| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Defining your issues and where you stand; When you vote this election | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 23 2008, 11:01 PM (225 Views) | |
| Sgt. Jaggs | Apr 23 2008, 11:01 PM Post #1 |
|
How about a Voyager Movie
|
What are your issues and your stance when you vote? I have had a tough time with sorting out my beliefs as well as the lack of authenticity of the candidates this season. I am confused about where I would classify myself. Maybe the think tank here can help influence a meatball like me. 1. The Economy A. OPEC B. China C. Wages - Jobs - Taxes - Housing 2. National Security and Foreign Policy A. Border Security and Illegal Immigration B. War in Iraq C. War in Afganistan D. Possible future threats - Chavez - Russia - Iran 3. Social Issues A. Families B. Health Care C. Abortion D. Gay Marrige Tier 3 Social Issues: I believe (for me) foremost that a family is a Mom and Dad commited to each other and children with the identity of that family in their minds as they grow up. I think something has been lost in this society where we used to have The TV show The Waltons who would pray around the dinner table. Then they would say goodnight to each other every night at the end of the show. Or Andy Griffith or Happy Days. There was always a message of right and wrong. It was simple but it was constant. Where did that go? Health care: It works itself out. Some of us pay too much and some of us are dead beats and simply never pay. Nothing consequencial ever happens to either of us either way so its a Moot point. Abortion: Ultimately its up to the woman but I believe its not a choice its a life. Conflicted . Plus if Roe V Wade is over-turned it goes back to the States laws and then you will have Abortion Free and Abortion Legal states. Thats bad. But thats good, overall less abortions will occur because people more likely to become """woops I'm pregnant what was I thinking""" will not have the resources to drive from Virginia to Manhatten to see Doctor Howell for the ""Procedure"" Thus less abortions.Gay Marrige: Regardless of my beliefs for me I would want to be left alone if I liked to bang dudes. Homosexuals cannot reproduce genetically yet they continue to reoccur. Why is that? One thing I know is that depite their inability to pass on their DNA they still are produced. Sexual lifestyle issues are private but marrige should only be defined and sanctioned and recognized by our society and government as Man and Woman.Give Unions or partners insurance rights, tax credits or whatever I am fine with that. I think a flaming gay man with one life partner who is a legally committed and momogamous partner even homosexual is far better for society than a straight man who fathers kids like NBA player Shawn Kemp. Tier 2 Border Security an Illegal Immigration: How can we feel safe when anyone with money can get into our country? Overstaying Visas or Coyote in roads for the taking. All the While Border State Senators Like John McCain do nothing. Their solution? Bipartisan Comprehensive Immigration Reform. That is a dishonest abomination at best. No Mexican named Juan who lives in South Austin and breaks his ass every day painting walls and roofing and stands in line at the check cashing place (can't bank regular like) would ever pay 5 thousand dollars. Nor could he or would he go back to his country of origin. This sickness of policy and disregard of reality was propogated by the Amnesty merchants. What is worse is that the borders were not closed prior to this good will meaning every man with 6 kids in Mexico heard that its time to come to the States and fast. I do not want an appeaser a bargainer or a negotiator for a President. Thats why McCain so annoys, irritates and turns me off. These illegals are already here. A society of really poorer class is being created under your nose. Somebody is profiting from their cheap labor. Who is that? In the meantime Raul Enrique Ramirez and his family have had 3 more kids(born in the US) wich are now Legal US Citizens and they are here to stay. Raul does not pay the same taxes I have to pay but gets all of the benefits. Not fair. Not to mention all of the Infadel haters that have bought into this country. Crap I am Tired I will finish this tomorrow.
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| HistoryDude | Apr 24 2008, 09:04 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Shaken, not stirred...
|
For President and Federal Congress, I want some one who is for less government, less taxes, and is willing to read the Constitution and give more power back to the States and the People. For state and local government, then it becomes a little more complicated and I'm really actually all over the political board depending on the issue. In other words, I'm not Republican nor Democrat, or Conservative nor Liberal. However, I probably do vote to the right more often than on most issues. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Apr 24 2008, 11:00 AM Post #3 |
|
Time to put something here
|
I assume you would like use to give our opintions on the issues you listed
not come up with more issues?1. The Economy A. OPEC The government needs to take a real stance on switching to alternate forms of energy and an active role in energizing the people into reducing energy use. They also need to put the environmentalists in their place and start allowing Nuclear energy use, more drilling, and more efficient refining. They also need to come down hard on Oil companies who use anti-competitive tactics to drive up prices. The president really can't do anything to help or hurt this issue, they simply don’t have the power to. What they can do however is help energize the people. Obama is the only one of the three who has the "ability" to make a difference the question is whether he has the "desire" B. China I don't think the Government can do any more or any less then they are doing now with China; China is an adversary who is decades away from turning into a real problem and it would be bad from to do anything now with out seeing what first happens. The only thing to do is to keep pressure on them to move closer to democracy and to continue to monitor them as we do now. C. Wages - Jobs - Taxes – Housing The Government should do nothing about housing, anything they do will only hurt me and help someone else at my expense. What they need to do is place new "relevant" regulations on banks so that future issues similar to the current housing problem do not occur again. None of the candidates are addressing this issue. Taxes – I would like to see short term capital gains tax be brought in line with other income tax rates. There is no logical reason why income earned from investment should not be taxed at the same rate as income earned from every other source. The middle class tax rate should not be changed or only slightly raised and lower income earners who do not pay tax now should be expected to pay some sort of income tax, even 10 dolors from a 10 million people is worth something. Jobs – I see no Jobs issue at this time, those people who find their skills are no longer relevant to today's job market have a responsibly to them selves to gain new skills that are relevant. Yup that sucks, but its life, they government simply could not carry everyone who finds them selves in this position for the rest of their lives. Short term assistance, unemployment insurance and schooling brakes are all that is required from the government and there is already plenty of this type of help out there. Those people who are affective need to now seek them out. Wages are also fine for the same reason. 2. National Security and Foreign Policy A. Border Security and Illegal Immigration I am confused on this issue; on one hand I don’t want illegal immigrants in this country but on the other hand I have friends who are illegal immigrants and would hate to see them deported. I think McCain's revised plans for Immigration are the best where ever going to get. Secure the bordered and then create a avenue toward amnesty for those illegal's who are already in this country. Jag, I know a many illegals who would happily pay $5000 to become American citizens. B. War in Iraq We made a commitment to bring democracy and prosperity to Iraq and so we need to honor that commitment; we need to stop being such a wishy washy country and start living by our ideals and convictions. C. War in Afganistan Same as above. D. Possible future threats - Chavez - Russia – Iran Because the American people are too consumed with self-absorption we should not do anything about these other countries except monitor them. Recent history has shown that Americans do not have the attention span needed to create positive change in the world so we should stop trying too do so. We should instead try to become more isolated and self reliant. 3. Social Issues A. Families Men need to be given more rights over his children. Pore families should be rewarded for staying together and not rewarded for braking up. :)~ You should have to get a license to procreate and pay a penalty for every unlicensed procreation. B. Health Care I don’t want Health Care to change, I will be hurt by any change. C. Abortion Ro vs Wade is a outdated and out of touch peace of judicial "legislation" and should be over turned at the earliest possible convenience. Abortion should be divorced from the idea of woman's rights, because I'm sorry ladies but you aren't the only ones affected by the issue. Abortion is not a woman's issue it is a society issue and effects a lot of people not just the would-be-mother. At one time when woman did not have the rights they do now Ro vs Wade was an essential government action needed to bring about the gains we have seen in woman's rights. But that time has long since gone by and its time to reexamine the issue of Abortion and create real constitutional legislative legislation and that can not be done so long as Ro vs Wade exists. The short term fall out caused by the over turning is inconsequential compared to the long term gains. My opinion if abortion itself is that it’s a necessary evil for a society as large as ours to function. However I am embraced about how prevalent they are and the caviler attitude so many have about them and sex in general. D. Gay Marrige There should be a separation of church and state, marriage is a religious institution, there for marriage as a governmental institution should be done away with all together. No longer should the government and privet business use marriage as a tallying of coupling, instead the state should have all people, gay or striate, get civil unions if they wish to be considered a couple in the eyes of the law. Marriage should then be left to the religious institutions. Then if a gay couple can find a church (for example) to marry them good for them, and if a church (for example) refused to marry a gay couple, then the gay couple can move on to another church. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Apr 24 2008, 02:09 PM Post #4 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
To be blunt, I'll vote for the lesser of three evils. Staying home is just foolish, as is writing in RonPaul. I don't believe there is a strong candidate running this time, but rather than just hand over the election to the Dems I will work to get more conservatives on the ballet next time (and in Congress this and the next election). By the way, as far as gay unions are concerned, I still say no, but do believe in extending benefits to partners. On that note, companies should make the same offer to hetero couples in similar relationships. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Sgt. Jaggs | Apr 24 2008, 11:34 PM Post #5 |
|
How about a Voyager Movie
|
Completely agree with you. But what does this mean: as far as gay unions are concerned, I still say no Followed by this: but do believe in extending benefits to partners. On that note, companies should make the same offer to hetero couples in similar relationships. what is the difference?
