Republican Nomination?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Hahaha, no, I focused on Biden, I figure you meant him as front runner. Isn't vice president basically the dick job of all?

Well, I was joking. I'm glad you got that. I was typing the last post while you replied. But, I think that biden/Kucinich would be a good ticket given the complimentary nature of their positions. Biden is great as a foreign relations president and Kucinich has a great domestic focus. However, like Paul, they haven't got a chance. But I'll still support them until they're out of the race.

Originally posted by Devil King
I like Biden's ideas on Iraq. The fact that he realizes we can't just pull out and toss our hands in the air already places him in a more realistic mindset that Paul. There's nothing wrong with listening to the Iraqis while writing up our plans for their country.

That you guys have plans for Iraq is ridiculous though. Paul is absolutely right that it wasn't your business in the first place and it shouldn't be now either.

Originally posted by Devil King
And there's nothing wrong with more public schools, as long as they're on par with private institutions, which is his stance.

Yeah, I'd like candy rainbows coming out of the vaginas of twenty virgins too, but it's not going to happen. Public schools will always need excessively more funding to be on par with private schools. Everyone loses that way.

Originally posted by Devil King
(besides, as a child of private catholic education, I have seen teh glaring differences between the quality of private/public education...many of which have more to do with the student and less to do with the school) And freedoms in public schools doesn't equate to personal freedom in the every day world. I appreciate the standards of uniformity used by my private school. But those standards didn't equate to lack of freedoms that I should have had...which I did. What kind of freedoms do you think he'd like to do away with? Perhaps the one freedom public schools had that we didn't was the freedom to leave campus at lunch. The problem is that in a lot of schools, most of the kds don't come back. I know you're in Germany, but don't you think that the falling standards in public education are part of the problem?

I was mostly referring to personal prayer, which I find is a personal right of everyone. But that's a trivial point. And I would say the falling standards of public schools is certainly an important factor, I jsut don't think more excessive taxing and funding of them will help. Keeping in mind that taxing always equates to stealing money from people at the threat of violence. Public schools won't get as good as a free market competative school system ever. You could have an endless supply of money and it would just not have the necessary force it needs....competition.

Originally posted by Devil King
Global warming is a problem. And not just because of the environmental changes (which may or may not be the result of humans) but also because we are dumping mercury into the water and poisioning the oceans to the point that their acid levels are rising. (this is where I like Kucinich more than Biden)

Not sure what the second has to do with anything, but I feel global warming is without a doubt hyped beyond any means. I think we will see in 50 years that it was mostly propaganda bullshit, just that then there will be no one around that ever believed in Global Warming anyways of course. Either way, to act (which would do imense damage to the economy) one needs more information and scientific proof, I don't think it is sufficient that politicians declare that the issue is over with and something has to be done now, that's not really their call.

Originally posted by Devil King
It isn't a matter of raising taxes, it's a matter of using the money more appropriately. And this is where I have issues with EVERY candidate. We raise enough money in taxes every year to fund these beneficial programs. The problem is waste.

Every candidate except Ron Paul, who says exactly that, I assume.

Originally posted by Devil King
I think he kinda looks like Ian McKellen.

EDIT: Hey, why are you hanging out in parks with old men?

For anonymous Larry Craig-style sex.

Originally posted by Devil King
Grassroots are the people. But, I feel the "people" aren't thinking it through. 17 years as a conressman from Texas, a state that still thinks it shold be it's own country, isn't that big a deal to me...nor is it a suprise.

I'm all for getting rid of government bureaucracy. But I do not support the idea that dismantling the federal government is a good thing for a nation in our position in the year 2008! I do not find the idea that a US citizens rights can change from state to state a beneficial one.

Most things should be handled at the state level. Sweeping national legislature typically isn't a good thing.

Originally posted by Robtard
Think of America as clock, a large battered clock that's been dipped in salt water for the last 8+ years, now RP wants to open that clock up and tear out all the cogs, though some not necessary and some are outdated, he wants to tear them all out and attempt tp replace those cogs with sprockets, which may or may not work.

At least RP wants to move in the direction that is right (at least in my view -- less government, less spending, less taxes) instead of continuing on the same path or going on the same path and just changing shoes.

Originally posted by Devil King
Maybe someone who thinks that rights should be national, and not some one who thinks that abortion, marriage, taxes, criminal actions, penalties, trade and civil rights should be based on the hugely varied demographics of the particular state in which a US citizen finds themself.

