2008 Races

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

yes, because Democrats always vote based on policies and principles.

there are stupid people on both sides of the aisle.

[Chickenman 9]

I'm not negating that. But the more intolerant ones are usually on the right side. Not at all the majority, not even slightly. But there's a higher concentration there than on the left.

Edited July 1, 2008 by Chickenman

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

i find it funny that those who claim to be so "tolerant" aren't. especially towards the whites and Christians since it's apparently ok to slight them at every turn. Black Entertainment Televison? that's showing pride in who you are. White Entertainment Television? that's racist. Muslims taking time out of their school/work day for their prayers? wow, they sure are devoted. prayer before a sporting event for the players' safety? OMG, sue the pants off the coach.

[Chickenman 9]

I find it funny that all of those people who are "intolerant" towards white and christians are mostly....white christians. I'm not a fan of the PC Police either, far from it.

Then again, black people get their own television network. In return, white people don't get pulled over for speeding quite so much. Black people are allowed by society to make racial humor. White people make more money. Black people can dance. White people make more money. It's a balancing act.

People who are in charge of that ludicrousness are well intentioned, but are indeed ewoking it up. Their goal is not explicitly to discriminate against anyone.

As for the prayer thing, those examples don't really mesh well. The Islamic student is taking time out of school/work for personal devotion to their face. I likewise have no problem with a kid praying in school, which isn't, as is so often accused, illegal. I support any child who wants to pray in school. I suggest it, in fact, during finals week. I don't even have a problem with a teacher praying in school, as long as it's a personal thing, and he's not leading anyone in it.

Which is what the coach example is about. (I assume it's a coach you're talking about) He, a figure that the players are supposed to look up to, is then forcing a particular religious belief on his entire team. A team that can includes Atheists, Agnostics, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Budhists, Wiccans, Cultists, Scientologists, Ancient Greeks and any godless Democrats I might have missed. You have to see that situation from all angles. I for one, feel awkward and left out as though I don't belong. I feel really uncomfortable. It's not right to do that to a kid, especially with a team is supposed to be about working together.

If you weren't talking about a prayer before the game that the whole stadium is asked to join in...yeah...that's even worse.

Again, it's a balancing act though. I've seen (and I'm Independent) that the Democratic Party works harder to make America an equal opportunity employer, and that the Republican Party tends to promote an agenda that works for the rich white Christian male.

Edited July 1, 2008 by Chickenman

[TheUnknown 39]

JM, have you considered the fact that there is a BET because most other networks are geared toward whites?

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

not all of them UPN/WMYO is pretty geared toward the black community. we have women's channels, men's (sports/Playboy) channels, hispanic channels, ect. but if a network calls their new station the "White Pride" channel, media would be all over them for being racist. the other networks may be aimed at white viewers, but it's not expressly said like the others. it's reverse discrimination, and it's getting old.

now, i don't have a problem with accomodating different cultures/religions/people to a degree. but like everyone else, i don't like being slighted in the process. though it goes against my personal beliefs, i don't mind "safe sex" being taught in schools. but i also think abstinence should be a part of the curriculum. these days it's one or the other, and i don't agree with that. although i still think that particular example should be the parents' job, but we all know parents would rather be "cool" than be parents.

all in all, though i don't consider myself Republican or Democrat--i hate them both. i consider myself a conservative moderate. i get just as disgusted with the latest Republican diddling kids/interns as everyone else. but i don't like the Dems let's-be-everyone's-mommy social agenda either. i think we should all be respectful of others' beliefs, ideas, and cultures...another thing that's never going to happen. basically, i don't think either party can claim to be the "tolerant" one, because they both discriminate in different ways.

wow. that kinda rambled there, lol.

[Chickenman 9]

Actually my sex ed was a very good mix of both abstinence and...non abstinence. It was very "Condoms are effective, but remember that you can't get pregnant or diseased from abstinence!" And RI's pretty progressive.

But I still think the Democrats are much more tolerant than the Republicans. And less hypocritical too.

But I all I was saying a few posts above is that racists and homophobes and such tend to throw their hats in with the Republican party. Nothing bad about the Republicans, except that they appear so accommodating to those types.

*Shrug*

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

yeah, i know what you mean. they really make the party look bad.

[Chickenman 9]

Indeed. The party does have some good ideas...

Somewhere.

:p

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

i like their whole keep the money you earn thing. :p

[TheUnknown 39]

You pay more for healthcare, education, etc because they're more concerned with getting another yacht and convincing everyone that everyone who's poor is lazy, stupid, and immoral.

Edited July 1, 2008 by TheUnknown

[Chickenman 9]

*Votes for Unknown*

[Andy 60]

You know, I would love it if one day the candidates for President where Unknown and Pod. :p

[TheUnknown 39]

A Wiccan and an Atheist. That would be interesting.

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

i'd sell tickets to that one. :p

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

You pay more for healthcare, education, etc because they're more concerned with getting another yacht and convincing everyone that everyone who's poor is lazy, stupid, and immoral.

hey, i'm poor and only occasionally lazy, usually not stupid, and rarely immoral.

i don't have a problem giving what i can to people who need it, i just 1. don't like it being taken out of my paycheck before i even see it, thereby forcing me to be charitable, and 2. handing it to people that haven't worked a day in their lives. with my dad and my husband being in leadership positions at church, i've seen and heard plenty of people falling on hard times. the ones who get on my nerves are the ones who refuse to do anything about it.

and the fact that we can't really afford college, but still make too much to qualify for anything but student loans really irks me. it's the middle class that really gets screwed over. maybe someday the loopholes that allow big businesses to get out of paying the proper taxes will be closed, but i'm not holding my breath. i say we take half of the Congress people's paychecks and give it to third generation welfare queens. them loopholes get closed real fast, i bet, lol.

Edited July 1, 2008 by Radioactive Isotope

[TheUnknown 39]

i don't have a problem giving what i can to people who need it, i just...don't like it...handing it to people that haven't worked a day in their lives.

So, your going to throw the baby out with the water to stick it to the lazy people?

and the fact that we can't really afford college, but still make too much to qualify for anything but student loans really irks me. it's the middle class that really gets screwed over. maybe someday the loopholes that allow big businesses to get out of paying the proper taxes will be closed

The Republicans raised the interest rates on student loans and cut Pell Grants. The Democrats fixed that. And don't believe that corporate loopholes will be closed by Republicans OR "moderate" Democrats.

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

i don't care who does it. just fix it, dangit!

and no, i'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. i'm advocating stricter rules and more follow-up on a local level.

[Princess 35]

I can't decide who to vote for this election. Can we just make them both co-President's and split their domestic and foreign agendas?

And I like this guy Joe, American addresses the candidates

[Andy 60]

Unfortunately, politicians these days don't think they are there to serve the people; they seem to think they are there to rule them.

Not being funny or anything, but I think democracy today is a shadow of it's former self.

[Radioactive Isotope 29]

here here.

[Chickenman 9]

i don't care who does it. just fix it, dangit!

I don't care who fixes it either, but I'm going to vote for the party most likely to do so. That's not the Republicans, or the Green Party, or the American Nazi Party. Hold on, by process of elimination, I'll figure it out. Let me get back to you.

and no, i'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. i'm advocating stricter rules and more follow-up on a local level.

The stricter rules are going to hurt the unfortunate as much as the lazy. You're going to make others suffer because some people might be lazy? The only reason we're getting tax cuts is so that the rich don't have to lose any of their money. These tax cuts haven't helped the common man in the slightest. In fact, they've only made it worse for the common man by wrecking our economy.

What the HELL are we doing cutting taxes during a war anyway? That's retarded. There's no other word for it. Retarded. Wars cost billions of dollars. A single fighter plane costs millions of dollars. It's also because of these tax cuts that we can't give our troops the equipment like body armor, or the mine resistant vehicles that they were supposed to get years ago. Casualties have been down 90% since the addition of these vehicles recently in the war. 4,113 - 90%? 411 American deaths. Holy crap! The tax cuts have resulted in the deaths of American servicemen, the most noble people in the world. That's treason.

I can't decide who to vote for this election. Can we just make them both co-President's and split their domestic and foreign agendas?

And I like this guy Joe, American addresses the candidates

A couple years ago, same candidates, I'd agree with you. I love McCain as a person. I really do. The man's a hero of mine, he's got a great sense of humor (something you never see in politicians anymore) and the man tries(tried) to reach compromise rather than point fingers. But lately, McCain hasn't been that McCain. McCain says that he's a maverick, that he's willing to reach across party lines, and that he's not Bush.

Because he doesn't agree with Bush on all the issues. You know, like Iraq, Health Care, The Economy, Foreign Relations, Abortion, Gay Marriage (Aka: How to get the religious vote without actually doing anything about it), Immigration, Social Security, Tax Cuts, and more. He couldn't disagree with Bush more on these issues!

Hell, the man who opposes torture is also against letting the people that we've tortured (some of whom are innocent) from appealing their cases. Gitmo was the big thing he had in common with Democrats. Clearly he's reaching across party lines.

Not to mention he's been hanging out with the rich CEO b******s, religious nutjobs, and everyone else that runs the higher echelons of the the Republican Party.

The man is truly going to usher in a new kind of administration.

And by "kind of administration," I of course mean "World Order."

[TheUnknown 39]

I can't decide who to vote for this election. Can we just make them both co-President's and split their domestic and foreign agendas?

Which candidate's domestic agenda and which foreign agenda? I hope you're not talking about McCain's "Iraq for 100 years" and "We won't talk to governments we don't like" foreign agenda. Same as Bush.

And Chicken, McCain is no maverick. He's a panderer. He calls the likes of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson "agents of intolerance." Later, he runs off for photo ops with Falwell and actively seeks the endorsement of John Hagee, a guy that called the Catholic Church a great whore and basically said that Hitler was doing god's work.

MoveOn had a great ad about this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI

[Chickenman 9]

That's exactly what I was saying, Unknown.

It's hard to inject the full weight of my sarcastic tone in writing. :???:

Edited July 2, 2008 by Chickenman

[TheUnknown 39]

My snark radar is off. I wasn't sure if you were serious. Besides, maybe someone else will read that and realize McCain was either playing the left-center in 2000 with this "moderate" thing or playing the right now. Or both.