PDA

View Full Version : President



GGal
07-13-2007, 03:44 PM
I think if Edwards is nominated I will vote for him, and I'm Republican. If not, I just don't know. I will not vote for Hillary for many reasons, and I will not vote for Obama because I don't want a President named Obama with a Muslim background. I certainly cut my nose off to spite my face when I voted for Bush.....I think I was voting for his wife.....

Currently, my thinking is that this family (Edwards) is showing a lot of class and faith by going forward in spite of their terrible problems.

The big gripe I have with the Republicans today is the stem cell research issue, among others, and greed.

GGAL

vol46
07-13-2007, 03:48 PM
Think I would have to vote for Fred Thompson. Bout time we had another actor in the white house.

GGal
07-13-2007, 03:56 PM
Think I would have to vote for Fred Thompson. Bout time we had another actor in the white house.

Of course I like him a lot (as district attorney on L and O, he played a tough but fair fellow), but can he be nominated over Jewels (sic)??? I actually think Jewels will be the next President of the United States of America.

GGAL

fabijo
07-13-2007, 07:10 PM
Though he's a long shot, I'm voting for Ron Paul in the primaries. If he makes it through that, then I'm definitely voting for him for president. I've also been fed up with the Republicans, but at least he's a Republican who actually believes it's not the government's job to regulate our personal lives or meddle with the internal affairs of other nations. You'd be amazed at how honest this guy is when you see him speak. Here's a youtube link with ron paul as the search term:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ron+paul&search=

James48843
07-13-2007, 08:54 PM
Though he's a long shot, I'm voting for Ron Paul in the primaries.

Interestingly, Ron Paul is scoring well with a lot of people in my neck of the woods. The mainstream media won't give him any airplay, but a local on-line poll here placed him first among county republicans.

We'll have to wait and see if the voters in general are as savy as the on-line polls are showing. If they are, then the mainstream media will have a lot of explaining to do....

James48843
07-13-2007, 09:10 PM
... and I will not vote for Obama because I don't want a President named Obama with a Muslim background.

GGAL
Umm. GG: You may have been imbibing in too much Worldnet Daily.

Obama is a United Church of Christ member, not a Muslim: That was just some republican scare tactics. And you believed it?

Check out this page:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp



In fact, Obama has made several very conservative speeches. So much so, that this may be one reason that Hillary is doing better in the polls among Dems than Obama. Here is one such comment printed in the papers that makes the far left nervous:


================================================== ===
In an interview, Obama reportedly told the Tribune, "If I say to anybody in Iowa -- white, black, Hispanic or Asian -- that my church believes in the African-American community strengthening families or adhering to the black work ethic or being committed to self-discipline and self-respect and not forgetting where you came from, I don't think that's something anybody would object to. ... I think I'd get a few amens."
Addressing conservative criticism of the "value system," Obama also reportedly told the Tribune, "Commitment to God, black community, commitment to the black family, the black work ethic, self-discipline and self-respect. ...Those are values that the conservative movement in particular has suggested are necessary for black advancement." He added, "So I would be puzzled that they would object or quibble with the bulk of a document that basically espouses profoundly conservative values of self-reliance and self-help."
==================================================

Now, I do think he has some seasoning before he is ready to become President, but I do think that he is a very, very viable candidate.

I would not vote for Hillary, simply because she's Hillary.

But I would consider voting for Obama.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-070623obama-religion,1,1721448.story

mlk_man
07-13-2007, 09:30 PM
You gotta be kidding me...................oh that's right, GG doesn't start anything..........:rolleyes:

mlk_man
07-13-2007, 09:52 PM
The Democrats new promise "A New Direction For America"
>>
>> The stock market is at a new all-time high and America's 401K's are
> back.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Unemployment is at 25 year lows.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Oil prices are plummeting.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Taxes are at 20 year lows.
>> A new direction from there means, what t?
>>
>> Federal tax revenues are at all-time highs.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> The Federal deficit is down almost 50%, just as predicted over last
> year.
>> A new direction from there means. what?
>>
>> Home valuations are up 200% over the past 3.5 years.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Inflation is in check, hovering at 20 yea r lows.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Not a single terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/01.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Osama bin Laden is living under a rock in a dark cave, having not
> surfaced
>> in years, if he's alive at all, while 95% of Al Qaeda's top dogs
>> are either dead
>> or in custody, cooperating with US Intel.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Several m major terrorist attacks already thwarted by US and
>> British Intel,< /B>
>> including the recent planned attack involving 10 Jumbo Jets being
>> exploded in mid-air over major US cities in order to celebrate the
>> anniversary of the
>> 9/11/01 attacks.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Just as President Bush foretold us on a number of occasions, Iraq
>> was to be made "ground zero" for the war on terrorism -- and just as
>> President Bush said they would, terrorist cells from all over the region
> are arriving from the
>> shadows of their hiding places and flooding into Iraq in order to
>> get their faces blown off by US Marines rather than boarding planes
>> and heading to the United States to wage war on us here.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
>>
>> Now let me see, do I have this right? I can expect:
>>
>> The economy to go South
>>
>> Illegals to go North
>>
>> Taxes to go Up
>>
>> Employment to go Down
>>
>> Terrorism to come In
>>
>> Tax breaks to go Out
>>
>> Social Security to go Away
>>
>> Health Care to go the same way gas prices have gone
>>
>> But what the heck!
>>
>> I can gain comfort by knowing that Nancy P, Hillary C, John K,
>> Edward K, Howard D, Harry R and Obama have worked hard to create a
>> comprehensive National Security Plan, Health Care Plan, Immigration
>> Reform Plan, Gay Rights P lan, Same Sex Marriage Plan, Abortion On
>> Demand Plan, Tolerance of Everyone and Everything Plan, How to Return
>> all Troops to the U.S. in The Next Six Months Plan, A Get Tough Plan,
>> adapted from the French Plan by the same name and a How Everyone Can
> Become as Wealthy as We Are Plan.
>>
>> I forgot the No More Katrina Storm Plan.
>>
>> Now I know why I feel good after the elections. I am going to be
>> able to sleep so much better at nights knowing these dedicated
>> politicians are thinking of me and my welfare.

Show-me
07-14-2007, 09:36 AM
Hey vote for me! I'll take care of ya!

nnuut
07-14-2007, 10:04 AM
YOU'VE got my vote Show!!!!:D

VirginiaBob
07-15-2007, 05:00 AM
Anybody but Hillary, she's way too phony and changes her positions based on the polls. She's got the media machine behind her though.

Griffin
07-15-2007, 01:14 PM
The Democrats are going to whoop the Republicans in the next election because the Republicans have turned their backs on the most important base of their constituency - the US Soldier. This adminstration can fire Generals left and right until they get the guy that's willing to talk their talk. I truely believe the Generals that are stepping up have the soldiers best interests in mind, but the terms they agree to in order to get the top spots, bind them to a failed path they can not change. Every soldier knows the path we are on has only one outcome...war and more war.....Iran.....Pakistan (as soon as Musharref falls)....North Korea....Russia. Our enemies will gather strength and can afford to wait us out while we exhaust resources in Iraq and political sympathy around the globe. An absolute truth in Global Politics is: when you can afford to wait out your opponent because your opponent is exhasuting himself faster then you are, then you have the upper hand. When time is on your side - you have the upper hand. Our enemies have the upper hand, time is on their side and Bush refuses to even consider alternatives. Therefore we have lost the inititive and we can not get it back until after next election. Most soldiers know this - and they will vote for change because change is the only way to unbalance our enemies and open the door to reestablish the upper hand. We may have to conduct retrograde operations, but we can reconstitute ourselves and comeback to the fight with a fresh perspective, refreshed, retrained and with a spectrum of political options compared to the singular viewpoint of the Bush administration.


The Democrats new promise "A New Direction For America"
>>
>> The stock market is at a new all-time high and America's 401K's are
> back.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
Bush deserves as much credit for the stockmarket today, as Clinton did for 1999 stock market.
>>
>> Unemployment is at 25 year lows.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
Have you heard of anyone suggest that the retirement of the baby boomers was going to produce a glut of workers? If there was, maybe we wouldn't have to worry about so many illegals being snuck in to do the work American's won't do. Very low unemplyment also drives inflation...a certain amount of unemployment is healthy. The world is awash in US liquidity as a result of the housing bubble, which is great for the stockmarket but terrible for the dollar. Remember when it was cheap to travel to Europe? Now Europeans see the US as the land of the cheap vacation, and their safe for the most part as long as they stay to the policed areas (sound familiar....hmm...isn't this what we say about Mexico). Even when US unemplyment was at it's 25 year high was it that bad?
>>
>> Oil prices are plummeting.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
Oil prices are what?........
>>
>> Taxes are at 20 year lows.
>> A new direction from there means, what t?
Taxes are on the rise again....(simple economics, they could only be low long enough to get re-elected)
>>
>> Federal tax revenues are at all-time highs.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
The GDP is at an all time high....it's called inflation.
>>
>> The Federal deficit is down almost 50%, just as predicted over last
> year.
>> A new direction from there means. what?
The Federal deficit was 3.5 Trillion last year
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-08-02-deficit-usat_x.htm "
If you count Social Security and Medicare, the federal government's financial health got $3.5 trillion worse last year"
>>
>> Home valuations are up 200% over the past 3.5 years.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
Foreclosures of both prime and subprime mortgages are expected to peak over the next two years and the prices are dropping. How low do you think they will go?
>>
>> Inflation is in check, hovering at 20 yea r lows.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
If inflation is in check then why isn't the Fed cutting rates? and what are all these inflation woes that keep spooking the market?
>>
>> Not a single terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/01.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
What about the soldiers that are getting killed on foreign soil. No change in direction from there means what?
>>
>> Osama bin Laden is living under a rock in a dark cave, having not
> surfaced
>> in years, if he's alive at all, while 95% of Al Qaeda's top dogs
>> are either dead
>> or in custody, cooperating with US Intel.
>> A new direction from there means, what?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/11/terror/main3042947.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_3042947 "U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded al Qaeda has rebuilt its operating capability to a level not seen since just before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, The Associated Press has learned. "

This bit of garbage you dregged up from three years ago is outdated. Your not helping the Republicans cause by posting it. But then again, I am a Republican and I will continue to be a Republican even when I vote against it, because this administration turned my party into the party of bulllies and liars.

SkyPilot
07-15-2007, 02:20 PM
This bit of garbage you dregged up from three years ago is outdated.

While three years old, is appears that it is largely still true...

GGal
07-15-2007, 03:55 PM
I want a leader who will:

1. keep taxes down (which means keep undue spending at bay)
2. keep us safe
3. take global warming seriously
4. support stem cell research
5. keep social security safe
6. make sure that employers pay SS and Med taxes on any and all illegals they employ
7. limit welfare to the truly needy who are poor, elderly, disabled and unable to work (I don't want to hear some able bodied guy proclaim "we gonna bbq tonite" after picking up his foodstamps - I paid for those fkn food stamps.
8. stimulate the economy (incentives for small business)
9. support the IRS and congress' attempt to close the tax gap (stamp out tax shelters for the rich, tax the underground economy)

Tell me who this is!!!!!!!!!!!

GGAL

James48843
07-15-2007, 05:22 PM
GGal-

There are a number of on-line aids to ask you where you stand on issues, and match you with the candidates.

Here is one such place:

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html

After you insert all your answers, click on the 'See results" button. (Skip the registering page, it's not necessary).

You then tell us who most closely matches your answers- I'd like to know.

Thanks

and good luck...

Wolverine
07-15-2007, 06:10 PM
My match came up with.....Yoda.........LOL

tsptalk
07-15-2007, 06:29 PM
I think if Edwards is nominated I will vote for him
Edwards gives me the creeps. He's an ambulance chaser. He made his money suing the medical industry and businesses. Many doctors can no afford their malpractice insurance and /or are forced to raise their rates to compensate. Everyone blames big businesses for moving overseas yet many move to avoid these types of - spilled hot coffee lawsuits. He thinks he's helping the little guy but we all lose - except him of course.

I also don't find it honorable, as some do, that he continues to run for the biggest job in the world when his wife is ill. He will let nothing get in the way of his dream to be president. I think he should be home with his wife and young kids while they deal with their situation. He's not much good to them on the campaign trail.

Off my soapbox. :)

GGal
07-15-2007, 06:43 PM
GGal-

There are a number of on-line aids to ask you where you stand on issues, and match you with the candidates.

Here is one such place:

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html

After you insert all your answers, click on the 'See results" button. (Skip the registering page, it's not necessary).

You then tell us who most closely matches your answers- I'd like to know.

Thanks

and good luck...

Thanks James, I took the survey, and here are my results. It seems that nobody closely matches my answers ( I don't consider 58% a close match), but I was certainly surprised by the results. I would have thought Newt would be at the top of my list. I don't understand!

2008 President Selector Rankings: 1. Theoretical Ideal Candidate (100 %) 2. Michael Bloomberg (58 %) 3. Tom Tancredo (58 %) 4. Hillary Clinton (57 %) 5. Mitt Romney (57 %) 6. John Edwards (56 %) 7. Joseph Biden (55 %) 8. Al Gore (53 %) 9. John McCain (53 %) 10. Rudolph Giuliani (52 %) 11. Christopher Dodd (52 %) 12. Duncan Hunter (48 %) 13. Barack Obama (48 %) 14. Dennis Kucinich (47 %) 15. Wesley Clark (46 %) 16. Ron Paul (46 %) 17. Bill Richardson (45 %) 18. Chuck Hagel (42 %) 19. Kent McManigal (38 %) 20. Mike Huckabee (38 %) 21. Mike Gravel (37 %) 22. Tommy Thompson (35 %) 23. Sam Brownback (35 %) 24. Fred Thompson (34 %) 25. Alan Augustson (31 %) 26. Jim Gilmore (30 %) 27. Newt Gingrich (28 %) 28. Elaine Brown (22 %)

James48843
07-15-2007, 06:52 PM
And here is another one- lots of fun to click on and see who matches your values. Maybe this one can get you closer:


http://www.speakout.com/VoteMatch/senate2006.asp?quiz=2008

James48843
07-15-2007, 06:57 PM
...I took the survey, and here are my results. It seems that nobody closely matches my answers ( I don't consider 58% a close match), but I was certainly surprised by the results. I would have thought Newt would be at the top of my list. I don't understand!



When you set your priorities and positions, you have to look at the "whole candidate", not just one or two positions. These surveys are not "gold", but they do allow you to explore more about the different candidates. And then you can go to the candidates web sites, and learn more about all the positions they hold, and what THEY think should be the priorities of the nation.

This is going to be an interesting election cycle, because I think it will be the first where the internet really levels the playing field, and ALL candidates will have a shot, not just the ones the media want you to vote for.

See ALL the candidates, their records, and their plans, BEFORE you run to the voting booth.


Heck, it really doesn't matter.

Diebold has already decided who the next "Decider" is going to be anyway.....:blink:

mlk_man
07-15-2007, 06:58 PM
This bit of garbage you dregged up from three years ago is outdated. Your not helping the Republicans cause by posting it. But then again, I am a Republican and I will continue to be a Republican even when I vote against it, because this administration turned my party into the party of bulllies and liars.

One man's garbage is another man's treasure. So your basically saying after 9-11 that we should of remained status quo? How would you have us protect ourselves? Talk it over? When you mention the word liar, think of criminals that say "put the gun down and I won't shoot your wife". A terrorist is a criminal. When you say "bully", I say "protecting my family by taking an offensive position". After all, one can only hide in a basement for so long.


BTW, his name is Mr. President, not Bush...........

mlk_man
07-15-2007, 07:00 PM
Oh BTW, I didn't "dreg" it up. I posted it in another thread awhile back........

James48843
07-15-2007, 07:06 PM
Note:

This thread is fast becoming a
"free fire zone".

Post here at your own risk.

mlk_man
07-15-2007, 07:21 PM
You might want to fill your other moderator in that calling someone's post "garbage" is being biased. A good moderator shouldn't be biased.......;)

mlk_man
07-15-2007, 07:22 PM
You might want to fill your other moderator in that calling someone's post "garbage" is being biased. A good moderator shouldn't be biased.......;)

Which is why I had to resign..........:D

GGal
07-15-2007, 08:02 PM
And here is another one- lots of fun to click on and see who matches your values. Maybe this one can get you closer:


http://www.speakout.com/VoteMatch/senate2006.asp?quiz=2008


Okay, that one gave me Duncan Hunter and Tom Tonredo......since they won't be nominated, I guess I don't vote.

James48843
07-15-2007, 08:30 PM
Okay, that one gave me Duncan Hunter and Tom Tonredo......since they won't be nominated, I guess I don't vote.

Never count votes before they are cast. We don't know if Hunter or Tancredo will fade away, or will become the front runners after the first round of primaries.

Vote what you think is right, and let's hope everyone else out there votes what THEY think is right, rather than voting for who the media elite or the party insiders tell everyone to expect to win.

It's your vote.

Lots of Americans gave their lives in order to bring you that right. Please exercise it with due care and caution, but, by all mean, DO exercise it.

We may not all agree on who to vote for, but I'll step out on a limb and argue that we all DO agree that you should exercise your right to vote.

James48843
07-15-2007, 08:40 PM
Good point. We better make this official:



ATTENTION ALL THREAD LOUNGE VIEWERS:

This thread is hereby officially posted.


DANGER
http://www.qsi.co.nz/danger-mines.gif


READ PAST THIS POST AT YOUR OWN RISK

James48843
07-15-2007, 09:02 PM
Birch Bayh, U.S. Senator from Indiana, pulled a badly injured Senator Ted Kennedy from the wreckage of a small plane in which two others were killed.
Hmmmm..

I better not comment on that one.....




Senator Bayh was the principal architect of the 25th and 26th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Senator Bayh was also the principal architect of the Equal Rights Amendment, which was not adopted.

Senator Bayh intended to run for the 1972 Democratic nomination for president, but his wife was diagnosed with cancer and he put his plans on hold. Before her death in 1979, Marvella Bayh became a leading cancer activist. (I guess you could say that John Edwards is no Birch Bayh.....:rolleyes:)

In the 1980 election, Senator Bayh was defeated for reelection to the U.S. Senate by future vice president Dan Quayle. :nuts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birch_Bayh

He's 79 now, and would be 80 if elected.

I suppose he's got enough experience.

Is he ready to announce his candidcy for "Ought Eight"?

budnipper1
07-15-2007, 10:39 PM
Fred Thompson describes himself as a conservative.

Thompson supports free trade and low taxes.
He says that Roe v. Wade was a wrong decision that ought to be overturned,
but he also believes that states should decide not to criminalize young women for early term abortions.
Thompson is skeptical that humanity is to blame for global warming.
He generally supports the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
His position on immigration is that U.S. borders need to be secured before considering comprehensive immigration reform.
Thompson supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but believes that mistakes have been made since then.
He also believes that Iran's threats of war should be taken seriously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_thompson#Political_positions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_thompson#Political_positions)
Fred Thompson was also instrumental in exposing the crooked politics of former TN Gov. Ray Blanton.(1979)
On this last point alone, he wins my vote, if he runs...


http://216.77.188.54/coDataImages/p/Groups/27/27299/folders/216042/2186053FredThompson.jpg

James48843
07-15-2007, 10:53 PM
So now we got a "Fred Thompson vs. Birch Bahy" race .

Great.

Except neither one is on any ballots yet.

Thompson's positions:

2008 SelectSmart.com
Presidential Candidate Selector (http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html)
Candidate Positions
Former Sen. Fred Thompson - Republican
(Born August 19, 1942) Lawyer, lobbyist, character actor)
Iraq War Issues: Voted YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq. (Oct 2002) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#War_+_Peace/) \
Supports President Bush's decision to increase troops in Iraq. "Wars are full of mistakes. You rectify things. I think we're doing that now," he said. "Why would we not take any chance, even though there's certainly no guarantees, to not be run out of that place? I mean, we've got to take that opportunity and give it a chance to work." Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17576578/)
Security/liberties: Would pardon former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's conviction for perjury and obstruction of justice now, rather than waiting until all his appeals are exhausted.
Thompson is a fundraiser for Libby's defense. Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17576578/)
Social Security: Voted YES on Social Security Lockbox & limiting national debt. (Apr 1999) Voted YES on allowing Roth IRAs for retirees. (May 1998) Voted YES on allowing personal retirement accounts. (Apr 1998) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Social_Security/)
Stem cell research: ?
Same sex issues: Opposes gay marriage, but would let states decide whether to allow civil unions. "Marriage is between a man and a woman, and I don't believe judges ought to come along and change that." Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17576578/)
Trade issues: Voted YES on extending free trade to Andean nations. (May 2002) Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001) Voted NO on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Free_Trade/)
Budget issues: Voted YES on prioritizing national debt reduction below tax cuts. (Apr 2000) Voted NO on 1998 GOP budget. (May 1997) Voted YES on Balanced-budget constitutional amendment. (Mar 1997) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Budget_+_Economy/) "Reagan showed what can be done if you have the will to push for tough choices and the ability to ask the people to accept them." … "Lower marginal tax rates have proven to be a key to prosperity now by Kennedy, Reagan and Bush. It’s time millionaires serving in the Senate learned not to overly tax other people trying to get wealthy." Source (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/03/18/fred-thompson-on-taxes-mccain-feingold-iraq/)
Business & labor issues: ?
Abortion issues: Is "pro-life," and believes federal judges should overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision as "bad law and bad medical science." Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17576578/)
Capital punishment: Voted YES on limiting death penalty appeals. (Apr 1996) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Crime/)
Marijuana: Voted YES on increasing penalties for drug offenses. (Nov 1999) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Drugs/)
Gun control: Opposes gun control, and praised last week's 2-1 federal appeals decision overturning a long-standing handgun ban. "The court basically said the Constitution means what it says, and I agree with that." Source (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17576578/)
Minimum wage: Voted YES on killing an increase in the minimum wage. (Nov 1999) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Jobs/)
Health care: ?
Prescription drugs: Voted NO on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002) Voted YES on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001) Voted NO on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Health_Care/)
Environmental issues: Voted YES on confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior. (Jan 2001) Voted YES on more funding for forest roads and fish habitat. (Sep 1999) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Environment/)
Immigration issues: Voted YES on allowing more foreign workers into the US for farm work. (Jul 1998) Voted YES on visas for skilled workers. (May 1998) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Immigration/)
Mostly opposes amnesty/permanent legalization for illegal aliens and temporary legalization for illegal aiens as guestworkers Source (http://www.betterimmigration.com/candidates/2006/prez08_gop1.html) Education issues: Voted YES on school vouchers in DC. (Sep 1997) Source (http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Fred_Thompson.htm#Education/)

STILL A MINEFIELD HERE.

Griffin
07-16-2007, 08:36 AM
I agree 100%, but these are middle class values, and the midle class has no champion - we can't buy our candidates and we can't use "our plight" to tug on the heart strings of America.


I want a leader who will:

1. keep taxes down (which means keep undue spending at bay)
2. keep us safe
3. take global warming seriously
4. support stem cell research
5. keep social security safe
6. make sure that employers pay SS and Med taxes on any and all illegals they employ
7. limit welfare to the truly needy who are poor, elderly, disabled and unable to work (I don't want to hear some able bodied guy proclaim "we gonna bbq tonite" after picking up his foodstamps - I paid for those fkn food stamps.
8. stimulate the economy (incentives for small business)
9. support the IRS and congress' attempt to close the tax gap (stamp out tax shelters for the rich, tax the underground economy)

Tell me who this is!!!!!!!!!!!

GGAL

mlk_man
07-16-2007, 08:50 AM
This is for anyone who believes all the global warming hype. Let's hope it keeps warming, I hate to think about the consequences of it getting colder..........

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

GGal
07-16-2007, 09:10 AM
This is for anyone who believes all the global warming hype. Let's hope it keeps warming, I hate to think about the consequences of it getting colder..........

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html


MM, perhaps a week or two on a misplaced floating piece of melting ice with a couple of hungry polar bears would result in a different point of view......

GGAL

mlk_man
07-16-2007, 09:20 AM
MM, perhaps a week or two on a misplaced floating piece of melting ice with a couple of hungry polar bears would result in a different point of view......

GGAL

Why would it? At least the ice would be floating in water and the planet wouldn't be covered in it so there would be no polar bears.........or me...........now don't start crying because of that thought............:D

Griffin
07-16-2007, 11:04 AM
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html

Your Global Warming Test is as much hype as Al Gore's garbage. There are so many inaccuracies, opinions and deceptions that it qualifies as poor propoganda at best. Most everyone with formal training from a reputable college agree's with the vast majority of the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

In general, most non-politically affiliated scientists agree that we should be in a cooling phase. That doesn't mean that everywhere on the planet should be getting colder (or hotter). The change in temperature isn't the problem - it's the resulting changes in average rainfall, wind direction, forest fires (frequency of lighting events) and hurricane/typhoon frequency in local ecologies that cause systemic collapse.

Starving polar bears with there big dooey eyed innocense capture the hearts, but it's the rapid change of vegetation types and habitat in a forest which disrupt the food chain, especially if the animals and insects can not migrate fast enough to keep up.

PS - I agree with Bush on the Koyoto accords...they were designed to help China and punish the US.

Show-me
07-21-2007, 06:13 AM
Headline:
For the second time while in office, President Bush will hand presidential power to Vice Pres. Cheney while undergoing a colonoscopy.

There has to be a joke here some where. lol

rokid
07-21-2007, 07:31 AM
The change in temperature isn't the problem - it's the resulting changes in average rainfall, wind direction, forest fires (frequency of lighting events) and hurricane/typhoon frequency in local ecologies that cause systemic collapse.

It's my understanding that "Global Warming" may cause unpredictable changes (floods, storms, climate change, species extinction, disruption of the food chain, mass migrations etc.) that we would find painful and expensive to cope with. In addition, once a "tipping point" is reached, the changes may accelerate and become irreversible (in the short term).

Consequently, dealing with it seems like decision making in an uncertain environment. In other words, calculating the probability of Global Warming's consequences occurring and estimating the resulting costs/benefits (flooding Boston, New York, and Washington DC may be a bad thing; year around shipping in the Arctic may be a good thing) versus the cost of reducing carbon emissions now and mitigating the possible negative future consequences.

I suspect most people, world-wide, would rather push costs into the future. In other words, continue to emit carbon at ever increasing rates and let future generations deal with the consequences. Seems irresponsible but what can you do?:cool:

budnipper1
07-21-2007, 12:32 PM
For readers who like to see data on charts:

This graph is based on ice cores drilled in Vostok, Antarctica. It shows temperature changes near the South Pole, which were more extreme than in the middle latitudes.
http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/images/historical02.gif
http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/historical02.jsp (http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/historical02.jsp)
As recorded in ice cores from Vostok, Antarctica, the temperature near the South Pole has varied by more than 20 degrees Fahrenheit during the last 350,000 years. There have been peaks of warmth approximately every 100,000 years. The temperature and the carbon dioxide concentrations at the south pole parallel each other. The rise and fall of temperatures gives rise to the ice age/interglacial cycle.

Conclusion: (MHO)
Looks like a normal pattern in nature to me.

************************************************** ***********
This graph show the variability in temperature for the Washington, DC area during the twentieth century. A warming trend similar to the global average can be seen. The year-to-year variability(the spikiness)of the record at any one location is generally greater than the global average.
http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/images/historical05.jpg
("Hot air" in Washington, DC)
I'm not an expert at chart analysis, but I see the highest peak of temperature on this graph at the year,1948.(the year that both Al Gore and Howard Dean were born) Coincidence? I don't think so.:D

Illogical conclusion? Yes, similar most other so-called "scientific conclusions" on global warming. Maybe, after another 100,000 years we should look at this again.



