Obama-Biden or McCain-Palin(Speedsolving Votes)

[shelley]

removed

I don't care what your sexual preferences and fantasies are. HOW in the world does that relate to this discussion? Is her attractiveness supposed to make up for her incompetency as a VP nominee?

 

[hawkmp4]

removed inappropriate quote

I don't care what your sexual preferences and fantasies are. HOW in the world does that relate to this discussion? Is her attractiveness supposed to make up for her incompetency as a VP nominee?

There's no relevance, of course. Just an idiotic, stereotypical remark. How is that...even socially acceptable to say something like that? *shakes head* this is why I hate men.

 

[pjk]

If you look over a transcript, notice how McCain referred to "Senator Obama" whenever he was talking about him? Obama, on the other hand, refers to his opponent as "John".

Sorry, that just seems to reek of arrogance, or perhaps he was just getting flustered and decided to quit showing respect.

I don't think that shows any sign of disrespect or respect. I've always thought about this, and whether it is really appropriate to call someone by their title, such as 'Senator', or Dr. if they have a PhD. Many people prefer to be called by their name, others prefer to be called by their title. I always try to refer to people by their first name, and not their title. I work with several PhD students and none of them really care if they are referred to by their title. Afterall, what is it really showing, and what is the point? When Obama and McCain were debating, I don't think it is necessary to state their title every time you refer to them, although I don't see anything wrong with it. Obviously everyone knows they are both senators.

On a side note:

 

[CAT13]

If you look over a transcript, notice how McCain referred to "Senator Obama" whenever he was talking about him? Obama, on the other hand, refers to his opponent as "John".

Sorry, that just seems to reek of arrogance, or perhaps he was just getting flustered and decided to quit showing respect.

I don't think that shows any sign of disrespect or respect. I've always thought about this, and whether it is really appropriate to call someone by their title, such as 'Senator', or Dr. if they have a PhD. Many people prefer to be called by their name, others prefer to be called by their title. I always try to refer to people by their first name, and not their title. I work with several PhD students and none of them really care if they are referred to by their title. Afterall, what is it really showing, and what is the point? When Obama and McCain were debating, I don't think it is necessary to state their title every time you refer to them, although I don't see anything wrong with it. Obviously everyone knows they are both senators.

My principal has a PhD and he will only go by "Dr. Keith Kline". He doesn't like being called Mr. or anything. But I don't think he should be called doctor since that isn't his profession :rolleyes:

 

[Bryan]

I don't think that shows any sign of disrespect or respect. I've always thought about this, and whether it is really appropriate to call someone by their title, such as 'Senator', or Dr. if they have a PhD. Many people prefer to be called by their name, others prefer to be called by their title. I always try to refer to people by their first name, and not their title. I work with several PhD students and none of them really care if they are referred to by their title. Afterall, what is it really showing, and what is the point? When Obama and McCain were debating, I don't think it is necessary to state their title every time you refer to them, although I don't see anything wrong with it. Obviously everyone knows they are both senators.

In the normal course of day to day activities, I don't think people should have to refer to people by their titles (I work with 2 PhD's, and refer to them by first name only, and I don't even like the sign on my Sunday School door that says "Mr Logan"). But in a debate, it looks really tacky to refer to your opponent by their first name.

 

[Dene]

Just a quick point, if you do not understand politics, you should not be commenting on it and coming to ridiculous conclusions because of the crap you here on NBC. You can be liberal, thats fine, but make sure you know the facts first, because i find most people who are liberal, are that way because they have no idea of the facts. Gun control, universal healthcare, no war, it all sounds good straight up, and many people fall under the illusion that whoever preaches this is the right candidate. Just do me a favor and look up some facts and watch Fahrenhype 9/11 and get the other point of view, because reading this thread, i have seen extremely naive ideas being thrown out, and its a bit absurd and aggravating, specifically to Dene, its clear you have no idea what is happening and your bush-bashing, condescending remarks are frankly, offending.

First of all, I have never watched the NBC, and I am NOT, I repeat, NOT a liberal, and never will be.

Gun control? How is this a problem? America is pretty much the only "developed" country where you can get a gun with almost no effort. Every other country has it right, why can't America?

Universal healthcare: Impractical, but at least it can be made a lot easier to get healthcare. We have it in NZ (to an extent) and our economy is a complete load of poopy (I use this word because I don't swear) compared to the American economy.

No war: Oh it is very simple: pull out. I have done political philosophy, and am qualified to say that defensive war, at the most, is the only justified war (I am a pacifist myself, but I couldn't expect a country to sit back and take a beating).

As for Bush-bashing: I have every right, the rest of the world hates him. America hates him. Look at the two main presidential nominees! They are both trying to put a huge barrier between themselves and Bush. The comment I hear all the time on the news here is that Bush is the most hated American president ever. And for very good reasons!

As for offending you: good. I feel I wouldn't have succeeded in my comments unless I offended as many people as possible (while still remaining true to my own opinions).

 

[Kyle Barry]

To hawk, my post was meant to tell people to get informed, how is that ignorant in anyway, i make zero ridiculous claims, your being absurd, now Dene, Gun control, the problem is that in every situation where gun control is implemented, crime rates and homicide rates sky rockets, yet we continue to do it???its killing people, thats why its wrong, universal healthcare, we agree it seems, we should make it more affordable and mccain is doing that, the war, is in a sense a defensive war, please watch fahrenhype 9.11, its online, we cannot sit back and let people strike us, we need to stop it at its source, should we have gone into Afghanistan, of course, all but 2 senators voted for that war because we obviously needed to respond to 9/11, in Iraq, we had intelligence of WMDs, the UN past 17 resolutions telling Saddam to cooperate with weapons inspectors and he didnt, what were we to do, Saddam is also responsible for the deaths of about 1 million of his own citizens, children prisons where kids are tortured in front of their parents, torture chambers, he used biological weapons on his own people, they are also a sponsor of terrorism, saddam called for more suicide bombings on the anniversary of 9/11, his son made newspapers write about promoting suicide bombings, saddam payed huge bounties to terrorists' families if they blew themselves up to kill others, bush bashing, i dont think you can speak for the world because you are one person in another country, no doubt he has a low approval rating here and abroad, yet our congress, which votes for these things, has a 9% rating compared to a 25ish for Bush and we dont bash them, Democratic congress by the way, and im qualified, as a history major, to say in the past, Clinton, who didnt go after Osama after the 1993 bombing of the world trade center, who was responsible for it, allowed 9.11 to occur, so sitting back and waiting is absurd.

 

[pjk]

But in a debate, it looks really tacky to refer to your opponent by their first name.

I'd have to disagree, for the same reasons I mentioned earlier.

 

[hawkmp4]

To hawk, my post was meant to tell people to get informed, how is that ignorant in anyway, i make zero ridiculous claims, your being absurd, now Dene, Gun control, the problem is that in every situation where gun control is implemented, crime rates and homicide rates sky rockets, yet we continue to do it???its killing people, thats why its wrong, universal healthcare, we agree it seems, we should make it more affordable and mccain is doing that, the war, is in a sense a defensive war, please watch fahrenhype 9.11, its online, we cannot sit back and let people strike us, we need to stop it at its source, should we have gone into Afghanistan, of course, all but 2 senators voted for that war because we obviously needed to respond to 9/11, in Iraq, we had intelligence of WMDs, the UN past 17 resolutions telling Saddam to cooperate with weapons inspectors and he didnt, what were we to do, Saddam is also responsible for the deaths of about 1 million of his own citizens, children prisons where kids are tortured in front of their parents, torture chambers, he used biological weapons on his own people, they are also a sponsor of terrorism, saddam called for more suicide bombings on the anniversary of 9/11, his son made newspapers write about promoting suicide bombings, saddam payed huge bounties to terrorists' families if they blew themselves up to kill others, bush bashing, i dont think you can speak for the world because you are one person in another country, no doubt he has a low approval rating here and abroad, yet our congress, which votes for these things, has a 9% rating compared to a 25ish for Bush and we dont bash them, Democratic congress by the way, and im qualified, as a history major, to say in the past, Clinton, who didnt go after Osama after the 1993 bombing of the world trade center, who was responsible for it, allowed 9.11 to occur, so sitting back and waiting is absurd.

First off, use some style- This is a headache to read. I got as far as gun control before I gave up. Spaces and paragraphs are your (and more importantly, as the reader, my friend)
You are making ridiculous claims about a liberal media bias, and that liberals are by definition ignorant. That offends me. You're telling me that my viewpoints are absurd but all you're offering is a fingers-in-the-ears approach when I ask you what's so absurd.

