Thread: McCain Passes Obama In Official Gallup Poll

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Of course not, his interests are those of his supporters: big oil and pharmaceutical.

So you are certain that those are his only interests, despite his mind blowing POW story? He refused to come home until his comrades could come home also. That is 100% definite proof of loyalty to the country. Do you have a parallel Obama story to tell?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

You're attributing the Clinton administration success to Reaganomics, the economic system that cause the largest deficit in history up until that point?

Yeah, Reagan has some major flaws, but he also had some great economic policies that led to major prosperity for a long time.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Then why aren't we chasing him? Why did he put a large chunk of the military into a country with absolutely no ties to the attacks of 9/11?

Bin Laden is the most wanted person on Earth. Bush put a $25,000,000 bounty on his head. We have drones all over the place looking for him. We have sent several missions to places where he has been suspected of being. We just can't invade Pakistan. Iraq is about terrorism in general, not specifically Bin Laden. Bin Laden isn't exactly the world's only terrorist.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Bush's war crimes war exceed the the bombings in the 70s. No one died in those bombings. Just because you don't pull the trigger yourself doesn't make you not responsible. Bush's crimes have KILLED AMERICANS!

Bush has legitimate and proven reasons for his actions, which are very debatable and in my opinion right. You cannot truthfully say they are mindless evil. However, Ayers' actions were mindless evil.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Personal revenge because the man tried to kill his father is not a legitimate reason for war. Especially when there is a legitimate reason for war next door in Afghanistan.

Is that honestly the only reason you know of?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Citation please. Find me a scientific report by a scientist that is not on the republican (that includes Fox News) payroll or the oil company payroll.

Google it. While you are at it, find me something that proves that Fox News is on the Repbublican payroll.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Uhm... Canadians get surgery all the time, so do the british, french, dutch, belgians, germans. I'd rather have a life threatening condition somewhere else rather than the USA. If I get cancer I'm not paying $100 per pill so that I can get better.

I didn't say Canadians can't get surgery. I said that they have to wait for a very long time and then they get it from second rate doctors. Socialism destroys excellence.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

We need a president that will bring our world standing back up. I'm doing job interviews in other countries. I'm tired of being embarrassed to admit that I'm an American. I remember when I was proud to be an American, I want those days back.

Live in a socialist country for a while. You will be very proud of the United States.

Universal, I don't understand how you can be against socialism yet for the war in Iraq. Care to explain? Or do you simply not understand that there's a connection?

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

So you are certain that those are his only interests, despite his mind blowing POW story? He refused to come home until his comrades could come home also. That is 100% definite proof of loyalty to the country. Do you have a parallel Obama story to tell?

Doesn't he plan to leave our troops in Iraq?

Iraq is about terrorism in general, not specifically Bin Laden. Bin Laden isn't exactly the world's only terrorist.

No it's not, that was just the original cover story. Then it was WMDs, then it was democracy. Do you know the definition of terrorist? Isn't it someone who uses attacks and bombings to incite fear in their enemies? Sound familiar to a certain president?

What I can't understand is that the more we bomb the middle east, the more they hate us

Bush has legitimate and proven reasons for his actions, which are very debatable and in my opinion right. You cannot truthfully say they are mindless evil. However, Ayers' actions were mindless evil.

It was in protest of the Vietnam war, which was even more pointless than the Iraq war. Proven reasons? He can't even decide on a reason, he keeps changing it. Terrorism, oh wait there were no terrorists, WMDs, wait there are no WMDs, oil, oops, we can't say that, Democracy, yeah that's it, we were trying to democratize Iraq. Pretty sketchy considering Katherine Harris essentially rigged the 2000 election for Bush.

Google it. While you are at it, find me something that proves that Fox News is on the Repbublican payroll.

I never said fox was on the republican payroll, they're just a well know republican propaganda network (hence the nickname RPN). When I use google I find results like this one: "Environmental groups, many governmental reports, and the non-U.S. media often claim virtually unanimous agreement in the scientific community in support of human-caused warming, although there is less agreement on the specific consequences of this warming."

unanimous means no debate, right?

I didn't say Canadians can't get surgery. I said that they have to wait for a very long time and then they get it from second rate doctors. Socialism destroys excellence.

Since when? My step mom's mother is canadian and she just had surgery for something in her intestinal track. If doctors don't do things right then they get fired. How does that destroy excellence? Loosing your license is just as much as a deterrent than a malpractice lawsuit.

Live in a socialist country for a while. You will be very proud of the United States.

Believe me, I'm trying. I'm applying for jobs all over the world. You could go ask Robot_butler, adam, mes tarrant, luminous about socialized medicine. They all have it.

Ninja, all they unanimously agree on is that the average temperature is on the rise. It is not a crisis. Very few think it is a crisis. Name some problems that you think it will cause and I will try to give you some information.

But we do not have the scientific technology to predict what is causing the temperature to rise. Do you know what kind of variables are involved? Have you heard of the urban island effect?

Btw I am an environmentalist, and I hate fox news. Global warming is the green parties version of the neo-cons war on terror. It's just a scare tactic so they can pass legislature.

Yes, I've heard of the urban island effect, however scientific samples are either taken from the middle of the Pacific Ocean or at either pole; thousands of miles from the nearest city.

No, they are unanimous on the fact that it is man made, not just that it's happening.

Okay, some problems. If the Canadian and Greenland glaciers melt they disrupt the mid atlantic current, which warms Europe. If that gets disrupted too much the Europe will drastically cool down.

There is also enough ice in the poles to raise global ocean levels 40 feet. There are several million people living less than 40 feet above sea level.

Glaciers have been melting for 6000 years. So glaciers melting is not because of global warming or greenhouse gasses. Climate change is a natural phenomenon.

They are not unanimous on almost anything. Over 30,000 scientists signed a petition saying that the do not agree with the theory of man made global warming.

Do you understand how sea levels rise? IT's not like the just jump all at once. Like I said Glaciers have been melting for the past 6000 years and this has caused about .1 mm of increase in sea level every year. Real crisis, huh. It will take hundreds if not thousands of years before anyone is in real danger. They can move between now and that time.

In order for the ice to melt in the way your talking about, we'd have to have an increase of several degrees at least. Current climate change show less than 1 degree increase, and the data being used is very innaccurate. There are way to many variables to get an accurate depiction of global temperature.

1 degrees overall is about 5 degrees at the poles, i think more. Actually, until the industrial revolution, we were in a cooling cycle (according to the natural cycle we should be cooling) and glaciers were growing.

Ice isn't just melting, but the melting is accelerating. Gravity images of Antarctica and greenland prove that.

If the melting is accelerating, then why hasn't the rate of sea level increased in the way that global warming theory claims it will? Sea level increase will not get above 1 cm a year. right now it's not even close to that, less than 2mm. At that exagerrated rate it would take 100 years for it to go up 1 meter. If we take the current rate, it would take over 500 years per meter. How is this a crisis? The climate is changing, I agree, but it is not a crisis. We can adapt to whatever changes come, as people have done in the past when climate changed.

Because sea ice melts first. Sea ice is already in the water, therefore it can't contribute to rising sea levels. That's the ice shelfs in Antarctica and the entire northern ice cap. The danger is the ice that's on land. As the sea ice disappears there is nothing holding back the glaciers on the land from slipping into the ocean. This hasn't happened yet because there is still enough sea ice, but it's disappearing fast.

Ocean temperatures rise faster than air temperatures and water also transfers heat into the ice much easier than air does. That's why sea ice melts first.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

So you are certain that those are his only interests, despite his mind blowing POW story? He refused to come home until his comrades could come home also. That is 100% definite proof of loyalty to the country. Do you have a parallel Obama story to tell?



Yeah, Reagan has some major flaws, but he also had some great economic policies that led to major prosperity for a long time.



Bin Laden is the most wanted person on Earth. Bush put a $25,000,000 bounty on his head. We have drones all over the place looking for him. We have sent several missions to places where he has been suspected of being. We just can't invade Pakistan. Iraq is about terrorism in general, not specifically Bin Laden. Bin Laden isn't exactly the world's only terrorist.



Bush has legitimate and proven reasons for his actions, which are very debatable and in my opinion right. You cannot truthfully say they are mindless evil. However, Ayers' actions were mindless evil.



Is that honestly the only reason you know of?


Google it. While you are at it, find me something that proves that Fox News is on the Repbublican payroll.



I didn't say Canadians can't get surgery. I said that they have to wait for a very long time and then they get it from second rate doctors. Socialism destroys excellence.



Live in a socialist country for a while. You will be very proud of the United States.

woah woah did I just hear someone say Iraq was terrorism?

And my brother went to Iraq so you really don't know what your talking about. This war is simply inciting terrorism and destroying Iraq. No wonder the rest of the world hates us.

Woah woah and your saying fox news isn't bias. Well I have one word for you O'Reilly.

Proven reasons? WMDS? Now you are really naive.

Reagan started this whole borrowing trend and contributed to the mess this country is in now. So he was not good as people think he was. He made the country great when he was in office but like many republicans (such as both bushes) it was at the expense of future generations.

I am fed up with this whole thing about McCain being perfect cause he was a POW. Thats the same problem I had with John Kerry. The whole "I won three purple hearts" was widely critized. But hes a republican so hes perfect because he was in the military. People lead different paths. Obama is a harvard graduate and his short time in office has been good. He has one thing McCain will never have, he has not been in Washington long enough to be tainted by it.

UM, you've dodged this questions many time so I'm putting it in it's own post: Where does the right wing think that the government's money comes from?

The right is always spending lots and lots of money but have no way to finance it. Us on the left know that the government's money comes out of the economy, usually in the form of taxes. Spending 9 billion in Iraq while the government is 300 billion in debt is like having an overdrawn bank account and buying a new car.

No, they are unanimous on the fact that it is man made, not just that it's happening.

No.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzSzItt6h-s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDI2NVTYRXU


Who gives a shit about a caribu and ice blocks, when the oil will help slow our dependence on middle east oil? Many news outlets say the debate is over, BULLSHIT. Didn't you say FOX is being payed by republicans?

Originally Posted by tkdyo

I dont support dems or republicans, and a lot of the people in my area are heavily democrat. Idk where you get your figures that most of the country are fundamentalists, but it seems only weeks ago fundies were barely anywhere to be found. Just because a lot of people like Paulin better than Biden doesnt make them irrational. I think its more rational to be an independent

Why would you vote for the idies? they can't get in. why don't you vote for teh lesser of two evils, and your vote can make a difference

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

when the oil will help slow our dependence on middle east oil?

Originally Posted by Dreamworld

No.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzSzItt6h-s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDI2NVTYRXU


Who gives a shit about a caribu and ice blocks, when the oil will help slow our dependence on middle east oil? Many news outlets say the debate is over, BULLSHIT. Didn't you say FOX is being payed by republicans?

just as much as donating a penny to poverty will eliminate it

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Doesn't he plan to leave our troops in Iraq?

Yes, and so does Obama. None of the major candidates are planning on immediate and total withdrawal. Obama just wants a quicker withdrawal and might end up not wanting to have a base there, but I doubt it. McCain wants troops in Iraq in the distant future only in the way that we still have troops in Germany and Japan.

However, that is beside the point of what I said. I said McCain has proven his commitment to the country and Obama has not. Obama has only proven his quest for personal power. Do you disagree?

Originally Posted by ninja9578

No it's not, that was just the original cover story. Then it was WMDs, then it was democracy. Do you know the definition of terrorist? Isn't it someone who uses attacks and bombings to incite fear in their enemies? Sound familiar to a certain president?

All acts of war do that, but terrorism is illegal by definition and historically irrational and ineffective. Dropping bombs on Japan ended World War II, for example, but Bill Ayers just blew shit up and hurt people, and nothing good resulted from it except controversy for Obama. I know you see the difference. How many nations has Bill Ayers liberated, and what all has he done to prevent domestic terrorist attacks?

Put Bush and other presidents aside for a moment, and let's talk about Bill Ayers. Why do you not have a problem with him, and why do you not have a problem with Obama for co-chairing an organization with him, being his friend, and giving a pro-Ayers speech at Ayers' house, knowing the entire time what Ayers had done? Do you really not have a problem with that? Talking about Bush will not answer that question.

The reasons for the war have been numerous this whole time, but Bush is a weak communicator and kept focussing on different sales pitches. He needs to go down the whole list, or at least the part of the list he can talk about. As I have said before, I think part of the idea is that we set up a roach motel for people who have Islamofascist terrorist tendencies anywhere in themselves.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

What I can't understand is that the more we bomb the middle east, the more they hate us

You are painting with a very broad brush. The war has been about many things, and I have told you what they are. A great deal of good has resulted from the liberation of Iraq, and a great deal of the Iraqi people who hated us years ago have seen the changes and now love us. But the goal is not to make terrorists hate us less, the goals are numerous, and we are making major progress with them. For one thing, we have had no domestic terrorist attacks from foreign terrorists since 9/11/01. Part of the reason for that is that we showed what happens when people pull that shit, and it went directly against what Bin Laden said Al Qaeda expected of us.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

It was in protest of the Vietnam war, which was even more pointless than the Iraq war. Proven reasons? He can't even decide on a reason, he keeps changing it. Terrorism, oh wait there were no terrorists, WMDs, wait there are no WMDs, oil, oops, we can't say that, Democracy, yeah that's it, we were trying to democratize Iraq. Pretty sketchy considering Katherine Harris essentially rigged the 2000 election for Bush.

There were no terrorists? I have no idea what you are talking about there. There were no WMD's? How do you know? I don't think you really believe that not being able to find something proves that it never existed. I doubt you view your wallet that way. We had intelligence from the CIA, several other governments and the U.N. saying the stockpiles were there. Our acting on that information was understandable. Do you admit that there is any degree of understandabilty in how we handled the information? I know you don't agree with what we did, but do you really think there is absolutely ZERO understandabilty in it? And like I said, the sales pitches kept changing, but the long list has been the same the whole time. All of the things I talked about in other threads regarding this issue are legitimate reasons, or at least understandable reasons.

Now please explain how Ayers' bombings, which you so far have not said one word against, resulted in the end of the Vietnam War or at least how in the world they were supposed to. It was mindless violence with no calculation. Ayers is just a sociopath.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

I never said fox was on the republican payroll, they're just a well know republican propaganda network (hence the nickname RPN). When I use google I find results like this one: "Environmental groups, many governmental reports, and the non-U.S. media often claim virtually unanimous agreement in the scientific community in support of human-caused warming, although there is less agreement on the specific consequences of this warming."

Have you seen the petition of climate scientists who disagree with the idea that humans are causing global warming? Have you read what the head of NASA has said about it?

Fox News is clearly more Republican than Democrat, but they do have Democrats who give the news and commentary, such as Alan Colmes, Greta Van Susteren, and Geraldo Rivera. Also, the major Republican commentators have several liberal guests on to debate them every single show. Keith Olbermann is not so open-minded. He has never once been challenged on his show.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

unanimous means no debate, right?

It's not unamimous. Where are you getting this stuff?

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Since when? My step mom's mother is canadian and she just had surgery for something in her intestinal track. If doctors don't do things right then they get fired. How does that destroy excellence? Loosing your license is just as much as a deterrent than a malpractice lawsuit.

Again, I never said you can't get surgery in Canada. I said you have to wait way too long for it. Under socialism, people do just enough to get by. Under capitalism, people go the extra mile and do amazing things. That is the very important difference.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Believe me, I'm trying. I'm applying for jobs all over the world. You could go ask Robot_butler, adam, mes tarrant, luminous about socialized medicine. They all have it.

Well, keep running in races so you can stay healthy and be less likely to need major surgery. If you end up needing surgery to fight a life threatening condition, you will be in for the big government nightmare of your life.

Originally Posted by aceofspades

woah woah did I just hear someone say Iraq was terrorism?

No, you didn't. I don't even know what such a statement would mean. Iraq is a nation of 25 million people who used to live under a terrorist and genocidal government. Now they don't. There are many war on terror advantages that have resulted from our overthrow of the Hussein regime and our occupation during the transition period.

Originally Posted by aceofspades

And my brother went to Iraq so you really don't know what your talking about. This war is simply inciting terrorism and destroying Iraq. No wonder the rest of the world hates us.

Bull shit. Do some research and learn about the major improvements in Iraq. Start with the voting situation and how Iraqis vote in higher percentages than we do, despite the death threats. That is love for democracy.

Originally Posted by aceofspades

Woah woah and your saying fox news isn't bias. Well I have one word for you O'Reilly.

Please read more carefully. I have a low tolerance for people who argue with points I did not make. You have already done that twice in just three paragraphs. I asked Ninja to prove that Fox News is on the Republican payroll.

