Barack Obama 2008?

i am not sure i agree with the country not being ready for a (half) black or woman president. i just don't know if either of those candidates is the right one to fill the role. *shaggz musing* would we say that if Colin Powell were running *muse off*

didn't you mean to say "ready for a (half) black or (half) woman president"

sadly, the best and brightest like Powell tend not to run. Condi might but clearly not in 08.

it frightens me to think that I've come full circle to this, after being a political junkie for years, and believing deeply in the 2 party system: we need a real viable third party. again, i am frightened to think this and good Lord, say it out loud but I think its time.

here's my reasoning:

the democrats tend to run left and govern right. they have specific monkeys on the their backs (labor and teachers unions, greens, abortion advocates, etc.) and they are a prisoner of that reality. and geez, they just cannot get enough of my money. this is where I leave them in the rear view mirror.

that said, I respect Obama. I think he has some growing to do but he strikes me as honorable, respectable and smart. the rest can pound salt esp. Hillary and that ambulance chasing gazillionaire Edwards. (i don't mind rich people, but I object to the way Edwards shook down the OB/GYN industry in NC to get his money).

in a way the GOP, is the flip side. they run right govern middle. the GOP, which I can agree with on many levels is full of flawed candidates and politicians no better than the jackasses in the Democratic party, and many of their polices are no longer "conservative" in the Goldwater/Reagan sense (hell JFK was more conservative than most of these guys). I do respect Guiliani and McCain and a few others but most have a monkey on their back that imo is a serious flaw: the bible governs their actions to too high a degree. I think religion is great force for many people and I think it helps people govern their lives in a positive way. but there are times when it gets in the way of common sense, and its often worn on sleeves to push agendas. for example, the fixation on abortion, the fixation on gays (by some in this party), etc. is a useless distraction. the GOP also left the Reagan reservation

i'd like to propose the "common sense party" based on some of the following:

- we have enemies, let's have the best military on the planet. we do now, I am only saying let's keep it that way. in addition, let's be smart about where we deploy it. I won't get into the Iraq debate because we are there and I want that one in the win column, but we need to be damn careful about throwing good men and women into harms way in the future. there are lessons to be learned, i hope we learn them, but b/c there are 2 aisles, everyone is blaming each other and ignoring the point: we could have done better.

- we're addicted to oil, lets have a Manhattan project, Apollo moon mission style effort to make cars run on stuff that is renewable and created here, not in the sands of Arabia. its possible. theres some dude in TN that converted Schwarzenegger's hummer to get 200mpg (Popular Science or Popular Mechanics late last year had an article). He pulls out the motor, puts in a turbo diesel, bolts on flex fuel adaptations and boom, he does what Detroit *refuses* yes *refuses* to do. this is treasonous and bad policy for our country.

- we don't need the massive government we have, and the taxation is already oppressive. yet, we spend more than we take in. the fiscal conservatives in the GOP sadly were in power too long and got drunk on spending. they deserved to be thrown out. and bush vetoed none of it. both parties suck and are the same in this respect: they're addicted to pork. i take no pleasure in saying it either.

- consumerism out of balance. we're fat and addicted to Chinese Tchotckes. I was on a train in Dallas the other day and there was poster on the train advertising a nearby shopping mall: a thin fashionable hottie with words "Shop Eat, Repeat". Appalling... we consider "shopping and eating" a sport in this country. the the can we stop buying Walmart/Target crap? your dollars end up in the treasure of the PRC and the Chinese Navy is reaping the benefits of your patriotic purchases. Buy American products, or products from Asia that are not likely to be in a shooting war with the USA in a decade or two. I would level the playing field with China. I would instill a sense of shame for lazy fatsos that spend their time at the KFC then "work it off" in the wal-mart (and then I would be promptly run out of town, I know).

- I don't care if Gore is right or not, I think he's a hypocrite, but regardless, we need to continue researching whether or not climate change is human caused or cyclical. the press leans human but its no slam dunk. i do believe we are getting warmer, no doubt imo so is it really bad policy to take steps be more green, just in case? without killing american business? of course not, there are on balance huge benefits for being greener. cleaner air, water is worth certain sacrifices. let's get out of cars and on bikes. china is following our lead and leaving the bikes for cars. industry china (and india) ruining asia's environment, but that' not an excuse to ruin ours. we're smarter than that now. their growth is going to shocking in our lifetime and this ties back in to my point about clean renewable fuel that is not finite and from the middle east. if we don't do something, you can bet the farm we're going to have confrontation with China over oil one day.

- we have to get control of the trial lawyers. nuff said

- i forgot my last point. :rofl: maybe i'll come back to it.

in a way the libertarians are somewhat interesting because on the surface they talk about some things that ring ful-on "good common sense" then they have their own ideological goofy ideas that go to far bc they suffer from black and white thinking. so although, they're an interesting choice but by now means a panacea. ron paul has some good ideas but i think he's short sighted on foreign policy. he also does not act presidential, and he seems nervous.

i could ramble on but hell, that's enough of a blathering brain dump for today. yymmv, and I reserve the right to change my mind tomorrow ;)
 
Last edited:
Dawn: I was half-correct about Jeff :D

Jeff: That was one of the best posts on this board in a LONG time. is MTBNJ ready for it's own f=88?
 
Dawn: I was half-correct about Jeff :D

Jeff: That was one of the best posts on this board in a LONG time. is MTBNJ ready for it's own f=88?

geez... I wasted a lot of time in that bloody shark tank :D i do miss the duels tho. sometimes.
 
If I told you that a headline this week would read "Hillary RIP" would you have guessed that:

A. Clinton got toasted in NH
B. Sir Edmund Hillary died

?
 
It's a known fact that Hillary says she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary....Only problem.....He climbed Everest AFTER she was born. Funny stuff.:)
 
It's a known fact that Hillary says she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary....Only problem.....He climbed Everest AFTER she was born. Funny stuff.:)

It's a known fact? Please provide proof.

Disagree with her politics, but Hillary is smarter than everyone on this board put together, and it's highly doubtful she would ever say such a thing.
 
in a way the libertarians are somewhat interesting because on the surface they talk about some things that ring ful-on "good common sense" then they have their own ideological goofy ideas that go to far bc they suffer from black and white thinking. so although, they're an interesting choice but by now means a panacea. ron paul has some good ideas but i think he's short sighted on foreign policy. he also does not act presidential, and he seems nervous.

i could ramble on but hell, that's enough of a blathering brain dump for today. yymmv, and I reserve the right to change my mind tomorrow ;)

I've been a registered Liberatarian for two years and momentum within the party is growing.

I echo many of your sentiments, mergs. Paul won't make it to the top, I am not deluded into thinking he can stand up to the developing juggernaut that is the McCain campaign, and he is running as a Republican anyway, not a Libertarian, so it would still be a choice between two parties in the end.

If Obama offers anything, it is a voice that is soothing to the ears, wholly unlike Hillary's Mars-from-Space ACK-ACK grate that filters from my radio far too often.
 
I find this interesting:
http://nynerd.com/paypal-blocks-nh-recount/

Also the Clintons trying to rescind the Strip voting thing or whatever because it doesn't help them is interesting:
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jan/12/voting-stripa-no-no-suit-says/

Nothing says "politics as usual" like scumbag politics like this. As the first link says, it's getting demoralizing being in this country sometimes.

When people say that you don't have a right to complain if you don't vote, I ask this question. Are the politics in this country totally hell-bent broken because of corruption?

The more I start to follow this election the more I want to just go find a happy place and forget these people exist.
 
The more I start to follow this election the more I want to just go find a happy place and forget these people exist.


Well said. There are no viable candidates. Then again, I'm so conservative I make Rush Limbaugh look like a liberal. Government sucks.
 
take a look at Hillary's Energy proposal.

Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050 to avoid the worst effects of global warming, and cut foreign oil imports by two-thirds from 2030 projected levels, more than 10 million barrels per day.

Recognizing that transportation accounts for 70 percent of U.S. oil consumption, Hillary would increase fuel efficiency standards to 55 miles per gallon by 2030


An aggressive comprehensive energy efficiency agenda to reduce electricity consumption 20 percent from projected levels by 2020 by changing the way utilities do business, catalyzing a green building industry, enacting strict appliance efficiency standards, and phasing out incandescent light bulbs;

A $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund, paid for in part by oil companies, to fund investments in alternative energy. The SEF will finance one-third of the $150 billon ten-year investment in a new energy future contained in this plan;

Doubling of federal investment in basic energy research (National Labs)

Aggressive action to transition our economy toward renewable energy sources, with renewables generating 25 percent of electricity by 2025 and with 60 billion gallons of home-grown biofuels available for cars and trucks by 2030;

A requirement that all federal buildings designed after January 20, 2009 will be zero emissions buildings.
 
Wazu - word, the GUV sucks. Well not Mel Brooks but the rest of them.

Nimrod - I assume you're pointing out or objecting to the research investment? FWIW, government investment in research is pretty much at an all time low in most, if not all, sectors. Most funding comes from the private sector especially as it concerns pharmaceuticals. The best way to fund research has basically become for the various corporations to see a financial gain to it.

IOW, man never gets to the moon if not for government funding. Now you can question WTF going to the moon has to do with anything, and I have no answer for that. I'm just saying is all.

Lots of unattainable pie-in-the-sky stuff otherwise. But I assume all the candidates are blowing that sort of steam right now. Home-gorwn biofuels is a red herring right now. It still takes more energy to plant/harvest than it creates in available fuel.
 
Back
Top Bottom