The Presidency Is Not An Entry-Level Position

Page 1 of 2 12 Last
  1. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27398
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.52%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    The Presidency Is Not An Entry-Level Position


    The Presidency Is Not An Entry-Level Position
    Frank Turek
    Thursday, July 31, 2008

    Barack Obama’s recent op-ed in the New York Times declares, “It’s time to end this war.” (You remember that Senator McCain tried to respond, but the Times apparently wanted to give McCain his opinion rather than allow him to express his own. Every day I read the New York Times and the Bible just to see what both sides are doing.)

    Is Obama right? Is it time to end this war? Maybe it is time to begin drawing down our forces and handing-off more responsibility for security to Iraqi forces. This idea is gaining favor in Bagdad and Washington.

    The problem for Obama is that withdrawal, not victory, has always been his goal. Obama wanted to “end this war” when it would have meant an American defeat. The only reason a slow withdrawal is possible now is because President Bush made the unpopular but wise decision to increase our efforts while Obama and the Democrat party tried to get us to cut and run.

    This raises a larger question about Obama’s fitness for the presidency. Obama has four positions related to the war which, in my view, disqualify him for the presidency.

    First, how can a serious candidate for President of the United States have a long-standing goal to end the war rather than win it? Great presidents don’t end wars—they win them. The only way the American military can be defeated is when American leaders forfeit the fight for them. And that’s exactly what Obama has wanted to do for years.

    By forfeiting this war we will embolden Islamic radicals who will be free to turn Iraq into a new oil-rich haven where they will finance and launch a fresh round of terror attacks. We are fighting a suicidal enemy who will stop at nothing to end your freedom and mine. They will not be reasoned with, placated or appeased. They can only be defeated.

    Obama seems oblivious to these facts. He has long been more concerned with placating head-in-the-sand liberals than defeating our enemy and protecting our freedom. Government’s most fundamental duty is to protect its citizens from harm, and Obama fails to meet the most basic requirement for the job.

    Second, Obama wants to negotiate with the head of state most closely connected to the terrorists we are fighting—Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Other than the goose bumps liberals get when they think they are saving the world by talking with tyrants, there is nothing good that can come out of such negotiations. Not only would they legitimize an outspoken and dangerous enemy, but they would be an exercise in futility. How could we trust any resulting agreement with Ahmadinejad?

    Should the United States trust a character who denies the Holocaust and continually threatens Israel with comments such as, “Israel must be wiped off the map,” and “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury.”? Obama thinks so. With that kind of judgment he barely qualifies to be the mayor of San Francisco, much less the leader of the free world.

    Third, unlike President Bush, Obama will not adjust his position when the facts prove he’s wrong. Bush changed his tactics and instituted the surge. But Obama still has trouble admitting the surge worked and will not give credit to the United States soldiers who made it a success. Apparently, Obama would rather discount the brave actions of our fighting men and women than admit he made a mistake. He also persists with the absurd assertion that America is less safe since the war began. Will someone in the drive-by media ask Obama how a free Iraq and thousands of terrorists dead or on the run make us less safe?

    Finally, Obama has shown no capacity to do what presidents must do to protect the country: make the least bad choice when there are no good choices available. In fact, Obama is notorious for voting “present” in the Illinois Senate rather than taking a stand at all. If there’s one thing true about the presidency, it’s that all tough decisions rise to the top. You can’t hide by voting “present.” And in those tough decisions, there are often no good choices just less bad ones.

    Take the decision to go to war. Obama proudly claims he would have voted against the war had he been in the U.S. Senate at the time. But should he be proud?

    I hate to rehash the facts, but it’s necessary because Obama and the Democrat party either deny or ignore them: Saddam had a terrible record of WMD use and aggressive behavior. And it was he – not coalition forces— who originally initiated hostilities when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. As a result, Saddam was obligated to obey the cease fire terms that left him in power. He had to prove to the international community that he had given up his hostile ways and WMD. It was not our job to prove he hadn’t.

    But instead of signaling his repentance, Saddam’s defiant behavior required us to reopen the hostilities that he began. He violated 17 straight UN resolutions, kicked out UN inspectors looking for WMD, and continually broke the cease fire by shooting at coalition aircraft in the no-fly zone. What would a President Obama have done at the time? Passed another UN resolution? (No, that wouldn’t have allowed us to talk. How about tea at Camp David?)

    Removing Saddam may have been a bad choice, but it was the least bad of the choices. It was a necessary evil to prevent a greater evil in a post 9-11 world.

    Good presidents have the courage to execute the least bad choice and take the heat from the appeasers. Senator McCain has demonstrated that ability, while Senator Obama has done the opposite. He wants to end the war while defenders of freedom know we must win it.

    At worst, all of this reveals Obama’s ignorance; at best, his inexperience. In either case, he’s not qualified to be the leader of the free world. The Presidency is not an entry-level position.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html

  2. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11681
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.75%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    I don't know of too many people who have PoTUS experience before actually serving the position. This election has me where i'm not wanting to vote for either candidate...

    On a side note: the candidate offering to limit terms in congress would get my vote
  3. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    I agree J, all presidents dont have the experience prior to entering into office. Except for their second term, and look how well that has done for W.
    •   
       

  4. Senior Member
    Fastone's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,312
    Rep Power
    838
    Level
    27
    Lv. Percent
    31.44%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by bpmartyr View Post
    The Presidency Is Not An Entry-Level Position
    Frank Turek
    Thursday, July 31, 2008

    Barack Obama’s recent op-ed in the New York Times declares, “It’s time to end this war.” (You remember that Senator McCain tried to respond, but the Times apparently wanted to give McCain his opinion rather than allow him to express his own. Every day I read the New York Times and the Bible just to see what both sides are doing.)

    Is Obama right? Is it time to end this war? Maybe it is time to begin drawing down our forces and handing-off more responsibility for security to Iraqi forces. This idea is gaining favor in Bagdad and Washington.

    The problem for Obama is that withdrawal, not victory, has always been his goal. Obama wanted to “end this war” when it would have meant an American defeat. The only reason a slow withdrawal is possible now is because President Bush made the unpopular but wise decision to increase our efforts while Obama and the Democrat party tried to get us to cut and run.

    This raises a larger question about Obama’s fitness for the presidency. Obama has four positions related to the war which, in my view, disqualify him for the presidency.

    First, how can a serious candidate for President of the United States have a long-standing goal to end the war rather than win it? Great presidents don’t end wars—they win them. The only way the American military can be defeated is when American leaders forfeit the fight for them. And that’s exactly what Obama has wanted to do for years.

    By forfeiting this war we will embolden Islamic radicals who will be free to turn Iraq into a new oil-rich haven where they will finance and launch a fresh round of terror attacks. We are fighting a suicidal enemy who will stop at nothing to end your freedom and mine. They will not be reasoned with, placated or appeased. They can only be defeated.

    Obama seems oblivious to these facts. He has long been more concerned with placating head-in-the-sand liberals than defeating our enemy and protecting our freedom. Government’s most fundamental duty is to protect its citizens from harm, and Obama fails to meet the most basic requirement for the job.

    Second, Obama wants to negotiate with the head of state most closely connected to the terrorists we are fighting—Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Other than the goose bumps liberals get when they think they are saving the world by talking with tyrants, there is nothing good that can come out of such negotiations. Not only would they legitimize an outspoken and dangerous enemy, but they would be an exercise in futility. How could we trust any resulting agreement with Ahmadinejad?

    Should the United States trust a character who denies the Holocaust and continually threatens Israel with comments such as, “Israel must be wiped off the map,” and “Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury.”? Obama thinks so. With that kind of judgment he barely qualifies to be the mayor of San Francisco, much less the leader of the free world.

    Third, unlike President Bush, Obama will not adjust his position when the facts prove he’s wrong. Bush changed his tactics and instituted the surge. But Obama still has trouble admitting the surge worked and will not give credit to the United States soldiers who made it a success. Apparently, Obama would rather discount the brave actions of our fighting men and women than admit he made a mistake. He also persists with the absurd assertion that America is less safe since the war began. Will someone in the drive-by media ask Obama how a free Iraq and thousands of terrorists dead or on the run make us less safe?

    Finally, Obama has shown no capacity to do what presidents must do to protect the country: make the least bad choice when there are no good choices available. In fact, Obama is notorious for voting “present” in the Illinois Senate rather than taking a stand at all. If there’s one thing true about the presidency, it’s that all tough decisions rise to the top. You can’t hide by voting “present.” And in those tough decisions, there are often no good choices just less bad ones.

    Take the decision to go to war. Obama proudly claims he would have voted against the war had he been in the U.S. Senate at the time. But should he be proud?

    I hate to rehash the facts, but it’s necessary because Obama and the Democrat party either deny or ignore them: Saddam had a terrible record of WMD use and aggressive behavior. And it was he – not coalition forces— who originally initiated hostilities when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. As a result, Saddam was obligated to obey the cease fire terms that left him in power. He had to prove to the international community that he had given up his hostile ways and WMD. It was not our job to prove he hadn’t.

