Anyone notice this about Obama?

[Denny Crane]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy

In South East Asia, Kennedy followed Eisenhower's lead by using limited military action to fight the Communist forces ostensibly led by Ho Chi Minh. Proclaiming a fight against the spread of Communism, Kennedy enacted policies providing political, economic, and military support for the unstable French-installed South Vietnamese government, which included sending 16,000 military advisors and U.S. Special Forces to the area. Kennedy also agreed to the use of free-fire zones, napalm, defoliants and jet planes. U.S. involvement in the area continually escalated until regular U.S. forces were directly fighting the Vietnam War in the next administration. The Kennedy Administration increased military support, but the South Vietnamese military was unable to make headway against the pro-independence Viet-Minh and Viet Cong forces. By July 1963, Kennedy faced a crisis in Vietnam. The Administration's response was to assist in the coup d'état of the Roman Catholic President of South Vietnam, Ngo Dinh Diem.[23] In 1963, South Vietnamese generals overthrew the Diem government, arresting Diem and later killing him (though the exact circumstances of his death remain unclear)[24] Kennedy sanctioned Diem's overthrow. One reason for the support was a fear that Diem might negotiate a neutralist coalition government which included Communists, as had occurred in Laos in 1962. Dean Rusk, Secretary of State, remarked "This kind of neutralism?€?is tantamount to surrender."

Kennedy increased the number of U.S. military in Vietnam from 800 to 16,300.

(My note: I think we have about 16,300 in Afghanistan now, for comparison purposes).

 

[Denny Crane]

As for the Bay of Pigs... Kennedy ordered the attack and then withheld the necessary support that was promised to the Cuban freedom fighters. 1800 of them were taken prisoner, and JFK paid Cuba $53M to have them released. $53M doesn't sound like a lot, but 6 years later, the entire federal budget, including LBJ's grand social program spending and for a 500,000 troop war in Vietnam was $200M.

As for the Cuban Missile Crisis... The USSR wouldn't have been so bold if it were Reagan in office. Khruschev and the others in power in the USSR saw JFK as an intellectual lightweight and ill equipped for the presidency and took advantage of it. Never in Man's history since we mastered the atomic bomb were we ever so close to complete and utter destruction of the world via nuclear WWW II. And JFK effectively surrendered Cuba to decades of abuse, poverty, and a dictatorial regime as well as surrendering our bases in Turkey to avoid devastation at the last minute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy

A week later, he and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev reached an agreement. Khrushchev agreed to remove the missiles subject to U.N. inspections if the U.S. publicly promised never to invade Cuba and quietly removed US missiles stationed in Turkey. Following this crisis, which brought the world closer to nuclear war than at any point before or since, Kennedy was more cautious in confronting the Soviet Union.

 

[Denny Crane]

The Kennedys would have made Obama proud.

Starting in 1960, a bunch of white and black people got together and rode (segregated) on buses together throughout the south. At every stop, they were met by the KKK and other nasty bigots and got the shit kicked out of them and worse. The police down there even arrested them a bunch of times. These people were HEROES of the first order in my book.

Compare, say, to Ike who called out the National Guard to move aside the governor of Arkansas so black kids could attend the high school there. Oh yeah, that would be Bill Clinton's home town, of all places.

So the freedom riders did their thing and the Kennedys followed the news and basically did nothing but sit on their hands. This is typical of their record on civil rights:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_ride

On Wednesday morning, May 24, Freedom Riders boarded buses for the journey to Jackson MS. Surrounded by Highway Patrol and National Guard, the buses arrived in Jackson without incident, and the riders were immediately arrested when they tried to use the "white-only" facilities at the depot. In Montgomery, Freedom Riders including Yale University Chaplin William Sloane Coffin, Shuttlesworth, Abernathy, Wyatt Tee Walker, and others were similarly arrested for violating local segregation ordinances.

This established a pattern followed by subsequent Freedom Rides in which they traveled to Jackson where they were arrested and jailed. The strategy became one of trying to fill the jails. Once the Jackson City and Hinds County jails were filled to overflowing, Freedom Riders were transferred to the infamous Parchman Penitentiary ("Parchman Farm"). There abusive treatment included placement in the Maximum Security Unit (Death Row), issuance of only underwear, no exercise, no mail, and, when Freedom Riders refused to stop singing Freedom Songs, they took away mattresses, sheets and toothbrushes and removed the screens from the windows. When the cell block became filled with mosquitoes, they hosed everyone down with DDT at 2 AM.

The Kennedys called for a "cooling off period" and condemned the Rides as unpatriotic because they embarrassed the nation on the world stage. <span style="font-size:18pt;line-height:100%">Attorney General Robert Kennedy — the chief law enforcement officer of the land — was quoted as saying that he "Does not feel that the Department of Justice can side with one group or the other in disputes over Constitutional rights."</span>

 

[CelticKing]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DolfanDale @ Jul 5 2008, 02:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing @ Jul 4 2008, 11:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Obama should not be the president because of many reasons but the main one is that he has no experience what so ever with foreign affairs, and would only take this country down with his bring the troop backs in 15 months crappy idea.


VOTE 4 MCCAIN!!!</div>

Someone knit Satan a sweater because I agree with a CK post!
</div>

 

[CelticKing]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ Jul 5 2008, 02:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nader for Prez, jokes.</div>

Saturday he was at Bradley Airport (in Connecticut), where I work. I was at the gate so I missed him, I would have asked for an autograph at least. lol

 

[Lavalamp]

lol, I wonder how much time he actually puts into trying to gain voters. I mean he really has absolutely no chance.

 

[CelticKing]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ Jul 5 2008, 12:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>lol, I wonder how much time he actually puts into trying to gain voters. I mean he really has absolutely no chance.</div>

My fellow workers said that he was alone, and no one was paying attention to him. Poor fella.

 

[huevonkiller]

Well to me "Terror", War, whatever you want to call it, is a huge reason why I'm not voting for McCain. I disagree immensely with his philosophy on War, and combined with moral issues, that certainly makes me lean towards Obama. I wouldn't mind sacrificing the "free market" or "experience" for a Dem president right now. General Clark sounded like a complete asshole recently, but I saw quite clearly what his point was.

On another note, I was reading about Reagan's tenure in the White House, and I do indeed believe he handled our GDP very well. I know his methods can work as far as the economy is concerned, so I can see why the GOP likes Tax Cuts but that's not enough for me to vote for them (I would describe myself as a Libertarian-Liberal, for the record). I do think the Government needs to stay out of my way on various issues, but on Health Care Costs in America and such I disagree.

 

[Real]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jul 5 2008, 12:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well to me "Terror", War, whatever you want to call it, is a huge reason why I'm not voting for McCain. I disagree immensely with his philosophy on War, and combined with moral issues, that certainly makes me lean towards Obama.</div>

Out of curiosity, what is McCain's philosophy on war to you?

 

[RipCity]

Please don't mention Ronald Regan in the same breath as Barack Obama. Regan is quite possibly the best president this country has ever had whereas Obama if elected would be one of the worst.


And I understand being able to speak well is a great asset to have in a president, but I'll pass on someone who speaks endlessly without any real substance to his speeches. Obama loves to grandstand about the things that are wrong with our current president and the country, but I've never heard him offer a solution to any of the problems he supposedly is so passionate about.

I'm sorry, a little more than "It's time for a change" is required to get my vote.

 

[huevonkiller]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RipCity @ Jul 5 2008, 05:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Please don't mention Ronald Regan in the same breath as Barack Obama. Regan is quite possibly the best president this country has ever had whereas Obama if elected would be one of the worst.


And I understand being able to speak well is a great asset to have in a president, but I'll pass on someone who speaks endlessly without any real substance to his speeches. Obama loves to grandstand about the things that are wrong with our current president and the country, but I've never heard him offer a solution to any of the problems he supposedly is so passionate about.

I'm sorry, a little more than "It's time for a change" is required to get my vote.</div>

A little sensitive today? I didn't make that comparison, I am simply stating I know Reagan did many great things. AKA, I'm not a radical Liberal, but I'm voting for Barry.

 

[44Thrilla]

What's funny to me is that if the nominees were Hillary and Mitt Romney, it would be the Democrats in here crying about foreign policy work and political experience. People's opinions change based upon their candidate's strengths and weaknesses, and ultimately all they really care about is that their candidate wins the election.

