|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/2/2008 5:52:26 PM
|
|
|
Thessa
Posts: 811
Status: offline
|
Obama is promising change - but im not sure people realize what kind of change would really take place if he was to be nominated into office.
Hes really great at making speeches and making himself look like the 'only way for America to get back on track' but he is a liberal Democrat, which totally negates everything hes been saying in his speeches.
When is change a bad thing? When its pushed by a person who has no clue how to make that happen.
Mark my words - if hes elected people will regret it. Theres no doubt in my mind.
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 6:57:25 AM
|
|
|
csl7037
Posts: 1769
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
I think he knows how to make change happen - but I agree, we'll regret it! For generations! People in this country have become lazy and looking for a handout and think life and the government owe them - and I'm not talking about people on welfare! In subtle ways, this is the mentality of Americans across the board. And that's what Obama is appealing to...and that's what he'll give them.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 7:21:43 AM
|
|
|
huangshan
Posts: 770
Joined: 8/6/2008
Status: offline
|
It depends on what "change" means. Given Obama's policy proposals, I think that kind of change would be a great thing. He seems to be pretty good at rallying Democrats and moderate Republicans behind him, so I think he'd be pretty effective at bringing about that kind of legislative change. His foreign policy ideas are extremely attractive though, and that's the biggest draw for me. McCain is essentially more Bush （early Bush... bush has gotten better in the past year or so, but is still poor), but with more chest-thumping. I don't think America needs more of that. I think change in that respect would be good.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 8:03:43 AM
|
|
|
letusreason
Posts: 831
Joined: 8/30/2008
Status: offline
|
I think Fred Thompson helped shine a light on that democrat buzz word pretty well in his speech last night:
quote:
To deal with these challenges the Democrats present a history making nominee for president.
History making in that he is the most liberal, most inexperienced nominee to ever run for President. Apparently they believe that he would match up well with the history making, Democrat controlled Congress. History making because it's the least accomplished and most unpopular Congress in our nation's history.
Together, they would take on these urgent challenges with protectionism, higher taxes and an even bigger bureaucracy.
And a Supreme Court that could be lost to liberalism for a generation.
This is not reform.
And it's certainly not change.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 8:10:55 AM
|
|
|
letusreason
Posts: 831
Joined: 8/30/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
McCain is essentially more Bush
The montra of the liberal media lol ...nothing original to add on your own?
I couldnt believe how I saw commentators last night straining to keep McCain linked to Bush by asking questions like "how is he like George Bush"? Of course I flipped the channel.
I thought it was interesting how they noted that even though McCain's hero was Ronald Regan, he voted against deploying troops to Beirut (of which I was part of in the Navy).
Say what you want about him but he is his own person and not the poll driven puppet like Obama would be
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 8:52:53 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 1968
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
It depends on what "change" means. Given Obama's policy proposals, I think that kind of change would be a great thing.
If change means raising the level of public discourse in this country to the point where two opponents can remain civil and debate the issues while not sniping at each other, then I'm all for Obama.
And no, I do not believe McCain would accomplish that. The way he and Romney responded to each other during the primary debates was immature and petty.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 9:31:20 AM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7742
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: online
|
quote:
If change means raising the level of public discourse in this country to the point where two opponents can remain civil and debate the issues while not sniping at each other, then I'm all for Obama.
And no, I do not believe McCain would accomplish that. The way he and Romney responded to each other during the primary debates was immature and petty.
As Joe Lieberman so aptly pointed out last night, McCain has already accomplished bi-partisan dialogue long before Barak had his short term in the Senate.
And the Barak/ Hillary exchanges were nothing to write home about.
_____________________________
Jack
It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first..
- Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 9:38:20 AM
|
|
|
huskarine
Posts: 444
Joined: 7/31/2008
From: Wheaton, IL
Status: offline
|
i think Obama means "change" to be about no more bureaucracy and Washington politics...too bad he has flip-flopped (GWOT and ANWR, even nuclear power) like a typical politician (and yes, i know mccain has as well)...
change in this manner is impossible. we would have to wipe the slate clean. but the more reasonable alternative is for local government to matter more, like it was originally designed to be.
_____________________________
"Success is equated with excess/the ambition for excess wrecks us/as the top of the mind becomes the bottom line/when success is equated with excess" -Switchfoot "American Dream"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 9:41:27 AM
|
|
|
Sophie11
Posts: 777
Joined: 1/24/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huskarine
i think Obama means "change" to be about no more bureaucracy and Washington politics...too bad he has flip-flopped (GWOT and ANWR, even nuclear power) like a typical politician (and yes, i know mccain has as well)...
change in this manner is impossible. we would have to wipe the slate clean. but the more reasonable alternative is for local government to matter more, like it was originally designed to be.