    But instead of signaling his repentance, Saddam’s defiant behavior required us to reopen the hostilities that he began. He violated 17 straight UN resolutions, kicked out UN inspectors looking for WMD, and continually broke the cease fire by shooting at coalition aircraft in the no-fly zone. What would a President Obama have done at the time? Passed another UN resolution? (No, that wouldn’t have allowed us to talk. How about tea at Camp David?)

    Removing Saddam may have been a bad choice, but it was the least bad of the choices. It was a necessary evil to prevent a greater evil in a post 9-11 world.

    Good presidents have the courage to execute the least bad choice and take the heat from the appeasers. Senator McCain has demonstrated that ability, while Senator Obama has done the opposite. He wants to end the war while defenders of freedom know we must win it.

    At worst, all of this reveals Obama’s ignorance; at best, his inexperience. In either case, he’s not qualified to be the leader of the free world. The Presidency is not an entry-level position.

    Once again

    Do you ever write anything of your own
    Your avatar is offensive, insulting and just plain wrong.


    :bruce3:
  5. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27398
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.52%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Fastone View Post
    Once again

    Do you ever write anything of your own
    Your avatar is offensive, insulting and just plain wrong.


    :bruce3:

    You are not obligated to read the articles I post. I enjoy them and post them up for others to enjoy, or not.

    I chose my avatar because I thought it was a funny picture; you are the only one who has ever complained. I can't figure out why you would take offense to it or consider it an insult. Then in another thread you give me this:

    Seems to me that someone needs to grow up.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  6. Registered User
    RobInKuwait's Avatar
    Stats
    6'4"  269 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,272
    Rep Power
    1265
    Level
    34
    Lv. Percent
    69.5%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I agree J, all presidents dont have the experience prior to entering into office. Except for their second term, and look how well that has done for W.
    True. But this election is like choosing the new company CEO between the experienced VP and the intern that everybody likes.
  7. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post
    True. But this election is like choosing the new company CEO between the experienced VP and the intern that everybody likes.
    While I dont disagree to an extent, I dont know if the experienced VP is experienced in what is needed. How about this (I love the way you put Obama BTW)

    The intern everyone likes, and the senile AVP that most people feel should have retired years ago.

    McCain will be a danger (Obama might not be any different either) in the war and economy when you think about how much the defecit has increased as a direct result of the war. We will never be out of bankruptcy. Now again, Obama will raise taxes, but they will be for those earning $250,000 or more. I dont 100% agree, and think both candidates suck
  8. Registered User
    RobInKuwait's Avatar
    Stats
    6'4"  269 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,272
    Rep Power
    1265
    Level
    34
    Lv. Percent
    69.5%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    While I dont disagree to an extent, I dont know if the experienced VP is experienced in what is needed. How about this (I love the way you put Obama BTW)

    The intern everyone likes, and the senile AVP that most people feel should have retired years ago.

    McCain will be a danger (Obama might not be any different either) in the war and economy when you think about how much the defecit has increased as a direct result of the war. We will never be out of bankruptcy. Now again, Obama will raise taxes, but they will be for those earning $250,000 or more. I dont 100% agree, and think both candidates suck
    The thing about the war is....we're there. Whether Obama or McCain wins, we're still going to be there. Obama even stated we will be there at least two more years...and in politicianspeak that could be 10 years. Obama also recently spoke about containing Iran and supporting Israel. How can that be better done, than from Iraq.

    Taxes on those making over 250k is a bad idea that will hit small businesses harder than any other group. Tack on that a major increase in capital gains taxes and the economy isn't looking any better.
  9. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post
    The thing about the war is....we're there. Whether Obama or McCain wins, we're still going to be there. Obama even stated we will be there at least two more years...and in politicianspeak that could be 10 years. Obama also recently spoke about containing Iran and supporting Israel. How can that be better done, than from Iraq.

    Taxes on those making over 250k is a bad idea that will hit small businesses harder than any other group. Tack on that a major increase in capital gains taxes and the economy isn't looking any better.
    I dont disagree that there is a possibility of staying there longer, but I think Obama knows that he will be a 1 term pres. if he doesnt get us out in large numbers within this first term.

