Please sign in to complete your action
 
DONE!
Cheer and debate with
6,000,000+ fans!
My Team:
Charlotte
My Team:
Michael
My Team:
Britney
Asked by: jasonsmall1977 (+)

» Contact me
» Send Gift
Answers Created: 177
Miami Dolphins



Last Answer: Dream_Machine (+)

» Contact me
» Send Gift
Answers: 4500
Samoa




Who liked it? 28

SusanVette (+)
Detroit Tigers

bearcub1 (+)
Chicago Bears

wyldePHX (+)
Arizona Cardinals

carlalbert64 (+)
Boston Red Sox

Irish22 (+)
Notre Dame Fighting Irish

Daniel_and_Becca (+)
Denver Broncos

18packabs (+)
Boston Red Sox

PJ88Fan (+)
Dale Earnhardt Jr


... and 18 other fans
 « Locker Room Polls  |  Skip to Next Poll »
28
If you could do it again...
...would you vote the last presidential election differently?
FanIQ Pts? No | Locker Room | Closes 7 days | Numeric Input Opinion Poll
(enter a number)
28

(Caution -- you will be unable to change your answer.)


 &nbp;
TOP COMMENT * * * * * * * * * * * *
#11 | 22 days ago

 cubsgirl wrote:
Yeah heres my thought's you are not a good democrat, how dare you! I give you my very own disrespect on that comment. So there you go you are the proud owner of the first disrespect on the q
Where do you get off telling me im not a good democrat?  

     I expect things of the people i took the time and money to help get elected.  Name one thing Obama has done that Mccain wouldnt have!  The ONE good thing we got out of Obama was a liberal judge on the Supreme Court.  Nice.  Great first year, jack@ss.

Keep your disrespect by the way...i dont need it.
21

  
110 Comments | Sorted by Most Recent First | Red = You Disagreed
Vote for your favorite comments. Fans decide the Top Comment (3+ votes) and also hide poor quality comments (4+ votes).
#1 | 22 days ago

 I would have to say maybe yes.  I know its only been a little less than a year...but what has Obama done?  The fact we're still in the Middle East f*cking up two wars is p*ssing me off.  Might as well have Mccain.

Thoughts?
14

#2 | 22 days ago

 Jason: You would start a political poll! I'm going to make my answer short and sweet!

McCain would have been just like Bush with a different name.  Look what a mess he made of the economy and country over all!  Obama came in office facing a lot of difficulties and it will take a while to get things better.  I am seeing some things getting better.  I think some people expected the change over night.
Enter the poll to see my answer
13

#3 | 22 days ago

 i was horrified with both during the debates - such children. if neither could get through a battle of wits without scoffing or making faces behind each other's back, how the hell are things gonna be up on the hill? my candidate was a write-in
13

#4 | 22 days ago

 no.. I things were so bad, there's no way they were going to magically reverse in a matter of a year.  To think otherwise is just asinine.  I did vote for Obama, but even as a democrat I was going to vote for McCain until he picked Palin as his running mate..  There's something a little terrifying about a 103 year old cancer riddled war veteran picking a retarded women as his VP
Enter the poll to see my answer
12

#5 | 22 days ago

 jasonsmall1977 wrote:
I would have to say maybe yes.  I know its only been a little less than a year...but what has Obama done?  The fact we're still in the Middle East f*cking up two wars is p*ssing me off.  Might as well have Mccain.

Thoughts?
Yeah heres my thought's you are not a good democrat, how dare you! I give you my very own disrespect on that comment. So there you go you are the proud owner of the first disrespect on the q
Enter the poll to see my answer
8

#6 | 22 days ago

 No, I would definitely vote for McCain again.
Enter the poll to see my answer
12

#7 | 22 days ago

 I voted duck for president!  Duck for President by Doreen Cronin: Book Cover who know he would be a lame duck president
Enter the poll to see my answer
6

#8 | 22 days ago

 The_Real_Stoney wrote:
no.. I things were so bad, there's no way they were going to magically reverse in a matter of a year.  To think otherwise is just asinine.  I did vote for Obama, but even as a democrat I was going to vote for McCain until he picked Palin as his running mate..  There's something a little terrifying about a 103 year old cancer riddled war veteran picking a retarded women as his VP
you had to know someone was going to PQ you for that! Hope you had your shields up.

#9 | 22 days ago

 I voted for  Chuck Baldwin
Enter the poll to see my answer
3

#10 | 22 days ago

 Ok heres my real thoughts.lol. I think he is doing the best with an impossible situation. Lets give him our support
Enter the poll to see my answer
10

#11 | 22 days ago

 cubsgirl wrote:
Yeah heres my thought's you are not a good democrat, how dare you! I give you my very own disrespect on that comment. So there you go you are the proud owner of the first disrespect on the q
Where do you get off telling me im not a good democrat?  

     I expect things of the people i took the time and money to help get elected.  Name one thing Obama has done that Mccain wouldnt have!  The ONE good thing we got out of Obama was a liberal judge on the Supreme Court.  Nice.  Great first year, jack@ss.

Keep your disrespect by the way...i dont need it.
21

#12 | 22 days ago

 cubsgirl wrote:
Yeah heres my thought's you are not a good democrat, how dare you! I give you my very own disrespect on that comment. So there you go you are the proud owner of the first disrespect on the q
that was too smart and funny...i didn't know what to choose. thumbs up!
4

#13 | 22 days ago

 (Edited by cubsgirl)
jasonsmall1977 wrote:
Where do you get off telling me im not a good democrat?  

     I expect things of the people i took the time and money to help get elected.  Name one thing Obama has done that Mccain wouldnt have!  The ONE good thing we got out of Obama was a liberal judge on the Supreme Court.  Nice.  Great first year, jack@ss.

Keep your disrespect by the way...i dont need it.
Well you better take it. i gave it you have no choice!
Enter the poll to see my answer
6

#14 | 22 days ago

  i voted for the right man. mccain
9

#15 | 22 days ago

 (Edited by jasonsmall1977)
cubsgirl wrote:
Well you better take it. i gave it you have no choice!
  WTF are you talking about?  Jesus Christ in a birchbark canoe....Did I log on to www.faniqisf*ckeduptoday.com.
13

#16 | 22 days ago

 jasonsmall1977 wrote:
  WTF are you talking about?  Jesus Christ in a birchbark canoe....Did I log on to www.faniqisf*ckeduptoday.com.
Yes you did where you are owner and number 1 member! So for that you get a god i wish i was smart accolade.
Enter the poll to see my answer
8

#17 | 22 days ago

 kobe_lova wrote:
you had to know someone was going to PQ you for that! Hope you had your shields up.
People don't like hearing the truth
Enter the poll to see my answer
11

#18 | 22 days ago

 cubsgirl wrote:
Yes you did where you are owner and number 1 member! So for that you get a god i wish i was smart accolade.

I never said i was smart.  I simply asked a question to other democrats who might feel as let down as i do. 
12

#19 | 22 days ago

 jasonsmall1977 wrote:

I never said i was smart.  I simply asked a question to other democrats who might feel as let down as i do. 

Nope again you are the number 1 member of a club! heres a good for you you're all alone accolade
Enter the poll to see my answer
6

#20 | 22 days ago

 (Edited by zzj000)
JRSFLAME88 wrote:
Jason: You would start a political poll! I'm going to make my answer short and sweet!

McCain would have been just like Bush with a different name.  Look what a mess he made of the economy and country over all!  Obama came in office facing a lot of difficulties and it will take a while to get things better.  I am seeing some things getting better.  I think some people expected the change over night.
Gina... Im not singling you out dear ... mearly using ur post to rebut.... but this same comment seems to be the battle cry for many and its just not true.
George Bush did not create the economic struggles we all face these days. The econmic crisis is a direct result of decisions made by Democrats and Bill Clinton during the Clinton administration which made it legal for big financial institutions to "gamble" using the housing market as collateral. It was a ticking time bomb ready to explode at any time and it just so happened that it occured during Bush's 7th yr in office. Granted, You can say that the Bush people should have seen it coming and done something to prevent it... but again it was Greenspan and Gietner that repeatedly told congress there was nothing to fear nor any changes that should occur during the Bush period. And now that Obama is in office... he has appointed the very same people responsible for the mess to oversee its recovery.
Please quit blaming Bush for things that were not his doing. Bush may not have been the sharpest tool in the shed, however; the 2 main complaints against him are the economy (which was not his doing) and the Gulf War which EVERY Intelligence Organization "WORLDWIDE" ...... (CIA, KGB, Interpol, Scotland Yard, etc........) agreed was justified.
12

#21 | 22 days ago

 Kumbaya, my Lord. Kumbaya....
11

#22 | 22 days ago

 cubsgirl wrote:
Nope again you are the number 1 member of a club! heres a good for you you're all alone accolade

Here's an accolade for you....the "Stop making up accolades" accolade. 

