Support NeoGAF

[M3wThr33]

Well, this is neither here nor there, but the majority of other countries out there seem to prefer Obama, as well. That natural charisma can do wonders for international relations on its own.

 

[Socreges]

Well, this is neither here nor there, but the majority of other countries out there seem to prefer Obama, as well. That natural charisma can do wonders for international relations on its own.

so does being a dove.

 

[devilhawk]

It's always good to hear from opposing viewpoints. If one opens their mind to the 'opposition' it ultimately makes for a better decision. I'm not here to ridicule. I am just curious. I want to have some real discourse, and ultimately, we'll all be the better off from having a deeper understanding of the issues.

My case for Obama on foreign relations is that he has the charisma and fundamental understanding of the issues to make a well thought out choice. He got 200,000 Germans together to hear him speak. I'm confident he can work with our European allies to strengthen relationships, and this is crucial in increasingly more turbulent times.

McCain did well on the surge call and I agree with McCain in that we shouldn't be too hasty to retreat. On the other hand, I feel that Obama is correct in that we should start shifting responsibilities back to the Iraqis and create a timetable.

Also, Obama is backed by a vice president who has a lot of experience in foreign affairs, so he will be getting a solid and sometimes opposing viewpoint when he has to make tough decisions.

I agree that Biden will be an asset to Obama for foreign affairs. My immediate response to 200,000 Germans is who really cares? Thinking about it, I agree that it would be better to have closer relationships to the EU but I think that currently it is at its lowest point and will be better no matter who is elected.

While trying to avoid the deeper aspect of the Iraq war in this post, I do believe we went into it for the wrong reasons but I don't believe McCain should be punished for supporting that when he did. The war in Iraq has presented itself a few opportunities that would not be available otherwise. A complete and total victory (though unlikely and costly) can be a huge tipping point in the quest for stability in the Middle East. I think since we are so committed currently, a guaranteed timeline isn't practical.

My suburb has a high Jewish population and in my discussions with friends who are politically aware, they significantly favor McCain in regards to his up front view on Israel and Iran (though I must add this an upper middle class Kansas suburb).

 

[Rhindle]

Well, this is neither here nor there, but the majority of other countries out there seem to prefer Obama, as well. That natural charisma can do wonders for international relations on its own.

It's not a matter of Obama's charima. It's the fact that Bush (and by proxy, the Republican party) is universally reviled around the world. The goodwill and moral authority of the US has pretty much been entirely dissipated over the past 8 years. It's pretty embarassing to to admit you're American when travelling in Europe these days - you're looked at with a mixture of pity and disdain.

So basically, Obama offers hope that the US will rejoin the international fold and start acting like a responsible world citizen again.

 

[avatar299]

It's not a matter of Obama's charima. It's the fact that Bush (and by proxy, the Republican party) is universally reviled around the world. The goodwill and moral authority of the US has pretty much been entirely dissipated over the past 8 years. It's pretty embarassing to to admit you're American when travelling in Europe these days - you're looked at with a mixture of pity and disdain.

So basically, any Obama offers hope that the US will rejoin the international fold and start acting like a responsible world citizen again.

huh cow towing to euro's.

one of most unappealing things about Obama to me is the idea that I should give a fuck what europe thinks on a social level.

 

[Trakdown]

I think you should read that piece. From what I've heard(and this is with very little research) she imposed more taxes on oil companies and the checks she will be sending to Alaskan citizens are based off the extra revenue

I did- it's nice and all, and it's good work that should go on at a national level. Here's the problem, from the same article:

On Dec. 19, she signed the oil tax increase. Six days before, in the U.S. Senate, an energy bill that would have repealed billions in tax breaks for oil companies failed by one vote. Obama voted yea; McCain skipped the vote.

Remember, my original inquiry was to the overall financial scheme of the Republican Party, not Palin specifically. So far, her policy has helped out Alaska, but then she's charging Per Diem expenses to stay at home back onto the taxpayers. Wasilla was given a huge chunk of debt. It's hard to say whether or not she would be fiscally sound, especially because I don't think she's going to be allowed a whole bunch of influence once in office- she's meant to help McCain get into office more than anything else. Also, there's too many old boys with bad ties that aren't going to let the new kid get in the way.

 

[Socreges]

I agree that Biden will be an asset to Obama for foreign affairs. My immediate response to 200,000 Germans is who really cares? Thinking about it, I agree that it would be better to have closer relationships to the EU but I think that currently it is at its lowest point and will be better no matter who is elected.

even so, it's not just about what the relations would be in january 2009 or improving them to any degree, but the potential for significant improvement over four years. and for the record, mccain is perceived by many in europe as being more of the same.

huh cow towing to euro's.

one of most unappealing things about Obama to me is the idea that I should give a fuck what europe thinks on a social level.

he was obviously noting the importance with regards to international relations, and how this is visible socially.

and why would that make obama unappealing? please explain.

 

[Souldriver]

huh cow towing to euro's.

one of most unappealing things about Obama to me is the idea that I should give a fuck what europe thinks on a social level.

Well, that's all fine and dandy, but in the world we live in today, it's best to keep a friendly relationship with the other big players. Bush has blown up almost every bridge, and (while you might think this is stupid) the next president better tries to rebuild them. And don't despair, when/if Obama gets elected, Europe will play an active role in rebuilding them too. It's not like the USA will figuratively have to begg on its knees to be forgiven. Like Rhindle said: just good intentions and some charisma alone get you far.

 

[devilhawk]

huh cow towing to euro's.

one of most unappealing things about Obama to me is the idea that I should give a fuck what europe thinks on a social level.

I agree. I do think with each passing generation the Europeans will continue to care less and less about the US no matter what. The WWII generation has all but passed on and after those too young to remember or know of the Cold War and German reunification, the trend will continue no matter the President's over seas approval rating

 

[Huzah]

Well, that's all fine and dandy, but in the world we live in today, it's best to keep a friendly relationship with the other big players. Bush has blown up almost every bridge, and (while you might think this is stupid) the next president better tries to rebuild them. And don't despair, when/if Obama gets elected, Europe will play an active role in rebuilding them too. It's not like the USA will figuratively have to begg on its knees to be forgiven. Like Rhindle said: just good intentions and some charisma alone get you far.

Bush Saudi/China relations haven't been that bad. Saudi provides us with oil and China provides us with cheaper labor and giant markets. Euro who?

 

[avatar299]

he was obviously noting the importance with regards to international relations, and how this is visible socially.

and why would that make obama unappealing? please explain.

How important are they really? Our capitalist society has kinda negated the value of allies in this day and age. if anything they just drag you down.

We hate china. We still buy their stuff, and they still try to buy our banks.

Well, that's all fine and dandy, but in the world we live in today, it's best to keep a friendly relationship with the other big players. Bush has blown up almost every bridge, and (while you might think this is stupid) the next president better tries to rebuild them. And don't despair, when/if Obama gets elected, Europe will play an active role in rebuilding them too. It's not like the USA will figuratively have to begg on its knees to be forgiven. Like Rhindle said: just good intentions and some charisma alone get you far.

What exact bridges need to be rebuilt? Are we losing foreign investment? Are we losing a new workforce?

Despite Bush, America, India and China have been the most dynamic economies in the world today. If it wasn't due to this war, the dollar would still be ahead of the euro.(and it's only a matter of time before we pass it again.)

Europeans like us less, but then again french intellectuals were saying "I told you so" on 9/11 so it's not like it was some lovey, dovey romance

 

[Souldriver]

Bush Saudi/China relations haven't been that bad. Saudi provides us with oil and China provides us with cheaper labor and giant markets. Euro who?

If you think oil and cheap labor is effectively the only thing you need in foreign relations, fine. I'm just glad Obama doesn't think that (and most world leaders for that matter).

And iirc, you're the only saying in the other thread that you "knew the Euro currency would fail". I think you want it to...

Europeans like us less, but then again french intellectuals were saying "I told you so" on 9/11 so it's not like it was some lovey, dovey romance

European people might like the USA less now than 10 years ago and be stuborn about it, but diplomats and political leaders for the most part don't reason that way. They rightfully think partnership > cold peace/war > enemies.

 

[kevm3]

I agree that Biden will be an asset to Obama for foreign affairs. My immediate response to 200,000 Germans is who really cares? Thinking about it, I agree that it would be better to have closer relationships to the EU but I think that currently it is at its lowest point and will be better no matter who is elected.

The 200,000 Germans ordeal, to me, was a clear demonstration that Obama can reach out to people around the world and say something that they will listen to. THis is a critical element if we are to regain our standing in the world and to have the world look to us for leadership. I'm not saying that McCain won't be able to talk to leaders and eventually gain their trust. I just believe Obama will have a much easier time in doing so, especially due so to McCain's more hawkish nature, which isn't very popular around the world.

On the issue of protecting Israel, I can see how McCain would immediately be more attractive because of his more aggressiive stances. However, I believe that Obama will be better at drawing across nations so that a front can be formed to put pressure on a nation such as Iran, which poses a threat to Israel. The US alone doesn't look as intimidating as the US, Germany, France, UK, etc., especially at a time when the US is stretched thin militarily.

 

[avatar299]

European people might like the USA less now than 10 years ago and be stuborn about it, but diplomats and political leaders for the most part don't reason that way. They rightfully think partnership > cold peace/war > enemies.

but partnerships don't need to involve us actually working with them in some international dance. We have a partnership with china, and it has led to us evading war.

On the other hand, we have dancing with russia and the saudi's. Not so great results.

Th best kind of partnerships are ones based on good economic trade and common sense. This doesn't have to involve cow towing and appealing to people who just plain out don't like us

This is also ignoring the fact that Europe has never missed a beat when it came to potentially involving us into some sort of war since World War 1.

 

[devilhawk]

The 200,000 Germans ordeal, to me, was a clear demonstration that Obama can reach out to people around the world and say something that they will listen to. THis is a critical element if we are to regain our standing in the world and to have the world look to us for leadership. I'm not saying that McCain won't be able to talk to leaders and eventually gain their trust. I just believe Obama will have a much easier time in doing so, especially due so to McCain's more hawkish nature, which isn't very popular around the world.

On the issue of protecting Israel, I can see how McCain would immediately be more attractive because of his more aggressiive stances. However, I believe that Obama will be better at drawing across nations so that a front can be formed to put pressure on a nation such as Iran, which poses a threat to Israel. The US alone doesn't look as intimidating as the US, Germany, France, UK, etc., especially at a time when the US is stretched thin militarily.

A lot of my views towards European nations are cynical. I think that they are and have been in a period of Euro-centric isolationism. Though Bush hasn't helped, I think their view is almost independent of what administration comes in next. I am certainly not an expert on European foreign relations but I know that Europe is facing a rapidly changing demographic and foreign policy seems to mean less to them currently. I am sure EuroGaffers could expand on this topic but I really do feel that the US is going to be on its own no matter what.

For all the criticisms of what the Bush doctrine exactly means, I can definitely tell you that no European country even remotely cares about its future implementation. I believe that is a bad thing.

 

[kevm3]

A lot of my views towards European nations are cynical. I think that they are and have been in a period of Euro-centric isolationism. Though Bush hasn't helped, I think their view is almost independent of what administration comes in next. I am certainly not an expert on European foreign relations but I know that Europe is facing a rapidly changing demographic and foreign policy seems to mean less to them currently. I am sure EuroGaffers could expand on this topic but I really do feel that the US is going to be on its own no matter what.

For all the criticisms of what the Bush doctrine exactly means, I can definitely tell you that no European country even remotely cares about its future implementation. I believe that is a bad thing.

We've had a decent discussion on this issue. So now, let's talk about education. What do you feel to be McCain's stance on education and why is that agreeable to you?

 

[Souldriver]

A lot of my views towards European nations are cynical. I think that they are and have been in a period of Euro-centric isolationism. Though Bush hasn't helped, I think their view is almost independent of what administration comes in next. I am certainly not an expert on European foreign relations but I know that Europe is facing a rapidly changing demographic and foreign policy seems to mean less to them currently. I am sure EuroGaffers could expand on this topic but I really do feel that the US is going to be on its own no matter what.

For all the criticisms of what the Bush doctrine exactly means, I can definitely tell you that no European country even remotely cares about its future implementation. I believe that is a bad thing.

Well, that's just me being cynical and pessimistic, but just yesterday I said to a friend of mine that if "Americans keep electing dimwits, I hope they become irrelevant internationally sooner than later, and by electing those diwits, they're doing a good job at it". But please don't take my impulsive reaction seriously, because I know that's not what I actually really want.
Right now the EU is indeed more focused on other things than EU-US relations (perhaps Ukraine NATO membership and Cold Peace with Putinland can change that), but that's also because Europe is eagerly waiting for the new president to be elected, because really, why bother with Bush when he's only in power for 2 months anymore.

Either way, I'd rather have the USA and EU as partners than anything else, and I think most Europeans and Americans want that too, despite their gut reactions of "the US is evil and does more bad than good in the world" and "Europe can't tell is what to do".

 

[devilhawk]

We've had a decent discussion on this issue. So now, let's talk about education. What do you feel to be McCain's stance on education and why is that agreeable to you?

I had a decent discussion about education earlier but looking back it was a bit more fragmented than I remembered.

There are two basic facts about education and health care in their current forms. They are 1. a mess and 2. not going to be fixed by throwing more money at it. Quite a bit of Obama's reforms come attached with dollar signs of varying amounts.

I don't think McCain has a great education policy at all. I also think Obama's is terrible as well. Education isn't something that is going to be fixed with lip service or tax credits. Something drastic has to be done. Though I'm not necessarily a proponent of vouchers, it just might be drastic enough to work.

 

[woeds]

A lot of my views towards European nations are cynical. I think that they are and have been in a period of Euro-centric isolationism. Though Bush hasn't helped, I think their view is almost independent of what administration comes in next. I am certainly not an expert on European foreign relations but I know that Europe is facing a rapidly changing demographic and foreign policy seems to mean less to them currently. I am sure EuroGaffers could expand on this topic but I really do feel that the US is going to be on its own no matter what.

For all the criticisms of what the Bush doctrine exactly means, I can definitely tell you that no European country even remotely cares about its future implementation. I believe that is a bad thing.

I can't speak for all of Europe, but as a Dutchman I can tell you that I couldn't disagree more. The simple fact is that most Europeans would classify themselves as democrats on the american political playing field. So when Clinton was in office, Europe loved America. With the two terms of G.W Bush, not so much.

European countries are sending troops to the middle east too, to fight in the war on terror. So they're definitely keeping an eye on American foreign policy.

 

[avatar299]

I had a decent discussion about education earlier but looking back it was a bit more fragmented than I remembered.


I don't think McCain has a great education policy at all. I also think Obama's is terrible as well. Education isn't something that is going to be fixed with lip service or tax credits. Something drastic has to be done. Though I'm not necessarily a proponent of vouchers, it just might be drastic enough to work.

vouchers are useless unless you make more charter schools.

It's a catch 22. Create vouchers and introduce yourself to some huge education inequalities. Don't and just keep throwing money into the pit.

 

[devilhawk]

I can't speak for all of Europe, but as a Dutchman I can tell you that I couldn't disagree more. The simple fact is that most Europeans would classify themselves as democrats on the american political playing field. So when Clinton was in office, Europe loved America. With the two terms of G.W Bush, not so much.

European countries are sending troops to the middle east too, to fight in the war on terror. So they're definitely keeping an eye on American foreign policy.

Well this in itself is a problem. It shouldn't be a love hate relationship. With the exception of Bush, US political parties haven't significantly varied enough to deserve such hate in my opinion.

 

[woeds]

Well this in itself is a problem. It shouldn't be a love hate relationship. With the exception of Bush, US political parties haven't significantly varied enough to deserve such hate in my opinion.

I wasn't paying attention when H.W was around, so I don't know if Europe reacted the same to him as his son.

 

[devilhawk]

I wasn't paying attention when H.W was around, so I don't know if Europe reacted the same to him as his son.

I really didn't either, or was as much as a 4 year old could. I just hope Europeans are aware that US foreign policy won't drastically change all that much even if Obama is elected. There likely won't be an Iraq part 2 but I seriously doubt we see that with McCain either.

 

[Schlep]

I know I'm really lttp on this, but that "Disrespectful" ad makes the McCain campaign seem desperate. I mean, other than some racist old woman in Alabama, does anyone even care? Palin's not as shiny as she was a week and a half ago, and I think they can see the writing on the wall.

 

[Souldriver]

I really didn't either, or was as much as a 4 year old could. I just hope Europeans are aware that US foreign policy won't drastically change all that much even if Obama is elected. There likely won't be an Iraq part 2 but I seriously doubt we see that with McCain either.

