Second Presidential Debate -- The Stakes

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

As of October 6th, Obama's lead has been cemented to such a degree that he's maintained 5-9 digit leads on the national level, and is looking to turn some of the previously committed Republican states blue. In fact, his lead is so strong that all the real remaining toss up states usually trend Republican: Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, Colorado, Nevada, Florida and Ohio. Some major networks already believe that Obama has topped the 270 electoral goal through research and poll averages, and most voters have shown that 1) the economy is their top concern this election, and 2) Obama is the man they feel can take it on. In other words, Obama's lead has peaked. But tomorrow, the second crucial debate is on, and it's a debate that McCain absolutely needs to perform well in to stay afloat. Bad news for McCain: he's under pressure to turn things around quickly, given there are under 30 days left until November 4th, and the debate will focus completely on economics, a topic the general public don't feel he's well versed in. The Good news for McCain? Tomorrow's debate will be a town hall format, an atmosphere that McCain usually does very well in, and this gives him a chance to connect with the voters in the final stretch.

So the stakes are exceptionally high for John McCain right now, but on the bright side for him, at least Obama peaked sooner and not later. John has two more debates to get momentum on his side, and that means either proving his prowess on economic issues, or changing the subject entirely (which he and Sarah are already beginning to do, if you've been following the news). What do you think will happen tomorrow? Will John perform so well that he begins closing the gap, or will voters think Obama won 2-0? And if it's the latter, what's the state of affairs as far as election day is concerned? How are McCain's chances?

[Lucas]

By changing the topic, you mean screaming, "REVEREND WRIGHT!" "REVEREND WRIGHT!" "REVEREND WRIGHT!" in hopes that conservative Christians will put their Church over their finances? Yeah, I've expected this for some time and frankly, I think it will work like it does every time. I just don't know how well it will work because the times are so desperate.

Americans are shallow. I hope upon McCain's inevitable mentioning of Jeremiah Wright tomorrow night, Obama throws back McCain's pastor's quotes about Jews and Hitler. Of course, we all know he won't. He's too polite, and then the discussion will be about patriotism and values until November while the nation goes bankrupt. Works like a charm every time.

This stuff about pastors and values is irrelevant to how we will get America out of political, financial, and moral bankruptcy, but this is the kind of stuff that wins elections. It's also why that no matter how far ahead Obama is in the polls, I still think McCain will win.

[MR EPIC]

Gee, I wonder which way this thread is leaning? :rolleyes:

[Tanooki]

Well I'm not delusional enough to think that McCain doesn't have a hell of a fight against him. Going back over many years of history Democrats tend to win hands down on the Presidential level when going into an election year having the economy simply cluster****ed. I imagine the mentality behind it is people feel bad, they're panicked, and they'll take any big brother and handout they can to make things rosey...something democrats are known for, while the Republican side believes in work hard, get what you earn (which honestly is the right way to do it, freeloaders suck.)

Had in theory Paulson kept his big stupid mouth shut, and by some stroke of luck this crap let's say wouldn't bubble over and be in the minds of everyone until say early next year, McCain wouldn't be in a bad spot right now...but that's fairy dust fantasy. Given the ****storm tanking the dow and everywhere else took in the last 24hours I'd say McCain has a 66% chance of failure at this rate. The only solace a moderate/right or right leaning type can take is that the economy is so wacked the most financially damaging tax plans and other crap Obama was wanting to do he can't do because the money isn't there, and if he did he'd get a one-termer blowback out of it most likely.

Honestly I'd say McCain should do whatever he can at this rate whether it is nice or not at this point to try and claw back a few percentage points. As long as he throws some good mud that'll stick and isn't made up it could do some serious harm to Obama which is fine, BUT...Obama could throw the Keating 5 crap back at McCain in kind. Even though the old timer didn't get hosed on that like the others, perception shows he was noted for 'bad judgment' which could be enough. I'd say he should throw out there anything Hillary did that really tweaked off the democrats in various swing states hugely against him as it may just be enough. People have short memories in many cases so anything is plausible.

[Lizzaroni]

McCain knows jack **** about economics. Fortunately for him, so do most Americans. He probably won't have to change the subject as long as he can keep the parameters of the debate very broad and vague. He'll stick with his usual "The economy is strong and resilient" and "the fundamentals are still strong" lines, while occasionally tossing out a "free market" lines to all the ****heads who mouth laissez faire but want their Wall Street bailout, while the rest of us throw up in our mouth over his gall.

[Lucas]

I imagine the mentality behind it is people feel bad, they're panicked, and they'll take any big brother and handout they can to make things rosey...something democrats are known for, while the Republican side believes in work hard, get what you earn (which honestly is the right way to do it, freeloaders suck.)

I don't know anybody who doesn't believe in hard work for what you earn. It's just hard to find work when all the local businesses are going overseas and the economy is plummeting to hell thanks to the unregulated economy John McCain promotes. I know this mess we are in is just as much the fault of the ignorant douchebags who took out those loans they couldn't afford, but it's equally the fault of the unregulated market that offered the loans to them. McCain was promoting this setup a week before the system fell apart.

Case in point: John McCain knows sh*t about economics, but people know less. All he has to do is keep people thinking that Democrats are one step up from communists when the voters get gun shy around November 1st and everything will work out just fine for him.

[Tanooki]

I'm glad you don't know any freeloaders around you or personally, but being from a town with a large minority base who really uses all they can of the taxpayer dollars that crap really pisses me off. Free food, free daycare, free(or damn near it) housing+utilities, etc at the cost of taxpayers and a fair few of them just do the minimum to give the appearance of looking for work to keep it coming. Mind you part of the issue is the fairly long term used carsalesman douchebag of a mayor we have here that keeps doing lots of dumb/bad stuff and keeps getting re-hired by the idiots of society. :(

Well then lets not just blame McCain but every other dem and rep in the congress from sometime in the 1970s on when it all started. Pinning it on McCain out of pro-Obama convenience is fairly cheap. Most politicians don't know crap about economy, just enough to know slightly more than the public so they can sound well versed in it. The sad thing is, those few who should and control those necks of the congress/senate have proven they know even less than McCain has been tagged for (death glaring at Barney Frank and Chris Dodd) the final implosion we're having now.

[Lucas]

The economy was going to crater no matter what thanks to failing economics practices, but Bush accelerated the process by straining the infrastructure beyond the breaking point. Neither candidate can fix the consequences of thirty years of failed Reaganomics in one term. All the next president can do is figure out how to run the country with Bush's record deficit and debt to China. Frankly, I don't know how we're going to get out of it.

But whatever. I'm not voting for Obama for the economy. He can't fix it. There's a whole book of other reasons though.

[Tanooki]

Wow 30 years of Reaganomics...good one. Stop living in denial as this was started well into the early 1970s in the legistlative. I'm not saying Reagan didn't help matters, he had his hand, but at least try to spread the blame fairly. The huge tipping point if anything came in the 1990s mandating by law and not regulating over the limits Clinton set for new homes. They wanted to get so many people into new homes they forced banks to take at least 20% of their mortgages under the 'risky' category of people almost surely who will never be able to pay it off if the levels spike a 10th of a percent or so as they did a few years back starting the mortgage landslide. As they didn't set a 20% level, some dumb banks push it way way higher than that placing themselves in stupidly dangerous territory causing the snowball effect of the last few weeks end result of bad mortgages causing bad debt, being insured(AIG) by the blind or naive causing the domino effect.

The next 4 years probably 8 will be one of if those in power have sanity taxes that remain flat, no sweeping changes in plans (health, etc) because they'll cost tons which we don't have, and just trying to dig out of it. In exact 12mo we went from 14200 -> 9900 on the stock market as of 10/6 which is pathetic.

[Darc Requiem]

Wow 30 years of Reaganomics...good one. Stop living in denial as this was started well into the early 1970s in the legistlative. I'm not saying Reagan didn't help matters, he had his hand, but at least try to spread the blame fairly. The huge tipping point if anything came in the 1990s mandating by law and not regulating over the limits Clinton set for new homes. They wanted to get so many people into new homes they forced banks to take at least 20% of their mortgages under the 'risky' category of people almost surely who will never be able to pay it off if the levels spike a 10th of a percent or so as they did a few years back starting the mortgage landslide. As they didn't set a 20% level, some dumb banks push it way way higher than that placing themselves in stupidly dangerous territory causing the snowball effect of the last few weeks end result of bad mortgages causing bad debt, being insured(AIG) by the blind or naive causing the domino effect.

The next 4 years probably 8 will be one of if those in power have sanity taxes that remain flat, no sweeping changes in plans (health, etc) because they'll cost tons which we don't have, and just trying to dig out of it. In exact 12mo we went from 14200 -> 9900 on the stock market as of 10/6 which is pathetic.

The money we don't have argument has no weight with me any longer. We never have any money to help the American public get health care but we can always find enough money to go to war or give away in aid to other countries. If we going to debt ourselves into ruin we can at least do so helping out own citizens.

The economic problems aren't limited to one party. Reagan turned our national debt from a mole hill into a mountain with his policies. Trickle down economics is the meaning of epic fail. Clinton's free trade agenda was deeply flawed. Our politicians always screw us on trade deals. We never get an equal deal. The agreements always seem to favor the other country. Bush...well if you look up cluster f*ck in the dictionary you see his photo.

[Lizzaroni]

You're retarded if you think the economy is unregulated, and worse than that if you think Bush even remotely put a free market philosophy into practice. Case in point: the Clinton admin, for example, pressured banks to loan to folks who obviously would not qualify for them otherwise.

[Tanooki]

Well that's your choice Darc, NOT MINE. I'm not rich, and what I have I refuse to give to someone who 'needs' it. There are enough bleeding hearts out there, rich who give to charity, etc out there that can do that on their dime and so can you if you choose. I don't feel the need to prop up a system of entitlement and robin hood like shenanigans to take from me and give to those who have less either because they fell into that life or chose to milk the system. Universal healthcare is a farce and one that would hose this country as the population is too great to support such a plan...that is, unless you want to see everyone getting a huge tax increase to cover it. Do you want that?

Like Liz said, you're being retarded on your entire argument. Got to love stupid people who feel it's the president who can always wave the magic wand and take the blame for anything that's conviently too hard to explain for them so just shove the blame on the figurehead.

[Hottotty]

My only hope tonight is that Obama makes fewer attempts to find intellectual common ground. There were far too many polite gestures last time, considering John just kept calling Obama ignorant. Obama needs to stop looking like the stereotypical Democrat wuss and directly assert himself.

Preferably with fewer words. I've never heard a silver-tongue stutter and ramble so much in my life.

No one on these boards will have watched her, but the leader of the Green Party in Canada has recently shown in our debates that you really can disprove someone, prove your own point, and educate an audience, all in one sentence, all without coming off as a snob. I know Obama's got it in him to do it. John doesn't. We'll just have to wait and see, I guess.

[bountyhunter]

Well that's your choice Darc, NOT MINE. I'm not rich, and what I have I refuse to give to someone who 'needs' it. There are enough bleeding hearts out there, rich who give to charity, etc out there that can do that on their dime and so can you if you choose. I don't feel the need to prop up a system of entitlement and robin hood like shenanigans to take from me and give to those who have less either because they fell into that life or chose to milk the system. Universal healthcare is a farce and one that would hose this country as the population is too great to support such a plan...that is, unless you want to see everyone getting a huge tax increase to cover it. Do you want that?

Like Liz said, you're being retarded on your entire argument. Got to love stupid people who feel it's the president who can always wave the magic wand and take the blame for anything that's conviently too hard to explain for them so just shove the blame on the figurehead.

We're not blaming the figureheads...we're blaming the people charged with managing the economy.

Do you think Universal healthcare would cost more than this ridiculous ass war we're fighting?

[Lizzaroni]

I've said it once, I'll say it again: I don't want the government to make healthcare more affordable the way it made housing more affordable. The war's BS in its own right.

[Tanooki]

As Lizz said I'm with her on it...for those who didn't buy into Max trying to make me look like a liar on both those 2 political tests...I'm just barely to the left and slightly down towards the libertarian side too. I don't think the gov't needs to be intruding their stupid management into quite a few things, one of them is healthcare. Do I think it will cost more than the war? Maybe. Considering the amount the system as is for those self and company insured moves on a regular basis expect it to explode by some appalling exponential levels once it's made free for all.

Here's a thought for you...this is a quote I jacked from the Wikipedia for 2007, but it's sourced from here: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/proj2007.pdf

In 2007, the U.S. spent a projected $2.26 trillion on health care, or $7,439 per person.

Now Iraq runs us 10billion a month. Keep this in mind that is for those who are covered, people spending into the system. NOW, add in the fact suddenly all 300million people end up being covered and figure out how much grander that figure would be and ask me if the war is more expensive. This is why I flipped out over Hillarycare and the Barack's socialist medicine plan for America...it would bankrupt the nation. Do you feel we even if we just used the insured totals there could afford to pay for two and a quarter trillion in health care costs? I don't...and I won't.

[Darc Requiem]

Well that's your choice Darc, NOT MINE. I'm not rich, and what I have I refuse to give to someone who 'needs' it. There are enough bleeding hearts out there, rich who give to charity, etc out there that can do that on their dime and so can you if you choose. I don't feel the need to prop up a system of entitlement and robin hood like shenanigans to take from me and give to those who have less either because they fell into that life or chose to milk the system. Universal healthcare is a farce and one that would hose this country as the population is too great to support such a plan...that is, unless you want to see everyone getting a huge tax increase to cover it. Do you want that?

Like Liz said, you're being retarded on your entire argument. Got to love stupid people who feel it's the president who can always wave the magic wand and take the blame for anything that's conviently too hard to explain for them so just shove the blame on the figurehead.

Jeff, you didn't get my point at all. If you want to go off on some tangent my guest but don't twist my words to do so. I find it pathetic that we always have money to nation build for other countries instead of our own. That was my point, healthcare was merely an example. I hope you weren't referring to me as one your "stupid" people. I know that the legislative branch are the ones with the power to implement any changes. I hate stupid people that completely miss the point of a post. :stfu:

[Tanooki]

No I wasn't referring to you directly, just the general wave of jackasses nation wide who can't think enough for themselves to see that. I do agree we should be re-investing our money at home instead of sending billions around the world to suck up to people, who in many cases have no love for us at all, in some hope that goodwill will do some good down the line. We should take care of ourselves first to improve shortfalls of this nation before we start injecting hundreds of billions elsewhere.

[Lucas]

I really get tired of using patriotism and nationalism as a shield to dodge a question.

[Brian-AMN]

I like how Tom Brokaw is keeping them on point and on time. The candidates are getting frustrated by it, but he's enforcing the rules well. I think I want Brokaw for Prez!

[MR EPIC]

LOL, yeah Tom did a nice job.

Once again, neither of the candidates did much to add to their stances on current issues but rather seemed content to repeat what they had said during the previous debate. However, I felt Senator Obama did a pretty nice job tonight by expanding a little bit more on a couple of his policies, namely the energy crisis. When asked what each of the candidates would do to call upon the efforts of each individual American to help with our energy crisis, I felt Obamba was the only one of the two who directly answered that question. While he didn't come out and say that American's would have to cut back on energy or be penalized, he did say that incentives would be offered to those who in fact did help out in cutting back on energy consumption. I also felt that Senator McCain was more confident than arrogant tonight, whether or not it was a last gasp effort to appeal to American pride. I liked the atmosphere of the debate a lot better this time around and overall I felt that both sides did a decent job of not only taking pot shots at each other but trying to be sincere. If McCain need a sound victory tonight in his efforts to gain popularity I don't think he got it.

[Hottotty]

They really need to stop calling these things debates. If that's a debate, I'm smart.

[Lucas]

With McCain's answer on Russia foreign policy tonight, I believe he just assured a light-scale cold war with Russia should he win. He seemed angry the whole debate.

Obama won it easily, if only by the fact that both stuck to their talking points. The debate changed nothing, which is totally in Obama's favor.

[Lizzaroni]

Screw 'em both. I made my mind up after this debate, for sure.

[JValone]

These debates have only served to make me less and less enamored with Obama. Sure I'll still vote for him, but it's basically by default at this point. McCain is obviously doing poorly, while Palin does worse, but Barack has his own problems. The man has yet to show me anything that leads me to believe he has what it takes to pull us out of the economic slump.

McCain has tired (not actually)conservative ideas while Obama sells tired liberal ideas, no one is actually promoting meaningful change and it disgusts me. What makes it worse is the smug liberal media, especially MSNBC, who parade around like they've got this thing in the bag. You do, congratulations, but your party has yet to show me jack **** that's worth being smug about. The Democrats are just going to be the leader of a sinking ship for 4-8 more years and then the GOP is going to get to play the blame game.

If you're liberal be afraid, seriously, you're screwed. Your party has no ideas worth hearing and they aren't going to work. Obama intends to spend money he does not have and pulling out of Iraq will not make up all of that deficit. Your side is making promises they cannot keep and the people will not forget and I doubt they will forgive, especially if (and really, when) we enter what appears to be a significant recession. Good luck and god bless, we're all gonna need it based on what I saw today.

Maybe it's just because I'm in college, but if I see one more smirking liberal who acts like their party has nothing to do with the problem I may just punch them in the face. Everyone in that party is so quick to throw the free market under the bus, characterizing all decision-makers as "fat cats" or "robber barons", without ever mentioning how when government runs things it fails miserably and how the loan problem was initiated by Clinton. Who's going to be there when the feds run the economy into the ground with full control? Who has the magic bullet then?

[Tanooki]

Wow that post there by JV is made of win, very good analysis of the right, especially the left, and the smug turds in the media.

[Darc Requiem]

The debate was joke. It felt like I was watching successive clips of each candidates stump speeches strong together over the course of 90 minutes. Neither candidate will man up and say what will have to change about their prospective policies as a result of the bail out. At least, they both actually answered the questions. Which sadly is an improvement over the sham that was the VP debate.

[JValone]

The debate was joke. It felt like I was watching successive clips of each candidates stump speeches strong together over the course of 90 minutes. Neither candidate will man up and say what will have to change about their prospective policies as a result of the bail out. At least, they both actually answered the questions. Which sadly is an improvement over the sham that was the VP debate.

Exactly, absolutely right Darc you hit the nail right on the head. Neither candidate seems to know what the bailout means or how it will effect their plans, which leads me to believe they don't have a plan at the moment that takes that reality into account. I felt like Obama had a shot if the economy could stabilize a bit until he took over, maybe not a sure thing but he had a shot. I do not feel like that anymore. He has not adjusted his socialist spending (sorry if the term "socialist" offends anyone, but that's what it actually is, whether that's even bad or not is another debate entirely) in the least and I don't think he knows what he's going to cut other than Iraq. This bailout screwed him royally, like everyone else really, but his lack of flexibility as a result does not speak well of him or his leadership.

Luckily McCain is the GOP equivalent of John Kerry, an unlikable man with no vision at all.

[Tanooki]

That's a bit harsh calling McCain unlikable in comparison to Kerry.

I do agree though with you on Obama wanting to have some rotten socialist spending agenda, and actually it is bad. The problem a socialist never realizes is when they nail people with more and basically via entitlements and welfare plans 'give' their money to the poor the rich won't take it nicely. To adjust since it's legal in a free market, the rich just raise prices to whittle away their losses, and those cost boosts add up to larger bills coming out of my pocket for everything. It really sucks Obama is that blind on that matter as some of his other ideas (not the surrender in Iraq crap) are not that bad at all. Seems it's like the shower...you get hot or cold, no one with enough warm matter between their ears to figure something that works well for all.

[Lucas]

What? McCain is an unlikable man--at least in his current form. There was a time (pre-2001) that I liked, and get this...actually respected him. Not anymore.

That being said, I agree with Darc. The "debate" was a joke. It was a total joke. Neither of them will actually say what they plan on doing in office because they are too afraid of making a commitment they might not be cable to keep and then successively getting called on a failed promise. Tonight proved nothing.

Obama can't get us out of this crisis. This is thirty years of Reaganomics. We're in the dump for the long haul. Of course, neither can McCain. That's why I'm not voting based on the economy, because we're really screwed either way. I just wish Obama would man up and admit that the Democrats had just as big a hand in this disaster, otherwise the whole party might eventually pay for it. And another thing. We need to throw out congress and start anew. The incompetence we currently have in the House and Senate is staggering. But hey, if Oklahoma can get rid of Jim "I believe in the talking snake" Inhofe November 5th, I'll consider that a personal victory.


At least we can all agree that Tom Brokaw was a great moderator. He called them on their bullsh*t multiple times, which is way more than I can say for the previous moderators. Nicely done.

[MR EPIC]

I think Queen Latifah was the best moderator yet.

[Lucas]

^ You win.

[Darc Requiem]

JV, I think that both McCain and Obama know what they'd have to do as a result of the bail out. I just think they don't want to tell us. There are going to have to be some dramatic changes enacted not only by our government but us as citizens and neither candidate wants say this to the public. They fear that their opponent won't be as honest about the situation and will seize upon it to win the election.

[Tanooki]

As for McCain I still like and respect him as much as I did 8 or 12+ years ago and see no reason at this point to think otherwise. He's no different than he was before, the only new is that he as has Obama have both been forced into being at times jackasses on the campaign trail because of one is, and the other plays mr. nice guy...kiss that prize goodbye. To hate on McCain for playing politics and not Obama (or the other way around) just shows were your real alliances are as it's just convenient.

And that right there is spoken for truth. They know their plans are shot, they know worse case scenario not only cutting but more taxing will happen and going into an election saying 'I WILL RAISE YOUR TAXES VOTE FOR ME!' always works doesn't it?

I'm sick of lucas trying to blame reaganomics when it is only a piece of a much larger problem, but at least he's being honest saying the dems share equal blame as they do. Don't count on Obama ever coming forward and saying as much because they don't want that sound byte floating around for decades so thankfully it will blow up in their faces in 4 or 8 years and things will just shift back the other direction as it always does.

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

I'm sorta mind-boggled that people are frustrated that this debate didn't provide alot of information as far as policies go; this was BY FAR the most constructive debate as far as issues are concerned... they had no choice but to compare/contrast issues and I think voters got a much clearer vision of who will bring what kind of policy. Sure there were little political zingers and distractions on both the candidates' parts, but what do you expect out of a presidential debate when you're trying to score as many political points as possible? It's an inevitable process.

I think what it's shown me more than anything though is that I don't think any of them are going to be able to carry out their policy agenda in their first term. Bush ****ed up so badly that it's gonna take at least four years to get things back on track (ending the war, getting the economy out of the slum, decrease the deficit)... so it might turn out that whoever wins this November might not win re-election because people will think that he didn't do anything drastic in his term. As far as who's better suited to fix the problems, I've made up my mind about that a long while ago, and it was never more evident than tonight.

McCain needed a knockout punch because with 27 days remaining, there's only so much you can do to turn the tide at a high profile event. Polls already showing that Obama did better in a format more suited for McCain shows that the Repugs really are running out of time. I think McCain did a good job however, and in some cases came off as more honest than Barack did, even though some of his comments came off as smug and condescending ("that one"? Watch yourself..). Personally, John McCain never looked so unlikable to me, and even though he's a naturally mean person, he could have been more respectful and less like a pompous ass. Oh well, you can't change yourself.

So either McCain has to wait until the final debate to make a truly wow performance (which I'm not sure how effective that'll be; it doesn't seem like these debates have much effect on national/state polls), or he has to resort to attacking Obama's character. While even the slight association of Barack Obama with the word "terrorist" is an unpatriotic technique during a presidential election, it might work with the crazies. However on a large scale level, I think most people have already made up their minds from that first debate, so I can't imagine most of them thinking to themselves in the last week of October, "wow, maybe he does like terrorists". Obama's been in the public eye for the past two years, and most have an idea of what kind of person that is, so unless you're gullible or severely racist, I don't see these character attacks doing much good.

