Did anyone just see that Obama speech?

[ttosh]

I think Dave Mustaine says it best below.

Formed to prevent wars, it froze in the face of disaster and stood silent while terrorization took hostage the world.
In the mire of hipocrisy, the UN ignores sex crimes by its blue helmets and enables terrorism so in the end its failed.

And the UN is where our so called friends get to stab us in the back, and we pay 22% of thier tab to host our enemies here at home. Ambassadors from countries otherwise known as a catastrophie, enjoy diplomatic immunity
Living in mannhattan while their children are turned into prostitutes.

NATO invaded Yugoslavia to end ethnic cleansing, there was no U.N.
The U.S. invaded Afghanistan after 9/11, there was no U.N.
Saddam Hussein violated 17 U.N. resolutions; The U.N. was asked to join the war in Iraq. The U.S. invaded, Ha! there was no U.N.
Libya bombed a discotheque in Berlin killing Americans, there was no U.N.
Iran funds any terrorist organization it can, and attacked the U.S. in the seventies, there was no stinking U.N.

 

[duesentrieb]

Dude, a Euro conservative is left of a US liberal...

Yeah, scary, isn't it ?

 

[Marshall Freak]

In that same Wiki article, it talked about not only the Plutonium we removed, but listed the different types of Chemical weapons that he was KNOWN to have used, the quantities that he was known to have that were not accounted, for plus the thousands of pounds that he himself claimed to have in the mid 90s. It's intellectually dishonest to over look those facts and then present an argument of what was concluded after the invasion. end of story.

France openly opposed war as well as Russia and China. Like I said, they believed he had weapons, but wanted to go about it differently. I never said everyone thought we should go to war, I said everyone believed he had WMD's. That's not a question of opinion THAT is pure fact.

Your ignoring that the Chemical weapons weren't enough to meet the justification of war, neither were any of the flimsy claims made by governments in support of it.

Again I'd ask for your evidence that there are or were WMD - the article states that Iraq had potential to create chemical weapons. Potential. Australia has potential to maufacture massive nucleur weapons in a short time, your not warring with us.

No evidence France beleived there were weapons. Your not backing the claim of beleif up at all, an article, some evidence?

Look at the number of dishonest, misleading, and often plain wrong statements made by the US government and intelligence. Even relatively unbiased Wikipedia states there are close to 1000 'facts' that were incorrect made publically by George Bush and his administration pertaining to the Iraw war.

Read the whole thing, it's obviously a sham, there are no weapons. The premise of the war was false, the thing is a shambles. Stop making excuses.

You're arguing this from the point of conclusion of the war, not from what was believed to be facts beforehand. ALL I said in my initial post was that the entire world believed that he had weapons and that is an indisputable fact. The fact that the UN UNANIMOUSLY (Unanimously would include France) sanctioned Iraq because of the belief that they had them proves that ALL of the nations were on board with making Iraq get rid of the weapons that he was believed to have. I never said that there weren't mistakes made by the intelligence community, in fact I stated that long ago. Those mistakes weren't ours alone, the rest of the intelligence community from Russia, UK, England, France, and just about every other intelligence collecting European nation was wrong as well. I don't mind if you think I'm wrong about something, but when you start calling me a liar while your facts are wrong is inexcuseable. Fuck you.

 

[Marshall Freak]

major snippage!................

When someone from another country ignorantly tells me that people are starving and that 1/10 of the population are homeless, it's apparant they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and need to just mind their own business if they're going to interject such stupidity.

You know I was gonna stay out of this...but I gotta grab this one.
The statement from an American about other folks minding their own business is amusing at best. Seems to me that America as whole has an issue with minding their own business when it comes to foreign policy.
You really think America needs to police the rest of the world.Silly me, here I thought that was what the UN was for.
Korea, Vietnam, Cuba/Cold War, Eastern Europe, Afghansitan, Gulf Wars...you really think America has a valid reason to be there?

And on another note why is it that Socialism gets the same tretment ta used to be reserved for Communism?

You're right that we should stay out of more things and mind our own business. Some of those places you mentioned we had every right to be, others we didn't. I have no delusions that we're always right. The main beef I had was when the kid was telling us we need to adopt a socialized medice practice based on facts that were totally incorrect. As far as wars etc are concerned, that's a global concern but I'm not sure why anyone wants to tell people in other countries that they need to adopt different types of medicine, gun control etc. It's like me telling Germans that they need to put 50mph speed limits on the Autobahn. It has no effect on me whatsoever.


I'm not sure why it seems like it gets treated that way, when I talk about it, I'm talking about our Government and officials trying to socialize different facets of our society, and it's completely against everything in our Constitution and way of doing things.

 

[DannyM]

Quick political question:

Since Hillary is suspending her campaign....

what happens if some one kills Barama?

Does she get the nomination by default ?

 

[degenaro]

major snippage!................

When someone from another country ignorantly tells me that people are starving and that 1/10 of the population are homeless, it's apparant they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and need to just mind their own business if they're going to interject such stupidity.

You know I was gonna stay out of this...but I gotta grab this one.
The statement from an American about other folks minding their own business is amusing at best. Seems to me that America as whole has an issue with minding their own business when it comes to foreign policy.
You really think America needs to police the rest of the world.Silly me, here I thought that was what the UN was for.
Korea, Vietnam, Cuba/Cold War, Eastern Europe, Afghansitan, Gulf Wars...you really think America has a valid reason to be there?

And on another note why is it that Socialism gets the same tretment ta used to be reserved for Communism?

You're right that we should stay out of more things and mind our own business. Some of those places you mentioned we had every right to be, others we didn't. I have no delusions that we're always right. The main beef I had was when the kid was telling us we need to adopt a socialized medice practice based on facts that were totally incorrect. As far as wars etc are concerned, that's a global concern but I'm not sure why anyone wants to tell people in other countries that they need to adopt different types of medicine, gun control etc. It's like me telling Germans that they need to put 50mph speed limits on the Autobahn. It has no effect on me whatsoever.


I'm not sure why it seems like it gets treated that way, when I talk about it, I'm talking about our Government and officials trying to socialize different facets of our society, and it's completely against everything in our Constitution and way of doing things.

I'm not sure I understand, from what I've seen of the constituition it seems to me that there is no conflict with Socialism aspects of things. Can you elaborate?

 

[ttosh]

If only we could find some people from North Korea and China to help tell us how our country should be run, and how to fix our healthcare, homeless, drug issues, etc.. this post would get real interesting.

I'm not Chinese, but many people I'm at University with are Chinese, or Singaporean International students.

Almost universally they beleive stricter government regulation is a much better thing than the opposite. I'm not sure how they feel about things like censorship etc, but as far as crime, homelessness, health I know they all prefer China to Western countries.

There may be a few exceptions to this. I'm simply going on the conversations I've had.

Adolph Hitler also thought stricter government regulation was better than the opposite, however I think most sensible people would disagree. I know that is picking an extreme, but quite honestly those who like a specific country over another is all fine by me. They can stay where they are!

I have never had an issue with getting health care when I need it in a timely fashion, nor have met anybody that has complained of it. Does this mean it does not exist, certainly not. However those who live in other countries and bash our health care, our homeless issues etc really has no bearing on my opinions. Nor does it have any bearing on the upcoming election and policies either candidate is going to introduce.

Quite honestly I remember in a recent gathering of Obama proponents a question was asked. The question was to name one thing he has done since he has been in office that has made a difference. Bam, all of a sudden the deer in the headlight look was everywhere. One man said he was the first black man to hold his current position. First this is untrue and second that is not really a political accomplishment.

McCain while I am not a big fan has done quite a few positives as well he has fought for the country he loves. Obama can not even show a love for the country during a pledge of allegiance. I do not care if your from our country or not you all are entitled to your opinions. The ones on this forum that do live here and will live under the next 4 years of presidency of one of the candidates need to really think about what experience Obama has, what has he done and what does he stand for in regards to his outlooks. No McCain is not the best we could hope for, but he is also not another 4 years of Bush as the liberals want you to believe. Liberal FUDD!!! (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt)

 

[kannibul]

EVERY time it's been done it's been a positive growth. Kennedy did it, Reagan did it, and Bush did it. With both of the first two, income into the Government doubled. With Bush, The economy was actually quite good up until the last couple years with record growth. Now that it's on a decline, do you actually think that people would be better off with less money in their pockets?

The dollar is worth less and less each passing day, so, in a sense, we do have less money.

 

[Marshall Freak]

You know I was gonna stay out of this...but I gotta grab this one.
The statement from an American about other folks minding their own business is amusing at best. Seems to me that America as whole has an issue with minding their own business when it comes to foreign policy.
You really think America needs to police the rest of the world.Silly me, here I thought that was what the UN was for.
Korea, Vietnam, Cuba/Cold War, Eastern Europe, Afghansitan, Gulf Wars...you really think America has a valid reason to be there?

And on another note why is it that Socialism gets the same tretment ta used to be reserved for Communism?

You're right that we should stay out of more things and mind our own business. Some of those places you mentioned we had every right to be, others we didn't. I have no delusions that we're always right. The main beef I had was when the kid was telling us we need to adopt a socialized medice practice based on facts that were totally incorrect. As far as wars etc are concerned, that's a global concern but I'm not sure why anyone wants to tell people in other countries that they need to adopt different types of medicine, gun control etc. It's like me telling Germans that they need to put 50mph speed limits on the Autobahn. It has no effect on me whatsoever.


I'm not sure why it seems like it gets treated that way, when I talk about it, I'm talking about our Government and officials trying to socialize different facets of our society, and it's completely against everything in our Constitution and way of doing things.[/quote]
I'm not sure I understand, from what I've seen of the constituition it seems to me that there is no conflict with Socialism aspects of things. Can you elaborate?[/quote]

Free entitlements by the Government by taking from one segment of society to give to another is pretty much the opposite of a capitalistic ideal IMHO.

 

[duesentrieb]

I think Dave Mustaine says it best below.

Formed to prevent wars, it froze in the face of disaster and stood silent while terrorization took hostage the world.
In the mire of hipocrisy, the UN ignores sex crimes by its blue helmets and enables terrorism so in the end its failed.

And the UN is where our so called friends get to stab us in the back, and we pay 22% of thier tab to host our enemies here at home. Ambassadors from countries otherwise known as a catastrophie, enjoy diplomatic immunity
Living in mannhattan while their children are turned into prostitutes.

NATO invaded Yugoslavia to end ethnic cleansing, there was no U.N.
The U.S. invaded Afghanistan after 9/11, there was no U.N.
Saddam Hussein violated 17 U.N. resolutions; The U.N. was asked to join the war in Iraq. The U.S. invaded, Ha! there was no U.N.
Libya bombed a discotheque in Berlin killing Americans, there was no U.N.
Iran funds any terrorist organization it can, and attacked the U.S. in the seventies, there was no stinking U.N.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 807098.ece

 

[ttosh]

I think Dave Mustaine says it best below.

Formed to prevent wars, it froze in the face of disaster and stood silent while terrorization took hostage the world.
In the mire of hipocrisy, the UN ignores sex crimes by its blue helmets and enables terrorism so in the end its failed.

And the UN is where our so called friends get to stab us in the back, and we pay 22% of thier tab to host our enemies here at home. Ambassadors from countries otherwise known as a catastrophie, enjoy diplomatic immunity
Living in mannhattan while their children are turned into prostitutes.

NATO invaded Yugoslavia to end ethnic cleansing, there was no U.N.
The U.S. invaded Afghanistan after 9/11, there was no U.N.
Saddam Hussein violated 17 U.N. resolutions; The U.N. was asked to join the war in Iraq. The U.S. invaded, Ha! there was no U.N.
Libya bombed a discotheque in Berlin killing Americans, there was no U.N.
Iran funds any terrorist organization it can, and attacked the U.S. in the seventies, there was no stinking U.N.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 807098.ece

Yes I am well aware of this, and have always been totally against it!

 

[duesentrieb]

It's like me telling Germans that they need to put 50mph speed limits on the Autobahn.

130km/h speed limit would be fine for me. Serious. I think its ridiculous we don't have one yet.

 

[degenaro]

Free entitlements by the Government by taking from one segment of society to give to another is pretty much the opposite of a capitalistic ideal IMHO.

True...but that is not what constitutes Socialism. Lets try this another way...
I have to listen everyday to guys moan over gas prices. I tell you what 2 years ago I went from a car that I got a combined 15 miles to a car that I get a combined 30 miles. My wife car pools with me. So, listening to guys with a minivan and a big SUV complain about gas prices floors me. Who says that you need to own cars that cost you that much in gas. This is where I see entitlement.
Between the wife and me we pay about 300-400 bucks a month in health insurance. I would be okay paying an extra 20 % for a fund that goes for folks that don't have that. And you can extend this...back to gas, taxes type stuff. I'm all for an extra tax on gas to go for road improvements etc, instead of rolling it into car registration. Have the folks that use roads more, pay ,ore. Simple as that.
I'm a big believer by any chain being as strong as the weakest link.
I'm also all for Unions. I still pay my dues every year even though the Union for me is damn near useless. But there is truth to..."...Unions, who brought you weekends".

Let me illustrate a point, in my working band, one of the guys made some stupid decisions which led to friction and one of the other guys quitting. The dude that was the source felt horrible, and was ready to shoulder all responsibility. But I think that any group, band, marriage, community, even country needs to work through screw ups as a unit. In other words one guys screws it up, all guys pay for it. And vice versa, if you screw up you have a safety net.

 

[ttosh]

Free entitlements by the Government by taking from one segment of society to give to another is pretty much the opposite of a capitalistic ideal IMHO.

True...but that is not what constitutes Socialism. Lets try this another way...
I have to listen everyday to guys moan over gas prices. I tell you what 2 years ago I went from a car that I got a combined 15 miles to a car that I get a combined 30 miles. My wife car pools with me. So, listening to guys with a minivan and a big SUV complain about gas prices floors me. Who says that you need to own cars that cost you that much in gas. This is where I see entitlement.
Between the wife and me we pay about 300-400 bucks a month in health insurance. I would be okay paying an extra 20 % for a fund that goes for folks that don't have that. And you can extend this...back to gas, taxes type stuff. I'm all for an extra tax on gas to go for road improvements etc, instead of rolling it into car registration. Have the folks that use roads more, pay ,ore. Simple as that.
I'm a big believer by any chain being as strong as the weakest link.
I'm also all for Unions. I still pay my dues every year even though the Union for me is damn near useless. But there is truth to..."...Unions, who brought you weekends".

Let me illustrate a point, in my working band, one of the guys made some stupid decisions which led to friction and one of the other guys quitting. The dude that was the source felt horrible, and was ready to shoulder all responsibility. But I think that any group, band, marriage, community, even country needs to work through screw ups as a unit. In other words one guys screws it up, all guys pay for it.

I cannot disagree with anything you stated here at all!

To me this mentality also leads to something else I favor, a flat tax!

 

[degenaro]

Free entitlements by the Government by taking from one segment of society to give to another is pretty much the opposite of a capitalistic ideal IMHO.

True...but that is not what constitutes Socialism. Lets try this another way...
I have to listen everyday to guys moan over gas prices. I tell you what 2 years ago I went from a car that I got a combined 15 miles to a car that I get a combined 30 miles. My wife car pools with me. So, listening to guys with a minivan and a big SUV complain about gas prices floors me. Who says that you need to own cars that cost you that much in gas. This is where I see entitlement.
Between the wife and me we pay about 300-400 bucks a month in health insurance. I would be okay paying an extra 20 % for a fund that goes for folks that don't have that. And you can extend this...back to gas, taxes type stuff. I'm all for an extra tax on gas to go for road improvements etc, instead of rolling it into car registration. Have the folks that use roads more, pay ,ore. Simple as that.
I'm a big believer by any chain being as strong as the weakest link.
I'm also all for Unions. I still pay my dues every year even though the Union for me is damn near useless. But there is truth to..."...Unions, who brought you weekends".

Let me illustrate a point, in my working band, one of the guys made some stupid decisions which led to friction and one of the other guys quitting. The dude that was the source felt horrible, and was ready to shoulder all responsibility. But I think that any group, band, marriage, community, even country needs to work through screw ups as a unit. In other words one guys screws it up, all guys pay for it.

I cannot disagree with anything you stated here at all!

To me this mentality also leads to something else I favor, a flat tax!

You mean like everybody pays 20% tax or whatever, no exceptions type deal? No issue with this here.

 

[ttosh]

You mean like everybody pays 20% tax or whatever, no exceptions type deal? No issue with this here.

[/quote][/quote]

It is basically a flat percentage on goods purchased. Such as the mentality as what you said above on people that use the roads more pay more. The individual that makes $250,000 a year definitely purchases more goods that the single mom on a $20,000 a year salary. So the taxes is a percentage of purchases and there are not tax breaks for the wealthy complaints, etc...

http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/ke ... ssue_it=17

The fair tax is another way that would work and is better than our current system. I actually prefer this over the flat tax, but either is better than what we have.

http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/ke ... ssue_it=17

 

[Marshall Freak]

Free entitlements by the Government by taking from one segment of society to give to another is pretty much the opposite of a capitalistic ideal IMHO.

True...but that is not what constitutes Socialism. Lets try this another way...
I have to listen everyday to guys moan over gas prices. I tell you what 2 years ago I went from a car that I got a combined 15 miles to a car that I get a combined 30 miles. My wife car pools with me. So, listening to guys with a minivan and a big SUV complain about gas prices floors me. Who says that you need to own cars that cost you that much in gas. This is where I see entitlement.
Between the wife and me we pay about 300-400 bucks a month in health insurance. I would be okay paying an extra 20 % for a fund that goes for folks that don't have that. And you can extend this...back to gas, taxes type stuff. I'm all for an extra tax on gas to go for road improvements etc, instead of rolling it into car registration. Have the folks that use roads more, pay ,ore. Simple as that.
I'm a big believer by any chain being as strong as the weakest link.
I'm also all for Unions. I still pay my dues every year even though the Union for me is damn near useless. But there is truth to..."...Unions, who brought you weekends".

Let me illustrate a point, in my working band, one of the guys made some stupid decisions which led to friction and one of the other guys quitting. The dude that was the source felt horrible, and was ready to shoulder all responsibility. But I think that any group, band, marriage, community, even country needs to work through screw ups as a unit. In other words one guys screws it up, all guys pay for it. And vice versa, if you screw up you have a safety net.

The main difference I see is that you went into each of these things willingly. The Government taking from you is where I have a problem.

Wasn't it your bandmate a while back that had a wreck on the way home? If each of you chipped in a bit to buy him a new car that would be a generous thing to do, after all you all have to get to the shows and practices. But if they started taking money out of your check at each show without your permission that would be wrong. (Just an example, I don't think you should have to buy him a new car!)

 

[ttosh]

To me the overall differences in the Liberal view and the Conservative view is Socialism versus Capitalism. To put this into gear related terms:

You spend the last year gigging non stop. You buy your new rack setup based on the work and efforts you put in over the last year. You also have a family and full time job you keep and you are building your American dream.

Then there is the other guy who basically decides he wants a rig but does not want to work for it and does not really care to have a job since he is doing fine as is.

You can help him out and maybe give him your old rig, that would be a generous offer. Or you can have a governing power step in and say wow you are making money from the job and gigging and your income is quite high, let's take your new rig and give it to the less fortunate guy. You still have the old rig anyway.

That is the mentality of punishing the person who does well (Socialistic) views that a lot of liberal policies are based off of. I cannot buy into this mentality.

 

[degenaro]

Free entitlements by the Government by taking from one segment of society to give to another is pretty much the opposite of a capitalistic ideal IMHO.

True...but that is not what constitutes Socialism. Lets try this another way...
I have to listen everyday to guys moan over gas prices. I tell you what 2 years ago I went from a car that I got a combined 15 miles to a car that I get a combined 30 miles. My wife car pools with me. So, listening to guys with a minivan and a big SUV complain about gas prices floors me. Who says that you need to own cars that cost you that much in gas. This is where I see entitlement.
Between the wife and me we pay about 300-400 bucks a month in health insurance. I would be okay paying an extra 20 % for a fund that goes for folks that don't have that. And you can extend this...back to gas, taxes type stuff. I'm all for an extra tax on gas to go for road improvements etc, instead of rolling it into car registration. Have the folks that use roads more, pay ,ore. Simple as that.
I'm a big believer by any chain being as strong as the weakest link.
I'm also all for Unions. I still pay my dues every year even though the Union for me is damn near useless. But there is truth to..."...Unions, who brought you weekends".

Let me illustrate a point, in my working band, one of the guys made some stupid decisions which led to friction and one of the other guys quitting. The dude that was the source felt horrible, and was ready to shoulder all responsibility. But I think that any group, band, marriage, community, even country needs to work through screw ups as a unit. In other words one guys screws it up, all guys pay for it. And vice versa, if you screw up you have a safety net.

The main difference I see is that you went into each of these things willingly. The Government taking from you is where I have a problem.

Wasn't it your bandmate a while back that had a wreck on the way home? If each of you chipped in a bit to buy him a new car that would be a generous thing to do, after all you all have to get to the shows and practices. But if they started taking money out of your check at each show without your permission that would be wrong. (Just an example, I don't think you should have to buy him a new car!)

Point taken. That said, I was the first one to suggest if there was any need for financial aid for medical bills to take it out of the band fund.
Now, how about putting things like this out for vote? Then the government isn't deciding it, but you and your fellow voting citizens are.

 

[degenaro]

You mean like everybody pays 20% tax or whatever, no exceptions type deal? No issue with this here.

[/quote]

It is basically a flat percentage on goods purchased. Such as the mentality as what you said above on people that use the roads more pay more. The individual that makes $250,000 a year definitely purchases more goods that the single mom on a $20,000 a year salary. So the taxes is a percentage of purchases and there are not tax breaks for the wealthy complaints, etc...

http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/ke ... ssue_it=17

The fair tax is another way that would work and is better than our current system. I actually prefer this over the flat tax, but either is better than what we have.

http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/ke ... ssue_it=17[/quote]
I love that idea.