Well, how can you vote for someone on only one issue? N why not look @ the whole picture here?

Being a great diplomat, and being favorable in other powerful coutnries is just as important as what someone can do about taxes.

what i find to be so fuckin funny is how people tried to play that shit back @ obama when he said 'he'd be willing to talk to the Iranian leaders'

people like, WTF...YOU A TERRIOST, YOU MUST BE DOING SOMETHING WRONG


Its like, wtf....is every rich ass fuckin politican a fuckin 12 yr old? Grow the fuck up and talk face to face. Get the shit resolved. Obama's on the right path, that talkin things out and facing the issue is better than ignoring it

I'm not voting for McCain solely because of his tax policies. That's just the one I feel the most strongly about. I also agree with McCain on some smaller stuff, but the taxes are the biggest one for me.

I don't believe being a great diplomat is just as important as keeping our economy capitalistic. You may believe that, but I don't.

to each there own, and i can respect that

good chat.

Oh wow.

Just because I want everyone's vote to count as one instead of having a small amount of people represent everyone's vote in a small area, you think that'll bring us back to cave times ???

Uh, no, it would fix all of our problems. Because as it stands now, we can have a tie unless every single American votes against McCain and for your choice, Obama. If every super delegate votes for McCain then it will take almost every American to vote against McCain. Meaning that the courts will have to decide once more, and the election will once again be rigged. I mean, what's the point of having super delegates if they don't even represent the people? You can simply buy them off and they'll be like "I don't even really live in that area. Fuck those guys."

But I'm just pissed I had to explain that. No though, we'll go back to cave times. You're right. I'm so idiotic :(

wow, you and aphilly arn't the same person?

i see your point on taxes, and it is a very good point if u fully trust ur candidate... but with any presidential candidate, i never fully Believe them when they say "no new taxes".... especially since McCain has said "no new taxes" than later backed away wen asked about if he would raise social security taxes (basically saying that there is no option he has dismissed for it), than said he wouldnt fully commit to the tax question but that he feels there is no situation where he would accept a tax increase, and now hes finally back to his Promise of no new taxes as the convention rolls around....

im not saying he's lying but Tax increase/decrease talk from candidates is usually one of the most unreliable platforms to follow, specifically when they vow to not increase taxes or to even give tax cuts... it just never lives up to the full potential and promise even if they try to say it does... there are too many situations that may arise that will almost cause them to shift.... or they might just be telling the american people wat they want to hear in the first place

and dude, Pinky, im not saying it was his fault that we went into Iraq, im not even Just referring to the initial entry into Iraq... im talking about Everything... im simply stating the fact that he agreed with every issue or legislation the president wanted passed over 90% of the time once Bush took office.... which would imply that he wouldve put the country into a very similar hole if he had been president himself for those 8 years....

and no everyone didnt agree on an attack ON Iraq, maybe on attacking someone, but not specifically Iraq.... i remember being, i think, 11 years old when september 11th happening, and i wanted to attack the people who did it, too.... and from watching the news updates then i figured the Iraqis were Those people.... not until i was 13 did i wise up to the fact that Bin Laden was Not from Iraq, but was an Afghan terrorist..... it wasnt a push back.. it was like a domino, "afghanistan" hits us, we hit iraq.... wheres the logic in that...

rofl


you are a fuckin idiot

[QUOTE=Mannie Fresh]i see your point on taxes, and it is a very good point if u fully trust ur candidate... but with any presidential candidate, i never fully Believe them when they say "no new taxes".... especially since McCain has said "no new taxes" than later backed away wen asked about if he would raise social security taxes (basically saying that there is no option he has dismissed for it), than said he wouldnt fully commit to the tax question but that he feels there is no situation where he would accept a tax increase, and now hes finally back to his Promise of no new taxes as the convention rolls around....

im not saying he's lying but Tax increase/decrease talk from candidates is usually one of the most unreliable platforms to follow, specifically when they vow to not increase taxes or to even give tax cuts... it just never lives up to the full potential and promise even if they try to say it does... there are too many situations that may arise that will almost cause them to shift.... or they might just be telling the american people wat they want to hear in the first place

and dude, Pinky, im not saying it was his fault that we went into Iraq, im not even Just referring to the initial entry into Iraq... im talking about Everything... im simply stating the fact that he agreed with every issue or legislation the president wanted passed over 90% of the time once Bush took office.... which would imply that he wouldve put the country into a very similar hole if he had been president himself for those 8 years....

and no everyone didnt agree on an attack ON Iraq, maybe on attacking someone, but not specifically Iraq.... i remember being, i think, 11 years old when september 11th happening, and i wanted to attack the people who did it, too.... and from watching the news updates then i figured the Iraqis were Those people.... not until i was 13 did i wise up to the fact that Bin Laden was Not from Iraq, but was an Afghan terrorist..... it wasnt a push back.. it was like a domino, "afghanistan" hits us, we hit iraq.... wheres the logic in that...[/QUOTE]


lol....bro. We went to Afghanstan...and almost a year later, than we decided to invade Iraq

our 'push back' was us goin to Afghanstan....we were naive about the situation and told lies to go to war with Iraq.

It obviously worked like a domino effect, for the people who wanted to go to war in Iraq, Karl Rove and Cheney

i think people put alot of blame on Bush, and over look Cheney...that dudes one evil mother fucker.

oh i know we went to afghanistan, too, but it was/is very much a US vs Iraq war... if 9/11 did not happen then the Iraq War would not have happen.... and thats not what everyone wanted... and almost as a direct consequence we started having Iran problems and even Korean issues, and now there's a whole dark shadow cast over the US and an even bigger Target on our heads...

no one blames bush or mccain or cheney for entering Afghanistan in this "push-back"... the concern was the domino effect it had on attacking Iraq, and getting involved in a way bigger mess, and during this mess losing sight of the actual terrorists..

well...for one, you can't focus anything on 'terriosts'

terriosom in general is an ideology. N unless you can insitutite martial law, you can't get ride of an idea.

So trying to attack/defend/defeat 'terrisom' is a simple 'scare' tactic devised by goveremnt officals to make us continue to fear something that isn't always there.

Its the same concept as any type of thing that can kill us. A car, for example, is extremely dangerous...but we aren't afarid of it becuase we have no reason to be afaird. But, many people are killed each year by car's that hit pedestrians.

Same thing can be applied to terriosm, its always there, obviously people want to attack and hurt other people. But, its not like every day of every week people are like, LETS STRIKE!!!

Death is apart of human life, n we've only made terriosm recuritment easier for terriosts by publicing the fucking shit out of it.


N i'm pretty sure that the Iraq War was what alot of people wanted, considering that signs up for the Army were pretty fucking high. People wanted to prove a point, not to fuck with America, unfourtnely, when you go into another person's home country...and try to fight somethign thats unfightable, than destory there homeland. Your going to loose that war. Period.

hah, i think u sort of ran with my "lost sight of the terrorists" comment and took it out of context... i obviously am referring to one group of terrorists in Afghanistan, not to just the ideology of terrorism, and applying that to all terrorists... and of course i understand that its hard to "kill" these groups because there will always be someone to replace them and to keep the movement going... i was simply making the point that we stopped focusing our attack on the people who were the Real threat because they Actually attacked us, but instead aimed our attack at a country that did not attack us but was believed to have nuclear weapons.... your whole concept of "you cant focus on terrorists" and "scare tactics" is a little too conspiracy theory to me.... im saying that we proved our message to the wrong people

and yea military signups were up... but thats because of the Terrorist Attack, not because of the Iraq "threat"..... and because the average American was almost brainwashed into thinking that Iraq was our actual enemy of more terrorism. Now that was the scare tactic, because they werent a real threat.... trying to attack afghanistan was not a scare tactic, per se, because they attempted to kill thousands of innocent people and the most important people in Washington...

sign ups did not increase to fight Iraqis, they were increased to fight "terrorists", which the government attempted to basically label the Iraqis as.... many people in Washington were smarter, and many more Should've been smarter.... Obama opposed the Iraq War from the start but now realizes that since we are already there we cant simply pull out all of a sudden... that would be more irresponsible than going there in the first place on false grounds

and btw, the thing about cars... there is actually a small likelihood that people will actually begin to be innately scared of cars and guns, just as many are innately scared of spiders and other deadly animals/foods/insects.... this has nothing to do with wat you're talking about, but i read a psych report basically discussing the possibility... its interesting to think about... babies are way more likely to be scared of a spider when they first see one than when they first see a dog or cat, another human, or even a gun....even tho the latter are obviously much bigger imposing figures or provide more danger... and this has to do with that classic discussion of survival of the fittest, and the survival instinct, and blah blah blah, moral of the story is that things like guns and cars havent been long enough to pass this instinct along (i never actually read anything about the possible genetic connection) but they believe soon enough theres going to be these innate phobias of guns and cars... just like there are phobias of heights, animals, and all the other dangers of the world... just thought it would be interesting

I think we can all agree Rudy would be the best battle rapper of all time. He was throwing haymakers all night tonight. What a G.

yeah, i'm voting for the candidate endorsed by the worst president in the history of the United States of America :rolleyes:

Yeah, since it was clearly unexpected when the Republican president endorsed the Republican that's running for president. Get the fuck out of here.

But that's in the modern world, where republican and democrat are virtually indifferent.

True democrats like Mike Gravel even admit that democrats aren't even really democrats anymore. They've strayed from true democratic values...

Which again is why he switched from his heartfelt democratic position to a libertarian . Not to mention he's had more experience than McCain...

Not to mention that nobody ever votes for the libertarian.

Not to mention would have been the course of action I would have proposed as well.

ughh..


american politics......

you make a thread on a rap board entitled "Who else is voting McCain" then tell me to "get the fuck out of here"????

dude, do you even know what the fuck you would be doing by voting for McCain? if heaven forbid he does get elected, you do realize that the presidency will likely kill him as it has known to do to 76 year old bastards... it is not an easy job on the heart. then what are we left with? one of the most conservative evangelical candidates that could have possibly been chosen as PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!???? you do realize the only reason that McCain chose her was to get the evangelical republican voting base, which is a HUGE part of the republican party (i think i heard 1/3 on the news... visit www.godhatesfags.com for more information on this huge part of the republican voting base).

go ahead and vote for the president that will BE SURE to once again guarantee financial stability to the upper 0.1% of the american population if you want to, but i'm ready for a president who is concerned with the well-being of ALL of the American people... and i'm just so sick overall of having my country represented by someone with this ignorant ass conservative state of mind.

time to restore some power to the people!!!!

Yeah, you do have a point, but for the record, I don't work 2 jobs, I work a full-time job and go to school roughly 3/4 time, so don't respect me TOO much, lol.

I think more than anything I'm tired of the level of corruption there has been on the federal level with Republicans in office, and that's the biggest reason I would vote Dem almost regardless of the issues, it just so happens I have liberal ideals as well. That's a whole other story though.

What does a rap board have to do with anything? Should I have assumed that because this is a hip hop board everybody obviously doesn't know shit about economics? When people like you start posting, it's makes it look like that assumption comes close to holding true.

And once again you show yourself to be a fucking idiot. I haven't been talking about the 0.1% of this population, as I've stated at least 3 times already in this thread. I'm not voting for somebody who doesn't understand capitalism.

If by "restore power to the people" you mean "turn a capitalistic economy to a socialist one because taxing the people who generate the capital has shown to be so ridiculously successful in the past" I completely agree.

? you didn't say actually say anything in that post.

no counter arguments to what i said whatsoever... i didn't say YOU said anything about the top 0.1% of the population, i said that your candidate's policies are only going to help those people. you aren't running for president.

and please, tell me what obama has failed to realize about capitalism by being FARRRRRR more educated than you... i would love to hear you shed some light on the confused democratic party that believes in helping those in need.

can you seriously look at the McCain/fucking SARAH PALIN ticket and not see what of a fucking ridiculously elitist and ignorantly conservative ticket that is????

READ MY OTHER POSTS IN THIS THREAD.

I've already fucking responded to everything you said. I'm not going to type everything over again just because dumbfuck Blay can't find the "<< First" button at the bottom of the fucking thread. Read through all the pages. I've commented on a shit ton of stuff, and I imagine your fucking retarded ass won't get anything I said, but at least you won't be able to say that I didn't explain anything.

Obama either doesn't understand capitalism or doesn't support it, and that's obvious when you look at his tax policies. Neither one of those options works for me.

You seriously just hopped into my 7 page long thread and then said I haven't argued anything? Fuck outta here. Read the whole thread, you fucking idiot.

Meh. It's not hard to argue in favor of McCain when you have big news corporations attempting to defend every attack on McCain.

Then you wake up in the morning and turn on the news channel looking for some information on the newest hurricane but you see a video of black and white in-pain McCain and how he's a war hero and his buddy POW's love him.

