Thread: Obama/Biden or McCain/Palin

Originally Posted by Veronica

Do you know that Obama's full name is Barack Hussein Obama?

How weird is that the Americans will vote for someone named Hussein? And don't get me started on Obama Biden...

Perhaps it's not weird at all. Perhaps "Americans" should be given more credit.

And I don't understand your last comment about "Obama Biden"

Originally Posted by ScottJ

Perhaps it's not weird at all. Perhaps "Americans" should be given more credit.

And I don't understand your last comment about "Obama Biden"

Agreed. I'll be voting for Obama.

I'm guessing Veronica compared "Obama Biden" with "Osama Bin"... I'm right? I'm not THAT twisted, am I?

I think Bush (and so the republicans) did a lot to make this world a worst place. He is nuts, and I confirm that everytime I watch him speak on TV. It makes me sad to see that these kind of people are the ones who rule our world...

So I'd vote Obama all the way. I believe it's democrats turn to show the world what USA has to offer.

Obama/Biden are a dream come true. If that old shaky man and stupid embarrassment of a woman win ill quit the US. She can take a leap of the bridge to nowhere, aparently Russia is close enough to her house she can paddle ashore there.

Emily -

Long time no see! Good to see your heart hasn't softened in your time off!

Originally Posted by El Detective

I recognize that many people are living comfortably in socialist societies and I support their right to do so. But I, like many Americans, do not want to give up on capitalism as this would mean conforming to a government imposed socioeconomic norm and giving up on personal ambition. In a socialist society only politicians grow up to be wealthy and powerful. In a capitalist society anyone can. For these reasons I cannot support Barak Obama for president.

Joel

"giving up on personal ambition"? That is taking it to an extreme that simply blows my mind. The current capitalist system continues to have these blips because the people in charge are simply too greedy and they exploit those beneath them. Regulating that sort of abuse of the low and middle classes' resources would not affect ambition at all. I find it appalling that people I respect do not think that every citizen is entitled to health care, but that's a different argument with a wealth of solutions. The key point here is that I have not seen or heard anything to make me believe that Obama is a "socialist". The government ALWAYS gets involved in the lives of its citizens when it is working for the betterment of the majority. The New Deal is the best example, but you can look at things like "highways", the post office, public schools (ok...don't look there), etc., to see that the government has always stepped in and said "we'll take care of this part". Not to mention that George W. Bush, a capitalist man's pesident, no?, increased the budget and increased federal programs to a point never dreamed of by a Democrat...in short, I don't see ties to "socialism" in the form of Barack Obama's policies, but I do see that "capitalism" has brought the US to a dangerous point (again) and it may only get worse, depending on what happens to the budget deficit and foriegn debt...

Do I make any sense?

Originally Posted by El Detective

I blame the Congress (all the political parties represented) for failing to enforce the financial legislation currently in place that is meant to regulate those actors who have a strong influence in our economy. We would never see an Enron or Sallie Mae scandal if the current laws were enforced.
...

I do not believe the answer is the kind of government regulation and takeover of private business suggested by Senator Obama.


Joel

Just as you say that there is a difference between "proper government regulation" and "that proposed by Senator Obama", I set forth that there is a difference between "Obama's regulation proposals" and "socialism".

And, just to expound on a case you brought up regarding regulation, the truly concerning thing, big picture wise, is that they single-handedly caused the California blackout crises during the time that the commodities were deregulated (i.e., no laws were enforcing them...). Enron gladly stepped in, profited as much as they could, and then backed off when they were re-regulated in 2001. Yeah, I am for the government putting companies in check and making sure that blackouts or energy crises are not caused by people who are simply looking to mess around with people to make a buck. If that makes me a socialist (or someone who maybe didn't understand the situation), then feel free to call me a socialist (or someone who doesn't understand complex situations).

With all respect,
Scott