Where are you politically?
 

I'm curious... what are your political standpoints here at this good forum?

I've made some pretty clear postings as to where I stand (not that any Americans should care, cuz I've not been invited to vote in ur election any ways :-)), but where do you stand?

Let's have some heated debates - it's good for demoCRAZY!

Peace!

BARACK OBAMA!

Hank

I'm a romantic socialist. I believe that in a society it's to the benefit of all if conditions exist where those more able can assist those less able. I believe in liberty, equal opportunity, and tolerance, and I would support political initiatives that aim to fulfill these ideals.

I'm not in the US but if I had a vote there I would choose Barack Obama over John McCain.

My maaaan :respect:

I would be in favor of a benevolent despotism... with me as the despot naturally.

“Instead of a Dark Lord, you would have a queen, not dark but beautiful and terrible as the dawn! Tempestuous as the sea, and stronger than the foundations of the earth! All shall love me and despair!�
-Galladriel Lord of the Rings

I'm keen on the "All shall love me" bit :) but not so keen on the "despair" :(

Benevolent despotism is the ideal form of governance. Most people are more than happy to let someone get on with running things as long as they feel cared for, provided for, and protected. The trouble is it's virtually impossible to achieve. No sooner installed than your 'benevolent' despot will turn out to be nothing of the sort, someone else entirely, that seeks to exploit and supress people in order to maintain their own position. Then removing them is traumatic and bloody!

YES! I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT from the start... you ARE Barack (in drag)... I love you! MMMWWWWA! MMMWWWA! MMMMWWWA!

Rock on for CHANGE, giiirl!

Here I am, baby, signed, sealed, delivered!

BARACK OBAMA!

H

Except perhaps for a man chasing a Twat ! ( Anglo-speak for an inviting minge )

i always consider myself moderate or independent...but i will admit i do like some of the ideology of socialism and the like....still not decided on who i will vote for come this november.

My voting and beliefs have always been right of centre. Before anyone accuses me of being right wing extremist white supremacist remember that right of centre is a wide spectrum that involves social welfare through to extreme fascism. I don't subscribe to the extremist view. I do believe in capitalism, stock markets, and minimal interference and social engineering from governments.
For those that still want to label me a right wing kook just remember that the left wing is also a wide spectrum that involves social welfare through to communism and Stalinism. Those that vote Democrat in the US are usually looked on as lefties, but I don't call you communists so don't look on me as a right wing extremist.
It's also not a mistake on my part to say that both the left and right wing involve social welfare as both sides of the political sprectrum start from the centre and work outwards.
(so ends my political science lecture):)

i'm a full capitalist,the best system for innovation and compétition
born free or die :yes:

What I find interesting about the US 2-party system is the division of economic and social issues and how the division is pretty contradictory. For example..

The "Right" values little government influence in regards to business and feels that private charitable institutions are better able to handle social welfare needs. In essence a Conservative in the US would like to see less taxes and less government involvement in the private sector....

Until we come to social/personal issues. Then we have the "Right" fighting against Gay Marriage (or any legal recognition of the relationships), fighting against Trans* folks getting the legal sex changed on their documentation, wanting government policy to dictate legal sex acts and partners, and having authority to determine what medical options are available to people with HIV, and having a say as to whether a pregnancy comes to term or not.

And the "Left" here takes the opposite - strong government influence in business and taxes and social welfare with a "hands off" approach to personal/social issues. No wonder people think Americans are nuts!

What a fabulous observation!

But I believe that the left rightfully understands that without strong government influence in certain areas then the socalled "vulnerable" will be completely overrun by the "laissez faire" approach. Basicly, "strong government" in a capitalist, democratic society means "to protect and serve every body" including the minorities.

Luckily, this entire presidential campaign seems to have opened at least quite a few American eyes to the fact that "strong government" is neither marxism nor a stopper of personal freedom. I guess that eight years with an ultra right (and really not very bright) administration finally paved the way for a new awakening in your beautiful country.

But I do love you wit and your wonderful way with words ;-)

BARACK

I don't think Americans are nuts. Traditionally the European view has been that mainstream American politics is a fairly narrow spectrum, ie. not a lot of difference between the two main parties. This is changing, in part because European politics have become more narrow and perhaps American politics have become more polarised.

The question is whether the right's idea of minimal goverment is just a way of not dealing with the more difficult issues of poverty, health care, minority rights, etc. whilst discretely favouring their own (the rich). And for the left, will interventionist policies deliver genuine benefits or simply give more control and power to the politicians.

I'm optimistic about American politics. This is the country that gave us "The Rights of Man".

Democracy, as we know it, had its origins in ancient Athens. Although it was not a truly democratic equal rights society. Women had no rights as we know such rights today and Athens still had free men and slaves. Rome for a while had a form of democracy, but was still not an equal society. For the true origins of modern democracy you should look closer to home Marlowe. England is the model for all modern democratic societies. It is through many struggles and travails that the English endured and persisted in that gave the world modern democracy. The 'Rights of Man' actually started with the Magna Carta, but that was only just a beginning and didn't, in and of itself, bring about true democracy and equality.

Ah, I love being American! I can laugh at my own country - this silly republic in which democracy comes in the form of voting not for the presidential candidate you like the most, but the one you dislike the least.:lol: I mean, I have no illusions about the outcome. My feeling is, be it Obama or McCain, our next President is going to fuck up, BIG TIME. LBJ-Tricky Dick-Ford (Not a Lincoln)-Jimmy-The Gipper-Old Read My Lips-Bill-Dubya. It's a cycle of executive insanity!
On the other hand, being a centrist is a bitch! I'm constantly caught in the crossfire between liberals and conservatives.

Middle of the road
 

I'm in favor of Barrack, though I can vacilate between Rep and Dem. I really think the US needs to mature. It's still a very young country in comparison to others, and many other countries have adopted more socialistic policies, to the betterment of society (in some respects anyway).

As a Libra, I always find myself in the middle.

Oh yeah, and I believe the Republicans have to let go of their stranglehold on the Christian/Catholic segment. The bible drives too much policy.

Hank, did you really start a political thread? Guess I fell right into it.:D

I'm a socialist-to-communist! Government control over everything! Planned economy, equal share for everyone!

MWA-HA-HA! ALL HAIL MEGATRON!!!

:)

Thomas Paine
 

Hi Ila

I was referring to "The Rights of Man" by Thomas Paine. He promoted liberty and human equality as inalienable rights and his writings were a big influence on the American Revolution and the subsequent Declaration of Independence. Also, I believe it was Paine who first suggested the name 'United States of America' for the new nation.

Strictly speaking I'm not right in saying that work came out of America. Paine was an Englishman who emigrated to America. What I meant was that the underlying foundation of American politics are based on ideas of liberty and equality, and that's a reason to be optimistic.

I think Hank had a spare half hour between dates.

You bet I did!

And I cant wait for Barrack to take over that abused office!

We've now all (in this world) been tormented for eight years by probably the most amazing example of American governmental stupidity and a scary degree of ultra right wing horror, branded by "Patriotism, God and Glory..." and a degree of scare-vocabulary that we have to go back to the nineteenfifties to find matches for.

I hope that the pathetic, incompetent George Bush and his "administrasi-horribili" is the for ever LAST example of electoral corruption and right-wing bending the rules in the name of (their) mammon and suppression of democracy in your country. You guys should take the bunch of criminal ass holes to court... but how can you? These guys own it all... and you just let them.

But Obama will restore it all - it will not be easy for him, and the expectations will be unrealistic, but he's the man!

:yes:

H

Stirring stuff and a fine turn of phrase. :respect:

Brianna, in all respect... this is really not about socialism (I'm not a socialist at all). It's merely about a politic that takes ALL citizens into concideration. It's about DEMOCRACY and treating every citizen with respect and helping the ones not so fortunate like the rest to a nice life as well.

It's about social compassion and accepting the fact that ppl like George Bush and his hoods will NEVER care for any one but them selves and their hypocritical born again Christian companions...

In the end it's about Christian values... the Christian values that neither the Pope nor George Bush monopolized.

This is all about compassion and treating thy neighbour as you would want your neighbour to treat you.

"Solidarity" is not a socialist term - it's a term that is universal and necessary for any society to move on as a society.

It's about being open and willing to accept! And to lend a little help when needed!

