I'm sorry did you say something? I was distracted for some reason.
Anyway, clearly Alex would have the most comprehensive vetting processes. Very "hands-on".......if you get my drift.
U.S. Presidential Race: Official Thread
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
I'm sorry did you say something? I was distracted for some reason.
Anyway, clearly Alex would have the most comprehensive vetting processes. Very "hands-on".......if you get my drift.
Well, unlike Biden, McCain actually had a career before entering the Senate, so there is likelihood he "enriched" himself before entering politics. Also, as pointed out by others, he married into much of his wealth. As far as knowledge of how many "homes" he owned, is the question how many residences McCain and his wife move around to and actually live in, or how many bits of real estate do they own jointly, much of it brought into the marriage by his wife and theat he might not even have visited?
Mc Cain thinks Putin is President of Germany
http://dailywebb.com/according-to-mccain-vladimir-putin-is-the-president-of-germany/
Imbecile
http://dailywebb.com/according-to-mccain-vladimir-putin-is-the-president-of-germany/
Imbecile
everything you say is correct...its perception....both sides latch onto 'gaffs' by both sides.....the fact McCain had to check about his and his wife's houses showed he was out of touch with ordinary Americans...especially with this mortgage crisis....
does that mean he does not care about ordinary Americans? no....
imo I honestly believe both Obama and McCain are closer to the philosophy of working across party lines....both are pragmatic in their own ways...and both want to be President....
the difference is really the fundemental political and economic differences between the parties....
I have more confidence both men will govern from the center...the one worry we all must have is that because of McCain's age and health we may end with Palin as the President....which would mean a situation as bad or worse than Bush...can we really risk that??
This imo is the one gamble McCain took that May work...but at what cost?
"...what is the point of gaining the world...when you are losing your soul? "
Mc Cain thinks Putin is President of Germany
http://dailywebb.com/according-to-mccain-vladimir-putin-is-the-president-of-germany/
Imbecile
Lemme tube that for you, it deserves recognition
It's such a shame how partisan American politics is. Obama and McCain would have been great running-mates. They have perfectly complementary heads, Obaba's starting wide at the top and narrowing to a pointy chin, McCain with a jawline like Table Mountain and a forehead half the size:
If Obama doesnt win this election, I will brand America a racist country. Sorry but Obama beats McCain hands down, theres is nothing about mccain that appeals to me. America and the world needs Obama.
Stop raving and who are you to call anyone names just because they might not concur with your views.
There could be many reasons why persons who aren't African-American don't vote for Obama other than race. There are some who disagree with his opinions on the Second Amendment, abortion, the fact he's a "Chicago Democrat" (got that objection from a died-in-the-wool Demo who says he needs to hold his nose to vote Obama, but some neutrals might not be a generous). For some reason, there are those opposed to the basic Demo stance on the economy or view him as a whimp on foreign policy. While none of these views might be convincing to you or me, the fact is that many people in many countries decide how to vote for reasons alien to our understanding of the situation.
African Americans constitute around 12% of the population (and 80% of the NBA) and, although "minorities" are fast closing the numbers gap on the white population, only a confirmed racist or idiot would think that all "minorities" think, act, and vote alike. The GOP will still get a sizable percent of the "Asian" vote (as if all folks who trace ancestory back to a continent of that size and diversity should be treated as a single group) as well as between 1/4 and 1/3 of the "Hispanic" vote.
It's such a shame how partisan American politics is. Obama and McCain would have been great running-mates. They have perfectly complementary heads, Obaba's starting wide at the top and narrowing to a pointy chin, McCain with a jawline like Table Mountain and a forehead half the size:
Indeed. And neither of them know much about beer, unlike George W Bush, who had an extensive knowledge of it before he decided he didn't.
As Robin Williams says, Palin looks like she ought to be the sassy librarian from a porn video. You're waiting for the glasses to come off and the skirt to come up. A Palin sex tape sure would shake up the next 60 days; then again, a Palin sex tape with McCain in it would be even better - why she "really" got nominated!
Are you feeling that McCain - Palin bounce Raoul?
Nobody is revved up about McCain/Palin, with the exception of the furthest reaches of the right Neo-Eval-Cons. Oh, and the 2 dozen idiots that still listen to Rush Limbaugh are are bouncing off shit because they are the most retarded of all those that used to listen to his blathering lies.
The polls are bullshit because there just aren't quite as many brain-dead fools that believe in McCain and Palin. Both of them have whiney voices, and we all know EVERYthing they say is a lie.
Messure that up against Obama painting a rosey picture (I am a realist), that he's going to fix everything...
There is a chance that congress swings back to the GOP...
oh, wait... the news just spoke about that, they say there's no fecking way in the world it's going back to the GOP.
Well then, who knows... Obama might be able to deliver on his promises.
McCain's Voicemail to Sarah Palin, letting her know she's his running mate pick
http://www.billpressmedia.com/nsmpc/McCain Call to Palin.mp3
http://www.billpressmedia.com/nsmpc/McCain Call to Palin.mp3
The Onion informs me that they have sewn up the all-important Moose-hunting, pro-life, creationist, Alaskan women's vote.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/sep/10/women.uselections2008
12% lead for McCain apparently.
Do people want a creationist as a (fairly likely) President?
12% lead for McCain apparently.
Do people want a creationist as a (fairly likely) President?
Why not?
I've warmed to this Palin since I discovered her anti abortion beliefs. She isn't the one going to be president though. I rarely watch American late night live interview programs, but every time I do McCain seems to be on them. And he comes across as a funny guy who can take the piss out of himself, and I like that. But he's still a Republican, and I don't care how much he might have gone against his own party previously, he still represents them. And if there's something the world really doesn't need, its another Republican term
Seriously? A creationist? Someone who supports teaching creationism in science class?
Anti-abortion? That's a bit mild. She opposes abortion in cases of rape and incest, only allowing it when the life of the mother is threatened. That's not just anti-abortion, that's fairly extreme views even for someone who is opposed to abortion. Anyway, that's not even the issue.
If elected, McCain will be 72. Actuarial charts need only be consulted to note that he has a fair old chance of popping his clogs during his time as Commander in Chief, so Palin therefore comes under extra scrutiny.
Quite frankly, if someone thinks that Intelligent Design should be taught in science class, I would question their judgment.
Question their judgement?
Section them under the mental health act surely?
Section them under the mental health act surely?
I don't think it has extra-territorial effect unfortunately...
Seriously though, if creationists get their way and America's youth get peddled this rubbish, will they put their hands up and take responsibility when all the high tech science jobs end up in China and India in 15 years as there is no-one qualified to fill them in the US?
Seriously though, if creationists get their way and America's youth get peddled this rubbish, will they put their hands up and take responsibility when all the high tech science jobs end up in China and India in 15 years as there is no-one qualified to fill them in the US?
give these Republican nuts another couple of terms and the Chinese and Indians will be having the people here making stuff they with for slave labor...
The thing is that school curricula are controlled at state level rather than determined by the views of the president. Creationism taught in Alaska? Quite possibly. In California or Massachusetts or New York? No.
I understand that position. I also know that it is not just the Republicans that are creationists - there are enough Democrats out there who subscribe to the views as well.
Although most of the legislative power does reside with the state and federal congresses, the President still has an important symbolic position and as such their statements do necessarily hold much more weight than a Senator or Congressman. A simple endorsement of ID, as Bush did, can be very damaging as it is seen as a political endorsement by those at the state level who wish to propagate those views in science class.
Let me be clear. If schools want to teach Intelligent Design they can. Just not in science class as it is not science. Also, I think it would be hugely damaging if even one state, district or town, no matter where they are introduces creationism into science class. It would be incredibly patronising of me and anyone not to care about what Alaska does. For all we know the next Stephen Jay Gould is in Alaska right now.
McCain doesn't have a 12% lead. It's a dead heat right now according to the latest polls.
There are only two reasons why I prefer the Dems to the Republicans. 1 is healthcare - we have to fix the system and the Dems are the party trying to do this. The second is green energy. We have got to lead the way in this as it will not only help the environment but makes good economic sense - millions of new jobs, lower energy prices, less dependence on foreign oil. I think that Obama is clearly stronger on this issue.
On foreign policy, I actually prefer the Republicans mainly because I don't want to see us leave Iraq irresponsibly. We are in there now and have a duty to finish the job but the domestic issues are more important to me.
On foreign policy, I actually prefer the Republicans mainly because I don't want to see us leave Iraq irresponsibly. We are in there now and have a duty to finish the job but the domestic issues are more important to me.
Are you feeling that McCain - Palin bounce Raoul?
I'm feeling it alright - in Ibiza at the moment.
I think McCain did a good job of bouncing back. The next 7 weeks is going to be an absolute war. No more Mr. Niceguy from either candidate. Expect the airwaves to be flooded with negative ads.
Sadly, many people who vote for McCain will do so because they think she's hot.
Lemme tube that for you, it deserves recognition
This is quite funny and will likely make an Obama ad or two. I'm sure McCain knows who is in charge in Germany, but misstatements like that will only serve to question his lucidity.
I don't think the jobs will necessarily end up in China and India. Quite a number of them will stay in the US, because it's a rich country. But they will be filled by Chinese, Indians, Singaporeans, Bangladeshis, Koreans, Japanese, the odd Malaysian or two, by anyone from any country that doesn't attempt to fill the heads of its children with stupidity.
This issue is really important, and sadly I don't think US voters realise this, because like almost everyone else, they tend to vote on the basis of today and tomorrow, not 15-30 years time.
I started a poll..just for fun like. If it was down to RC, let's see who would win.
Started it in the wrong thread initially, so that one is closed.
Started it in the wrong thread initially, so that one is closed.
Can you make it so we know who has voted for who? I'm very nosy...
To be fair, Frosty, those who don't mind people knowing will probably have given their opinion already, or will do so. Best to respect those who prefer it to be private I think?
I knew you would say that, as it is the right answer... still, if you don't ask you don't get!
Based on the posts it's pretty easy to guess how this will turn out. I can't vote because my choices are not represented. I'm still choosing between Green Party Cynthia McKinney, Libertarian Party Bob Barr, Independent Ralph Nader and Constitution Party Chuck Baldwin. I think any of these are much closer to the average American than the other 2 business as usual choices.
Can you make it so we know who has voted for who? I'm very nosy...
To be fair, Frosty, those who don't mind people knowing will probably have given their opinion already, or will do so. Best to respect those who prefer it to be private I think?
Why did my post come out twice and at different times???
I blame CERN.
I blame CERN.
...many vote on cultural issues.....plain and simple...guns,abortion,religon....and race.....
sad really....
From The Times
September 12, 2008
Barack Obama the speechmaker is being rumbled
There is a yawning gulf between what the Democratic candidate says and how he has acted. That's why the race is so close
Gerard Baker
It's funny how the harder you look at something, the harder it can be to understand it. I can't recall a US presidential election that has attracted more attention. But neither can there have been a time when the world has watched what goes on in America with the nonplussed, horrified incomprehension it has now.
Travelling in Britain this week, I've been asked repeatedly by close followers of US politics if it can really be true that Barack Obama might not win. Thoughtful people cannot get their head around the idea that Mr Obama, exciting new pilot of change, supported by Joseph Biden, experienced navigator of the swamplands of Washington politics, could possibly be defeated.
They look upon John McCain and Sarah Palin and see something out of hag-ridden history: the wizened old warrior, obsessed with finding enemies in every corner of the globe, marching in lockstep with the crackpot, mooseburger-chomping mother from the wilds of Alaska, rifle in one hand, Bible in the other, smiting caribou and conventional science as she goes.
Two patronising explanations are adduced to explain why Americans are going wrong. The first is racism. I've dealt with this before and it has acquired no more merit. White supremacists haven't been big on Democratic candidates, whatever their colour, for a long time, and Mr Obama's race is as likely to generate enthusiasm among blacks and young voters as it is hostility among racists.
Background
* Middle-of-the-road Obama run over
* Barack Obama's Palin problem
* US election race descends into taunts
* Obama rattled as rivals steal limelight
In a similarly condescending account, those foolish saps are being conned into voting for Mr McCain because they like his running-mate. Her hockey-mom charm and storybook career appeals to their worst instincts. The race is boiling down to a beauty contest in which a former beauty queen is stealing the show. Believe this if it helps you come to terms with the possibility of a Democratic defeat. But there really are better explanations.
One is a simple political-cultural one. This election is a struggle between the followers of American exceptionalism and the supporters of global universalism. Democrats are more eager than ever to align the US with the rest of the Western world, especially Europe. This is true not just in terms of a commitment to multilateral diplomacy that would restore the United Nations to its rightful place as arbiter of international justice. It is also reflected in the type of place they'd like America to be - a country with higher taxes, more business regulation, a much larger welfare safety net and universal health insurance. The Republicans, who still believe America should follow the beat of its own drum, are pretty much against all of that.
You can argue the merits of each case. But let me try to explain to my fellow non-Americans why Mr Obama's problems go well beyond that. Even if you think that Americans should want to turn their country into a European-style system, there is a perfectly good reason that you might have grave doubts about Mr Obama.
The essential problem coming to light is a profound disconnect between the Barack Obama of the candidate's speeches, and the Barack Obama who has actually been in politics for the past decade or so.
Speechmaker Obama has built his campaign on the promise of reform, the need to change the culture of American political life, to take on the special interests that undermine government's effectiveness and erode trust in the system itself,
Politician Obama rose through a Chicago machine that is notoriously the most corrupt in the country. As David Freddoso writes in a brilliantly cogent and measured book, The Case Against Barack Obama, the angel of deliverance from the old politics functioned like an old-time Democratic pol in Illinois. He refused repeatedly to side with those lonely voices that sought to challenge the old corrupt ways of the ruling party.
Speechmaker Obama talks about an era of bipartisanship, He speaks powerfully about the destructive politics of red and blue states.
Politician Obama has toed his party's line more reliably than almost any other Democrat in US politics. He has a near-perfect record of voting with his side. He has the most solidly left-wing voting history in the Senate. His one act of bipartisanship, a transparency bill co-sponsored with a Republican senator, was backed by everybody on both sides of the aisle. He has never challenged his party's line on any issue of substance.
Speechmaker Obama talks a lot about finding ways to move beyond the bloody battlegrounds of the “culture wars” in America; the urgent need to establish consensus on the emotive issue of abortion.
Politician Obama's support for abortion rights is the most extreme of any Democratic senator. In the Illinois legislature he refused to join Democrats and Republicans in supporting a Bill that would require doctors to provide medical care for babies who survived abortions. No one in the Senate - not the arch feminist Hillary Clinton nor the superliberal Edward Kennedy - opposed this same humane measure.
Here's the real problem with Mr Obama: the jarring gap between his promises of change and his status quo performance. There are just too many contradictions between the eloquent poetry of the man's stirring rhetoric and the dull, familiar prose of his political record.
It's been remarked that the biggest difference between Americans and Europeans is religion: ignorant Americans cling to faith; enlightened Europeans long ago embraced the liberating power of reason. Yet here's an odd thing about this election. Europeans are asking Americans to take a leap of faith, to break the chains of empiricism and embrace the possibility of the imagination.
The fact is that a vote for Mr Obama demands uncritical subservience to the irrational, anti-empirical proposition that the past holds no clues about the future, that promise is wholly detached from experience. The second-greatest story ever told, perhaps.
Interesting article - I would be very interested in the American poster view of this article - especially those bits highlighted
September 12, 2008
Barack Obama the speechmaker is being rumbled
There is a yawning gulf between what the Democratic candidate says and how he has acted. That's why the race is so close
Gerard Baker
It's funny how the harder you look at something, the harder it can be to understand it. I can't recall a US presidential election that has attracted more attention. But neither can there have been a time when the world has watched what goes on in America with the nonplussed, horrified incomprehension it has now.
Travelling in Britain this week, I've been asked repeatedly by close followers of US politics if it can really be true that Barack Obama might not win. Thoughtful people cannot get their head around the idea that Mr Obama, exciting new pilot of change, supported by Joseph Biden, experienced navigator of the swamplands of Washington politics, could possibly be defeated.