 
15

#23 | 22 days ago

 I wouldn't change my vote.
Enter the poll to see my answer
10

#24 | 22 days ago

 zzj000 wrote:
Gina... Im not singling you out dear ... mearly using ur post to rebut.... but this same comment seems to be the battle cry for many and its just not true.
George Bush did not create the economic struggles we all face these days. The econmic crisis is a direct result of decisions made by Democrats and Bill Clinton during the Clinton administration which made it legal for big financial institutions to "gamble" using the housing market as collateral. It was a ticking time bomb ready to explode at any time and it just so happened that it occured during Bush's 7th yr in office. Granted, You can say that the Bush people should have seen it coming and done something to prevent it... but again it was Greenspan and Gietner that repeatedly told congress there was nothing to fear nor any changes that should occur during the Bush period. And now that Obama is in office... he has appointed the very same people responsible for the mess to oversee its recovery.
Please quit blaming Bush for things that were not his doing. Bush may not have been the sharpest tool in the shed, however; the 2 main complaints against him are the economy (which was not his doing) and the Gulf War which EVERY Intelligence Organization "WORLDWIDE" ...... (CIA, KGB, Interpol, Scotland Yard, etc........) agreed was justified.
Yes YOU did! You did single me out!!!   I'm telling on you! :)
Enter the poll to see my answer
11

#25 | 22 days ago

 JRSFLAME88 wrote:
Yes YOU did! You did single me out!!!   I'm telling on you! :)
LOL... Honestly, this was not directed at you sweetie. I was merely borrowing your porch to stump on. Feel free to whack me with a broom and run me off your property at any time! :)      btw.... Go DAWGS!
9

#26 | 22 days ago

 jasonsmall1977 wrote:

Here's an accolade for you....the "Stop making up accolades" accolade. 

 

Gotta go to work we will finish this later.lol
Enter the poll to see my answer
4

#27 | 22 days ago

 My vote would be the same.  There are just too many fundamental differences in what I believe and hold dear and what McCain/Palin were hoping to do with this country.  I actually liked McCain in 2000 ... back then, he really WAS a "maverick" and had he stayed that course, I might have considered giving him my vote.  I think in the 2008 election, he tried too hard to be "political" and rally a certain base of voters that made him sway far too right for my liking.

Oh yeah, and Palin was the final nail in the coffin for me ... I get his choice to pick a woman (smart politics), but at least pick someone who is even semi-qualified for the job, knows anything at all about the issues without having crash course study sessions beforehand,  and has more than a room temperature IQ. 
12

#28 | 22 days ago

 I  voted for  Chuck Baldwin... so its all the Democrat and Republican's fault..lol
Enter the poll to see my answer
5

#29 | 22 days ago

 Wouldn't change my vote for anything.  I just wish the jobs would hurry back.
Enter the poll to see my answer
13

#30 | 22 days ago
sherribaby88 (+)

nope... wouldn't change a thing..already made up my mind on that...
5

#31 | 22 days ago
10

#32 | 22 days ago
Wordsmith (+)

The_Real_Stoney wrote:
no.. I things were so bad, there's no way they were going to magically reverse in a matter of a year.  To think otherwise is just asinine.  I did vote for Obama, but even as a democrat I was going to vote for McCain until he picked Palin as his running mate..  There's something a little terrifying about a 103 year old cancer riddled war veteran picking a retarded women as his VP
But Obama picked someone more retarded!
Enter the poll to see my answer
7

#33 | 22 days ago

 I wouldn't change a thing and like has been said, it's WAY too soon to make a decision about whether anything's been done or not.  It takes time and the wheels of government turn slowly.

Also, Janet, SMART, cubsgirl, smart, stoney, funny and smart and I wanted to smart KitNKaboodle's comment over and over and over.
6

#34 | 22 days ago

 I know it's UnAmerican but I didn't even bother to vote because I felt that none of the candidate's deserved my vote.
Enter the poll to see my answer
6

#35 | 22 days ago

 I would have made sure that I did vote, turns out my vote could have counted, if I would have voted to begin with.
Enter the poll to see my answer

#36 | 22 days ago
rileyjames47 (+)

OBAMA without a doubt. Anyone who would put Sarah Palin in the V.P. seat needs their heads examined. I won't waste time with what Obama has accomplished because on this site very few people have anything good to say about Obabma anyway. Whoops, I am so SLANTED.   LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
6

#37 | 22 days ago

 jasonsmall1977 wrote:

Here's an accolade for you....the "Stop making up accolades" accolade. 

 

Lol well I guess we both had to work, you know it was fun, but i dont like people thinking im being rude to you. so my last made up accolade is going to be, i give you a cool friend one.
Enter the poll to see my answer
6

#38 | 22 days ago

 No way would I change my vote. I  do understand where Jason is coming from though. I don't believe that just because you are a Democrat that means you are happy  with every decision or non-decision made.

I am waiting for his plan for education (not the rumored plan) to unfold before turning on him.  

 
Enter the poll to see my answer
8

#39 | 22 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
My vote would be the same.  There are just too many fundamental differences in what I believe and hold dear and what McCain/Palin were hoping to do with this country.  I actually liked McCain in 2000 ... back then, he really WAS a "maverick" and had he stayed that course, I might have considered giving him my vote.  I think in the 2008 election, he tried too hard to be "political" and rally a certain base of voters that made him sway far too right for my liking.

Oh yeah, and Palin was the final nail in the coffin for me ... I get his choice to pick a woman (smart politics), but at least pick someone who is even semi-qualified for the job, knows anything at all about the issues without having crash course study sessions beforehand,  and has more than a room temperature IQ. 
Would you mind telling me just what it is about Palin you don't like?  She is a femist.  She is one of those women who has done it all.  Had children, has a career, has a marriage.  Just what is it you don't like?  She is a very good looking woman, she hunts and fishes.  I don't find her ignorant except for the far left media and Washington radicals which gave her hell.

No i would not change my vote.  I would like  ask another question of everyone that voted for Obama.  Do you really want our country turned into  a Marxsis, communist country?
Enter the poll to see my answer
4

#40 | 21 days ago

 No....I wouldn't change my vote, but with everything that's going on in this country and the war, it's going to be awhile till we see any type of improvements. There are no jobs to be had anywhere around where I live, pretty bad when McDonald's aren't even hiring. The one thing that did irritate the crap out of me was when Congress was given a raise, like they needed it, but they denied giving all the Senior Citizens a cost of living increase. Their priorities are definitely out of wack and until they get their sheet together, we're going to be waiting a long time to any kind of improvements. Give something to the citizens instead of all the politicans.
Enter the poll to see my answer
6

#41 | 21 days ago

 cuddles127017 wrote:
Would you mind telling me just what it is about Palin you don't like?  She is a femist.  She is one of those women who has done it all.  Had children, has a career, has a marriage.  Just what is it you don't like?  She is a very good looking woman, she hunts and fishes.  I don't find her ignorant except for the far left media and Washington radicals which gave her hell.

No i would not change my vote.  I would like  ask another question of everyone that voted for Obama.  Do you really want our country turned into  a Marxsis, communist country?
Certainly.  I think that Sarah Palin is very accomplished in her own way.  As you said, she has a family and rather successful career.  However, millions of American women have accomplished just as much, or more, in their lifetimes.  This does not make her, or anyone else with similar accomplishments, ready or able to serve as Vice President of this country.  I find her to be completely ignorant on the issues (evidenced by the aforementioned "crash course study sessions" she had to go through before the debates just to familiarize herself with the issues), and think that she was force-fed answers to the though questions from day one simply because she was so vastly uninformed and, dare I say, out of her league (and anyone who did not hold a prior bias and watched the Vice-Presidential debate could easily attest to the fact that Palin obviously had memorized answers to the questions that could come up).  And I'm sorry, but anyone who believes that abortion is wrong in all circumstances (as she did state in her interview with Katie Couric ... even going so far as to say that if an underage girl is raped and impregnated by her own father, she should not have an abortion and, instead, seek counseling) is NOT a feminist. 

As for the second question you posed ... our country is now, and always has been at least a partially socialist country.  Our public school system, public transportation, social security, unemployment benefits, Medicare/Medicaid, welfare system, child protective services ... all are socialist programs/ideas that have been a part of our nation for years.  Well before President Obama came along.  This is not an "Obama plan" or a "Democratic plan", this is the American government in action. 
4

#42 | 21 days ago
4

#43 | 21 days ago

 We would vote the same way McCain always
Enter the poll to see my answer
3

#44 | 21 days ago
Irish22 (+)

I wouldn't change my vote, I choose the lesser of two evils. Let's all remember that politics can be broken down In Latin. Poli meaning many and tics being bloodsuckers. I also gave Obama 4 years to accomplish what he said not 1. So when the election comes around in 2012, I will look at what Obama has done and who is going against him and decide between those two evils.
Enter the poll to see my answer
6

#45 | 21 days ago

 JRSFLAME88 wrote:
Jason: You would start a political poll! I'm going to make my answer short and sweet!

McCain would have been just like Bush with a different name.  Look what a mess he made of the economy and country over all!  Obama came in office facing a lot of difficulties and it will take a while to get things better.  I am seeing some things getting better.  I think some people expected the change over night.
 Really Gina?  What is better.... unemployment? Value of the dollar on world markets?  National Debt?  What.... what?  What exactly do you see that is better?  Divisiveness? Government spending?  Stop me when I name something?

Neither candidate was a good choice for President...... so, people who go by packaging jumped on the hope and change bandwagon without even knowing what hope and change was going to be.....

Now we have a  President who has an untold number of Czars (more than any other President has had) with radical viewpoints....

Oh!  I know..... yes, he did increase the money supply by 120%...... that should really make inflation go crazy in about a year or so..... uh huh.... the second and even scarier second coming of Jimmy Carter!

Don't get me wrong.... McCain wouldn't have been any better!
5

#46 | 21 days ago

 kobe_lova wrote:
you had to know someone was going to PQ you for that! Hope you had your shields up.
 And he deserves every PQ he gets! 
1

#47 | 21 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
My vote would be the same.  There are just too many fundamental differences in what I believe and hold dear and what McCain/Palin were hoping to do with this country.  I actually liked McCain in 2000 ... back then, he really WAS a "maverick" and had he stayed that course, I might have considered giving him my vote.  I think in the 2008 election, he tried too hard to be "political" and rally a certain base of voters that made him sway far too right for my liking.

Oh yeah, and Palin was the final nail in the coffin for me ... I get his choice to pick a woman (smart politics), but at least pick someone who is even semi-qualified for the job, knows anything at all about the issues without having crash course study sessions beforehand,  and has more than a room temperature IQ. 
 Well Janet..... hate to burst your bubble but Palin was more qualified for the position then Obama was..... other then being a "community organizer" for a corrupt organization ( ACORN) and spending about a year and a half in the Senate before embarking on his Presidential campaign..... his only qualification was being able to do a great job reading a speech from a teleprompter that was prepared for him by someone else........ so, you can say whatever you want about Palin but her accomplishments far outweigh anything that Obama had or has accomplished..... Oh... no wait.... now he has won the Nobel Peace Prize...... yea.... he worked hard for that award...

McCain would have been Bush the 3rd..... no good choices.....
6

#48 | 21 days ago

 KitNKaboodle wrote:
Wouldn't change my vote for anything.  I just wish the jobs would hurry back.
 Rhonda.... don't hold your breath.... they aren't coming back anytime soon.... as a matter of a fact, the unemployment rate will go much higher before it goes down..... just wait until the Christmas season is a bomb and oil prices continue to sky rocket because the value of the dollar is plummeting.....
5

#49 | 21 days ago

 rileyjames47 wrote:

OBAMA without a doubt. Anyone who would put Sarah Palin in the V.P. seat needs their heads examined. I won't waste time with what Obama has accomplished because on this site very few people have anything good to say about Obabma anyway. Whoops, I am so SLANTED.   LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 Yea... you are slanted but I still love you anyway...... 

Reference post #47 for my take on Palin......

Also, if Laura Bush and G.W. Bush had done all the extravagant things that President Obama is doing, the press would have been all over him like they were about his "vacations".  

It's unfortunate that we had such poor choices this past Presidential election.......
3

#50 | 21 days ago

 kteacher wrote:
No way would I change my vote. I  do understand where Jason is coming from though. I don't believe that just because you are a Democrat that means you are happy  with every decision or non-decision made.

I am waiting for his plan for education (not the rumored plan) to unfold before turning on him.  

 
 Don't worry Becky.... Obama will sell education down the river just like everyone else...... if he was so big on public education, why are his kids going to Sidwell Friends School?  At least Jimmy Carter sent Amy to public schools.......

Oh.... and that health insurance plan you have through the school? Uh yea... according to his health insurance reform..... you probably have what is considered a "cadillac plan" so I'm sure you will be taxed handsomely for that..... but hey, you teachers make huge salaries so I know you can afford to pay more taxes!  (just remember, if you make under 250K your taxes won't go up... not one dime....hehe.. yea, right!
2

#51 | 21 days ago

 wow can we come back and revisit this poll in lets say 10 months and see how the answers would be, the first year of any administartion is just learning on who he can depend on when he needs a vote, with the  democrats in power he doesnt need that many votes from the republicans to get his work though the congress and the house.......but lets just remember on how many things change in the country if and when the health care bill passes, and then we shall come back and ask that poll again....LORD help America
2

#52 | 21 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
Certainly.  I think that Sarah Palin is very accomplished in her own way.  As you said, she has a family and rather successful career.  However, millions of American women have accomplished just as much, or more, in their lifetimes.  This does not make her, or anyone else with similar accomplishments, ready or able to serve as Vice President of this country.  I find her to be completely ignorant on the issues (evidenced by the aforementioned "crash course study sessions" she had to go through before the debates just to familiarize herself with the issues), and think that she was force-fed answers to the though questions from day one simply because she was so vastly uninformed and, dare I say, out of her league (and anyone who did not hold a prior bias and watched the Vice-Presidential debate could easily attest to the fact that Palin obviously had memorized answers to the questions that could come up).  And I'm sorry, but anyone who believes that abortion is wrong in all circumstances (as she did state in her interview with Katie Couric ... even going so far as to say that if an underage girl is raped and impregnated by her own father, she should not have an abortion and, instead, seek counseling) is NOT a feminist. 

As for the second question you posed ... our country is now, and always has been at least a partially socialist country.  Our public school system, public transportation, social security, unemployment benefits, Medicare/Medicaid, welfare system, child protective services ... all are socialist programs/ideas that have been a part of our nation for years.  Well before President Obama came along.  This is not an "Obama plan" or a "Democratic plan", this is the American government in action. 
 Just because you don't agree with her stance on abortion does not make HER ignorant.  Maybe she would consider YOUR view ignorant.  I would agree that the abortion issue is difficult and there are wide ranging opinions on that.  I would guess, that by her religious beliefs, she believes that taking the life of an unborn child is wrong.  There are many people who feel the same way, does that make all of them ignorant? Or are we just supposed to believe that Janet is the all knowing and because you believe a certain thing we should all believe it?  At least she has the integrity to stand by her beliefs and does not flip flop to gain public approval.  If nothing else you should respect her for that.  As far as Palin's answers..... she was being coached on the way the McCain people wanted her to answer the questions.  If they let her speak her mind they would have been much better off.  All the people running the McCain campaign where a bunch of amateur morons......

This is the big issue for Republicans... do we want to be like the McCain morons and be the Democrat-lite party or be the true Conservative Republican party.  It has been proven that if voters are given the choice between a Democrat and a Democrat-lite candidate, they will vote for the Democrat.....

How are those socialist programs working out Janet?  Social Security is broke the politicians have robbed the trust fund, Amtrak is not profitable, medicaid is bankrupt, over run with fraud and is also nearly bankrupting the states, New Orleans is a great example of what welfare has created in this country...... child protective services is a big joke for the most part and is completely overwhelmed.... so, I guess in you like failure and incompetence.... yea... Obama is following a great template...
3

#53 | 21 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Well Janet..... hate to burst your bubble but Palin was more qualified for the position then Obama was..... other then being a "community organizer" for a corrupt organization ( ACORN) and spending about a year and a half in the Senate before embarking on his Presidential campaign..... his only qualification was being able to do a great job reading a speech from a teleprompter that was prepared for him by someone else........ so, you can say whatever you want about Palin but her accomplishments far outweigh anything that Obama had or has accomplished..... Oh... no wait.... now he has won the Nobel Peace Prize...... yea.... he worked hard for that award...

McCain would have been Bush the 3rd..... no good choices.....
oh Carl even you cannot blieve palin is qualified to do anything that has to do with the white house. What accomplishments carl? nope i'm not doing this. She was a female pick in hopes of getting women to vote for Mc cain and it didn't work
Enter the poll to see my answer
2

#54 | 21 days ago

  Glenda.... P L E A S E !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Accomplishments?  Do you really want me to list them all?  You are smart.... Google her and read all the things she did as Mayor of her town and Governor of Alaska... her accomplishments are many!
3

#55 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Glenda.... P L E A S E !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Accomplishments?  Do you really want me to list them all?  You are smart.... Google her and read all the things she did as Mayor of her town and Governor of Alaska... her accomplishments are many!
Palin was great for about the first 2 weeks. 

She was added to McCain's ticket to give life to McCain, then when they tried to get her to conform to his liberal points of view, she looked like a moron.

I personally don't blame women for thinking she is one, she should have never agreed to sell out her beliefs for political gain.  They tried to get Reagan to 'soften his message'.  He never did.  And he'll go down in history as one of the greatest President's of our time.

 I think most liberal women are upset at her for having such conservative principals, then selling out and sending a message of ignorance.
Enter the poll to see my answer
4

#56 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Well Janet..... hate to burst your bubble but Palin was more qualified for the position then Obama was..... other then being a "community organizer" for a corrupt organization ( ACORN) and spending about a year and a half in the Senate before embarking on his Presidential campaign..... his only qualification was being able to do a great job reading a speech from a teleprompter that was prepared for him by someone else........ so, you can say whatever you want about Palin but her accomplishments far outweigh anything that Obama had or has accomplished..... Oh... no wait.... now he has won the Nobel Peace Prize...... yea.... he worked hard for that award...

McCain would have been Bush the 3rd..... no good choices.....
Well Carl, we agree on one thing at least ... "McCain would have been Bush the 3rd...".

And what, exactly, made Palin more qualified?  Her partial term as governor of Alaska?  You know, the seat she got to begin with by playing the "hockey mom/you betcha" card against a corrupt, legally troubled incumbent that a summer squash could have defeated in the election?  Oh yeah, BIG accomplishment there.  But in her defense, she did win bunches of beauty pageants and worked for awhile as a small-time sportscaster ... I guess that's a much more illustrious background than being a community organizer, civil rights lawyer, 3-term State Legislator, US Senator, and constitutional law professor. 
You're right, Carl ... I stand corrected. 
3

#57 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Just because you don't agree with her stance on abortion does not make HER ignorant.  Maybe she would consider YOUR view ignorant.  I would agree that the abortion issue is difficult and there are wide ranging opinions on that.  I would guess, that by her religious beliefs, she believes that taking the life of an unborn child is wrong.  There are many people who feel the same way, does that make all of them ignorant? Or are we just supposed to believe that Janet is the all knowing and because you believe a certain thing we should all believe it?  At least she has the integrity to stand by her beliefs and does not flip flop to gain public approval.  If nothing else you should respect her for that.  As far as Palin's answers..... she was being coached on the way the McCain people wanted her to answer the questions.  If they let her speak her mind they would have been much better off.  All the people running the McCain campaign where a bunch of amateur morons......

This is the big issue for Republicans... do we want to be like the McCain morons and be the Democrat-lite party or be the true Conservative Republican party.  It has been proven that if voters are given the choice between a Democrat and a Democrat-lite candidate, they will vote for the Democrat.....

How are those socialist programs working out Janet?  Social Security is broke the politicians have robbed the trust fund, Amtrak is not profitable, medicaid is bankrupt, over run with fraud and is also nearly bankrupting the states, New Orleans is a great example of what welfare has created in this country...... child protective services is a big joke for the most part and is completely overwhelmed.... so, I guess in you like failure and incompetence.... yea... Obama is following a great template...
Oh Carl, if only your READ what I said instead of jumping the gun.  Typical.
I didn't say her stance on abortion makes her ignorant.  I said it makes her a non-Feminist.  Her ignorance comes from her lack of knowledge on the issues.  Scroll up and read it again. 

As for the government-sponsored programs ... c'mon Carl, how dumb do you think the people reading this are?  To use your line of logic, how many PRIVATELY-OWNED companies have failed in the same time-span that these "failed" government programs have been around?  Thousands and thousands.  So by your own logic, I suppose you just proved that the "socialist programs" are vastly more effective than the alternative. 
2

#58 | 20 days ago

 huskerfan_ia wrote:
Palin was great for about the first 2 weeks. 

She was added to McCain's ticket to give life to McCain, then when they tried to get her to conform to his liberal points of view, she looked like a moron.

I personally don't blame women for thinking she is one, she should have never agreed to sell out her beliefs for political gain.  They tried to get Reagan to 'soften his message'.  He never did.  And he'll go down in history as one of the greatest President's of our time.

 I think most liberal women are upset at her for having such conservative principals, then selling out and sending a message of ignorance.
I can't speak for all liberal women, but that's not why I dislike her.  I think she's ignorant, misinformed/uninformed/under-informed (depending on what issue, exactly, we're talking about), closed-minded, sheltered, and a hypocrite.
1

#59 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
Well Carl, we agree on one thing at least ... "McCain would have been Bush the 3rd...".

And what, exactly, made Palin more qualified?  Her partial term as governor of Alaska?  You know, the seat she got to begin with by playing the "hockey mom/you betcha" card against a corrupt, legally troubled incumbent that a summer squash could have defeated in the election?  Oh yeah, BIG accomplishment there.  But in her defense, she did win bunches of beauty pageants and worked for awhile as a small-time sportscaster ... I guess that's a much more illustrious background than being a community organizer, civil rights lawyer, 3-term State Legislator, US Senator, and constitutional law professor. 
You're right, Carl ... I stand corrected. 
 Obama has never been an executive, he has never had to run anything!  For most of the tough votes in the IL legislature he voted "present" remember?  Oh... excuse me, he did vote to not give any medical assistance to babies born through botched abortions... yes, he is a very compassionate man.  Was he really a civil rights lawyer?  I seem to remember that he has a law degree but never tried a case....... Palin was responsible for a State budget and did many things to help reduce the cost of State government (selling the State private jet and eliminating the Governor's chef position).  

Thank you Janet, I know I'm right! 
4

#60 | 20 days ago

 (Edited by carlalbert64)
janet011685 wrote:
Oh Carl, if only your READ what I said instead of jumping the gun.  Typical.
I didn't say her stance on abortion makes her ignorant.  I said it makes her a non-Feminist.  Her ignorance comes from her lack of knowledge on the issues.  Scroll up and read it again. 

As for the government-sponsored programs ... c'mon Carl, how dumb do you think the people reading this are?  To use your line of logic, how many PRIVATELY-OWNED companies have failed in the same time-span that these "failed" government programs have been around?  Thousands and thousands.  So by your own logic, I suppose you just proved that the "socialist programs" are vastly more effective than the alternative. 
 Two points - who gives you the right to say who is a feminist and who isn't?  Just because in your world you can't be a feminist if you don't think it's alright to kill unborn children, well, I'm just sorry you feel that way because you are wrong.... taking any life is not right and the most innocent (unborn children) should be the afforded the most protection.  I think it is ridiculous to say if you don't believe in abortion you can't be a feminist.  I think it is more important to lead by example and be accomplished and show young women and women in general what is possible if you follow your dreams and achieve.

Here's the difference and thank you for making my argument..... the difference between a private business that fails and a government program that fails?  The private business GOES OUT OF BUSINESS!  The government business just keeps sucking in more and more tax dollars..... Thank you, thank you, thank you for making my point!
3

#61 | 20 days ago
3

#62 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
I can't speak for all liberal women, but that's not why I dislike her.  I think she's ignorant, misinformed/uninformed/under-informed (depending on what issue, exactly, we're talking about), closed-minded, sheltered, and a hypocrite.
Whether you know it or not, you've proved my point. 
Enter the poll to see my answer
1

#63 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Obama has never been an executive, he has never had to run anything!  For most of the tough votes in the IL legislature he voted "present" remember?  Oh... excuse me, he did vote to not give any medical assistance to babies born through botched abortions... yes, he is a very compassionate man.  Was he really a civil rights lawyer?  I seem to remember that he has a law degree but never tried a case....... Palin was responsible for a State budget and did many things to help reduce the cost of State government (selling the State private jet and eliminating the Governor's chef position).  

Thank you Janet, I know I'm right! 
Once again, I stand corrected.  That is quite a laundry-list of accomplishments!  Both of them.  I guess she upped unemployment, though.  That pilot is out of work now, and eliminating a position like Governor's chef.    Thankfully, she had the strength and inner-fortitude to make THOSE "tough calls". 

And President Obama was a civil rights attorney (many attorneys do very little, if any, trial work ... especially in civil rights, so don't even try to play THAT card, Carl!) ... an associate at a firm for three years, then of counsel for about eight more years.  During that same time he was also a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School for almost twelve years (and was a Senior Lecturer for eight years of that).
1

#64 | 20 days ago

 blueseat9 wrote:
 One of, if not the best President in our Country's history.  We really needed him after the mess that Jimmy Carter created.   I certainly hope we can find another Reagan to bail the Country out of the mess we will be in post-Obama......
6

#65 | 20 days ago

 (Edited by kteacher)
carlalbert64 wrote:
 Don't worry Becky.... Obama will sell education down the river just like everyone else...... if he was so big on public education, why are his kids going to Sidwell Friends School?  At least Jimmy Carter sent Amy to public schools.......

Oh.... and that health insurance plan you have through the school? Uh yea... according to his health insurance reform..... you probably have what is considered a "cadillac plan" so I'm sure you will be taxed handsomely for that..... but hey, you teachers make huge salaries so I know you can afford to pay more taxes!  (just remember, if you make under 250K your taxes won't go up... not one dime....hehe.. yea, right!
You are just the knower of all things....aren't you? Why should I even think for myself when all I have to do is just ask you? 

One question though.......how are you able to walk a straight line with your head so heavy and full of itknowledge?
Enter the poll to see my answer
4

#66 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
Once again, I stand corrected.  That is quite a laundry-list of accomplishments!  Both of them.  I guess she upped unemployment, though.  That pilot is out of work now, and eliminating a position like Governor's chef.    Thankfully, she had the strength and inner-fortitude to make THOSE "tough calls". 

And President Obama was a civil rights attorney (many attorneys do very little, if any, trial work ... especially in civil rights, so don't even try to play THAT card, Carl!) ... an associate at a firm for three years, then of counsel for about eight more years.  During that same time he was also a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School for almost twelve years (and was a Senior Lecturer for eight years of that).
 Oh boy.... a lecturer for eight years!  Wow..... what do they say... those who can do, those who can't teach..... perfect example of that saying.....
3

#67 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Oh boy.... a lecturer for eight years!  Wow..... what do they say... those who can do, those who can't teach..... perfect example of that saying.....
Enter the poll to see my answer
3

#68 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Oh boy.... a lecturer for eight years!  Wow..... what do they say... those who can do, those who can't teach..... perfect example of that saying.....
LMAO, you stepped in it now Carl.
Enter the poll to see my answer
5

#69 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Two points - who gives you the right to say who is a feminist and who isn't?  Just because in your world you can't be a feminist if you don't think it's alright to kill unborn children, well, I'm just sorry you feel that way because you are wrong.... taking any life is not right and the most innocent (unborn children) should be the afforded the most protection.  I think it is ridiculous to say if you don't believe in abortion you can't be a feminist.  I think it is more important to lead by example and be accomplished and show young women and women in general what is possible if you follow your dreams and achieve.

