Election issue round up

[stafffighter]

Usually I do my round ups at the end of the year but going a little early might influence voters, so ok. I do not hold myself to either party

1. civil unions. To allow every right that means marriage but not the word marriage is every bit arbitrary and beholden to tradition as those who oppose it.

2. Foley. Not a conspiracy on either end so much as a follower of the Janet Jackson princible of "when there's sex people forget violence."

3. Iraq. No weapons of mass destruction, no ties to taliban, no forseeable end.

4. privacy. While my sig quote says it perfectly I'll simply add the question "Is it effective use of equipment and personel to watch everyone for the few who commit crimes?"

5. illegal immigration. By all means make it harder to get in illegally but once someone has established a life does it make more sense to ship them off or make them productive members of the community?

6. Kerry. Messed a joke, already had no shot, judge him if you want but remember it was the action of an individual.

7. Korea. The threat of these weapons is being handeled on a global scale, which considering the power of these things is the only way to do it.

Discuss all you want but remember your views only matter if you vote according to them.

[JohnnyUtah]

I'm just going to say DON'T VOTE REPUBLICAN.

If you realy need all the points explained to you on why, you shouldn't even be voting.

[MoralLibertarian]

At 11/4/06 06:23 PM, stafffighter wrote: 6. Kerry. Messed a joke, already had no shot, judge him if you want but remember it was the action of an individual.

Wait, what was funny about it to begin with? Great sense of humor.

[JohnnyUtah]

At 11/5/06 04:05 PM, Grammer wrote:

At 11/5/06 03:57 PM, JohnnyUtah wrote: I'm just going to say DON'T VOTE REPUBLICAN.

If you realy need all the points explained to you on why, you shouldn't even be voting.

No, I'd actually like that to be explained.

If I was registered to vote, I'd probably vote "R" this tuesday =]
Simply because ads for the Democratic opponent here in New Jersey are accusing the Republican running for Congress of being similar to Bush. I hear that and I'm like: good?

Bob Menendez vs. Tom Kean or something like that. I don't even know which guy is in what party :|

are you even paying attention? the republican ads are out and out discusting.

WAIT..WHOA...you think bush is going a good job?

FINE CHAMP, I'LL EXPLAIN.

1. republicans say - democrats will raise taxes. well GUESS WHAT? they have to because republicans have been spending all the money in the world giving the rich tax cuts and not killing osama bin laden.

2. republicans say - terrorists want democrats to win. In actualilty, bush and cohorts inflame that radical islamic hatred towards america, then run on offering to protect is from that? WHAT?

3. republicans say - democrats will "cut and run". no sir, BUSH LOST THE WAR PERIOD. republicans are so arrogant they thought we wouldnt even need a post war strategy...and this is where they got us.

4. stem cell research has great potential to save lives. seems like republicans are greatly conflicted here. they want to save protoplasmic slime that isnt evena person yet, but dontr mind sending troops to their deaths - as long as it isnt them.

5. ENOUGH RELIGION IN POLITICS. taking the bible literally is bullshit, and I've had enough of politicians letting that nonsense influence them.

6. think what you will of gays, but they're not destroying marriage anymore than straight people are.

anyways, that should be enough for you.

good day.

[stafffighter]

At 11/5/06 04:05 PM, Grammer wrote:

If I was registered to vote, I'd probably vote "R" this tuesday =]

Well why aren't you? Like I said at the start you need to vote for your views to matter.
And just for the record EVERYONE has negative ads. I don't like it more any any of you but it's pretty much the name of the game.

[Draconias]

At 11/5/06 04:20 PM, JohnnyUtah wrote: 1. republicans say - democrats will raise taxes. well GUESS WHAT? they have to because republicans have been spending all the money in the world giving the rich tax cuts and not killing osama bin laden.

So in other words, the Republicans are telling the truth: Democrats will probably raise taxes, and are no less likely to be fiscally irresponsible than the Republicans. The spending of the current administration is highly unusual for Republicans and actually has many party members upset.

2. republicans say - terrorists want democrats to win. In actualilty, bush and cohorts inflame that radical islamic hatred towards america, then run on offering to protect is from that? WHAT?

Again, it sounds as if the Republicans are telling the truth: you believe the Democrats will attempt to placate the terrorists, and act tantamount to surrendering. If killing terrorists and foiling their plots enflames them, then too bad. They need to be angry, and frustrated, and so defeated that they stop threatening us. Clinton proved that hiding from terrorists won't make them stop hating us. Only fools would try that again.

3. republicans say - democrats will "cut and run". no sir, BUSH LOST THE WAR PERIOD. republicans are so arrogant they thought we wouldnt even need a post war strategy...and this is where they got us.

How can Bush have lost the war if the war isn't lost? We defeated Saddam, an Iraqi court just sentenced him to death, all of his followers have been eliminated, and Iraw is on the verge of being stable. The only problems are foreign insurgents fighting us in Iraq and the religious feuds causing violence. It is nowhere near lost, and it should have been obvious going in that it would take a long time.

4. stem cell research has great potential to save lives. seems like republicans are greatly conflicted here. they want to save protoplasmic slime that isnt evena person yet, but dontr mind sending troops to their deaths - as long as it isnt them.

"Great potential"? Stem cells don't have to come from embyroes, and recent research has shown that mature cells reverted back into the stem cell form are actually more effective than embryo-grown stem cells. You don't have the right to declare that embryoes are not living humans, and that's the entire issue: even if it means possibly saving lives, we shouldn't sacrifice people. It's an extension of a strongly-held American philosophy of never sacrificing the one for the "good" of the many.

And who says they don't mind sending troops to Iraq? It may pain them greatly, and be a source of great regret, but the troops are fully-aware, voluntary soldiers. The difference between an embryo and an adult is the difference between pedophilia and legal sex: the former cannot legally consent to anything, while the latter can. Soldiers choose to enter the military with the knowledge that they will be going to war. It is their choice.

5. ENOUGH RELIGION IN POLITICS. taking the bible literally is bullshit, and I've had enough of politicians letting that nonsense influence them.

So, even though America is the most religious country in the world, politicians must be athiests? If someone is religious, they can't completely ignore that even if you tell them to. I may not agree with their beliefs, or want to see them act with too heavy a religious influence, but they are completely free to practice whatever religion they wish and believe in it however they want.

6. think what you will of gays, but they're not destroying marriage anymore than straight people are.

Of course they aren't: they aren't allowed to marry, so how can they destroy? However, your arrogant opinion does not affect the debate over whether they should be allowed to marry, and I do believe that redefining marriage to be between any two people would destroy the traditions for which it exists. It would no longer be marriage, and no longer be meaningful.

Your opinion isn't everything, and you aren't necessarily correct on anything. Unless you actually support your positions more effectively, the only thing that anyone will listen to is your single vote (or, lacking that, nothing). Your opinion will have no sway.

[stafffighter]

At 11/5/06 05:58 PM, Grammer wrote:

How can you consider a war lost when it's still being fought?

Remember the exactuation from vietnam? They did that because they knew it was a lost cause.

[lapis]

At 11/5/06 05:58 PM, Grammer wrote:

2. republicans say - terrorists want democrats to win.

No they don't. (...) No one's saying that,

Well, Cheney did. He said that the insurgents were increasing the frequency and gravity of their attacks in order to influence the US mid-term elections and since I don't think he meant that the insurgents were thereby trying to garner support for the Republicans I assume he meant that the terrorists want the Democrats, or maybe independent candidates to win, either because they perceive the Democrats or independents as being soft on terror or because they want the President's party to lose control over Congress or the Senate.

[Monocrom]

At 11/4/06 06:23 PM, stafffighter wrote:

5. illegal immigration. By all means make it harder to get in illegally but once someone has established a life does it make more sense to ship them off or make them productive members of the community?

To be honest, I've never understood the concept behind deporting someone who was caught sneaking into the country. But letting them stay if they snuck in years ago and got away with breaking the law, back then. Both types should be deported.

