Re: Barack N Roll!
agreed.
agreed.
-
Originally posted by Adamaja456Originally posted by twiggy_2004 -
Re: Barack N Roll!
You point to all the problems internally for the country but still want to talk about the need to continue meddling in international affairs to a huge degree. That's been the biggest problem, a refusal to redirect all that time and money and energy into fixing the problems at home.
The Middle East as a region has been forcibly kept static by the United States and "The West" since before the world wars, and it's resulted in a huge amount of internal sectarian violence among people who have no business actually belonging to the same country. Iraq isn't one country, it's three countries. Trying to make it into one democratic country is simply going to fail, because it's never been unified, and has only ever held together because it was in the economic best interest of the american-installed and supported dictator to keep it together any way he could.
What the West needs to do is stop trying to "stabilize" the Middle East, because they equate stability with stagnation, and that's pretty much the root of all the problems. Peoples in the middle east that would be in the middle of seceding from their countries, or at least fighting one hell of a civil war to stop being so oppressed by these regimes are seeing the regimes being propped up by the West, and so guess where their anger goes instead.
The Sunni, Shi'a and Kurds in Iraq will be -far- too busy hammering out the details of creating three seperate states in the wake of a departure of the American military presence forcing them to pretend they are still unified to be launching terrorist attacks across a continent and an ocean. Need I bring up the usual issue about how not a single person involved in the attacks that led to the invasion actually had any connection whatsoever to Iraq at all? Everyone was Egyptian and Saudi and trained in Afghanistan. None of these countries are under active US military occupation, and yet none of these countries are launching huge terrorist attacks at the US, why should moving out of another one magically create a huge problem?Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
thats just as what if as anything else and holds no water.
Originally posted by Adamaja456Originally posted by twiggy_2004Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
whoa whoa this is chit chat devonin if you wanna write up more than two paragraphs go do it in ct
we can't handle that level of intelligence here
Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
hey fish welcome to the party.
Originally posted by Adamaja456Originally posted by twiggy_2004Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
OH EM GEE
i need that shirt djshox
582 Tier Points(Tier 3)
602 AAAs(517+23+62)
People who bought me subscriptions/tokens:
DrugstoreCowboy(1 month) ELRayford(3 months)
~GJampa(3 months) Jerry DB(3 months)
4th place in Gamewhore Competition(3 months)
Phynx(FGJ album and Dendrite V2)
dragon890x(1 year) Slide(1 year)
Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
Dev you are my hero. I find myself agreeing with everything you say. You're quite a persuasive person.
That said, I too, support Obama for this election. I admit, however, that my knowledge on each candidate isn't anywhere near where it should be in order to make an informed decision. Until I actually can vote, when my opinion begins to matter, I don't think I'll be able to muster up the drive to inform myself as much as I should.
Here's what I know about the three candidates:
Obama - Relatively inexperienced in comparison to the others, but clearly enumerates his goals for the nation and is a powerful speaker. Readily admits his shortcomings. Speaks often about "change" but not nearly as often about how exactly he hopes to achieve it. General policies: focus on domestic issues, get out of Iraq, fix the economy, national health care, improve education. Not a return to isolationism, but elimination of the role of America as the world's police. Claims Clinton runs a largely negative campaign, but is thus committing negative campaigning in doing so.
Clinton - Energetic, but a politician. Has views for the country but prefers to say whatever is most convenient at the time. Exaggerates the truth or lies fairly often, runs a largely negative campaign focusing on incriminating photographs or scandals. Supported by her husband, and receives a lot of her support due to him. General policies: Out of Iraq, focus on domestic issues.
McCain - Relying on his "war hero" image to win him the presidency. Was a Vietnam POW for five years, but was ridiculously reverent to his flag and comrades. Thus appeals to hardcore patriot conservatives. Believes that America, as the strongest nation in the world, has a duty to moderate it. Will stay in Iraq as long as is necessary to "succeed."
As you can see, I'm really not nearly educated enough to make a logical decision. As far as I'm concerned, if you're going to vote, you need to really do some research to find the candidate you believe is best for the position. If you're just going to watch commercials and get all your info that way, then you open up the most powerful single position in the world to the person with better politics and more money, not with the best qualifications. To vote well, you need to see past the political spin, past the media bias, past the scandals, and see the true policies, opinions, and qualifications of each and every candidate.Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
My 2 cents (now that this has become more political than humor):
I honestly don't care who the President is. The two big issues to me (implementing the Fair Tax and raising the minimum ethanol in fuels) are going to be fixed by lawmakers in Congress. In my opinion, the President only serves to put the spotlight on issues that will then influence people's votes on congressmen, rather than actually causing change directly. That said, Huckabee has done plenty to put the spotlight on the Fair Tax, so I'm going to write him in if he's not McCain's running mate =P. Unfortunately, NOBODY SEEMS TO CARE about the minimum ethanol in fuel. If it had been being raised by even 1% every year since that minimum was first in place, we'd be in a much better spot when it comes to gas. And hell, maybe instead of paying farmers to not plant crops, we could encourage them to plant sugar so we'd have a MASSIVE ethanol supply. But that'd just be too easy.
That said, one thing about this race is that McCain is the only reliable candidate. If you look back, the reason Kerry lost to Bush is because nobody knew what the hell he'd do once he got into office, because he didn't seem to be consistent at all while campaigning. Obama hasn't been around as long as others and hasn't built up such a reliable track record, Hilary seems to forget major details and not realize what's going on, but McCain sticks to his guns (even if everybody thinks he's an idiot for it). Really though, I wish Huckabee had won on the Republican side, and if he isn't on the ticket with somebody I'll be pretty sad. =(
Anywho, between Hilary and Barack, Barack has a few HUGE things going for him. I think foreign nations would be much more receptive of Obama. He's not the same middle-aged white guy that they're used to seeing, but he's not a woman (which just wouldn't work, given the places we're directly involved with). Also, that same charisma that is drawing so many people in the US to him could really help in dealing with foreign nations. Hillary is a classic politician. She's shifty and I just don't trust her. It's not so much what she says, but how she acts when she says it. That's one reason I love Huckabee so much, because he acted more like a real, believable, trustworthy person. Plus he had a sense of humor about himself.
But enough about Huckabee. At this point, I'll be kinda surprised no matter who wins. How any Republican could win after Bush is beyond me, but Obama and Clinton (either themselves or their supporters) have dragged each others' names in so much mud McCain may just do it.
Or hell, maybe all this disgust with the Republicans and Democrats will pave the way for a third-party win. =PSo I've gone completely slack-ass and haven't done any work on creating games. =(
In less-depressing news, I got a job for an online business (which sells non-electronic games, of all things!) which has taught me a lot about marketing online and all that jazz.
So now I'm on Twitter @NoahWright.
And I write the blog for their website.
Plus I do cool programming in-house that you'll never see. =OComment
-
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
Uh Oh. Complete the trinity.
I totally want to do this girl.Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
Don't be a hater, vote for Nader.Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
Sorry buddy, you're an idiot.
Thoughts? I don't take "LOL OBAMA IS THE BEST UR RETARDED" as an answer either.
Back it up or keep living you're perfect world with Barack Obama as "President"
PS: I heard that you're the "big" Obama fan here, but why? What makes you like him so much?Comment
-
Re: Barack N Roll!
That video was one of the most ridiculous things I think I've ever seen passed off as news.
A big long series of completely out of context cuts, and an absurd attempt to just go "Because someone that Barack said he respected says a lot of really radical things some of the time, there is therefore something horribly wrong with him."
Oh God! Someone who he is close to has some crazy opinions! We must discount everything he says entirely because he isn't going to publically condemn someone he respects because they've said some radical things!
I can't believe the level of "news reporting" being presented there. The scene at the end was especially fantastic. 5 days after 9/11, a very radical christian minister was railing that America only reaped what it sowed, and that after nuking cities of civilians, and supporting overseas terrorist movements, it was somehow still managing to be shocked and indignant when someone did to them what they'd been arguably doing elsewhere in the world for years, and they call it "A hateful attack on america" and condemn Obama for continuing to respect someone who in my opinion, was 100% absolutely correct in his statements.
Over in Critical Thinking we call this "Package Deal fallacy" and "Guilt by association fallacy" and both of these things discredit arguments very easily.Comment
Comment