US presidential election

A place for discussing news articles, politics and more serious issues.

discourse?

YES!
3
50%
NO!
0
No votes
BALLS!
3
50%
 
Total votes : 6

US presidential election

PostPosted by McFuck » Sat Sep 13, 2008 8:41 pm

Anyone want to discuss the upcoming election and/or use of cosmetics on farm animals?
Don't attempt anything without the gloves.
User avatar
McFuck
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:00 am
Location: America, fuck yeah!

PostPosted by McFuck » Sun Sep 14, 2008 12:09 am

In fact, I think he was referring to her as the lipstick and McCain as the pig. She is ghastly, isn't she? Just proves that McCain is already showing signs of senility in his old age. Why'd he choose her? And what if he croaks and leaves her in charge? God help the USA! We'll be invaded by the Chinese!!
Don't attempt anything without the gloves.
User avatar
McFuck
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:00 am
Location: America, fuck yeah!

PostPosted by crooked » Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:25 am

Well I just watched the clip where he said the lipstick on a pig thing and it clearly had fuck all to do with the ghastly Alaskan woman. He was just saying that the old dude is pretending to stand for change but isn't at all.
ImageImageImage
User avatar
crooked
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2438
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:56 am
Location: London

PostPosted by Lostat » Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:12 am

That Sarah Palin seems more & more vile with every new piece of crap that oozes out of her mouth. I really really hope the republicans don't get in to the White House again, she (Sarah Palin) makes Dubya look like a liberal progressive!
"The gene pool could use a little chlorine"
User avatar
Lostat
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland.

PostPosted by jeff wode » Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:57 pm

McCain pulled a smart move drafting Palin in. sure she's superficial and just a bit of pointless eye candy. but those of us on the outside have to realise that american politics is all about eye candy and superficiality. the actual truth doesnt seem to matter. whilst the republicans might want to play on the soccer mom, and the "isnt she brave letting her kid go to war" factor, i'll be willing to bet he never goes anywhere that has a risk of him stopping a bullet. i'll bet he's shuffling papers in a bunker somewhere. ive always thought Obama had the better policys, the lack of experience argument cant ever hold water. how do you get experience to be president of the US, except by doing the job. McCain is just Bush lite, a slighltly less rabid and more sellable version of the same brand. if he gets in it will be "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"
my own opinion is that the Democrats will be better for the vast majority of American citizens who dont own an oil or petrochemical company, better for the environment, only in that they may well admit that theres a problem, not that they will be able to do too much about it, and better for the outside world as a whole.
"imagine the size of his balls!"
jeff wode
 
Posts: 975
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:52 pm

PostPosted by McFuck » Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:21 pm

I've wondered about Palin's "family values" in that if she takes on the job of vice prez - - well, when is she going to spend time with her family??? It's not exactly your 9 to 5 type job, and she has a special needs child! I predict her children will be raised by nannies, and what does that say about her family values? If she were serious, she would put her family FIRST. I'm not saying a woman can't work and care for a family, but not with a job as stressful and demanding as vice prez. Her kids are going to grow up to be serial killers because Mom didn't spend enough time with them!

I'm also uneasy about McCain - he married his money, so to speak - so how can he identify with those of us who have to actually WORK for a living? I need lower taxes and gas prices, and I'd like to buy a house too! That asshole owns SEVEN houses!
Don't attempt anything without the gloves.
User avatar
McFuck
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:00 am
Location: America, fuck yeah!

PostPosted by Silage Heap » Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:20 pm

The Republicans and the Democrats are essentially the same. Both support the same system, both use the same tactics. Just like Labour and the Conservatives over here in the UK. The whole 2 party system is just a spectacle to distract people from the fact that whoever you vote for, the capitalist system wins. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. With the Republicans/Tories it's pretty open. They're evil and everyone knows it. But the Democrats/Labour party do all the same shit, they're just more cautious and less honest about it. It's just a two headed dictatorship. Do you want Bad, or do you want Worse? Throw your piece of paper with a cross into the mix and maybe the guy you like will win so he can go back on all the policies that made you vote for him in the first place. When people stop obsessing over the personal lives of candidates and the so called 'different policies' of each party, and realise that their country's situation stays pretty much the same no matter who's in office, maybe we can get something done. But the electoral system, as it stands today, will never make real changes, because it is not intended to. It's a cliche, but it's true-if voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal.
Right lads!
Pack your bags
And come aboard as we hoist the Black Flag...
User avatar
Silage Heap
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:05 am
Location: Wonko's Asylum

PostPosted by Silage Heap » Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:41 pm

