McCain vs. Obama

[Bristlebane]

Of course it's not a bad move. He's a politician, just like McCain, Bush, and everyone else who has ever run for president.

They all pander to certain groups of people while hoping the other groups of people on the opposite spectrum forget and/or don't pay attention.

Just like all the rest, Obama is an elite, pandering politician who will do or say whatever it takes to interest groups to get votes.

Everyone running for president is shit.

There is no candididate running who will actually stand up for their own beliefs and stick with them.

[GrobbeeTrull2.0]

Why do you want an "everyman" for President? I certainly hope he's elite and smarter/better than me.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Bristlebane

Obama to expand Bush's faith based programs



My Way News - Obama to expand Bush's faith based programs

You see what he is doing here. He is taking away the GOP's ownership of religion and patriotism. My guess is that Jim Webb will be his VP to make the circle complete.

Fear Jim Webb you Republican bitches. If he becomes the VP, not only will the elites be Democrat but Webb represents blue collar "god and country" Americans. The Republican Party is now in shambles but will be destroyed. Oh how I will take great pleasure at the destruction of the Republican party. The only thing better than the destruction of the Republican Party would be the death of Sean Hannity.

[Bristlebane]

Originally Posted by GrobbeeTrull2.0

Why do you want an "everyman" for President? I certainly hope he's elite and smarter/better than me.

He could literally say he supports the Iraq war, and the reasons for going there, and you'd phrase it in some way that it was a good thing.

You can't criticize him for anything. He's MAGICKAL.

[spronk]

because every candidate who has stuck to their beliefs always ends up with a marginal percentage of the vote.

we're a nation of giant, self-centered douche faggots who tell politicians we like them to be honest, but when they are we say they are crazy and not right for us. half our voters pick one crazy issue as a litmus test for president (pro-choice/life, guns, gays, owls, trees). half our voters want a president who loves jesus more than they do. Even though its probably the most important thing happening in the past 10 years, we ignore all news about Iraq/Afghanistan and change the channel when something about it comes on. The second a story about gasoline comes up though we immediately have opinions and know exactly who to blame, because nothing is more important than what is affecting me personally.

running for president is like trying to babysit a group of 50 kids, 50 dogs, and 50 cats. by voting day all you've got is a ton of shit on you.

[Bristlebane]

Originally Posted by spronk

because every candidate who has stuck to their beliefs always ends up with a marginal percentage of the vote.

we're a nation of giant, self-centered douche faggots who tell politicians we like them to be honest, but when they are we say they are crazy and not right for us. half our voters pick one crazy issue as a litmus test for president (pro-choice/life, guns, gays, owls, trees). half our voters want a president who loves jesus more than they do. Even though its probably the most important thing happening in the past 10 years, we ignore all news about Iraq/Afghanistan and change the channel when something about it comes on. The second a story about gasoline comes up though we immediately have opinions and know exactly who to blame, because nothing is more important than what is affecting me personally.

running for president is like trying to babysit a group of 50 kids, 50 dogs, and 50 cats. and at the end of your term all you've got is a ton of shit on you.

Stop making excuses for two shitty candidates who won't make a stand on anything.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Originally Posted by Bristlebane

Stop making excuses for two shitty candidates who won't make a stand on anything.

Candidates who are extreme can not win. They are President of everybody not just one group. Even Ronald Reagan was ok with open borders and illegal immigrants.

Notice that extreme Candidates lose every election.

[Soriak]

What's the issue with letting churches carry out some of the aid work? If they have the volunteers and the will to help out, it seems prudent to help them do so. Certainly cheaper than hiring people and trying to set up something from scratch. Plus, the people you get are actually committed to improving the community, which surely leads to better results than people doing it for the money. It's not like people will have to sit through a sermon to get some food.

As for discriminating based on faith for religious groups: Isn't that the case already? Can a gay atheist sue if he doesn't get a job with a conservative religious organization? That wouldn't make sense...

[Bristlebane]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

Candidates who are extreme can not win. They are President of everybody not just one group. Even Ronald Reagan was ok with open borders and illegal immigrants.

Notice that extreme Candidates lose every election.

While that is true, it's sickening to see people saying how much INTEGRITY Obama has when he's just as willing to play musical chairs as anyone else running for president.

It'll be a great day when someone states their beliefs, runs for president, and doesn't change them based on what state or area he's politicking on that partiuclar day.

[Bristlebane]

Originally Posted by Soriak

What's the issue with letting churches carry out some of the aid work? If they have the volunteers and the will to help out, it seems prudent to help them do so. Certainly cheaper than hiring people and trying to set up something from scratch. Plus, the people you get are actually committed to improving the community, which surely leads to better results than people doing it for the money. It's not like people will have to sit through a sermon to get some food.

As for discriminating based on faith for religious groups: Isn't that the case already? Can a gay atheist sue if he doesn't get a job with a conservative religious organization? That wouldn't make sense...

This from the guy who was saying things like "I hope Obama is just faking his religion. I hope he's really an atheist."

Any of you rabid Obama supporters will go along with ANYTHING he says, and you'll change your view on anything to match his view.

And you're not even a member of this country, nor can you vote.

[Sunder]

Originally Posted by Bristlebane

It'll be a great day when someone states their beliefs, runs for president, and doesn't change them based on what state or area he's politicking on that partiuclar day.

It happened this year. You just weren't paying attention.

Enjoy your 4% of the vote.

[GrobbeeTrull2.0]

How does hoping he's an an athiest change the fact that he's prudently using an existing support structure?

I don't think he's magickal, I think he's prudent. I already voiced my displeasure with him "rejecting" Clark's statement, so what more do you want from me?

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by Bristlebane

This from the guy who was saying things like "I hope Obama is just faking his religion. I hope he's really an atheist."

So? I still stand by that... but him not using the Presidency to spread his religious believes is the next best thing and there's no indication that he plans on doing this. I think he has so far been very pragmatic about his faith, I do hope he remains that way.

I don't see the issue with churches as community support groups. As long as faith or membership isn't a criteria for getting aid, what motivates the volunteers is secondary in my view. Another point should be that the effectiveness of the aid isn't hindered by religion: aid groups that refuse to make available condoms in Africa, for example, shouldn't get federal funding. But that doesn't really apply here...

It's not like I agree with everything Obama says... I don't think NAFTA should be changed. Luckily, he has been toning down the rhetoric on that. Ideally he shouldn't have opposed NAFTA during the primaries, but pragmatically he wasn't going to win without doing so. He's a politician, I don't expect him not to act like one. Losing an election on principle isn't something he should be aiming for.

[Kolle]

i would support that move if it included religions besides christianity and atheist ran charity groups. in other words, the atheist group can deny people a job if they belong to a religion.

[Kuro]

You don't see people just "standing up for their own beliefs" because you'll never be elected President on your own beliefs. The electorate is fractured into a billion different pieces that get pissy if you don't give them their nod and promise them your support (which, most of the time, compromises your personal beliefs).

And, quite frankly, the President should be in office to support and defend the beliefs of the Americans who put him there, not his own.