The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   US Elections 2008: Debate the Issues (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=152191)

Allstories September 13th, 2008 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurasphere (Post 3935329)
The exact same thing could be said about Obama. You believe the Palin is inexperienced and would be a disaster if she got into office. Well, I believe the exact same thing about Obama, except Obama is the one actually running for president! I wouldn't take Obama to be a qualified president in a million years.

I already mentioned near the beginning of this therad all of the things he's been, and he sounds pretty qualified to me. I don't think 'experience' has much to do with the success of your presidency, though, as long as you are an informed and intelligent individual, at least if we look at history. Lincoln had about as much experience as Obama does now, and he's arguably the best president we've ever had. Conversely, Buchanan was very experienced but is typically regarded as one of the worst. In McCain's case, I certainly don't think any experience you have as a candidate is any good for the country if you have horrible policies and happen to be a blithering idiot.

I understand you have to sort of 'play the game' so to speak in order to be a politician, but he's reversed his policies on just too many issues (abortion, gay marriage, etc) just so as to fit with his party. In speeches he refers to borders that don't even exist, his 'energy plan' consists of not spending any money on renewable energy, he opposes Iraq timetables (which even the Bush administration is entertaining the idea of as of recently), and then there's his VP choice, Sarah Palin, who is absolutely indefensible as a VP choice. I do not, for the life of me, understand what McCain has that makes him trustworthy that Obama does not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurasphere (Post 3935329)
Really, if everyone just took some personal responsibility instead of sitting on their lazy butts and letting the government take care of them (not everyone, just some people), we wouldn't be in this much of a jam.

This is something I really despise about Republican arguments like these, and that is that they sound really great and convincing when they are merely vague, general statements about groups of people, they absolutely fall apart when applied on an individual basis. Do you really think that if you approached a bunch of people who were below the poverty line, and were struggling to survive, and maybe even had kids to support on top of all that, and you asked them why they were still in poverty, that any sort of substantial number of them would say "Well, no reason, I guess. I'm just lazy!" IS THIS WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE ME BELIEVE?

Aurafire September 13th, 2008 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allstories (Post 3935705)



This is something I really despise about Republican arguments like these, and that is that they sound really great and convincing when they are merely vague, general statements about groups of people, they absolutely fall apart when applied on an individual basis. Do you really think that if you approached a bunch of people who were below the poverty line, and were struggling to survive, and maybe even had kids to support on top of all that, and you asked them why they were still in poverty, that any sort of substantial number of them would say "Well, no reason, I guess. I'm just lazy!" IS THIS WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE ME BELIEVE?

I'd have you believe that at least some of those people are being lazy and don't really care. You can't argue with that. There are people in this country that live off the government who have the means to get themselves off of wellfare programs. But hey, why should they when the government takes care of them?

And THIS is something I really despise about the Democrat argument, that somehow every poor person in this country somehow got the short straw in the draw of life and it's not their fault their below the poverty line. Bull. This is America, and if you put your mind to it, you can be happy, make money, and live comfortably. Go to community college. Take out a student loan. Really, it's not that difficult. But they decide to slack off in high school, don't go to college, get a low paying job, and COMPLAIN about being poor.

Before you go jumping down my throat, I'm not saying that there are poor people in this country that are poor for no good reasons. Of course people have legitimate problems that are causing money problems, but don't tell me that a good number of those people didn't do everything they could to get themselves above the poverty line. It's just not true. We are a lazy nation with lazy people who don't want to work, and lucky for them, our government supports them by throwing money at them.

At least Republicans take a positive stance on the issue. People make it sounds like Republicans are evil and hate poor people and don't want to help. Democrats just yell boo and criticize us for not understanding what people are going through. Republicans want to help people help themselves. Democrats just want to help people by throwing money at them. You tell me which is going to be more worthwhile?

Allstories September 13th, 2008 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurasphere (Post 3935794)
I'd have you believe that at least some of those people are being lazy and don't really care. You can't argue with that. There are people in this country that live off the government who have the means to get themselves off of wellfare programs. But hey, why should they when the government takes care of them?

This was my point. Lazy poor people exist, sure, but I have real trouble believing that they are much more than an overwhelming minority of the poor in whole.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurasphere (Post 3935794)
This is America, and if you put your mind to it, you can be happy, make money, and live comfortably. Go to community college. Take out a student loan. Really, it's not that difficult. But they decide to slack off in high school, don't go to college, get a low paying job, and COMPLAIN about being poor.

That's pretty naive. I hate to break it to you, but the world is more complicated than that, and even if it's mathematically possible for you to get yourself out of poverty, that doesn't mean that everyone has the education and foreknowledge to actually do anything about it. I can't imagine that very many people would suspend their right to, y'know, eat and have shelter in order to pay for some community college, and good luck paying off student loans when you have no money. Good luck if you happen to have children to feed. Good luck finding a job with the economy the Bush administration left us in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurasphere (Post 3935794)
Republicans want to help people help themselves. Democrats just want to help people. You tell me which is going to be more worthwhile?

Uhh, the more straightforward one, with less pointless rigmarole, and less people falling through the cracks (ie. the latter option)? I don't understand your point.

Aurafire September 13th, 2008 2:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allstories (Post 3935953)
This was my point. Lazy poor people exist, sure, but I have real trouble believing that they are much more than an overwhelming minority of the poor in whole.


That's pretty naive. I hate to break it to you, but the world is more complicated than that, and even if it's mathematically possible for you to get yourself out of poverty, that doesn't mean that everyone has the education and foreknowledge to actually do anything about it. I can't imagine that very many people would suspend their right to, y'know, eat and have shelter in order to pay for some community college, and good luck paying off student loans when you have no money. Good luck if you happen to have children to feed. Good luck finding a job with the economy the Bush administration left us in.



Uhh, the more straightforward one, with less pointless rigmarole, and less people falling through the cracks (ie. the latter option)? I don't understand your point.

I edited my last sentence, I forgot to add a part, hopefully it makes more sense now.

Don't really feel like debating this anymore, let's agree to disagree...at least for now on this particular subject.

speedinglight September 15th, 2008 10:08 AM

Hmm decisions decisions.....


ill think when i haveth the time now...

Netto Azure September 15th, 2008 4:28 PM

See how....
 
Much one can miss if you don't go to PC for the weekend...Anyways as you can see last week the candidates have started using campaign smears (aka "stretching the truth") for political advantage...(Eh should be normal by now)...
Anyways I missed commenting on lipstick-on-a-pig-gate from last week...

http://images.salon.com/comics/tomo/2008/08/26/tomo/story.jpg

I know AuraSphere is just going to say "Liberal Media" But how could you still say it's liberal media when all they comment on is "the stupid campaign distraction"....I've lost trust in the traditional media and have moved on to NPR, PBS, (At least these two are partially publicly funded and eh less "ads") BBC, The Internet (Yeah..yeah..."Liberal Media" AuraSphere...) I know I'm showing a comic from a "liberal" blog but he does show funny portrayals of current events that must be shared...

Since I'm on the topic of journalistic quality I was listening to PBS's Bill Moyer's Journal and they were talking about the quality of news we are getting today with the so called "Blogosphere" and the Internet added to the mix...this should be common sense but I feel I should reiterate that always remember to FACT CHECK everything you see (aka News) if you have the time...from this thread(The Internet) to traditional media...Heh it's paradoxical but the Internet is a good place to start =P

They're also right...If we want a relatively non-partisan interview on the issues for this campaign we should have BBC come over and Intervew ALL the candidates (Both Presidential/VP) not just the ones from the major parties because they will interupt if they see hot air...but eh just something to think about...

Aurafire September 15th, 2008 4:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtommy1 (Post 3942641)
Much one can miss if you don't go to PC for the weekend...Anyways as you can see last week the candidates have started using campaign smears (aka "stretching the truth") for political advantage...(Eh should be normal by now)...
Anyways I missed commenting on lipstick-on-a-pig-gate from last week...

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2008/08/26/tomo/

I know AuraSphere is just going to say "Liberal Media" But how could you still say it's liberal media when all they comment on is "the stupid campaign distraction"....I've lost trust in the traditional media and have moved on to NPR, PBS, (At least these two are partially publicly funded and eh less "ads") BBC, The Internet (Yeah..yeah..."Liberal Media" AuraSphere...) I know I'm showing a comic from a "liberal" blog but he does show funny portrayals of current events that must be shared...

Since I'm on the topic of journalistic quality I was listening to PBS's Bill Moyer's Journal and they were talking about the quality of news we are getting today with the so called "Blogosphere" and the Internet added to the mix...this should be common sense but I feel I should reiterate that always remember to FACT CHECK everything you see (aka News) if you have the time...from this thread(The Internet) to traditional media...Heh it's paradoxical but the Internet is a good place to start =P

They're also right...If we want a relatively non-partisan interview on the issues for this campaign we should have BBC come over and Intervew ALL the candidates (Both Presidential/VP) not just the ones from the major parties because they will interupt if they see hot air...but eh just something to think about...

Well the internet is a whole different story. No one "owns" the internet, anyone can post whatever they want. There are maybe a few reliable news sources that I've found. One is www.realclearpolitics.com , Which posts editorials from many different columnists giving both points of view. But really, anyone getting their news from the internet isn't really getting news...

The comic is just alright for me =P

Atomic Reactor September 15th, 2008 5:11 PM

It's hard to believe half the things I hear on TV anymore.
I always go for republicans, which, I know, isn't the most logical approach.
It's just something I do. So obviously, my choice is for MC Cain :)

Republicans FTW :D

Aurafire September 15th, 2008 5:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomic_Reactor (Post 3942819)
It's hard to believe half the things I hear on TV anymore.
I always go for republicans, which, I know, isn't the most logical approach.
It's just something I do. So obviously, my choice is for MC Cain :)

Republicans FTW :D

Gasp, a fellow republican, I'm not alone!

WOOO McCain Palin 08!!!

Atomic Reactor September 15th, 2008 5:23 PM

lol XD
fa sho, I'm very conservative.
I hate how everything on TV is usually liberal :(
It depresses my political feelings lol.