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Hoss | Apr 25 2008, 08:13 AM Post #6 |
![]()
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
|
Companies should do what they want. Companies offer nice benefits to compete with other companies for good employees. If offering gay benefits and such helps toward this end, they should be free to do it. If it produces no real benefit for them, they shouldn't. If my company cancelled health insurance for the spouse and children of its employees, they'd probably have a lot more room in the office buildings and empty spaces parking garages come next month. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| somerled | Apr 25 2008, 09:13 AM Post #7 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
XXXXXXXXXXXL = 10XL , my you're a big guy .... is that pants size , shirt size or hat size ?maybe the employees who have not been with the company (under 5 years say) would ditch them immediately , I doubt the guys who have been long termers ... with big golden handcuffs would .... they have too much to loose and might find it hard to find jobs at the same or higher level. They might also be reluctant to leave because they have big commitments. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| RTW | Apr 25 2008, 11:49 AM Post #8 |
![]()
Vice Admiral
|
What's the difference between a "life-partner" and someone 'you've' been dating for a couple months? For example, in my state I believe "Common law marriage" takes seven years of continuous co-habitation to take effect. Have a tiff and move out for just one weekend and the clock goes back to zero. Marriage is a commitment that one can't legally get out of very easily. Few people are willing to get married just for benefits. Is there a similar commitment with "life partners"? As far as single people getting benefits for partners, what's the requirement? One date? One year of commitment? Seven years as in common-law marriage? The expense of refiling paperwork each time a single people start seeing other people could be enormous. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Apr 25 2008, 01:31 PM Post #9 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
Sorry, my goof. By union, I meant "marriage." I believe marriage to be between a man and a woman. On the other hand, I have no problem with the whole life-partner idea. Should benefits be extended to partners? Yes. Also, by extension, the same recognition should be made for cohabitating hetero couples. Look at the UK, where there are more unwed couples than wed couples. This is just an extension. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Apr 25 2008, 01:55 PM Post #10 |
|
Time to put something here
|
I agree with that, any two people (or maybe three or four or five or whatever) should be able to enter into civil unions and be seen as a couple/group in the eyes of the law. They would have to document this through the government which would displace the marriage certificate and the marriage certificate should be dispended, with consideration of grand farthing in any already exercised certificates. What religious' institutions do with Marriage is let up to them, they under the freedom of religion, will have the right to accept or reject any people from their ceremonies. Work places will do what they do now; decide whether or not they extend benefits to unioned people and under what rules that takes place. I think this opens the door for another thing I want to see implemented in some way, and that is the "family" seen as a corporation in the eyes of the law. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Admiralbill_gomec | Apr 25 2008, 01:58 PM Post #11 |
|
UberAdmiral
|
I'm thinking "one step at a time", Dante, but that's just me. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |


. Plus if Roe V Wade is over-turned it goes back to the States laws and then you will have Abortion Free and Abortion Legal states. Thats bad. But thats good, overall less abortions will occur because people more likely to become """woops I'm pregnant what was I thinking""" will not have the resources to drive from Virginia to Manhatten to see Doctor Howell for the ""Procedure"" Thus less abortions.
One thing I know is that depite their inability to pass on their DNA they still are produced. Sexual lifestyle issues are private but marrige should only be defined and sanctioned and recognized by our society and government as Man and Woman.

not come up with more issues?



9:31 AM Jul 11