Presidential Debate Tonight - Obama vs. McCain.... DING, DING, DING

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
You know, if no one from either side is going to convince the other to change their vote so why go round and round about it?

I honestly think we're screwed in one way or another voting for either one. And both sides are to blame for the mess our nation is in today. And until people are more willing to vote more independants in, it's just going to be more :banghead
 
Yeah, funny when Palin was mentioned as VP all of the sudden experience mattered.

I better leave now, the hypocrisy in this thread is getting my blood pressure up. I think I'll go stick my head in the sand and dream about Obama.

i am boggled. you are defending Palin over Obama? you see merit in choosing her over him?
 
You know, if no one from either side is going to convince the other to change their vote so why go round and round about it?

I honestly think we're screwed in one way or another voting for either one. And both sides are to blame for the mess our nation is in today. And until people are more willing to vote more independants in, it's just going to be more :banghead

thats a cop out. if everyone took your attitude we truly would be screwed... there are good people out there fighting for change! this country has never seen this sort of mess and the clean up is not going to be easy... but we have to start somewhere! we have to take the first step in a new direction...
 
Soooo... people who take their time to carefully think about what they're saying, and pause while speaking are not smart? try again, don't think too many are gonna buy into that spin.

Do the American people really want another dunderhead like Bush who spouts off without thinking? I surely hope not.

I thought you were for Obamessiah? :confused:
 
Yeah, funny when Palin was mentioned as VP all of the sudden experience mattered.

I better leave now, the hypocrisy in this thread is getting my blood pressure up. I think I'll go stick my head in the sand and dream about Obama.


Yeah, Obama's experience was never, ever brought up since he announced his run. :rolleyes:

The Dems were stupid to not endorse Hillary, and Obama was dumb not to get her as VP. And McCain was stupid picking Palin. What were these people thinking?

I wish McCain was the same person he was when he ran against Bush. He'd have my vote. No one has my vote right now. I'll probably wait till the last minute to decide.
 
Yeah, Obama's experience was never, ever brought up since he announced his run. :rolleyes:

The Dems were stupid to not endorse Hillary, and Obama was dumb not to get her as VP. And McCain was stupid picking Palin. What were these people thinking?

I wish McCain was the same person he was when he ran against Bush. He'd have my vote. No one has my vote right now. I'll probably wait till the last minute to decide.



i wish Hilary was on Obama's ticket... not that i have any doubts with Biden, but Hilary would have definitely strengthened the bill...

i do however disagree with your view on picking Palin... it was a brilliant move to help get the uninformed and uneducated to have someone to identify with.

you should be right though! in a perfect world, you would absolutely think it was the worst move ever! a moose hunting hockey mom as the president's running mate? but the GOP know that by keeping education at the bottom of the priority list, this is what will appeal to people... i mean, even here in california... a blue state... we have a republican terminator running things...

its sad, but we get the government that we deserve.
 
Palin went against party lines. Threw out the corrupt in her own party.
Thats a change.

Has Obama gone against party lines and held them accountable? Has he condemned himself, Biden and Barney Frank for voting against the regulation of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae in 2005 that would have stopped this financial disaster?

When they were having meetings to try and fix the mess he helped make, he stayed campaigning and looking out for his career instead of being a Senator in the Senate.
In other words, he was still being a politician.
That's not a change at all.
More government, higher taxes, corporations are evil, the 'rich' are evil, spend even more money on education whether it helps or not.
Thats just leftist rhetoric, it's not new, its not change.
He's going to cut the taxes of the middle class while he causes their jobs to disintegrate by taxing the employer.
The taxes of the middle class will drop alright, because when the businesses can't afford to stay competitive and they close up, the middle class will be the poor and the poor don't pay taxes.
 
thats a cop out. if everyone took your attitude we truly would be screwed... there are good people out there fighting for change! this country has never seen this sort of mess and the clean up is not going to be easy... but we have to start somewhere! we have to take the first step in a new direction...

I typed a response over and over again.......but......forget it.

:horse
 
But you do see merit in Obama right? I think the term "simple" might be appropriate then....

if seeing merit in Obama is considered simple, then call me simple. if seeing the GOP completely make a mess of this country in the last 8 years is simple, then call me simple. if seeing the threat and potential disaster of a hockey mom and a 73 year old man become potential leaders of this nation is simple, then call me simple. if continuous concern for all of the people put in harms way by the current administration is considered simple, then call me simple... if deciding that a change in leadership and a new mindset is in question then i would say the answer is simple.

Obama.
 
thats a cop out. if everyone took your attitude we truly would be screwed... there are good people out there fighting for change! this country has never seen this sort of mess and the clean up is not going to be easy... but we have to start somewhere! we have to take the first step in a new direction...

I agree. Its gonna take a while to get out of this mess. I just don't think McCain is the guy to do it. He doesn't care about the Middle Class, health care, education, etc. He says he does but if you take the time to look at his plans they're not going to help people. He talks about tax breaks but when you look at the long term effects of his plan it actually hurts us.

I'm not gonna say Obama is perfect or that he'll fix everything. I do think he'll do more to fix whats wrong than McCain. I want someone who will do whats right for everyone, help people get health care they can afford, get an education, keep jobs here in the US, etc. Someone who will take more time to actually care about the people of this country (as much as a politician can).

As I said in the end I just don't believe the Rep Party right now nor McCain in general is the right person to do that.
 
I think chavez was actually Obama. That would explain his absence.

:dunno

(maybe El Roranous is actually Sarah Palin.)
 
i am boggled. you are defending Palin over Obama? you see merit in choosing her over him?

Obama helped contribute to the current economic crisis with his minimal voting record while serving as a senator for less than two years. I haven't heard much about Palin's record leading us to this crisis. From what I can tell, Alaska is doing fine with her serving as govenor.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/09/021622.php


Edit: show me some facts or links to prove to me otherwise
 
Obama helped contribute to the current economic crisis with his minimal voting record while serving as a senator for less than two years. I haven't heard much about Palin's record leading us to this crisis. From what I can tell, Alaska is doing fine with her serving as govenor.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/09/021622.php


Edit: show me some facts or links to prove to me otherwise

This thread is turning nasty (again) but here's some more spin - it's never as simple as a propaganda video and it's not as simple as this article -

And It All Started with Deregulation

There was a time, not too long ago, when Washington did regulate banks. The Depression triggered the creation of government bank regulations and agencies, such as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Bank System, Homeowners Loan Corporation, Fannie Mae, and the Federal Housing Administration, to protect consumers and expand homeownership. After World War II, until the late 1970s, the system work. The savings-and-loan industry was highly regulated by the federal government, with a mission to take people's deposits and then provide loans for the sole purpose of helping people buy homes to live in. Washington insured those loans through the FDIC, provided mortgage discounts through FHA and the Veterans Administration, created a secondary mortgage market to guarantee a steady flow of capital, and required S&Ls to make predictable 30-year fixed loans. The result was a steady increase in homeownership and few foreclosures.

In the 1970s, when community groups discovered that lenders and the FHA were engaged in systematic racial discrimination against minority consumers and neighborhoods -- a practice called "redlining" -- they mobilized and got Congress, led by Wisconsin Senator William Proxmire, to adopt the Community Reinvestment Act and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, which together have significantly reduced racial disparities in lending.

But by the early 1980s, the lending industry used its political clout to push back against government regulation. In 1980, Congress adopted the Depository Institutions Deregulatory and Monetary Control Act, which eliminated interest-rate caps and made sub-prime lending more feasible for lenders. The S&Ls balked at constraints on their ability to compete with conventional banks engaged in commercial lending. They got Congress -- Democrats and Republicans alike -- to change the rules, allowing S&Ls to begin a decade-long orgy of real estate speculation, mismanagement, and fraud. The poster child for this era was Charles Keating, who used his political connections and donations to turn a small Arizona S&L into a major real estate speculator, snaring five Senators (the so-called "Keating Five," including John McCain) into his web of corruption.

The deregulation of banking led to merger mania, with banks and S&Ls gobbling each other up and making loans to finance shopping malls, golf courses, office buildings, and condo projects that had no financial logic other than a quick-buck profit. When the dust settled in the late 1980s, hundreds of S&Ls and banks had gone under, billions of dollars of commercial loans were useless, and the federal government was left to bail out the depositors whose money the speculators had put at risk.

The stable neighborhood S&L soon became a thing of the past. Banks, insurance companies, credit card firms and other money-lenders were now part of a giant "financial services" industry, while Washington walked away from its responsibility to protect consumers with rules, regulations, and enforcement. Meanwhile, starting with Reagan, the federal government slashed funding for low-income housing, and allowed the FHA, once a key player helping working-class families purchase a home, to drift into irrelevancy.

Into this vacuum stepped banks, mortgage lenders, and scam artists, looking for ways to make big profits from consumers desperate for the American Dream of homeownership. They invented new "loan products" that put borrowers at risk. Thus was born the sub-prime market.

At the heart of the crisis are the conservative free market ideologists whose views increasingly influenced American politics since the 1980s, and who still dominate the Bush administration. They believe that government is always the problem, never the solution, and that regulation of private business is always bad. Lenders and brokers who fell outside of federal regulations made most of the sub-prime and predatory loans.

In 2000, Edward M. Gramlich, a Federal Reserve Board member, repeatedly warned about sub-prime mortgages and predatory lending, which he said "jeopardize the twin American dreams of owning a home and building wealth." He tried to get chairman Alan Greenspan to crack down on irrational sub-prime lending by increasing oversight, but his warnings fell on deaf ears, including those in Congress.

As Rep. Barney Frank wrote recently in The Boston Globe, the surge of sub-prime lending was a sort of "natural experiment" testing the theories of those who favor radical deregulation of financial markets. And the lessons, Frank said, are clear: "To the extent that the system did work, it is because of prudential regulation and oversight. Where it was absent, the result was tragedy."

https://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_conservative_origins_of_the_subprime_mortgage_crisis
 
Yeah, funny when Palin was mentioned as VP all of the sudden experience mattered.

I better leave now, the hypocrisy in this thread is getting my blood pressure up. I think I'll go stick my head in the sand and dream about Obama.




thought you were leaving. :lol
 
What does this have to do with anything??? :confused:



you brought up change... if i have to explain to you all of the "change " happening under your nose while you, in your own words, have your "head in the sand". then i am fighting a pointless battle.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top