hookie

no, I think evidence shows a pretty clear lack of a supreme being. but its not something i have to believe, because its actually supported by evidence. this has nothing to do with gut feelings. I never said any of this had to do with gut feelings. I'm interested in the research that is so well documented to which you are referring.

you seem to misunderstand the scientific method. as an atheist, I dont BELIEVE there is a god. nor do I BELIEVE there isn't a god. try to think about this. I might be way off on this, but I'm thinking you're an agnostic, not atheist.

I wonder how long it will be before conservatives acknowledge that based on all the empirical data Socialized Medicine is the most successful political idea in the history of modern Democracy? I mean none of the fruits of Capitalism even come close to the success of Socialized Medicine which is universally supported in every first world country except the US- it is a testament to willful self-ignorance and isolation that most Americans aren't even AWARE that Socialized Medicine has worked completely and has won the debate on how to take care of people in society- Sorry to say, but THAT is an extreme radical statement. Can you tell us how this has worked so well? Please share the fruits of this wonderful system.

It says so on his site. How do you know where McCain stands? I'm not arguing FOR McCain, I'm questioning what 'we' know about Obama and what he stands for. Please re-read my post. McCain's idea of spreading the wealth means bigger tax cuts for people who are already well off. That's the typical left response. However, some of this might be true, but there's still a misunderstanding about capitalism. As far as I know, Sweden isn't a burning pile of ashes yet with rioters in the streets. Didn't say it would. Yes. And? What would Jesus do? I'm not a biblical scholar, but I'm guessing Jesus would help the poor, not be MANDATED to do so. Yes, there IS a difference. Government control. Nonsense of course. I agree here. Nonsense. It's not like you stumble into the hospital with a broken leg and have to wait a week while you're bleeding to death. It should also mean that you shouldn't have to pay through the nose when you fall ill or lose your job. Healthcare is NOT a right, at least in the US Constitution Maybe you need to research this part a bit more. Find out how many qualified medical doctors leave the field or come to the US because they cannot practice medicine, they are controlled by government regulations and restrictions. The patient's interest doesn't matter. At least everyone has healthcare! Yes, but no choices. There's a lot of space between RAAARGH EVIL SOCIALISTS and "screw everyone who's off worse than me!". Don't lean to the latter because you're afraid of the former. I understand, but don't automatically think I'm so far to 'the right' on this one.

Yeah, that must be it. Pretty cocky response. Sounds like you are one who thinks of himself as of such superior intelligence and finds it far below yourself to respond to such rubbish. Or maybe you just don't have anything intelligent to say.

That's an easy one. The difference between Obama and Palin has to do with adaptivity and intellectual capacity, and not necessarily directly measurable experience. We need a president who is intelligent. The office is so unique in its rigors and demands as times change and events unfold that NOBODY really has "experience" that ultimately fits the position. It's more about talent and ability. There are qualities that tend to define someone as presidential material, and probably chief among them is this certain flexible and adaptable intelligence, which also includes the willingness to listen to others, think in non-partisan terms, seek the counsel of experts, and consider multiple points of view in making decisions. In contrast, Republicans have demonstrated a dangerous combination of stubbornness and inability at this. Republican foreign and domestic policy has adhered to the tired philosophy that what is good for corporate America is by default good for the rest of America. Sort of a cross between Reagan's trickle down myth wherein the "free market" always brings the greatest good, and early 20th century corporatism espoused by the likes of Calvin Coolidge. Yes, McCain is a war hero, and I suppose, a good legislator. But he is out of touch. He went on record not long ago admitting he knew next to nothing about economics, and admitted that he would need to pick a VP who was strong in that area. That person is now Palin (!!??). Moreover, his position on foreign policy is a relic of the Cold War. He still has it in his mind that "winning" is a simple matter of bringing sufficient might to bear. To put it bluntly, he's no TR, and this is not 1898. Meanwhile, Palin is the everyman (or woman) candidate, which is fine, but we don't need an everyman as vice president. We need exceptional people for this position, and soccer moms don't cut it. Some may find her likable as a person, but that's not really relevant. America has had a problem with this for some time now, this aversion when it comes to electing people smarter than themselves. It should be clear by now that when you elect a wastrel C student with strong corporate ties, it puts you where we are right now, which is not a good place. On that point, I think it's interesting how the word "elite" has been thrown around and contested in this campaign. The word has two primary connotations in our culture, describing in turn people who are smarter than average, and people who are wealthier than average. Strangely, many seem to prefer a candidate of the latter type over the former. We resent people who are smarter than we are, but admire and envy those who are materially successful. You make some good points. I'm not saying Palin is qualified. I questioned why so many people are overlooking so much with Obama. He is a dynamic speaker, really knows how to get the crowd going, pumped up. He SOUNDS like he is intelligent, but again, I'm looking at his record, what has he actually done. What does he believe in, what does he stand for - and how will he do what he says. It's one thing to be intelligent, it's another thing to make intelligent choices. Obama has shown me he is a great speaker - knows how to rally the people. But that's it. Somehow this is strictly a bash against republicans, as though only republicans are responsible for all the problems. I'd like to hold all politicians accountable. Don't forget Congress has been 'controlled' by the democrats at times... I