 

[tim]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jul 5 2008, 08:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What's funny to me is that if the nominees were Hillary and Mitt Romney, it would be the Democrats in here crying about foreign policy work and political experience. People's opinions change based upon their candidate's strengths and weaknesses, and ultimately all they really care about is that their candidate wins the election.</div>
While the republicans don't do the same?

I respect McCain with all my heart for what he did as a war veteran, but what he has said he plans to do as president reminds me of a certain President Bush, in that he wants to continue the war, keep Bush's tax cuts that benefit the rich, keep restrictions on gay rights (I know not an issue on the same level as the other two, but close to my heart. I have two gay uncles that deserve more respect than they get). And I know many of you don't find George Dubya to be a great president. From what I see here, republicans seem to be doing the same thing by just making sure McCain wins.

I'm not saying democrats are innocent in this accusation, but IMO you can't keep republicans out of this.

 

[TheBeef]

Many say that tax cuts only benefit the rich, but that couldnt be farther from the truth....lets start with this: Poor people dont pay taxes in this country, atleast not income taxes....for the past 10 years, my tax return has been 100% of what I put in + much, much more....in most years, I pay under $100 during the year and get a return over $3000....so while its true that a tax cut doesnt give me direct benefit, thats because you cant cut $0 and thats what I pay....During the Bush administration, Ive twice been sent a check by the government related to a tax cut that wasnt related to my personal returns....the 1st happend shortly after he took office and was for $600, the other came this year and was for $1800....how does that benifit only the rich???? The basic difference between the two parties is in the size of the Federal Government. Republicans believe in a limited government that covers the basics such as defense and tranquility, Dems believe in a larger government that regulates much more and provides lots of social programs....the truth is, the Republicans want you to keep your money, Dems want to take it and disperse it to those less fortunate....often, that dispersal goes not to those less fortunate, but to those who will not put forth effort, refusing to work for themselves or thier families....the rules are so complex and counterintuitive that they restrict help for those that are literally working themselves to death and give help freely to some who do nothing and collect a living....

 

[Real]

McCain has said he doesn't support the Bush tax cuts because they work, he supports the Bush tax cuts because he thinks he would be ridiclious to raise taxes in a recession.

EDIT: McCain's tax cuts, without the Bush tax cuts, come out to about 200 billion a year.

 

[tim]

Recessions are temporary. That logic makes no sense for a four year term.

My original point was just that both republicans and democrats are able to look past the faults of their candidates if it means they win the election.

 

[TheBeef]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tim @ Jul 6 2008, 01:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Recessions are temporary. That logic makes no sense for a four year term.

My original point was just that both republicans and democrats are able to look past the faults of their candidates if it means they win the election.</div>

Recessions are temporary, but sometimes they turn into depressions....and depressions usually require something major to recover from, like a major war or a new technology....you cant count on either....it is crazy to raise to taxes during a recession....people are struggling hard enough without having the governemt dipping further into thier pockets....

 

[Real]

It's all irrelevant anyway because tax cuts aren't as effective if you don't cut spending.

And I haven't heard Obama say one thing about reducing spending. He and Hillary only sponsored the ban on earmarks because McCain did as well. Republicans have long lost their minds when it comes to fiscal discipline, but the Democrats are the masters of pork.

McCain's 2006 rating for Citizens Against Government Waste: 95%

Obama's 2006 rating for Citizens Against Government Waste: 30%

Link

 

[tim]

Well, that is fine. If he doesn't want to mess with taxes during a recession, I can understand that. But I would hope he would do something about them when it ended.

 

[TheBeef]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tim @ Jul 6 2008, 01:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well, that is fine. If he doesn't want to mess with taxes during a recession, I can understand that. But I would hope he would do something about them when it ended.</div>

I dont understand why you would be against tax cuts....thats the one policy I dont understand the critisism of because who wants to pay higher taxes? Are people lining up and protesting because they want to pay more?

 

[tim]

Well, living in Minnesota, a lot of the taxes have been going towards construction for our bridges (35W bridge collapse).

Taxes don't just go straight to the gov officials pockets, they go towards things like what I mentioned. Maybe if we pay higher taxes, we won't spend as much on gas, which would mean we wouldn't drive as much, putting less toxic gas into the environment. It's not all just how much you pay. It's the bigger picture in this case.

 

[TheBeef]

What toxic gas do cars release into the environment?

 

[tim]

The carbon gases.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The transportation sector alone is responsible for about one-third of our nation's total production of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that contributes in a big way to global warming.</div>

More on this topic

 

[TheBeef]

Do you realize that Co2 is used by trees to make oxygen? Also, cows produce far more Co2 than cars in this country and cows have been prevelent for a long time....don't be sucked in to the green lobby and all the theories they present as facts....for instance, the average tempeture of the earth is .5 degree celcius higher than 100 years ago....what they dont tell you is that theres no reliable data before that, so for all we know, its still colder than 200 years ago....the point is, the sample size is so small and theres nothing to compare it to, so how can it be considered a trend....its like noticing that a players scoring jumped from 10 points a game to 20 points a game and using that trend, he will score 40 points a game this season and 80 points a game next year....theres a very good chance that increases in tempature will turn out to be a statistical anomaly....

 

[tim]

You know what's funny about these debates I'm having with you guys? As much as I enjoy them, it really doesn't matter. I'm going to be too young to vote

By about a month.

 

[cpawfan]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tim @ Jul 6 2008, 02:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The carbon gases.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The transportation sector alone is responsible for about one-third of our nation's total production of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that contributes in a big way to global warming.</div>

More on this topic
</div>

First you have to prove that there is such a thing as global warming

 

[TheBeef]

If you take nothing else from this, please, take this one piece of advice: Be inquisitive, ask questions, and do research on your own, using independant sources....I say this because I know there are people in your life that are trying to indoctrinate you with thier political views, and they will use whatever information, even if its sensationalistic, to pull you in a direction....In my opinion, the Right v. Left war is lost, not because the left has a point, in fact, I believe them to be dead wrong on many issues, but becasue the educational institutions of this country are employing teachers that heavily lean left and they teach it like its a core subject. So, don't believe everything you hear in school, everything you read in your text books, or everything you hear on the news, theres an agenda in all these things....and dont be afraid to ask when, where, who and most importantly why, and then decide for yourself....

 

[tim]

I do, I find myself to be a very inquisitive person. That's why I believe what I believe. I ask questions. I am strong enough to not get brainwashed by my teachers. I read. I watch the news. I am not a case of someone who doesn't make opinions for himself. I feel strongly about my beliefs, which is why I am willing to debate with you all despite the fact that you all probably have more political experience, seeing more than I have. Although I am younger than you, I am knowledgeable and do form my own opinions on the various issues. And while I am younger, please respect my opinions as I do decide for myself what I believe what is wrong and right on these issues.

 

[44Thrilla]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tim @ Jul 6 2008, 12:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jul 5 2008, 08:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>What's funny to me is that if the nominees were Hillary and Mitt Romney, it would be the Democrats in here crying about foreign policy work and political experience. People's opinions change based upon their candidate's strengths and weaknesses, and ultimately all they really care about is that their candidate wins the election.</div>
While the republicans don't do the same?

I respect McCain with all my heart for what he did as a war veteran, but what he has said he plans to do as president reminds me of a certain President Bush, in that he wants to continue the war, keep Bush's tax cuts that benefit the rich, keep restrictions on gay rights (I know not an issue on the same level as the other two, but close to my heart. I have two gay uncles that deserve more respect than they get). And I know many of you don't find George Dubya to be a great president. From what I see here, republicans seem to be doing the same thing by just making sure McCain wins.

I'm not saying democrats are innocent in this accusation, but IMO you can't keep republicans out of this.
</div>
You basically just repeated what I said. Both sides are guilty of it.

 

[Denny Crane]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jul 6 2008, 12:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tim @ Jul 6 2008, 02:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The carbon gases.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The transportation sector alone is responsible for about one-third of our nation's total production of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that contributes in a big way to global warming.</div>

More on this topic
</div>

First you have to prove that there is such a thing as global warming
</div>

There is global warming, of that there is no doubt. The science is sound; there's a geological record in stone and in ice cores.

What's not sound is the claim it's caused by man. Man wasn't burning fossil fuels when this latest instance of warming began 10,000 years ago, ending the last ice age, melting glaciers that covered the great lakes. Nor did the Dinosaurs burn fossil fuels during the previous ice age, or when they were at their peak and the world's temperature was much warmer than today.