Clinton and Obama

[Gecko]

It was nice to see a debate not moderated by people throwing complete softballs or pandering, a la the MSNBC stooges.

I'd guess the people hating this debate were Obama supporters.

The questions were valid. Since the two candidates have identical views on most of the other issues, and character is of extreme importance in electing a President, this was really the only good debate we've had so far.

I think both candidates will regret the absolutism they pushed on some of the issues.

[Tristinn]

The debate was fucking trash.

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

Is that more important than Obama's view on [other stuff]?

Considering that they asked questions about that other stuff, I'm not sure what you're complaining about.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Gecko

It was nice to see a debate not moderated by people throwing complete softballs or pandering, a la the MSNBC stooges.

I'd guess the people hating this debate were Obama supporters.

The questions were valid. Since the two candidates have identical views on most of the other issues, and character is of extreme importance in electing a President, this was really the only good debate we've had so far.

I think both candidates will regret the absolutism they pushed on some of the issues.

So when we get to the general election, do you think it is valid to spend the first hour grilling John McCain on:

• His wife being addicted to pain pills.
• His previous affair with Iseman.
• The Keating Five.
• The black baby Karl Rove said he has.
• Why he sang "Bomb Iran"
• Why he left his first wife after she had an accident.
• Marrying his mistress.
• The Vietnam propaganda tapes he made.

I don't want to hear that crap. Those are considered "hardball questions"? This is an example of how low the media has sunk.

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

] Now we have this Idiot in office for 8 years and he has killed and maimed 30000 Americans. George Bush is the worst serial killer in our history and he is still President.

And you know what that son of a bitch did next? He snuck in my laundry room and stole my fucking socks! And I am positive he is the one who left the dome light on in my car overnight so that my battery would die. I also think he orchestrated the placement of pickles on my Whopper despite my express request that this not happen!

I guess in IRB land, George Bush is responsible for all ills of the world, even those that other people advertise having done themselves. Like Iraqi insurgents. Why the fuck aren't you railing about how THEY killed and maimed 30,000 American volunteers?

[chaos]

600,000 to 1.2 million Iraqi civilians didn't volunteer. But I guess brown people don't count.

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by chaos

600,000 to 1.2 million Iraqi civilians didn't volunteer. But I guess brown people don't count.

I'll make a deal with you. I'll tell you who systematically targeted those Iraqi civilians, and you'll tell me why you're not angry at them but are angry at Bush.

[chaos]

So you think Bush was not in a position to premptively stop the war which resulted in their deaths? Bush isn't the boogyman, but he is kind of the leader of the free fucking world dude.

[chu]

Originally Posted by Tolanin

Reducing returns from investment reduces investment. This isnt up for debate, its a fact.

You want to provide evidence of that or are you going to leave it there soiled with shit?

Reasonable people invest and save for their future and retirement. 205 or 28%, they'll still save and invest the amount that they can, because some capital gain is better than nothing. They aren't generally investing with a 2 year time span to buy that really big tv. Well maybe that's the motto of dumb inbreds in the south, but not anyone that this is targeting.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Manseed

Yes. Lowering the reward causes less reason to invest. Pretty simple concept.

Seems Manseed and I agree once again. To me this is more damaging to Obama than any other issue even Wright. If his enemies stay focused on the non-issues, he will be able to slip this one in with no problem however. I actually wish they would challenge him on it so he will change his mind.

This could be an example of where both sides have good ideas. Get the best ideas from each side and elect Obama to implement them. We need to discuss these issues, not someone who lives on Obama's street. He is too busy defending himself against this crap instead of listening to good solutions from the Republican side. Not only that but if Hillary had stayed on issue, there would be more of a possibility to have a joint ticket. Now her attacks make that impossible. It would have been nice to have the advice of Hillary and Bill once Obama is in the Oval Office.

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by chaos

So you think Bush was not in a position to premptively stop the war which resulted in their deaths? Bush isn't the boogyman, but he is kind of the leader of the free fucking world dude.

Ok, just so we're on the same page:

Bush orders the lighting-fast and virtually casualty-free (on both sides) invasion of Iraq, which concludes in less than two months. This results in the toppling of a regime which murdered and terrorized its own people and clears the way for elections to occur.

Other assclowns then decide to start bombing civilians purely for the purposes of creating chaos, and you blame Bush?

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by chu

You want to provide evidence of that or are you going to leave it there soiled with shit?

Reasonable people invest and save for their future and retirement. 205 or 28%, they'll still save and invest the amount that they can, because some capital gain is better than nothing. They aren't generally investing with a 2 year time span to buy that really big tv. Well maybe that's the motto of dumb inbreds in the south, but not anyone that this is targeting.

Did it occur to you that large-scale investors will invest in places with lower capital gains tax? Meaning, not in America?

[chaos]

Edit: fuck this shit, you're a troll and I was dumb to fall for it.

[Zerai]

Originally Posted by Payndar Circusdorf

Ok, just so we're on the same page:

Bush orders the lighting-fast and virtually casualty-free (on both sides) invasion of Iraq, which concludes in less than two months. This results in the toppling of a regime which murdered and terrorized its own people and clears the way for elections to occur.

Other assclowns then decide to start bombing civilians purely for the purposes of creating chaos, and you blame Bush?

So you're saying Bush did a great job? You know that when he said the Mission accomplished the first time...it was a lie right? They obviously weren't done.

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by chaos

WHAT THE FUCK, dude are you claiming there were no Iraqi casualties in the US bombings? Jesus fucking christ dude.

No, I did not claim that. I said there were virtually no casualties. Civilian casualties for an invasion of that magnitude were extremely light.

I notice you do not dispute that Coalition forces did not target civilians but that subsequent forces specifically did target them.