Forums | MacLife

Pat Buchanan:

"Outstanding" "Magnificent" "The greatest and most important convention speech I've ever heard." "It was beautiful." "This was not a liberal speech - it was a deeply, deeply centrist speech." "It had wit, it had humor, and he stuck the needle into McCain."

HES POPULAR AND THAT IS BAD
WE CANNOT HAVE A POPULAR MAN RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

aside from the spectacle that would rival most rock concerts, it was a great speech obama gave.  i think his heart is in the right place, i think he has great ideas, i just don't agree with most of his policies.

he had some great points...

* tax breaks for those who keep jobs here in the USA
* eliminate capital gains for new businesses
* cut taxes on the middle class
* harness nuclear power
* drilling is not a long term option
* go through federal budget and eliminate useless programs
* government can't replace parents, make them turn off the TV
* keep insurance companies in check
* civil unions
* how iraq has a surplus while we're in a deficit

all of those were great points.  no doubt.  will they get any attention if he's in office?  who knows.  politicians and government aren't known for keeping to their word.  remember all of the things bush said he wouldn't do and did, and all of the things the democratic congress said they would do and didn't.

my biggest problem with obama, and mccain, is they're not addressing the issues at the core.  it simply seems they want to change current methods in government to hopefully patch up issues instead of changing the government to be what the founding fathers and the constitution intended.  if the foundation is wobbly, doesn't matter what's on top...it is not stable.

some of the things i disagree with from obama's speech is...

* mandatory paid sick days
* government should work for us (remember the ole 'ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country' speech?)
* if you can't afford healthcare, people who work will pay for yours and their own
* privatized social security is a gamble, but apparently government social security is a sure thing - even though it's going to be bankrupt
* equal pay for women
* government lets people slide into poverty
* foreclosures and credit card debt is government's problem

many things obama listed should be addressed by the free market and our own individual choices.  do i think women should get equal pay, for example?  of course i do.  do i think it should be a law that women should get paid the same?  no i do not.  no one group should be guaranteed something through government.  individualism is what makes america what it is.  breaking things, including laws, into groups (gender, race, etc...) only creates further division.

back to the core issue with government...  i cannot accept obama's view of the constitution.

"I have to side with Justice Breyer's view of the Constitution--that it is not a static but rather a living document and must be read in the context of an ever-changing world." Barack Obama

the constitution was written to simply keep structure, power, authority, etc... of government in check and those checks and balances should not be tampered with.

author and historian kevin gutzman said it best...

"Those who would give us a 'living' Constitution are actually giving us a dead Constitution, since such a thing is completely unable to protect us against the encroachments of government power." Kevin Gutzman

i think obama could be a wonderful president.  i have nothing bad to say about the guy.  i just can't agree with how he views government and most of the policies he wants to bring.

Did someone hack into NokX's account ?   

Alien wrote:

everlong205 wrote:

A third term of george bush is not a character attack? Impylying that conservatives are trying to take all gains away from poor people to give to rich people is not a character attack?

No, and no.

It's really rather sad that you even have to ask, you know.

Certainly Obama can make attacks on Mcain, I expect it (and vice versa). That's what politics are about.

Again: no.

.tsooJ

Of course hes engaging in character attacks. Many of the attacks on Bush and conservatives in general are in fact character attacks. Which is fine. Politics isn't beanbag as they say. What is particularly disingenous though is that Obama is somehow engaging in a different kind of politics and not hitting below the belt whenever he can. That's whats offensive. There is nothing to suggest his rhetoric at all matches his actions, merely his say so.

bratboy wrote:

That's a difficult line to swallow coming from someone who appeared to be interested in nothing more than the differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals for years on this board.

and i've said a few times that my views have changed to an extent on the issue.  still, i don't agree with the lifestyle and i don't think there's a gene that tells us what sexual relationship we prefer.

i do, however, think every american citizen should be able to legally determine who is their benefactor(s) should something happen.  if i want my girlfriend to be legally recognized as my benefactor, that should be my choice.

there shouldn't be tax breaks for those who are married, either.  treat every american as an individual.  if i want to get in a divorce, my business.  if i want to break that 'legal contract' i've setup with my girlfriend, should we breakup, then you pay a fee to have that contract nullified with the legal system.

if i want 3 of my friends to be my benefactors, that's my choice.  it shouldn't matter to the government.

granted, this is just an idea i've had and i'm sure there are tons of pros and cons that can come of this, but it's just an idea i've had.

Everlong hasn't had an original thought in his entire life.

everlong205 wrote:

bratboy wrote:

everlong205 wrote:

Of course hes engaging in character attacks. Many of the attacks on Bush and conservatives in general are in fact character attacks. Which is fine. Politics isn't beanbag as they say. What is particularly disingenous though is that Obama is somehow engaging in a different kind of politics and not hitting below the belt whenever he can. That's whats offensive. There is nothing to suggest his rhetoric at all matches his actions, merely his say so.

No, saying a policy has been a failure or that it has undesired results is not a "character attack" (unless you'd like to make the assertion that every attack is a "character attack," thus completely robbing the term of any meaning).

Trying to link Mcain to Bush and describing it as Bush's third term is. It's not technically the case, and of course don't even get into the personal attacks on Bush made by democrats over the past 8 years. Saying that Mccain is a third term of Bush is trying to tie all those smears together and simpy wrap them around mcain's neck.

I expect that in politics, so I'm not arguing how dare the dems do it. I'm just saying don't then sugggest that Obama is somehow actually acting in a bipartisan manner or not engaging in such attacks.

He's a politician.

Please. McCain supported over 90% of Bush's decisions. Saying that he's Bush's 3rd term isn't a character attack, it is the truth.

Last edited by iSeamas (2008-08-29 10:36 am)

McCain's stated policies echo the policies of the last eight years. How is that not a continuation?

user wrote:

A personal attack is calling McCane a doody-head.

THey've called Bush MUCH worse than that, and now they're saying Mcain is a third term of Bush. Therefore, they're trying to smear him by association. That's an attack on his character.

Last edited by everlong205 (2008-08-29 10:40 am)

Your rotator cuff is going to need surgery with the way you're reaching.

Most historians are already comfortable claiming Bush is the worst president yet and nearly all those who say it's too early to make that sort of claim agree he is among the worst.

ScifiterX wrote:

Most historians are already comfortable claiming Bush is the worst president yet and nearly those who say it's too early to make that sort of claim agree he is among the worst.

You have a link for that?