Here's the difference and thank you for making my argument..... the difference between a private business that fails and a government program that fails?  The private business GOES OUT OF BUSINESS!  The government business just keeps sucking in more and more tax dollars..... Thank you, thank you, thank you for making my point!
It makes her NOT a feminist because a true feminist believes that no one (including the government) has the right to dictate what a woman can/can not do with her own body.  Eliminating a woman's right to CHOOSE is taking away a woman's right ... period.  That is sort of the definition of anti-feminist.
I find it funny, though, when right-leaning folks like yourself make this big deal over abortion and protecting the unborn children.  It's all about the unborn children.  Yet, once they ARE born, you don't want to know about them!  Cutting social services, welfare, food stamps, headstart programs, school lunch programs, etc.  Force women to have babies that they may not want, and then refuse to help them out in any way once they have the baby they are forced to have.  Just leads to more dumpster babies, more strain on child protective services, and more cases of child abuse/neglect.  And you wonder WHY these social programs are not doing well ... we're putting more strain on them than is necessary, and refusing to fund them appropriately!

And you and I both know that even comparing private and public organizations like that is unfair (I was doing it facetiously before).  Private industries are in it to make profits.  Government-funded programs are not.  It's much easier to "go under" when you don't have any reserves set aside like private industries can/do.  Government programs are given a specific amount of money with which to function/operate.  They don't make profits to expand or improved their "business".  Apples and oranges.
2

#70 | 20 days ago

 huskerfan_ia wrote:
Whether you know it or not, you've proved my point. 
The only part of my statement that proved your point, Scott, was the part where I called her a "hypocrite".  The rest of it cites very different reasons why I think she's Satan not qualified.  
1

#71 | 20 days ago

 kteacher wrote:
You are just the knower of all things....aren't you? Why should I even think for myself when all I have to do is just ask you? 

One question though.......how are you able to walk a straight line with your head so heavy and full of itknowledge?
 Becky..... look at what he has done to the Auto workers unions...... I can't wait until people finally see President Obama for the failure and lying hypocrite he is...... let's see..... here is the list of people he has thrown under the bus (that I can remember) his grandmother, Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers..... those are the ones that were most publicized....

It is you who are accusing me of being full of knowledge... I guess that is a good thing.  So when is being knowlegeable about a subject a bad thing...... of course you are a teacher so I should just bow at your feet and take for granted anything that you spew from your mouth?  Of course... government run schools... we don't want our kids to think for themselves.... teacher knows best!

Please don't start personal attacks Becky....... I have stuck to making points but I can continue down this road if you want to open that can of worms.  Of course that is how liberals typically approach debates, can't prove your opponent wrong resort to personal attacks... very nice teacher!
2

#72 | 20 days ago

 cubsgirl wrote:
oh Carl even you cannot blieve palin is qualified to do anything that has to do with the white house. What accomplishments carl? nope i'm not doing this. She was a female pick in hopes of getting women to vote for Mc cain and it didn't work
I agree with one thing you say Glenda. The SMART and CORRECT choice for McCain would have been Kay Bailey Hutchinson from Texas but the McCain people came to the conclusion that her selection would have appeared to be a selection with ideals and associations to Bush and they didnt want that perception. BAD CALL McCain.... and it cost him the election.
Of course if you go down the what if road.... the best option for the Conservatives would have been a Romney / Hutchinson duo. Dont be surprised to see that Republican combo on the ticket in 2012.
3

#73 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Oh boy.... a lecturer for eight years!  Wow..... what do they say... those who can do, those who can't teach..... perfect example of that saying.....
Well I know it's a far-cry from Palin's cream-of-the-crap crop career as a sportscaster, but still.  I think being a professor/lecturer at a law university for over a decade is ok, too!
2

#74 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Becky..... look at what he has done to the Auto workers unions...... I can't wait until people finally see President Obama for the failure and lying hypocrite he is...... let's see..... here is the list of people he has thrown under the bus (that I can remember) his grandmother, Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers..... those are the ones that were most publicized....

It is you who are accusing me of being full of knowledge... I guess that is a good thing.  So when is being knowlegeable about a subject a bad thing...... of course you are a teacher so I should just bow at your feet and take for granted anything that you spew from your mouth?  Of course... government run schools... we don't want our kids to think for themselves.... teacher knows best!

Please don't start personal attacks Becky....... I have stuck to making points but I can continue down this road if you want to open that can of worms.  Of course that is how liberals typically approach debates, can't prove your opponent wrong resort to personal attacks... very nice teacher!
What personal attacks? I was asking a real question.
Enter the poll to see my answer
1

#75 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
It makes her NOT a feminist because a true feminist believes that no one (including the government) has the right to dictate what a woman can/can not do with her own body.  Eliminating a woman's right to CHOOSE is taking away a woman's right ... period.  That is sort of the definition of anti-feminist.
I find it funny, though, when right-leaning folks like yourself make this big deal over abortion and protecting the unborn children.  It's all about the unborn children.  Yet, once they ARE born, you don't want to know about them!  Cutting social services, welfare, food stamps, headstart programs, school lunch programs, etc.  Force women to have babies that they may not want, and then refuse to help them out in any way once they have the baby they are forced to have.  Just leads to more dumpster babies, more strain on child protective services, and more cases of child abuse/neglect.  And you wonder WHY these social programs are not doing well ... we're putting more strain on them than is necessary, and refusing to fund them appropriately!

And you and I both know that even comparing private and public organizations like that is unfair (I was doing it facetiously before).  Private industries are in it to make profits.  Government-funded programs are not.  It's much easier to "go under" when you don't have any reserves set aside like private industries can/do.  Government programs are given a specific amount of money with which to function/operate.  They don't make profits to expand or improved their "business".  Apples and oranges.
 Once again..... the whole abortion argument is hypocritical.  Why do states have laws that when a person kills a pregnant woman they are tried for two murders?  Are they a human life or not?  Every year the medical technology get's better and babies more premature and more premature are able to survive.  When a baby is wanted and a woman loses it, she doesn't say she lost her fetus, she says she lost her baby.  Just because Palin doesn't believe in abortion, it makes her no less of a feminist.

Conservative people believe in personal responsibility.  If you aren't able to raise a child, don't get pregnant.  I know several women who had an unexpected, out of wedlock baby with guys who walked away (which I think is horrible and any man who does that is not much of a man IMHO) and they finished school, worked and took care of their kid.  I think that we should be taxed less so we can give more money to charities that help unwed pregnant women.  Non profit organizations typically are much more efficient with money where government organizations are so heavy in bureaucratic costs that they only a sliver of the actual dollars make their way to the people who actually need it.  Not to mention most non-profit organizations are closer to the need and can better determine how to spend the money.

I like the fact that you can't dispel my argument of private vs. public organizations.  When a private organization fails, it goes out of business, when I public program fails it just gets more money so it can continue to fail.......
1

#76 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
Well I know it's a far-cry from Palin's cream-of-the-crap crop career as a sportscaster, but still.  I think being a professor/lecturer at a law university for over a decade is ok, too!
 Ohhhhh.... I know why he couldn't be a trial lawyer...... they didn't allow teleprompters in the court room! 
4

#77 | 20 days ago

 zzj000 wrote:
I agree with one thing you say Glenda. The SMART and CORRECT choice for McCain would have been Kay Bailey Hutchinson from Texas but the McCain people came to the conclusion that her selection would have appeared to be a selection with ideals and associations to Bush and they didnt want that perception. BAD CALL McCain.... and it cost him the election.
Of course if you go down the what if road.... the best option for the Conservatives would have been a Romney / Hutchinson duo. Dont be surprised to see that Republican combo on the ticket in 2012.
 Gary.... McCain cost McCain the election.  He ran a Bob Dole style election and be democrat-lite.  I have said it before.... if people have the choice between democrat-lite and a democrat, they will always vote for the democrat.....

Ronald Reagan was a perfect example what the Republican party needs to do..... express a positive conservative message out there and people will vote for you.......
3

#78 | 20 days ago

 Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooy! Another political poll! Pardon me while I don't jump up and clap my hands.

I would not change my vote.

Had McCain won, we'd have President Palin by now, because he would have keeled over from a heart attack with as much stress as this position entails right now.

Obama hasn't wowed me, but I am reserving judgment. It's only one year. By this point in his first term Bush had already dealt with 9/11 which at least temporarily engendered a lot of goodwill for him. There's no "right here and now" moment transpiring in the past year that could benefit Obama in the same way. The things he and Congress are working on-- the economy, healthcare, etc.-- do not offer "quick fixes." 

I still believe, and I'll always believe, that if he were white, he would not be receiving nearly as much criticism. It's a sad state of affairs that racism is still so insidious in this nation, but it is. Anyone who wants to play ostrich and keep their head buried in the sand about it, go ahead. But the truth is he'll never be judged purely on the merits of his actions, or inactions. I'm sure he realizes this as well and I give him a lot of credit in perservering to do what he thinks is right in spite of this. For the record, I said the same thing about Bush-- that even though I disagreed with much of what he did, I gave him credit for the courage of his convictions. That being said, both presidents would benefit (now or then) from listening to others that may have a more objective view. Situations do change and flexibility is a necessity.
6

#79 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Ohhhhh.... I know why he couldn't be a trial lawyer...... they didn't allow teleprompters in the court room! 
And sportscasters are used to notecards ... that's why Palin kept flipping around paperwork on her podium during the VP debate!  It all comes together now. 
2

#80 | 20 days ago

 zzj000 wrote:
Gina... Im not singling you out dear ... mearly using ur post to rebut.... but this same comment seems to be the battle cry for many and its just not true.
George Bush did not create the economic struggles we all face these days. The econmic crisis is a direct result of decisions made by Democrats and Bill Clinton during the Clinton administration which made it legal for big financial institutions to "gamble" using the housing market as collateral. It was a ticking time bomb ready to explode at any time and it just so happened that it occured during Bush's 7th yr in office. Granted, You can say that the Bush people should have seen it coming and done something to prevent it... but again it was Greenspan and Gietner that repeatedly told congress there was nothing to fear nor any changes that should occur during the Bush period. And now that Obama is in office... he has appointed the very same people responsible for the mess to oversee its recovery.
Please quit blaming Bush for things that were not his doing. Bush may not have been the sharpest tool in the shed, however; the 2 main complaints against him are the economy (which was not his doing) and the Gulf War which EVERY Intelligence Organization "WORLDWIDE" ...... (CIA, KGB, Interpol, Scotland Yard, etc........) agreed was justified.
Thanks Gary..........nice to see some realistic clear-headed thinking here.  We seem to have a lot of Dems here that embrace partisanship  way too fervently.  Too bad they can't be as well informed as you are on the subject.
3

#81 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
My vote would be the same.  There are just too many fundamental differences in what I believe and hold dear and what McCain/Palin were hoping to do with this country.  I actually liked McCain in 2000 ... back then, he really WAS a "maverick" and had he stayed that course, I might have considered giving him my vote.  I think in the 2008 election, he tried too hard to be "political" and rally a certain base of voters that made him sway far too right for my liking.

Oh yeah, and Palin was the final nail in the coffin for me ... I get his choice to pick a woman (smart politics), but at least pick someone who is even semi-qualified for the job, knows anything at all about the issues without having crash course study sessions beforehand,  and has more than a room temperature IQ. 
You are so right on. Lets get on with life. Obama came into office by vote. Obama had a lot of  sh*# on his plate when he took office. It is our duty to help him as much as we can. No matter who the president is, if they go down we all go with them.
2

#82 | 20 days ago

 (Edited by janet011685)
carlalbert64 wrote:
 Once again..... the whole abortion argument is hypocritical.  Why do states have laws that when a person kills a pregnant woman they are tried for two murders?  Are they a human life or not?  Every year the medical technology get's better and babies more premature and more premature are able to survive.  When a baby is wanted and a woman loses it, she doesn't say she lost her fetus, she says she lost her baby.  Just because Palin doesn't believe in abortion, it makes her no less of a feminist.

Conservative people believe in personal responsibility.  If you aren't able to raise a child, don't get pregnant.  I know several women who had an unexpected, out of wedlock baby with guys who walked away (which I think is horrible and any man who does that is not much of a man IMHO) and they finished school, worked and took care of their kid.  I think that we should be taxed less so we can give more money to charities that help unwed pregnant women.  Non profit organizations typically are much more efficient with money where government organizations are so heavy in bureaucratic costs that they only a sliver of the actual dollars make their way to the people who actually need it.  Not to mention most non-profit organizations are closer to the need and can better determine how to spend the money.

I like the fact that you can't dispel my argument of private vs. public organizations.  When a private organization fails, it goes out of business, when I public program fails it just gets more money so it can continue to fail.......

I agree that the abortion issue is also about when is a fetus a living thing?  Yes, a woman will say she lost her"baby" if she miscarries.  But people don't say "I have 3 children" when they have 2 kids and the woman is pregnant.  They say "I have 2 children and one on the way".  Not that either version makes it a valid point.  Medically speaking, there are many arguments over when "life" truly begins.  And there are too many arguments over how far to go with it. 

And once again, it's not about what Palin believes, personally.  This is the problem I have with so many people who think and reason like you do.  Politics is NOT (and should not be) about what you think.  She doesn't have to BELIEVE in abortion.  She doesn't have to BELIEVE that gay marriage is ok.  But she DOES have to realize that these are not moral issues for her to decide.  These are political issues determining whether people have the right to decide what they want to do with their own bodies, etc.  If she doesn't believe in abortion, she doesn't HAVE to have one!  She doesn't believe in gay marriage ... don't marry another woman.  It's so simple that it hurts.  Calling Palin a feminist, despite her stance on abortion, is like saying "I'm a civil rights advocate, but don't think the races should be allowed to inter-marry". 

Pesonal reponsibility is all well and good, Carl.  However, you're relying heavily on people actually giving their money away willingly.  I'm not willing to bank on THAT one.  Also, I agree that people should be responsible for their actions.  But who are you (or anyone else) to say how these situations SHOULD be dealt with?  Who says YOUR take on it is right?  That the BEST thing for a girl to do is have the baby, struggle through, and hope she can beat the odds while still doing right by her child?  And what about cases of rape?  Should girls who are sexually assaulted and impregnated be forced to give birth?  The woman did NOT make a mistake in that case.  She is not at fault for getting pregnant.  What say you on that?

And I can't "dispel" your argument about public vs. private organizations because, like I said, it's not a logical argument.  You know it's not.  They are far too different to even compare fairly.
1

#83 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
And sportscasters are used to notecards ... that's why Palin kept flipping around paperwork on her podium during the VP debate!  It all comes together now. 
 Yes.... but remember her teleprompter failed during her RNC big speech.... guess what..... she carried on without missing a beat.... so... that being said and let's be honest, they all bring notes.... even "The Great One".....

#84 | 20 days ago

 jasonwrites wrote:
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooy! Another political poll! Pardon me while I don't jump up and clap my hands.

I would not change my vote.

Had McCain won, we'd have President Palin by now, because he would have keeled over from a heart attack with as much stress as this position entails right now.

Obama hasn't wowed me, but I am reserving judgment. It's only one year. By this point in his first term Bush had already dealt with 9/11 which at least temporarily engendered a lot of goodwill for him. There's no "right here and now" moment transpiring in the past year that could benefit Obama in the same way. The things he and Congress are working on-- the economy, healthcare, etc.-- do not offer "quick fixes." 

I still believe, and I'll always believe, that if he were white, he would not be receiving nearly as much criticism. It's a sad state of affairs that racism is still so insidious in this nation, but it is. Anyone who wants to play ostrich and keep their head buried in the sand about it, go ahead. But the truth is he'll never be judged purely on the merits of his actions, or inactions. I'm sure he realizes this as well and I give him a lot of credit in perservering to do what he thinks is right in spite of this. For the record, I said the same thing about Bush-- that even though I disagreed with much of what he did, I gave him credit for the courage of his convictions. That being said, both presidents would benefit (now or then) from listening to others that may have a more objective view. Situations do change and flexibility is a necessity.
 Jason..... I couldn't disagree with you more........ is there racism in the USA?  Yes, there is racism in every country and every society.  Is at as prevalent as you would like to believe, absolutely not and I live in NC so pretty much in the heart of the south.....
1

#85 | 20 days ago

 (Edited by feel_the_steel)
carlalbert64 wrote:
 Jason..... I couldn't disagree with you more........ is there racism in the USA?  Yes, there is racism in every country and every society.  Is at as prevalent as you would like to believe, absolutely not and I live in NC so pretty much in the heart of the south.....


What's really funny (not really) about you guys mentioning the racism angle is this..........if Obama WERE white, he would have gotten absolutely creamed in the election.  That seems to be the biggest 'pink Elephant' in the room in all of this.  I for one think it's a very sad statement about our country that we had to have a 'minority' candidate to actually get so-called 'minorities' to get out and vote. I'd be willing to bet piles of money on the fact that at least half of the ppl who voted for him have never voted before in their entire adult life.......and the only reason that they did was because he is half African-American.  Utterly shameful and seriously needs to be corrected in the voting process.

What's REALLY wrong with America????......way too many dumbasses.  Now they have to live with it, at least until the next time.
5

#86 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Jason..... I couldn't disagree with you more........ is there racism in the USA?  Yes, there is racism in every country and every society.  Is at as prevalent as you would like to believe, absolutely not and I live in NC so pretty much in the heart of the south.....


This is what I mean when I say racism is "insidious"... you don't see people be blatant about it hardly ever, because that would be politically incorrect, but almost everyone still has prejudiced attitudes on some level, even if it's subconscious. If that were not true, there wouldn't be such a firestorm about illegal immigration. No one's really too concerned about Canadians illegally entering the country, are they? But they do. I was born and raised in suburban Atlanta, lived there until I was 25, so I do have perspective on this. I've also lived in Indiana and here in Colorado, where it's a Hispanic population rather than African American, but it's all the same story. Don't worry, kids are sold on this too, every time I talk to students about racism they talk about it like it's something in the past, and I struggle to give them obvious examples of it happening now. But just look at what happened to Dr. Henry Louis Gates this past summer. Obviously we can never know how it would be different if Obama was white-- and/or was named Joe Bob Smith instead of Barack Hussein Obama-- but be realistic here. Perceptions make a huge difference. The whole crap of talking about his alleged Muslim faith during the campaign was the same deal. He isn't Muslim, but what would it matter if he was? It only matters if you're prejudiced against Muslims. Some Muslims have committed terrorist acts. Some Christians have bombed abortion clinics. Let's not even get into the Crusades and Inquisition... am I making any point yet? lol
3

#87 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Jason..... I couldn't disagree with you more........ is there racism in the USA?  Yes, there is racism in every country and every society.  Is at as prevalent as you would like to believe, absolutely not and I live in NC so pretty much in the heart of the south.....


Also the most simple fact of the matter is that you and I as white men can never have any proper perspective on racism or sexism in this nation... but come on, I've been pre-judged just based on my Southern accent, you don't think people are still making much greater judgments on appearance-- race, ethnicity, dress, size, etc.?
2

#88 | 20 days ago

 feel_the_steel wrote:
What's really funny (not really) about you guys mentioning the racism angle is this..........if Obama WERE white, he would have gotten absolutely creamed in the election.  That seems to be the biggest 'pink Elephant' in the room in all of this.  I for one think it's a very sad statement about our country that we had to have a 'minority' candidate to actually get so-called 'minorities' to get out and vote. I'd be willing to bet piles of money on the fact that at least half of the ppl who voted for him have never voted before in their entire adult life.......and the only reason that they did was because he is half African-American.  Utterly shameful and seriously needs to be corrected in the voting process.

What's REALLY wrong with America????......way too many dumbasses.  Now they have to live with it, at least until the next time.
This was the first presidential election in which I voted, and it was NOT because Obama is half-black.  I voted because I believe he was the better candidate, and think that if McCain had taken office, this country would have been looking forward to 4 more years of the same.  I know many people who voted for the first time in this election and none of them did so because Obama is bi-racial.  Yes, I'm sure he received many votes from people just because he's a minority.  But I'm also sure he lost many votes for the same reason.  Every American has the right to vote for the candidate they think is best, and for whatever reason they decide.  I can make the same argument that the Republicans rallied votes for McCain from ignorant racist people who may have never voted before, just because they didn't want a minority president. 

And the percentages you gave are very skewed when it comes to new voters supporting Obama ... it's nowhere NEAR half.  Now I want my piles of money. 
1

#89 | 20 days ago

 LOL.....now Janet.....you know I luv ya.......but you are seriously reinforcing my previous point about partisanship.  I was giving the benefit of the doubt by saying only at least half.  Also keep in mind you are a bit younger than me, and have yet to experience the things to come that will surely pull away your blinders with time.  I will agree that there were probably some folks who voted against Obama because he is of mixed race, which is also sad, but nowhere near the hordes of  minorities that voted PURELY because of it.  And yes, a lot of them will directly admit that fact.....especially in my part of the country.

#90 | 20 days ago

 jasonwrites wrote:
This is what I mean when I say racism is "insidious"... you don't see people be blatant about it hardly ever, because that would be politically incorrect, but almost everyone still has prejudiced attitudes on some level, even if it's subconscious. If that were not true, there wouldn't be such a firestorm about illegal immigration. No one's really too concerned about Canadians illegally entering the country, are they? But they do. I was born and raised in suburban Atlanta, lived there until I was 25, so I do have perspective on this. I've also lived in Indiana and here in Colorado, where it's a Hispanic population rather than African American, but it's all the same story. Don't worry, kids are sold on this too, every time I talk to students about racism they talk about it like it's something in the past, and I struggle to give them obvious examples of it happening now. But just look at what happened to Dr. Henry Louis Gates this past summer. Obviously we can never know how it would be different if Obama was white-- and/or was named Joe Bob Smith instead of Barack Hussein Obama-- but be realistic here. Perceptions make a huge difference. The whole crap of talking about his alleged Muslim faith during the campaign was the same deal. He isn't Muslim, but what would it matter if he was? It only matters if you're prejudiced against Muslims. Some Muslims have committed terrorist acts. Some Christians have bombed abortion clinics. Let's not even get into the Crusades and Inquisition... am I making any point yet? lol
 You can take your argument and counterpoint it so easily.  Regarding Barack Hussein Obama, Bill Cunningham was attacked by the left for using President Obama's middle name when talking about him yet Obama himself uses it when being inaugurated, a bit hypocritical, wouldn't you say? 

I will agree that President Obama is prejudice based on his response to the Professor Gates incident.  Obama tried to rile up his base by making blatant remarks of racism in the incident when Professor Gates was clearly in the wrong.  Obama called the police action stupid in a national address without even having all the facts about the incident.  In that case President Obama was being racist and I would say should have been ashamed for inciting public unrest.

Two different ways at looking at the same set of facts.......

#91 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Really Gina?  What is better.... unemployment? Value of the dollar on world markets?  National Debt?  What.... what?  What exactly do you see that is better?  Divisiveness? Government spending?  Stop me when I name something?

Neither candidate was a good choice for President...... so, people who go by packaging jumped on the hope and change bandwagon without even knowing what hope and change was going to be.....

Now we have a  President who has an untold number of Czars (more than any other President has had) with radical viewpoints....

Oh!  I know..... yes, he did increase the money supply by 120%...... that should really make inflation go crazy in about a year or so..... uh huh.... the second and even scarier second coming of Jimmy Carter!

Don't get me wrong.... McCain wouldn't have been any better!
"Neither candidate was a good choice for President"

This is probably the most intelligent sentence on this entire poll.
Enter the poll to see my answer
1

#92 | 20 days ago

 feel_the_steel wrote:
LOL.....now Janet.....you know I luv ya.......but you are seriously reinforcing my previous point about partisanship.  I was giving the benefit of the doubt by saying only at least half.  Also keep in mind you are a bit younger than me, and have yet to experience the things to come that will surely pull away your blinders with time.  I will agree that there were probably some folks who voted against Obama because he is of mixed race, which is also sad, but nowhere near the hordes of  minorities that voted PURELY because of it.  And yes, a lot of them will directly admit that fact.....especially in my part of the country.
There were a little more than 3.5 million new voters registered in 2008.  Obama secured almost 70% of them, according to exit polls (I know, polls again  lol  but these are the closest thing we have to facts for this issue ... and as you'll see, even if this figure is completely wrong, it still wouldn't make a difference). 

Let's just round UP and say there were 4 million new voters, and round UP again to an even 70% for Obama.  That means that Obama scored himself 2.8 million votes from newly registered voters.
Over 69 million people voted for Obama in the 2008 election.  2.8 million votes is not even CLOSE to half of 69 million.

I'll take my piles of money in small bills, please.   
2

#93 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
There were a little more than 3.5 million new voters registered in 2008.  Obama secured almost 70% of them, according to exit polls (I know, polls again  lol  but these are the closest thing we have to facts for this issue ... and as you'll see, even if this figure is completely wrong, it still wouldn't make a difference). 

Let's just round UP and say there were 4 million new voters, and round UP again to an even 70% for Obama.  That means that Obama scored himself 2.8 million votes from newly registered voters.
Over 69 million people voted for Obama in the 2008 election.  2.8 million votes is not even CLOSE to half of 69 million.

I'll take my piles of money in small bills, please.   
Ok.....so he scored 70% of new voters......who would NOT have voted otherwise........now add that to all the ones who have been automatically registered by virtue of renewing their driver's license, but have never voted. (you may be a little young to remember the Motor Voter legislation a few years back.....might have been before you turned 18)........then you will have a better idea of how the figures really add up. No money for you.

#94 | 20 days ago

 feel_the_steel wrote:
Ok.....so he scored 70% of new voters......who would NOT have voted otherwise........now add that to all the ones who have been automatically registered by virtue of renewing their driver's license, but have never voted. (you may be a little young to remember the Motor Voter legislation a few years back.....might have been before you turned 18)........then you will have a better idea of how the figures really add up. No money for you.
Depends on if they count those who were automatically registered in with the overall figure for newly registered voters.  Hmmmm.  Can't say I know for a fact whether they counted that or not ... I've done my research for the day, your turn.   
And don't try to lie so you don't have to pay up!  I'll be watching you (not really, but an ominous threat like that might keep you honest!  lol).
3

#95 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
Depends on if they count those who were automatically registered in with the overall figure for newly registered voters.  Hmmmm.  Can't say I know for a fact whether they counted that or not ... I've done my research for the day, your turn.   
And don't try to lie so you don't have to pay up!  I'll be watching you (not really, but an ominous threat like that might keep you honest!  lol).
True.....but just be sure you know I'm way too lazy to go looking up that stuff while football is on....lol. If I make that kind of statement, it's because I have already read it somewhere and filed it away for future reference. And if I really had the piles of cash.....I would share with you anyway.
3

#96 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
There were a little more than 3.5 million new voters registered in 2008.  Obama secured almost 70% of them, according to exit polls (I know, polls again  lol  but these are the closest thing we have to facts for this issue ... and as you'll see, even if this figure is completely wrong, it still wouldn't make a difference). 

Let's just round UP and say there were 4 million new voters, and round UP again to an even 70% for Obama.  That means that Obama scored himself 2.8 million votes from newly registered voters.
Over 69 million people voted for Obama in the 2008 election.  2.8 million votes is not even CLOSE to half of 69 million.

I'll take my piles of money in small bills, please.   
 How many were registered by ACORN.... just wondering....... 
2

#97 | 20 days ago

 Pat wrote:
"Neither candidate was a good choice for President"

This is probably the most intelligent sentence on this entire poll.
 Hmmmm..... Pat... you are still around....... curious.......
1

#98 | 20 days ago

 feel_the_steel wrote:
True.....but just be sure you know I'm way too lazy to go looking up that stuff while football is on....lol. If I make that kind of statement, it's because I have already read it somewhere and filed it away for future reference. And if I really had the piles of cash.....I would share with you anyway.
Well then, right after the game I want you to go buy at least 500 lottery tickets ... the only way I'm getting your money is if you have some to give!  Now move it!  These bills of mine aren't gonna pay themselves this month! 
4

#99 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Hmmmm..... Pat... you are still around....... curious.......
Was he supposed to NOT still be around?  lol  Maybe I'm out of the loop.
3

#100 | 20 days ago

I thought this site was for fans of various sports.... NOT POLITICS!!!!!!!!!

#101 | 20 days ago

 DAPLAYAHATA wrote:

I thought this site was for fans of various sports.... NOT POLITICS!!!!!!!!!

Yeah....it mainly is.....but you are in a Locker Room poll where ALMOST anything goes. 
2

#102 | 20 days ago

 janet011685 wrote:
Was he supposed to NOT still be around?  lol  Maybe I'm out of the loop.
 Inside joke Janet.... he knows what I mean......
3

#103 | 20 days ago

 carlalbert64 wrote:
 Glenda.... P L E A S E !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Accomplishments?  Do you really want me to list them all?  You are smart.... Google her and read all the things she did as Mayor of her town and Governor of Alaska... her accomplishments are many!
Carl please !!!! You can google Richard M. Daley and see what a kickass mayor he is for the city of Chicago, but that doesnt make him a vice presidential candidate!
Enter the poll to see my answer
2

#104 | 20 days ago

 cubsgirl wrote:
Carl please !!!! You can google Richard M. Daley and see what a kickass mayor he is for the city of Chicago, but that doesnt make him a vice presidential candidate!
Honestly, I didn't really like Sarah Palin, but she was just as qualified to be vice president as Barack Obama was to be president.
Enter the poll to see my answer
3

#105 | 20 days ago

 Pat wrote:
Honestly, I didn't really like Sarah Palin, but she was just as qualified to be vice president as Barack Obama was to be president.

If only you were around like 40-50 posts ago ... then I would have been debating against multiple people.  I like those odds and I'm used to it around here.   

Bring it on, boys!    lol
2

#106 | 20 days ago

 DAPLAYAHATA wrote:

I thought this site was for fans of various sports.... NOT POLITICS!!!!!!!!!

The "Locker Room" is for any topic--within the Code of Conduct that is....
4

#107 | 19 days ago

 I haven't changed my mind. Obama has signed a lot of laws that needed passed and there are more he needs to get passed. It will take time to get out of the wars we are in. Iraq  already has a signed deadline imposed by the govt. We will be out of Iraq. I have concerns about Afghanistan because unless they reveal a plan. We need a plan and the plan may have to change from what Obama originally ascertained as necessary. I think considering the mess he was handed, Obama has acted admirably. I would maybe have prioritized differently and waited another year on health care and maybe tackled the job market problem first. However, I understand why they felt the need to tackle health care while his popularity was higher. Any president's popularity generally declines throughout his administration. People become frustrated and want action quickly. They forget it takes a long time to get things done. Problems as severe as ours aren't solved overnight.

I do believe the Administration needs to seriously tackle the job situation and they need to figure out a way to get manufacturing back in our country. First of all, when a country can no longer make its own goods, that makes that country more vulnerable. Secondly, manufacturing jobs are the jobs where people can support their families. Third, they are active in the local communities where they are based, supporting local schools, local charities and so on. Our country is weaker and does not have as strong a sense of communities without manufacturing in our cities and small towns.

They have to encourage businesses to stay home, maybe change tax structures, offer incentives, and so on. Democrats won't agree with this because they think corporations get enough breaks already. They also need to penalize corporations who send their jobs overseas, or even from state to state. This would involve tariffs on goods coming in to our country that were made overseas. Republicans will never agree with that.  I remember when the shoe factory Nine West closed their plants in this country. In Kentucky, several plants were closed. They closed their Cincinnati office and moved their offices to Hebron, KY near the Greater Cincinnati Airport. For that move, they got a reward from the state of Kentucky for creating jobs in Kentucky. This was after they had eliminated a couple of thousand of jobs in Kentucky with the closure of their plants still in Kentucky. Talk about irony! This loophole should be eliminated. If a plant is restructuring like that and they closed plants, they should not get a reward like that company did. Nine West was eventually bought by Jones of New York and they finished shutting down all the stateside operations.  Fourth, these companies that locate plants in these third world countries are exploiting those people. Jones of New York, (now called Joneswear, I think) closed plants in Honduras and Dominican Republic. They took all their manufacturing to China. The people in Honduras and Dominican Republic were being paid pennies on the dollar to what Americans were and as soon as they found a cheaper way to go than what they were paying to operate in Central America, they were gone leaving a group of people who were already vulnerable to more suffering.

So, the job market needs to be tackled by the government and I think Obama probably made a mistake expecting  the stimulus to take care of it and so far it hasn't. It will be a long time before the job situation gets better unless the government does something about it.  Even then, recovery here won't be soon enough.

I don't think we would have been better off with McCain. He did not have any clear cut plans laid out to follow, plus he had as a vice presidential nominee someone he didn't want. Sarah Palin was forced on him by the conservative wing of the party and whether you like her for her spunk and willingness to say what she thinks, that doesn't change the fact that she was and is unequipped to be Commander in Chief if something happened to McCain. Despite his great health, at his age, there is a good chance, she would have had to take charge temporarily or for the rest of the term. I would not vote for any team with her on it, not now...not ever.

#108 | 19 days ago

 NorseHeathen wrote:
The "Locker Room" is for any topic--within the Code of Conduct that is....
I suppose FanIQ can mean a fan's IQ on any subject. If we have a high FanIQ we should be able to wax eloquently on a multitude of subjects, sports being one of them.

#109 | 19 days ago

 This thread was a joke so me and Cubs could faux argue over politics.  Just to let you all know.  Carry on. 
LOL
4

#110 | 19 days ago

 blueseat9 wrote:
You can thank this "great" president for the deregulation of banks and while you are at it, assign him his share of the blame for the banking fiasco we have today.

You can thank him for the fact that children of a deceased parent lose their benefits and can't draw the Social Security benefit they were receiving while they are further education.

You can thank this president for ignoring the health crisis known as AIDS.

Under Reagan, we sent the deficit skyrocketing, growing faster in real dollars than under any other president, including the current one. We cut social spending to the bone, creating the homeless problem by turning hundreds of thousands of mentally ill people out on the streets. We appointed Antonin Scalia to the Supreme Court. We cut school funding, trying to classify ketchup as a vegetable. We banned the Beach Boys as attracting the wrong sort of crowd. We traded arms, money, drugs, and hostages between Iran and the Nicaraguan rebels. More appointed officials were indicted and convicted of crimes than under any other president. We gave chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein. We claimed that trees cause most pollution.

He catastrophically lowered taxes in 1981, creating debt so bad he raised taxes each of the next six years and still didn't make up for it. And while he streamlined the complex and exemption-riddled income tax, his changes created the largest-ever shift of tax burden from the wealthy to the middle-class and working poor. (whiterose.org)

Oh yeah! He was simply great! He had the gift of gab and he could make you believe you were eating steak when you couldn't afford hot dogs.

Jimmy Carter made a lot of mistakes, but my father who was self employed as a used car dealer said he had more money in his pocket to operate on under Jimmy Carter than anyone else ever. The problem is, under Carter, inflation was rabid and interest on loans was out of sight. The attempt to rescue the hostages was bungled. He was a brilliant man, but he had a lot of trouble delegating responsibility to others. He was such a detailed oriented person that he couldn't complete what he needed to. He spun his wheels on so many things because of his obsessive attention to details. He, however, has been one of the greatest former presidents ever! He had worked with charities and has been a great resource diplomatically.


Post a Comment   Already a user? Sign in here
Join FanIQ - It's Free
FanIQ is the ultimate free community for sports fans.
•Talk sports with fans from all over - 1,649,417+ Comments
•Track your game picks - 38,670,182,382+ Sports Predictions
•Prove you know sports - 116,275+ Trivia Questions
•Find fans of your teams - 11,453,110+ New Friends



Join Today
About FanIQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
DMCA Policy
Contact Us
Report A Bug
Help

Copyright 2009 Sportelligence, Inc. All Rights Reserved