Great post, I agree with you entirely! 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 9:46:11 AM
|
|
|
raivyne
Posts: 915
Joined: 8/28/2008
Status: offline
|
I wish Fred had actually wanted to win the nomination...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 9:49:32 AM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 1968
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
If change means raising the level of public discourse in this country to the point where two opponents can remain civil and debate the issues while not sniping at each other, then I'm all for Obama.
And no, I do not believe McCain would accomplish that. The way he and Romney responded to each other during the primary debates was immature and petty.
As Joe Lieberman so aptly pointed out last night, McCain has already accomplished bi-partisan dialogue long before Barak had his short term in the Senate.
I was thinking more about the way that the public perceives things. Maybe if a moderate candidate can get up there and show "the other side" that "their side" isn't all that bad, we can start down a path that doesn't require demonization of the opposition to achieve persuasion.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 9:58:56 AM
|
|
|
huskarine
Posts: 444
Joined: 7/31/2008
From: Wheaton, IL
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
If change means raising the level of public discourse in this country to the point where two opponents can remain civil and debate the issues while not sniping at each other, then I'm all for Obama.
And no, I do not believe McCain would accomplish that. The way he and Romney responded to each other during the primary debates was immature and petty.
As Joe Lieberman so aptly pointed out last night, McCain has already accomplished bi-partisan dialogue long before Barak had his short term in the Senate.
I was thinking more about the way that the public perceives things. Maybe if a moderate candidate can get up there and show "the other side" that "their side" isn't all that bad, we can start down a path that doesn't require demonization of the opposition to achieve persuasion.
-Dan.
problem is that you will never know what the moderate stands for...
i at least want to know what my candidate stands for.
_____________________________
"Success is equated with excess/the ambition for excess wrecks us/as the top of the mind becomes the bottom line/when success is equated with excess" -Switchfoot "American Dream"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 10:22:38 AM
|
|
|
csl7037
Posts: 1769
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
If change means raising the level of public discourse in this country to the point where two opponents can remain civil and debate the issues while not sniping at each other, then I'm all for Obama.
How in the world has Obama done that??!?! This is turning out to be the most down and dirty, nothing is sacred, campaign in American history. Obama's standing up pretending to be above it while all his supporters are the ones looking desperately for mud to throw. Whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 12:56:57 PM
|
|
|
huangshan
Posts: 770
Joined: 8/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: letusreason
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
McCain is essentially more Bush
The montra of the liberal media lol ...nothing original to add on your own?
The closer to election day, the more his stated policy goals and proposals match Bush. Foreign policy (my personal biggest concern) is essentially early Bush, which I would argue is the worst Bush. Tax policy, Bush. Abortion Bush. Etcetera. I am happy with McCain's motions towards nuclear energy though, sadly unrealistic though they may be.
Curiously enough, "liberal media lol" is rather less than original as well. I would be honored to receive a letusreason original. Should I hold my breath?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 1:09:40 PM
|
|
|
letusreason
Posts: 831
Joined: 8/30/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
quote:
ORIGINAL: letusreason
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
McCain is essentially more Bush
The montra of the liberal media lol ...nothing original to add on your own?
The closer to election day, the more his stated policy goals and proposals match Bush. Foreign policy (my personal biggest concern) is essentially early Bush, which I would argue is the worst Bush. Tax policy, Bush. Abortion Bush. Etcetera. I am happy with McCain's motions towards nuclear energy though, sadly unrealistic though they may be.
Curiously enough, "liberal media lol" is rather less than original as well. I would be honored to receive a letusreason original. Should I hold my breath?
Instead of trying to marginalize the terminology i use to point out your parroted phrases, how about provide some specifics on how McCain's foreign policy is like Bush's? On Tax? On Abortion? That way you can raise your arguement rather than try to lower someone else.
Here's a new paradigm for you, maybe the reason that McCain seems like Bush is that they are both on the same platform??!? Consequently , if another republican ran , then THEY would be like Bush. Get the point?
Furthermore, would you like to spell out how Obama is not going to be like past democrats?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 1:28:31 PM
|
|
|
huangshan
Posts: 770
Joined: 8/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: letusreason
Here's a new paradigm for you, maybe the reason that McCain seems like Bush is that they are both on the same platform??!? Consequently , if another republican ran , then THEY would be like Bush. Get the point?
Furthermore, would you like to spell out how Obama is not going to be like past democrats?
To the first, that was almost entirely my point. I was assuming you disagreed with it, which seemed really odd... and given your apparent support, I'm confused as to why you took the tone you did.