It's not so much that Europe is democrat or anti-republican, it's that Europe is against the neoconservative agenda pushed by Bush and his administration. In the past, Europe got along quite well with a republican USA too. It's just that the republican party took a weird turn the last 20 years.

 

[devilhawk]

It's not so much that Europe is democrat or anti-republican, it's that Europe is against the neoconservative agenda pushed by Bush and his administration. In the past, Europe got along quite well with a republican USA too. It's just that the republican party took a weird turn the last 20 years.

Point taken. The way the US electorate is fractured a true moderate conservative has no chance. Depressingly, I just don't see how that is going to change.

Slightly OT: Been reading the wiki on neocon. Wow, is that a convoluted mess especially with great lines like "most neoconservatives are republicans."

 

[Schlep]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080915/ap_on_el_pr/obama

Obama's new commercial opens with a picture of McCain saying, "I will not take the low road to the highest office in this land." The announcer then asks, "What happened to John McCain?"

The ad uses brief phrases from editorials and commentators from The Washington Post, Time magazine, the Chicago Tribune, CBS and The New Republic: "one of the sleaziest ads ever seen," "truly vile," "dishonest smears," "exposed as a lie," "a disgraceful, dishonest campaign." It concludes, "It seems `deception' is all he's got left."

 

[grandjedi6]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080915/ap_on_el_pr/obama

Obama is pissed

 

[clav]

Decided to jump in this thread now.

What's the deal with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVy2yh28eig

There have been also circulating reports around the internetz that, if needed, the Dems are going to do a switch-a-roo with Biden for Hillary?

 

[Souldriver]

Decided to jump in this thread now.

What's the deal with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVy2yh28eig

There have been also circulating reports around the internetz that, if needed, the Dems are going to do a switch-a-roo with Biden for Hillary?

What?!? Has this ever been done before?

 

[sprsk]

Decided to jump in this thread now.

What's the deal with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVy2yh28eig

There have been also circulating reports around the internetz that, if needed, the Dems are going to do a switch-a-roo with Biden for Hillary?

Uhh, no.

 

[teruterubozu]

What?!? Has this ever been done before?

Yes it has - and proven to epic in failure. This will not happen.

 

[Rlan]

Europe and the UK wasn't exactly happy with your last pic:

I certainly fucking wasn't

 

[clav]

Yes it has - and proven to epic in failure. This will not happen.

When was that?

 

[teruterubozu]

Obama is pissed

I'm not too fond of this "boohoo he's so dishonest" route. It's a weak punch.

 

[AniHawk]

When was that?

1972

 

[teruterubozu]

When was that?

McGovern dumped Eagleton while running against Nixon.

 

[clav]

1972

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

Hm...

Replacement on the ticket

McGovern said he would back Eagleton “1000%”, but on August 1, Eagleton withdrew at McGovern's request and, after a new search by McGovern, was replaced by Kennedy in-law Sargent Shriver.

A Time magazine poll taken at the time found that 77 percent of the respondents said "Eagleton's medical record would not affect their vote." Nonetheless, the press made frequent references to his 'shock therapy', and McGovern feared that this would detract from his campaign platform.[3]

McGovern's handling of the controversy was an opening for the Republican campaign to raise serious questions about his judgment. In the general election, the Democratic ticket won only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia.

 

[AniHawk]

I'm not too fond of this "boohoo he's so dishonest" route. It's a weak punch.

This is to counteract the GOP's "boohoo he's disrespectful" except now there's actual media examples and shifting public opinion to back him up.

 

[Synth_floyd]

Who cares what the world thinks about our President. What matters is if he's doing the right thing, not what public opinion is.

 

[Schlep]

I'm not too fond of this "boohoo he's so dishonest" route. It's a weak punch.

I think it's needed to snap independent voters, and even some republicans out of their sudden love affair with the McCain campaign. It uses highly respected media outlets to call McCain a dishonest sleazeball, completely going against his image of an honorable war vet. They're attacking his strength, which is a great step, imo.

 

[Kildace]

I'm not too fond of this "boohoo he's so dishonest" route. It's a weak punch.

Disagree, I think it hits him where it hurts the most : his Straight Talk and his Maverickness.

