Nobody Wants To Play Debate The Debate?!

[Haven]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:00:10 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 10/15/2008 9:57:20 PM

Author: fisherofmengirly

I thought it was part of the new post on the rules, and it had been banned. I just assumed because I didn't see a thread on the debate tonight.

I wasn't sure at first either, but I guess we can post while it's here. I think the very first one was civil and light-hearted but the subsequent ones got personal and heated compared to the first. I think that turned a lot of people, including me, off.

ETA: Along that same thread...WHY ask posters to defend their posts on this thread? Maybe this thread isn't supposed to be like the first one, but if someone posts, 'Obama is doing great!' I'm not going to ask them, 'Why? What has he said that was so great?' It's all just opinions and running commentary IMO. It's supposed to be fun, let's not make it adversarial, you know, like every other thread on here...

Indygirl--If someone enters a political discussion with a nebulous comment about Obama's lies, yet these supposed lies are not obvious to everyone engaged in the conversation, it is only natural for people to ask for further explanation. Certainly you can see that there is a difference between asking someone to defend a post and asking someone to clarify the meaning of their post.

I'm just trying to engage in the conversation. Please don't attack me for asking an honest question. ETA: It is responses like yours that kept me from engaging in any of the previous political threads here.

 

[jcrow]

finally finally! obama called mccain out on his health care plan.

 

[goobear78]

Joe...Joe....you there Joe?

Where is Joe? Joe is very popular.

 

[jcrow]

i''m tired of hearing about joe schmoe too

 

[miraclesrule]

I wish they would give the candidates a lot more time to get into details about health plans, middle men, etc. McCain did get some information in that I have been wanting to hear and that is that people should be "rewarded" for fitness and wellness participation, but then again, a healthy and fit individual person can still be struck with cancer.

I am glad Obama refuses to go on the attack because the previous debates clearly show that the majority of the public does not respond well to negative attacks vs. the promotion of ones own plans and policies.

But as one poster noted in another thread, the people in America don''t want to many details and don''t generally get into the details of their politicians plans but prefer to jump behind polarized extreme sound bites.

I think the debates are becoming as boring as all get out.

OMG, I can''t believe they are still making abortion an issue of this debate.

 

[jcrow]

but abortion is an issue in this debate.

 

[ChargerGrrl]

Agree that this format is the best.

Too bad that the content is more of the same. blah.blah. blah.

I wish that McCain would get that smug look off his face, and that Obama would look up a bit more- he''s kinda talking downwards.

 

[zhuzhu]

Why does McCain keep on blinking?

 

[E B]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:17:26 PM
Author: zhuzhu
Why does McCain keep on blinking?

He doesn't look healthy tonight. His eyes are red and watery, and he's constantly blinking. Hopefully it's a reaction to the lights, or allergies.

 

[fleur-de-lis]

It''s nice to see McCain be a bit more spirited in this third debate; he''s been a thoughtful senator whom I''ve liked for many years and it''s been sad to see him get a bit "spanked" in the first two debates.

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:10:45 PM
Author: Haven

Indygirl--If someone enters a political discussion with a nebulous comment about Obama's lies, yet these supposed lies are not obvious to everyone engaged in the conversation, it is only natural for people to ask for further explanation. Certainly you can see that there is a difference between asking someone to defend a post and asking someone to clarify the meaning of their post.

I'm just trying to engage in the conversation. Please don't attack me for asking an honest question. ETA: It is responses like yours that kept me from engaging in any of the previous political threads here.

Sorry you took it as a personal attack, Haven. I purposefully didn't quote anyone in my post because I knew people would think I was trying to attack them. If you believe my ETA was an attack on you then I agree that you probably aren't inclined to engage in other discussions around here, though, as I hardly think I was being nasty. An answer to "What lies?" would inevitably be replied to with "Those aren't lies" responses and so on and so forth. The first debate was friendly and non-adversarial and I was hoping this one could be too.

ETA: I see that you all received an answer...so there ya' go!

 

[idreamofcushions]

Date: 10/15/2008 9:58:49 PM
Author: Haven

Date: 10/15/2008 9:54:48 PM

Author: idreamofcushions

Go McCain! He totally shoots done all the LIES Obama tells! SO and I are sitting here cracking up! I just hope other Americans can see through the Obama facade...

I don''t see what you''re talking about--details, please. Which lies? How did McCain shoot them down?

McCain clearly points out that Obama doesn''t understand anything about Free Trade Agreements. You can''t unilaterally negotiate an agreement multiple countries are a part of. (Isn''t that genius?)

McCain is right when he says that Obama will raise taxes. Letting the Bush tax cuts expire when they''re up for renewal will cause the federal income tax rates to increase, affecting those who make just $42,000 a year. When you cut through the BS, it''s rather alarming. In addition, raising taxes on small businesses making over $250k/yr is effectively taxing the same companies that generate 60% of America''s jobs. Sounds like a great prescription for a failing economy to me.

Obama does indeed propose almost a trillion dollars in new spending. Raising capital gains on the upper class will actually curb American ingenuity by grossly decreasing incentive and capital to invest and start new jobs. Americans are best to remember the result of a Hoover presidency. (as McCain says, from recession to depression.) Additionally, when taxes increase, more actually becomes less. There''s less business to be taxed. Rich people find more ways out of taxes with offshore bank accts, etc, and less investment''s going around. With less money moving, there''s less to be taxed. Stocks don''t sell because no one wants to pay more taxes (20% as opposed to 15%) if they can help it. (FYI, McCain proposes dropping long term cap gains taxes from 15% to 7.5% over the next two years. That puts more than $4000 in me and my boyfriend''s pockets to go buy American goods when we sell our stock, which will likely purchase my ring. How can you argue with that? lol)

In short, Obama is a socialist. He proposes taking money from the rich, and providing "tax cuts", also known by folks as the REDISTRIBUTION OF MONEY FROM THE RICH TO THE POOR, AKA, SOCIALISM, in the form of REFUNDABLE CHECKS. That means that if people don''t pay in taxes to qualify for the tax cut, they GET THE MONEY ANYWAY. Talk about unfair. Please refer to the Tax Foundation, a non-partisan enterprise, for more info. Here''s a direct transcript:

"The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year. The Heritage Foundation''s Center for Data Analysis estimates that by 2011, under the Obama plan, an additional 10 million filers would pay zero taxes while cashing checks from the IRS."

This is robbery, its plainest form. Obama even said it himself to ''Joe the plumber''... "The plan is to distribute the wealth." The main paradigm of Socialism. Imagine that.

If you have any further doubt about what I just mentioned above regarding the economy, please see the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122385651698727257.html


Shall I go on? I think McCain''s doing excellent in this debate.

So people can tell I support McCain... anyone wanna take a shot at why they support Obama? As strongly as I feel about conservative ideas, I''d be happy to hear how the weather is on the other side of the isle. Enjoy

 

[galeteia]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:14:18 PM
Author: jcrow
but abortion is an issue in this debate.

Seriously?!

 

[jcrow]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:25:03 PM
Author: Galateia

Date: 10/15/2008 10:14:18 PM

Author: jcrow

but abortion is an issue in this debate.

Seriously?!

how is it a non issue?

 

[iheartscience]

I think if someone''s going to pop in and say "Obama''s telling lies!" it''s reasonable to ask what lies he told. If someone wants to ask me why I think Obama spanked McCain, I''d be more than happy to explain. That''s the nature of a discussion/debate/etc. Asking someone to explain themselves isn''t a personal attack.

 

[mimzy]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:19:22 PM
Author: idreamofcushions

Date: 10/15/2008 9:58:49 PM

Author: Haven

Date: 10/15/2008 9:54:48 PM


Author: idreamofcushions


Go McCain! He totally shoots done all the LIES Obama tells! SO and I are sitting here cracking up! I just hope other Americans can see through the Obama facade...

I don''t see what you''re talking about--details, please. Which lies? How did McCain shoot them down?

McCain is right when he says that Obama will raise taxes. Letting the Bush tax cuts expire when they''re up for renewal will cause the federal income tax rates to increase, affecting those who make just $42,000 a year. When you cut through the BS, it''s rather alarming.

obama has repeatedly said that he would extend the bush cuts for those who make > 250k.