    I disagree about the tax issue. Right now the middle class is dwindling from the way it is set up right now. THey are getting hit relatively harder than almost anyone, so there certainly needs to be an adjustment
  10. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,790
    Rep Power
    11681
    Level
    67
    Lv. Percent
    47.75%
    Achievements Activity AuthorityActivity ProPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Im torn on Obama. I don't like him and don't particularly care for some of his plans but I do think having someone 'new' isn't a bad thing. once you're in a system so long you're boud to get caught up in it. Among his faults, I don't see his 1st term in congress as one of them.
  11. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    I am in the same boat J. I am not a big fan, however he will be a change (good be good or bad of course), but McCain represents the old guard. Now, if Obama is able to get an experienced VP, with either real economic or foreign policy experience, then I will go with him.

    please be Joe Biden
  12. Senior Member
    Fastone's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,312
    Rep Power
    838
    Level
    27
    Lv. Percent
    31.44%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by bpmartyr View Post
    Y
    I chose my avatar because I thought it was a funny picture; you are the only one who has ever complained. I can't figure out why you would take offense to it or consider it an insult. Then in another thread you give me this:

    Seems to me that someone needs to grow up.


    I gave you this to get your attention cause I thought that was a funny picture, funny in the same way you think your avatar is. btw, growing up is something I did when you were being born.




    :bruce3:
  13. Diamond Member
    VolcomX311's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    13,250
    Rep Power
    78137
    Level
    70
    Lv. Percent
    66.31%
    Achievements Activity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Governors tend to have more applicable experience toward Presidency then Senators, IMHO.

    Completely Off Topic: President Bush made a surprise appearance on Rush Limbaugh this morning. I thought it was pretty cool.
    NSCA - CSCS
  14. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27398
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.52%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Fastone View Post
    I gave you this to get your attention cause I thought that was a funny picture, funny in the same way you think your avatar is. btw, growing up is something I did when you were being born.




    :bruce3:

    I did not post my avatar picture in the body of an estimate that quoted you and I still fail to see what is insulting or offensive about it in the first place. This: is a universal gesture that is typically used to denigrate the recipient. But of course, as you suggested, age is the actual indicator of maturity; so you will be voting for McCain then since he has many years on the "Chosen One"?
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  15. Board Moderator
    Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    47
    Posts
    31,881
    Rep Power
    778122
    Level
    95
    Lv. Percent
    28.65%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity RoyaltyActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I dont disagree that there is a possibility of staying there longer, but I think Obama knows that he will be a 1 term pres. if he doesnt get us out in large numbers within this first term.

    I disagree about the tax issue. Right now the middle class is dwindling from the way it is set up right now. THey are getting hit relatively harder than almost anyone, so there certainly needs to be an adjustment
    the middle class isn't dwindling because of taxes, they are dwindling because their position is untenable. the middle class manufacturing blue collar lifestyle is only maintainable if the middle class doesnt expect a ton of luxuries. nowadays they do.....
  16. Diamond Member
    VolcomX311's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    13,250
    Rep Power
    78137
    Level
    70
    Lv. Percent
    66.31%
    Achievements Activity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting AuthorityPosting Veteran

    Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    the middle class isn't dwindling because of taxes, they are dwindling because their position is untenable. the middle class manufacturing blue collar lifestyle is only maintainable if the middle class doesnt expect a ton of luxuries. nowadays they do.....
    well put
    NSCA - CSCS
  17. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    the middle class isn't dwindling because of taxes, they are dwindling because their position is untenable. the middle class manufacturing blue collar lifestyle is only maintainable if the middle class doesnt expect a ton of luxuries. nowadays they do.....
    I think there is more to it than that. THe middle class has been the ones that have been hit by the mortgage crisis, which of course is partially their own fault. With that said, many of the middle class jobs have been outsourced as well which has also ended up hurting the middle class.

    this is a many faceted issue
  18. Senior Member
    Fastone's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,312
    Rep Power
    838
    Level
    27
    Lv. Percent
    31.44%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Did the folks who worked for Enron expect a ton of luxuries?


    :bruce3:
  19. Senior Member
    Fastone's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,312
    Rep Power
    838
    Level
    27
    Lv. Percent
    31.44%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by bpmartyr View Post
    I did not post my avatar picture in the body of an estimate that quoted you and I still fail to see what is insulting or offensive about it in the first place. This: is a universal gesture that is typically used to denigrate the recipient. But of course, as you suggested, age is the actual indicator of maturity; so you will be voting for McCain then since he has many years on the "Chosen One"?

    1. As a great thinker it should be obvious to you why your avatar is offensive to me. My method of getting you're attention though admittedly tacky was effective, no?

