US Elections

[No_way]

Voted in the poll, silly you . Against the US? Never said that. Just mentoined something about putting a roof over it, so you could keep your polution for yourself... lol But that was a diffrent discussion

[xhuga2]

Obama! Why?
Obama because he understands America's economic woes and has a sensible approach to solve it. With him in power, I can rest assure that the that the US economy won't drag the world economy down with it as it is doing now.

I prefer Obama because he has a good, sensible and achievable educational policy.
He has also has a good flexible health care plan. Clinton's healthcare plan was better than Obama's own. But atleast Obama's own is way better than McCain's.

McCain's only strength is in national security. Obama may have never been a soldier but he does have more than a clue on what's happening in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama is on the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs. McCain on the other hand is only on the Armed Services commitee. McCain's 'good' bad luck is that he fell out of a plane and became a POW. Otherwise he wouldn't have anything to mouth at his town hall meetings.

I prefer Obama to McCain because he is touch with ordinary people. He worked as community organiser, he knows what people need and he work towards it.

I prefer Obama because he rarely flip flops. I prefer Obama because he has helped Veterans more in his state in short term than McCain has done during his so long "experienced" terms.

I prefer Obama because he knows Gautanamo bay is illegal and that waterboarding is a creul and good way of getting inaccurate terrorist information.

To me, If you are an American and you believe in the founding principles of liberty then you will vote Obama. Obama supports a woman's right to choose whether to abbort or not. McCain does not. Obama supports LGBT. McCain does not. Obama hasn't divorce yet, McCain has. So how does make McCain a good conservative? I thought Conservatives uphold marital and christian values. hmm...

Obama supports use of clean alternate energy like wind and solar. McCain claims he does. McCain wants us to use Nuclear energy which is good but not too safe.

Obama is an excellent lawyer. He graduated Harvard Law School, J.D. magna cum laude 1988-1991. He was the President, Harvard Law Review. Obama even taught Law at the University of Chicago law school. America is basically screwed because of bad laws that the Republican congress passed. Obama understands laws and will put in good laws that will help the people.

I also know that Obama shall perform extremely well in power because he is going to be the first African American president. He is going to have to set the pace and confirm to the American people that African Americans can also be effective in the Oval office. He would definitely want another second term in office as well so he would have to work for it. Finally he will want to make sure he leaves a good record for Hillary to take over in 2017.

I am not a blind fan of Obama. I don't listen to pundits, one line attacks and out of context quotes by each candidate. I do my research.

Find time to visit each candidate's site and read on what their views instead of watching fox news and cnn. Read articles in Business Week, The Economist and any other credible information source and see what their expert analyst have to say about each candidate.

I'm positive the more you research the more you become alligned with Obama. Let's make this election about issues and not religion and race.

[zuki]

I know that USA need more cheap petrol po prevent their airlines to collapse but let's stop killing innocent people in islamic world ok? peace\/

[RanceedaW]

Should've been a 5th option: None of the Above

I wouldn't vote for any who's running, even in a poll
This country has been f-----, and no matter who's in
Office, it'll stay the same or get worse.. I didn't like
Bush, nor the people running now.. so I'ma vote for...

Walter. Jeff Dunham's buddy

[Morningstar]

I haven't been around much lately. I thought I would drop in to see what was happening when I stumbled over this little discourse and figured I may as well add my two cents to the pot.

Barack Obama refused to wear the American flag pin that was offered to him because he thought it was embarrassing. He refused to put his hand over his heart during the national anthem because that too caused him to be embarrassed. However he wasn't embarrassed to sit in a church pew while his pastor trashed America. He tells his rich buddies in San Francisco that the middle-class working folks "cling to guns or religion" because they are "bitter" over the tough economic times. He tells us that we shouldn't be concerned about immigrants learning English but we should concentrate more on teaching our kids to speak Spanish. "It's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe and all we can say is merci beaucoup."

Young American soldiers are fighting, and dying in battles thousands of miles from their homes and American medical personnel are caring for refugees and orphans throughout the world, and the American people are more generous than any on earth, ready to help the sick and needy wherever they live, but Barack Obama is embarrassed because his countrymen don't speak French? Who is this character? He's born in the greatest nation on earth and he's too embarrassed to wear a flag pin or honor our anthem with a simple gesture. He's uncomfortable with gun loving, Bible thumping, hard working, English speaking people who are the heart and soul of what is good about his country, but he seems to be real comfortable sitting for years in a church where the pastor preaches hatred of America.

I've got no burning love for John McCain; the man should have been prosecuted for his part in the Keating scandal years ago. His actions as an American soldier and a POW are suspect at best and anyone who thinks he is was a hero doesn't know the meaning of the word. The idea of having to pick between Obama and McCain is enough to make me want to throw up. Either way the American people lose, because neither of them is worth the powder to blow them to h3ll. Even still, if push comes to shove, I'll vote for McCain long before I vote for some mealy mouthed commie who is so embarrassed by his country that he can't even put on a flag pin or put his hand over his heart during the national anthem. We would be better off voting for Osama bin Laden than Barack Obama - at least bin Laden has the guts to say that he hates us, but Obama can't even muster enough spine to do that. Just my opinion.

[Centurian]

Obama as I dont really know the other guy and Obama seems perfectly sane.......


And then I read the above comment, so from now on I'll keep my gob shut.

[Nova]

Whoops! I was a little trigger happy before reading properly. I voted as a US Citizen. Thor, can you change my vote to Non US Citizen.

Sorry about that. Go Obama

[Morningstar]

Originally Posted by xhuga2

To me, If you are an American and you believe in the founding principles of liberty then you will vote Obama.

For your edification, the founding principle of American liberty is the absence of government coercion and I, as an American citizen, fail to comprehend how voting for a junior senator who has established the well-deserved reputation as the most socialistically inclined politician in the 110th session of the U.S. Congress, will reduce government coercion. The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama and the entire Democratic Nation Party espouse a political philosophy that the founding fathers of this nation would consider entirely abhorrent and morally repugnant because it contradicts the very essence of what they struggled to achieve with their creation of a very limited form of government. The American government was purposely limited to specific areas of responsibility because the founders of this nation were well aware of the natural tendency of government officials to gravitate towards authoritarian despotism. This was why the inalienable (defined as "granted at birth by a higher power") rights of men were originally protected from government intervention and the role of government was limited to protecting the American citizens from foreign invaders, coordinating interaction with foreign nations to benefit the American people, and maintaining order among the separate states.

The numerous problems facing the United States today are the result of our government's constant push for greater authority over the daily activities of its citizens. The American government was never intended to act as a regulatory body exercising control over our free market economy and every government incursion into the business affairs of free American citizens has backfired miserably resulting in economic hardship for all.

The American government was not intended to be the benefactor of the poor and the entirely dependent at the expense of others, and Obama's health care plan is nothing more than a socialistic redistribution of wealth designed to take from those who work for what they have and give it to those who do not. It is a plan that is entirely contingent on the government's ability to coerce tax money out of the pockets of the American citizens so that it can be used to provide health care benefits to individuals who are unable or unwilling to provide for themselves. Since the Bill of Rights establishes that all American citizens have the inalienable right to be secure in their possessions how can you justify the use of government coercion to forcibly take any portion of their wages for what is essentially, nothing more than a socialistic redistribution of wealth?

The American people failed to remain vigilant, and as a result their form of government has gotten farther and farther away from its founding principles with every new law passed. It is extremely unlikely that we can correct that error at this time by going even farther away from where we started because that will only make matters worse.

Before we can begin to fix the problems we have created for ourselves we need to realize that the current population of this country has become politically polarized and falls into two separate but distinct categories, those who work for a living and pay taxes and those whose survival is dependent on the tax money of others. Our form of government has become dominated by elected representatives who are willing to take advantage of the power inherent in the growing number of tax takers to gain control over the dwindling number of tax providers. The primary problem with this should be readily obvious to anyone because those who work and pay taxes can only accept a limited amount of burden before they are either crushed or accept defeat and join the ranks of the tax takers. When everyone is carefully slotted into being entirely dependent on the government for their daily sustenance where will the tax money come from to support their needs?

Barack Obama, like all liberally inclined politicians, would work for legislation that placed a greater burden on workers while making life easier for those who simply wanted to lay back and take whatever the government provided. He has promised to provide amnesty to the estimated 20 million illegal aliens already in this nation and clear the path for the next 20 million to follow while the American people are forced to pay the high cost associated with adding a massive number of primarily illiterate, semi-skilled individuals to our equation. He has given his strong support to increased spending for social programs that will directly reduce the amount of money working people will have left to feed, clothe, house and educate their own families. Where does it stop? The guy preaches change, but the only change I see coming as a result of his plans are changes that we can ill afford.

Before anyone runs out and casts their vote for Barack Obama they should sit down and figure out exactly how much of their income is currently being sucked up all the various forms of government taxation. I'm not just talking about state and federal income taxes here; I'm talking about every form of government tax you can imagine, including permits, fees, registrations, licenses and all the other ways our government has found to separate us from our income. By the time you're done adding all of these items up you will have discovered that nearly 70% of your income is going into the deep pocket of government never to be seen by you again. The real question you should be asking yourself is how much more are you willing to give? The government is already dipping its furry hand into your pocket and pulling out billions of dollars every year so it can dole that money out to those who are unwilling to work for what they get. That money is not being spent to build new roads, improve our waterways, construct more efficient power plants and secure our nation's borders. While the infrastructure of our nation falls into disrepair your tax money is being spent to provide for the daily needs of those who are too dumb or too lazy to get off their butts and go to work like the rest of us. It is being spent to provide educational opportunities to illegal aliens that are not available to American citizens. It is being spent to provide free housing and free medical care to people who are unwilling to provide for themselves like you and I have worked all of our adult lives to do for ourselves and our families. How much longer can this sort of thing go on before the whole system falls apart around us and we all end up being screwed?

It appears to me that the single best way to guarantee that things become worse than they already are is to vote for Barack Obama, and that is why I will not vote for him or anyone pushes a similar brand of political philosophy. Admittedly, John McCain is not my idea of a perfect candidate for president, in fact he is far from it, but since we are being given a choice between the lesser of two evils, he is certainly more preferable to voting for Barack Obama which is the political equivalent to shooting myself in the foot.

[xhuga2]

Morning Star, I would first of all thank you for your interesting piece. It’s has enlighten me a bit of a few issues but has failed to change my view on Obama. In reading your argument, I’m assuming you are a conservative by nature. These are arguments often raised by many conservatives and I would argue why I feel you are wrong.

Our world has changed over the last centuries, in the past we lived with strict ideologies. The world was divided into communism, capitalism, federalism, liberalism, fascism etc but as mankind progressed through his history, we realized that not one ideology was perfect. For example, China and Russia realized that practicing communism was not the best way to achieve optimum economic growth. Sweden was a communist country but later became social capitalists (social democrats) and the US which hails as the beacon of capitalism even created a social security system. So what I’m saying is that we can not rely on one philosophy or ideology to solve all our problems. As time goes on some of these ideologies has to be tuned to suit the situation.

You mention that the founding fathers did not want a lot of government interference in the lives of the American people and that governments were never supposed regulate the economy. This idea sounds beautiful but in practice is dangerous. Ask any economist (Keynesian) and they will confirm it. Regulation is needed to ensure the smooth running of the economy but too much of it is also bad. However it is more dangerous not to regulate it than to regulate it.

One of the reasons why the Great Depression came about in the 1928 was because there was no market regulation. During the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat) came up with the “New Deal” and “Second New Deal” which gave relief to the poor, created union protection programs, the Social Security Act, and reformed the banking laws, emergency relief programs and agricultural programs. It is because of government influence that America was able to recover in time to face World War II as a strong force. If it wasn’t for Roosevelt’s idea of Government can help solve your problems, America might not be enjoying the power it currently possesses in the world. This is not to say that America hasn’t entered into recessions since then. But when you analyze the recessions since the Great Depression, you will realize that the magnitude are not as great as the Great Depression. Right now America is probably in a recession, do you feel it?

Now to the issue of taxes, Obama wants to increase taxes but not for the middle class. He wants to increase the taxes of the rich. In all nations, for the economy to perform there has to be circulation of money into the system. But when the rich have all the money the system fails. Why do you think Congress became Bipartisan for the Stimulus package? It’s because they know that money has to enter the system in order to save it. Bush’s tax breaks for the rich keeps money in the hands of rich and the fruit of his actions is this slow growth of the US. McCain wants to keep the Bush taxes permanent. How will this improve the economy? McCain has little no knowledge of economics; he himself has stated it on a few occasions. When the economy works, the rich and poor benefit, it is a win, win situation.