To the second, Obama is extremely charismatic and, should he win, comes with an extremely energized electorate and, in all likelihood, a congress that can start cleaning up after Bush. He has also shown considerably better judgment than many past Democratic candidates, particularly with respect to the Iraq war.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 2:10:56 PM
|
|
|
stamper_ben
Posts: 10989
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lone Star State
Status: offline
|
Do you want to know what change I want to see?
Oh well, you're gonna hear it anyway. 
I want to see a huge change in Washington. What I want to see changed is to have those in Congress who identify with the GOP actually vote that way! And if they don't then I'd like to see a change in personnel, see them booted out of office until someone can and will vote for what it is their constituents want.
I suppose this same change could apply to both sides of the aisle. But I won't hold my breath. I enjoy life too much.
_____________________________
We will be known as His by the love we show one another.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 2:56:51 PM
|
|
|
letusreason
Posts: 831
Joined: 8/30/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
To the first, that was almost entirely my point. I was assuming you disagreed with it, which seemed really odd... and given your apparent support, I'm confused as to why you took the tone you did.
To the second, Obama is extremely charismatic and, should he win, comes with an extremely energized electorate and, in all likelihood, a congress that can start cleaning up after Bush. He has also shown considerably better judgment than many past Democratic candidates, particularly with respect to the Iraq war.
I said the first because I think it's cheap, unoriginal, intellectually dishonest, and unfair to try to tie McCain to a President with low approval ratings as if his policies are the reason for that. If that is true, Obama should win in a land slide which he won't. So Bush's policies are supported by 44% of America as indicated in McCains support, if it is as you say and they are the same.
Can you see the lack of logic in your statement now?
I'm trying to help you break away from what the media is telling you to think and think for yourself.
I just wanted to see if you actually had any specifics to illustrate your knowledge on the subject of your opinion.
However, I didn't get any. All I got was "energized electorate" and "charisma". So that is what you are voting for??
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 3:51:38 PM
|
|
|
csl7037
Posts: 1769
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
quote:
ORIGINAL: letusreason
Here's a new paradigm for you, maybe the reason that McCain seems like Bush is that they are both on the same platform??!? Consequently , if another republican ran , then THEY would be like Bush. Get the point?
Furthermore, would you like to spell out how Obama is not going to be like past democrats?
To the first, that was almost entirely my point. I was assuming you disagreed with it, which seemed really odd... and given your apparent support, I'm confused as to why you took the tone you did.
To the second, Obama is extremely charismatic and, should he win, comes with an extremely energized electorate and, in all likelihood, a congress that can start cleaning up after Bush. He has also shown considerably better judgment than many past Democratic candidates, particularly with respect to the Iraq war.
He meant any other Republican would be portrayed like Bush - because that's all they've got. They don't have the foundation to argue on issues because the failed, historically flawed ideals of liberalism can only be sold by slight of hand, buzz words, and meaningless, deceptive rhetoric.
The democratic platform can't even hold up their original change mantra with a straight face anymore. All they can think to use is to claim that a man who has been the bane of President Bush's (and the Republican party's) existence at times the last four years is just like him. It only works if you either want to believe it or you've lived in a cave the last eight years. Problem is, some people want to beleive the fairy tale of socialism and others pay as much attention as if they might as well be living in a cave! I'm just praying the number of people who actually understand history and think things through plus the number who come out of their cave to vote because Palin's pretty or a mom or can handle a rifle - or whatever reason they latch onto, outnumber the ones falling for the scam.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 3:53:10 PM
|
|
|
csl7037
Posts: 1769
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: letusreason
All I got was "energized electorate" and "charisma". So that is what you are voting for??
You forgot that friendly Congress! That makes me feel better!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 5:27:28 PM
|
|
|
Thessa
Posts: 811
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: csl7037
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
If change means raising the level of public discourse in this country to the point where two opponents can remain civil and debate the issues while not sniping at each other, then I'm all for Obama.
How in the world has Obama done that??!?! This is turning out to be the most down and dirty, nothing is sacred, campaign in American history. Obama's standing up pretending to be above it while all his supporters are the ones looking desperately for mud to throw. Whatever.
Do you know whats down and dirty? Its being sexist and putting Palin down before she even had a chance to speak.
And yes - - - a Democratic advisor did that.
_____________________________
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 5:51:10 PM
|
|
|
kernsfamily
Posts: 1351
Joined: 4/26/2006
From: Dallas (originally Detroit)
Status: offline
|
quote:
If change means raising the level of public discourse in this country to the point where two opponents can remain civil and debate the issues while not sniping at each other, then I'm all for Obama.
Pelosi, Reid and all their ilk need to be removed immediately. Then, that will happen.
Their "agenda" all along, for 8 years, is to block George W. from doing anything...obstructionists....and, ignore ANY and ALL "good news" and successes....but, yell from the rafters when things go bad.
want change?
