2008 Presidential Candidates Comparison ( Side By side)... DOn't know what to think.

[florabundance]

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stargazer* Yeah, I did.

My question was, did you read the article in its entirety, or did you stop at that paragraph.

From The Guardian:

"This article was amended on Sunday June 29 2008. We stated that John.McCain 'attended the elite West Point military academy'; he actually went to the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, graduating in 1958 to begin his career as a naval aviator. This has been corrected"

I don't think that a minor mistake takes away from the validity of the article as a journalistic piece.

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by florabundance My question was, did you read the article in its entirety, or did you stop at that paragraph. From The Guardian: "This article was amended on Sunday June 29 2008. We stated that John.McCain 'attended the elite West Point military academy'; he actually went to the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland, graduating in 1958 to begin his career as a naval aviator. This has been corrected" I don't think that a minor mistake takes away from the validity of the article as a journalistic piece.

I answered your question as to whether I read the entire article.

Yeah, and my sole point was that the fact checking sucks. At what point did I say anything other than the fact checking sucks and that McCain did not, in fact - widely reported fact at that, attend West Point? That article made it through to publishing with a glaring error.

 

[florabundance]

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stargazer* I answered your question as to whether I read the entire article. Yeah, and my sole point was that the fact checking sucks. At what point did I say anything other than the fact checking sucks and that McCain did not, in fact - widely reported fact at that, attend West Point? That article made it through to publishing with a glaring error.

Oh whatever. As if the fact of whether he went to West Point or not was the entire point of the article. That's why I asked if you'd read it, to see if you had an opinion on anything else that was written.

 

[SkylarV217]

Quote:

Originally Posted by florabundance Oh whatever. As if the fact of whether he went to West Point or not was the entire point of the article. That's why I asked if you'd read it, to see if you had an opinion on anything else that was written.

I think what she is trying to say is that You read an article to gain facts that you did not previously know, when key points about a person are wrong in the begging of the article, you lose faith in the author and their facts. Once a person discredits themselves you being to question the other "facts" in the article especially if they are facts that are not widely known.

 

[Lapis]

I HATE when people copy and paste and don't fact check!

The whole tax issue
snopes.com: Proposed Tax Changes

Obama's tax Plan from his website
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes...Plan_FINAL.pdf

Want to know how much Obama would really cost you
ObamaTaxCut.com
go there and use the calculator

Using the OP's CNN link
Quote:

n addition to making the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent, McCain says he would double the exemption for dependents, lower the corporate tax rate, make expensing rules more generous for small businesses and lessen the bite of the estate tax and Alternative Minimum tax. The net result: compared with their tax bill today, taxpayers on average would see their tax bill cut by nearly $1,200. That means their after-tax income would rise by 2%. But those in the lowest income groups would only see their after-tax income rise by less than 1% (or between $19 and $319). By contrast, the highest-income households - those with incomes of at least $603,000 - would see a boost in after-tax income of 3.4%, or more than $40,000. Obama's plan would keep the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts in place for everyone except those making more than roughly $250,000, and he would increase the capital gains tax. Obama would also introduce new tax breaks for lower and middle-income groups. Such breaks include expanding the earned income tax credit, giving those making less than $150,000 a $500 tax credit per person on the first $8,100 in income, giving those making under $75,000 a 50% federal match on the first $1,000 of savings, and exempting seniors making less than $50,000 from having to pay income tax. The net result: compared with their tax bill today, taxpayers on average would see their tax bill cut by nearly $160 under Obama's plan. That means their after-tax income would rise by 0.3%. But those in the lowest-income groups would enjoy the biggest after-tax income rise as a percentage of income - between 2.4% and 5.5% (worth between $567 and $1,042). By contrast, the highest-income households - those with at least $603,000 in income - would see a dramatic decline in their after-tax income - a drop of 8.7%, or $116,000. "Middle-class families get tax cuts that are three times larger from Obama than from McCain," Furman said. "And the McCain plan gives nearly one-quarter of its benefits to households making more than $2.8 million annually - the top 0.1%."

 

[Lapis]

Ok the illegal aliens one
McCain, Obama and Clinton Backed Social Security for Illegals | Human Events | Find Articles at BNET
Quote:

One thing Senators Barack Obama (D.Ill.), Hillary Clinton (D.-N.Y.) and John McCain (R.-Ariz.) all have in common is that they voted to give retroactive Social Security benefits to illegal aliens who committed document fraud. Indeed, McCain voted for it before he was against it.

Gay Marriage
Quote:

Although Barack Obama has said that he supports civil unions, he is against gay marriage. In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman." Barack Obama did vote against a Federal Marriage Amendment and opposed the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. He said he would support civil unions between gay and lesbian couples, as well as letting individual states determine if marriage between gay and lesbian couples should be legalized. "Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn't cause discrimination," Obama said. "I think it is the right balance to strike in this society." Sources: Chicago Daily Tribune, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force

Obama gun ownership


Quote:

The senator, a former constitutional law instructor, said some scholars argue the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees gun ownerships only to militias, but he believes it grants individual gun rights. "I think there is an individual right to bear arms, but it's subject to commonsense regulation" like background checks, he said during a news conference.

ok I'm done

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by florabundance That's why I asked if you'd read it, to see if you had an opinion on anything else that was written.

Nope. I don't vote on anything other than the issues I feel are important, so I tend to avoid all of the extraneous stuff, particularly when it's of a personal nature.

 

[florabundance]

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stargazer* Nope. I don't vote on anything other than the issues I feel are important, so I tend to avoid all of the extraneous stuff, particularly when it's off a personal nature.

I know what you mean. The Guardian is a very left wing newspaper, and therefore it's obvious that they'd rather write negatively about McCain. I still just thought it was quite an interesting read.

