posted
My reasons for opposing the war are mostly aligned with Tom's, but to add to what he said:
1. I thought inspections should have been given more of a try, and that the burden of proof was wrong formulated to create a situation impossible for Iraq to get out of. 2. There was nothing in place to replace Saddam. "Democracy" isn't a one size fits all solution. Saddam was a force that kept together a region that since birth was determined to fly apart. 3. We had relatively few allies on our side, and it shouldn't be done without a large coalition of forces.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Yes, of course, Gov. Palin is better qualified to be president right now, than Sen. Obama, who has spent most of his short legislative career voting "present."
I'm curious how short you think Obama's legislative career has been. If city and state-level government doesn't count, I'm pretty sure that leaves Palin with no experience.
Come on Tom, that's namby pamby legislative experience, not super awesome, totally cool mayoral or gubanatorial experience. It only counts when it's executive experience.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Spires--one thing I find weak in the AM-Radio Republicans is that they have a "them or us" attitude. If you disagree on anything you are a scum-liberal. The problem is that those people who disagree on one or two things realize that they are neither scum nor liberal. They then disregard everything else you have to say.
Only those who are invested heavily in the Conservative label and are willing to subjugate all of their ideals to what some other person defines as the "conservative" view is still going to listen to you.
Back to Governor Palin.
When I first heard Senator McCain's choice I was worried. Could he have found a way to gather the disappointed Hillary vote? Was this woman the wonderful Maverick that was being promoted and could this end Senator Obama's campaign?
Then there was the first week of revelations. Again I was afraid, were we unearthing some Crusading Faith-monger so Christianly conservative that all others risk being burned at the stake if she becomes President?
Now, however, after researching all the accusations and revelations, the lies pro and con, I am just saddened.
She is merely a politician, a petty one at that, more interested in her own electability than in any true cause.
I consider her a "Centurion in Temple Robes."
What is that? Well, there is a story.
For a time Rome held Israel, and even some within the Temple itself bowed to the might of Rome. One day, being a bit curious, a Centurion of Rome slipped into the Temple to see what happened there. He was impressed with the devotion and worship that the Isrealites gave to their God.
The next day he forced the Temple priests into disguising him as one of them. He would slip on one of their robes and join the other priests in leading the prayers.
He even memorized enough Hebrew so as to say the right words.
When he stood up there and the hundreds in the room bowed to God, he thought "They are bowing to me". When they gave up Praise and Worship to God, he thought "They are praising me. They are worshiping me." When the swore to obey God's law he thought "They have sworn to obey me."
And the saddest part of the story is that a few, seeing him in the correct robes, hearing the correct language out of his mouth, believed as he did.
But the Centurion, who could have used his time in the Temple of God to find his faith, or to discuss with the wisest of Israel the meaning of God's word, he sought only to seek donations to line his pockets.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Christine: I would have voted for McCain 8 years ago or even 4 years ago. Wish the same guy were running today.
It amazes me that so many people can believe that john McCain would actually run the country differently than he would have eight years ago. He changed campaign tactics this time around because he wants to win. He has to get elected to make a difference. Abe Lincoln ran on a pro slavery platform, If he had not, he would not have become president. If John McCain (Who some people SAY they would have voted for) Had used those "deplorable" tactics eight years ago, everyone might have gotten what they wanted, and we wouldn't we might not have had the republic party hi-jacked by a bunch of neo cons trying to redefine what it means to be a conservative.
Posts: 278 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it comes down to a question of integrity. I wouldn't have voted for McCain in any election, so I can't say for sure, but after he railed against the tactics Bush used, to use those same tactics, and even worse, to use tactics that even Karl Rove has called over the line puts him pretty low on my totem pole of respect.
I would never vote for a guy who was willing to absolutely do or say anything to get to the office. That's part of why I didn't support Clinton. As her campaign went on and it appeared she wouldn't coast to victory, she showed a vicious, honorless streak in her that totally turned me off to her.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
For me it is the aformentioned integrity and a grasp of issues that he doesn't seem to have anymore.
Different times call for different leaders. The US wasn't in the same "place" eight years ago. We weren't involved in two wars. Though he seems pretty gung ho about Iraq now, I don't know that he (minus VP Cheney) would have rushed us into that war in the first place. Since we are there, he seems inclined to stay. As the world is now, I think he would be a disasterous president.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The New York Times runs a lengthy article today on how the 9/11 attacks contributed to Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) foreign policy, particulary his aggression towards Iraq. “A terrorist resides in Baghdad,” he said in Feb. 2002, adding, “A day of reckoning is approaching”:
quote: Within a month he made clear his priority. “Very obviously Iraq is the first country,” he declared on CNN. By Jan. 2, Mr. McCain was on the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt in the Arabian Sea, yelling to a crowd of sailors and airmen: “Next up, Baghdad!” […]
“These networks are well-embedded in some of these countries,” Mr. McCain said on Sept. 12, listing Iraq, Iran and Syria as potential targets of United States pressure.
In written answers to the Times, McCain blamed “Iraq’s opacity under Saddam” for any misleading remarks he made about the threat. Weeks after 9/11, McCain told Larry King that he would have named Donald Rumsfeld and Colin Powell to a McCain cabinet. “Oh, yes, and Cheney,” McCain added, saying he would have offered Dick Cheney the vice presidency. Update One month after 9/11, McCain was already warning that "the second phase is Iraq."
posted
That is something I didn't know about Sen. McCain at the time.
In other news, Gov. Palin refusing to meet with investigators regarding the firing of Walter Monegan is not what I would call the behavior of a champion of accountable, transparent government.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I think it comes down to a question of integrity. I wouldn't have voted for McCain in any election, so I can't say for sure, but after he railed against the tactics Bush used, to use those same tactics, and even worse, to use tactics that even Karl Rove has called over the line puts him pretty low on my totem pole of respect.
I would never vote for a guy who was willing to absolutely do or say anything to get to the office. That's part of why I didn't support Clinton. As her campaign went on and it appeared she wouldn't coast to victory, she showed a vicious, honorless streak in her that totally turned me off to her.
I agree completely. I don't think McCain would be a disaster, but I don't trust him any more. Anyone who could not only work for the guy who did that to him, but could then turn around and claim to be a maverick despite that doesn't get my vote.
Please not that I don't dislike him, but I don't agree with a lot of his political positions, and don't like his support for the Bush admin's policies despite the unmitigated disaster they have been. That shows a disconnect with reality IMO, and makes me fear he will continue to throw our resources away at the current rate.
When I think what I could have spent all the money on the war on it makes my blood boil, and I am not even a public servant. Even with no training or education in the field, I could hardly spent the money any worse....and at least our own country would have benefited.
posted
I understand your frustration, but a few minor points:
Capitalism != letting Wall Street do what it wants.
A substantial part of the most problematic securities were created by semi-private companies (the FMs) able to borrow at gov't rates, not market rates, making them carry less risk while securing more (short term) gain.
Many of the other problematic securities (credit swaps) were created to deal with increased regulation on the grade of debt/investment various kinds of companies were allowed to hold as part of capital requirements. That is, it is possible to acquire one grade of debt, then effectively switch it out for another grade of debt. There's nothing inherently wrong with credit swaps, but because they were being used for regulatory arbitrage they ended up spreading risk without diluting it all that much.
Heck, without mark to market accounting, the credit collapse certainly wouldn't have happened so dramatically (though there would have been some sort of decline). That was a practice mandated by Sarbanes-Oxley, of course.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Anyone else notice Peggy Hill and Palin are almost identical?
Only in that they are both women and they are both brunettes. Beyond that they are completely different.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
First Lady Laura Bush met with Governor Palin and said, "She doesn't know enough of foreign policy, but she is a quick learner."
That seemed good enough for some people, but nobody bother to ask, "Great, she a quick learner, but who is going to be the teacher?"
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, considering who her husband is, she'd know a lack of ability to handle foreign policy when she sees it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Should be interesting. I will watch what I can tonight, but I am moving tomorrow so I may not get to see it.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