    2. No I won't be voting for John McCain



    :bruce3:
  20. Senior Member
    LilPsychotic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,606
    Rep Power
    903
    Level
    29
    Lv. Percent
    90.76%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    The democrats need this war to stay in power. Think about it, they said the same thing in 2006, and what was the result? Nothing. This war can be the scapegoat of poor economic times for years to come, whether its warrented or not. Both parties have failed, both parties are corrupt. Democrats and republicans are one in the same, have been for years. We need a change, something fresh and new. Obama is terrifying, and Mccain is a sad choice to say the least. What kind of conservative votes to expand the Americans with disabilities act? Anyway, I have half the mind to stay home this election, and pray that a real conservative will come to the forfront sometime in the near future. Mccain thinks that he has the conservative vote locked up, not this right winger. I'd rather let the cards lay as they fall. If we get a one term obama, so be it. It's the only thing that can get the GOP back to some remnance of conservatism. Some say its crazy, but I'd rather have obama sink this economy than Bush III. Any rebuttal is welcomed.
  21. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by LilPsychotic View Post
    The democrats need this war to stay in power. Think about it, they said the same thing in 2006, and what was the result? Nothing. This war can be the scapegoat of poor economic times for years to come, whether its warrented or not. Both parties have failed, both parties are corrupt. Democrats and republicans are one in the same, have been for years. We need a change, something fresh and new. Obama is terrifying, and Mccain is a sad choice to say the least. What kind of conservative votes to expand the Americans with disabilities act? Anyway, I have half the mind to stay home this election, and pray that a real conservative will come to the forfront sometime in the near future. Mccain thinks that he has the conservative vote locked up, not this right winger. I'd rather let the cards lay as they fall. If we get a one term obama, so be it. It's the only thing that can get the GOP back to some remnance of conservatism. Some say its crazy, but I'd rather have obama sink this economy than Bush III. Any rebuttal is welcomed.
    well said, it is something I am considering as well <staying home in November>. Neither candidate is worth a hill of beans IMO. I think the economy is going to kill McCain, as the average american looks at it as a republican caused problem, which it was not. If the economy doesnt rebound and do it soon , I think McCain is sunk, and Obama wins. Now the interesting issue will be 2012 and if the Repubs can find someone to unite the party to beat Obama. If Romney was not a mormon <sorry but religion is important in this country> I think he would have wrapped this all up on his own months ago.

    We are on a very slippery slope hear, and it will be tough to climb out, especially with either of these 2 leading the way
  22. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27398
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.52%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Fastone View Post
    1. As a great thinker it should be obvious to you why your avatar is offensive to me. My method of getting you're attention though admittedly tacky was effective, no?

    2. No I won't be voting for John McCain



    :bruce3:

    1. I am not a great thinker. Is there a reason that you are unwilling to delineate the offense?

    2. I was just following your own logic to it's natural conclusion.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  23. Snuggle Club™ mascot
    bpmartyr's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  175 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    41
    Posts
    4,443
    Rep Power
    27398
    Level
    45
    Lv. Percent
    88.52%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    well said, it is something I am considering as well <staying home in November>. Neither candidate is worth a hill of beans IMO. I think the economy is going to kill McCain, as the average american looks at it as a republican caused problem, which it was not. If the economy doesnt rebound and do it soon , I think McCain is sunk, and Obama wins. Now the interesting issue will be 2012 and if the Repubs can find someone to unite the party to beat Obama. If Romney was not a mormon <sorry but religion is important in this country> I think he would have wrapped this all up on his own months ago.

    We are on a very slippery slope hear, and it will be tough to climb out, especially with either of these 2 leading the way

    If religion is really all that important Obama shouldn't have a chance based on the church he has attended the last 20 years. IMO.
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html
  24. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by bpmartyr View Post
    If religion is really all that important Obama shouldn't have a chance based on the church he has attended the last 20 years. IMO.
    actually it sadly is important. Look back to 2004 and the exit polls as to why people voted for W. "He went to church" was the #1 answer. How friggin ridiculous is that? I personally wouldnt care if he worshipped an alligator, if he was a strong leader, with a head on his shoulders that was his own, i can live with it. However, what we have had the last 8 years has been recklessness with both lives and money. Something that I cannot stand. Sadly, these 2 ding a lings might be cut from the same cloth is one way or another.
  25. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7018

    Quote Originally Posted by Fastone View Post
    Did the folks who worked for Enron expect a ton of luxuries?


    :bruce3:

    The folks had an option to have their plans all in one stock or to diversify. Retirement funds are not a right, its an investment with inherent risk if you invest in stocks.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  26. Board Moderator
    Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    47
    Posts
    31,881
    Rep Power
    778122
    Level
    95
    Lv. Percent
    28.65%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity RoyaltyActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    if he was a strong leader, with a head on his shoulders that was his own, i can live with it.
    so you mean someone who has principles and sticks to them regardless of public or foreign opinion? Someone like Bush? not someone like Obama who his principles are based on who his audience is at the moment? We leave iraq immediately, we stay as long as we have to. We will never drill for offshore oil as its pointless, offshore drilling may make sense as part of an overall plan.

    And before saying something about his approval rating being the lowest in whatever statistical period, keep in mind that approval rating of the democrat majority congress is less than 2/3 of what bush's approval rating is....
  27. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    so you mean someone who has principles and sticks to them regardless of public or foreign opinion? Someone like Bush? not someone like Obama who his principles are based on who his audience is at the moment? We leave iraq immediately, we stay as long as we have to. We will never drill for offshore oil as its pointless, offshore drilling may make sense as part of an overall plan.
    first, you will get no disagreement from me on Obama. However, both he and the Mcelderly are two severe flip floppers. Bush doesnt stick to his guns, the decisions are made for him based on faulty intelligence

    Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    And before saying something about his approval rating being the lowest in whatever statistical period, keep in mind that approval rating of the democrat majority congress is less than 2/3 of what bush's approval rating is....
    i couldnt agree more, both Bush and this Congress have been terrible and need to be replaced asap.
  28. Advanced Member
    atjnutrition2's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  195 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    609
    Rep Power
    385
    Level
    19
    Lv. Percent
    54.85%

    Saw something interesting the other day. In a gallup poll on how satisfied the country is with the congress...it was lower than it has been in the history of the poll. And this is a democrat led congress. hmmmm.
  29. Advanced Member
    atjnutrition2's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  195 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    609
    Rep Power
    385
    Level
    19
    Lv. Percent
    54.85%

    Quote Originally Posted by LilPsychotic View Post
    The democrats need this war to stay in power. Think about it, they said the same thing in 2006, and what was the result? Nothing. This war can be the scapegoat of poor economic times for years to come, whether its warrented or not. Both parties have failed, both parties are corrupt. Democrats and republicans are one in the same, have been for years. We need a change, something fresh and new. Obama is terrifying, and Mccain is a sad choice to say the least. What kind of conservative votes to expand the Americans with disabilities act? Anyway, I have half the mind to stay home this election, and pray that a real conservative will come to the forfront sometime in the near future. Mccain thinks that he has the conservative vote locked up, not this right winger. I'd rather let the cards lay as they fall. If we get a one term obama, so be it. It's the only thing that can get the GOP back to some remnance of conservatism. Some say its crazy, but I'd rather have obama sink this economy than Bush III. Any rebuttal is welcomed.

    The sad fact is that the game of politics is played to keep a certain party in power. I haven't seen a truly altruistic candidate for an elected position in years if ever. Elections and partisanship will continue to worsen for years to come. An even sadder fact is that IF someone did come along who ran for office because they truly wanted to help the country, they would never be elected by either party.
  30. Advanced Member
    saludable24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    649
    Rep Power
    18357
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    83.65%

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    I disagree about the tax issue. Right now the middle class is dwindling from the way it is set up right now. THey are getting hit relatively harder than almost anyone, so there certainly needs to be an adjustment
    I just don't understand this argument. It never makes sense. So, because the middle class struggles we should tax the upper class more? Please tell me how taking more money from those who pay the majority of the tax burden in the first place raises up the middle class's standard of living? Thats the same as saying because the middle class can't have everything the upper class has, we must take more from the upper class so things are "fair". What a bunch of socialistic/communistic Bull Sh1t.

    Life isn't supposed to be fair. If we had everything we ever wanted there would be no incentive to improve ourselves and thereby our status and living conditions. There would be little purpose in life other than existing. Capitalism gives incentive to better ourselves and help others do the same. Those who choose not to do so do not deserve the blessings attained by those who do. Taking even more from those who deserve wealth through their hard work to supposedly make things "fair" is just wrong on so many levels.

    And for the record I'm just barely in the middle class making well under the 30k/year mark. But I have incentive to get even more education and work hard to get promoted and am in the process of doing so because I believe in the capitalist system and more importantly myself.

    Sorry, rant off. I just hate seeing this argument made on why we should tax the upperclass even more when the top 10% pay something like 50% of the tax burden.

