Written by [user id=1738] on 11.06.2008 at 00:33

Written by Clintagräm on 07.02.2008 at 06:05

I'm looking for:

Less Free Trade (Need jobs here in America)
Finish up in Iraq
Grant illegal Immigrants citizenship (Walls and deportation is too Soviet Union for my taste)
Flat Tax
Less drug regulation (Especially mary jane.)
Alternative Power
Environmental Regulations (Pro Environmental that is.)
Private Social Security (People need some say so over the money they make.)
No Death Penalty
Gay Rights and Marriage
Abortion Legal (If they're going to do it, let them do it. No partial birth abortion.)
Welfare Programs that don't just support, but push people to support themselves. (Get them off on the right foot.)
More federal funding for college. (Everyone needs to get a chance to go.)
Objective Religious Studies (Sorry Ron, but no creationism, please. Not as a fundamental study at least.)

Hey, gotta say I agree on all topics there (except flat tax and alternative power, I'm not sure what those mean )
I was wondering, as an US citizen living abroad, do I get to vote for the elections?

- Finish up in Iraq now is impossible, though it is to hope that it is soon over now. But first they need to clean up the mess they made.
- If you make drugs easier (or freely) available you will have more addicted, this costs really much money for the state, which you will have to pay with your tax money.
- Religious studies are just like any other study and can never be objective. That would be very naive.

thanks for the lovely neocon propaganda, but I really wasn't looking for a debate on those points

That's ok. I just gave my opinion as I thought all these points could be relevant for the elections. And it was more a reaction on Wyatt, not really on you.

Obama and McCain are both shysters.

It's a stupid idea to allow any third world immigration into the USA. The average IQ is dropping and with it the quality of life, and we're breeding more useless people.

Privatization of social security is a great idea; what to do about current obligations? No functioning business will take those on...

I never liked the Iraq war but have to admit (a) it has scared off potential terrorists from ganging up on the US and (b) it has guaranteed an oil supply.

I would vote for any candidate who supported the following:

* Ethnocultural fragmentation of the USA
* End of the welfare state
* Reward the smart, ignore the failed
* Reserve 2/3 of land for nature

Democracy will NEVER support that, because democracy is empowerment for the ignorant.

Not in concept, and it doesn't HAVE to be that way at all. We just have to get some worthwhile peole in political offices. I don't really think Obama is a bad candidate at all.

so why would the third world imigration lower the IQ?

invading a country to get at what they have for free is NOT a good reason to invade anywhere unless we are reverting to conquering countries again. in which case i'll have my eye on a plot of land in new zealand with nice views and some farmland please and kick the kiwis off it, bugger them, i want their fertile soil!

and you support selection based on genetic IQ i take it? the cleverer you are the better off you are. so who's going to do all the "menial" yet vital jobs? you? you're clearly going to remove those who can tolerate them from existence as by ignoring them you'll starve them, leave them to die from poor health care and give them no education!

perhaps some of your views i'll agree with but i VERY strongly disagree with most of what you jsut said. Justto start a heated discussion!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=IRkCvubUGCM

Books by Carroll Quigley

http://www.alexanderhamiltoninstitute.org/lp/Hancock/CD-ROMS/GlobalFederation%5CWorld%20Trade%20Federation%20-%20136%20-%20The%20Anglo-American%20Establishment.html

http://www.alexanderhamiltoninstitute.org/lp/Hancock/CD-ROMS/GlobalFederation%5CWorld%20Trade%20Federation%20-%2098%20-%20Tragedy%20and%20Hope.html

What I have noticed with this election more than any other, is that NONE of the main media outlets focus on any of the country's financial problems, but defer always to much less important issues. I think the main candidates were practically hand picked by American media outlets, while a few of the honest politicians who would probably make a difference weren't even mentioned. The two parties do, in essence, the same thing. Each party brings the country further down the tubes, and after 4-8 years the American people STILL thing that the solution is voting for someone in the opposite party. It is an ongoing deception that has been talked about OPENLY by former Presidents.

Meanwhile, European news outlets continue to talk about America as if we are the WORLD'S ONLY SUPERPOWER, while neglecting to realize that Russia has more nuclear capabilities than all of the other world's countries combined.

Yes, I wish the youtube videos didn't have stupid music and would just get to the point, but there is truth in this information. We are being constantly lied to...constantly being told that the Democrat or Republican parties will make a difference. Meanwhile, the government continues to dump billions of dollars into the UN, and other useless organizations that only tighten the grasp around our necks. It seems to me that to goal of ALL mainstrem politicians is to give up US Sovereignty, put the country more into debt, and obviously do everything else in our power to get the world to hate us.

I have not taken much time recently to explore the third party/independent options, but whichever candidate want's to stay out of everyone else's business and fix our finincial problems gets my vote. Sadly, I don't think it will make a difference.

Please don't just argue about Mccain and Obama...that's what they want you to do...we need to be more intelligent than this!

Written by Konrad on 21.07.2008 at 16:19

I have not taken much time recently to explore the third party/independent options, but whichever candidate want's to stay out of everyone else's business and fix our finincial problems gets my vote. Sadly, I don't think it will make a difference.

Please don't just argue about Mccain and Obama...that's what they want you to do...we need to be more intelligent than this!

NADER FTW. I would have voted for him four years ago if I was old enough. He's too old now though :/

Written by [user id=27451] on 16.07.2008 at 13:40

so why would the third world imigration lower the IQ?

See IQ and the Wealth of Nations.

Written by Dangerboner on 22.07.2008 at 01:49

NADER FTW. I would have voted for him four years ago if I was old enough.

He's not too old -- his party turned against him.

I would vote for Nader, Kucinich or Paul.

hehe those actually were my three candidates as well.

Written by [user id=30512] on 22.06.2008 at 21:41

- If you make drugs easier (or freely) available you will have more addicted, this costs really much money for the state, which you will have to pay with your tax money.

At the moment my tax money goes toward locking up minor drug offenders in prison, so I don't see what it could harm by legalizing the less dangerous recreational drugs. The other advantage is obvious if you just look at the history of drug Prohibition, when alcohol was banned it provided organized crime with a nice profit venture in the world of smuggling booze, much like today's drug dealers. Much of the danger surrounding drugs revolves around the drug dealer (gateway to harder stuff they might be selling, inconsistent and sometimes dangerous mixups, etc.) I don't think legalizing marijuana will result in more addicted people, considering it is not addictive at all. Sure it is fun, just like video games, so maybe people do it a lot but that doesn't mean their body is addicted to it. The huge plus side I can see, as do many politicians including Republicans, is the billions of dollars that stand to be made from taxes with an organized marijuana production industry, so we will actually GAIN $$$ with legalization. Obama says he supports marijuana legalization, but I'm sure once the lobbyists get to him he will deny everything...

Written by Dangerboner on 22.07.2008 at 21:49

hehe those actually were my three candidates as well.

They're the only ones like to create change, no matter how much that other guy talks about "change" and then does the same old stuff.

Written by Introspekrieg on 23.07.2008 at 02:58

Written by [user id=30512] on 22.06.2008 at 21:41

- If you make drugs easier (or freely) available you will have more addicted, this costs really much money for the state, which you will have to pay with your tax money.

At the moment my tax money goes toward locking up minor drug offenders in prison, so I don't see what it could harm by legalizing the less dangerous recreational drugs.

Drug arrests are used to stand-in for general enforcement. Drug users have a higher rate of crime; minorities have a higher rate of crime and drug use; impoverished people use more drugs than any other class, and also commit more crimes, although their rate is not as high as the minority rate.

If law enforcement were able to recognize these other issues, life would be much easier, because I agree with you: as long as I don't have to pay for someone else's possible self-destruction, I'd legalize all drugs and sell at cost.

Written by Black Winter on 10.06.2008 at 19:40

Anyways,a great hail to Obama,a very young and full of energy man,talented speaker..

...so was Adolf Hitler...

^^oh yeah I forgot for a second.......Christians will oh-so-typically support the right wing party....sadd. But then again I'm not one to talk as Buddhists typically lean towards the left.


I've seen quite a few Obama stickers on some cars HERE IN THE BAHAMAS.......*sigh* you'd think we were allowed to vote!

Written by Dane Train on 23.07.2008 at 17:12

Written by Black Winter on 10.06.2008 at 19:40

Anyways,a great hail to Obama,a very young and full of energy man,talented speaker..

...so was Adolf Hitler...

Of all the great energetic young speakers of this planet's history I find it rather telling that your mind automatically gravitates to Hitler.

How the hell do you connect Obama to someone like Hitler? I mean, come on, that;s rediculous.

Written by Dane Train on 23.07.2008 at 17:12

Written by Black Winter on 10.06.2008 at 19:40

Anyways,a great hail to Obama,a very young and full of energy man,talented speaker..

...so was Adolf Hitler...

...so was Jesus
I know being a talented speaker is not enough,but it's essential to motivate people to follow and change even slightly the direction of their country,of course I am not an american citizen,and what I care about in first place is external policy,you can see how popular is Obama outside the US,as for not being conservative,I don't know much about it,but I know that someone like McCain,has no enough political knowledge,and I don't say experience because that's what he has been talking about all the time,in addition to his war experience,that makes him to many people,a 'hero'.
As for the consevative wing,would you have prefered McCain or Huckabee to win the nomination?clearly Huckabee is the most conservative?

Written by [user id=160] on 23.07.2008 at 21:08

^^oh yeah I forgot for a second.......Christians will oh-so-typically support the right wing party...

And I forgot how non-Christians will ignorantly assume that all Christians are members of right wing parties. Just to let you know, I am an anarchist. I despise the Republican party as much as the Democratic party.

My point is that so many people are voting for Obama just because he is an articulate public speaker.

kind of a stupid question, but does anyone who is running for president in 2008 support marijuana decriminalization or something? i'd sure as hell vote for that dude

The way i see it, if either of them had a chance to make a difference they'd get shot down like the few congressman who actually tried to do something good lol, for example Robert F. Kennedy or Louis Mcfadden.
Anyways i'd still vote Obama, just because of what it could do for race relations.

Check out the following books:

The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America by Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt

The Changing Images of Man by Charles F. Kettering

Morals and Dogma by Albert Pike

and also the books by Carroll Quigley

Anyone in the Trilateral Comission or the Council on Foreign Relations will certainly not help out country.

Written by Introspekrieg on 23.07.2008 at 02:58

Written by [user id=30512] on 22.06.2008 at 21:41

- If you make drugs easier (or freely) available you will have more addicted, this costs really much money for the state, which you will have to pay with your tax money.

At the moment my tax money goes toward locking up minor drug offenders in prison, so I don't see what it could harm by legalizing the less dangerous recreational drugs. The other advantage is obvious if you just look at the history of drug Prohibition, when alcohol was banned it provided organized crime with a nice profit venture in the world of smuggling booze, much like today's drug dealers. Much of the danger surrounding drugs revolves around the drug dealer (gateway to harder stuff they might be selling, inconsistent and sometimes dangerous mixups, etc.) I don't think legalizing marijuana will result in more addicted people, considering it is not addictive at all. Sure it is fun, just like video games, so maybe people do it a lot but that doesn't mean their body is addicted to it. The huge plus side I can see, as do many politicians including Republicans, is the billions of dollars that stand to be made from taxes with an organized marijuana production industry, so we will actually GAIN $$$ with legalization. Obama says he supports marijuana legalization, but I'm sure once the lobbyists get to him he will deny everything...

In a short time the state will gain dollars, absolutely, but legal or not, drugs are the cause of many illegal actions. It is like in Holland, where prostitution was legalized to:
1. give prostitutes rights on the labor market.
2. bring it out of the criminal circuit
What happened here was that prostitution remained in the criminal circuit, as the pimps did not want to pay taxes, the prostitutes are sucked out right as much as before, but that the prostitution has become much harder to control.
With drugs it will happen the same way. Only will it be easier for dealers to make people start using "recreational" drugs like marijuahana, and the step from marijuhana to heroin isn't so big. Marijuhana is less addictive and less damaging, but still it is both. All those drug adictive people cost a lot to the state, first because they are more often sick, they cause more trouble to others, they are more often homeless, criminal and have psychologic diseases more often, and finaly they need more addiction care. To stop it completely is more needed than a ban, but legalization is not an option also. People must know what the risks of drugs are, it is not fun, and not camparable to videogames. Drugs harms the body and the mind, even marijuhana harms the mind.

Written by [user id=30512] on 29.07.2008 at 14:05

In a short time the state will gain dollars, absolutely, but legal or not, drugs are the cause of many illegal actions. It is like in Holland, where prostitution was legalized to:
1. give prostitutes rights on the labor market.
2. bring it out of the criminal circuit
What happened here was that prostitution remained in the criminal circuit, as the pimps did not want to pay taxes, the prostitutes are sucked out right as much as before, but that the prostitution has become much harder to control.
With drugs it will happen the same way. Only will it be easier for dealers to make people start using "recreational" drugs like marijuahana, and the step from marijuhana to heroin isn't so big. Marijuhana is less addictive and less damaging, but still it is both. All those drug adictive people cost a lot to the state, first because they are more often sick, they cause more trouble to others, they are more often homeless, criminal and have psychologic diseases more often, and finaly they need more addiction care. To stop it completely is more needed than a ban, but legalization is not an option also. People must know what the risks of drugs are, it is not fun, and not camparable to videogames. Drugs harms the body and the mind, even marijuhana harms the mind.

Very good point about the criminal circuit still existing through legalization to avoid taxes, I never thought of that scenario.
The main point I was trying to make was the fact that if people don't have to go to a drug dealer and pay expensive prices, they will not be exposed to the harder drugs (like heroin.) They will also be able to avoid the criminal underground, it will just be similar to going to the six-pack store to pick up booze.
From a Conservative viewpoint I say: NOTHING that makes real money should ever be illegal. Why turn over the big bucks to organized crime?

I can personally tell you from experience that marijuana is about as addictive as alcohol, your body will not be physically addicted at all, there are no withdrawal symptoms, especially when compared to cigarettes (which I just quit after four grueling months of trying.) The jury is still out of the health risks of marijuana, it always seems to depend on who is funding the study: I even have read of two large-scale studies that show the THC in cannabis actually stops cancer from spreading. LINK1
LINK2
This idea that people must know what the risks of drugs are is a complete joke, the government will slap your wrist and tell you marijuana is a dangerous drug, and then turn around and try to sell you alcohol and tobacco, which are ALSO drugs. Just because they are legal doesn't change the fact that they are DRUGS, that chemically alter the natural harmony in the brain. The reasons that mariHuana is illegal stem back to the early days of racism, plastics vs. hemp corporate competition, and the hippies ruining everything for everyone else. If you say drugs aren't fun, I wonder if you have done them. I mean, why would SO many people break the law and go out of their way to do drugs if it was boring???
I completely understand your argument, and I apologize if I have come across as being rude or harsh, and I thank you for the good points that have been made in this debate.

man made beer God made cannabis in God we trust

"I think we need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws," Mr. Obama told an audience during a debate at Northwestern University in 2004. "But I'm not somebody who believes in legalization of marijuana." http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jan/31/obama-decriminalize-pot/
Regardless of our little debate, I don't think the United States is mature enough yet for marijuana decriminalization. We are too busy straightening out other countries to worry about fixing our own...

Written by Valentin B on 27.07.2008 at 22:46

kind of a stupid question, but does anyone who is running for president in 2008 support marijuana decriminalization or something? i'd sure as hell vote for that dude

Dennis Kucinich, Ron Paul, and Ralph Nader

Too bad they won't be the president though...

Written by Dangerboner on 31.07.2008 at 08:12

Written by Valentin B on 27.07.2008 at 22:46

kind of a stupid question, but does anyone who is running for president in 2008 support marijuana decriminalization or something? i'd sure as hell vote for that dude

Dennis Kucinich, Ron Paul, and Ralph Nader

Too bad they won't be the president though...

well how come no pot-smoking dudes come together and start voting for one of those guys? there were lots of people doing the 4:20 thing, but they're not interested in politics or something?

Written by Dane Train on 27.07.2008 at 22:40

Written by [user id=160] on 23.07.2008 at 21:08

^^oh yeah I forgot for a second.......Christians will oh-so-typically support the right wing party...

And I forgot how non-Christians will ignorantly assume that all Christians are members of right wing parties. Just to let you know, I am an anarchist. I despise the Republican party as much as the Democratic party.

My point is that so many people are voting for Obama just because he is an articulate public speaker.

lol, okay so you're an 'odd one', congratulations. I still don't think that what I said was ignorant, It's still very true for the most part.....well for protestants inparticular, even the non-american ones show shameless support for the right wing/republicans. It's mighty sad.

Written by [user id=160] on 31.07.2008 at 20:25

lol, okay so you're an 'odd one', congratulations. I still don't think that what I said was ignorant, It's still very true for the most part.....well for protestants inparticular, even the non-american ones show shameless support for the right wing/republicans. It's mighty sad.

Actually, Christian Anarchy is not an odd thing. In fact, most of the folks I live and work with are Christian Anarchists.

You are correct that many Protestants vote for Right Wing politicians. It is sort of an interesting dilemma to look at. I personally find it very sad that so many people have attached Christianity and Republicanism together. It is sort of a door that swings both ways; the Republicans love to market their campaigns at Christians, especially Protestant and non-denominational Evangelical Christians, and money hungry church leaders see a huge gain for teaming up with such politicians.

What really frustrates me is how people try to make Jesus out part of their political party. One of my biggest inspirations, Dr. Tony Campolo, wrote a great book a while back called Is Jesus a Republican or Democrat that really addresses this issue of people making Jesus into a political figure.

@Dane Train: Well personally, I think politics and religion should really be kept separate, otherwise the doctrines end up perversed!