 

[ChargerGrrl]

anyone watching on CNN?
talk about a SPIKE on that graph (undecided Ohio voters) when Obama gave his closing remarks!

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:28:19 PM
Author: thing2of2
I think if someone's going to pop in and say 'Obama's telling lies!' it's reasonable to ask what lies he told. If someone wants to ask me why I think Obama spanked McCain, I'd be more than happy to explain. That's the nature of a discussion/debate/etc. Asking someone to explain themselves isn't a personal attack.

And I definitely don't consider it a personal attack...people are absolutely free to post whatever they want, I was simply posting my opinion on it, which is permissible as well. My post also just asked, "WHY ask posters to defend" and asked to keep it non-adversarial. If someone took that as an attack then I apologize but I definitely didn't mean it that way.

ETA: Given the nasty tone of some of the other debate threads I was trying to keep it friendly...it looks like the questioned poster backed up her post very well, so perhaps my fears were must ado about nothing.

 

[fleur-de-lis]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:19:22 PM
Author: idreamofcushions

In short, Obama is a socialist. He proposes taking money from the rich, and providing ''tax cuts'', also known by folks as the REDISTRIBUTION OF MONEY FROM THE RICH TO THE POOR, AKA, SOCIALISM, in the form of REFUNDABLE CHECKS. That means that if people don''t pay in taxes to qualify for the tax cut, they GET THE MONEY ANYWAY. Talk about unfair. Please refer to the Tax Foundation, a non-partisan enterprise, for more info. Here''s a direct transcript:

Actually, socialism refers to the broad set of economic principles advocating state or collective ownership of the means of production.

Though by that measurement, would President Bush be a socialist via the acquisition of 79.9% ownership of AIG?

 

[idreamofcushions]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:28:19 PM
Author: thing2of2
I think if someone''s going to pop in and say ''Obama''s telling lies!'' it''s reasonable to ask what lies he told. If someone wants to ask me why I think Obama spanked McCain, I''d be more than happy to explain. That''s the nature of a discussion/debate/etc. Asking someone to explain themselves isn''t a personal attack.

I agree, thing2of2. I''m happy to explain where I stand and I truly don''t mind backing my views...heck, it helps me spread the knowledge! lol

Now, if I were to feel attacked because of my viewpoint...that would be a problem.

So any comments on my second post? Everyone seemed pretty interested to hear the backup to the first

 

[Haven]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:19:16 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

Date: 10/15/2008 10:10:45 PM

Author: Haven


Indygirl--If someone enters a political discussion with a nebulous comment about Obama''s lies, yet these supposed lies are not obvious to everyone engaged in the conversation, it is only natural for people to ask for further explanation. Certainly you can see that there is a difference between asking someone to defend a post and asking someone to clarify the meaning of their post.


I''m just trying to engage in the conversation. Please don''t attack me for asking an honest question. ETA: It is responses like yours that kept me from engaging in any of the previous political threads here.

Sorry you took it as a personal attack, Haven. I purposefully didn''t quote anyone in my post because I knew people would think I was trying to attack them. If you believe my ETA was an attack on you then I agree that you probably aren''t inclined to engage in other discussions around here, though, as I hardly think I was being nasty. An answer to ''What lies?'' would inevitably be replied to with ''Those aren''t lies'' responses and so on and so forth. The first debate was friendly and non-adversarial and I was hoping this one could be too.


ETA: I see that you all received an answer...so there ya'' go!

I said nothing of nasty. My follow-up to your post was an attempt at clarification as a means of keeping things "non-adversarial" as you wrote. (Indy--You must be a lawyer, no? I haven''t heard "non-adversarial" in conversation since I was in law school. Sorry for the tangent; I was just curious.)

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:33:33 PM
Author: fleur-de-lis

Date: 10/15/2008 10:19:22 PM

Author: idreamofcushions


In short, Obama is a socialist. He proposes taking money from the rich, and providing ''tax cuts'', also known by folks as the REDISTRIBUTION OF MONEY FROM THE RICH TO THE POOR, AKA, SOCIALISM, in the form of REFUNDABLE CHECKS. That means that if people don''t pay in taxes to qualify for the tax cut, they GET THE MONEY ANYWAY. Talk about unfair. Please refer to the Tax Foundation, a non-partisan enterprise, for more info. Here''s a direct transcript:

Actually, socialism refers to the broad set of economic principles advocating state or collective ownership of the means of production.


Though by that measurement, would President Bush be a socialist via the acquisition of 79.9% ownership of AIG?

Not to mention the plan for the partial nationalization of the major U.S. banks, some against their will.

 

[ChargerGrrl]

I gotta admit that McCain did well tonite. (even with the Joe the Plumber bit)

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:35:12 PM
Author: ChargerGrrl
I gotta admit that McCain did well tonite. (even with the Joe the Plumber bit)

He did better than the last debates, but I don''t think that was too hard!

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:34:25 PM
Author: idreamofcushions

Date: 10/15/2008 10:28:19 PM

Author: thing2of2

I think if someone''s going to pop in and say ''Obama''s telling lies!'' it''s reasonable to ask what lies he told. If someone wants to ask me why I think Obama spanked McCain, I''d be more than happy to explain. That''s the nature of a discussion/debate/etc. Asking someone to explain themselves isn''t a personal attack.

I agree, thing2of2. I''m happy to explain where I stand and I truly don''t mind backing my views...heck, it helps me spread the knowledge! lol


Now, if I were to feel attacked because of my viewpoint...that would be a problem.


So any comments on my second post? Everyone seemed pretty interested to hear the backup to the first

I made one-check it out!

 

[ladypirate]

OK, so did anyone else

when McCain did his whole "the ''health'' of the mother" thing? SO and I couldn''t believe he said that!

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:34:39 PM
Author: Haven

I said nothing of nasty. My follow-up to your post was an attempt at clarification as a means of keeping things ''non-adversarial'' as you wrote. (Indy--You must be a lawyer, no? I haven''t heard ''non-adversarial'' in conversation since I was in law school. Sorry for the tangent; I was just curious.)

Haha not yet! (Perhaps I should be supporting Obama, as I know he will create more jobs for lawyers!)

I''ve heard it too much in (law school) class and in this election; it''s been imprinted in my mind nowadays. I have no problem with your asking for clarification Haven! Being around ATW a lot has probably heightened my sensitivity to things turning ugly very quickly on debate threads...I certainly didn''t mean to single you out at all. Hopefully you stick around!

 

[idreamofcushions]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:10:55 PM
Author: jcrow
finally finally! obama called mccain out on his health care plan.

It''s important to look at a relative analysis done by two US Senators. The results are... interesting!

In short, Obama tried to attack McCain because he''s taxing the healthcare benefits! Oh no! What he doesn''t tell you is that the $5000 break McCain offers more than makes up for that by many fold. The average American would enjoy a few thousand dollars in extra money. Not only that, but we could pick any plan across state lines! That ignites competition in the industry and lowers rates in order to attract business -- just what consumers in a free market want! If you''re interested in the analysis, see below.

----

"The fact is Americans in every tax bracket would enjoy enormous savings under the McCain-Palin plan, with lower income workers receiving the most benefit. Individuals earning up to $63,700 and receiving a $12,000 health insurance policy through their employer would enjoy a net benefit of $3,200 while wealthy Americans earning nearly $350,000 would receive $800 in net benefits.

McCain-Palin have offered a sensible and compassionate plan to help provide health coverage to the millions of Americans who are falling through the cracks of employer-sponsored health care. Obama-Biden, on the other hand, would decimate the private insurance market and cause 52 million Americans to lose their private insurance as employers dumped those workers into a government-sponsored plan that will be unworkable and unsustainable. Senator Obama wants to go in this direction. He said in a town hall meeting that, "If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go ahead with a single-payer system."

 

[iheartscience]

Date: 10/15/2008 10:39:14 PM
Author: ladypirate
OK, so did anyone else

when McCain did his whole ''the ''health'' of the mother'' thing? SO and I couldn''t believe he said that!

YES! I was going bonkers here!

 

[iheartscience]

Alright, I''ve gotta run-I haven''t eaten dinner yet and I have to catch the rerun of the Project Runway Finale. (Yes, I skipped it for the debates!) Night ladies!