Page 14 of 53 FirstFirst ... 491011121314151617181924 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 1043
  1. #261  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    She scared me tremendously - partly because of her opinions, and partly because of the way that seemly smart people are so supportive of her, echoing the party line without thought. The idea that "she has more executive experience than Obama", but that "she doesn't have more executive experience than McCain because of his military assignment in the 1970's" is simply silly, yet folks in this hall are following like lemmings.

    There's no way intelligent folks can really think that she's the best person for the job. Ridge, Romney, Lieberman and Huckaby all have more experience. Even my state's governor (Jodi Rell, CT) is a Republican,has more experience, has done tremendous work on ethics reform, and has approval ratings similar to Palin. As someone who follows politics obsessively, I just find it....weird.
    You're definitely right there. She is NOT the best person for the job. Then again...she technically does have more executive experience than the other 3 major people in this race.

    I find it weird, too...but I guess there's not much we can do.
    a740 --> a900 --> Katana --> a900 --> a900m --> M1 --> a900m --> PPC6700 --> a900m--> 8400 --> a900m --> Treo 700wx --> Treo 800w
  2. #262  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Well, I can't really be considered "the left", but I do indeed resent that faith be a REQUIREMENT for a candidate, considering we have a fundamental separation of church and state. We certainly don't currently choose our leaders based upon "having no faith" - quite the opposite. An agnostic / athiest could simply never be elected in this day and age.

    We have candidates (including Sarah Putin) believe that we should teach Intelligent Design alongside evolution in our science classes, despite the fact that (a) there is no actual science to support it, and (b) the fact that my children should not be forced to be indoctrinated with other people's religious beliefs.

    We also have candidates, based upon THEIR faith, would outlaw abortions, thus forcing their beliefs onto others who may not share them.
    never said faith is REQUIRED to be a candidate. I just said it is not something that should be reason to reject them. Many people are spiritual in some way or have faith of some kind or another. Its not a crime or a demerit to character.
  3. #263  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    As I expected, she delivered a very good speech

    The content fairly strong, and her stumbles few
    She was a former local news reader. No one doubted she could read a teleprompter. Now, think of that a half heart beat away from the presidency.

    Scares the hell out of me and I will expatriate if that situation occurs.
  4. #264  
    Quote Originally Posted by Freak4Dell View Post
    My kids (imaginary as they may be), shouldn't be forced to learn a detailed analysis of why some people think the caged monkey at the local zoo is my cousin.
    Ummm....except that it's true.

    The difference is that evolution is supported by science. Intelligent Design, as taught in public schools, directly conflicts with our country's freedom of religion.


    Ahh...the beauty of the elected representative system...if Congress decides to outlaw abortion, then it would seem that the majority wanted it to be outlawed. I'm sure there are crazies out there who believe stabbing random bystanders on the street is not wrong...should we repeal laws against that because we shouldn't force our beliefs on them?
    I understand your point, and I don't fundamentally disagree with it; however, when the religious beliefs of the majority become enmeshed with the law, it can be a slippery slope. If the religious beliefs of the majority of people in the country is that, for example, homosexuality is an abomination and gay bashing should be a legal practice, does that make it right? (That may not be the best example, but I'm sleepy.)
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  5. #265  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    never said faith is REQUIRED to be a candidate. I just said it is not something that should be reason to reject them. Many people are spiritual in some way or have faith of some kind or another. Its not a crime or a demerit to character.
    No, but then should lack of faith be a reason to reject them? I would argue that it currently is the case.

    You're definitely right there. She is NOT the best person for the job. Then again...she technically does have more executive experience than the other 3 major people in this race.

    I find it weird, too...but I guess there's not much we can do.
    I have more executive experience than all four: I've been an assistant principal, principal, and assistant superintendent of schools, for a total of over 12 years. However, all executive experience isn't created equal - I'm pretty sure that I'm not qualified to be president. I'm pretty sure that being a small-town mayor doesn't qualify her any more than my experience has prepared me.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  6. #266  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    She was a former local news reader. No one doubted she could read a teleprompter. Now, think of that a half heart beat away from the presidency.

    Scares the hell out of me and I will expatriate if that situation occurs.
    my personal view of her is I think, fairly well understood --

    one of the good things about a forum of this small size and anonymity is that I don't worry about persuading anyone else to my point of view.

    I say what I want -- and sometimes hear what others have to say -- indifferent to any real life implication.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  7. #267  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    She scared me tremendously - partly because of her opinions, and partly because of the way that seemly smart people are so supportive of her, echoing the party line without thought. The idea that "she has more executive experience than Obama", but that "she doesn't have more executive experience than McCain because of his military assignment in the 1970's" is simply silly, yet folks in this hall are following like lemmings.

