John McCain doesn't know how many houses he owns .....

[Zylstra]

Hosterhoven key....

Got medicate problems? Grab him by the neck and throw him around!
Taxes too high? Grab him by the neck and throw him around!
Gas prices too high? Grab him by the neck and throw him around!
Unable to live like you used to? Grab him by the neck and throw him around!
House market crash? Grab him by the neck and throw him around!

[Aegis]

Being a prisoner of war does not make anyone more qualified to be commander in chief than anyone else, because one does not become a prisoner of war when one is commander in chief -- unless you're President Bush, and you don't have the good sense to leave alone a war your father wouldn't fight.  He made us all prisoners to a war which is an insult to the good members of our military forces, worldwide.

[squall_01]

cant argue against that.

[mroilfield]

It really doesn't matter who we put into office. Every president stands up and says what he will do or won't do but until he gets the rest of the numpties in congress to work with him nothing is going to work.

Take Bush for instance. When he (and the rest of the US) wanted to go to war congress backed him up on but now they are all up talking bad about it and say that bush went to war. It is funny how they are forgetting they wanted the war as well. Bush has tried to do some of the things that he promised but congress keeps shooting him.

It has been that way for every president and will continue to be that way until we make a complete ovrhaul of the whole system.

[squall_01]

Thats politace my friend, where have you been.  A president is more of a figure head then any thing.  More the voice of the people an what the goverment says he can say.  Yes, but do you really want to get rid of something thats been working since the seperation,  true that some of the old things need to be into to play more but who will say that they want it.  Rebellion?  Boycott?

[Zylstra]

Did it ever occur to anyone that the US is a communist nation?

Our wonderful system of "freedom" can be re-written any time to take away basic rights, which happens with the P.A.T.R.I.O.T act, and what Abraham Lincoln did during war times.

[Aegis]

We're not quite communist, but are in thrall to money and special interests.

I recently learned that the People's Republic of China looks pretty democratic on paper, because they have an elected "congress" which, in turn, elects the president and prime minister.  The problem is, the only candidates for which they can vote are those submitted by the communist party.

Now, before we laugh too much, how different are things here in America?  Sure, on paper, any natural citizen can run, but face it, while you can be a member of another party, and get elected to state legislature, governor, or even Congress, if you're not Republican or Democrat, you're not getting elected President.  It's a two party lock.

[Zylstra]

George Washington tried to communicate a very big idea to us and make it extremely clear:
Do NOT use political parties, all it will cause is problems.

Sure enough, he dies, and look what happens.

Political parties are a bad idea... personally, I dont believe in parties. If someone asks me if I am Democratic or Republican, I simply say: "Neither."
If I was old enough to vote this November, I would vote for Barrack Obama since he has a lot of views that I am glad he is focusing on, not to mention, his 18 month war end plan.
But, heres another thing: John McCain has a lot of good ideas as well, and both share great moral values.
So, who do you vote for?
Maybe we should eliminate presidents, and just vote on every issue that comes by every month or so... sure, it would take time and resources, but, if it were set up right, I bet it would be worthwhile... (still, I realize such a system has many flaws, but then again, so does the current system...)

[Aegis]

No, you're right -- as much as your suggestion may have flaws, we have the technology to vote by referendum.  This would horrify the analysts who like to say that the common people aren't educated enough to decide what's best for them!   

[mcxeb52!]

If we get rid of presidents, who would represent the United States in terms of foreign affairs?

John McCain picked Sarah Palin to be his V.P.?

[drmsucks]

Palin hit it out of the park tonight - absolutely brilliant!

Finally, a breath of fresh air and truth instead of empty words based on nothing.

[Aegis]

First of all, Obama's words aren't empty and based on "nothing."  He has called on each of us to be more involved -- something I haven't been in years.

I just read Palin's speech.  It's good.  See, the Republicans criticize the "tax and spend" Democrats, but what have the Republicans been for the last eight years?  "Don't tax and spend."  I truly hope she knows what it means to balance our Federal budget.  Seems like the last President to give us one was, uh, Clinton.  You can say he had the benefit of a lot of tax income from a good economy.  Fine -- it's true.  This economy of ours has been going downhill since the dot-com bust of 2000, and all we ever hear from our illustrious leader is that the economy is better than we think it is.  Maybe for him.

McCain said he's going to get bin Laden.  Really?  It sounds good, but "he's" not going to do it -- if it is done, it will be done by our fine young men and women of the armed services.  Sounds a little too much like "mission accomplished."  Remember that?

Truth?  We're a long way from "Truth" on both sides of the aisle.

[squall_01]

If any other system worked we would be useing it.  At one point we found communistism to be a good thing.  But if you flat look at it,  its more of a dictatorship.  Yes that idea has been expressed an at one point Bush had that chance but Macine isnt getting it.  The Country is in a huge debt but some how we make money?  The American people know what we want a good percent of the time.  Its that if you want a system like that you take away the orginal american society,  yes I do refer before black freedoms.  But at that point the goverment wasnt as currpted.

[drmsucks]

First of all, Obama's words aren't empty and based on "nothing." 

He has absolutely NO published work experience or published life experience to raise an expectation that he can actually DO or accomplish anything - speechifying, having "visions" and/or "hope" is not the same as having a list of bona fide, concrete achievements; an academic resume and a vision of hope is fine for a 22 year old - it is not a sufficient history for a 47 year old candidate for the presidency of the United States.

This is a computer forum and I wouldn't presume to interject politics - but, someone else started this topic. Now I'm out

[Zylstra]

Obama takes an interesting approach to speeches... he covers a lot of big ideas, and does use a lot of "power" and interesting word choices in his speeches.

In the 1960's, Presidents started using speech writers. I really think that the presidents should make their own speeches... if they truly care, they should be able to get over their points by themselves.

I think its poor (not talking about you, Drsmucks) that so many of the McCain supporters are targeting Obama, and focusing on his speeches, and how they think his weak point is that he can have great speeches, but that its all a "show."

Martin Luther King Jr. had extremely impressive speeches, but, that doesn't mean he was wrong, or trying to make a show. Impressive speeches are a way to get the audiences attention, nothing more. People might as well want to pay attention.