If the election was held today

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12

saden1
09-12-2008, 12:42 PM
I wonder if the imbeciles even know what the word judge means. What it means to be a judge. They would have been better served to just say "wants to appoint anti-abortion conservative judges."

v., judged, judg·ing, judg·es.

v.tr.

1. To form an opinion or estimation of after careful consideration: judge heights; judging character.
2.
1. Law. To hear and decide on in a court of law; try: judge a case.
2. Obsolete. To pass sentence on; condemn.
3. To act as one appointed to decide the winners of: judge an essay contest.
3. To determine or declare after consideration or deliberation.
4. Informal. To have as an opinion or assumption; suppose: I judge you're right.
5. Bible. To govern; rule. Used of an ancient Israelite leader.

v.intr.

1. To form an opinion or evaluation.
2. To act or decide as a judge.

n.

1. One who judges, especially:
1. One who makes estimates as to worth, quality, or fitness: a good judge of used cars; a poor judge of character.
2. (Abbr. J.) Law. A public official who hears and decides cases brought before a court of law.
3. Law. A bankruptcy referee.
4. One appointed to decide the winners of a contest or competition.
2. Bible.
1. A leader of the Israelites during a period of about 400 years between the death of Joshua and the accession of Saul.
2. Judges (used with a sing. verb) (Abbr. Judg. or Jgs or Jg) A book of the Bible.

mheisig
09-12-2008, 12:44 PM
Isn't Sarah Palin running for President now? John who? Matt Damon might have put it best so far. Think about it? Are we really going to gamble the future of this great country in a matchup between Sarah Palin and Vladimir Putin. It's absurd. Palin seems like a fine politician, but John McCain is so desperate to win that he has really put our country into a real mess. He met this woman once. Bad news.

Matt Damon has a point, but it doesn't resonate with me in the way I think he intended it.

If you're going to use the U.S. President vs. Putin scenario, the only one of the entire bunch (Obama, Biden, McCain, Palin) I would feel comfortable having go against Putin is McCain.

Obama is like the little kid trying to look tough in that scenario, Biden is just another long-term senator, and yeah, Palin is about as inexperienced or ill-equipped as the first two.

If I have two parties, and only one party has at least ONE person I'd feel comfortable standing up to Putin, why would I vote for the other?

saden1
09-12-2008, 12:46 PM
Matt Damon has a point, but it doesn't resonate with me in the way I think he intended it.

If you're going to use the U.S. President vs. Putin scenario, the only one of the entire bunch (Obama, Biden, McCain, Palin) I would feel comfortable having go against Putin is McCain.

Obama is like the little kid trying to look tough in that scenario, Biden is just another long-term senator, and yeah, Palin is about as inexperienced or ill-equipped as the first two.

If I have two parties, and only one party has at least ONE person I'd feel comfortable standing up to Putin, why would I vote for the other?


There's something to be said for not playing your trump card before you know how the game is going to end.

mheisig
09-12-2008, 12:47 PM
Having the the majority of people on the planet wanting you as the president (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7606100.stm) of the USA is a good way to start don't you think? What about Biden or does he not count?

It is a good start. Call me when Germany, France or any other country somehow factors into the U.S. election system.

mheisig
09-12-2008, 12:58 PM
Like I said, I didn't write it nor do I know the original sender. If you will look you will notice that McCain's answers are on top and Obamma's are on bottom.

I dont fully understand the Judge thing either, nor do I really care. Correct me if I should.

Yes, you should. I would argue that the Judicial branch is far more important than the executive branch. The power that the U.S. Supreme Court has to steer this country, and interpret/make law is absolutely incredible and dwarfs ANY presidents power.

Frankly I wish the executive branch were FAR less emphasized. Nowadays it's all about who's president - I'm pretty sure most of the population has simply forgotten how the system works and that there's a lot more going on than what one guy/girl in the Oval Office does.

mheisig
09-12-2008, 01:05 PM
There's something to be said for not playing your trump card before you know how the game is going to end.

Not sure I follow...

KLHJ2
09-12-2008, 01:23 PM
Yes, you should. I would argue that the Judicial branch is far more important than the executive branch. The power that the U.S. Supreme Court has to steer this country, and interpret/make law is absolutely incredible and dwarfs ANY presidents power.

Frankly I wish the executive branch were FAR less emphasized. Nowadays it's all about who's president - I'm pretty sure most of the population has simply forgotten how the system works and that there's a lot more going on than what one guy/girl in the Oval Office does.

I wasn't looking at that perspective, but It still does not change my mind abut the candidates overall.

saden1
09-12-2008, 02:10 PM
Not sure I follow...

You seem to find the fact that McCain talks tough a virtue. There is wisdom in not showing your fangs from the outset. You can stare Putin in the eyes and smile at the same time. It can be interpreted as a sinister or friendly smile. In any case, you should go pick up the "The Art of War."

mheisig
09-12-2008, 02:20 PM
You seem to find the fact that McCain talks tough a virtue. There is wisdom in not showing your fangs from the outset. You can stare Putin in the eyes and smile at the same time. It can be interpreted as a sinister or friendly smile. In any case, you should go pick up the "The Art of War (http://www.amazon.com/Art-War-Sun-Tzu/dp/1599869772/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221239297&sr=8-2)."

Read "The Art of War" three times, but thanks for the recommendation.

You're correct in a sense, but it's not necessarily a universal truth that it's always, in every situation the best policy to take that approach.

I spent three years as an inner-city cop and have had an experience or two with talking to people in high-stress, hostile situations. Sometimes it's good to play nice, be gentle and sweet talk them. Sometimes you have to be polite but firm. Sometimes you have to look at them like you're the devil and if they say one wrong thing you're going to fuck them up like they've never experienced.

It's dependent on the situation and it's incredibly naive to assume that one approach works under all circumstances

I'll freely admit there's little to base the opinion on, and it's just that, an opinion. My general feeling of Obama, Biden AND Palin is that none of them have any experience dealing with hostile situations and I there's no way of telling one way or another if any of them have the balls to make the tough calls when the situation calls for it. My general impression of Obama and Biden is that they'll pussy-foot around and might end up putting the country in severe danger because they're trying to play so nice and make everyone like us.

McCain hasn't been tested in the executive sense either, but his experiences as a POW lead me to believe he has the character to hold up, make tough calls and deal with the consequences.

The other three are simply unproven in ALL respects.

Again, totally just my subjective impression of Obama. Frankly I'm not sure anyone can argue with any certainty how anyone will perform for sure in a given future situation.

Unless you're Nostradamus, of course.

MTK
09-12-2008, 03:22 PM
The latest smear ad from the fish

McCain Paints Obama as Disrespectful | The Trail | washingtonpost.com (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/12/mccain_paints_obama_as_disresp.html)

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum