GameBanshee Forums

Ok read it. Now what?

What's ironic is that the Chicago Tribune, despite a long history of association with the Republican Party, actually endorsed Obama.
you can read about it [url="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-chicago-tribune-endorsement,0,1371034.story?track=email-alert-breakingnews"]here[/url].

Come on Klorox, stop simply posting links without comment and tell us why you think a McCain/Palin win would benefit the US and the world generally.

Well, for one I don't favor socialism. I don't like the fact that I'd have more incentive to work less than work harder, because the money I'd be working hard for would go to people who don't work for it.

Joe the Plumber brings the socialism point to light, and the response to him is to discredit the person, NOT the issues he's raised.

I don't want the government telling me I have to be charitable, and deciding for me what charities my money goes to. I'm already a charitable person.

I think McCain would protect the country from foreign attacks much better than a guy who has said he'd sit down and talk with terrorists. Terrorists who have said that the world would be a better place with Israel wiped off the map.

I don't like the idea of Obama getting into office when he hasn't been forced to answer a whole lot of questions about his past: Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, Rashid Khalidi, ACORN, Father Flaiger,

He and his own VP candidate can't even agree on what "middle class" means, and more and more people would be taxed as his number has dropped from $250k, to $200, to $150, and now it's $120! How low will it go?

Joe Biden has said he'd be tested by terrorists in his first 6 months in office.


What's crazy is that the "responses" to the points I've presented above focus on how much was spent on Palin's wardrobe. [Acronyms of a swearing expression deleted by Maharlika] does that have to do with anything political?

Well, for one I don't favor socialism. I don't like the fact that I'd have more incentive to work less than work harder, because the money I'd be working hard for would go to people who don't work for it.

That is not how socialism works, not even remotely.

I wish people would quit thinking that Obama's ideals and the ideals of socialism are to take money from the rich and give to the poor. That is closer to Capitalism, not socialism.

Furthermore, McCain has already stated that he wants to take taxpayer dollars and give some of it to people who can't afford health insurance. With tax, the Rich who buy more stuff than the poor usually pay more tax (not more of a percentage in tax, just more money because they buy more stuff), and McCain wants to give poor people 5000 bucks. This was said during his DEBATE.

Obama vaguely mentioned spreading wealth around, McCain point blank said how he'd do it if he were president, and yet calls Obama a socialist for wanting to spread wealth around.

I don't want the government telling me I have to be charitable, and deciding for me what charities my money goes to. I'm already a charitable person.

They've been doing that since America was first born dude...in fact, any government does this. It's called Tax.

I don't like the idea of Obama getting into office when he hasn't been forced to answer a whole lot of questions about his past: Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, Rashid Khalidi, ACORN, Father Flaiger,

He's made official answers to each and every one of those. He did that a LONG time ago.

He and his own VP candidate can't even agree on what "middle class"

What his Vice president thinks about the president's policies for middle class are completely moot anyways.

What's crazy is that the "responses" to the points I've presented above focus on how much was spent on Palin's wardrobe. WTF does that have to do with anything political?

Simple, Palin and McCains entire political campaign for president has had the theme that they are 100% related to the working class, despite McCain having several owned homes and Palin spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on just clothing to make herself look pretty during the speeches.

However...that's not one of the reasons I'm not voting for McCain/Palin. Two main ones are both are quite out of their minds and have no experience on how to deal with an economy like ours (which should be our top priority), and McCain's at a venerable enough age that I actually have to worry about Palin being President, which is even scarier than McCain.

Klorox.... This place is called SYM, which is short for "speak your mind," and does not stand for "Lie, twist the truth and promote ignorance." Before you continue with your political crusade, I would suggest that you use your search engine... a lot! Look up socialism, the 2008 election, and so on. Another good advice is to pay attention in school, provided you attend one. If you follow these simple little guidelines, you will avoid embarrassing yourself on a public message board, and we won't have to be harsh with you.

Finally, I find it hilarious that your avatar is that of director Kevin Smith, one of the staunchest Obama-supporters in the USA. Goes perfect with the rest of your image.:laugh:

Definition of Socialism from the [url="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism"]Merriam Webster[/url]


Pronunciation:
\ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1837

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Obama, a socialist? You have got to be kidding me, nowhere do I see him advocating any of the above. That's right up there with the claims that Obama is a Muslim. Of course, as Colin Powell so succinctly phrased it, that shouldn't matter anyway.

dragon wench wrote: Obama, a socialist? You have got to be kidding me

That's just what I thought. I first thought 'Is socialisme so different in Europe and the US?'.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Although, these days the party's that do follow socialism idea's are not as left as they used to be. Meaning they borrow alot of factors that other party's hold. Here in Belgium, when we speak about Socialism, we don't really think about the heritage of Karl Marx. So, while the deffinition holds, the meaning of socialism can be compared with the party's that hold socialism in their party name .Although, I could be wrong.

Klorox wrote:Terrorists who have said that the world would be a better place with Israel wiped off the map.

Are you saying every terrorist is an extremist muslim? 'Cause that would be wrong on so many levels.

That's just what I thought. I first thought 'Is socialisme so different in Europe and the US?'.

Well, what I can tell you is that the political spectrum in the US (and Canada, though to a somewhat lesser extent) is skewed considerably further to the Right than in Europe. In Europe Obama would, at most, be considered centrist, or at the centre/right.

In the US, however, the term "socialist" is inaccurately defined as anything even slightly to the Left of Attila the Hun.
OK, that's an exaggeration on my part, but hyperbole deserves to be met with hyperbole

The McCain campaign is simply using the label "socialism" as a scare tactic, it hearkens back to the McCarthy era when they thought Communists were hiding under every bed.

I thought it was pretty funny to see Obama's response to the name-calling, he said, I paraphrase, "Yeah, they found out I shared my toys and peanut butter sandwiches when I was in Kindergarten"

Moonbiter wrote:Klorox.... This place is called SYM, which is short for "speak your mind," and does not stand for "Lie, twist the truth and promote ignorance." Before you continue with your political crusade, I would suggest that you use your search engine... a lot! Look up socialism, the 2008 election, and so on. Another good advice is to pay attention in school, provided you attend one. If you follow these simple little guidelines, you will avoid embarrassing yourself on a public message board, and we won't have to be harsh with you.

Finally, I find it hilarious that your avatar is that of director Kevin Smith, one of the staunchest Obama-supporters in the USA. Goes perfect with the rest of your image.:laugh:

Well, we don't have to be rude. Yes, Klorox is wrong, but you really didn't say what was wrong, you just made him look ridiculous.

dragon wench wrote:hyperbole deserves to be met with hyperbole

So true

SupaCat wrote:Well, we don't have to be rude. Yes, Klorox is wrong, but you really didn't say what was wrong, you just made him look ridiculous.

Should we really go through how he is wrong? Is that our job? Shouldn't he be able to figure that out for himself? Like, by actually reading and learning and stuff? I'm not rude. What's rude is coming here amongst relatively informed people behaving like an obnoxious lout and chain-posting retarded hyperbole. That's rude.

Oh, and just a note Klorox, you know what he meant and aptly explained by the phrase "Spread the wealth around"?

He said something to the effect of giving money to the banks that are failing so they survive long enough to get back on their feet, and can pay the money back to the government.

It's not socialism, Obama is talking about Stocks, something I use on a daily basis and nearly every American who hasn't succumbed to the idiocy of lottery tickets.

It is funny how the word socialist is being thrown towards Obama when McCain have expressed the exact same sentiments many times over. "Redistribution of wealth".
Guess he's a socialist and "communist" too....... or is this just a matter of what is okay for one, is not okay for another?

It is typical type of "arguments" and issues, which follows lack of actual arguments as foundation.

Actually I think people who are earning 120,000 dollars a year should pay low taxes so they can buy expensive luxaries like second homes, sports cars, european vacations, plane tickets, expensive foods and liquors. This is much more important than providing medical care or food to poor people. And so much more important than opening up jobs for people who are looking for one but lack skills.

(note the sarcasm)

I love talking points!

Klorox wrote:Well, for one I don't favor socialism. I don't like the fact that I'd have more incentive to work less than work harder, because the money I'd be working hard for would go to people who don't work for it.

Joe the Plumber brings the socialism point to light, and the response to him is to discredit the person, NOT the issues he's raised.

I don't want the government telling me I have to be charitable, and deciding for me what charities my money goes to. I'm already a charitable person.

Hey, guess what, John McCain thinks you're wrong.
McCain Town Hall: "It's not socialism."

I think McCain would protect the country from foreign attacks much better than a guy who has said he'd sit down and talk with terrorists. Terrorists who have said that the world would be a better place with Israel wiped off the map.

Hey, guess what, Henry Kissinger thinks you're wrong
YouTube - Henry Kissinger: High Level Negotiations with Iran
edit: So does Madeline Albright! You are so so so wrong lalalala
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8kG6FW- ... re=related

I don't like the idea of Obama getting into office when he hasn't been forced to answer a whole lot of questions about his past: Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright, Rashid Khalidi, ACORN, Father Flaiger

Obama was in the same room with people who he disagrees with. Shock. Horror. P.S. look up McCain's pastor if you're wondering why he thinks talking about pastors is off limits. Then look up Palin's. Did you know anything about them? If not, you know more about Obama's past than McCain's.

He and his own VP candidate can't even agree on what "middle class" means, and more and more people would be taxed as his number has dropped from $250k, to $200, to $150, and now it's $120! How low will it go?

Okay, it's actually pretty simple so pay attention: Above $250k you get a tax raise. Below $200k you get a tax cut. Between those two numbers your tax burden stays constant. The $150k number came out when Biden used it as an example in a speech. I've no idea where you got $120k from, but it doesn't matter because Obama's tax plan hasn't changed. In the unlikely scenario you care about the actual numbers, go to his website and look them up.

Joe Biden has said he'd be tested by terrorists in his first 6 months in office.

What's your point? Joe Biden can see the future? He also said they'll find his spine is made out of steel. CAN WE TRUST A MAN WHO HASN'T PROVEN HE'S NOT SECRETLY A CYBORG?

What's crazy is that the "responses" to the points I've presented above focus on how much was spent on Palin's wardrobe. [Acronyms of a swearing expression deleted by Maharlika] does that have to do with anything political?

The fact that her image of a middle-class hockey mom that's just like you and me is condescending and deceitful.

Also your guy doesn't know the differences between sunnis and shiites without Joe Lieberman whispering in his ear during a live press conference so, ha!

edit: if I'm coming off as contemptuous it's because I don't respect you as a person

SupaCat wrote:Well, we don't have to be rude. Yes, Klorox is wrong, but you really didn't say what was wrong, you just made him look ridiculous.



So true

There's a big difference between disagreeing and being wrong.


If you think I'm wrong, just wait and see. If Obama wins, and you actually have an open mind, you'll see who suffers: Americans.

Klorox,
nobody here is castigating you for disagreeing. Hell, we are a varied bunch at SYM and disagreements are hardly unusual. Not only that, it would be awfully boring if everyone always agreed.

The problem is that you are tossing out simple video links in multiple threads, and your only commentary consists of worn out GOP talking points that, at best, are an exceptionally creative interpretation of reality.
And this is insulting to the majority of us.

Klorox,

Chill, man. Some of us here are Obama or even McCain supporters and yet don't get that kind of flak you're getting.

Dragon Wench has said it correctly and I would want to reinforce this as well: It's NOT WHAT you stand for or think that's the issue here. It's the WAY YOU EXPRESS your opinion is what is in question here.

As one of the moderators of SYM, I'm attacking the BEHAVIOR and NOT THE PERSON.

Claudius wrote:Actually I think people who are earning 120,000 dollars a year should pay low taxes so they can buy expensive luxaries like second homes, sports cars, european vacations, plane tickets, expensive foods and liquors. This is much more important than providing medical care or food to poor people. And so much more important than opening up jobs for people who are looking for one but lack skills.

(note the sarcasm)

I need to do a double take on this post. For a minute I thought it was Vicsun until you had to mention that you were sarcastic. :laugh:

@Klorox, you're not wrong for Favoring McCain over Obama.

You're wrong because all of your statements about Obama are wrong. I could honestly care less if you voted for McCain and said he was the best candidate, but at least argue this with correct information.

Liking McCain's economic plan better than Obama's is one thing, but calling Obama's economic plan socialist is simply not correct or factual, and not a reason to hate Obama for it.

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.

As a definition of socialism how does this not fit the vision Obama has for the US? What I see in his tax plan is a further schism between wealthy and poor in terms of benefit derived versus effort expended. The current system already "spreads the wealth" Obama's plan simply exaggerates it even more.

Its not at all far fetched to say that Obama believes in a tax and spend approach benefiting his constituency while McCain believes in tax and spending cuts, benefiting his constituency. The problem I have is that increasing taxes ALWAYS leads to a slower economy. Its a quick fix with long term harm to the country.

---------------------------
Hey, guess what, Henry Kissinger thinks you're wrong
YouTube - Henry Kissinger: High Level Negotiations with Iran
edit: So does Madeline Albright! You are so so so wrong lalalala
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8kG6...eature=related

If you are going to link a YouTube video as proof, at least pick ones that agree with your statement. Both Kissinger and Albright agree with McCain that the President of the United States should not sit down and talk with leaders of nations that have been designated as terrorists states as a first plan of action. They agree (as do both McCain and Obama) that negotiations are always useful. However, Obama did say in a Democratic primary debate that he would personally talk with these type leaders "without preconditions". Hillary Clinton then gave a more intelligent response.
Obama has since backed off of that statementand Biden, who was also at the debate, now denies that Obama ever said such a thing. (But it is on tape)
The incident shows that Obama has no idea how to approach foreign policy (and also why he picked Biden as a running mate) and would indeed be learning on the job.