The moderator of Thursday's vice-presidential debate

[ragged325]

Here is my summary of the debate. The Republicans would like to have everyone believe that Palin hit a home run last night. To continue with the analogy, going into the debate, Palin's team was down by six and the bases were empty. As a VP candidate, hitting a game winning grand-slam was not an option. She hit a single and got on base. Good for her, she's not a complete moron.

[Raginl3ull]

Hey Aptyp,

What I can't figure out is how anyone with a brain could back the McCain ticket. You aren't stupid-why are you supporting stupidity and mediocrity?

It's a sad reality that McCain is "stumped" when asked if he believes certain forms of contraception can prevent the spread of HIV. This is out of touch. He wasn't even able to cite his own policy on the matter without first consulting his policy advisor. Weak. There is an HIV crisis in the US and other parts of the world. But the Bush/McCain policies (McCain stated he wasn't sure of his policy, but he knows he supported the President) refuse to teach anything other than "just don't" and consequently, there has been an uptick of HIV infections in younger persons. Far riskier anal sex is more frequent, since in these kid's minds it isn't really sex, and they can't get pregnant. Palin's daughter is quite possibly a victim of insufficient sex ed coupled with busy non-present parents. You know-the very thing Dobson and Robertson claim is ruining the country:

Dobson “blames the supposed crumbling of ‘moral values’ and [the] ‘anarchy that is now rumbling through the midsection of democracy’ on working mothers and ‘permissiveness.’” Jim Daly, president and CEO of Focus on the Family, cheered the fact that fewer women aim to be working moms, “a reflection,” he says, “of a renewed realization that nothing is more important than being there for your kids.”

The only good thing to come from Palin might be somehow proving those "annointed-by-god" blowhards wrong.

Palin got mowed last night. Her first answer was that she wasn't going to answer! What hubris! Instead we got fluff, and cute little smiles and winks, and commentary more suited to a city council meeting. I cringe when I imagine her in a meeting with a US adversary.

I'm with Chris Rock on this one. Vote for the man with one house. We need a leader, not a confused old man who doesn't know where he stands without his advisors feeding him the lines, coupled with a spunky, ambitious noob who would likely get steamrolled in DC.

+1..."You aren't stupid-why are you supporting stupidity and mediocrity?" Well said sir!

[ragged325]

Join Moola.com. Get a free penny and play games to double it again and again. Don't forget to do your daily search for some extra cash!
http://www.moola.com:80/moopubs/b2b/...4d304e54453d-2

Come on man. It's like we're all trying to read what you're saying and take you seriously, but you've got a giant booger hanging out of your nose.

[DarkWing6]

Come on man. It's like we're all trying to read what you're saying and take you seriously, but you've got a giant booger hanging out of your nose.

Turn off sigs if you don't want to read em. Tons of people have signed up for that and used it because of my sig. It's just a stupid game website that you can win money on, jeez.

[Raginl3ull]

I'm going to quote this in this thread for Raginl3ull and everyone else.

In all fairness, warn Aptyp and Vedubin...if not then the bias is revealed. They attacked me too, and again they drew first blood. And again, I stated facts, cited websites and proved my point. How useless is that? Now sir, you have a choice....you ban me and you display a flex of conservative power in favor of Aptyp and Vedubin, or you warn them also publicly like you did me and come off being unbiased and fair. :up:

[Old'n'Slow]

I just found out Obama's stance on gun laws.


Handgun bans, one a month bans, CCW fedral bans, and, I don't even own a gun, but that's enough to lose my vote (Not that he had it)

Look, the NRA is a strong lobby. Don't worry about Obama's gun stance. No court will back most of those ideas.

Worry about a woman who thinks Jesus may have had a pet dinosaur.

A vote for Palin is a vote for a return to the Dark Ages.