It just makes me wonder why a good chunk of the POW's at that time hate John McCain and would never vote for him. @_@

dude, i read through the thread... and believe me, i have heard EVERY single one of your arguments before.

by the way, chill the fuck out with the personal shots... talking big and bad on an internet forum makes you look retarded as hell.

now, first of all - this generic claim that obama's policies are "close to bordering socialism" is played as hell. do you have any fucking clue what socialism is? bush's tax cuts benefited only the extremely wealthy in this country, and mccain has stated that he plans to make those same "tax cuts" that bush established permanent. the idea that instead giving tax cuts to those who need it, benefiting the lower and middle class, is somehow "socialist" is straight up republican propaganda that you have been brainwashed into believing. are you serious?!? humane? yes.
socialist? HELL no.


and i'd like to address this response of yours to CALI's post:


the statement CALI made was not a stretch whatsoever. the fact is, our generation WILL be paying out of our asses for bush's unnecessary and illegal invasion of a sovereign nation... yet republicans want to preach against raising any kind of taxes when they're being raised to actually help those in need in this country (who are, of course NOT republicans). the republican party is the most pompous, elitist group of people... blahhhhh q;liajioajdls;kfjakl;djfadfoiajweohf[ioaudfljansdflkasjdf

lol, it just blows my mind sometimes that people can actually consciously stand behind the conservative ideals of the republican party.

ROFL

now 2v's saying that only Fox News is biased

again, i'm a huge Obama supporter. but to sit and say that the media isn't being fair to Obama. ROFL

MSNBC...totally fucks Obama....


only station i see with 'semi'....fair news reports, is CNN. Only becuase it seems to have shows that have people who are conservative and liberal

What? I didn't sit there and say shit, I said that the news organizations GLORIFY McCain. It's bullshit.

& as far as MSNBC goes, they complete fucked over all the good candidates with false comments and pathetic opinions. When the polls popped up that Ron Paul got a majority of the poll online, the fucker doing the report was like "It seems Ron Paul has a lot of crazy internet fans."

pretty much a direct quote.. That fuck head with the orange hair that does HardBall or whatever kept quoting and twisting Mike Gravel's words to make Mike look like an idiot, but most of the media does that anyway. Mike Gravel has a lot of good things to say but the news organizations falsely project his words. I would give an example but I doubt anyone cares to read.. Fact is, you shouldn't trust any news that is payed for by the government. Especially if you don't trust the government.

I almost made it through your first real paragraph before it became obvious to me that you either haven't read any of my posts or you're too stupid to comprehend them. I've stated time and time again in this thread that I'm not talking about the "rich," and am actually talking about the middle class. If you haven't managed to pick that up yet then there's no way in hell I'm going to explain this all over again for you.

Oh, and Bush's "tax cuts for the rich" is actually a bunch of political bullshit, as the figures actually suggest something completely different. I said earlier in this thread (you would have fucking saw it if you would have read this thread) that'd I'd gladly post up the figures as taken from the Bureau of Economic Analysis if anybody still wanted to say Bush is only helping the rich. I'm not a fan of Bush, but to say that he's only helping the rich is inaccurate.

And yes, the redistribution of wealth in a nation IS socialist, period. Raising taxes to outrageous levels IS socialist. Taxes are a socialist concept by themselves, but we need them, and that's why I've never argued to abolish them. However, when you start taxing the shit out of middle class people to give to the lower class people it is socialism. That's not propaganda, are you fucking stupid? Explain to me how that is not the redistribution of wealth and I will gladly say it is not socialist.

I'm not going to sit here and retype everything I've already said in the last 7 pages, so if you don't read my posts and don't say something that other people haven't already said and I haven't already addressed, I'm going to stop paying attention to your posts. You've disagreed with me over political shit for years, and nothing ever gets accomplished.

^ ? seriously? look kid, YOU're the one who clearly didn't read my post. your whole defense once again was "i'm not talking about the rich." do i need to quote myself? YOU AREN'T RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. this isn't a debate over voting for Mimesis. so what you're "talking about" is irrelevant. the facts are that the ONLY group of Americans that have benefited economically from Bush's term is the top 1%. PLEASE try and prove otherwise... and PLEASE stop saying that i haven't read your posts and actually respond to mine. and writing off everything i say by saying that everything liberals say is "political bullshit" isn't a response.

Look, you fucking retard, OBAMA'S NOT GOING TO BE TAXING THE SHIT OUT OF JUST THE TOP 1% OF THE POPULATION. HE'S GOING TO BE TAXING THE SHIT OUT OF MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE, AND THAT'S WHY I'M TALKING ABOUT THEM. The fact is, you don't fucking know what you're talking about and you're stupid to realize it. And sounds good, I'll find my economics folder on Monday (I have it stored at a locker in the library on campus) and post up the actual figures for you. You're fucking stupid, Bush's tax cuts didn't just help the top 1% of the population. You're wrong, period, and even after I prove it to you I know you'll still keep spewing inaccurate bullshit.

