OMG I Changed My Mind.

[Miss Ismurii]

If Obama can stop this war than I'm voting for him. Seriously.

I hate you McCain.

[Keller]

If Obama can stop this war than I'm voting for him. Seriously.

I hate you McCain.

Emo-chick goes emo on McCain.

Who didn't see this coming?

[Miss Ismurii]

No dude, it's just that I haven't really thought about the war and I actually did when my best friend told me he's pretty sure he's going to have to go to Iraq so now I'm really upset.

[Warriorbird]

She might be more like the 'average American' than most of the rest of us.

[Nieninque]

OMG I Changed My Mind

That must have been a world shattering event.

[Parkbandit]

To be honest, I never realized she had a mind TO change..

Grats?

[Miss Ismurii]

That isn't nice PB.

[Keller]

No dude, it's just that I haven't really thought about the war and I actually did when my best friend told me he's pretty sure he's going to have to go to Iraq so now I'm really upset.

How in the world does this refute my point?

You had a wild reaction to an emotion. You are emo. Face it.

[Skeeter]

At least her tits are somewhat nice. She has a future as a 2nd rate stripper.

[Warriorbird]

VP worthy?

[Allereli]

No dude, it's just that I haven't really thought about the war

7 years since 9/11 and you haven't thought about the war?

fuck you

[Miss Ismurii]

Sorry for being young and not into politics?

[Keller]

Sorry for being young and not into politics?

Well nows as good a time as any to waste your time trying to debate it!

[Nieninque]

7 years since 9/11 and you haven't thought about the war?

fuck you

To be fair, the war in Iraq has fuck all to do with 9/11

[Allereli]

To be fair, the war in Iraq has fuck all to do with 9/11

I doubt we would have invaded Iraq if it weren't for 9/11

[Keller]

There is a grand sarchasm.

[Miss Ismurii]

I'm just voting for Obama, okay?

[diethx]

Okayy.

[ViridianAsp]

I'm just voting for Obama, okay?

Yeah, but why? I mean do you know his political platforms? Do you know how he wants to deal with the economy? war?

Look hon, even if Obama gets elected that isn't going to bring your friend back from Iraq, I just had a good friend ship off over there. Just because Obama gets into the White House, doesn't mean we still won't be over there in some way, shape or form, no matter what he says.

[Allereli]

Okayy.

i knew you'd post that

[Miss Ismurii]

): Yeah I guess you're right V.

[diethx]

Get out of my head.

[ViridianAsp]

): Yeah I guess you're right V.

I know it's hard to see friends get shipped off, but if you're going to vote look at all the facts, not just because you're upset that your friend is going over there.

If you like Obama's platforms, vote for him, but not because of your friend.

[Allereli]

Get out of my head.

stop being so predictable

[Warriorbird]

She's definitely 'Right.'

;)

If you're worried about somebody getting deployed places... they're far more likely to be under McCain.

[diethx]

stop being so predictable

Sorry, I should be like you and sit on the ass-end of a sarchasm. :x

[ViridianAsp]

She's definitely 'Right.'

;)

If you're worried about somebody getting deployed places... they're far more likely to be under McCain.



Right, because the minute Obama gets into office all the soldiers are going to come home LMAO, good one.

I know that it's far more likely, but my argument here is: Don't just vote because your friend is getting shipped off, look at all the issues before you vote.

[Miss Ismurii]

See the thing is I agree with a lot of which McCain has to say compared to most of which Obama says. I just hate the war deal.

[Warriorbird]

Did I say that, Sammie? No.

I agree, though. Before anybody decides they should look and try to figure out everybody's platforms.

[diethx]

Or she could just vote how she wants because of whatever reason she wants to.

[Warriorbird]

They're certainly not obligated to. I doubt a lot of people will.

[Parkbandit]

She's definitely 'Right.'

;)

If you're worried about somebody getting deployed places... they're far more likely to be under McCain.

And if you're worried about us getting attacked or challenged... it's far more likely under Obama.

At least that is what Biden says...

[Warriorbird]

Palin feels like their ticket might've been too negative...

...and a large number of Republicans feel like she brought it down...

...but we could go on in that vein forever.

[Durgrimst]

No dude, it's just that I haven't really thought about the war and I actually did when my best friend told me he's pretty sure he's going to have to go to Iraq so now I'm really upset.

Just putting this out on the table, Jan 09 when the new SOFA agreement with the GOI goes into effect coalition forces have to request permission from the Iraqi's to even leave the FOBs/COPs/Bases....

I am currently in Iraq and on my 3rd tour, the war in Iraq is now babysitting while the ISF do pretty a good chunk of the work. I would have to say that Iraq is safer for me than driving to work in the US, and I am USMC Infantry. The real fighting is in Afghanistan, those guys are getting fucked up and need all the prayers/help they can get.

[Stanley Burrell]

If Obama can stop this war than I'm voting for him. Seriously.

I hate you McCain.

Can I have your phone #?

[Miss Ismurii]

Just putting this out on the table, Jan 09 when the new SOFA agreement with the GOI goes into effect coalition forces have to request permission from the Iraqi's to even leave the FOBs/COPs/Bases....

I am currently in Iraq and on my 3rd tour, the war in Iraq is now babysitting while the ISF do pretty a good chunk of the work. I would have to say that Iraq is safer for me than driving to work in the US, and I am USMC Infantry. The real fighting is in Afghanistan, those guys are getting fucked up and need all the prayers/help they can get.

I feel a lot better. Thank you so much. Yet I'm still highly worried.

[Kuyuk]

What, she showed her tits? repost plz

[diethx]

Or you could just quit being lazy and go look in the boob thread like everyone else.

[Gelston]

Iraq is winding down anyways. Fallujah(And all of Al Anbar), once one of the most dangerous cities in all of Iraq, has been placed under complete Iraqi control. We are in the process of turning over all Air space to the Iraqis.

Infact, a new agreement is being worked up that will cause US Military to stay in their FOBs unless called for to assist Iraqi forces, i.e. no more foot/mounted patrols.

No matter who gets elected, we are pulling out of Iraq.

[Garnet Doyle]

I doubt we would have invaded Iraq if it weren't for 9/11

Bush, being a texas good ol' boy, would've found some way to invade iraq and get sadaam back for tryin' to kill his daddy in kuwait. When the whole "IRAQ DID 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111" thing didn't pan out, they went with the bullshit story they made Powell tell the U.N. instead.

Nothing like being forced to lie for some shitheads back home like that to put a damper on one's political career. At least it was good for a chuckle some 9 months or so down the line, when it turned out the satellite photos of "Sadaam's secret mobile terror weapons doomsday laboratory" turned out to be a mobile decontamination shower.

[Garnet Doyle]

Right, because the minute Obama gets into office all the soldiers are going to come home LMAO, good one.

I know that it's far more likely, but my argument here is: Don't just vote because your friend is getting shipped off, look at all the issues before you vote.


My argument here is: Vote for whatever reason you want to vote. It's your voice, cast it in intelligence, or cast it in stupidity, you get one to make just for existing, so do what you want with it. Also, keep in mind, that for some people "Look at all the issues" would be "Damn! thas a black man wanna be prez!". So if these people can vote stupid, why can't anybody else?


P.S. I'd rather have a stupid vote cast, than no vote cast at all.

[ViridianAsp]

My argument here is: Vote for whatever reason you want to vote. It's your voice, cast it in intelligence, or cast it in stupidity, you get one to make just for existing, so do what you want with it. Also, keep in mind, that for some people "Look at all the issues" would be "Damn! thas a black man wanna be prez!". So if these people can vote stupid, why can't anybody else?


P.S. I'd rather have a stupid vote cast, than no vote cast at all.

Oh right, yeah I'm really sorry for making someone think about issues and really put meaning behind their vote.

Yeah, sorry my bad for thinking that making an educated decision on the future of our country is a wise thing.

I was merely suggesting she look at all the issues, I don't care who she votes for but she should do it for who she thinks is the best decision not a rash one, as voters and citizens it is our duty.

[Moist Happenings]

I was merely suggesting she look at all the issues, I don't care who she votes for but she should do it for who she thinks is the best decision not a rash one, as voters and citizens it is our duty.

Completely agree. If you don't have a grasp of what the issues are or the policies at stake, I don't think you should vote, or even be allowed to. There should be a little test before they let you vote just to make sure you have an idea of what's going on, regardless of what your opinion on things are. We don't let people drive cars without licenses.

Constitutional rights are great and all, but too many people take them for granted, and are so preoccupied with the fact they could do something that they don't stop to think if they should. In general of course, not specifically regarding voting.

[diethx]

If you don't have a grasp of what the issues are or the policies at stake, I don't think you should vote, or even be allowed to.

Now that's a pretty slippery slope.

And that's why we're a pluralistic nation. Because not everyone is going to be informed, but that doesn't mean they don't have a right to cast a vote.

[Moist Happenings]

Now that's a pretty slippery slope.

And that's why we're a pluralistic nation. Because not everyone is going to be informed, but that doesn't mean they don't have a right to cast a vote.

I'm not saying people should have to know every little intricate detail of every proposed policy for every candidate. Even something like requiring first time registered voters to watch a video or read a pamphlet and then take a small quiz before voting would alleviate a lot of the issue. It could all be set up right at the voting precincts. It'd at least be a small attempt to quell just a little bit of the "I'm voting for McCain because I heard that Obama is a terrorist muslim." vote. It probably won't sway many votes either way, but at least some people would have a slightly better idea of why they're voting one way or the other.

[diethx]

I'm not saying people should have to know every little intricate detail of every proposed policy for every candidate. Even something like requiring first time registered voters to watch a video or read a pamphlet and then take a small quiz before voting would alleviate a lot of the issue. It could all be set up right at the voting precincts. It'd at least be a small attempt to quell just a little bit of the "I'm voting for McCain because I heard that Obama is a terrorist muslim." votes. It probably won't sway many votes either way, but at least some people would have a slightly better idea of why they're voting one way or the other.

It's not your right to quell any of that, though. It's the right of every citizen 18+ to their vote, no matter why they feel how they feel. And as much as I disagree with the idiots who think Obama is a terrorist Muslim, it's their right to think whatever they want and vote that way because of it.

[Moist Happenings]

It's not your right to quell any of that, though. It's the right of every citizen 18+ to their vote, no matter why they feel how they feel. And as much as I disagree with the idiots who think Obama is a terrorist Muslim, it's their right to think whatever they want and vote that way because of it.

Sigh. You're right, I know. I guess I'll just have to wait for them to breed themselves far enough into stupidity that they can't find the right hole anymore. My issue is that we keep helping them along, damnit!!

[TheRunt]

I am currently in Iraq and on my 3rd tour, the war in Iraq is now babysitting while the ISF do pretty a good chunk of the work. I would have to say that Iraq is safer for me than driving to work in the US, and I am USMC Infantry. The real fighting is in Afghanistan, those guys are getting fucked up and need all the prayers/help they can get.

And Obama wants to send most of the soldiers from Iraq into Afghanistan. And over the border into Pakistan with or without Pakistani approval or knowledge.

But for fairness sake McCain will have to increase the forces there also.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

And Obama wants to send most of the soldiers from Iraq into Afghanistan. And over the border into Pakistan with or without Pakistani approval or knowledge.

But for fairness sake McCain will have to increase the forces there also.

Obama wants to send all our troops from Iraq to Afghanistan? Interesting. Where did you hear that?

Also, last I heard from Obama on Pakistan and "over the border" attacks, it was that if Pakistan was unable or unwilling to attack someone like Bin Laden but the US could, he would take the shot... sorry but I can't disagree with that. Bin Laden caused 9-11 (not Hussein, sorry Bush-lovers who haven't gotten the memo or apparently taken current history of the middle east) and he needs to be brought to justice for that. I dunno what to believe though, since apparently Obama is easy on terrorists, and yet too hard on Al Qaeda!!! You just don't tell Al Qaeda you're gonna hold them accountable!

[TheRunt]

Obama wants to send troops from Iraq to Afghanistan? Interesting. Where did you hear that?

Also, last I heard from Obama on Pakistan and "over the border" attacks, it was that if Pakistan was unable or unwilling to attack someone like Bin Laden but the US could, he would take the shot... [/I]

Where did I hear it? From the last debate. Obama said we didn't need the troops in Iraq we needed them in Afghanistan. And I hate to admit it but I can't remember exactly where it was but he was quoted as saying he would invade Pakistan without there permission or informing them if needed.

[kallindra]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr-tiCJFw3M&feature=user

Just... interesting.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Where did I hear it? From the last debate. Obama said we didn't need the troops in Iraq we needed them in Afghanistan. And I hate to admit it but I can't remember exactly where it was but he was quoted as saying he would invade Pakistan without there permission or informing them if needed.

Selective hearing, then. It's a further explanation of the idea that we should have gone into Afghanistan, and not Iraq. Obama mirrors that sentiment in regards to how our troops should now be used-- as in, our troops would better serve in Afghanistan than Iraq, considering Afghanistan actually had something to do with the acts of terrorism committed on our soil seven years ago. Iraq did not. Withdraw from Iraq. And place more troops in Afghanistan. Not anywhere near the same thing as doing Iraq v.2 in Afghanistan. In fact, Obama has said the war in Afghanistan will need to be conducted differently than the Iraqi war no matter how many soldiers are on the ground. So has General McKiernan who says we'll need to use a strategy different than the surge (the tactic used in Iraq).

As far as Pakistan goes, Obama said, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will". That means that if people like Bin Laden are in our sights, and Pakistan won't move to get them, then the US will and Pakistan be damned for not acting to take them out.

If that offends people, sorry for them, but I don't think that's foolish for Obama to say he wants to bring Bin Laden or other high ranking Al Qaeda associates to justice and other countries trying to block that be damned.

[Nieninque]

If you don't have a grasp of what the issues are or the policies at stake, I don't think you should vote, or even be allowed to.

So says Mr I R IRA GANGSTA!

[Nieninque]

Even something like requiring first time registered voters to watch a video or read a pamphlet and then take a small quiz before voting would alleviate a lot of the issue. It could all be set up right at the voting precincts.

Who would make/censor the videos? How would you ensure that it was an accurate reflection of the policies (given the fact that the candidates themselves are incapable of representing their own policies most of the time)? How many questions would someone be able to get wrong before they were not allowed to vote? Can you come up with any more stupid ideas?

[TheRunt]

Selective hearing, then. It's a further explanation of the idea that we should have gone into Afghanistan, and not Iraq.

As far as Pakistan goes, Obama said, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will". That means that if people like Bin Laden are in our sights, and Pakistan won't move to get them, then the US will and Pakistan be damned for not acting to take them out.

If that offends people, sorry for them, but I don't think that's foolish for Obama to say he wants to bring Bin Laden or other high ranking Al Qaeda associates to justice and other countries trying to block that be damned.

"OBAMA: I'll be very brief. We are going to have to make the Iraqi government start taking more responsibility, withdraw our troops in a responsible way over time, because we're going to have to put some additional troops in Afghanistan. "
Selective hearing? Thats exactly what I posted before. He wants to pull troops from Iraq to put them into Afghanistan.
And I'm sorry I was wrong it was the second debate not the third. And your kind of right on who gives a damn. But should you give them advance warning? I like how McCain put it as he quoted Roosevelt "walk softly and carry a big stick" Don't antagonize countries that you want to be friends. Yes do what you have to do but don't brag about it before hand.

[TheRunt]

So has General McKiernan who says we'll need to use a strategy different than the surge (the tactic used in Iraq).


And General Petraus has said the surge will work in Afghanistan. Who should we listen to? The general who's stratagy is working? or the general who's is not?

[Furrowfoot]

As far as Pakistan goes, Obama said, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will". That means that if people like Bin Laden are in our sights, and Pakistan won't move to get them, then the US will and Pakistan be damned for not acting to take them out.

If that offends people, sorry for them, but I don't think that's foolish for Obama to say he wants to bring Bin Laden or other high ranking Al Qaeda associates to justice and other countries trying to block that be damned.

I'm hoping that's just an old quote considering Musharraf hasn't been President of Pakistan for over 2 months now.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

"OBAMA: I'll be very brief. We are going to have to make the Iraqi government start taking more responsibility, withdraw our troops in a responsible way over time, because we're going to have to put some additional troops in Afghanistan. "
Selective hearing? Thats exactly what I posted before. He wants to pull troops from Iraq to put them into Afghanistan.
And I'm sorry I was wrong it was the second debate not the third. And your kind of right on who gives a damn. But should you give them advance warning? I like how McCain put it as he quoted Roosevelt "walk softly and carry a big stick" Don't antagonize countries that you want to be friends. Yes do what you have to do but don't brag about it before hand.

Obama said pull troops from Iraq, put some in Afghanistan. Again, I'm not seeing where you saw transfer them from one country to another in full force. He's saying we need to get the fuck out of Iraq and focus on Afghanistan, not do a mind-numbing country invasion swap of some sort.

As far as talk softly and carry a big stick, sorry but McCain already loses at that. Not even counting his "joking" song about bomb bombing Iran (I wonder how Americans would feel if another international leader "joked" about bomb, bomb bombing the US to a popular tune), he's called Pakistan a "failed state" and condemned Russia. Don't antagonize countries? I totally agree. But McCain has said shit that could "antagonize foreign countries" just as Obama may have. Neither of them have any room to condemn on that account.


And General Petraus has said the surge will work in Afghanistan. Who should we listen to? The general who's stratagy is working? or the general who's is not?

Actually, no. Petraeus has never given support to a surge strategy in Afghanistan.

" “People often ask, ‘What did you learn from Iraq that might be transferable to Afghanistan?’ ” he said. “The first lesson, the first caution really, is that every situation like this is truly and absolutely unique, and has its own context and specifics and its own texture,” he said."NY Times Source (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/world/asia/01petraeus.html?_r=2&ref=world&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)

Meaning different tactics to a different situation.

There's more than just insurgents to deal with in Afghanistan, something Obama has noted. The poppy issue, our lack of allies in the region, etc all comes into play.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I'm hoping that's just an old quote considering Musharraf hasn't been President of Pakistan for over 2 months now.

Thank you for being so purposefully obtuse. This just changes EVERYTHING!

"If the United States has al Qaeda, (Osama) bin Laden, top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out" says Obama. Quote of that here. (http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2008/09/27/obama-mccain-underline-policy-differences-on-pakistan/)

Basically doesn't matter who the hell you are, if you're Musharraf, Justin Timberlake or Joe the Plumber, you try to hide Osama Bin Laden and won't go after him, then fuck you and we will. I have to say it's amusing to see how that is so "offensive" to some people, considering he's the one responsible for 9-11, etc and the reason for so much extra security, loss of freedom, and fear in general in our lives as Americans.

[crb]

Since when do Obama and McCain have different Iraq policies?

9 months ago they did, now... notsomuch. This is why you don't see them talking about it anymore.

McCain "We need to win, I can win, the surge worked, it was a good idea, I was right to vote for it, we can now draw down troops, I'll probably get them mostly drawn down and out by the end of my first time, so long as nothing on the ground changes."

Obama "The war was a mistake, I was right to vote against it. The surge worked (beyond our wildest dreams) it was a good idea, so good in fact I think we should do the same thing in Afganistan. However I wasn't wrong to vote against the surge (I'm never wrong). I want to draw down the troops, I plan to have them out before the end of my first term, except for a "strike force" of unspecified size left to secure US interests. If I'm talking to a moderate crowd in a swing state I'll say I'll listen to the generals and change timelines if necessary. If I'm talking at a liberal fundraiser in San Francisco I'll say I'll follow my timelines no matter what."


.... they're pretty much the same. Obama is a little wishywashy on it but in the end I think he is pandering to the elite donors when he says he'll follow his timelines no matter what. If he is president and says "pull out now" and all his generals say "bad idea sir" he won't do it. So... in the end... they're the same on future Iraq policy.

Which is probably another reason why Obama has gained in the polls. Iraq was his weakpoint after the surge changed the game, and so he just copied McCain's positions and removed it as an advantage against him.

[crb]

Obama said pull troops from Iraq, put some in Afghanistan. Again, I'm not seeing where you saw transfer them from one country to another in full force. He's saying we need to get the fuck out of Iraq and focus on Afghanistan, not do a mind-numbing country invasion swap of some sort.

As far as talk softly and carry a big stick, sorry but McCain already loses at that. Not even counting his "joking" song about bomb bombing Iran (I wonder how Americans would feel if another international leader "joked" about bomb, bomb bombing the US to a popular tune), he's called Pakistan a "failed state" and condemned Russia. Don't antagonize countries? I totally agree. But McCain has said shit that could "antagonize foreign countries" just as Obama may have. Neither of them have any room to condemn on that account.



Actually, no. Petraeus has never given support to a surge strategy in Afghanistan.

" “People often ask, ‘What did you learn from Iraq that might be transferable to Afghanistan?’ ” he said. “The first lesson, the first caution really, is that every situation like this is truly and absolutely unique, and has its own context and specifics and its own texture,” he said."NY Times Source (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/world/asia/01petraeus.html?_r=2&ref=world&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin)

Meaning different tactics to a different situation.

There's more than just insurgents to deal with in Afghanistan, something Obama has noted. The poppy issue, our lack of allies in the region, etc all comes into play.
Dear Narcissia - appeasement is far more dangerous foreign policy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement

Oh yes... Chamberlains foreign policy was ever so successful.

[Daniel]

Who the fuck said anything about appeasement? Stop being fucking stupid.

[Keller]

Who the fuck said anything about appeasement? Stop being fucking stupid.

That's like asking you to stop being tall.

Sometimes, you just are what you are.

[Moist Happenings]

Who would make/censor the videos? How would you ensure that it was an accurate reflection of the policies (given the fact that the candidates themselves are incapable of representing their own policies most of the time)? How many questions would someone be able to get wrong before they were not allowed to vote? Can you come up with any more stupid ideas?

It is not difficult if you look to find a good idea of what a policy represents no matter how much the candidates dance around or speak in generalities (another thing I take issue with).

http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/2008/03/detailed-analysis-of-barack-obamas.html

For example.

In my opinion this isn't the only aspect of our system that needs a reform badly. I think the entire system is completely ass backwards. A pamphlet could be created (or video, I say, for those who can't read), by a neutral party just outlining the key points on policies that a candidate stands for. It could even be created by a campaign itself, but be strictly regulated to ONLY give information about proposed policies without any bashing of the policies of the other side. Personally I have to weed through all the bullshit that spews forth from the candidates and their campaigns to find the actual information, and I hate that. Something to the effect that I suggested might at least alleviate some of the votes based solely on the "He said she said I heard he's a terrorist, I heard he wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years" schoolyard bullshit.

Right now we have a thousand different outlets that both sides use to say whatever trash they want to about the other side. All I'm saying is that it might help somewhat if we had SOME manner of medium that filtered out all the negative stuff and just focused on proposed policies.

[crb]

Who the fuck said anything about appeasement? Stop being fucking stupid.
Narc attacked McCain as being confrontational with Russia because he was stern with them. The opposite of that type of approach would be appeasement.

Was it wrong to think that attacking one viewpoint means you favor the other? Or is this the type of issue where it is best to just vote "present"?

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Narc attacked McCain as being confrontational with Russia because he was stern with them. The opposite of that type of approach would be appeasement.

Was it wrong to think that attacking one viewpoint means you favor the other? Or is this the type of issue where it is best to just vote "present"?

I said both of them (meaning Obama included) don't have too much room to attack the other as being inflammatory with other countries, because both of them have done it. And having a VP who tried to make it sound like Russia is coming into our airspace and going to invade the country via Alaska is not simply "being stern" on McCain's part. Nor is singing a song about bombing another country going to be taken as cute and funny by the people living in that country. Again, how would you feel if there was video footage of of a top North Korean official singing "Bomb bomb America"?

And again with the "voting present" shit-- how about you actually research what that is and why senators do it, because then you could actually use it in an insult that makes sense.

[Tsa`ah]

Or is this the type of issue where it is best to just vote "present"?

What do you know about IL politics and the effort to remain a bi-partisan figure?

[Nieninque]

It is not difficult if you look to find a good idea of what a policy represents no matter how much the candidates dance around or speak in generalities (another thing I take issue with).

http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/2008/03/detailed-analysis-of-barack-obamas.html

For example.

In my opinion this isn't the only aspect of our system that needs a reform badly. I think the entire system is completely ass backwards. A pamphlet could be created (or video, I say, for those who can't read), by a neutral party just outlining the key points on policies that a candidate stands for. It could even be created by a campaign itself, but be strictly regulated to ONLY give information about proposed policies without any bashing of the policies of the other side. Personally I have to weed through all the bullshit that spews forth from the candidates and their campaigns to find the actual information, and I hate that. Something to the effect that I suggested might at least alleviate some of the votes based solely on the "He said she said I heard he's a terrorist, I heard he wants to stay in Iraq for 100 years" schoolyard bullshit.

Right now we have a thousand different outlets that both sides use to say whatever trash they want to about the other side. All I'm saying is that it might help somewhat if we had SOME manner of medium that filtered out all the negative stuff and just focused on proposed policies.

The whole idea of democracy is based on choice and free will. There goes your argument right there.

There are also some people who would say that making up your mind who to vote for based on the promises they make before an election is just as stupid as making your choice based on "he said/she said". All politicians end up self-serving scumbags after they are elected anyway, so their promises count for nothing.

[Nieninque]

Again, how would you feel if there was video footage of of a top North Korean official singing "Bomb bomb America"?

I have a T-shirt that says "Burn America Burn"

Does that count?

[Moist Happenings]

The whole idea of democracy is based on choice and free will. There goes your argument right there.

There are also some people who would say that making up your mind who to vote for based on the promises they make before an election is just as stupid as making your choice based on "he said/she said". All politicians end up self-serving scumbags after they are elected anyway, so their promises count for nothing.

Very jaded. You sound a lot like me. My issue is not that we have freedoms. It's that we take them for granted. The issue I haven't isn't really with the fact that absolutely everyone is allowed to vote. It's that we don't properly educate everyone and a large portion of the votes are based on poor or no information at all. All I'm suggesting is that we take some measure to quell some of the stupidity in our country today. We have a right to bear arms, but you still have to get a background check before you buy a handgun. We have a right to vote. There's no reason we shouldn't require a short treatise before registering.

Edited to add:

We have a right to bear arms, but we have a moral and legal responsibility not to go out and just shoot people randomly.

All I'm saying is that we have a right to vote, but we have a responsibility to at least be a little informed about what we're voting for.

[Miss Ismurii]

Ugh. I don't know who to vote for anymore. I need to figure this shit out.

[Nieninque]

You sound a lot like me.

/wrists

[Sean of the Thread]

All politicians end up self-serving scumbags after they are elected anyway, so their promises count for nothing.

Hey don't lump my Reagan into that bunch.

:(

[Nieninque]

He was too busy trying to find the force.

[TheRunt]

What do you know about IL politics and the effort to remain a bi-partisan figure?

If your talking about Obama isn't he ranked the most liberal senator? He voted the dem party line 97%

[Warriorbird]

Obama and McCain both have sponsored bipartisan bills and worked with members of the other party.

[Parker]

My general take thus far is that if McCain hadn't chosen a fucking retarded teletubby for his runningmate, he'd be a shoe-in.

As it is, Obama will win, because McCain could die at any moment. And NOBODY wants Palin as president.

[Trouble]

As it is, Obama will win, because McCain could die at any moment. And NOBODY wants Palin as president.

That pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter. I'm not necessarily thrilled with Obama/Biden, but I don't think she's presidential material.

[Parkbandit]

Obama and McCain both have sponsored bipartisan bills and worked with members of the other party.

You can't even compare the two WB. Let's be honest, McCain has pissed off the Republicans probably more than he's pissed off the Democrats. He's across the isle so often he forgets which seat he is supposed to sit in. Some of the worst legislation has McCain's name right next to a liberal Democrat's.

Calling Obama even close to a bi-partisan anything is a fucking joke.

[Warriorbird]

John McCain's conservative rating is still 83%. Give Obama 30 years and he'd likely do similar. He's sponsored bills with Republicans and he's worked with them.

His standing apart from voting has often not helped liberals either.

[Ignot]

Ugh. I don't know who to vote for anymore. I need to figure this shit out.

Don't worry. Forget about the issues and just vote on looks:

2442 2443

[Gelston]

Obama has always reminded me of the guy from the Allstate commercials.

[Keller]

Obama has always reminded me of the guy from the Allstate commercials.

McCain has always reminded me of the guy from the diabetes commercials.

[Allereli]

Obama has always reminded me of the guy from the Allstate commercials.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4accpvRuf0

[Gelston]

http://www.aef.com/images/diversity/burrell/allstate_newcar_thumb.jpg
http://mobasoft.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/barack-obama-official-small.jpg

The other guys a bit blacker and all that.

[Allereli]

The other guys a bit blacker and all that.

Yes he's black...and so is Obama, so they have to be the same dontcha know?

[Gelston]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4accpvRuf0

Why did I watch the whole thing?

[Gelston]

Yes he's black...and so is Obama, so they have to be the same dontcha know?

Never said they were. He REMINDS me of him.

[Allereli]

Why did I watch the whole thing?

because it's Dennis Haysbert's (the Allstate Guy) classic role as Pedro in Major League

[Gelston]

because it's Dennis Haysbert's (the Allstate Guy) classic role as Pedro in Major League

I know, I'm wondering why I watched the whole thing... in Spanish...

[Allereli]

I know, I'm wondering why I watched the whole thing... in Spanish...

sorry i don't have sound, bad link

[Keller]

McCain has always reminded me of the guy from the diabetes commercials.

http://moldychum.typepad.com/moldy_chum/images/2008/01/06/mccain_brimley.jpg

[Ignot]

http://moldychum.typepad.com/moldy_chum/images/2008/01/06/mccain_brimley.jpg

Wow, you can get anything on the internet these days.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

http://www.aef.com/images/diversity/burrell/allstate_newcar_thumb.jpg
http://mobasoft.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/barack-obama-official-small.jpg

The other guys a bit blacker and all that.

They really don't look alike to me.. dude on the top has little ears and heavy jowls.

[Ignot]

They really don't look alike to me.. dude on the top has little ears and heavy jowls.

They all look alike.

[Gelston]

They really don't look alike to me.. dude on the top has little ears and heavy jowls.

Thats because Obama is scrawny.

[Keller]

Thats because Obama is scrawny.

MY CANDIDATE CAN BEAT UP YOUR CANDIDATE!

[Insodus]

Sorry for being young and not into politics?


I'm just voting for Obama, okay?

LOL


She might be more like the 'average American' than most of the rest of us.

Yea, that ^^. Meaning: dumb as a stump and voting for Obama for no good reason.

[Stanley Burrell]

http://moldychum.typepad.com/moldy_chum/images/2008/01/06/mccain_brimley.jpg

That guy's ear-to-face ratio is impressive, especially considering his overlyweightedness. Wow.

He needs a tophat and a monocle.