change.gov

[nando]

If Obama had promoted these things, you'd be screaming for his anti-freedom, anti-American head on a platter. But those freedom-loving GOP boys did it, so I guess that makes it OK?

you guys need to get over Bush. he had approval ratings in the low teens. Don't you suppose conservatives weren't big fans of him either? His budget deficits were right up there with the worst of the tax & spend liberals. Being a conservative doesn't mean you worship the ground Bush walks on any more than being a liberal means you're a pot smoking hippy communist.

[rwh11385]

Right. For instance, McCain was against torture:

“One of the things that kept us going when I was in prison in North Vietnam was that we knew that if the situation were reversed, that we would not be doing to our captors what they were doing to us,” he said.

Until he was for it:

"Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), a former prisoner of war, has spoken strongly in favor of implementing the Army Field Manual standard. When confronted today with the decision of whether to stick with his conscience or cave to the right wing, McCain chose to ditch his principles and instead vote to preserve waterboarding..."

He felt this way:

In 1999, McCain was in New Hampshire, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a moderate. He proclaimed himself a pro-life candidate, but told reporters that “in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade.” He explained that overturning Roe would force “women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.”

Until he felt this way:

"I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support…."

There are more. A lot more.

If he were a car, I wouldn't want to be at the wheel! Somedays, turning the wheel to right would make the car turn right. Other days, the same action would cause a left turn!

Obama is not going to destroy America. With all this vitriol aimed at him and the idea he will somehow force America to give up liberty I have to ask..... Where was your righteous outrage when the Patriot Act was being signed into law? Where and how often have you protested warrantless domestic wiretapping? How about the multiple times Bush claimed "Presidential Priviledge" to hide his tracks?

If Obama had promoted these things, you'd be screaming for his anti-freedom, anti-American head on a platter. But those freedom-loving GOP boys did it, so I guess that makes it OK?

I do not think that the bailout nor the patriot act were created with everyone thinking properly about it. A growing issue is people reacting quickly and strongly with such emotion that they do not realize what they are getting into. This is what is troubling about Obama presenting policies that sound good to people but no one considers the repercussions.

I don't believe that Bush lied about the threat of WMDs, but America reacted with such emotion and bought into the idea. Now that same thing is happening with Obama, he pulls at heart strings and misleads people with shit like minimum wage. And then later America is pissed off in the end that they fell for people appealing to their sense of urgency and wanting a resolution. America is becoming a land of sheep who click links on youtube that tell them what to think, rather than educating themselves and deciding on their own.

In your quote, McCain said that he would not support the repeal of Roe v. Wade, but simply said he believe it would be possible and likely that it could be. And then mentioned it would go to the States, which in my eyes is highly preferred. Why should the federal government try to force the entire country to have an overarching policy? Fits well with the 10th amendment.

[Ral]

Right. For instance, McCain was against torture:

“One of the things that kept us going when I was in prison in North Vietnam was that we knew that if the situation were reversed, that we would not be doing to our captors what they were doing to us,” he said.

Until he was for it:

"Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), a former prisoner of war, has spoken strongly in favor of implementing the Army Field Manual standard. When confronted today with the decision of whether to stick with his conscience or cave to the right wing, McCain chose to ditch his principles and instead vote to preserve waterboarding..."

I really don't see a switch. There's a huge, huge jump between what is allowed in the Army Field Manual and what he went through.

He felt this way:

In 1999, McCain was in New Hampshire, campaigning for the GOP nomination as a moderate. He proclaimed himself a pro-life candidate, but told reporters that “in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade.” He explained that overturning Roe would force “women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.”

Until he felt this way:

"I don’t think a constitutional amendment is probably going to take place, but I do believe that it’s very likely or possible that the Supreme Court should — could overturn Roe v. Wade, which would then return these decisions to the states, which I support…."

OK, so in the first one he thinks abortion's wrong, but outlawing it would force the procedures underground and create dangers to people who would have abortions anyway. In the second, he says States should be able to regulate it. I don't see the problem.

[mrsleeve]

you guys need to get over Bush. he had approval ratings in the low teens. Don't you suppose conservatives weren't big fans of him either? His budget deficits were right up there with the worst of the tax & spend liberals. Being a conservative doesn't mean you worship the ground Bush walks on any more than being a liberal means you're a pot smoking hippy communist.

X2


I am no fan of BUSH not in the least little bit, I dont agree with many of his policies Patroit act, the last stimulus thing this spring, the WMD bull crap, the list goes on. That dose not mean I am going to jump into bed with Obama we know virtually nothing about him,, nearly any other dem would have had my vote save for Biden now we have both. The only things we know about Obama is that he would not take a yes or no stand on 160 some odd votes, when he did it was to limit the liberties of law abiding citizens or to hand out more entitlements.

[rwh11385]

My prediction, in the long term:

Democrats = hand-out, socialist principles popular with people who can't afford to donate much
Libertarians = push control to states and have the social liberalism of democrats plus fiscal conservatism. frugal government and stay out of people's business
Republicans = low taxes, low spending, high concern for other people's business with influence on morals, bordering on the line of separation of church and state

[DCColegrove]

I'm no fan of Bush or friend of the GOP either...

I am a big fan of our Constitution though However I'm not going into it here...

But take a look at this one:



Very Sexy... Can we Agree?

[mrsleeve]

we agree DC on many things but the pics are good today

[DCColegrove]

we agree DC on many things but the pics are good today

You guys should feel honored, I don't whip out my pro shots in forums very often...

It does make this discussion easier to bear doesn't it.

EDIT: If the debate gets hotter I may have to dig into the archives for some art nudes.

[StereoInstaller1]

Awesome shot, Dan'l!

[h0lmes]

My prediction, in the long term:

Democrats = hand-out, socialist principles popular with people who can't afford to donate much
Libertarians = push control to states and have the social liberalism of democrats plus fiscal conservatism. frugal government and stay out of people's business
Republicans = low taxes, low spending, high concern for other people's business with influence on morals, bordering on the line of separation of church and state

So what is your position then? I consider myself a libertarian but with a strong emphasis on environmental regulation.

[rwh11385]

So what is your position then? I consider myself a libertarian but with a strong emphasis on environmental regulation.

I've posted it plenty of times here. Libertarian.

For a lot of environmental change, you need two things: 1) technology 2) incentives to use them

[StereoInstaller1]

I've posted it plenty of times here. Libertarian.

For a lot of environmental change, you need two things: 1) technology 2) incentives to use them

Really, a Lib?

OK, I can deal with that.

In the meantime, who said "technology will eat itself"?

[Charlie]

Ever wondered why it took the US almost 4 years to enter WWII?

1941 - 1939 = ...4?

I hope your brake kits are better engineered than your social reasoning, history & math skills.

-Charlie

[Pinepig]

1941 - 1939 = ...4?

I hope your brake kits are better engineered than your social reasoning, history & math skills.

-Charlie

Thankfully they are, Lee's stuff is the shit.:up:

[Farbin Kaiber]

I've posted it plenty of times here. Libertarian.

x2, I really hope in the next century this party can take off. Thus why I voted as such, even knowing the guy had not a chance. Maybe the numbers can grow and one day they will get credit in the mainstream media durring elections.