[Lucas]

I'm expecting a Bin Ladin tape to surface during the last week of the election and throw the whole thing on it's ear.

[Tanooki]

Bush didn't f'up so badly, the entire legislative f'd up badly since the 70s and the presidents on both parties that went along with it adding into the mess. Bush is more or less a scapegoat because it blew up in his face finally. I do wonder all those who suffer from the Bush derangment syndrome blame game crap would be so finger pointy if Kerry had won 4 years ago in all fairness.

You're right though, and I've said it too...at least the next 4 if not more years will be dictated by paying off this crap both parties contributed in while serving their interests and not the people.

And 'repugs?' Shows your maturity. I don't see to many saying democraps around here or something against the DNC now do you? It shames me people like you are allowed to vote when you're so childish, close minded, shut off, bitter and resentful of someone just because they're not in the same party as you kiss ass to as it's sickening. That 'you' is figurative to anyone so while I'm using your post to do this it's general.

[Hottotty]

Of course no one would have blamed Kerry. Because if Kerry were president, or better yet Gore, there'd have been no crisis.

Natch.

[MikeWolfskin]

McCain is full of bull **** saying that American economics is good, where in the worst state this country has been in twenty four years. Obama kicked his ass last night. He is right clearly the little business and middle business matter to and are hurting the most. Even more so huge bake company's are going under so even large business are hurting.

[Kaizoku_Kouji]

And 'repugs?' Shows your maturity. I don't see to many saying democraps around here or something against the DNC now do you? It shames me people like you are allowed to vote when you're so childish, close minded, shut off, bitter and resentful of someone just because they're not in the same party as you kiss ass to as it's sickening. That 'you' is figurative to anyone so while I'm using your post to do this it's general.

Aren't you the one who, just like last week or the week before, was constantly using the "Obamassiah" jab in a couple other threads? Come on. :brow:

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

Bush didn't f'up so badly, the entire legislative f'd up badly since the 70s and the presidents on both parties that went along with it adding into the mess. Bush is more or less a scapegoat because it blew up in his face finally. I do wonder all those who suffer from the Bush derangment syndrome blame game crap would be so finger pointy if Kerry had won 4 years ago in all fairness.

yes, because when we had real, economic prosperity, record low unemployment rates, hundreds of thousands of new jobs, and a federal surplus under Bill Clinton, he was just "adding to the mess". I think your blatant attempts at being 'objective' are blinding you from the truth. Bush doesn't get 100% of the blame for what's happened over the last 8 years, but his policies have certainly been the catalyst to most.

And 'repugs?' Shows your maturity. I don't see to many saying democraps around here or something against the DNC now do you? It shames me people like you are allowed to vote when you're so childish, close minded, shut off, bitter and resentful of someone just because they're not in the same party as you kiss ass to as it's sickening. That 'you' is figurative to anyone so while I'm using your post to do this it's general.

First of all, that was actually a very awesome spelling error on my part. It wasn't intended, but hey, I'll keep it.

Secondly, don't diminish what I do and do not know and my political maturity because I dislike a group of people who have not given me any reason to feel otherwise. Your party is the party of hypocrisy, who after stealing the 2000 election have shown me a brand of corruption, close-mindedness, bigotry, hate, ignorance and a complete lack of respect for the intelligence and well-being of the American people in a way that hasn't been seen since the 60's. That's not my "political immaturity" talking, that's eight years of government devolution that's talking. Of course the Democratic party isn't completely innocent either; probably the most petty and unorganized political party of the Western World, but they absolutely do not compare to the God awful tendencies of the GOP. As for you, there's a fine line between being objective but calling a party out for its obscene behavior (me), and shielding yourself from any kind of coherent research for the sake of coming off as a moderate (you). You can say "they're just as bad" all you want, and yes, in some cases they are, but you're kidding yourself if you think that they even remotely compare to each other as far as campaign behavior, professionalism, and respect for the American people are concerned.

[JValone]

Of course no one would have blamed Kerry. Because if Kerry were president, or better yet Gore, there'd have been no crisis.

Natch.

Hopefully that was sarcasm. The financial crisis is a train wreck via head-on collision. Neither the GOP or Dem conductors are innocent. Republicans thought always siding with huge corporations, and thus allowing them to take ridiculous risks they weren't prepared to handle if they backfired, was a good idea. They were wrong. Democrats thought pressuring banks to give people a loan who had no business doing so was a good idea, under oftentimes false pretenses of racism. They were wrong. If Gore/Kerry were president the loans would have been more to blame than the corporate free-wheeling, but either way the results would be basically equal.

I think the worst part of this whole fiasco might be that the average person starts thinking the Democrats have all the answers. I mean, they're a pretty smug group as-is, perhaps rightfully so, and places like MSNC will gladly tell you it's 100% Bush's fault all the way and not blink. If the people give too much trust to the left it's going to blow up in our face because big government does not nor has it ever worked. Not in a way that preserves personal and economic freedoms anyway.

What we actually need is politicians who uphold the constitution and scale things back significantly. Our problem is too much complexity and the bureaucracy that comes with that. Things need to be simplified. People are too easily fooled by magic-bullet promises. I wish they'd figure out that the truth is both parties are full of incompetents and we need to jerk the leash back as hard as we can and put them in their rightful place. They work for us, not the other way around, or at least that's how things are supposed to be. They're tripping on power, it's totally obvious.

[MR EPIC]

Neither of the two candidates are going to be able to do much about the current state of our country anytime soon, nor does either one seem to have a clear-cut plan on how to do so. All this election will end up amounting to is people voting for the lesser of two evils.

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

Neither of the two candidates are going to be able to do much about the current state of our country anytime soon, nor does either one seem to have a clear-cut plan on how to do so. All this election will end up amounting to is people voting for the lesser of two evils.

They DO have clear-cut plans, there's only so much you can say in 60 seconds a turn. Go to each candidate's website, they have cohesive and specific plans on there, and they are drastically different from each other.

This isn't about you Epic (and I know you've been doing your part), but what bothers me about elections is always the undecided voters who need to be spoon fed what each candidate's policy is without doing the research him/herself. MSNBC had a focus group and one independent said that he'd vote for McCain if he only he was more specific, and a woman said the same about Obama. I mean there is only so much specificity that can be made in a 60 second answer, so if people expect to hear comprehensive plans explained bullet by bullet in a debate they're fooling themselves. Smart voters need to do their research, period. And John I know that you've been researching them both instead of solely what they say in a political debate, and I applaud you for that.

[JValone]

I've read all the stuff off Obama's site and I still feel like he should be more specific. I can't say I've every bit of McCain's, just enough to know I'm not backing it. Obama's plans are still too pie-in-the-sky for my tastes at times,"if this goes right...and this goes right...and the American people get energized just this way...and everyone doesn't mind the taxes it's gonna take...then bam! We've got things fixed." is what it boils down to. I'm still voting for it, mainly because I prefer slightly naive optimism and a shot in the dark to what seems to be certain failure, but I can't see how Democrats feel terribly confident about it. It's a cross your fingers situation.

[Tanooki]

Well if you want to play the 'your party' crap child one could call the party of the democrats the party of debauchery, robin hood economics, stifling taxation, free rides for the poor and/or lazy, socialist policies, general lies and corruption, a party of users who manipulate by any means minorities to score more votes and a general lack of respect for their worth by keeping them in a position that'll help keep the party in power.

You're also full of pure **** if you think Bill helped, his dumb ass was the one who got the ball rolling on the let's make sure at least 20% of all fanny/freddie home loans are to the ones who normally can not dream to afford them while not setting a max cap on that % opening the door for the massive levels of bad mortgage paper that tipped it over the edge lately. Bill and his buddies were quite wide open for blame on that but of course that's easy to ignore that crap. Both damn parties are corrupt, what do you expect with a 2 party system the parties directly own keeping out other choices.

As JV said, we need to select people from either of those parties or neither who actually give a rats ass about minimalization at this rate, followers of the constitution, and a seriously sliced bureaucracy. The sad thing is stupid people every time the economy goes into the crapper runs like little kids to their mommy the DNC thinking it will make it all better as their arrogant smug smoothtalking will make any chump believe. The problem is there's enough in that party who swing so far left they'll make it seem cool on the surface, and then bring an all new level of pain as history has shown. Sadly when it happens the RNC rolls in to town in mass, they play good, fix stuff for a few years, then they go into complacency mode, then start acting nearly as corrupt until some crap blows up in the other direction and then the circle jerk of politics is complete.

[Lizzaroni]

"That one."

Nice, McCain.

[Hottotty]

"That one."

Nice, McCain.

Gawd, it's true. I'm a white Canadian, and even my jaw dropped. John seemed agitated all night, even being disrespectful of Tom and the time structure, but that little lash was almost creepier than his "Spending freeze on everything but military" line.

[Lucas]

John McCain was booed by his own supporters during a rally on Friday after he described Barack Obama as a "decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States."

McCain was responding to a town hall attendee who claimed he was concerned about raising a child under a president who "cohorts with domestic terrorists such as [Bill] Ayers." Despite the fact that McCain and his campaign have repeatedly used Ayers to hammer Obama in recent days, the Arizona Senator tried to calm the man.

"[Senator Obama] is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared about as President of the United States," he said, before adding: "If I didn't think I would be one heck of a better president I wouldn't be running."

The crowd groaned with disapproval.

Later, McCain was again pressed about Obama's "other-ness" and again he refused to play ball. "I don't trust Obama," a woman said. "I have read about him. He's an Arab."

"No, ma'am," McCain said several times, shaking his head in disagreement. "He's a decent, family man, [a] citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign is all about."

At another point, McCain declared, "If you want a fight, we will fight. But we will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments." Supporters booed then also. "I don't mean that has to reduce your ferocity," McCain responded. "I just mean to say you have to be respectful."


Now that's the John McCain I remember. It makes me wonder just how much control Karl Rove has over those ads. What makes me ill inside is all the supporters who booed him for showing a little human decency. What is wrong with those people?

I mean, we bitch and moan and debate like crazed kindergartners in here, but I never get the feeling that anybody hates each other. I myself don't hate anybody. We just like to debate to each others respective brick walls and get pissed accordingly (lol). But the hate and cultural division that is fuming at some of these rallies is bothering the hell out of me.

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

It's about time he did something about it; for the past week the McCain campaign has been fanning the flames of discrimination and hate, and it's not only unpatriotic and desperate, but absolutely dangerous for Obama's life. This is very dangerous territory McCain and Palin have stepped in, and in a country whose history is filled with assassinations, feeding this hidden aggression red meat is something people are gonna be looking at if something does happen to Barack Obama. Shame on him, but at least he attempted to calm the anger down, even though you can tell he was having the hardest time just calling Obama "decent". Ugh.

[Hottotty]

I'm with Z. I feel like McCain is trying to have it both ways. His team is feeding the aggression, which sets McCain up nicely for a token gesture of respect. It's politiking at its absolute worst.

[Tanooki]

Well look this kind of goes back to what I was saying was that John McCain is still the same guy. I think the last couple weeks made things patently obvious after this booing what is going on. The McCain camp is running TWO campaigns. McCain himself still is about being nice, wanting things more clean than dirty, and to speak about issues in his country first straight talking kind of way. Then you have the other side, in particular select campaign managers, Palin, and some dumb**** 527s and RNC ad spots calling him (Obama) a damn terrorist and terrorist lover among other stuff.

Of course him acting like his old self and tiring of that **** I'm sure he's taken a ton of closed door heat over likely telling them to knock the crap off finally bubbled over with him saying screw you...I'm putting an end to this, and he got roasted by his own base there at that rally for it. McCain always talked about doing the right thing over winning the job, and he did it there despite knowing he probably just tossed a few very needed votes. So you know, good for him.

[Smokey]

I'm glad he did this. McCain needs to rein his people in A LOT. I don't know which rally this was at, but Palin was giving some kind anti-Obama speech, and people at different points were yelling out "Terrorist!" and "Kill him!". She said nothing and went on. NOTHING. No one took any action whatsoever. That **** shouldn't be allowed to happen.

[Hottotty]

If nothing else, doesn't it worry anyone else that the potential leader of the free world can't even manage his own hand-selected campaign team?

[Tanooki]

You know I think we need a little more racist gas on the fire so this might scare a few of you. I was watching the news earlier and a commentator brought up a scary but valid point using historical reference of this country as a point. Each time black people get ahead or attempt to in this nation by one means or another depending on their policies and approach things are accepted or reviled. As it stands now Barack going into this is falling into the reviled category because those who didn't like him really hate he's benefitting just being a democrat by the economy going into the crapper as bad econ years they win, that's fact. If he gets in their it will stoke a crap load of hatred because it will be viewed he got in using race, not having properly(to them) his ties to the terrorist Ayers, the crooked money guy Rezko, his nutbag hater mentor Rev Wright (and also that jerk Pfleger) and it could cost him his life. This is a nation that until Bush had successful assassinations or damn near it(Reagan) every 20 years give or take a few. We're overdue, and people are pissed off hardcore. With race being a factor among others this will stir up likely a new rise and public persona of things like the KKK and WAR(White Aryan Race) and some fool from those depths of stupidity may just take a high powered rifle to the guy at a few 100 yards out and no one can stop that.

It's just something to consider because there just are far too many pissed people over the economy, over Barack and his shady background that may not be so shady if he'd be 100% honest about it, general racist pieces of crap, and so on.

[Hottotty]

All the more reason for the opposition leader, in this case McCain, to take every action to denounce such behavior. Not just make token gestures at his discretion. He and his party must preach tolerance. Make it part of the effing platform if they must.

Instead, we get Palin arguing for straight talk, but then drawing undue attention to Obama's middle name, as do her cronies, like middle school bullies. It doesn't take a political science major to know what that does to a group of rabid fans. As always, they put the message out there, and then retract it and say "oops! Didn't mean for you to take it so racisty." *Cue cute smile and gee-gosh charm* But the damage is already done. This doublespeak is pathetic, two-faced, and while you think it draws attention to racial tension, I say it's recklessly legitimizing the us-versus-them assassination fantasies of white idiots across the nation.

If people want to draw attention to race, there are responsible and measured ways to do so. Stirring people's pre-existing prejudices is not the way.

I don't always agree with you, Tanooki, but I think your argument was particularly lame this time.

[Tanooki]

What argument? I just reported what I picked off the news, it's their argument. Personally it wouldn't phase me if either of them took a bullet from some idiot as you can't stop it if someone is determined enough.

In all fairness though if you want to bring race into it, look no further than Obama as he did it with that 'he has a funny name and he doesn't look like any of the guys on the dollar bills' crap and the rest of it from a good year back now. That stunned me when he did that as he was trying until then not to bring it into play but I guess Hillary spooked it out of him or something I dunno.

[Hottotty]

Oh? My bad I thought that was your feelings. You did, after all, say:

I think we need a little more racist gas on the fire

Now, as for that comment by Obama, I think that's a fair joke on his part. He was, after all, half-joking and trying to add some levity to the issue of race. I firmly believe race should be talked about. Ignoring it doesn't make anything go away, after all. Any form of perversion, racism included, seems fed by repression. My problem is that a lot of what has come out of McCain's camp can easily be read as hateful. They are not being thoughtful about it. They're turning it into political fire. And that irresponsibility is bound to make white racists feel validated, if not completely emboldened.

If Obama started talking to white-hating black voters about how John McCain is a stereotypically white, fat, rich guy with a lust for power (or whatever white people are stereotypically guilty of) I'd be equally suspicious of him.

[Tanooki]

Yah I said that line, but reading the one next to it says it came off the news. It was a sarcastic lead up.

Honestly I don't think race needs talking about or being addressed, people are people, and if someone can't handle that fact they need to get themselves checked at the door. Now I know that Obama hasn't done the whole taking to blacks who hate whitey thing you brought up, but being friends and having a mentor who does act like that for over two decades comes kind of close enough. No one can be that dumb and sheltered who had gone to church every other sunday on average over that entire time and never heard a thing short of being deaf.

[Lucas]

Look, McCain did the right thing. Yes, but to finish the job, he needs to get rid of Palin. That woman is a terror. She's the closest thing we've ever seen to a local access TV pastor getting up and stage and delivering a political hate speech. I know it's the VP's job to do the dirty work which the candidate can't, but what she's doing is scary. She's making the generational gap the worst it's been since the 1960's, and she's making the social divide perhaps the worst it's ever been in this nation. I honestly fear for Obama's life. With all the gun toting rednecks in this nation and the hate at these rally's, it's literally shocking that nothing has happened yet. Hell, I had my teeth gritted through the whole nomination speech in Denver. Most of our greatest leaders are dead because of people like the ones screaming "KILL HIM" at the Palin rallies. Now McCain gets booed at his own rally's for trying to calm the violence? It's gotten too far. These people are crazy.

This is why we don't mix politics and religion. Now that the hype of Palin has died down, we're getting a real taste of the kind of feelings Sarah Palin inspires in the religious extremists. I agree with a couple of core "Teddy Roosevelt era" Republican principles, but I could never and would never stand with the party because of people like the ones in those rallies and their leader Sarah Palin. Moderates in this country are going extinct fast.

Every day the thought of Sarah Palin being a heartbeat away from the Oval Office makes me a little more sickly.

[Smokey]

This is possibly the biggest factor present in my parents' indecision about who to vote for. They don't particularly care for McCain's platform and are actually leaning toward Obama, but they and my uncle are becoming more and more certain that if Obama gets elected, the state of Idaho is going to empty out and Obama will be assassinated within two weeks of his inauguration, if not earlier. I'll admit, I'm concerned about this possibility, though that won't stop me from voting for Obama.

If he does nothing else, McCain needs to shut Palin and the rest of his campaign staff up. I would prefer that he have his staff lash out at people promoting ignorant/racist remarks and the murder of Obama, but if he just keeps his own people from doing that, that would be a great step forward.

[Lucas]

I say a prayer every night that I don't wake up and see the headlines "Obama shot". Anybody who would hint at such a thing, even in the most indirect, discrete way is scum of the Earth. This nation is divided enough. Palin needs to shut the hell up or be run out of the country on a rail.

[HGW XX/7]

Palin needs to shut the hell up or be run out of the country on a rail.
'Cause that's the American way. :P

[Lucas]

Preaching hate is not the "American way". I know in her heart, she's got to believe what she is doing is right, but it's not. While John McCain may condemn the hate speeches, he isn't telling Palin to shut the hell up. You'd think with his falling poll numbers, he would take a hint.

[MR EPIC]

1. What "Hate" speech are you guys talking about?

2. I already said that there was a good chance Obama would be assassinated in the original debate thread, it's hardly a revelation.

[HGW XX/7]

Actually the American way allows you preach whatever you want.

You can't necessarily practice it, but you're allowed to have the beliefs that you do.

I don't think she needs to shut up. Let her say what she wants to say, and let it hurt McCains campaign. The day they start silencing people because others don't agree with them is the day I'm afraid to be an American.

"Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too."

[Tanooki]

Epic Lucas considers anything anti-Obama as hate speech, he also considers stupid people saying hate filled stuff in the crowd and not stopping them hate speech too. And as we all know that when it comes to lefties, the freedom of speech only matters when it agrees with their side of things. :D Ask NBC and the NY Times they'll tell you so and anything else as long as it fits within the plan.

[Lucas]

Actually the American way allows you preach whatever you want.

You can't necessarily practice it, but you're allowed to have the beliefs that you do.

That's the way it works. You can't practice hate speech, but there's always some retard out there with more guns than sense to do the job for them.

It's hard to believe in anything, or anyone in the country, because anyone worth believing in is more than likely to get shot.

[Tanooki]

Wow that's a real positive statement. And yes you CAN practice hate speech, you just don't wish people would, but it's legally protected to a point.

[Lucas]

Meh, doesn't matter either way. The new Osama tape should be coming any day now to throw the election. I laugh if I wasn't actually expecting it.

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

1. What "Hate" speech are you guys talking about?

2. I already said that there was a good chance Obama would be assassinated in the original debate thread, it's hardly a revelation.

The McCain campaign saying things like Obama likes to "pal around with terrorists" and doesn't "see America as you and I do", and use his middle name to imply that he has some sort of terrorist background. The only thing worse than rousing up discrimination and hate is seeing that hate blooming all over the recent McCain rallies. Instead of asking about the economic failure or anything important they're taking the mic to say things like "I don't want to bring my son into a world where Barack Hussein Obama is president" or "He's an Arab". I'm just proud of the fact that our generation doesn't have that inherent hate, and we'll become a majority soon enough.

[Hottotty]

I'm just proud of the fact that our generation doesn't have that inherent hate, and we'll become a majority soon enough.

Ya, cuz no one ever felt that way in the sixties.

[Smokey]

1. What "Hate" speech are you guys talking about?

There has been at least one rally that Palin spoke at where supporters were shouting "Terrorist" and "Kill him" when Palin was taking shots at Obama. I wouldn't expect Palin to say anything, but I would expect the security to do something about the cries for Obama's head.

McCain doesn't need his VP pick encouraging that sort of rhetoric. I don't care if he winds up looking good because he reins in his people on this. The fact that he's a decent human being won't sway many voters anyway.

[HGW XX/7]

It's hard to believe in anything, or anyone in the country, because anyone worth believing in is more than likely to get shot.

I've found that the only person I need to believe in is myself. IF you can't do the same with yourself, then that's your problem. Not mine.

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

Ya, cuz no one ever felt that way in the sixties.

Exactly, alot did feel that way back then. I'm saying that our generation has grown up without the racial tension.

[Tanooki]

We have grown up without racial tension? What land do you live in? These days you have PC stuff out the ass and minorities crying unfairness left and right and getting unjust crap like affirmative action passed. You also get some people wanting payment or compensation for past crap from other generations by the present and get pretty vocal about it. And there's no racial tension. Thanks for the laugh. :D

Also that's pretty lame and I doubt anyone here will find a source of McCain ever throwing 'Hussein' out there or 'Arab' as a shot at Obama. That's some right wing cranks doing that crap. I mean if you want to hate him good, but at least use facts not fairy dust. You can't blame him for some morons going to the mic, it's called freedom of speech. At least he has in nicer terms told them the shut the f up and go sit back down.

[Smokey]

No one is saying that McCain is the one calling Obama a terrorist or anything like that, it's his staff. Even Palin is tacitly, if not outright, approving of this behavior.

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

We have grown up without racial tension? What land do you live in? These days you have PC stuff out the ass and minorities crying unfairness left and right and getting unjust crap like affirmative action passed. You also get some people wanting payment or compensation for past crap from other generations by the present and get pretty vocal about it. And there's no racial tension. Thanks for the laugh. :D

First of all, I'm not sure if you fall into our generation anyway so of course you're gonna disagree. Secondly, our generation wasn't born or raised in an environment where segregation was ubiquitous behavior, or where racism was open and casual, or where you'd see published books called "how to spot a Jap". Tension has died down severely after the 60's, and so we have grown up to the mentality that everybody is equal.

I would love to bitch at you for calling Affirmative Action unjust, but I'll refrain from it this time.

Also that's pretty lame and I doubt anyone here will find a source of McCain ever throwing 'Hussein' out there or 'Arab' as a shot at Obama. That's some right wing cranks doing that crap. I mean if you want to hate him good, but at least use facts not fairy dust. You can't blame him for some morons going to the mic, it's called freedom of speech. At least he has in nicer terms told them the shut the f up and go sit back down.

Next time read what I posted. I said that the McCain CAMPAIGN has evoked some disgusting insinuations about Obama, not the man himself. And, again, if you read more carefully, I said that it was supporters that were saying things like "he's an arab", not the man himself. Yes, you can throw the freedom of speech excuse at me, but the fact still remains: People obviously did NOT have this gross attitude toward Barack Obama, at least not vocally, until McCain and his campaign began playing dirty politics. He brought this upon himself, and now he has to resort to telling his own supporters that Obama isn't as bad as they think.

[HGW XX/7]

I would love to bitch at you for calling Affirmative Action unjust, but I'll refrain from it this time.


If there's truly no racial tension in this generation then affirmative action would be unjust, wouldn't you say so? The fact that it's there proves there's racial tension.

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

If there's truly no racial tension in this generation then affirmative action would be unjust, wouldn't you say so? The fact that it's there proves there's racial tension.

Affirmative Action is in place not to compensate for minorities in our generation, but for the last one. I think in the future Affirmative Action will be obsolete, but right now, it's necessary for people who in the last few decades didn't get the same treatment as their white counterparts even if they worked equally as hard. And I don't think affirmative action proves there's racial tension, just racial inequality.

[Smokey]

Wouldn't the two go hand in hand? Besides, affirmative action screws over white males that are deserving of positions in college or the workplace. Affirmative action doesn't even mean that the black/Hispanic/Asian/woman needs to be qualified, he/she just can't be white. It's an unfair and unjust system that gives minorities a cheap shot at whitey.

[MR EPIC]

JGZ - Isn't this a bit coincidental , considering the information that I told you I had on Obama months ago about him rising to power in Chicago because of shady characters and about him being backed by terrorists? I wanted to share that information with you but you wouldn't even so much as listen to it. I realize you've been way ahead of me on the political side of things and I applaud you for being so, but I think there's something to be said about a person's past when considering that person may be controlling our future.

[Lucas]

We have grown up without racial tension? What land do you live in? These days you have PC stuff out the ass and minorities crying unfairness left and right and getting unjust crap like affirmative action passed. You also get some people wanting payment or compensation for past crap from other generations by the present and get pretty vocal about it. And there's no racial tension. Thanks for the laugh. :D

Also that's pretty lame and I doubt anyone here will find a source of McCain ever throwing 'Hussein' out there or 'Arab' as a shot at Obama. That's some right wing cranks doing that crap. I mean if you want to hate him good, but at least use facts not fairy dust. You can't blame him for some morons going to the mic, it's called freedom of speech. At least he has in nicer terms told them the shut the f up and go sit back down.

I have to agree with Jeff here. I can't think of one single instance where McCain used the "Hussein" card or the Arab card. The only time I can remember him actually saying the word was when he was defending Obama to that lady and got booed for it. It's just a bunch of right wing crazies and Fox news pundits who do that.

And racism is everywhere. I grew up surrounded by it, and I still see it today. It's not the racism of the 60's. It's the racism of today, and it hasn't diminished. It's just learned how to survive in this mostly tolerant society we are blessed with. The Internet has bestowed a sense of anonymity on the ignorant public. You can throw around racial slurs like you never could in past decades. I've heard little kids (1st graders mind you) in public, white and black alike, not afraid to use the "N" word in casual conversation. It's disgusting, but it's a reality. Racism is alive and well. Hell, I've heard of at least two white supremacist groups in the town I used to live, and they were scary as hell.

[Lizzaroni]

**** AA. If you're going to help people, it should be by financial status instead of assuming that people are at a disadvantage through race as a default. It's bull**** that folks that are as equally wealthy, etc as me get an advantage and the poor kid down the road gets the shaft just because he's pasty and doesn't have a sexy ethnic background.

If you think being a woman is treated as being a minority (with regard to AA) I'd say you're pretty nuts. These days most undergrad institutions have more women than men, and I know the same holds true for many law schools, too. Unless you're a woman + some other minority status (ex. African American female, Asian American female, etc) you're pretty much at the same point as white males and not going to get a whole lot of preference, if any. I wouldn't even bother claiming "female" as a minority status on an application; you'd probably get laughed at.

[Tanooki]

Zeidan please do bitch at me about affirmative action you nitwit. I was a victim of it for over a year at my college when trying to get employed because of that bull**** quota system. Within weeks of it being abolished by Governor Wilson I got a job on campus in the same areas I was denied while they happily hired up minorities. Affirmative action hiring practices can kiss my ass. Just to make a point of it for the entire year, I'd head into the department and intentionally screw crap up in those areas and ask them for help. I'd let the morons sit and spin on it for 5-10min and then act all innocent and go 'Oh!' and fix it making it obvious to others near by they were dumb...and it was noticed.

AA is horse****. You don't force a quota onto a workplace and demand they hire various levels of race and sex just to be fair damning the consequences of stupidity vs experience. What you need to do is give people the financial backing so they can go and get the proper skills and talents to fill that job on a more equal level, you don't give a moron a job just to fill a quota.

And I am of 'this' not the last generation. I'm 31, and my earliest memories of things really start in the middle/late 80s beyond playing Nintendo, GI Joe and hanging out with friends. To me racism has two flavors...the early 70s and back racism of the KKK, Gov Wallace type ****, down to just the glares, intentional avoidance of people, and related crap. Then you have the racism of the 90s and 00's...now. Affirmative Action, reverse discrimination, demanded restitution, double standards on behaviors/words allowed, political correctness, the big elephant of the race card in the room, and so on as if it's some way to make things right being able to step on the children and grand children of those who screwed with people in the past to 'level things out.' It's crap...it's just reverse racism...both sides need to grow the hell up.

[MR EPIC]

As a Hispanic American, I take a bit of offense to your "Experience vs Stupidity" insinuation there Jeff. Furthermore your post comes off as very angry and full of aggression.

[Tanooki]

It's agressive towards zeidans blind post. And if you mistook the experience vs stupidity bit I'm sorry. The entire concept of that is you shouldn't just hire someone because you need to fill a quota (potential stupidity) vs experience (someone who does know but doesn't fit the quota.) Make sense?

[MR EPIC]

Yeah, I don't agree with AA either. The more qualified person should get the job, period. Most people I know would be too ashamed to take a job if they knew it was because of their color or ethnicity.

[Lizzaroni]

I don't really think it's fair to talk about a quota system in the context of AA today since it's no longer legal.

[Smokey]

The quota system itself might be illegal, but that's essentially what AA is. Until AA is made illegal, you're still going to have an informal quota system to get enough minorities to make the Rainbow Coalition happy.

[Tanooki]

Yup I was a victim of AA at my college computer labs. I couldn't get work for a year, found out unofficially that's why. Though I had it figured out when they'd hire male and female minorities instead. Me having 2 hour breaks in the day would use the labs to do stuff online back then. I was furious over it needing the money badly so I'd cause little fixable errors anyone with some level of sense could fix...they couldn't. People in general hated the lab anyways because they couldn't get help, would go to computer science majors/minors or friends to figure crap out which was sad. Once it got lifted I got hired as well as a few others, things improved and those who did have sense minorities and not stayed on. AA was nothing but an official quota system, but it still exists today just the law was tweaked to outlaw strict quotas. Thing is though, it's still a quota system when you have to hire X amount of people or face legal challenges. I hate even making this entire argument as it makes me sound like I hate minorities, I don't...have friends who are, but that system cost me a job for a year.

[Z.E.I.D.A.N]

JGZ - Isn't this a bit coincidental , considering the information that I told you I had on Obama months ago about him rising to power in Chicago because of shady characters and about him being backed by terrorists? I wanted to share that information with you but you wouldn't even so much as listen to it. I realize you've been way ahead of me on the political side of things and I applaud you for being so, but I think there's something to be said about a person's past when considering that person may be controlling our future.

Uh, the 'information' you told me that you said came from a friend falls into the conspiracy theory category, along with millions of other stories that spread through word of mouth without any kind of proof or source behind them. Unless you can back up a ridiculous story like that with some evidence, then you shouldn't feel bad for not getting a response about it.

I have to agree with Jeff here. I can't think of one single instance where McCain used the "Hussein" card or the Arab card. The only time I can remember him actually saying the word was when he was defending Obama to that lady and got booed for it. It's just a bunch of right wing crazies and Fox news pundits who do that.

