The 2008 Election:, Obama v. McCain Options

[NoSex]

So, political discourse has been showing up more and more the closer and closer we get to November. As a result, I've decided that this thread should exist. All political arguments that relate to the elections (and the candidates) should find their home here, more or less.

Who do you think should run America? Why?
What direction do you think America is going in, as a country? What direction do you think we should go in? Why?

Support your arguments with evidence and details, make citations, try to have fun; no spamming, character bashing, etc. etc.

[pink.x.r0se]

well at least palin is doing something. what exactly qualifies obama in foreign relations?

obama has voted "present" almost 130 times, ever. i'd say that is most of his voting history. and even when he does vote, its contrived with fellow democrats in gain more power over the republicans.

you say that he's taken a stance on speeches, writing, etc. that's the thing with obama. he's very eloquent, saying he'll do this, do that. but what will he really do? is he just a talker? or a doer as well? i'd say by not voting he is not taking a stance on very many things...

when you say "Yes, because we've seen over the past eight years that attacking sovereign nations is the best foreign policy."

9/11? what did we do to provoke that? there are terrorists out there like the extreme islamists who believe that we, as a society are evil and must be eliminated. we did not attack them first. the bush administration just decided to fight back.

at least mccain knows from experience what it means going into the war. my point is, negotiation just does not work with people who want you dead. period.

[mipadi]

well at least palin is doing something. what exactly qualifies obama in foreign relations?

I'll be honest, I don't have a good answer to this question. I feel that Obama has been involved in foreign policy issues on a grander scale than Palin; as a US Senator, it'd be hard to have no involvement in foreign affairs. But more importantly, I feel that Obama is more capable of delegating foreign affairs issues to capable, intelligent staff members. Given our foreign policy failures under the Bush Administration, I no longer feel comfortable letting any right-wing Republican deal with foreign leaders. The most prominent thing McCain has said about Iran, for example, is "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran". That's not the kind of person I trust to make foreign policy decisions. I somehow feel that Palin is no more capable or influential.

That's not to say that this is a "lesser of two evils" issue. I do feel that Obama is intelligent enough to make the right decision on most foreign policy issues, and to delegate decision-making when necessary. It's an error to think that our politicians can and should know everything about everything.

Admittedly, one big area in which I disagree with Obama is his stance on Israel, but aside from that, I think he is quite capable on foreign issues -- not necessarily because he's an expert, but he surrounds himself with people who are.

obama has voted "present" almost 130 times, ever. i'd say that is most of his voting history. and even when he does vote, its contrived with fellow democrats in gain more power over the republicans.

Obama's been a US Senator for four years, and spent seven years as a state senator before that; 130 votes is a drop in the bucket (although I wouldn't mind a citation for that figure). I read through about four pages of his voting record, and that went back only about a year. Senators cast a lot of votes. If you'd like to give percentage figures on his yeas, nays, and non-votes, be my guest. I linked to his voting record; it's just a matter of counting everything up.

Of course, I don't deny that Obama has a tendency to vote with Democrats, but, geez, you can hardly criticize Obama for trying to leverage the position of Democrats against Republicans -- that's how politics work. A Republican senator (such as McCain) would vote in a similar way. I do feel that Obama does not merely toe the party line, but tries to vote as best he can.

you say that he's taken a stance on speeches, writing, etc. that's the thing with obama. he's very eloquent, saying he'll do this, do that. but what will he really do? is he just a talker? or a doer as well? i'd say by not voting he is not taking a stance on very many things...

I can't promise anything, but his writing and speeches do show him to be a more passionate, intelligent candidate than McCain, who at least tries not to sink to petty name-calling and mudslinging. What are McCain/Palin guaranteed to do that's so much better than Obama? What are they going to do to save America?

when you say "Yes, because we've seen over the past eight years that attacking sovereign nations is the best foreign policy."

9/11? what did we do to provoke that? there are terrorists out there like the extreme islamists who believe that we, as a society are evil and must be eliminated. we did not attack them first. the bush administration just decided to fight back.

at least mccain knows from experience what it means going into the war. my point is, negotiation just does not work with people who want you dead. period.

The reason we're in the mess we're in right now is because of simplistic thinking like this -- the idea that there are swarms of Islamic fundamentalists who hate America so much that they want to see it destroyed, and the only thing we can do to stop it is kill 'em all -- and maybe take over a few oil-rich countries in the process, right?

The truth is, our foreign policy issues are much, much more complicated than that, and have roots long before September 11, 2001. Did we directly provoke 9/11 by bombing another country? No. But we've spent years -- decades -- meddling in the foreign affairs of the Middle East. We've supported Israel since the beginning in their quest to essentially steal land from the Palestinians. We've lobbed cruise missiles at Kenya and Afghanistan. We sold arms to Afghanistan, then abandoned them as soon as they pushed out the Soviets. We intervened in the Balkans. We've falsely accused Iraq of having weapons of mass destruction. We've sold arms and given to support to Israel (yes, I already mentioned that, but it's important). We've meddled in the politics of Iran (and lost out on the deal in the end).

And that's just the Middle East. We've had our fingers in other pies in places ranging from Southeast Asia to Central America, and we've done some pretty nasty things there. In short, we've created a situation in which no one can really trust the US. Would you trust a country like the US?

So yes, I'd say we did provoke 9/11. I'm not saying anyone deserved to die, but there was provocation. That it didn't happen sooner is what's really surprising.

But that's the problem with McCain -- and, by extension and association, Palin. They promote the myth that you've repeated -- that America's a-okay and some mean, nasty Muslims just hate us for no good reason. Swap out Muslims for Soviets and Communists, and you have a similar situation that created an atmosphere of fear from the 1945 to 1991. Well, I for one am tired of politicians pulling the wool over our eyes by creating threats against one scapegoat or another. Communists or Muslims, it's all the same illusion -- and you'll just get more of that illusion if McCain is in office.

The real cause of our problems with foreign affairs is America's atrocious foreign policy and human rights record. And I don't want more of the same.

[pink.x.r0se]

i'll look up the figures for obama's voting history later; i don't have time right now. but..

what you say about mccain voting usually for republican isn't true. in 2006, mccain was rated 62% (or 64, i can't remember off the top of my head) his level of conservative ratings. so 48% of the other times, he voted more liberally, showing he is more openminded to both sides, although he IS more conservative than liberal.

compare this to obama, who was rated 8% conservativeness, 92% of the time being liberal, his own party.

as to what palin and mccain are GUARANTEED to do, i'm not sure i admit. but with what i hear about obama's spotty voting record, it makes me wonder what he will do as a president; you can't just not have an opinion there. (once again, i will check up on that later)

"The truth is, our foreign policy issues are much, much more complicated than that, and have roots long before September 11, 2001. Did we directly provoke 9/11 by bombing another country? No. But we've spent years -- decades -- meddling in the foreign affairs of the Middle East. We've supported Israel since the beginning in their quest to essentially steal land from the Palestinians. We've lobbed cruise missiles at Kenya and Afghanistan. We sold arms to Afghanistan, then abandoned them as soon as they pushed out the Soviets. We intervened in the Balkans. We've falsely accused Iraq of having weapons of mass destruction. We've sold arms and given to support to Israel (yes, I already mentioned that, but it's important). We've meddled in the politics of Iran (and lost out on the deal in the end)."

we've supported israel because they are our ally...,shall we just drop them? they are just trying to fight for land of their own. from what i can remember from last year, they didn't just "steal" land, they won the land when they were attacked after trying to proclaim themselves as independent. like the yom kippur war? or the 7 days war, i really can't remember.

afghanistan, we just fought with to push out the soviet war. the enemy of my enemy is my friend...at least for the time being.

and from what i know, there has been no proof that there either war OR wasn't WMD in iraq

that's basically all i can touch up on right now,.i have to sleep ;)

[Comptine]

"The truth is, our foreign policy issues are much, much more complicated than that, and have roots long before September 11, 2001. Did we directly provoke 9/11 by bombing another country? No. But we've spent years -- decades -- meddling in the foreign affairs of the Middle East. We've supported Israel since the beginning in their quest to essentially steal land from the Palestinians. We've lobbed cruise missiles at Kenya and Afghanistan. We sold arms to Afghanistan, then abandoned them as soon as they pushed out the Soviets. We intervened in the Balkans. We've falsely accused Iraq of having weapons of mass destruction. We've sold arms and given to support to Israel (yes, I already mentioned that, but it's important). We've meddled in the politics of Iran (and lost out on the deal in the end)."

we've supported israel because they are our ally...,shall we just drop them? they are just trying to fight for land of their own. from what i can remember from last year, they didn't just "steal" land, they won the land when they were attacked after trying to proclaim themselves as independent. like the yom kippur war? or the 7 days war, i really can't remember.

afghanistan, we just fought with to push out the soviet war. the enemy of my enemy is my friend...at least for the time being.

and from what i know, there has been no proof that there either war OR wasn't WMD in iraq

that's basically all i can touch up on right now,.i have to sleep ;)

The 9/11 attacks were planned for years. Other attacks on other countries/places were supplemented the 9/11 attacks. Planning started in 1996! That's nearly 5 years in the making. 9/11 was the accumulation of many pent up hostilities towards the US. It's hard to pinpoint what exactly provoked the attacks. All we understand is that the extremists totally disagree with US policies. It's all well and good to side with an ally but it's very different if we help supply troops and weaponry.

Not only did experts say there were probably not many or any at all WMDs in Iraq... but the CIA itself confessed as did the executive branch that much of the WMDs reports were known to be false. There was a huge media frenzy for months as the CIA went under investigation for the reports. Whether or not there were ACTUALLY hidden WMDs in Iraq is not the main concern. The main concern is that Bush and the government LIED and said there was PROOF of DEFINITE WMDs in Iraq and went to war for that.

Searches of all the possible places to put WMDs in Iraq has turned up nothing.