Change you can believe in?????

[dude1394]

Hee-larious. When even your professional spin-meister can't find one that's so easily fact-checked...you are a leaky vessel to put your hope in.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive.../09/021463.php

Not Just the Most Liberal Senator

Barack Obama is perhaps also the least effective Senator. This exchange between Chris Wallace and David Axelrod on yesterday's Fox News Sunday is hilarious:

It takes a lot of nerve--more specifically a lot of confidence that the mainstream media have your back--to cite as your number one example of something that "didn't please people on either side of the aisle" a measure that passed unanimously on a voice vote! Once again, that's typical Obama. Granted, he's been in the Senate only a short time, but even so it is remarkable that he doesn't have more legislative accomplishments to his name.

Not even a VOTE!!! And this is his example of standing up against his party!! Wow..as the powerline said, you've got a lot of confidence that the media has your back if you slap that out there.

[Ninkobei]

hey, how many houses do you own? just curious

[rabbitproof]

Not enough question marks in thread title. Pass on thread.

[92bDad]

I am honestly and respectfully curious...

We tend to attack the opponent that we do NOT support...so, could the Obama/Biden supporters provide, in their own words...what is it about Obama/Biden that you are for and support?

I don't want to know what he is NOT, but rather what he IS.

Tell us about them, what is it that you believe about these two?

[Ninkobei]

Obama is a guy who worked his way up from a less fortunate life style. he didnt have a silver spoon in his mouth before he was even born.

he plans on cutting taxes by 5% average, mostly to the poorer americans, where as mccain plans to cut only by 3%.

McCain's party donations are backed by huge companies (AT&T donated $600,000, Pfizer donated $600,000)

Obama's campaign is backed by Unions...the workers of our nation. blue collar. I trust Unions a hell of a lot more than I do a giant corporation.

[Mavdog]

I'd rather tell you how I see the positives in each of them.
-------------------------------------------------------
obama is proposing to make the tax liability more fair by decreasing the tax obligation of the middle class with commensurate increases on the upper class. in my opinion that is more fair, I'm for a more progressive tax structure.

obama is emphasizing investment/incentives to accelerate our transition from oil based fuels for our energy/transportation sources. he is for higher fuel standards.

obama will prioritize enforcement of our environmental laws, which have been bypassed and unenforced over the last 8 years.

obama has voiced the view that many people need to take responsibility for improving themselves, and not rely on some program to magically rescue them.

obama proposes to change the way we access our health insurance without a government run insurance program, but relying on private carriers.

obama is a break from the last 8 years, and that is important.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
mccain shows a great independence, the "maverick" persona.

mccain proposes to allow school choice.

mccain advocates a change and better enforcement in our ethics laws.

mccain tells us he will be tough with our adversaries.

mccain proposes to allow more nuclear plants to replace dirty coal electricity plants.

mccain proposes to reform our immigration laws in a way that is humane to those here illegally.
----------------------------------------------------
so far, and believe it or not I've not decided, obama is ahead....

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

I'd rather tell you how I see the positives in each of them.
-------------------------------------------------------
obama is proposing to make the tax liability more fair by decreasing the tax obligation of the middle class with commensurate increases on the upper class. in my opinion that is more fair, I'm for a more progressive tax structure.

obama is emphasizing investment/incentives to accelerate our transition from oil based fuels for our energy/transportation sources. he is for higher fuel standards.

obama will prioritize enforcement of our environmental laws, which have been bypassed and unenforced over the last 8 years.

obama has voiced the view that many people need to take responsibility for improving themselves, and not rely on some program to magically rescue them.

obama proposes to change the way we access our health insurance without a government run insurance program, but relying on private carriers.

obama is a break from the last 8 years, and that is important.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
mccain shows a great independence, the "maverick" persona.

mccain proposes to allow school choice.

mccain advocates a change and better enforcement in our ethics laws.

mccain tells us he will be tough with our adversaries.

mccain proposes to allow more nuclear plants to replace dirty coal electricity plants.

mccain proposes to reform our immigration laws in a way that is humane to those here illegally.
----------------------------------------------------
so far, and believe it or not I've not decided, obama is ahead....

Lets see:

Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Section 3 - State of the Union, Convening Congress

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Mavdog -- positives of Obama --- MONEY -MONEY - Environment - Money - Money - Change

positives of McCain : Independence - Choice - Law enforcement - Military Foreign Affairs - Environment - Borders


Which one of these men have positives that are in alignment with what the Constitution says is the role of the Executive Branch?



Typical though.............

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dalmations202

According to Mavdog -- positives of Obama --- MONEY -MONEY - Environment - Money - Money - Change

positives of McCain : Independence - Choice - Law enforcement - Military Foreign Affairs - Environment - Borders

Which one of these men have positives that are in alignment with what the Constitution says is the role of the Executive Branch?

Typical though.............

uh, you forgot to paste the first sentence: "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America"

and it seems you failed to notice that the constitution also says "he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices"

so the "alignment" exists in the obana positions, just as much as the mccain focus on military you seem to be fond of.

in case you've missed it, mccain is also speaking a lot about his tax cuts ("money-money" as you put it). it's just imo his "money-money" planks are not to my liking.

according to you "money-money" includes higher fuel standards and taking personal responsibility. interesting perspective.

thanks for playing....

[92bDad]

Mavdog,

Thank you for writing your view.

I truly appreciate reading your perspective.

Myself, I honestly have a difficult time separating my personal values from either party and as such I find that I am voting for McCain/Palin based on party affiliation.

Now I don't know 100% what any of these candidates HONESTLY plan to do if and when in office.

I find that when I view McCain/Palin, I get the impression that they are going to lead based on their values...as if I truly know what those are.

Look, I am trying to be honest here.

I know that I am voting McCain/Palin and I tend to make a decision and no longer burn time contemplating it.

But as Mavsdog pointed out, they are leaning towards Obama, but in reality are undecided.

So rather than do my usual to tick people off...I would like to try and get back to what is positive about either side.

For me, when it comes to McCain -

Honestly, prior to the past couple of weeks, I knew virtually nothing about.

He grew up in a Military family with a rich history, but as many of us in our younger days, was a bit of a rebel. I can relate - my dad was career military and I was a young trouble maker who did everything I could to rebel against my parents.

He served in the military - as did I (McCain was quite a bit up the food chain...but nevertheless a military man)

Here is where the experience changes...I had it easy, but I did grow and gain some maturity during my years of service. McCain is a story of an American Hero and one the I strongly respect.

After that, I find that he enters politics to serve his country and that he has a track record of bucking the system...essentially pissing people off that he works with, because he doesn't like what they are doing.

Now me, I'm a conformist and I tend to toe the line and follow, rather than lead...I don't rock to boat to often, but rather whine about things behind closed doors and then simply follow what is going on. Every once in a while if something is really really screwed up, I might gain the guts to say or do something.

I tend to respect someone with a track record like McCain...he appears to have some guts, at least he's not afraid to speak his mind and that should account for something. I don't believe I want a Yes man leading this counntry...I want someone who stands for something and is willing to stick his neck out...regardless of the 'Popular' view is.

Not to digress, but that is what I like about our current President and why I believe he has done a good job, simply on the issue of Terrorism and Iraq. - but that is for another thread...this is about this election.

I like that McCain, amidst political suicide voted for the surge and as we see the success in Iraq as a result of the surge, we find that his decision was and is the right one to make, while Obama was clearly against the surge.

If I knew nothing else, this would be enough to get my vote.

Now McCain running mate - Palin is a rather surprising but interesting candidate.

First, I knew nothing of her and honestly, as with most guys, I noticed that she is an attractive person...much the same as Obama. These are honestly two good looking people and I believe it is fair to make that statement.

In fairness, when I look at McCain, I have a hard time getting past his Austin Powers teeth...but I digress.

As for Palin, all I know is what I've heard since the announcement...and it's funny one of the attacks on her stance with the Bridge to nowhere is what actually I find rather attractive on her leadership style.

The Democrats use the she was for it before she was against it line, that was so popular to use against Kerry 4 years ago. And yes, this statement is true. However, she was for it when she campaigned, and then when she got into office and understood the details, she changed her view. Now obviously this is a bit of a Political Suicidal thing to do, but what it proves is that she has a backbone and when what she perceived to be one way, turned out to be something else, she was strong enough to change course and make a decision that she felt was right for the people she represented.

Her track record is filled with items that prove to be from a person who leads by actions rather than words.

The biggest thing I enjoy, is seeing a Woman in leadership with a Conservative view of issues. For years I have heard the Liberal Womans Voice and little to any attention given to Conservative woman...but her voice is being heard loud and clear and I believe it is providing a platform for many woman who have NOT been listened to an opportunity to stand up and be counted.

Woman everywhere are being valued and appreciated as equals, perhaps for the first time in my adult life.

Look, I am a man, 40 years of age, white, married going on 18 years, 2 sons ages 17 and 18...I constantly would find myself nausiated at a womans movement because of its leftist leaning views. I know many woman, like my wife who are strong woman, but don't share the views of the left. Now for the first time in my life, I am willing to listen and weigh on issues coming from woman...I am listening to what they have to say because I know that not ALL woman are Left...there is a voice for the Conservative woman and I want to hear and listen to what matters to them.

Sarah Palin is providing an opportunity for me to stand up and be a better Man.

Now when it comes to Obama and Biden...again, I have shared this before and I will refrain from goint mud slinging negative...but I know very little outside of party affilation.

So with that, here are my views on issues...please tell me, based on my views...who do you vote for?

1) - War - I am for our current position on Iraq with no HARD timeline - I want to see the job done and our troops return home with Honor.
2) - War - I believe we should continue to work through the Afghan area and keep fighting the terrorist wherever they are and go...again, I see no need for a HARD timeline...we must perservere and finish what these terrorist started...way before 9/11.
3) - Economy - I believe the economy is tied directly to the Energy issue - I believe we should dig and utilize our own energy resources - increase the usage of U.S. based oil, raise our prices to exporting oil - provide tax incentives to domestic oil and increased taxes to oil imported from other nations.
4) - Energy - to add to what I just stated - we should tap into new technologies - encourage companies, even oil companies to invest in alternate fuels such as electric - wind energy. Forget cars that can travel 40 miles on battery power, we have the technology for cars to travel 200 or more miles on battery power...companies need the financial incentives to do so. That same batter power, can be refueled through wind energy - in other words, we can not only reduce our dependance on oil, but actually remove our need for fossil fuels period. - Companies and Individuals need the start-up investment/financial incentives to drive this option. Oil companies are not interested because it puts them out of business, but if we create a way to turn Oil companies into Automotive Battery companies and setting up charging stations throughout America and the world, we could effectively convert our transportation system from its need of gas/oil to electric. - I don't want this for "Green" reasons - I am interested in this, because I believe it will cost less in the long run to me the consumer. The fact that it benefits the environment is purely icing on the cake
5) - environment - I don't believe in Manmade Globam Warming or Global Climate change. I believe this is a myth. I do however believe that there are changes that are natural as a part of the world aging. I also believe that we are each responsible for our own part of the world. I believe that technology has been developed for companies to keep their waste minimized and that oil companies have proven that they are environmentally safe...simply by looking at Drilling Stations in the Gulf Coast and how they have survived the rash of hurricanes the past couple of decades, without any major environmental consequences. Honestly, I believe the tactics of a few Environmentalist have caused our economy to fall the way it has.
6) - Housing - these lenders are a business that take risk, if they are losing because of the risk they took with lenders then that is their problem. I don't believe the government should bail them out, nor to do I believe the government should bail out the individuals who also took that risk. If an individual can't afford their borrowed lifestyle, then it's time to sale what you can and downsize to what you can afford, it's not the governments job or our taxpayers money that needs to keep people living in a "Borrowed" lifestyle. Companies who lose taking the risk...well, they should suffer the consequences of their risky ventures.
7) - Life - I am pro-life in terms of abortion - I believe that life begins at conception and I also believe in teaching Abstinance in school. Personally, I believe in providing support to those expentant parents. My older son was born nearly 3 months before my wife and I got married. He is highly valued in this family and he is a highly valued member of society. We had help from family and friends, in the early days and I signed up for a 2nd stint in the military until I could figure out what to do...I worked to ensure that my wife and kids were taken care of. But I didn't expect a handout...I learned that the more I work and accept my responsibility, the more I was able to provide. I've had friends who couldn't handle things and expected others to provide...they are still living in a state of "Victim" - it's their choice, but I don't believe that my tax dollars should go to them. Perhaps that's a harsh view, I just expect people to do something to earn assistance...if you want to have choices, then you have to work to afford those choices...otherwise your choices will be limited.
8) - Social Security - I believe we need to continue supporting the current system, with a gradual change. The system is broken and losing money, so someone has to sacrifice in order to make things better for the future. So I would support a SS system that used a portion of the money to maintain the current system and took a percentage, small at first and build it over time to...I'll touch on this shortly...essentially setting up private acconts. Today 100% of my SS withholding goes to pay for SS benefits of current members of society. So why not transition this...increase my SS withholding by 10%...only use that 10% into a private account for me. Essentially making it a 90-10 split. Now, as todays youth gets into the work force they would be use to this split...in a few years, you no longer increase, but your change the percentage split to 80-20, then 70-30, then 60-40 and so on, until some point in the distant future, perhaps 40-60 years from now, the SS system would 100% private accounts. I would even be willing to take less in benefits when I am 70 years old, if it meant that my grandkids or great grandkids would have a better system established...again, I am willing to sacrifice for the benefit of future generations and a better future for America.

Alright so that covers a few issues...I am more than happy to discuss my views on other issues, but based on my views of these issues...who supports my way of thinking and living better...McCain/Palin and the "R" ticket or Obama/Biden and the "D" ticket

By the way, on social issues, I am also conservative - I am for "Straight Marriage" and believe that "Gay" lifestyles are a choice that people make...they are not born gay, as one is born a Man, a Woman, Black, White other...Gay rights are an insult to the rights of Woman and Blacks everywhere.

I am against Government mandated Volunteer Service.
I am against Indoctrination in public schools (Left or Right) - Currently I believe the schools are indoctrination our youth to live and believe as the left, which I believe is leading this nation to a very dark future. I see in the schools today, that my son's have had required reading from books that promote Leftist thinking, and when we suggest a balance to that reading, something that is more of a Right political/social ideology, we are viewed as some type of zealot.

I have no issue with reading and even teaching on an ideology, provided that equal time, energy and passion is given to the other side, and that the teachin is based on facts and NOT rhetoric.

Let the youth form their views based on information on both sides...these are great young people who have the ability to think for themselves, which may be the biggest threat to the left.

[Ninkobei]

Originally Posted by 92bDad

Mavdog,
I am against Indoctrination in public schools (Left or Right) - Currently I believe the schools are indoctrination our youth to live and believe as the left, which I believe is leading this nation to a very dark future. I see in the schools today, that my son's have had required reading from books that promote Leftist thinking, and when we suggest a balance to that reading, something that is more of a Right political/social ideology, we are viewed as some type of zealot.

I have no issue with reading and even teaching on an ideology, provided that equal time, energy and passion is given to the other side, and that the teachin is based on facts and NOT rhetoric.

Let the youth form their views based on information on both sides...these are great young people who have the ability to think for themselves, which may be the biggest threat to the left.

I agree with you on a lot of these points. I have to ask, how did the book your son was reading promote leftist thinking? do you have any examples/name of the book?

As far as "leftist" ideas go, lets look at gay marriage. You may be opposed to gay marriage, as many people are...but lets look at some historically "taboo" marriages.
50 years ago it was ILLEGAL for a black and a white person to be married. It couldnt be done, and people said that it corrupted traditional family values. They are now saying the same thing about Gay marriage. Do you see a pattern? People's ideas need to be kept up with the social changes going on around them, even though they may be happening far away.

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by Ninkobei

I agree with you on a lot of these points. I have to ask, how did the book your son was reading promote leftist thinking? do you have any examples/name of the book?

As far as "leftist" ideas go, lets look at gay marriage. You may be opposed to gay marriage, as many people are...but lets look at some historically "taboo" marriages.
50 years ago it was ILLEGAL for a black and a white person to be married. It couldnt be done, and people said that it corrupted traditional family values. They are now saying the same thing about Gay marriage. Do you see a pattern? People's ideas need to be kept up with the social changes going on around them, even though they may be happening far away.

As for books...two come to mind. "Guns, Germs and Steel" - essentially is an "Evolutionary" look at the world. The themes are very Leftist in nature, and again, I have no issue with regard to this as a book to be "Required" reading, however, there is no balance...there is no book offered that is based on a more "Right" view of world history.

Recently, my son's are having to read a book by Chris Matthews - Honestly, I have NOT read the book, but I view Chris as a former Carter Speech writer and one who leans to the left in his programs as someone that has a leftist view...when asked if the students could read a book by Rush Limbaugh as a counter balance, I was told that they don't promote one political view over another and thus would not have a Limbaugh book as something for students to read.

There are a few other books that the themse in the book contained pre-marital sexual relations as well as homo-sexual relations...but not a single book which focused on what some would call "Traditional Values"

My stance is that if a school or public education system is going to utilize material that shows any view, then they should provide a balance and allow material with an opposing view to be used.

My sons spent K-8 homeschooling. Part of their courses taught both Creation and Evolution, the same evolution taught in the public schools. This allowed the boys an opportunity to weigh the data from both sides of the argument. They have made their choice on what they believe and they are able to debate the topic based on their informed view.

Isn't that what school is about, developing young people to have the skill to think for themselves, researching topics/issues so that they can either change their view on an issue, or further support the reason they believe and live the way they do.

None of us want robotic right-wing kids, nor do we want left-wing robots...I happen to believe in people, especially kids...they tend to cut through the garbage and get down to the bottom line. I value their view and believe that they are much brighter than many of us adults give them credit for.

Now on our point regarding marriage.

I again point out that being Gay is NOT like being black or white.

People are born whatever skin color they are born...to discriminate based on skin color and not allow interracial marriage is and was WRONG.

However, one's choice to participate in "Gay" activities, is simply that a choice. Nobody is born gay, but rather thier life experiences offer them this option and they freely choose to take part in homosexual sex. That is what it means to be gay.

Just because someone loves someone of the same sex, does NOT make them gay, that might make them best friends and thus a lifelong bond is formed, but unless they are sexually involved in some way with one another they are not 'Gay'

Once they make the CHOICE to participate in Gay Sex...then they did just that.

As such, I don't believe that marriage is even a topic for someone who chooses to be gay. It is nowhere NEAR what Blacks/White have had to go through and to lump them together is an insult to the racial prejudice that White/Blacks have had to endure for centuries.

If you want to know my background on this...I have spent years of my life in recovery from addiction. Spending time in Therapy, as well as addiction recovery and support groups. I have had some truly great friends who have tried to escape the "Gay" community and I have come to know a bit of what the "Gay" community is about.

If you want to know the truth, I believe that the Government should have NOTHING to do with ANY marriage. Make marriage a religious union.

As for the benefits (Insurance, Taxes) - Seems to me that when we file our taxes or we fill out a W2 within the company we are working for, that is where we can list our 'Dependants'

If Bob wants to claim Larry as a Dependant then fine...I have no problem with it...call it a legal partnership...but using "Marriage" is not accurate.

Make it so that one can only claim one adult that is not a blood relative as a dependant, without going through some type of legal adoption (This is in regards to special needs individuals) This can be used for medical insurance purposes.

If you ask me there is a way to accomodate Gay choice...but don't force it down the necks of Traditionalists and call it a marriage.

On that note, if someone decides that they no longer want someone as a dependant...then it is done, no strings attached. Unless two partners draw up some type of legal document prior to the partnership as to what happens if the partnership is dissolved. If Bob is done with Larry, then he can drop Larry and not have to worry about supporting Larry as a dependant or estranged Gay friend.

Perhaps not a traditioanl 'conservative' view on the issue, but I do believe in protecting "Marriage" - I have no objection to a legal civil union that has NO Church affiliation.

IMHO - Gay issue is a Church and Belief issue, not a Government issue. However I do believe that the "Gay Community" is trying to force the Government to make it a Government issue.

Why should I treat someone who has Gay sex with any "Special" benefits?

I don't believe in their choice, and I should be allowed to teach my own children what I believe and the basis of my beliefs. In my case they are based on Biblical information. Pardon me, but this is a hate the sin, love the sinner type of teaching.

Okay, no more bible thumping...I don't want to go down that road.

...

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

uh, you forgot to paste the first sentence: "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America"

and it seems you failed to notice that the constitution also says "he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices"

so the "alignment" exists in the obana positions, just as much as the mccain focus on military you seem to be fond of.

in case you've missed it, mccain is also speaking a lot about his tax cuts ("money-money" as you put it). it's just imo his "money-money" planks are not to my liking.

according to you "money-money" includes higher fuel standards and taking personal responsibility. interesting perspective.

thanks for playing....

I pasted the constitution, not the "wish list" most people see.

You stated that you saw these things as Obama positives -- I said that money was the driving factor that you like about Obama -- based upon what you wrote.

You stated that the positives of McCain were the other list.

All I said was that you put Obama ahead in your books because of MONEY. If you look at what you wrote -- money was the biggest positive factor of Obama, that and change.

I don't care if you like or dislike McCain -- or whether you like his money ideas or not. That wasn't the point of my writing either.

The point was that you gave positives for both of the candidates. You say Obama is ahead in your book. You gave the reasons. I used your list, and showed that Money is the biggest factor. Then I posted the constitution of the US that shows the main "job" of the executive branch of the government. The job is to be commander in chief, and to make sure laws are faithfully executed.

Money while it ends up being important -- is not truthfully under the control of the President. Obama might be better for the economy -- if he can get others to vote like he wants them too -- of course if Congress voted like their constituents wanted, instead of down political lines -- maybe he wouldn't get the chance. He might be better for the environment -- but isn't it Congress that passes the laws on this one. He might be better at convincing Congress -- but Congress should be listening to the people and not the President.

I realize that the President exerts his power quite often and gets his way --- but realistically the power is with the people -- unless the people are acting as sheeple (which they have been for years now).

Thanks for playing yourself. You win some, you lose some.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dalmations202

I pasted the constitution, not the "wish list" most people see.

running the executive branch, managing the cabinet, isn't a part of this "wish list" you mention. it's part of the stated duties expressed in the constitution.

You stated that you saw these things as Obama positives -- I said that money was the driving factor that you like about Obama -- based upon what you wrote.

You stated that the positives of McCain were the other list.

All I said was that you put Obama ahead in your books because of MONEY. If you look at what you wrote -- money was the biggest positive factor of Obama, that and change.

no, money WASN'T the constant theme.

the environment isn't about money. personal responsibility isn't about money. not being addicted to oil isn't about money, it's about security.

I don't care if you like or dislike McCain -- or whether you like his money ideas or not. That wasn't the point of my writing either.

The point was that you gave positives for both of the candidates. You say Obama is ahead in your book. You gave the reasons. I used your list, and showed that Money is the biggest factor. Then I posted the constitution of the US that shows the main "job" of the executive branch of the government. The job is to be commander in chief, and to make sure laws are faithfully executed.

...and, as I showed, managing the executive branch.

and again, money is not the "biggest factor".

Money while it ends up being important -- is not truthfully under the control of the President. Obama might be better for the economy -- if he can get others to vote like he wants them too -- of course if Congress voted like their constituents wanted, instead of down political lines -- maybe he wouldn't get the chance. He might be better for the environment -- but isn't it Congress that passes the laws on this one. He might be better at convincing Congress -- but Congress should be listening to the people and not the President.

I realize that the President exerts his power quite often and gets his way --- but realistically the power is with the people -- unless the people are acting as sheeple (which they have been for years now).

Thanks for playing yourself. You win some, you lose some.

the president submits the budget, right?

the executive branch enforces the environmental laws, right?

the executive branch promulgates environmental regs, right?

the executive branch enforces the civil rights laws, right?

the pres does have a great amount of control thru its constitutionally dictated authority.

people's power is via their right to vote, to "throw the bums out". or in as the case may be.

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

running the executive branch, managing the cabinet, isn't a part of this "wish list" you mention. it's part of the stated duties expressed in the constitution.



no, money WASN'T the constant theme.

the environment isn't about money. personal responsibility isn't about money. not being addicted to oil isn't about money, it's about security.



...and, as I showed, managing the executive branch.

and again, money is not the "biggest factor".



the president submits the budget, right?

the executive branch enforces the environmental laws, right?

the executive branch promulgates environmental regs, right?

the executive branch enforces the civil rights laws, right?

the pres does have a great amount of control thru its constitutionally dictated authority.

people's power is via their right to vote, to "throw the bums out". or in as the case may be.

Is the Presidents first and biggest job "The Commander in Chief" of the US military?

Is the Presidents second biggest job "To make sure the Laws of this land are enforced"?

He may have the right to ask for written stuff. Yes, he submits a budget that Congress can not vote for. Yes, he can suggest lots of things, and yes he has some control.

Why do we vote for anyone who is not the best at the first two though, if that is what is described as the position of the President of the US?

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by dalmations202

Why do we vote for anyone who is not the best at the first two though, if that is what is described as the position of the President of the US?

Because the opportunity to do so is almost never afforded us?

[wmbwinn]

The problem or difference in Dalmations and Mavdog is that Mavdog sees a need for military strength and use for security and Mavdog (I am guessing so flame me if I'm wrong) sees no such need. Mavdog sees mainly the domestic issues and would probably like to see all the wars end now.

I would ask this of Mavdog:

You listed several entities of law enforcement as fitting the role of the President as it is his job to enforce the laws of the land.

Just wondering, can any of you ever remember a President saying, "OK, EPA, you are not enforcing the laws. OK, IRS, you are not enforcing the tax code. OK, penal system, stop letting murderers and rapists go short of their terms."

No, that never happens.

So, in my opinion, your desire for domestic policy changes really has nothing to do with the President of the USA.

Honestly, I don't think the EPA, the IRS, or the penal system really answer to anyone.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

The problem or difference in Dalmations and Mavdog is that Mavdog sees a need for military strength and use for security and Mavdog (I am guessing so flame me if I'm wrong) sees no such need. Mavdog sees mainly the domestic issues and would probably like to see all the wars end now.

I believe what you meant to say was:

The problem or difference in Dalmations and Mavdog is that Dalmations sees a need for military strength and use for security and Mavdog..sees no such need. Mavdog sees mainly the domestic issues and would probably like to see all the wars end now.

well, wouldn't we ALL "like to see all the wars end now"?

we are less likely to have the need for war if we have a strong and capable military. one of the roles of the pres is to be the head of our forces, and that is certainly an asset of mccain.

but the pres isn't the person who actually runs the military, they rely on the soldiers to do that. the soldier comes to the pres with their recs, and the pres decides to either accept that rec or do otherwise.

we're very fortunate in our country that we have military leadership who understand the primacy of civilian control, a great tradition.

mccain clearly has the best understanding of military, hands down. but that is not (imo) the only criteria to select who to vote for.

I would ask this of Mavdog:

You listed several entities of law enforcement as fitting the role of the President as it is his job to enforce the laws of the land.

Just wondering, can any of you ever remember a President saying, "OK, EPA, you are not enforcing the laws. OK, IRS, you are not enforcing the tax code. OK, penal system, stop letting murderers and rapists go short of their terms."

No, that never happens.

So, in my opinion, your desire for domestic policy changes really has nothing to do with the President of the USA.

Honestly, I don't think the EPA, the IRS, or the penal system really answer to anyone.

yes, the current administration HAS told department to change existing regs and has stopped enforcement of existing regs. many of those are environmental, but also civil rights and labor.

so yes, the president DOES have A LOT to do with domestic policy.

[wmbwinn]

yes, your correction above to place Dalmations name in the false place of your name was a correct fix.

Anyway, you said:

"yes, the current administration HAS told department to change existing regs and has stopped enforcement of existing regs. many of those are environmental, but also civil rights and labor.

so yes, the president DOES have A LOT to do with domestic policy."


Examples? Sources of info.?

Let us eval the process more largely. Who creates the entities of law enforcement in all their federal forms such as the IRS, EPA, etc.? Answer: Congress.
Who determines their budgets? Answer: Pres Admin presents a budget to Congress BUT Congress determines the details of the budget.
Who is in charge of the structure and purpose of these entities? Answer: Congress

Once the entities of law enforcement are created, then they fall under the Pres Admin and Executive branch.

But, it is my observational assumption (means it looks like this to me as an observer) that the Prez is rarely really involved in any of these entities.

So, you said above that the Prez has recently been involved in many ways. Explain.

[Mavdog]

uh, maybe you don't know, but the president selects who runs these agencies.....the president issues directives on policies in these agencies.

the departments are under the supervision of the executive branch. congress in not able to tell these departments what to do, unless congress can show the departments are not following the law that authorized them, or violating other laws of the land.

as the recent episode at the justice dept shows, the departments can hide behind "executive priviledge" and "seperation of powers" quite easily.