Obama Presidency Discussion Thread

How would you vote in the 2008 US Presidential Election?

  • Obama-Biden (Democrat)

    Votes: 67 59.3%

  • McCain-Palin (Republican)

    Votes: 18 15.9%

  • Barr-Root (Libertarian)

    Votes: 14 12.4%

  • Nader-Gonzales (Independent-Ecology Party / Peace and Freedom Party)

    Votes: 5 4.4%

  • McKinney-Clemente (Green)

    Votes: 1 0.9%

  • Baldwin-Castle (Constitution)

    Votes: 7 6.2%

  • Gurney-? (Car & Driver)

    Votes: 1 0.9%

  • Other...

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    113
  • Poll closed .
OPEC and Iran were a buildup of issues that had to do with things dating very far back in time, not specifically with Carter himself. Unfortunately that falls into the caveat of the executive office as a prison, in that, a leader he is blamed for everything no matter what happens. Quite certainly you can make the same case for Bush, however, I do not wish to defend either of them...

As for the RFK comparison, he never really was able to become President, so you can't call that one either. Most people I know, particularly people in my Grandparent's generation see it as the popular candidate that seems to knock people over with a fairly convincing message... Something that Reagan certainly was able to do in the '80s as well. I personally find Obama quite captivating, seeming quite honest, and in a sense delivering a fair message that if we work together, we can do great things... Regardless of our politics. Like I've said before, I've met McCain, I've shook hands with him... I've listened to him speak, and I've been pummeled with pro-McCain discussion and literature at my college, but I just don't buy it.
 
YSSMAN
Saying that it is a living document doesn't mean that I want to throw it away,
Click to expand...
Nor did I mean to imply that you said that (although I admit I used the word "you" in my statement, but it was intended as a general you, not as in you personally).

What I am saying is that if we can allow for it to be redefined then you can have redefinitions of everything. If you don't think that can happen I would like to point you to the Patriot Act. The debate of whether it violates parts of the Constitution goes on today. There are numerous issues where people argue whether it violates the Constitution. We do it almost daily on this very Web site.

but more or less, that I prefer to use it as a solid foundation of ideas and principles to help frame the modern issues that we face today.
Click to expand...
Yet you support some fairly social ideas that go against those ideas and principles of individual freedoms. You have even made a very common good style statement about doing not what is best for you but for the nation, when the Bill of Rights is specifically designed to protect the individual from the group, because, as I said, the idea was that what is best for the individual is best for the nation.

YSSMAN
OPEC and Iran were a buildup of issues that had to do with things dating very far back in time, not specifically with Carter himself. Unfortunately that falls into the caveat of the executive office as a prison, in that, a leader he is blamed for everything no matter what happens. Quite certainly you can make the same case for Bush, however, I do not wish to defend either of them...
Click to expand...
Just like todays prices are the result of a build up of issues. The comparison to Carter comes in when Obama is pushing for actions that are similar to what was done in the Carter administration, that obviously made the situation worse. If Obama's ideas go through it is quite possible that they will create the same additional problems that they created 30 years ago.

If Obama managed to get through every idea that he has then we could very well see rationing and lines at gas stations. But hey, at least the troops will be home, right?
 
YSSMAN
OPEC and Iran were a buildup of issues that had to do with things dating very far back in time, not specifically with Carter himself.
Click to expand...
That's why I used a smiley.

YSSMAN
As for the RFK comparison, he never really was able to become President, so you can't call that one either.
Click to expand...
But I know what he did when he was attorney general while his brother was president, so not only do I think that the Obama comparisons are invalid (the only thing those two share is being backed by the Kennedy family), but I also say that if they were accurate from an issues point of view there would be no easier way to keep me from voting for him.
 
That's pretty interesting... I'm surprised at some of the ratings there as well. I usually get a good run between The Huffington Post, NPR and the BBC. Maybe a bit of Politico and The Drudge Report for good measure as well...
 
Lol @ Clinton talking about special interests.

Looks like Hillary learned to lie like Bill.
 
