....

http://www.public.asu.edu/~kadams/PoliticalGraffiti_files/image002.jpg

Ezee E
07-28-2008, 03:33 AM
I found this to be pretty profound and sums up my disinterest in politics....

http://www.public.asu.edu/~kadams/PoliticalGraffiti_files/image002.jpg
Hmm... I'm not even going to comment on that one.

Sycophant
07-28-2008, 03:35 AM
Spike Lee and Quentin Tarantino are going to be at the National Convention here in Denver.

WeirdTo announce a collaborative biopic about Barack Obama?

Ezee E
07-28-2008, 03:43 AM
To announce a collaborative biopic about Barack Obama?
There's already a documentary in the works by Ed Norton, who will also be there.

MadMan
07-28-2008, 04:10 AM
I found this to be pretty profound and sums up my disinterest in politics....I'm not even that cynical.


Voting for Bush doesn't help general political discourse. I'd say people who have voted for Bush have done a lot more damage than I have.Point taken, however I blame his advisors and Dick C, who drive his policy decisions and actions far more than John Q. Public. Not that I'm saying those who voted for him don't bear some responsibility for his actions, of course.

Sycophant
07-28-2008, 04:36 AM
John Q. Public should have been well aware of his advisors and Dick C. by November 2004.

Spinal
07-30-2008, 07:59 AM
Jon Voight: Paranoid Loony (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/28/voight/)

MadMan
07-30-2008, 08:15 AM
John Q. Public should have been well aware of his advisors and Dick C. by November 2004.Oh come on, do you really think that most of the American public understands and knows the machinations of most of the branches? Especially the executive branch, which is probably the most least understood out of all them? I'm not saying that some don't, but considering that many Americans can't even name at least five Supreme Court justices among other things I don't think its too arrogant or elitist to suggest such a thing.

Jon Vought is just like Charlton Heston: liberal during the 60s and 70s, conservative in his later years. But I donno if Heston ever became that paranoid or not.

Kurosawa Fan
07-30-2008, 02:12 PM
Jon Voight: Paranoid Loony (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/28/voight/)

I love that first paragraph. How's your relationship with your daughter again Jon? Been to see the grandkids lately? Apparently you know the importance of teachers, you just didn't feel like doing much quality teaching yourself.

bac0n
07-30-2008, 02:21 PM
Madman - Sycophant said should have known, not did know. All of the shit Bush was doing was all over the newspapers, the internet, everywhere. But most people were getting their news from CNN and Fox (or not at all), which aren't exactly bastions of in-depth get-to-the-bottom-of-the-story coverage.

And then there was the fact that John Kerry put up one of the most pathetic, limp campaigns in history. He didn't start calling Bush to task in earnest until September, when it was too late.

Lewis Black put it really well.


The fact of the matter is the Democrats not being able to find somebody to defeat George Bush is beyond belief. It's stunning. It would be like finding a normal person who would lose in the Special Olympics."

origami_mustache
07-30-2008, 03:08 PM
Hmm... I'm not even going to comment on that one.

actually I do vote...only out of respect for my grandma

:lol:

anyways....I won't be back in this thread.

lemon
07-30-2008, 05:34 PM
Obama is just owning McCain media wise. When the media does decide to do a story about McCain the stories are always negative or somehow point to him being a bumbling old man. Obama on the other hand will have 3 new stories about him contemplating about thinking about talking to an aide on the pros and cons of visiting a presumptive vice presidential nominee. Granted, I do not watch Fox News and only read Google News and the Washington Post (occasionally Baltimore Sun).

I guess a lot could change in the next few months but honestly I think Obama already has this in the bag.

Benny Profane
07-30-2008, 06:03 PM
Bush signs housing rescue law (http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/30/news/economy/housing_bill_Bush/index.htm?cnn=yes)

Here are some of the details...there are strings attached, but the owner getting bailed out essentially gets to re-purchase the house at its current assessed value while the responsible people making their payments still get to pay full price from the boom years. Sounds perfectly fair to me, a responsible person who bought his home in 2006.

Who's eligible?
Qualified borrowers must live in their homes and have loans that were issued between January 2005 and June 2007. Additionally, they must be spending at least 31% of their gross monthly income on mortgage debt to be eligible for the program.

They can be up to date on their existing mortgage or in default, but either way borrowers must prove that they will not be able to keep paying their existing mortgage - and attest that they are not deliberately defaulting just to obtain lower payments.

Before homeowners can get FHA-backed mortgages, they must first retire any other debt on the home, such as a home equity loan or line of credit. Borrowers are not permitted to take out another home equity loan for at least five years, unless it's to pay for necessary upkeep on the home.

To get a new home equity loan, borrowers will need approval from the FHA, and total debt cannot exceed 95% of the home's appraised value at the time.

How can I apply?
Borrowers can contact their current mortgage servicer or go directly to an FHA-approved lender for help. These lenders can be found on the Web site of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

How does the refinancing process work?
This is a voluntary program, so lenders holding the original mortgage have to agree to rework a given loan before things can get started. The bill requires lenders to make major concessions, writing down the value of the loan to 90% of the home's current value. In areas where prices have plummeted by as much as 20%, that will mean a substantial loss for the lender.

But lenders won't sign off on a workout unless they think that they'll lose less money on that than they would by allowing a home to go through the costly foreclosure process.

Each loan will have to be underwritten by an FHA lender on a case-by-case basis. That means the banks will do a new appraisal to determine the home's current value, as well as examine and verify income statements, bank accounts, job histories and credit scores.

Based on that new appraised home value, the FHA lender must determine how much the original lender has to reduce the original mortgage, so that it will reflect 90% of the home's market value.

If the original lender agrees to the writedown, the new lender buys the old loan and takes over the reworked mortgage.

As part of the deal, the old lender writes off any fees and penalties on the original mortgage, including prepayment penalties, and accepts the proceeds from the new loan on a paid-in-full basis. Additionally, it pays the FHA an up-front premium equal to 3% of the mortgage principal.

What does it cost?
There should be little up-front costs for borrowers to bear. Loan origination fees will vary by lender, but these can usually be paid by the borrower over the life of the loan in the form of a slightly higher interest rate.

However, the refinanced loans do come with many strings. For one thing, borrowers are responsible for paying an insurance premium to the FHA guaranteeing the loan, which will be 1.5% of the principal annually.

Borrowers also agree to share any profits from future home-price appreciation with the FHA. To do that, they'll pay a "3% exit fee" of the mortgage principal to the FHA when they resell or refinance.

Plus, they'll agree to pay the FHA 100% of any profits they realize from higher home prices if they sell or refinance within a year. So if the original loan principal is $200,000 and the home sells for $250,000, the borrower will owe the FHA $50,000, minus costs.

After a year, borrowers will share 90% of the profits with the FHA. The percentage keeps dropping in 10% increments to 50% after the fifth year, where it stays.

Benny Profane
07-30-2008, 06:41 PM
Meanwhile...

Good job, guys! (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/07/27/ST2008072701005.html)

"Richard F. Syron, chairman of Freddie Mac, earned $14.5 million in 2007, including a $2.2 million performance bonus.

Daniel H. Mudd, Fannie Mae president and chief executive, saw his pay drop 15 percent last year, according to the company's proxy. Still, Mudd received $14.2 million in 2007, including a $10 million direct stock award."

These two fucks should be shot.

The first $20 million for the bailout should be coming directly out of their fucking pockets.

Scar
07-30-2008, 07:08 PM
Frustrating is far too polite of a term....

Spinal
07-30-2008, 07:18 PM
Sure, Obama is a celebrity, but so are BRITNEY AND PARIS HILTON!!!! (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/30/mccain-ad-links-paris-hil_n_115841.html)

DavidSeven
07-30-2008, 09:04 PM
"What we decided to do is find the top three international celebrities in the world, and I would say from our indications, Britney and Paris came in second and third," said campaign manager Rick Davis. "Will people think of this as negative advertising? Look, it is the most entertaining thing I have seen on TV in a while." He went on: "It is not our campaign that is trying to make him into an international celebrity. It's his campaign... I don't know Paris Hilton and Britney Spears but they are international celebrities, so, you know, apples to apples."

:|

People. They're stupid.

Spinal
07-30-2008, 09:07 PM
The Republicans trying to turn Obama's overwhelming popularity into a negative is comedy of Yogi Berra-esque proportions.

MadMan
07-30-2008, 11:51 PM
Madman - Sycophant said should have known, not did know. All of the shit Bush was doing was all over the newspapers, the internet, everywhere. But most people were getting their news from CNN and Fox (or not at all), which aren't exactly bastions of in-depth get-to-the-bottom-of-the-story coverage.Oh, I must have misread his post. Point taken, and another reason why I stopped watching cable news a long time ago.


And then there was the fact that John Kerry put up one of the most pathetic, limp campaigns in history. He didn't start calling Bush to task in earnest until September, when it was too late.

Lewis Black put it really well.Heh yeah, Kerry did suck. I regret voting for him back then. I should have just voted third party. But nooo, I wanted Bush out so bad that I was willing to vote for someone was merely "The lesser of two evils."

Lewis Black is really awesome, and hilarious. That quote is completely spot on.

As for the housing stuff, that really just pisses me off. Especially the post about the performance bonuses. Good freakin' grief.

Dead & Messed Up
08-02-2008, 06:12 PM
So Obama reneged on "no offshore drilling," and is now saying he'd be willing to strike a compromise. This adjustment immediately after polls that showed a slight majority of Americans favor offshore drilling as a means of offsetting economic woes.

Spinal
08-02-2008, 06:17 PM
So Obama reneged on "no offshore drilling," and is now saying he'd be willing to strike a compromise. This adjustment immediately after polls that showed a slight majority of Americans favor offshore drilling as a means of offsetting economic woes.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of that decision.

Benny Profane
08-02-2008, 06:30 PM
Flip.

Flop.

Duncan
08-03-2008, 12:40 AM
Hmm. If Obama is going to end up disappointing me I hope he just gets it over with rather than letting me down a little bit at a time with decisions like that. Tell me he's a child molester or something so I can go back to my comfortable cynicism. I've never put so much faith in a person I didn't know on an intimate level before. Time will tell, of course. But it's weird how much decisions like that hurt me. I feel like a needy little girl. It's a terrible policy. He knows it's a terrible policy. Stick to what's right for christ's sake! Ugh.

Benny Profane
08-03-2008, 12:53 AM
Obama is definitely not what he was built up to be. That much is obvious.

Ezee E
08-03-2008, 01:08 AM
All that's left is to see who his running mate will be.

Milky Joe
08-03-2008, 01:17 AM
politics in america (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXpdJLJqG9U&feature=related)

MadMan
08-03-2008, 01:58 AM
Leadership has been the one crucial thing lacking in American politics today. Clearly its not that popular with the voters :| But then that's what part of leadership is: making unpopular decisions that may be right, or necessary.

Acapelli
08-03-2008, 05:25 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/02/campaign.wrap/?iref=hpmostpop


CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama responded Saturday to criticism that he has changed his position on opposing offshore oil drilling.

Obama said Friday that he would be willing to compromise on his position against offshore oil drilling if it were part of a more overarching strategy to lower energy costs.

"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama told The Palm Beach Post early into a two-day swing through Florida.

But on Saturday morning, Obama said this "wasn't really a new position."

"I made a general point about the fact that we need to provide the American people some relief and that there has been constructive conversations between Republicans and Democrats in the Senate on this issue," he said during a press conference in Cape Canaveral.

"What I will not do, and this has always been my position, is to support a plan that suggests this drilling is the answer to our energy problems," Obama added.

"If we've got a plan on the table that I think meets the goals that America has to set and there are some things in there that I don't like, then obviously that's something that I would consider because that's the nature of how we govern in a democracy."

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html


The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. Total domestic production of crude oil from 2012 through 2030 in the OCS access case is projected to be 1.6 percent higher than in the reference case, and 3 percent higher in 2030 alone, at 5.6 million barrels per day. For the lower 48 OCS, annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher—2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case (Figure 20). Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.

Acapelli
08-03-2008, 05:56 AM
and attacking flip-flopping is stupid and lazy

i mean look at what bush's stubborness has got us these last 8 years

Dead & Messed Up
08-03-2008, 04:46 PM
and attacking flip-flopping is stupid and lazy

i mean look at what bush's stubborness has got us these last 8 years

Adjusting a plan has merit when the plan requires adjustment. This cannot be said of Obama's softening on funding offshore drilling, which is still as inefficient as ever. What made him alter his position? My guess is recent gallup polls that say Americans believe offshore drilling will have an impact on oil prices.

Which they won't.

Which makes his change in policy pandering.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v179/deadandmessedup/starjones.jpg

Acapelli
08-04-2008, 12:22 AM
yeah i'm totally against offshore drilling, which is why i posted the second link, but i can hear all the flip flop attacks coming and working, and it's just annoying

Dead & Messed Up
08-04-2008, 01:01 AM
yeah i'm totally against offshore drilling, which is why i posted the second link, but i can hear all the flip flop attacks coming and working, and it's just annoying

What's annoying is how such childish, reductionist catch-phrases carry so much weight. Political strategy and nuanced thought run together like oil and water.

number8
08-07-2008, 08:44 AM
Finally, a candidate with integrity (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/64ad536a6d)

number8
08-14-2008, 06:08 PM
This (http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=1036)? This makes me sick.

Fuck you, Michael Moore. Seriously.

Duncan
08-14-2008, 07:03 PM
This (http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=1036)? This makes me sick.

