I miss political conversations and such

[HighEnergy]

I have been looking at the forum boards on the front page, and it's missing something without the, um, how shall I put this without sounding too, well, um...

I miss the political threads. I miss the intelligent conversation. Surely we can converse without too much bitching. I liked hearing other folks thoughts. I even liked the folks bitching about talking about something other than sex.

I went to the Obama rally last week and it was a wonderful scene of diversity and excitement. I'm really, really bummed about the results today. I was thinking that I drive around the city a lot and I've been seeing lots of Obama signs, and very few Hillary signs. Are her supporters embarrassed to put up signs? Well, it turns out the major cities in Ohio voted for Obama, but the places in between voted for Hillary. Is a woman lesser of the two evils for some of our less urban areas? The good news is Senator Obama only got 4 less delegates than she did in the long run here in O-hi-o.

Anyone else care for a friendly political conversation, or am I going to get slammed for daring to change the subject for a bit?

[Skater Boy]

Excuse me for not being up on my American history, but has the US ever had a FEMALE president before? If not, then this is gonna be a ground-breaking election... either the first female president, or the first black president. Perhaps all the WOMEN in America should vote for Hilary and all the BLACK people should vote for Barack. But then who should the BLACK WOMEN vote for? ANYWAY, I fear I've lowered the tone of this thread before its even got going...

[The Barefoot Contess]

Hey, I am all about politics :) Even when, or precisely when I get all upset and people make me want to cry, I also enjoy hearing what people have to say.

I am also disappointed about the primaries in Ohio and Texas, because I like Obama better than Hillary. I just hope "hope" will not get defeated by the so-called "experience", or, in other words, that people will not be defeated by fear. What I mean by "fear" is, on the one hand, the one that thinks Hillary will "protect" us better because she has foreign policy experience, and, on the other, the one that is afraid of "change" (however rhetorical you might want it to be).

I reeeaaally wish I were a US citizen so I could vote!

[The Barefoot Contess]

ANYWAY, I fear I've lowered the tone of this thread before its even got going...

LOL ;) We love you anyway, Skater.

[TaylorMade]

Excuse me for not being up on my American history, but has the US ever had a FEMALE president before? If not, then this is gonna be a ground-breaking election... either the first female president, or the first black president. Perhaps all the WOMEN in America should vote for Hilary and all the BLACK people should vote for Barack. But then who should the BLACK WOMEN vote for? ANYWAY, I fear I've lowered the tone of this thread before its even got going...

Whoever I want to. :tong: <goes to check her voter registration card. . .

*Taylor*

[HighEnergy]

Experience is one thing, but having a gentle poker face during the debates and her nonsense about Saturday Night Live made me think he'd be better with foreign heads of state than she would with all the nonverbals she was sending out. I think she's more of politics as usual, and rather cranky looking. Given she's taken money from health insurance companies, drug companies, and weapons manufacturers, I'm not thinking she has the interests she talks about at heart.

[HighEnergy]

Excuse me for not being up on my American history, but has the US ever had a FEMALE president before? If not, then this is gonna be a ground-breaking election... either the first female president, or the first black president. Perhaps all the WOMEN in America should vote for Hilary and all the BLACK people should vote for Barack. But then who should the BLACK WOMEN vote for? ANYWAY, I fear I've lowered the tone of this thread before its even got going...

Ah friendly banter and lowing the tone is a good thing, especially from a cutie like you.

And yes, either way it will be a historical election. My friend will be in Italy on inauguration (where's the spell check button?) day and is all excited about being proud to be an American of colour that day, especially while abroad. Being the depressed cynical person I am, I said as long as some redneck idiot doesn't do something stupid that day.

[darkeyes]

Not been in 2 much recently as yas knows..but all me can say is..God forums is deadly.. back enda las summa moaned bout how borin they wer an they gettin worse!!! Every 1 all 2 luffy duffy (she cute by the way..an husky voice wich wets the knicks..tee hee.. shudn confuse brits that lil quip but mite me merician an otha luffles... an who cares wetha it confuses guys ne way..don take much at besta times).

In all honestly tho forums has been dull.. no reel controversy.. an its hardly been worth replyin 2... wetha it shud b Hil or Obama..1st lady Pres or 1st black Pres.. don matta much 2 me... eitha will do..gonna havta ..seems they the only choice.. jeez cant have McCain...ne 1 wo produces oven chips an stuff as bad as McCains darent b allowed ne power ne wer... had enuff rite wingers runnin bout creatin mizziness in the world... don wont ne more..tho mus admit cant say me 2 confident that me can class eitha Hil or Obama of the left... in US terms mayb.. Christ bad enuff wiv Brown ova ere.. e is marginally betta than Blair.. but its a case of wetha ya wonna lose the hand ya rite wiv or the otha 1... kinda catch 22...

Wy is the world so soddin scareda electin peeps who r reel radicals..reel revolutionaries an wonna c reel change..no tinkerin bout...but overhaulin an changin things so they invlove an give sum reel say an so empower the masses? Sounds a bit socialist huh? Shud bloody hope it dus... its nowt 2 b scared of.. unless yas 1a the arseholes who holds the reigns of power now...

Obama ar Hil will make things only marginally betta.. or lemme rephrase that... they will make things marginally less worse at a slower rate than Bushie has dun... jus a lil prediction.. yea wud ratha hav them than the rite wing arsehole the repubs hav decided on... but it don give me much confidence that the world will get 2 much betta as a aresult for the very reasons me gave kwik resume of earlier... Jeez..dus hope me wrong... Jus wen it cums 2 representative democracy... ina capitalist world.. am jus so sceptical an cynical bout it all me has me doubts...

Rite thats me contrib 2 a lil political controversy.. ova 2 u lot..enjoy..

[shameless agitator]

Hey, I am all about politics :) Even when, or precisely when I get all upset and people make me want to cry, I also enjoy hearing what people have to say.

I am also disappointed about the primaries in Ohio and Texas, because I like Obama better than Hillary. I just hope "hope" will not get defeated by the so-called "experience", or, in other words, that people will not be defeated by fear. What I mean by "fear" is, on the one hand, the one that thinks Hillary will "protect" us better because she has foreign policy experience, and, on the other, the one that is afraid of "change" (however rhetorical you might want it to be).

I reeeaaally wish I were a US citizen so I could vote!Check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe0BPwWAxnk

[shameless agitator]

Excuse me for not being up on my American history, but has the US ever had a FEMALE president before?Nope Perhaps all the WOMEN in America should vote for Hilary and all the BLACK people should vote for Barack. But then who should the BLACK WOMEN vote for? ANYWAY, I fear I've lowered the tone of this thread before its even got going...[/QUOTE]This is exactly what's happening for the most part. It puts us in the weird position of having white men as the swing vote.

