• The site migration is complete! Hopefully everything transferred properly from the multiple decades old software we were using before. If you notice any issues please let me know, thanks! Also, I'm still working on things like chatbox, etc so hopefully those will be working in the next week or two.

OBAMA OR McCAIN?????



Randy_W said:
By all means you're not implying that a 90% approval rating in her home state is trumped my a local woman that doesn't like her?
How hard is it to find volumes of absolutely true, very negative stories of Obama, Biden, McCain or any other public person you name? The answer, not very. You seem like a sharp Liberal, I can't believe you offer that as proof of her as unfit!:th_laugh-lol2::th_laugh-lol2:
Click to expand...

You've made up your mind. I could tell you she killed a man, and you'd say he deserved it. I never offered it as proof, but we've seen plenty of letters from friends. Why not offered fair and balanced letter from the other side? You don't see what you like, so you say it's bogus?

Someone who starts firing people when they don't get their way is a bully. Someone who makes up facts, and refuses to correct them, and CONTINUES TO REPEAT them, shouldn't be trusted. The Alaskan governor's plane was NOT sold on eBay - it was listed, and eventually sold for a lose elsewhere. The state of Alaska gets MORE PER CAPITA from the US government that any other state. Yet she's against pork and earmarks? Explain that one. Just that one. Tell me, PLEASE. You hire a lobbyist to go to Alaska to bring money to your state, but you're against pork spending and earmarks. How is that possible? Also, McCain and Palin continue to say Obama has never introduced legislation. So the legislature below was entered in Bizarro world?

Barack Obama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I offered evidence of the other side, and again, the response I get are that I'm and idiot or that proof isn't enough. I'm giving out facts to counter a lot of conjecture and statements others on here are making.
 
Randy_W said:
I hope he continues to exercise his first amendment rights, for the more he does the fewer that will vote for him.:th_thumbsup-wink:
Click to expand...

What church does McCain attend, since religion seems to matter to you. What about Palin? Tell me about her religious history.
 
Street Wolf said:
No, it means something, but apparently someone thinks the 2nd Amendment means nothing.
Click to expand...

You're right. McCain and Palin want terrorists to have guns.

What, you say? Where is my proof? Well, they support the 2nd amendment, which gives us the the right to have guns. Terrorists want guns. Ipso facto, McCain and Palin support terrorists.

See, I can play games with facts too! :th_laugh-pointup:
 
Deezul_AwT said:
You're right. McCain and Palin want terrorists to have guns.

What, you say? Where is my proof? Well, they support the 2nd amendment, which gives us the the right to have guns. Terrorists want guns. Ipso facto, McCain and Palin support terrorists.

See, I can play games with facts too! :th_laugh-pointup:
Click to expand...

Wow, your a ****ing retard. lmao


What makes you think if we make it illegal to have guns that criminals won't still be able to get them? The only people we are going to disarm are the law abiding citizens. Criminals don't care if they have to break the law to get thier hands on a weapon.
 
All I can say Deezul is that I respect your opinion and do not want this thread to turn into something that needs to be locked but quite frankly Snoopes and Wikipedia are not exactly irrefutable sources or facts.

Dont take that as an attack, I just would be reluctant to state those sources as completely factual. Though, at least you and others such as Street Wolf are trying to do research and find the information and you are both to be commended for that.

I guess what we have to understand is that the same information can mean different things to different people. We all have a different collection of information and determinations based on that information. So one additional piece of info may fill in a blank for one to strengthen his/her position and that same piece of information may be the ammunition for another to make his/her counter point.
 


Street Wolf said:
Wow, your a ****ing retard. lmao


What makes you think if we make it illegal to have guns that criminals won't still be able to get them? The only people we are going to disarm are the law abiding citizens. Criminals don't care if they have to break the law to get thier hands on a weapon.
Click to expand...

You said because Obama attend a church by a racist pastor, you were IMPLYING he's racist. I'm making the same huge leap of faith you are. Give me proof where Obama has said, "I am a racist."

Of course Palin and McCain don't support the terrorists. You believe what you want about the candidates but when presented with facts that contradict what you believe, you argue that it's not enough to change your mind. I just want to keep everyone informed. Just understand that your choice of candidate is NOT perfect, and probably has views that you don't agree with. Stay informed, do your research. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet!
 
Deezul_AwT said:
You said because Obama attend a church by a racist pastor, you were IMPLYING he's racist. I'm making the same huge leap of faith you are. Give me proof where Obama has said, "I am a racist."

Of course Palin and McCain don't support the terrorists. You believe what you want about the candidates but when presented with facts that contradict what you believe, you argue that it's not enough to change your mind. I just want to keep everyone informed. Just understand that your choice of candidate is NOT perfect, and probably has views that you don't agree with. Stay informed, do your research. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet!
Click to expand...

Rofl, are you a joke dude?

Name one post of mine where I mentioned anything about him being a racist. All my post talked about was him being agianst guns and why it is a horrible, horrible idea to ban them from law abiding citizens.

I don't know. Maybe you took that as me saying he's racist agianst guns or something. Hell if I know.
 
Street Wolf said:
Rofl, are you a joke dude?

Name one post of mine where I mentioned anything about him being a racist. All my post talked about was him being agianst guns and why it is a horrible, horrible idea to ban them from law abiding citizens.

I don't know. Maybe you took that as me saying he's racist agianst guns or something. Hell if I know.
Click to expand...

You supported Randy_W's post regarding Obama's exercising of his freedom of religion. Which was an earlier comment Randy_W made about Obama attending Trinity Baptist church and Randy_W said the minister racist. He is applying that because Obama attended that church, he must be racist.

Many people who argue against gun restrictions often say, "Enforce the laws on the books!" Ok, that means having to raise your taxes to hire more police officers, purchase computers and other things for background checks, etc. But find me a candidate that got elected saying, "I will push for enforcement of current gun laws, but it's going to cost, so I'm going to have to raise you local taxes to pay for the police."

As soon as someone says "I will raise taxes" he or she loses the election.
 
SyntheticShield said:
All I can say Deezul is that I respect your opinion and do not want this thread to turn into something that needs to be locked but quite frankly Snoopes and Wikipedia are not exactly irrefutable sources or facts.

Dont take that as an attack, I just would be reluctant to state those sources as completely factual. Though, at least you and others such as Street Wolf are trying to do research and find the information and you are both to be commended for that.
Click to expand...

I try to find an outside source, not just my opinion. When I ask for the same, the response I get is conjecture and opinion. Only once has someone else provided me with proof supporting their position, and I thanked them for it.
 
Deezul_AwT said:
Many people who argue against gun restrictions often say, "Enforce the laws on the books!" Ok, that means having to raise your taxes to hire more police officers, purchase computers and other things for background checks, etc. But find me a candidate that got elected saying, "I will push for enforcement of current gun laws, but it's going to cost, so I'm going to have to raise you local taxes to pay for the police."
Click to expand...

Ultimately, I think this is a major issue. We want to pass laws and regulations without regard to what it will cost to effectively enforce them all in the name of 'looking' like something is being done. We should not be passing such things without the infrastructure and man power in place already to do the enforcement. Additionally we should be forcing our legislators and leaders to first cut all the wasteful spending and such before they consider raising taxes for ANYTHING.

I personally would like to see a law that defined what pork spending, earmark spending and appropriation type spending are and then stipulate that if there is more than 1% of that type of spending in a budget, they cannot raise taxes. That would FORCE them to cut such spending first before considering a raise on taxes of ANY kind.

It has never made sense to me for ANY party to first consider taking more money from our own pockets to try and get an economy back in shape or to do so before looking for ways to cut stupid and unnecessary spending. In an economy that is centered on consumer spending it make absolutely NO sense to take more money from those consumers in the form of taxes. You're just shooting yourself in the foot. You want to see an economy take off? Cut out some of the stupid taxes and excess taxes we have and our economy will see a boom like no other.
 


I was going to quote all of you post SynShield, but no need...

I will use the generic "his" in this post.

Every Congressman knows that to keep being elected, he has to give something to his community, whether it's money for jobs creation, road construction, etc. For every congressman that wants to "cut pork spending," he'll find some way to funnel money to his district. McCain has not asked for "pork" spending, in the sense that he wants $500,000 for a study of the life of a peanut, or the habitats of a groundhog. BUT, he has had money sent to Arizona for an academic center honoring William Renquist. Was it needed? Was it pork?

If, and this is a HUGE if, Congress asked the American people "We need to raise your gas tax 2 cents a gallon. However, 100% of those 2 cents would go to road improvements" I'd say more than 50% of the population would say yes.

Another game politicians like to play is the "raise your taxes" pledge. Many of the tax cuts passed a few years ago included sunset provisions in 2010 or 2011. I know the Estate tax is one of them. McCain wants to make them permanent, Obama does not. It is unlikely the laws would have passed at the time HAD they been permanent from day one. But putting a sunset date makes them more likely to pass. Now, by technically not doing anything about ending the sunset date, Obama's plan means "raising" taxes. I'd like to call a politician out on this. I'd say, "I don't want to pay ANY taxes except for local taxes and ones to support the military By making me pay for something I don't want to pay, you are RAISING MY TAXES above what I'm willing to pay." No one WANTS to pay taxes, but if you want services that folks have gotten used to, the money's got to come from somewhere.
 
Well I agree, for the most part with what you are saying. However, there are a lot of so called services that are just not working and yet still get funding. There is just a lot of spending I feel could be cut back.

When I need more money or have to cover additional expenses, my first action isnt to go to my employer and ask for a raise, its find ways to cut expenses or stop purchasing other things that arent absolutely necessary. I would very much like to see our government, both local and federal held to the same standard.
 
SyntheticShield said:
When I need more money or have to cover additional expenses, my first action isnt to go to my employer and ask for a raise, its find ways to cut expenses or stop purchasing other things that arent absolutely necessary. I would very much like to see our government, both local and federal held to the same standard.
Click to expand...

'94 Congress tried with the line item veto, but the Line Item Veto would require a constitutional amendment. Too bad a candidate can't run on that. But no incumbent congressman would consider supporting line item veto.
 
I was actually pretty happy they passed that and rather upset when it was knocked down. Its too bad a constitutional amendment was not pursued.
 


Has anyone notice that since we became a nation, we've spent the entire time since trying to fix it. When do we just get to sit back and just live. When do the politicians just superivise and make sure things happen right. That's what I want, but I know with human nature and all that will not ever happen. As for who will I vote for; I don't know. At first I was about McCain because Obama keeps lying and just saying things to please the voters and is caught time and again. Then I thought well our economy needs fixing and McCain doesn't seem like the type. But Then again how can I trust Obama to do it after all his bullcrap anyways.

McCain might be a greedy politician, but I say choose the idiot we know, over the one we don't.
 
I'm not going to single you out, DesQ, but what "lying" and "bullcrap" do you think Obama has done, that McCain, or ANY politician has done to get elected? McCain is now campaigning as the candidate for change, yet he voted with George W. Bush 95% of the time. How is that change?
 
Obama is a moron, he always says one thing then he says something completly different in the next sentence. As far as Mclean he is just to old and senial, he is a moron too. They are both dumbazzes. If i had to vote id say Mclean because of his choice of VP, Sarah Palin , the governor of Alaska who did all these wonderful things for Alaska and not to mention looks dead sexy with those librarian glasses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top