I like both Obama and McCain, in their own ways they're exactly what the US needs after the weak, crooked leadership of Bush. The choice of Palin has put me right off McCain, though. She strikes me as a terrible choice for Vice-President and a cynical vote-grabbing ploy. McCain's 72 and if something happens to him then she's clearly not equipped for national leadership. It demonstrates a lack of seriousness on his part and that worries me.
I agree. It seems as if bringing Palin in was purely attempt to pull in a percentage of those Democratic voters who would have voted for Hilary Clinton, but cannot bear to vote for Obama.
Maybe that's just the cynic in me, but she really does seem to have come from nowhere, and I think it's no coincidence that she's 1. A woman, and 2. An attractive woman at that.
I agree. It seems as if bringing Palin in was purely attempt to pull in a percentage of those Democratic voters who would have voted for Hilary Clinton, but cannot bear to vote for Obama.
Maybe that's just the cynic in me, but she really does seem to have come from nowhere, and I think it's no coincidence that she's 1. A woman, and 2. An attractive woman at that.
As The Daily Show put it, McCain seems to think that women don't think with the big head, but rather with the little hood.
They've just had their conf, bound to be riding high. It's going to be VERY close. People will see in months to come that Palin is a fat pig with lipstick. Only thing which is overlooked I think is that McCain has said he will be a 1 term president, and he is ancient. So, presumably A vote for McCain is really a vote for Palin.
Who cares though, Corpo-america doesn't care, its got both sets of strings in its greedy fucker hands.
You will also have to put into consideration that McCain is in fact 72 years old and could in fact die of age in a few years. That will put Palin directly in the position of President and commander of some thousand nuclear weapons and all.
If she is mainly recruited for being an good-looking (conservative) woman than she might not have just the experience that the pro-McCain is complaining that Obama is lacking.
Whoever gets in at the white house i cant see a ton being different. Everyone mocks Bush but if the other guy got in (Forget his name) he would have probably acted the same after 9/11.
I dont know about that one. English is obviously the official language in the UK, its quite difficult for some people to get by if they cant talk any english whatsoever. I wouldnt move to Spain unless i had a basic grasp of the language. Costs companies a fair bit if they have to keep using interpreters all the time.
The European Union seems to cope with having multiple languages. Whatever happens, English is the de facto language of the USA. It just seems a little odd that the supposed freedom loving Republicans are so pro telling people what language they must speak, and so pro telling how people may have sexual relations, (and fiscally, so against balancing the budget. Clinton was the last president to do that).
But I don't have a horse in the race - at the end of the day there's nothing I can do about it. I didn't really care whether it was McCain or Obama until McCain chose his running mate. It would be "suboptimal" if McCain carked it and the highly superstitious Palin was in charge. She might not be an Ayatollah, but someone who denies the science and reason that America is so famous for won't be good for the country.
McCain reminds me of Cyril Sneer from the old Racoons cartoon, he cannot talk in public without coming across as dishonest, as he's so inept at public speaking his smiles turn into a snakey sneer. I don't believe he would be a good figure head for America internationaly.
And to put a list of tax hikes without also putting a list of benefits from the tax hikes is very biased. As I understand that 95% of Americans will pay less tax under Obama, its only the high paid that have an increase. Not to mention free health care for everyone. Obama is like Robin Hood, but the rich are actually giving to the country so that future generations of all Americans can have a better standard of life. Whether it will be succesful depends on how many rich Americans have a love of their country and its future, if they don't then they'll just emigrate abroad.
And in my opinion Sean Hannity from Fox News is a republican anarchist second only to Alex Jones, who will blindly follow the republican line without questioning whether its right or wrong, to him its always right because its 'republican', he never seems to have his own thoughts, he has blind faith. I prefer Colmes' opinions which are more balanced/logical, he actually thinks for himself and agrees with either democrat or republican views based upon its content.
And to put a list of tax hikes without also putting a list of benefits from the tax hikes is very biased.
More to the point, it fails to take into account that the president of the USA doesn't work by decree. Law is made by Congress, not by the President. The President can't introduce legislation (he can veto it though). Legislation is introduced by members of congress (of course, the President can ask a congressman to introduce legislation for him, but it still must pass). He's not like the Russian president who can make decrees.
Of course the Democrats have a majority at the moment, so a Republican president is going to have a much harder time than a Democrat - but this could easily change in the future, but with the Republicans so distrusted at the moment (lying over Iraq, insufficient oversight over the money markets) it'll probably be a while before they bounce back.
Its like all the labour lot going crazy when they beat the tories, they seemed to do alright for a few years and now look.
???? From the first, New "Labour" were a dissapointment. Most of us weren't expecting too much from them, and voted New labour as a way of getting the Tories out (in Great Britain most votes are not so much in favour of one party, more against the other party, I don't know if this is true in other countries), as the Tories were so corrupt, incompetent and uncarring. And Blair promised us an end to corruption. Then proved to be the most corrupt prime minister ever.
Everyone loves the tories again,
No, the Tories are as unpopular with most people as they ever were. It's just that New Labour have sunk so low (worse than the Tories ever were, incredibly) that the voters are desperate to get rid of them at any cost, and the Tories are the only other party who will ever get in (it's only ever the Tories or New Labour, no one else will get in). Having said that, thanks to New Labour's "sod the public" attitude, and the lack of trust the people feel for both New Labour and the Tories, the BNP are now gaining seats, which is very dangerous. Although it's difficult to blame the voters, as they feel so let down and betrayed by the major parties.
they'll get in (Labour seem so bad right now), do a decent job for a year or two then it'll be downhill again and then Labour will look great.
This reads like the Bruce Everiss blog! You should have titled this post "British politics in Wonderland". Sorry to sound so facetious, but most voters are just plain disillusioned with both the Tories and New Labour, and the chances of either party looking great to voters in the next few years is very slim indeed.
You're right. Let's ignore world politics. It doesn't matter. My bad.
If everyone would vote for Beanz, as I suggested when he gave me the brilliant idea of adding a drop or two of Vanilla extract to Coca Cola, to make my own Vanilla Cola* (which they stopped selling, sadly), then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Instead we'd be discussing Beanz' announced policies of:
- A free Spectrum for every household,
- Changing the name of the USA to "Spectrum's are brill but C64's are crap Land", and renaming the states after WOS posters, such as Martijn-ville, JMK-way, Jumping Stack-ington, and so on.
- The banning of Whisky and Brandy ('cos they're crap) from bars, and the compulsary serving of Irn Bru (free to all WOS members) instead.
- The clothing ban for every woman aged between eighteen and forty.
- The banning of all TV evangelists, and replacing them with Dangermouse, as it's more morally uplifting. And Penfold rules.
- Rap "singers" are to have their vocal chords removed, and taught how to play the violin instead. Bliss!
- The evacuation of all decent people from the San Andreas fault area, then the filling in of the area with all known C64 owners. Then dropping a bomb on the fault to set it off. For a laugh.
- All Americans are to be taught how to speak English properly. For example, it's "tom-ar-toe", not "tom-ay-toe". It's "pavement", not "Sidewalk". It's "professional netball", not "basketball". It's "a military campaign mostly against unarmed civilians in order to gain control of oil reserves", not "a war on terror". And so on.
Beanz would make a great president. Wonder if he'd make me vice president (me, president of vice, what a dream;)) ?
* Pepis Cola with a few drops of Vanilla extract is gorgeous!
I think calling an ex-soldier a "warrior" is a bit off, as though all ex-servicemen/women are gung-ho hotheads. Many of them aren't. What does distinguish them is that they have experience of a war situation and a realistic grasp of what actually happens. That tends to make them better-equipped to lead in times of war.
I'm not entirely sure that's true. LBJ made a pig's ear of Vietnam yet he had served in WWII. Being able to make great tactical decisions in your immediate surrounding does not necessarily translate into ability to make strategic decisions.
I'm not entirely sure that's true. LBJ made a pig's ear of Vietnam yet he had served in WWII. Being able to make great tactical decisions in your immediate surrounding does not necessarily translate into ability to make strategic decisions.
did LBJ fight for the americans though? if he fought for the germans he might have made all those stupid decisions, like invading russia, letting the americans land on those beaches, surrendering just as the germans were about to win.
No, the Tories are as unpopular with most people as they ever were. It's just that New Labour have sunk so low (worse than the Tories ever were, incredibly) that the voters are desperate to get rid of them at any cost, and the Tories are the only other party who will ever get in (it's only ever the Tories or New Labour, no one else will get in). Having said that, thanks to New Labour's "sod the public" attitude, and the lack of trust the people feel for both New Labour and the Tories, the BNP are now gaining seats, which is very dangerous. Although it's difficult to blame the voters, as they feel so let down and betrayed by the major parties.
There are other parties to vote for though but the British are far too lazy to get involved - Politics aren't all about what happens down in London - it's about everyday life - It's in everything we do - The sooner that's realised, the better
Maybe it's because I'm Swedish, but we are far more involved and we discuss politics nearly on a daily basis - Boring? No. Very interesting. And you get a respect for other people's views and it might even expand your brain a tad
Everything is linked - And I think that this is why most of Europe is getting so involved with the US elections
Eliminate Our Need for Middle Eastern and Venezuelan Oil within 10 Years
* Increase Fuel Economy Standards.
Obama will increase fuel economy standards 4 percent per year while providing $4 billion for domestic automakers to retool their manufacturing facilities in America to produce these vehicles.
* Get 1 Million Plug-In Hybrid Cars on the Road by 2015.
These vehicles can get up to 150 miles per gallon. Barack Obama believes we should work to ensure these cars are built here in America, instead of factories overseas.
* Create a New $7,000 Tax Credit for Purchasing Advanced Vehicles.
* Establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard.
Obama will establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) to reduce the carbon in our fuels 10 percent by 2020. Obama will also require 60 billion gallons of advanced biofuels to be phased into our fuel supply by 2030.
* A “Use it or Lose It” Approach to Existing Oil and Gas Leases.
Obama will require oil companies to develop the 68 million acres of land (over 40 million of which are offshore) which they have already leased and are not drilling on.
* Promote the Responsible Domestic Production of Oil and Natural Gas.
An Obama administration will establish a process for early identification of any infrastructure obstacles/shortages or possible federal permitting process delays to drilling in the Bakken Shale formation, the Barnett shale formation, and the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska.
There's still the problem that people lie to pollsters when discussing candidates who are either publicly unpopular or from a minority group.
So people will be less likely to tell a pollster they are voting for McCain/Palin because they don't want to look like facists and are more likely to tell pollsters they are voting Obama because he is black.
It's a double whammy so the stats in the run up are going to be so out of whack with the final result it might replace the UK general election of 1987 as the example of when polls wrong.
You would think that. However, after the Americans for some reason elected Bush for a second time in 2004, nothing they do surprises me anymore.
First time :) and it was the war time leader thing, it always works and it fell into his lap so he didn't have to contrive it. Maggie almost failed to get Argentina to take the bait on the Falklands but it worked a treat in the 83 elections after the seasaw 70's
First time :) and it was the war time leader thing, it always works and it fell into his lap so he didn't have to contrive it. Maggie almost failed to get Argentina to take the bait on the Falklands but it worked a treat in the 83 elections after the seasaw 70's
That and the alternative choice at the time was John Kerry...no thanks.
Comments
I agree. It seems as if bringing Palin in was purely attempt to pull in a percentage of those Democratic voters who would have voted for Hilary Clinton, but cannot bear to vote for Obama.
Maybe that's just the cynic in me, but she really does seem to have come from nowhere, and I think it's no coincidence that she's 1. A woman, and 2. An attractive woman at that.
As The Daily Show put it, McCain seems to think that women don't think with the big head, but rather with the little hood.
They've just had their conf, bound to be riding high. It's going to be VERY close. People will see in months to come that Palin is a fat pig with lipstick. Only thing which is overlooked I think is that McCain has said he will be a 1 term president, and he is ancient. So, presumably A vote for McCain is really a vote for Palin.
Who cares though, Corpo-america doesn't care, its got both sets of strings in its greedy fucker hands.
If she is mainly recruited for being an good-looking (conservative) woman than she might not have just the experience that the pro-McCain is complaining that Obama is lacking.
I think that might need a rethink PSJ.
The War in Iraq wouldn't have happened with Gore in charge.
That vote count in Florida completely reshaped the world we live in.
The European Union seems to cope with having multiple languages. Whatever happens, English is the de facto language of the USA. It just seems a little odd that the supposed freedom loving Republicans are so pro telling people what language they must speak, and so pro telling how people may have sexual relations, (and fiscally, so against balancing the budget. Clinton was the last president to do that).
But I don't have a horse in the race - at the end of the day there's nothing I can do about it. I didn't really care whether it was McCain or Obama until McCain chose his running mate. It would be "suboptimal" if McCain carked it and the highly superstitious Palin was in charge. She might not be an Ayatollah, but someone who denies the science and reason that America is so famous for won't be good for the country.
And to put a list of tax hikes without also putting a list of benefits from the tax hikes is very biased. As I understand that 95% of Americans will pay less tax under Obama, its only the high paid that have an increase. Not to mention free health care for everyone. Obama is like Robin Hood, but the rich are actually giving to the country so that future generations of all Americans can have a better standard of life. Whether it will be succesful depends on how many rich Americans have a love of their country and its future, if they don't then they'll just emigrate abroad.
And in my opinion Sean Hannity from Fox News is a republican anarchist second only to Alex Jones, who will blindly follow the republican line without questioning whether its right or wrong, to him its always right because its 'republican', he never seems to have his own thoughts, he has blind faith. I prefer Colmes' opinions which are more balanced/logical, he actually thinks for himself and agrees with either democrat or republican views based upon its content.
My ZX Art Music Page
Carlos Michelis Theme
More to the point, it fails to take into account that the president of the USA doesn't work by decree. Law is made by Congress, not by the President. The President can't introduce legislation (he can veto it though). Legislation is introduced by members of congress (of course, the President can ask a congressman to introduce legislation for him, but it still must pass). He's not like the Russian president who can make decrees.
Of course the Democrats have a majority at the moment, so a Republican president is going to have a much harder time than a Democrat - but this could easily change in the future, but with the Republicans so distrusted at the moment (lying over Iraq, insufficient oversight over the money markets) it'll probably be a while before they bounce back.
???? From the first, New "Labour" were a dissapointment. Most of us weren't expecting too much from them, and voted New labour as a way of getting the Tories out (in Great Britain most votes are not so much in favour of one party, more against the other party, I don't know if this is true in other countries), as the Tories were so corrupt, incompetent and uncarring. And Blair promised us an end to corruption. Then proved to be the most corrupt prime minister ever.
No, the Tories are as unpopular with most people as they ever were. It's just that New Labour have sunk so low (worse than the Tories ever were, incredibly) that the voters are desperate to get rid of them at any cost, and the Tories are the only other party who will ever get in (it's only ever the Tories or New Labour, no one else will get in). Having said that, thanks to New Labour's "sod the public" attitude, and the lack of trust the people feel for both New Labour and the Tories, the BNP are now gaining seats, which is very dangerous. Although it's difficult to blame the voters, as they feel so let down and betrayed by the major parties.
This reads like the Bruce Everiss blog! You should have titled this post "British politics in Wonderland". Sorry to sound so facetious, but most voters are just plain disillusioned with both the Tories and New Labour, and the chances of either party looking great to voters in the next few years is very slim indeed.
If everyone would vote for Beanz, as I suggested when he gave me the brilliant idea of adding a drop or two of Vanilla extract to Coca Cola, to make my own Vanilla Cola* (which they stopped selling, sadly), then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Instead we'd be discussing Beanz' announced policies of:
- A free Spectrum for every household,
- Changing the name of the USA to "Spectrum's are brill but C64's are crap Land", and renaming the states after WOS posters, such as Martijn-ville, JMK-way, Jumping Stack-ington, and so on.
- The banning of Whisky and Brandy ('cos they're crap) from bars, and the compulsary serving of Irn Bru (free to all WOS members) instead.
- The clothing ban for every woman aged between eighteen and forty.
- The banning of all TV evangelists, and replacing them with Dangermouse, as it's more morally uplifting. And Penfold rules.
- Rap "singers" are to have their vocal chords removed, and taught how to play the violin instead. Bliss!
- The evacuation of all decent people from the San Andreas fault area, then the filling in of the area with all known C64 owners. Then dropping a bomb on the fault to set it off. For a laugh.
- All Americans are to be taught how to speak English properly. For example, it's "tom-ar-toe", not "tom-ay-toe". It's "pavement", not "Sidewalk". It's "professional netball", not "basketball". It's "a military campaign mostly against unarmed civilians in order to gain control of oil reserves", not "a war on terror". And so on.
Beanz would make a great president. Wonder if he'd make me vice president (me, president of vice, what a dream;)) ?
* Pepis Cola with a few drops of Vanilla extract is gorgeous!
I'm not entirely sure that's true. LBJ made a pig's ear of Vietnam yet he had served in WWII. Being able to make great tactical decisions in your immediate surrounding does not necessarily translate into ability to make strategic decisions.
did LBJ fight for the americans though? if he fought for the germans he might have made all those stupid decisions, like invading russia, letting the americans land on those beaches, surrendering just as the germans were about to win.
There are other parties to vote for though but the British are far too lazy to get involved - Politics aren't all about what happens down in London - it's about everyday life - It's in everything we do - The sooner that's realised, the better
Maybe it's because I'm Swedish, but we are far more involved and we discuss politics nearly on a daily basis - Boring? No. Very interesting. And you get a respect for other people's views and it might even expand your brain a tad
Everything is linked - And I think that this is why most of Europe is getting so involved with the US elections
Here here...
Hmm, no, he's in favour of furthering research into alternate fuel sources ... iIrc.
Looks like he's doing both: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy_more#relief
The cover shows a plane with, what looks like, a high-rise tower exploding.
The first part of the instruction reads (and I quote): You have been ordered to make an air attack on the city. That city is New York (end quote).
Considering this was written in 1982, there's a massive similarity to the 9/11 events here and I daren't sell it out of respect.
Has anybody come across this title before?
If I could vote, I'd vote for Obama on principle. Who cares if he's not as experienced.
Once the Hadron Collider gets really going, the world's going to end anyway... ;)
I wish this guy was running for president though!! That'd be ace!!
Now more confident of an Obama win.
So people will be less likely to tell a pollster they are voting for McCain/Palin because they don't want to look like facists and are more likely to tell pollsters they are voting Obama because he is black.
It's a double whammy so the stats in the run up are going to be so out of whack with the final result it might replace the UK general election of 1987 as the example of when polls wrong.
You would think that. However, after the Americans for some reason elected Bush for a second time in 2004, anything's possible.
www.VoteForTheMILF.com redirects to johnmccain.com!
True - politics of fear, and all that.
First time :) and it was the war time leader thing, it always works and it fell into his lap so he didn't have to contrive it. Maggie almost failed to get Argentina to take the bait on the Falklands but it worked a treat in the 83 elections after the seasaw 70's
That and the alternative choice at the time was John Kerry...no thanks.