[alaskacouple]

Well, both me and the missus are disappointed that Obama wasn't able to finish this thing yesterday. However, we Obama supporters shouldn't let the Clinton "spin doctors" confuse the facts. Just a couple of weeks ago Clinton was about 20 percentage points ahead of Obama in both Texas and Ohio - and she had already been campaigning hard there while Obama was campaigning more vigorously in the "smaller states". So, what really happened is that Clinton lost a lot of supporters in the last couple of weeks as Obama started to campaign for real in Texas & Ohio.

Obviously a lot of people like the Clintons. I remember their time in office and I just disagree that they were that good for the country. I find them very hard to trust or believe. Ever notice how Hilary answers a question? It's like there is just something in her that will not let her answer in a straight forward way - it's always a deflected answer that eventually gets spun around to nothing more than vague nonsense. Same with Bill (remember him as he sat under oath saying, 'it's all in what your definition of is, is'). I just think they will be a divisive force instead of bringing the country together.

I guess the one thing that saddens me more than anything though is the fact that many women are voting for Clinton based on gender alone. That is just ignorant - it's the same as a man saying he's voting against her because she is a woman - it's just the other side of the same coin of bigotry and ignorance.

[HighEnergy]

Check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe0BPwWAxnk

Oh, Shameless, that was fantastic. Funny how things can come back and bite you in the ass.

Most of the women I talk to are voting for Obama. Yes, we'd love a woman president, just not that one. Seems to me she spent her years in the White House lying and hiding documents or not remembering. Not sure what she's done in the Senate from the state she never lived in, but if it was anything all that great, wouldn't she be mentioning that now?

[bisexualinsocal]

I'm pretty relieved that Hussein is probably getting the nomination. Hilary would have posed a challenge to the Republican nominee. Obama? He won't win in a general election. He's winning in the primaries because, well, hippy liberals and their diversity fetish.

Conservative Republicans like myself do not vote on race or gender so to me all this talk about a "wonderful display of diversity" is tatamount to racism and genderism. Each side turning out to vote for their side.

Collectivism= Bigotry and Discrimination


When I go to political functions, I do not celebrate diversity. In fact, I don't even see race or gender. What I see is people and what I hear are values and experience. That's all I experience. The tangibles.

All the rhetoric of "change" and "hope" is just slick salemenship. Show me the scoreboard and shut the fuck up. Let the records speak for themselves.

I'm not a huge fan of McCain but to tell you the truth, Hilary has zippo experience in anything but hitching her wagon to Bill Clinton and I just can't support a man who supports subsidized daycare (especially when this man didn't even know his father himself). It's not the governments job to subsidize the supervision of your children.

[eddy10]

We have way too much federal government now. Clinton and/or Obama will increase Federal involvement and control of our lives. Let's all go for less government and vote Libertarian.

[shameless agitator]

In fact, I don't even see race or gender. Anybody ever notice white men are the only ones to ever say this?

[flirtchewieflirt]

Conservative Republicans like myself do not vote on race or gender so to me all this talk about a "wonderful display of diversity" is tatamount to racism and genderism. Each side turning out to vote for their side.

Collectivism= Bigotry and Discrimination


Now that is diversity! Breaking stereotypes! I can't tell you how many people I have met who assume that all non-straight folks are automatically democrats and socialists... Way to buck the trend, bust the stereotype!

Hell, in my case, it’s a double whammy! I am an atheist too! They always think I must be a card carrying member of the DNC.

Well, I’m not.

So three cheers to the minority within the minority! LOL!

Hmmmm…. Did I just praise breaking stereotypes followed by assuming one?

[vittoria]

Excuse me for not being up on my American history, but has the US ever had a FEMALE president before? If not, then this is gonna be a ground-breaking election... either the first female president, or the first black president. Perhaps all the WOMEN in America should vote for Hilary and all the BLACK people should vote for Barack. But then who should the BLACK WOMEN vote for?

OPRAH

:lokai:

:cutelaugh

;)

[TaylorMade]

Anybody ever notice white men are the only ones to ever say this?

They have to say it, or else someone will accuse them of being racist. :tongue:

*Taylor*

[vittoria]

They have to say it, or else someone will accuse them of being racist. :tongue:

*Taylor*


:cutelaugh

[The Barefoot Contess]

Anybody ever notice white men are the only ones to ever say this?

Of course, Shameless. They are so beyond race, gender, class and sexuality issues, and so sure that everything is all right and that there is justice, legal equality, and freedom for all, that the rest of us cannot help but feeling terribly blind when we fail to see all those wonders.

[TaylorMade]

Case in point. :p

*Taylor*

[flirtchewieflirt]

Anybody ever notice white men are the only ones to ever say this?

It was true in my case. I grew to pay attention to people based on what they did, not what they were. Of course, that changed after I had lost my 3rd job opprotunity because I was white and/or male.....

[BronzeBobby]

I like politics so I'm glad somebody started this thread. I hope I don't get attacked by all the Hillary fans though....

I was also disappointed by Ohio voters choosing Hillary. There seem to be so many misconceptions about Bill Clinton's legacy and what NAFTA did and why people lost so many jobs in the Rust Belt. Clinton signed NAFTA, with Hillary cheering him on -- so why are they punishing Obama over a few inconsistencies about NAFTA, if the Clintons were the ones who actually pushed the damn thing through?

Then again, NAFTA isn't the reason for the unemployed blue collar workers in Ohio. There were a few cases like Trico, which closed a wiper blade plant on Lake Erie and opened a sweatshop in Mexico, but those cases are actually quite unusual. The Rust Belt lost most of their jobs because of free trade with Asia. And that's largely Bill Clinton's fault because of the WTO and such; Hillary was praising her "foreign policy" credentials regarding free trade with Asia a few weeks earlier to win California, where the large Asian population supported her and everybody is generally happy with free trade. So why is she a hero in California for championing free trade, and a hero in Ohio for fighting against free trade?

And even if there weren't free trade with Asia, the blue collar workers in Ohio would've probably lost their jobs anyway because the cost of American cars was rising faster than the American middle class could pay for them, which is why Americans buy foreign cars for lower prices in the first place. If it weren't Japanese cars, they would have started buying Brazilian cars. In other countries, when sales drop, all employees (managers and workers together) accept austerity measures like temporary pay cuts, in order to weather the crisis. In Ohio the unions would never do that, so the result is layoffs.

But even if all that didn't matter, Hillary Clinton's been the Senator for New York for eight years. There's a stretch from Syracuse to Buffalo that has been the fastest shrinking economy in the entire United States. If I'm not mistaken, Syracuse, Buffalo, and Rochester, have all been shrinking at a rate of 10% a decade, and in eight years Hillary Clinton hasn't done anything to reverse the trend. Meanwhile, Barack Obama has been the Senator from Illinois, and Illinois hasn't been shrinking anywhere as badly as upstate New York. So why did people in Ohio think she's going to help them better than Obama?

Regarding the issue of race and gender, remember that most people of the color in the United States are not black (Latinos are about 13-14% of the population, and Asians are around 3-4%, while Blacks make up 12%). Women in many states have voted in the majority for Obama, and Latinos and Asians both seem to be gravitating toward Clinton. And then lots of women and Latinos and Asians are Republican anyway so they're voting for white men all over the place. Identity politics really aren't playing that big of a role in this case; the media is talking about it much more than voters.

It's a mystery to me. :) Anyway I'm pro-Obama and I don't mind McCain very much. I could see myself voting for Nader or a Libertarian on a whim in November too.

[darkeyes]

Anybody ever notice white men are the only ones to ever say this? Me c's peeps race an certainly ther gender..but mos of all me c's peeps.. but then me not a white anglo saxon male. Its wot an who peeps r that mattas an wot they say an mos importantly wot they do that is the crux of the matta..

Justice by the way is equal only 2 the powerful in part..more powerful ya r.. more "justice" ya gets. Whoeva ya elects ova ther won change that 2 much...

[HighEnergy]

Yeah, I've been trying to re-invent my wheel since my textbook typesetting job wandered to India. Seems if it was easy to email work to me in Oxford, Ohio, then India wasn't too big of a leap. So, now your college textbooks are being edited and typeset in a place where English is not the first language. That's ok, because the latest trend is having the afterschool homework helplines being answered by folks in India, so the next generation will be better able to understand them. :rolleyes:

[gfofbiguy]

Yeah, I've been trying to re-invent my wheel since my textbook typesetting job wandered to India. Seems if it was easy to email work to me in Oxford, Ohio, then India wasn't too big of a leap. So, now your college textbooks are being edited and typeset in a place where English is not the first language. That's ok, because the latest trend is having the afterschool homework helplines being answered by folks in India, so the next generation will be better able to understand them. :rolleyes:

I feel for you...I type medical transcription (doctors' dictation) and I know my job will be eventually going overseas as well. There are SO MANY companies that outsource medical transcription to overseas (India and Pakistan are two of the largest that are receiving our medical transcription jobs), that I find that quite scary...to have my medical information to be typed out by someone in India - with no concept of HIPAA or who could even swipe my SS# if it's used anywhere in my medical records...or...

[wolfcamp]

I like politics so I'm glad somebody started this thread. I hope I don't get attacked by all the Hillary fans though....

I was also disappointed by Ohio voters choosing Hillary. There seem to be so many misconceptions about Bill Clinton's legacy and what NAFTA did and why people lost so many jobs in the Rust Belt. Clinton signed NAFTA, with Hillary cheering him on -- so why are they punishing Obama over a few inconsistencies about NAFTA, if the Clintons were the ones who actually pushed the damn thing through?

Then again, NAFTA isn't the reason for the unemployed blue collar workers in Ohio. There were a few cases like Trico, which closed a wiper blade plant on Lake Erie and opened a sweatshop in Mexico, but those cases are actually quite unusual. The Rust Belt lost most of their jobs because of free trade with Asia. And that's largely Bill Clinton's fault because of the WTO and such; Hillary was praising her "foreign policy" credentials regarding free trade with Asia a few weeks earlier to win California, where the large Asian population supported her and everybody is generally happy with free trade. So why is she a hero in California for championing free trade, and a hero in Ohio for fighting against free trade?

And even if there weren't free trade with Asia, the blue collar workers in Ohio would've probably lost their jobs anyway because the cost of American cars was rising faster than the American middle class could pay for them, which is why Americans buy foreign cars for lower prices in the first place. If it weren't Japanese cars, they would have started buying Brazilian cars. In other countries, when sales drop, all employees (managers and workers together) accept austerity measures like temporary pay cuts, in order to weather the crisis. In Ohio the unions would never do that, so the result is layoffs.

But even if all that didn't matter, Hillary Clinton's been the Senator for New York for eight years. There's a stretch from Syracuse to Buffalo that has been the fastest shrinking economy in the entire United States. If I'm not mistaken, Syracuse, Buffalo, and Rochester, have all been shrinking at a rate of 10&#37; a decade, and in eight years Hillary Clinton hasn't done anything to reverse the trend. Meanwhile, Barack Obama has been the Senator from Illinois, and Illinois hasn't been shrinking anywhere as badly as upstate New York. So why did people in Ohio think she's going to help them better than Obama?

Regarding the issue of race and gender, remember that most people of the color in the United States are not black (Latinos are about 13-14% of the population, and Asians are around 3-4%, while Blacks make up 12%). Women in many states have voted in the majority for Obama, and Latinos and Asians both seem to be gravitating toward Clinton. And then lots of women and Latinos and Asians are Republican anyway so they're voting for white men all over the place. Identity politics really aren't playing that big of a role in this case; the media is talking about it much more than voters.

It's a mystery to me. :) Anyway I'm pro-Obama and I don't mind McCain very much. I could see myself voting for Nader or a Libertarian on a whim in November too.

All very good points.

A few weeks ago I went to a lecture where a point was made about sulfur emissions. The speaker showed maps of acid rain contamination over a time period from the 1970's until today. The point of interest was the rust belt area along the south edge of the great lakes. Environmental laws enacted in the 70's clamped down on polluters. The maps showed acid rain dwindling over time until it is almost zero today. That's a good thing. BUT, the speaker said he took a drive through that area recently and it's obvious that industry has shut down and moved out. They have moved to countries where they can continue to externalize those environmental costs. They have moved to countries where they can pollute all they want and get away with it. And along with the industry have gone the jobs.

So what is the answer to this problem? Should we relax our environmental laws and go back to the bad old days where rivers were dying and the paint was eaten off your cars? No, the better solution is to pressure the Chinese and others to adopt stronger environmental laws themselves. They will have to do it eventually, and we should figure out incentives to make them do it sooner. The problem is that this takes time, and in the mean time, we are losing more and more jobs. Free trade is good, but we need better leverage in the trade agreements that we make.

Everyone thinks that U.S. technology is going to get us out of this mess. The problem here is that we have to import scientists to fill jobs now. Europe is producing 2 doctoral candidates for every one in the US. Asia is producing 4 to 1. We need to start putting a lot more money into education if we are going to keep up with the rest of the world. Enable the innovators. Nobody is going to bring back the old rust belt jobs. We need new innovations that we can export to the rest of the world. The candidate who I think "gets it" will get my vote.

[Ninnian]

Anybody ever notice white men are the only ones to ever say this?

Huh,go figure- Im a white/native american female.... and I say stuff liek that all teh time. I dont WANT folks judgeing me on how well my family has done "off teh Rez", and I don't want them thinking how well I did " As a woman".

I want to be taken on my merits,and I want to be able to discern the qualities of others based on thier merits as I see them
. I want to be able see results, not mindless hysterics.
Records, results, research and history. *us history nerds demand , ya know, History*:tong:

Me an Eddy... voting Libertarian unless they put up someone who can't thier head around protecting my country . (well I mean.,. eddy might not be bothered by that, I dunno... ).

[alaskacouple]

Excellent comments wolfcamp!

This begs the question though; Have we gone beyond the tipping point in this country with both the loss of 'real jobs' (e.g. jobs that actually produce something besides junk mail or lattes) and also the loss of the ability for a large enough number of our citizens to be able to afford an education (not to mention the fact that not everyone is college material - but there's no reason to train industrial workers if there's no industry)?

Our economy is primarily fueled by consumerism. Now that the reality of the absurdity of that being a proper foundation for an economy is becoming clearer, we look around and find that there is no 'real' work to be done. Opps! Now no one has the money to consume. Opps! College costs about $30,000 a year - who can afford to be retrained? Opps! The house of cards is beginning to shake.

I saw an interesting piece on PBS about imports and exports. Exports are up a bit, but it was interesting to find out what was in the shipping containers. A good percentage of the contents are scrap metal (crushed cars) and waste paper (crushed boxes, etc.). All of this scrap is going to Asian counties to be reused for more export goods. I thought; how ironic, we have reduced ourselves to a third world type economy where we export raw materials to a more advanced country so they can add value to it and sell it back to us (it's worse though, it's not even just raw materials we are exporting, it's the crap we already bought from them once before)!

Makes me wonder why anyone would even want to be President:eek:

[Ninnian]

[QUOTE=vittoria;96552]OPRAH

Omigosh, Vittoria, Im So sorry!

I wont go into teh long story, but as I was discussing the theories of Natural Selection vs Supernatural appeasement with my 11 year old the other week. We discussed how some celebrities seemed liek fine folks, even did OK things.. but most really didnt accomplish much in teh ways of real world machinations. In teh natural way of things , they would have been dropped from teh gene pool.
Even tho we thought Oprah might have done better than most in this case..... well- we decided that she either would have been, or should be tossed to appease teh "Volcano Gods". (This coinsided with a revue of a National Geo. article on teh same...)

Im sorry if this decree makes her less available, should it come to pass. ;)

Nin- who has an amazingly resilient son.. LOL

[HighEnergy]

All very good points, Wolf. My sister lives in the woods in southern KY. They have decided that they should increase jobs by creating a new factory for biological weapons out in the middle of nowhere. Now, keep in mind that KY is all mountains, translation, rock with underground caverns and water running through this rock and what topsoil there is is only from decomposing tree litter. And it's warm most of the time so there are both northern and southern birds almost year round. So there's nothing to filter any spills. Most folks have their own wells since there is water under the ground running in a system of underground rivers. Spill something and it's in someone's drinking glass 20 miles away in a matter of days. Also, since it's warm there, there are lots and lots of vector critters, aka mosquitos and ticks. Since there are mountains, those underground rivers become above ground over and over again. So critters will be drinking the same biological agents and bugs will be biting them and then biting us in days. Yup, great place for a biological weapons plant so the locals have jobs. Yikes!

Here's another tidbit of info you might like.

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/video/shifthappens

[bisexualinsocal]

Anybody ever notice white men are the only ones to ever say this?

You ought to look at my picture before you start making racist statements like that.

[wolfcamp]

Bill Clinton was in town this evening, right here in little ol' Laramie. He's probably still here. Hillary didn't come. Bill's speaking venue was the volleyball arena about 2 blocks from my apartment, so I thought I'd walk over and listen to him talk. I found a line several blocks long with people standing in 25 degree temperatures and a biting wind. Most of the people around me were talking about health care. Before we got close to the door the word came to us that the building was full. We were invited to move into the old field house where the speech would be piped in over the PA system. Most people left, probably a couple thousand, but a few of us went into the field house. The audio system reverberated so loudly that it was almost impossible to understand the speakers. I took my Hillary sticker and just walked back home.

The volleyball facility holds 1200 people. Obama will be here tomorrow night and will speak in the basketball arena that holds 15000 people. The speculation in the line was that Hillary's campaign here was impromptu because she didn't know if she would still be in the race after Texas and Ohio. Maybe she could only afford the volleyball court. Maybe Wyoming's delegates are only worth a volleyball court. I was a little disappointed. I'll probably go see Obama tomorrow night. After all, it's probably 100 paces closer to my apartment than the volleyball court.

[HighEnergy]

Well something we've learned in Ohio: Obama supporters go to rallies and put signs in their yards, Clinton voters just vote.

Hillary signs are few and far between around here and she filled a 700 person high school auditorium while Obama filled the 10k seat college basketball arena.

We enjoyed the rally and I hope you do also.

[bisexualinsocal]

Now that is diversity! Breaking stereotypes! I can't tell you how many people I have met who assume that all non-straight folks are automatically democrats and socialists... Way to buck the trend, bust the stereotype!

Hell, in my case, it’s a double whammy! I am an atheist too! They always think I must be a card carrying member of the DNC.

Well, I’m not.

So three cheers to the minority within the minority! LOL!

Hmmmm…. Did I just praise breaking stereotypes followed by assuming one?



Don't worry about that your last question. That's over analysis.

And thanks for the props. One thing I never do is wear a brown shirt and throw my efforts behind some meaningless cause. You'll never see me marching for LGBT rights, labor unions, communist healthcare or any other special interests.

I don't brownshirt.

I am beholden only to my God, my country and my family.

[nothings5d]

Anybody ever notice white men are the only ones to ever say this?

I'm reminded of the Avenue Q song "Everyones a Little Bit Racist"

[the mage]

I have been looking at the forum boards on the front page, and it's missing something without the, um, how shall I put this without sounding too, well, um...

I miss the political threads. I miss the intelligent conversation. Surely we can converse without too much bitching. I liked hearing other folks thoughts. I even liked the folks bitching about talking about something other than sex.

I went to the Obama rally last week and it was a wonderful scene of diversity and excitement. I'm really, really bummed about the results today. I was thinking that I drive around the city a lot and I've been seeing lots of Obama signs, and very few Hillary signs. Are her supporters embarrassed to put up signs? Well, it turns out the major cities in Ohio voted for Obama, but the places in between voted for Hillary. Is a woman lesser of the two evils for some of our less urban areas? The good news is Senator Obama only got 4 less delegates than she did in the long run here in O-hi-o.

Anyone else care for a friendly political conversation, or am I going to get slammed for daring to change the subject for a bit?

..............speaking as a Canuk... I think Hillary is the better choice for your country. You need good will and fast track connections to the world in the coming times. Bill has the personal hooks and Hilary the office.

[Not2str8]

Hillary winning the Democratic nomination will be handing the November election to the Republicans. No American political candidate has more "negatives" than she does. She is who they WANT to run against in November. If you look at the turnout for Republican primaries this year, you'll see that alot of Republicans aren't bothering. They are not excited by their candidates. (who can blame them?) But watch what happens if Hillary is nominated. Nothing will energize the Republican base like a Clinton candidacy. Besides, if she were elected, there will have been a Clinton or a Bush in the White House for 32 consecutive years ! That is not healthy for democracy. And the polarization is ripping our country apart. No more Clintons....No more Bushes...EVER !

[alaskacouple]

Hillary winning the Democratic nomination will be handing the November election to the Republicans. No American political candidate has more "negatives" than she does. She is who they WANT to run against in November. If you look at the turnout for Republican primaries this year, you'll see that alot of Republicans aren't bothering. They are not excited by their candidates. (who can blame them?) But watch what happens if Hillary is nominated. Nothing will energize the Republican base like a Clinton candidacy. Besides, if she were elected, there will have been a Clinton or a Bush in the White House for 32 consecutive years ! That is not healthy for democracy. And the polarization is ripping our country apart. No more Clintons....No more Bushes...EVER !

DITTO! DITTO! DITTO!

[wolfcamp]

I went to listen to Obama speak tonight. It was uplifting, but not riveting. Frankly I don't see how these candidates keep up the pace. It must be grueling.

I decided tonight that I would like to see Obama get his chance to see how far he could take his ideas. Why not? From what I saw tonight, people are actually excited about the future again.

[alaskacouple]

I went to listen to Obama speak tonight. It was uplifting, but not riveting. Frankly I don't see how these candidates keep up the pace. It must be grueling.

I decided tonight that I would like to see Obama get his chance to see how far he could take his ideas. Why not? From what I saw tonight, people are actually excited about the future again.

I think that is why I would like to see him get a chance. What we all tend to forget in presidential elections is the fact that the president can't really enact any new policy without the cooperation of congress. That requires leadership and not confrontation. There will have to be a finding of common ground among the many differing views and I think Obama has the best personality to accomplish that.

[HighEnergy]

I think that is why I would like to see him get a chance. What we all tend to forget in presidential elections is the fact that the president can't really enact any new policy without the cooperation of congress. That requires leadership and not confrontation. There will have to be a finding of common ground among the many differing views and I think Obama has the best personality to accomplish that.

Agreed.

[bisexualinsocal]

I think that is why I would like to see him get a chance. What we all tend to forget in presidential elections is the fact that the president can't really enact any new policy without the cooperation of congress. That requires leadership and not confrontation. There will have to be a finding of common ground among the many differing views and I think Obama has the best personality to accomplish that.

Leadership isn't always "finding common ground". Sometimes it's believing that your way is right in spite of popular opinion. This is why I tend NOT to vote for senators, who's job is literally to do what popular opinion dictates. The president must lead, not blow with the wind of opinion or browbeaters. I prefer my presidents have experience as a company CEO, company founder, state governor... hell, even mayor of New York City. In other words, I prefer my president have executive experience.

[vittoria]

[QUOTE=vittoria;96552]OPRAH

Omigosh, Vittoria, Im So sorry!

I wont go into teh long story, but as I was discussing the theories of Natural Selection vs Supernatural appeasement with my 11 year old the other week. We discussed how some celebrities seemed liek fine folks, even did OK things.. but most really didnt accomplish much in teh ways of real world machinations. In teh natural way of things , they would have been dropped from teh gene pool.
Even tho we thought Oprah might have done better than most in this case..... well- we decided that she either would have been, or should be tossed to appease teh "Volcano Gods". (This coinsided with a revue of a National Geo. article on teh same...)

Im sorry if this decree makes her less available, should it come to pass. ;)

Nin- who has an amazingly resilient son.. LOL

:cutelaugh

[alaskacouple]

Leadership isn't always "finding common ground". Sometimes it's believing that your way is right in spite of popular opinion. This is why I tend NOT to vote for senators, who's job is literally to do what popular opinion dictates. The president must lead, not blow with the wind of opinion or browbeaters. I prefer my presidents have experience as a company CEO, company founder, state governor... hell, even mayor of New York City. In other words, I prefer my president have executive experience.

I can't disagree that some executive experience would be helpful for a president to have, but that leaves a pretty small pool of candidates (and I guess none of the current ones would qualify if executive experience is the main selection criteria). Plus, just having had executive experience doesn't mean you are immune from "blowing with the wind of opinion" - in fact I don't really see that it has any bearing on that personality trait at all (I don't think the mayor of NYC is less interested in public opinion than any other politician for example). However, being the leader of a nation is not the same as being the leader of a company. By the very nature of our form of government compromise and finding common ground is required in order to accomplish anything (not to mention successful foreign relations). Therefore, I think the ability to pick qualified advisers and to bring all sides to a satisfactory compromise in a given situation is more valuable that CEO experience.

[bisexualinsocal]

I can't disagree that some executive experience would be helpful for a president to have, but that leaves a pretty small pool of candidates (and I guess none of the current ones would qualify if executive experience is the main selection criteria). Plus, just having had executive experience doesn't mean you are immune from "blowing with the wind of opinion" - in fact I don't really see that it has any bearing on that personality trait at all (I don't think the mayor of NYC is less interested in public opinion than any other politician for example). However, being the leader of a nation is not the same as being the leader of a company. By the very nature of our form of government compromise and finding common ground is required in order to accomplish anything (not to mention successful foreign relations). Therefore, I think the ability to pick qualified advisers and to bring all sides to a satisfactory compromise in a given situation is more valuable that CEO experience.

A small pool of candidates isn't a problem. We have 350 million people here, surely if at least .00005% of them had executive experience we'd have more than enough people qualified to be president.

Executive experience doesn't make you immune to blowing with popular opinion, but it does bring you closer to understanding what decisions are appropriate and which are not. It brings you a better understanding of risk vs reward in high stakes dealings.

One thing we can agree on, none of these candidates impress me either. 3 senators? Give me a break! 3 people with little experience in running anything. I'd like to say that at least McCain has tenure, but so what? A senator is a senator. I wish my guy, Mitt Romney, had won the nomination but oh well... maybe 2012

And I don't understand the fascination with compromise. One reason why I'm a big supporter of President Bush is that he's not afraid to put his agenda out in public and let Americans voice their opinions. Right or wrong, the man stands behind his decisions. Sometimes he changes, sometimes he stands firm and I think that is a trait to be admired and the mark of a man.

Compromise I can live with. If it's compromise on a deal that everyone agrees works for the best, I can live with it. If it's compromise so that everyone feels all warm and fuzzy inside (which is especially the case in matters of religious environmentalism and thought policing), then I'm willing to go jihad against it.

If it's compromise so that no one gets their feelings hurt, then we have a problem.

[DiamondDog]

If it's compromise so that no one gets their feelings hurt, then we have a problem.

It was funny how Hilary cried for attention!

http://www.all4humor.com/images/files/Scary%20Hillary%20Clinton.jpg

Politicians make great actors!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pl-W3IXRTHU

[Not2str8]

A small pool of candidates isn't a problem. We have 350 million people here, surely if at least .00005% of them had executive experience we'd have more than enough people qualified to be president.

Executive experience doesn't make you immune to blowing with popular opinion, but it does bring you closer to understanding what decisions are appropriate and which are not. It brings you a better understanding of risk vs reward in high stakes dealings.

