RRC Archives

The War Party's fucking agenda is clear and simple: de-legitimize anyone who advances foreign policy ideas that go against the grain of militarism and slavish appeasement of Israel. Anyone who questions why we are in a war in the midst of Mesopotamia for no apparently good reason is going to be smeared shitless, and brought down. The War Party – and by that I don't just mean Republicans – plays dirty, and they play for keeps. It's bullshit.

The war parties days are numbered. Don't worry Ray

John McCain’s bad temper is fucking legendary. Even as he runs for president, he continues to have difficulty with managing his anger. Is this bullshit acceptable from the individual that could hold the highest office?

In considering the power of the president’s office, we would be under the mercy of McCain while he controls whether this country goes to war, deploys a nuclear weapon, and engages in foreign diplomacy. Viewing any number of videos of his verbal interchange under anger, his style could be case for great concern.

Consider this one during a discussion with a reporter, Pigsteak. McCain demonstrates that he is:

* unable to listen to a question and respond dispassionately.
* unable to listen further after he has made his judgment.
* responds disrespectfully even though the individual speaking with him maintains their respectful stance.
* repeats the same statement over and over again in a tirade-like manner
* continually interrupts without allowing the other party to speak

It's bullshit.

caribe wrote:Shamis: Many of our financial problems would end if we pulled out of Iraq. You appear to be worried about Iraq in our absence and you realize that our own countries domestic affairs are going down the tube. Where are your priorities??

I don't like the war at all. We never should have gone in. However, I'm a big fan of making the best of the situation. If managed properly I do think the war could have been somewhat of a sucess, even if it was for the wrong reasons.

I think I can make an analogy out of the huge building they want to build in lexington that so many people are upset about. Lets say that you were strongly opposed to the construction, but it happened anyway. Then after the building was 80% finished, somehow the power to decide the outcome of the situation suddenly fell into your hands? Would you tear down the building and start over? Would you finish it and try to make the best of it? Either answer is ok I guess. However, the 3rd option would be to just knock it down and leave the rubble behind. To me, thats the equivalent of pulling out of iraq in a disorderly fashion. You cannot go back and change what has happened, all you can do is make the best of the current situation.

Pulling out is a great idea, but only if it is done in such a way as to prevent further turmoil in the area. And that can't happen with the kind of timelines that Barock and Hillary are touting.

I want a president that will commit to getting the troops out as soon as possible, without jeopardizing what little progress has been made. I think that's an honest answer, and one you probably won't hear from any of the candidates (although I think hillary is actually the closest on this issue).

But as I hinted in my last post, the war is really secondary to me. I'm much more concerned with politicians who seem to be incapable of adding up numbers and determining if the result is negative or positive. I think our economy depends on a balanced budget(and selling lots of weapons), just like every other financial entity. And if we fail to address that, then bad things will happen. McCain is the only person in the race who seems to have a grasp on the whole cutting spending idea. He didn't want to support bush's tax cuts unless they also cut spending. And he seems to have a solid record of voting against superfluous spending in the govt.

I also like the age of Mccain. I think old age fosters honesty, because money loses its value the closer you get to the grave.

Both hillary and obama scare me because I think they are socialists. And although I think national healthcare is a great idea, I don't want to see it put in place until the govt shows some indication that they can add and subtract numbers properly. I'm also concerned that they will both try to help poor/middle class people by regulating prices of various necessary products...which has historically been disastrous for any economy.

SCIN wrote:John McCain’s bad temper is fucking legendary. Even as he runs for president, he continues to have difficulty with managing his anger. Is this bullshit acceptable from the individual that could hold the highest office?

In considering the power of the president’s office, we would be under the mercy of McCain while he controls whether this country goes to war, deploys a nuclear weapon, and engages in foreign diplomacy. Viewing any number of videos of his verbal interchange under anger, his style could be case for great concern.

Consider this one during a discussion with a reporter, Pigsteak. McCain demonstrates that he is:

* unable to listen to a question and respond dispassionately.
* unable to listen further after he has made his judgment.
* responds disrespectfully even though the individual speaking with him maintains their respectful stance.
* repeats the same statement over and over again in a tirade-like manner
* continually interrupts without allowing the other party to speak

It's bullshit.

you talking about mccain or pigsteak here? don't make me give you penalty slack...

shamis, what we need is a democrat president, and republican congress...that way socialized healthcare will never pass.

under the socialized program, our premiums will be a percentage of what we make. does that make sense to anyone?

not a flat rate bsed solely on your health and use of the system, but on whether you make more money than the next guy.

even social security with holdings are phased out of your check right now. although medicare payments are not.

Jeez, I hear this meme alot... but Hillary is one of the least "liberal" Democrat candidates out there, if you mean by "liberal" as aligning with the left. People need to put down their NRA mags, turn off Rush, and listen to what she really says and has stood for as being a Senator and now a presidential candidate.

Somebody who was a socialist wouldn't take truckloads of money in campaign contributions from the insurance industry, for starters. Her healthcare plan is pretty modest and is not similar at all to the one in Canada, it is more similar to programs in Germany or Japan.

Personally, I don't like Hillary because she is too much supportive of corporate interests (not a populist), is a bit of a war hawk. She's one step to the left of Joseph Lieberman. But she has so far been in no way a "socialist", and I doubt she would lead the country all that much to the left.

I favor Obama or especially Edwards. They are further to the left and at the same time have a populist message.

Now, if you want to get really left wing, Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel would be closer to it than that.

<a><img alt="Rayray" border="0" height="299" src="http://image.blingee.com/images15/conte ... 901696.gif" title="Rayray" width="400"></a><br><a><font>Glitter Graphics</font></a><br><br>

I would vote for Kucinich for anyone on any ticket anywhere. That guy was totally solid!!

"I say that the Democratic Party changed. The Democratic Party today was not the party it was in 2000. It's not the Bill Clinton-Al Gore party, which was strong internationalists, strong on defense, pro-trade, pro-reform in our domestic government. It's been effectively taken over by a small group on the left of the party that is protectionist, isolationist and basically will --and very, very hyperpartisan. So it pains me. I'm a Democrat who came to the party in the era of President John F. Kennedy. It's a strange turn of the road when I find among the candidates running this year that the one, in my opinion, closest to the Kennedy legacy, the John F. Kennedy legacy, is John S. McCain." -- Joe Lieberman

"McCain is the best democrat in the race, and I'm voting for him." L K Day