Slashdot Mirror
IT Workers Split For McCain, Obama
antipeon alerts us to a presidential preference survey, done in late February and early March, indicating that Obama and McCain lead among IT workers with 29% each. Clinton follows with 13%, just ahead of Huckabee (11%) and Ron Paul (9%). The Computing Technology Industry Association commissioned the poll, and the article notes that this trade group claims the population of IT workers is four times as large as the Bureau of Labor Statistics thinks it is — the better to make a voting block whose views must be attended to.
Read his speech from last week. Think about leaders that you've disagreed with, too, but followed because you had faith in where they were going. There are lots of those in my history; we're not perfect beings and his pastor obviously has some issues with where America's been going. So do I. His pastor's not a showstopper for me. Given Clinton, who can't win, and McCain, who's too much of a turncoat and politico, Obama's the only remaining horse that can win this race and try to mend the mistakes made in two terms of an elected fear-monger.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
but the idea of a "voting block" made up by geeks, is uterly inane. Why, you say?
We like to think ourselves (ie, us geeks) as a special part of our society, (us vs the ID-10T problem). it's a dipole, hence a false dilema. we're part of the US society as much as everybody else. We are workers ourselves, even if most of us make a well-to-do living from our work.
But in no-way do we differ from another working caste of this society. In this Revolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Baroque_Cycle of the wheel, we got the upper hand, because we are techically inclined. But the wheel *will* make another revolution, and we'll be bottom-feeders once again.
My point is, in these comming elections do not vote such and such because you are a geek/woman/black man/white man/polka-dotted-man from mars. Vote vote according to your class: a working man trying to make ends meet.
----
Um, McCain solictited and got the endorsement of John Hagee, an outspoken anti-Catholic pastor of a megachurch in Texas. Among other things, Hagee has called the Roman Catholic Church "the Great Whore" and says that Catholics are apostates (non-believers).
Of course, McCain now says he disagrees with Hagee's remarks on Catholics, but he hasn't renounced the endorsement.
Personally, I think these types of attack vectors are silly. People make all kinds of friendships and relationships throughout their lives, and to be held responsible for all the beliefs and actions of those friends or associates is just ridiculous.
I'll add another log onto your flame war bait fire....
John McCain is the *ONLY Candidate* (of the three) who can claim "IANAL".
We can all admit to ourselves, that there are FAR MORE Lawyer jokes then Honored Veteran & Hero Air Force Pilot jokes... Just saying...
To serve in the military is NOT the same as to serve in any elected office.
i cannot understand why ANYBODY would want to vote for the party that has done more to destroy the USA in the last 7 years than any other party in my memory the USA seems to now stand for war,torture, xenophobia, racism, corruption and financial mismanagement full of the same corrupt actors as the nixon era but worse (cheney et al), even "conservatives" are disgusted with what the current incarnation of rogues that are perverting the name of true conservatives have done (record debts, gov size) but hey you crack on, the rest of the world is busy making plans without you (witness the dollars slump) if the GOP get back in power you agree with all they have done and you deserve everything you get
From the summary: "...done in late February and early March..."
I largely agree, I like McCain and he's the candidate that will most likely receive my vote in November. It's really not surprising that he'd be getting most of the Republican votes out of the IT sector.
I too was really disappointed that sen. Obama didn't take the opportunity to say on the record that racism is racism and that black people shouldn't behave in a racist manner either. Just seems to me to be common sense, as well as common courtesy. Race relations are largely a mess because of the differing standards that come into play. As well as the willingness to not play well with other minority groups.
As far as McCain goes, he's the only Republican candidate that has an official statement on how he plans to remedy global warming. It isn't as strict as the ones pushed by most Democrats, but it does exist. He's officially on the record as saying that the government spending is largely out of control; furthermore has declared that earmarks need to be eliminated. Presumably cut in some instances and moved into the regular budget in others.
That's not to say that I don't agree with some of his view points, but at least I can respect that he's come by those viewpoints honestly.
