Your Vote, Your Reasons

[Extra Stout]

I will reply to the original intent of the thread.

I wrote in John McCain in 2004 because I was dissatisfied with the Bush Administration. I thought he misled the country into Iraq. My vote amounted to nothing of course, since McCain wasn't running and Texas does not count those votes.

So when McCain won the nomination in 2008, I figured if he was good enough for me in 2004, he was good enough for me in 2008. When all the controversies about Barack Obama came in the news, I studied his views and came to the conclusion he was a really smart, talented, sincere guy who held a lot of views which I found somewhere between wrong (on role of government, economic ideas) and abhorrent (abortion).

When McCain picked Sarah Palin, a dark horse whose name I already had heard, I thought it was a brilliant pick to revitalize the base and bring young new talent to the forefront of the GOP. At least, I thought that at first. Then I found out that she knows absolutely nothing about national issues. I mean, zero. People who read magazines at the doctor's office know more than she does. She might as well be a goat herder in Pakistan.

Now I don't think you need to be Patrick Henry Moynihan to run for Vice President, but I can't abide total ignorance, no matter how much people at rallies love her.

This made me doubt McCain's judgment. Was he just that desperate? Even so, this is a campaign for President of the United States, and I at least expect it to be taken seriously by the candidates. That was not a serious pick.

Then the economic crisis came down. This was something I kind of anticipated a few years ago. The housing market seemed totally out of whack exactly the same way the stock market was out of whack in 2000. Even though the economy was "strong," it looked like it was all on paper due to easy credit. So when it finally fell, I wasn't shocked. I didn't understand right away exactly why all these banks were failing, but I studied and figured it out.

Then I contrasted the behavior of the candidates. John McCain pulled a stunt where he "suspended" his campaign to work on a rescue package for the credit markets. Then the Republicans shot it down, and blamed Nancy Pelosi for making a partisan speech, an excuse that made no sense whatsoever. They were afraid of getting voted out is the reality, just like the 40% of Democrats who voted no!

Then the second debate came. By this time, I had read about credit default swaps and other derivatives, and understood how the deregulation ended up magnifying risk and endangering the financial system. When I listened to the debate, it was clear to me that at least Obama understood the crisis, while John McCain still really had no idea what was going on.

I started reading economists. Paul Krugman, who I'd long dismissed as a partisan hack, seemed to have the best handle on the crisis, and theories that explained both what was happening, and why the Fed and other central banks were doing what they were doing. Other left-of-center economists were similarly on top of things. Right-wing economists like Donald Luskin ranged between wrong and ignorant. I learned about Krugman's theory of the "reverse-S" curve and multiple macroeconomic equilibria. The best the right could do was blame the crisis on a bill President Carter passed. My intelligence was thoroughly insulted. At this point, I began questioning my right-wing economic beliefs. Do Republicans even believe them? I began to think that the free market is just a hypothetical that cannot exist in real life due to human nature, and that there is just good and bad regulation. I began to consider Obama's economic views.

In Iraq, though I believe and hope the war is coming to a positive conclusion for the Iraqis, I am ambivalent about whether in sum it served American interests. I don't think Iraq will spark a democratic renaissance in the world; rather, I think a big part of Bush's legacy is the discrediting and retreat of democratic regimes in the world since the Iraq invasion. I am not satisfied with "resource security" as a justification either on moral or economic grounds. So, while I can agree with McCain's view that we need to make sure what has been achieved in Iraq, I also agree with Obama that what is happening in Afghanistan/Pakistan is more pertinent to our national interest.

On things like en lements, Medicare is quite obviously going to bankrupt the country, and neither party is willing to talk about that honestly. We're already swimming in debt and the Baby Boomers have hardly started retiring! We have a serious case on unreality. Our current system combines the disadvantages of the free market and socialist systems with few of the advantages. I don't think McCain has any ideas; Obama's socialist plans leave me wondering whether we will have an expensive, high-tax, high-service plan that consumes a whole bunch of GDP, or a cheap, low-tax, low-service plan that basically makes medical innovation cease and doctors go elsewhere. But at least he has a plan.

On social issues, I tend to agree with Republicans, at least weakly. I don't have the same views on imposing Christian ideals on the government as some do. I do not think young-earth creationism should be taught in science class, or Sunday school for that matter. I think social consevatives are nostalgic for a past that never actually existed. But the one thing I strongly oppose is abortion, because I believe it is murdering a human being. I would give up capital punishment to get rid of abortion. I would support spending money on social programs if they would get rid of abortion. I honestly struggle to understand how people think that it is acceptable.

I know Obama has talked about working together to reduce the number of abortions. If that happened, each life that would be saved is precious and valuable. But he and I still differ on the moral monstrosity of abortion.

I agree with Federalist Society ideas on the role of the judiciary. I believe in restraining the role of government most of the time. I hope John McCain would nominate more John Roberts types to the bench. I know Obama would nominate more Ginsburgs. I would hate to see the Court go back in the direction of making stuff up out of thin air a la Griswold v. Connecticut, or citing foreign law to make U.S. precedent.

So on the issues, I still lean McCain, but am considering Obama like I never thought I would. If Obama were not so pro-abortion, I might actually switch.

Now, the behavior of some conservatives might push me over the edge anyway. I'm not talking about McCain-Palin rallies as reported in the media. I'm talking about people I know personally and once respected, becoming openly racist, and making jokes about assassinating President Obama. People who talk about a military coup as maybe a good idea. People who start stockpiling guns and ammunition. I don't want to be on their side.

So maybe I vote third-party?

[ElNono]

Props to this thread for setting a SpursTalk record.

I wonder if we're gonna make it to FoxNews at 11

[AntiChrist]

I approve this thread.


Sincerely,


B.O.

[kalyug]

I didn't say Obama was the anti Christ- only that he COULD be and that time would prove it one way or the other.

I am just saying that I am watching Senator Obama- very carefully.


The Anti Christ is going to be someone that is well spoken, well liked, charismatic, impressive and likely handsome.
The Anti Christ will be convincing and a humanitarian.
Not until later in his reign will the Anti Christ show his true colors and prove to be the villian that he is.

What concerns me about Obama is 1) how he appears to be so easily and widespread received as a political savior
and 2) the instances in which Obama subtly undermines the Truth of the Bible while appearing to embrace it.

I offer this example of the latter:



You cannot pick and choose portions of the Scripture to embrace. Either God's Word is ALL true or it is a lie.

In the above referenced verses, we are not even talking about Old Testament vs New Testament.
Senator Obama does not even have the faith to take the entire New Testament as it is written.

Yet Senator Obama is willing to reference to parts of it such as the Sermon on the Mount that he knows most everyone will find palatable.

You may all think I am crazy.
But at least you can know I am not a liar because I tell you EXACTLY what I believe, regardless of how popular or unpopular my view is.

Someone, someday WILL be the anti christ, so I am not sure why you find so shocking the fact that I am open to Obama proving to be he.
Again, I admit nothing has been absolutely proven- yet.

So when Christ (if he existed the way you see him) picked and chose portions of the Old Testament, he was being the anti-Christ? Or was it anti-Moses back then? What about other scriptures? They all claim to be the direct word of God. Give me a single rational (I know that's asking for the impossible) reason why the version of the New Testament (guess what, there's more than one) you read is free of misinterpretation, mis-translation, or grammatical error. Wasn't Paul's letter (Epistle if you prefer) to the Romans (yes I have read the Bible) written by a man? While the Sermon on the Mount was Christ speaking himself. So if we take everything in the New Testament as it is, Paul didn't get anything wrong? Hence, Paul is also God? The New Testament contradicts itself many times, so how are you taking it all as it is written? You yourself clearly only reinforce the parts of the New Testament you agree with, for all your moral posturing.

[MannyIsGod]

I approve this thread.


Sincerely,


B.O.

Most predictable troll of all time yet carried out sooooooooooo well with the avatar.

[timvp]

So when Christ (if he existed the way you see him) picked and chose portions of the Old Testament, he was being the anti-Christ? Or was it anti-Moses back then? What about other scriptures? They all claim to be the direct word of God. Give me a single rational (I know that's asking for the impossible) reason why the version of the New Testament (guess what, there's more than one) you read is free of misinterpretation, mis-translation, or grammatical error. Wasn't Paul's letter (Epistle if you prefer) to the Romans (yes I have read the Bible) written by a man? While the Sermon on the Mount was Christ speaking himself. So if we take everything in the New Testament as it is, Paul didn't get anything wrong? Hence, Paul is also God? The New Testament contradicts itself many times, so how are you taking it all as it is written? You yourself clearly only reinforce the parts of the New Testament you agree with, for all your moral posturing.

You seem a little too nice for the ST political forum.

Welcome, anyways

[AntiChrist]

I'll take care of this Angel_Luv person as soon as I'm done with Joe the Plumber.

[beachwood]

I don't know. Maybe.

I have not rulled out the possibility, but I don't have enough information yet to be certain one way or the other.

If Senator Obama has addressed the anti Christ accusations, I would be greatly interested to hear what he had to say.
Have any articles/ quotes?

I think addressed them by saying he's a Christian. What else does he need to say?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

[FromWayDowntown]

I will reply to the original intent of the thread.

I wrote in John McCain in 2004 because I was dissatisfied with the Bush Administration. I thought he misled the country into Iraq. My vote amounted to nothing of course, since McCain wasn't running and Texas does not count those votes.

So when McCain won the nomination in 2008, I figured if he was good enough for me in 2004, he was good enough for me in 2008. When all the controversies about Barack Obama came in the news, I studied his views and came to the conclusion he was a really smart, talented, sincere guy who held a lot of views which I found somewhere between wrong (on role of government, economic ideas) and abhorrent (abortion).

When McCain picked Sarah Palin, a dark horse whose name I already had heard, I thought it was a brilliant pick to revitalize the base and bring young new talent to the forefront of the GOP. At least, I thought that at first. Then I found out that she knows absolutely nothing about national issues. I mean, zero. People who read magazines at the doctor's office know more than she does. She might as well be a goat herder in Pakistan.

Now I don't think you need to be Patrick Henry Moynihan to run for Vice President, but I can't abide total ignorance, no matter how much people at rallies love her.

This made me doubt McCain's judgment. Was he just that desperate? Even so, this is a campaign for President of the United States, and I at least expect it to be taken seriously by the candidates. That was not a serious pick.

Then the economic crisis came down. This was something I kind of anticipated a few years ago. The housing market seemed totally out of whack exactly the same way the stock market was out of whack in 2000. Even though the economy was "strong," it looked like it was all on paper due to easy credit. So when it finally fell, I wasn't shocked. I didn't understand right away exactly why all these banks were failing, but I studied and figured it out.

Then I contrasted the behavior of the candidates. John McCain pulled a stunt where he "suspended" his campaign to work on a rescue package for the credit markets. Then the Republicans shot it down, and blamed Nancy Pelosi for making a partisan speech, an excuse that made no sense whatsoever. They were afraid of getting voted out is the reality, just like the 40% of Democrats who voted no!

Then the second debate came. By this time, I had read about credit default swaps and other derivatives, and understood how the deregulation ended up magnifying risk and endangering the financial system. When I listened to the debate, it was clear to me that at least Obama understood the crisis, while John McCain still really had no idea what was going on.

I started reading economists. Paul Krugman, who I'd long dismissed as a partisan hack, seemed to have the best handle on the crisis, and theories that explained both what was happening, and why the Fed and other central banks were doing what they were doing. Other left-of-center economists were similarly on top of things. Right-wing economists like Donald Luskin ranged between wrong and ignorant. I learned about Krugman's theory of the "reverse-S" curve and multiple macroeconomic equilibria. The best the right could do was blame the crisis on a bill President Carter passed. My intelligence was thoroughly insulted. At this point, I began questioning my right-wing economic beliefs. Do Republicans even believe them? I began to think that the free market is just a hypothetical that cannot exist in real life due to human nature, and that there is just good and bad regulation. I began to consider Obama's economic views.

In Iraq, though I believe and hope the war is coming to a positive conclusion for the Iraqis, I am ambivalent about whether in sum it served American interests. I don't think Iraq will spark a democratic renaissance in the world; rather, I think a big part of Bush's legacy is the discrediting and retreat of democratic regimes in the world since the Iraq invasion. I am not satisfied with "resource security" as a justification either on moral or economic grounds. So, while I can agree with McCain's view that we need to make sure what has been achieved in Iraq, I also agree with Obama that what is happening in Afghanistan/Pakistan is more pertinent to our national interest.

On things like en lements, Medicare is quite obviously going to bankrupt the country, and neither party is willing to talk about that honestly. We're already swimming in debt and the Baby Boomers have hardly started retiring! We have a serious case on unreality. Our current system combines the disadvantages of the free market and socialist systems with few of the advantages. I don't think McCain has any ideas; Obama's socialist plans leave me wondering whether we will have an expensive, high-tax, high-service plan that consumes a whole bunch of GDP, or a cheap, low-tax, low-service plan that basically makes medical innovation cease and doctors go elsewhere. But at least he has a plan.

On social issues, I tend to agree with Republicans, at least weakly. I don't have the same views on imposing Christian ideals on the government as some do. I do not think young-earth creationism should be taught in science class, or Sunday school for that matter. I think social consevatives are nostalgic for a past that never actually existed. But the one thing I strongly oppose is abortion, because I believe it is murdering a human being. I would give up capital punishment to get rid of abortion. I would support spending money on social programs if they would get rid of abortion. I honestly struggle to understand how people think that it is acceptable.

I know Obama has talked about working together to reduce the number of abortions. If that happened, each life that would be saved is precious and valuable. But he and I still differ on the moral monstrosity of abortion.

I agree with Federalist Society ideas on the role of the judiciary. I believe in restraining the role of government most of the time. I hope John McCain would nominate more John Roberts types to the bench. I know Obama would nominate more Ginsburgs. I would hate to see the Court go back in the direction of making stuff up out of thin air a la Griswold v. Connecticut, or citing foreign law to make U.S. precedent.

So on the issues, I still lean McCain, but am considering Obama like I never thought I would. If Obama were not so pro-abortion, I might actually switch.

Now, the behavior of some conservatives might push me over the edge anyway. I'm not talking about McCain-Palin rallies as reported in the media. I'm talking about people I know personally and once respected, becoming openly racist, and making jokes about assassinating President Obama. People who talk about a military coup as maybe a good idea. People who start stockpiling guns and ammunition. I don't want to be on their side.

So maybe I vote third-party?

[/audition]

[Shelly]

Holy mother of Angel_Luv's God.

Is that a record?

[Bartleby]

I'll take care of this Angel_Luv person as soon as I'm done with Joe the Plumber.

[AntiChrist]

I'll send my enforcer out to discipline anyone who interferes with my campaign. You don't know REAL pain until you've been slapped by one of Mic e's unnaturally long stick arms.

[peewee's lovechild]

I will reply to the original intent of the thread.

I wrote in John McCain in 2004 because I was dissatisfied with the Bush Administration. I thought he misled the country into Iraq. My vote amounted to nothing of course, since McCain wasn't running and Texas does not count those votes.

So when McCain won the nomination in 2008, I figured if he was good enough for me in 2004, he was good enough for me in 2008. When all the controversies about Barack Obama came in the news, I studied his views and came to the conclusion he was a really smart, talented, sincere guy who held a lot of views which I found somewhere between wrong (on role of government, economic ideas) and abhorrent (abortion).

When McCain picked Sarah Palin, a dark horse whose name I already had heard, I thought it was a brilliant pick to revitalize the base and bring young new talent to the forefront of the GOP. At least, I thought that at first. Then I found out that she knows absolutely nothing about national issues. I mean, zero. People who read magazines at the doctor's office know more than she does. She might as well be a goat herder in Pakistan.

Now I don't think you need to be Patrick Henry Moynihan to run for Vice President, but I can't abide total ignorance, no matter how much people at rallies love her.

This made me doubt McCain's judgment. Was he just that desperate? Even so, this is a campaign for President of the United States, and I at least expect it to be taken seriously by the candidates. That was not a serious pick.

Then the economic crisis came down. This was something I kind of anticipated a few years ago. The housing market seemed totally out of whack exactly the same way the stock market was out of whack in 2000. Even though the economy was "strong," it looked like it was all on paper due to easy credit. So when it finally fell, I wasn't shocked. I didn't understand right away exactly why all these banks were failing, but I studied and figured it out.

Then I contrasted the behavior of the candidates. John McCain pulled a stunt where he "suspended" his campaign to work on a rescue package for the credit markets. Then the Republicans shot it down, and blamed Nancy Pelosi for making a partisan speech, an excuse that made no sense whatsoever. They were afraid of getting voted out is the reality, just like the 40% of Democrats who voted no!

Then the second debate came. By this time, I had read about credit default swaps and other derivatives, and understood how the deregulation ended up magnifying risk and endangering the financial system. When I listened to the debate, it was clear to me that at least Obama understood the crisis, while John McCain still really had no idea what was going on.

I started reading economists. Paul Krugman, who I'd long dismissed as a partisan hack, seemed to have the best handle on the crisis, and theories that explained both what was happening, and why the Fed and other central banks were doing what they were doing. Other left-of-center economists were similarly on top of things. Right-wing economists like Donald Luskin ranged between wrong and ignorant. I learned about Krugman's theory of the "reverse-S" curve and multiple macroeconomic equilibria. The best the right could do was blame the crisis on a bill President Carter passed. My intelligence was thoroughly insulted. At this point, I began questioning my right-wing economic beliefs. Do Republicans even believe them? I began to think that the free market is just a hypothetical that cannot exist in real life due to human nature, and that there is just good and bad regulation. I began to consider Obama's economic views.

In Iraq, though I believe and hope the war is coming to a positive conclusion for the Iraqis, I am ambivalent about whether in sum it served American interests. I don't think Iraq will spark a democratic renaissance in the world; rather, I think a big part of Bush's legacy is the discrediting and retreat of democratic regimes in the world since the Iraq invasion. I am not satisfied with "resource security" as a justification either on moral or economic grounds. So, while I can agree with McCain's view that we need to make sure what has been achieved in Iraq, I also agree with Obama that what is happening in Afghanistan/Pakistan is more pertinent to our national interest.

On things like en lements, Medicare is quite obviously going to bankrupt the country, and neither party is willing to talk about that honestly. We're already swimming in debt and the Baby Boomers have hardly started retiring! We have a serious case on unreality. Our current system combines the disadvantages of the free market and socialist systems with few of the advantages. I don't think McCain has any ideas; Obama's socialist plans leave me wondering whether we will have an expensive, high-tax, high-service plan that consumes a whole bunch of GDP, or a cheap, low-tax, low-service plan that basically makes medical innovation cease and doctors go elsewhere. But at least he has a plan.

On social issues, I tend to agree with Republicans, at least weakly. I don't have the same views on imposing Christian ideals on the government as some do. I do not think young-earth creationism should be taught in science class, or Sunday school for that matter. I think social consevatives are nostalgic for a past that never actually existed. But the one thing I strongly oppose is abortion, because I believe it is murdering a human being. I would give up capital punishment to get rid of abortion. I would support spending money on social programs if they would get rid of abortion. I honestly struggle to understand how people think that it is acceptable.

I know Obama has talked about working together to reduce the number of abortions. If that happened, each life that would be saved is precious and valuable. But he and I still differ on the moral monstrosity of abortion.

I agree with Federalist Society ideas on the role of the judiciary. I believe in restraining the role of government most of the time. I hope John McCain would nominate more John Roberts types to the bench. I know Obama would nominate more Ginsburgs. I would hate to see the Court go back in the direction of making stuff up out of thin air a la Griswold v. Connecticut, or citing foreign law to make U.S. precedent.

So on the issues, I still lean McCain, but am considering Obama like I never thought I would. If Obama were not so pro-abortion, I might actually switch.

Now, the behavior of some conservatives might push me over the edge anyway. I'm not talking about McCain-Palin rallies as reported in the media. I'm talking about people I know personally and once respected, becoming openly racist, and making jokes about assassinating President Obama. People who talk about a military coup as maybe a good idea. People who start stockpiling guns and ammunition. I don't want to be on their side.

So maybe I vote third-party?

I respect what you wrote here.

Although, I have a problem with one thing you wrote:

I would give up capital punishment to get rid of abortion.

I don't understand how you can be okay with one type of ending a life over the other type of ending a life.

It's a bit hypocritical.

Mind you, I'm riding the fence on this one. I'm against abortion for the most part, although I'm for abortion when it comes to rape, incest, and when the mother's health is in danger or if the baby will be deformed or re ed.

But, I respect your opinions.

I just wish more right of center people could think like you do.

[2centsworth]

I will reply to the original intent of the thread.

I wrote in John McCain in 2004 because I was dissatisfied with the Bush Administration. I thought he misled the country into Iraq. My vote amounted to nothing of course, since McCain wasn't running and Texas does not count those votes.

So when McCain won the nomination in 2008, I figured if he was good enough for me in 2004, he was good enough for me in 2008. When all the controversies about Barack Obama came in the news, I studied his views and came to the conclusion he was a really smart, talented, sincere guy who held a lot of views which I found somewhere between wrong (on role of government, economic ideas) and abhorrent (abortion).

When McCain picked Sarah Palin, a dark horse whose name I already had heard, I thought it was a brilliant pick to revitalize the base and bring young new talent to the forefront of the GOP. At least, I thought that at first. Then I found out that she knows absolutely nothing about national issues. I mean, zero. People who read magazines at the doctor's office know more than she does. She might as well be a goat herder in Pakistan.

Now I don't think you need to be Patrick Henry Moynihan to run for Vice President, but I can't abide total ignorance, no matter how much people at rallies love her.

This made me doubt McCain's judgment. Was he just that desperate? Even so, this is a campaign for President of the United States, and I at least expect it to be taken seriously by the candidates. That was not a serious pick.

Then the economic crisis came down. This was something I kind of anticipated a few years ago. The housing market seemed totally out of whack exactly the same way the stock market was out of whack in 2000. Even though the economy was "strong," it looked like it was all on paper due to easy credit. So when it finally fell, I wasn't shocked. I didn't understand right away exactly why all these banks were failing, but I studied and figured it out.

Then I contrasted the behavior of the candidates. John McCain pulled a stunt where he "suspended" his campaign to work on a rescue package for the credit markets. Then the Republicans shot it down, and blamed Nancy Pelosi for making a partisan speech, an excuse that made no sense whatsoever. They were afraid of getting voted out is the reality, just like the 40% of Democrats who voted no!

Then the second debate came. By this time, I had read about credit default swaps and other derivatives, and understood how the deregulation ended up magnifying risk and endangering the financial system. When I listened to the debate, it was clear to me that at least Obama understood the crisis, while John McCain still really had no idea what was going on.

I started reading economists. Paul Krugman, who I'd long dismissed as a partisan hack, seemed to have the best handle on the crisis, and theories that explained both what was happening, and why the Fed and other central banks were doing what they were doing. Other left-of-center economists were similarly on top of things. Right-wing economists like Donald Luskin ranged between wrong and ignorant. I learned about Krugman's theory of the "reverse-S" curve and multiple macroeconomic equilibria. The best the right could do was blame the crisis on a bill President Carter passed. My intelligence was thoroughly insulted. At this point, I began questioning my right-wing economic beliefs. Do Republicans even believe them? I began to think that the free market is just a hypothetical that cannot exist in real life due to human nature, and that there is just good and bad regulation. I began to consider Obama's economic views.

In Iraq, though I believe and hope the war is coming to a positive conclusion for the Iraqis, I am ambivalent about whether in sum it served American interests. I don't think Iraq will spark a democratic renaissance in the world; rather, I think a big part of Bush's legacy is the discrediting and retreat of democratic regimes in the world since the Iraq invasion. I am not satisfied with "resource security" as a justification either on moral or economic grounds. So, while I can agree with McCain's view that we need to make sure what has been achieved in Iraq, I also agree with Obama that what is happening in Afghanistan/Pakistan is more pertinent to our national interest.

On things like en lements, Medicare is quite obviously going to bankrupt the country, and neither party is willing to talk about that honestly. We're already swimming in debt and the Baby Boomers have hardly started retiring! We have a serious case on unreality. Our current system combines the disadvantages of the free market and socialist systems with few of the advantages. I don't think McCain has any ideas; Obama's socialist plans leave me wondering whether we will have an expensive, high-tax, high-service plan that consumes a whole bunch of GDP, or a cheap, low-tax, low-service plan that basically makes medical innovation cease and doctors go elsewhere. But at least he has a plan.

On social issues, I tend to agree with Republicans, at least weakly. I don't have the same views on imposing Christian ideals on the government as some do. I do not think young-earth creationism should be taught in science class, or Sunday school for that matter. I think social consevatives are nostalgic for a past that never actually existed. But the one thing I strongly oppose is abortion, because I believe it is murdering a human being. I would give up capital punishment to get rid of abortion. I would support spending money on social programs if they would get rid of abortion. I honestly struggle to understand how people think that it is acceptable.

I know Obama has talked about working together to reduce the number of abortions. If that happened, each life that would be saved is precious and valuable. But he and I still differ on the moral monstrosity of abortion.

I agree with Federalist Society ideas on the role of the judiciary. I believe in restraining the role of government most of the time. I hope John McCain would nominate more John Roberts types to the bench. I know Obama would nominate more Ginsburgs. I would hate to see the Court go back in the direction of making stuff up out of thin air a la Griswold v. Connecticut, or citing foreign law to make U.S. precedent.

So on the issues, I still lean McCain, but am considering Obama like I never thought I would. If Obama were not so pro-abortion, I might actually switch.

Now, the behavior of some conservatives might push me over the edge anyway. I'm not talking about McCain-Palin rallies as reported in the media. I'm talking about people I know personally and once respected, becoming openly racist, and making jokes about assassinating President Obama. People who talk about a military coup as maybe a good idea. People who start stockpiling guns and ammunition. I don't want to be on their side.

So maybe I vote third-party?

We agree just about on every point except for some parts of the credit crises. Fannie and Freddie ignited the fire. Deregulation added fuel to the flame.

[Shelly]

Religion is gonna crash ST.

See? Things happen in the name of religion!

[peewee's lovechild]

I'll take care of this Angel_Luv person as soon as I'm done with Joe the Plumber.

[Bartleby]

Religion is gonna crash ST.

See? Things happen in the name of religion!

only if God wants ST to crash.

[tp2021]

only if God wants ST to crash.

Or the Church of Manu.

[AntiChrist]

Coincidence? I think not.

[peewee's lovechild]

Coincidence? I think not.

Son of a , you're on a roll!!

[MannyIsGod]

I started reading economists. Paul Krugman, who I'd long dismissed as a partisan hack, seemed to have the best handle on the crisis, and theories that explained both what was happening, and why the Fed and other central banks were doing what they were doing. Other left-of-center economists were similarly on top of things. Right-wing economists like Donald Luskin ranged between wrong and ignorant. I learned about Krugman's theory of the "reverse-S" curve and multiple macroeconomic equilibria. The best the right could do was blame the crisis on a bill President Carter passed. My intelligence was thoroughly insulted. At this point, I began questioning my right-wing economic beliefs. Do Republicans even believe them? I began to think that the free market is just a hypothetical that cannot exist in real life due to human nature, and that there is just good and bad regulation. I began to consider Obama's economic views.

A few years ago, as many of my older posts in this very forum will testify to, I was an ardent libertarian. I voted Libertarian in 04 and I really felt that the free market was the way to go.

But, much like you, I've had to reexamine the thought of a truly free market. Its an economic utopia which requires the general public to be far more educated and informed that it will likely ever be. I just can't realistically buy into it anymore. I don't know how to fix our economy and how to make it run at peak efficiency, but like you Krugman was my source for info on this economic crisis and I was really impressed by his handle on the entire situation. I think that Krugman and maybe some of the more liberal economists out there may be onto something, and I really think our country is really on the verge of moving far more to the left. The demographics of a future America are not kind to what the GOP has become, and I think in order for it to make an impact in the future its going to have to move to the left.

[beachwood]

No because my boyfriend has accepted and confesses Jesus Christ as his personal savior, which for the record is all Senator Obama needs to do to clarify his position and prove himself not to be the anti christ.

You are out of your ing mind.

[Findog]

Hmmmm, this thread could turn out to be a game-changer.

It could mark a fundamental shift.

[Findog]

I always knew the Anti Christ would be a Spurs fan.

[Findog]

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showpost...&postcount=340

Hey Kori or timvp,

Can I get a Spur under my name for helping Spurstalk set a record?