The Facts

[AZhitman]

Is there something wrong with the idea of socialism or communism? Look at how the idea of Democracy has manifested.

If you don't know the answer to this, World History 101 is mandatory.

I'm guessing you're joking, or you've been fooling us all with glimmers of intellect.

[480sx]

Come on man, i was specific. The idea of communism and socialism isnt half bad, it is flawed in ways, same as a democracy. In practice, it sucks, sucks hard.

China is kicking A right now with communism. A vast majority of people are happy and quite patriotic. A large section is also very unhappy, repressed, and miserable, however the masses are happy. Their countries economy is booming, 10% gain for like 8-9 years strait.

Dont get me wrong, I cant stand China. Im just playing devils advocate here.

Its hard to completely dismiss everything that a communist or socialist government entails. There are good points to some of the ideas, and bad points as well.

Are you suggesting that a Democracy is the 'true' and 'right' way to run a country?

[telcoman]

Interesting that you're the only one who has access to this information, given the early ballots are locked up.

BTW, I voted early because I'll be out of the state.

I don't need to vote to "feel important".

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27308749/

I watch real news

[AZhitman]

China is kicking A right now with communism. A vast majority of people are happy and quite patriotic.

China is shatting the bed, my friend.

If you think the "vast majority" would choose their current lot in life over what we have here, you're nuts. Do you KNOW anyone who's emigrated from China? Are you familiar with the ridiculous mandates they place on their citizens? Are you aware of the suicide rate? The condition of their air and water? The government intrusion into their personal lives?

Back to school, brotha.

They can have all the so-called prosperity they want. Without freedom, it's useless.

Then again, you've never experienced NOT having freedom, so I can't blame you for not comprehending its value.

Are you suggesting that a Democracy is the 'true' and 'right' way to run a country?

Absolutely. Since the dawn of civilization, it's been the only way.

To suggest otherwise implies that the Constitution is a worthless piece of paper.

[AZhitman]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27308749/

I watch real news

Watching it and understanding it are very different.

Nothing in that tells you that early ballots are favoring one candidate over another.

Hence, your prior statement is null and void (as we've become accustomed to).

[480sx]

China is shatting the bed, my friend.

If you think the "vast majority" would choose their current lot in life over what we have here, you're nuts. Do you KNOW anyone who's emigrated from China? Are you familiar with the ridiculous mandates they place on their citizens? Are you aware of the suicide rate? The condition of their air and water? The government intrusion into their personal lives?

Back to school, brotha.

They can have all the so-called prosperity they want. Without freedom, it's useless.

You say these things because you are an American, and the idea of a overbearing regime like that of China is absurd to you, as it is to all Americans. However, how are you to say that those people who are happy with Chinas success because they to, dont know any other way, are flawed? What might not be right for you, might be right for some.

Im not even going to get into the rest of what you brought up, China is a disaster, IMHO.

Then again, you've never experienced NOT having freedom, so I can't blame you for not comprehending its value. .

Your absolutely right, i, like most, am a spoiled American who takes the Constitution for granted.

Absolutely. Since the dawn of civilization, it's been the only way.

Not true at all. Many happy and prosperous civilizations lived under a Monarch. World history 101?

To suggest otherwise implies that the Constitution is a worthless piece of paper

It absolutely IS a worthless piece of paper(ignoring its awesomeness, please). The Constitution is NOTHING without a country willing to know it, support it, and LIVE it.

To this current executive branch, the Constitution IS a worthless piece of paper.

[audtatious]

A common mans background is to bounce around the US to five different colleges(Hawaii being one of them) never attending a single one for more than on average ~1.75 semesters?

Who said anything about intelligence here? Talking strictly about educational backgrounds. However, since you bought it up, you have seen her talk right? I dont care if your being baited or not, theres no legitimate excuse. What the hell is the relevance to your last comment?

I've, uh...uhm...seen Oba..uh..ah..Obama talk...uhm...uhh...too.

Educational background does not make intelligence. If that were the case then I would not be paid well to go in and fix a corporations infrastructure that was put in place by those with Masters, Bachelors and multiple other degrees. My point is that a high end college degree does not mean you are intelligent nor have the answers. Just because Obama went to Harvard (and Occidental and Columbia) does not mean he has the answers nor does that even mean he is more intelligent than you nor I. Sorry but I don't subscribe to the "He went to Harvard and must know more than I so he should be able to solve MY problems for me" mentality.

Your almost 100 percent correct here. Maybe there are a few 'state issues' that might have some parallels with the job of a VP. Maybe.

Uhm...Wouldn't you think that someone who ran the Gov for a State (management + balancing budgets, etc) has more working knowledge of running something than someone who only looks at individual issues at a time? I'm FAR from saying that Palin is some wonderkind, I'm simply saying she has experience at that level that Obama, Biden nor McCain have. Simply discrediting her based upon population is asinine.

In recent years, this actually seems to be coming out of the GOP a lot more than democrats. How many affairs, bathroom stall misunderstandings, and outright BS has come out of the GOP in the last 8 years? LOTS.

Happens to both sides and I want them all immediately replaced.

Oh and by the way, 'do what you wana do' is more of an American philosophy. Freedom to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. First amendment. 2nd amendment. Need i go on?

It's fine as long as you are not a Christian or against abortion. Just saying you are a Christian is akin to shoving religion down someones throats as is being anti-abortion. Now, if you are a gay Republican then you should be chased down and persecuted by the same people who are pressing forth for gay rights. If you are a female running for VP then groups like NOW must be against you because you are not a Dem and doing it their way. If you are a black republican then you are an Uncle Tom until you speak out and support the Democratic nominee, then you are applauded as a hero. I'm all for supporting the Constitution and at least I don't chastise someone for doing as I do, unlike the liberal left. I simply want to be left the fuk alone and not forced to pay into programs nor social agendas that I don't believe in.

On another note, pursuit of happiness /= Gov makes sure you are happy and have everything you want.

I have seen so much democratic campaigning on just this exact thing.

Someone sure is instituting agendas. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/i...78829Obama is for starting sex education in kindergarten as well although he likes to throw out "age appropriate" with his comments on it. I've seen news reports showing some of the material which included dolls with genitalia, etc. I admit, they don't teach proper condom use with bananas at least until the 5th grade

So much of this is BS. Yea, he did drugs going through school and wrote a book. K. Does it make you a hero? Who the FVK said that. We all grow up in our own unique ways.

His wife hates the USA? Listen to yourself, do you really believe that?

WHO DOESNT HAVE A RACIST FAMILY MEMBER?!?

The terrorlst ties? Give me a freaken break. That has been discounted so many times in so many ways, you dont even fully stand behind the statement.

Is there something wrong with the idea of socialism or communism? Look at how the idea of Democracy has manifested.

You must be joking. His school records are sealed, his list of donors are sealed, his wife found nothing to be proud about the US until he came into office (yeah, hate may be a strong word), he sucked at writing but all of a sudden came out with this eloquent book in which he has never actually come out and stated that HE wrote it, he has quite the history with socialists, communists, racists, etc. and he's not hiding anything and is MR Red White and Blue.....

Right. You believe what you want. If he becomes President I will support him as such until he starts phucking things up, then he will be derided as much as Bush has been by the left.

I go off on a tangent enough for you? I wanna make sure you have plenty to retort to.

[dblanehopr]

abortion, don't agree with. maybe we shouldn't teach our kids that screwing is the only things important enough to sell commercials, sports, and of course clothing. i know what freedom is, i've had it revoked a couple times, and had it suppressed a few by the local law enforcement doing whatever they want to because they don't like how i'm dressed.

the healthcare should be free, as in Canada. but you don't get this without being a little socialist now do you? all you people want help from the government, but don't want the government to be involved. it's dumb.as for privacy invasion; i understand both sides of it.. invade privacy and find the guy that just sexually assaulted a 90 year old woman last weekend here. but also gives cops the idea that they are infallible and can say or do whatever they want to to you. been subject to that plenty of times.

personally what i don't get about american voters is their idiodic defending of opposing parties. it's pretty freaking simple. it doesn't matter who's in office as long as they're doing what they're supposed to. why do they have to split spending all to one topic? wtf don't they just continuously spend the correct amounts on all topics, term after term.. then we wouldn't have a rollercoaster in every freaking social structure. it would be constant and steady improvment acrossed the board.

i know something that would solve everyone's problems, and there's absolutely not real and true defense against this: population control, a limit of allowed children and overall population census.

healthcare wouldn't be stretched. food would be abundant. jobs would be easy to find. the economy would be stretched out.

but that's not going to happen because most people think it's their birthright to have 3-20 children eating up the food and land and resources like they're effing ENDLESS.

i don't vote. why?, because it doesn't matter who is in office, the next term will do the exact opposite because of the rollercoaster funding. a democrat is going to lower taxes (losing gov spending money) and spend the remaining money on stuff like healthcare, soc. sec., government programs until they run out and then raise them again. a republican is going to raise taxes (getting more gov. spending money) and spend it on making more money so that they can spend it on healthcare, soc. sec, government programs until people start complaining about taxes and then lower them again.

it doesn't really matter who's in office; unless they have some underlying agenda like the Bush administration that was continuing on the agendas of the 50's, all Presidents are going to react in pretty much the same ways. and since the agenda has been around long enough to live through both parties in power, i don't see a DAMN thing changing.

at least not until a bunch of sane civilians stop bickering over BS like you ppl here, and start using common sense and common economy/funding cooperation.

everyone wants the US to be perfect for them, until they realize a govenment gets it's money from the public or colonial conquests such as gold. when they realize you have to pay for stuff like anything else in life, then it's like total surprise.

YEAH, I'D LOVE TO HAVE AN S13 WITH A NASCAR MOTOR AND A CHASSIS THAT CAN HANDLE THAT POWER AROUND A HAIRPIN TURN, AND EVERY LITTLE NICE THING INBETWEEN, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE CASH FOR IT. SO WHAT DO I DO TO GET IT? I WORK MORE (TAXES).

it's a choice. do you want government help or not? and if you do, you've got to pay for it. i really don't see how they'd be taking away our freedoms by operating all the little things that we really want without having to pay for them. at the same time, just because they're paying for my anisteethsha *lol, f-u, i don't know how to spell it, but you know what i just said*, doesn't mean they have to control my personal life.

point is, if you want them to do something. TELL THEM TO DO IT. that's what the constitution is for. but you're too busy b****in at each other about who you're going to allow lead you when they're going to do the same freaking thing either way. lie to you, and do whatever they feel like is best for the greater good. and like any other bit of life, they're going to throw crap acrossed the board instead of being particular about what goes where and how it's exercised.

in the end, i could care less who's in office, just as long as i don't have ex-military cops running around like they're freaking Judges in that famous selvester stalone flick.

ever try to dispute what a cop said happened in court? you'll be bankrupt before you even get an appeal. that's all that matters to me.. the end of abuse of power without handing the cities over to homicidal maniacs that are either pissed off at their classmates or just plain figure the world owes them something.

[dblanehopr]

if you noticed, i promoted overall spending and particular spending at the same time. pretty much what happens no matter who's in office.

here's a good exercise on how well your opinion would actually change how things operate, rather than the government just doing whatever they want as they already do.

walk up to a cop and tell him that he's an ahole punk b**** and a limp dik that's never going to leave his contractor's toolbelt, it's perfectly legal. now, when he illegally busts you and you try to use your "inalienable rights" to walk away free, ENJOY TRYING TO EXERCISE YOU'RE AMERICAN FREEDOM AFTER THE COURT RULES YOU GUILTY AND POSSIBLY IN CONTEMPT FOR TRYING TO ENFORCE YOUR CONSTITUTION. loopholes are a PITA; the government has plenty.

the worst part about it... they've got you fighting with each other so much over plainly obvious misleads, that it's just gonna get worse each decade. who cares what the name is, or who it is in power... as long as they're doing WHAT WE TELL THEM TO DO.

we're the ones paying for them to tell us what to do right? doesn't make much sense does it? when i'm paying for someone to work for me, they do what i tell them to do or they can find another job.

[sensibleS13driver]

Wow! By reading that post I correctly guessed what car you drive and what color it is!

[dblanehopr]

lol what? a toyota overborred v8 block with a single cam riding on needle bearings, in a completely rebuilt s13 chassis? ha, no, still stock KA. she just drives around and looks fast.

[audtatious]

Can we assume that you having a primer car means you are the poor that would benefit from taking money outta my pocket?

[dblanehopr]

nope. you can assume i have a black primed car, because i like black primer and the original paint looked like crap.

noone's going to sway me on how i feel about the gov. whether democrat or republican, it's always going to do whatever it feels like until enough people say we don't want them to do it that way.

but since they've made it easier to give reason to declare Martial Law, i think it's a little late to be telling the government that I would like them to continue being We the People, For the People, By the People. *shrugs* we live in the best country on earth, we've progressed everything known to man, and we still have more freedoms that any other country. sides Canada. so tell me why we would go from a country that was founded on the government not being able to whip us into control through military or laws, to a country that's doing the opposite. i'm not a conspiracy theorist or some crap, I just wish I could trust them not to take away my rights.

consider how when martial law was established in N.Orleans, how they were revoking gun licenses, or doing warrantless raids.

now i'm not saying i'm on a criminal's side.. in a lot of cases i believe steps should be taken to prevent high murderrates and criminal activity. but who's to say what's going to happen down the road if americans don't stop fighting with each other and just do everything together like any other progressive country.

*shrugs* it's always been a hard debate on how to fix our country. it'll keep being one. i don't know, i'm not the best political analyst anyways. i just dont like cops running around acting like they've got the right to be rude and pushy because they can get away with it. someone needs to establish a way of keeping that from happening. a while back Dallas was needing more cops... they started hiring all types. 3 or 4 of em got caught driving a stolen vehicle on the highway. many more were felons.

it just doesn't seem right to give that much sway and power to someone that's most likely a cop just to get away with stuff, or got insulted a lot in school and wants revenge, or was in the military and can't quit the drug adrenalin. there's a lot of good cops out there, and i'm proud to have known a few of em. i have a lot of respect for those guys. and enjoyed hearing them tell me that there's a lot of bad cops that do wrong things.

everyone has their issues that sway them to vote one way or another. that's what this govenment is all about, being able to vote how you feel things should change because thats what's important to your experiences and life. for me, the things that make others vote for aren't as important to me. for me, the issue of bad cops doesn't really count in a presidential election. and i don't feel i should vote because i'd basically be throwing a vote out there on a bunch of issues i'm not in tune with and on the fence for. i don't feel it's right for me to vote when i don't agree with the way things are ran either way it lands.
Modified by dblanehopr at 1:34 AM 10/24/2008

[audtatious]

So, you like the look of primer, think Martial Law is coming and guns are going to be taken away, think the Gov has too much power, don't like rude and pushy cops but know some good ones. Right?

Well, I like to think, I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech, and freedom of choice. I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly may feel the need to, okay?

And all this really has to do with what?

[AZhitman]

consider how when martial law was established in N.Orleans, how they were revoking gun licenses, or doing warrantless raids.

Tell that to one of our Moderators, who was getting SHOT AT by the miscreants and losers in that city while in a helicopter trying to pluck doomed people off of rooftops.

I feel your frustration, but somewhere along the line, we HAVE to stop blaming the "system" and find some self-reliance and hold our fellow citizens accountable.

New programs, bigger government and more intervention are NOT the answer.

[HashiriyaS14]

New programs, bigger government and more intervention are NOT the answer.

Solving the problems is the answer, nothing more and nothing less.

Some problems really are best and most efficiently solved by government (not necessarily federal government). They tend to be few and far between, but they do exist. Education is one of them, so that we can uphold some semblance of universal standard, as is defense. There are others.

Other problems are quite obviously best solved by the private sector.

Strict ideology-based approaches that assert that "x" or "y" is ALWAYS wrong EVERY time, however, have little place in reality. The idea that a single philosophy can be applied to advantage in all situations is infantile. Humans tend to want to simplify the world's problems into a mantra or a catchphrase like "government is the problem", and this can be great in elections when you're trying to be snappy and appealing, but that doesn't mean it translates to reality.

Both parties are equally guilty of this sin.

Post-partisanship doesn't concern me, as I consider the back-and-forth of party politics to be a good vetting system to ensure that all voices are heard.

What interests me is post-ideological politics. One of the biggest reasons I support Obama is that he seems to support the idea that no single orthodoxy is the solution to all ills, an approach that, at least to me, appears to be the only logical alternative.

[Jesda]

When the government offers a solution, it is funded by tax payers who are forced to give up their incomes for the public "good". This means those who favor said programs take from those who disfavor it at gunpoint. Doing this may be a necessary evil, but it should be avoided.

I see this as a moral issue, and it is wrong. I do not favor the government's solution if this is the cost.

Quote »What interests me is post-ideological politics. One of the biggest reasons I support Obama is that he seems to support the idea that no single orthodoxy is the solution to all ills, an approach that, at least to me, appears to be the only logical alternative.[/quote]Except during the primary when he campaigned left of Senator Clinton and won. He's just the flame on the wick of a candle. If the wind blows hard enough he'll burn out.

[HashiriyaS14]

When the government offers a solution, it is funded by tax payers who are forced to give up their incomes for the public "good". This means those who favor said programs take from those who disfavor it at gunpoint. Doing this may be a necessary evil, but it should be avoided.

I see this as a moral issue, and it is wrong. I do not favor the government's solution if this is the cost.

Yes, but this is not a totalitarian government. Especially on the local level, people tend to have great control over the programs supported by their candidates. If the public has decided that the most efficient way to solve a problem is through government, then they are free to vote in people who will create these solutions.

If they feel that private solutions are the best alternative, then they will then in turn vote in people who will eschew public solutions and encourage private ones.

It sounds like your issue is less with the idea of the government solving problems (or not) and more with the entire concept of "majority rule". If the concept of the majority being able to exert its will, to an extent (limited by checks and balances), upon the minority is objectionable to you, I would argue that you are in fact opposed to the very idea of representative democracy.

We live in a society founded on documents that use majority rule as their guiding principle. There are indeed checks and balances built in to protect the minority, but NO competent reading of the documents would ever yield the viewpoint that individuals should somehow be completely exempted from the will of the majority. The entire electoral process is about majority rule.

The conservatives tend to favor more social limitations placed on society by the majority and the liberals tend to favor more fiscal ones, but neither side (nor, for that matter, the constitution) entertains the idea that we should all just be self-governing individuals totally exempt from the consensus of society. That would be anarchy, not America.

Cutting out government programs that suck is indeed a great cause, among the very best. Believing that we can each exist in our own vacuum however, untouched by one another, is lunacy and is absolutely contrary to the founding principles of this country.

(I'm not trying to call you Un-American, I'm really just railing against what I feel is a popular over-extension of an otherwise good set of principles. This is how ideologies get in trouble)

[WDRacing]

Tell that to one of our Moderators, who was getting SHOT AT by the miscreants and losers in that city while in a helicopter trying to pluck doomed people off of rooftops.

I feel your frustration, but somewhere along the line, we HAVE to stop blaming the "system" and find some self-reliance and hold our fellow citizens accountable.

New programs, bigger government and more intervention are NOT the answer.

That would be me...

Stupid people are going to be stupid with or without Gov intervention...PERIOD.

Anyone that wants Socialism or Communism can GTFO of the country my family has been protecting via Military for last 3 generations. WE are what we are...if you don't like it, then go somewhere else.

Personally I don't like Palin at all, I think she was a stupid choice and it's going to lose the election for McCain. Obama already won IMO. The Repub party did a great job this year of screwing the pooch. I don't really like Obama, I see him for what he is, just another politician that isn't actually going to make any major change. I won't vote Democrat because I hate Liberals. I can't give a vote to someone that will pander to the people that think the world owes them a living. Those same people that make saying Merry Christmas in public NOT PC. But that's just me...the real reason a Republican won't win this year is because we've had 8 years of the worst leadership in history under one.

Back to Palin, I kinda like the OP...biased but funny. Every time I hear her speak I wanna throw up in my mouth..."Donchaknow"...Hockey Mom or not, learn to speak for F's sake. Wanna impress me? Show me those titties

I can't believe our next President will have the name Barack Obama. That will never sit right with me.

WD

[HashiriyaS14]

I can't believe our next President will have the name Barack Obama. That will never sit right with me.

I understood it all up until here.

Why does it matter what the guy's name is?

[WDRacing]

It's not something I'm asking anyone to understand, nor agree with. Spend a few years catching bullets in the Desert or flying into hot LZs and picking up bodies full of holes. Call me prejudice, I don't care, it's my right to NOT like his name. I don't think he's a terrorlst or any of that BS, it just doesn't sit well with me. We've been at war with the Middle East since 91, now our President has a name that sounds like he could have been a road side b0mber. It's a connection that can only be made by people that have been placed in extreme conditions under extreme circumstances. It's just a personal thing Hash, the Desert makes me think of friends that I've lost. I simply connect Obama with that period in my life, totally a mental thing, but a thing just the same.

[Urabus GodofTraction]

but since they've made it easier to give reason to declare Martial Law...

Find me how they've "made it easier." I want a link to the law making it easier.

consider how when martial law was established in N.Orleans, how they were revoking gun licenses, or doing warrantless raids.

Powerhungry men already breaking the law. Mayor Negan is a r'tard. Also, there's no such thing as a "gun license" in Lousiana.

While you're looking up the martial law thing, google "Vitter law."

[telcoman]

Back to Palin, I kinda like the OP...biased but funny. Every time I hear her speak I wanna throw up in my mouth..."Donchaknow"...Hockey Mom or not, learn to speak for F's sake. Wanna impress me? Show me those titties WD

In case anyone was wondering why the McCain campaign is short on money here is why-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------NewYork Times

"Updated | 12:20 p.m. Who was the highest paid individual in Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign during the first half of October as it headed down the homestretch?

Not Randy Scheunemann, Mr. McCain’s chief foreign policy adviser; not Nicolle Wallace, his senior communications staffer. It was Amy Strozzi, Gov. Sarah Palin’s traveling makeup artist, according to a new filing with the Federal Election Commission on Thursday night.

Ms. Strozzi, who was nominated for an Emmy award for her makeup work on the television show “So You Think You Can Dance?”, was paid $22,800 for the first two weeks of October alone, according to the records. The campaign categorized Ms. Strozzi’s payment as “Personnel Svc/Equipment.”

Gee $150k for clothes, $22800 for makeup. Pretty soon it starts to become real money.

Talk about spreading the wealth around.

Telcoman

[HashiriyaS14]

It's not something I'm asking anyone to understand, nor agree with. Spend a few years catching bullets in the Desert or flying into hot LZs and picking up bodies full of holes. Call me prejudice, I don't care, it's my right to NOT like his name. I don't think he's a terrorlst or any of that BS, it just doesn't sit well with me. We've been at war with the Middle East since 91, now our President has a name that sounds like he could have been a road side b0mber. It's a connection that can only be made by people that have been placed in extreme conditions under extreme circumstances. It's just a personal thing Hash, the Desert makes me think of friends that I've lost. I simply connect Obama with that period in my life, totally a mental thing, but a thing just the same.

Fair enough.

For the record, I wasn't somehow trying to imply that you're an awful bigot, but I think (I hope) you already knew that.

I just asked a question and you answered it, and given some of your life experiences, your answer makes sense, at least to me. Being on the receiving end of gunfire is not an experience I've ever had, and thus I don't even remotely claim to be able to comment intelligently on how it affects people. It's a free country, you're allowed to not like him because he has big ears, for all I care. If you weren't allowed, I wouldn't want to live here.

One of my greatest hopes for an Obama Presidency happens to be that we might finally get on track with establishing productive relations with most of the Islamic world, as I believe that it is, by and large, populated by people that want most of the same things out of life that we do. He's not anymore of a Muslim than Dubya is, but if something about how he is perceived allows the world Muslim population to view us in a more favorable light then that's a bonus, as hopefully it will allow us to become allied with the reasonable majority in finally marginalizing and destroying the extremist minority.

The people who we're fighting don't represent the majority sentiment of any Muslim nation(s), and the sooner we can turn the Muslim majority firmly against them, the sooner we can finally hunt down the last of them and stop losing Americans, military and civilian alike, to their bombs and bullets.

It's not why I'm voting for him, but it doesn't hurt.

[WDRacing]

I wasn't somehow trying to imply that you're an awful bigot

BAH..."I fart in you general direction"

[AZhitman]

I can certainly comprehend where Brian is coming from, and I have NOT had the experiences he has.

I don't know if it makes me a "racist", but then again, I don't care.

We all have some degree of innate, yet unfounded apprehension about people who are percieved as "different" from us.

Here, let's take it to the extreme: You know nothing about the two candidates, but here's the tickets -

Daniel J. Washington and his running mate Martha Haynes McCormick

vs

Aasiyah Abu-Jahl and his running mate Shaneequah Malikkia Vanunuu.

Pick your yard sign.

[HashiriyaS14]

Here, let's take it to the extreme: You know nothing about the two candidates, but here's the tickets -

Daniel J. Washington and his running mate Martha Haynes McCormick

vs

Aasiyah Abu-Jahl and his running mate Shaneequah Malikkia Vanunuu.

Pick your yard sign.

Well played.

In all seriousness though, the answer to this probably has something to do with how the respondent views America. If the respondent sees America as something that has some identity outside of the people who live in it that needs to be somehow preserved, they'd likely opt for the first sign. If the respondent views America as something that is shaped entirely by those who inhabit it, something that can thus change drastically depending on the makeup of it's population, then they might pick the second sign or simply opt out of picking based solely on names.

[WDRacing]

Shaneequah Malikkia Vanunuu.

Pick your yard sign.

That is the next screen name I'm going to use when I sign up for anything.

[AZhitman]

I tapped that in college. Good times.

[Jesda]

We've spent the last three hundred years adding more government to our lives. At some point, its become a hindrance.

Government is like fire. You can cook, you can heat homes, and you can turn garbage into ashes. But just because it does a few things reasonably well doesn't mean you should start burning everything. And burning people without their consent is wrong.

I think its naive, at best, to see government as the solution, especially federal government. Localities can manage their resources and needs far more effectively if really necessary. Micromanaging the country from the white house never works.