dieAntagonista:

That and the unknown factor. People fear Obama because he brings to the table a great unknown. Obama has not been around long enough for people to have a gauge on him, and that scares people. His limited voting record in the Senate is very liberal, but contradicts his message. He is very good at telling people what they want to hear, but the public has grown wary of trusting what any politician says. If he holds his lead until election day, I only hope he delivers on what he says. I like much of what he says, but as a voter, I have to look at what he has done. That’s why I won’t vote for him. At least with McCain I know what I am getting. A staunch defender of my country who will not take away my right to put a cap in some cock sucker trying to steal my TV at three in the morning.

dieAntagonista:

What can I say? I’m a conservative Democrat(if there can be such a thing). If McCain gets in a bind, he will turn to his party for advice. I am much more comfortable with that idea than Obama turning to his. I’m a Democrat, but I don’t think the party leaders represent me. They seem much more concerned with helping people who have no interest in helping themselves than helping the struggling people who actually try to contribute to society.

I’m more interested in a stuffed beaver.

dieAntagonista:

Isn’t it weired that we think that people who don’t share our oppinion are some how uneducated. I am guilty of it from time to time as well. You want to know what really gets me though? It would appear as though both you and I have researched the same facts, formed two opposite oppinions, and will cast our ballots in favor of two vastly different leaders for two vastly different reasons. I’m o.k. with that. It’s the fact that this election will not be decided by informed voters, rather those who have not done the research. Those are the truly ignorant people. Those who form their oppinion based on what their friends think, or merely what they get from the highly polarized news services that pisses me off.

nyokki:
Checks and balances are essential to our
democracy. Else it’s just another dictatorship.

I think McCain truly belives in his message and is confused why Obama is still leading.

I think Obama truly believes that his message will confuse the voters.

A subtle difference I know.

Who do you think would be a good candidate? Just curious who you guys would choose without being restricted to the two we have now.

Since it was brought up, let’s talk about greed. I think it is interesting that people always seem to associate wealth with greed. I look at it like this: There can only be so much wealth in the world. For any individual to gain wealth, someone else has to lose wealth. Maybe the wealthy are greedy, and maybe the poor should exercise a little more restraint in their spending. Maybe you shouldn’t purchase $8000 wheels to put on a car you bought for second hand for $3500. Maybe you should have settled for a smaller house rather than one you neither need nor can afford. I find it amazing that in less than 10 years, a starter home has gone from a 2 bedroom, 1000 sq. ft. modest house to 4 bedroom 3500 sq. ft. house. Now, is it the lender just being greedy, tricking people into loans they can’t afford? Is the consumer the greedy one, attempting to live beyond his/her means? I personally don’t think the blame lies solely with lending industry. I know what I can afford, and no amount of double talk and fine print can make me believe I can afford more. I would hold myself responsible if I chose to live beyond my means.

All this talk about “spreading the wealth” makes me sick. It is a fundamental difference I hold with the leaders of the Democratic party. The idea that giving someone, for free, something they did not earn, by taking it away from someone who did is going to solve either of their problems is simply retarded. It only creates dependency while dismissing personal responsibility. It is handy to think that the wealthy of the world came through the window like a cracked out Tooth Fairy and stole all of our money while we slept. That’s handy indeed. It gives me someone to blame. It completely ignores the truth of things, however. The truth that the wealthy got that way by bettering theirselves, little by little, generation by generation. Meanwhile the poor have gotten that way by doing nothing. Accepting their social stature as the ceiling and not the floor. Constantly handing over their money, land and freedom to anyone willing to take it.

Those are the extremes of the spectrum of wealth. Most of us lie somewhere in the middle. The middle is where transition of social stature takes place. Some of us are on the way up, standing on the backs of our parents who worked their entire lives so that their children can have life a little better than they had it. That’s the sweet side of the story. The other side, the side we choose to write off, is that for us to make this upward transition, someone else has to be on the downward spiral. One can say that the decline is a result of the greed of those of us on the incline. The truth of the matter, however, is that the ones losing wealth are the ones most willing to part with it. It has been said that if we were to redistribute all of the worlds wealth evenly among the population, in ten years time, The poor would be poor again and the same people who were wealthy whould be wealthy again.