US Presidential Elections

[Pop]

Oh noes! It's teh global elite!

[Morgoth]

People these days don't want to listen to unpleasent and important matters from their political leaders anymore - they want to hear bold, direct and easily digestable statements. Palin and McCain exactly deliver this very well to the folks. No, it's not my prerogative to judge the American people, or American patrotism, but I really have to wonder if McCains hostile and inconsiderate behaviour really makes American people proud, or can identify with. I kinda liked that John F. Kennedy dude more, actually. :D

[Hurlshort]

The UN was formed after WW2. The League of Nations was similiar and was formed after WW1, but it collapsed early on and the US wasn't even a member (congress didn't want to involve itself in world affairs.)

[Hildegard]

According to one of the soldiers who was tortured in 'Nam with him, it doesn't.

 

He claims McCain is very unpredictable, has a horrible temper and is unsuited to running a country. The guy's running an ad campaign on TV about it, to boot.

 

I was talking about Republicans and Americans in general, it's like, I was in a POW camp for five years, I know what's hard in life, on the other hand our country is in difficult and hard position, therefor I'm more eligible. LOL

[Meshugger]

the UN was designed by and for a socialist ideal. it is more than just big boys playing around with world affairs now. it has become its own behemoth bureaucracy that has no voter control. the UN is the only non-human entity i can honestly refer to as something evil. "the united nations. it's your world. we just want to own you." unisevil.com.

 

Well, that is strange to hear, the Evil Socialist plan with which in mind the UN was formed was actually the downfall of Hitler and Mussolini. I do hope you have no idea what you're talking about, or you're even more of a right- wing extremist than you seem to be.

 

I don't now where you got that info from, but as hurlshot said, the UN as we know it was formed after WWII. It's predecessor collapsed since germany and the soviet union was kicked out when the great war started, and the US wasn't even a member to begin with. The UN was later formed in order to keep a somewhat status quo between the big players after the war. For those with a permanent seat in the security counsil, it is more of a joke, as they don't need the UN in order to achieve their respective interests.

 

For all the other small countries in the world, it is the only forum where they can have their voices heard. Otherwise, they would be even more pushed around by the big players than before in their game of 'risk'.

Edited September 6, 2008 by Meshugger

[SteveThaiBinh]

I honestly don't see the point of having the United Nations based in a country that despises it and flouts it at any opportunity. And the infuriating thing is that the UN does so much good work around the world in child protection, food security, development and culture exchange and yet has to put up with so much nonsense from weak US politicians.

[Pop]

Ostensibly the UN was placed in America to ensure our participation, since we had the least to gain. But the truth is, it was built on donated land by the Reptilian Illuminati Jews who live in the center of the Earth, as a stronghold from which they could infringe upon the freedoms of good-hearted smalltown America using socialist doctrine disseminated through institutions of higher learning.

 

Most nations flout the UN in any case, at least the P5 and those countries whose interests are entwined with theirs. It's just that the executive branch has made a bigger show of being cowboy ****heads than usual, as of the last 8 years.

Edited September 6, 2008 by Pop

[SteveThaiBinh]

*grumble*

 

Well, at least McCain is a grown up. Hopefully things will get better, no matter who wins.

[Pop]

Do you really think so? In order to court the Republican base McCain has promised to pursue the same foreign policies that the Bush administration has enacted. We certainly won't leave Iraq (ever) if he's elected.

Edited September 6, 2008 by Pop

[SteveThaiBinh]

In the sense of "It's not what you do, it's the way that you do it." It's easier to take McCain seriously, even if you disagree with him. George W. was just so - well - substandard.

[Moatilliatta]

(or better, objectivism).

So you see yourself as an Objectivist or are you just pointing at the closes thing to your actual views?

[Hurlshort]

taks does seem pretty extreme in his anti-socialism stance. Personally I think it's a balancing act.

[taks]

probably the latter... i don't fall into any camp, which should be obvious to those that have been around long enough (i've been posting as taks for a decade now). ayn rand pushed the envelope further than i think i could. i truly think it is possible to do something for someone else selflessly, she did not.

 

lessee, hardcore capitalist, to a fault, quite socially liberal (probably from my wild younger days and 4 years working in a bar... you see everything, and sometimes, do everything), small government works best, death penalty doesn't work, the "war on drugs" is a misnomer (and doesn't work, either), women should have the right to choose, but it should NOT be a federal mandate, which leads into "i am big into states rights... don't like it where you are, MOVE!" . atheism rawks, one less piece of programming i have running around in my head, and i have a lot of stuff up there (it is scary, indeed). education is NOT a right, it is a privelege, and not everyone is capable of acheiving the same level of education. we spend too much time trying to teach people things they just can't, or don't want to, grasp, which ultimately drags down the rest of the population... i won't go into all those views. suffice it to say that while my son is technically in a "public school," it is actually a charter school run by a private, non-profit company (imagine schools). we were going to put him into private school, but this opportunity came up so we thought we'd give it a try. no, not a catholic private school, hehe. oh, and his mother is not allowed to teach him about gawd until he's old enough to ask intelligent questions. i'm guessing 8 or 10 years of age.

 

taks

[Gorth]

Evil censorship strikes back and a few posts have been removed by the system. Let's insult the presidential candidates and not each other

[Hurlshort]

I plan on teaching my daughter about every major faith, and creating a crazy calendar for us to follow that will give us exposure to major holy days across the spectrum. I'll expose her to athiesm and non-mainstream religions as well, but the focus will be on Judaism, branches of Christianity, and Islam.

 

It sounds hippy-dippy, I know, but I'm dead serious.

[Laozi]

The UN was formed after WW2. The League of Nations was similiar and was formed after WW1, but it collapsed early on and the US wasn't even a member (congress didn't want to involve itself in world affairs.)

 

 

Also prior to WWI the U.S. wasn't invited to participate in the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, a crying shame.

[Moatilliatta]

I plan on teaching my daughter about every major faith, and creating a crazy calendar for us to follow that will give us exposure to major holy days across the spectrum. I'll expose her to athiesm and non-mainstream religions as well, but the focus will be on Judaism, branches of Christianity, and Islam.

 

It sounds hippy-dippy, I know, but I'm dead serious.

What's the point of this? People who don't feel at ease in either atheism or their family's faith tends to find the faith that fits them easily enough without touching upon them in the early years.

I would personally rather keep a religiously well educated household that is completely neutral in regards to religions thereby keeping religion at an individual level.

 

I do think it's admirable of you to try and do what's best (supposedly) for your child rather than what is easiest for you.

 

Edit: Wouldn't your aproach give problems with the amount fo gift-giving holidays in religions?

Edited September 7, 2008 by Moatilliatta

[Hurlshort]

I plan on teaching my daughter about every major faith, and creating a crazy calendar for us to follow that will give us exposure to major holy days across the spectrum. I'll expose her to athiesm and non-mainstream religions as well, but the focus will be on Judaism, branches of Christianity, and Islam.

 

It sounds hippy-dippy, I know, but I'm dead serious.

What's the point of this? People who don't feel at ease in either atheism or their family's faith tends to find the faith that fits them easily enough without touching upon them in the early years.

I would personally rather keep a religiously well educated household that is completely neutral in regards to religions thereby keeping religion at an individual level.

 

I do think it's admirable of you to try and do what's best (supposedly) for your child rather than what is easiest for you.

 

Edit: Wouldn't your aproach give problems with the amount fo gift-giving holidays in religions?

 

The point isn't necessarily to give her a lot of choices, but rather to help her have an open mind about the many different concepts of faith and spirituality. In my line of work, I see a lot of children who simply mimic their parents belief structure. My daughter is only 17 months old, so I'm still developing the strategy here, but my overall goal is really just teaching tolerance and open mindedness.

 

I forgot to add Buddhism and Hinduism to my major faith list in the last post.

 

As for gift giving, from what I have researched, not too many major holidays are like Christmas. Ramadan, for example, is a huge part of Islam and is more about coming together as a community and sharing meals after sundown.

[Killian Kalthorne]

I plan on teaching my daughter about every major faith, and creating a crazy calendar for us to follow that will give us exposure to major holy days across the spectrum. I'll expose her to athiesm and non-mainstream religions as well, but the focus will be on Judaism, branches of Christianity, and Islam.

 

It sounds hippy-dippy, I know, but I'm dead serious.

 

I think it is a good plan. It allows her to make up her own mind instead of having things dictated to her. I commend you.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Socialism in the US!!!

 

Where will it end? Castroism, that's where! Whatever happened to moral hazard anyway?

[taks]

btw, i should add as my last fully off topic post, my version of things with my son is not to "teach" him anything. he will be taught about christianity only because his mother is catholic. he will ask me, and i will respond that i do not believe in any higher power/god/almighty, etc. that's about all that needs to be taught. i'll let him know why i do not believe in such an entity, but i'll leave it up to him to make up his own mind otherwise. that's why i want to wait till he's old enough to ask pertinent questions before introducing him to religion. IMO, he'll then be equipped to either see the light as i have, or join in with the herd. at the very least, he won't have come to his belief system simply because it was taught as fact from the time he was born.

 

taks

[Tigranes]

I think what Hurlshot does is admirable and it's something I would really consider doing myself. I came across Christianity during my teens and to date I still don't have an in-depth knowledge of other religions (it's on my to-do list, hah). Unlike some Christians I believe that all religions and some of the various branches of atheist attitudes are all just different ways of trying to get to the same place, and it really pisses me off when pastors or whatever starts talking about those 'poor misguided souls' who believe in the 'wrong religion'. Which is the same reason, really, I think that practice of baptising infants is horrible. My mother kept her religious views to herself until I wanted to know more about them.

 

Anyway, I'm not sure how we got here, but I guess it's OT.

[Gorth]

Socialism in the US!!!

 

Where will it end? Castroism, that's where! Whatever happened to moral hazard anyway?

>_

 

I read that story (another website) yesterday and didn't believe my eyes. Cuba and the USSR would have been proud of such moves. Whatever happened to capitalism and the free market these days?

 

I wonder what the two main candidates views are on such blatant communism.

[SteveThaiBinh]

McGain leads in the opinion polls, due to Palin?

 

Palin, who has shunned answering questions from journalists so far, faces a major test this week when she gives her first nationally televised interview after a week of intense press scrutiny into assertions she brings virtually no international experience to the ticket and has exaggerated her reformer credentials.

I shall look forward to this. It's not on Foxnews, though, is it?

[Moatilliatta]

McGain leads in the opinion polls

This cracked me up.

 

I also think it has more to do with the convention than Palin.