Fuck you, Michael Moore. Seriously.

Why does it make you sick? The 6th one is annoyingly self-centered (as so much of Moore's stuff is), but a lot of it is true. I think Obama has been advised beyond the capacity to inspire. I find everything that comes from Obama himself to be kinda incredible. His books, the speeches he writes himself, his more candid interview remarks, even the fact that he married a woman like Michelle Obama - all these things suggest to me that he is a remarkably intelligent man who has a genuine, sophisticated understanding of the human condition. And he has the charisma to make people buy into that understanding. I also happen to agree with nearly all his policies. A few months ago I heard that sort of stuff all the time. Recently I hear it less and less often. I hear speeches I honestly couldn't distinguish from those of other Democrats (or even Republicans?). I hear louder and louder a voice of committee averages. In March I could never have associated the word "mediocrity" with Obama. Now, maybe...I keep waiting for him to realize how small he is becoming and return to the person he was.

Sycophant
08-14-2008, 07:11 PM
Why is everyone expecting Obama to pick someone right-leaning or even somewhat right-wing to be his running mate? What the fuck is that?

Maybe if McCain picks Barney Frank as his veep.

D_Davis
08-14-2008, 07:16 PM
Finally, a candidate with integrity (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/64ad536a6d)

She couldn't do any worse than of the jackasses with "experience" we have running the country now.

Kurosawa Fan
08-14-2008, 07:22 PM
Why does it make you sick? The 6th one is annoyingly self-centered (as so much of Moore's stuff is), but a lot of it is true. I think Obama has been advised beyond the capacity to inspire. I find everything that comes from Obama himself to be kinda incredible. His books, the speeches he writes himself, his more candid interview remarks, even the fact that he married a woman like Michelle Obama - all these things suggest to me that he is a remarkably intelligent man who has a genuine, sophisticated understanding of the human condition. And he has the charisma to make people buy into that understanding. I also happen to agree with nearly all his policies. A few months ago I heard that sort of stuff all the time. Recently I hear it less and less often. I hear speeches I honestly couldn't distinguish from those of other Democrats (or even Republicans?). I hear louder and louder a voice of committee averages. In March I could never have associated the word "mediocrity" with Obama. Now, maybe...I keep waiting for him to realize how small he is becoming and return to the person he was.

This is exactly how I feel. I barely even recognize the Obama that inspired confidence months ago. It's been very disappointing, to the point where I've almost lost any vested interest in who wins the election, because I feel like it won't matter in the long run. He feels like just another puppet right now.

Spinal
08-14-2008, 07:43 PM
This is exactly how I feel. I barely even recognize the Obama that inspired confidence months ago. It's been very disappointing, to the point where I've almost lost any vested interest in who wins the election, because I feel like it won't matter in the long run. He feels like just another puppet right now.

Agree slightly to some of the campaign disappointments, but disagree strongly with your conclusion. Obama will NOT be the same president as McCain.

Duncan
08-14-2008, 07:45 PM
Obama will NOT be the same president as McCain. Yeah, I definitely agree with this as well.

Sycophant
08-14-2008, 07:49 PM
Thirded or whatever.

I haven't been paying that much attention lately (because I know I support Obama, and the chance of me voting for anyone else is next to nill, and campaign oversaturation can be wearying), but while I'll agree that Obama's campaign--especially since the nomination was a lock--has been a bit disappointing, his presidency would still be preferred.

DavidSeven
08-14-2008, 07:57 PM
Well, Obama's already captured the far left vote and is in no danger of losing it. His recent "middle of the road"-ness is entirely based on strategy to capture the more simple minded swing voters who tune out complex political policies and only respond to keywords like "lower taxes" and "more oil." His track record is more important than the lip service he has to do now, and it indicates he'll live up to his early promise. Unfortunately, he has to make concessions to get elected, but that can be lived with.

Benny Profane
08-14-2008, 08:00 PM
Well, Obama's already captured the far left vote and is in no danger of losing it. His recent "middle of the road"-ness is entirely based on strategy to capture the more simple minded swing voters who tune out complex political policies and only respond to keywords like "lower taxes" and "more oil." His track record is more important than the lip service he has to do now, and it indicates he'll live up to his early promise. Unfortunately, he has to make concessions to get elected, but that can be lived with.

What about FISA?

DavidSeven
08-14-2008, 08:05 PM
What about FISA?

It's really funny that you mention that because I was actually looking for info on it to throw in as a counterpoint to my own post.

And yeah, what I was going to add is that his decision to vote "yes" on that bill is an epic disappointment from any viewpoint. He has no excuse for that one.

shaun
08-14-2008, 08:16 PM
His recent "middle of the road"-ness is entirely based on strategy to capture the more simple minded swing voters who tune out complex political policies and only respond to keywords like "lower taxes" and "more oil."Are you calling people who don't gravitate towards either extreme of the political spectrum retards, or just the people who are still undecided?

Kurosawa Fan
08-14-2008, 08:20 PM
Agree slightly to some of the campaign disappointments, but disagree strongly with your conclusion. Obama will NOT be the same president as McCain.

Oh, I know. It's just frustration bubbling over. He went from an inspiring figure to what feels like a mouthpiece for a political party. It's just discouraging.

Sycophant
08-14-2008, 08:22 PM
Are you calling people who don't gravitate towards either extreme of the political spectrum retards, or just the people who are still undecided?I think he's rather specifically and explicitly referencing "the more simple minded swing voters who tune out complex political policies and only respond to keywords like 'lower taxes' and 'more oil,'" which does not include all people who don't identify with a specific political philosophy.

I would, but I don't think Seven here was.

shaun
08-14-2008, 08:25 PM
I don't see any strategic benefit to only targeting the idiots so I would assume all the undecideds would fall into that classification of 'simple minded swing voters who tune out complex political policies'.

Sycophant
08-14-2008, 08:28 PM
I don't see any strategic benefit to only targeting the idiots so I would assume all the undecideds would fall into that classification of 'simple minded swing voters who tune out complex political policies'.That's kind of an assumption. I'm sure you'd agree there are a fair number of easily-won or easily-repulsed swing voters who don't really get into the nitty gritty, but buy buzz words by the bushel and take the word of whoever got out the first and muddiest character assassination.

And the strategic benefit? These people vote.

