Current Events

TOPICS:

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

 ... 429

Next

lostboy

lostboy

Carlisle, PA
November 2002

JUN 10, 2008 01:32 AM

A foreward, please remember I am not making an attack here or trying to aggravate anyone in anyway, I do not have any hate towards the candidates, well maybe some resentment towards McCain from him totally changing his positions to those I hate, but not really animosity. That said, this is a plea, a humble request, please do not take this as any kind of insult, except maybe to our popular media, they may feel most heavily that I do insult them most fervently, with disgust, repulsion of the heaviest nature, even my beloved daily show and of course the master of all media Stephen Colbert. Ok all that said, now my real request now that you hopefully know the nature in that it has been asked.

I do believe, unless the election is totally rigged, or all moral people die of an acute heart attack election day, that next President of the United States of America will be Barak Obama. He is a very likeable guy really, I'd love to kick back eat pasta and have some beer or wine with him. I really think it would be the highlight of my year, informative and fun. I would sooooo brag about it. I originally was pro Hillary, mostly from reading about other female world leaders whcih she really doesn't match in my opinion she is no Indira Ghandi or Margaret Thatcher. I have soooo hoped for a real woman to finally be in office. I'm actually kinda pro minority too, alot(ok most) of my close friends have been Indian, African, Chinese, Korean and Japanese. I know there is no way its going to happen for a century probably more, but I think an Indian could make a great US leader. I guess that makes me racist, because I have a high opinion of the Indian people I have known over my lifetime, so be it. I guess I'm sexist also, because I appreciate women and respect thier intelligence and views, quite often over the males I regularly interact with. Guess I'm just a self hating white man... wait no I actually like myself. I digress of course as usual.. What this is all really about is simply this. Does anyone know anything these candidates actually have gone out on a limb sponsored, campaigned for fought for other than themselves. I know Hillary fought for education, failed but atleast she tried. I really don't care what McCain might have fought for, I know he fought for our military... matter fact spent years in a tiger cage being tortured, now hes protorture, that really saddens me. As for Barak, I can't find anything other than NV(not voting),absent and of course 97% voting with the party(even against reform, that kinda irked me). I know you Obama supporters must have tons of stories of what hes done for Illonois, America and the world. It just seems to me the media wants to pull up anything negative, no matter how pathetic. I don't care if Barak had dinner with an impoverished american family, I don't care if he was in the Tour De Cure, or anything else he just showed upto and walked around and gave talking points. I am a democrat, who earnestly is beginning to believe we are electing the prom king, alot of ideas, likeable, everyone wants to hangout with, but really hasn't done anything, least not anything positive the media would put out there cause who would want to hear that? I guess, I just want to believe, can anyone give me something anything to believe in other than campaign promises? Again please don't take this as an insult or attack on Barak, I really do like him and I am going to vote for him if I have to crawl the five miles to my voting station, I just think among the campaign promises, lapel pins, weird preachers and what other silliness whatever he has actually done has been lost, and as my candidate so am I lost. So I'm calling on all Barak supporters, please, I beg you tell me of his deeds, what he has fought for locally, nationally and worldwide.

Chainlink

Chainlink

Dickeyville, WI
August 2005

JUN 10, 2008 01:42 AM

Paragraphs are your friend.

lostboy

lostboy

Carlisle, PA
November 2002

JUN 10, 2008 02:20 AM

Hehe I sooooo know what you mean Chainlink I have grammar Nazi friend who would soooo freak out reading that lol. smile

FellOnEarth

FellOnEarth

Temecula, CA
April 2006

JUN 10, 2008 02:20 AM

Don't despair lostboy, I don't know if there is an antidote to apathy, but hope ain't a bad place to start. wink

If subtlety isn't your thing, then perhaps this will light a fire under your ass:
ImVotingRepublican.com (thanks slacker elite)

Otherwise, "you'll get what you deserve". Whatever you decide to do, just follow your heart. Oh and... Heh, heh. Use the force.

ChrisSick

ChrisSick

Philadelphia, PA
March 2008

JUN 10, 2008 08:09 AM

I don't have stills of Star Wars movies or cats in weird places to add to the conversation. Is there some sort of website I can go to load up my drive with that stuff? Picturestopostwhenyouhavenothingtosay.com or something?

Here's a piece from the New York Times about Obama's time in the Illinois Senate It's pretty evenhanded and while it won't leave you with the opinion that he has god-like powers to accomplish anything he sets his mind to, it does hit a lot of interesting points. Among them, that he often understood his limitations and accomplished as much as he could reasonably accomplish with bipartisan support. Some of the highlights are his work in reforming the Illinois death penalty (more on that here). And campaign finance reform in Illinois that watchdog groups have called 'the most ambitious campaign finance reform in 25 years', which has also made Illinois become considered as one of the most open states in where the money is moving around, if not tighter controls on how it's spent.

Here's an interesting, if somewhat critical profile form The Nation, pointing out that Obama has accomplished a decent amount in the Senate for his short time there, but hasn't used his coverage to change the national debate enough.

And, finally, here is a list of bills in the Senate currently that Obama has sponsored.

I got a little annoyed a while ago when someone assumed that because I'm an Obama supporter I'm somehow physically incapable of naming his accomplishments, or worse, that he has none and that's why no one can name any. Every voter would serve themselves well to throughly read up on any candidate they support, instead of just getting a campaign button and hoping for the best.

DhD_No_Pants

DhD_No_Pants

Katy, TX
May 2006

JUN 10, 2008 09:39 AM

ChrisSick said:
I don't have stills of Star Wars movies or cats in weird places to add to the conversation. Is there some sort of website I can go to load up my drive with that stuff? Picturestopostwhenyouhavenothingtosay.com or something?
.



Kittehs

Politics

It kind of sickens me personally that McCain is in favor of waterboarding, having been tortured himself. But since he gave up info while being tortured, maybe he thinks it is a good way to get it.

Tallboy66

Tallboy66

USA
January 2005

JUN 10, 2008 10:25 AM

Chainlink said:
Paragraphs are your friend.



Or atleast spaces. I'll have to come back to read, it's too nice out now.

turin

turin

Denver, CO
October 2003

JUN 10, 2008 12:39 PM

BOW TO URBOT
MASTER OF THE INTERNET

ChrisSick

ChrisSick

Philadelphia, PA
March 2008

JUN 10, 2008 03:09 PM

DhD_No_Pants said:
It kind of sickens me personally that McCain is in favor of waterboarding, having been tortured himself. But since he gave up info while being tortured, maybe he thinks it is a good way to get it.



McCain's position on torture is... complicated. From what I can tell he's against anyone in the military using waterboarding and other torture techniques, but he wants the CIA to be exempt. He added the McCain Anti-Torture Amendment to a defense spending bill, but voted against the CIA Waterboarding Ban in the Senate. So, to be honest, I can't tell if McCain is just trying to be be tough on National Security for the election, or if he actually thinks that while torture shouldn't be something the military engages in, the CIA might need it in the toolbox from time to time. For my part it isn't hard to figure out that the CIA and the military operate differently, but if we all agree that waterboarding is torture, then the US shouldn't be involved in it.

Thanks for the links.

Shiny_metal_ass

Shiny_metal_ass

I'm lost
October 2006

JUN 10, 2008 05:16 PM

ChrisSick said:

DhD_No_Pants said:
It kind of sickens me personally that McCain is in favor of waterboarding, having been tortured himself. But since he gave up info while being tortured, maybe he thinks it is a good way to get it.



McCain's position on torture is... complicated. From what I can tell he's against anyone in the military using waterboarding and other torture techniques, but he wants the CIA to be exempt. He added the McCain Anti-Torture Amendment to a defense spending bill, but voted against the CIA Waterboarding Ban in the Senate. So, to be honest, I can't tell if McCain is just trying to be be tough on National Security for the election, or if he actually thinks that while torture shouldn't be something the military engages in, the CIA might need it in the toolbox from time to time. For my part it isn't hard to figure out that the CIA and the military operate differently, but if we all agree that waterboarding is torture, then the US shouldn't be involved in it.

Thanks for the links.



So, basically, he's pro-torture. I don't see how it being OK for one branch of government to torture and not another can be anything but pro-torture. You're either for it or against it.

ChrisSick

ChrisSick

Philadelphia, PA
March 2008

JUN 10, 2008 05:40 PM

Shiny_Metal_Ass said:

ChrisSick said:

DhD_No_Pants said:
It kind of sickens me personally that McCain is in favor of waterboarding, having been tortured himself. But since he gave up info while being tortured, maybe he thinks it is a good way to get it.



McCain's position on torture is... complicated. From what I can tell he's against anyone in the military using waterboarding and other torture techniques, but he wants the CIA to be exempt. He added the McCain Anti-Torture Amendment to a defense spending bill, but voted against the CIA Waterboarding Ban in the Senate. So, to be honest, I can't tell if McCain is just trying to be be tough on National Security for the election, or if he actually thinks that while torture shouldn't be something the military engages in, the CIA might need it in the toolbox from time to time. For my part it isn't hard to figure out that the CIA and the military operate differently, but if we all agree that waterboarding is torture, then the US shouldn't be involved in it.

Thanks for the links.



So, basically, he's pro-torture. I don't see how it being OK for one branch of government to torture and not another can be anything but pro-torture. You're either for it or against it.



Believe me, I don't want to be in the position of defending John McCain or torture, but I think we can agree that different intelligence apparatuses have different goals and very different methodologies. The bill that everyone cites when calling John McCain 'for torture' specified that the CIA should stick to the Army's guidelines(FM 34-52) on interrogation. However, everyone forgets that McCain attached an earlier amendment to a Pentagon Funding Bill, that limited the powers of military officers conducting interrogations, but had no effect on the CIA or civilian 'defense contractors' who might be working for intelligence agencies. The Congress tried to pass a law to close the loop-hole, which McCain voted against.


The Act generally prohibits "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment" of detainees by any person, but only military interrogators are restrained to the specific guidelines of the Army's Field Manual on interrogation -- the Central Intelligence Agency was not. In an effort to close this loophole, Congress passed legislation to similarly constrain the CIA to the Field Manual's techniques. [5] McCain voted against this bill and recommended that President Bush follow through on his threat to veto it, arguing that the CIA already could not engage in torture but should have more options than afforded military interrogators. [6] The bill did not pass with sufficient votes to override an executive veto.



His position on the issue, as I said, is a little more complicated than pro-or-anti torture.