Database Develop

Bush

Did any Americans on this forum vote for the bush?

Personally I hope not......

wonder how many recounts they do this time around ?
and maybe a trail ?
read about there being very many activists trying to keep people from voting this time
flyers saying the election had been moved to the day after
and
people comming round to peoples doors saying that the election place they were to go to had been shutdown and they could just write their vote in and give it to them
pretty crazy well suppose some people care more about who win then the democratic process

I'm sure there are some.
The fact that the rest of the world was hoping Kerry would win, has little influence to the us-citizens. Like we should care what America thinks of who we should vote for.
I just hope that this victory, doesn't give Bush a carte-blanche on his foreign policy. The fact that he no longer has to worry about getting re-elected won't help his diplomatic powers. He also doesn't have to care anymore about men coming home in body bags. These men believing they fought for freedom, democracy and the glory of the US, but in fact only went to defend the intrest of some multinationals.

Jupiter said:
Did any Americans on this forum vote for the bush?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Statistically, one out of two.
Not sure your question is really inocent though :roll:
I think you like hot & touchy thread

The fact that the rest of the world was hoping Kerry would win, has little influence to the us-citizens. Like we should care what America thinks of who we should vote for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah it could even have the opposite effect a lot of people would get stubbern and do the opposite then what some snotnosed rest of the world person would advice
I just hope that this victory, doesn't give Bush a carte-blanche on his foreign policy. The fact that he no longer has to worry about getting re-elected won't help his diplomatic powers. He also doesn't have to care anymore about men coming home in body bags. These men believing they fought for freedom, democracy and the glory of the US, but in fact only went to defend the intrest of some multinationals.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but how that he dont have to worry about reelection he may begin to worry about how he looks in the history books and be less confrontational agenst the rest of the world when it comes to deplomatics
here a big news papir had a pole
32000 people voted
kerry got 79%
nater got 8%
nobody got 7%
bush got 6%
so one might say that if that pole had been reality bush lost to nobody

Guys,
Please give me 5 specific reason why Kerry should have been elected, concrete issues/reasons, not just buzz words.
Thanks,

paulmc
imho then kerry was less religous in his motivs when it came to politics thinking stemcell research and giving gay people the rights of marriage in some form or another
imho then kerry was less likely to offend and alienate allies and other countries in the world
imho then kerry would not have a prison camp on cuba where the internaitiol laws conserning prisoners of war were not enforced
maybe the kerry administation would have had less % of people being investergated for insider deals and corruption
and finaly then imho then it keeps a better balance if the house of rep
and the senetors and president is not in the hands of a single party
it's more moderated
just a few things i could come up with on the top of my head
of cause there are surely people who differ in openion

Please give me 5 specific reason why Kerry should have been elected, concrete issues/reasons, not just buzz words
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who said I wanted Kerry to be elected. Its a case of Predator vs Alien. Whoever wins, we lose!

Not sure your question is really inocent though
I think you like hot & touchy thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who, me?

Jupiter said:
Not sure your question is really inocent though
I think you like hot & touchy thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who, me?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes

paulmc said:
Guys,
Please give me 5 specific reason why Kerry should have been elected, concrete issues/reasons, not just buzz words.
Thanks,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll give you my personal opinion, conceptual more than practical as I do not live in the US, nor be concerned with elements such as "he voted that" or "he said this".
I think Bush is a dangerous religious totalitarist. I have no reason to vote for Kerry, but plenty to wish that Bush be moved aside from active international politics.
To me this man should not be re-elected as he should be forced into in LaHaye and charged with the 5 following elements against him:
1. Invading a sovereign country in complete violation of all international law, without UN approval, under very suspicious reasons, obviously telling lies about AMD and supposed connection with Ben Ladden
2. When forced to admit the is no connection between Sadam Hussein, Ben Ladden and AMD, thus no reason to invade this country, not even admitting he was wrong or worst, he got cheated or even worse of all, he deliberately lied to his people, to the nations concerned and to the rest of the world.
3. Establishing concentration camp for Afghanistan prisoners in complete violation of international law, and principles, and international treaty without having those prisoners charged of anything, and allowing no international control of what is happening in this camp
4. Sending his army to perpetuated atrocity and humiliation to irakee prisoners who have not even been charged of anything. (Keep in mind that all the US commanding officers in Irak saw before leaving, the French film "The Battle of Alger" showing what France did during the battle of Algeria, were we did exactly what you are doing presently in Iraq because we were facing the same problem). Let's call it what it is Atrocity. And we know what we are talking about for we did it too!
5. Legitimating the exclusive right for the US to strike any nations they think be a potential threat to their interest and freedom, and denying any one else the right to do so. This is to me the worst of all as establishing this principle is like opening the box of Pandora. It is open to excess, abuse and one-sided interpretation.
I've put a lot of strong word in my post. Take a moment and think about it
- Why does most of the earth citizen desired that this guy be not elected?
- Why did France, which is one of the FEW developed nations that NEVER started a war against your country and which stood many times with your people to fight all along your history, decided to stand-up and shout so loud.
- Why did my small country (France), which has relative small influence, little to offer and many to loose, be backed up by so many countries in its protest?
The US cannot be right against the rest of the world; else this is not democracy any more.
This is to me the 5 reasons why Kerry should be elected.
What would be 5 reasons to elect Bush?

- Why did France, which is one of the FEW developed nations that NEVER started a war against your country
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so that mean that there are pretty few developed nations since when i think i can mention
briten / canada
mexico
germany
japan
vietnam
koera
who were at war with us

[quote="Rudegarso that mean that there are pretty few developed nations since when i think i can mention
briten / canada
mexico
germany
japan
vietnam
koera
who were at war with us
[/quote]
????
Sorry I did not get this ? What is you point ?
If you talk about nations who were officially at war with the US, you can add UK, Italy, Spain, Philippine, Laos. Buy my post was more about Western European nations

i were just wondering which countries had been to war with US since they were formed and you helped me by adding some that i dident remember

IMHO, for me it's kind of obvious why Bush will win... (not that I like to see him win), but remember that ever since Bush started his presidential period, the US where attacked in their own territory, so basically all Bush has done is to govern based on terror, and in the other hand all Kerry has done is negate the terror threat and threaten to reduce the weapons and national security budgets. Ok, it might be true that the terror threat is not that great, but tell that to the American people and I bet they rather not take chances.
So, I think that for the American people, which basically has lived in terror for more than three years, it's imperative that Bush takes care of business, you know, fight for "freedom" in his own selfish pathetic way :evil:
Like the old sayng goes "better safe than sorry"... :roll:
[thought]I wonder why Al Gore didn't run this time? [/thought]

i believe it's rare that a loosing party put the same guy up more then once
popular vote showed that people dident like him too much last time
that he were to unanimated for their taste

That Idiot Let Libby Off The Hook!!!

<RANT>
HOW COULD HE SERIOUSLY SAY THE SENTENCE WAS TOO HARSH? HE GOT THE MINIMUM FOR THAT SENTENCE. AND DUDE CONSPIRED TO OUT A CIA AGENT. PUT THE LADY AND HER FAMILY IN HARMS WAY AND THEN LIED TO THE GRAND JURY, JUDGE, PROSECUTORS, AND FBI ABOUT IT.
IF THIS WAS A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY HE WOULD BE PUT IN FRONT OF A FIRING SQUAD FOR TREASON.
</END RANT>

Dang Yankee fans... they get all upset when their team sucks.

Madcap180 said:
Dang Yankee fans... they get all upset when their team sucks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wear my yankee emblem proudly.

well if libby was really just the fallguy for rovoe or even cheney
maybe they had too for him to keep his trap shut

Impeach Dubya
Oh don't even get me started talking about our Village Idiot. I keep telling myself that in 2008 we will all wake up from a very bad dream!! After his daddy's joke of a Presidency, I KNEW not to vote for Dubya...so don't blame me...I laugh daily at all the Bush-isms, and cry because of how ridiculous the US must look right now to other countries. To all those folks NOT from the US...trust me when I say, the US doesn't want this jackass (or at least the citizens who aren't multi-gazillionaires)...and now THIS????? They went after Bill for booty calls, why in Hell's name aren't we doing something about our slimebag Prez= IMPEACHING his @ss???
UGGG...one more year...one more year...one more year (it seems to be my new mantra).

saw some covering of him going to albania
it was mentioned that he was more popular there then
in us at the moment
but then recall blair being more popular in us then in uk so maybe thats normal enough

National Jester...
Hmm...was he talking about the speech-bungling-ever-so-clumsy Bush or immaculate-speaking (even-though-lying-through-his-teeth) Blair ?
I would presume the ultimate crown of village idiot goes to Bush...and many do agree.
Now to the issue at hand - Scooter Libby did as he was told - period !
I am sure we are all smart enough to see that, and why should he go to jail for the ever scheming Cheney? Not that I am a fan of www.counterpunch.org (they seem a bunch of disgruntled ex-CIA, ex-FBI ex-XYZ), but they do give you a balanced view to the intrigues of American polics. Those guys were right on the money, even before the Bush intervention was public.
Just do as Mike said...come back home wayward 'poodle'....err more like 'Rottweiler'
lol

AD10 said:
Hmm...was he talking about the speech-bungling-ever-so-clumsy Bush or immaculate-speaking (even-though-lying-through-his-teeth) Blair ?
I would presume the ultimate crown of village idiot goes to Bush...and many do agree.
Now to the issue at hand - Scooter Libby did as he was told - period !
I am sure we are all smart enough to see that, and why should he go to jail for the ever scheming Cheney? Not that I am a fan of www.counterpunch.org (they seem a bunch of disgruntled ex-CIA, ex-FBI ex-XYZ), but they do give you a balanced view to the intrigues of American polics. Those guys were right on the money, even before the Bush intervention was public.
Just do as Mike said...come back home wayward 'poodle'....err more like 'Rottweiler'
lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he did what he was told involving the leak of valerie plame.
now the reason he got convicted because he got caught in lies. the whole point of this thing was for him to tell the truth. if he did, some very important people would have had to go down. like, carl rove. carl rove would have been in the hot seat and would have had to name names. and he would have named the big ****. and it would be all down hill from there.
he lied to protect his cabinet. so he should be in jail. he broke a federal law.
people who break laws, should be in jail.
btw: dont act like its just bush alone who is an idiot. if a scholar follows an idiot, then how much of a scholar can he really be? (speaking of course about tony blair)

well as i understand it near the end of the presidency they get to hand out a get out of jail free card
recall something like it with clinton but forget it the public outcry caused him to avoid doing it anyway
maybe libby was promised a pardon later on to keep his mouth shut
personaly i dont think anybody really think that it's right or fair
many people in the history have been punished even if they were just
acting under orders
free will should cause one to take ones own stand no matter what anybody tells you to....