Originally posted by Devil King
[B]I like Biden's ideas on Iraq. The fact that he realizes we can't just pull out and toss our hands in the air already places him in a more realistic mindset that Paul. There's nothing wrong with listening to the Iraqis while writing up our plans for their country.

Haha. We shouldn't up plans for any country besides our own. That is not the way America should work.

Originally posted by Devil King
[B]And there's nothing wrong with more public schools, as long as they're on par with private institutions, which is his stance. (besides, as a child of private catholic education, I have seen teh glaring differences between the quality of private/public education...many of which have more to do with the student and less to do with the school) And freedoms in public schools doesn't equate to personal freedom in the every day world. I appreciate the standards of uniformity used by my private school. But those standards didn't equate to lack of freedoms that I should have had...which I did. What kind of freedoms do you think he'd like to do away with? Perhaps the one freedom public schools had that we didn't was the freedom to leave campus at lunch. The problem is that in a lot of schools, most of the kds don't come back. I know you're in Germany, but don't you think that the falling standards in public education are part of the problem?

Originally posted by Devil King
[B]Global warming is a problem. And not just because of the environmental changes (which may or may not be the result of humans) but also because we are dumping mercury into the water and poisioning the oceans to the point that their acid levels are rising. (this is where I like Kucinich more than Biden)

Ron Paul FTW. America will be in deep Sh*t if Hillary,or Rudy becomes president.

Originally posted by Devil King
Well, I was joking. I'm glad you got that. I was typing the last post while you replied. But, I think that biden/Kucinich would be a good ticket given the complimentary nature of their positions. Biden is great as a foreign relations president and Kucinich has a great domestic focus. However, like Paul, they haven't got a chance. But I'll still support them until they're out of the race.

Who do you think will win the Rep nomination? Even though he's (supposedly) been falling behind, I still think Thompson will be the Republican running in '08.

Originally posted by Robtard
Who do you think will win the Rep nomination? Even though he's (supposedly) been falling behind, I still think Thompson will be the Republican running in '08.

Either that or I will. With all due respect to Thompson, the guy is boring as hell considering he was supposed to the savior of the GOP and nothing short of amazing. Not that I look at any of that in deciding that I don't like Thompson, but just saying.

Latest NBC/Wall Street Journal poll has Guiliani dropping to only 2-4 points above Huckabee and Clinton still as the wide front-runner on the Democratic side.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22327166/

REP

Rudy-20%
Romney-20%
Huck-17%
McCain-14%
Thompson-11%

DEM

Clinton-45%
Obama-23%
Edwards-13%

(all other dems came in at 4% or lower)

For Comparison, the article also lists a recent poll from Rueters/Zogby:

Rudy-23%
Huck-22%
Romney-16%
Thompson-13%
McCain 12%

I think it's safe to say, that if Huckabee keeps up his momentum, that it'll be a face-off between him and Rudy for the nomination.

My prediction: Rudy will get McCain's supporters, Huck will get Thompsons, and they'll split Romney's supporters.

Romney will drop first after the early primaries, then Thompson, and finally ol' McCain will throw in the towel.

Hope Huck gets it, but either way both of them can beat Hillary in a national election.

As I've said for many months, the Dems best shot at the Presidency is to elect Obama.

Rudy is such a combative bully that he'll turn voters off as soon as they get to know him. That's why he lost the 2000 Senate race to Clinton, even before he dropped out.

Huckabee supports batshit crazy economic reforms like a 23% sales tax (completely regressive) that a majority of Americans oppose.

I can't wait for either of those two to get nominated so they can get destroyed.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That you guys have plans for Iraq is ridiculous though. Paul is absolutely right that it wasn't your business in the first place and it shouldn't be now either.

Can't cram that shitstorm Genie back in the bottle though. And, Ron Paul wants to leave right now, without concern for the aftermath of the shit storm we caused. It perfectly illustrates why his foreign policy ideas are naive. And Biden's plan takes into account what the Iraqis want. You should be in favor of it, in fact. It calls for a bunch of little states that all have a say in the national government.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, I'd like candy rainbows coming out of the vaginas of twenty virgins too, but it's not going to happen. Public schools will always need excessively more funding to be on par with private schools. Everyone loses that way.

Public schools can be just as cost effective, if there are more of them. What is it about the adversity private school face that makes their students so much more well equiped?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I was mostly referring to personal prayer, which I find is a personal right of everyone. But that's a trivial point. And I would say the falling standards of public schools is certainly an important factor, I jsut don't think more excessive taxing and funding of them will help. Keeping in mind that taxing always equates to stealing money from people at the threat of violence. Public schools won't get as good as a free market competative school system ever. You could have an endless supply of money and it would just not have the necessary force it needs....competition.

The threat of violence? So, you're saying that private schools are ahead of the game because theyaren't public? Please explain why the public school system can't be overhauled to meet current private school standards. How can you say falling standards in public school are important and then imply the system needs to be done away with?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not sure what the second has to do with anything, but I feel global warming is without a doubt hyped beyond any means. I think we will see in 50 years that it was mostly propaganda bullshit, just that then there will be no one around that ever believed in Global Warming anyways of course. Either way, to act (which would do imense damage to the economy) one needs more information and scientific proof, I don't think it is sufficient that politicians declare that the issue is over with and something has to be done now, that's not really their call.

The second point is the more important in my opinion. I have my doubts as to the climate changing because of human actions, on such a massive scale. What I do hold humans and governments responsible for is the toxification of the environment. Greenhouse gases, et al, are one thing, Dumping toxic waste into a river is nothing but humans.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Every candidate except Ron Paul, who says exactly that, I assume.

Nope, I include Paul in that as well.

Originally posted by BigRed
Who said anything about dismantling the government? I'm not an anarchist haha.

Ron Paul said. And I said the "Federal" government. He wants to gut the national government in favor of fifty little versions of it.

Originally posted by BigRed
Most things should be handled at the state level. Sweeping national legislature typically isn't a good thing.

What kind of sweeping national legislation are you pointing to as an example?

Originally posted by BigRed
Rights shouldn't be national. Because rights aren't universal. Murder itself is handled at the state level. Why not such a widely divided issue like abortion?

Because I live in the United States of America, not just in this state or that one. I'd prefer that my marriage mean the same thing in New York that it means in California. I honestly can't believe you think that rights are a matter of state perogative. Exactly how far back in our own history would you like to go?

Originally posted by BigRed
If we just stormed in, we can just storm out. It is a fact that Ron Paul receives more money from veterans and active military personel than any other presidential candidate running for President. Maybe that has something to do with his foreign policy...

and you think Ron Paul is going to do just that, storm out?

Originally posted by BigRed
Personally, having been in public school for a very long time, I'm of the opinion that public education sucks.

So am I. In fact, that's exactly what I said.

Originally posted by BigRed
I think it might pose a marginal problem down the road. But to the degree people say? I don't think so.

Well, we keep dumping pulp mill waste into rivers and allowing cattle run off in lakes, we won't have to worry about what people say "down the road".

Originally posted by Robtard
Who do you think will win the Rep nomination? Even though he's (supposedly) been falling behind, I still think Thompson will be the Republican running in '08.

I have no idea.

Originally posted by Devil King
Can't cram that shitstorm Genie back in the bottle though. And, Ron Paul wants to leave right now, without concern for the aftermath of the shit storm we caused. It perfectly illustrates why his foreign policy ideas are naive. And Biden's plan takes into account what the Iraqis want. You should be in favor of it, in fact. It calls for a bunch of little states that all have a say in the national government.

You don't actually have a responsibility for anyone but yourself though. Good if the Iraqis wangt that they can do it themselves. You don't have to pay money and sacrifice your people for that.

Originally posted by Devil King
Public schools can be just as cost effective, if there are more of them. What is it about the adversity private school face that makes their students so much more well equiped?

That's nonsense of course. They are never as cost effective, regardless of the amount. No idea what you meant with the second.

Originally posted by Devil King
The threat of violence? So, you're saying that private schools are ahead of the game because theyaren't public? Please explain why the public school system can't be overhauled to meet current private school standards. How can you say falling standards in public school are important and then imply the system needs to be done away with?

It's easy, actually, the falling standards are important because besides being a really horrible institution in the first place it also doesn't have many benefits anymore, it should be done away because it doesn't benefit many people (if at all) and costs a lot of money for people who have nothing to do with it and don't want it.

Originally posted by Devil King
The second point is the more important in my opinion. I have my doubts as to the climate changing because of human actions, on such a massive scale. What I do hold humans and governments responsible for is the toxification of the environment. Greenhouse gases, et al, are one thing, Dumping toxic waste into a river is nothing but humans.

Yes, but it has nothing to do with the Global Warming hoax. No one is really for more pollution and toxication (especially not Ron Paul, should watch the "at google interview" with him), but to pay an insane amount of money damaging all sorts of free market resources in the process for not even a very founded theory, is ridiculous.

Originally posted by Devil King
Nope, I include Paul in that as well.

Well, that's stupid then, since he doesn't want to waste any money on anything.

Devil King...you made a bunch of good points that I would like to address but I don't have the time to address.

Case in point...You are correct that just up and taking everyone out of Iraq is not a solution. IF most of the military presence was removed suddenly from Iraq, most of the problems facing Iraq would need to be resolved FIRST. (Mainly just government problems.) I personally feel that excessive killing/murdering needs to be implemented by the Iraqi police force against the people until the message of 'stop f***ing blowing each other up" gets across. (In other words...a "Judge Dredd" type of police system where you are judged on site and killed on the spot if the police find you guilty enough on the spot....plenty of room for corruption, I know..but I know of one Iraqi Chief of police who has fired over 6000 policeman over corruption/improper policing. A very strict form of martial law needs to be instituted(above and beyond what is already in place.) by the Iraqi police...not the coalition forces, in order for Iraq to gain back its stability..and this is all in addition to having a and excellent government in place BEFORE the American forces are pulled...because let's face it, a good government is not enough.)

About public schools....I graduated from one of the top 50 (There are more than 600 highschools in my state...maybe over 700...but it was "more than 600" at the time.) highschools in my state...it was NOT a private school. It was actually ahead of a few private schools. Why was it better than most other schools in the state while still being public?...easy, the very small town I grew up in is mostly middle class to upper class AND the parents were STRONGLY involved in most school activities/polices. (Case in point...that Tinsley girl from High school Musical 2 actually went to highschool with my little sister.) Why did I bring up economic status for this? Simple...the parents had the money to raise money for school projects that helped better the school system. Of course...most of the parents also had educations so they, generally, made better decisions about "school policy". (Having and education DOES help when making decisions about your child's education.)

Can this same type of model be employed for all public schools? HELL NO!!! It requires several things....a small town where shit can actually get accomplished...the citizens in the school district to be making a lot of money...and the citizens to be educated. Of course those aren't the only prereqs for something like this...the parents actually have to be involved with their child's education. Of important note: That town is full of good people...we still do not have a police force because it isn't necessary.

Originally posted by dadudemon

About public schools....I graduated from one of the top 50 (There are more than 600 highschools in my state...maybe over 700...but it was "more than 600" at the time.) highschools in my state...it was NOT a private school. It was actually ahead of a few private schools. Why was it better than most other schools in the state while still being public?...easy, the very small town I grew up in is mostly middle class to upper class AND the parents were STRONGLY involved in most school activities/polices. (Case in point...that Tinsley girl from High school Musical 2 actually went to highschool with my little sister.) Why did I bring up economic status for this? Simple...the parents had the money to raise money for school projects that helped better the school system. Of course...most of the parents also had educations so they, generally, made better decisions about "school policy". (Having and education DOES help when making decisions about your child's education.)

I agree with that mostly, and I (and Ron Paul) are not against community schools at all. What we dislike is the government taking money from everyone to pay for shitty education for not everyone's children.

I think a community that has a school (and pays for it themselves voluntarily) or schools run by charitable organisations are great and good (because a) they have to compete and b) no one with forced by threat of harm, to pay anything), but public schools are bullshit. It's a monopoly on shit education, people are always so afraid of monopolies (I'm not, I know in a free market they don't happen easily and aren't a danger to anyone), but the government is the number one monopoly we have, and no one cares. Most people want to give it even more power. It is ridiculous.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think a community that has a school (and pays for it themselves voluntarily) or schools run by charitable organisations are great and good (because a) they have to compete and b) no one with forced by threat of harm, to pay anything), but public schools are bullshit.

"Forced by threat of harm"...hmmm....sounds like "No Child Left Behind" to me...*whistles and walks away slowly*

Originally posted by Bardock42
You don't actually have a responsibility for anyone but yourself though. Good if the Iraqis wangt that they can do it themselves. You don't have to pay money and sacrifice your people for that.

I can certainly agree with the idea that packing up our shit and getting out is the best thing to do. But it can be done in a responsible manner. I don't see the long term benefits of simply walking away. And it has nothing to do with the reasons provided by the corporate money machine that got us into it. It has everything to do with the "investment" made in the country.The long term involvment in the country is a matter of fact at this point. Even if the President of the United States decided to pull out our troops tomorrow, the fact remains that the number of US civilians and mercinaries left in the country rivals that of the military personnel. And the involvment of that many American citizens isn't going to do much to engraciate us to the people of Iraq.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's nonsense of course. They are never as cost effective, regardless of the amount. No idea what you meant with the second.

Perhaps you can explain why they can't be run at a cost-effective level? And beyond your explaination remains the fact that there are a number of government departments and agencies that benefit the American people beyond the bottom line. And public education is one program that I can't see handing over, fully, to the private sector. (It largly is now, but still remains under the jurisdiction of the government) I consider public education a right, and if it has to run in the red to be fulfilled, then so be it. (notice I said "I"😉 Not to mention the fact that under a fend for yourself system, the benefits of an education never find their way to the lower class citizenry.

Originally posted by Bardock42
It's easy, actually, the falling standards are important because besides being a really horrible institution in the first place it also doesn't have many benefits anymore, it should be done away because it doesn't benefit many people (if at all) and costs a lot of money for people who have nothing to do with it and don't want it.

you're kind of vauge, what do you mean?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yes, but it has nothing to do with the Global Warming hoax. No one is really for more pollution and toxication (especially not Ron Paul, should watch the "at google interview" with him), but to pay an insane amount of money damaging all sorts of free market resources in the process for not even a very founded theory, is ridiculous.

If no one is for the toxification of the environment, then how is it being polluted? It may very well not be a conserted effort, but it's happening. A link? As for the "global warming hoax", even if it's not the result of man made pollution, it's happening. And it will have to be dealt with. Just because the idea that humans didn't cause it, doesn't mean it's not happening. The beauty of it being natural, is that it will happen over a long period of time, giving us a better chance to adapt to the changes.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, that's stupid then, since he doesn't want to waste any money on anything.

EXACTLY MY POINT!

Originally posted by Bardock42
What we dislike is the government taking money from everyone to pay for shitty education for not everyone's children.

This was a complaint my parents had. They paid for my private education, while still paying taxes for public education.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Case in point...You are correct that just up and taking everyone out of Iraq is not a solution. IF most of the military presence was removed suddenly from Iraq, most of the problems facing Iraq would need to be resolved FIRST. (Mainly just government problems.) I personally feel that excessive killing/murdering needs to be implemented by the Iraqi police force against the people until the message of 'stop f***ing blowing each other up" gets across. (In other words...a "Judge Dredd" type of police system where you are judged on site and killed on the spot if the police find you guilty enough on the spot....plenty of room for corruption, I know..but I know of one Iraqi Chief of police who has fired over 6000 policeman over corruption/improper policing. A very strict form of martial law needs to be instituted(above and beyond what is already in place.) by the Iraqi police...not the coalition forces, in order for Iraq to gain back its stability..and this is all in addition to having a and excellent government in place BEFORE the American forces are pulled...because let's face it, a good government is not enough.)

That's similar to the way Saddam kept the peace, someone stepped out of (his) line, they were crushed. Sadly, that's what will eventually end up happening, anther Saddam type of "President" will take control of Iraq, when America pulls out.

Originally posted by Devil King
This was a complaint my parents had. They paid for my private education, while still paying taxes for public education.

That doesn't sound right...they should have gotten a tax exemption. I know that in the town I went to school in, we had a municipal tax for our school system for about a couple of years to pay for massive facility upgrades/expansions. Some families living in the town sent their children to private school...but they still had that school upgrade sales tax.

Originally posted by Robtard
That's similar to the way Saddam kept the peace, someone stepped out of (his) line, they were crushed. Sadly, that's what will eventually end up happening, anther Saddam type of "President" will take control of Iraq, when America pulls out.

I, of course, do not really want something like that to happen. I think that it may become necessary if it doesn't improve significantly soon...especially if the US president elected wants to pull out.

Originally posted by dadudemon

I, of course, do not really want something like that to happen. I think that it may become necessary if it doesn't improve significantly soon...especially if the US president elected wants to pull out.

If a stable Democracy isn't happening with the US/Coalition forces in place now acting as police, I doubt one will just form when they pull out (which they eventually will). Instead of multiple factions killing US/Co forces and each other, they'll turn (more so) on each other. Who knows, maybe a bloody civil war where only one side is left is what needs to happen for Iraq to achieve a level of "peace." Or maybe strict 'My Side/Your Side' divisions in Iraq itself, Kurds there, Sunnis here etc. etc. etc., but then you have the problem of who gets what.

There's also the matter of the foreign private sector in Iraq as DK mentioned, they certainly aren't obligated to leave when the military does.