[DarkWing6]

In all fairness, warn Aptyp and Vedubin...if not then the bias is revealed. They attacked me too, and again they drew first blood. And again, I stated facts, cited websites and proved my point. How useless is that? Now sir, you have a choice....you ban me and you display a flex of conservative power in favor of Aptyp and Vedubin, or you warn them also publicly like you did me and come off being unbiased and fair. :up:

Check out the thread before you joined it? Your first post was also an offbased attack at Vedubin in half a sentance.

Wikipedia is a very credible source for the information he was trying to convey. If someone is looking to get a good general idea of what something is (i.e. Socialism) then reading through Wikipedia is a great place to go. Wikipedia also does a great job keeping accurate information in the more popular topics out there, and I think Socialism would fall into that. He also backed that up with other sources you didn't point out, so you are just as good as the media that pulls things out of context trying to make people look bad.

I will also leave my warning directly at you and keep Vedubin and Aptyp (funny you didn't point out the guys that are on your side) in the general warning.


Now for me to reply to one of your earlier posts.

1. Remove tax breaks for those who do not need it in order to help the struggling middle class. This is geared towards repairing the damage of the last 8 years with the right in office. He has also stated that he will close Corporate loopholes. Why give 320 billion dollar tax break to wealthiest folks in the country who don't even need them? This falls under McCain and the Republicans policy.

Do you understand how this works? So they increase taxes to the business and the wealthy. They will just in turn increase the cost of their products and reduce the wages of their employees so they can stay in the same income braket they are already in.

This causes the middle class and the poor to make less at their jobs and pay more for the goods they have to buy. Effectively hurting them more. Now they are in a worse place than they were before.

Oh ya, and this is if the businesses even stay in the US. That would really suck when they leave and we all lose our jobs, and don't think that couldn't or wouldn't happen.

Let's look into some better solutions and not something that anyone with a basic education in econ, business, logic, or anything of the sort could understand is foolish from the get go.

2. Mandated Health Care which is geared again towards helping the middle class, which in turn will help the economy.

This is another terrible idea. What government regulated services do you enjoy being a "customer" of? The DMV? How about the post office? The last doctor I want to see if the disgrutled grumpy one that I get stuck with after being in the government waiting room for 2 hours. Now the government can physically have you by the balls.

Here is your solution (see, I am one of those people that point out the problem and offer a solution).

Offer tax incetives to businesses for offering health care to their employees and encrouage competition within health care.

Now we have health care provided by our jobs, options for who we want to go with, and providers that are competing for our business. Competion creates good service and lower costs. They are competing because they WANT you to be their customer, not because they GET you as their customer.

3. A more reasonable approach to diplomacy in terms of SPEAKING to our adversaries which Biden emphasized how our allies have been pressing us to do

*I would like to apologize for my sarcasm in this reply beforehand*

This is sooo realistic. I'm pretty sure those invloved with a 9/11 attacks had calls in to the White House before they got on the planes. Bin Laden has been trying to contact Bush for years now. He just wont pick up.

/sarcasm

Obviosuly we are all for diplomacy when possible, but there is a place for war. Sometimes that is the only way to get across to certain types of people. Kids don't always listen to a time out or saying no. Spanking is necessary at times.

4. Ending the war in Iraq by setting a time table and putting more responsibility on the Iraqi government which currently has an 80 billion dollar surplus. We are spending 10 billion a month to fund the troops in Iraq. The policy will again put more pressure on the Iraqi government to take more responsibility and allow us to focus our resources on where the war really started (War on Terror) Afganastan.

Don't try and cut costs when you have my soldiers overseas! Those guys are putting their lives on the line and deserve much more than they get.

I think we need to get out soon, but we also need to be smart about it. I will trust this to those in control becasue they know much more about war strategy than I do.

Also, talk to soe of the soldiers. I have a very good freind (see thread about the buddy of mine that borrowed my car for his wedding) that spent time in Iraq. I also have 2 other friends that are in the Army right now and are requesting to go. These guys want to serve thier country and they believe in why they are there. Ask Obama how his trip to Iraq went. His views changed a lot (at the time) after actually talking to the commaders in control over there.

[kronus]

*I would like to apologize for my sarcasm in this reply beforehand*

This is sooo realistic. I'm pretty sure those invloved with a 9/11 attacks had calls in to the White House before they got on the planes. Bin Laden has been trying to contact Bush for years now. He just wont pick up.

/sarcasm

Have you read Bin Laden's letters to the U.S. government? Did you ever see footage or hear of the massive protests against U.S. involvement in the Middle East in the 90's?

Just pointing out that your assertion is wrong here, and your 'sarcastic' statement turns out to actually be true.

[Vedubin01]

Look, the NRA is a strong lobby. Don't worry about Obama's gun stance. No court will back most of those ideas.

Under Clinton an AWB was set as a test for 10 years. Banning such imports and placing bans on guns that were said to be evil. Such as having 5 components. A pistol grip handle, a collapsible stock, a magazine that holds 30 rounds or more, a bayonet lug, and a flash suppressor. The ban was you had to have all 5 to ban. I have never herd of anyone getting stabbed by a bayonet in a very long time. If anyone that has owned a gun knows that this does not make guns more evil and was a stupid ban.

Its not that Obama might change the gun stance, Heller vs. DC set the tone on the 2nd amendment but the next president looks like they will have the option to replace 2 of the ailing SCOTUS. This could lead to more leftist judges sitting on the Court. This could also rewrite the decision not in favor of how the 2nd amendment was written and seen by the current SCOTUS.

As far as your attacks on religion, you attack Christianity very hard. Again I do not see or have seen a President of this Country force his/her personal beliefs on the people of the United States. Why don’t you come out and say all religions? Obama is also Christian, or so he claims. Your views are seen as Atheist and there is only about 15% of the entire world that thinks like you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_atheism
So you would be fighting a huge up hill battle.

Personal faith people take very seriously. You cant explain where everything came from. The answer is not "well its always been there" Though Religion does not have solid scientific fact on how things started, it was what this country was founded on. See your dollars in your wallet, or say the Pledge of Allegiance. I’m sure other countries would take kindly to your doctrine. Might want to check them out. I’m sure they will welcome you with open arms.


Darkwing, I heed the warning!

[DarkWing6]

Have you read Bin Laden's letters to the U.S. government? Did you ever see footage or hear of the massive protests against U.S. involvement in the Middle East in the 90's?

Just pointing out that your assertion is wrong here, and your 'sarcastic' statement turns out to actually be true.

Do you have some additional information on this? I'm not saying this becasue I don't believe you. I would seriously like to look into this.

Also, the spirit of what I was saying still stands.

[kronus]

Do you have some additional information on this? I'm not saying this becasue I don't believe you. I would seriously like to look into this.

Also, the spirit of what I was saying still stands.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver

It's a pretty good summary of at least some of the reasons a lot of the Middle East is vehemently against the U.S.

(and no, it's not because 'they hate our freedom')

[Aptyp]

Have you read Bin Laden's letters to the U.S. government? Did you ever see footage or hear of the massive protests against U.S. involvement in the Middle East in the 90's?

First of, When you say Middle East, do you mean Israel? or Kuwait?

Because as far as Israel goes, they have been handling their business.

If you're talking about Kuwait, then you'll probably know that entire region was screwed by US involvement, mainly because they were scared shitless of a man that we corrupted with power. Or is it something like most men that we corrupted and put in power. From Pakistan to Egypt.

Biden has been right plenty of times, and what do you expect from a person who made a career out of being a senator. He's been there for so damn long, that when he brought up Home Depot, audience called out his bullshit. Biden has done it all, and is by far one of the dozen qualified people to run the country today. Unfortunately, it won't happen.

Bidens stances are (were) way different from Obama, other than call themselves "democrats", these two are morally different. Biden has openly criticized Obama every step of the way. The only time they worked together is on the "End poverty" bill, when everyone worked with them (still hasn't gotten through congress, though). Biden criticized Obama for not voting on hard issues, he criticized him for not doing his job as an elected official. Biden criticized Obama for experience.

But for dems, none of that matter.


Biden is superior to ANY VP that McCain could possibly choose. In the best case scenario, if Obama wins, he'll get shot, and Biden would take office.

Voting for a democratic president with a democratic congress would be a disaster. Especially as some supreme judges plan to retire. Consequences are dangerous.

McCain is known for working with both sides, why do you think Biden has such respect for the man. As a matter of fact, nearly every seasoned dem in the congress has worked with McCain on one issue or another. He's shown being a team player and being a leader on both sides. McCain got into politics because he believed he could make a serious change. People don't get elected into any office, if their constituents don't demands change. McCain and Biden have been there, and have seen it all.

Don't forget it's not Biden/Obama and not Palin/McCain campaigns. People are confusing who'll be in power, and who we'll the court joker. Not to mention that Biden would have a job in McCains administration (openly discussed by McCain of the character of people he wants in the White House).

Not to mention Obama has strong ties with DSP and CPUSA, which really damages his reputation. If his change is reverse perestroika, then that is the kind of change I'll avoid.

[KenC]

This is another terrible idea. What government regulated services do you enjoy being a "customer" of? The DMV? How about the post office? The last doctor I want to see if the disgrutled grumpy one that I get stuck with after being in the government waiting room for 2 hours. Now the government can physically have you by the balls.

Here is your solution (see, I am one of those people that point out the problem and offer a solution).

Offer tax incetives to businesses for offering health care to their employees and encrouage competition within health care.

Now we have health care provided by our jobs, options for who we want to go with, and providers that are competing for our business. Competion creates good service and lower costs. They are competing because they WANT you to be their customer, not because they GET you as their customer.

This is precisely what is fundamentally uneconomical about the healthcare system of our country. Over 30% of your private health insurance premiums go directly to administration of the system. Staggering, isn't it? Inefficiency at its finest.
Neither candidate's plan does much to curtail the rising cost of medicine. You can only apply so many band-aids to a festering wound.
We have some of the best physicians in the world here in the US, and one of the poorest structures for them to provide care.

It's a pretty big stretch to compare a government administered health plan to the DMV or the Post Office. Doctors are different than the dolts that process driver's licenses and those that deliver my bills. I'm not sure how many physicians most of you know personally, but I work in the medical field and know quite a few (I'm actually aspiring to be one myself). Of those I have encountered, the demeanor of those who work in private practice is the same as those who work in the VA hospitals (GASP, a GOVERNMENT-run health care system). Providing health care is different than selling tires; competition amongst clinicians is unlikely to result in superior care. EVERY clinician that I've ever encoutered (a lot of them) provides their highest quality care regardless of compensation.
Speaking of the VA, statistically, it provides some of the best care in the country with very little administration costs (percentage wise). Furthermore, of the hundreds of patients I have encountered, those who receive care at the VA seem no less satisfied than those who receive private care.
Overall, for the amount of money we spend on healthcare, our populace should be a lot more healthy :).

[kronus]

By involvement in the Middle East, I mean massive military and financial aid to Israel, as well as continued use/abuse of the U.S.'s power in the U.N.

"If you are the friend of my enemy, you are my enemy" is a common belief.

[Aptyp]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver

It's a pretty good summary of at least some of the reasons a lot of the Middle East is s vehemently against the U.S.

(and no, it's not because 'they hate our freedom')

Got "official" copy? Dated or authenticated? I mean, it says that it was pulled from internet in arabic. Is bin Laden the only literate arab with internet?

If this surfaced over a year after 9/11, then your arguement is kinda weak.

Should we go after every so-called "leader" if they threaten US? If that's the case, Iran here we come.