    There's no way intelligent folks can really think that she's the best person for the job. Ridge, Romney, Lieberman and Huckaby all have more experience. Even my state's governor (Jodi Rell, CT) is a Republican,has more experience, has done tremendous work on ethics reform, and has approval ratings similar to Palin. As someone who follows politics obsessively, I just find it....weird.
    You know, the people of obama's church scared me too. Between the pastor's speeches and his wife's initial public addresses, there's quite a bit to be alarmed about there as well. She's only proud of america now that her husband has been elected now, otherwise she'd still be disenchanted with it? You might perceive these people to be the pitbulls here too..

    How can intelligent people think OBAMA is the best man for the job? What has he done in his life to convince you that he can lead as well? It would seem other "intelligent" people are following his whole campaign on "change" and "hope" like lemmings just the same, no? Anyone curious as to how he's going to achieve this?
    Last edited by logmein; 09/03/2008 at 11:03 PM.
  8. #268  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    How can intelligent people think OBAMA is the best man for the job? What has he done in his life to convince you that he can lead as well? It would seem other "intelligent" people are following his whole campaign on "change" and "hope" like lemmings just the same, no?

    You mention supposedly "smart" people following the party line without thought, well where is the intellectual curiosity in discovering the substance behind HOW obama is going to achieve change. What exactly does he mean by change? Should a smart person seek to inquire about just what that MEANS before falling in line with the party without thought or curiosity in that regard? Is that not lemming characteristics as well?

    Glass houses. Man oh man.
    Because the Obama campaign is devoted to returning the Country back to a focus on the working class. The people whose good paying factory jobs have been sent overseas by the Corporatist (yes Dems as well as Repubs) leaving only low paying walmart greeter and burger flipping jobs. If you want to know HOW then read the frigging website campaign platform and decide for yourself.
  9. #269  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    my personal view of her is I think, fairly well understood --
    Didn't intend otherwise.
  10. #270  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Didn't intend otherwise.
    cool --
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  11. #271  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    You know, the people of obama's church scared me too. Between the pastor's speeches and his wife's initial public addresses, there's quite a bit to be alarmed about there as well. She's only proud of america now that her husband has been elected now, otherwise she'd still be disenchanted with it? You might perceive these people to be the pitbulls here too..

    How can intelligent people think OBAMA is the best man for the job? What has he done in his life to convince you that he can lead as well? It would seem other "intelligent" people are following his whole campaign on "change" and "hope" like lemmings just the same, no?

    You mention supposedly "smart" people following the party line without thought, well where is the intellectual curiosity in discovering the substance behind HOW obama is going to achieve change. What exactly does he mean by change? Should a smart person seek to inquire about just what that MEANS before falling in line with the party without thought or curiosity in that regard?

    Man oh man.
    Hmm...did I ever say I was voting for Obama? I've only reported the facts of folks' statements, and stated that Palin scared me. I like following the political process, but I don't actually have a horse in this race yet.

    (For the record, I was a Reagan Republican, am now registered as Independent, and have never voted Democratic....which is not to say I'm necessarily averse to it)

    I think you're proving a central theme of my view of national politics - if someone dares to question any aspect of a political party, they're immediately attacked as an agent of "the other side". I believe it's important to question all aspects of the party line....however, you only seem to be currently questioning the side that you're trying to build arguments against.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  12. #272  
    [QUOTE=Bujin;1493058]No, but then should lack of faith be a reason to reject them? I would argue that it currently is the case.
    "

    - Bujin


    I wasn't the one taking issue with anyone based on the presence or absence of religion here. If a leader is qualified, he or she is qualified. That is the crux of the matter. Is it possible for a person to have faith AND be an excellent leader? Yes. Is it possible for a person to lack faith and be an excellent leader as well? Sure. Equally as likely, just don't try to say that because an individual is religious, they should automatically be discarded. That is just ridiculous.
  13. #273  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    I wasn't the one taking issue with anyone based on the presence or absence of religion here. If a leader is qualified, he or she is qualified. That is the crux of the matter. Is it possible for a person to have faith AND be an excellent leader? Yes. Is it possible for a person to lack faith and be an excellent leader as well? Sure. Equally as likely, just don't try to say that because an individual is religious, they should automatically be discarded. That is just ridiculous.
    Problem is, one group of people wants to impose their faith on the American people, the other side wants to protect the American people's right to worship as they choose.

    BIG DIFF.
  14. #274  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Hmm...did I ever say I was voting for Obama? I've only reported the facts of folks' statements, and stated that Palin scared me. I like following the political process, but I don't actually have a horse in this race yet.

    (For the record, I was a Reagan Republican, am now registered as Independent, and have never voted Democratic....which is not to say I'm necessarily averse to it)

    I think you're proving a central theme of my view of national politics - if someone dares to question any aspect of a political party, they're immediately attacked as an agent of "the other side". I believe it's important to question all aspects of the party line....however, you only seem to be currently questioning the side that you're trying to build arguments against.
    I haven't declared myself loyal to either party either, but I have strong feelings against Obama's ideas on tax increases during the economic period in which we find ourselves.

    Raising taxes on the income classes that basically drive the economy is NO way to surface from the mire we are currently in.
    Raising income taxes, payroll taxes on small businesses, death taxes and capital gains taxes is no way to help the our situation.

    Raise taxes on the superwealthy, not those making below a million. In today's world with student loans, business debts, cost of homeownership and college savings plans, $250,000 is NOT a lot of money anymore. He'll be raising taxes on the wrong segment of society.

    I'm building that argument against him because I feel very strongly about it.
  15. #275  
    [QUOTE=logmein;1493078]
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    No, but then should lack of faith be a reason to reject them? I would argue that it currently is the case.
    "

    - Bujin


    I wasn't the one taking issue with anyone based on the presence or absence of religion here. If a leader is qualified, he or she is qualified. That is the crux of the matter. Is it possible for a person to have faith AND be an excellent leader? Yes. Is it possible for a person to lack faith and be an excellent leader as well? Sure. Equally as likely, just don't try to say that because an individual is religious, they should automatically be discarded. That is just ridiculous.
    I don't think I ever said that anyone should be discarded on the basis of faith. You actually started that line of discussion with your "I suppose..." statement.

    I think we're saying the same basic idea here....qualifications should be the determining factor in deciding our leaders. However, I would ask you to ponder this: when was the last time that a person without faith has been in office, or was a serious contender for president?

    My issue with faith-based decisions for leader is, as daThomas stated above, the institution (formally or informally) of religious edicts disguised as laws.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  16. #276  
    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    I haven't declared myself loyal to either party either, but I have strong feelings against Obama's ideas on tax increases during the economic period in which we find ourselves.

    Raising taxes on the income classes that basically drive the economy is NO way to surface from the mire we are currently in.
    Raising income taxes, payroll taxes on small businesses, death taxes and capital gains taxes is no way to help the our situation.

    Raise taxes on the superwealthy, not those making below a million. In today's world with student loans, business debts, cost of homeownership and college savings plans, $250,000 is NOT a lot of money anymore. He'll be raising taxes on the wrong segment of society.

    I'm building that argument against him because I feel very strongly about it.
    I can see that you do; however, I lived through "Reaganomics", in which those of high income were protected from tax increases, under the philosophy that their spending will "trickle down" and drive the economy. As an economic model, it is generally seen as being unwise.

    Raising taxes on the super-wealthy is fine; however, from where I'm sitting, $250K is still pretty good.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  17. #277  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Problem is, one group of people wants to impose their faith on the American people, the other side wants to protect the American people's right to worship as they choose.

    BIG DIFF.

    Well, yes, religious views shouldn't be forced upon others. That is wrong. I don't have a problem with someone evoking their god among a smaller group of people of known similar leanings when hoping for a positive outcome during a crisis or problem as long as that is kept in check when addressing a larger, more diverse group who might not all share those leanings. A bit wordy there, but you get what I mean.
  18. #278  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    I can see that you do; however, I lived through "Reaganomics", in which those of high income were protected from tax increases, under the philosophy that their spending will "trickle down" and drive the economy. As an economic model, it is generally seen as being unwise.

    Raising taxes on the super-wealthy is fine; however, from where I'm sitting, $250K is still pretty good.
    Yes, but when you live in states like connecticut, new jersey or new york where property taxes are absolutely outrageous AS IT IS, you can't fathom the possibility of even higher income taxes, payroll taxes and the rest on top of it. Christ. Its just thievery when you see how poorly the money is being handled. One might say the tendency to tax and spend as heavily as NJ does is equally unwise as the reagonomics trickle down philosophy.
    . The state is bankrupt despite holding the lead in median property tax rates!!! Absurd.

    So as I see it, there is no reason to believe that increasing taxes is the solution to our problems. We need the govt to be wiser in HOW they are spending the taxes we are paying right now!!

    Seriously, just look at nj. scandalous, corrupt, riddled with embezzlement and disarray. Giving them more money is not the solution. Getting rid of the corruption and lack of disciplined spending IS.
  19. #279  
    Better than not saying anything of substance - that labels this country as totally empty.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Actually, McCain's response was generally considered to be confrontational sabre-rattling, at a time when we have absolutely no military capacity to back it up.
  20. #280  
    The UN handle it? The UN cannot even handle a food crisis, what makes one think it can handle this. Last week had even more on another "crisis" the UN was handling - what a waste of an organization.

    Quote Originally Posted by logmein View Post
    obama's response - let's let the UN handle the problem, while forgetting that russia has the right to veto whatever the UN decides. LOL.

    Is he serious?

Posting Permissions