One thing we can agree on, none of these candidates impress me either. 3 senators? Give me a break! 3 people with little experience in running anything. I'd like to say that at least McCain has tenure, but so what? A senator is a senator. I wish my guy, Mitt Romney, had won the nomination but oh well... maybe 2012

And I don't understand the fascination with compromise. One reason why I'm a big supporter of President Bush is that he's not afraid to put his agenda out in public and let Americans voice their opinions. Right or wrong, the man stands behind his decisions. Sometimes he changes, sometimes he stands firm and I think that is a trait to be admired and the mark of a man.

Compromise I can live with. If it's compromise on a deal that everyone agrees works for the best, I can live with it. If it's compromise so that everyone feels all warm and fuzzy inside (which is especially the case in matters of religious environmentalism and thought policing), then I'm willing to go jihad against it.

If it's compromise so that no one gets their feelings hurt, then we have a problem.

How odd that you would cite being a successful CEO as being a qualification for President, and then stating that you support George W. Bush. The man has failed at nearly every business undertaking he has ever been involved with. He headed Arbusto, (failed) Spectrum 7 Energy, (failed) and Harken Energy, where the SEC says that he violated federal securities law at least 4 times in the late 80's & early 90's, by selling company stocks, while he was a director of the company. Only the intervention of his father George H.W. Bush kept him from being prosecuted. His one "success" if you can call it that, was lobbying the City of Arlington to enforce it's powers of eminent domain to condemn the land on which the new Texas Rangers Stadium (of which GW was an owner) was to be built, paying way below market value for the land. He stole this land from the Mathes family in order to enrich himself. The stadium is a giant, taxpayer supported cash machine that provided a return of 23 times his original investment. How ironic that this avid supporter of "the free market", said on the first day of his 1993 campaign, "The best way to allocate resources in our society is through the marketplace, not through a governing elite." (Do as he says, not as he does....you call that leadership?) His entire life, prior to being selected President, is the same repeating pattern of failure, followed by the family bailout. Everything from his DUI arrest, to his business dealings, to his supposed National Guard stint. He's an alcoholic who managed to stop drinking, without addressing any of the issues that caused his alcoholism in the first place. His behavior is that of the classic "dry drunk."
As for his "steadfastness", when I'm a passenger on a bus and the driver is heading into oncoming traffic, I want a driver who adjusts his decisionmaking based on the reality of the situation, not someone who has "the courage of his convictions", and plows blindly forward, insisting that he is right and that only he can save us.
As for compromise, I don't think anyone is advocating compromise for the purpose of making sure no one's feelings are hurt. Politics itself is the art of compromise. Negotiation is the art of getting what you want, by giving others what they want. Every CEO knows this. Stubbornly digging you heels in, ruling in an autocratic mannner, may make people obey you, but they will never respect you, once it become clear that you do not respect them. Behind the scenes they will work to undermine you. The world faces daunting problems that only diplomacy can solve. We've had enough of the kind of leadership that is so single-minded it cannot see when it has gone off course. Maybe it's time we tried a statesman.
And what a pleasure it will be to have a President who tortures neither captured prisoners, nor the English language.

[bisexualinsocal]

How odd that you would cite being a successful CEO as being a qualification for President, and then stating that you support George W. Bush. The man has failed at nearly every business undertaking he has ever been involved with. He headed Arbusto, (failed) Spectrum 7 Energy, (failed) and Harken Energy, where the SEC says that he violated federal securities law at least 4 times in the late 80's & early 90's, by selling company stocks, while he was a director of the company. Only the intervention of his father George H.W. Bush kept him from being prosecuted. His one "success" if you can call it that, was lobbying the City of Arlington to enforce it's powers of eminent domain to condemn the land on which the new Texas Rangers Stadium (of which GW was an owner) was to be built, paying way below market value for the land. He stole this land from the Mathes family in order to enrich himself. The stadium is a giant, taxpayer supported cash machine that provided a return of 23 times his original investment. How ironic that this avid supporter of "the free market", said on the first day of his 1993 campaign, "The best way to allocate resources in our society is through the marketplace, not through a governing elite." (Do as he says, not as he does....you call that leadership?) His entire life, prior to being selected President, is the same repeating pattern of failure, followed by the family bailout. Everything from his DUI arrest, to his business dealings, to his supposed National Guard stint. He's an alcoholic who managed to stop drinking, without addressing any of the issues that caused his alcoholism in the first place. His behavior is that of the classic "dry drunk."


Well that's the first of the accusations your making that I've heard of. If they're true, I'd sure be persuaded by any information you could provide on these issues. I admit, I'm skeptical, but I'm only human. You sure do seem to know a lot about alcoholism, though.


As for his "steadfastness", when I'm a passenger on a bus and the driver is heading into oncoming traffic, I want a driver who adjusts his decisionmaking based on the reality of the situation, not someone who has "the courage of his convictions", and plows blindly forward, insisting that he is right and that only he can save us.

You might be in the minority here. I'd rather my driver plow forward. Not blindly of course, but hey, we are in a BUS! I think that when out in the open plains on a bus, it's a mandate that you plow forward. I mean, what if we make a sharp 12 degree turn? We might rollover and cause countless un-needed vehicular deaths. Are you a proponent of needless vehicular deaths? You gonna clean up all that blood?


As for compromise, I don't think anyone is advocating compromise for the purpose of making sure no one's feelings are hurt. Politics itself is the art of compromise.

It is? Do tell!


Negotiation is the art of getting what you want, by giving others what they want. Every CEO knows this. Stubbornly digging you heels in, ruling in an autocratic mannner, may make people obey you, but they will never respect you

You stole that from Godfather 2! Admit it! Pentangeli said the same about Hymen Roth!

That was a great movie! THANKS FOR THE QUOTE, BROTHER!


once it become clear that you do not respect them. Behind the scenes they will work to undermine you.

Yes. And in the end the old man eats some poisoned &#233;clairs and then it's endsville! Well then you know what happens, right?


TEASER: The Godfather 3


Do not scroll down. It will ruin the movie for you.






































Mary?! No! Oh god no!



The world faces daunting problems that only diplomacy can solve. We've had enough of the kind of leadership that is so single-minded it cannot see when it has gone off course. Maybe it's time we tried a statesman.
And what a pleasure it will be to have a President who tortures neither captured prisoners, nor the English language.


So far I haven't seen a man in from either party in these primaries. Let me know when you want to identify one. Just make sure he's not a bastard child.

[The Barefoot Contess]

I think if countries begin to be ruled as if they were corporations, we are in big trouble; we are also in big trouble if we believe that leaders should not listen to those who selected them (that is the point when democracy becomes totalitarianism -and this is not to say that democracy is a panacea).

[wolfcamp]

Well that's the first of the accusations your making that I've heard of. If they're true, I'd sure be persuaded by any information you could provide on these issues. I admit, I'm skeptical, but I'm only human. You sure do seem to know a lot about alcoholism, though.

One place you can find all the issues listed by Not2str8 is in the book "Worse Than Watergate" by John Dean. Remember that Dean was White House Counsel to Richard Nixon. It's not really the kind of book that most staunch conservatives would read, because it's not very kind to W, but the information is there if you care to look.

WC

[HighEnergy]

That's an excellent book. I've got his new one on the hold list at the library. My sister said it's even better.

[Not2str8]

No, I didn't steal those lines from the Godfather movies. lol Those maxims are as old as politics....and as old as business. They are an integral part of the dynamics of leadership. I'm quite sure those ideas were uttered well before the Godfather movies. I never claimed them as original ideas. By the way, I never saw any of the sequels, just the original one, and even then, I waited until it came to TV. I HATE going to movie theatres. The last one I saw in a theatre was when I got dragged to see Titanic. Before that, it was Mary Shelley's Frankenstein in 1994.
The point of the bus driver analogy is that decisions have to be made based on what's actually happening, (which frequently changes) not some rigid ideology that says the oncoming cars are "wrong", and should bend to the will of the bus driver. (OK, I think we've beaten the bus analogy to death.)
And yes, I do know a few things about alcoholism, having had 2 alcoholics in my family. I've seen the behavior up close. I've spent many hours in AlAnon (for family members of alcoholics) listening to alcoholics tell their stories. It's pretty well known that the ones who make a successful ongoing recovery, do so by doing more than the simple act of stopping the drinking. Read the 12 Steps that make up the heart and soul of the Alcoholics Anonymous program sometime, and you'll see what I mean. And you'll see what I mean when I call someone a "dry drunk". It means someone who stopped drinking,
(a commendable achievement for sure) but didn't work on any of the steps, and pronounced himself "cured". Step 4 is to "make a searching and fearless moral inventory of yourself". Step 10 is "...continue to take personal inventory and promptly admit when you are wrong." Introspection is not something the Bush's have ever practiced, according to those close to the family and familiar with how the Bush kids were raised. And we all know about Bush's refusal to admit when he's wrong. (He never is.) Remember when he was asked in the 2004 debates, now that he had the perspective of being the President for 4 years, what mistakes had he made, and how would he do things differently? His answer was that he couldn't think of any any mistakes he had made. Now, even the most ardent Bush supporter knows that GW is human, and as such, has made many mistakes. It seems that everyone knows it, but Bush himself. That's what I mean by "dry drunk". And I stand by that characterization.
I don't believe that George W. Bush is evil. But he is the perfect "front-man" for the cabal of evil men he surrounds himself with, the so-called Neo-Con true believers, who actually set the agenda of the Administration. I'm not sure which is worse.

[bisexualinsocal]

One place you can find all the issues listed by Not2str8 is in the book "Worse Than Watergate" by John Dean. Remember that Dean was White House Counsel to Richard Nixon. It's not really the kind of book that most staunch conservatives would read, because it's not very kind to W, but the information is there if you care to look.

WC

Whoa! You mean to tell me it's in a book?

Well if it's in a book, then it MUST be true! I mean, come on. It's in a book!

A book with pages and glue and letters and made of paper!

Are we alone in believing that if it's in a book, it must be true?

[wolfcamp]

Whoa! You mean to tell me it's in a book?

Well if it's in a book, then it MUST be true! I mean, come on. It's in a book!

A book with pages and glue and letters and made of paper!

Are we alone in believing that if it's in a book, it must be true?

Oh, yes. I remember when all this was in the news. Bush Sr. was in office. I remember almost feeling sorry for him that he, as the President of the United States, would have to endure such an embarrassment of a son. That is why I remember it. I also remember my astonishment when it occurred to me that the newly elected President Bush, and the embarrassing son were one in the same.

Junior was being investigated for antitrust violations by the SEC for selling all his shares in his oil company (Arbusto, I believe) only days before the earnings report came out and the stock dropped precipitously. It was basically the same kind of insider deal that got Martha Stewart in trouble, except Martha was just an outside stockholder. Bush Jr was a company executive, president of the company I believe, but I could be wrong about that. Well, guess who the SEC prosecutor ultimately answered to. Yep, you guessed it...President George Bush Sr. It was all over the news for a while, but it was eventually hushed up and dropped.

[bisexualinsocal]

Oh, yes. I remember when all this was in the news. Bush Sr. was in office. I remember almost feeling sorry for him that he, as the President of the United States, would have to endure such an embarrassment of a son. That is why I remember it. I also remember my astonishment when it occurred to me that the newly elected President Bush, and the embarrassing son were one in the same.

Junior was being investigated for antitrust violations by the SEC for selling all his shares in his oil company (Arbusto, I believe) only days before the earnings report came out and the stock dropped precipitously. It was basically the same kind of insider deal that got Martha Stewart in trouble, except Martha was just an outside stockholder. Bush Jr was a company executive, president of the company I believe, but I could be wrong about that. Well, guess who the SEC prosecutor ultimately answered to. Yep, you guessed it...President George Bush Sr. It was all over the news for a while, but it was eventually hushed up and dropped.


Really? Could you provide some sort of link or other information to help?

[wolfcamp]

Really? Could you provide some sort of link or other information to help?

Here's one of the more credible ones.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush073099.htm

A fine businessman he was, indeed. He sat on the board of auditors, and yet his defense to the SEC was that he didn't know what kind of shape the company was in before he sold his stock.

[bisexualinsocal]

Thanks for the link. It looks like the SEC had no problem with him selling his stock.

I'd also like to add that he was entitled to sell his stock.

[Not2str8]

On the contrary, the SEC does have a problem when company executives use "insider" knowledge that is not available to the trading public, to enrich themselves, or to dump stocks to avoid losses, based upon that executives inside information. It's called "insider trading" and is quite illegal and unethical. (Unless of course, your daddy is the sitting President of the United States and can pull strings for you that make the investigation magically go away.)

[bisexualinsocal]

On the contrary, the SEC does have a problem when company executives use "insider" knowledge that is not available to the trading public, to enrich themselves, or to dump stocks to avoid losses, based upon that executives inside information. It's called "insider trading" and is quite illegal and unethical. (Unless of course, your daddy is the sitting President of the United States and can pull strings for you that make the investigation magically go away.)

Thank you Captain Obvious. That's quite a feat, stating the obvious AND going on a conspiracy rant all at the same time?!

I admit, I'm impressed.

Like I said, the SEC had no problem with the nature of the sell off. But if you're still interested in stretching this out to push your opinion, I'm eager to read what you have to type. I find it hilarious.

[Not2str8]

Thank you Captain Obvious. That's quite a feat, stating the obvious AND going on a conspiracy rant all at the same time?!

I admit, I'm impressed.

Like I said, the SEC had no problem with the nature of the sell off. But if you're still interested in stretching this out to push your opinion, I'm eager to read what you have to type. I find it hilarious.

Suddenly, I am reminded of the old saying,
"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."

[bisexualinsocal]

Suddenly, I am reminded of the old saying,
"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."

Just because the SEC found no wrong doing on Bush's part, does not give you the right to call them a "Pig". That's uncalled for. The SEC does not represent your political slant.

[12voltman59]

When Republicans talk about Barak Obama not having enough experience to become president---I just laugh---when Bush was their nominee---what experience did he have?? Busting every company he ever had into the ground save maybe being involved with running the Texas Rangers baseball team??--(but he was not in total control of the team.)

Sure, Bush was a governor, but many in Texas felt his record in that state was a mixed one at best and in Texas---they have a "weak governor" form in which the governor doesn't have a great deal of power.

I wish we had had more scrutiny of the abilty of Bush to run things--now he can add busting a country to his illustrious Curriculum Vitae.

[DiamondDog]

BiSexInSoCal-Who do you plan on voting for? How do you feel about McCain? Or Ron Paul?

[Not2str8]

Just because the SEC found no wrong doing on Bush's part, does not give you the right to call them a "Pig". That's uncalled for. The SEC does not represent your political slant.

Ummmm, it was the SEC to which I referred. (Final post on this subject, btw)

[Not2str8]

Ok, I lied. Now let's try that again. The last post was supposed to say,

Ummm, it wasn't the SEC to which I referred. (This is really the final post on this !

[bisexualinsocal]

BiSexInSoCal-Who do you plan on voting for? How do you feel about McCain? Or Ron Paul?

Ron Paul: I haven't seen a more limp-dicked presidential candidate since Michael Dukakis.


McCain: Whatever.

[bisexualinsocal]

When Republicans talk about Barak Obama not having enough experience to become president---I just laugh---when Bush was their nominee---what experience did he have?? Busting every company he ever had into the ground save maybe being involved with running the Texas Rangers baseball team??--(but he was not in total control of the team.)

Sure, Bush was a governor, but many in Texas felt his record in that state was a mixed one at best and in Texas---they have a "weak governor" form in which the governor doesn't have a great deal of power.

I wish we had had more scrutiny of the abilty of Bush to run things--now he can add busting a country to his illustrious Curriculum Vitae.

What you just said about Bush does nothing to add to the bastard child's empty resume as a leader.

[alaskacouple]

Suddenly, I am reminded of the old saying,
"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig."

My Grandpa told me this when I was very young; "Son don't wrestle in the mud with the pigs, they like it and you just get dirty."

[alaskacouple]

When Republicans talk about Barak Obama not having enough experience to become president---I just laugh---when Bush was their nominee---what experience did he have?? Busting every company he ever had into the ground save maybe being involved with running the Texas Rangers baseball team??--(but he was not in total control of the team.)

Sure, Bush was a governor, but many in Texas felt his record in that state was a mixed one at best and in Texas---they have a "weak governor" form in which the governor doesn't have a great deal of power.

I wish we had had more scrutiny of the abilty of Bush to run things--now he can add busting a country to his illustrious Curriculum Vitae.

I find myself yelling at the TV whenever Hilary uses this same argument (I know, I know, yelling at TV - this is not good - and I'm trying to quit). But, I have yet to hear anyone say; 'Hey, wait a minute. What foreign relations experience did "Bubba" (big Bill) have that enabled him to answer that terrible dreaded 3:00 am phone call?' And yet, Bubba's all good now, or so it seems, even without said "experience" - and even he went on to become the past savior of the world as I hear it now.

Another thing that gives me some pause about Hilary getting that phone call; I had always assumed that any President would call in a good sized group of advisers and such if that ever happened. Hilary's ad makes me think she would just wake up long enough to fire a nuke or something and roll back into the sack.

And poor old McCain, I fear he may not wake up at all

[12voltman59]

Excellent comments wolfcamp!

This begs the question though; Have we gone beyond the tipping point in this country with both the loss of 'real jobs' (e.g. jobs that actually produce something besides junk mail or lattes) and also the loss of the ability for a large enough number of our citizens to be able to afford an education (not to mention the fact that not everyone is college material - but there's no reason to train industrial workers if there's no industry)?

Our economy is primarily fueled by consumerism. Now that the reality of the absurdity of that being a proper foundation for an economy is becoming clearer, we look around and find that there is no 'real' work to be done. Opps! Now no one has the money to consume. Opps! College costs about $30,000 a year - who can afford to be retrained? Opps! The house of cards is beginning to shake.

I saw an interesting piece on PBS about imports and exports. Exports are up a bit, but it was interesting to find out what was in the shipping containers. A good percentage of the contents are scrap metal (crushed cars) and waste paper (crushed boxes, etc.). All of this scrap is going to Asian counties to be reused for more export goods. I thought; how ironic, we have reduced ourselves to a third world type economy where we export raw materials to a more advanced country so they can add value to it and sell it back to us (it's worse though, it's not even just raw materials we are exporting, it's the crap we already bought from them once before)!

Makes me wonder why anyone would even want to be President:eek:

I thought about this a year or so back---there was this program on about ports and such on the telly---they were talking about the dollar value of exports and imports in and out of the port of Los Angeles---the spokesperson gave the numbers of what goes out and what the items were being shipped into the port--the material being shipped out was primarily raw materials--primarily going to China---I forget the amount but say it was something like $8 billion and the manufactured goods shipped in from China was something like $40 billion--the interviewer goes to the spokesperson: "that sounds like shipments in and out of a third world country"
The spokesperson responded---"yes--that is basically the situation--we ship out raw materials to China and elsewhere and we get back manufactured goods made from our natural resources from them--it used to be that we had the natural resources shipped in and we shipped out the manufactured goods"

Kind of a sad state of affairs----

[alaskacouple]

12volt,

The same thing is witnessed to in the aviation world. We have a very large airport here in Anchorage which is mostly used for Air Cargo coming in from Asia. I have talked to a number of the pilots and they all say they go over mostly empty and return full.

I just wonder how long we can do this and still remain a major player in the economies of the world. I'm no economist, but common intuition leads me to think that we cannot sustain ourselves as a nation with only 'consumerism' being the main element of our economy.

But, I have thought for a number of years that the global corporate giants and most politicians know this. IMO they understand and accept that American citizens will be forced to accept a lower standard of living and the citizens of some of the "new economies" will see an increase in theirs. IMO, we are witnessing the "great leveling" of the populations of the world into a two class society of the very rich and the poor (sort of a return to historic norms of serfs and lords).

My thoughts as to whether or not this is good or bad is still not settled. I think we Americans have taken advantage of many people through our corporations since the end of WW2, and all people regardless of nationality should have opportunity for a better life. But, I do hate the fact that people here have lost the ability to maintain good manufacturing employment, and thus their quality of life, due to the shift.

[shameless agitator]

Viva la revolucion!

[12voltman59]

Bisexual---you have such incredibly insightful and intelligent assessments of the various candidates---Barak Obama is "Hussein" and the "bastard child"

Ron Paul is "limp dicked" and McCain is 'whatever"---

Your incredible insights are amazing--simply amazing!!!!

[bisexualinsocal]

Bisexual---you have such incredibly insightful and intelligent assessments of the various candidates---Barak Obama is "Hussein" and the "bastard child"

Ron Paul is "limp dicked" and McCain is 'whatever"---

Your incredible insights are amazing--simply amazing!!!!

And you have time to reply? I must have said something you liked.