Duncan
08-14-2008, 08:29 PM
Well, Obama's already captured the far left vote and is in no danger of losing it. His recent "middle of the road"-ness is entirely based on strategy to capture the more simple minded swing voters who tune out complex political policies and only respond to keywords like "lower taxes" and "more oil." His track record is more important than the lip service he has to do now, and it indicates he'll live up to his early promise. Unfortunately, he has to make concessions to get elected, but that can be lived with.
Sure, he has a base that will vote for him no matter what. But he proved in the primaries that he could motivate people who were ambivalent about him. His followers were intensely passionate. All of a sudden he was overwhelmingly popular. What did he do when the whole Rev. Wright thing happened? Wrote and delivered a brilliant speech himself. It made me even more a fan of the guy, despite all the media nonsense. That's the kind of persuasiveness that you probably only get once, and I'm afraid now it's gone. I am convinced that the passion of the people who believe[d] in him would have won over those middle ground people. It's infectious. Much more so than a conservative leaning speech written by 6 guys in a dark room each curbing the other's personal ideals until there are no recognizable ideals at all. This election wasn't just about getting elected. It was about getting elected with a zeitgeist behind him that could have been a great, great thing for the world. Maybe it still will be, but I think irrevocable decisions have been made that have severely damped that ripple effect.

And seriously, who the fuck is this guy voting for that FISA bill?

DavidSeven
08-14-2008, 08:37 PM
Are you calling people who don't gravitate towards either extreme of the political spectrum retards, or just the people who are still undecided?

I can see how it would be read like that, but no. I was just referring to the large chunk of voters who vote based on a couple very broad issues and choose to ignore the candidates overall political platform and track record. At this stage of the election, it seems that this is the demographic that ultimately decides who becomes president.

I think the idea of political parties themselves is retarded, so the fact that well-reasoned people wouldn't automatically gravitate toward either one is understandable to me.

DavidSeven
08-14-2008, 08:38 PM
I don't see any strategic benefit to only targeting the idiots so I would assume all the undecideds would fall into that classification of 'simple minded swing voters who tune out complex political policies'.

Not true. The chunk of idiots is just larger than you think (based on recent elections). :)

DavidSeven
08-14-2008, 09:07 PM
Sure, he has a base that will vote for him no matter what. But he proved in the primaries that he could motivate people who were ambivalent about him. His followers were intensely passionate. All of a sudden he was overwhelmingly popular. What did he do when the whole Rev. Wright thing happened? Wrote and delivered a brilliant speech himself. It made me even more a fan of the guy, despite all the media nonsense. That's the kind of persuasiveness that you probably only get once, and I'm afraid now it's gone. I am convinced that the passion of the people who believe[d] in him would have won over those middle ground people. It's infectious. Much more so than a conservative leaning speech written by 6 guys in a dark room each curbing the other's personal ideals until there are no recognizable ideals at all. This election wasn't just about getting elected. It was about getting elected with a zeitgeist behind him that could have been a great, great thing for the world. Maybe it still will be, but I think irrevocable decisions have been made that have severely damped that ripple effect.

And seriously, who the fuck is this guy voting for that FISA bill?

The primary and the general election are two different beasts, and as sad as it is, I don't know that the latter could be won under those ideal conditions. Bush's re-election after a horrendous first term kind of showed that what we perceive as the general consciousness of America doesn't mean a whole lot in the booths. There's too many unrepresented demographics in the media to get a handle on what America really thinks. The way to ensure victory now is win over the people who haven't been won over by his iconic campaign. At least this is what his advisers are probably telling him. I don't like it. I don't agree with it. It's not who I thought he would be. But I know where it's coming from, and he's still the best candidate.

The FISA thing... that's just epic failure.

number8
08-15-2008, 01:37 AM
Why does it make you sick? The 6th one is annoyingly self-centered (as so much of Moore's stuff is), but a lot of it is true. I think Obama has been advised beyond the capacity to inspire. I find everything that comes from Obama himself to be kinda incredible. His books, the speeches he writes himself, his more candid interview remarks, even the fact that he married a woman like Michelle Obama - all these things suggest to me that he is a remarkably intelligent man who has a genuine, sophisticated understanding of the human condition. And he has the charisma to make people buy into that understanding. I also happen to agree with nearly all his policies. A few months ago I heard that sort of stuff all the time. Recently I hear it less and less often. I hear speeches I honestly couldn't distinguish from those of other Democrats (or even Republicans?). I hear louder and louder a voice of committee averages. In March I could never have associated the word "mediocrity" with Obama. Now, maybe...I keep waiting for him to realize how small he is becoming and return to the person he was.

#6 makes me want to kick Michael Moore in the gut, but it was #1 that turned me off completely. Don't mention anything good that McCain does because it might upset the Dems' winning strategy? That's bullshit partisanship, something I'm incredibly against.

And sure, Obama practices in swing voting, and yeah, nobody likes it, but I'm sad to say that it's just standard practice. Every presidential campaign at some point would treat the election as a Poker game. My distaste had more to do with the obvious "Come on, guys, we gotta win this one for the team! What can we do to fuck with the other party? Oh that's right, let's pretend John McCain never went to war, supports torture, ignores global warming, and all the other shit we like our evil Republicans to be, because we can't risk the chance of our guy losing! He can't even use a computer hahaha what a dolt. Listen to what I say and who I endorse!" This list is just utter nonsense from a guy who wants to peddle his work out (Kerry lost the 2004 election because he said he didn't watch Fahrenheit 9/11? REALLY?). I just want Michael Moore to go away.

Sycophant
08-15-2008, 07:36 PM
Barack Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, sent me an email entitled "2 million people like you." I was really touched for a moment, until I realized it wasn't actually a complete sentence and that, as usual, Plouffe is after only one thing: my three-fiddy*.

_________
*Actually, the minimum donation is five dollars.

D_Davis
08-15-2008, 07:48 PM
Barack Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, sent me an email entitled "2 million people like you." I was really touched for a moment, until I realized it wasn't actually a complete sentence and that, as usual, Plouffe is after only one thing: my three-fiddy*.

_________
*Actually, the minimum donation is five dollars.

I got this one. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65I0HNvTDH4)

shaun
08-15-2008, 08:49 PM
David Plouffe has already been added to my spam filters. That bastard is relentless.

Rowland
08-15-2008, 11:08 PM
Obama the Antichrist? (http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CNN_Since_McCain_ad_Obama_Anti christ_0815.html)

number8
08-15-2008, 11:30 PM
Obama the Antichrist? (http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CNN_Since_McCain_ad_Obama_Anti christ_0815.html)

Of course. We know for a fact that Christ was white, so the anti-Bizarro-Christ must be black. Damn, I can't believe I never thought of that.

Spinal
08-17-2008, 02:25 AM
It's frustrating that presidential candidates are forced to go woo the evangelical vote by flaunting their Christian credentials.

Raiders
08-17-2008, 02:37 AM
It's frustrating that presidential candidates are forced to go woo the evangelical vote by flaunting their Christian credentials.

I originally had responded differently, but I understand your frustration since it really should be completely superfluous to the role of the president what his religious beliefs are.

D_Davis
08-17-2008, 02:41 AM
Even as a Christian I sympathize with Spinal's post, although, like Raiders said, there isn't really much of a difference.

However, I personally believe that a man's personal faith should have nothing to do with him being elected president, nor should it account for his ability to lead a country. The appropriation of Jesus, or any other faith, by either the Republican or Democratic party is totally irresponsible and sacrilegious. That people now argue over whether Jesus would be an 'R' or a 'D' is disgusting, and is only further proof that many Christians have totally lost sight of what is important.

People electing politicians based on religion is equally as disgusting, and I believe it should be considered unconstitutional to run on a platform in which religion is a talking point as it is blatantly against the separation of Church and State. Atheists often argue that a theocracy is damaging to a nation, and I also believe that a theocracy is damaging to religion and positive spirituality. It's a no win situation, except for those who wish to usurp power in the name of God, and those corrupted by greed.

Qrazy
08-17-2008, 03:43 AM
Jesus would be an Independent, anyone who says differently is sacrilegious.

D_Davis
08-17-2008, 04:02 AM
:)

Personally, I would rather have a devout atheist as a president.

This way, at least, if he ends up being a total dumb ass he won't make Christians look more stupid than people already think we are.

D_Davis
08-17-2008, 04:05 AM
I remember people at my dad's church asking him who the church was backing as a presidential candidate. I don't often see my dad angry at anything (he's never once even yelled at me), but he got very upset about this and spent a great deal of time talking about the wrongs of politicizing Jesus, and the problems of religion in the government. I think some people left our church after this.

Acapelli
08-17-2008, 04:14 AM
Obama the Antichrist? (http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CNN_Since_McCain_ad_Obama_Anti christ_0815.html)
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/343356


Election Shocker!
08/08/2008 @ 09:01am

Biblical scholars in Colorado Springs have uncovered startling evidence that Senator John McCain may be the Antichrist. Their conclusions, while highly controversial, may have a dramatic impact on the 2008 elections, since many Bible-believing Christians have already expressed doubts about McCain's fealty to Christianity.

The analysis was conducted by the respected True Bible Society, and it will be published next month in the End Times Journal.

The analysis was especially ironic, given that it came out just one day after McCain was accused of subtly hinting that Barack Obama could be the Antichrist. McCain ran a commercial depicting Obama as "The One," giving rise to charges that he was sending a subliminal messages to anti-Obama Christians.

"What started us looking at this issue is the fact that Senator McCain has declared his intention to maintain US forces in Iraq for a hundred years," said David Jenkins, a leading Biblical scholar. "That means that McCain wants to control Babylon for at least a century." According to many scholars of the Book of Revelation, the Antichrist will try to rebuild the ancient city of Babylon in order to use it as a springboard for an international effort at world domination. Ultimately, the Antichrist will marshal forces from Babylon to spark a showdown with Christian and Jewish-led forces in the battle of Armageddon.

"We believe that the End Times is near, based on the pattern of wars, earthquakes. and other strange phenomena we've been witnessing since the start of the New Millennium," said Jenkins. "Given that it may be imminent, the person who controls Babylon must be the Antichrist." Until 2003, many Christians believed that Saddam Hussein might be the Antichrist, since he started excavations to restore Babylon in the mid 1970s. But Hussein's death meant that the Antichrist is someone else. Since Obama wants to get out of Iraq, he can't be the Antichrist either, concluded Jenkins.

Jenkins said his teams suspicions were further heightened when genealogical research showed that McCain's great-grandfather was actually not John McCain, but John Mihai. Mihai is an ancient Romanian name, and according to Bible-believing Christians, the Antichrist is likely to be a Romanian. "What clinched it for us was that the name Mihai means 'who is like the Lord,'" said Jenkins. "As far as we're concerned, that was enough. It means that McCain might easily pretend to be the Redeemer."

McCain's geniality and folksiness are consistent with his being the Antichrist, Jenkins said. "Many people think that the Antichrist will be a evil-seeming leader, but in fact the Bible tells us that he will be charming."

So far the McCain campaign has refused to comment on Jenkins' study.

D_Davis
08-17-2008, 04:24 AM
If I had to choose who was more antichristy, McCain, or Obama, I'd go with McCain.

Spinal
08-17-2008, 05:20 AM
If I had to choose who was more antichristy, McCain, or Obama, I'd go with McCain.

Both of them are merely decoys. We all know it's going to end up being Kevin Spacey.

MadMan
08-17-2008, 05:22 AM
Both of them are merely decoys. We all know it's going to end up being Kevin Spacey.Dun dun dun!!! :eek:

Benny Profane
08-18-2008, 07:24 PM
http://bitsandpieces.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/imagesbroc-20obama.jpg

shaun
08-20-2008, 03:38 PM
McCain takes the lead in new Zogby/Reuters poll.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12656.html

Things should at the very least become interesting again leading into the conventions. More substance, less cult of celebrity on both sides please.

Spinal
08-20-2008, 03:55 PM
This is not a tough call, America. Focus.

MadMan
08-20-2008, 04:04 PM
This is not a tough call, America. Focus.The American people? Focus? We're a nature of reality TV addicts, ADD folk (like myself), and many an apathetic person who says "Why vote? It doesn't matter." I'm surprised that the candidates running aren't the winner of American Idol and "So You Think You Can Dance?" :|


All cynical sarcasm aside, this message has to be pointed at swing voters (I'm among them) and not those who are either staunchly Republican or Democrat. To one or the other, who should be president is obvious. Whether or not they are wrong is a matter of opinion. Do I think that Obama should be president? Yes, but I'm only 60-75% sure he should be. But I'm not convinced that the world will come to an end if McCain gets elected.

Spinal
08-20-2008, 04:10 PM
If McCain wins, I'm holding Madman accountable.

Kurosawa Fan
08-20-2008, 04:14 PM
If McCain wins, I'm holding Madman accountable.

If McCain wins, the Democrats should just disband, because it will be the biggest failure in modern political history. The Presidency is theirs for the taking after the bumbling of Republicans the last 8 years. Obama is a great candidate. If they can't pull this off, they should just walk away, heads hanging low, and admit that they're completely incompetent.

shaun
08-20-2008, 04:31 PM
If they can't pull this off, they should just walk away, heads hanging low, and admit that they're completely incompetent.Pretty much. I don't think a November victory necessarily clears them of incompetence but a loss would definitely remove all doubt.

Sycophant
08-20-2008, 04:42 PM
Last night, I listened to a dozen or so family members "discuss" how Obama doesn't like America, is friends with terrorists, and plays the race card in every speech. I was the only non-neocon there, so I just silently drank my water and watched the sun dip behind the mountains, but it's strange to witness such idiocy first hand.

Benny Profane
08-20-2008, 04:49 PM
Pretty much. I don't think a November victory necessarily clears them of incompetence but a loss would definitely remove all doubt.

Remember how happy all the dems were when they gained control of the Congress a couple years ago? Anyone witness a lot of "change" since then? Goes to show it's absolutely impossible to nail down what a candidate will do. They lie so much, they misrepresent so much, and they change so much during elections (and in office) that the best you can hope for is aligning as many of your very core issues and hope they do a good job with the rest of it.

