United States Presidential Election 2008

[Kash]

I don't like the woman, but these effigies are just plain stupid. Then again, what do you expect from this politically correct brainwashed society? Liberals are just as guilty as conservatives when it comes to doing stupid things.

[ExRoadie]

Hey, you're preaching to the choir when it comes to media bias. Which is why I don't watch any of it and get my information from less biased sources that are more interested in presenting the facts rather than being slaves to their bottom line and simply pandering to the lowest common denominator.

 

The point of my comment was that when a conservative posts a conservative link, the liberals scream bias, and when liberals post liberal links, conservatives scream bias. It's a vicious cycle.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

I appreciate your point but happen to think the way it was phrased left a little to be desired considering your elaboration in the follow-up post.

 

For me in particular it isn't the media outlet that matters but the substance of the reporting. I use a variety of sources for my information gathering and always, always check the by-line to get some background on the reporter.

 

Even a source like Media Matters can post some valid info when not pandering to the Clinton camp.

[ClayMeow]

That reminds me, I need to start getting the supplies together to hang a big-eared, afro-sporting Obama effigy from my front porch on Halloween... you know... all in good, festive fun.

 

Another thing we don't believe in - double standards.

I agree 100%. My guess is that display won't be there come Halloween...not because the owners take it down, but because someone else will do it for them...and probably a whole lot more. That's a house asking to be egged and TP'd.

[Great_Gig]

http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2...ll-sarah-palin/

An "art" exhibit allowing people to pose as if hunting with Palin, and "many of the visitors shoot Sarah Palin." Can you imagine the uproar if there was an "art" exhibit of Obama and "many of the visitors shoot Barack Obama"?

 

I have up to now, through appreciation that it's a US Election, remained passive in this thread, but am enjoying it immensely. It's being closely followed here and I have watched the debates as much as I can - the Palin-Biden was some of the best TV I have seen for a long time (watched it 3 times!). I have said it before right at the start, that she worries me immensely and I also felt she would ruin McCain's chances - that seems to now be bearing fruit. But insults like the above are wholly inappropriate and rather shameful on those that tout them. She deserves a modicum of respect whatever you feel about her.

 

However, if she wants to be a 'hockey mom', then I reckon that's what she probably is good at, as she clearly has many talents. But stay in Alaska Sarah, bake some cookies and take care of business there, as you are not Presidential in any shape or form and way out of your depth (IMO). I think the McCain camp made a monumental faux pas in selecting her.

 

[runs for cover]

[94Camaro]

So...a couple months ago, the tax breaks were for people making under 250k...

 

Then sometime last week...it becomes 200k.

 

And over the weekend...suddenly 150k.

 

Don't worry people, I'm sure it'll make it into our salary ranges soon.

[jammin]

Anyone got any empirical evidence that shows that private charity could take the place of a welfare system?

 

It's just that any opinion I recall reading on the subject suggested that it wouldn't work too well.

 

Please read this article by Walter E. Williams before proceeding to the body of my post...

http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWill...tion_of_thieves

 

If you've read and understand the article you can see why "welfare" isn't well or fair. We don't need to replace it, we need to end it.

 

 

Sure, I think we can all agree that the welfare system has some downfalls (find me something that doesn't).

 

I'll go along with your line of thinking, even though it diverges a bit from what I was asking.

 

If we put ourselves into a hypothetical situation whereby welfare was abolished, what would the likely consequences be? Would they be acceptable?

[94Camaro]

If we put ourselves into a hypothetical situation whereby welfare was abolished, what would the likely consequences be? Would they be acceptable?

Short term? There'd be a lot of hurting people. Long term? I think we'd all be a lot better off.

 

Of course, that's assuming welfare was abolished overnight. A more realistic idea would be a gradual reduction of welfare payouts which would hopefully force the recipients to apply themselves gainfully. Heck transfer part of the money saved from the payouts into a "career services" program that can provide networking and direction for someone. A transition program would ease the short term pain, and allow us to reach a long term solution where only the truly needy are assisted. I don't think anyone who supports getting rid of an abused welfare program wants to just hang those people out to dry, nor do they oppose programs that help people who can't work. We just want to stop supporting the people who are fully capable of supporting themselves.

[jammin]

Short term? There'd be a lot of hurting people. Long term? I think we'd all be a lot better off.

 

Of course, that's assuming welfare was abolished overnight. A more realistic idea would be a gradual reduction of welfare payouts which would hopefully force the recipients to apply themselves gainfully. Heck transfer part of the money saved from the payouts into a "career services" program that can provide networking and direction for someone. A transition program would ease the short term pain, and allow us to reach a long term solution where only the truly needy are assisted. I don't think anyone who supports getting rid of an abused welfare program wants to just hang those people out to dry, nor do they oppose programs that help people who can't work. We just want to stop supporting the people who are fully capable of supporting themselves.

 

Yes, a lot of that does seem sensible (and obviously isn't completely abolishing the welfare system, a position I would find hard to understand if that was what someone actually supported).

I think the main problem lies in assessing who is "truly needy" as you put it.

There are obviously some clear cut cases in this regard, as well as some which could be seen as borderline (or open to abuse).

 

I am of course, not intimately familiar with the ins and outs of the U.S. welfare system.

I would be interested if there are any estimated figures of the number of people who are "fully capable of supporting themselves" currently making use of welfare.

Edited October 29, 2008 by jammin

[suchuwato]

"learn2source, n00b." How rude of you! Are you that arrogant?!?!

 

Oh I say! How horribly dreadful of me, please accept my most sincere heartfelt apologies! <_<

 

You really don't understand how this whole internet thing works do you?

[Great_Gig]

He's priceless isn't he

[ClayMeow]

Yes, a lot of that does seem sensible (and obviously isn't completely abolishing the welfare system, a position I would find hard to understand if that was what someone actually supported).

I think the main problem lies in assessing who is "truly needy" as you put it.

There are obviously some clear cut cases in this regard, as well as some which could be seen as borderline (or open to abuse).

 

I am of course, not intimately familiar with the ins and outs of the U.S. welfare system.

I would be interested if there are any estimated figures of the number of people who are "fully capable of supporting themselves" currently making use of welfare.

There is nobody in mind that is "truly needy" of welfare. Welfare should be like collecting unemployment...you can do so for a certain amount of time, and then after that, you're done. And while you're collecting, you have to prove you are striving to make your life better.

 

I remember a couple of weeks ago there was a news story on TV about a single mother who was unemployed...the story was supposed to show the hardships that "real people" are facing in the economy, but what it wound up showing was how truly lazy and/or stupid people are. This chick was unemployed for TWO years. I don't care who you are, you can find SOMETHING in a two year span. If you're truly facing hard economic times, then you can settle for less until you work your way up. People laid off from $100k jobs that claim they can't find anything because they're only being offered $60k jobs should be shot.

[Compxpert]

Hmm lately I'm finding a lot of pro-obama bias.... I'm getting a little pissed at it... Today in school at lunch it seems like all the tv's and fliers they were handing out were touting that everyone in the school should vote obama... and I saw little if not no support towards McCain at all. It would seem I'm not the only one thinking this either. Googleing pro-obama bias brings fourth a multitude of articles that agree with my position on this. I even see an Ohio State gov. a democrat even who agrees: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail...s_for_pro-.html

 

Anyone else also feeling this way? I think Obama is way over hyped in the media.