obama and mccain...one and the same?

fuck

Thecure wrote:

never said the president can't do anything but i did say that the president does not have as much power as people think. the president can only aprove what was passed from congress. that limits the amount of work that the president can complete. the only thing that the president has that make sthem powerful is the abilty to say no to everything. that is a major power, but it is up to congress to bring ideas to the table that will look good to the public. the congress has major power also as they can force the president to do thinsg that they would not want to do. but lets face it the congress now are cowards who vote for everything that GWB wants. i dont' see that changing, but that is my opinion.

that is true, but congress isn't the only one who brings ideas to the table, the cabinet members also do since they specifically work with that. I think the idea now is if Obama were president, then he would work with Congress to accomplish somethings, but since they haven't proved otherwise in the past 2 years, I just don't see it happened.

I hope I'm wrong though.

Vince

Thecure wrote:

for me there are great differences between Obama and McCain but i will always say that when either one is president the same stuff will happen as when GWB was president. i don't believe that the president has as much power as people think. i see america still being in Iraq, i still see america paying at the pump. i still see you having a housing crisis, i still see banks getting federal grants to save their asses (and in all honesty saving people asses), I still see jobs being lost, i still see you having more free trade agreements. i still see you having the same health care system.

who knows i could be wrong?

If you fail to recognize the two other branches of government and the Constitution as the Bush Administration has for the past 7.5 years then yes the Executive branch is very powerful.

my2hands

decides2dream wrote:

i just can't believe that people truly believe their presidencies would result in the same outcomes, at all.

thats probabaly because there are obvious huge differences between them and the direction of the country the next 8 years...


these are the same folks that said Gore was the same as Bush :rolleyes:

acutejam

Vince wrote:

If you fail to recognize the two other branches of government and the Constitution as the Bush Administration has for the past 7.5 years then yes the Executive branch is very powerful.

Can you blame him? Districts are rigged and Judiciary is appointed -- they don't represent the people that elected Bush. Perhaps it's very similar to his initial impressions/attitude toward the press, when questioned about reports he doesn't watch or read the news ... which I thought were spot on!


And the reporter then said: Well, how do you then know, Mr. President, what the public is thinking? And Bush, without missing a beat said: You’re making a powerful assumption, young man. You’re assuming that you represent the public. I don’t accept that.

Which is a powerful statement. And if Bush believes it (a possibility not to be dismissed) then we must credit the president with an original idea, or the germ of one. Bush’s people have developed it into a thesis:

We don’t accept that [the press] have a check and balance function. We think that they are in the game of “Gotcha.” Oh, they're interested in headlines, and interested in conflict. They're not interested in having a serious discussion… and exploring things.

http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2004/04/25/bush_muscle.html

clark_kent

acutejam wrote:

Can you blame him? Districts are rigged and Judiciary is appointed -- they don't represent the people that elected Bush. Perhaps it's very similar to his initial impressions/attitude toward the press, when questioned about reports he doesn't watch or read the news ... which I thought were spot on!


And the reporter then said: Well, how do you then know, Mr. President, what the public is thinking? And Bush, without missing a beat said: You’re making a powerful assumption, young man. You’re assuming that you represent the public. I don’t accept that.

Which is a powerful statement. And if Bush believes it (a possibility not to be dismissed) then we must credit the president with an original idea, or the germ of one. Bush’s people have developed it into a thesis:

We don’t accept that [the press] have a check and balance function. We think that they are in the game of “Gotcha.” Oh, they're interested in headlines, and interested in conflict. They're not interested in having a serious discussion… and exploring things.

http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2004/04/25/bush_muscle.html

according to the popular vote, the electoral college that put bush in the house doesnt represent the american people either.

if the press don't play a part, why are they mentioned in the very first amendment to the constitution? if not for the press, we'd all still think there are wmd's in iraq.

Its Evolution Baby

my2hands wrote:

thats probabaly because there are obvious huge differences between them the directionof the country the next 8 years...


these are the same folks that said Gore was the same as Bush :rolleyes:

Thats a key point.

How can Nader Supporters convince Obama supporters that hes really the same as McCain when they ran the same campaign in 2000 with Bush and Gore and were clearly wrong.

clark_kent

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

Thats a key point.

How can Nader Supporters convince Obama supporters that hes really the same as McCain when they ran the same campaign in 2000 with Bush and Gore and were clearly wrong.

reality doesn't have much of an effect on them.

decides2dream

my2hands wrote:

thats probabaly because there are obvious huge differences between them and the direction of the country the next 8 years...


these are the same folks that said Gore was the same as Bush :rolleyes:

the thing is, i don't have a problem with people not liking either candidate, not wanting to vote for either candidate, etc. it's all good. vote who best represents your ideals, what you want to see happen and all of it. my only 'issue' in this arena is when i read over and over and over the idea that mccain or obama...we will end up with the exact same outcome, the exact same america, the exact same affect on the world. i seriously do not see how others can truly say it, or believe it, no matter how similkar one may see them - which i don't - but even if one does, i think their DISsimilarities are great enough, and important enough to at least take notice. still don't either...cool...but stop saying they are one and the same, and will result in one and the same presidency b/c while we'll never know for certain, i just don't see how anyone can truly, seriously believe that.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Surely a douche and a turd sandwich have their differences....

Abuskedti

Of course they are... the whole bunch of them.. Congress and their salaries, kick backs, and pensions.. Its a club with the power to take what they want. and we still vote for them. They have us arguing between Dem and Rep and they are both on the same fucking team.

decides2dream

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Surely a douche and a turd sandwich have their differences....

thank you, that's all i ask. recognize the differences, even if you like neither.


and...

Abuskedti wrote:

Of course they are... the whole bunch of them.. Congress and their salaries, kick backs, and pensions.. Its a club with the power to take what they want. and we still vote for them. They have us arguing between Dem and Rep and they are both on the same fucking team.

i just don't believe it. not of all of em, period. i am thankful i am not so jaded just yet. sure, a lot of em suck...bigtime. however, i still believe many are there b/c they truly do want to make a difference. any segment of the population os going to contain both good and bad people, elected officials are no different there. btw - i think we ALL should be on the 'same fucking team'...meaning, the team who desires to best serve the needs of the american people, and whatever influence we have on the world at large.

fuck

decides2dream wrote:

i just don't believe it. not of all of em, period. i am thankful i am not so jaded just yet. sure, a lot of em suck...bigtime. however, i still believe many are there b/c they truly do want to make a difference. any segment of the population os going to contain both good and bad people, elected officials are no different there. btw - i think we ALL should be on the 'same fucking team'...meaning, the team who desires to best serve the needs of the american people, and whatever influence we have on the world at large.

of course some people wanna make some difference. Kucinich is one great example. but then you have people like Obama who just "play the game," even when they claim to be "changing it."

decides2dream

_outlaw wrote:

of course some people wanna make some difference. Kucinich is one great example. but then you have people like Obama who just "play the game," even when they claim to be "changing it."

obviously, a difference of opinion there. nd just as obviously, it's all good.
my only question in this thread was about viewing the differences, and if there are some who TRULY believe, obama or mccain, it will make NO difference whatsoever if either get elected. it gets said often enough them being the *same*.....and since i disagree with that stance, i asked. that's all.



and even in an earlier post, an article link, posted i guess to prove just how similar they are....included this quote:


"To be sure, a McCain presidency would look far different than an Obama presidency. The two candidates have starkly different approaches to healthcare, Social Security and Supreme Court nominations, among other issues. But this makes it all the more surprising that in many areas the rivals are more or less aligned."


http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-centrists13-2008jul13,0,6980359,full.story



i do not discount some of the similarlites, but i also think them different enough to make an important distinction. and while they both may move a bit more 'centrist' in regards to the war, i still believe obama has the desire to end it a lot more quickly and not so quick to act in regards to starting even more war in the future. an important difference to me. some may not see it like that and fair enough, but i do. they just are not one and the same, and to say so is painting with a very broad brush. i would think very similar to the brush that nader supporters get so tired of; people who say nader has no chance of winning, or throwing their votes away, etc. and i agree, both kind of comments are frustrating to read.

clark_kent

_outlaw wrote:

of course some people wanna make some difference. Kucinich is one great example. but then you have people like Obama who just "play the game," even when they claim to be "changing it."

change comes from within.

fuck

decides2dream wrote:

obviously, a difference of opinion there. nd just as obviously, it's all good.
my only question in this thread was about viewing the differences, and if there are some who TRULY believe, obama or mccain, it will make NO difference whatsoever if either get elected. it gets said often enough them being the *same*.....and since i disagree with that stance, i asked. that's all.

When people say no difference, it's not that they have the same stances. It's that, in the end, the outcome won't be much different. unfortunately, if you want examples, look at this shitty congress. they've done SOME things, fine, but in the end, how much better has our country really gotten??

and even in an earlier post, an article link, posted i guess to prove just how similar they are....included this quote:

"To be sure, a McCain presidency would look far different than an Obama presidency. The two candidates have starkly different approaches to healthcare, Social Security and Supreme Court nominations, among other issues. But this makes it all the more surprising that in many areas the rivals are more or less aligned."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-centrists13-2008jul13,0,6980359,full.story

Good article.

i do not discount some of the similarlites, but i also think them different enough to make an important distinction. and while they both may move a bit more 'centrist' in regards to the war, i still believe obama has the desire to end it a lot more quickly and not so quick to act in regards to starting even more war in the future. an important difference to me. some may not see it like that and fair enough, but i do. they just are not one and the same, and to say so is painting with a very broad brush.

The problem is that I think Obama, while he will be better than McCain in certain aspects, clearly is too scared to do anything. Look at him now, dancing like a puppet in front of AIPAC, saying all this bullshit about how tough we have to be with Iran and sanctions, and talking about Afghanistan- people justify it by saying it's politics and he needs votes... well, you'll (I don't mean specifically you) all be saying that for the next 4 years since, if he wins, he's going to want to be re-elected, right?? and afterwards, he can't be too different since he's going to want his democratic party to win in 2016... it's all just a cycle. people find ways to justify everything and hope it turns out fine in the end... but it doesn't.

and all of you can sit here and talk shit about Nader, but atleast he fucking stands up for what he believes in, unlike Obama. and atleast Nader is TRULY a man of the people, unlike Obama.

i would think very similar to the brush that nader supporters get so tired of; people who say nader has no chance of winning, or throwing their votes away, etc. and i agree, both kind of comments are frustrating to read.

Thanks.

clark_kent

_outlaw wrote:

and all of you can sit here and talk shit about Nader, but atleast he fucking stands up for what he believes in, unlike Obama. and atleast Nader is TRULY a man of the people, unlike Obama.

he is? last i heard, his stock portfolio had some serious corporate heavyweights. of course, he won't reveal any information about his finances now...

fuck

clark_kent wrote:

he is? last i heard, his stock portfolio had some serious corporate heavyweights. of course, he won't reveal any information about his finances now...

this issue was discussed several times on this board, and that ridiculous point has been proven to be a lie. feel free to keep using that to justify your vote for obama though.

Thecure

Vince wrote:

If you fail to recognize the two other branches of government and the Constitution as the Bush Administration has for the past 7.5 years then yes the Executive branch is very powerful.

i agree with this statement. except it was more liek 6.5 years not 7.5 years

clark_kent

_outlaw wrote:

this issue was discussed several times on this board, and that ridiculous point has been proven to be a lie. feel free to keep using that to justify your vote for obama though.

i justify my vote by recognizing that the last time i voted for nader, it put a man in office who has absolutely destroyed this country in 8 years and started 2 wars, one which was unfinished and unsuccessful, the other which was an unnecessary travesty of everything this country stands for. he wrecked our economy, wiped out the middle class for the expense of the privileged and wealthy, and trampled upon the constitution. i see one candidate who could very likely continue in the same vein, another who will work hard to set the country back on the right course, and another who will pull a 180 with disastrous results. i do not need nader's own shortcomings to vote for obama. all i need is his inadequate policy stances and obama's intelligent and nuanced ones.

Speakers

decides2dream wrote:

my question is though, does one truly believe there won't be sany difference in office with either candidate? similarities or not, i think their differences are significant enough that there would be very different outcomes with either as president. of course, that's just imo.





i never understood people who thought THAt either, at all. i thought they were sooooooo different, and voted accordingly. however, that's my point....and i just don't get it.



and yes, that's my thought exactly.
i think they would both make very different presidents, and have very different influence on our country, the world.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1JSBhI_0at0