OTOH if Obama manages to get gov. Richardson as his vp., candidate, that would definitely make it a tougher choice. Richardson was the only Democrat who could make a meaningful list of accomplishments which required making deals across the aisle. Richardson was the best candidate that the Democrats fielded this election, it's really a shame that he wasn't able to capture the attention of the Democratic party early enough to get his campaign going.
It was never America, not in that sense that was even talked about there. Very specific cirtique of prevailing social trends, and that is the point of a large church like that. It is a social center. Obama is the best candidate, and if this shit pulls him out then maybe we deserve to be doomed to the hell of the current ways, at least then the ignorant motherfuckers and blind fools will be happy.
Do you feel better about Hillary Clinton being a Walmart Board member during the 90s when they earned their deserved anti-worker reputation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart#Governance
http://beforewisdom.com/blog/?p=276
Please do not take any offense.
If she didn't care about workers getting health care as Walmart Board Member Clinton, why do you think she will care about people like you getting health care if she is elected?
I want McCain. He's the only one who's proven his courage and loyalty under fire.
<sarcasm>What, by getting shot down?</sarcasm>
Seriously, whatever young John McCain, fighter pilot, may have done four decades ago, it's clear that old John McCain, politician, has no integrity left today. Look at the way he rolled over and showed his throat for Bush's people after the smear job they did on him in the 2000 campaign. Look at the way he talked tough about banning torture by the US military and intelligence services, then voted for the Military Commissions Act. He's a cowardly, self-serving, party-line Republican, and anyone who falls for his "straight talking maverick" act is a fool.
If McCain had associated with a minister who was a white supremacist and KKK supporter, he would have been kicked out, just like that.
Bullshit. McCain is closely associated with -- in fact, has courted and embraced -- right-wing preachers like John Hagee and Rod Parsley, who are on record with views that are at least as extremist as anything Jeremiah Wright has ever said. And yet somehow, the "liberal media" has failed to pick this up. Just like Bush, McCain is getting damn near a free ride from the press while his Democratic opponents are picked apart.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
McCain might help the economy if he is true to his word about reducing government spending.
I really wouldn't count on Mr. "Hundred Years in Iraq" to do that if I were you.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
From an IT perspective, since all of the candidates some how think that there is a massive shortage of IT workers in the US and we should increase the number of H1-Bs to solve this problem, it really doesn't matter who is elected.
Skip ------ See the latest from http://www.anArchyFortWorth.com
I hope you enjoy war with Iran and a never ending war on an intangible concept that can't technically be defeated. Real bright decision there, chief.
I too was really disappointed that sen. Obama didn't take the opportunity to say on the record that racism is racism and that black people shouldn't behave in a racist manner either. Just seems to me to be common sense, as well as common courtesy. Race relations are largely a mess because of the differing standards that come into play. As well as the willingness to not play well with other minority groups.
Did you read the speech? The whole point was that people have reasons for their flawed beliefs, and we should empathize with what the origins are, but he in no way endorsed them. I think a lot of people haven't gone any further into this subject than "Wright is Barack's pastor" and a few 10 second YouTube.com clips. As for standards, they're different because people in this country have historically been treated differently. I think the speech was historic in that it spoke at an adult level. Now, if you chose to evaluate his words at the same old bumper-sticker level, then that's your fault.
Richardson was the best candidate that the Democrats fielded this election
That's obviously a very small minority opinion. Resume bullets are only a small part of the job interview. Remember, GWB had great resume bullets as well.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Remember, GWB had great resume bullets as well.
He did?
paintball
While that is a bit extreme.....it is nothing unusual for religions to point at others to say they are wrong, or doing the wrong things. If they didn't , well how would they differentiate themselves and get people to believe in what "they" say, you know?
This is something MUCH more different than putting someone down for being of a certain race, or sex....something you don't have a choice in. You can decide what church you want to go to.
That being said...I think Obama got a HUGE slide on associating with that preacher who was giving some really, really racist 'sermons'. If someone white was known to be going to a church where the minister was extolling how the black man had been responsible for all the crime in the US or something equally distastful....I can imagine that white candidate would apologize enough or distance themselves enough to have a remote chance of staying in public office, much less run for high office. I was shocked how little this stuff Obama's preacher's statements initially was played on tv and discussed in the general media. It did finally get out there, but, it took a bit IMHO.
I still like a lot of what Obama says....I think he's a great orator....and I'll listen to what he has to say....but, I hate the double standard we have here in the US about what is generally tolerated by what minorities can say about whites vs what whites can say about minorities before the racist card is thrown and they are publically crucified.
Personally...I think both sides need to quit being so thinned skinned....and people shouldn't get so upset when someone says something offensive about someone. Free speech kinda negates freedom from offense.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Oh come on...
The electorate is so stupid about some things.
McCain doesn't plan to be or want to be in Iraq for 100 years. But, he plans to be there until the job is done. Why can't we recognize this as the only honest answer to the question? Not "We must leave Iraq immediately no matter what!" but "We will leave Iraq when it makes sense to leave Iraq."
Now, I'm still a fan of getting the hell out of Iraq, but I'm suspicious of anyone who promises to do so no matter what.
On the pastor front, who the hell cares what Obama's pastor says? That makes about as much sense as caring what McCain's mom says, or what Hillary's husband says, you know, the one who got his pole smoked while his wife was in the same building. EVERYBODY knows people who are even good friends of yours who say stuff that you absolutely don't agree with, or that is just downright stupid. If we all refused to associate with people who sometimes said things we didn't like, we'd have a pretty hard time talking to anyone!
If you videotape what someone says for years, you're going to have some tape of somebody saying something stupid.
And in this specific case, I think Obama understands, and tried to communicate, that while he doesn't personally agree with his pastor's decision, he understands why his pastor feels that way, and why a lot of Americans feel that way. It's not that these Americans hate America, it's that they feel that America has not treated them well. Some of their feeling is justified, and some of it is blame transference, but it's important to understand that. Justified or not, it's going to be difficult to resolve what causes opinions like Obama's Pastor's opinion if you don't even understand it.
Anyway, this pastor stuff is going to blow over. McCain doesn't even care about it - as he's an upstanding candidate who wants to campaign on the issues. It's only totally-desperate-Hillary who cares.
paintball
He's consistent, transparent, follows the rules, supports strong currency, fair and free trade, reduced government and taxes, and no lame wars based on BS. Of the politicians running, he's the least of a politician and the most of just an honest dude. that's the impression I got, I forget now, 8 terms as a Rep, no hint of scandal or taking bribe money or anything like that. No FUD, and IT people can see FUD, so maybe that is why they like him.
I don't agree totally with all of his platform or personal views, but dang most of it and them, and I will be writing him in, after voting for him in the primary, I don't care what the official neocon party nominates. He's an old fashioned nice guy and statesman, one who has real constructive change at heart. You look how he votes, never one time voted for anything that would contradict the constitution or waste money or expand the powers of the federal government beyond what they were designed for.
Any of the rest, including the top three still running..meh...same old politicians.
For crying out loud Bush *endorsed* McCain. To make it even clearer, McCain voted against the senate
anti-torture bill --1E6 hypocrite points-- and supports retroactive immunity for telecoms -- basically
indicating he's for the blatant and outrageous violation of the 4th amendment by Herr Bush even
though in public he disagrees with the policy - another 1E6 hypocrite points. If you still don't
believe me, he says that the U.S. needs the military option to deal with Iran. I rest my case.
jdb2
Between "outsourcing" and "downsizing" a lot of American IT workers have lost their jobs. They're looking for work, but there's not enough openings to employ them all (not by a long shot).
Every time the call for more and more H1B workers goes out it further drives home the blatant fact that our government doesn't care about the citizens that it supposedly represents. All their actions do is further enrich their corporate masters.
But while this evil is transpiring, the simple fact that corporations need customers with money to spend seems to elude everyone. If your population is unemployed and unable to purchase your products, how can you continue to post increasing profits and make your shareholders happy?
Sure, it's cheaper to produce it in China or support it in India. But who is going to buy it? Those American workers you laid off were the customers you were selling your products to.
These corporations are very short-sighted. When their market contracts (due to fewer customers) their profits will decrease. Will they try to make up the difference by hiring even more cheap foreign labor and further erode their customer base? Will our corporate masters continue to believe that their actions have no repercussions? Sometimes I wonder...
So what you're saying is that IT people (like you, that is) like McCain because he'll import more foreigners to compete with Americans for IT jobs? IT people (like you) want to leave the economy with Bush's policies intact, so no taxes to pay for a continuing explosion in spending (like a $TRILLION+ for Iraq), and continuing to leave no oversight of the corporations who have robbed that economy, like the banks, Halliburton, KBR, Enron and whichever new ones are based in Arizona instead of over in Texas?
IT people like you think that Progressivism is socialism, but that the Bush handouts McCain will continue (if there's anything left) are somehow not? That haven't noticed how different the US is from real socialisms like Canada, UK, France, Germany and so many others whose economies are making ours look like some failing MBA's final project?
Are there really that many IT people like you who haven't noticed that McCain and Bush's "Conservatism" has failed more miserably than any kind of government since the Soviet system it most closely resembes?
--
make install -not war
Taxes must be raised or spending must be cut. The current economic situation demonstrates that stimulus policies based on debt spending do not work in the long term. Sure, it worked sort of well for a few years, but the bubble just burst and now we're all paying the price for it.
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
"USA seems to now stand for war,torture, xenophobia, racism, corruption and financial mismanagement"
Reading your statement saddens me greatly. Not only because you're right, but because this was forseen and warned.
During the 2004 campaign, after he had dropped out and started campaigning for Kerry against Bush, Wes Clark explained that he has traveled the globe as a soldier, and currently travels internationally on business trips. So he has a wider international exposure than most Americans. In his travels, he found that although Bush was seen negatively by the world, the people he met still admired and loved America and the American people, no matter how much they despised the Bush government.
Clark explained that the foreigners held a distinction between "Bush" and "America" in part due to the disputed election of 2000. But if Bush was re-elected, this distinction would fade in the minds of others.
Clark said that the negative stuff Bush has done and what Bush represents (torture, manipulating intelligence to get us into war, suspending habeaus corpus, warrantless wiretaps, etc.) was not the policy or will of the American people. But that if Bush was reelected, at the end of 2008, all of that would BECOME the policy and will of the American people, and no longer associated only with the Bush Administration. Bush would have molded America into his image, carve his intentions (torture, holding people without trial, etc.) into the permanent law of the land. European allies and others would no longer recognize a distinction between the position Bush Administration and the position of the American people.
So when you say that ""USA seems to now stand for war,torture, xenophobia, racism, corruption and financial mismanagement" it grieves me to know how far we've fallen, exactly as Clark presciently predicted in 2004.
Blah Blah Blah sexism Blah BLah Blah.
Oh by the way... did I mention that if you don't vote for Obama you are automatically a grand wizard in the KKK and are evil racist scum?
See that's the problem with identity politics, the Dems were inconvenient enough to have candidates from two different victim groups so these lame arguments sound even sillier than normal.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
Why the hell is net neutrality the geek position? What geek with a brain in their skull would invite government intervention into the Internet? Companies can't kill the Internet. Governments *can*.
It's pretty easy to see through your backwards glass just by considering that "Conservatives" have been spending this economy for 7.5-13.5 years (in the White House and Congress, respectively) into $10 TRILLION Federal debt, plus $10 TRILLION mortgage debt plus $10 TRILLION other personal debt. All of which has been centrally planned to squander, but oh so decentralized in actually wasting on little productive capital. Sure, they're as "Conservative" as the Soviets were "Communist", but likewise there are no real "Conservatives" or "Communists" once either of them get the power and the budgets.
The dollar wasn't "overvalued" when we could buy half a gallon of gas with it, or half a gallon of milk. The destruction of the dollar's value isn't a measure of lowered demand for US goods per se, but rather the fear of investing in the US economy. That "Conservative" economy.
The one that John McCain has been voting to run for over 20 years. The economy McCain helped banks "deregulate" most famously with the Keating 5 to lose over $1.5 TRILLION (in 1980s dollars in a GDP 1/4 today's). The banks that got the biggest handout in history with deregulated lending rules, no oversight, and nearly 0% wholesale rates (on money loaned them by taxpayers) on loans back to taxpayers that they marked up to several percent to people who couldn't do the math to be able to pay them back for more than a few years. A few years they lived on their credit cards (and flipped those houses to the next layer in the pyramid).
Including those Americans who don't have a job, but aren't "unemployed" because the government only counts Americans for a little while "actively seeking" work. Of course, the Feds count any Europeans without a job as unemployed, so we look pretty good, as long as we're willing to pretend.
Like pretending that all those profits we waste on private insurers are giving us healthcare comparable to our international competitors who pay less because theirs is all paid on the same basis as our Medicaid. Like pretending that GM and other big employers can compete with a fat, wasteful private insurance bill that Toyota doesn't pay, or that Wal-Mart could keep its employees well enough to peddle crates of Chinese products without government health insurance (or healthcare in taxpaid emergency rooms).
I see "trial lawyers" spending their money in the US (though they do get a lot more of those Bush/McCain taxfree holidays than most Americans), but Halliburton seems to have absconded directly to the Persian Gulf with all the $BILLIONS it stole, out of range of US jurisdiction, but somehow right in the laps of our enemies.
But really, it's that Iraq War that is John McCain's most obvious contribution. The one that's already cost over $600 BILLION already spent, headed to over a $TRILLION even if we shut it down ASAP. And that's not counting the collateral damage to our military, some of which we can rebuild for money, much of which will cost untold $BILLIONS for veterans injuries, and the further damage to an economy running on $4+ gallons of gas for the years while it runs out, prematurely inflated on endless fear and risk in the producing countries. Since the Iraq War is run on borrowed money, at least 80% of it borrowed (if you just count it equally with the rest of the discretionary expenditures), and borrowed from enemies like China, that's something like $600T * (.8 * 1.55) = $744 BILLION so far. After McCain's next 100 years (or more) there, the figures will be higher. All in an economy in recession, and eventually depression, with our reserves wasted for nothing but more violence, threats and uncertainty.
It's the Enron economy. Fake profits pitched under government cover without regulation, counting debt as assets. The "Conservative" economy, centrally planned from Dick Cheney's bunker, and eaten up by "Conservatives" like you. People who'd rather ignore all that to pretend that Europe is doing badly, that the US somehow is the opposite of "socialism" (with the greate
--
make install -not war
On top of that, to blame Obama for what someone else says? Ridiculous. And Obama's speech afterward? Amazingly good for a politician. That's the person you want answering the phone at 3am, not the whining candidate who was dumb enough to lie through her teeth about "running for cover under sniper fire" at the airport in Bosnia, only to have video footage appear on youtube 12 hours later showing her landing where she was greeted by the president and his daughter, who read her a poem right there on the tarmac.
A-Bomb
Your reaction is exactly what the right-wing smear machine has counted on time and again.
What the right-wing smear machine wants, the right-wing smear machine gets. Witness:
- McCain having a black child out of wedlock in the 2000 primaries.
- Al Gore ridiculed for "inventing the internet".
- The introduction of a new verb in the 2004 campaign: swiftboating.
- In the 2008 primaries, the pastor Wright snippet, as if Obama had said it.
These carpet-bombing media campaigns have several things in common:
- They are distortions, fabrications or out-of-context shallow interpretations of reality.
- They intend to generate gut level reactions, as opposed to thoughtful analysis.
- They intend to generate images that stick, even as they are debunked in public, the meme kept alive until the end of the election cycle.
- Sadly, they keep alive PT Barnum's axiom: "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the american people".
I was on the fence until last week, when Obama's speech on Tuesday nailed it for me. I watched the full thing three times, to assimilate and digest the trove of ideas in there.
IMO, Obama effectively condemned the words of pastor Wright, while acknowledging the deep sense of frustration felt by a wide range of the population that leads to expressions of damnation for a society that has failed your parents, you and your children.
Furthermore, Obama rightly expressed the fact that the United States is a self-correcting mechanism that has gradually tilted towards a better society for all of its' people.
But most importantly for this discussion, Obama spoke about a deeply entrenched, moneyed clique that runs the electoral process. Corporate interests have such a tight grip in Washington because they have the mechanism down to a tee:
1. Unfurl the corporate candidate or candidates.
2. Concentrate the largest amount of money on the key states (Florida, Ohio, etc).
3. Make the candidate go throw the well-established motions.
4. Smear, ignore or offhandedly dismiss the oponent via the mass media.
5. Win the election, by hook or by crook.
6. Profit!!!
7. Rinse and repeat.
What makes corporate influence so powerful is point 2. Under the current paradigm, the campaign contribution investment/return ratio is enormous. If the United States population can bust this cycle, the consequences will be HUGE, as corporate influence will wane in Washington. Grotesque saturation campaigns in Iowa-Florida-Ohio will not do anymore. Would corporations be willing to throw triple or quadruple the money into campaigns with an uncertain outcome? Lobbyists will still be there, but they won't be the deciding influence in election victories anymore. Imagine that!
If just to bust the cycle, Obama should win. But also, by virtue of his speech, which had brains, balls and heart, during a time when Obama was under fire, he showed that he is as cool as they come when that 3 am phone call happens. Furthermore, it's apparent to me that if and when Obama sits in the Oval Office, he will surround himself with tough-minded and extremely capable individuals who will be free to generate heated discussions with The President, as opposed to corporate "yes men" or consiglieris. No Chertoffs, Gonzalezes or Brownies, thank you VERY MUCH. Obama will roll up his sleeves and truly earn his salary, and not behind closed doors with Exxon and Mobil.
Finally, much of the world will be shocked into an more open attitude towards the United States if it elects a man named Barack Hussein Obama into the presidency. The prestige of this great nation will be salvaged from eight years of atrocities committed in its' name.
Can this possibly happen? Here is where the words "Hope" and "Change" come into play. With the other candidates, there will be neither.
Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
I would consider Clinton to be the worst candidate of the three at the moment, for a couple of reasons:
I consider McCain a bad candidate purely because he comes from the Republican party (admittedly his affiliation is looser than the average Republican though):
I understand there are other issues like healthcare, the sub-prime crisis, the economy etc., but the war is just so much bigger. I'd make a case that if we hadn't bled over 500 billion dollars (!!) on the war over 5 years, the economy/housing crisis/VA-issues/healthcare issues would be nowhere near as dire as they are right now. And we'd have a lot more allies in the world than we do now. And there would be a lot less anti-american resentment fuelling terrorist group recruitment.
The sad part for us is -- Iraq is truly reduced to rubble now. We cannot leave until we repair the damage. It's gonna cost more troops lives, and more than another 500 billion dollars most likely. But its our cross to bear now -- we broke it, and we gotta fix it.
He's the only one who's consistently opposed the expansion of government surveillance.
That's why I've always liked McCain. Unfortunately, I haven't really seen much of that in the past couple years. It's enough to make me wonder, but not enough to make me choose Clinton instead.
"The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
Admitting he doesn't understand the economy is honesty. How many people really understand the economy and not what they get from CNN or even the WSJ? He's not an economist - so what? What a good president should do is get a lot of good advisors, who understand their areas, and listen to their advice. Sure, the president has to understand it enough to ask some tough questions and try to determine what else it will affect - but they can't be experts in everything.
I would rather have someone who admitted they don't know something than a poser, who pretends they do. Who do you think will mess things up more?
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
The government has been in the Internet since day one. They built the damn thing after all, and its commercial history has been governed by federal laws--most recently the 1996 Telecomm Act. Anyone who tells you we should "keep the goverment out of the Internet" is trying to sell you a bridge. They're in there...the question is, are they preserving common carrier so you can serve an anti-Comcast Web site to Comcast subscribers? Or will they give Comcast the power to filter content as well as BitTorrent? Make your choice wisely.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Well first of all, there is a big difference between a random supporter and your friend, mentor, and pastor. The better analog to Hagee would be Farrakhan's endorsement of Obama, which frankly I didn't think he had to renounce (or reject, for the Hillary Clintons of the world). While it can be slightly embarrassing, the fact that someone likes your politics does not mean you like their politics. In fact, it can be a testament to the broad appeal of your politics. Casting away everyone who disagrees with you is not generally considered a noble trait.
The main problem I had with the whole Wright controversy (not that I was inclined to vote Obama anyway) wasn't that it made me doubt Obama's judgment or values. It made me doubt his effectiveness. Much of his campaign is based on his supposed ability to bring people together, whether they be of different political parties or they are of different races (I guess he thinks he is a uniter, not a divider, though that sounds a bit familiar...). Well if his community back home has the opinions expressed during Wright's sermons, clearly he hasn't succeeded at that so far in his life.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
It's all political theatre.
Nobody is actually afraid of Rev. Wright. He's not a threat to society, or to anybody individually. And nobody actually believes Barack Obama agrees with any of this after he's said he does not, and has never shown in any of his writings or speeches that he agrees.
Someone thought they could avoid the issues of the economy, foreign affairs, the future of America in this world, etc... and undermine Obama with this cheapshot.
That's what politics is all about. Nobody actually pays attention to the important issues. How did GW Bush get elected? He's a guy you want to have a beer with, even though he's a fucking moron who couldn't find America on a map.
Anyway, better to get this bullshit out now instead of waiting until October like they normally do.
Oh, yeah - just like George Bush. You Republicans really never learn about trusting authority instead of competence. Or the difference between a false dilemma like "lying ignoramus or honest ignoramus", and someone who can actually understand the economy, which is far from impossible at the level that presidents operate.
It's not like we need a "presidentist". We need someone with a brain who can tell when his advisors are lying to him. Or care - it's been a long time since we've had a Republican president who actually cared whether his advisors were lying to him, instead of just treating him like a spokesmodel.
--
make install -not war
Overall I think this is working in Senator Obama's favour. As long as he is publicly associated with a wacky Christian it is hard to accuse him of being a Muslim.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
All that proves about John McCain is that he is MORE likely swayed by false politics, not grounded in the reality of an existing legal framework. I think a Civil Law and Constitutional Law expert is much more likely to do exactly what I want in office -- to protect the existing rights of ALL Americans, even at the expense of political expediency. That makes Barack Obama the ONLY candidate with qualified experience, in my book. Warmongering, Senate back-rubbing, or Lobby appeal experience are all counter to the main experiences I want in the White House.
Also interesting is how in the other big line of his, the "chickens coming back to roost" one the Reverend was actually paraphrasing a former US ambassador to Iraq, Edward Peck, who was interviewed on Fox News after 9/11. Of course you would have no idea that the "racist" minister was actually referencing a very white American ambassador if you only saw the context free clips on the 24 hour news networks.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
McCain is on the record for anything you want -- anti-torture, pro-torture, anti-abortion, pro-abortion. McCain is simply on the record for everything, because he says anything for money -- how attractive is that really?
1) Unemployment is historically low.
This is correct, but it is no good enough if your home is going to be repossessed.
2) Self defense is not war mongering. Even if you think Iraq was no threat, they've
gone from 50,000 killed per year under Saddam to 50,000 killed in the time since.
It may be the lesser of two evils, but this evil is a LOT less. Don't forget that all
the Democrats WANTED the war in Iraq. They just don't want to stick around and WIN it.
What did ever Iraq do to the US?
You know, to defend yourself first you have to be attacked or threatened.
Then you bring as part of your "self defense" strategy the plight of the Iraqi people.
Look, that is great, now we know you are truly generous and we will send you a medal for that. But the plight of the Iraqi people was not the reason for the Iraq invasion. You were lied to but here you are, matching the unintended consequences (that would need checking, mind you, I don't know where you are pulling those numbers of Iraqis killed by Hussein from) to cover thsi sameful invasion failures.
3) Wanting free trade with other nations is not a sign of xenophobia or racism nor
is appointing the first two black Sec's of State.
4) 3 Documented cases of waterboarding in the GWT is not a pattern of Communist style torture. Overall, enemy combatants have been given better treatment than domestic felons.
Sorry, any shreds of credibility you had as an interlocutor were burned in the above paragraph.
All serious human rights organizations have found the shambles of Guantanamo as one of the most egregious violations of human rights by a liberal democracy (of course if you compare this with other countries, like your allies Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, then you are doing fine).
The Bush administration has broken pretty much any moral and legal precedence by setting up this concentration camp (honestly, I can't think of a better description) and as an aside, has created precedence that even US citizens can be denied funddamental rights if the terrorism word is involved in there somewhere.
Although Bush did not achieve this alone (to the eternal shame od Democratic and genuine Conservative politicians) he was the engine pushing for this quasi fascist situations. How somebody can still excuse this, is beyond any logical comprehension.
5) People have more stuff than they ever have. The NY Times, which is NOT GOP
friendly, ran an op-ed explaining that consumption by the top fifth of the
population by income is only twice that of the bottom fifth. How many other
countries can come close to that?? Yes, there's a big mortgage problem out there, but before lending homes to poor people was "predatory lending" the Dems were pushing the banks to give those loans.
6) We've even cut greenhouse gas emissions for hippies who still believe in that crap.
Yes, the GOP should cut government spending and get rid of dumb-ass shit like
Social Security and Medicare but they don't have the votes to make it happen.
Uncle Sam collects about $17,000 per worker, most of which goes to social
programs that no one would ever need if their taxes were less. It won't stop
no matter who is in power until the public realizes the true cost.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
The Catholic church defended priests that were involved in abuse allegations, should the entire Catholic community abandon the greater church because of that? Are they all supporters of sexual abuse because they don't leave? What about radical Muslims that endorse terrorism? Do all Muslims support it? Shouldn't they reject it? There is a social aspect to these organizations and they simply cannot represent all of the beliefs of a candidate. If Huckabee was still in it, I could promise you that he'd do things his church couldn't back and vice-versa.
Lots of negative questions in that... rather frustrating actually!
Suffice to say, I came up -4.62 / -5.49, which is roughly where I expected to fall as a "typical European IT geek".
I also think the test could probably do with some more degrees of "agree/disagree", and clarification over some questions. The question "a significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system.", I had to agree with, because it IS an advantage of that system, despite the fact that that system is unworkable and horrific to me on so many other levels. Nor do I think that the delay of progress in a democratic system is really a problem - because the cause of that delay is the checks and balances that make sure what's being done is truly right. Without this delay, a lot of very bad stuff could happen. But, I still had to agree with the statement as it was worded, because if there were a way to have checks and balances WITHOUT a delay, it would be better, and therefore the lack of delay in a one-party system is an advantage.
I'm not entirely sure that my answer "agree" accurately reflected my belief though.
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
For the "IT workers" with their head up their ass ---> John McCain is unfit for duty. Hillary Rodham Clinton or "Billary", as they are known, is a loose cannon & self-serving, Obama is far and above the best for the job. Quoting: "the better to make a voting block whose views must be attended to" IS the reason WHY the U.S. is where it is now - In deep Shit, I mean REALLY DEEP SHIT. Selfish, greedy and short-sighted actions like "Lobbying" to get what they want is going to send the U.S. back to the dark ages, perhaps this is good anyway, as the U.S. isn't doing the WORLD any GOOD anyway. Cr0vv.