Then you're agreeing with me too. I repeat, the man himself hasn't used those words, but his surrogates have used one, and his insinuations about Obama's patriotism and heritage have fired up a base of bigots who were silent in the past. If I was Barack Obama, I'd think about suing McCain's campaign for libel.

[Tanooki]

Considering his ties to Ayers among a few others, I think calling his character into question is well within reason. People calling out death chants and stuff though should be discouraged.

I'm not quite sure how Obama could nail McCain for libel. I've seen many of the ads and while they can be a good stretch in some, they're not complete lies, and some are fairly dead on too. Obama though at least is running quite a few less of that type and sticking with the issues.

Hey want a laugh? I just picked up watching 'Head of State' on TBS this evening...they had Rock play a little experience Chicago politician who came out with charisma, slick talk, and a huge message of CHANGE, and in the end won. Sound familiar? :D

[Lizzaroni]

The quota system itself might be illegal, but that's essentially what AA is. Until AA is made illegal, you're still going to have an informal quota system to get enough minorities to make the Rainbow Coalition happy.
No, like, literally it's illegal, informal or otherwise.

[Smokey]

No, like, literally it's illegal, informal or otherwise.

Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[MR EPIC]

Uh, the 'information' you told me that you said came from a friend falls into the conspiracy theory category, along with millions of other stories that spread through word of mouth without any kind of proof or source behind them. Unless you can back up a ridiculous story like that with some evidence, then you shouldn't feel bad for not getting a response about it.

Don't be an idiot. I've got sources, websites, proof, anything you need. These are facts as I mentioned to you before, not some part of a conspiracy theory. All I wanted to do was share them with you, but you were so afraid of them being true that you went all berzerk over AIM like an emotional little girl.

[Lizzaroni]

Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Fine, but feel free to back up your assertion. I don't like AA but I'm not going to walk around with a tinfoil hat on my head.

[HGW XX/7]

Share the information. Spread the knowledge.

[Tanooki]

Please share Epic, about time someone shut down that weak argument that it's racism, hatred, anything but the facts.

[Lucas]

Considering his ties to Ayers among a few others, I think calling his character into question is well within reason.

You do realize that works both ways, right?

[Tanooki]

Yes I do...please do call McCain's character into question. I'd love nothing more than to see both of them line by line ticked off for every negative and positive issue they have going for them. I think it would make things a lot clearer.

[Smokey]

Fine, but feel free to back up your assertion. I don't like AA but I'm not going to walk around with a tinfoil hat on my head.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmativetimeline1.html

[Lizzaroni]

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmativetimeline1.html
This proves your assertion how?

[Smokey]

AA was only made unconstitutional in two cities' educational systems two years ago. What makes you think that that magically made AA go away everywhere?

[Lizzaroni]

I never said AA went away. I said the quota system was deemed unconstitutional.

[Rensa]

A lot of university equity scholarships over here give weight to Indigenous Australians (example (http://www.uts.edu.au/study/heas.html)), which I'm not particularly fond of. Racism isn't really a huge problem here for the most part - certainly not like it is in the States - but in principle I'm opposed to positive discrimination/affirmative action.

[Darc Requiem]

Okay, I'm gonna have to chime in on this AA debate briefly. I work for an electrical supplier in Construction and my last job had plenty of AA. The whole job site was full people unqualified for their jobs but they weren't women or minorities, they were white. The superivising staff was alll related either by blood or marriage. The most qualified guys, the ones that actually new what they were doing were their subordinates.

The Site Foreman was the General Superintendents son and the guy directly under him was Honduran and he actually had to do his bosses job. I ended up doing the foreman's job when it came to ordering supplies for the site because he didn't seem want to do it. So here I am the guy low end grunt that is supposed be filling orders and I'm calling around the site tacking down the supervisors for each project and getting their orders, writing them out, and sending them in. When all I was supposed to do was fill the damn orders.

I don't think unqualified people should be hired period, but there continue to be some form of AA regardless. It wasn't fair that Victor nor I had to do the job of a guy making four times our salary either. It goes both ways. I'm not even going get into the crap my mom had to deal with. It took her forever to get her GS11 promotion. Despite being a in an offense full of them and half of them not knowing what the hell they were doing.

[HGW XX/7]

^I don't know if that's affirmative action. Isn't that just nepotism?

[Darc Requiem]

Well its not true affirmative action Sean, but its the reason why affirmative action came to be. Different name, same function though. Unqualified people getting jobs they shouldn't have and qualified people getting screwed. My mother, grandmother, and myself have all been personally screwed over by this in the past 12 months.

[HGW XX/7]

^I see your p.o.v. on that. Wasn't thinking about it that way.

I've been screwed by nepotism too. People who hire/promote family/friends suck.

[Tanooki]

I can see the nepotism argument, but it's just another word for the same slimy crap. Instead of just forcing a quota based on race or gender, you're forcing a family based quota. In either case you stack the deck with morons instead of the qualified.

AA is just a legalized loophole for a quota system since the exact quota system was deemed unconstitutional. All you're doing is basically removing an exact number you have to have per total worker population in a business and using soft percentages or whatever other fairydust can be used to dodge the issue and stack idiots into jobs they shouldn't have.

[MR EPIC]

Please share Epic, about time someone shut down that weak argument that it's racism, hatred, anything but the facts.

There's a lot of information to try and post here, nearly 50 pages worth to be exact. It ranges anywhere from which iimportant bills Obama passed on to how he came to power to what ties he has with what type of individuals. Depending on what information you want I can either provide links to the references or try to post a bit of here as a summary.

[Smokey]

I never said AA went away. I said the quota system was deemed unconstitutional.

Again, that's what AA is- a quota system. What else would call a system that calls for a certain number of minorities among your workforce? Just because there's no document saying "'Kay, we've got the three Filipinos and two Dominicans we needed, but we still need five black people. Oh, and we need two of them to be women." doesn't mean it isn't a quota system.

[Tanooki]

Epic:
Ahh I was just wanting general links to some highlights of the wide range of things that would have some value just so people in here get a real taste. I'm just tired of all the one sided selective stuff here with little rebuttal.

[Lizzaroni]

Again, that's what AA is- a quota system. What else would call a system that calls for a certain number of minorities among your workforce? Just because there's no document saying "'Kay, we've got the three Filipinos and two Dominicans we needed, but we still need five black people. Oh, and we need two of them to be women." doesn't mean it isn't a quota system.
You're retarded. A quota system is just that: explicit numbers that must be met.

[Smokey]

Okay, how would YOU explain affirmative action if it's not an informal quota system?

[Lizzaroni]

It gives preference, but an informal quota system would still require at least a numbered range, or some unwritten/unofficial number to meet. Quotas - that is, explicit numbers, official or unwritten - are still illegal. Saying "Oh well this person is African American and that is more interesting/diverse/looks better/whatever than white folk" does not constitute as a quota.

[Smokey]

You're still taking a certain number of minorities that aren't qualified. It's the same concept.

[Tanooki]

Assuming they are unqualified you do have a point. The problem is quotas were banned so they use soft ghost numbers and call it AA to get around that.

[Lizzaroni]

You're still taking a certain number of minorities that aren't qualified. It's the same concept.
NO, IF THEY ARE SPECIFYING X AMOUNT OF MINORITIES - IN WRITING OR IN "WINK WINK NUDGE NUGDGE" - THEN THEY ARE DOING IT WRONG AND CAN FACE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS.

[Rensa]

Smokey, Liz is pointing out the legal ramifications here, not the ethical ones. It's the legal definition of 'quota system' that's pertinent - namely the explicit numbers of employees to be made up - not the... um, abhorrentness? The ethical quality of the act. Showing preference to minorities might be just as naughty, but it won't get you in trouble like explicit quotas will, apparently.

[Smokey]

I understand that Liz is talking about the legal side of it. My point is that it still happens, regardless of legality.

[Tanooki]

That's my take on it too which is why I just don't get why she keeps slamming you on it when you're not even discussing the same angle. It may be the same general talking point to work an argument but the approaches are not so arguing that back and forward will get nowhere. You're talking reality, she's talking legality, and in my piece I hit both.