Your Global Warming Test is as much hype as Al Gore's garbage. There are so many inaccuracies, opinions and deceptions that it qualifies as poor propoganda at best. Most everyone with formal training from a reputable college agree's with the vast majority of the following:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

In general, most non-politically affiliated scientists agree that we should be in a cooling phase. That doesn't mean that everywhere on the planet should be getting colder (or hotter). The change in temperature isn't the problem - it's the resulting changes in average rainfall, wind direction, forest fires (frequency of lighting events) and hurricane/typhoon frequency in local ecologies that cause systemic collapse.

Starving polar bears with there big dooey eyed innocense capture the hearts, but it's the rapid change of vegetation types and habitat in a forest which disrupt the food chain, especially if the animals and insects can not migrate fast enough to keep up.

PS - I agree with Bush on the Koyoto accords...they were designed to help China and punish the US.

Show-me
07-21-2007, 01:21 PM
My opinion: We will debate global warming until we are blue in the face and nothing will get done. Our elected knuckle heads can't fix Social Security or Medicare. What makes you think they will "fix" GLOBAL warming? LOL Check out the post that Robo posted about the GAO General on 60 Minutes. Were screwed!

IMO, mankind IS a problem. The planet will only support so many people, like your garden will only support so many plants. Ya gotta have good climate, air, water, and nutrients for both. Screw one of those up and your done.

We are the big fossil fuel burner since the Industrial Revolution. Now China and India are experiencing their "Industrial
Revolution".

China and India are doing everything possible to pollute the air and water while gobbling up all the nutrients they can to put more "plants" in the garden. By the time the "world" realizes the harsh reality the we can only support so many people it WILL me to late.

Simply put, trees make Oxygen from Carbon Dioxide. People breath Oxygen. People cut down trees that make Oxygen to make room for more people that breath more Oxygen. Ya don't have to be a genius to know how this one will end. It is like compound interest, give it time.

Is a Ice Age coming? Sure. Will a asteroid strike the earth and cause havoc? Sure. Will the caldera at Yellow Stone explode? Sure. It happens every so many years. How arrogant or stupid of us to think it will not ever happen again. Just because we developed civilizations and tools the natural occurrence of things stops. NO! Tectonic plates are moving every day. Volcano's erupt every day. Earthquake happen every day. Magnetic North Pole moves every day.

The longer we live the more we learn.

nnuut
07-21-2007, 02:35 PM
Over population will be the scourge of all humanity!:worried: Who said that; me?:confused:

rokid
07-21-2007, 06:38 PM
Actually, budnipper1 came up with an interesting site. Check it out. http://www.koshland-science-museum.org/exhibitgcc/index.jsp

Per the National Academies (the owner of the site), Global Warming is happening and "Global warming affects many different facets of life on Earth. There will be winners and losers, even within a single region. But globally the losses are expected to far outweigh the benefits." (my emphasis)

Incidentally, I've done some work with the National Academies and they're anything but "tree huggers".

Therefore, risk takers will take a "wait and see approach" and conservatives will want to mitigate the negative consequences. Interestingly, on this issue, the risk takers are Conservatives and the conservatives are Liberals! Whoda think it! :laugh:

JTH
07-21-2007, 08:35 PM
Maybe it’s just me, but I want our next President to have the capacity to orate a proper sentence.

FUTURESTRADER
07-21-2007, 09:21 PM
Maybe it’s just me, but I want our next President to have the capacity to orate a proper sentence.

I cringe when I hear 'nuceular'. It's crazy. And this man is ostensibly our boss.
I shake my head ruefully when I walk on to a military base and see the obligatory chain of command photos with Dubyah at the top. The same exists at most fed agencies, I know. But I voted for him.

JTH
07-21-2007, 09:36 PM
I would never be one to disrespect my President. Having said that, I’m comforted in the knowledge that our government has Term Limits. Although I don’t think he has a chance, Ron Paul would get my vote on the Republican side. On the conservative Democrat side, my vote would go for Bill Richardson.

If Hillary gets the nomination, I will do everything in my power to support the other candidate.

GGal
07-22-2007, 10:55 AM
There has not been a president in my lifetime that I've not disrespected to one degree or another, (some more than others) with the exception of Ronald Reagan. What a mighty good man.

GGAL

budnipper1
09-06-2007, 11:30 AM
I would never be one to disrespect my President. Having said that, I’m comforted in the knowledge that our government has Term Limits. Although I don’t think he has a chance, Ron Paul would get my vote on the Republican side. On the conservative Democrat side, my vote would go for Bill Richardson.

