This is a sad election year.

[lazur]

I'm not sure that I have come to fully understand the significance of the election to come this November, but I do want to chime in on how this year's political climate has just saddened the hell out of me. Not personally, mind you, I still carry on in life with a great amount of joy; it's more of a loss of faith, I guess ... like the faith I used to have in this country and its people.

When I was growing up, we were always the good guys in the world, ya know? Long before all comprehension of 'politics' reared its ugly head into our minds. Superman stood for Truth, Justice and the AMERICAN Way, for example. I probably felt that way all the way up until about two years after 9/11. Boy did that change my perspective on things. Not 9/11, because all that did was instill within me an even greater sense of patriotism, but really when we went into Iraq...

I tried to defend Bush and his administration because I could easily recall how great our national unity was during that time, and how many politicians who were also onboard and reassuring the American people themselves that everything would be okay.

Bush screwed it up bigtime. Sometimes I have to believe that he just made some mistakes - and we all know that many, many mistakes are made during war, ANY war - but that he still had our best interests as a nation in his heart; but other times I have to really question his character, and whether he is someone I'd consider to be a 'good' or 'decent' person. And believe me, in my line of work, I can ascertain this about someone very, very quickly. But it certainly doesn't make me right 100% of the time, either.

Our nation's financial backbone is buckling under this current administration. The spending is absolutely out of control. In 1980, our national debt was 11 Trillion dollars. Today, it's more than 44 Trillion.

(For a very compelling read on the state of our economy, by all means please hit this link: http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9162)

For those still with me, what is going to be required of our country is the presence of an honorable, noble and, more importantly, humble American President. A President who understands what will be required, and who will execute it, in order to fix the mistakes Bush has made, but ALL without compromising the freedoms and the rights that we have as citizens.

What do we know about McCain and Obama? What do we know, really? What's really *that* important? Is it their position on healthcare? No. Not for me. I believe we should have a healthcare system that provides care for those who *need* it - children, homeless, mentally or physically disabled. I do not believe we need a healthcare system that will encompass *every* American. Neither candidate really meets that criteria, and so it's become one of those issues that, while important to me, probably isn't important to a lot of other people right now (reference 'jaded and wounded').

When I take a look at Obama, I see a guy who seems decent. On the other hand, I don't think I've seen another politician as 'controlling' as he appears to be. He doesn't talk with the open candor that Bill Clinton did, for example. He preaches to his audience, as if to disciples, or on a more innocent level maybe as if to students. Still, this guy's barely older than I am. What in the hell could he have to teach me? Also, has anyone actually read some of what he is proposing? He's talking about 'renegotiating' NAFTA, for example. Can anyone say NAU? (North American Union. Probably closer than you think.)

When I take a look at McCain, I see a guy who has the most honorable record of conduct and service for a 'politician' that I've ever seen. When he was a POW, he deliberately stayed behind in Vietnam because he refused to leave before before anyone else had gone home. What in the hell does that *say* about the man?? Look at his face. The man was tortured and knows pain. Yet he's humble. Hmm.

To this day, Obama has either refused or cancelled 'town hall' debates with McCain. Meanwhile, McCain is raising some serious issues in the news that he really wants to talk to Obama about (ie NAFTA). He wants to talk to Obama about his 'timeline' for the war in Iraq. He wants to present some facts and see how Obama reacts to them. After all, McCain has been in Congress for 26 years and, to date, and has maintained the most honorable record one could have.

Still, I'm undecided on who to vote for. Is *now* the right time for another Reagan? That's what I believe McCain would be. I'm not so sure we could endure another republican right now. At the same time, I think how much *worse* could things really get? And can Obama make them better? For real?

Neither candidate will get us through the impending, and historically unmatched, economical depression our country is to suffer, and suffer it will. I again reference this link (http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9162) and advise you to check it out, as it most certainly does require a post of its own, and it's worth the read. It's not political. It's the unbridled 'truth' about our economy, how it operates, and why it's about to experience 'catastrophic failure.'

My best advice - vote your conscience. But before you do cast your vote, STORE UP ON FOOD, buy yourself a generator and a significant amount of fuel to run it for a while, buy yourself some electric heaters ... and hope for the best.

This is a sad election year, but something tells me that next year, no matter who gets elected, will make this year seem like paradise.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Lazur, no s*** man, I have never respected you more than I do right now. We may differ radically in terms of our politics, but much of what you just said could have been taken right out of my mouth. I have the same fear about this country that you do, and even for the rest of the planet. Especially with oil becoming more of a global issue, I too fear that things will be getting worse before they get better. Too much demand for an economically vital substance, not enough supply. Never a good thing.

The debt is crushing, and I have no idea how it will be paid off. Is the tide turning in Iraq? Maybe, I dont know. But is it too late at this point? Not for Iraq, but for the US. Even if we plant a stable, functioning democracy in Iraq how will we deal with this ever increasing debt? Loans? Bad idea,it means our creditors will own us. Raise taxes? While we are barely able to pay for gas?

I just dont know.

 

[Matt]

I'm with you guys. Obama won't end it. McCain won't end it. We're screwed. My only hope is that Obama loses and Mark Warner takes the White House in 2012. He has proven he knows how to fix a broken state. Hopefully he can do the same with our country.

 

[Spider-Bite]

I think this is a great election year. the country is in sad shape, because bush basically ruined everything, but as far as elections go, McCain is better than Bush, and Obama is even better than McCain and he's got so much momentum right now, this election is in the bag. Finally not some democrat catering to the middle just so they can win. We will have an actual liberal in the white house!!

And on top of that dems will make gains in the senate and the house this election. Obama will not have to fight republicans, except for a few in the senate.

 

[Matt]

Someone on the extremely far left unchecked, is just as dangerous as someone on the far right unchecked (i.e. Bush for the first 6 years). Then again, I doubt you would understand that Spider-Bite.

 

[The Senator]

For me, the Senate and House races are a little more exciting than the Presidential race. I was a fan of Obama as a rising star in the Democratic Party. I was even a fan of possibly including Obama on the 2008 ticket as a VP. But I was not a fan of Obama as a presidential candidate.

While it is becoming increasingly evident that Obama will probably win this election, I am still not all that excited. Obama has yet to prove to me that he has a solid plan for success, and that he truly will be able to reverse the course this country has been on for the past seven years.

Add this to the fact that my top four choices for President (Warner, Bayh, Fengold and Gore) did not run, and you can see why I haven't been the biggest fan of this election cycle...

 

[deathshead2]

I worried about the voters, myself and alot of my friends are voting this year. I'm still trying to decide who to cast my vote for, while all my friends have decided to vote for Obama. Sadly the only reason they want to vote for his pull troops out of Iraq thing. Not saying thats a bad things, I just think it's sad thats all they care about. That and he seems to be hip and cool to them.

 

[Matt]

The irony is, Obama is not going to keep his promise to pull troops out. He already said he would not if there is proof of Al-Queda operating in Iraq (and they are).

 

[deathshead2]

The irony is, Obama is not going to keep his promise to pull troops out. He already said he would not if there is proof of Al-Queda operating in Iraq (and they are).

Well I guess my friends just want to vote for him now cus he's hip and cool. Great

 

[DACrowe]

Yeah, dude growing up makes you realize that. There was never an "innocent" time in history. Merely we all begin innocent and childhood is innocent for all of us. I remember the 1990s as an "innocent" fun time, but now looking back historically the decade was all skin surface and there was a growing apathy left over from the Reagan-era policies that encouraged narcissism and self-interest in the 1980s (which exploded more in the 1990s with the Cold War over and a president who knew how to manage the economy). It just caused all sorts of antipathy. There was Rwanda, Somolua, Bosnia, Clinton and his sex scandals, an apprehension warning signs of what was happening in the Middle East, etc.

This decade has been really ****ed up. My wake up call, I suppose, was the 2000 elections. But we all have it. But you look back there was never a simpler times when things were black and white. You (as we all do) become more self-aware. Bush did **** up and I think all realize now Iraq was a mistake that squandered our good will post-9/11 and our opportunity to make a difference in Afghanistan (and thusly Darfur and now Iran). I have lost faith in politics in 2000, so I already knew Bush was screwing up, but damn...growing up and becoming self-aware of our world sucks, don't it?

At least you are becoming aware. Many Americans like to cling to the idealism they are taught as children by simplified history and Disney movies. There are many who don't want to think on that wider scope.

 

[DACrowe]

I'm with you guys. Obama won't end it. McCain won't end it.

I agree with that part. Anyone looking for miracle answers from a single politician or election cycle is kidding themselves. With that said, I think there is a clear difference in policy this election and it is far more promising than the choices in 2004, but anyone thinking either is a perfect answer to our nation's problems want to revert back to the days when blissful ignorance was preferred. But that is not a cause to lose faith in the system we have or patriotism either.

 

[deathshead2]

^Sweet your from Nc! I know off topic, but did you go to Heros?

 

[DACrowe]

No I did not see anybody special today. I did see Bill Clinton when he came to Apex in April and Obama when he came to Chapel Hill. If McCain shows up, I'll see him to.

BTW if we go off-topic on NC, a small thing. I see people throwing around Mike Easley's name as a possible VP for Obama and how he is "so loved in NC." I really wonder who determines these things. Most North Carolinians I think are rather ambivalent about Easley. He was elected on the goodwill and endorsement of a beloved NC governor, Jim Hunt (who did far a lot of damage people forget about and Easley spent his first term trying to fix with mixed results). Easley's second term has been lackluster and he is accepted as governor, but with apathy. He would not carry NC and would be a cosmetic choice. Especially as this is his last year and he chose to spend it by using taxpayers money to buy a $50,000 trip to Italy for his family and friends. Really.

 

[chaseter]

It is a sad election year because Obama is running off being 'hip' and 'cool' and 'calm' without any merit as a politician and no serious plans to fix this country other than by keep saying change this and change that. And then we have McCain who is in the thick of most of the problems with the current white house and helping boost oil prices. If McCain continues to stay a liberal Republican...we will be better off than a far left Democrat which is just as bad as what we have now...a far right Republican.

I just wish that the loser of the primaries would become the vice president and get some bipartisanship going in a partisan government.

 

[luke1234]

It is sad. Its sad to grow up and realize the world you knew is not what it really is and its a punch in the gut. Right now its real easy to lose faith in our country and civilization with Terrorism and AlQaeda, Nukes, and this Energy Crisis knocking on our door. But this has been happening all the time. LIke the other guy said No time was innocent people just went on with their normal lived in a bubble of their own worlds. I see this with my mom and step dad. They dont care about the future of energy and war they're worried about retirement. Thats how life is. Its easy to lose faith but you must realize that though we may be voting for the canidate who seems less of a tool, theres still good in this world. (Benazar Bhutto taught us that.)

 

[deathshead2]

I heard that about Mike as well. I think only people are caring about him now is because a guy from NC could be VP which would make everyone here feel special I guess. I don't really think he stands a chance of being VP next to other rumored canidates.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Someone on the extremely far left unchecked, is just as dangerous as someone on the far right unchecked (i.e. Bush for the first 6 years). Then again, I doubt you would understand that Spider-Bite.

Kennedy? He is considered the most liberal person in congress and is credited for much success.

What about Lincoln? For his time he was pretty far left, and he acheived more success than any other president in history.

 

[rdh007]

I agree that we're living at the end times of the American Empire. I only hope that we have a relatively small loss of life as we transition into the beginnings of the Lichtensteinian Empire.

Spoiler

No, seriously, we can't let banks from every other country own us and expect this to come out pretty.

 

[lazur]

Kennedy? He is considered the most liberal person in congress and is credited for much success.

What about Lincoln? For his time he was pretty far left, and he acheived more success than any other president in history.

Lincoln was a republican.

Also, this thread isn't about whether republicans or democrats are better. If you want to talk about that BS, make another thread.

 

[Matt]

Kennedy? He is considered the most liberal person in congress and is credited for much success.

What about Lincoln? For his time he was pretty far left, and he acheived more success than any other president in history.

Kennedy did not have much success, his legacy is greatly overexaggerated due to his assassination. He was unable to work with his Republican Congress because he was so far left. The only success he had was the Cuban missile crisis, and the only reason that was successful is because no one wanted to be blown off the face of the Earth. Everything else was LBJ after he died (but Kennedy gets the credit because Kennedy was shot).

As for Lincoln, different time, different politics.

 

[The Senator]

I think Spider-Bite is referring to Ted Kennedy. Considering he used the word "is" in his response, which refers to the current. In which case, he's completely off the mark, considering Ted Kennedy was never president and we're talking about a far-left president.

Also, John F. Kennedy was not far left, his political views were in the dead center, similar to those of FDR and Truman. LBJ was a far-left liberal who pretty much went unchecked, and he led us into the disaster which was Vietnam. So, I agree with Matt-- a far-left liberal left unchecked could be as disastrous as a far-right conservative left unchecked.

 

[Tag279]

Kennedy did not have much success, his legacy is greatly overexaggerated due to his assassination. He was unable to work with his Republican Congress because he was so far left. The only success he had was the Cuban missile crisis, and the only reason that was successful is because no one wanted to be blown off the face of the Earth. Everything else was LBJ after he died (but Kennedy gets the credit because Kennedy was shot).

Kennedy drafted a lot of the civil rights legislation that was passed under LBJ. Republicans at that time were more receptive to civil rights than they were during Nixon. This was due to the fact that many Democrats changed party during Kennedy and LBJ's administration. Meny Democrats were severely opposed to civil rights legislation. The Democratic party was more conservative at the time.

As for Lincoln, different time, different politics.

Republicans were more progressive during Lincoln's time.

 

[Matt]

Never the less, Kennedy's inability to work with Congress is the reason he did not pass his civil rights legislation but LBJ did due to his ability to work with Congress and the momentum from Kennedy's death. And I am aware Republicans were the progressive party in Lincoln's time/.

 

[The Senator]

Never the less, Kennedy's inability to work with Congress is the reason he did not pass his civil rights legislation but LBJ did due to his ability to work with Congress and the momentum from Kennedy's death. And I am aware Republicans were the progressive party in Lincoln's time/.

Correct. Back in the day, and up until LBJ, the Democrats were considered the proponents of slavery and "Jim Crow" laws.

But back to Kennedy... you are absolutely correct. LBJ was an experienced politician, and as a former Senate majority leader, he knew how to make alliances with both Democrats and Republicans. That's the whole reason why his Civil Rights legislation and welfare expansions passed in Congress. JFK was ill-seasoned in that regard, and I'm under the impression that, had he lived to serve out two terms, he probably wouldn't be considered one of our greatest presidents... just a mediocre one at best...

 

[Tag279]

Never the less, Kennedy's inability to work with Congress is the reason he did not pass his civil rights legislation but LBJ did due to his ability to work with Congress and the momentum from Kennedy's death. And I am aware Republicans were the progressive party in Lincoln's time/.

That is not an entirely fair statement Matt after Kennedy made the first draft of the civil rights act he was killed he was unable to submit it. Much of the legislation Kennedy drafted LBJ submitted.