I'll be the first to say that I'm not comfortable having them around the Obama campaign. If I were running his game, I'd be trying to distance myself completely. But, they're afraid that Hillary supporters will go to McCain (25% of Hillary supporters in Ohio and Pennsylvania are apparently voting for McCain), so they've gotta keep things tied together.

...Still, not what I'd be trying to do...
 
Its a very delicate position. Obama could play ball and give in to Hilary, or he could tell her to go off and risk throwing away all of her supporters. And she is too smart for him to try and fake going along with her.
 
YSSMAN
I'll be the first to say that I'm not comfortable having them around the Obama campaign. If I were running his game, I'd be trying to distance myself completely. But, they're afraid that Hillary supporters will go to McCain (25% of Hillary supporters in Ohio and Pennsylvania are apparently voting for McCain), so they've gotta keep things tied together.

...Still, not what I'd be trying to do...
Click to expand...

Why are you afraid? Hillary and Obama have exactly the same policies.
 
On some things yes, on others not so much. Hillary is further into the "right" with her politics than he is, and by that stroke, would be far closer to where McCain sits on most issues. Really, in my opinion, they're the same candidate. That, and they both seem to have a knack for getting away with saying rather stupid things...
 
Obama certainly cannot throw his Liberal, anti-American, 9/11 Truther, conspiracy theorist, terrorist, socialist, fascist, supporters under the bus.

Can he?

Or maybe Obama will just go back to eating his waffles.
 
I don't know how you form an opinion without knowing the facts? It's not an Constitutional amendment, it's a law. There are currently amendments to that law going through Congress. The House has already passed it and is waiting for Senate approval. This is where Obama will flip flop (again).

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978 is a U.S. federal law prescribing procedures for the physical and electronic surveillance and collection of "foreign intelligence information" between "foreign powers" and "agents of foreign powers" (which may include American citizens and permanent residents engaged in espionage and violating U.S. law: §1801(b)(2)(B)) on territory under United States control.
Click to expand...
 
Obama throws English under the bus:



Obama necesita una pala más grande.

On another note: the FISA bill passes the Senate 69-28 with Obama voting yes. Chalk up another flip flop for Obama. Will the FISA bill make a screaming noise when the bus runs it over?
 
Hopefully the Clarence Thomas and co. in the judiciary will knock this one out. It's the only hope for the 4th amendment.

I can't believe the people in this country put up with such a crappy congress.
 
Lower courts have ruled FISA constitutional. I don't see why the Supreme Court would rule any different, unless the justices are politically biased...

All those tards who voted Democrats into the majority are reaping what they sewed.
 
Obama does have a point, people in this country don't speak enough languages. I mean several of my European friends know English, French and German and are baffled why I can't speak another language. Yes I know enough German to get me by if I went there, but I don't really know it like I should. If America wants to be a big player in world affairs our citizens need to know other languages, whether it be Spanish, Chinese, German or French.

I agree people immigrating to this country should know English though, just as if I was going to live somewhere that spoke another language I would feel as if I should know it.
 
Joey D
Obama does have a point, people in this country don't speak enough languages. I mean several of my European friends know English, French and German and are baffled why I can't speak another language. Yes I know enough German to get me by if I went there, but I don't really know it like I should. If America wants to be a big player in world affairs our citizens need to know other languages, whether it be Spanish, Chinese, German or French.

I agree people immigrating to this country should know English though, just as if I was going to live somewhere that spoke another language I would feel as if I should know it.
Click to expand...

What? No, Americans don't need to be polyglots in order for America to be "a big player" in the world. If you're in an environment where using a certain language is more economical than another, you learn/use it. It's not a big deal.

Obama is an idiot. Learning Spanish is a complete waste of time if you never use it, and judging by the status quo of education I'd say kids need to concentrate more on learning English in the first place.

Solid Fro
Lower courts have ruled FISA constitutional. I don't see why the Supreme Court would rule any different, unless the justices are politically biased...

All those tards who voted Democrats into the majority are reaping what they sewed.
Click to expand...