Yes, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity are Republicans. The guests they debate every week night are not. What about it?

Originally Posted by aceofspades

Proven reasons? WMDS? Now you are really naive.

We did in fact have intelligence from multiple governments and multiple bodies in our own government that the stockpiles existed. Not acting on that information would have been highly irresponsible, and not being able to find something does not prove its nonexistence. Do you come even close to understanding the seriousness of what we are dealing with?

Originally Posted by aceofspades

Reagan started this whole borrowing trend and contributed to the mess this country is in now. So he was not good as people think he was. He made the country great when he was in office but like many republicans (such as both bushes) it was at the expense of future generations.

He did drive up the debt, but that was because he did so much to crumble the Soviet Union. You and I are damn fortunate that he did that. Imagine what Obama would have done with the threat of Soviet world take over, which in fact was what the Soviets were working toward. Imagine that world.

Originally Posted by aceofspades

I am fed up with this whole thing about McCain being perfect cause he was a POW. Thats the same problem I had with John Kerry. The whole "I won three purple hearts" was widely critized. But hes a republican so hes perfect because he was in the military. People lead different paths. Obama is a harvard graduate and his short time in office has been good. He has one thing McCain will never have, he has not been in Washington long enough to be tainted by it.

Who said anything about perfect? I just said he proved his commitment to the country. Kerry was in Vietman pretty briefly and used his service there to trash the military and make America haters like him. McCain refused to leave his POW camp without his comrades and stayed an extra five years, during which time he was frequently tortured. That speaks volumes about who he is.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

However, that is beside the point of what I said. I said McCain has proven his commitment to the country and Obama has not. Obama has only proven his quest for personal power. Do you disagree?

No, Barrack Obama has proven his commitment to people, he was a community organizer for years and fought for workers rights. McCain has proven that he was a military hero, that doesn't translate to a political leader. Voting records are public, he's voted for big corporations time and time again.

Put Bush and other presidents aside for a moment, and let's talk about Bill Ayers. Why do you not have a problem with him, and why do you not have a problem with Obama for co-chairing an organization with him, being his friend, and giving a pro-Ayers speech at Ayers' house, knowing the entire time what Ayers had done? Do you really not have a problem with that? Talking about Bush will not answer that question.

I'm on a board for Habitat for Humanity with some right wing gun nuts and call some of them friends too. Some of them even still support dubya. A man can keep company of people that they disagree with. Last time I checked Obama's speeches in honor of him said nothing positive about the bombings, weren't they more in light of his community activism?

You are painting with a very broad brush. The war has been about many things, and I have told you what they are. A great deal of good has resulted from the liberation of Iraq, and a great deal of the Iraqi people who hated us years ago have seen the changes and now love us. But the goal is not to make terrorists hate us less, the goals are numerous, and we are making major progress with them. For one thing, we have had no domestic terrorist attacks from foreign terrorists since 9/11/01. Part of the reason for that is that we showed what happens when people pull that shit, and it went directly against what Bin Laden said Al Qaeda expected of us.

They love us now? This picture is from May.

There were no terrorists? I have no idea what you are talking about there. There were no WMD's? How do you know? I don't think you really believe that not being able to find something proves that it never existed. I doubt you view your wallet that way. We had intelligence from the CIA, several other governments and the U.N. saying the stockpiles were there. Our acting on that information was understandable. Do you admit that there is any degree of understandabilty in how we handled the information? I know you don't agree with what we did, but do you really think there is absolutely ZERO understandabilty in it? And like I said, the sales pitches kept changing, but the long list has been the same the whole time. All of the things I talked about in other threads regarding this issue are legitimate reasons, or at least understandable reasons.

Our own reports including the 911 report said that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and there still aren't any WMDs surfaced. And believe me, the republican party is grasping at straws to make thw ar look worth it, if they surfaced, we'd know.

Now please explain how Ayers' bombings, which you so far have not said one word against, resulted in the end of the Vietnam War or at least how in the world they were supposed to. It was mindless violence with no calculation. Ayers is just a sociopath.

No one's defending his actions, he went to jail and served his time. Now he does community activism. A man can keep company of those he does not agree with. Do you have any left wing friends?

Have you seen the petition of climate scientists who disagree with the idea that humans are causing global warming? Have you read what the head of NASA has said about it?

I haven't head anything about the head of NASA, but NASA's official position is that it's man made. They have an entire website for it.

Again, I never said you can't get surgery in Canada. I said you have to wait way too long for it. Under socialism, people do just enough to get by. Under capitalism, people go the extra mile and do amazing things. That is the very important difference.

How so? Explain how fear of loosing your practice forever in a socialized system is different than fear of malpractice suits in capitalized systems? The governments don't exactly look the other way if a doctor does something wrong.

Well, keep running in races so you can stay healthy and be less likely to need major surgery. If you end up needing surgery to fight a life threatening condition, you will be in for the big government nightmare of your life.

Will do, just make sure you keep your wrist in shape. You'll need it for all the insurance company and hmo paperwork that you'll have to do. Keep your wallet thick too, drugs can get very expensive.

UM is STILL carrying water for these sad sacks? lol

no thats the thing. Iraq whether u find this as insensitive or not was better under saddam's rule. It is a country ruled by strife and civil war and that is why saddam's hard iron fist was needed. now that we have unraveled the fabric of that society now it has degraded into something far worse than we could have thought. In fact I don't blame the sunnis for attacking americans and shiites. they are just defending themselves because now they are being persecuted because they are the minority.

Saddam was staunchly secular and was known for killing terrorists. He never supported terrorists and thought they were a threat to his rule. I just think it is naive to think everything would be hunky dori because we went there.

Now we have opened a pandoras box.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

No, Barrack Obama has proven his commitment to people, he was a community organizer for years and fought for workers rights. McCain has proven that he was a military hero, that doesn't translate to a political leader. Voting records are public, he's voted for big corporations time and time again.

Obama has not done anything that politicians don't very often do in search of power. McCain, on the other hand, proved conclusively that he puts the country before himself. Everything you just said Obama did led to the power he has now. You cannot say that about what McCain did in Vietnam.

Big corporations have enriched your life a great deal, and they are the backbone of the economy. They need low taxes and little regulation, for the sake of all of us.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

I'm on a board for Habitat for Humanity with some right wing gun nuts and call some of them friends too. Some of them even still support dubya. A man can keep company of people that they disagree with. Last time I checked Obama's speeches in honor of him said nothing positive about the bombings, weren't they more in light of his community activism?

Once again, it is not a simple matter of being friends with somebody he disagrees with. It is about being friends with a terrorist who attacked the United States. I disagree with a whole lot of what right wing nuts believe, but I know that they generally have good intentions and that their wrong beliefs are AT LEAST UNDERSTANDABLE. You cannot say that about Ayers. You also cannot say that about rapists and serial killers. I would not have a problem co-chairing an organization with you, and for all I know, I might even give a speech in your honor at your house. The fact that we disagree when, as far as I know, your intentions are good is not enough reason for me to hate you. But if you ever bomb the Pentagon, the Capitol building, and New York City Police Headquarters just so you can go, "Grrrrrr, I'm mad and I'm protesting," I will definitely change my mind about that. Disagreement is not synonymous with publicly condoning what is known to be pure evil. There is a very big difference between the two.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

They love us now? This picture is from May.

Is that a picture of the entire population of Iraq? Posting that to make your point is just like me posting a picture of an American mansion and saying Americans are therefore millionaires.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Our own reports including the 911 report said that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and there still aren't any WMDs surfaced. And believe me, the republican party is grasping at straws to make thw ar look worth it, if they surfaced, we'd know.

That does not get around the fact that our action was understandable based on the intelligence we had. I never said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. I can't name one person who has ever said it. It is just a common strawman that the left keeps using. The war in Iraq is about combatting terrorism in general in many, many ways. The only people who ever bring up the idea of connecting the Hussein regime and 9/11 are leftists. It is a tired, old strawman.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

No one's defending his actions, he went to jail and served his time. Now he does community activism. A man can keep company of those he does not agree with. Do you have any left wing friends?

Yes, I have left wing friends. I have left wing close relatives too. However, I DO NOT have unrepentant terrorist friends. Bill Ayers is an unrepentant terrorist. Anybody who is friends with him AND praises him in speeches at his house AND co-chairs an organization with the unrepentant bucket of slime is automatically disqualified from being president of the United States. What we are dealing with is way too serious for such an absurd presidency.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

I haven't head anything about the head of NASA, but NASA's official position is that it's man made. They have an entire website for it.

http://www.enviroblog.org/2007/05/na...-this-fuss.htm

Originally Posted by ninja9578

How so? Explain how fear of loosing your practice forever in a socialized system is different than fear of malpractice suits in capitalized systems? The governments don't exactly look the other way if a doctor does something wrong.

The fear of malpractice suits may be the same, but what I am talking about goes way beyond that. Capitalist doctors desire to absolutely kick ass at what they do, not merely avoid malpractice suits. They want to be the best around so they can get the best business they can get. They get people in much quicker, they search for the best breakthrough techniques, and they often try to make their own breakthroughs. Also, the people who are best cut out to be doctors are more likely to be doctors in a system where they can be supersuccessful instead of doing something else. A socialist system attracts a lower level on the ladder and influences the people with the most medical potential to be executives and such. Socialism is a disaster because it is based on barely getting by. Capitalism promotes amazing success. It is a far better system.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

Will do, just make sure you keep your wrist in shape. You'll need it for all the insurance company and hmo paperwork that you'll have to do. Keep your wallet thick too, drugs can get very expensive.

But I will feel secure that I would have a life threatening condition treated as well as possible.

Imagine what cross country meets would be like if they just took the average time everybody ran and made that everybody's time and everybody just got a participation ribbon. How many sub-16 5K's do you think would be run at a typical cross country meet? Imagine how little would get learned if schools did that with grades. That is socialism.

Originally Posted by aceofspades

no thats the thing. Iraq whether u find this as insensitive or not was better under saddam's rule. It is a country ruled by strife and civil war and that is why saddam's hard iron fist was needed. now that we have unraveled the fabric of that society now it has degraded into something far worse than we could have thought. In fact I don't blame the sunnis for attacking americans and shiites. they are just defending themselves because now they are being persecuted because they are the minority.

Saddam was staunchly secular and was known for killing terrorists. He never supported terrorists and thought they were a threat to his rule. I just think it is naive to think everything would be hunky dori because we went there.

Now we have opened a pandoras box.

Read about what the Hussein regime did to the people of Iraq. Read about the genocide, the rule based on terrorizing citizens, the rape and torture, and the fact that there was no end in sight. Then think about the fact that a new government is in place, not just for now, but for the very long term. The people already vote in higher percentages than Americans, despite death threats from the terrorists you just took up for. Things are already much better, and this is just the transition phase.

The Hussein regime was terrorist. They funded and trained terrorist groups and provided financial incentives for Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel. They used sarin gas, a WMD, in a terrorist attack on the Kurds. They in fact were a terrorist government.

The Hussein regime claimed to be secular, and they were not a theocracy, but they did commit acts of evil in the name of Islam. Hussein called the United States "infidel" and "Satan" in fits of rage. Go figure.

The insurgent terrorists you just took up for are the scum that are keeping us in Iraq. They are not trying to drive us out. Stopping their terrorism would accomplish that, so obviously that is not their goal. What they are doing is trying to prevent democracy. They despise it.

Read about what the Hussein regime did to the people of Iraq. Read about the genocide, the rule based on terrorizing citizens, the rape and torture, and the fact that there was no end in sight. Then think about the fact that a new government is in place, not just for now, but for the very long term. The people already vote in higher percentages than Americans, despite death threats from the terrorists you just took up for. Things are already much better, and this is just the transition phase.

The Hussein regime was terrorist. They funded and trained terrorist groups and provided financial incentives for Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel. They used sarin gas, a WMD, in a terrorist attack on the Kurds. They in fact were a terrorist government.

The Hussein regime claimed to be secular, and they were not a theocracy, but they did commit acts of evil in the name of Islam. Hussein called the United States "infidel" and "Satan" in fits of rage. Go figure.

The insurgent terrorists you just took up for are the scum that are keeping us in Iraq. They are not trying to drive us out. Stopping their terrorism would accomplish that, so obviously that is not their goal. What they are doing is trying to prevent democracy. They despise it.

Wow you are naive. Lets analyze what you said.

