I have frequent rotations at the VA in Indianapolis and I have to say that both the surgeons and the Internists are top notch (likely bc our VA is affiliated with the nearby IU school of medicine) and rival that of our private hospital. In fact, I would like to be cared for at the VA before said private hospital. So just bc it is the VA doesnt mean that the Vets dont get excellent care. In Indianapolis, they do!
Obama v. McCain
- Thread starter Crash cart
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2002
- Messages
- 5,332
- Reaction score
- 138
1) the concept that being a democrat and being loved by the rest of the world makes us safe is hog-wash... under Clinton (who was loved by the rest of the world), we had 2 attacks on our embassies with much loss of life, we had the attack on the USS Cole, and we had the planning/preparation/financing to go ahead with 9/11... Jimmy Carter was a democratic president and beloved around the world, but Iran went ahead and held our embassy staff hostage for 440 days... JFK was a democrat and was beloved around the world, and yet we had the Vietnam war AND the Missile crisis which LITERALLY brought us to the brink of a nuclear war --- so don't give me this crap about democrats making us all happy and peaceful...
2) the issue about Palin promoting abstinence has little to do with her daughter... girls get pregnant while on the pill and girls get pregnant when condoms are used....
3) I have lived in a socialist state with socialized medicine... that is what Obama wants.... well, the ONLY way to have socialized medicine is to significantly increase taxes... if you think that the government can spend our money more wisely in terms of healthcare then fine - the answer is that typically our government spends, but not necessarily wisely.
The people who benefit from socialized medicine are the low-income families and the bureaucrats who populate that system... The only doctors who were financially successful were those senior-level academics with a reputation who could create cash-only practices geared towards the upper-income families who don't want to wait 12 weeks for a lap chole....
4) Obama = Socialist.... McCain = Free Market... your pick... the only way a market can survive and be productive is to be free market.... Show me ONE socialist state that has a booming economy without using free market principles... there isn't one...
5) Obama = guaranteed MUCHO MUCHO MORE taxes to be paid by you and me to further propagate the welfare state vs McCain = guaranteed a few more taxes, but NOWHERE near as bad as Obama...
and who whoever quotes Howard Finemann from MSNBC must know that he is a Keith Olberman fanatic, and therefore must understand his liberal bias.
Experience is important... Obama hasn't done anything other than write 2 memoirs, vote PRESENT instead of actually voting yes/no, run an AMAZING campagin and give electrifying speeches... so it is kind of funny when we see Democrats bash Palin who isn't even heading the ticket, but at least she has made executive decisions, at least she has enforced reform...
and now the democrats are bashing Palin regarding "troopergate" - she supposedly was pushing hard for a trooper to get fired. That trooper was the ex-husband of her sister... That same trooper used a Taser on his 10 year old step-son. Shouldn't that be a good enough reason to fire that trooper?
2) the issue about Palin promoting abstinence has little to do with her daughter... girls get pregnant while on the pill and girls get pregnant when condoms are used....
3) I have lived in a socialist state with socialized medicine... that is what Obama wants.... well, the ONLY way to have socialized medicine is to significantly increase taxes... if you think that the government can spend our money more wisely in terms of healthcare then fine - the answer is that typically our government spends, but not necessarily wisely.
The people who benefit from socialized medicine are the low-income families and the bureaucrats who populate that system... The only doctors who were financially successful were those senior-level academics with a reputation who could create cash-only practices geared towards the upper-income families who don't want to wait 12 weeks for a lap chole....
4) Obama = Socialist.... McCain = Free Market... your pick... the only way a market can survive and be productive is to be free market.... Show me ONE socialist state that has a booming economy without using free market principles... there isn't one...
5) Obama = guaranteed MUCHO MUCHO MORE taxes to be paid by you and me to further propagate the welfare state vs McCain = guaranteed a few more taxes, but NOWHERE near as bad as Obama...
and who whoever quotes Howard Finemann from MSNBC must know that he is a Keith Olberman fanatic, and therefore must understand his liberal bias.
