Stitch on 18/9/2008 at 17:44
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
GI was turned down for the Air Force due to physical issues (which you can see in another thread).
why must you bring your breasts into everything :mad:
Got to say, though, lollin at your BUT CAN WE TRUST OBAMA'S COMMUNITY SERVICE MOTIVES bit.
OH SHIT HE SET UP JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS LOOK OUT
BEAR on 18/9/2008 at 17:53
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
Corruption is widespread in our government and touches both parties equally.
I think that could be debated. I've not really taken the time to crunch the numbers though.
Given your tone of disdain towards "stupid wars", I hope you don't think that the people who fight in these wars are stupid as well... I have the deepest respect for those who serve our country. I have no respect for those who disrespect the men & women who sacrifice so much to protect our freedom and our right to be here discussing this.
Uhgn. Where does that come into this, honestly?
You guys have totally ruined my ability to be proud of our military. You've turned it into something so ugly and divisive that whenever I hear shit like that it makes me want to barf. I'm not even going to argue against it, or try and make and or defend a position because I'm so fucking sick of that sentiment.
I hope that...aw fuck it, what is the point.
Quote Posted by Stitch
why must you bring your breasts into everything :mad:
Got to say, though, lollin at your BUT CAN WE TRUST OBAMA'S COMMUNITY SERVICE MOTIVES bit.
OH SHIT HE SET UP JOB TRAINING PROGRAMS LOOK OUT
Look out, employed militant negros will stalk the night, smoking their dope and lusting for white women!
heretic on 18/9/2008 at 20:04
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
Given your tone of disdain towards "stupid wars", I hope you don't think that the people who fight in these wars are stupid as well. I honor the sacrifices of our military.
No doubt she will answer herself, but she's also a military brat. Not sure which branch.
Quote Posted by BEAR
You guys have totally ruined my ability to be proud of our military. You've turned it into something so ugly and divisive that whenever I hear shit like that it makes me want to barf.
Not sure who "You guys" are, but the face of the military remains the same regardless of the current Commander in Chief. To say that face is "ugly and divisive" is despicable to say the least. Keep in mind, the military does not
choose to fight, it simply does as
ordered. Take it from me, every last one of them would rather be home.
Like it or not, agree or not..
understand or not, you are indebted to the service men and women for every right and comfort that you enjoy. Given the volunteer services that we have, all should have earned at least a modicum of your respect.
That doesn't mean you have to agree with every (
or even any) campaign, but you should recognize the end result of having an armed force in a 'free' country is of great benefit to even the most pacifistic civilian or society.
This extends to
any 'free' country, it's not about jingoism.
heywood on 18/9/2008 at 21:12
Quote Posted by BEAR
Another example of someone who hasn't even attempted to find out how Obama plans to do this. He's already come right out and said it.
No.1: repeal bush tax cuts. As Greenspan recently came out saying, the country can't take the taxcuts financially (which are by the way 3.5
trillion dollars)
Last week, Obama said he would likely hold off on repealing the Bush cuts if the economy was looking sour.
But aside from that, Obama's plan only called for repealing the Bush cut for the top bracket. Combined with his cuts to the lower brackets, his plan would be essentially revenue neutral and would add something like 3.3t to the debt over 10 years. That's not counting all the tax exemptions he's proposed to promote various things (e.g. plug-in hybrid cars). Nor does it count all of the new spending on health care, energy, and education. Nor does it count all the supplementary spending on Iraq and Afghanistan.
Quote:
No.2: end the war in Iraq. How is it that people question where Obama is going to get the money, when we're blowing trillions in Iraq? People would have balked at childrens healthcare before the war if it was going to cost 1/1000th of what we've paid in Iraq. What the fuck is with peoples priorities?
People would have balked at the war before the war if they knew how much it was going to cost.
Quote:
Probably. I don't think Democrats are somehow superior beings totally immune to human nature. I do, however, think that they are not as bad as the republicans because of the fact that democrats aren't linked together like republicans. We don't have all the Faith-Based things that supersede policy and ideology. It doesn't change things much, but I think we feel in general a lot less connected, even if we tend to vote in the same way.
I don't know about that. I think the conservative media is united but the party is not. Most Republicans are not bible thumping evangelicals and there is a definite split between big government social conservatives and small government libertarians.
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
It doesn't matter what your salary is when you are receiving perks & promises from the political machine. Who wouldn't suck up a few years of low pay and politically expedient community service when the rich prize of pay-offs from special interests is right around the corner.
Oh, FFS. Obama was still paying off student loans until 2005. His book deals have made him wealthy, but with a net worth of ~800k he's still one of the poorer Senators. There's a story out there about him not being able to rent a car at the first convention he tried to attend in 2000 because his credit card was denied. At that time, he was a political outsider and couldn't even get into the convention. So don't tell me that while he was working in the community that rich pay-offs were right around the corner.
Ko0K on 18/9/2008 at 21:55
Quote Posted by SlyFoxx
Perhaps they made enough money to live a comfortable life while acting but then decided to go into public service and do something that's really worthwhile?
There are many politicians on both sides who used to be in business and other non-political career origins, but actors seem to flock towards the Republicans. What I was alluding to was that many Republican voters rely on their observation of how presidential a candidate looks, talks, and acts (i.e., apparent character) to decide who they are going to vote for than knowing anything about their policies. That's not to say that character doesn't count, but it's pretty pathetic when that is the *only* thing that matters to them.
Quote Posted by heywood
Another fantasy.
Only in your mind.
In any case, I don't take anything said about Democrats too personally, because there are all kinds of them out there, and I don't identify with any of them to the extent where I feel the need to be on the defensive. Whereas, that doesn't seem to be the case for a lot of people nowadays, on either side. Funny how we refer to the two sides of the political isle as "wings," yet few bother to think that maybe we should be flapping those wings in sync. I said this before, but I'm all for having another civil war and getting this out of our system.
Morte on 18/9/2008 at 22:00
Meanwhile, McCain appears to have another (
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/217802.php) senior moment by forgetting what or where Spain is, but then his campaign comes to the rescue and states that he was actually (
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2008/09/sheunemann_mccain_just_doesnt_want_to_meet_with_spains_pm.php) articulating policy:
Quote:
But now along comes Randy Scheueneman with an official campaign statement saying that it wasn't a gaffe, that McCain was articulating an actual “no meetings with Spain” policy:
The questioner asked several times about Senator McCain's willingness to meet Zapatero (and id'd him in the question so there is no doubt Senator McCain knew exactly to whom the question referred). Senator McCain refused to commit to a White House meeting with President Zapatero in this interview.Because not talking to fellow NATO members is just how mavericks roll, y'all.
I'd have a lot more patience with the nitpicking over Obama is his opponent wasn't unelectable.
jay pettitt on 18/9/2008 at 23:22
If McCain had come out and said - 'gosh, it was an interview conducted over the phone and it wasn't very clear, I was sure she was asking about (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapatista_Army_of_National_Liberation) Zapatistas' that'd be done and dusted. But to have a spokesman come out and confirm that no, he really did mean to cold face Spain is just bizarre. Have the Republican camp got a clue what they're doing?
Quote Posted by heretic
Not sure who "You guys" are
I think Bear is referring to people who try to claim moral ownership of service men and women on partisan/political/philosophical grounds (and claim proxy immorality of their detractors); which is a really cheap, ugly and cynical thing to do.
Starrfall on 19/9/2008 at 00:48
Quote Posted by pavlovscat
stuff
Why do you ascribe ulterior motives to Obama? What exactly is it about him that makes you so persistent in your conviction that he must have been on the take or whatever it is? I mean you're saying you're not ascribing these to Obama specifically, but your writing makes it look like they're pretty strongly associated in your mind, so I'm curious as to what's making you uncomfortable here.
And for a follow up, do you distinguish those who use community service for political gain from those who use military service for political gain?
And actually (as has been noted) my father was also in the air force during the Vietnam war. And one of the things he told me regarding the military was to think long and hard before ever giving someone else that much control over my life. And so I thought and decided not to join up.
However while finishing up law school I'm helping abused prisoners vindicate their civil rights through the magic of the law. Do you suspect me of seeking pay-offs?
BEAR on 19/9/2008 at 01:00
Thank you Jay. I laughed out loud when I read heretics reply. It totally just reaffirms what I said, and it is exactly why I hate it.
Quote:
Given your tone of disdain towards "stupid wars", I hope you don't think that the people who fight in these wars are stupid as well. I honor the sacrifices of our military.
This is such a profoundly stupid thing to say it just boggles my mind, and then you're own reply was just icing on the cake. This is where the whole SUPPORT OUR TROOPS thing comes from, it is an invented conflict, as if there is ANYONE WHO DOESN'T.
I mean, really, calling a war stupid being instantly equated with calling the troops stupid? That makes no sense at all, but it is a perfect example of what Jay just said. And the neo-cons have done a GREAT job of capitalizing on it and indoctrinating people into it as a means of restricting discourse on the war.
I've gained a lot of perspective from my father who served in the special forces in Vietnam. He told me stories of being protested at getting off the plane coming home and what not. I couldn't disagree more with someone who would do that (read my previous philosophical posts and ask again whether you think I really would blame the troops for what they do), but you act as if that still goes on, which it doesn't. If we think it hurts us to see what goes on in Iraq, it hurts him doubly because he knows so much of what they are going through there and when they come home (he thinks its a worse situation than what he went through because they have no real safe places, or haven't had, like he had).
heretic on 19/9/2008 at 02:53
Quote Posted by BEAR
Thank you Jay. I laughed out loud when I read heretics reply. It totally just reaffirms what I said, and it is exactly why I hate it.
If you feel that my post reaffirms anything that you may have meant in regards to the moral ownership of veterans or simple neocon politicking then you didn't understand it at all.