Isn’t it one of America’s core beliefs that every body should have a chance to pursue their American dream even though they are not guaranteed to get it? If yes, then how do we achieve this? Humans are not some insects that all die in batches so that resources are transferred back for the rest to have an equal opportunity. Redistribution of wealth and government investment in education helps. It gives similar opportunities to all children. No matter the financial standing of their parents they each get a good start in chasing their American dreams. Redistribution of wealth also helps create skilled labor; skilled labor is essential for all economies. Obama wants to give funds to college students, and McCain has nothing to say on that issue.

On the issue of taxes, whose ideas do you prefer? Bush-McCain cuts for the rich whiles you suffer to get groceries etc? Or Obama’s taxes for the rich which will redistribute income and boost the economy? Or you prefer Bush-McCain policy or using your taxes to continue a war that was uncalled for? Or Obama’s plan to end the war, to channel tax money into developmental programs such as renewable energy? The US-Iraq war has cost you close to a trillion dollars. If half of it was given to the United Nations, living conditions around the world would seriously improve. Africa is still waiting for it’s waiting on G8 leaders promises.

Frankly speaking, I doubt McCain is fit for the job president. If Clinton was a republican McCain wouldn’t be here today. McCain is lucky he has some military experience to tout about in this election and that Mitt Romney, Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee were not competition. His military experience is even questionable. He goes around claiming he knows how to win wars meanwhile the only war he fought in, America lost. I think I’m starting to agree with General Clark: falling out of a plane does not equal to superior military knowledge. I think the media is helping McCain out to give him some leverage with Obama. Why? Because he really has little to offer and they want negative rhetorics to get their ratings up. McCain’s campaign had to undergo a shake up because they knew they had nothing to offer.
Go judge for yourself, visit McCain’s and Obama’s website and check on what they have to say on various issues. http://www.johnmccain.com/ and http://www.barackobama.com/splash/

Do you wonder why the New York Times rejected McCain’s article? Because all McCain did was criticize Obama and state previous facts, McCain offered no explanation on how he would use his ideas to implement his goals. If you read Obama’s article, you can see that although he does criticize McCain and Bush, he offers an explanation on how he hopes to achieve his goals with his ideas should he become president. I can send you the links of both articles at your request.

Don’t be too worried about socialism. A little bit of socialism never hurt any country. For example, Sweden has a strong economy; it has the longest life expectancy in the world, low unemployment, inflation, infant mortality, national debt and cost of living with strong economic growths. It’s time for CHANGE.
A vote for Obama is a vote for positive CHANGE. A vote McCain is a vote for the DEVIL!

[Morningstar]

Your version of the economic history of the U.S. is not too comprehensive in scope, and you seem to be leaving out quite a few facts that would detract from the liberal political philosophy you appear to be favoring. In that respect I can understand why you favor Keynesian economics.

John Maynard Keynes, the father of Keynesian economics declared that the economic instability leading to the Great Depression could have been alleviated through government intervention, however, because a large number of significant factors playing a role in the Great Depression did not fit into Keynes theory, he chose to ignore those factors and anything else that detracted from his belief that the effective use of interventionist economic government policies utilizing monetary and fiscal mechanisms could conceivably reduce the negative effects of economic depressions, recessions and inflations.

The Great Depression began in the United States with the stock market crash of 1929 and lasted until the implementation of economic changes necessitated by preparations for World War II, beginning around 1939. Your statement that the Great Depression was the result of no market regulation is historically unsubstantiated.

The Great Depression was the result of government intervention on the monetary and credit system, furthermore when the government turned over the responsibility for monetary policy to the Federal Reserve System, their abysmal and incompetent handling of what should have been a minor blip in the markets created a major disaster. The U.S, had experienced depression prior to the 1930's and weathered it without major consequence. The Great Depression was the longest lasting depression ever seen in U.S. history, and consequentially it was the only depression in which the government heavily intervened. It was the combination of Federal Reserve policies and economic regulation by the U.S. government that caused of the Great Depression.

To begin with the Federal Reserve fixed its currency to the value of gold. When the value of gold went down and the fixed price of the currency remained constant a huge surplus of gold was created while the worldwide value of the currency plummeted. This resulted in a world wide increase in the demand for gold, and since the value of the currency in the U.S. was lower than it was in other countries, the U.S. gold supply began to migrate out of the country which resulted in the further deflation of our currency's value and ultimately resulted in bank depositors withdrawing their money from U.S. banks in record numbers. In other words, the Federal Reserve created the deflation of the American dollar but couldn't repair the damage because they had fixed the exchange rate at a stationary level. After the stock market crashed in 1929 the Federal Reserve allowed the quantity of money to decline and essentially strangled the monetary structure of the country. If instead, they had stepped in and bought up all of the available government securities thereby providing the American banks with a ready supply of cash, the bank depositors would have been able to get their money and the bank runs could have been averted. Instead, the Federal Reserve refused to buy government bonds and the American banks crashed and burned all over the nation. The government of the United States exacerbated the depression by raising taxes and then by printing more money to pay their debts which resulted in a massive inflation and wiped out the savings of America's middle class citizens. The already disastrous situation was made even worse when Franklin Roosevelt initiated his "New Deal" which only served to cause the American people more unnecessary pain and actually served to enlarge the quagmire of a depression whose effects were felt until after World War II was over. If anything, the Great Depression should have been taken as an excellent lesson in why government intercession in the free market system should never be allowed because it was a clear demonstration of how much harm can result when a few men wield a vast amount of power over the monetary system of a country such as ours. Unfortunately, that very good lesson was not taken to heart and the American government has continued to dabble in economic intervention ever since, and that is exactly why this country is experiencing the economic problems we are today.

The American Dream that you speak of is not a guarantee to anyone, it is the realization that in a nation where free market principles flourish anyone who is willing to provide hard labor, or innovative ideas and hard labor, can become very prosperous. The American Dream was never intended as something the government would subsidize by taking tax money from American workers and supplying it to people who were not willing to supply their hard labor and had no innovative ideas of their own. Millions of immigrants came to this country, realized the potential and turned their willingness for hard labor into fortunes. Millions more were far less fortunate. There has never been a guarantee of prosperity, implied or otherwise. The American Dream is as much a gamble as dropping your money into a slot machine. Sometimes you win, other times you don't.

You mistake me for being someone who is pro-McCain. I do not favor the man as a candidate nor do I endorse his or G.W. Bush's economic policies, both of which favor strong government intervention and a continuation of past failures. However, that does not mean that I favor Barack Obama's even stronger government intervention in our economy and I certainly don't endorse any measure of socialism. While I am on the topic of McCain; you twice made the comment that McCain fell out his plane and I don't know if this is your attempt at being humorous or what, but just to set the matter straight, John McCain's fighter plane was shot down by North Vietnamese anti-aircraft fire during combat operations in Vietnam. He did not fall out of the plane. Admittedly, being shot out of the sky does not make him a hero, nor does it impart any sort of superior military knowledge but all the same, there is a difference between being shot down and falling out, and for the sake of your own credibility you should endeavor to express events as accurately as possible.

Thanks for your offer to send me links to the articles you mentioned but I've already read them and that is one of the numerous reasons why I won't be voting for Obama. I have been to his websites, listened to his speeches and followed his campaign closely as I have done with the other candidates. I still believe that John McCain's brand of government corruption will result in less damage and pain for the American citizens than Barack Obama's socialistic brand of government corruption, and in the 2008 presidential election the ultimate choice is between two devils and the best choice is to pick the one that will do the least amount of damage. I don't admire McCain and I do not endorse his policy statements or his stand on many of the issues that are most important, but nonetheless, I intend to vote for him because his opponent poses a far greater risk to the stability, security and future prosperity of this nation.

By the way - I have been labeled conservative, libertarian and other less flattering things in the past but I honestly see myself as being an American. If the Democrats began to push an agenda that would actually benefit this nation they would gain my support and the same for the Republicans. Unfortunately, partisan politics is all about government power and who controls it, and neither of the two dominant political parties in the U.S. are willing to represent the citizens who gave the government its actual authority so I will remain independent of both and base my decisions on who to vote for on how well they serve the essential principles of freedom and liberty that once made this the greatest and the most prosperous nation on Earth.