I like another part of Thompson's speech last night:
We need a president who understands that you don't make citizens prosperous by making Washington richer, and you don't lift an economic downturn by imposing one of the largest tax increases in American history.
Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases.
They tell you they are not going to tax your family.
No, they're just going to tax "businesses"! So unless you buy something from a "business", like groceries or clothes or gasoline ... or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small "business", don't worry ... it's not going to affect you.
They say they are not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the "other" side of the bucket! That's their idea of tax reform.
_____________________________
Proud dad of 3 great girls....Erin, Emilie and Elise
Blessed to have all of them in a "totally awesome" public elementary school!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 8:59:54 PM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 1968
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huskarine
problem is that you will never know what the moderate stands for...
i at least want to know what my candidate stands for.
Did you come to that conclusion on your own or were you told that? I have a hard time believing anybody w/o some serious bias or agenda can come to that belief. Moderate doesn't mean that you don't stand for anything. It means that your positions are extreme. There IS a difference.
quote:
ORIGINAL: csl7037
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
If change means raising the level of public discourse in this country to the point where two opponents can remain civil and debate the issues while not sniping at each other, then I'm all for Obama.
How in the world has Obama done that??!?! This is turning out to be the most down and dirty, nothing is sacred, campaign in American history. Obama's standing up pretending to be above it while all his supporters are the ones looking desperately for mud to throw. Whatever.
I'm hoping his attitude and decorum will rub off.
quote:
ORIGINAL: kernsfamily
I like another part of Thompson's speech last night:
We need a president who understands that you don't make citizens prosperous by making Washington richer, and you don't lift an economic downturn by imposing one of the largest tax increases in American history.
Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases.
They tell you they are not going to tax your family.
No, they're just going to tax "businesses"! So unless you buy something from a "business", like groceries or clothes or gasoline ... or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small "business", don't worry ... it's not going to affect you.
They say they are not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the "other" side of the bucket! That's their idea of tax reform.
Come on. Has supply-side/trickle-down economics REALLY worked? Or at least as well as some would like us to believe? If things are really this simple, then why have corporate profits been rising as a % of gdp while wages have been falling as a % of gdp? Obviously, Fred Thompson's description is true to a degree, because if companies earned no money, they couldn't pay anybody. But to imply that there's a direct linear correlation like that is pretty silly and is one of the reasons why I've become fairly disheartened by the Republican party. If your goal really is to improve the economy and the lives of everybody, then come up with some policies that will really do it. But don't try to sell me on lower capital gains and corporate taxes just so they can continue offshoring jobs and keeping the extra money for themselves.
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/3/2008 9:54:03 PM
|
|
|
huangshan
Posts: 770
Joined: 8/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: letusreason
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
To the first, that was almost entirely my point. I was assuming you disagreed with it, which seemed really odd... and given your apparent support, I'm confused as to why you took the tone you did.
To the second, Obama is extremely charismatic and, should he win, comes with an extremely energized electorate and, in all likelihood, a congress that can start cleaning up after Bush. He has also shown considerably better judgment than many past Democratic candidates, particularly with respect to the Iraq war.
I said the first because I think it's cheap, unoriginal, intellectually dishonest, and unfair to try to tie McCain to a President with low approval ratings as if his policies are the reason for that. If that is true, Obama should win in a land slide which he won't. So Bush's policies are supported by 44% of America as indicated in McCains support, if it is as you say and they are the same.
Can you see the lack of logic in your statement now?
I'm trying to help you break away from what the media is telling you to think and think for yourself.
I just wanted to see if you actually had any specifics to illustrate your knowledge on the subject of your opinion.
However, I didn't get any. All I got was "energized electorate" and "charisma". So that is what you are voting for??
I guess I don't understand. Why else wouldn't people like Bush? I mean, the policy is pretty much all there is to look at...? And I suppose I should be a little more accurate, no, not every Republican is like Bush. Some, or many of them are. McCain is, except he has a more enthralling personal history and the media likes him a lot more. He also has maintained his "maverick" image in the face of growing similarity to Bush policy. Image-wise, McCain is more attractive than Bush, I think, though I don't think the substance justifies this discrepancy.
With respect to Obama, yeah, basically I'm voting for a Democrat who is exceptional at pursuing a Democratic agenda. And if you care to go there, image and personality-wise, he's leagues away from Bush and McCain.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Change? Would it be a good thing? - 9/4/2008 12:00:47 AM
|
|
|
Thessa
Posts: 811
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: huangshan
And if you care to go there, image and personality-wise, he's leagues away from Bush and McCain.
Thats actually very true. lol
Obama will NEVER be as wonderful a politician as Bush and McCain are.
_____________________________
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
