U.S. Presidential Election 2008

What say I? I say the United Nations could not solve the international conflict through diplomacy and the mission in Iraq was not done unilaterally.

but the POpe opposed it tooth and nail and called on Catholics worldwide to oppose it too. Which you didn't do BadBob - does that mean you'll burn in hell?

A pseudo libertarian, I beleive in funding infrastructure and education and public health unlike some of the batshit crazy libertarians who support highway privatisation.

But nothing better than nailing a hooker from behind while doing lines of blow off their back and shooting your .45 wildly in the air!

technically that is sort of correct. But do you really think that if the US had had no interest in blasting Iraq to kingdom come that any of the other Coallition of the Coerced would have had any interest in regime change?

Yeah, Ron Paul is batshit crazy - and so are his supporters.


WHAT!? A True Texan would have a .44, not a .45.

Hard up for a new iphone are we?

But I liked my .45... I'd post pictures at it but I don't feel like the smug gun nut comments from the government-knows-best euro-nazis.

Probably a wise move. These people do love to suck at the teats of the nanny state.

The "Coallition of the Coerced" were countries like France and Russia inter alia who were being bought off by Sadaam Hussein with oil vouchers, and thugs, like Koffee Anan's son, Kojo, in the "Oil for Food" scandal at the United Nations. You forget a lot of shit, don't you?

Does anyone have an answer to my question? I'm really wondering. I can't really figure who profits by Barr's nomination except maybe the Democrats.

They're giving iPhones to pimps? Not sure what you're driving at.

Actually, you seem to be forgetting that it was Germany that first broke ranks to point out that the invasion of Iraq was completely wrong and should be opposed. France followed suit a few months later and Russia after that. TBH, if Blair had not been the PM Broitain would probably have opposed it too.

surely his candidacy will become the focus for Republicans who think that McCain is soft and much of the disaffected religious right. Hopefully the Democrats will benefit more from that than they will lose to Ralph Nader on the left.

you say that as if it was a negative thing to have legislation to protect the public and a welfare state to support the weakest. Do you really think those are negatives?

I think the Germans have done enough invading, don't you? You still haven't rebutted anything I wrote.

From Wiki:




Looks like it will about even out.. Although who knows with polling.

I've been cogitating on this, and Bob Barr is such a weak candidate, that even the nutty Libertarians won't vote for him. That benefits the Repuglicans by weakening competition and is ample payback for Ron Paul running as a Republican with a libertarian platform.

At least someone's making an effort to stay on topic here!

A real nutty libertarian wouldn't vote for a pro-war candidate like McCane (get it, because hes old and needs a cane, I can be clever with candidate names like BadBob!!).

No matter what you print on his poster, BB, he still looks damn Presidential.

Are you saying he can score me some dope?? Hamburgs dry and that might convince me to actually vote this election..

He surely scored more dope in his youth than a lot of people on this site...

At least he never lied and said he 'can't remember' like Mr. 4 months, 25 days left (but who's counting).

Think I give a shit? I didn't vote for him.

Obama was just a rich kid, though obviously not as rich as Bush, who liked to have a good time.

I wouldn't trust a person who didn't do a little blow and pot in their youth to run my country in an adult.

Wrong again.

So that's how Obama will magically achieve world peace?
"Yo Kim! Check this out! This is prime quality Colombian shit! Why don't you sit back, relax, have some of this and we can talk things over afterwards?"
"Goddamnit, Michelle, didn't I tell you to get some razor blades when you went to Target!?";)

Think about the end of the night when everyones hanging around the guy who has the coke talking about shit like its solving the worlds problems.. You want another line holmes, sure.. just sign this arms treaty really quick and i'll hook you right up.

McCain's heart couldn't handle more than 2 rails..

Obama was rich? His parents separated when he was two and his mother married an Indonesian while Obama was brought up by his grandmother in Honolulu. While he wasn't poor, his background certainly wasn't as priviledged as Bush, McCain or Hilary's were.

There are pros and cons. For upwardly mobile people, it's a con. If you lost your job and felt like playing Wii all day, it'd be a pro.

/But this really is a topic for another thread.

OK, but cocaine is a very comfortable, middle class type of drug.

Hillary Clinton didn't come from a wealthy background. McCain's is military, again, not poor, but not rich either.

Maybe because most of what you say is such monumental bollocks. Racism; alive and well and living in BadBob...Or pray, do tell how many countries Germany has invaded in the last 50 years? Hmm? What? Speak up man I can't hear you. None, do I hear none? Well fuck me backwards with a Welsh leek. How many has the good ol' US of A invaded in the same time frame. Bob, you're mumbling again, I can't hear you. Tell you what, here's a list of a few:

1945-53 Philippines
1953 Iran
1953 Guatemala
1950-73 Vietnam
1955-73 Cambodia
1953-64 British Guyana
1945-53 South Korea
1960-65 Congo
1961-64 Brazil
1963-66 Dominican Republic
1959 to now Cuba
1965 Indonesia
1970-73 Chile
1964-74 Greece
1975 East Timor
1978-89 Nicaragua
1979-84 Grenada
1981-89 Libya
1989 Panama
1990s Iraq
1979-92 Afghanistan
1980-92 El Salvador
1987-94 Haiti

And then of course the the New Wars too...

War on Terrorism, 2001 - present
Operation Enduring Freedom - Afghanistan 2001 - present
Operation Enduring Freedom - Philippines 2002 - present
Operation Iraqi Freedom - Horn of Africa 2002 - present
Operation Iraqi Freedom, 2003 - present
Waziristan War, 2004 - present
War in Somalia, 2006 - present
Operation Iraqi Freedom - Trans Sahara 2007 - present

Not that I like Obama, but what is this 'snob' crap.. I don't want an average person in charge, thats not generally how a sucessfull organization is run... Of course, this is the electorate that picked Bush becuase he seemed like a guy you could have a beer with.

While I really don't wish to get too involved in this thread, I feel compelled to say the following:

Both candidates have their pros and cons. Some pros are glaring and some cons are egregious. All told, however, I think Obama is a superior candidate, and none of that opinion comes from a distaste for McCain (on the contrary, I think he's about the best person the Republicans could have put forth).

I actually feel that we're choosing between the greater of two goods rather than the lesser of two evils.

eh?

British Guyana was a British colony and in the period 1953-64 the constitution had been suspended and the colony was being ruled directly by Britain. If the US had invaded (which they did not, ever) they would have been invading the United Kingdom.

DrivingWest, I think you need to have a deeper look at McCain. He's really not trustworthy:
McCain vs. McCain


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI

Where is the karma button when you need one?

+2 for you

I know where you're coming from, but don't worry though, our time will come: Clinton '12!

Thanks for the link, but I've decided to limit my YouTube watching to Weezer videos and cats on treadmills. I just don't think it's a good source for information on important topics.

Sorry, my bad; the British military occupied Guyana after not liking the fact that the communist loving PPP started to gain popularity...

It's just clips of McCain talking. He says one thing, then he says the opposite. He does all the damage himself. You really should see it.
In the words of a fellow democrat, 'I know politicians are supposed to be slimy, but this one really makes my stomach turn.'

And the USSR sat on its hands for fifty years...

Are you serious?


Attlee was the British Labor Party leader for 20 years, and presided over the 1945 - 1951 Labor government. This was the most significant reforming administration of 20th century Britain, the regime that introduced the British National Health Service, nationalized one fifth of the British economy, and granted independence to India.

Privatizations (reversals) conducted under the Thatcher era:

British Petroleum (BP) 1979
British Aerospace 1981
Britoil 1983
British Ports 1983
Jaguar Cars 1984
British Telecom 1984
Radiochemicals group
Amersham International
National Freight Company
etc, etc.

Bluntly, Atlee was a Keynesian and Thatcher was a monetarist.


Right. So the guy in charge isn't responsible. Atlee nationalised 1/5 of the econonmy and ushered in the nanny-state in the UK, which Thatcher, more than any other, reversed. Furthermore, it demonstrates the folly of such policies as they become permanent. If you are still unaware, here's a few quotes by Thatcher that put her squarely in the Free Market Sector:

Our inspiration was less Rab Butler's Industrial Charter than books like Colm Brogan's anti-socialist satire, Our New Masters . . and Hayek's powerful Road to Serfdom, dedicated to 'the socialists of all parties'. Such books not only provided crisp, clear analytical arguments against socialism, demonstrating how its economic theories were connected to the then depressing shortages of our daily lives; but by their wonderful mockery of socialist follies, they also gave us the feeling that the other side simply could not win in the end. That is a vital feeling in politics; it eradicates past defeats and builds future victories. It left a permanent mark on my own political character, making me a long-term optimist for free enterprise and liberty ..".

.. Adam Smith, the greatest exponent of free enterprise economics till Hayek and Friedman.


Rather irrelevant point what was said, her actions whilst PM and her policies were opposite those of Atlee. Furthermore, leaders generally speak well their predecessors; for example, Churchill's eulogy on Chamberlain:

It fell to Neville Chamberlain in one of the supreme crises of the world to be contradicted by events, to be disappointed in his hopes, and to be deceived and cheated by a wicked man. But what were these hopes in which he was disappointed? What were these wishes in which he was frustrated? What was that faith that was abused? They were surely among the most noble and benevolent instincts of the human heart--the love of peace, the toil for peace, the strife for peace, the pursuit of peace, even at great peril, and certainly to the utter disdain of popularity or clamor. Whatever else history may or may not say about these terrible, tremendous years, we can be sure that Neville Chamberlain acted with perfect sincerity according to his lights and strove to the utmost of his capacity and authority, which were powerful, to save the world from the awful, devastating struggle in which we are now engaged. This alone will stand him in good stead as far as what is called the verdict of history is concerned

well said DrvinWést.

God, it would be like deciding how trustworthy Gordon Brown was watching youtube vids put together by the Conservative party

TBH McCain does not seem a bad candidate but he has had to lurch to the right to satisfy his own party and is standing on a platform of little change, is over 70, has his pockets half full of lobbyists cash (which he will have to seek more of as time goes on) and has some truly frightening people who have been touted to be part of his administration.

He personally might be trustworthy, but on so many other levels he pales into insignificance next to Obama

My fear is the lack of context. I will watch it, but I'll be skeptical. I don't think it will have much of an impact on my stance.


If I had to pick my single biggest gripe about McCain, that'd be it. Once upon a time he was a "Republican in Name Only" (RINO) which as far as I'm concerned is a good thing (same goes for a "Democrat in Name Only"). Pissing off the fringe wing of either party probably means you're on the right track.

My biggest gripe about Obama is his space policy. I think it SUCKS. While it could have a sizable impact on me professionally, some things are more important, and I won't based my vote on one issue alone.

Here's an excerpt from an email I got today from a friend in America:

On the way back from Florida, I had a 2 hour layover in Atlanta and had a close encounter w/ a woman who immediately told me she was a McCain supporter. While we were sitting there, a newsflash came on CNN about Zimbabwe, and she asked, "Is that in Africa?" which immediately caused her to remember an email she'd gotten about Obama and how he has a cousin who is an Islamic TERRORIST and is working w/ Al QAIDA (you know, the same group that Osama bin Laden belongs to) to overthrow the government of Africa and to plan more attacks on the U.S., and that Obama is MUCH more involved in this activity than most people realize. It was all so ludicrous that I had a hard time not laughing. She was dead serious. Time to leave the country, I think.

Welcome to McCainland where BadBob's allies and bedfellows live; sometimes it's hard not to feel elitist... On the other hand, it's also hard not to be scared, very scared...