Both of these candidates are partisan schmucks.

Kurosawa Fan
08-20-2008, 04:52 PM
Last night, I listened to a dozen or so family members "discuss" how Obama doesn't like America, is friends with terrorists, and plays the race card in every speech. I was the only non-neocon there, so I just silently drank my water and watched the sun dip behind the mountains, but it's strange to witness such idiocy first hand.

I heard a certain woman very close to me (though I won't mention who (no, not my wife)) say that she believed Obama was a terrorist. I was so floored I was rendered completely speechless. There's no point in speaking with someone like that. It's a waste of time and oxygen.

Spinal
08-20-2008, 05:03 PM
I heard a certain woman very close to me (though I won't mention who (no, not my wife)) say that she believed Obama was a terrorist. I was so floored I was rendered completely speechless. There's no point in speaking with someone like that. It's a waste of time and oxygen.

And people wondered why I objected to the New Yorker cover? It doesn't matter how stupid it is. All you have to do is put the words or images out there enough times and there's a percentage of the population who will use it lend credence to their paranoid fears.

D_Davis
08-20-2008, 05:06 PM
Last night, I listened to a dozen or so family members "discuss" how Obama doesn't like America, is friends with terrorists, and plays the race card in every speech. I was the only non-neocon there, so I just silently drank my water and watched the sun dip behind the mountains, but it's strange to witness such idiocy first hand.

You know what? If "liking" America means never-ending war, sending Americans to die for lies, a terrible economy, and a lower standard of living, then I am all for voting for somebody who hates the fucking shit out of America.

MadMan
08-20-2008, 05:29 PM
If McCain wins, the Democrats should just disband, because it will be the biggest failure in modern political history. The Presidency is theirs for the taking after the bumbling of Republicans the last 8 years. Obama is a great candidate. If they can't pull this off, they should just walk away, heads hanging low, and admit that they're completely incompetent.If both parties fell apart that would rock. I'll settle simply for the destruction of the two party junta, which has an iron grip on this nation and is strangling our democracy. Besides Washington and the Founding Fathers warned us about the dangers of what Madison called "Factions," noting that they would rise up and harm our republic.


If McCain wins, I'm holding Madman accountable.:lol: Even though I'm voting for Obama? Oh and if you hold me accountable, just don't negative rep me. I like my rep. That's all I ask. :P

Also I would get drunk and argue with the people Sycophant was at the party with. In the end I would call them all idiots, arguing that they had no idea what the hell they were talking about and that partisan extremism would be the downfall of America. Quite frankly I don't even bother trying to talk politics with most people, as it either leads to really bad things, possiblity of fighting, or simply the wailing and nashing of teeth. Plus swear words.

Duncan
08-20-2008, 05:30 PM
This is not a tough call, America. Focus.

I'm not sure whether or not this is an exaggeration, but I think the biggest lesson I took from 5 years of living in the States is to never underestimate how scared, ignorant, religious, lacking in spirituality, and conservative the average American is. When I am bewildered by something like this I remember that and come to the conclusion that it's a very tough call.

bac0n
08-20-2008, 05:30 PM
Both of these candidates are partisan schmucks.

Ya know, at one point I would have agreed with this statement, about not only Obama, but McCain as well, but these days... *sigh*

Sycophant
08-20-2008, 05:36 PM
I can't see how anything but a two-party system would work within American government.

Kurosawa Fan
08-20-2008, 05:39 PM
I can't see how anything but a two-party system would work within American government.

A zero party system would be ideal. Otherwise I'll take two.

MadMan
08-20-2008, 05:39 PM
Ya know, at one point I would have agreed with this statement, about not only Obama, but McCain as well, but these days... *sigh*What I found laughable after both candidates seized the nominations is that they promised to "Run honorable campaigns," without any attacks. I knew that was bullshit, and it didn't take long for either one to go negative. What I've "learned" (aka, noted) from these adds:

*Under McCain, it'll be Bush II. McCain is a corporate whore, beholden to the same evil companies that are destroying America. He'll drill for oil everywhere! We'll have oil wells on the White House lawn! We'll be in Iraq for centuries!

*Obama will raise taxes! Lots of taxes! He's a dirty liberal! The dirty rat will cut and run from Iraq! Surrender monkeys!

And I think while I failed to mention a couple more things, you get the point.

Duncan
08-20-2008, 05:57 PM
Both of these candidates are partisan schmucks. I don't think that's fair or accurate. Obama is liberal, but that's not the same as someone who follows the party line for the sake of following the party line. He also isn't just "liberal" as the word is presently defined. His economic policies can actually be construed as right wing. They're not, but they're not left wing either. This (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/magazine/24Obamanomics-t.html?hp)is a pretty great, in depth article on his economic stance. It's much more nuanced than it is portrayed as. And, as always, the quotes in the interview show him to be a remarkably intelligent and thoughtful person.

Duncan
08-20-2008, 05:59 PM
Why wouldn't more than two parties work?

Benny Profane
08-20-2008, 06:07 PM
I don't think that's fair or accurate. Obama is liberal, but that's not the same as someone who follows the party line for the sake of following the party line. He also isn't just "liberal" as the word is presently defined. His economic policies can actually be construed as right wing. They're not, but they're not left wing either. This (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/magazine/24Obamanomics-t.html?hp)is a pretty great, in depth article on his economic stance. It's much more nuanced than it is portrayed as. And, as always, the quotes in the interview show him to be a remarkably intelligent and thoughtful person.

Obama voted in line with fellow Senate Democrats 97 percent of the time in 2007 and 2005, and 96 percent of the time in 2006, according to Congressional Quarterly. That's where my statement came from.

McCain's numbers range from 67% in 2001 to 95% in 2007.

bac0n
08-20-2008, 07:10 PM
Why wouldn't more than two parties work?

Say you have five parties putting forth candidates, and the race is relatively close.

Flip Patterson (Republican) wins with 22% of the popular vote.
Sam Blake (Democrat) gets 20%.
Moon Starchild (Green) gets 19%.
Fred Hayek III (Libertarian) gets 19%.
Ralph Nader (Independent) gets 15%.
And the rest (24%) vote for other candidates.

Now you have yourself a plurality, not a majority. And a president who got only 22% of the popular vote. That means 78% of the voters didn't want Flip Patterson to be president. That means a lotta disgruntled voters.

This tends to be the main argument against three/four/five/etc. party systems.

Winston*
08-20-2008, 07:25 PM
Why wouldn't more than two parties work?

Name a country where a multi-party system has been successfully implemented. That's right, you can't.

Duncan
08-20-2008, 07:42 PM
Name a country where a multi-party system has been successfully implemented. That's right, you can't.

Canada?

