Politics – Republicans used the PA, IN, and NC primaries to register their unhappiness with McCain by voting for Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, or Mitt Romney. In Penn, 27% opted for Huckabee or Paul; in N Carolina and Indiana, McCain opponents earned 23% of the vote. The Washington Times calculated that McCain had garnered no more than 45% of the Republican vote.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
CrawfordBizDev
blico
slashup67
asolious
daviannewton651975
nopatacious
harleyb761960
SunnyDays
rylandl831968
vinatamayo
BJTJ
pyuuuke
dadesider
ind06
2jojoyo
Helixbuilder
david_nwpa
postaphis
woggman
jeepndave
thinkingserious
Soren85
zlovelj
seopranos
time4change
stephy304
y_soitenly
rebner
Radiofreeeuropa
popeller
tkeeley
lolip
UnusualSuspect
cosmogenium
iMattK
Tessylo
nickjones321
alamala
TechnologyExpert
lins_lis
325)
I find it disturbing that in a nation of 300 million citizens the three front runners are the BEST we can choose....!!!!
Yes, that's certainly true (though Obama looks rather distinguished to me), but you'd find similar sentiments expressed in most of the genuine democracies around the world, about the choices before the electorates.
Japan and Italy, in particular stand out in this regard. Fukuda and Berlesconi seem to be, respectively, a nonentity and a rogue!
I wonder if there are any academic studies on why this seems to be so widespread.
Here's one. This was written about America, but its basic principles have been borne out in all democracies.
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/toc_ind...
That looks a good link Beau, I'll study that with interest. Thanks indeed.
Ah, de Toqueville, early 19th century but much of this is of timeless relevance.
WOW there is 11 attempts to sink this. I think you are gett under someones skin. Look, how long can you lie to people before they realize that you are. I am just shocked that it took these guys this long to realize this fact about the GOPers.
I can see why McCain would run from this, it's soo extrema he wouldn't be elected with these thought processes in place, if even he was handing out free cars to every American. Your Time Is Up.
This doesn't bode well for McCain at all. Nope. My guess is that a lot of Republicans who were thoroughly disillusioned, duped, and basically repeatedly lied to by Bush are going to stay home and chill out on the barcalounger on election day. And who could blame them, really? The party had control of all three branches of government for 6 years and what do they have to show for it? Extreme and disgraceful failure everywhere you turn. It's like they can't even turn on the TV without being reminded that what they got for their loyalty to Bush, Cheney and Big Oil are record national debt, $4 gas, $4 milk, incompetence, corruption, lies, destruction of the planet, and the disgust and disdain from the international community. Cosmic failure beyond all comprehension. McCain will be lucky to get a quarter of the vote Bush got in his second term. Oh well...
McCain has all the passion and sex appeal of Bob Dole, BEFORE viagra, combined with the failures of the Bush admin.
This is the weakest Republican candidate in my lifetime.
libsRfunny,
I usually don't call people out for negative votes--it's your prerogative.
But why would you neg my comment that included a link to the full text of Tocqueville's "Democracy in America," which is still taught today in most high-school history classes as one of the most incisive analyses of the pros and cons of democracy?
Is it simply too long for you to read?
Its all part of the craaazie neo-Con ideeologie Beau.
All part of the craaazie neo-Con ideeologie.
He negged democracy in America. That's almost like the Republicans voting against motherhood.
I was surprised by that too, Beau. I guess he doesn't see any "timeless relevance" in democracy in America.
Beau7890 - He does that to anyone that doesn't agree with his way of thinking, He will neg anything I post, if even it says god is good! I will make a post that gets 50 pos and one neg, however, this is how you know you are on point because he only does that to those who's makes sense. It's just stupid because he doesen't like McCain!
Id hesitate a guess to say the figures being presented are the ones who can be manipulated by the real powers that be. If you look at the REPUBLICAN candidates since RayGun they have fallen into the senile, althzhiemer, idiot category (with possibly the exception of Bush I who is a string puller). They can easily be manipulated by the men behind the curtain.
dumbkirk,
Your observations amaze me.
Well actually Dane what Ive noticed is reality tends to amaze you.
dumbkirk,
You know I am amazed with reality. I wake up every morning and know that anything I want to accomplish I can if I want it bad enough and willing to work for it.
You on the other hand wake up everyday and see nothing but negative. I really feel sorry for you.
ROFLMAO, No Dane I wake up every morning realizing I can laugh as long and as hard as i want by just reading your posts.
Obama is the first candidate I have ever been excited about in my life.
He is a populist instead of a `party` candidate. The establishment on the right has chosen YET another immoral, unethical flip-flopping puppet in John McCain. The establishment on the left has chosen Hillary, because let`s face it, the Clintons are a huge part of that establishment for good or bad.
Which is why of all three candidates, I am excited about Obama! It`s time to take back OUR govt.
"Obama is the first candidate I have ever been excited about in my life."
That's because his "feel good" propoganda has overshadowed his pro-Marxist positions. Read his books. He makes Hillary look like Ron Paul.
> has overshadowed his pro-Marxist positions.