 

[SkylarV217]

I was looking into more political things today and ran across this I'll probably get grief for posting it but it truly disturbed me ... can anyone dispute any of the given "facts"?
Eyeblast.tv - A Video Portrait Of Barack Hussein Obama

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkylarV217 I was looking into more political things today and ran across this I'll probably get grief for posting it but it truly disturbed me ... can anyone dispute any of the given "facts"? Eyeblast.tv - A Video Portrait Of Barack Hussein Obama

Anyone who dismisses Barack Obama because of his "three Islamic names" is a dumbass. The fearmongering, by Republicans, based on HIS FATHER'S religion and his "furren" sounding name is disgraceful.

OMGWTFBBQ, he refuses to wear an American flag? TERRORIST!!!! And he doesn't always put his hand over his heart!!! (People are aware that there are religious people all over the US that don't either, right?)

I find the Jeremiah Wright thing problematic, honestly. There is also some serious hypocrisy in his condemnation of Imus, certainly.

The Che thing is so overblown. What control does Obama have over what someone else has in an office?

Lifting the ban on meeting with terrorist leaders? That's such a broad paintbrush. I doubt Obama wants to have tea with Osama. Dismissing, out of hand, meeting with leaders because they are labeled terrorists is short-sighted.



Wow, anyone reading that probably thinks I'm voting for Obama, huh?

Which, FTR, I'm not.

 

[SkylarV217]

I have no Problems with the general Islamic people.... so the fact that he has Muslim names.... I mean i have problems with the extremists and the terrorist groups in the same way that I have problems with extremist Christian groups.

The most troubling part to me was the Reverend and anyone that could listen to that a couple times a week for 20 years ... I mean if i didn't agree with a pastor at a church I would find a new one ... but thats so much hatred
and it would be hard to listen to that weekly unless you agreed ... or I would think so at least.

And believe me i don't presume to say which way any person would vote, I think the most important thing is to have the FACTS the real ones and not what this group says about that person or vice versa... Thats why I am interested in what you ladies have to say b/c there is so many lies and slander going around this go around its disgusting.

 

[rbella]

I thought that Sarah Palin did very well last night. I was quite impressed with her speech. I wish people would lay off her experience. I believe she is a bit more experienced than the opposition who is actually running for President. Just something that annoys me.

 

[SkylarV217]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbella I thought that Sarah Palin did very well last night. I was quite impressed with her speech. I wish people would lay off her experience. I believe she is a bit more experienced than the opposition who is actually running for President. Just something that annoys me.

I agree here .... I liked how one of the men was talking about the democrats put a women up and its Progressive but when the Republicans do it ... its sexist ....lol

 

[concertina]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkylarV217 I agree here .... I liked how one of the men was talking about the democrats put a women up and its Progressive but when the Republicans do it ... its sexist ....lol

Its because of the way its being done. Its deliberate pandering to voters on the fence.

As for her speech? Laughable, full of snide poking at Obama based on little substance.

I esp. like how her abstinence-only sex ed policy worked for her daughter. Thats nice.

 

[SkylarV217]

Quote:

Originally Posted by concertina I esp. like how her abstinence-only sex ed policy worked for her daughter. Thats nice.

Children don't always do what their parents teach them... I think as parents you can only do what you believe is best, after a certain point you can't force your child to do anything. Her daughters choices are just that ... her daughters choices. Many parents have children that have done drugs or did drugs themselves as teenagers .... i do believe the majority of those parents would still support a "just say no" program in the schools ... I'm not agreeing with the abstinence only teachings ... but i'm not judging her on her daughters actions....

We all know we did things as teenagers that our parents taught us not to do .... why would a governors child be any different ?

 

[rbella]

Quote:

Originally Posted by concertina Its because of the way its being done. Its deliberate pandering to voters on the fence. As for her speech? Laughable, full of snide poking at Obama based on little substance. I esp. like how her abstinence-only sex ed policy worked for her daughter. Thats nice.

If that is in fact what it is, then I actually think it is quite a genius move.

I somehow doubt that the Democrats have never pandered to voters who are on the fence.

I think the snide comments in her speech were just as fair as some of the comments made about the Republicans at the Democratic National Convention.

Let's be honest, the only people who will hate her speech are those who are Obama supporters. I mean, that just goes without saying. Just as those who are unhappy with the other side's speeches will most likely be McCain supporters.

Just as reference here, I don't particularly like either candidate. That means everyone on here can hate me.

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbella I think the snide comments in her speech were just as fair as some of the comments made about the Republicans at the Democratic National Convention.

I'd put them right up next to the comments from the Democrats that the arrival of Hurricane Gustav proves that God is on their side. Klassy.

 

[rbella]

^^^Very true. Both sides slander the other. It just always seems to me, someone who is a true INDEPENDENT, that the dems get pissed about it more. I don't understand why what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander??????

Ok, I'm done.

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbella ^^^Very true. Both sides slander the other. It just always seems to me, someone who is a true INDEPENDENT, that the dems get pissed about it more. I don't understand why what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander?????? Ok, I'm done.

Right? Where is the outrage over Fowler and Moore's comments? Oh that's right, there is none because when a Democrat says something terribly offensive, a half ass apology is all that is needed for penance (Hello, Joe Biden? I'm brown. Thanks for that little 7-11/Dunkin Donuts dig!) and yet when someone on the right says something terribly offensive, no one rests until they lose their job (Trent Lott, anyone?)

 

[concertina]

I think the 'God is on our side' thing was, at best, a JOKE considering how religious the GOP likes to pretend to be.

I certainly didn't hear anyone *LYING* about McCain at the DNC. Anyone care to point that out for me? Cause the lies Palin was spewing? yeah...how about that...