Mccain Or Obama?

[Sean223]

Okay. By this point I don't think two-thirds of your facts are right, so I'm not going to argue anymore. And by the way, if you use the words "a lot" a lot, you should probably spell them right.

Also, it's Hillary.

[wozzym]

can this maybe get a poll on it instead?

[aussiemcgr]

can this maybe get a poll on it instead?

Ask, and you shall receive

[SwintellSoft]

Okay. By this point I don't think two-thirds of your facts are right, so I'm not going to argue anymore. And by the way, if you use the words "a lot" a lot, you should probably spell them right.

Also, it's Hillary.

all my facts are right...

and no i dont spell very well =p its a habit im trying to break.. specially when im typing at 2 AM in the mourning and thats fine , you dont have to...

I just think you should resarch a little more... you say you "think" that my fact are not right , well thats probably because the truth hurts....

And I know a lot , but I come from a very country style part of america and alot of red neck habits catch on to me when i hang out with my friends...

[Sean223]

all my facts are right...

and no i dont spell very well =p its a habit im trying to break.. specially when im typing at 2 AM in the mourning and thats fine , you dont have to...

I just think you should resarch a little more... you say you "think" that my fact are not right , well thats probably because the truth hurts....

And I know a lot , but I come from a very country style part of america and alot of red neck habits catch on to me when i hang out with my friends...

Talk about redneck -- I live in Utah!

No worries. I'm always researching new things. I don't think the truth hurts, it's discovering that other people lie to you that hurts.

And although you may think the Clinton years sucked his popularity rating was above 50% when he left office. Remind me what Bush's is? 28? 32? i could probably live with the obvious "Clinton error" in exchange for a better economy, less death, better schools, better healthcare, etc. A price well paid, in my opinion.

And i did say that I "think" your facts aren't right. But then really nothing is set and stone. Whoever becomes president can do whatever the crap they want to.

[JLane]

In regards to abortions - Abortions aren't bad? In one way, I agree. I think half of the human population should have been aborted and then there wouldn't be so many idiots around. On the other hand, while it may be a 'choice,' women also - unless they are raped - make the choice to spread their legs. If they're going to do that and not bother to take birth control, well, then they need to live with the consequences of their actions. If the woman has taken every precaution outside of not having sex at all, and she's either too young or not stable enough, etc., then I can understand getting an abortion when she isn't fit to raise the child. Or, she could always give the child up for adoption. True, there's no guarantee that the kid will go to a nice family and have a nice life, but it's another option.

Although this argument -

2. If it was truly a 'live' human being, wouldn't it have the same rights? Such as social security number, right to a lawyer, etc?

Should be questioned. Who decides on who has rights and who doesn't? Then you could answer your own question, because if it was turned around and a fetus was given those same rights by the people who deny those rights now, it would suddenly be validated, correct?

Having said that, I don't like either candidate.

I know many homeschooled kids who don't know anything academically or socially. Not to say that all of them are of course, everyone's different.

Yes, everyone is different, because I know the opposite. While I wasn't homeschooled, I know about a dozen who were, and every single one of them not only grew up to be productive and intelligent people, half of them earn six figures per year. None of them have any social deficiency.

As far as funding, more focus needs to be placed on education in general, instead of paying for illegals and their fifty kids. I like California's stance on the matter. If you go on welfare and have more kids once you're on it, you lose money with every kid you have after that, instead of getting more. It should be that way in every state.

One last thing, and this is directed specifically at Sean223. I like a lot of what you have to say, but there is something to keep in mind - you should never criticize anyone else for something that you, yourself, are guilty of, and that's misspelling. You pointed out that someone didn't know how to spell "a lot" or "Hillary," yet you misspelled two words, yourself. You spelled "awful" as "aweful" and "ridiculous" as "rediculous."

[Sean223]

In regards to abortions - Abortions aren't bad? In one way, I agree. I think half of the human population should have been aborted and then there wouldn't be so many idiots around. On the other hand, while it may be a 'choice,' women also - unless they are raped - make the choice to spread their legs. If they're going to do that and not bother to take birth control, well, then they need to live with the consequences of their actions. If the woman has taken every precaution outside of not having sex at all, and she's either too young or not stable enough, etc., then I can understand getting an abortion when she isn't fit to raise the child. Or, she could always give the child up for adoption. True, there's no guarantee that the kid will go to a nice family and have a nice life, but it's another option.

Although this argument -

2. If it was truly a 'live' human being, wouldn't it have the same rights? Such as social security number, right to a lawyer, etc?

Should be questioned. Who decides on who has rights and who doesn't? Then you could answer your own question, because if it was turned around and a fetus was given those same rights by the people who deny those rights now, it would suddenly be validated, correct?

Having said that, I don't like either candidate.
Yes, everyone is different, because I know the opposite. While I wasn't homeschooled, I know about a dozen who were, and every single one of them not only grew up to be productive and intelligent people, half of them earn six figures per year. None of them have any social deficiency.

As far as funding, more focus needs to be placed on education in general, instead of paying for illegals and their fifty kids. I like California's stance on the matter. If you go on welfare and have more kids once you're on it, you lose money with every kid you have after that, instead of getting more. It should be that way in every state.

One last thing, and this is directed specifically at Sean223. I like a lot of what you have to say, but there is something to keep in mind - you should never criticize anyone else for something that you, yourself, are guilty of, and that's misspelling. You pointed out that someone didn't know how to spell "a lot" or "Hillary," yet you misspelled two words, yourself. You spelled "awful" as "aweful" and "ridiculous" as "rediculous."

This entire post is directed specifically at JLane.

Well, first I'm glad you like a lot of what I have to say.

Second, I am sure you don't live in Utah with children running everywhere. There are so many home-schooled children here, that my experiences are most assuredly different and possibly more numerous than yours.

Third, the way you say "illegals" makes me think you support slavery or something. If you haven't noticed, foreign people aren't the only ones doing illegal things. That label you give is absolutely horrid.

Fourth, I did not directly criticize his spelling. I didn't say "Wow your spelling sucks!" I simply had a difficult time trying to interpret parts of SwintellSoft's posts, and those are the mistakes that were very recurring and not so much one-time typos but rather habbits. Truthfully, SwintellSoft did not really care. It's hard to have an intelligent conversation if you can't understand the people you're talking to. The fact that you come and criticize more than anyone else shows that you are the one being overcritical.

Fifth, how can something be considered equal to a human in the sense of abortion, but not in other senses? Once again, this reminds me of a "sub-human" way of thinking.

Basically, I'm glad you agree to a lot of what I had to say, but I don't necessarily appreciate the fact that you but into a conversation so rudely. If you had read your own post as critically as you had read all of mine, you would have found numerous grammatical errors that make your post much more difficult to read than mine.

There's a difference between a comment on a person's spelling and just being rude. You just found the line. But, this arguement is ridiculous (spelled correctly) anyway.

[SwintellSoft]

Talk about redneck -- I live in Utah!

No worries. I'm always researching new things. I don't think the truth hurts, it's discovering that other people lie to you that hurts.

And although you may think the Clinton years sucked his popularity rating was above 50% when he left office. Remind me what Bush's is? 28? 32? i could probably live with the obvious "Clinton error" in exchange for a better economy, less death, better schools, better healthcare, etc. A price well paid, in my opinion.

And i did say that I "think" your facts aren't right. But then really nothing is set and stone. Whoever becomes president can do whatever the crap they want to.

Good to know and im not lying... I wouldnt lie about this kind of thing lol if that was what you were implying
its going to take alot for the economy to get to that state , as sad as it sounds ,

and your right , they can do what they want. and that worries me because the goervment is ment to protect the citizens but so far their not protecting us that great now are they? =/ sucks to live in this day in age , in some ways anyways

In regards to abortions - Abortions aren't bad? In one way, I agree. I think half of the human population should have been aborted and then there wouldn't be so many idiots around. On the other hand, while it may be a 'choice,' women also - unless they are raped - make the choice to spread their legs. If they're going to do that and not bother to take birth control, well, then they need to live with the consequences of their actions. If the woman has taken every precaution outside of not having sex at all, and she's either too young or not stable enough, etc., then I can understand getting an abortion when she isn't fit to raise the child. Or, she could always give the child up for adoption. True, there's no guarantee that the kid will go to a nice family and have a nice life, but it's another option.

Although this argument -

2. If it was truly a 'live' human being, wouldn't it have the same rights? Such as social security number, right to a lawyer, etc?

Should be questioned. Who decides on who has rights and who doesn't? Then you could answer your own question, because if it was turned around and a fetus was given those same rights by the people who deny those rights now, it would suddenly be validated, correct?

Having said that, I don't like either candidate.
Yes, everyone is different, because I know the opposite. While I wasn't homeschooled, I know about a dozen who were, and every single one of them not only grew up to be productive and intelligent people, half of them earn six figures per year. None of them have any social deficiency.

As far as funding, more focus needs to be placed on education in general, instead of paying for illegals and their fifty kids. I like California's stance on the matter. If you go on welfare and have more kids once you're on it, you lose money with every kid you have after that, instead of getting more. It should be that way in every state.

One last thing, and this is directed specifically at Sean223. I like a lot of what you have to say, but there is something to keep in mind - you should never criticize anyone else for something that you, yourself, are guilty of, and that's misspelling. You pointed out that someone didn't know how to spell "a lot" or "Hillary," yet you misspelled two words, yourself. You spelled "awful" as "aweful" and "ridiculous" as "rediculous."

abortions in my opnion are a good thing as well... i mean no one will ever stop teenagers from sleeping with each other , its human nature... so we have condoms wich sometimes may break , bust , defective or the boyfriend puts a hole in it =O thats why we need abortions.... although its killing a baby , its killing it before it ever even thinks , about anything....

funding: you are totally right.... mostly in the south we have a problem with illigle mexicans *(no this is not racist)* and they come in , get welfare and all the cash they can get their hands on and go back to their country... wich makes our economy shitty.... =/

[aussiemcgr]

On the other hand, while it may be a 'choice,' women also - unless they are raped - make the choice to spread their legs. If they're going to do that and not bother to take birth control, well, then they need to live with the consequences of their actions.

so we have condoms wich sometimes may break , bust , defective or the boyfriend puts a hole in it =O thats why we need abortions.... although its killing a baby , its killing it before it ever even thinks , about anything....

Concerning this abortion issue, there is one more additional thing to consider. The age old statement: "Shit happens". Sometimes things just happen, like getting pregnant, and the parents may not be fit in any way to accommodate a child. If you ever get in that situation where your girlfriend runs up to you, maybe at an airport lounge and she runs up to you and gives you lots of hugs and kisses but then she grabs your hand smiles at you and says "Jacob, I am pregnant." (sorry NaRzy, couldnt resist)

[Mark]

Anyone supporting McCain needs to reassess their political opinion and sources of facts.

[Sean223]

Good to know and im not lying... I wouldnt lie about this kind of thing lol if that was what you were implying
its going to take alot for the economy to get to that state , as sad as it sounds ,

and your right , they can do what they want. and that worries me because the goervment is ment to protect the citizens but so far their not protecting us that great now are they? ...

abortions in my opnion are a good thing as well...

See we're basically on the same page.
And I wasn't implying that.

Concerning this abortion issue, there is one more additional thing to consider. The age old statement: "Shit happens". Sometimes things just happen, like getting pregnant, and the parents may not be fit in any way to accommodate a child. If you ever get in that situation where your girlfriend runs up to you, maybe at an airport lounge and she runs up to you and gives you lots of hugs and kisses but then she grabs your hand smiles at you and says "Jacob, I am pregnant." (sorry NaRzy, couldnt resist)

Haha, so true.

Anyone supporting McCain needs to reassess their political opinion and sources of facts.

I don't think anyone could have said it better.

[InfamousMetal]

1) abortions arent a bad thing
2) obama is Christian...
3) obama is Christian

obama cant be christian if he is pro choice....

and i am not trying to be racist or anything but obama will get shot before his inauguration if elected thats just the way this country is....


furthermore he did not even have the respect for our country....he did not recite the pledge of aligence nor did he put his hand over his heart....not one i would have for a pres. if you ask me

[Sean223]

obama cant be christian if he is pro choice....

and i am not trying to be racist or anything but obama will get shot before his inauguration if elected thats just the way this country is....
...

So Christians can't make choices? We have the choice to kill thousands in Iraq or let thousands die in Africa but not the choice for abortion? Who can be pro-choice? Jews? Budhists? Mormons? Why do you discriminate against religion? America was founded on religious freedom.

So if you don't like "the way this country is" wouldn't you want someone to change it (cough, cough, Obama, cough)? If you do like that you think he would be shot immediately than I have nothing to say to you except get some morals.

McCain has supported about 90% of Bush's legislation pushed through Congress, he really needs to shake off the "Bush Mk. II" image and stand on his own two feet.

Obama has a better overall economic policy, I like his funding ideas and of course he is more realistic about Afghanistan & Iraq. I cringed at his "pump up your tyres" stint, but overall he is a strong, extremely intelligent individual who holds a better vision for the future of America.

Out of the two of them, definitely Obama.

Yup.

[Eagle 1]

His idea for Iraq is to pull out and send our guys back if the situation goes bad. That's a death sentence for a lot more troops down the road.

Hopefully if things continue as they are now in Iraq, if Obama does get into office, we'll have brought the Iraqi military and government to the position where they can defend themselves and we'll come out ok anyway.

McCain's plan is simple - reduce troop levels based on conditions on the ground. The way things are going now that could be pretty soon anyway. McCain knows national security - he knows what it means to serve, to sacrifice, and when to seek help on any issues he may not be strong on. McCain said a while back he was better at national security than the economy, but he's learned a lot since then. Besides, exactly what's good about Obama's economic plans?

And on McCain's issue with being "Bush III" - he's made decisions based on what he's believed would do the country the most good. Whether or not they happen to coincide with what Bush did too shouldn't matter if it helped the country and our military. Bush ordered the surge and McCain was one of the original supports of the new plan - that new plan has basically won us Iraq now.

[aussiemcgr]

obama cant be christian if he is pro choice....

Would just like to say I'm not spamming, just proving a point...

http://www.faithandaction.org/index.cfm?fu...;feature_id=126
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/01/21/obama/
http://www.newsweek.com/id/145971
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jws4AA6...3tZ-GAD92J09601
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail...hasizes_ob.html
http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/s/stix/2004/stix082204.htm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle3194740.ece
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060628-call_to_renewal/
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20071...ian-leaders.htm


I can get more if you'd like. I just went down the first page of google.

[Sean223]

@aussiemcgr

Thanks for the links. They really strenghthen my arguement.

@Eagle 1

Bush's idea was to lie, go in, and kill people (on both sides).

Last January, Iraq leaders met together and only agreed on one thing. Take a wild guess at what that was. That they wanted Americans out. Guess what Bush said. Oh, they are finally agreeing on something. This shows that it is working and we should stay!

Bush's approval rating is retardedly low. So if McCain's ideas "happen to coincide with what Bush did" shouldn't 70% of the country hate him too? This just shows you people do not know what is going on and can't think for themselves. They'd rather listen to oil companies, church leaders (not all are good you know), and Fox news.

It's not like this is World War II. This is Bush's stupid thing that he lied about and blew way out of porportion. If we pull out (effectively, but very quickly) it's not like the Nazi's will take over the world. If we wouldn't have went in in the first place we wouldn't have this problem anyway. Bush just can't admit his mistakes (and his lies).

How many hundreds of people died in 9/11? And how many hundreds of thousands of people have died in this war? How many lives are equal to one American life? If you ask me, Americans are selfish, stubborn, and lazy. We need to start thinking of others as equals and look at the world in a twenty-first century way. No matter how much the Republicans try to say that the world isn't and shouldn't be changing, it is. I hate change in my personal life. It's understandable. But denying it like this on a world level is rediculous.

And if you're going to blame Obama for one specific incident, I could think of dozens of incidents of Bush's idiocy. Like Bush's response to 9/11 for instance (reading to the children). If you haven't seen that tape, I'd look it up! It's very entertaining.

[Eagle 1]

Last January, Iraq leaders met together and only agreed on one thing. Take a wild guess at what that was. That they wanted Americans out. Guess what Bush said. Oh, they are finally agreeing on something. This shows that it is working and we should stay!

I'm aware of what they said, but dont try to make it that simple. Wish it could be, but it's not. A time horizon (a term I actually hate hearing) is being proposed. What does that mean? It means a broad range of time in the future when we can pull out based on conditions on the ground.

Bush's approval rating is retardedly low. So if McCain's ideas "happen to coincide with what Bush did" shouldn't 70% of the country hate him too? This just shows you people do not know what is going on and can't think for themselves. They'd rather listen to oil companies, church leaders (not all are good you know), and Fox news.

And Congress's approval rating? *Cough* the Democratic Congress.

We know not to listen to all church leaders - apparently Obama has a little trouble in that area.

In the intrest of keeping fair and balanced, how come you haven't mentioned MSNBC's overwhelmingly biased reporting? Fox, while I'll admit is a right leaner, go after the right as well as the left. MSNBC is basically the Obama All-The-Time Channel, and CNN used to be left biased in my opinion, but as of recently have done pretty well reporting everything fairly - which is kind of wierd since the way my channels are set up - MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News come right after eachother, in that order

It's not like this is World War II. This is Bush's stupid thing that he lied about and blew way out of porportion. If we pull out (effectively, but very quickly) it's not like the Nazi's will take over the world. If we wouldn't have went in in the first place we wouldn't have this problem anyway. Bush just can't admit his mistakes (and his lies).

The "Bush Lied Troops Died" line is really just getting old now. No, he didn't lie. He provided us what our intelligence told him. Yeah, it was wrong, but can I have your opinion on this? Would you rather Saddam Hussein still be in power? I know it's not WWII, but I can easily relate Saddam to Hitler and Stalin, and allowing Saddam to stay in power is a crime in itself.

How many hundreds of people died in 9/11? And how many hundreds of thousands of people have died in this war? How many lives are equal to one American life? If you ask me, Americans are selfish, stubborn, and lazy. We need to start thinking of others as equals and look at the world in a twenty-first century way. No matter how much the Republicans try to say that the world isn't and shouldn't be changing, it is. I hate change in my personal life. It's understandable. But denying it like this on a world level is rediculous.

Nearly 3000 people died on September 11th. I remember 9/11 every single day.

America is a country of humanitarians. All members of the United States Military are taught service before self. With the exception of a few idiots who have disgraced the uniform in this war, the American military has even provided care for the enemies that we've wounded in the field after battle. We have shown compassion, and selflessness on a daily basis over there and around the world. Every single day people all across the United States, whether they be in the military, in civilian organizations, in law enforcement or emergency services, aim to train and provide the best service possible to people all around the country and the world. Does this country have selfish and arrogant people who I'd rather just be shot in the head? Yes. However the vast majority of Americans are good people.

Ya know, it's a fact of war that people die. Yes, thousands of Americans and others have died in this war. It's a horrible cost, but think about it - you call us selfish? Thousands and thousands of more people would die without us, in Iraq, and around the world. People are tired of us being the world's police? Well, someone needs to do it, the job needs to be fulfilled, and you know it. Thinking about the UN? They can't even define terrorism. Nothing gets done overthere unless we're involved anyway, and by the time they'd act on anything of importance, we'd be dead.

And if you're going to blame Obama for one specific incident, I could think of dozens of incidents of Bush's idiocy. Like Bush's response to 9/11 for instance (reading to the children). If you haven't seen that tape, I'd look it up! It's very entertaining.

Are you serious? What the hell do you expect him to do? There was nothing for him to do elsewhere, and he kept the kids calm there. That was by far one of the better parts of the day - that for a few hours more, they could have a nice day.

By the time Bush was told about it, our military was activitated. We were doing our jobs. If another situation arose, then he'd be told about it, and he'd respond to it if a Presidential decision was required, but at that point, there was nothing he, even as the President of the United States, could do. We closed all air traffic. Fighters were scrambled and on patrol. Emergency services on the ground were doing their jobs, and people all over the country did their's to help in the days following.

Bush's reading to children has got to be the worst possible argument anyone has brought up to me about Bush.

[Sean223]

...
Bush's reading to children has got to be the worst possible argument anyone has brought up to me about Bush.

Haha, seriously? Ya, if I were president I would look across the room "nonchalantly" several times, and continue reading. Haha. He didn't even ask who or where or why or anything! Oh, dear. It wasn't really my "point" but more of a funny thing.

I agree with you on news (thank you for realizing CNN is fair).

I am not going to comment on anything else you said. It would be a waste of my time. you wouldn't care anyway. I've told you my view, so now I'm done. If anyone else has a comment though, I'd happily answer (even if you disagree with me).

Eagle 1, please realize I'm only disliking your political arguements nothing else. And a bit of the reason I'm not replying is because you are about as stubborn as i am. That and it makes me a little angry.

[aussiemcgr]

People are tired of us being the world's police? Well, someone needs to do it, the job needs to be fulfilled, and you know it.

Ahahahahaahahaha, if the US has taken over the job of "world police" then they've done a crap job. The entire purpose of "police" is to bring peace to the area by capturing the "criminals" with little damage as possible. Also, if there were such thing as the "world police" they would policing the WORLD, not just their own country. Ya, there are problems in the middle east but its not the only place. What about the constant violence in the Sudan and the human right issues in China? The US pretty much ignores this because it hasnt really effected them yet well, police arent suppose to ignore parts of their area just because they dont see it as a threat. The US isnt a "world police", its ruled by a bunch of self-centered politicians that dont know when to throw in the towel.

[Sean223]

Ahahahahaahahaha, if the US has taken over the job of "world police" then they've done a crap job. The entire purpose of "police" is to bring peace to the area by capturing the "criminals" with little damage as possible. Also, if there were such thing as the "world police" they would policing the WORLD, not just their own country. Ya, there are problems in the middle east but its not the only place. What about the constant violence in the Sudan and the human right issues in China? The US pretty much ignores this because it hasnt really effected them yet well, police arent suppose to ignore parts of their area just because they dont see it as a threat. The US isnt a "world police", its ruled by a bunch of self-centered politicians that dont know when to throw in the towel.

Yup. We're not "world police". We're just greedy.