Presidential Race - Are We United?

ORIGINALLY POSTED BY 68DROPTOP
QUOTE:
The other main reason to vote for McCain is the security of our country. With millions still sworn to jihad of destroying our country and our way of life, I don't want a Commander in Chief that doesn't have a clue. Just because we haven't been attacked recently, many have forgot of the danger, that millions in this world would love to set off nuclear bombs in this country. Iran almost has one and they are a leading supporter of terrorism. Does anyone think Obama has a clue on this issue? Look how he reacted to the Russia/Georgia conflict...scary. He's all style and no substance. His supporters are all in love with him, but want has he ever shown he can do but read a speech really well?


I am incomplete agreement with you!!! I think everybody has forgotten what happened 7 years ago next thursday(9-11-01). After that happened a lot of people got behind Bush to go get those b astards. Now since mostly everybody who switched to support Bush after the World Trade Center disaster, now feels nice and cozy in our country, they talk bad about him agian. Then you put a persn who has NO IDEA how the military works in office we are going to be attacked again and again because Obama will be hiding in some cave in the Rockies with his tail between his legs.

My single vote is going for the war veteran, John McCain.

Thanks
and have a nice day
 
kingeddy said:
Now Todd, Go back and look. I didn't specifically call anyone a moron in that post. I just made the general comment about being a moron if that was your only criteria. However, I did unleash in a later post...AFTER..I was insulted first.

The pot calling the kettle black...NO...I'm not out of ammunition. I'm not resorting to calling people names simply because I have nothing else to say or don't have a valid argument. Don't insult me and don't write stupid statements and I won't call you out. If your gonna be a moron, I'll have the nerve to call you one.

I'm not sure why you think a non-partisan website would give fabricated and intentionally false figures regarding Obama's tax plan...but if you have legitimate non-partisan sources that can refute what they have reported, I would like to seem them. Otherwise you've just wasted your time typing a bunch of meaningless babble.
Click to expand...


Not out of ammunition??? Neither am I Mike, if you wish to get in a whizzing contest with a skunk, so be it!!

Maybe you need to quit flinging poo and go choke some chickens, dinner rush is getting near !!
 
t.nie said:
So in short, I won't be voting because I don't think either party fields a candidate worthy of my vote. If all I have is a "lesser of two evils" choice, I won't choose either and I'll just live with whatever the rest of you choose this time around.
Click to expand...



I think the South Park episode has it right its always between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.
 
Intake said:
Not out of ammunition??? Neither am I Mike, if you wish to get in a whizzing contest with a skunk, so be it!!

Maybe you need to quit flinging poo and go choke some chickens, dinner rush is getting near !!
Click to expand...

well that was pretty intellectual. I can see I'm no match for you. I guess I'll tuck my tail and hide now.
 
kingeddy said:
well that was pretty intellectual. I can see I'm no match for you. I guess I'll tuck my tail and hide now.
Click to expand...


NO NO I was just going to say YOU WIN!!!! But I guess we need to go on now:(:( BTW I have commited no name calling!!!!

Actually I am in complete agreement with Fireball I will be voting for McCain because I am all for a Hot First Lady and as a bonus we get a Hot VP in the deal, and neither one of them seem to act like the Messiah!

Hey King, maybe if his royal majesty gets elected you'll get an invite to the Second Coming and you can supply the chicken!!!:D:D:):)
 
I need to make sure I fully understand the Republican side of this argument. I assume you will all agree on these four points.

  • Democrats raise taxes
  • Raising taxes causes inflation because companies raise prices due to tax increases
  • Clinton raised taxes immediately upon taking office.
  • The Bush family of fine Presidents immediately lowered taxes upon taking office
With that said lets take a historical look at what happened with our economy from Big Daddy Bush right up to good ole “W” himself.

During Clinton’s presidency from 1992 till 1999 the consumer price index rose from 138.1 to 164.3 an increase of 26.2 or by an average of 3.275 each year.
During this same time the inflation rate dropped from 3.03 to 2.19 High was 3.03 and the low was 1.55


So can someone please explain the following?

From 1988 till 1991 during the BUSH-1 presidency the consumer price index rose from 115.7 to 134.6 an increase of 18.9 or by an average of 4.725 each year
During this same time the inflation rate rose 4.08 to 4.25. High was 5.39 and the low was 4.25

From 2000 till 2008 during the GW BUSH-2 presidency the consumer price index rose from 168.8 to 211.0 an increase of 42.2 or by an average of 5.275 each year
During this same time the inflation rate dropped from 3.38 to 2.85. High was 3.39 and low was 1.59


So do I understand this correctly? When the Democrat was in office he increased taxes, but the CPI rose by a smaller percentage than when either Bush who both lowered taxes held office. And the inflation rate was at its 20 year low of 1.55 with a Democrat in office. How can that be?

Here is a less confusing look at those same numbers.
Average yearly increase in CPI for BUSH-1----4.725 Inflation hi-5.39 lo-4.25 avg. 4.82
Average yearly increase in CPI for BUSH-2----5.275 Inflation hi-3.39 lo-1.59 avg 2.49
Average yearly increase in CPI for CLINTON--3.275 Inflation hi-3.03 lo-1.55 avg 2.29

I think its pretty clear who's numbers are better. Let the excuses begin.

Here are links to the tables I gathered my information from.

http://www.miseryindex.us/irbyyear.asp

http://www./inflationdata.com/inflation/Consumer_Price_Index/HistoricalCPI.aspx?rsCPI_currentPage=0
 
The reason we have high inflation is the cost of energy period. Bill Clinton allowed Exxon Mobile to merge, Conoco Phillips to merge, British Petroleum to purchase AMOCO. That took away much competition. Clinton also loosened the regultions on trading oil causing the high cost of the barrel of oil. The democrats under Nancy Pelooser will not allow us to use our own oil instead favoring buying it from terrorists. This congress will do anything to get the white house no matter what it costs the american public. Liberals not only cannot give anything good that Obama has done or will do but also cannot show anything Bush has specifically done to deserve all the name calling they do to him, besides the war in Iraq which the democrat controlled congress with the exact same info he had agreed with him on.To me a "moron" is anyone who would vote for any party without looking at each individual candidate. Look up "The Global Poverty Act" that is what Obama will do with our tax dollars. Obama definatly favors high gas prices as does the nut Al Gore. Bill Clinton sent 1/2 of our good jobs to China and India and Mexico via NAFTA and GATT, Obama will send the other 1/2 to Africa via the Global Poverty Act. Can any of you liberals out there tell me how the Global Poverty Act can help the american worker? Open your eyes the democrats are not for the working man. Also look up the North American Union, one day we will wake up and ask where our sovereignty went
 
Bopper is right. He makes some very real points. Just wait till the interstate highway that is beng built from Mexico to Canada gets finished. They aren't calling it the Mexiamaicanada Highway for nothing! Nafta at it's best. With unskilled truck drivers from Mexico driving right through the heartland of the USA.
The only thing I saw come out of the DNC convention was a bunch of flash and awe. Boy did they spend the money on that thing! The back drop alone was over the top. OMG! The RNC convention didn't spend even one tenth of the money! I didn't tune in to see the political version of American Idol. I saw people talk about how bad the economy was. BUT, I don't think that is true because the Obama campaign has spent MILLIONS and MILLIONS and MILLIONS and more MILLIONS etc.etc etc..and MORE MILLIONS of Dollars for a job that pays what $600,000. The television, radio and newspaper adds and the airlines and hotels and restraurants have definitely benifited from this thats for sure!
Experience....It's like racing, you can have the best equipment money can by, BUT if you don't have the experience behind the wheel your just spinning your wheels for a 2nd place finish
SEAT TIME<>SEAT TIME<> SEAT TIME! How many have heard that?
I am waiting for the debates, to make my decision. It may be eye opening.
 
kingeddy said:
See, this is just what I was talking about earlier..when the ammuniton runs low, resort to insults. Atleast when I insult someone, there is a legitmate reason for doing so. (see MOJO's post) I never have claimed to be knowledgeable. I'm just stating what is obvious. I used google to find information on the facts/figures I have stated.

No one can refute that if McCain is elected we will have 4 more years of exactly what we have now. And for all of you who say your not happy with the current state of affairs, why on earth would you even consider voting for a clone of "W". Can we really afford "the devil we know"?
Click to expand...


man i really hate to do this but dude,in your first post on this thread you insulted someone.
 
kingeddy said:
So do I understand this correctly? When the Democrat was in office he increased taxes, but the CPI rose by a smaller percentage than when either Bush who both lowered taxes held office.
Click to expand...

The answer is "no", you don't understand it correctly. Bush inherited an economy already in recession, the dot com bust, and then we had 9/11.

I don't think I've ever heard your argument, that higher taxes are good for the economy, increase jobs, and lower inflation. What do they call that economic principle? How far would you have them raise our taxes? The more the better? By your brand of logic, a big tax increase would be better than a small tax increase. I guess if we really want our economy to zoom we should double all taxes.

I just wish we were smart enough to spend our own money and didn't need our uncle to spend it for us. :rolleyes: But, I guess it's so much more effective (helpful for the economy) to have the government take our money, eat most of it in bureaucratic administration of the money, then redistribute the small remaining fraction to others as they see fit. I guess I'm starting to see it your way, king.
 
Presidential Candidates

Here are the announced candidates for the 2008 Presidential Election.
Charles Baldwin Constitution, U.S. Party
John McCain Republican Party
Ralph Nader Independant Natural Law Party
Robert Barr Libertairan Party
Cynthia McKinney Green Party, Peace and Freedom
Barack Obama Democratic Party

I think for a person to say they are not going to vote for a perticular party based on "I don't want XXXXX party in office" has not researched the other candidates. For instance, if I did not like the democratic party I would not vote republican just to keep the dem's out. Give your vote to Nader, he needs all the help he can get.

You know, in two years when nothing has changed, no matter who is elected there will allways be the people who will say, "if so and so had been elected thing would not be this bad. All I can say is WE are AMERICANS and WE are to support the PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES! Yes we do have our freedoms and one is the freedom of speech, and we can disagree with our elected officials.

Out of all the debates that have taken place, and the ones that will take place, one candidate may say ONE thing that will sway my or your vote. That my friends does not make us stupid people!
 
Obama will raise taxes and funnel money right out of the country, along with all of his other big govt. nanny state plans. Since this is a racing forum, I'll point out as others have that people on his side (Algore) hate internal combustion engines and would like to eliminate racing. Voting for him is like shooting yourself in the foot.
 
What started

68droptop said:
No, it makes us "morons" or "mindless monkeys", unless of course we agree with the faulty logic of King Eddie. :)
Click to expand...

Your post started with we should all support McCain/Palin because you perceive them as racing friendly nothing else. Sorry but that is and always will be a moronic statement. If you would have given other reasons that you like the Republican ticket that is one thing but you did not. You might as well just said I like them because Palin has big boobs. Your post was started to do one thing and one thing only to stur the pot.
 
I think that mentioning the racing stuff was something that everyone on here can relate to, not his only reason. If I listed everything I dislike about Obama the server would probably crash. I'm not crazy about McCain either to be honest. He's not conservative enough on issues like illegal immigration. THAT will be the downfall of the country.
 
Momma Drew said:
Bopper is right. He makes some very real points. Just wait till the interstate highway that is beng built from Mexico to Canada gets finished. They aren't calling it the Mexiamaicanada Highway for nothing! Nafta at it's best. With unskilled truck drivers from Mexico driving right through the heartland of the USA.
The only thing I saw come out of the DNC convention was a bunch of flash and awe. Boy did they spend the money on that thing! The back drop alone was over the top. OMG! The RNC convention didn't spend even one tenth of the money! I didn't tune in to see the political version of American Idol. I saw people talk about how bad the economy was. BUT, I don't think that is true because the Obama campaign has spent MILLIONS and MILLIONS and MILLIONS and more MILLIONS etc.etc etc..and MORE MILLIONS of Dollars for a job that pays what $600,000. The television, radio and newspaper adds and the airlines and hotels and restraurants have definitely benifited from this thats for sure!
Experience....It's like racing, you can have the best equipment money can by, BUT if you don't have the experience behind the wheel your just spinning your wheels for a 2nd place finish
SEAT TIME<>SEAT TIME<> SEAT TIME! How many have heard that?
I am waiting for the debates, to make my decision. It may be eye opening.
Click to expand...


the last time i saw flash and awe like this was from carter,and unfortunately,i drank that koolaid. those were some great years my freinds.
remember the phrase,wear a sweater? and a 55 mph speed limit?
i dont really think the economic situation has a whole lot to do with any particular president,more likely the congress has more effect. too many votes being sold to get thier own bills passed. i havent really suffered all that much during any administration,but i can see some very dark clouds on the horizon if we continue to allow so many manufacturing jobs to be shipped beyond our borders. and i dont see any candidate addressing that situation. and show me a candidate that favors flat taxing both corporations and individuals at THE SAME RATE and that person has my vote,no matter what sex they are or what color they are. a simple tax on INCOME,shouldnt be that hard to figure out. might even increase the irs's
working staff just trying to make sure the big corporations arent cheating.
and what is gonna happen when there arent any jobs to support a middle class? that seems to be the direction that we are heading.a whole lot of this probably started with the so called right to work laws. and i think this
may have been a republican backed issue. unfortunately for most working people,labor unions were corrupted by organized crime and when most of the mobsters were finally corraled,the leadership vacuum didnt leave much political clout to keep this from being passed. i really think we as a whole need to start thinking outside of the box here and start really following
how our senators and representitives vote on key issues and if they dont vote the way we would like em to,then vote them out. i dont think the presedential vote is as much of a player here as it is our reps and senators up in congress. all too often,they get a free carreer based on party lines back home while voting for thier own interests and not for the
folks back home who elected them. look at some of the terms some of them have served. all based on voting the party line.
 
awsmv6 said:
Your post started with we should all support McCain/Palin because you perceive them as racing friendly nothing else. Sorry but that is and always will be a moronic statement. If you would have given other reasons that you like the Republican ticket that is one thing but you did not. You might as well just said I like them because Palin has big boobs. Your post was started to do one thing and one thing only to stur the pot.
Click to expand...

So now two people on a motorsport forum calling me a moron for pointing out that we have the most "motorsports friendly" potential administration that needs our support. ;) Isn't it ironic that the same people who must call people names and insult the intelligence of others, in the process prove themselves to be most intellectually challenged?

There was nothing moronic about my statement. This is a motorsports forum. I simply pointed out that we have an import choice between the most motorsports friendly administration in our history and the most motorsports unfriendly administration in our history. Those who care about motorsports and want to prevent the assault that many on one side would love to lead, should care about this issue.

I guess you are as numb as King when it comes to fact that ultra-liberals HATE motorsports and would have it outlawed. Sure, they couldn't shut down NASCAR, but they could easily act to restrict and harass short track owners and promoters to the point that they close. Al Gore, proposed Obama Secretary, openly campaigns for the "elimination" of the internal combustion engine. How easy would it be for government to change liability laws that would make insurance prohibitively expensive for small tracks? It could almost happen overnight.

I'm sorry, but what would have been really stupid would have been a thread started on a motorsports forum about politics that had nothing to do with motorsports. I'm sorry I didn't originally lay out all my other issues for you and therefore avoid the brunt of your childish name calling, JERK!
 
I've never heard such bs in my life..I told you the excuses would follow. Its the standard Republican rhetoric that they cannot prove. They only point fingers and say it was Clinton's fault, or the dot.coms fault, or 9/11's fault. I'll address these one at a time and be done with this nonesense.

High inflation is due to the cost of energy. Then why was inflation at a 20 year high and the CPI making its largest jumps under HW Bush when fuel was cheaper? Did he inherit a bad economy too? (the answer is no, he did not inherit a bad economy)

Clinton is responsible for allowing oil companies to merge. HUH? Is this a little republican double talk. I thought most republicans were against most all government regulation?????????

Clinton loosened regulations on trading oil causing high prices...I thought the high demand in China was the standard Republican line on this topic of high oil prices?

Pelose will not allow us to drill and use our own oil..Why do we currently export our oil to other countries (1.48 Billion barrels per day)?

We are currently buying oil from terrorists. 41% of our crude comes from US, 9%Canada, 8% Saudi Arabia, 8% Venezuela, 7% Mexico. Who are the terrorists?

What has Bush specifically done to deserve the harsh treatment? Man, take off the rose colored glasses!

Bush inherited a bad economy..Really? It was handed to him with the lowest inflation rate in over 30 years. and the dot.com bust and 9/11 happened under who's watch, and who ignored the intelligence reports regarding an attack?

I never argued that higher taxes promote a healthy economy..I only disproved the myth that higher taxes hurt the economy.

And finally..The internal comb. engine and automobiles replaced steam engines, horses and stagecoaches. The people in those days feared it much the same you are fearing any change now. Its a travesty if our society doesn't continue to evolve with new technology to meet the growing demands for transportation and curtail the eradication of our natural resources. Milk it till its dry...just another republican belief I guess. Our country needs to look ahead to the end of the so called oil-age. Many countries already have. Solar power and hydrogen powered engines have already liberated a few. Iceland is very close to becoming the first fossil fuel free country. Norway is not far behind. Why fear change?

As I have stated many times before...If you are happy with the current state of our country (which most of you say you are not) then go ahead...Vote for the clone...Your gonna get 4 more years of exactly what we have now. Atleast with Obama he is looking for ways to make a difference.

I'm thru arguing this. If you can live with yourself for voting the McSame ticket, well..may God have mercy. It would be easier to teach pigs to fly than to educate a Republican.

Its been fun, I'm out of here...see ya when I see ya!
 
Here are a couple of quotes for everyone to consider:

Al Gore, in his 1992 book “Earth in the Balance,” proclaimed that the internal combustion engine was “a mortal threat . . . more deadly than that of any military enemy.” Gore proposes we work to "eliminate the internal combustion engine..."

At a town-hall meeting, Obama was asked if he would tap the former vice president for his Cabinet to handle global warming.
"I would," Obama said. "Not only will I, but I will make a commitment that Al Gore will be at the table and play a central part in us figuring out how we solve this problem. He's somebody I talk to on a regular basis. I'm already consulting with him in terms of these issues, but climate change is real. It is something we have to deal with now.

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell’s DNC speech should have reminded us that Democrats -- a.k.a. the saboteurs of real energy independence -- have no intention of ever letting us into the pantry. Rendell was unapologetic when he called voters to support Obama so the U.S. can finally “end the age of oil.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Back
Top