Experience is important... Obama hasn't done anything other than write 2 memoirs, vote PRESENT instead of actually voting yes/no, run an AMAZING campagin and give electrifying speeches... so it is kind of funny when we see Democrats bash Palin who isn't even heading the ticket, but at least she has made executive decisions, at least she has enforced reform...
and now the democrats are bashing Palin regarding "troopergate" - she supposedly was pushing hard for a trooper to get fired. That trooper was the ex-husband of her sister... That same trooper used a Taser on his 10 year old step-son. Shouldn't that be a good enough reason to fire that trooper?
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 15,445
- Reaction score
- 21,789
She's pro-life, anti-contraception, anti-sex-ed, anti-gun control, pro creationism in schools. Those who agree with her and feel those issues are important were always going to vote Republican anyway. She's from Alaska, a state that was guaranteed to go Republican even before she was named. She doesn't help McCain win any swing states. Her nomination has hamstrung McCain's strongest criticism of Obama - that he's too inexperienced to lead. Now a 72-year-old 4-time cancer patient is saying that she's experienced enough to be one bullet or coronary away from being president?
Granted, it's still a couple days early, but McCain's had NO bump in the polls from the RNC. Nothing but distractions: an anti-sex-ed and anti-contraception VP candidate's teenage daughter is pregnant out of wedlock; the claim that her inexperience is totally different from Obama's inexperience; the ethics scandal that just won't go away; on and on and on.
Look at ANY of the major pollster electoral maps, and you'll see Obama has a very large lead in electoral votes. Here's one. Compared to 2004, the democratic party has picked up five states (Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio); the republican party has picked up none. States that weren't even contested last time are close this time.
Swing states decide elections. Obama has made tremendous gains in those states. McCain hasn't. Palin doesn't help - it doesn't matter that she is being received favorably by voters in red states who were going to vote for McCain anyway.
Voters are gullible and will fall for substanceless sound-bite ads. Obama will air more of them because he has a lot more money to spend on advertising than McCain.
I'll restate my prediction that Obama wins by a lot of electoral votes ... and yes, I know that my prediction and $5 will get you a very small coffee at Starbucks.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 15,445
- Reaction score
- 21,789
And it doesn't help McCain that his own campaign advisors are getting caught admitting "it's over" when they thought their microphones were off.
They all know Palin was a terrible, terrible choice and they're doing their absolute best to spin the whole thing:
(Wasila is actually the 5th largest city and has a population of 9000 people.)
And when Virgina governor Tim Kaine was a potential running mate for Obama ...
(Richmond may be the 105th largest city in America, but it has 200,000 people living in it.)
The Republican Party won't make you give your card back if you admit that McCain has managed his campaign very, very poorly and that Palin is just the latest poor decision.
More: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=sarah-palin-gender-card. It's funny. Laugh.
They all know Palin was a terrible, terrible choice and they're doing their absolute best to spin the whole thing:
Karl Rove on Palin said:
(Wasila is actually the 5th largest city and has a population of 9000 people.)
And when Virgina governor Tim Kaine was a potential running mate for Obama ...
Karl Rove on Kaine said:
(Richmond may be the 105th largest city in America, but it has 200,000 people living in it.)
The Republican Party won't make you give your card back if you admit that McCain has managed his campaign very, very poorly and that Palin is just the latest poor decision.
More: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=sarah-palin-gender-card. It's funny. Laugh.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2004
- Messages
- 153
- Reaction score
- 0
Thank you! One of the 2 VA hospitals I've worked at was the Indianapolis VA. There is no doubt that that one is one of the model VA hospitals, but overall the quality of VA healthcare improved enormously in the 90's and is generally very good.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2007
- Messages
- 76
- Reaction score
- 0
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/359/8/781
Read this. Seriously, neither of these candidates are going to end up doing crap for healthcare. So why would I vote to have over half my paycheck taken away to fund these people's unrealistic plans?
Read this. Seriously, neither of these candidates are going to end up doing crap for healthcare. So why would I vote to have over half my paycheck taken away to fund these people's unrealistic plans?
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2001
- Messages
- 1,039
- Reaction score
- 95
Southpaw,
I would never, ever call him anything but a HERO for his highly honorable service (even if he was Navy. . .J/K).
My mind is already made up, BTW.
Actually, never had a doubt.
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2001
- Messages
- 1,039
- Reaction score
- 95
Really? Social Security? You serious? You must've never worked a day in your life. If you have, you'd be pretty pissed about paying a large amount of money into a system in which you likely will never receive a dime when it comes your time to withdraw.
S hit yeah! High five!!!
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,049
- Reaction score
- 6,409
Southpaw,
I would never, ever call him anything but a HERO for his highly honorable service (even if he was Navy. . .J/K).
My mind is already made up, BTW.
Yeah I didn't mean to direct that at you...sorry about that. I believe Arch made the comment so it should have been directed towards him.
Arch Guillotti
Senior Member
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2001
- Messages
- 9,575
- Reaction score
- 6,478
That's fine to direct it at me, it doesn't change my opinion of him. Quite frankly I am sick of hearing him hype up his time as a POW.
Arch Guillotti
Senior Member
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2001
- Messages
- 9,575
- Reaction score
- 6,478
Arch Guillotti
Senior Member
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2001
- Messages
- 9,575
- Reaction score
- 6,478
LOL, good one. I would suggest that you do the same. Best wishes.
Arch Guillotti
Senior Member
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2001
- Messages
- 9,575
- Reaction score
- 6,478
Actually the libertarians have a moderate amount of appeal to me. Ron Paul seems kinds strange though what with the skeletons in his closet (I know, just like everyone else) and the whole big deal he makes about the gold standard.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,084
- Reaction score
- 19
AND, everyone seems to forget that the WORLD TRADE CENTER was bombed during the Clinton administration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing
Just a friendly reminder.
-copro
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,084
- Reaction score
- 19
There's a lot of jumbled, emotive thought (indicative of "wooly" thinking) going on there. Let's break it down...
"She's pro-life, anti-contraception, anti-sex-ed, anti-gun control, pro creationism in schools."
First off, the only ones there that are on the record are the pro-life and anti-gun control issues. To that I say: So what? These are and have repeatedly been proven to be election "distractors". Nothing will change on these issues, no matter how much smoke is generated. There is no fire.
The rest of these having no direct bearing on your life, do they? Likewise, she doesn't (and won't) set the tone for these policies as vice president. President Bush feels the very same way. I don't see creationism being taught as science in schools or abortion being outlawed anywhere. Next.
"Those who agree with her and feel those issues are important were always going to vote Republican anyway."
So, she has a broad appeal to a core constituency. Big deal. I call that a smart move. There are also many of us, including those who've voted Democrat in the past, who are also likely to vote for the McCain ticket this time around.
"She's from Alaska, a state that was guaranteed to go Republican even before she was named. She doesn't help McCain win any swing states."
I'll deal with this issue where you bring it up below.
"Her nomination has hamstrung McCain's strongest criticism of Obama - that he's too inexperienced to lead. Now a 72-year-old 4-time cancer patient is saying that she's experienced enough to be one bullet or coronary away from being president?"
Just like Dick Cheney, a veritable cardiac cripple, did to GWB... twice? Come on.
You seem to completely overestimate the average American's attention span. You should have stopped at "Granted, it's still a couple of days early..." Actually, it's a couple of months early.
Ibid.
Okay. Here we go.
How did the Dems lose 2000 and then again in 2004? Florida and Ohio. The rest of the country is pretty evenly divided. You have a powerful, dynamic, young speaker who blew the doors off last night during her speech. There is going to be a lot of interest in her as a tough, non-nonsense working woman that, I believe, is going to appeal to a lot more "undecided" voting women out there than you currently believe. If anyone blew it, it was Obama for not picking Hillary as his running mate.
My prediction: Democrats won't even win Biden's measly 3 electoral votes in Delaware.
That's not what's currently happening now. I watch the TV too, you know. Fact is that the McCain campaign, in just the first day, got a $7 million dollar bump after announcement Palin's nomination.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/30/mccain_gets_7_million_bounce_f.html
Note that the Obama campaign refused to disclose how much they got from announcing Biden. Draw your own conclusions.
I'll take that bet. I think it's going to be a very tight race. And, I just don't think the Dems will have the horsepower to win the battleground states. I think you're going to see the 2004 election all over again, personally. And, FWIW, Biden, on "The Today Show" this morning, looked completely unprepared to offer a retort to Matt Lauer when asked about what he's going to debate her on. Strong showing.
-copro
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2003
- Messages
- 1,068
- Reaction score
- 189
the only problem is that the spending estimates have ballooned from the expected $472 million to $869 million for next year because they underestimated the number of people who would accept the government insurance. that's almost double! and that's in massachusetts... imagine what those figures would look like in texas or california.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,923
- Reaction score
- 6
Uh, I think the WTC came all the way down during the Bush administration, so what's your point?
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,923
- Reaction score
- 361
I'm watching the RNC right now... McCain is trying to paint himself as a real republican and saying how the GOP was suppose to change washington DC but it let DC change the party. He wants to go back to the roots, republican ideals of free market, reduced government impingement, reduce government spending yada yada. It sounds good and all, but I think he really is going to have a hard time swaying ppl from thinking he is Bush Jr. That is just the truth. I predict Obama wins easily.
1
177983
Has anyone carefully examined McCain's healthcare plan? I personally think it will only worsen the uninsurance problem. If businesses are taxed for providing health insurance for their workers, I think large numbers of businesses will just drop it and tell their employees to get the $2500 tax credit. Once that happens with too many businesses, little money will come in while most goes out.
Plus, that hardly solves the situation for people with bigger pre-conditions. People who've had cancer or have chronic conditions are being asked for $1,000/month for health insurance. How's $2,500 going to make a difference for those people?
Furthermore, John McCain is pushing the HSAs that were introduced by GW. Haven't those been shown to favor younger, generally healthy people in the first place? People who are less healthy and have higher medical costs end up paying more with HSAs.
I just don't know. I mean, there's relatively little separating the candidates in my mind, but I just don't see how McCain's healthcare ideas will actually work in the real world.
Plus, that hardly solves the situation for people with bigger pre-conditions. People who've had cancer or have chronic conditions are being asked for $1,000/month for health insurance. How's $2,500 going to make a difference for those people?
Furthermore, John McCain is pushing the HSAs that were introduced by GW. Haven't those been shown to favor younger, generally healthy people in the first place? People who are less healthy and have higher medical costs end up paying more with HSAs.
I just don't know. I mean, there's relatively little separating the candidates in my mind, but I just don't see how McCain's healthcare ideas will actually work in the real world.
Last edited by a moderator:
1
177983
Honestly, other than strong rhetoric, what other differences do that candidates have?
1) Immigration = the same.
2) Taxes = admittedly different, but with that being so dependent on Congress neither can really say what they'll *do*, just what they would like.
3) Climate change/environment/energy policy = surprising similar.
4) Iraq will probably play out similarly for both, regardless of talk. Slow repeal of troops with a small long-term presence in Iraq. The Iraqis want that as much as any American.
5) Education = similar. Fight for the children, loan reform, costs too high, yadda yadda.
In my opinion, either candidate will enact fairly similar policies, all considerably more rational and well thought out than GW. Plus, from what I've read, it's not even an issue that Democrats will control Congress even more strongly after November. There are like 7 or 8 Republicans retiring and Democrats are highly favored in most of those races. Just my 2 cents.
1) Immigration = the same.
2) Taxes = admittedly different, but with that being so dependent on Congress neither can really say what they'll *do*, just what they would like.
3) Climate change/environment/energy policy = surprising similar.
4) Iraq will probably play out similarly for both, regardless of talk. Slow repeal of troops with a small long-term presence in Iraq. The Iraqis want that as much as any American.
5) Education = similar. Fight for the children, loan reform, costs too high, yadda yadda.
In my opinion, either candidate will enact fairly similar policies, all considerably more rational and well thought out than GW. Plus, from what I've read, it's not even an issue that Democrats will control Congress even more strongly after November. There are like 7 or 8 Republicans retiring and Democrats are highly favored in most of those races. Just my 2 cents.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2003
- Messages
- 2,187
- Reaction score
- 1,225
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2005
- Messages
- 929
- Reaction score
- 12
The point is that the escalation of acts began throughout the Clinton administration eventually leading up to the planning and logistics of 9/11. All of which could have been prevented by decisive action much earlier on.
Our calculations were not very accurate this time. However we promise you that next time it will be very precise and the Trade Center will be one of our targets. Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman of Egypt (the blind Sheik) February 26, 1993
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,049
- Reaction score
- 6,409
Again, McCain is only the Republican nominee because Bush has screwed things up SO bad. Prior to this election, and basically up until this year when the Pubs realized how bad off they were, he was shunned by the Republican party because he wouldn't fall into party line. Your statement shows how little you know about politics over the past decade. It's cool if you don't like McCain, want to vote for Obama and hand your hard earned money over to a government that YOU believe to be smarter than you, but please be factual with your statements.
1
177983
Everyone else catch the speech? I thought it was okay, but not overly inspiring. Liked the message, but McCain just seems unhappy giving speeches. I actually felt bad for the guy in the beginning with all those interruptions by protesters with the crowd responding by chanting "USA! USA! USA!" Seemed to throw the poor guy off his mark a bit.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,923
- Reaction score
- 6
Maybe, maybe not. I think only an idiot would blame either Bush or Clinton for 9/11. The president isn't god.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,084
- Reaction score
- 19
Are you serious? Think about what you just said for a moment.
The point was that, as some in the Democratic party are asserting (as they did in 2004), having a Dem in the White House will increase our credibility in the world and work to build bridges and somehow "restore" our world image.
What world image?
It's this mamby-pamby, touchy-feely stuff that people think makes a difference. Everyone else in the world has a love/hate relationship with us. And, so long as we're perceived as the world power, no single representative in the White House is going to change that perception. If anything, we're only going to be seen more as meddlers when we reach out and try to offer an olive branch... unless we're willing to give up something in return. And, I can assure you, no single person sitting in the Oval Office has that much will or power to actually meet the demands of what the rest of the world really wants in order to "restore" our image.
And, that was Tenesma's point.
-copro
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2002
- Messages
- 2,537
- Reaction score
- 825
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2004
- Messages
- 2,923
- Reaction score
- 6
I think that not being a rogue nation will help our standing in the world. You know, not invading other nations without any legal justification, things like that. Will that prevent lunatics like Osama bin Laden from attacking us? No. But it can't hurt.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,923
- Reaction score
- 361
What is wrong with my statement? It is true, Americans are tired of the GOP as they are right now. He needs to distance himself from the GOP to have a shot. Most people see McCain and think Republican despite being shunned by the Repubs. Don't tell me how little I know about politics brother, because I already know about McCain. I'm just stating the fact that he has an uphill battle just based off the fact he is republican. Is that wrong of me? I am basing an opinion. Sorry for not being all factualicious and all.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,923
- Reaction score
- 361
lol. It was ONCE. Remember, he cheated the first time.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 15,445
- Reaction score
- 21,789
Either the VP is relevant or not. The VP is one bullet away from being president and their opinions and beliefs matter. If you're going to claim that she's an asset to McCain, someone who is going to really complement McCain, you can't also pretend that what she says and thinks don't matter to a lot of voters.
The problem is that the core constituency was never going to vote for Obama in the first place. She's preaching to the choir.
Look, I'm not an Obama devotee, I don't think he's going to save us all from whatever it is we need to be saved from. I do think he's going to win, though.
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2004
- Messages
- 1,577
- Reaction score
- 6
??? They do that already. Even most private insurance companies set their reimbursement rates according to medicare. Soo..
Also, just because you work in a country with universal health care.. it doesn't mean you have to be a gov employee. There are heaps of doctors in Canada, the UK, etc that own and work in their own private practices and set their own rates.
I am still waiting however, to hear about the new socialised "medical education" system they will be bringing into effect soon. You know.. just like in the UK where medical students don't pay more than 2-3k USD/year for tuition. Oh.. and they get paid more as residents... oh and they don't have to pay jack all for malpractice insurance. I think we should get form a "resident doctors union of america" and demand these along with our new universal health care provision system. anybody with me?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,084
- Reaction score
- 19
Ummm... what?!??!??
Are you serious, pseudoknot? Do you really believe the country you live in is a "rogue nation"? Are you a U.S.A. hater?
If that's the case, I suggest you move somewhere else. In the meantime, try listening a little less to what the pundits are saying and instead to what the candidates are actually saying.
-copro
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,084
- Reaction score
- 19
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,049
- Reaction score
- 6,409
So yeah, universal health care is inevitable. Like you said though, I think we need to have an infrastructure in place first. Our government must first subsidize our education BEFORE it cuts our payment and increases our taxation. A lot of Obamans around here don't seem to care one single ion about that.
I was talking with a dude from the UK when I took CS. He said the system over there is pretty bad. Granted, that's n=1, but still, taxation of around 40-50% to support a universalized health care. No incentive to work hard. Making less. So yeah, basically like most government employees we see now. So of course, like a ton of other IMGs, he wants to cash in here before we self-implode.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,049
- Reaction score
- 6,409
McCain has lived a life so dissimilar than GWB that even mentioning the two in the same sentence, MUCH LESS comparing the two, is an insult to McCain. He's everything but Bush Jr., and regardless of his and your politics, you should realize and respect this.
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2002
- Messages
- 715
- Reaction score
- 2
For disclosure purposes, you should wear a sign saying:
I Know Nothing About The Relationship Between McCain and Religious Conservatives.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
- Messages
- 4,157
- Reaction score
- 1,990
Uh, the Libertarian candidate is Bob Barr, not Ron Paul. Typical Democrat - short on facts.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
- Messages
- 4,157
- Reaction score
- 1,990
Pro-life - great. There are certainly worse things to be.
Anti-contraception? She's conservative, not Catholic.
Anti-gun control - love it! That means she supports the Constitution - ever actually heard of it or read it?
She still has more experience than BHO who has none.
And McCain may be 72, but he's got some pretty good genes - his 96 year old mother is sharp as a tack and looks a whole lot younger than she is.
You'll never be happy with McCain or Palin of course. But how anyone with a brain thinks Obama and Biden, a racist and a plagiarist, are a better choice to lead America, is just absolutely amazing to me.
Arch Guillotti
Senior Member
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2001
- Messages
- 9,575
- Reaction score
- 6,478
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,923
- Reaction score
- 361
I really gave him a chance and watched a good amount of the RNC last night.
Could McCain's speech have been anymore brain-disintegratingly boring and terrifying at the same time? "Keep fighting" 'We'll do the right thing', "Lets fight", "Country first", "I've always been a fighter" "Yay for America" 'We're a nation of fighters" "It's all about fighting" "Don't stop fighting"
Sounded to me like the underlying theme was: America has no problems, lets revel in it's greatness, anybody who doesn't is not a true American. It was more like a rally than a convention. I was waiting for the sycophants to stop their cheering and break into a full sieg heil. If McCain gets in then there is going to be some really scary times ahead.
That is my opinion. At least I watched the RNC, unlike how many McCain supporters just tuned out the DNC.
Could McCain's speech have been anymore brain-disintegratingly boring and terrifying at the same time? "Keep fighting" 'We'll do the right thing', "Lets fight", "Country first", "I've always been a fighter" "Yay for America" 'We're a nation of fighters" "It's all about fighting" "Don't stop fighting"
Sounded to me like the underlying theme was: America has no problems, lets revel in it's greatness, anybody who doesn't is not a true American. It was more like a rally than a convention. I was waiting for the sycophants to stop their cheering and break into a full sieg heil. If McCain gets in then there is going to be some really scary times ahead.
That is my opinion. At least I watched the RNC, unlike how many McCain supporters just tuned out the DNC.
Arch Guillotti
Senior Member
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2001
- Messages
- 9,575
- Reaction score
- 6,478
I was disgusted by the video of 9/11 that used this horrific event as a political manuever for McCain.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2004
- Messages
- 153
- Reaction score
- 0
Until the Republicans and their supporters finally acknowledge their guilt in the travesties of the last 8 yrs, I cannot vote for them.
The Republicans are running against the Washington "elites", wasteful government spending, terrorism, and ineffective governement. All things that THEY are responsible primarily for! They broke Washington. They caused spending to increase greater than Clinton could have imagined, while DECREASING government revenue to do it. Who do you think is going to pay for it??? I though Republicans were good at business? Shouldn't they be the ones telling us this massive debt with high interest should be a problem? They did just about everything in their power to strengthen Al Qaida. They couldn't find Bin Laden. They tortured mostly innocent or low-tier combatants doing little but getting bad information and ruining any idea the the USA is a special nation. They ignored all the preparations and warnings from the Clinton adminstration with regards to an impending attack that became 9/11. They are mostly wealthy, white people who control everything (sound like "elites" to me). They voted and supported Bush TWICE!!! How can anyone think that the same idiots who did all of this finally saw the light and will all the sudden be smart, efficient legislators providing the most cost-effective government since... Clinton. Oh yeah, and McCain ultimately supports most of it!
Again, if the dollar is worth dirt and our economy is in the toilet, why do a few extra bucks in our pockets mean anything? McCain's health plan will not do anything for the uninsured (oh, but you'll still have to treat them, of course) and will likely increase the amount of government coverage of those currently covered by employers. Obama's won't cover everyone, but has the potential of covering most people and you will get paid for for taking care of them! Obama will raise your taxes, but if McCain doesn't, our country will contine to slide towards insolvency.
Oh yeah, NOBODY has mentioned making doctors employees of the government. I don't know why this keeps coming up. There are only a few truly socialized systems in the world (Great Britain is one) where the government owns the hospitals and employs the physicians. This is not in the plan of anybody advocating for universal coverage in the US. It's just not.
The Republicans are running against the Washington "elites", wasteful government spending, terrorism, and ineffective governement. All things that THEY are responsible primarily for! They broke Washington. They caused spending to increase greater than Clinton could have imagined, while DECREASING government revenue to do it. Who do you think is going to pay for it??? I though Republicans were good at business? Shouldn't they be the ones telling us this massive debt with high interest should be a problem? They did just about everything in their power to strengthen Al Qaida. They couldn't find Bin Laden. They tortured mostly innocent or low-tier combatants doing little but getting bad information and ruining any idea the the USA is a special nation. They ignored all the preparations and warnings from the Clinton adminstration with regards to an impending attack that became 9/11. They are mostly wealthy, white people who control everything (sound like "elites" to me). They voted and supported Bush TWICE!!! How can anyone think that the same idiots who did all of this finally saw the light and will all the sudden be smart, efficient legislators providing the most cost-effective government since... Clinton. Oh yeah, and McCain ultimately supports most of it!
Again, if the dollar is worth dirt and our economy is in the toilet, why do a few extra bucks in our pockets mean anything? McCain's health plan will not do anything for the uninsured (oh, but you'll still have to treat them, of course) and will likely increase the amount of government coverage of those currently covered by employers. Obama's won't cover everyone, but has the potential of covering most people and you will get paid for for taking care of them! Obama will raise your taxes, but if McCain doesn't, our country will contine to slide towards insolvency.
Oh yeah, NOBODY has mentioned making doctors employees of the government. I don't know why this keeps coming up. There are only a few truly socialized systems in the world (Great Britain is one) where the government owns the hospitals and employs the physicians. This is not in the plan of anybody advocating for universal coverage in the US. It's just not.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,049
- Reaction score
- 6,409
This includes me. I have no interest in voting for the Democratic nominee because I already know what they stand for, so therefore there is no use wasting my time listening to them (I do admit that I have listened to a couple of Obama speeches, and I enjoyed his speaking style and ability). I have no interest in wasting my time listening to someone who has nothing new to tell me. There are simply better things to do with my time.
I have no clue why two (badass and Arch) listen to McCain claiming you're giving him a fair chance, when in reality you're watching like a hawk for things to use against him.
And badass, the sound bytes you quote from McCain give absolutely no indication that America has no problems or that if you ain' fer us, yew agin us. Again you're trying to equate McCain to GWB, and again, it's just lame character assassination.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,049
- Reaction score
- 6,409
You describe Democrats very well!
You have no interest in discussion, just lame liberal rhetoric regurgitation. For the sake of keeping you honest though I will instruct you to research that Clinton had multiple chances to catch Bin Laden before 9/11 ever occured, but he passed. Still, I realize those were different times and circumstances and I'm sure Clinton had his reasons and they were probably just.
starsop, one day you'll finish school and get a job and make some money. You'll then realize that you're smarter than the government and therefore you can better decide how to spend your money than just handing it over to the government so they can spend it for you. When that day comes, you'll have a good laugh, and realize how many votes you wasted.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm pretty sure that ANYONE who calls Obama a great speaker and thats it has a 100% (and thats sensitivity I'm talkin about) chance at never going to his website and lookin at his platform. Being ignorant is easy because its lazy. Lets face the truth....many McCain supporters never venture to Obama's website and and Obama's supporters vice versa. We all stay blind to what we don't want see....and stay focused on what we do. Shyt is simple. On a side note I'm a Obama supporter matching into Anesthesia this yr and I too worry bout shooting myself in my foot. But I know deep down I'll always be comfortable in life, maybe not rich, but comfortable regardless of this yrs presidential candidate. Atleast with Obama's health care plan thats one less thing God will have to discuss with me at the pearly gates. And believe me....I will be holding the line up....lol.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2004
- Messages
- 153
- Reaction score
- 0
First off, I finished "school" a whille ago. I've been in private practice almost three years now. Your profile lists you as a medical student, so I suppose I should ask you when you will finish school?
I think I understand very well what I am talking about and who I am voting for. Actually, when I was in school I considered myself a Republican and actually voted against Clinton in 1996 (I greatly regret my vote though). I do not care only about myself and my net worth. While those are of course important, I make plenty of money and will not be suffering any time soon. The goverment has been astonishingly irresponsible under the Republican leadership, and I no longer believe they actually will ever decrease the size of the government. What the will do is further worsen the financial state of the USA and I care about my country enough to do something about it. I used to make some of your arguments as well, but I graduated and learned that I was wrong.
As far as all the times Clinton could have gotten Bin Laden, I think you should stop watching miniseries on TV and read a little more about it. Clinton never had that chance. I can't say he would have taken it if he had, but his adminstration had an entire plan of action against Al Qaida in his last few months. They delivered it to the Bush adminstration who ignored it up until and after 9/11 because they hated Clinton so much. That is a matter of record. Whether Bush could have gotten him, I don't know, but he sure as hell didn't think it was worth spending any time on until the towers fell.
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2008
- Messages
- 355
- Reaction score
- 0
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,049
- Reaction score
- 6,409
You're referring to me, and you're incorrect. I've read his platform, and I know he states he only wants to raise taxes on the top 5% income earners. While I believe this is inherently a socialist concept and disagree with it, I also see he will raise corporate taxes. I must ask you then, who do you really believe pays corporate taxes? Let me put it another way. Let's say Obama raises taxes on Exxon. You think Exxon really cares? Heck no, they'll simply pass that increased taxation onto their customers, which are you and I, and they'll charge us more. This is why increasing corporate taxes is a Democrats way of hiding the fact that they're increasing spending for the lower-middle class, who they claim to protect.
Obama also states he wants to provide health care for all. He states no plan for infrastructure on implementing this plan. Now this, BeBlessedMD, is where YOU need to pay close attention. How can you provide health care for all, which by the way equates to across the board tax increases upwards of 40-50% of total income (look at UK for reference), without 1) supplementing educational cost BEFORE you decrease our income and increase our taxation and 2) raise income during training (we have increased length of training than most other countries, so if you're going to increase our taxation which WILL happen, you have to pay us more for longer training since our income at the end will be decreased)? The short answer is that if that program IS implemented, then WE pay. You think Obama cares if medical students/resident physicians ultimately pay more and pay longer for HIS plan? NO, but you should!
You make an assumption that you'll always live comfortably. You however believe it to be fact. You MIGHT be right, but if you're an AVERAGE medical student you have loans upwards of $150k. Under a socialist health care system, the AVERAGE physician will make less income and the AVERAGE physician will pay more in taxes. That doesn't sound comfortable at all to me. It sounds quite....AVERAGE. I'm sorry, but for me, I've worked TOO hard for TOO long for that. But you want to guarantee that life for me with your vote. I inherently disagree with that in principle.
I've read Obama's platform and it reads like the platform of any other Democrat. Increase taxation, decrease incentive to work hard, take from those who make more and give to those who make less/nothing, ensure that those who don't want to work still maintain a livelihood in this so called capitalist country. It's the platform of a Democrat, and while I ensure you I've read it, it reads like the same ole' same ole' to me.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
- Messages
- 3,049
- Reaction score
- 6,409
I'll finish soon. I worked for several years after college before going back to medical school. As for the rest of your post and those prior, I'll simply agree to disagree. I respect your views as it seems you've developed them over years of introspection. As for me, as a Libertarian, I believe that I can better decide how to spend my money than the government since I'm smarter than the government. Take care.
