Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Heron TSG]

That's it, if Rick Perry gets elected I'm taking that offer to study over in Australia. I'll go chill with Jackrabbit and Tack and them folks.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I'm not worried about Perry. It's not even the end of the primaries yet, and his lead isn't all that massive. It's going to change up once more of the other republicans drop out of the race and their supporters get divided up among the ones still running. And frankly, Perry is extreme even by Republican standards. Legal homosexuality has had a stable majority of the public opinion in the US for five or so years now, so Perry would be a fool to try and change that. Not only would it not pass, he would probably end up denounced as extremist even by fellow conservatives who are not insane.

What I'm more worried about is Obama running for a second term. He is not a good president, and if he cares about America he won't try for another term. Although, it may not even matter if he tries or not anyway. Presidents pretty much always win their party's primary, but Obama has seriously alienated the Democrats. Seeing a three-way race between the two major parties and a now independent incumbent would be interesting.

[G-Flex]

What I'm more worried about is Obama running for a second term. He is not a good president, and if he cares about America he won't try for another term.

Do you think any plausible democratic alternative would be better?

Also: As disappointing as Obama has been, I still believe that part of the reason for that is the fact that he has to pander to the right wing, and the right wing at the moment is hardly sane. You can only blame him so much for that.

[KaelGotDwarves]

I'll tell you what I told Aqizzar last night.

There is no chance in all the burning hells that the general populace will be voting in another governor from Texas to the presidency any time soon. Bachmann has a better chance than Perry.

[lemon10]

-snip-

Could you show me where it says that he want's to declare being homosexual a crime?
Yeah, he wants gay marriage to be illegal, but that's hardly the same thing.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

What I'm more worried about is Obama running for a second term. He is not a good president, and if he cares about America he won't try for another term.

Do you think any plausible democratic alternative would be better?

Yes.

Also: As disappointing as Obama has been, I still believe that part of the reason for that is the fact that he has to pander to the right wing, and the right wing at the moment is hardly sane. You can only blame him so much for that.

Obama has proven through his actions that he is a compromising coward who cares about nothing but his approval rating, which ironically has killed his approval rating. I mean, fuck man, he doesn't even really "compromise" with the right-wing most of the time, he just gives them what they want. I was too young to vote when Obama's first election came along, but if I had voted for him I'd be even more pissed than I am now. Obama wasn't elected to be a slightly less crazy Bush in everything but name.

I want a President who has strong convictions about human rights and justice in the world, but the only Presidents who are ever willing to show political force for their ideals are the far-right nutjobs! No politician who cares about making the world a better place is willing to be strong about it! To defend their convictions and convince people that they are worth following!

The only way Obama is getting my vote is if he pulls a 180, right now. Otherwise, I don't care what he promises or what election cycle rhetoric he uses. "Yes We Can" was complete bullshit, and the mini-personality cult he had back in those days should have been a better warning sign. He is a weakling. A dammed, lying weakling who has no place as President of the United States.

[KaelGotDwarves]

I know I'm not the only one when I say that Obama's done a pretty good job with everyone breathing down his neck, considering how much failure and shit we were in at the beginning of his term, and how everyone is lazy as shit and all the rich, powerful people have been basically conspiring against the rest of the country since well, ever.

[Heron TSG]

Hell yes, I'll have a couple days to register to vote in time this year! Time to get researching, self!

MetalSlimeHunt, that post of yours reminds me of an oh-so-unfortunately-true tweet about the DC earthquake.

Obama wanted the 'quake to be a 3.4, but the Republicans wanted a 5.8, so he compromised and called it a 5.8.

Still, he has done some good. Healthcare reform, for example.

Although I haven't seen many Democratic candidates yet. The only other that I've seen so far is Randall Taylor, a rather conservative pro-life (that's a stupid term) anti-abortion supporting candidate.

[Willfor]

pro-life (that's a stupid term) anti-abortion

I just want to point out that people who use the marketing-laden label of Progressive for their political views shouldn't throw stones in the glass house that is terms-and-their-use-in-conversation.

[Heron TSG]

1. I have never called myself Progressive. Liberal, perhaps.

2. Name one single person that isn't pro-life. Everyone wants to live. There's a difference between 'I am okay with abortions' and 'I am anti-life.'

[Vector]

If I have to argue under the banner of "Pro-Death" in order to get women their reproductive rights, I'll do it.

I do not like the "pro-life" moniker, because it ignores the life of the woman; often, literally so, and is thus mendacious in the extreme.  Certainly, the "pro-choice" moniker ignores the choice-making ability of the fetus; on the other hand, I do not see anyone asking newborns what their major will be.

I don't think these terms are quite equal by way of truth-value.  Opinions?

[Heron TSG]

I would think that pro-choice and anti-choice would suffice. Or perhaps 'Against abortions' and 'In support of abortion as an option', but those are a bit long for casual conversation.

[Bauglir]

Well, nobody wants "anti" in front of anything good in their position's name. I can see where they're coming from with that, especially because I think that (to them) choice isn't the issue they're fighting over. To call them "anti-choice" is a misnomer, because whether or not there's choice involved isn't a question that's even on their radar; to them, it's about what you're doing to the fetus. Now, I don't think that's a defense; hell, if anything, it's insulting that a woman's control over her own body is apparently so unimportant that the rhetoric just tries to brush it under the rug in favor of even-more-loaded terminology like "pro-life". I... don't have any solutions, because my ability to sleep has been slightly fucked for the past week and I'm a caffeine zombie at this hour, and I didn't resolve this the last time I thought about it. So, yeah. Sorry about that, just trying to come at this from a know-thy-enemy perspective thing.

[Willfor]

My argument wasn't to denigrate what anyone believes, but to point out the labels that we use for ourselves will often be positively charged, and that taking away these terms that other people use for themselves is saying -- in my opinion -- that they, as people, do not deserve the right to see themselves as a positive influence in the world.

[Bauglir]

Right, well, I only have problems with "pro-life" because of the implication that anybody else must logically be "anti-life" or "pro-death" or however you want to phrase it.