    The problem isn't that the government needs more income, it's that they need to stop spending our money on crap projects and initiatives and start running itself in an efficient manner.
  31. Board Moderator
    Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    47
    Posts
    31,881
    Rep Power
    778122
    Level
    95
    Lv. Percent
    28.65%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity RoyaltyActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    i couldnt agree more, both Bush and this Congress have been terrible and need to be replaced asap.
    i would be happy to have obama as president, if we had 60 republican seats in the senate. (the house can go either way at that point really)
  32. Advanced Member
    saludable24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    649
    Rep Power
    18357
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    83.65%

    Quote Originally Posted by atjnutrition2 View Post
    The sad fact is that the game of politics is played to keep a certain party in power. I haven't seen a truly altruistic candidate for an elected position in years if ever. Elections and partisanship will continue to worsen for years to come. An even sadder fact is that IF someone did come along who ran for office because they truly wanted to help the country, they would never be elected by either party.
    That is unfortunately true of our pathetic government in Washington. It doesn't matter if an idea or bill comes up that will benefit the American people, it only matters if the controlling party can use it to stay in power or the minority can use it to oust the majority. Truely pathetic.

    Imposing term limits on congress and prohibiting gifts would solve part of the problem, but the rediculous thing is that congress is in charge of regulating itself. With the amount of corruption entrenched so deeply within congress there is no way such bafoons would give up any of their power themselves.

    I imagine our Founding Fathers would be glad we are still here as a nation, but would weep at the sorry state of our government leadership.
  33. Board Moderator
    Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    47
    Posts
    31,881
    Rep Power
    778122
    Level
    95
    Lv. Percent
    28.65%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity RoyaltyActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting Pro

    we have reached the point where it is technically feasible to have a direct democracy rather than a representative republic and i would be happy to see that happen
  34. Advanced Member
    saludable24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    649
    Rep Power
    18357
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    83.65%

    Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    we have reached the point where it is technically feasible to have a direct democracy rather than a representative republic and i would be happy to see that happen
    The only problem I see with that is the mob mentality that could ensue on some issues such as taxing the upper class even more or giving away health care at the tax payer's expense to everyone making less than $100,000.00 just because there are more people in the middle and lower classes than the upper class.

    I do, however, think this might be something interesting as far as Presidential elections go; getting rid of the electoral college would eliminate some of the confusion, but I believe there would have to be an Amendment to change this. Again I think it is an interesting idea, not necessarily a good one. It could become a slippery slope leading to scenarios such as what I mentioned above.

    Our Founding Fathers really were geniuses with regards to what they did to build and set up our nation as well as people who cared about the nation they just formed and the survival of it and its rights, privilages, and oportunities for upper, middle, and lower classes.

    If you can't tell I really enjoyed studying history and politics.
    Last edited by saludable24; 08-03-2008 at 09:24 PM. Reason: one more comment
  35. Board Moderator
    Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    47
    Posts
    31,881
    Rep Power
    778122
    Level
    95
    Lv. Percent
    28.65%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity RoyaltyActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting Pro

    well, my thought is leaving the republic representative portion as it is, but have the actual voting on bills be direct after a much simplified process in the house/senate
  36. Advanced Member
    saludable24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    649
    Rep Power
    18357
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    83.65%

    Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    well, my thought is leaving the republic representative portion as it is, but have the actual voting on bills be direct after a much simplified process in the house/senate
    Can you imagine congress sending out a governmental budget for the American people to vote on showing that we would be overspending half a trillion dollars and knowing that that would be paid for by them? They wouldn't even dare do such absurd crap if they were accountable to us in such a manner.
  37. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,470
    Rep Power
    1083706
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    45.81%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by saludable24 View Post
    I just don't understand this argument. It never makes sense. So, because the middle class struggles we should tax the upper class more? Please tell me how taking more money from those who pay the majority of the tax burden in the first place raises up the middle class's standard of living? Thats the same as saying because the middle class can't have everything the upper class has, we must take more from the upper class so things are "fair". What a bunch of socialistic/communistic Bull Sh1t.

    Life isn't supposed to be fair. If we had everything we ever wanted there would be no incentive to improve ourselves and thereby our status and living conditions. There would be little purpose in life other than existing. Capitalism gives incentive to better ourselves and help others do the same. Those who choose not to do so do not deserve the blessings attained by those who do. Taking even more from those who deserve wealth through their hard work to supposedly make things "fair" is just wrong on so many levels.

    And for the record I'm just barely in the middle class making well under the 30k/year mark. But I have incentive to get even more education and work hard to get promoted and am in the process of doing so because I believe in the capitalist system and more importantly myself.

    Sorry, rant off. I just hate seeing this argument made on why we should tax the upperclass even more when the top 10% pay something like 50% of the tax burden.

    The problem isn't that the government needs more income, it's that they need to stop spending our money on crap projects and initiatives and start running itself in an efficient manner
    .
    The bolded part is 100% correct. As much as people ***** and moan about dems, it has been the republican administration (for 6 years prior to this terrible congress) that has spent and spent and spent.

    in terms of tax, the saddest aspect is that in this world, the rich get rich, while the rest of us watch. So out of fundamental fairness there is a need to "even" the playing field a bit. Keep in mind that the wealthy class here is roughly the top 3% (give or take) and a slight increase in tax which they would bairly feel, could do wonders for the rest of the country.
  38. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7018

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post

    in terms of tax, the saddest aspect is that in this world, the rich get rich, while the rest of us watch.
    I'm not watching...you can but I certainly won't.

    The "rich" are not predominantly made up of old money passed down through generations. The majority of the ultra rich now is new money, not old. Innovation coupled with hard work makes the "rich" rich. Its just easier to stay there once you get there...

    This class warfare BS is the same attitude that will keep you from wealth.
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  39. Board Moderator
    Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    47
    Posts
    31,881
    Rep Power
    778122
    Level
    95
    Lv. Percent
    28.65%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity RoyaltyActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Reaper329 View Post
    The bolded part is 100% correct. As much as people ***** and moan about dems, it has been the republican administration (for 6 years prior to this terrible congress) that has spent and spent and spent.

    in terms of tax, the saddest aspect is that in this world, the rich get rich, while the rest of us watch. So out of fundamental fairness there is a need to "even" the playing field a bit. Keep in mind that the wealthy class here is roughly the top 3% (give or take) and a slight increase in tax which they would bairly feel, could do wonders for the rest of the country.
    why should they pay more? they already pay a higher percentage as well as way higher absolute dollars. a man earning 40k a year pays an insignificant amount of taxes vs a man making 400k. And the man making 400k does not use more government services.
  40. Advanced Member
    saludable24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    649
    Rep Power
    18357
    Level
    20
    Lv. Percent
    83.65%

    Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    why should they pay more? they already pay a higher percentage as well as way higher absolute dollars. a man earning 40k a year pays an insignificant amount of taxes vs a man making 400k. And the man making 400k does not use more government services.
    Exactly. And the notion that the playing field must be evened is complete CRAP. The rich get rich because they make themselves useful to others by providing goods and services to others. They do so by hard work, ie. getting themselves an education which will allow them to get paid better anywhere that hires them and by doing quality work in whatever field they are in. All this leads to higher income which can then be INVESTED either in stocks or in doing what most do in order to attain wealth, investment in oneself in the form of a small business they get going with their own money. All this brings even higher returns and leads to wealth.

    NO ONE is forbidden from working towards getting a raise or a promotion to raise their income level. NO ONE is forbidden from attaining a higher education to make them more valuable to employers. NO ONE is forbidden from looking for another job that pays better. In that sense the playing field is even enough for anyone with the will and determination to do so can become wealthy.

    You know what? Life isn't fair, some of us are born into better circumstances than others. Some of us are not afforded opportunities that others have as a result of their birth and economic status. But NO ONE is forbidden from changing and lifting themselves up from less fortunate circumstances to greatness. This process may take longer for some than others depending on their circumstances, but it is open to all.

    Taxing the wealthy even more will not change the fact that opportunities exist for all if we are willing to pursue them. Taking more money to give in the form of ever expanding and extended welfare, medicaid, and other programs to those who have opportunities but won't take the initiative to get themselves out of poverty or raise their standard of living in the first place is a Mockery to the American way. We are guaranteed Life, Liberty, and the PURSUTE of Happiness by the Constitution. We are not guaranteed that the use of our lives and liberty WILL result in our happiness and/or wealth.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Philadelphia Eagles Position by Position breakdown
    By R1balla in forum Sports Talk
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-11-2011, 06:19 PM
  2. HUNDATAR+need to build muscle, RLS contest entry
    By Hundatar in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-26-2011, 12:16 PM
  3. George Will-- McCain is unfit for the presidency
    By BodyWizard in forum Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-23-2008, 11:32 AM
  4. What's your position on gun rights?
    By AM07 in forum Politics
    Replies: 165
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 08:58 PM
  5. new entry from italy
    By ironbbvip in forum General Chat
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-01-2006, 12:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in