Homeless people 'driven' to register and vote for Obama; All they want is a sandwich

[zabu of nΩd]

Yes, let's elect Obama who is one of the people who started this economic crisis.

Are you suggesting that McCain is any less responsible for the crisis?

 

[AchrisK]

The crisis probably started during the reign of Clinton.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Nobody is denying the rights of gays. They can be as gay as they want. Pregnant women? How about the rights of the human inside them? How about personal responsibility? Canada shows us that universal health care is not a perfect system and the answer to all of our woes. The idea is to cut takes and reduce government presence, and allow people to take care of themselves.

I am not trying to argue the points above, I am just giving examples of how people see things differently. If you think you have nothing to learn, you have a lot to learn.

Except that I and others here have already argued those points to exhaustion, and gotten approximately dick worth of a rebuttal from anyone. See:

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/...vey-way-do-you-lean-each-political-issue.html

 

[The Ozzman]

You can't nail the economic debacle now to one specific person. IT'S A MULTITUDE OF PEOPLE. SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT IT ALREADY!

 

[zabu of nΩd]

You can't nail the economic debacle now to one specific person. IT'S A MULTITUDE OF PEOPLE. SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT IT ALREADY!

Thank you.

 

[Caecius]

Are you suggesting that McCain is any less responsible for the crisis?

Less, Yes.

 

[Caecius]

You can't nail the economic debacle now to one specific person. IT'S A MULTITUDE OF PEOPLE. SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT IT ALREADY!

I wasn't trying too. Both parties are responsible, I'm just not voting for a guy who played a big role in it.

 

[The Ozzman]

Please give me websites that say he played a big role in the current crisis. Please show me links that say he had a bigger involvement in it than Alan FUCKING Greenspan or President Bush or President Clinton (since their involvement was substantial).

 

[Caecius]

Please give me websites that say he played a big role in the current crisis. Please show me links that say he had a bigger involvement in it than Alan FUCKING Greenspan or President Bush or President Clinton (since their involvement was substantial).

I'm comparing McCain to Obama here.

 

[The Ozzman]

I'm comparing McCain to Obama here.

I still want you to provide evidence of your claims

 

[Caecius]

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/16171/?ck=1

Barack Obama has received more money from Fannie and Freddie than any other senator, with the exception of Senator Dodd, in the last four years. Before entering the senate, Obama filed a class-action lawsuit against Citibank, alleging that the bank was red-lining, or not doing enough lending in certain areas. That lawsuit was eventually settled. Arguably, Barack Obama helped cause the problem he now wants to fix.

The blue links are sources.

I just to clear things up, I'm independent.

EDIT: I shouldn't have said "started" earlier, rather I should have said contributed.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

I'll see your lawsuit against Citibank, and raise you a Keating Five scandal.

 

[Caecius]

I'll see your lawsuit against Citibank, and raise you a Keating Five scandal.

The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal

And screw Wikipedia. I can't believe so many people use that site. Let me go back to edit that...

 

[AchrisK]

Except that I and others here have already argued those points to exhaustion, and gotten approximately dick worth of a rebuttal from anyone. See:

http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/...vey-way-do-you-lean-each-political-issue.html

Wow, so on the Ultimate Metal Forum a bunch of liberals got together and agreed? And that's your proof that your point of view is right?

Come on...

 

[zabu of nΩd]

The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal

Sure, sure - with $112,000 he got from Keating, his family's $359,000 investments in Keating's business, and McCain's close personal relationship with Keating, I'm sure McCain did NOTHING wrong.

It's not like the committee "investigating" the incident was the most neutral ever. It was made up of Senators, and they only punished one of the five guys involved. Looks pretty damn fishy to me.

.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Wow, so on the Ultimate Metal Forum a bunch of liberals got together and agreed? And that's your proof that your point of view is right?

Come on...

Trade: Bob Barr
Tariffs hurt countries, so why have them?
Health Care: Bob Barr
NASA: I don't really care either way
Taxation/Budget: Bob Barr. Obama knows shit all about how taxes work, so fuck him
Social Security: Bob Barr
End Social Security as a public system. It should have been ended as such years ago.
Network Neutrality: Don't force network neutrality unless it's obviously hurting consumers, so McCain
Lobbying: Obama
Iraq: Bob Barr
Education: I'm not really sure. I would consider a public education system, but it needs to REALLY be reformed, so I don't really support any candidate here
Patriot Act: Bob fucking Barr

Can't you tell I'm pretty libertarian?

Except when you stop focusing on specific issues and begin saying things like "liberalism is correct", you're making generalisations which are not only divisive and arrogant but also assume things which aren't necessarily true.

Things like pacifism and opposition to economic freedom keep me skeptical of the generalised "liberal viewpoint". There's also a tendency to assume that the tax burden should be focused on high income earners without taking into account the contributions of businesses to the economy.

I just can't agree with you. I completely understand what you're saying, but I don't believe in it. Collectivism is not the proper method of economy. I don't believe in this ideal society where, by governmental regulation, we try and make every human being equal/have equal opportunities. I believe in individual progress. If it then benefits us to extend an arm to our fellow man, we will. And I assure you, people will see the benefit in helping each other (if they don't already). The idea of community must prevail. That's all the faith we can have in humanity. I don't believe in forcing a collective welfare system which caters to the less fortunate.

A great deal of money lies with the middle/upper-middle class. It's those people we have to put our faith in. Collective systems which hurt the middle and upper-middle class will be ultimately detrimental to our economy.

I don't believe in (forceful) redistribution of wealth

Money trickles both ways. There's a certain philosophy behind capitalism, and it's the philosophy that I believe works best. When we start making exceptions we risk relinquishing more control than we previously anticipated. I don't trust any government with that much control. I realize this is a "slippery slope" argument; but it does work that way.

Yeah - nothing but a bunch of liberals sitting around and agreeing with each other there.

I'm not saying this place isn't fairly infested with mindless Democrats, but for the love of god, there has been far too much political debate here for you to simply write all this off as a bunch of liberals agreeing with each other. And it seems pretty disingenuous of you to simply complain about there being "too much liberalism" when you can't actually adequately defend the opposing viewpoint which you supposedly consider more sensible.

 

[Caecius]

Can I have a link for the money amounts?

 

[AchrisK]

I haven't read that thread, but whatever happened in there is not proof that liberal, Democratic, conservative or Republican ideology is objectively always correct.

My whole point, and comment, was to point out how people of similar intelligence can be so adamant about opposing points of view. It trips me out.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Can I have a link for the money amounts?

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE4D91230F931A15752C1A96F948260
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE1D91F3CF936A35752C0A967958260
http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20081007/888/twl-obama-targets-mccain-s-role-in-keati.html

 

[zabu of nΩd]

I haven't read that thread, but whatever happened in there is not proof that liberal, Democratic, conservative or Republican ideology is objectively always correct.

It is objectively correct that homosexuals have inferior marriage rights in the U.S. compared to heterosexuals, and that this is due to religious people viewing homosexuals as immoral despite the biological evidence which shows that homosexuality is natural.

It is objectively correct that the countries which have implemented universal health care have vastly lower health care expenses than the U.S. does, as well as not leaving 15% of their populations behind. It is also objectively correct that health care costs are rising in the U.S. under a predominantly private system, and will become unaffordable if they continue their current trend.

I could go on to cite other issues such as the war in Iraq, the war on drugs, and the utter failure of Bush's economic and tax policies (which McCain predominantly supported), but apparently anything short of 100% verifiable fact is just not good enough for you to accept.