Such a ridiculous post. Like you know what a Marxist position is.
Anyway, can you back up that claim with evidence, such as a pro-marxist quote from Obama`s book, or are you just spewing hate and smear again?
I doubt he's ever read a book written by Barack Obama either... He's just repeating what he's heard from his beloved FOX News pundits...
Thank you Jose!
I was waitin for one of us from the Christian Conservative Political Right dumb down the essential Obama for us.
Our nation NEEDS folk liek you to bandy bout useless 'code words' that ... while we really dont understand what they mean ... we know we should be afeared of em'.
This has worked sooo well for us righties. So well, in fact, that we was able to elect a man who was a draft dodger, a cocaine user, an alcoholic, ... and GET THIS (if you REALLY are opposed to MARXISM) ... he got the city of Arlington Texas to STEAL LAND from middle class citizens so to build a baseball stadium..
AND GUESS WHAT!
He got the CITY to force the middle class citizens to PAY for it by raisin their TAXES!!
Soooo, Jose, if you REALLY dont liek pro-Marxist positions ... I am SHURE you dint vote for Goerge W. Bush ... now DID you?
Lurch
Talk about being ridiculous, as if you know anything about pro-Marxist positions. Your post sort of proves you don't much about politics or anything else for that matter. You're best at being rude.
Any Con who wants to debate facts, I am right there.
If they want to repeat smears and BS, I will smack them down as they deserve.
In this case, the smack down fit the smear.
Well JoseMadre Bush feel bad propaganda um, oh well it made us feel BAD...if there was ever a Marxist government in the US it would be your beloved bush, Mr decider. This guy who has ******ed on our constitution and say it doesn't stand with the time. Who remove the rights of the citizen if evidence is found in an illegal search...the list goes on and on too many to mention, well just one more illegal wiretapping!
I'm with TheRealizer on this one. Obama has beautiful rhetoric, for sure. He also had no positions on issues when he started campaigning, and voted "present" instead of making decisions on hard issues in the senate
He's also supporting what democratic author Naomi Wolf warns against. He is very anti-second amendment (although he's tried to downplay it), and has served on a foundation that actually funds key gun-ban advocates.
I don't trust anyone who thinks s/he knows more than Thomas Jefferson, and I don't feel very comfortable with any one of the candidates.
"I'm with TheRealizer on this one. Obama has beautiful rhetoric, for sure. He also had no positions on issues when he started campaigning, and voted "present" instead of making decisions on hard issues in the senate"
--You sound extremely dangerously misinformed (like someone who has been reading right wing campaign literature without using your brain even once to research the other side). Lots of talking points in your post which makes you sound like an obvious plant or a conned sheep. What have you bothered to do in the way of research to understand why Obama holds the positions he does? I suspect very, very little. ;-(
It's an interesting change of tactics. The anti-Obama crowd use to claim Obama has no substance and that he has no clear policy direction. Now that it is obvious he DOES, they are switching to, "We'll he HAD no positions early in his campaign."
WTF?
I hear ya...I'm always suspicious of posters whose comments are spiked with stale sound bites about Obama. For instance, why must I read for the million time (and yet phrased in a way that clearly suggest the poster believes he or she originated the observation) that Obama is articulate? Or about this voting "present" nonsense (which he has responded to repeatedly)? LOL Is there a living soul left on the planet who doesn't know that Barack Obama is a liberal? That Obama "has beautiful rhetoric" isn't some groundbreaking news and when I see simplistic CRAP like that post, I don't have to wonder how our country has deteriorated to the sh*thole it is today. WTF, indeed.
meso, I've reviewed every bill he's sponsored and many he has cosponsored at the national and state levels; read his own words; reviewed his activity with groups such as the Joyce Foundation, the U.N., etc.; and pretty much read everything I find about him.
On key presidential-level policy, he pretty much parroted Clinton until he found his own legs (which he did). "Change we can believe in" just seems empty to me.
Thanks for the ad hominem attack. I'm flattered you read my post.
"meso, I've reviewed every bill he's sponsored and many he has cosponsored at the national and state levels; "
--I see...I find it breathtaking that, after reading all of the more than 800 bills he submitted in the Illinois State Senate, somehow you were still left with the impression that he "had no positions on issues." Fascinating. Even more intriguing is the fact that you are perplexed that Hillary and Obama hold similar (if not identical) views on certain issues. You see, the problem I have with your post above is that there is nothing whatsoever to suggest that you've done any kind of fact checking about Obama. I've lost track of the number of times the question of his voting "present" came up in interviews and debates, but you write as if you're just learning of his voting record today. And why are you pretending that you're *completely* clueless regarding the Democratic Party's political agenda? This is the part I don't get...
Sorry to disappoint, especially if I contributed to your not "getting" it.
MD-btw, I didn't say "read," I said "reviewed." I have no idea how many there are--I just looked up his name and the bills he sponsored and skimmed through them. You can stop putting words in my mouth, if you don't mind. And you seem clueless yourself if you think all the democrats follow the same political agenda. That's one reason we have primaries. The nuances can be significant even if a candidate adopts an entire general platform.
How can he have no positions on issues, but be very anti-second amendment? I hear that a lot, in variations.
Does that go with him being an elitist but a socialist?
And Obama probably feels he knows better than Jefferson, on at least one subject.
memestryker's post reminds me of one of those cute little campaign postcards some candidates send out at election time. You know, the ones with a photo of the candidate kissing a baby or hugging a bunny or planting a rainforest or whatever politicians do to appear human these days and with a handful of bullets listing their opponent's shortcomings. Anyway, it's as if some people read the bulleted statements on the card but the critical thinking switch in their brain (the one that in normal people says, "find out what the opponent is saying in his or her defense) shorts out and remains stuck in the off position. Wow...
He was weak on major issues like healthcare at the beginning of his campaign, and then started to sound like Clinton before he finally developed it later in the game.
He's been doggedly anti-second amendment, even serving as a board member on the Joyce Foundation, which spends huge sums of money funding the most extreme anti-second amendment organizations, and he supports the U.N.'s citizen disarmament program (see their Millenium Declaration at http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares55...
Elitists like to disarm everyone else. Here is a taste of what others might be calling his "socialism": http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-s2433/show
"He's been doggedly anti-second amendment, even serving as a board member on the Joyce Foundation, which spends huge sums of money funding the most extreme anti-second amendment organizations"
--See, again you're writing as if these are bombshells. I believe the majority of Democrats support some degree of gun control and, in general, Democrats are for diplomacy over senselessly funding the military industrial complex. These aren't issues that require super sleuthing to learn what his positions are. Yet, based on your words, it would seem that this was the first Presidential election in the entire history of elections and you're discovering the Democratic party's platform this year. Are you a new citizen? I'm just curious...
md, The individual right to keep and bear arms has absolutely nothing to do with senselessly funding the military industrial complex.
Have a great life.
meme, I think the voting present was from his days in the state legislature and it was a tactic used to reduce the effectiveness of the anti-abortion lobby. If you have other information, by all means share it.
No problem.
http://votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id...
Okay, memestryker can you provide the proof to back up your allegations against Obama?
I think he's unbeatable, with the right running mate. He's well-spoken and inspirational. I honestly hope he's as good as people believe he is and not just another Jimmy Carter.
I knew he was in the game when he clearly and publicly stated his own opinion with respect to those expressed by Pastor Wright. He took care of business.
I think I already provided links and data to support my "allegations" in an earlier post. Let me know if there is something specific I missed.
Don't get me wrong--I may well vote for him (after I see his running mate).
Prohibition (alcohol, abortion, guns, or most products and services) simply pushes items onto the black market. I remember when abortion was illegal--and common. Restrictions are moving it back into the black market. Drugs are illegal and common. Guns are easy to make, so criminals would love to capture that market. I'd like to see Obama state the obvious.
You try living on the West Side of Chicago and see how pro guns you would be. If you are using the fact that Obama said that people cling to their guns and whatever in hard times to mean that he is anti guns then you are an ass!
Sorry not an ass, I meant an IDIOT!!!
Instant Karma, Blackacereturn.
I would be especially FOR my constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense if I lived on the West Side of Chicago.
Do some homework on his involvement with the Joyce Foundation (who funds anti-gun extremists who pose as "non-violence educators to get 501(c)3 non-profit status so donors can make tax-deductible donations); his support of disarming the U.S. under the auspices of the U.N. in the Millenium Declaration; his endless attempts to ban semi-automatics, handguns, and rifles (using Horwitz' "assault weapon" terminology to scare people), and it goes on.
I am totally with Mr. O on many issues, but I think he is dead wrong on thinking that disarming law-abiding citizens or making laws that turn them into instant felons is going to stop lunatics and criminals from manufacturing, distributing, possessing, and using guns. Prohibition doesn't work for abortion, for alcohol, for drugs, and it won't work for guns. Period.
Americans in general are too violent and poorly educated for us to distribute guns to everyone as if it were candy. If the people in Congress pushing for expanded gun rights were as enthusiastic about extending statehood rights to DC where I live (instead of imagining that every black person they see is armed and dangerous) their motives wouldn't be so questionable. By no means do I want to see more and bigger guns in the hands of people who voted for Bush. It's terrifying enough knowing they actually have the right to vote.
MD, Thomas Jefferson and a lot of other very bright people disagreed with you. They thought ordinary citizens were trustworthy, and would normally do the right thing. We've seen it play out repeatedly--at Appalachian School of Law in Virginia, New Life Ministries in Colorado, etc. See, for example, http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/04/when-m...
The Supreme Court actually upheld a lower court's ruling that the police have no duty to protect you. Citizens are responsible for their own self-defense. See http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protec...
Concealed carry weapon permitholders are less likely to commit crimes than the general population. Prior to the late 1960s, when most children were routinely taught safe firearms handling and played with toy guns, were around their family's hunting rifles and shotguns and dad's service pistol; drew them in school; could buy them at 14, etc., accidents and violence were rare.