McCain's Speech

[Wasabista]

Originally Posted by Fooflowers

i WOULD love for america to elect a president who isnt "all happy" after he gets a sentence right, shits seriously retarted HES YOURE FUKING PRESIDENT!!!1

Fooflowers seems to be a piss taker but he has a point. Whoever wins the election, the President of the United States will be a non-moron for the first time in eight years. If McCain buys it, and he's already a 72-year-old cancer survivor, you could have a president who is, if not a moron, at least batshiat crazy.

[theAlphaDuck]

have to agree with ivi0nk3y here...

Global Destruction??.....

i take it you've never been to a war zone,
and youve never seen a dead body.

like a child your views are....

[ivi0nk3y]

Originally Posted by Tenchu

Yeah well, I'm just sayin it, we're all thinking it...

That movie is just a comedy.

Seriously, your remark came out of no where and was pretty misguided. You can not criticise someone for changing their mind, and I made only small changes about most things in the big picture. It is not a negative thing.

A women can sit down with a baby in one arm and a cup in the other and make a fuckload of money in Bangkok. It was been discovered that women forced into prostitution who were not making enough were instead used as beggars on the street, many with children also bought in slave trades or fuck knows where. Where a prostitute can make a company about 2,000 THB per day ($80 US) some beggard can match it with about 3,000 Baht a day if they have the right look. So you can see the problem. Giving to beggars is not only futile, yet it also half the time fuels prostitution and slave trade... things in this world are so inter twined it is hard to even step out side your door without becoming a criminal... hell, with the internet, television, even electricity you manage to fuck shit up even from the safety of your home...

Its not the that giving to individual beggars is futile but that you say "the world is full of poor, if we were to fix it all then there would be more overcrowding" etc.
Firstly, its quite evident that the amount of poor isn't going away any time soon. Even so, this in no way should deter anyone from helping someone in such a situation, if they can. In a situation where i'm faced with a dying kid for instance, it is a test for me to try and help, as much as it is for them to survive. I have the responsibility to do so as does anyone else with morals.
Secondly, the only way the situation of so many starving people would be resolved is if there was a balance in the resources on Earth. If people were happy with what they have up to a point, instead of consuming the share of someone else, then poorer people wouldn't need to breed so much for a better chance of survival. Places like India and Africa are made worse because if each family didn't have 5 kids or more, what hope would they ever have of a better future? Working in Cotton fields and shit is ridiculous for the amount that these people are paid. Why do you think there is so much child labour?
Only education can work and the reshaping of greed in society, rather than put in systems like Communism which have their own flaws.
Yes giving to individual beggars like your example is futile in the long run. That is why I rather give to charities who can improve on a certain areas situation as well as sponsor as many kids as I can at one time.
Still I was more pissed at you for wanting McCain to win, just cos you want more genocide. I know you're not a pussy like some members of this forum, who rather preach to others about killing themselves but won't consider their own advice like the little bitches they are.
Or are you?

[SSJup81]

I used to sponsor two children. I did it for a long time, until about December of last year when I finally ran out of the extra money from the other job I had. I hated the fact I had to do so, though. I always liked giving stuff to charities since I like helping others. I know it wasn't much, but it was something.

Originally Posted by MMM

So we should elect presidents based on how f-able they are? Thank you, Tenchu, for bringing this discussion to the lowest level possible.

Ironic...I just came across this...



As a woman, I was insulted and, imo, most men should be too. He just pretty much labeled all men as sexist pigs who only gives a woman any kind of attention if she looks good enough and if she's good looking enough to get into bed with. I feel sorry for those men who actually do care about issues as opposed to looks since, apparently, men who think with the head on their shoulders is a rarity as far as this election is concerned.

[Sutiiven]

To be honest i think the best thing to about him is he served 22 yrs in the military and i think that should be a rule for anyone who runs

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Sutiiven

To be honest i think the best thing to about him is he served 22 yrs in the military and i think that should be a rule for anyone who runs

I think that should be a requirement for military generals, but why should it be a requirement for a president? Military expertise is only one part of a president's job.

[Sutiiven]

True very true but i think some should at least serve the country before so at hand if something comes they have the experience to know what to do.

[SSJup81]

Originally Posted by Sutiiven

True very true but i think some should at least serve the country before so at hand if something comes they have the experience to know what to do.

IMO, whether or not someone was in the military should be irrelevant. My aunt was in the Navy for 10 years (she got out after she became pregnant), should she run for the Presidency? My friend, who is currently stationed in Hawaii, has been in the Navy for 10 years and going for another ten, which means he'll have 20 years military experience when he retires. Should he run based on just that?

IMO, I would feel more comfortable with someone who has held some type of an actual government office than just military experience. IMO, this type of person is probably better suited to work under the President in a position dealing directly with the military, if the only thing being considered is that person's military experience.

[Sutiiven]

not what i meant Gov experience as well as Military unlike Bama which only 143 days in congress

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Sutiiven

True very true but i think some should at least serve the country before so at hand if something comes they have the experience to know what to do.

So they should also be teachers so they know how to deal with education.

Doctors, so they understand healthcare.

Lawyers, so they can deal with the law.

Economists, so they can understand taxes.

Shall I keep going....?