Duncan
08-20-2008, 08:01 PM
Say you have five parties putting forth candidates, and the race is relatively close.

Flip Patterson (Republican) wins with 22% of the popular vote.
Sam Blake (Democrat) gets 20%.
Moon Starchild (Green) gets 19%.
Fred Hayek III (Libertarian) gets 19%.
Ralph Nader (Independent) gets 15%.
And the rest (24%) vote for other candidates.

Now you have yourself a plurality, not a majority. And a president who got only 22% of the popular vote. That means 78% of the voters didn't want Flip Patterson to be president. That means a lotta disgruntled voters.

This tends to be the main argument against three/four/five/etc. party systems.
So that voting break down is similar to what happens in Canada. What happens is that if a party wants to get something accomplished they are forced to talk with other parties and compromise so that something closer to the true national sentiment is reached. It avoids polarization because if the party with the most seats tries to take the country too far in one direction (as I think the Republicans have in the US) then the alliances break down and the momentum is stopped.

Yeah, 78% of people didn't want Mr. Patterson to be their president, but (assuming proportional representation, which I know is not the case) this is off set by the fact that those who would allign themselves most closely with the Libertarian or Green party get their voices heard more loudly. It's like the Bloc Quebecois in Canada. They're never going to win a national election. But they do win a significant number of seats in the house of parliament. That allows Quebecors who feel disenfranchised by the Liberal and Conservative parties to have their specific views heard on the national stage.

I think the main difference is actually the President, who has a lot more power than the Prime Minister.

Barty
08-20-2008, 08:28 PM
Both candidates are schmucks.

DavidSeven
08-20-2008, 08:41 PM
We heard the "they're both schmucks" argument during the Bush/Gore election. "What's the difference..." is what got us in this shit.

Duncan
08-20-2008, 08:47 PM
We heard the "they're both schmucks" argument during the Bush/Gore election. "What's the difference..." is what got us in this shit.

And the Bush/Kerry election.

Barty
08-20-2008, 08:48 PM
We heard the "they're both schmucks" argument during the Bush/Gore election. "What's the difference..." is what got us in this shit.

There's a huge difference, no doubt. But either way, I lose. I have McCain, a pansy faux-conservative who does whatever is political expedient for him and sucks the life out of any place he is at. And then there's socialist Obama, who doesn't stand for a damn thing I agree with.

Acapelli
08-20-2008, 08:49 PM
so any preferences on the vp choices?

i almost want obama to pick biden just so someone will finally start fighting back against this mccain campaign. obama's been taking these hits and not retaliating for too long

although i think i'd rather have sebelius

Duncan
08-20-2008, 08:52 PM
There's a huge difference, no doubt. But either way, I lose. I have McCain, a pansy faux-conservative who does whatever is political expedient for him and sucks the life out of any place he is at. And then there's socialist Obama, who doesn't stand for a damn thing I agree with.

Obama is not a socialist. Read the article I posted above.

Benny Profane
08-20-2008, 08:53 PM
We heard the "they're both schmucks" argument during the Bush/Gore election. "What's the difference..." is what got us in this shit.

You can point out that both candidates are schmucks without adding the "what's the difference", though.

shaun
08-20-2008, 08:55 PM
I voted Badnarik in 04 specifically because both major candidates were schmucks and I couldn't in good conscious vote for either as my representative. That won't be the case this year, but it's not like I'm particularly enamored with either at this point.

Politicians at their core are scummy people who end up screwing ~1/2 their constituents with every vote they cast. On a personal level, it's almost always going to come down to voting in the lesser of two evils.

Barty
08-20-2008, 09:17 PM
Obama is not a socialist. Read the article I posted above.

Clever, very clever I will admit. It's still socialism, but a different brand of it, but it's there hidden inside his policy plan. Also, there's more to socialism than just taxes.

transmogrifier
08-20-2008, 09:27 PM
Clever, very clever I will admit. It's still socialism, but a different brand of it, but it's there hidden inside his policy plan. Also, there's more to socialism than just taxes.


To be fair, this response is simply you regurgitating your previously held belief with no explanation at all about why you believe that.

"The earth is flat"

"No, it's not. If you observe carefully, the body of departing ships disappear first, followed by the sails, which implies that the earth is curved."

"Whatever, that's just a secret form of flatness that we are unable to comprehend right now."

Barty
08-20-2008, 09:39 PM
To be fair, this response is simply you regurgitating your previously held belief with no explanation at all about why you believe that.

"The earth is flat"

"No, it's not. If you observe carefully, the body of departing ships disappear first, followed by the sails, which implies that the earth is curved."

"Whatever, that's just a secret form of flatness that we are unable to comprehend right now."

His tax plan cuts taxes for the poor and middle class, it also gives more benefits to them through government programs, to pay for it he raises taxes on the wealthy.

As the article puts it: "These tax cuts are really the essence of his market-oriented redistribution philosophy"

He also supports universal health care, has espoused in his speeches the concept of economic justice.

D_Davis
08-20-2008, 09:49 PM
His tax plan cuts taxes for the poor and middle class, it also gives more benefits to them through government programs, to pay for it he raises taxes on the wealthy.

He also supports universal health care, has espoused in his speeches the concept of economic justice.

And this is bad?

Winston*
08-20-2008, 09:51 PM
Canada?

Name two.

Barty
08-20-2008, 09:52 PM
And this is bad?

Everything after the first comma, yes.

shaun
08-20-2008, 10:33 PM
And this is bad?Not everyone is a fan of forced wealth redistribution. I obviously see a benefit at a human level to maintaining a standard of living "floor", but I still think charity should be an option that's heavily encouraged and not mandated.

I don't even want to think of the billions in bureaucratic bloat that go into maintaining a program like welfare when a non-profit operating at a 1-2% overhead could do so much more with those funds.

D_Davis
08-20-2008, 10:39 PM
Not everyone is a fan of forced wealth redistribution. I obviously see a benefit at a human level to maintaining a standard of living "floor", but I still think charity should be an option that's heavily encouraged and not mandated.

I don't even want to think of the billions in bureaucratic bloat that go into maintaining a program like welfare when a non-profit operating at a 1-2% overhead could do so much more with those funds.

Well, until that happens, I wouldn't mind a little "forced charity."

But then again, I am a stinking, anti-war, hippie, new ager or something.

The way I see it, the old system has gotten us this fucked, so let's see what something different can do. Might as well take a chance on something radically different.

Ezee E
08-20-2008, 11:40 PM
Is it true that McCain recently said something along the lines of, "Today, we are all Georgians?"

Duncan
08-21-2008, 12:13 AM
His tax plan cuts taxes for the poor and middle class, it also gives more benefits to them through government programs, to pay for it he raises taxes on the wealthy.

