What I'd like to hear from Republicans on this day.

[Modbert]

Sarah Palin DOES have more experience than Barack Obama. She is in charge of the state of Alaska, with 22,000 employees she is accountable for. She also is in charge of the Alaska National Guard. Prior to that she sat on boards that do with ENERGY--of which Alaska is the largest in country supplier to the lower 48.

Barack Obama--was a prior "community organizer". What do community organizer's do? Does anyone really know? He was in the Illinois State legislature & voted "present" (meaning he could not make up his mind on issues) related to the state of Illinois. He was then elected to the U.S. Senate & upon setting foot in that door, he started his campain for the POTUS.

THE MOST FRIGHTENING THING ABOUT BARACK OBAMA: One of his campaign managers stated yesterday as to why Barack Obama did not leave Pastor Wright's church, "if that's what you want to call it". Is because Barack Obama WAS AFRAID of the political consequences of leaving that church. "Meaning he has no intentions of confronting his own party, when warranted." He will always choose his personal political goals over what's good for this country.

BARACK OBAMA--would not even be able to obtain a job with the FBI or the CIA in this country, because of his extremist radical associations

Again, notably this poster is intent on comparing Barack Obama to Sarah Palin, because he/she knows that there is absolutely no comparison in character or in experience to John McCain.

And again, YOU fail at doing what I asked. COMPLETELY failed.

What is it with the majority of Republicans being unable to say something nice about McCain/Palin without bringing up Obama, any Democrats, or the Left? Is it a nervous tic or something?

 

[Tech_Esq]

Palin has given Alaskans large tax cuts, she did it of course by spreading the wealth. She raised the taxes on the oil companies and gave it to the citizens, sounds familiar right? Some people from a certain party call that welfare or wealth redistribution, I don't but some do. I wonder who they are?

You know, of course, that Alaska as an oil exporting state usually receives more than it requires for state funding of government etc, from its oil exports. As a result, in most years, Alaskans all receive a check for their share of the excess oil revenues brought in. This isn't wealth redistribution, that's just what's supposed to happen when government takes in excess revenues, it should return to the people in equal shares (because all people are equal).

Redistribution of wealth or "spreading the wealth around" occurs when you tax me at some rate and take MY money from me. Then, you decide there are some people you do not want to tax because they make so little, it would be a shame to tax them, but you do give them a "TAX CUT". Now, it should be something of a wonder to you how you can have TAX CUT if you pay no tax. So, the net effect is you take some of my money and give it to the person who pays no taxes but is now getting a tax cut.

That is called a lie. It's not a tax cut. It is a pure Robin Hood event. The government commits strong arm robbery and takes my money and gives it to someone else they think can use it more than me even though they didn't work for it. They should cut out the middleman overhead and just legalize mugging.

 

[Andrew2382]

And again, YOU fail at doing what I asked. COMPLETELY failed.

What is it with the majority of Republicans being unable to say something nice about McCain/Palin without bringing up Obama, any Democrats, or the Left? Is it a nervous tic or something?

Didn't I answer your question?

 

[Tech_Esq]

Techinally, that's taking from the rich (Oil Companies) and giving to the poor. (The people)

They only get money because she allows the oil companies to ravish Alaska's beautiful landscape. She allowed Chevron to dump TRIPLE the toxic waste into the ocean in just one area alone. Doesn't sound real Mavericky to me.

Now who's hating? Turn about is fair play, you don't get to sit back and sharp shoot positive Republican responses to your thread. You asked for no fire on your guy, now you can't set up a firing squad on your side. What would JFK say about that?

By the way, if you sell something, it isn't taking money from someone. It's called trade. You get oil, you give money. If I have excess that I give to all citizens equally, it isn't giving to the poor. The left's inability to understand such simple economic information is one of the reason's there is a problem with Obama.

 

[N4mddissent]

that's my argument. McCain is not obamalama the marxist.

Which is an Anti-Obama argument. Therefore your answer is no. What would you do without me here to translate?

 

[Modbert]

Didn't I answer your question?

You actually succeeded Andrew.

Note I said majority, not all.

 

[WillowTree]

Which is an Anti-Obama argument. Therefore your answer is no. What would you do without me here to translate?

No, this is an anti obama argument. Listen carefully now. O-B-A-M-A S-U-C-K-S.

 

[Modbert]

Now who's hating? Turn about is fair play, you don't get to sit back and sharp shoot positive Republican responses to your thread. You asked for no fire on your guy, now you can't set up a firing squad on your side. What would JFK say about that?

By the way, if you sell something, it isn't taking money from someone. It's called trade. You get oil, you give money. If I have excess that I give to all citizens equally, it isn't giving to the poor. The left's inability to understand such simple economic information is one of the reason's there is a problem with Obama.

The topic I responded to was actually off-topic of what I asked.

And nothing about Obama in which you quoted.

And in your post you go insulting "the left".

Notice in my post I said techinally, not that it was fact. But I suppose you cannot read due to the blinders.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Now who's hating? Turn about is fair play, you don't get to sit back and sharp shoot positive Republican responses to your thread. You asked for no fire on your guy, now you can't set up a firing squad on your side. What would JFK say about that?

By the way, if you sell something, it isn't taking money from someone. It's called trade. You get oil, you give money. If I have excess that I give to all citizens equally, it isn't giving to the poor. The left's inability to understand such simple economic information is one of the reason's there is a problem with Obama.

The topic I responded to was actually off-topic of what I asked.

And nothing about Obama in which you quoted.

And in your post you go insulting "the left".

Notice in my post I said techinally, not that it was fact. But I suppose you cannot read due to the blinders.

Of course, if you want to turn this into a thread where Repubs say something nice about their candidate and you sit back and tear up their responses, then there would be no point in my abiding by your rules. And, what kind on out do you think the use of the word "technically" gives you? (provided you had spelled it correctly of course).

 

[N4mddissent]

No, this is an anti obama argument. Listen carefully now. O-B-A-M-A S-U-C-K-S.

Your brilliance is dazzling. I am stunned by the extraordinary depth of your understanding of the arguments and issues.

 

[strollingbones]

Are we stuck....in the swing state status? will we ever know how we voted?

 

[Mr. President]

What I'd like to hear from Republicans on this day is simply a good argument for McCain.

In my entire time here, all I've heard is trying to bring Obama down.

Obama has been called an illegal alien, a socialist, someone with horrible judgement, a racist, a terrorist, anti-christ, etc.

However, generally the elephants in the room has been ignored by Republicans; John McCain and Sarah Palin.

For Republicans to find Obama horribly underqualified, they must Sarah Palin to be really worse no?

But no, I've actually seen people defend her "experience" and say she actually has more then Obama.

And McCain? I get the usual, he's a war hero.

So what I want to hear on this day from Republicans is simply a argument for McCain that does not attack Obama, Biden, or Democrats.

Can any Republican here do that for McCain and or Palin?

If so, I'd like to hear it.

You have Posted on average once every 23 minutes since you have joined this board. There is no way you think before you speak. You are asking people to justify their votes according to your standards. This is not neccessary nor does it prove anything.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Well I'm not going to give you an argument because really, what's the point?

I voted for John McCain for the following reasons:

I agree with his stand on abortion. I agree with his view on keeping tax rates low and cutting the corporate tax. I agree with keeping the internet and cell phone usage tax free. I believe he would defend this country with his soul. I admire his 'reaching across the aisle', even when it wasn't the popular thing to do. He has the battlescars of experience and I trust him. I agree with his choice of Sarah Palin. I believe that her complete lack of being a 'Washington Insider' would have been a huge boost to the administration and to the country. I like that she isn't afraid of the big old boys and that she has no problem saying no, even when it's a no to her own party. I believe she is one smart lady and a quick study to boot.

Happy?

 

[dcapollady]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gem
In 2004, many conservatives were asking a very similar question about John Kerry. I could find very few people who were able to come up with an argument as to why they should vote for John Kerry, but rather they provided numerous examples of why they were voting against George Bush.

I guess I'm wondering why it was ok for Democrats to vote against a candidate - but you seem determined to view Republicans as doing something wrong or being weak somehow if they choose to vote against Barack Obama?

I voted for McCain because his past actions and present platform most closely mirror my views and opinions regarding what is best for our nation. I also voted for McCain because Obama's past actions and present platform contain numerous issues and decisions which demonstrate to me that he does not share my views and opinions as to what is needed to help this nation recover from its current problems and continue as a successful and powerful nation.

I consider both the candidate I'm voting for and the candidate I'm voting against. I don't think there is anything wrong with voting against a candidate - although I think that when a party does that, it often indicates that they chose the wrong candidate and will lose - which is one reason why I think McCain will lose this election and why Kerry lost in 2004.

So I guess, in conclusion...I'm wondering what your game is...thousands upon thousands of Democrats (and probably Republicans as well) voted against Bush in the last election not for John Kerry...I don't remember Democrats on this board demanding those fellow Democrats explain why they supported Kerry and calling them names or implying that they were doing something wrong by doing so...so why are you here now, doing just that?
This is not 2004. And that is simply those democrats. Not myself.

Again, those are not me and this is not 2004.

I'm asking the people of THIS board.

Stop staying in the past.

JFK said it best:

"Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future."

Gem's post was full of valid points, and flawlessly presented. It was also a thoughtful response to the question you posted. Your response in turn (having no other avenue I assume) was asinine and thin. If this is how you react to such an eloquent and thoughtful response... maybe that's why you hear crickets when you pose your questions.
I just stumbled on this forum today in search of real time thoughts on the Obama victory, and there are a few "gems" on this site, but for the most part I am once again disappointed and moving on. It shouldn't be that someone of average intelligence, such as myself, should feel superior to the majority. Me thinks the Internets is the wrong place for real political discussion. That or religion. no matter who wins the gold ... it's still the special Olympics.
Oh and when I say "win" I use it loosely... because it's usually fucktards like you who "win" the argument. Not because you are better or smarter, but because people finally give up trying to reason with you and your persistent ignorance.

 

[auditor0007]

What I'd like to hear from Republicans on this day is simply a good argument for McCain.

In my entire time here, all I've heard is trying to bring Obama down.

Obama has been called an illegal alien, a socialist, someone with horrible judgement, a racist, a terrorist, anti-christ, etc.

However, generally the elephants in the room has been ignored by Republicans; John McCain and Sarah Palin.

For Republicans to find Obama horribly underqualified, they must Sarah Palin to be really worse no?

But no, I've actually seen people defend her "experience" and say she actually has more then Obama.

And McCain? I get the usual, he's a war hero.

So what I want to hear on this day from Republicans is simply a argument for McCain that does not attack Obama, Biden, or Democrats.

Can any Republican here do that for McCain and or Palin?

If so, I'd like to hear it.

I'm a Republican, and I can't give you a good argument for McCain. Of course, I never was a big fan of John McCain. I supported Mitt Romney and felt he was the most qualified of anyone to be President. I almost voted for Obama, but doing so would have gone against everything that I believe in, the most important being smaller government and less spending.

There is no doubt we needed change. However, it is still my belief that the change we need has to do with fiscal responsibility, something the Republicans were supposed to do but did not. Unfortunately, Obama's plans do not call for anything remotely close to fiscal responsibility.

There is something that every American, every voter must face up to. Eventually someone (the American taxpayer) will have to pay for all of this. SS and Medicare alone are going to grow completely out of control unless some real changes are made soon. As of late, the federal budget has been around 22 to 23 percent of GDP. Under Obama, it is likely to grow to as much as 27 % to 30% over the next eight years. That will be the highest percentage of GDP since WWII. Beyond that, it will continue growing until it hits 40%. This is not workable and something has to be done.

No, I don't have a good argument for McCain, but I can't say you can give me a good argument for Obama either.

 

[Modbert]

You have Posted on average once every 23 minutes since you have joined this board. There is no way you think before you speak. You are asking people to justify their votes according to your standards. This is not neccessary nor does it prove anything.

Averages are no good when I can post plenty of times during CNN projections, debates, primary results,etc.

I think before I speak certainly. Not my fault your obsessed with my numbers.

I simply asked people to give me a argument for McCain without bringing up Obama, some did it and some couldn't.

Simple concept.

 

[N4mddissent]

You have Posted on average once every 23 minutes since you have joined this board. There is no way you think before you speak. You are asking people to justify their votes according to your standards. This is not neccessary nor does it prove anything.

Don't try to read too much into the request. Is it so hard to believe someone would be curious about why people with different views feel strongly about their candidate rather than just hear their strong views against one's own candidate? I came to this thread and offered a positive perspective on McCain just because I thought it was a worthy question and was interested in the responses. I felt if I would show that I could describe positive aspects of McCain as a supporter of Obama, that it might be an example of constructive discourse rather than the destructive attack-only debates. To then accuse the author of asking people to justify their votes according to his standards is unfair and unnecessary. Furthermore, your argument that he does not think before he speaks based on an average is completely fallacious and is just an ad hominem attack which is irrelevant to the value of the question. If you don't want to post positives you see in McCain, that's fine. Don't post. I feel though, based on some other comments I have seen in this thread that many feel the author was setting some sort of trap so he may shoot down their candidate. It's sad when attack-only discussions have become so prevalent that an appeal for positive discussion is met with cynicism and suspicion.

 

[Modbert]

Don't try to read too much into the request. Is it so hard to believe someone would be curious about why people with different views feel strongly about their candidate rather than just hear their strong views against one's own candidate? I came to this thread and offered a positive perspective on McCain just because I thought it was a worthy question and was interested in the responses. I felt if I would show that I could describe positive aspects of McCain as a supporter of Obama, that it might be an example of constructive discourse rather than the destructive attack-only debates. To then accuse the author of asking people to justify their votes according to his standards is unfair and unnecessary. Furthermore, your argument that he does not think before he speaks based on an average is completely fallacious and is just an ad hominem attack which is irrelevant to the value of the question. If you don't want to post positives you see in McCain, that's fine. Don't post. I feel though, based on some other comments I have seen in this thread that many feel the author was setting some sort of trap so he may shoot down their candidate. It's sad when attack-only discussions have become so prevalent that an appeal for positive discussion is met with cynicism and suspicion.

Great post N4m. I wasn't setting any trap though for all of those wondering.

Anyone who was able to offer me a argument as to why they wanted McCain without mentioning Obama I said good job.

 

[Mr. President]

Not a worthy question at all. Asking to give only pro McCain reasons as to why someone voted for him may not be entirely possible given the fact that the comparison is truly what made them vote for McCain. If McCain had an excellent economic plan but Mr. Donut had a better one I would vote for the better one. So the arguement that McCain had the best economic plan could only be made in "comparison too". Not soley based in and of itself.

I brought up the frequency of posts as an insinuation as too a need to just talk instead of think through the validity of statements. Which is not off the subject of this question given that my opinion is that a complete answer can not be given without the allowance of comparisons.

If RS didn't want "Obama Bashing" then all he need say is compare plans and use educated and solid interpretations of the candidates views when comparing and try to sway from generic opinions rendered without any validity or substance.

 

[Modbert]

Not a worthy question at all. Asking to give only pro McCain reasons as to why someone voted for him may not be entirely possible given the fact that the comparison is truly what made them vote for McCain. If McCain had an excellent economic plan but Mr. Donut had a better one I would vote for the better one. So the arguement that McCain had the best economic plan could only be made in "comparison too". Not soley based in and of itself.

I brought up the frequency of posts as an insinuation as too a need to just talk instead of think through the validity of statements. Which is not off the subject of this question given that my opinion is that a complete answer can not be given without the allowance of comparisons.

If RS didn't want "Obama Bashing" then all he need say is compare plans and use educated and solid interpretations of the candidates views when comparing and try to sway from generic opinions rendered without any validity or substance.

I think you need to reread the thread. When Andrew and Allie offered up opinions without bringing up Obama, I said good job.

You can compare the two candidates all you want but you should have at least one good thing to say about your candidate without bringing up the other one.