Every other developed country in the world has some sort of socialized medicine. Obviously, its working for them. Only reason it won't work here is because people equate socialist with communist.
America is the only place I know of where "socialist" is used as a derogatory term. I know many other countries not only have an active socialist party, but one that holds several seats in their legislative house/s.

 

[Kyle Barry]

I'm not concerned with writing to please you. There is no ridiculous claim about media bias, donations from tv stations were 100-1 in obama's favor, its well-documented that there is a liberal bias, I don't see how you can argue that. And socialism is derogatory because it is inherently, un-american, as we believe in freedom, not the gov't telling us how we can spend our money, we don't believe we work for the gov't or other people, we work for ourselves. And i said it is ok to be liberal, and it goes for conservatives as well, as long as you are informed, its clearly silly to have an opinion on something without knowing anything about it, i didnt say you didnt know anything, just making a general statement, there's nothing absurd about it.

 

[WWEFreak666]

I would, like most Canadians, prefer Obama over McCain. It does seem like Obama will win, but sadly there's my fear and a lot of others, that if Obama is elected that he may become assassinated, because he's black. If all goes well and Obama does a successful run and actually changes America for the better, this could be amazing. But no matter what, Obama has already made history in the books. I'm just at fear that the government will turn their backs on this man simply because he seems to want change, unlike McCain who just seems to want exactly what Bush wants.

 

[Dene]

Gun control, the problem is that in every situation where gun control is implemented, crime rates and homicide rates sky rockets, yet we continue to do it???

Where does this come from? Where are the largest homicide rates in the western world? America! (America on a whopping 5.7, under a morbid list of eastern countries.

the war, is in a sense a defensive war, please watch fahrenhype 9.11, its online, we cannot sit back and let people strike us,

It's called pre-emptive strike, and is a cheap excuse. Unless you are fighting on your borders, you shouldn't be fighting at all.

Saddam is also responsible for the deaths of about 1 million of his own citizens, children prisons where kids are tortured in front of their parents, torture chambers, he used biological weapons on his own people, they are also a sponsor of terrorism

And how many have the Americans killed? Saddam Hussein was caught a long time ago, why are you still there?!

bush bashing, i dont think you can speak for the world because you are one person in another country, no doubt he has a low approval rating here and abroad

I can assure you, I only speak what everyone else is saying. It is not only me.

Clinton, who didnt go after Osama after the 1993 bombing of the world trade center, who was responsible for it, allowed 9.11 to occur, so sitting back and waiting is absurd.

That is quite a claim, but at least Clinton isn't responsible for the deaths of thousands of American's in war, and other innocent civilians, and yet ignores his own country when hurricanes come blasting through. Good job Bush, good job!

And socialism is derogatory because it is inherently, un-american, as we believe in freedom, not the gov't telling us how we can spend our money, we don't believe we work for the gov't or other people, we work for ourselves..

Clearly, you lack any knowledge of how the economy works (and that's saying something, as my knowledge of the economy is not very widespread, yet it is clearly above and beyond your own). You currently do not work for yourself, you work for the few big businesses that are currently running the world.
Instead of working for the government, you would rather work in an absurdly unstable economy, which is now going into a recession because only a few businesses are crumbling? At the moment the whole of the world is relying on just a few big businesses to keep afloat, or else we are going into the biggest depression in history.
No matter how you spin it, you will never truly work for yourself unless you live on a farm and produce all your own stock.
Personally, I'd rather the knowledge that I am forever financially secure in a socialist government, than scraping the bottom of the barrel in this capitalist farce.
Also, the government don't tell you how to spend your money. Get the facts straight please, instead of preaching against what a few anti-communists have told you.
I may as well add, you don't have freedom. Try taking some political philosophy, and you will know what I mean.

 

[Kyle Barry]

Where does this come from? Where are the largest homicide rates in the western world? America! (America on a whopping 5.7, under a morbid list of eastern countries.

-Yes, we have a bad homicide rate, and whenever we enforce stricter gun control, homicide rates go up, as does crime, dc bun ban, the year after it was enacted, homicide went up 200%, every situation, UK, Australia, and countless places in the United States, the new gun control causes more crime, its logical because all you do is take away guns from law-abiding citizens who defend themselves, and leave the criminals with the guns, because they buy illegally 85% of the time

It's called pre-emptive strike, and is a cheap excuse. Unless you are fighting on your borders, you shouldn't be fighting at all.

-It's in no way a cheap excuse, we are trying to prevent further terrorism

And how many have the Americans killed? Saddam Hussein was caught a long time ago, why are you still there?!

-We are there because we are rebuilding a democracy so the nation doesn't crumble and become a hot-bed for terrorism and make us go back there one day

That is quite a claim, but at least Clinton isn't responsible for the deaths of thousands of American's in war, and other innocent civilians, and yet ignores his own country when hurricanes come blasting through. Good job Bush, good job!

-Clinton allowed thousands of American citizens to die because of 9.11, Bush and Congress, again, not all Bush like everyone claims, has invaded a country, with our military to achieve a goal, to secure our homeland, long term, and are you aware FEMA is responsible for handling disasters and the director resigned because of his failures, sorry Bush cant control the weather

Clearly, you lack any knowledge of how the economy works (and that's saying something, as my knowledge of the economy is not very widespread, yet it is clearly above and beyond your own). You currently do not work for yourself, you work for the few big businesses that are currently running the world.
Instead of working for the government, you would rather work in an absurdly unstable economy, which is now going into a recession because only a few businesses are crumbling? At the moment the whole of the world is relying on just a few big businesses to keep afloat, or else we are going into the biggest depression in history.
No matter how you spin it, you will never truly work for yourself unless you live on a farm and produce all your own stock.
Personally, I'd rather the knowledge that I am forever financially secure in a socialist government, than scraping the bottom of the barrel in this capitalist farce.
Also, the government don't tell you how to spend your money. Get the facts straight please, instead of preaching against what a few anti-communists have told you.
I may as well add, you don't have freedom. Try taking some political philosophy, and you will know what I mean.

-By work for myself i mean we work to support OUR families and support OUR way of life, not other people's, "Also, the government don't tell you how to spend your money. Get the facts straight please, instead of preaching against what a few anti-communists have told you," clearly you not living here disallows you to see that the government forces you to take money out of your paychecks to pay for other people's healthcare and social security, and youd rather the knowledge that i am forever financially secure in a socialist govt then scraping the bottom of the barrel in this capitalist farce, America has become the most dominant economy in the world through capitalism, im certainly not scraping the bottom of the barrel, and neither are a humongous majority of americans, you said before your economy sucks compared to ours, and its true, i dont have complete freedom obviously, but i sure would like it, and socialism is the complete opposite of economic freedom

 

[Kyle Barry]

If you want to respond, please just email me at [email protected], it's a hassle to check this every 5 minutes and we are discouraging other people from posting I think, but do as you will.

 

[hawkmp4]

All I'd like to do is respond with a quote from the lovely Stephen Colbert for those of you who whine about the liberal media bias-
"Reality has a known liberal bias."

 

[Crickets]

removed

I don't care what your sexual preferences and fantasies are. HOW in the world does that relate to this discussion? Is her attractiveness supposed to make up for her incompetency as a VP nominee?

I really don't see what "incompetency" your seeing. Seems like shes done a pretty good job with Alaska to me.

 

[Crickets]

the war, is in a sense a defensive war, please watch fahrenhype 9.11, its online, we cannot sit back and let people strike us,

It's called pre-emptive strike, and is a cheap excuse. Unless you are fighting on your borders, you shouldn't be fighting at all.[/QUOTE]

The thing is this is "terrorism" they want to fight they just don't want to have a "fair fight" cause they know they wouldn't stand a chance. Terrorist just want to make quick cheap hits against the country that they hate. And letting them get away with that would just be telling the people of this country. We love you when your payin taxes but, when the terrorists have your work building targeted your **** outta luck.

 

[Stefan]

whenever we enforce stricter gun control, homicide rates go up, as does crime, dc bun ban, the year after it was enacted, homicide went up 200%

Liar.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/dccrime.htm
(for those who don't know, it was enacted 1976)

 

[Escher]

Im glad at least Stefan does his research.

 

[Kyle Barry]

Excuse me, I meant to say, from the year after it was enacted until 1991, homicide rates rose 200%

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2005/may/20/20050520-081040-3508r/