Fun with McCain!

Let the debates begin.

Moderators: Astarin ShadowPrince, Zahrim, Rhen

Fun with McCain!

Postby Xanai » January 25th, 2008, 5:01 pm

Ok, so it's a Ron Paul clip however listening to John McCain's answer to Dr. Paul's question cracked me up...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9QMddAFoZkY

The Question is: What would you do to bring more transparency to the President's Working Group on Financial Markets?
Answer: I'd rely on people I trusted, like the Secretary of the Treasury...

No duh Sherlock, the Secretary of the Treasury is on the President's Working Group on Financial Markets! As well as:

- The Chairman of the Board of Governor's of the Federal Reserve
- The Chairman of the SEC
- The Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission

And if you can't "trust" those people then WTF are they doing in those positions in the first place?

The aggregrate McCain answer? = "I don't know wtf I'm talking about so I'll use buzz words"

He's running for President and he doesn't even know what the job entails. Awesome. Awesome to the max. More importantly, if you were planning on hiring someone and during their interview you asked them a question and instead of answering they BS'ed around and got around the question would you be more or less likely to hire that person? Why or why not?

Xanai
Xanai
I talk too much
 
Posts: 585
Joined: April 30th, 2006, 2:19 am

Postby Wenceslas » January 25th, 2008, 6:18 pm

McCain is not and NEVER has been Republican.
He is derided as a RINO of the worst sort.

No one in the Republican party will vote his ass in as Pres - the primary caucuses have no real relation to actual nominees since anyone and everyone votes in whatever caucus they want to.

This whole process is taking about 1/2 year too long anyway.
Wenceslas
MCP's buff pimp
 
Posts: 4267
Joined: April 14th, 2004, 11:37 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Postby Bigfatbino » January 25th, 2008, 6:49 pm

I'd never vote for his ass, I don't care what he got shoved under his toenails in 'Nam. Campaign finance, illegal immigration, the gang of 14, for those reasons alone I'd tell him to fuck off.
Image

Bigfatbino, Lord of the Wings
Bigfatbino
I talk too much
 
Posts: 1167
Joined: June 11th, 2004, 7:26 pm
Location: Virginia beach

Postby Cuin » January 28th, 2008, 1:57 pm

Excluding McCain, the Republican party is offering up two religious nuts and a guy who just-so-happened to be mayor of the right place at the right time. Little wonder Xanai is pro-Ron Paul.

Across the aisle, the Democrats are offering up a woman, a black guy and a rich white dude.

And they wonder why I don't vote.
Cuin
 
Posts: 169
Joined: October 21st, 2004, 6:50 am

Postby Wenceslas » January 28th, 2008, 3:18 pm

the Republican party is offering up two religious nuts and a guy who just-so-happened to be mayor of the right place at the right time.


You are, you know, Full of Shit.

Huckabee is a bonehead.
McCain ain't a fuckin Republican.

Romney ain't a religious nut, neither is Guilliani.
Romney, at least, is a Conservative. He *admits* to religion. So anyone admitting to religion is a religious nut?

Guilliani might be a conservative BUT for a "guy who just-so-happened to be mayor of the right place at the right time" he did a lot more than just be there.

You do realize that NYC is about 1/30 of the population of the US?
Did you know that he took a liberal city and cut taxes (conservative), increased jobs because of it (conservative), cut down crime (conservative) and actually brought NYC budget under control (conservative)


Did you KNOW that it is a persons RIGHT to be religious?
Did you know that 90% of the USA IS religious?

Sorry man, the religious "nuts" outvote you.
Wenceslas
MCP's buff pimp
 
Posts: 4267
Joined: April 14th, 2004, 11:37 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Postby Cuin » January 28th, 2008, 6:47 pm

Huckabee is a bonehead.
McCain ain't a fuckin Republican.


So there's two of the four...

Romney, at least, is a Conservative. He *admits* to religion. So anyone admitting to religion is a religious nut?


Romney is a Mormon. Now, I can't say that I've ever met a bad Mormon. Every one I've run across has been a person of considerable moral and ethical fiber. The trouble is that it's not one of those religions where you can sin Monday through Saturday and get saved all over again on Sunday. It pervades every aspect of a person's life and weighs considerably on his decision-making process. To me, that's a "religious nut." A nice guy, maybe, but a nut nonetheless.

Guilliani might be a conservative BUT for a "guy who just-so-happened to be mayor of the right place at the right time" he did a lot more than just be there.

You do realize that NYC is about 1/30 of the population of the US?
Did you know that he took a liberal city and cut taxes (conservative), increased jobs because of it (conservative), cut down crime (conservative) and actually brought NYC budget under control (conservative)


I'd like to see statistics on how many other mayors of major metropolitan areas in recent history have performed similarly. I'm willing to bet there are a few; yet, none of them are running for president. There could be a host of reasons for why that is, but I feel the most obvious is that none of the others endured a major terrorist attack during their term as mayor. That tragedy bought Guilliani massive media attention and galvanized his career as a polititian. Erase that, and he's another local leader that no one has ever heard of. As with Romney, I'm not saying he's a bad guy, and I'm certainly not intending to diminish his achievements, but it's going to take a lot more than one horrific tragedy to win my vote.

Did you KNOW that it is a persons RIGHT to be religious?
Did you know that 90% of the USA IS religious?


To the former, of course -- I've read the Bill of Rights. To the second, it sounds like a reasonable percentage, so I'll assume your figures are correct. I have always been of the opinion, though, that political offices should be athiest -- not athiest in the sense of "against God," but more in the sense of "without God." America is a melting pot of diverse cultures, and is home to all the major world religions and their obligitory host of sects. Furthermore, America is not a nation in a vacuum; we are a cog in the machine of a global economy. The actions and attitudes of our leaders reflect on us as a people and affect the actions and attitudes of the other nations of the world towards us. As national boundaries fade, a president can ill-afford to alienate himself from the rest of the world, and if his religious zeal is the most profound divisive factor, he cannot perform the duties for which he was elected to the greatest benefit of the people he represents.
Cuin
 
Posts: 169
Joined: October 21st, 2004, 6:50 am

Postby Wenceslas » January 28th, 2008, 7:55 pm

I have always been of the opinion, though, that political offices should be athiest -- not athiest in the sense of "against God," but more in the sense of "without God." America is a melting pot of diverse cultures, and is home to all the major world religions and their obligitory host of sects. Furthermore, America is not a nation in a vacuum; we are a cog in the machine of a global economy. The actions and attitudes of our leaders reflect on us as a people and affect the actions and attitudes of the other nations of the world towards us. As national boundaries fade, a president can ill-afford to alienate himself from the rest of the world, and if his religious zeal is the most profound divisive factor, he cannot perform the duties for which he was elected to the greatest benefit of the people he represents.


And you totally missed the Founders intent.
Most of our Presidents and great leader types were and are religious.
No leader professing a religion is stating "That's OUR Country's religion" anymore than the leader of India is proclaiming (by just being the Prime Minister) India's true religion is Hindu or Muslim.

You have a problem with religion.
But that's YOUR problem. Don't push your views onto the politicians - it ain't yer place to do so as define by the Constitution of the USA.
Freedom of Religion.

This means that the Political offices SHALL NOT PASS LAWS AGAINST YOUR CHOICE OF WORSHIP.

Has NOTHING to do whether or not they worship themselves.

Nothing at all.
Wenceslas
MCP's buff pimp
 
Posts: 4267
Joined: April 14th, 2004, 11:37 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Postby Xanai » January 28th, 2008, 8:53 pm

Funny that here we are arguing over the Constitution of the USA and the only candidate who is running on a back-to-the-Constitution platform is getting serious hate from every party.

On Foxnews, they announced the 1st, 3rd and 4th place "winners" from Arizona... leaving out Ron Paul who placed 2nd. Same thing happened on NPR.

That's not neglect, that's the media openly declaring who is a "fit" candidate and who is not.

Stick it to The Man tm, vote Ron Paul!

Xanai
Xanai
I talk too much
 
Posts: 585
Joined: April 30th, 2006, 2:19 am

Postby Wenceslas » January 28th, 2008, 9:01 pm

Because Mr Paul ain't a Constitutionalist - he's an anarch.
Wenceslas
MCP's buff pimp
 
Posts: 4267
Joined: April 14th, 2004, 11:37 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Postby Xanai » January 28th, 2008, 10:01 pm

Because Mr Paul ain't a Constitutionalist - he's an anarch.

Evidence?

Xanai
Xanai
I talk too much
 
Posts: 585
Joined: April 30th, 2006, 2:19 am

Postby Xanai » January 28th, 2008, 10:07 pm

I have always been of the opinion, though, that political offices should be athiest -- not athiest in the sense of "against God," but more in the sense of "without God." America is a melting pot of diverse cultures, and is home to all the major world religions and their obligitory host of sects. Furthermore, America is not a nation in a vacuum; we are a cog in the machine of a global economy. The actions and attitudes of our leaders reflect on us as a people and affect the actions and attitudes of the other nations of the world towards us. As national boundaries fade, a president can ill-afford to alienate himself from the rest of the world, and if his religious zeal is the most profound divisive factor, he cannot perform the duties for which he was elected to the greatest benefit of the people he represents.

It sounds as if you would be opposed to a strongly religious man holding office in our government; a man who holds his faith above anything else.

To which I'd look at the Founding Fathers and their ideas...

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
-- John Adams

"It cannot be emphasized too clearly and too often that this nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religion, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here."
-- Patrick Henry

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”
-- Thomas Jefferson

Seems like the people who wrote the Constitution, fought the war for Indpendence and gave the world a concrete example of a Republic in action think radically different than you. How do you overcome their opinions with one so different?

Xanai
Xanai
I talk too much
 
Posts: 585
Joined: April 30th, 2006, 2:19 am

Postby Khaw » January 28th, 2008, 10:12 pm

Cuin wrote:Romney is a Mormon. Now, I can't say that I've ever met a bad Mormon. Every one I've run across has been a person of considerable moral and ethical fiber. The trouble is that it's not one of those religions where you can sin Monday through Saturday and get saved all over again on Sunday. It pervades every aspect of a person's life and weighs considerably on his decision-making process. To me, that's a "religious nut." A nice guy, maybe, but a nut nonetheless.


Wow, what religion says it's okay to go out and sin everyday?

WOOT!! I can go be a scumbag everyday!! But it's OKAY!

Why would this be a better religion then one that actually wants you to try to hold yourself to a moral standard?

Oh, and BTW, FWIW, LDS have sacrament every sunday. We eat the bread and drink the wine to cleanse ourselves of the sins we commited over the week. Does that mean it's okay to go out and sin everyday? No, but humans are not perfect, and the LDS church is not blind to that. I think you have a very misinformed perception.
Khaw
I talk too much
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: January 19th, 2005, 7:11 am
Location: Utah

Postby Solaxx » January 28th, 2008, 11:20 pm

Nuts are people too! :wink:
Image
Solaxx
I talk too much
 
Posts: 697
Joined: April 15th, 2004, 1:43 am

Postby Cuin » January 29th, 2008, 2:28 pm

And you totally missed the Founders intent.


The Founders also intended that only white, land-owning males over the age of 21 should be able to vote. I'm sure our nation's women, poor and minorities will thank you to stick to the black and white concepts and stay out of the gray areas.

You have a problem with religion.


You know nothing of me or my religious background, which I would be more than happy to share with you if I thought it would make an ounce of difference. Let me instead say that, unlike most, I can separate my personal beliefs from my professional conduct.

It sounds as if you would be opposed to a strongly religious man holding office in our government; a man who holds his faith above anything else.


I'd like to think that the person who holds the highest office in the land would hold his country above anything else.

Wow, what religion says it's okay to go out and sin everyday?


Quite a few, if the actions of worshippers speak louder than words in a book. If you need an example, I encourage you to watch the Mardi Gras festivities in which countless millions will be engaging over the course of the week. I'm sure Christ would approve.
Cuin
 
Posts: 169
Joined: October 21st, 2004, 6:50 am

Postby Xanai » January 29th, 2008, 2:45 pm

I'd like to think that the person who holds the highest office in the land would hold his country above anything else.

I think history has shown again and again what a horrific idea it is to hold the country in more esteem than morality.

Stalin.

Mao.

Pol Pot.

The list goes on and on...

Also, FWIW...

Quite a few, if the actions of worshippers speak louder than words in a book. If you need an example, I encourage you to watch the Mardi Gras festivities in which countless millions will be engaging over the course of the week. I'm sure Christ would approve.

That's a biased sample and you know it. Poor form old chap.

Xanai
Xanai
I talk too much
 
Posts: 585
Joined: April 30th, 2006, 2:19 am


Return to Rhen's Politics, Religion and World Events Forum.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron