The Political debate thread

[DRUNK]

Well the quality of life will change with a democrate in the white house, now if it would be a good change or a bad change depends on who you are. Maybe our national security will be threatend if obama gets in becasue he's against the military, There is a good chance for more taxes if hillary gets in, becasue she wants to baby everbody and tax those who made themselves who they are.

Politics=broken promises.

Who knows what will happen? I think we will be in ok shape no matter whether Hillary, Obama, or MCcain wins.

Nothing hugely significant will change. I have already outlined what I think in a previous thread.

We have a two party system, and multiply divided nation. It is hard to make big changes.

I am a fan of balance. If a Democrat comes in, then that is supporting balance. However, in these times, it might be better to stick with someone like McCain. The world is a dangerous place for America. Obama or Hillary might be able to pull through because of what has happened in the last 8 years, but that isn't clear at the moment.

I don't know who to go for, but I like Obama because as far as I can see he is fresh and he hasn't been bought...........yet.

[Pb Derigable]

True they all lie but bush is vindictive and malicious and i can see thru that lying sack of shit from a million miles away. I'm 34 years old and i have never seen a standing president so openly arrogant in my 34 years. He is absolutely pathetic, and his decisions serve him and not America , he is the biggest hypocrite piece of trash there is.

Well, i disagree with you that his decisions serve him, and not the America best interest. while you may think he started a war for his pleasure, i believe this war will help our cause in the future and honestly we all have to hope for that. Even if you think this war is wrong, you have to hope that this wont bite us in the ass and i think it wont.

[Pb Derigable]

Politics=broken promises.

Who knows what will happen? I think we will be in ok shape no matter whether Hillary, Obama, or McCain wins.

Nothing hugely significant will change. I have already outlined what I think in a previous thread.

We have a two party system, and multiply divided nation. It is hard to make big changes.

I am a fan of balance. If a Democrat comes in, then that is supporting balance. However, in these times, it might be better to stick with someone like McCain. The world is a dangerous place for America. Obama or Hillary might be able to pull through because of what has happened in the last 8 years, but that isn't clear at the moment.

I don't know who to go for, but I like Obama because as far as I can see he is fresh and he hasn't been bought...........yet.

I not supporting Hillary or Obama because of their stance on the war. I believe no matter who's in there is going get us out, even if it is Bush, he's going to get us the fuck out of there. but that decision is going to made by the military personal to prevent a fuck up. The next POTUS would be making a bigger mistake if we leave badly

The reason I'm not supporting obama and Hillary is because of their local policies concerning taxes, health care, abortion, and welfare. Obama is a great speaker, but his beliefs i don't agree with. The change he want is change i don't want. If had a replubilcan hiding up his ass for the next 8 years, i would think he would be a great president, but he still has liberal view that i don't agree with.

[Hermit]

Do you really think your quality of life is going to change so much when someone new gets elected?

Yes, I do.

Before GWB took office, gas was about $1.50/gallon; today I'm paying almost $4/gallon. Under GWB's economic policies, the value of the US dollar has plummeted. Under GWB's pandering to credit card companies, the interest rates have gone up on most peoples' credit cards. Under GWB's mis-leadership, the govt surplus has been squandered and he's rung up a record debt; that affects our quality of life in ways that may not be immediately evident.

GWB has borrowed more money from foreign countries than all previous presidents combined.

"According to the Treasury Department, from 1776-2000, the first 224 years of U.S. history, 42 U.S. presidents borrowed a combined $1.01 trillion from foreign governments and financial institutions, but in the past four years alone, the Bush administration borrowed $1.05 trillion." *source*

National debt and presidents responsible for it:

I don't know about you, but my quality of life hasn't changed significantly in the last five elections.

Politics are nothing to get excited about. I support Obama, but do I really expect shit to change all that much? Not really.

Middle class Americans are undoubtedly economically

worse off now than they were before GWB took office.

Things do change depending on who's setting the priorities

and implementing policies. To suggest otherwise is absurd.

More people say they're worse off now than they were 4 years ago.

---------

We’re worse off than 4 years ago, voters say

WASHINGTON - Are you better off now than you were four years ago?

This has become a fundamental question in presidential elections. And for the first time since 1992, a plurality of voters heading into November’s election answer that question with a resounding no, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

Forty-three percent say that they and their families are worse off, compared with 34 percent who say they’re better off; 21 percent respond that their status is the same. By contrast, strong pluralities or majorities answered that they were better off before entering the general elections in 1996, 2000 and 2004 — when, with the exception of the extremely close 2000 race, the incumbent party held onto the presidency.