1. It simply was not as bad as republicans state it was. Hussein kept order ...something which we apparently cannot do. Iraq is always going to be in a transition phase all they ever do is fight. Any iraqui would prefer running water, electricity, and peace over the symbolic fake democracy they have recieved.
2. I do not know where you are getting your information but Hussein saw terrorists as a threat to his regime and were just as brutal with terrorists as he was with his dissidents.....and btw we gave them those weapons >.< Iran-Iraq war. We are F***ing brilliant arent we
3. People do a lot of things in a fit of rage. I am sure when we were kicking his ass in desert storm he did not become a fan of us. I would be calling us "Satan" and "Infidels" after what happened. Doesn't mean he was going to pick a fight with the largest country in the world
4. Hmm you do understand they came to iraq to fight US. They are not there to fight democracy. They could care less about democracy but they don't see it as a democracy they see it as an american occupation (which it is) and the Sunnis see it as they are going to be persecuted by the Iraqi government since they are a minority.

Ah and the little optimist thinks we can defeat terrorism with guns The stupid thing is we can bomb them, we can kill them, we can even nuke them...but we can't win. Its a different kind of war. If we kill 1 of them 2 more will avenge them.

Have fun defeating the arabs. You know why you can't circumcise an arab?

Cause there is no end to those pricks

Not to mention you think that Iraq is a country of retards. Ahh they don't know what they want they just havent understood that democracy is so incredible. Who needs basic neccesities when you can vote?

And stop being so spiteful its just a little forum about dreaming

And remember
You can't force democracy at gun point

PS: Dont blame me for the misspellings...chrome's spell check isn't good yet >.<

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Obama has not done anything that politicians don't very often do in search of power. McCain, on the other hand, proved conclusively that he puts the country before himself. Everything you just said Obama did led to the power he has now. You cannot say that about what McCain did in Vietnam.

McCain fought in a pointless war that cost thousands of innocent lives. If he cared about the country he would have said fuck the military and joined the protesters. Then he came home and joined the Senate where he consistently voted with George W Bush. Obama has legitimately helped people.

That does not get around the fact that our action was understandable based on the intelligence we had. I never said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. I can't name one person who has ever said it. It is just a common strawman that the left keeps using. The war in Iraq is about combatting terrorism in general in many, many ways. The only people who ever bring up the idea of connecting the Hussein regime and 9/11 are leftists. It is a tired, old strawman.

Didn't Bush himself order the CIA to forge a letter linking Iraq to 911? Read "The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism"

Yes, I have left wing friends. I have left wing close relatives too. However, I DO NOT have unrepentant terrorist friends. Bill Ayers is an unrepentant terrorist. Anybody who is friends with him AND praises him in speeches at his house AND co-chairs an organization with the unrepentant bucket of slime is automatically disqualified from being president of the United States. What we are dealing with is way too serious for such an absurd presidency.

If you were invited on the to chair a board for a charity organization, but a former terrorist who served his time in prison was on it also, you would say no?

The fear of malpractice suits may be the same, but what I am talking about goes way beyond that. Capitalist doctors desire to absolutely kick ass at what they do, not merely avoid malpractice suits. They want to be the best around so they can get the best business they can get. They get people in much quicker, they search for the best breakthrough techniques, and they often try to make their own breakthroughs. Also, the people who are best cut out to be doctors are more likely to be doctors in a system where they can be supersuccessful instead of doing something else. A socialist system attracts a lower level on the ladder and influences the people with the most medical potential to be executives and such. Socialism is a disaster because it is based on barely getting by. Capitalism promotes amazing success. It is a far better system.

Research and practicing medicine are two different things. Strange you should mention medical breakthroughs, when most of the major medical breakthroughs are coming from countries with socialized medicine. There are a lot of breakthroughs coming from The Netherlands and London. Isn't Oxford the premier medical school in the world? England has socialized medicine.


Why does McCain continually use songs from songwriters that would never endorse him? Jackson Brown is actually suing him for using his song in an attack ad. I'm sure that there are plenty of country singers that would endorse him, why take songs from Van Halen and Jackson Brown?

his argument that doctors will get screwed if we have socialized medicine is stupid. Right now we don't pay for our doctors anyways nor can doctors dictate what they charge. Doctors have to charge what the insurance companies tell them they can charge. But even still brain surgeons get paid more than regular doctors.

There is nothing stopping a doctor in socialized medicine for moving higher in the ranks.