Jump to content
Create New...

Recommended Posts

Posted
My brother who works for the NRO just called me, he said the Secret Service has just been assigned to guard Delaware's Senator Joe Biden. I wonder why? :smilewide:

Yeah, heard about that in the WSJ:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/08/22/o...oints-to-biden/

The Associated Press is reporting that several Obama associates have hinted that Biden will be his VP pick. ABC News reporters who are staking out Biden’s house say a Secret Service detail has arrived to protect the senator … a likely sign that Biden is the one (or at least is The One’s one).
Posted

Also heard news leaked from a print shop producing obama/biden material.

Hillary wasn't even vetted... too bad in that that combo might actually turn things around for BO, who's been sliding recently.

Reportedly there is a considerable quantity of dems that have been holding out for HC, and have vowed to go R if that doesn't happen.

BO is a nightmare waiting to happen.

Posted
BO is a nightmare waiting to happen.

+1, but he has already for Illinois and the senate.

Posted (edited)

at least biden has experience.

plus, he actually has a clue about foreign policy and national security.

more importantly, this means the dems still have a chance of competing for the non threatening white male vote. any singular combo including hilary or obama and no seemingly conservative white guy was doomed to go down to defeat in nov.

i had no idea the dems were capable of making a smart choice like this. the overt competence of this is truly shocking.

if the tail wags the dog, and obama is nothing more than an actor giving speeches, then this could be a ticket i would actually vote for in nov. of course, now we need to see who the fossil is picking for the repubicans.

this really negates the chance that obama turns out to be an incapable nutjob with regards to foregin policy, which would have been his weakest link. now, it may become a strength. who knew the dems had the ability to pull this one out of their a5535?

Delaware, gotta involve the east coasters if you want that vote also. with teddy slowing down after the surgery this makes even more sense. looks like bill and hillary will end up having to sleep together now and renew their realtionship since hill got shut out big time on this deal

Edited by regfootball
Posted

When Biden was being talked up a few weeks ago, I was a little incredulous. The guy has a loose mouth, and he often sticks his foot in it. But he can be the effective attack dog doing the dirty work in the election next to the nice guy Obama. I was kinda hoping for Hillary as a symbol of Democratic unity, but she's a lightning rod, and the Clintons generate so much controversy.

Posted
As long as Obama wants to jack up CAFE standards to ridiculous, pie-in-the-sky levels, I want nothing to do with him. He comes across as a dreamer with his feet off the ground.
Posted

While Biden has his pros and cons, he's a pretty safe choice, which disappoints me. I was hoping he'd pick someone completely out of the blue, like the 2nd Ward Alderman from Bumblef@#k, ND.

Posted
Yeah, he's been slamming "CHANGE" down our throats for months now... and he picks a good ol' boy. But that's all I'll say, I've never wanted to see the Lounge politicized. So I'm out of this thread.
Posted
BO is a nightmare waiting to happen.

Seems better than more of the same with another Republican and their failed agenda..

Posted

I can tell you this;

Picking Hillary would've been a disaster IMO because it would've divided the party.

Not to count, people like me who usually vote R but are thinking of voting D this time around might be a little turned off.

Obama has this traditionally conservative voters attention and I might vote for him. However, put Hillary on the ticket and I'm out.

Ultimately though I think this election suffers the same thing that the last 2 or 3 have: lack of choice.

Posted
Seems better than more of the same with another Republican and their failed agenda..

+1

Were we to actually get someone who was competent and held some sort of "conservative' fiscal policy that actually wasn't delusional, and was also a Republican, I would vote for them.

However, the current crop of Republicans is a disaster. No matter how bad Obama is he can be NO worse than Bush, IMHO.

I still think McCain is a bush re-tread.

Chris

Posted
+1

Were we to actually get someone who was competent and held some sort of "conservative' fiscal policy that actually wasn't delusional, and was also a Republican, I would vote for them.

However, the current crop of Republicans is a disaster. No matter how bad Obama is he can be NO worse than Bush, IMHO.

I still think McCain is a bush re-tread.

Chris

Took the words right out of my mouth.

After 8 years of struggling to eat and buy gas, I think it's time for a change ;)

Posted
While Biden has his pros and cons, he's a pretty safe choice, which disappoints me. I was hoping he'd pick someone completely out of the blue, like the 2nd Ward Alderman from Bumblef@#k, ND.

you know, that's a pretty nice town actually. cheap drinks at the bar.

Posted
Yeah, he's been slamming "CHANGE" down our throats for months now... and he picks a good ol' boy. But that's all I'll say, I've never wanted to see the Lounge politicized. So I'm out of this thread.