Aurafire September 15th, 2008 5:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomic_Reactor (Post 3942855)
lol XD
fa sho, I'm very conservative.
I hate how everything on TV is usually liberal :(
It depresses my political feelings lol.

Me too...I stick to Fox News, where the stories aren't biased =P

Atomic Reactor September 15th, 2008 5:33 PM

:D

same here!
lol i like fox news :)
Oreily FTW!
and Hannity :P

Aurafire September 15th, 2008 5:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomic_Reactor (Post 3942886)
:D

same here!
lol i like fox news :)
Oreily FTW!
and Hannity :P

I know!!!

Everyone hates O'reily, but that's only because he makes liberals so mad =P

Atomic Reactor September 15th, 2008 5:40 PM

I love watching that! They get so pissed it makes me laugh XD

did you know that he's like... 73?
i guess he gets a lot of botox.

Aurafire September 15th, 2008 5:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomic_Reactor (Post 3942902)
I love watching that! They get so pissed it makes me laugh XD

did you know that he's like... 73?
i guess he gets a lot of botox.

59 according to wikipedia O.O

But yeah he's so awesome.

Atomic Reactor September 15th, 2008 5:44 PM

Oh, lol. He said he was 73, but now that I recall, he did sound a bit sarcastic lol

Aurafire September 15th, 2008 5:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomic_Reactor (Post 3942913)
Oh, lol. He said he was 73, but now that I recall, he did sound a bit sarcastic lol

That must be it....I'd trust wikipedia anyway.

I was gonna say, he didn't look that old =P

Atomic Reactor September 15th, 2008 5:52 PM

lol, wikipedia is like, against the rules for references XD (not here, other places)
But yeah, I think we should cease this conversation, it has nothing to do with the '08 elections lol

XD

Aurafire September 15th, 2008 5:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atomic_Reactor (Post 3942939)
lol, wikipedia is like, against the rules for references XD (not here, other places)
But yeah, I think we should cease this conversation, it has nothing to do with the '08 elections lol

XD

Kinda true....lol. Sorry tommy =X

Netto Azure September 16th, 2008 9:32 AM

Heh...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurasphere (Post 3942944)
Kinda true....lol. Sorry tommy =X

Scary...you guys actually listen to what they're saying...O_O...Eh doesn't really matter...

But anyways more depressing economic news:

Global Market Turmoils continue: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7617976.stm
(The Lehman Bros. collapsing and Merryl-Lynch merger is old news =P)

AIG Teeters as Markets face more trouble: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94660752

How can I help but be pessimistic right now...I know your going to oppose what I'm going to say but you have to realize that as the Economy falters people need Social Services even more...But at the same time we're cutting Social Services for our grandiose buyouts of Wall St.

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2008/07/29/tomo/

Eh..At least the Federal government has draw the line on the Lehman.Bros and actually started to discipline Wall St...Also Global Diversification has cushioned the blow...

Also I watched the PBS special "American education in the 21st Century" and is NCLB really not working? I mean they did also point out hat we don't have a National Standard and have unequal distribution of funding...But accountability has to count for something...

Netto Azure September 19th, 2008 6:46 AM

Argh....
 
Are we going to Bail out everyone??? We already have a large budget deficit!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26787984?GT1=43001

Thoughts?

Aurafire September 19th, 2008 7:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtommy1 (Post 3951196)
Are we going to Bail out everyone??? We already have a large budget deficit!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26787984?GT1=43001

Thoughts?

I don't particularly enjoy debating economic issues because I'm not very educated about the economy. It's harder for me to take a stance because you can't really inject morals into your argument...and that's probably my strong point =P

Allstories September 19th, 2008 7:18 AM

So what do the McCain supporters here think of Palin? I think she's an insultingly poor VP choice, even for the Republicans, but it doesn't seem to bother them too much. Is it just begrudging acceptance?

Aurafire September 19th, 2008 9:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allstories (Post 3951247)
So what do the McCain supporters here think of Palin? I think she's an insultingly poor VP choice, even for the Republicans, but it doesn't seem to bother them too much. Is it just begrudging acceptance?

In an election like this, I think the republicans needed to do something out of the ordinary to stand out from the pack. Whether you like her or not, Sarah Palin is definitely getting the republicans some attention (granted, some of this is negative). I was really quite surprised to hear that she was elected, but I gave her a closer and found she has strong conservative values. I also agree with many of her policies. It'll actually give republicans something to be enthusiastic about this election year. So all in all, I think it was the choice that needed to be made to give the GOP a chance in November. The only problem I see is, obviously, lack of experience, which the Democrats will (and should) play on during the debates. Should be fun to watch =P

Xairmo September 19th, 2008 9:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allstories (Post 3951247)
So what do the McCain supporters here think of Palin? I think she's an insultingly poor VP choice, even for the Republicans, but it doesn't seem to bother them too much. Is it just begrudging acceptance?

I'm not a McCain supporter but I can not stand Palin. She's just such a-- well I think you know what word I would put here >.>
I think McCain picked her as his VP as a pathetic attempt to win over "fence sitting" Hilary supporters.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:59 PM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.