Who'll be the better president?

[farlex85]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

That's what happens when you fundamentally disagree.



It hasn't "become" anything. The difference is the driving force. A thousand years ago, that driving force was necessity; today, the driving force is greed. "I want more than [name] just to have more than [name]." It is no longer "I need [item] and [name] can provide it." It is a consequence of having basic needs so "easy" to satisfy. If you need biological proof of the "easiness," look at obesity rates. XD

The reason for fundamental disagreement is a fundamental flaw and is a result of closed-mindedness and closed personal perspective though, which was the point I was going for.

That may be true in the US, but not globally. There are still many parts of the world that operate under pure need. And even in the US pure need drives many, and "need" now takes a different context. My main point with that was that it has become so convoluted and gargantuan that it's somehow gotten out of control, it is an entity unto itself and we are slaves to it. Like I said, it's hard for me to explain in words, I doubt you understood most of what I said there (at least the way I meant it), and I don't blame you.

[AuDioFreaK39]

I, for one, know that each and every American reading this thread is wholeheartedly loyal and committed to our United States of America, whether qualified to submit an honest vote or simply underage, and that each and every one of us American people submit honest respect and consideration for our nation's history, through rough unknowns and through glorious prosperity.

When the devastating American Civil War came to a conclusion on April 9, 1865, former President Abraham Lincoln could finally focus most of his efforts on reconstruction and beginning to mend the deep scars between the North and South. When asked how defeated Confederates should be treated, Lincoln responded, "I'd let 'em up easy, let 'em up easy."

As Americans, I completely understand that we want facts the quick and easy way. Without further delay to proclaim a truthful generalization, the mass of textual and visual media we receive through the internet, television, political magazines, and regional newspapers all contribute to our effectively long-lasting worldviews on societies and governments.

Without further hesitation, I present to you a brief outline highlighting the platform of Senators John McCain and Barack Obama - an outline based on absolute objective truths and completely unbiased fact.


*PLEASE READ ALL POLITICAL STANCES LISTED BELOW BEFORE POSTING A REPLY*







Source links can be obtained by viewing the corresponding PDF file:

McCain / Obama Voter's Guide

[WhiteLotus]

Now this is here (sorry for being an ass) it does give an interesting comparison, why would he [McCain] not favour cloning - i am assuming here that cloning also includes stem cell research. Which is about the niftyist thing since can openers.

[das müffin mann]

i am for stem cell research and the cloning of human ORGANS, i do not, however think it is that great of an idea to fully clone humans

[SK-1]

Trying to figure out any positive in the youth abortion across state line without parental notification.
Call me old fashioned.

[WhiteLotus]

Originally Posted by SK-1

Trying to figure out any positive in the youth abortion across state line without parental notification.
Call me old fashioned.

I totally agree with you here - I would make sure that if the girl is not old enough to have sex in the state she is from then the parents or guardians have to be notified.

[das müffin mann]

sk-1 i do agree with you on that, tbh if a underage child is going to have an abortion the parents should know

[AuDioFreaK39]

Originally Posted by das müffin mann

sk-1 i do agree with you on that, tbh if a underage child is going to have an abortion the parents should know

Agreed. Why does America have this sinister perspective of hiding potential life-changing moments? Minors shouldn't be keeping secrets from their parents - and yes, this directly compares to the motivation parents should give their children for staying in school and achieving socially commendable goals (eg. graduating high school). Besides, privacy is a dying concept, get used to it.

mother produced child > child produces potential grandchild

therefore, mother should have the right to know.

[DaedalusHelios]

Originally Posted by das müffin mann

sk-1 i do agree with you on that, tbh if a underage child is going to have an abortion the parents should know

Usually if the child doesn't turn to there parents during that time of need it means one or more of these situations.

1. The parent impregnated the child.
2. The parent is already physically abusive and could kill the child out of retribution.
3. The child was impregnated through rape and doesn't want the parent to make the child carry the baby full term.
4. The child would then be kicked out of the household by the parents and become homeless.

All of these things do happen. Ignoring the possibility is ignorant. I knew a girl who was kicked out of the house for getting pregnant. She was also beaten severely. So saying the parents should know depends on the parent, which should be decided by a doctor.

There are many more scenarios if you want to know them. I think it is the choice of the doctor after evaluating the situation and taking into account the possible situations listed above to ask the child if its the case.

PS. This Golden view of mothers is ignorant. I have seen abuse in many circumstances and assuming the parent will be god-like and loving in every situation is idiotic to say the least. When parents beat a child, the child is usually not taken from the home. The child is almost always bullied into not testifying against the parents in court if it ever even makes it that far.


When sexually abused, most children never tell anyone until they are in there twenties or later(adulthood). So the parent impregnating the child is much more common than you would like to assume. I agree its very depressing and I don't even like to think of those kind of things. It does happen and you must defend children as much as you can in those situations.

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by farlex85

The reason for fundamental disagreement is a fundamental flaw and is a result of closed-mindedness and closed personal perspective though, which was the point I was going for.

That is, in itself, close-minded. It works on the assumption that people will change their mind and in your eyes, to your perspective; however, in the oppositions eyes, they feel the same way towards you. In the end, all we can do is speak our mind and agree to disagree.

The only "fundamental flaw" is the fact everyone sees everything in a different way. No two people agree 100% percent on everything (in a lot of cases, anything). As long as we don't kill each other over it, I don't see it as a flaw at all.

Originally Posted by farlex85

That may be true in the US, but not globally. There are still many parts of the world that operate under pure need. And even in the US pure need drives many, and "need" now takes a different context. My main point with that was that it has become so convoluted and gargantuan that it's somehow gotten out of control, it is an entity unto itself and we are slaves to it. Like I said, it's hard for me to explain in words, I doubt you understood most of what I said there (at least the way I meant it), and I don't blame you.

I'm talking what is commonly referred to as "the West." You can separate "the West" from the rest simply by looking at who is being severely effected by this global recession. "The West" has a greed-driven economy; the rest have a need-driven economy. "The West" fall and rise in relative unison; the rest couldn't care less about anything "relative."

Yes, there's a lot of people in "the West" that still fit in the need category but it's the few that don't that cause these greed-driven collapses.

Originally Posted by AuDioFreaK39

I, for one, know that each and every American reading this thread is wholeheartedly loyal and committed to our United States of America, whether qualified to submit an honest vote or simply underage, and that each and every one of us American people submit honest respect and consideration for our nation's history, through rough unknowns and through glorious prosperity.

...

It's biased simply by the fact that most questions are worded in a way that makes McCain's answers YES and Obama's NO. YES is generally perceived as positive and NO is generally perceived as negative.

Originally Posted by WhiteLotus

Now this is here (sorry for being an ass) it does give an interesting comparison, why would he [McCain] not favour cloning - i am assuming here that cloning also includes stem cell research. Which is about the niftyist thing since can openers.

Ever seen The Sixth Day? Cloning opens up possibilities that humans should not be investigating. It inevitably leads to "engineering" babies and the human perception of a "perfect" child/adult is generally uniform. The result is a species with even less genetic diversity than we currently have--so close, in fact, that one bug these babies and all their subsequent kin cannot fend off would result in almost assured extinction of the human population overnight. We should NEVER play God. It leads to everything that will ultimately destroy us. We gain nothing from cloning but have the potential to lose everything.

McCain supports "Adult Stem Cell" research, not "Embryonic Stem Cell" research. As far as I know, "cloning" means "Dolly the Sheep" experiments.


I believe cloning of organs should only be available to those under the age of 30 (cases where they would die young due to some kind of birth defect or disease). The last thing we need is 60-100 year-olds with 20 year-old innards. As much as we hate the idea of dying, we MUST make way for the young. To not do so is again, to contribute to the demise of the human race.

[das müffin mann]

we have MUCH to gain from cloning...it just has to be done responsibly, and has to be very controlled and regulated
and the sixth day was a pretty good movie
and i feel there really isn't anything wrong with embryonic stem cell research

[farlex85]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

That is, in itself, close-minded. It works on the assumption that people will change their mind and in your eyes, to your perspective; however, in the oppositions eyes, they feel the same way towards you. In the end, all we can do is speak our mind and agree to disagree.

The only "fundamental flaw" is the fact everyone sees everything in a different way. No two people agree 100% percent on everything (in a lot of cases, anything). As long as we don't kill each other over it, I don't see it as a flaw at all.



I'm talking what is commonly referred to as "the West." You can separate "the West" from the rest simply by looking at who is being severely effected by this global recession. "The West" has a greed-driven economy; the rest have a need-driven economy. "The West" fall and rise in relative unison; the rest couldn't care less about anything "relative."

Yes, there's a lot of people in "the West" that still fit in the need category but it's the few that don't that cause these greed-driven collapses.

Nope I didn't say anything about changing one's mind. Everyone has an opinion on everything, the trick is recognizing fully why others have their opinion, and what merits that opinion has (b/c there is always some merit, doesn't have to change your mind, but it can alter it). Getting stuck in a "this is the way it is" mentality neglects so much, b/c there is simply too much for any one person to know. Again, this is hard for me to put into words, but it goes beyond simply disagreeing, or agreeing to disagree, it's an understanding that many different opinions can be right without another being wrong. We are intrinsically trapped within ourselves, but insight to the collective comes from the collective. It's relativism with a personal perspective. Or something like that.

Here maybe an example. I understand your take on the second amendment completely. Humans kill each other, and better to have defense than to give would-be-attackers power. I don't think anyone at all should have guns, and would never myself use one, most likely even if that meant my own demise. I of course recognize that many would think this foolish, and on the issue I couldn't rightfully say that you shouldn't own a gun, b/c your argument holds merit. That doesn't mean I agree w/ it though, and in my mind working towards an environment where you would not feel compelled to own a gun would be a better goal than simply taking the stance that stricter gun control needs to happen (which would of course be the opposite partisan stance).

[ShadowFold]

Stem cell research is ESSENTIAL. We need it. And cloning humans would be cool.. Maybe if we got a cloned human that can talk and interact maybe religious radicals will stop their nonsense(maybe..).

[DaedalusHelios]

Originally Posted by AuDioFreaK39

I, for one, know that each and every American reading this thread is wholeheartedly loyal and committed to our United States of America, whether qualified to submit an honest vote or simply underage, and that each and every one of us American people submit honest respect and consideration for our nation's history, through rough unknowns and through glorious prosperity.

When the devastating American Civil War came to a conclusion on April 9, 1865, former President Abraham Lincoln could finally focus most of his efforts on reconstruction and beginning to mend the deep scars between the North and South. When asked how defeated Confederates should be treated, Lincoln responded, "I'd let 'em up easy, let 'em up easy."

As Americans, I completely understand that we want facts the quick and easy way. Without further delay to proclaim a truthful generalization, the mass of textual and visual media we receive through the internet, television, political magazines, and regional newspapers all contribute to our effectively long-lasting worldviews on societies and governments.

Without further hesitation, I present to you a brief outline highlighting the platform of Senators John McCain and Barack Obama - an outline based on absolute objective truths and completely unbiased fact.


*PLEASE READ ALL POLITICAL STANCES LISTED BELOW BEFORE POSTING A REPLY*







Source links can be obtained by viewing the corresponding PDF file:

McCain / Obama Voter's Guide

Those are constitutionalist interpretations on your source. The constitutionalist party is very republican and forgets privacy rights and abortion rights to name a few. Privacy rights against modern technology would have been put in the constitution if they could have seen that far ahead. The constitution was written before all modern technology and when our total population was laughable in modern terms. So to think the most literal translation of a document made to serve the needs of a tiny population without our technology, diversity, and knowledge is pretty short sighted by all those that think of life in america as different from the 1700's.

The constitution is a great document. No pork in it.

[FudFighter]

Originally Posted by Bigjohn

and I think you should go to school to learn basic grammar and sentence structure.

sure sign you know your arguments are flawed and that you are full of it, attacking grammer, "you are the weakist link, goodbye!"

Taxes for SERVICES = a valid part of government.
Taxes to take my money and yours and give it to some crackhead == NOT!

like I said, if you dont like taxes, then move someplace you dont have to pay them.

[DaedalusHelios]

Originally Posted by FudFighter

sure sign you know your arguments are flawed and that you are full of sh!t, attacking grammer, "you are the weakist link, goodbye!"



like I said, if you dont like taxes, then move someplace you dont have to pay them, otherwise STFU.

Thats hilarious. I agree with you but you have to say it in a more friendly tone or people will try to get you infracted.


I just don't want to see the thread closed because somebody started a flame war. Welcome to TPU!

[FudFighter]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Apparently you don't watch the news much. Ever heard of the Al Smith Dinner? I mean look how disrespectful they are being to each other!

FYI notice McCain turning his whole body?

Oh and here look at this! I mean McCain and Obama are hugging! Clearly they dont respect each other.

Dude Obama isn't a Saviour anymore than McCain is a Traitor. They both are cut from the same cloth. They both want power. Both are professional politicians and have no clue as to whats happening in this country. So with this being said Ill vote for the man who has served his country for longer and harder than the other. Not that Obama is a bad guy but look at the shape his state is in compared to McCains Arizona. That should tell you enough to have a little more faith in McCain and KNOW just because he's a republican doesn't make him inherently evil.

At the end of the day they ALL lie. We just have to pick the one that lies the least.

First is it just me or in that 2nd pic does it look like they are bout to make out?
VERY GAY!!!!! rofl


Its not McCain that scares me so much as the fact that when he dies in office that religious Reigh Nutter he picked as vice pres would be running things.(would call her a dumb blonde but shes not blonde....)


I know full well they both suck, I just FEAR obama/biden less then I fear palin becoming pres and mccain starting another war.......

[das müffin mann]

Originally Posted by FudFighter

I know full well they both suck, I just FEAR obama/biden less then I fear palin becoming pres and mccain starting another war.......

sadly when you look at it, both campaigns are both based on fear, just like the media

[DaedalusHelios]

McCain's Arizona has been moving up in crime rate in the last 7 years. So thats not exactly doing well. Besides, being a senator from a state doesn't mean it has much to do with how well its doing. Unless you take into account "pork on bills", and then you would be actually admitting McCain is far more corrupt. So that logic actually backfires on you.

[DaedalusHelios]

Originally Posted by das müffin mann

sadly when you look at it, both campaigns are both based on fear, just like the media

Obama's campaign isn't about fear. He is taking the high road on debates and advertising. Unless you think likening McCain to Bush is smear. Its just accurate.

Palin's supporters at rallies chant "Kill Obama". Thats not the high road.

[FudFighter]

Originally Posted by DaedalusHelios

Thats hilarious. I agree with you but you have to say it in a more friendly tone or people will try to get you infracted.


I just don't want to see the thread closed because somebody started a flame war. Welcome to TPU!

it was ment to be funny, I see attacking grammer or spelling as the last resort when a person cant reply with anything better to counter somebody elses opinion.

[erocker]

Keep it civil and respectful towards one another please.


...And now back to your political devices.

[ckoons1]

Originally Posted by erocker

Keep it civil and respectful towards one another please.


...And now back to your political devices.

On the matter of RESPECT let us not forget that McCain is a "WAR HERO". This may not mean a lot to the younger crowd but it means a lot to the older group. Think for a moment the price this man paid for US ,our country to be FREE. FREEDOM isn't FREE.

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by farlex85

Nope I didn't say anything about changing one's mind. Everyone has an opinion on everything, the trick is recognizing fully why others have their opinion, and what merits that opinion has (b/c there is always some merit, doesn't have to change your mind, but it can alter it). Getting stuck in a "this is the way it is" mentality neglects so much, b/c there is simply too much for any one person to know. Again, this is hard for me to put into words, but it goes beyond simply disagreeing, or agreeing to disagree, it's an understanding that many different opinions can be right without another being wrong. We are intrinsically trapped within ourselves, but insight to the collective comes from the collective. It's relativism with a personal perspective. Or something like that.

Here maybe an example. I understand your take on the second amendment completely. Humans kill each other, and better to have defense than to give would-be-attackers power. I don't think anyone at all should have guns, and would never myself use one, most likely even if that meant my own demise. I of course recognize that many would think this foolish, and on the issue I couldn't rightfully say that you shouldn't own a gun, b/c your argument holds merit. That doesn't mean I agree w/ it though, and in my mind working towards an environment where you would not feel compelled to own a gun would be a better goal than simply taking the stance that stricter gun control needs to happen (which would of course be the opposite partisan stance).

It's one thing to dream and something completely different to legislate. With legislation we have only four options: 1) decide this is not something government can or should define and do nothing, 2) repeal a previous law, 3) amend a previous law, or 3) author something entirely new. In every case, it comes down to one of four choices: 1) Don't show up at all (don't support), 2) YAY (support), 3) NO (don't support), or 4) Present (don't support). As pointed out in the parenthesis, there's only two options: support or don't support. There is no middle ground. In law, you are in support of, or opposed to, everything. Anything between the two extremes is considered as being opposed. Nuanced answers like the one you gave doesn't work in legislation--that's why it comes down to support or oppose.

It really doesn't matter how nuanced something is, it can always be broken down to a support or oppose vote. Just try to think of a situation--a theoretical law--where support or oppose wouldn't work. You'll eventually come to a conclusion one way or another eventually. That is why legislation works. It asks the politicians if they fundamentally agree or disagree on the subject: nuance, if included, plays little role in the outcome.


I belong in bed so I may have to rewrite that one later...

Originally Posted by DaedalusHelios

McCain's Arizona has been moving up in crime rate in the last 7 years. So thats not exactly doing well. Besides, being a senator from a state doesn't mean it has much to do with how well its doing. Unless you take into account "pork on bills", and then you would be actually admitting McCain is far more corrupt. So that logic actually backfires on you.

A large white and hispanic population clashing. It is, to say the least, inevitable. The solution, most likely, is better schools which so far, rank "epic fail."

Originally Posted by DaedalusHelios

Obama's campaign isn't about fear. He is taking the high road on debates and advertising. Unless you think likening McCain to Bush is smear. Its just accurate.

Palin's supporters at rallies chant "Kill Obama". Thats not the high road.

Agism ("erratic"), Sexism ("$150,000 on cloths"), Racism (Obama's statement "don't vote for him because he's black"), ... pretty much every discriminatory "-ism" on the books has been used against the Republican ticket by the Democrats. Let's not forget how Obama claimed there was "57 States" and forgot it was his 16th anniversary, not 15th. McCain didn't pick on him for those slip ups either. Frankly, McCain is actually being very nice to Obama. Unfortunately, that doesn't get votes.

Even invoking the name Bush is completely irrelevant to this election. Did McCain even mention "Clinton" in any of the debates? I think not--it's irrelevant to the campaign. And before you try to spin that one me, remember that Clinton signed into law legislation that promoted sub-McCain does have a lot of ammunition from the Clintons, as with Wright, but decided to to, as you say, "take the high road" and leave it alone.

McCain nor Palin approve of those chants but, as with any crowd, your control is limited to only how quickly the security can drag them out.

[das müffin mann]

Originally Posted by ckoons1

On the matter of RESPECT let us not forget that McCain is a "WAR HERO". This may not mean a lot to the younger crowd but it means a lot to the older group. Think for a moment the price this man paid for US ,our country to be FREE. FREEDOM isn't FREE.

being a war hero is all nice and good but, being a hero of war doesn't necessarily mean your well suited for politics
i consider my brother a war hero, not in the sense of McCain (being tortured and all that jazz)
i respect McCain for the strength he has to endure all the atrocities he has been through, i just don't entirely agree with the mans political views man's political views or the way he has run his campaign (not that i really agree with obama either
btw my bro would NEVER make a good politician

also obama supporters have a lot of fear in them, if there is one thing i've noticed about each campaign is that both sides are absolutely TERRIFIED of the other candidate getting into office

and one last view point of mine
WHO REALLY GIVES A FLYING FUCK ABOUT JOE THE NOT SO MUCH PLUMBER
if i have to hear about joe the plumber, bob the builder, or douchebag the useless commentator im going to loose it