As the article puts it: "These tax cuts are really the essence of his market-oriented redistribution philosophy"

Barty, there is no affluent, post-industrial revolution society in history that does not have a wealth redistribution policy. Constantly lowering taxes and trimming government intervention results in massive wealth disparities, intolerable working conditions, the collapse of infrastructure, and corruption. Pure laissez-faire market economics (ie. pure capitalism) is an epic failure. That is not opinion, it's historical fact. It is equally true that extreme forms of socialism lead to disaster. However, a combination of the two (as all modern democracies have, including the good ol' USofA despite what you may want to believe) can prove successful. The U.S. is actually a great example. It rallied from the Great Depression using the sneakily socialist tactic of spending government money like crazy to become the world's largest superpower. The current President does this too, but on reckless wars rather than worthwhile domestic causes.


He also supports universal health care, has espoused in his speeches the concept of economic justice.Quite honestly I don't think there is a moral defense for not supporting universal health care. Is the idea that we should let those who can't afford health insurance just suffer if they get sick because if they were real Americans they could make enough money to survive? Are we to let people go on dying slow, agonizing deaths because they can't afford the medications they need? Does being American preclude having empathy?

In any case, Obama's health care policy is not mandatory. You can opt out if you don't want the government's help.

As for the "concept of economic justice," I'm not totally sure what that means. But if it means adopting an economic policy that closes the class gap (which is astronomical at the moment) then it doesn't sound like a bad thing to me. Perhaps you can explain to me why economic disparity is a good thing for the country. I can't say that I see it.

Dead & Messed Up
08-21-2008, 12:24 AM
I really liked how Scott McClellan referred to the Bush Administration as an endless campaign. That they never fully left the "we-have-to-sell-ourselves" attitude. The concept is something I wish I'd put my finger on sooner, since so many representatives never have the time to engage in nuanced politics. They're too busy prepping for the next battle, too busy kissing babies, too busy denouncing, shifting, allying, denying, invoking, provoking, and otherwise stoking the fires of their endless campaign. It's not just a quest for money - it's a Red Queen dash where they race as fast as they can just to stay in office.

The sick joke of this electoral season, in my opinion, is both campaign's supposed hard line on lobbyists.

transmogrifier
08-21-2008, 12:33 AM
It seems logical to me that any society that has any aspirations of functioning over a significant period of time is going to have to maintain some standard of living for the majority of people within that society. In essence we are more or less paying tax on our earnings for the maintainence of a cultural environment that allows us to earn that money in the first place, without being subject to lawlessness and the potential of losing everything at the whim of revolution.

Unfortunately, most conservatives prefer to construct a strawman argument (allied with the convenient spectre of "socialism", even though the word has lost all meaning) of liberal governments taxing in order to tear down the rich and allow all the lazy poor people to lay X-box all day.

D_Davis
08-21-2008, 01:17 AM
I know statistics can be made up ad hoc, but I read one that stated that the divide between the rich and the poor in America, today, is much larger than that between the kings and peasants of long ago.

Anyone else read this? Any grain of truth to it?

Also, I believe that not supporting universal health care is morally reprehensible, and ethically bankrupt. No one asks to be born, however, if you are born I believe it should be up to everyone - government and private citizen - to work together to provide basic human rights such as food, shelter, and the proper care to live a healthy life.

Everyone who posts here was obviously born into a family that was blessed enough to provide, or has worked hard to provide for themselves. However, some people are not, and through no fault of their own their lives are miserable wrecks.

If I have to pay a couple hundred extra dollars a year so that someone can see the doctor when they are sick, great, no big deal. That money will not be missed. So it's two or three games a year I'll have to not play.

That we, in America, have people who are homeless, jobless, starving, and without health care (through no fault of their own) is a great travesty that completely undermines anything else we say we stand for.

MadMan
08-21-2008, 01:44 AM
There's a huge difference, no doubt. But either way, I lose. I have McCain, a pansy faux-conservative who does whatever is political expedient for him and sucks the life out of any place he is at. And then there's socialist Obama, who doesn't stand for a damn thing I agree with.Vote libertarian then. I wish I had back in the 2004 election, if only because I don't really support most of the policies of the Green Party.

However in this election even though I am anti-abortion, pro-gun, and in favor of less government I think that this is the time for more government intervention. According to Time polls (and I wish I could relay on others, but its the one I have on hand for the time being that is not some random internet poll) more and more Americans want the government to become more involved. They don't feel that right now the corporate and private sector is capable, or willing, or able to handle the current economic crisis. And I think they are clearly right.

While I do think that FDR went a bit too far in expanding government during the Great Depression, he had no choice. The policy of kicking back and letting corporate America do its thing lead to a massive economic failure. What I find funny is that even though he's overrated, and even though he has been bashed so much, Bill Clinton was fiscally responsible, enacted sweeping welfare reform, and presided over a long period of economic prosperity and growth. Sure he wasn't responsible for all of it (and the president really doesn't have that much control over the economy, plus he didn't really do anything to screw with that good thing), but still that is worth noting.

In the end, I'm voting for Obama for the following reasons:

*I do feel that he is the better candidate. He's shown a willingness to be more pragmatic, reasonable, and intelligent than McCain.

*Regardless of some shifts on planned Iraq policy, I still think he will end the war. Or at least reduce our presence in Iraq. I was against this sad, long, mess of a war from the get go, and McCain's support of it is a major strike against him.

*His more pro-environmental stance. When it comes to environmental issues, I trust the Democrats more than the Republicans. Although in McCain's defense he has expressed some support for environmental protections of certain wildlife areas.

Beyond that there are other, more or less subtitle reasons that I have yet to either fully develop or dive into. However I refuse to be labeled as someone who is a huge follower of the man, or really buying into his clear "Cult of personality" (yes he does have one, and it is incredibly strong). Still I think while McCain could be a decent president Obama has the potential to be a good, maybe even, great one. Of course either one is a step up from the last douchebag, a man who deserved to be impeached out of office and run out of this country for multiple abuses of power.

Sven
08-21-2008, 01:31 PM
Well, I got a good score, but I kept going over and over it in a fevered rush, so it took me forever. Bah. It was kind of hard for Intermediate.

Raiders
08-21-2008, 01:34 PM
Well, I got a good score, but I kept going over and over it in a fevered rush, so it took me forever. Bah. It was kind of hard for Intermediate.

What questions did you miss? Universal health care and activating the draft?

Sven
08-21-2008, 01:54 PM
What questions did you miss? Universal health care and activating the draft?

OOPSY!

Ezee E
08-21-2008, 01:59 PM
Well, I got a good score, but I kept going over and over it in a fevered rush, so it took me forever. Bah. It was kind of hard for Intermediate.
??

Barty
08-21-2008, 07:59 PM
Obama will pick Hillary. Count on it.

shaun
08-21-2008, 08:13 PM
I don't see that as even a remote possibility.

Ezee E
08-21-2008, 08:33 PM
Obama will pick Hillary. Count on it.
Why would you think this?