TFTF (too funny to flame) Care to explain?? Guess you can't refute it...

I think this thread illustrates how so many people tend to make complete generalizations and paint everyone in a group with one stroke of the brush. First, I attend an Evangelical Free Church. I play all three services most weekends. When I don't, I attend. I have NOT ONCE heard our pastor make any reference to either candidate or that one is right or wrong. He has never mentioned either candidate by name or referrenced them in anyway. He HAS stated that it is important to pray for whoever leads this country and has acknowledged all the tough times in the coutry at this time. I'm afraid most of our viewing public has this distorted image that christians - whether you want to call them born again, Jesus freaks, evangelicals, whatever, all have the same EXTREME RIGHT viewpoints. This is simply not the case. How can you base your opinion, sometimes part or completely, by what you see on TV or read in the papers? Most of the "evengelicals" preaching on TV are a bit 'out there' in terms of what the majority of christians believe, etc. They are necassarily representative of the christian pastors out there. So, the pastor at my "extreme conservative" Evangelical Free Church is preaching about praying for all our leaders, we have Obama attending and being in some type of relationship with the pastor of his church for some 20 years, who spews lots of political talk into his messages. And that's okay? We're not concerned about this? We can only say it's better than the crazy extreme right evangelicals? Hmmm...something isn't right here... I am not totally a McCain supporter, though I will vote for him. I don't understand how so many can miss so much about Obama. How can one question the inexperience of Palin, who is running for VICE President, yet IGNORE the inexperience of Obama, who is running for PRESIDENT?? How long has Obama been in political office?? What has he really done?? What is his record? How do we really know where he stands on issues?? We certainly can't look at much of his voting record, because there is so LITTLE!! We are suppose to believe he will make such good choices and somehow make the USA this great country again?? Simply by believing in CHANGE?? What has he really said? Well, for one, spread the wealth. Do you all really understand what this means?? Look at other countries that are run with this idea. The GOVERNMENT takes money from people who have more and give it to the prople who don't have much. Then everyone is equal. Then you have people withdrawing from hard work because it doesn't matter anyway. Unfortuantely, we, or least some of us, see this in our present welfare system today in this country. What about his health care plan?? It would be similar to Canada's. How many know this? How many know that Canada's system has failed terribly. People have to wait MONTHS to get MRI's, surgeries, etc. Even if they can pay for it thenselves, they MUST WAIT. Go ahead and research it a bit. People come to the US from Canada to get medical services they can't get without waiting MONTHS in Canada. There is no easy way to deal with the health care issue, nor with any other issue facing this country. To be so shallow in thinking a "change" is all that's needed is naive and ignorant of history. JMHO, flame away!