And I laugh at you calling me kid. My knowledge of the economy towers yours, you fucking idiot.

I've responded to yours, what the fuck? It's just kind of hard when you're STILL saying Obama is only helping the top 1% of the population. What do you want me to say other then, "You're wrong." YOU ARE WRONG. I can't argue a point that doesn't fucking exist. You saying only the top 1% is going to be helped isn't accurate, so of course I have no fucking response to that argument.



Please, since you so conveniently forgot, explain to me how redistributing the wealth of a country is not socialism. I can't wait to see what bullshit you can make up!

don't get your pathetic little conservative panties in a bunch, kid.

Obama plans on cutting the taxes for those below the $250,000 range and raising it for those above... i've heard so many conservatives make the same argument you did, that Obama is somehow going to be taxing the shit out of the middle class. look, if $250,000+ is the middle class then i'm not worried about the middle class, lol. i'm more concerned about the people making less than $10,000 a year, and about re-establishing the middle class that your president destroyed.

and what i'm DEFINITELY not concerned about is terminology. the difference between socialism and a liberal economic policy is the degree in which money is redistributed. a liberal economic plan like obama's concerned with helping people, and money is not going to be re-distributed NEARLY to the level where people are going to start becoming un-motivated to work hard, etc. (another argument i've heard ignorant ass conservatives like yourself make).

less then 10,000 a year is middle class? lmao....


i think obama would win a lot more votes if he planned on taking that tax money...and instead of redistributing it to people who don't make shit.....redistribute it to the cities with poor economies....clean up the cities...put it into schools...pay teachers...police force...create an enviroment that gives people less of an excuse not succeed in....instead of just giving people money who might not necessarily deserve it.


Just my 2 cents

of course $10,000 a year isn't middle class. thats not what i was saying, i was saying a person making $250,000 a year isn't the main concern of the Obama campaign. people making $10,000 a year, for example, AND the middle class are the concerns of the Obama campaign.

You're more worried about people making less than $10,000 a year and I'm more worried about keeping a capitalistic economy intact. Now we've reached a point where the debate ends because there's nothing you can say to me and there's nothing I can say to you that is going to change either of our values or beliefs.

And you should be worried about terminology if you're going to start saying Obama's tax policies aren't socialist. They are. The degree that money is redistributed, and the meaning/purpose/plan behind it, doesn't change the fact that it is socialism. At the core it's still the redistribution of wealth.

And once again, we're reaching a point where the debate is going to end because now we're predicting the future. In my opinion, if you start taxing the people who make 250k a year, they will be less motivated to do the things that they're doing. In your opinion they won't be. The difference between our two opinions is that history backs mine up, and not yours.

Calling me ignorant is stupid and inaccurate. I'm ignorant about some things, much like everybody else, as ignorant is just defined as the lack of knowledge of something, but the economy isn't one of those things. May I ask what makes you think I'm ignorant? In fact, what makes you think you're not ignorant? You stated repeatedly in this thread that McCain will only help the top 1% of this population, which implies ignorance to me. You stated that taxing the shit out of people making 250k a year isn't socialism, which also implies ignorance to me. So, what brings you to the conclusion that you're not ignorant? What was your major in college? What was your GPA? What learning or knowledge do you have that makes you not ignorant, despite the ignorant posts you've made in this thread?

all i can say is....

i've taken...basic economic courses...as they are not needed for my major....but my roommate is a business finance major.....and he's come home and explained to me the many intricacies of micro/macroecomics...

and i can tell ALL of you this..when it comes to economic debate...someone who hasn't had the type of instruction that goes into micro/macroec........can't legitimately or successfully debate with someone who has.

those courses are no joke.

I've taken political science courses....so i know a thing or two about politics....so i can debate on politics reasonably...but...i already know mimesis knows more about economic issues then i probably ever will....and i know more then most of my peers...those courses are just on a completely different level.

Thought about it and no. I won't be voting for John McCain this fall. But Obama just seems too inauthentic for me as well. I'm looking at Bob Barr.

I wont lie, i've never really thought about doing that.


But after thinking about it, i would say that your prob. right. N that idea is much better idea than just giving money to people. Make people motivated, and give them the surroundings to suceed, for live long sucession, isntead of momentarily being successful


props V

V for president!!!

i hope your the only one