H

In all fairness... not ALL Republicans have been dumb, ultra right wing idiots with only their own corrupt agenda... Ronald Reagan was, in spite of the very unfair criticism, probably the best placed American president ever!

By my political book Ronald Reagan paved the way for detente - he truly and personally disliked the nuclear threat and acted on it. Unfairly it was the stupid current president's dad who closed the deal, but it was all done by Ronald Reagan. The fact that he never got a Nobel peace prize is to me one of the most gross political mistakes ever.

H

Last minute Questions and answers
 

What is "aggressive peacekeeping"?
(Farting noiselessly)
What is maintenance of the "balance of power"?
(Keeping the lion's share for myself ;))
What is making rules?
(Breaking them blatantly every now and then, as needed)
What is unleashing agents of disruption on my neighbours?
(They are growing fat, exercise will keep 'em busy)
Why start a new crusade in modern times, instead of sewing up religious hatred?
(Its all about God and all Glory goes to him. I only keep the oily part :p)
Man, politics is bathed in corruption, conspiracy and innocent blood!
(Where there is meat, there always will be vultures)
What happens to dear old Buchy Buchy?
(Ah, him! He has gotten a whole theme-park reserved in Hell.)
Absolute power corrupts absolutely, is it true?
(Only if I'm scared of losing power all the time... and try to keep it forever! Power is like money. It comes and it goes.)

Hi Marlowe,

I know Thomas Paine and I'm not a big fan of his writings. His arguments can be very polarizing as in his book 'The Age of Reason' (although I haven't read the full book, only extracts).

In a functioning democracy the right and the left will always oppose each other, but at the same time they will find elements in each others' ideology that they can support for without support from the opposition issues would not move forward to the satisfaction of the majority. In this you will find what appears (or is in fact) the contradictions of left wing ideologues sometimes espousing what most people think of as right wing and of right wing ideologues voicing what most people consider left wing ideas. Democracy needs these apparent contradictions in order to function.

I wonder if Obama will ever make a stand on any of his principles and beliefs. He seems to bend whichever way the wind blows. He has opinions until they become unpopular and then he changes his mind. He supports people until they start to become a political liability at which time he drops them like a hot potato. He says things in private that he later repudiates in public. The Democrats would have been better off nominating Hillary as their presidential candidate. She's principled, strong, knowledgeable, and definitely not a jellyfish.

Political Country Club
 

The Senate or Parliament is a place where card game is played.
Here, an issue which is not profitable for the players becomes a dead issue.
Like in the Cartoon: The poor Little fellow sitting on the President's lap is a Mega Insurance Company. And the real poor fellows become non-issue here.

On the other hand, if it turns out to be a sensation, everybody tries to take credit for the policy even though they opposed it initially! ;)

In this game, you think of something, now... watch the other players, then, you say something else, watch some more for public reaction, do something different from what you said. :p

Ah, before entering the clubhouse, leave your ideology at the doorstep, along with your umbrella ;). And murmur Shakespeare before standing up to speak:

"Fair is foul, and foul is fair,
Hover through fog and filthy air."

There are times when the game of politics is like a Drama.
The Big figures are chosen as actors and the world population are the gullible audience. :p
Generally, in a Drama, there is a prewritten script, also there is much prompting and the actors know exactly who is acting which part and the next move written in the script. :cool:
The only party taken by surprise is the audience!

And after some of these days in parliament one might also say
"So foul and fair a day I have not seen."
(with apologies to Shakespeare)

Ila,
Dont call 'Bama a bad actor, even before he steps on the stage.
Give the kid a fair chance.:respect:

in agreement...
 

Very well said, Hank. I agree whole-heartedly. The reference to socialism was only in relation to the balance between left and right wing philosophy & policy. Having free enterprise, but with enough social conscience to not let it get out of hand, where the wealth is held by a disproportionate few, and the middle is left struggling, and the poor are left with little hope, not to mention that hundreds of thousands of jobs are allowed to be outsourced overseas.

Always refreshing to read your posts. Keep it up. and hard...

He has set forth on the world stage where he is more than “merely a player� and “in his lifetime he will play many parts�

Which part is he playing now:

"An infant - mewling and puking in the nurse's arms

Whining school-boy â€" with his satchel And shining morning face, creeping like snail

The lover â€" sighing like furnace

A soldier â€" full of strange oaths

The justice â€" in fair round belly with good capon lined. With eyes severe and beard of formal cut full of wise saws and modern instances

Sixth age â€" shifts into the lean and slipper'd pantaloon with spectacles on nose and pouch on side his youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide for his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice turning again toward childish treble, pipes and whistles in his sound

Last scene of all â€" that ends this strange eventful history is second childishness and mere oblivion, sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything"

Ok chumps! POST YOUR SCORES!

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

Economic Left/Right: -8.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.08

Mock Debate
 

Repub: We raise an Agendaaaaaaaah! "coughs":p

Demo: We second it; with a twist ;)

Nader: I debate and holler :confused:
(or someone similar)

And the tune plays on forever.
Traaa La La La La ....
Traaa La La La La ....
Traaa La La La La ....

Father and son: comparison
 

Bussie-baby: Ah, Presidency: sweet days, sour days and bitter days.

Journalist: Dont forget, its not a permanent job, its a temporary term only.;)

Bussie-baby: The public, which is always forgetful and forgiving... sometimes grow an elephant's memory! And Total Recall every Damn Thing!

Journalist: How about job-satisfaction, sir?
Job sucks? :p

Bussie-baby: Grrrr... :censored:

Hmmmmmm......where would men stand in your society?

Hopefully its in a good position. (pun intended). ;)

As far as my political position or beliefs. I don't trust any politician regardless of any party affiliation, and feel they are all liars, only wanting to fulfill their own agendas that benefit them and not their constituents.

I prefer a hardliner approach, just short of a dictatorship. The people still need to rule.

Obama may not be too pleased when news of Hank's support goes public. I can see the headlines now -

"PREACHER OF THE POWER OF TRANSSEXUAL LOVING PASSIONATELY BACKS OBAMA" Shock horror!

A headline like that would surely grow legs and go for a long time (not to mention what the tabloids could do with this headline). Poor Hank (Obama's strongest proponent) may become a liability to Obama.

One of the most important rules I live by is "Never - EVER - trust politicians, no matter how honest, charismatic and otherwise popular they seem." :no: Obama's just being a politician.

I consider myself a left-liberal. US-citizens may think this is sayin' the same thing twice, but here in Germany, the "liberal" party is anything but left. Other's from left partys are anything but liberal, some even wanting Stalinism back. I believe that there is enough fortune for everybody, it just has to be properly shared.
A few years back, I met this homeless guy who asked me for a few Euro-Cents to complete his one Euro-Dollar he needed to buy himself a coffee. I just felt so damned sad, that in a rich society like Germany, there are people who even have to ask for so little.

Economic Left/Right: 3.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.13

That makes me Authoritarian Right. :eek:

Somewhere between the Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela. Illustrious company, I'm honoured.

However, since I'm not in the US I can't vote there. I preferred Obama (and I'm happy that most of you did too). I'm glad we have a more pluriform political system here in Holland.

I'm not as up on politics as I should be, BUT I'm anti-illegal immigration (WAY too many undocumented ppl coming from our southern border now. every nation has such laws for a reason), pro gay rights, pro state's rights, pro-guns/militia and right to self defense, pro separation of church and state, anti-affirmative action and racebaiting/white guilt politics, anti-smoking in public building bans, anti-sexism (from BOTH sides), anti- PC/pro freedom of speech, pro environment, anti-war except as a last resort, pro death penalty (a security blanket, so optimistic attitudes about rehab won't let undeserving ppl out of LIFE sentences to repeat the same crimes), more affordable education, decriminalization of hemp and prostitution, and I'm for more affordable health care but I'm not sure if putting it on taxes is a positive alternative.

I'm not sure what I am. I'd probably have more of an idea if I read up more.

I think you are absolutely right on that. It's backwards. Also... the right is allied with the christian coalition. If someone were an atheist, you'd much more often than not find them on the left. But it's the left who economically seems to be doing more of "god's work". Giving to the needy, it takes a village, equal health benefits and education for all, etc. Although citizens on the right do donate heavily, the political party tries to stay out of that.

It is backwards.