Biden isn't a "good old boy" at all. For as many years as he has been in politics, he has resisted the lobbyists. He's one of the least-wealthy senators (if not THE least), his wife is an educator, and he rides Amtrak everyday to work. Plus he's a veteran with many positions the opposite of McCain.

Posted
Ultimately though I think this election suffers the same thing that the last 2 or 3 have: lack of choice.

I'm actually not quite sure I get what you mean, here...it seems to me that we have two very different candidates who have, for the most part, resisted any urge to "triangulate" so as to come off as two sides to the same coin. Even on the policy side, these two are very different.

Posted

>>"After 8 years of struggling to eat and buy gas, I think it's time for a change ;) "<<

You were not struggling (relatively speaking) to buy food & gas until year #8.

'Change' can run either way: better... or worse. Check into the proposed tax increases by the Ds: $1T. And you thought you were struggling in 2000 ??!!??

Posted (edited)
>>"After 8 years of struggling to eat and buy gas, I think it's time for a change ;) "<<

You were not struggling (relatively speaking) to buy food & gas until year #8.

'Change' can run either way: better... or worse. Check into the proposed tax increases by the Ds: $1T. And you thought you were struggling in 2000 ??!!??

Actually, Obama has said he would institute a middle class tax cut....increase 'CEO' taxes... said no tax increase for people under $200k.. sounds like a good deal to me...

Taxes article

Edited by moltar
Posted

The Bush tax cuts actually cost you money even if you got lower taxes or a rebate.....

The tax cuts were provided to you via Uncle Sam's American Excess card and you'll have to pay back those cuts PLUS interest.

Posted
Actually, Obama has said he would institute a middle class tax cut....increase 'CEO' taxes... said no tax increase for people under $200k.. sounds like a good deal to me...

Taxes article

promises and action once in office are two different things tho

Posted
promises and action once in office are two different things tho

Couldn't be any worse than the neocon's 'cut taxes, dramatically increase spending approach' of the last 8 years... I thought conservatives were supposed to be fiscally conservative? What BS...

Posted
I'm actually not quite sure I get what you mean, here...it seems to me that we have two very different candidates who have, for the most part, resisted any urge to "triangulate" so as to come off as two sides to the same coin. Even on the policy side, these two are very different.

Doesn't mean either of them is any good or has a clue.

It's a long way from blue collar to Washington, despite what the candidates try to say when they speak of their blue collar roots.

I just don't see the qualities of a good leader in either, but then again, everything is so filtered, refined and distilled that who knows what these guys are really like.

Posted
As long as Obama wants to jack up CAFE standards to ridiculous, pie-in-the-sky levels, I want nothing to do with him. He comes across as a dreamer with his feet off the ground.

don't forget, make GM pay taxes along with other corporations, because profits are evil!!!! a socialist idea.

All politicians are elitist or they would not be in office.

not true, i know of one. look at sig.

as far as the taxes (income) Cnn easy to see chart

income taxes are illegal to the 13th amendment. because you work: you owe the gov't money.

Posted

as far as too political for the lobby.... maybe an "election 08" section should be started

Posted

It takes a pretty good sized ego to wake up one mornign and think, "I should be the leader of the free world.

So when is McCain going to go ahead and announce he's going with The Mormon Mitten?

Posted

Okay this is politcal talk.... I thought it wasn't allowed? But uhh I'll comment, so anyways here is my five cents. Anyone that supports raising cafe, and hopes filling up your tires with air and good tune-up on your car are enough to help you at the pump won't have my vote. I want an energy policy that includes domestic drilling, I also want a safe nation and would rather be on the offensive than the deffensive. Anyone who talks change and fails to tell me exactly what he will change is not my canidate. I want a canidate with experinse and the ability to work across party lines to get things done. I want a man who will put his country ahead of his ambitions to become president. I will not be voting for a man that has the most liberal record in the senate, someone on either extreme isn't good. McCain is more of a moderate and he has my vote. This Obama this and that is getting old, and his Change, and Hope lines are tired. I want a man that has good values, a solid record, a good forigen policy, and some that understands the challenges we face in the world. That is why I will be voting for McCain. Sorry I got political but I disagree with many people on here and that is okay. I just don't want a change for the worse. :rolleyes:

Posted
income taxes are illegal to the 13th amendment. because you work: you owe the gov't money.

:confused0071:

Yeah, I really don't know how you get that from this:

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Section 2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Are you trying to equate income taxes with slavery?

Posted
Okay this is politcal talk.... I thought it wasn't allowed? But uhh I'll comment, so anyways here is my five cents. Anyone that supports raising cafe, and hopes filling up your tires with air and good tune-up on your car are enough to help you at the pump won't have my vote. I want an energy policy that includes domestic drilling, I also want a safe nation and would rather be on the offensive than the deffensive. Anyone who talks change and fails to tell me exactly what he will change is not my canidate. I want a canidate with experinse and the ability to work across party lines to get things done. I want a man who will put his country ahead of his ambitions to become president. I will not be voting for a man that has the most liberal record in the senate, someone on either extreme isn't good. McCain is more of a moderate and he has my vote. This Obama this and that is getting old, and his Change, and Hope lines are tired. I want a man that has good values, a solid record, a good forigen policy, and some that understands the challenges we face in the world. That is why I will be voting for McCain. Sorry I got political but I disagree with many people on here and that is okay. I just don't want a change for the worse. :rolleyes:

McCain is just plain old, though. Same old right wing BS, even though he has the 'maverick' label. I'm sick of the conservatives, 'values voters', the 'God and Guns' crowd and all their BS....

Posted

Go to Wal-Mart at 11 in the morning, or the mall before all the stores open, those are average 72 year olds. Do you really think any of them are up to the rigors of the presidency?

Posted

At one time I respected McCain. He was principled and was the original type of conservative, not the right-wing, pandering neocon nutjob. It's hard to tell who and what he is now, but if you go by his pronouncements in the last year, he's more of Bush.

Posted
At one time I respected McCain. He was principled and was the original type of conservative, not the right-wing, pandering neocon nutjob. It's hard to tell who and what he is now, but if you go by his pronouncements in the last year, he's more of Bush.

I think he's sold out to try and attract the party faithful....the Republican party has shifted to the right strongly in the last decade...IIRC, a few years ago he called the disgusting evangelical scum like Pat Robertson and James Dobson 'agents of intolerance' but in the past year he's been cozying up them...

Posted
Couldn't be any worse than the neocon's 'cut taxes, dramatically increase spending approach' of the last 8 years... I thought conservatives were supposed to be fiscally conservative? What BS...

well, yeah, but when your main goal in office is to create a war to fund your buddie's pockets......LMAO

Posted
Go to Wal-Mart at 11 in the morning, or the mall before all the stores open, those are average 72 year olds. Do you really think any of them are up to the rigors of the presidency?

too bad clinton (bill) couldn't be in office again to test that theory. feed him some viagra along with his metamucil and i'd bet he'd be game to at least test out whether he could have a redux of his last go round

Posted
I think he's sold out to try and attract the party faithful....the Republican party has shifted to the right strongly in the last decade...IIRC, a few years ago he called the disgusting evangelical scum like Pat Robertson and James Dobson 'agents of intolerance' but in the past year he's been cozying up them...

let's see

mccain's choice

'i'm 72 so i can sell out and be prez if i do this'

or

'stick to my principles and become irrelevant'

Posted

If he had sold out in 2000 and gone nasty on Bush the way Bush went nasty with him, we'd be in a much better place today.

Posted
If he had sold out in 2000 and gone nasty on Bush the way Bush went nasty with him, we'd be in a much better place today.

Sad but true.

Posted (edited)
At one time I respected McCain. He was principled and was the original type of conservative, not the right-wing, pandering neocon nutjob. It's hard to tell who and what he is now, but if you go by his pronouncements in the last year, he's more of Bush.

:word:

Same same here...

I really respect him for serving his country as he did. But I hear a lot of the 'same old stuff' from him instead of what this country needs.

If he had sold out in 2000 and gone nasty on Bush the way Bush went nasty with him, we'd be in a much better place today.

+1

Edited by FUTURE_OF_GM
Posted
McCain is more of a moderate and he has my vote.

i'm not disagreeing...much, but some think life beginning at conception is a radical idea, even though it's science. radical to one may not be radical to another. that is all.

:confused0071:

Yeah, I really don't know how you get that from this:

Are you trying to equate income taxes with slavery?

because you work, the "man" deserves part of those benifits--monies..how is that not involuntary servitude?

Income taxes are perfectly legal, the 16th Amendment says so.

ok, then why do we not have a flat tax that is mandatory...aka why do exemptions exist? because the income tax is not fair and subverts your economic freedom if you can't weasel out of paying because of exemptions. and somehow rich people or corporations are "evil" that make money.

i've even heard of a case that the defendant won because the 1040 is not a legal document according to the reduction of paperwork act. i have it bookmarked if you want the link.

there was quite an interesting book/speaker on cspan. the throes of democracy talked about America circa 1820's to 1880's or so. he looked at how europeans looked at us and concluded we had many pretenses/falsehoods they all "believed" and didn't question, much. and then talked about our ACR. American civil religion. and also talked about how we "worship" the union above states rights and why we now think it's ok to ...have an interventionist foreign policy. ...reconstruction failed miserably, and now we just try to do that abroad.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search