I think we all forget at times that this is no longer a govt for the people by the people but a govt for the rich and corporations. by the rich and corporations. That's all right though cuz soon us middle of the line folks will be ran down till there is nothing left for them to take. And then who will wipe there as#@.

Back home in Boston a FBI agent was sentenced to like 20 years or something like that for helping out a mob guy named Whitey Bulger.. He got more of a sentence then Libby did.. lol

Rudegar said:
well as i understand it near the end of the presidency they get to hand out a get out of jail free card
recall something like it with clinton but forget it the public outcry caused him to avoid doing it anyway
maybe libby was promised a pardon later on to keep his mouth shut
personaly i dont think anybody really think that it's right or fair
many people in the history have been punished even if they were just
acting under orders
free will should cause one to take ones own stand no matter what anybody tells you to....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats exactly my point here. he had a chance to be a man, or a pawn of the establishment. and he conformed to protect the very people that put him in harms way to begin with.
this transcends party lines. lets forget for a minute that clinton, bush sr, regan, and nixon have all pardoned people. is that the excuse now, because your predecessor has pardoned people, you have to? why can't each man stand on his own record? bush has made it clear that he will not hand out pardons and sentence commutes to the guilty. why should he turn back on his word now?
this makes me feel like our justice system is a big joke. even martha stewart got a year for insider trading. lil kim got a year and a day for the same exact thing libby did... lie to the feds. my parents taught me that if i did the wrong thing i will go to jail. what example is this setting for the rest of the country and the youngsters growing up watching this?

<avoids inserting NY joke here>
who did Clinton pardon anyway? .. and .. Since Bush was re-elected, does that mean he got 2 free pardons? lol.. since one of his terms ended already..

Madcap180 said:
<avoids inserting NY joke here>
who did Clinton pardon anyway? .. and .. Since Bush was re-elected, does that mean he got 2 free pardons? lol.. since one of his terms ended already..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20010120/aponline135239_000.htm
nobody significant. the most controversial one was hillary's brother. i mean i think they should do away with the pardon thing all together. executive privilege is out of hand.
presidents can pardon how many people they want. they hand out get out of jail free cards like its candy.

Impeach Dubya
The truth is that Dubya has been a liar and cheat since day ONE. He can care less about the average American, and rather goes out of his way to line the pockets of the rich buddies who got him into office ($3.31/gallon gas??? Puleez!)...our unemployment levels are insane, are property sales are bottomed out, our economy is far from stable...there are more people living in the U.S at poverty level than there were during the great depression...seriously WTF??? Nobody wants this so-called "War on Terror" to continue, the death toll is beginning to look like Vietnam, and even the soldiers who traditionally are treated well, have been losing benefits and pay...so why serve? In 7 years Dubya has taken us from a healthy and stable economy and growth to sh*t, we are losing allies, and the rest of the world sees the U.S as a bully and/or joke. And sadly it is because of our dipsh*t figurehead and his lying cabinet, when in truth most Americans do not want any association with him...well except for Florida and Ohio (thank the lord he cannot run for a 3rd term)...and for the record, the RIAA/MPAA have prosecuted, won, and served harder punishments on pirates than Libby faced, or was released from. Even Paris Hilton had to have her few short weeks in jail...yet Libby goes free???? To say that this will be a hardship for his family still, despite his not going to jail...he willingly lied and saved the collective asses of the Presidency and Cabinet...if this isn't a reason to call for impeachment I don't know what is!!! Let's compare...a blowjob or swindling and cheating America, lying about the war, commuting sentence on what should be treason...or a blowjob...WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG HERE??? I say let the Prez get booty calls...kept the economy stable and healthy, kept us out of a war, created jobs...a happy Prez is an ok Prez (have yet to see a good Prez)...JFK got tons of booty calls and is remembered as a fantastic Prez...think about it.
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." Dubya, August 2004, Washington, DC
end rant.
told you not to get me started talking about the Idiot.

akashastrega said:
The truth is that Dubya has been a liar and cheat since day ONE. He can care less about the average American, and rather goes out of his way to line the pockets of the rich buddies who got him into office ($3.31/gallon gas??? Puleez!)...our unemployment levels are insane, are property sales are bottomed out, our economy is far from stable...there are more people living in the U.S at poverty level than there were during the great depression...seriously WTF??? Nobody wants this so-called "War on Terror" to continue, the death toll is beginning to look like Vietnam, and even the soldiers who traditionally are treated well, have been losing benefits and pay...so why serve? In 7 years Dubya has taken us from a healthy and stable economy and growth to sh*t, we are losing allies, and the rest of the world sees the U.S as a bully and/or joke. And sadly it is because of our dipsh*t figurehead and his lying cabinet, when in truth most Americans do not want any association with him...well except for Florida and Ohio (thank the lord he cannot run for a 3rd term)...and for the record, the RIAA/MPAA have prosecuted, won, and served harder punishments on pirates than Libby faced, or was released from. Even Paris Hilton had to have her few short weeks in jail...yet Libby goes free???? To say that this will be a hardship for his family still, despite his not going to jail...he willingly lied and saved the collective asses of the Presidency and Cabinet...if this isn't a reason to call for impeachment I don't know what is!!! Let's compare...a blowjob or swindling and cheating America, lying about the war, commuting sentence on what should be treason...or a blowjob...WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG HERE??? I say let the Prez get booty calls...kept the economy stable and healthy, kept us out of a war, created jobs...a happy Prez is an ok Prez (have yet to see a good Prez)...JFK got tons of booty calls and is remembered as a fantastic Prez...think about it.
end rant.
told you not to get me started talking about the Idiot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*claps*
that was perfect. the only thing ill add is that... there is nothing wrong with a "war on terror". but we cannot, or should not terrorize people to stop terror. all its doing is helping recruit more terrorists. i have family in the armed forces. so i feel sorrow for the troops who have died because of this war. but on a human level i also feel for the 30,000+ civilians (women and children, and innocent men) that died in iraq. how can we force a democracy on a country that ever asked for it in the first place. the last country that tried force something on us, we kicked their ass (england, lol). why can't the same logic go into our foreign policy?
the sentence communication that the president granted single handedly shot down any moral high ground this presidency had left. they are total users and abusers of the system. and the dems are no better for letting it happen.
republicans are blind followers, and dems are spineless bureaucrats with all talk.
i think im going to change my party affiliation to indepenant

wonder if senat could stop those pardons if they wanted to?
was ROFL when bush used the senat's hollyday to get Bolton the un ambassador elected by himself because the senat dident want to vote for him
thats pretty wacked democracy

I come from a military family. My mom, dad and step dad served, my grandpa served, 2 uncles served, my husband served...I have a strong dose of patriotism running through my veins. That said, it is appalling what the troops and their families have had to endure under the Dubya Admin. An article 36 was filed against a soldier in Hawaii for refusing to go to Iraq and (as he stated it) be forced to murder innocents in the name of oil. If found guilty, his military career will end, he will do time, and will forever have problems getting a good-paying job, as the article 36 and dishonorable discharge will forever follow him. He will lose any pension and VA benefits. All for standing up for his beliefs. Libby?? He gets first a slap on the wrist, follow by a presidential release to serve time. WTF????? WTF????? WTF?????
I will always support the soldiers. They and their families make so many sacrifices for crappy pay, and possibly death....but I do not and will not support Dubya and his lies. His "war on terror", or rather fight to control oil producing countries. Saddam is dead. Where is Osama, and why hasn't he been brought in? It is no longer a terrorist hunt, it is an issue of Dubya insuring his oil buddies interests, rather than the interests of U.S.
Libby was (I'm sure) aware of this, and probably knew of items proving this...he "took one for the team" so to speak, and for doing so, Bush covered his @ss. Just one more thing I wish to use as a nail in the coffin of Dubya's lying, cheating presidency.

I am kind of anti military .. well, not anti military, I respect the guys who were DRAFTED into the army more than the ones who CHOSE to go and then WHINE about it later.... I dunno.. I can't stand the way George Bush always says 'This war is about protecting the way of life in America' ?? I dont get it, what does Iraq have to do with how WE live? .. we spend 100's of billions of dollars on rebuilding a country, but somewhere in the ghetto's of LA and New York some homeless family can't even get a bite to eat..
FIX HOME FIRST.. hypoctite.

Madcap180 said:
I am kind of anti military .. well, not anti military, I respect the guys who were DRAFTED into the army more than the ones who CHOSE to go and then WHINE about it later.... I dunno.. I can't stand the way George Bush always says 'This war is about protecting the way of life in America' ?? I dont get it, what does Iraq have to do with how WE live? .. we spend 100's of billions of dollars on rebuilding a country, but somewhere in the ghetto's of LA and New York some homeless family can't even get a bite to eat..
FIX HOME FIRST.. hypoctite.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
point taken...
however, murphy says "where a man stands on an issue depends on where he sits".
bush, nor his cabinet can relate to a homeless family in la or new york. to a lot of people, they have the mind set of "why can't they just get a job". they dont understand the social ills in the innercity or how to change them. most of the guys who make the laws were born with a silver spoon, most of the guys who look up to them are dirt poor.
p.s. thats whats really wrong with the republican party. their base is so blind that they dont even realize that their representatives dont even represent them. i always find it amazing when i have a discussion with a middle class white person that they are republican and dont even know why. their party does absolutely nothing for them.
dont blame the troops though. they take advantage of what options are available to them. the armed forces recruit in the inner cities and the poor rural areas because they know those people hardly other options. it is only after they get out of the military that they understand what was really going on all along. while in the military i think they feel they have an obligation to not question their leaders. i guess they see that as insubordination. however, leaders are human too. and they are also american.
i'll end by saying this. i can't stand when another american questions my patriotism because i am against this war. i was against this war from the start. when it was UNCOOL to speak out against the war. and i still am against the war. i support the troops but i do not support what they are doing in iraq.
i thank akashastrega's family for their contribution.

Obama - Dream Come True or Disaster?

Hi all,
I think it's fantastic that Barack Obama is President Elect of USA.
As this is an international forum I thought it would be interesting to see whether there is a difference of opinion between US Citizens, and those outside the US. I am British.
What do you think of Barack Obama's success in the election? What are your hopes, expectations, fears and concerns about for his administration?
It would be helpful for the purpose of discussion to state whether or not you are a US Citizen if it's not in your profile.
Cheers,
andrew-in-woking

I am a U.S. citizen and I believe it's a great thing. I'm not so sure he'll be the greatest man ever to be elected to office, but I know we dodged a bullet by not electing McCain/Palin. Imagine George Bush with a Vice President that considers herself experienced in foreign relations because she lives across the Bering Straight from Siberia... What a joke.

I live in the south and I think that the old days of the racist guard are over. It's an amazing thing, and I have a gut feeling he could be a historic president outside of the black thing. I was over joyed last night and even got a little misty eyed...and this is coming from someone who is a staunch Nader supporter. It's so amazing to see my state go blue!

burgertime said:
I live in the south and I think that the old days of the racist guard are over. It's an amazing thing, and I have a gut feeling he could be a historic president outside of the black thing. I was over joyed last night and even got a little misty eyed...and this is coming from someone who is a staunch Nader supporter. It's so amazing to see my state go blue!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sir, I commend you and your state... From the south, you still turned up blue. It's great to see states like NC and VA (who hadn't voted Democrat in over 40 years) making the right decision. This election has renewed a bit of the faith I had lost in the American people as a whole, the ability to see beyond race and beyond the fancy credentials and realize what this nation really needs. Congratulations to all Americans, and let's just wait for the day... What is it, 01/20/2009? This was one hell of a first election for me, great way to start voting.

I'm in Italy, very far from US, and maybe i dont know anythiiii...
But from first sight, i did non trust McCain. I was more disappointed, when i saw Madame Palin.
Cannot say i trust Obama, as i dont know his politic history; but i thik he's better.
We will see in the near future.

I think the idea of this being a "historic" election is over rated, and also the most racially charged one. There is no way anybody can convince me there wasn't a large voting block that voted for Obama purely on the bases they considered him "black". It should be written in the history books the US elected a mixed race president. To label him "black" is a slap in the face of his "white" mother.
I for one am sick of the concept of "race". I reject the racial color lines and do not subscribe to any race other than the human race. There will be forever racial tension as long as we label ourselves "black" or "white". It's time we give up our whiteness or blackness, and everything in between. It creates division and doesn't promote any unity.
Having said all that, I will support the new president and wish him well. My only fear is, it doesn't matter who is president, it's our senators and congressmen that controll this country's destiny. And unfortunately they are controlled by the highest bidder.

Hi,
I'm from Austria and watched the whole election night on CNN Int. and other local senders. I think its a very good first step. Obama can't do it any worse than Bush did it the past 8 years and I think he will be better than McCain too. There's a chance that the US now can fix their broken image in the world and fix their problems in the country itself. Hope it works.
One more thing: I didn't consider McCain to be a big problem as president, but I didn't like to see Palin as vicepresident. You can say what you want, but with 72 years theres a higher risk to become unfit to be president, than with 47. And in that case Palin would have been a disaster for both, the world and the US - imho.
So, my best wishes to the US citizens. I think it was the right choice.

chalid said:
Hi,
I'm from Austria and watched the whole election night on CNN Int. and other local senders. I think its a very good first step. Obama can't do it any worse than Bush did it the past 8 years and I think he will be better than McCain too. There's a chance that the US now can fix their broken image in the world and fix their problems in the country itself. Hope it works.
One more thing: I didn't consider McCain to be a big problem as president, but I didn't like to see Palin as vicepresident. You can say what you want, but with 72 years theres a higher risk to become unfit to be president, than with 47. And in that case Palin would have been a disaster for both, the world and the US - imho.
So, my best wishes to the US citizens. I think it was the right choice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly what it comes down to... I don't think Obama is our Lord and savior, I simply think he's better for the country than another George Bush. McCain loved to say "they say I vote with George Bush 90% of the time, but I'm not George Bush." Well obviously you're not, but ****, 9 out of 10 is 9 out of 10! 10% better than the last 8 years is not good enough.

It's a disaster unless you'll be one who will enjoy the benefits of socialism. "Spreading the wealth" isn't something that helps the economy or promotes job growth. Raising taxes stifles the economy and increases dependency on government programs.
So whether it's a good thing or not is subjective to whether you make money or take money.
I have a job. His proposed tax changes will hurt me more than help me and I don't make that much money. And by "not much" I mean not much more than a full time wal-mart checkout person.
-Mc

Black93300ZX said:
I simply think he's better for the country than another George Bush.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He didn't run against George Bush. So a vote for Obama was NOT a vote against George Bush.

McHale said:
He didn't run against George Bush. So a vote for Obama was NOT a vote against George Bush.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you read what else I said? You're right, McCain isn't George Bush, he's 90% of George Bush.

GWelker62 said:
I think the idea of this being a "historic" election is over rated, and also the most racially charged one. There is no way anybody can convince me there wasn't a large voting block that voted for Obama purely on the bases they considered him "black". It should be written in the history books the US elected a mixed race president. To label him "black" is a slap in the face of his "white" mother.
I for one am sick of the concept of "race". I reject the racial color lines and do not subscribe to any race other than the human race. There will be forever racial tension as long as we label ourselves "black" or "white". It's time we give up our whiteness or blackness, and everything in between. It creates division and doesn't promote any unity.
Having said all that, I will support the new president and wish him well. My only fear is, it doesn't matter who is president, it's our senators and congressmen that controll this country's destiny. And unfortunately they are controlled by the highest bidder.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Many Republicans and Democrats vote straight ticket, this is no different then a black man voting solely on race. They are both dumb reason to vote. That being said I just can't see how anyone can say this is not historical. I agree with you on the labels thing though.

McHale said:
It's a disaster unless you'll be one who will enjoy the benefits of socialism. "Spreading the wealth" isn't something that helps the economy or promotes job growth. Raising taxes stifles the economy and increases dependency on government programs.
So whether it's a good thing or not is subjective to whether you make money or take money.
I have a job. His proposed tax changes will hurt me more than help me and I don't make that much money. And by "not much" I mean not much more than a full time wal-mart checkout person.
-Mc
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right, we should stay in Iraq for another decade like McCain wants, spending $12 billion a month, I'm sure that'll lead to tax cuts... Oh wait, how does that math work? Oh that's right, it doesn't. Considering Obama said the only tax hikes will be for people with $250k+ salaries, I don't think your "not much better than Wal-Mart salary" will suffer as much as you think. I guess you can call me a taker, because I, along with much more than half of the planet, forget our country, agree that Obama is a much better selection. Stop listening to the McCain campaign and what daddy tells you, tax hikes for higher paid citizens is not socialism, look it up.

burgertime said:
Many Republicans and Democrats vote straight ticket, this is no different then a black man voting solely on race. They are both dumb reason to vote. That being said I just can't see how anyone can say this is not historical. I agree with you on the labels thing though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't recall many times Obama mentioned in his campaign that he was black, he didn't use it as a leverage point at all. That's why the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton failed so miserably in their political escapades, it was all about race. With Obama, he showed how he can change the nation, not with his skin color but with his intelligence and his views... McCain just brought up being held captive 5 decades ago and hoped that would pull him through.

McHale said:
"Spreading the wealth" isn't something that helps the economy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually it does. The more money people have the more they can spend, which for sure will boost the economy.
Socialism. What is that exactly? Please explain
And another thing: Its true Obama didn't run against Bush, but McCain did. If there weren't the last 8 years McCain could have won this. But unfortunately for him, Bushs politics failed over and over again, which naturally strengthened all political enemies. And one of those is Barack Obama.

GWelker62 said:
I think the idea of this being a "historic" election is over rated, and also the most racially charged one. There is no way anybody can convince me there wasn't a large voting block that voted for Obama purely on the bases they considered him "black". It should be written in the history books the US elected a mixed race president. To label him "black" is a slap in the face of his "white" mother.
I for one am sick of the concept of "race". I reject the racial color lines and do not subscribe to any race other than the human race. There will be forever racial tension as long as we label ourselves "black" or "white". It's time we give up our whiteness or blackness, and everything in between. It creates division and doesn't promote any unity.
Having said all that, I will support the new president and wish him well. My only fear is, it doesn't matter who is president, it's our senators and congressmen that controll this country's destiny. And unfortunately they are controlled by the highest bidder.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very well said sir. I actually did not vote for either of the two more popular candidates. I agree "there will be forever racial tension as long as we label ourselves "black" or "white." Why can't we all be called Americans. Isn't that what makes American great? That no matter where you came from or what ethnicity you are, you are still an American first. Not Mexican American or African American, Asian American, Italian American, German American, etc. why not just be American.
I agree that it is important to keep and cherish historic traditions and customs. Each different ethnic group brings something good to this country and it's important to recognize that. Maybe this election will help bring this country closer together. There is no doubt some real tension is surrounding this country. I would like nothing more than Americans to come together.
I for one will give Barack Obama a fair shot. In his speech last night he said, "And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn – I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your President too."
His speech was excellent last night. He is a great orator and I am encouraged by his presence and hope that he does well. I trully do.
Black93300ZX said:
You're right, we should stay in Iraq for another decade like McCain wants, spending $12 billion a month, I'm sure that'll lead to tax cuts... Oh wait, how does that math work? Oh that's right, it doesn't. Considering Obama said the only tax hikes will be for people with $250k+ salaries, I don't think your "not much better than Wal-Mart salary" will suffer as much as you think. I guess you can call me a taker, because I, along with much more than half of the planet, forget our country, agree that Obama is a much better selection. Stop listening to the McCain campaign and what daddy tells you, tax hikes for higher paid citizens is not socialism, look it up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you. I never thought I would say that. We are spending way to much in Iraq and need to leave as soon as we can. I don't think that John McCain wanted to spend another decade in Iraq but that is neither here nor there now.
President Bush spent money like a Liberal. I have never seen a Republican candidate spend so much money. It's funny that Republicans run under the platform and spending but many of them as just as bad as there Liberal counterparts. I hope that Barack Obama reduces military expenditures like the one in Iraq and direct this attention to Afghanistan.
I am not however going to argue with you concerning the tax increases for people of 250k+. If he does that it will be curious to see what effect this will have on the real economy.
...but remember when you start taxing companies that will entice them to seek else where to incorporate. Which takes the jobs with them. I just hope that we can come to a middle ground because the real problem of America are not going to be settled overnight. With a clear majority in both the House and Senate the Democrats will have complete control of everything.

burgertime said:
That being said I just can't see how anyone can say this is not historical.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree.... Just note I didn't say it wasn't historical, I said it was over rated.

GWelker62 said:
I agree.... Just note I didn't say it wasn't historical, I said it was over rated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry read too fast!

McHale said:
It's a disaster unless you'll be one who will enjoy the benefits of socialism. "Spreading the wealth" isn't something that helps the economy or promotes job growth. Raising taxes stifles the economy and increases dependency on government programs.
So whether it's a good thing or not is subjective to whether you make money or take money.
I have a job. His proposed tax changes will hurt me more than help me and I don't make that much money. And by "not much" I mean not much more than a full time wal-mart checkout person.
-Mc
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do realize that 90% of current America from around 1920 on has embraced socialist ideas?
Have you been to college? This is a socialist ideal, you give tuition which is then spread throughout to help out say a sports program you have nothing to do with. In turn the money the sports program makes is then spread (usually unequally) to academics. So are you also anti college because of it's evil socialist agenda?
How about police and fireman? They are paid through taxes which "share the wealth" to those agencies. Ever notice how some wealthy small towns have over the top police departments? This is because the "wealth" is being distributed there. Are you also against fireman and police?
How about your highway and roads? Should we abolish these because the "wealth is spread around"?
You would probably answer no to all three. So actually research stuff before you start making broad over dramatic statements about something you know nothing about. Americans have such a narrow view of socialism because of our involvement in Vietnam and our hastiness to decry anything slightly socialist.
Obama has socialist ideals, this makes him no more a socialist then you if you pay taxes or went/go to college.

I'm from Canada and I'm pretty happy with who won. Mind you...I'm a conservative at heart and always will be, but with the two men that were running, I think the best man for United States won. Years from now, history will tell us if it was a good thing or bad. Until such time, the storm has to be weathered.
...oh...and for those wondering, Canada is more or less a socialist country.

[Q] Do you think war will become obsolete?

Do you think war will become obsolete?
i personally think that some day it will, but not because we as a race are becoming better, oh no, i think it will become obsolete simply because there will be no point in fighting... ill try to explain it better.
ok... as we all know many countries (8 or so) are now in possesion of nuclear weapons, HOWEVER with the further improvement of missile defence systems, both short range and long range, how much longer will it be before a nuclear missile (or any other missile for that matter) is picked up by satellites or some other means and is destroyed in midair?
that thereby makes the use of long-range missiles effectively useless...
now for the battlefield... as you may or may not know, in recent years governments have been pumping money into the development of "war robots?" (for lack of a better name) in fact, in late 2005 the pentagon released a report stating that robots may be on the battlefield by 2020. in fact, they already are, if you include the use of UAVs as robots of course...
what im trying to get at here, is if both sides have no humans on the battlefield, nobody gets hurt, and without people getting hurt, there is no reason to fight as the battle would simply never stop and the attacking nation would never achieve its war goals...
so in theory a nation with far more resources would win, but it would most defenately get to the point where the payout would not be worth the amount of resources spent on the war...
________
sorry if what i said makes no sense and i am also sory for the terrible grammah and punctuation, but its one AM in the morning here, and im dead tired, but i really wanted to ask your opinion on this...
so, what do you think?

(loop)
war need money
bank have money
bank give money for interest
taxpayer pay money to bank
politicians need money for campaigns , media and villa
bank friend with politician and give money to politician
politicians make war
bank likes war cuz war need money and make businesses
(/loop)

lol unfort as there are still religions and people in "power" - there will still be war because the sheeple of the world will fight for them no matter how inane it might be.
The U.S. is doing it for "Freedom" ... when before it was to "Save <x> Country from Communism".
Same BS with a different label.

urbanengine1 said:
Do you think war will become obsolete?
i personally think that some day it will, but not because we as a race are becoming better, oh no, i think it will become obsolete simply because there will be no point in fighting... ill try to explain it better.
ok... as we all know many countries (8 or so) are now in possesion of nuclear weapons, HOWEVER with the further improvement of missile defence systems, both short range and long range, how much longer will it be before a nuclear missile (or any other missile for that matter) is picked up by satellites or some other means and is destroyed in midair?
that thereby makes the use of long-range missiles effectively useless...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean, that thereby means we'll take war to space and start destroying each others satellites. And then we'll invent ways to kill the people who are destroying the satellites. Who will be protected by something new. Which we'll invent some sort of missile for. I think you can see where this is going..
now for the battlefield... as you may or may not know, in recent years governments have been pumping money into the development of "war robots?" (for lack of a better name) in fact, in late 2005 the pentagon released a report stating that robots may be on the battlefield by 2020. in fact, they already are, if you include the use of UAVs as robots of course...
what im trying to get at here, is if both sides have no humans on the battlefield, nobody gets hurt, and without people getting hurt, there is no reason to fight as the battle would simply never stop and the attacking nation would never achieve its war goals...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except that they'll try to make the robots kill people as well!
So no, I don't think war will become obsolete, it'll just change.

We already have satellites that can destroy ICBMs. They were made during the Cold War and sent up into space. DO some research or "Star Wars" and not the movie but the thing where the US Government got the name for its program.

jaszek said:
We already have satellites that can destroy ICBMs. They were made during the Cold War and sent up into space. DO some research or "Star Wars" and not the movie but the thing where the US Government got the name for its program.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but the satellites itselfes can be destroyed with rockets

Yes it will become obsolete!
In a future we won´t need any of the weapons on the globe, when we finally understand we are not enemies and we stop fighting for power, money and oil= CONTROL

I didnt read the details but no there will always be war. Somebody will always want something they dont have...

War. War never changes.
http://www.google.com.my/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&sqi=2&ved=0CDsQtwIwBQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DAihKA_AgMok&ei=if4sTePaMYrkrAeZ_sioCg&usg=AFQjCNGHKPYrk8gwTS2F7dh5VvMIXcoQ2A

War will never end. I see ants fighting all the time.
Sent from the destroyer of minds: my Epic 4g.

[Q] 7-1 paris terrrorist attack, how do you think about it?

so, i'm curious how the users of xda think about the charlie hebdo attack of last week?
i think the UN should compile an army force and send them out to the middle east to prevent the terrorist groups
from traveling further and try to prevent groups from attacking innocent and harmless civillians (anywhere in the world)!
i believe the people of Isis and Al-qaeda should be taken out by force! honestly i don't approve of any violence! however in this
case the diplomatic way didn't had any positive result! therefore for the first time i'm saying yes to open fire! obama and other worldleaders should
finally put action to their words! these terroristgroups are an absolute thread to freedom of speech and expression!
so please give youre opinion and you're thoughts about this awful tragedy
(sorry for my broken english) i'm dutch :silly:
my condolances to the victims and family of the fallen!
je suis charlie

And as such the victims will have died in vain. Charlie Hebdo stood for freedom of speech through humour. They abhorred violence.
Murdering others because you don't agree with their ideas, however controversial they may be, makes you no better than those who murder others because they disagree with their ideas.
Murdering innocent people because you're upset over a cartoon is pure cowardice. It's not brave, it doesn't make you a hero. It makes you a pathetic coward.
But answering violence with more violence isn't the answer. That's how this whole mess started in the first place.
The problem here is religion. For as long as history can remeber, people have been slaughtering innocents in the name of some fictitious god. Christianity is no better, or have people forgotten about the crusades?
Cue more butthurt people now painting a target on my head just for saying that. Freedom of speech kids, it works both ways. You get to preach about your god to those who don't want you to, and we get to ridicule it. If we aren't allowed to ridicule it, you're not allowed to preach to us. It's both sides of the blade.
Religious followers being upset because someone drew their fictitious figurehead is as ridiculous as all of us going on a murderous rampage because someone drew the Android robot with a pink hat. But people are so brainwashed from birth that they can't see the sheer idiocracy of what they're doing.
That is what lies at the heart of this. But nobody wants to see it. All the imams have condemned the attack, but not a single muslim is willing to take a good hard look at their religion and see that it needs to change. In the west we have learned to accept (the hard way) that there are others who believe different, and we have learned to share our lives with them. We accept that someone won't pray at dinner, that someone won't thank a god every evening. Now it's time for muslims to make that growth as well.
What none of them realized is that those controversial catroons weren't meant as an insult.
The west learned through Apartheid that a seperate society doesn't work. We adapted.
The French shared their country, their lives and their culture with the muslims who came to live in France. They took them into their schools, their busses, their shops, their homes. They gave them the same rights and liberties as citizens.
Charlie Hebdo welcomed them into their lives by sharing their humour with them.
And as a reward for their acceptance, they were murdered.
And that is unacceptable. It is also why there is now such a backlash. If you come to live in our counties and want to share in our lives and become. A part of our society, you can't cherrypick the parts you want. It's all or nothing. You want the right to practise your religion in our society, then we retain the right to practise our humour.
I have gained a newfound respect for mayor Aboutaleb. That man should be an example to all muslims.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2

ShadowLea said:
But answering violence with more violence isn't the answer. That's how this whole mess started in the first place.
The west learned through Apartheid that a seperate society doesn't work. We adapted.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A wonderful humanist once said an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
Then I look at history the Christian crusades where many were murdered. Centuries later into the 21st century where Muslims, and I'm not meaning all Muslims, have the spotlight in committing many heartless acts against humanity. The cost of human life..................... the torture ,abuse,deprivation or murder of a human being there is never an excuse for that. I'm assuming these individuals have a built up, or have instilled in them, a hatred for the western way of life and use religion as an excuse to commit atrocities.
Apatheid indeed did not work, several of my friends who are Caucasian have worked in South Africa and it was an unsafe place to be for them.
There will be a balance for both, I'm thinking 2 or 3 lifetimes away. Hope is almost always a positive thing.
I have Muslim friends, some I have known most of my life and they are very different to what I have seen in the media.
I think I have written enough I'm emotionally drained.
Round and round we go

Political threads aren't really something that we allow. To much potential for emotions to get out of hand resulting in flaming of members.
Thread Closed