They look upon John McCain and Sarah Palin and see something out of hag-ridden history: the wizened old warrior, obsessed with finding enemies in every corner of the globe, marching in lockstep with the crackpot, mooseburger-chomping mother from the wilds of Alaska, rifle in one hand, Bible in the other, smiting caribou and conventional science as she goes.
Two patronising explanations are adduced to explain why Americans are going wrong. The first is racism. I've dealt with this before and it has acquired no more merit. White supremacists haven't been big on Democratic candidates, whatever their colour, for a long time, and Mr Obama's race is as likely to generate enthusiasm among blacks and young voters as it is hostility among racists.
Background
* Middle-of-the-road Obama run over
* Barack Obama's Palin problem
* US election race descends into taunts
* Obama rattled as rivals steal limelight
In a similarly condescending account, those foolish saps are being conned into voting for Mr McCain because they like his running-mate. Her hockey-mom charm and storybook career appeals to their worst instincts. The race is boiling down to a beauty contest in which a former beauty queen is stealing the show. Believe this if it helps you come to terms with the possibility of a Democratic defeat. But there really are better explanations.
One is a simple political-cultural one. This election is a struggle between the followers of American exceptionalism and the supporters of global universalism. Democrats are more eager than ever to align the US with the rest of the Western world, especially Europe. This is true not just in terms of a commitment to multilateral diplomacy that would restore the United Nations to its rightful place as arbiter of international justice. It is also reflected in the type of place they'd like America to be - a country with higher taxes, more business regulation, a much larger welfare safety net and universal health insurance. The Republicans, who still believe America should follow the beat of its own drum, are pretty much against all of that.
You can argue the merits of each case. But let me try to explain to my fellow non-Americans why Mr Obama's problems go well beyond that. Even if you think that Americans should want to turn their country into a European-style system, there is a perfectly good reason that you might have grave doubts about Mr Obama.
The essential problem coming to light is a profound disconnect between the Barack Obama of the candidate's speeches, and the Barack Obama who has actually been in politics for the past decade or so.
Speechmaker Obama has built his campaign on the promise of reform, the need to change the culture of American political life, to take on the special interests that undermine government's effectiveness and erode trust in the system itself,
Politician Obama rose through a Chicago machine that is notoriously the most corrupt in the country. As David Freddoso writes in a brilliantly cogent and measured book, The Case Against Barack Obama, the angel of deliverance from the old politics functioned like an old-time Democratic pol in Illinois. He refused repeatedly to side with those lonely voices that sought to challenge the old corrupt ways of the ruling party.
Speechmaker Obama talks about an era of bipartisanship, He speaks powerfully about the destructive politics of red and blue states.
Politician Obama has toed his party's line more reliably than almost any other Democrat in US politics. He has a near-perfect record of voting with his side. He has the most solidly left-wing voting history in the Senate. His one act of bipartisanship, a transparency bill co-sponsored with a Republican senator, was backed by everybody on both sides of the aisle. He has never challenged his party's line on any issue of substance.
Speechmaker Obama talks a lot about finding ways to move beyond the bloody battlegrounds of the “culture wars” in America; the urgent need to establish consensus on the emotive issue of abortion.
Politician Obama's support for abortion rights is the most extreme of any Democratic senator. In the Illinois legislature he refused to join Democrats and Republicans in supporting a Bill that would require doctors to provide medical care for babies who survived abortions. No one in the Senate - not the arch feminist Hillary Clinton nor the superliberal Edward Kennedy - opposed this same humane measure.
Here's the real problem with Mr Obama: the jarring gap between his promises of change and his status quo performance. There are just too many contradictions between the eloquent poetry of the man's stirring rhetoric and the dull, familiar prose of his political record.
It's been remarked that the biggest difference between Americans and Europeans is religion: ignorant Americans cling to faith; enlightened Europeans long ago embraced the liberating power of reason. Yet here's an odd thing about this election. Europeans are asking Americans to take a leap of faith, to break the chains of empiricism and embrace the possibility of the imagination.
The fact is that a vote for Mr Obama demands uncritical subservience to the irrational, anti-empirical proposition that the past holds no clues about the future, that promise is wholly detached from experience. The second-greatest story ever told, perhaps.
Interesting article - I would be very interested in the American poster view of this article - especially those bits highlighted