All that said though, in the short term it would be better if Obama wins. We may have a few years left to live then, instead of sudden death in the nuclear war that'll probably happen by Christmas if McCain and Palin get in. This sabre rattling with Russia is as worrying as it is hypocritical. Although all that could just be a sham to keep us afraid. Maybe they've decided that the "terrorist threat" is wearing a bit thin, and we need a major enemy with real nuclear weapons again.
PS What's that poll at the top all about? I have absolutely no idea what it's for. Maybe I'll just play it safe and click BALLS!
Right lads!
Pack your bags
And come aboard as we hoist the Black Flag...
User avatar
Silage Heap
 
Posts: 530
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:05 am
Location: Wonko's Asylum

PostPosted by McFuck » Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:32 pm

It's a long-standing tradition to rule by fear and intimidation. We need to be protected, either by our church who will save us from evil, or our elected leaders who will save us from evil. You make an excellent point, Mr Heap. They need to keep us afraid so we will keep buying into their idiocy.

The poll was just for fun; you chose wisely.
Don't attempt anything without the gloves.
User avatar
McFuck
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:00 am
Location: America, fuck yeah!

PostPosted by oomska » Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:59 pm

Silage Heap wrote:All that said though, in the short term it would be better if Obama wins. We may have a few years left to live then, instead of sudden death in the nuclear war that'll probably happen by Christmas




I hope there is a nuclear war by christmas as i dont think i can afford christmas this year, probably will have enough spare cash for next christmas

How come my quotes dont get a nice box around them, WHY HAVENT I GOT QUOTE BOXES?
.`. `. .


.`.
oomska
Formerly wicksy42
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 12:41 pm

Re: US presidential election

PostPosted by oomska » Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:05 pm

McFuck wrote:Anyone want to discuss the upcoming election and/or use of cosmetics on farm animals?



I always say a country gets a president / prime minister / dictator it deserves , so I would like to nominate the Cookie Monster ( Sesame street fame ) for US president, after all he did make constantly gorging on cookies acceptable to the impressionable youth of the time, which is possibly why Americans are amongst the fattest people on the globe , sorry im not supposed to say fattest am I , why the fuck not I ask, you are fucking fat how else do you say it. And also Cookie Monsters friend Oscar lived in a bin which is where US policies belong Image
Last edited by oomska on Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:49 pm, edited 3 times in total.
.`. `. .


.`.
oomska
Formerly wicksy42
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 12:41 pm

PostPosted by crooked » Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:08 pm

oomska wrote:How come my quotes dont get a nice box around them, WHY HAVENT I GOT QUOTE BOXES?


You are too much of a fuckwit to untick the "disable BB code" box. :P

Image
ImageImageImage
User avatar
crooked
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2438
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:56 am
Location: London

PostPosted by oomska » Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:45 pm

Thanks for the lesson crooked, that felt like i just got the cane off the headmaster there and the headmaster seemed to enjoy it, in a priest / choirboy lessons after church type way.

:oops:
.`. `. .


.`.
oomska
Formerly wicksy42
 
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 12:41 pm

PostPosted by crooked » Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:52 pm

McFuck wrote:I need lower taxes!


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 2370018023

The misrepresentation and misapplication of the United States federal income tax constitutes the largest acquisition of wealth by way of deception in history. A handful of government lawyers fabricated an intricate maze of legalese which created a perfectly Constitutional tax (a tax on income derived from certain types of international and foreign commerce), but which at the same time could easily be misread to give the impression that the income of all Americans is subject to the tax. For decades, the American people have been "conditioned" to believe that the income tax applies to all income and trained to pay "their" taxes. All the while, however, hidden in a previously nearly universally misunderstood (therefore misapplied) section of the law known as Subchapter N, Section 861 was the truth that the income tax is NOT a direct tax on incomes but is an indirect tax imposed only on those individuals engaged in certain types of international and possessions commerce. Most Americans are engaged in purely domestic commerce (commerce that occurs entirely within and between the 50 states). Subchapter N proves that domestic income received by residents of the United States (most incomes) is not taxed, due to Constitutional restrictions on Congress' power to tax
ImageImageImage
User avatar
crooked
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2438
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:56 am
Location: London

PostPosted by McFuck » Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:39 am

I smell another conspiracy!
Don't attempt anything without the gloves.
User avatar
McFuck
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:00 am
Location: America, fuck yeah!

Next

Return to News and politics, man

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


Style by Gokinstudio | Free forum hosting by ProphpBB | Software by phpBB | Report Abuse | Privacy
cron