You never know. I wouldn't be angry if they did take action against it though.
The FISA act itself isn't unconstitutional as an ex post facto law. The problem, however, is that now there won't even be any possibility to explore indictments. Behind the itch for retroactive immunity, I can only see "guilty guilty guilty." People should at least be entitled to try their individual cases civilly.
 
Omnis
What? No, Americans don't need to be polyglots in order for America to be "a big player" in the world. If you're in an environment where using a certain language is more economical than another, you learn/use it. It's not a big deal.

Obama is an idiot. Learning Spanish is a complete waste of time if you never use it, and judging by the status quo of education I'd say kids need to concentrate more on learning English in the first place.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Obama himself isn't exactly affluent in Spanish or any other language either. Yet, he deems himself fit to tell us that we need to learn other languages... and we can't have our SUVs, eat as much as we want, or keep our homes at 72 degrees either.

Also, if you ever written a single line of computer code, you have to know English and English only. So, want to be a big player in the computer world? Learn English.

End
 
Wow I can't believe you are saying we shouldn't have to learn another language. Look at where a lot of our business is done, China. If you know Chinese now you won't have an issue getting a job, even GM will hire you and they are broke. Even learning Spanish would be good since a lot of our auto industry is in Mexico as well. I think it's ridiculous that we expect other countries to know English when we want to export our jobs there. If we are going to do business in their country we should be able to speak their language.

I can't believe you guys aren't for being multilingual and I can't believe you you expect the rest of the world to just learn English. I agree that English is a widely spoken language and others should, and many do, learn it. But we still should learn other languages as well and it will help you out later in life. A second language should be required in school, whatever it is you choose.
 
Internationally speaking, English is the most common used language. I think learning other languages in only required if you do business with other countries or the like. Learning a new language just for the sake of it is not a must do, although it's good for you.
 
Still I believe both Hindi and Mandarin Chinese are the most spoken languages on the planet and judging how the US loves to export all of our jobs to India and China it seems like learning one of those languages would be good for us.
 
Joey D
Wow I can't believe you are saying we shouldn't have to learn another language.
Click to expand...
That word is the problem with your statement. Why force everyone to become polyglots when only 5% will ever use that skill? I used to be able to hold a conversation in German when I was in college. I can barely speak any of it now, five years later. Why? Because, aside from cursing and insults that I purposely don't want others to understand, I never use it. So we will spend money on forcing every child to learn second languages just to forget it later on?

Look at where a lot of our business is done, China. If you know Chinese now you won't have an issue getting a job, even GM will hire you and they are broke. Even learning Spanish would be good since a lot of our auto industry is in Mexico as well.
Click to expand...
That is great and anyone interested in a job that will have them dealing with stuff overseas should learn multiple languages as an added job skill. It is a bonus for anyone who learns it and seeks a job that will use it, but for everyone else it doesn't matter.

Someone looking to have a job in a localized area has no need of it, and forcing them to learn it is a pointless waste of time and resources.

I think it's ridiculous that we expect other countries to know English when we want to export our jobs there. If we are going to do business in their country we should be able to speak their language.
Click to expand...
That is a very valid point, but the US government can not dictate how business is done outside the US or what job skills are required of their employees.

I can't believe you guys aren't for being multilingual
Click to expand...
No one is against it. We are against requiring a skill that the majority of the population will never use.


It is not accurate to look at Europeans and say it is unfair that they know multiple languages and we don't. A European can be in another country, and language zone, almost as easily as I can be in another state. The fact of the matter is that I would have to drive nearly 16 hours to reach an are a with a native language that is not English (French Canada). The next closest region would be over a 20 hour drive away (Mexico). I went on vacation this year and spent 14 hours in a jet and still didn't leave the country.

It just isn't practical to be a required skill in a country as large as the US.
 
It sure sounds like some of the members think it's pointless for us to learn another language, when it reality you will probably use it more than a lot of the other stuff you learn in school. I was forced to learn calculus, music, and art history in school and to this day I've never used any of it and probably never will. If I would have been required to learn a language of my choice instead it would have been much more useful. This is what I'm getting at, we learn pointless stuff in school all the time, why not replace it with some you might actually use and will be better for anyways?
 

Latest Posts

Back