*source*

--------

[zepsteve]

I would love to agree to disagree but i truly believe bush had more to do with 9/11 than any terrorist the guy is one bullshit excuse after another and in the end there simply is no excuse for bush its just that simple!!!

[Pb Derigable]

I would love to agree to disagree but i truly believe bush had more to do with 9/11 than any terrorist the guy is one bullshit excuse after another and in the end there simply is no excuse for bush its just that simple!!!

If you belive that, then there is no point of saving this country, because if country that allows somthing like that to happen, it will die no matter who was the president at that time. because its a matter of time before someone else lead us to our death. I would be very scarred to bring children into this world if i belived that could happen.

[Electrophile]

There's no way Bush was behind 9/11......he's too stupid to be able to pull it off and keep up the charade all this time. 9/11 required a lot of planning, a lot of foresight, a lot of work. If you think this current administration knows how to do any of that, you're nuts.

[zepsteve]

I'm not suggesting they planned it as much as they were aware it was going to take place. If you watched those towers drop, and they dropped like a construction demolition then you would know somebody was behind it. I work constuction and if you fly a fully jet fueled plane into a structure such as the twin towers all the support beams will give out but not at the same time so remember the building went straight down all at once as a matter of fact both buildings went down inthe same way it just dont work that way and im really surprised more people havent questioned this bullshit!!!

[The Bomber]

True they all lie but bush is vindictive and malicious and i can see thru that lying sack of shit from a million miles away. I'm 34 years old and i have never seen a standing president so openly arrogant in my 34 years. He is absolutely pathetic, and his desicions serve him and not america , he is the biggest hypocrite piece of trash there is.

Bush is the worst president since Nixon.

I'm not suggesting they planned it as much as they were aware it was going to take place. If you watched those towers drop, and they dropped like a construction demolition then you would know somebody was behind it. I work constuction and if you fly a fully jet fueled plane into a structure such as the twin towers all the support beams will give out but not at the same time so remember the building went straight down all at once as a matter of fact both buildings went down inthe same way it just dont work that way and im really surprised more people havent questioned this bullshit!!!

I don't think Bush did it,i think that the towers were brought down by terrorists,but the plane thing,well,they needed a backup,you ram a plane into a building,you could miss,or a thousand other things,so they planted explosives in,maybe the gov't should have checked for bombs.

[wanna be drummer]

I would love to agree to disagree but i truly believe bush had more to do with 9/11 than any terrorist the guy is one bullshit excuse after another and in the end there simply is no excuse for bush its just that simple!!!

These conspiracy theories have been debunked so many times over I can't even count.

The directors of "Loose Change" even admitted putting misleading/flat-out false "facts" in their movie because they wanted people to go out and "search for the real facts themselves."

And if anyone is to blame, it's Bill Clinton. That guy ahd the oppurtunity to wipe Osama off the face of the Earth, but opted not to, because a kid was around him and may have witnessed his death

Nice...

[wanna be drummer]

Bush is the worst president since Nixon.

I would argue that Nixon, besides the Watergate fiasco, wasn't even that bad of a president.

I don't think Bush did it,i think that the towers were brought down by terrorists,but the plane thing,well,they needed a backup,you ram a plane into a building,you could miss,or a thousand other things,so they planted explosives in,maybe the gov't should have checked for bombs.

I doubt they planted bombs in the WTC. To plant bombs in a building that big would take weeks, if not, months to do. Even then, security inside the building was pretty tight. Also, with the thousands of people who worked there, don't you think the terrorists would've been caught in the act at least once?

[bigstickbonzo]

^ I'd take Nixon any day of the week over Bush.

Nixon's downfall was his inner turmoil with himself, not lust for oil money.

Bush is without a doubt the worst US President, over LBJ, James Buchanon, Herbert Hoover and Andrew Jackson.

[Electrophile]

Bush worse than Hoover? I'd put the two of them side by side, really. I do agree with him being in the bottom of the barrel when it comes to Presidents.

And at least Jackson is on the money. Let's give him just that.

[wanna be drummer]

I'm throwin Andrew Johnson into that mix as well. Theres a man that screwed up history

[Electrophile]

Johnson fucked up Reconstruction for a number of big reasons, two of them being his haste to reincorporate the Confederate states back into the Union and his vetoing of civil rights bills. He allowed Southern states to hold elections that put Confederate leaders in public office. Congress wouldn't seat them, of course.

[bigstickbonzo]

And at least Jackson is on the money. Let's give him just that.

Jackson is only on the 20 because:

He became the Father of the Democratic Party after ensuring the 'jackass' as its mascot

He won the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, eventhough the war was already over.

He slaughtered thousands of Native Americans in his tenure; unquestioned until well into the 20th century

Is romanticed by some because he was the 'last' American war hero before the Civil War, pitting him in a league with Washington.

[bigstickbonzo]

Johnson fucked up Reconstruction for a number of big reasons, two of them being his haste to reincorporate the Confederate states back into the Union and his vetoing of civil rights bills. He allowed Southern states to hold elections that put Confederate leaders in public office. Congress wouldn't seat them, of course.

I would agree. Johnson is questionable for Top 5 Worse Presidents with Buchanon, who single handedly gave up on the country, leading to the Civil War.

[The Bomber]

I would argue that Nixon, besides the Watergate fiasco, wasn't even that bad of a president.

I doubt they planted bombs in the WTC. To plant bombs in a building that big would take weeks, if not, months to do. Even then, security inside the building was pretty tight. Also, with the thousands of people who worked there, don't you think the terrorists would've been caught in the act at least once?

Nixon was paranoid,bad trait for a president.

The alternative to my 9/11 theory is that GWB planted the bombs,it was two big buildings,look at where the plane hit,almost at the very top of the tower,how is that supposed to bring it down?The angle was not a good place to destroy a building from,and 3 buildings collapsed,so i can only assume a bomb was planted there,one very big bomb,a terrorist would have walked in,put in a bomb,walked out,and when the planes struck,detonated.

Otherwise,the american government did it,i don't believe that.

[DRUNK]

Hermit,

Blame Bush all you want. The world is an ever changing place, with other nations growing and doing far better than they were doing before Bush came in office, but that is not Bush's fault. These countries are staying true to earlier predictions of growth.

The rest of the world is catching up, and this shouldn't be a surprise.

[Hermit]

Hermit,

Blame Bush all you want. The world is an ever changing place, with other nations growing and doing far better than they were doing before Bush came in office, but that is not Bush's fault. These countries are staying true to earlier predictions of growth.

The rest of the world is catching up, and this shouldn't be a surprise.

Of course the world is growing and changing, and of course its no surprise that the rest odf the world is catching up. You at least have a firm grasp of the obvious. But what does that have to do with things going in the wrong direction in America? To think what happens in America happens irregardless of the policies of the POTUS and the party in power is naive.. nay, ignorant.

Take a look around as see how things have changed in America over the last 7 years. Are you not discerning enough to see the downward trend in peoples' satisfaction all through the country? There's a reason that *nearly 75% of Americans feel America is "headed in the wrong direction"*...that's the highest rate of discontent in a decade...and...wouldn't ya know it...Bush has been in office.. has been the primary policy setter...during most of that time span. Can you not connect the dots?

Give Bush a pass (on having any responsibility) all you want.

Edited March 17, 2008 by Hermit

[zepyep]

Hi all,

Nixon was paranoid,bad trait for a president.

No,very bad for anyone who has power.

The alternative to my 9/11 theory is that GWB planted the bombs,it was two big buildings,look at where the plane hit,almost at the very top of the tower,how is that supposed to bring it down?The angle was not a good place to destroy a building from,and 3 buildings collapsed,so i can only assume a bomb was planted there,one very big bomb,a terrorist would have walked in,put in a bomb,walked out,and when the planes struck,detonated.

"Mom,Dad,got a take trip to NYC!"

"Why son?"

"Well,got to plant some bombs."

"Really?"

"Yep,it's how I will win Florida!"

"Good luck,son!"

Well Rosie O'D,we just like killing our own innocents,yep,that what we like to do!Hell,with so many folks,you know the kind and gentle folks,that just want to kill for the shoots and ladders of it,....heck we might as well join in on the fun of killing folks.What a great idea,......

KB

Otherwise,the american government did it,i don't believe that.

[wanna be drummer]

Nixon was paranoid,bad trait for a president.

But besides Watergate, he didn't do anything that dramatically changed the country. We weren't doing horrendous when he was in charge.

The alternative to my 9/11 theory is that GWB planted the bombs,it was two big buildings,look at where the plane hit,almost at the very top of the tower,how is that supposed to bring it down?The angle was not a good place to destroy a building from,and 3 buildings collapsed,so i can only assume a bomb was planted there,one very big bomb,a terrorist would have walked in,put in a bomb,walked out,and when the planes struck,detonated.

Otherwise,the american government did it,i don't believe that.

Debris couldn't have hit those buildings, causing them to crash?

A bomb big enough to take down those three buildings is also unlikely, given the size it would have to be and the manpower it would have taken to carry the thing. Again, I believe someone would've seen them.

If the American gov't did it, they sure planned it out remarkably well in a few months, because thats how long Bush was in office, unless you don't believe Bush was the official who ordered it, in which case I daresay no one else in politics would have the power to create a catastrophe as big as it was without the presidents approval and planning and say.

[The Bomber]

But besides Watergate, he didn't do anything that dramatically changed the country. We weren't doing horrendous when he was in charge.

Debris couldn't have hit those buildings, causing them to crash?

A bomb big enough to take down those three buildings is also unlikely, given the size it would have to be and the manpower it would have taken to carry the thing. Again, I believe someone would've seen them.

If the American gov't did it, they sure planned it out remarkably well in a few months, because thats how long Bush was in office, unless you don't believe Bush was the official who ordered it, in which case I daresay no one else in politics would have the power to create a catastrophe as big as it was without the presidents approval and planning and say.

As i said,I DON'T BELIEVE BUSH BLEW UP THE TOWERS!!!I'm not a conspiracy theorist,i believe that a bomb was planted,of course,of a reasonable size,as a backup,so,you have:

Planes hitting the towers.

A bomb going off.

Falling debris.

Quickly melting metal as a result of all of these points.

My point is this,the way it fell suggests the use of other methods,i was simply debunking conspiracy theorists,the plane hit the tower,and heated up the metal to such a high temperature that it's very atomic structure fell apart and ceased to be,at the same time,a bomb went off,somewhere,further destroying the building,and debris falling from the air,further weakening the buildings as the debris would have crashed from building to building,all of this explains why it fell the way it did,it was NOT a government conspiracy,but it was used to gain support for the Iraq war,it shouldn't have taken a terrorist attack to convince you to get rid of Sadaam,he should have been stopped a long time ago.

[zosodude13]

in the whole convo about 9/11 being a set up by the gov't to justify Iraq and ect... I believe it was a real attack and not a planned job by the gov't

but the real issue I see here is that fact that this is EVEN considered a plot or ploy by the goverment... it really shows how far the gap is between the government and the people...

not to mention, after what has happened in Iraq and the aftermath and what we are left with, it would be easy for someone to claim 9/11 was a hoax, to "explain" what is happening in Iraq... and the fact that 9/11 was used as a vice (See Rudy "9/11" Guliani and his 2008 presidential campaign) by the government to get into something many Americans regret today

I keep hearing the comparison between 9/11 and pearl harbor, and how both attacked pushed America into war with a common emeny... well, I havent heard about pearl harbor being an American plot to convince the nation to enter WWII

---------------------------------------------------

But besides Watergate, he didn't do anything that dramatically changed the country.

I think Nixon's visit to China was VERY significant, when you compare it to our perception of communist nations, espicailly in the 1970's... it was monumental that the leader of the "free world" set foot into a country that was the ultimate opposite. Pretty big event, imo.

Edited March 17, 2008 by zosodude13

[Dzldoc]

Jackson is only on the 20 because:

He became the Father of the Democratic Party after ensuring the 'jackass' as its mascot

He won the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, eventhough the war was already over.

He slaughtered thousands of Native Americans in his tenure; unquestioned until well into the 20th century

Is romanticed by some because he was the 'last' American war hero before the Civil War, pitting him in a league with Washington.

With a little help from his friends

Jean Lafitte Jean Lafitte, or Laffite, c.1780-c.1826, was a Louisiana privateer and smuggler who helped U.S. forces in the Battle of New Orleans at the end of the WAR OF 1812. About 1810 he and his men settled in the area of Barataria Bay, near New Orleans, and preyed on Spanish ships in the Gulf of Mexico. In 1814 the British attempted to buy Lafitte's aid in attacking New Orleans. Instead he passed their plans onto the Americans and helped Andrew Jackson defend the city in January 1815. Lafitte later returned to privateering.

Lafitte was not a native of Louisiana. He was born in Southwest France and moved with his family to Santo Domingo in the early 1800's. He and his is family were forced to leave after a slave uprising, and LaFitte found work as a blacksmith in New Orleans. He fought valiantly in the Battle of New Orleans and was a proud and devoted advocate of the exiled French emporer, Napoleon.

Though no one knows for sure, many scholars believe that Lafitte took up residence on the Southwest Louisiana coast for several years toward the end of his life. It is said that Lafitte's schooner was finally sunk by a United States gunboat and now lies in its underwater grave at Shell Beach.