If Hillary gets the nomination, I will do everything in my power to support the other candidate.

The election will decide between Hillary(the terrible )and whoever becomes the final Republican candidate. My choice, as I have already stated, is Fred Thompson (http://www.fred08.com/index.aspx). And not just because he hails (originally) from Lawrenceburg, Tennessee. (my home state)
Just my opinion.:)

Dodge_Em
09-06-2007, 01:21 PM
Woman to be U.S. president in January (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/22/woman-to-be-us-president-in-january/)

When the thriller “24” returns for its seventh season in January 2008, actress Cherry Jones will occupy the Oval Office playing President Allison Taylor.

Does Fox know something that we don't? :blink:


Hey ... what ever happened to that show ... staring Gena Davis? :confused:

grandma
09-07-2007, 10:34 AM
The election will decide between Hillary(the terrible )and whoever .......
Will she, her husband, and their cronies, return all the things they stole, took with them when they left the White House on their previous service? And will they reimburse us taxpayers for the trashing & damages they did to the rooms as they walked out the doors? Will they up and fire whole departments so as to create openings for their New Yorker buddies?
I am of the belief that those actions verified their true nature before they even went to DC. Why would we, and do we really want to, return folks with such unprincipled character to our White House?
Yes, I voted for them the first time round, that was enough.
(at what point after Grand Larceny can the term Felon be used?)

budnipper1
09-07-2007, 11:38 AM
Will she, her husband, and their cronies, return all the things they stole, took with them when they left the White House on their previous service? And will they reimburse us taxpayers for the trashing & damages they did to the rooms as they walked out the doors? Will they up and fire whole departments so as to create openings for their New Yorker buddies?
I am of the belief that those actions verified their true nature before they even went to DC. Why would we, and do we really want to, return folks with such unprincipled character to our White House?
Yes, I voted for them the first time round, that was enough.
(at what point after Grand Larceny can the term Felon be used?)

AMEN, grandma! You are speaking truths.;)

BeaverState
09-07-2007, 12:59 PM
Much as I love people from Arkansas - Hill & Billy won't be getting my vote.:toung:

offtrack
09-07-2007, 01:17 PM
This is a fun site
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008

Don't forget to check the selected industries to see who's buttering your favorite

offtrack
09-07-2007, 01:21 PM
http://www.politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2007

And then there is the view that there isn't much difference between them

thamm
09-07-2007, 02:04 PM
Great website!


This is a fun site
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008

Don't forget to check the selected industries to see who's buttering your favorite

camper65
09-18-2007, 06:57 AM
Which would you rather have?
An idealist? (We know who they are!)
A crook? (Who ever she is!)
Or 4 more years of dogma, cronyism, and ineptitude!
Lets see,
An idealist can’t get anything done. (Carter)
Enough is enough of what we have now. (Cant see much better from that side of the street!!!)
Guess I’ll take the crook, at least a crook knows that they have to give you some in order
To get!

Show-me
09-18-2007, 06:58 AM
Write in vote for Show-me!

James48843
09-18-2007, 07:30 AM
I say we draft Ebb to run.

EBB FOR PRESIDENT.


(At least that way, we can attack that nasty deficient thingy...)

SkyPilot
09-18-2007, 07:35 AM
Maybe it’s just me, but I want our next President to have the capacity to orate a proper sentence.

Coulda had Kerry... but then, you woulda had Kerry...

Frixxxx
09-18-2007, 12:27 PM
This is a fun site
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp?cycle=2008

Don't forget to check the selected industries to see who's buttering your favorite
Wow! if you add up all the money's raised to get these people noticed:

$296,435,627

All that for a $400,000 a year job.

hmmm.....:cool:

Birchtree
09-18-2007, 01:56 PM
I need to pay more attention - I don't know how I missed this thread. With moderators puking up garbage it's right up my ally.

nnuut
09-18-2007, 02:07 PM
Hey Birch, meet me behind the Barn!:suspicious:

Birchtree
09-18-2007, 02:35 PM
I had to use moderators as a plural to be polite. There is only one that likes to puke and sling his own garbage and has limited tolerance of others' garbage. Have limb - will travel. If this thread remains toxic I'll gladly strap on the pearl handles and cherish the opportunity to display my marksmanship. I really can't stand too many Johnny Depps.

kar_crazy
09-18-2007, 02:37 PM
Much as I love people from Arkansas - Hill & Billy won't be getting my vote.:toung:
i am with you on this:nuts:

grandma
09-18-2007, 09:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeaverState http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?p=114627#post114627)
Much as I love people from Arkansas - Hill & Billy won't be getting my vote.:toung:

":Car Crazy:i am with you on this:nuts:"

Hey - leave Arkansas out of this!. They Are Nuu Yorkers - they wanted them - they got 'em !!