[Demosthenez]

At 11/5/06 06:10 PM, stafffighter wrote: Remember the exactuation from vietnam? They did that because they knew it was a lost cause.

The war wasnt lost then. It was lost when our Congress stopped funding South Vietnam. The Vietnamese were very capable of defending themselves but when they had to compete by themselves with no American backing against the DRV, backed by both Russia and China and supplied with tons of cash and material. They kept the DRV at bay for a time until the DRV broke the treaty we helped create and we did shit about it.

Our Congress lost that war just like they sabotaged the League of Nations by not joining it.

America did not lose in Vietnam, we killed ourselves by not funding the south Vietnamese after 1974. Our leaders in Congress, capitalizing on Nixons impeachment, betrayed the South Vietnamese. It is a disgusting mark on Americas history, we had an ally who we basically shot in the back and left for dead to the dogs of the DRV and Politburo.

Stafffighter if you think it is acceptable to leave your allies high and dry, I think that is rather abhorrent. We involve ourselves there, we dont leave for selfish reasons, you stay for the long haul until the situation is resolved and your ally is in a safe position.

And Draconias I dont feel like debating you but I just want to say your ideas on terrorism are beyond fucking stupid. Yes indeed, lets keep pissing off more people and not doing jack shit about securing our safety just becuse we enjoy retaliating and revenge so much. Fucking stupid.

[stafffighter]

At 11/5/06 07:05 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

Stafffighter if you think it is acceptable to leave your allies high and dry, I think that is rather abhorrent.

I never said I accepted it but it happened.

[Draconias]

At 11/5/06 04:56 PM, JohnnyUtah wrote: we had a several billion dollar surplus before the bush administration. oh thats right, we can thank clinton for that.

Ha, no. We can thank a booming economy and a deadlocked Congress for that. But oh wait, didn't that economic boom turn into a bubble that triggered a recession we're still recovering from? Will Clinton take responsibility for that, too?

pay attention. we are only making MORE PEOPLE HATE AMERICA. and therefore MORE TERRORISTS. you're not really so niave you think we can just bomb the problem till it goes away? we're fighting an ideology here kid..

Do you think running away like pussies will make anyone like America more? Terrorists will hate America whether or not we do anything, and the only way to stop them requires angering a few other people. But most of that "hate" is just an illusion provided by mass media-- it's only our interference that has people miffed, not permanently angered. As soon as we finish Iraq, it will die down, but the Democrats aren't helping the American case much by constantly attacking the country they supposedly support.

Iraq is on the verge OF BEING STABLE??? AHHAHAHA holy shit, stop watching fox news. that place is on the verge of civil war. and remember, we didnt go over there with the purpose of "defeating" saddam. stop drinking the cool aid.

On the verge of a civil war, but not in a civil war. Only a fool would believe that it has to degenerate into a civil war, especially when most Iraqis don't want a civil war. Only a minority in each group is fighting.

Also, we did go over there with the purpose of fighting Sadam. There was no other primary reason, only incidental ones, and definitely not what you are probably assuming, that we went in for Oil.

America doesn't get most of its oil from the Middle East, and what we do get comes from Saudi Arabia. Invading Iraq has not increased how much oil we received, or decreased the price-- in fact, the opposite has inevitably happened. We've been consuming more oil (for military vehicles) and the war disrupted the prices. The US also hasn't pushed to gain any benefits whatsoever out of Iraq's oil, and we actually still buy very little of it. Only a politically blind man would believe that was our motivation.

embryoes ARENT HUMANS. secondly, the ones they'd be testing would never have been humans in the god damn fist place. scientists arent out there killing babies. they're using embryos that would normally be discarded. I guess you don't read.

Who the hell are you to declare that embryoes aren't human? You're not God, nor anything close, just a close-minded, liberalized fool. I support stem cell research, but they need to find a better source method. Regardless of ethical dilemmas, embryoes are not a good source.

my point being many of these loudmouth republicans voting for war would never let their OWN KIDS fight. they wuld rather let others - like the poor - do it.

The Republicans don't get to choose who goes and fights because it is the soldiers who chose to join the military, not their parents. No parent wants to see a kid go away to war, so who can blame them?

Pulling out now can only cost more lives. Don't forget that every democrat voted for the war as well. We're in it, and everyone supported it before. Running like pansies won't help.

Oh, by the way, did you know that the WMD theory has only become more reasonable as time passes? Did you hear about the extremely detailed technical plans for how to actually design a nuclear bomb that public translators found while digging through the several million pages of secret documents from Saddam's government? Saddam was far closer to nukes than the Iranian could possibly be at this point, and everyone is already freaking out about Iranian nukes.

Did I say you had to be athiest? no i didn't. the constitution prohibits the merging of religion and politics....you know about the constitution right?

And who says having personally-religious people in the government is violating the Constitution? It isn't. In fact, demanding that religion not be allowed for politicians (as you must necessarily propose as the only means for seperating personal religion from politics) actually violating the Bill of Rights?

marriage is a legal and binding document son. nothing more. all it means is, you get tax cuts and when and if you get divorced, the woman gets to clean you out. and uhh..it still would ber between two people. p.s. "tradition" is a dumb reason to do anything..

Son? Don't hand me that crap. You're probably younger than me, and far less knowledgeable. The entire point of marriage is the tradition. It is a tradition.

And don't bursh off traditions as unimportant-- why do Americans wear tuxes to formal events? Why do they wear ties? Why do they wear certain uniforms in sports? Why do they honor a piece of cloth? Why do they sing a national song? Why do they have a federal government system?

It's all traditions.

i believe I have effectively supported my views, and blown holes in yours.
but thanks for trying.

Tunnel vision? Delusion? I can't figure you out.

[Steel-Reserve]

At 11/4/06 06:23 PM, stafffighter wrote: Usually I do my round ups at the end of the year but going a little early might influence voters, so ok. I do not hold myself to either party

1. civil unions. To allow every right that means marriage but not the word marriage is every bit arbitrary and beholden to tradition as those who oppose it.

Watching psycho televangelists try to convince people that gays are fucking up marriage by doing something that effects nobody but themselves was entertaining.

I thought Bill O'Reilly made a good point when he said on his news program that if gays get marriage rights, bigamists will demand marrage rights as well.

2. Foley. Not a conspiracy on either end so much as a follower of the Janet Jackson princible of "when there's sex people forget violence."

I shall never forget the violence of the Iraq and Afghan wars America is fighting.
I started a topic in General, saying that if Congress approved a draft, I would go straight to the nearest recruiting office. I would do this, if for no other reason, than to make peace with the inevitable nature of the draft, by accepting it, rather than ruinning away.

3. Iraq. No weapons of mass destruction, no ties to taliban, no forseeable end.

Getting the Iranian Badr fighters out of the Iraqi police force and throwing them in jail would be a step in the right direction.

4. privacy. While my sig quote says it perfectly I'll simply add the question "Is it effective use of equipment and personel to watch everyone for the few who commit crimes?"

I shall give George W Bush a Dirty Sanchez. No one can stop me!
There, I gave the government spies a little chuckle.

Yet, it accomplished nothing. x_x

5. illegal immigration. By all means make it harder to get in illegally but once someone has established a life does it make more sense to ship them off or make them productive members of the community?

Run background checks on them. If they have a rap sheet with a felony, boot their asses out.
If they have a clean record, give them language training so they can find their way into jobs.

Forcing American companies to pay illegal immigrants a wage that is equal to what they pay American-born citizens would eliminate the motivation companies have to hire illegal immigrants. Props to Maddox for coming up with that. :)

6. Kerry. Messed a joke, already had no shot, judge him if you want but remember it was the action of an individual.

Agreed. People should be given a second chance if they say the wrong thing.

7. Korea. The threat of these weapons is being handeled on a global scale, which considering the power of these things is the only way to do it.

I feel I need further elaboration from stafffighter on this one.

[stafffighter]

At 11/5/06 09:16 PM, Steel-Reserve wrote:

7. Korea. The threat of these weapons is being handeled on a global scale, which considering the power of these things is the only way to do it.

I feel I need further elaboration from stafffighter on this one.

North Korea has tested nukes. This is generally considered as bad.

[Steel-Reserve]

Imeant the part about "handling it on a global scale". How many nations are involved in the N Korea nuckear disarmament talks?

[stafffighter]

At 11/5/06 09:32 PM, Steel-Reserve wrote: Imeant the part about "handling it on a global scale". How many nations are involved in the N Korea nuckear disarmament talks?

The U.N are handeling it meaning a whole bunch of countries.

[Steel-Reserve]

At 11/5/06 09:34 PM, SevenSeize wrote:

Come now, maybe they just wanted to have a big barbecue...

Now I'm frightened. O_O
Beer will make it all better.

[wwwyzzerdd]

At 11/5/06 06:00 PM, Grammer wrote: Do you know how many records the DOW has been breaking recently? Holy shit you have no idea what you're talking about.

YES! Corporate America is doing great while the average homeowner is getting fucked over from rising property taxes! I guess that explains the pay cut I had to get while my company once again tops Fortune's top companies list.

Johnnie is completely right; taxes are going to have to be raised in order to fight off the looming debt we have growing. The stupidest thing about it is that the general public will not see a huge increase in taxes (if they'll even see one) as much as only the richest 15% might see. This whole logic that "the rich pay more money in taxes, so they should get a bigger break" is utter bullshit. First, the rich pay more money dollar-wise (dur). However, the rich attribute the least amount of money percentage wise. And why is this fair? Take a person earning $30,000, and compare them to a person making $300,000. Take 1/3 of each of their earnings, and the person making $30K will most likely have to find another way of paying the rent, while the $300K person will most likely have to cut back on luxuries. OH HOW FUCKING UNFAIR TO THE RICH!

Also, the DOW was at (or near) these levels in the late 90's. The stock market isn't a true measurement that shows that everyone is richer though; just those who make more. This whole "trickled-on" theory suggests that as long as the rich are doing great, everyone else will share in their success. Too bad the rich are generally concerned with increasing their own success at the expense of others.

[SuperKooter]

At 11/5/06 03:57 PM, JohnnyUtah wrote: I'm just going to say DON'T VOTE REPUBLICAN.

If you realy need all the points explained to you on why, you shouldn't even be voting.

I agree.

People who still want to vote for them haven't been paying attention for the past 6 years.
But it will be a blowout, I predict the dems will take 30 seats at least and take the senate by 6, which is all what they need.

It need to be done, mainly to restrict the bush admins power. It will send him message that he can't assume he will get whatever he wants. When it comes to the mess in iraq he will have to create a plan...finally and put forth the effort. When it comes to national security you can't play politics with it like he has been doing.

[stafffighter]

I wouldn't so much mind "staying the course" if there was a clear course. That's what is being asked for, not an arbitrary date but a set definition of what needs to be done. The current projections are at the best vague and at the worst unattainable. There will not be complete peace in that area for the forseeable future and that's an issue much larger than America can be thrown in front of.

[Demosthenez]

At 11/6/06 12:43 AM, wwwyzzerdd wrote: YES! Corporate America is doing great while the average homeowner is getting fucked over from rising property taxes!

Johnnie is completely right; taxes are going to have to be raised in order to fight off the looming debt we have growing.

The two above statements do not reconcile. You complain about taxes and then say they need to be raised. And anyways, not every state has property taxes just like not every state has an income tax.

OH HOW FUCKING UNFAIR TO THE RICH!

Its easy to scream about taking other peoples money when its not your own. And dont bring up Paris Hilton, most people who are rich, doctors, lawyers, businesspeople, earned their money. Why should they give up their money when they earned it? Just because you are spiteful of their wealth?

[SuperKooter]

True