Post by: ilbob on August 30, 2008, 02:08:13 AM
Offhand, I see it this way:
Executive experience - neither has a whole lot, so maybe a tie.
Foreign policy - serious edge to McCain. BHO clearly has no clue how the world really works.
Taxes - McCain wants to not raise taxes, BHO wants to raise them. Edge to McCain, but personally I think big tax cuts are in order.
Spending - McCain wants to hold the line. BHO has a whole litany of things he wants to spend more on, mostly areas the US Constitution does not even give the federal government any power to do anything in the first place. I look for serious CUTS in spending in those areas. major edge to mcCain.
Defense - BHO totally clueless on this, too. Big edge to McCain.
Border control - about even. McCain seems to have come around some, but neither really wants to take the steps necessary to send illegals back where they belong.
Got to go to work. Maybe I will expound more later. I hope Oldskoolfan will come here from THR and give us the benefit of his thinking on why BHO is better.
Post by: agricola on August 30, 2008, 02:11:16 AM
I started this thread as a place for a poster on THR to respond to his statement there that BHO was a chocie than McCain, since I could not think of a single area where i could come to that conclusion.
1. His name is worth more at Scrabble, or would be if names were allowed in Scrabble.
Post by: Silver Bullet on August 30, 2008, 06:34:38 AM
Quote
His name is worth more at Scrabble, or would be if names were allowed in Scrabble
Hmmm, I hadn't thought of that.
This might change my vote. 
Post by: longeyes on August 30, 2008, 06:56:18 AM
Post by: Gowen on August 30, 2008, 07:11:42 AM
Besides, he will usher in the antichrist, if he isn't him already. Oh, that's right, he defeated her in the primary.(this is a joke people, don't take me seriously.)
Post by: marsofold on August 30, 2008, 08:19:26 AM
Post by: Regolith on August 30, 2008, 08:38:54 AM
Because the Kenyan is preferable to the Panamamian. Both were born outside the borders of the USA, so actually neither is constitutionally eligible to run for president.
McCain was born on a US military base to two US citizens, therefor he was born a US citizen. Obama was born in Hawaii.
Sorry, doesn't wash.
Post by: longeyes on August 30, 2008, 09:26:12 AM
That time is gone.
We should all be concerned.
This nation is turning into The United States of Whatever.
Post by: lee n. field on August 30, 2008, 10:05:20 AM
BHO succumbs to socialized medicine and we get Biden.
Post by: Jamisjockey on August 30, 2008, 11:58:00 AM
Because the Kenyan is preferable to the Panamamian. Both were born outside the borders of the USA, so actually neither is constitutionally eligible to run for president.
Yeah Obama is a ragheaded muslim sleeper cell terrorist, didn't anyone see the picture? His daddy smuggled him in the country so he could activate our nukes and destroy us from within!
You've been listening to too many idiots on late night AM radio if you think that either of your statements are true.
And no where does it say that they must be born within the borders of the US. They must be natural born citizens. Both of them are.
Post by: Desertdog on August 30, 2008, 12:22:31 PM
Quote
Because the Kenyan is preferable to the Panamamian. Both were born outside the borders of the USA, so actually neither is constitutionally eligible to run for president.
Sorry but you are incorrect. The Constitution states "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."I think your problem is with the phrase "No person except a natural born Citizen,".
The definition used today for natural citizen includes persons born to US citizens that are residing temporairly outside the US. The operative words are "temporairly outside the USA"
This does include my grandaughter Jessica who was born in an American military hospital in Germany. This would also include tourist, students, and other people who was oversea with plans to retun to the USA.
Post by: MechAg94 on August 30, 2008, 01:38:36 PM
How about change? BHO is better on change. Change, that stuff you have left in your pocket when he gets done taxing the very heart and soul out of this country.
Yes, CHANGE is why Obama selected a long time Washington insider for his VP. Obama has been a party-line voter and a willing member of the Chicago political machine. No change there at all.
Post by: Desertdog on August 30, 2008, 06:22:19 PM
Quote
Executive experience - neither has a whole lot, so maybe a tie.
One of thetalking heads on the Journal Editorial Report (Fox News Network, Saturday, 8:00 PM) made the comment that Sarah Palin had no "executive exerience" and got the reply, "She has more executive experienc than Obama, Biden and McCain combined" Right on.
Post by: marsofold on August 30, 2008, 06:43:16 PM
Post by: longeyes on August 31, 2008, 06:51:38 AM
Obama is a story wrapped in a resume sitting astride a donkey.
Post by: RoadKingLarry on September 01, 2008, 05:06:47 PM
Quote
Executive experience - neither has a whole lot, so maybe a tie.
McCain was a squadron commander with at the time the higest readiness status on record.
Post by: Scout26 on September 04, 2008, 08:29:26 PM
So, I'm wondering how 5 years as a POW makes one a 'hero' let alone qualify him for POTUS. I thought 'heroes' either killed or captured the enemy, not were captured by them.
Congrats.
Despite the best attempts of Paddy McRiley, Tecumseh, and a few others this qualifies as the most ignorant and asinine thing I've read on APS.
My hats' off to you sir.
Post by: GigaBuist on September 04, 2008, 08:54:41 PM
Executive experience - neither has a whole lot, so maybe a tie.
Tied at 0 on that one.Quote
Foreign policy - serious edge to McCain. BHO clearly has no clue how the world really works.
McCain speaks as though the Soviet Union and Czechoslovikia still exist. He's referenced them by name recently. Dude might be slightly out of touch with the real world. I can't be real confident in a guy that's 10 years behind the whole "what countries actually exist" issue.Quote
Taxes - McCain wants to not raise taxes, BHO wants to raise them. Edge to McCain, but personally I think big tax cuts are in order.
Quote
Spending - McCain wants to hold the line. BHO has a whole litany of things he wants to spend more on....
Point to McCain there.Quote
Defense - BHO totally clueless on this, too. Big edge to McCain.
*yawn* Bring every American soldier home and then we'll talk about defense. Neither candidate it speaking my language on that topic.
Post by: Harold Tuttle on September 05, 2008, 05:32:22 AM
Post by: RoadKingLarry on September 05, 2008, 06:30:49 AM
Quote
Congrats.
Despite the best attempts of Paddy McRiley, Tecumseh, and a few others this qualifies as the most ignorant and asinine thing I've read on APS.
My hats off to your sir.
Despite the best attempts of Paddy McRiley, Tecumseh, and a few others this qualifies as the most ignorant and asinine thing I've read on APS.
My hats off to your sir.
OK. I'll bite. As a POW, what did McCain do to further the military objectives of the U.S. during the Vietnam war?
Or do we just feel sorry for him because he was a POW?
Maybe POW status bestows an entitlement for life?
Or is it just an invocation of victimization?
How does it work?
So do you think he just flew into Viet Nam and got shot down on his first day?
Do you think he didn't provide leadership and inspiratin to his fellow POWs?
Do you completely discount the remainder of his exemplary military service?
Do you have any idea what true service and sacrifice means?
I am in 100% agreement with Scout26.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 05, 2008, 06:38:12 AM
Post by: K Frame on September 05, 2008, 06:43:18 AM
Only warning.
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 05, 2008, 08:48:05 AM
I personally see Obama better suited as applied to science and technology. For one thing, he would end the ban on funding for new stem cell lines. Which, whether you believe the president should address or not, the previous one did, and needs fixing.
Is that enough to vote for him? I don't think so. But it would definitely be a boon to emergent medical technologies.
Post by: AZRedhawk44 on September 05, 2008, 08:53:09 AM
Quote
Stop the manly-man emotional Vietnam argument crap and address the topic at hand.
I personally see Obama better suited as applied to science and technology. For one thing, he would end the ban on funding for new stem cell lines. Which, whether you believe the president should address or not, the previous one did, and needs fixing.
Is that enough to vote for him? I don't think so. But it would definitely be a boon to emergent medical technologies.
I personally see Obama better suited as applied to science and technology. For one thing, he would end the ban on funding for new stem cell lines. Which, whether you believe the president should address or not, the previous one did, and needs fixing.
Is that enough to vote for him? I don't think so. But it would definitely be a boon to emergent medical technologies.
Why does John Q Public need to fund medical research? There's no ban on the research, there's just a ban on the FedGov paying for it. And I'm okay with that.
Let the state of California pay for it over in their socialist utopia. Let New York pay for it. Their states are welcome to research anything they want, and they might even see some return on their investment with regard to business tax revenues after the fact.
But the FedGov never gets a return on its investments. It's just wasted money... which means its my money that's wasted. I don't like that.
If it were truly profitable science, then Pfizer and the other companies would be researching it without government grants, or other states/universities would be funding it by whatever means necessary.
Post by: Scout26 on September 05, 2008, 10:52:58 AM
Stop the manly-man emotional Vietnam argument crap and address the topic at hand.
I personally see Obama better suited as applied to science and technology. For one thing, he would end the ban on funding for new stem cell lines. Which, whether you believe the president should address or not, the previous one did, and needs fixing.
Is that enough to vote for him? I don't think so. But it would definitely be a boon to emergent medical technologies.
I personally see Obama better suited as applied to science and technology. For one thing, he would end the ban on funding for new stem cell lines. Which, whether you believe the president should address or not, the previous one did, and needs fixing.
Is that enough to vote for him? I don't think so. But it would definitely be a boon to emergent medical technologies.
As AZ pointed out there is no ban on Stem-cell research, just a ban on the .gov providing the funding. The fact is that so far stem cell research has proved to be a bust. If stem cells truly were the be-all and end-all cure of every evil sickness in the world, then every major pharm company would be investing like mad in developing it. The fact is that the promise of stem cell therapy hasn't been bourne out in tests. Hence, the typical liberal clamour that "We need to spend more money to make it work."
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 05, 2008, 11:28:27 AM
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 05, 2008, 11:47:27 AM
The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. The fact is the limit on federal funding of stem cell research has produced myriad complications in everyday research beyond its intended, misguided target, which has a lot to do with shared usage of equipment and resources and the bureaucratic red tape that inevitably results from arbitrary bans. The fact is stem cells- the evil, godless, mustn't-be-funded kind- still hold our best chance for defeating most of the world's worst afflictions.
It's just so awful that those want to perform stem cell research have to pay for it themselves. It's so inconvenient when the government doesn't pay for it all.
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 11:53:35 AM
The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. The fact is the limit on federal funding of stem cell research has produced myriad complications in everyday research beyond its intended, misguided target, which has a lot to do with shared usage of equipment and resources and the bureaucratic red tape that inevitably results from arbitrary bans. The fact is stem cells- the evil, godless, mustn't-be-funded kind- still hold our best chance for defeating most of the world's worst afflictions.
Typical Democrat logic. Not funding something is a ban. Not increasing the size of an entitlement is cutting it back.
If the tech for stem cell (or bio-diesel, solar or wind, electric cars etc) was all that viable, fed.gov pork wouldn't be needed. Only loser ideas need the .gov to steal my money to fund them.
Post by: richyoung on September 05, 2008, 11:54:30 AM
So, I'm wondering how 5 years as a POW makes one a 'hero' let alone qualify him for POTUS. I thought 'heroes' either killed or captured the enemy, not were captured by them.
That Skyhawk he flew? It dropped BOMBS, not chinese fortune cookies. Not everyone that contributes to killing the enemy does so first hand - the air-to-air tankers, the jamming birds, the search and rescue guys, the photo joes, even the guy that washes the pots in the galley all have a hand in putting the trigger-pullers and bomb droppers in position.
Quote
McCain reminds me of 'did you know I was in Vietnam'? Kerry.
Try "I was ordered into Cambodia by Richard Nixon a year before Richard Nixon took office" Kerry, & see if the comparison still holds...
Quote
My dad had a boatload of military medals I never knew about until after he died.
He was a hero.
He was a hero.
Tru dat.
[/quote]
McCain is an opportunist.
[/quote]
That is an "opinion" - and being an "oppertunist" DOESN'T mean you AREN'T a hero - see Boyington, Bong, McGuire, McArthure, Patton, Halsey, Doolittle, Lindberg, Audie Murphy,, Sgt. York, etc, etc, etc....
Post by: Desertdog on September 05, 2008, 11:54:48 AM
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 05, 2008, 12:07:24 PM
Typical Democrat logic. Not funding something is a ban. Not increasing the size of an entitlement is cutting it back.
If the tech for stem cell (or bio-diesel, solar or wind, electric cars etc) was all that viable, fed.gov pork wouldn't be needed. Only loser ideas need the .gov to steal my money to fund them.
If the tech for stem cell (or bio-diesel, solar or wind, electric cars etc) was all that viable, fed.gov pork wouldn't be needed. Only loser ideas need the .gov to steal my money to fund them.
You're oversimplifying. If it were simply a case of not funding, the word "ban" would be inappropriate. But the way it is executed is an effective ban.
It's true, while those beneficial technologies will come to fruition even with government interference, said interference does slow it down. But hell, I'm young. I guess I could just wait a bit longer as the old fat people die of cancer and diabetes, but I'd rather they didn't have to do that. We have an opportunity to speed things up, but we'd rather wail and moan about decaying embryos having souls, and liberal handouts.
Do you think all the technologies you enjoy came about without any government assistance? How many loser ideas enable your lifestyle?
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 12:15:11 PM
It's ok tho, everyone over 35 will die a horrible death if no tax money is spent on this. After all, the research is so promising no one else will fund it!
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 05, 2008, 12:27:59 PM
And I think you should do some reading before you state that "no one else will fund it". That's simply not true.
Again, I'm not saying this research won't happen without government funding, but that doesn't mean government funding would not be beneficial.
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 12:36:59 PM
Calm down. No one is talking about supposed violation of rights. It's okay to disagree on this, you know. It doesn't make either of us idiots. I can see your perspective on this, but I think there's a lot more to it than you're addressing.
And I think you should do some reading before you state that "no one else will fund it". That's simply not true.
Again, I'm not saying this research won't happen without government funding, but that doesn't mean government funding would not be beneficial.
And I think you should do some reading before you state that "no one else will fund it". That's simply not true.
Again, I'm not saying this research won't happen without government funding, but that doesn't mean government funding would not be beneficial.
So your contention is that the feds have banned it. But it'll still happen, just slower. Do you see how this position is just a tad inconsistent?
Post by: Dntsycnt on September 05, 2008, 12:57:09 PM
Post by: GigaBuist on September 05, 2008, 01:03:42 PM
Quote
The fact is the limit on federal funding of stem cell research has produced myriad complications in everyday research beyond its intended, misguided target, which has a lot to do with shared usage of equipment and resources and the bureaucratic red tape that inevitably results from arbitrary bans.
Wait, wait, wait.
*sarcasm mode = on*
I, for one, find it hard to believe that the federal government would cock-up the situation that badly. I mean, really. It sounds so simple to execute... and they got it wrong? Unpossible!
*sarcasm mode = off*
I think the boy has a point, guys. Hell, we might be wasting more money just complying with the darned restrictions than we're actually saving. Maybe. Just throwing that out there.
Quote
I guess I could just wait a bit longer as the old fat people die of cancer and diabetes, but I'd rather they didn't have to do that.
Damnit! If we fund embryonic stem cell research we're just gonna muck up Social Security!
Post by: Thor on September 05, 2008, 01:09:02 PM
Ohh and for that person that claims McCain is not a hero, what about him refusing to get out of POW Camp early because of his familial ties
He stayed an extra four years because he felt he owed something to his fellow POWs. That meant more torture for him. He could have just said, sure, I'll go and left his bretheren behind. He didn't. He endured countless hours of additional torture because he has principles. That, alone, makes him a hero in MY eyes. Of course, I'm retired Navy and was in the Aviation community. For the record, I'm NOT a McCain fan. At least I wasn't until he chose Palin. In any case, he's STILL better than our alternative, IMHO.
Post by: Balog on September 05, 2008, 01:33:23 PM
No. Say I own four labs, and Jed owns three. I ban the evils of electricity to be researched in my labs. Jed allows it. While there exists a ban, electricity will still be researched, and thus will still advance, but will do so more slowly than it would with the added assistance of my labs.
Oh, so you're saying the fed.gov controls the majority of the research labs trying to find a cure for cancer and diabetes etc?
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on September 05, 2008, 03:57:58 PM
Post by: K Frame on September 05, 2008, 07:41:14 PM
Unfortunately, the stem cells have higher standards.
Jesus...