Who will win?

Here we discuss topics unrelated to Jake E Lee.

Moderator: skezza

who do you think will win the USA 2008 election?

Republicans
8
42%
Democrats
11
58%
 
Total votes : 19
Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 1231
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: OBeach town, Florida

Re: Who will win?

Postby frethead » Tue Oct 14, 2008 12:27 pm

I've had trouble getting onto the internet for the last couple of days, and was I wowed by the flood of posts!!! I appreciate the words of wisdom you guys have shared in this thread, as I think we can all benefit. My thoughts of politics are slowly maturing, and are, certainly unorganized. The wisest, most sincere contribution I believe I can make is this bottom line: O Lord, as it is written, may God's will be done on earth as it is Heaven. In Jesus' name I pray. Amen
Last edited by frethead on Fri Oct 17, 2008 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Everyone will love you, just as long as you are a shooting star.

All Access Member
Posts: 1643
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Sacramento

Re: Who will win?

Postby Shadow » Tue Oct 14, 2008 7:43 pm

I'm not moved by neither one of the Presidential Candidates McCain or Obama although both seem sincere in their speeches: politics it's all mudd sligging to me and it seems who ever wins, like JR97 says the American people loses due to untrust of both parties the Democrates & the Republicans. They play too much with our lives...'it's mind whirling anger what has gone on with Wall Street, etc.,.: hundred of thousands/millions of Americans got damaged by that/their life savings "gone". Many times it has to do with the party itself and the President can only handle so much cause the party rather Democratic or Republician will go over the President's head often...'then when something horrible goes wrong the blame gets put on the President when it should be put at fault toward the Staffing of the Dem or Rep Party. So it's difficult to really say who is the best to choose...'whoever wins it: has to be a very reliant concious strong-will power "highly knowledgeable & caring" Spiritual/Godly person: that gives a damn about the well being of the American people and World issues (other Counties/people of the World) and get the Country back on track :!: Godbless...'we are "all" GOD's Children rather you believe in him or not.

Rock N' Roll Rebel
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Europe

Re: Who will win?

Postby bubbles » Wed Oct 15, 2008 2:20 am

mrmetal wrote:When he wins, the far left - the fringe element that has hijacked the Democratic Party will mistake that for a social mandate and try and implement their socialistic policies - further dragging down the economy, drive up inflation and unemployment. Get ready folks, this ride is just begining.


Thanks for taking the time to answer and not just to rip my last question open and view it as a form of insult.

Here in Europe we have governments that swing from Socialist to mild right wing, all of them are free market principled and all have economies that pulse up and down but tend to grow are supported by everyone.
They also have social care that has not undermined its principles or drag the nations down.
I think that over the coming years you might find things were not to bad, in Britain we implemented social care and had diverse fight backs in 1946-1949 so they are behind us now. Even the additional tax we pay for these services is very little and has no real impact on our earnings.

B

Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Who will win?

Postby mrmetal » Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:38 am

bubbles wrote:
mrmetal wrote:When he wins, the far left - the fringe element that has hijacked the Democratic Party will mistake that for a social mandate and try and implement their socialistic policies - further dragging down the economy, drive up inflation and unemployment. Get ready folks, this ride is just begining.


Thanks for taking the time to answer and not just to rip my last question open and view it as a form of insult.

Here in Europe we have governments that swing from Socialist to mild right wing, all of them are free market principled and all have economies that pulse up and down but tend to grow are supported by everyone.
They also have social care that has not undermined its principles or drag the nations down.
I think that over the coming years you might find things were not to bad, in Britain we implemented social care and had diverse fight backs in 1946-1949 so they are behind us now. Even the additional tax we pay for these services is very little and has no real impact on our earnings.

B


You are welcome. I can't really comment on the aspect of socialized care because I haven't lived in a country where that is practiced. I just know what I have been told by some friends that live in Canada, France, and Spain. But to really comment on it, I think you would have to experience it to make a valid comparison.

I did watch a BBC documentary on some of the pitfalls of their care system because the government is involved. Alot of bureaucracy and forms to justify the costs and ensure that tax money was not being wasted. I can't remember the details of it, but it had to with 5-hour wait times for ambulances. :wink: The overall consensus of the show was indifferent, they really didn't say it was good or bad, just that this is what it is.

Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 1679
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Who will win?

Postby mrmetal » Wed Oct 15, 2008 8:52 am

JR97 wrote:On the contrary. Brokers and bankers make money by lending, creating loans, collecting fees/interest, and packaging up loans for sale. The low-interest rates of the Clinton/Greenspan years led to a windfall of new lending and the beginning of the housing bubble. Money from the sky. Granted, loose lending regulations lead to a lot of bad loans, but it's not like the gov't was holding a gun to anybody's head forcing lenders to take advantage of and even skirt the loose regulations. I mean, who's fault is it if you gorge yourself into oblivion at the all you can eat buffet? Banks and lenders gorged themselves.

But the "system" as a whole is destined to fail because the Federal Reserve System is a credit system. Monetized debt. Meaning the borrower will always be in debt even if the interest rate was barely above 0%. So for the system to work, new credit/new money has to be constantly generated or the thing collapses. At some point, there is no longer the ability even make the minimum payment because inflation will have robbed any/all value of the currency making it nearly impossible for anybody.. be it corporation, family farm, or individual, to financially operate.


Uhh... isn't that pretty much what I said? They didn't hold a gun to anyone's head, but groups like ACORN did plenty of stiff-arming, with the help of an Clinton Administration of pressuring lenders to loan people money.

It didn't help that Republicans de-regulated the whole thing, nor did it help when a Democrat-led financing committee stonewalled the investigator who was analyzing the practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the crook Frank Raines.

A borrower doesn't always have to be in debt. You do have the ability to pay off your loans early if you choose.

Rock N' Roll Rebel
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:46 pm

Re: Who will win?

Postby JR97 » Wed Oct 15, 2008 6:55 pm

mrmetal wrote:A borrower doesn't always have to be in debt. You do have the ability to pay off your loans early if you choose.


But if everyone did that the system would completely collapse. the gov't can't even pay off it's debt or the system collapses. They can be 100% balanced in the budget and even have a surplus, but it's impossible to pay off the debt because there is not enough money in the system to do that because of interest. Same for commercial credit. Moreover, for the system to even maintain, there has to be sustainable growth which means more credit has to be created constantly. In other words there comes a time when the system can no longer function because the ability so maintain sustain growth is no longer possible.

Politics can sway a few things here and there, but the end result is inevitible. And that's where people need to learn how things work and push for change where it truely matters. But unfortunately monetary reform is never put on the debate agenda as an issue. Heck, I bet neither candidate has a clue on how the financial system even works. And then we expect these guys to make a positive difference in the country?

Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 1231
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: OBeach town, Florida

Re: Who will win?

Postby frethead » Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:38 am

Remember the Crusades and the Knight's Templar! When the going gets rough, the tough get going!!! :x
Everyone will love you, just as long as you are a shooting star.

Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 1231
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: OBeach town, Florida

Re: Who will win?

Postby frethead » Sat Oct 25, 2008 9:25 am

I found these two articles relevant to helping Bubble find an answer for her question.

Understanding Obama: The
> Making of a Fuehrer
> By Ali Sina
>
I must confess I was not
> impressed by Sen. Barack Obama from the first time I
> saw him. At first I was excited to see a black
> candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared
> to be confident – a wholesome presidential
> package. I was put off soon, not just because of his
> shallowness but also because there was an air of
> haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His
> posture and his body language were louder than his
> empty words. Obama's speeches are unlike any
> political speech we have heard in American history.
> Never a politician in this land had such a quasi
> "religious" impact on so many people. The fact
> that Obama is a total incognito with zero
> accomplishment, makes this inexplicable infatuation
> alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a
> genius. In fact he is quite ignorant on most
> important subjects. Barack Obama is a narcissist.
> Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the Malignant Self
> Love, also believes, "Barack Obama appears to be a
> narcissist."
>
>
> Vaknin is a world authority
> on narcissism. He understands narcissism and
> describes the inner mind of a narcissist like no
> other person. When he talks about narcissism
> everyone listens.. Vaknin says that Obama's
> language, posture and demeanor, and the testimonies
> of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the
> Senator is either a narcissist or he may have
> narcissistic personality disorder (NPD).
>
>
> Narcissists project a
> grandiose but false image of themselves. Jim Jones,
> the charismatic leader of People's Temple, the man
> who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully
> commit mass suicide and even murder their own
> children was also a narcissist. David Koresh,
> Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin,
> Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong Ill and Adolph Hitler are a
> few examples of narcissists of our time. All these
> men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers.
> They created a personality cult around themselves
> and with their blazing speeches elevated their
> admirers' souls, filled their hearts with
> enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest
> for life. They gave them hope! They promised them
> the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to
> their doom. When you are a victim of a cult of
> personality, you don't know it until it is too
> late.
>
>
> One determining factor in
> the development of NPD is childhood abuse.
> "Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and
> replete with traumatic and mentally bruising
> dislocations," says Vaknin. "Mixed-race
> marriages were even less common then. His parents
> went through a divorce when he was an infant (two
> years old). Obama saw his father only once again,
> before he died in a car accident.. Then, his mother
> re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia :
> a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to
> be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he
> was whisked off to live with his maternal (white)
> grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently
> in the following few years and then she vanished
> from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in
> 1995."
>
>
> One must never underestimate
> the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists.
> They project such an imposing personality that it
> overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the
> charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay
> in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and
> delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes
> the world around himself and reduces others in his
> own inverted image. He creates a cult of
> personality. His admirers become his co-dependents.
>
>
>
> Narcissists have no interest
> in things that do not help them to reach their
> personal objective. They are focused on one thing
> alone and that is power. All other issues are
> meaningless to them and they do not want to waste
> their precious time on trivialities. Anything that
> does not help them is beneath them and do not
> deserve their attention. If an issue raised in the
> Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he
> has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a
> safe vote. No one can criticize him if things go
> wrong. Why should he implicate himself in issues
> that may become controversial when they don't help
> him personally? Those issues are unworthy by their
> very nature because they are not about him.
>
>
> Obama's election as the
> first black president of the Harvard Law Review led
> to a contract and advance to write a book about race
> relations.. The University of Chicago Law School
> provided him with a fellowship and an office to work
> on his book. The book took him a lot longer than
> expected and at the end it devolved intod€¦,
> guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of
> writing a scholarly paper focusing on race
> relations, for which, he had been paid, Obama could
> not resist writing about his most sublime self. He
> entitled the book Dreams from My Father .
>
>
> Not surprisingly, Adolph
> Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was
> still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist no
> subject is as important as his own self. Why would
> he waste his precious time and genius writing about
> insignificant things when he can write about such an
> august being as himself?
> Narcissists are often
> callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack
> conscience. This is evident from Obama's lack of
> interest in his own brother who lives on only one
> dollar per month. A man who lives in luxury, who
> takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who
> has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his
> campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no
> interest in the plight of his own brother. Why?
> Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent
> to power. A narcissist cares for no one but himself.
>
>
>
> This election is like no
> other in the history of America . The issues are
> insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can
> be more dangerous than having a man bereft of
> conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot
> distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader
> of the free world?
>
>
> I hate to sound alarmist,
> but one must be a fool if one is not alarmed. Many
> politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to
> others... They are simply self serving and selfish.
> Obama evinces symptoms of pathological narcissism,
> which is different from the run-of-the-mill
> narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton, for
> example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined.
> This is a mental health issue, not just a character
> flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because
> they look normal and even intelligent. It is this
> disguise that makes them treacherous.
>
>
> Today the Democrats have
> placed all their hopes in Obama.. But this man could
> put an end to their party. The great majority of
> blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a
> fool does not know that their support for him is
> racially driven.
>
> Let us call a spade a spade.
> This is racism, pure and simple. The truth is that
> while everyone carries a misconceived collective
> guilt towards the blacks for wrongs done centuries
> ago by a bygone people to a bygone people, the
> blacks carry a collective rancor, enmity or vendetta
> towards non-blacks and to this day want to "stand
> up" to the white man.. They seem to be stuck in
> 19th century.
>
>
> The downside of this is that
> if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he
> will cause widespread resentment among the whites.
> The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of
> their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and
> unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the
> sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This
> will cause a backlash among the whites. The white
> supremacists will take advantage of the discontent
> and they will receive widespread support. I predict
> that in less than four years, racial tensions will
> increase to levels never seen since the turbulent
> 1960s. Obama will set the clock back decades…
> America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the
> world depends on the strength of America , and its
> weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism
> and victory of rogue nations. It is no wonder that
> Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the
> Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo
> terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of
> America are so thrilled by the prospect of their man
> in the White House. America is on the verge of
> destruction. There is no insanity greater than
> electing a pathological narcissist as president

And this . . .

I know everyone has a different opinion on the war and our current President, but, this article makes a lot of sense, take 2 minutes, read it and give it some thought.
When electing the next President, 'the only decision you have to make is who you want sitting in that seat in the White House when - not if - when we get hit again and millions of American lives are put at risk!'

This is from: ' You Ain't Gonna Like Losing.' Author unknown.

President Bush did make a bad mistake in the war on terrorism, but the mistake was not his decision to go to war in Iraq. Bush's mistake came in his belief that this country is the same one his father fought for in WWII . . . . It is not.
Back then, we had just come out of a vicious depression. The country was steeled by the hardship of that depression, but they still believed fervently in this country. They knew that the people had elected their leaders, so it was the people's duty to back those leaders.
Therefore, when the war broke out the people came together, rallied behind, and stuck with their leaders, whether they had voted for them or not or whether the war was going badly or not.
And war was just as distasteful and the anguish just as great then as it is today. Often there were more casualties in one day in WWII than we have had in the entire Iraq war. But that did not matter. The people stuck with the President because it was their patriotic duty. Americans put aside their differences in WWII and worked together to win that war.
Everyone from every strata of society, from young to old pitched in. Small children pulled little wagons around to gather scrap metal for the war effort. Grade school students saved their pennies to buy stamps for war bonds to help the effort.
Men who were too old or medically 4-F lied about their age or condition trying their best to join the military.
Women doubled their work to keep things going at home. Harsh rationing of everything from gasoline to soap, to butter was imposed, yet there was very little complaining.
You never heard prominent people on the radio belittling the President. Interestingly enough in those days there were no fat cat actors and entertainers who ran off to visit and fawn over dictators of hostile countries and complain to them about our President. Instead, they made upbeat films and entertained our troops to help the troops' morale. And a bunch of them even enlisted.
And imagine this: Teachers in schools actually started the day off with a Pledge of Allegiance, and with prayers for our country and our troops!
Back then, no newspaper would have dared point out certain weak spots in our cities where bombs could be set off to cause the maximum damage. No newspaper would have dared complain about what we were doing to catch spies. A newspaper would have been laughed out of existence if it had complained that German or Japanese soldiers were being 'tortured' by being forced to wear women's underwear, or subjected to interrogation by a woman, or being scared by a dog or did not have air conditioning.
There were a lot of things different back then. We were not subjected to a constant bombardment of pornography, perversion and promiscuity in movies or on radio. We did not have legions of crack heads, dope pushers and armed gangs roaming our streets.
No, President Bush did not make a mistake in his handling of terrorism. He made the mistake of believing that we still had the courage and fortitude of our fathers. He believed that this was still the country that our fathers fought so dearly to preserve.
It is not the same country. It is now a cross between Sodom and Gomorra and the land of Oz. We did unite for a short while after 9/11, but our attitude changed when we found out that defending our country would require some sacrifices.
We are in great danger. The terrorists are fanatic Muslims. They believe that it is okay, even their duty, to kill anyone who will not convert to Islam. It has been estimated that about one third or over three hundred million Muslims are sympathetic to the terrorists cause. Hitler and Tojo combined did not have nearly that many potential recruits. So, we either win it -or lose it -and you ain't gonna like losing.
America is not at war. The military is at war.
America is at the mall, or watching the movie stars.
Remember Obama said in his book 'Audacity of Hope': 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction'.
What better place for the Muslins to control our country, than in the office of the President of USA.

Rock N' Roll Rebel
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Europe

Re: Who will win?

Postby bubbles » Mon Oct 27, 2008 3:44 am

I will read through these later today on my break.
Have you found other articles that suggest the planet should fear the Republican running mates? Here in Europe both parties have been questioned regarding who is running but they see the Democrat team as more mature and able to lead on a global scale.

Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 2138
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 5:00 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Who will win?

Postby MetalHead » Mon Oct 27, 2008 5:14 am

oh man, couldn't you just link to the articles instead ;)
"Spend less time chasing tones and more time just playing music." - Marty Friedman

Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 1231
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: OBeach town, Florida

Re: Who will win?

Postby frethead » Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:44 am

Again, in response to another one of Bubble's brilliantly cloying interrogations . . . No, I have to honestly say. Then, why should I go searching for information that is equally available to the most amateurish. I've got to say, that's awful funny about the Democrats' team being more mature and able to lead on a global scale, though! I guess you could say we're all doomed! Have yourself a good laugh, Bubbles deserves it. Want a little more? Just, a little more? O.K, that's it. Ofcourse, liberty, sustenance, the advancement of technology, and, as has been shown, the world economy is based on the strength of the United States, and all the wiggling animus in "Europe" isn't going to do the first damn thing to save it from collateral failure. I'll leave you, there.
Sorry, MetalHead, I know the length of those articles is testy, but, I received them as E-mails, and outside of posting my E -mail address, I don't know of any other way to present them. Besides, this is the Age of Exponentialized Information, right?! Or, something like that? LOL
Everyone will love you, just as long as you are a shooting star.

Rock N' Roll Rebel
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: Europe

Re: Who will win?

Postby bubbles » Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:14 am

frethead wrote:Again, in response to another one of Bubble's brilliantly cloying interrogations . . . No, I have to honestly say. Then, why should I go searching for information that is equally available to the most amateurish. I've got to say, that's awful funny about the Democrats' team being more mature and able to lead on a global scale, though! I guess you could say we're all doomed! Have yourself a good laugh, Bubbles deserves it. Want a little more? Just, a little more? O.K, that's it. Ofcourse, liberty, sustenance, the advancement of technology, and, as has been shown, the world economy is based on the strength of the United States, and all the wiggling animus in "Europe" isn't going to do the first damn thing to save it from collateral failure. I'll leave you, there.
Sorry, MetalHead, I know the length of those articles is testy, but, I received them as E-mails, and outside of posting my E -mail address, I don't know of any other way to present them. Besides, this is the Age of Exponentialized Information, right?! Or, something like that? LOL


I very much enjoyed these articles FH and I enjoyed reading reports that were critical of the Democrats. Although I am more left wing I feel that if we ignore our Political opposites we are closing our minds to debate. Most of my close friends are of the opposite Political persuation to me and that does not get in the way of our friendships.

I think the reason that Europe see the Democrat contenders as more mature is based on the fact that both men have a global view and the Vice-Presidential candidate has been active in foreign affairs. We in Europe pay lots of attention to global events because for centuries we owned most of it and still have interests there, we also have a collective guilt regarding our exploits of the third world and now work towards helping poor nations build wealth and favor. I really feel that these collective memories contribute to many seeing the Democratic team as a way forward for the planet.

I remember when in 1997 the Labour party (Socialist) in Britain won the election in Britain, a feel good factor followed across the whole country and Britain grew economically because the population felt hopeful. I imagine that even if Republican voters feel disappointed with a possible Democratic victory a mood of hope could work wonders on the domestic USA economy as it did in Britain in 1997. I have seen also that the British opposition political parties gained experience and learned from defeat. I think that the republicans could grow and prosper from a defeat at this coming election, and should a black man become the most powerful man on the planet it will bring admiration to your nation from the poorer nations on the globe.

Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 1231
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: OBeach town, Florida

Re: Who will win?

Postby frethead » Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:48 am

I appreciate your commentary from across the pond, as well, Bubbles; your explanation of the meat and potatoes ( or is it bread and butter?) perspective in Europe. With slightly clearer eyes, I will peer across the grey of the Atlantic. Pardon me for saying this, but, these are politicians we're talking about, basically corporate attorneys -the same "piranha" who represent insurance companies, and they aren't in the business because they give a rocky shit about how good they make people feel. I've hardly been able to raise my head since that damn Albrecht/ Clinton guy was in the Whitehouse, so I am disengaging before I'm forced into conversation over another freaking generation of tree huggers with their 3G Karen Carpenter shades walking around in the dark, and "hoping with all their heart" to find change. To that end, thanks for the laughs, and raise one to the bloody Queen! LOL
Everyone will love you, just as long as you are a shooting star.

All Access Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:29 pm
Location: UK

Re: Who will win?

Postby _will_ » Tue Oct 28, 2008 8:53 am

I don't think there has been any particular favour showed to either side from the UK's perspective atleast.
Then again the UK isn't really the same as general europe

Killer of Giants
User avatar
Posts: 1231
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:00 pm
Location: OBeach town, Florida

Re: Who will win?

Postby frethead » Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:01 am

Oops, you're absolutely right, Will! I guess I was caught -up in the moment, or something. There ain't no freaking Queen of Europe, heh? Damn, I was trying to make a "clean break" and thinking how funny everyone would think I am, too! LOL
Everyone will love you, just as long as you are a shooting star.

PreviousNext

Return to Free for all...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests