Obama or Clinton? - Page 27

oldirti · 05-22-2008, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

when jfk ran for president in the 60's no one really knew who he was, but when they had the first televised debates and people saw who he was, a large majority favored him over nixon.

Edwards could only help obama.......i am not saying i would vote for him i myself am leaning towards the republicans, but remember america likes what they see, they like their tv's and they like watching them, and also a lot of americans don't vote but if obama and edwards were a team it could strike some interest in the baby boomers and the generation below them.

Which is why i think it's what's wrong with these elections. Politicians can't spout out as much BS as they want, as long as they look good while doing it. Or say, in the case of Hillary and Mccain, supporting a gas tax break during holiday times. While everyone (who knows anything about economics) knows you can't do that, and holds no ground, they do it anyway becuase it sounds good.

**leejo** · 05-23-2008, 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beatnik

They'll actually be talking? There will be some dialog, however potentially arbitrary? That's just a wild guess though.

You think they're not talking? Of course we're having discussions with the Iranians and with Hezbollah all the time. We're just not giving them a free dog and pony show.

Steeler · 05-23-2008, 11:23 AM

We cannot risk reducing our strategic dog and pony reserve.

**leejo** · 05-23-2008, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steeler

We cannot risk reducing our strategic dog and pony reserve.

Aka the Film Actors Guild. I don't think there's a risk of losing our ability to provide well-intentioned nitwits to meet with these people, but I also don't think it strengthens the US power or the prestige of the President to compete with Sean Penn and Jimmy Carter for face-time with these characters. I'd prefer for the President to spend his time signing actual agreements with reliable counterparties than haggling with bandits and criminal regimes.

**Lusitano Louco** · 05-24-2008, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CingularDuality

+rep for this post!

That's absurd. Think about it this way instead, so that you don't confuse the issue with currency, and we'll limit it to a small group of people instead: We're on a small island and there are 5 people. The island has plenty of coconuts, crabs, berries and fish. But only one person knows how to build a fire. The economy that they'll create is fairly obvious: the guy that can build a fire will get to kick back and relax while the others fish, crack coconuts, pick berries and catch crabs. Eventually one of the others might weave a net and catch twice as many fish per hour, and the guy with the fire might agree to teach him how to build a fire for an insane amount of fish.

Anyway, I could go on and on to describe how capitalism encourages innovation and hard work, but I wanted to ask you, what prevents any of those people from simply accumulating more and more economic wealth? Can the coconut guy not simply keep picking more and more coconuts until he has a large enough stockpile that he would never have to work another day in his life? (For the sake of discussion, let's pretend that coconuts won't go bad over time...) Can't everyone work hard enough to do the same? Can't the firemaker make contracts to teach the others how to build fire so that HE never has to work again? The answer is yes. There is nothing that stops EVERYONE from being rich in a capitalist economy, except, perhaps, for personal motivation...

No, THAT is absurd. You do know that all of those items can be eaten raw and they probably have more nutrients that way, right? I would just tell the fire guy to go screw himself. If he can't fish or climb a tree he better start selling fire at bargain basement prices or come up with a fire eating act. Dance for your fish fire boy!

**leejo** · 05-24-2008, 11:27 AM

Late-night Friday and Saturday night posts really are the best.

So....anyone seen the latest news on the race? Billary won't quit 'cause someone might shoot Obama's s***?

Someone jumped the shark back around SC, but decided to go back, put on a Fat Elvis costume, throw in rings of fire and some frickin' laser beams on the shark's forehead and jump it again - backwards - just in case anyone thought there was any life left in the campaign.

Delta*RandyShugart* · 05-26-2008, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldirti

Which is why i think it's what's wrong with these elections. Politicians can't spout out as much BS as they want, as long as they look good while doing it. Or say, in the case of Hillary and Mccain, supporting a gas tax break during holiday times. While everyone (who knows anything about economics) knows you can't do that, and holds no ground, they do it anyway becuase it sounds good.

since when during this election has obama or hillary said anything productive, other than getting out of iraq which would be a complete disaster and would only incite more hate towards the USA because now they will say they made us leave and i could see more attacks happening on US soil, but thats IMHO.

Also......I can't see barack winning being a good thing, just because of his middle name......it would be horrible on many different levels having a "hussein" as president of the united states.

but honestly are there any hardened issues or topics that hell or obama have stated other than iraq and raising taxes (which i don't agree with)?

**El_Gringo_Grande** · 05-27-2008, 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

Also......I can't see barack winning being a good thing, just because of his middle name......it would be horrible on many different levels having a "hussein" as president of the united states.

You can't be serious? I mean really.... You must be joking? Right? Please tell me you are joking.

If not, describe these levels you speak of. And describe how it would be horrible.

ScratchMonkey · 05-27-2008, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

since when during this election has obama or hillary said anything productive

Since when in any election has any front-runner said anything useful? I recall voting for Anderson because Reagan and Carter failed to say anything substantive. And it's been the same ever since.

**CingularDuality** · 05-27-2008, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Delta*RandyShugart*

Also......I can't see barack winning being a good thing, just because of his middle name......it would be horrible on many different levels having a "hussein" as president of the united states.

Are you kidding? I think that's one of the good things that will come out of this!

**TheSkudDestroyer** · 05-27-2008, 04:02 PM

At least Al Sharpton will never be able to play the race card again if Obama won...

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldirti

...Or say, in the case of Hillary and Mccain, supporting a gas tax break during holiday times. While everyone (who knows anything about economics) knows you can't do that, and holds no ground, they do it anyway becuase it sounds good.

And you do? Have you even taken a high school economics course yet? Don't pull that thing out unless you plan to bang...

**El_Gringo_Grande** · 05-27-2008, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSkudDestroyer

At least Al Sharpton will never be able to play the race card again if Obama won...

Oh yes he will.

**TheSkudDestroyer** · 05-27-2008, 04:10 PM

Because Obama is not black enough, obviously.

**El_Gringo_Grande** · 05-27-2008, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSkudDestroyer

Because Obama is not black enough, obviously.

Nahh, because it is effective. Electing a black president may take some of that effectiveness away but not all.

Partly because racism still will exist. In fact having a black president may even give some racists the idea "there can't be racism, we have a black president."

Delta*RandyShugart* · 05-27-2008, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by El_Gringo_Grande

You can't be serious? I mean really.... You must be joking? Right? Please tell me you are joking.

If not, describe these levels you speak of. And describe how it would be horrible.

nope not joking......call me crazy but i'm not.

hmmm would you like to have a president with the name hussein? even if its his middle name...personally i would certainly not....i think it would be bad for the country, plus there is something irky about the guy.......i dont know, the only reason if any that i would vote for him (99.9percent chance of me not would be so al sharpton would shut up for 4 years and not blame anything more on the white man holding the black man down)

05-23-2008, 11:23 AM	#393 (permalink)
Steeler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Age: 30 Posts: 2,952	Re: Obama or Clinton? We cannot risk reducing our strategic dog and pony reserve. __________________

05-24-2008, 11:27 AM	#396 (permalink)
leejo Join Date: Sep 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 7,839	Re: Obama or Clinton? Late-night Friday and Saturday night posts really are the best. So....anyone seen the latest news on the race? Billary won't quit 'cause someone might shoot Obama's s***? Someone jumped the shark back around SC, but decided to go back, put on a Fat Elvis costume, throw in rings of fire and some frickin' laser beams on the shark's forehead and jump it again - backwards - just in case anyone thought there was any life left in the campaign.

05-27-2008, 04:10 PM	#403 (permalink)
TheSkudDestroyer Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: NY Posts: 3,225	Re: Obama or Clinton? Because Obama is not black enough, obviously. __________________ \|TG-6th\|Skud BMT Graduate - 320th Training Squadron, Flight 024 - MSgt Romero - "Kids no more!" 30 weeks Keesler AFB, 1W031 - Weather

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links