 

[Hootie]

Wow, even ROVE is saying McCain's ads are going too far. :lol

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080915/ap_on_el_pr/obama

You know, I actually have a lot of thoughts on this and the other ads, but it's late and I don't have the energy to elaborate fully. I'll give the short(er) version though.

I think the Obama campaign spends way too much time responding to what the other side is putting out there. I remember how impressed I was during the primaries when the shit hit the fan with Reverend Wright and in the midst of all the noise Obama came out and used it as a platform to address race issues in a frank and nuanced way. It was actually one of the things that made me want to vote for Obama and not just against the peanut gallery I was seeing during the Republican debates. Now during the general election I'm left wondering why he's so prone to getting sucked into combating the attacks of the McCain campaign rather than turning them around and using them as an opportunity to bring real issues into sharper relief.

More and more I see the lack of follow through of the Democrats I've hated so much for the past several years echoed in Obama's campaign strategy, and it's really disappointing. When they do go on the offensive it seems to always be safe and ineffectual. At some point this above the fray angle became a flat and antiseptic way of addressing everything. Sure, it's even handed, but it lacks resonance. I feel like there's a fear of being perceived as aggressive, but there's nothing wrong with being forcefully pointed as long as it's above the belt. Look at how much more interesting the O'Reilly interview turned out to be because he chided Obama into more emotional responses. Obama kept his composure and always stayed on message, yet there was a certain fervor and energy as he defended himself. That's what I'd like to see more of from him at this point, and I'm hoping that he can go into the debates with a more assertive edge. He needs to stop being just fair, and start being tough but fair; cutting through the bullshit with a vengence and sticking it to McCain on actual issues, not this he said she said crap.

 

[teruterubozu]

You know, I actually have a lot of thoughts on this and the other ads, but it's late and I don't have the energy to elaborate fully. I'll give the short(er) version though.

I think the Obama campaign spends way too much time responding to what the other side is putting out there. I remember how impressed I was during the primaries when the shit hit the fan with Reverend Wright and in the midst of all the noise Obama came out and used it as a platform to address race issues in a frank and nuanced way. It was actually one of the things that made me want to vote for Obama and not just against the peanut gallery I was seeing during the Republican debates. Now during the general election I'm left wondering why he's so prone to getting sucked into combating the attacks of the McCain campaign rather than turning them around and using them as an opportunity to bring real issues into sharper relief.

More and more I see the lack of follow through of the Democrats I've hated so much for the past several years echoed in Obama's campaign strategy, and it's really disappointing. When they do go on the offensive it seems to always be safe and ineffectual. At some point this above the fray angle became a flat and antiseptic way of addressing everything. Sure, it's even handed, but it lacks resonance. I feel like there's a fear of being perceived as aggressive, but there's nothing wrong with being forcefully pointed as long as it's above the belt. Look at how much more interesting the O'Reilly interview turned out to be because he chided Obama into more emotional responses. He kept his composure and always stayed on message, yet there was a certain fervor and energy as he defended himself. That's what I'd like to see more of from him at this point, and I'm hoping that he can go into the debates with a more assertive edge. He needs to stop being just fair, and start being tough but fair; cutting through the bullshit with a vengence and sticking it to McCain on actual issues, not this he said she said crap.

That's exactly what I meant. I hate this schoolyard catfight tactic.

 

[Insane Metal]

Europe and the UK wasn't exactly happy with your last pic:

I certainly fucking wasn't

:lol

 

[AndyIsTheMoran]

Holy crap. So you give Bush CREDIT for going into Afghanistan and leaving it a shambles?

And recessions are normal. What's NOT normal is having policies that lead to worsening the recession instead of providing relief and waiting it out. Blaming Clinton for the 2001 recession is laughable, Hannity-esque ignorance.

About the surge - you give CREDIT to Bush for fucking up Iraq? First of all, the surge wouldn't be necessary if we weren't their in the first goddamn place. Secondly, there is almost no evidence that the surge contributed to ANYTHING resembling political reconciliation in Iraq, making it a total failure which didn't even meet its own goals.

I don't understand this. It's like you're defending Bush for fucking up.

-Ok First off i don't blame Clinton, i was replying to the posters opinion that our current recession is a continuation of the 2001 recession, under which time we hadn't passed any of Bush's economic policies.
-I'm not giving Bush credit for fucking up Iraq as you put it. Even Obama on the O-Reilly interview said the surge was a success...so either hes lying or hes right, or he thinks hes right. I'm not say you gotta agree with the war but at least recognize when somethings working, if the surge helped stopped the killing of soldiers and people how is that so bad? The government there is making success, you cant really deny this. Im not saying you have to agree with the war, no argument can be made to persuade you, but i would hope you can acknowledge whats working and whats not.

I swear its like some of you who hate us being in Iraq actually want the war to be a giant failure so you don't have to give any credit to the Republicans, even thought the Dems are equally responsible for us being there. Most agreed with Bush in 2003, and in 2006 they didn't cut the funding which would have ended the war immediately. Now some of you will respond to this and say it would have been political suicide. But shouldn't a politican put his beliefs before his job? i would hope so anyway.

Except we weren't there to kick their dog and make noise, we were there to capture Osama bin Laden, dead or alive, and we failed.

-Not getting Osama was a huge mistake and/or failure, im not denying that. But we were also there to topple the Taliban government no? Which we have done. Look building a new government or a democracy is no easy task. Epically in these parts of the world with little infrastructure, and having been under authoritative regimes for most of their history. I don't think anyone can argue that trying to take on two at once was more than we could chew. I agreed with Afghanistan, and not with Iraq. But now that we are there im not going to write it off as a huge failure. trying every option before us to be successful is in the best interest of both sides. Again, you don't have to agree with the war to hope that it works out, because you are afraid to give people credit.

AndyIstheMoney - because I genuinely believe those people will benefit tremedously from an Obama administration. Andy in particular will benefit from improved education in the country.

Cheers, and fingers crossed.

Just when i thought you might say something nice...By the way whetehr McCain or Obama wins, i will be doing the same thing, working my ass off trying to improve my life. Under Obama i may be paying a litte more in taxes. but whatever ill just work a little bit harder to make up for it. Im not on suicde watch like most of you lol. Im pretty sure i still decide the outcome of mu life, not my governement,

Dude jumped the shark when he threw down the "I've met many CEOs, and they're just great" line. I mean, really.

What was wrong with McVampire, anyway?

EDIT: Also, I love the polling today. Looking great.

I have met alot of upper-management people in my live of work, and know a few of them. Just expressing my opinion that they all aren't corporate vampires who suck the blood out of their employees. Alot of them are good people who really do try to make people happy and work hard. I think the perception of business in this thread is a bit skewed. And again just trying to point out, from my experience, not all people are assholes.

Wow. That's all it took?

"Met many CEOs" is slang for "I'm rich, white and priveleged, of COURSE I'm out of touch."

-Seriously fuck you for making this statement. I come from a poor family, a grandma who runs a mission and feed and clothes homeless people, and passes out toys to kids from a shelter on Christmas. I give a percentage of all of my income to church and charity. Don't act like you know me. I grew up with 4 sisters and a brother in a 3 bedroom house, poor as shit. Don't give me this out of touch shit, the whole world doesn't fit inside the labels you have in your small head.


By the way, yesterday when i was typing a response my power went out due to the massive wind, and didn't come back until sometime over the night, you know, just in case you missed me.


EDIT: meant OSAMA instead of OBAMA, come on its only one letter. Hey, that could be a new McCain ad

"John McCain...because Obama is only one letter away from Osama."

 

[Slurpy]

Decided to jump in this thread now.

What's the deal with this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVy2yh28eig

There have been also circulating reports around the internetz that, if needed, the Dems are going to do a switch-a-roo with Biden for Hillary?

He was paying respect to Hillary. Thats it. I cant fucking believe people are looking further into it than that,

 

[HocusPocus]

It's actually good to be a republican again. We might even have a shot at congress.

 

[Schlep]

The ad has to be what it is. During the primaries, Obama was the sensation that was covered all the time. The softball ad about old McCain unable to use the internet went nowhere; Ike was more interesting, Palin was more interesting. This kind of ad will bring the focus back to Obama and goad the media into taking a harder stance towards McCain (I hope).

Also has anyone noticed that the press releases from the Obama campaign are now including harsh quotes from Biden? I'm guessing this is an effort to put more eyes on his stump speeches.