|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 10:38 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:18 pm
MegaTherion777 i was under the impression that there was no communist party of america, merely a socialist party? and anyways, perhaps its not the fact that they split off and such, perhaps it's the fact that in many states only the main two parties, and perhaps one or two other candidates, appear on the ballot, and a fair percentage of those states don't allow write-ins. for example - in maine you only have R, D, I, and G. in oklahoma, you have ONLY R and D, and you can't write in. They keep going off and forming their own parties with similar names and only very minor changes, all claiming to be the true Communists...
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:19 pm
ATTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACK!!!!! scream
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:26 pm
Rotting Gnarl MegaTherion777 i was under the impression that there was no communist party of america, merely a socialist party? and anyways, perhaps its not the fact that they split off and such, perhaps it's the fact that in many states only the main two parties, and perhaps one or two other candidates, appear on the ballot, and a fair percentage of those states don't allow write-ins. for example - in maine you only have R, D, I, and G. in oklahoma, you have ONLY R and D, and you can't write in. They keep going off and forming their own parties with similar names and only very minor changes, all claiming to be the true Communists... huh. either way, not many americans are going to vote communist/socialist anyways. we're, traditionally, fans of free market capitalism. disciples of adam smith, not karl marx lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:46 am
no he is not on gaia. He was a few years ago but his account is inactive now.
I will only say about elections that I believe that the right choice was made. I fully believe that Obama is the right person for this time. I am thinking maby another Roosevelt? (aside from the absolute silence till inauguration I hope)
but I do not think it is unreasonable to expect something akin to the 100 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:42 am
lotusvoid no he is not on gaia. He was a few years ago but his account is inactive now. I will only say about elections that I believe that the right choice was made. I fully believe that Obama is the right person for this time. I am thinking maby another Roosevelt? (aside from the absolute silence till inauguration I hope) but I do not think it is unreasonable to expect something akin to the 100 days. Yo're not serious, miss, I hope? Roosevelt sold us to Stalin!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:45 am
shhh!
I was only referring to his ability to pull a country face first out of disaster.
he did in fact make alot of huge mistakes. but look at the new deal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:54 am
lotusvoid shhh! I was only referring to his ability to pull a country face first out of disaster. he did in fact make alot of huge mistakes. but look at the new deal Hmmm.... I hope this rocket system deal won't have the same effect...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 6:56 am
I hope you will not be negatively affected by our new president. but really, I think he is going to work out VERY well for foreign relations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:52 am
Honestly saying, the commentators said McCain would be much better from the European perspective wink .
Obama will ask to "pay" for everything (which is good for you, not so good for us).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 4:37 pm
lotusvoid no he is not on gaia. He was a few years ago but his account is inactive now. I will only say about elections that I believe that the right choice was made. I fully believe that Obama is the right person for this time. I am thinking maby another Roosevelt? (aside from the absolute silence till inauguration I hope) but I do not think it is unreasonable to expect something akin to the 100 days. both roosevelt's were statist asses. talk2hand
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:54 pm
who were very successful.
If you feel that you can argue that, hit the books man. Flaws yes. success also yes. the new deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:24 pm
lotusvoid who were very successful. If you feel that you can argue that, hit the books man. Flaws yes. success also yes. the new deal. i never said they weren't successful. they were also wildly popular. i mean, c'mon, FDR is the reason the 2 term limit was put into effect. still, the were expansionist, statist, and in the case of teddy (not certain how to qualify FDR in this respect) imperialist asses. in short, my point is that popular opinion and success does not change the fact that their politics were abhorrent, and comparing obama to either of the roosevelt's is not likely to win someone who realizes this over. mrgreen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 8:47 am
I was referring to success in achieving goals, not in popularity, and certainly not in ethics. when has ethics ever played a role in American politics in the truest form? I know that morality and justice are on the agenda, unfortunately I also know that historically American interests and power have always rated higher. The nature of said goals are not in question, he was... well, not the most pure of interests, but what he wanted to do, he did. FDR was effective, he was capable. (unlike the ineffectual terms we have been plagued with.) I am not trying to insinuate he (Obama) will do the same types of things, only that he in my opinion is capable of having as resounding an impact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 3:03 pm
lotusvoid I was referring to success in achieving goals, not in popularity, and certainly not in ethics. when has ethics ever played a role in American politics in the truest form? I know that morality and justice are on the agenda, unfortunately I also know that historically American interests and power have always rated higher. The nature of said goals are not in question, he was... well, not the most pure of interests, but what he wanted to do, he did. FDR was effective, he was capable. (unlike the ineffectual terms we have been plagued with.) I am not trying to insinuate he (Obama) will do the same types of things, only that he in my opinion is capable of having as resounding an impact. ...i see nothing to nitpick in this statement. you have successfull clarified. +10 sexy points for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