A 2 party system hinges on 50-50 topics like abortion and gun control, and from the electoral map of the last election it looks like the 50-50 cut is urban-country.
Proposition 8 in California....the blacks voted against gays! Gov Arnold said he was always in favor of two people in love. One thing is for sure, presidential elections make for great TV. You can't write this stuff.

My personal politics are contradictory.
I frequently engage in "homosexual acts", but do not support gay marriage.

I have a strong respect for and belief in God, even though some of His followers say I'll burn in hell for whom I chose to have sex with.

I am an aggresive militrist, but question commiting troops for police actions; expressly if there is no international danger or if there is nothing to gain by such deployments. If two countries or factions or ethnic groups want to go to war, then let them. Just as long asthey do not threaten my Country's interests and security or that of our allies.

I am a passionate gun owner. To quote Mr. Heston, "You can take my guns when you pry them out of my cold, dead hands." However I recognize that some weapons should stay illegal, also some people should not have firearms.

I support the first ammendment, but some people take it much too far. It's one thing to disagree with the government, but one should not cross the line into sedition or treason. But, if the government becomes destructive to its purpose, it needs to be abolished then reformed. As Caesar said, "I love treason but hate a trator."

I don't support abortion, but do support the death peanality.
Overall, I'd say I'm a conservative that has some 'left leanings'.

If people truly had equal opportunity, wouldn't it be horribly unfair to force the more productive ones to support the lazy ones who didn't take advantage of said opportunity? And that would lead to general ennui among the populace and nobody would accomplish anything.

Admitting that some are "less able" means that they do not have equal opportunity. Pick an ethos.

Socialism in practice has proven that attempting to give everyone the same standard of living lowers everyone's standard of living. Of course, if we're talking about the US, capitalism has been totally perverted and the middle class is disappearing. Nothing better exemplifies this than the countless companies that go bankrupt losing the jobs and pensions of all the workers while the CEOs are given millions for no reason.



The 2-party system sucks, but it would be a lot better if it was as you point out split differently. I'd love to vote for smaller government and more social freedom. In the end (seeing as neither Republican nor Democrat social policies are truly oppressive), I think it's more important to vote for smaller government and economic responsibility. The problem with that is that Republicans have proven that they do not actually have any interest in those ideals. I don't think I need to get into the details of how massively Republicans have expanded the size of government, and on what a ridiculous scale they have pissed money away on not just war but handing out trillions to corrupt business.



They sure are. You're a self-loathing homophobic homosexual. It's probably your parents' fault for instilling you with a bunch of religious guilt.

I'm a gun owner, too. I have a concealed carry permit to deal with guys like you who would probably like to fuck me then chain me to the bumper of their pickup.

Seriously, if you engage in gay sex but are against gay marriage, just go ahead and kill yourself. Or at least get sterilized. It'd be nice if we didn't have to worry about people like you continuing the cycle of abuse and cranking out kids to indoctrinate with your BS.

I also hate people who are against abortion but don't want to do anything to help all the unwanted kids who just end up filling the prisons.

Democracy........yes, started off really well until you notice that it favours the top few percent of the population.

It's not the best political system only the best of what is currently available.

Anyone getting into the position of president or prime minster gets there by the greatness of their campaign and that is paid for by those that will take their profit later on.

Here here! CWP is what I'm talkin about! There are too many crazies in South Carolina who would just assume beat you down if they knew too much about your private life. Course, I guess you'll find that anywhere. I dunno how many people get beaten to death while carrying heat ;)

Fear
 

Fear the government that fears our guns. We (not me) have elected a man who does not believe in our Constitution.

But pissing away $2 trillion of the taxpayer's money, giving it to corrupt banks with zero oversight, that's defending the Constitution?

Invading random countries under the pretense of a total lie that they had weapons which they didn't have, and continuing a war for 6 years without even having a stated purpose, that's defending the Constitution?

Doubling the size of government, doubling government spending, exponentially increasing the power of the executive branch, that's defending the Constitution?

You're a genius! Of course Obama's the real threat to the Constitution!

Genius
 

You are correct in that I am a genius. IQ of 152 says so. But to further clarify my statement... There are what? 14 Amendments to the Constitution? These are your personal freedoms. Your so called guaranteed rights. Like your First Amendment right to write what you want here on this forum. Suppose he wanted to take away that right? How would you feel then? Well like so many democrats he doesnt believe in the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Doesnt believe you should have the right to defend yourself. Not even in your own home. He does not believe in your right to keep and bear arms and has always worked hard to take away YOUR RIGHTS! Therefore he does NOT believe in the Constitution And to close remember this... Fredoms lost are seldom regained. Signed, A TRUE PATRIOT.

Guns
 

RACHEL:

What is the big deal about guns? Protection w/ regard to your specific situation?

Besides, what about the right of forming militias, because 200 years ago we had a small army and a sheriff?


Piece,


TAL

Democracy?
 

Does anybody here believe we still have a Democracy in this country? The economic meltdown dramatically demonstrates that we have lost control of our government. For example: Freddy mac spent millions lobbying to prevent regulation of its activities. Without regulation we have become a lobbyoctracy. Can Obama restore some semblance of fairness in our government remains to be seen. In my neighborhood, homeless people are breaking into foreclosed homes to find shelter. The Republican principle of deregulation (unlimited greed) and "free" markets (job losses) is the basis of this debacle. A lot of Democrats went along with it for the financial goodies involved.:(
Lots of great comments! Lets keep going.

guns
 

It is a very big deal to 60 million Americans. And it's not just about the Second Amendment. It's about ALL the Amendments. If they manage to take that one away which one will be next?

Hi, cute schoolgirl
 

Sweet RACQUEL:

It wasn't just a lie; it was using 9/11 to justify the action, while portraying dissenters like myself as anti-American traitors. Plus, Chaney, Rummy & Wolfie drew up a paper in 1997 that said the only way to attack Iraq, and get Saddam--to finish what was started in '91--was for a Pearl Harbor type attack to occur.

BTW, that 3rd one wasn't puffy to me, it was enticingly innocent.


More Kisses for you,


TAL

You didn't answer my questions.
 

RACHEL:

What about ALL the constitutional abortions of the current occupant of The WH? Like wiretapping?

From what I've heard Army guys cannot refer to their rifle as a gun. If they make that mistake in boot camp, they have to run naked around the base w/ one hand holding their rifle, and the other holding their cock. They have to sing this is my rifle, this is my gun; this is for shooting, this is for fun.


Piece,


TAL

The correct term for someone in the army is soldier. Also you shouldn't believe rumours.

Gee I always thought that the second amendment to your constitution was the right to bare arms.

j/k I'm only trying to inject a bit of my warped sense of humour.

ILA,

I should say: it's US Army, and years ago.

wiretapping?
 

If anything illegal was done then how come G W Bush hasnt been impeached? Seems I recall the last Democrat in the White House was impeached. Hmmmm? And which question are you referring to Tal?

RACHEL:

Clinton was impeached as the result of a witch hunt, while Dems don't treat impeachment as a revenge tool. Dems don't want to stain the country w/ impeachment. Obama will probably be impeached--not convicted--for the economy, because Pubs need a scapegoat.


Piece,


TAL

2 questions below:
 

RACHEL:

Those 2 were not rhetorical questions.


Piece,


TAL

Well that sucks. My IQ was only 147 when I took the test. :(

IQ is a joke, though, and I've certainly never brought up my IQ to try and defend my position on anything. You could have an IQ of 200 if you were 6 and tested at a 12-year-old level, but you could spend the rest of your life not learning a thing, so then you're a "genius" who's as smart as a 12-year-old.

As far as your statements are concerned, it doesn't matter what you got on any IQ test. Your logic is flawed.

How can you even bring up the Constitution and defend Bush? They could ban all guns today and it still wouldn't be as gross a violation of the Constitution as the Patriot Act was.

For the record, I live in Dayton, Ohio, and I keep a 20-gauge by my bed and often carry a 9mm. If you actually look at what the 2nd Ammendment is saying, though, it's not really about personal protection. It's about average citizens being armed to protect a "free state," meaning the tyranny of a corrupt government. I certainly don't agree with the theory that the 2nd Amendment doesn't apply because we don't need a militia.

All politicians are corrupt, but certainly Obama can't be as corrupt as Bush. You are a complete fool if you thought it was a good idea to vote for a Republican who is OK with Bush burning the entire Constitution just because you think Obama wants to take your guns away. That is not true. Obama has never spoken out for gun control. He never made much of an issue out of it. When he was pressed to make a statement, Obama said:

"I think it's important for us to recognize that we've got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage. And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill. We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people's traditions."

Gun control isn't the most important issue in the world. In case you didn't notice, we actually have less gun control than we had a few years ago. Obama is for the states having control over gun issues, and it is because of that kind of a policy that I was able to get a carry permit in Ohio. So I've got four guns, I've got 33-round magazines for them, I've got hollow-point ammo that isn't legal to use in a war but is legal for me to carry. My shotgun is basically sawed-off, with an 18" barrel and a pistol grip, and that's perfectly legal. It cost me $75 for a concealed carry permit. A friend of mine just told me that it only cost him $200 to get a permit to use a silencer. Who the hell needs that??? But it's legal. And you're worried about gun control? Then go buy an assault rifle while you can, psycho.

Of course, I think people who say Obama is going to fix all the problems in the country are totally ignorant, too, but that's a different story...


That depends on what you mean by "impeached." He was charged by the House then acquitted by the Senate.

You honestly think Bush didn't do anything wrong? He started a war! He started a war under a totally false pretense. He put people in charge like Rumsfeld who directly defied the Pentagon over and over again when they told him what they would have to do to accomplish anything in Iraq. He supported people like Cheney who funneled most of the money going to Iraq into a company which he owns stock in. He demanded that this recent $2 trillion in handouts would have absolutely no oversight and nobody can be prosecuted for using those funds illegally.

You want to talk about destroying the Constitution? Do you know what an interpretive signing statement is? Basically, every time Congress passes a bill and gives it to Bush, he doesn't just pass it. He doesn't just veto it (then they could push it through with another vote). He rewrites it himself with a signing statement, which amounts to him interpreting it himself and saying that anything he doesn't like doesn't apply. Bush has written over 100 signing statements re-interpreting over 1,000 laws.



I think Constitutional abortion is a pretty good thing to call it :)

Seriously, I'm amazed at the ability of people with an agenda to be in complete denial about reality.

IQ
 

Wow that was some essay. You must have been the smartest person in jail.

Carry on with your discussion, but stop the derogatory comments about each other.

IQ. :( Half the people are below average.

derogatory comments
 

Hey! She started it with the name calling not me! Glad I got in the knockout shot though lol

IQ
 

Yes, they are the ones that voted for Bush!:censored:

That anyone after the last eight years can still support Bush is simply absurd. With all respect, Rachel, have you been living on another planet?

Gun Control, abortion, stem cells, religion, immigration, the politicians laugh at that stuff. It's all about the MONEY! You don't need to be a genius to figure that out!

The only thing I called you was a genius. You should be happy.

What's this about a "knockout shot"? Wouldn't that require an actual rebuttal? The only knockout was what your witty ad hominem did to your credibility. And then you "lol" me? You sound like a 14-year-old boy who spent too much time listening to his pickup-drivin' lifetime-NRA-membership-havin' dad. You don't even have an argument, just a couple things you've heard other people say which you don't understand and can't defend. If you are TS, up your spiro and use that brain of yours.

That's fine if you're a Republican, but don't you have anything to say besides bragging about your IQ and about Clinton being impeached? That makes about as much sense as arguing that Obama is stupid because he's black and Flavor Flav is a fuck-up.

name calling
 

Your so messed up you dont even remember what you said. You called me a psycho. Does that ring a bell? Scroll back and read one of your lengthy essays. My credibility is just fine thanks. However yours is down the toilet. Any testimony of yours wouldnt stand up in court. In Bianca's thread you state and I qoute, "the last time I was arrested" so apparantly there has been more then one time. Then you mention your probation officer. Hmmm ,I find it hard to believe that they issued you a CCW permit.

support
 

No dear I live in America. And I support MY President no matter who he is. When he's out of office then I may have things to say about him. Until then...

Gun Control, abortion, stem cells, religion, immigration, the politicians laugh at that stuff. It's all about the MONEY! You don't need to be a genius to figure that out!( see post above)

Oh yes, we all in America take political advice from Europeans. ( gi'me a freakin' break!)

Ooooh girl fight. Tracy sits back to watch the biting and scratches that will surely turn to :kiss:es and t-girl / t-girl :coupling:

Maybe a sword fight is in the cards. :yes:

Errrr.... And where's the logic in that? If a president is a bad president, he shouldn't get any support, no matter who he is. It's a simple as that.

Why don't you look at the context in which I said "psycho" and see if you can refute any of it?

Yes, I've been arrested. I don't know an American tgirl who hasn't been. And I said probation officer, not parole officer. I've never gotten a felony. I can still vote and pass a background check. This isn't even relevant, though. You've really raised the bar by pressing the issue. I've never met a bigot tranny before.

This thread is about politics, and you still haven't said a single thing to defend the political nonsense you've posted here. You like to respond by going totally off topic. You're confused if you think that makes you look smart.



The Patriot Act, the invasion of Iraq, and the gross misappropriation of $2 trillion of the country's money are each plenty to make a rational person stop supporting the president. At what point does he lose your support?

How's it feel to support a president who says the Bill of Rights doesn't apply to the LGBT community? Are you some kind of self-loathing transsexual?

Does this mean you supported Clinton, even after you found out he liked to pull his cock out in front of interns?

where do you stand politically
 

[QUOTE=racquel;54375]Why don't you look at the context in which I said "psycho" and see if you can refute any of it?


This was the topic. Where do I stand. I gave a view, an opinion. I do not have to defend my views to you or anyone else. You however started with the name calling. Whatever context you think it is or was doesnt matter. I posted in this thread and you go on the attack as you do in other threads. Do me a favor... Dont reply to my posts and I wont reply to yours ok?

I´m a communist with symphaties for anarchosyndicalism. So, very leftist.

views
 

LOL Cyborg!

Well, I´m member of the Austrian Communist Party since 2003. ;)

I don't believe in the 2 party system. Lots of people here in Europe say that in America people have 2 options, to vote right (Democrats) or to vote far right (Republicans).

It's so bad, you can't express your true opinion if you only have 2 options.

Besides, I hope you know, politics don't matter too much, 'cause politics are decided by economics nowadays. Do you think there's a real difference between Obama and Mc Cain? Go search for the companies that are paying their campaings!!!

Yes, you could say I'm far right. But I'm not communist (despite I want to practice sexual communism :P) nor a socialist, just a dreamer.

Nihilist.

To extremly simplify that would be to say an atheistic anarchist.

Otherwise, check out Counterorder for a waaaay better description.

I am a nationalist and I belongs to a party called Sverigedemokraterna, we believe in freedom and the idea of folkhemmet which I cannot explain in detail here you can however read about it on wikipedia if you wish, the concept originated by the early socialdemocrats but they have corrupted it later on, and we do not think that islamism is the greatest thing there is unlike most of our members of parliament, we also do not think that EU is good for Europe.
We believe that immigration should be restricted to a level that the country can absorb. Because of this every other party in the country hates us and call us nazis, racists and so on but we are almöst certain to enter parliament in the elections 2010, all the polls show this. I do however have a big problem with communism, that in part have something to do with the fact that I did spend time in an EastGerman prison in 1989, one other thing is that they have killed about 100 million people over the years.

Well, now that Obama's waiting for Dubya to clear out, it's only a matter of time before the Assault Weapons Ban is passed...this time, for good.:(
I'll never be able to own one of these, even if I leave Washington:

I'm a very moderate democratic socialist. Overall, first and foremost, I am moderate, unbiased, and objective. I am this way with my daily activities and my philosophy on life. Some of the things I like to research as a hobby such as history, religion, and sociology, I take the same approach to avoid being extreme, intolerant, unfair, and ignorant to what's actually there. But, I have a natural tendency to prefer a slightly socialist viewpoint most of the time. Looking back at ancient history, if I'm not mistaken, places that became major forces like Egypt, West Africa, Moorish Empire, Persia, Arabia, India, China, Greece, and Rome were more socialist than anything else. So there's no reason for anyone to try to demonize that type of government. Any kind of government can go to hell if it's not done properly and if it goes TOO FAR to the left or right. Something too liberal, conservative, socialist, or capitalist winds up running into problems because you put all of your eggs in one basket. Look at what's happened in the USA.

Yeah, all those socialist programs like CRA and over spending finally caught up to us. Perhaps if we repeat those mistakes magnified by several orders of magnitude it will get better.