The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events >> Election 2008



Message

adelphi_sky -> The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/12/2008 7:58:34 PM)

This is the most engaged I've been in the campaign prcess and at the same time the most discouraged and disappointed by the pettiness. Is there no voice of reason in all this? Even in this forum there seems to be a lot of assumptions, presumptions, accusations, and character bashing. Either there are some very bitter people who are disappointed in their party and will attack the opponent without reason. Or that we still aren't ready for a black president. Oh we say we're ready. The polls do, but deep down, we're skeptical. I'm not voting for McCain or Hillary because of their policies. Whether we like it or not, one of the three will be president. Anything else is silliness and slanderous. Which I do believe is a sin. Do you actually think we can do worse than what we've already experienced? I mean really people. We're not voting for a minister, pastor, or any type of clergy. While that is somewhat important, as long as the person can separate their beliefs or lack thereof from doing the best job possible for their country, we should be happy with that. We can't sit up here and judge who is saved, who is not. Who is backslidden and who actually has a relationship with God. Recall that scripture about the plank. So what if we don't agree with their theology. Last time I checked, this forum is filled with heated discussions about theology. But dare we question someone's relationship with God because they are different? Hillary may go to church every Sunday, but does that excuse the fact that she's been caught lying or inflating the truth on more than one occasion? What about McCain? Is he more Christian or saved because he's republican? I couldn't dream up the slander and baseless accusations and even conspiracy theories that I've witnessed in this campaign this far. Let's use reason and objectivity people. Evangelicals loved Bush to death. Thought he was very much qualified. Said he understands Christians and what they want. Said he had the experience and the know-how. Look where that got us. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Perhaps we need to do something different for a change.



tracydolls -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/12/2008 11:38:44 PM)

I came to this forum(election 2008) in this site Christanity to discuss my polictical beliefs with other Christians, you in your post ,post your beliefs. We are told by the Bible to check the theology, BO don't match up. Have you ever read his books? I can go look what he said by hisself.

None of the leaders anywhere looks like by my Bible will be any good for the World. It's only getting worse.

Especially in this Babylon Kingdom.

Change is needed I agree. I think BO will be a good president, help the poor. But from what I believe, he will only have 42 months.


And yes, after that IT WILL BE WORSE.



davemiller7 -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/14/2008 4:09:06 PM)

quote:

Either there are some very bitter people who are disappointed in their party and will attack the opponent without reason. Or that we still aren't ready for a black president.


Yeah, I'm disappointed in my party (Republican). They've bowed to the wishes of Democrats for years now. Not very many are willing to make a stand for freedom and rights.

Am I ready for a black president? Well, Alan Keyes has been My choice for years. Does he stand a chance? Ha!

-Dave, another typical white guy.



blessedinnyc -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/14/2008 4:31:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: adelphi_sky

This is the most engaged I've been in the campaign prcess and at the same time the most discouraged and disappointed by the pettiness. Is there no voice of reason in all this? Even in this forum there seems to be a lot of assumptions, presumptions, accusations, and character bashing. Either there are some very bitter people who are disappointed in their party and will attack the opponent without reason. Or that we still aren't ready for a black president. Oh we say we're ready. The polls do, but deep down, we're skeptical. I'm not voting for McCain or Hillary because of their policies. Whether we like it or not, one of the three will be president. Anything else is silliness and slanderous. Which I do believe is a sin. Do you actually think we can do worse than what we've already experienced? I mean really people. We're not voting for a minister, pastor, or any type of clergy. While that is somewhat important, as long as the person can separate their beliefs or lack thereof from doing the best job possible for their country, we should be happy with that. We can't sit up here and judge who is saved, who is not. Who is backslidden and who actually has a relationship with God. Recall that scripture about the plank. So what if we don't agree with their theology. Last time I checked, this forum is filled with heated discussions about theology. But dare we question someone's relationship with God because they are different? Hillary may go to church every Sunday, but does that excuse the fact that she's been caught lying or inflating the truth on more than one occasion? What about McCain? Is he more Christian or saved because he's republican? I couldn't dream up the slander and baseless accusations and even conspiracy theories that I've witnessed in this campaign this far. Let's use reason and objectivity people. Evangelicals loved Bush to death. Thought he was very much qualified. Said he understands Christians and what they want. Said he had the experience and the know-how. Look where that got us. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Perhaps we need to do something different for a change.

SO PLEASE!!! HELP US!!! We need all the help we can get trying to elevate the level of discourse.

The next time you see an ad-hominem, a straw-man argument, or a claim that seems unsubstantiated, could you please call us out on that?



blessedinnyc -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/14/2008 4:35:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: davemiller7

quote:

Either there are some very bitter people who are disappointed in their party and will attack the opponent without reason. Or that we still aren't ready for a black president.


Yeah, I'm disappointed in my party (Republican). They've bowed to the wishes of Democrats for years now. Not very many are willing to make a stand for freedom and rights.

Am I ready for a black president? Well, Alan Keyes has been My choice for years. Does he stand a chance? Ha!

-Dave, another typical white guy.

Huh. I think Dems have been caving to Republicans for years.

If voters could enter into a legally binding contract not to vote for members of a certain party with other voters, we'd be rid of both parties in four years. Every Democrat and every Republican would hunt a member of the other party down, and in four years, either Dr. Dobson or Ralph Nader would be president. IMHO, either would be preferable to what we currently have.



rcjames -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/14/2008 7:41:51 PM)

quote:

Or that we still aren't ready for a black president


I am qujite ready for a black president - Condi Rice, or Colin Powell will do just fine.

I am also ready for a woman president - Kay Bailey Hutchinson will do just fine.

I am not ready for the elitist marxist Obama, or a coniving lying loveral Clinton.

Thanks
RC



inthysite -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/14/2008 8:05:15 PM)

quote:


Either there are some very bitter people who are disappointed in their party and will attack the opponent without reason. Or that we still aren't ready for a black president.


Why is it when anyone criticizes Barack Obama it is either because we are racists (we are not ready for a black president), or it's because we are bitter, angry, disappointed, insert adjective of choice here...

Why can't it ever be because we don't agree with his far left liberal ideals and policies.

quote:


Perhaps we need to do something different for a change.


Different how? What exactly has Barack stated that he will do that is different from any other Democrat? He plans on raising taxes, increasing spending, increasing the size of government. All typical Democrat policies.


Michelle Obama made the following statement;
"If we don't wake up as a nation with a new kind of leadership...for how we want this country to work, then we won't get universal health care," she said.

"The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more."

I'm sorry but if I worked hard for my pie then I want the whole thing to do with it what I want. If I see someone who is hungry then I will give them a piece of my pie willingly but I don't want the government coming in and taking/stealing my pie to give it to someone else who may not have even tried to earn their own pie.

This is socialism pure and simple!



blessedinnyc -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/14/2008 8:13:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: inthysite

quote:


Either there are some very bitter people who are disappointed in their party and will attack the opponent without reason. Or that we still aren't ready for a black president.


Why is it when anyone criticizes Barack Obama it is either because we are racists (we are not ready for a black president), or it's because we are bitter, angry, disappointed, insert adjective of choice here...

Why can't it ever be because we don't agree with his far left liberal ideals and policies.

quote:


Perhaps we need to do something different for a change.


Different how? What exactly has Barack stated that he will do that is different from any other Democrat? He plans on raising taxes, increasing spending, increasing the size of government. All typical Democrat policies.


Michelle Obama made the following statement;
"If we don't wake up as a nation with a new kind of leadership...for how we want this country to work, then we won't get universal health care," she said.

"The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more."

I'm sorry but if I worked hard for my pie then I want the whole thing to do with it what I want. If I see someone who is hungry then I will give them a piece of my pie willingly but I don't want the government coming in and taking/stealing my pie to give it to someone else who may not have even tried to earn their own pie.

This is socialism pure and simple!



This is a country that can't afford Universal Health Care. Because of the war in Iraq, we have increased the federal debt by roughly $500 Billion. If our government used accrual accounting like all corporations are required to, I'd be able to say that the war has cost us closer to $1 Trillion.

What we need instead is to use whatever savings Obama planned to fund Universal Health Care to pay down the national debt. On top of that, we also need to raise marginal taxes on the top three brackets by about 2-3% for a short time while we pay down the debt. (This will increase my taxes, so don't say I'm wishing higher taxes on others.)

America needs to start getting its fiscal house in order. What finally did the Romans in was debt and currency inflation. We're better than the Romans, and it really isn't time for America to go into decline.



TomTurn -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/14/2008 8:25:25 PM)

quote:

This is socialism pure and simple!


Michell Obama and her puppet husband Barack Hussein Obama left socialism a long time ago.



inthysite -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/14/2008 9:38:39 PM)

quote:

What we need instead is to use whatever savings Obama planned to fund Universal Health Care to pay down the national debt. On top of that, we also need to raise marginal taxes on the top three brackets by about 2-3% for a short time while we pay down the debt.


Raising taxes in a struggling economy is a definite death sentence. Why is the Democrat/Liberal answer always higher taxes? What about reducing the size of government? How about fewer pork projects/less spending?

Why is it that a congress with an approval rating in the low teens feels like it can vote itself a raise? Where I come from lower productivity does not equal higher pay. How about forgetting the salary increase and applying that money to the national debt.

quote:


America needs to start getting its fiscal house in order.


I couldn't agree more, but why does it always fall to the taxpayer? Why is the government allow to go unchecked with their spending and we always have to foot the bill?

A couple of the things that I agree with McCain on is keeping the Bush tax cuts and no more pork barrel spending.



tracydolls -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 9:59:45 AM)

quote:

A couple of the things that I agree with McCain on is keeping the Bush tax cuts and no more pork barrel spending.



Get rid of Bush tax cuts, they help the wealthy! And first get the money back all the REpugs have spent. The Dems just been in office 1 1/2 years, they could not be the reason all this mess is falling.

Repugs had 6 years, what happened--over the top spending, trillion dollar debt, owe China,



phreddy -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 10:20:39 AM)

Tracydolls,

You should look into the Bush tax cuts a little deepr before you say to get rid of them. Yes, if you look at statistics, people can give you a skewed look at who benefited, but almost everyone who paid taxes got a tax cut, millions of lower income familes were removed from the tax rolls all together. If the Bush tax cuts are rescinded, millions of families are going to be paying a lot more to Uncle Sam on top of the extra money they are currently paying for fuel and the effect of fuel on other prices including groceries. In my opinion, it would be the quickest way to insure that we go into a recession (if not worse). Higher income tax payers did get to keep a large proportion of the dollars from the tax cuts, but they are the ones paying more of the tax load. and that doesn't mean that lower income tax did not benfit. Almost any tax cut that lowers rates is going to have the same effect.



tracydolls -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 10:31:01 AM)

a person worth millions or billions could never pay enough. What does one person need with 12 houses, 2 jets, 100's of diamonds, a stamp, a painting worth millions.

Tax them!



Jhud -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 10:44:04 AM)

quote:

a person worth millions or billions could never pay enough. What does one person need with 12 houses, 2 jets, 100's of diamonds, a stamp, a painting worth millions.

Tax them!


You know, as many of the people who have these things (Kennedy, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, Soros, now Clinton and Obama) are definitively liberal Democrats, instead of raising taxes why don't they just give generously to the IRS out of the goodness of their hearts? It never turns money away.



stamper_ben -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:05:01 AM)

quote:

a person worth millions or billions could never pay enough.
I'm sure not even if they were to pay trillions![8|]



phreddy -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:18:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

a person worth millions or billions could never pay enough. What does one person need with 12 houses, 2 jets, 100's of diamonds, a stamp, a painting worth millions.

Tax them!


You know, as many of the people who have these things (Kennedy, Kerry, Edwards, Gore, Soros, now Clinton and Obama) are definitively liberal Democrats, instead of raising taxes why don't they just give generously to the IRS out of the goodness of their hearts? It never turns money away.

And Congressman John Campbell from California is trying to help make it easier.

The "Put Your Money where Your Mouth is" Act.
http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/17575574.html



inthysite -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:23:46 AM)

quote:

a person worth millions or billions could never pay enough. What does one person need with 12 houses, 2 jets, 100's of diamonds, a stamp, a painting worth millions.

Tax them!


I see, so we punish the people who work hard in this country and are successful, then turn around and give that money to people who don't even try. That is a socialist view, big government distributing wealth. What's next, 'hey they have 3 houses that's too many, let's take away two of them and give them to the homeless!'.

With that kind of attitude all you end up doing is building a welfare state, destroying the economy because no one will want to work hard because they know if they become successful they won't be able to keep their money, and encourage others not to work at all. Why should they when the government will give them everything they need.

That's the problem with the Democrats, tax the rich and give to the poor, only they don't really give to the poor, they take all that money they get from the rich and spend it on pork barrel projects.

quote:



Repugs had 6 years, what happened--over the top spending, trillion dollar debt, owe China,


What happened during the six years of Republican control? Well let's see, record low unemployment, record highs set by wall street, millions of low income families removed from a tax burden due to the Bush tax cuts, national security.

What happened once the Dems took over? Well unemployment went up, the stock market fell, the economy is tanking, the housing market crashed, sub-prime mortgage scandals, blockage of free trade agreements which hurt the ecomony, gas prices rose. I can't say the Dems are directly responsible for all this but is sure is a weird coincidence that it all started after they took control, and I really don't believe in coincidences.

Oh, and to your point about the national debt, that was handed to Bush thanks to 9/11. And as I recall the whole nation rejoiced when fought back. The whole country came together against the terrorist that attacked us. But now everyone is tired of the war and have changed their minds and now it's a big bad thing, it's Bush's war.

Heck, even the Dems voted to go to war, not only in Afghanistan but also Iraq. Bush had an overwhelming consensus from congress allowing him to go to war but now they don't want to own up to it.



Jhud -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:23:51 AM)

Personally, I am finding this current election season increasingly interesting and engaging.



blessedinnyc -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:35:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: inthysite
Raising taxes in a struggling economy is a definite death sentence.

It's only a political death sentence, and that's only if we allow it to be. In reality, the 90% of the country that's in the bottom three tax brackets won't notice, and the 10% that's in the top three brackets (including me) probably won't mind. We raised taxes during the 1980-1983 recession, and it didn't slow down the recovery much at all. This was also a decision made by and supported by Reagan.

quote:

Why is the Democrat/Liberal answer always higher taxes? What about reducing the size of government? How about fewer pork projects/less spending?

Because we actually paid attention in Econ. Raising taxes to fund new projects during a recession is the best thing for the federal government to do. In fact, combined with increased spending in WWII, that's how we got out of the Great Depression.

Pork projects make up roughly 1% of government spending. This is according to the anti-pork-spending group, Citizens Against Government Waste. The remaining 99% of spending goes to:

-Debt service
-Military spending
-Law enforcement
-Social Security and Medicare
-Highway construction and maintenance

In reality, we actually have a relatively efficient budget, at least as far as liberals are concerned. Most unnecessary liberal pet projects have been thrown out over the past 25 years.

quote:

Why is it that a congress with an approval rating in the low teens feels like it can vote itself a raise? Where I come from lower productivity does not equal higher pay. How about forgetting the salary increase and applying that money to the national debt.

A $10K raise for all 550 members of congress costs the feds $5.5 million/year. This is roughly the cost of two cruise missiles.

quote:

I couldn't agree more, but why does it always fall to the taxpayer? Why is the government allow to go unchecked with their spending and we always have to foot the bill?

Because ultimately, this collection of taxpayers makes up the United States (see constitution's preamble.)

quote:

A couple of the things that I agree with McCain on is keeping the Bush tax cuts and no more pork barrel spending.

But 1% of total federal spending isn't a substantive answer to the national debt question. Cutting all pork spending would reduce the deficit by about 7%- and be enough to cover roughly 6% of the government-accounting cost of the Iraq war. (If we used accrual accounting like all American businesses, one year's pork barrel spending actually amounts to 2-3% of the war's cost.)

If McCain is promising to keep taxes at today's levels, he's either not being honest about our country's fiscal situation, or doesn't care if we have a $1.5 Trillion/year in debt service payments in 20 years.



HighPlainsDrifter -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:36:44 AM)

quote:


Get rid of Bush tax cuts, they help the wealthy!


Yeah, sunset those babies, that way a rich person making 50K a year will pay an additional 2K to the government. Otherwise he or she might foolishly spend it on useless stuff like rent and shoes and new tires for the old ride.

I presume you're not 50K a year rich. How many people do you employ? How many families make a living thanks to your initiative?



blessedinnyc -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:42:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: inthysite

What happened during the six years of Republican control? Well let's see, record low unemployment, record highs set by wall street, millions of low income families removed from a tax burden due to the Bush tax cuts, national security.

Actually, unemployment generally increased. The mid-to-late '90s saw unemployment levels of around 3.5%; under Bush and the Republicans, this figure increased to 4.5%-5%. We also saw the stock market actually decrease in value from when Clinton left office (the longest sustained stock market decrease in 30 years), record budget deficits to support tax cuts, and the largest trade deficits in US history.

You need to do a better job of figuring out how to whitewash the past seven years.

quote:

What happened once the Dems took over? Well unemployment went up, the stock market fell, the economy is tanking, the housing market crashed, sub-prime mortgage scandals, blockage of free trade agreements which hurt the ecomony, gas prices rose. I can't say the Dems are directly responsible for all this but is sure is a weird coincidence that it all started after they took control, and I really don't believe in coincidences.

Actually, despite the banking meltdown- driven by the Bush housing bubble- the DJIA is still up from where it was when Dems took office. Three cheers for the nanny state ensuring orderly markets!

quote:

Oh, and to your point about the national debt, that was handed to Bush thanks to 9/11. And as I recall the whole nation rejoiced when fought back. The whole country came together against the terrorist that attacked us. But now everyone is tired of the war and have changed their minds and now it's a big bad thing, it's Bush's war.

What if, instead of Bush telling us to go buy new SUVs to thwart the terrorists, he told us that we needed to reduce energy consumption so we could go tell Iraq, Iran, and Syria to take a long walk off a short oil rig?

quote:

Heck, even the Dems voted to go to war, not only in Afghanistan but also Iraq. Bush had an overwhelming consensus from congress allowing him to go to war but now they don't want to own up to it.

He had an overwhelming consensus that it was OK to threaten war if we couldn't get weapons inspectors in. After the weapons inspectors couldn't find anything, most Dems opposed the war.



blessedinnyc -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:46:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HighPlainsDrifter

quote:


Get rid of Bush tax cuts, they help the wealthy!


Yeah, sunset those babies, that way a rich person making 50K a year will pay an additional 2K to the government. Otherwise he or she might foolishly spend it on useless stuff like rent and shoes and new tires for the old ride.

I presume you're not 50K a year rich. How many people do you employ? How many families make a living thanks to your initiative?

Actually, this would affect the 28% tax bracket, which now starts at $77K/year, IIRC.

I am perfectly fine with taxing people who make $77K/year+ at 30% instead of 28%. This is coming from someone who lives in NYC under some of the country's most suffocating costs of living and tax rates. This is also coming from someone who plays a part in a system that makes sure that the company you work for and the companies you do business with can get loans to stay in business and expand their operations.



P31W -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 11:52:15 AM)

quote:

Personally, I am finding this current election season increasingly interesting and engaging.


Me too Jack. I have enjoyed watching Obama be exposed for who he really is.



stamper_ben -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 12:01:59 PM)

quote:

He had an overwhelming consensus that it was OK to threaten war if we couldn't get weapons inspectors in. After the weapons inspectors couldn't find anything, most Dems opposed the war.
Speaking of whitewashing the past - ALL the Dems but one or two voted to FUND the Iraq war.

How easy it is to forget the facts when they don't fit the argument...



its_GO_time -> RE: The 2008 Campaign Is Disappointing (4/15/2008 12:18:42 PM)

Those of you, of the opinion that we should "Tax the Rich", would do well to check out a copy of Do As I Say, Not As I Do , exposing the likes of Ted Kennedy(who keeps his millions in offshore accounts), Nancy Pelosi($50 million herself), and how they skirt around the very laws, we're expected to abide by.
For these people, it is more to their advantage, to hire lawyers, to avoid taxes.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI