Jeep Wrangler Forum

Jeep Wrangler Forum (http://www.wranglerforum.com/)
-   Off-Topic (http://www.wranglerforum.com/f6/)
-   -   The next President (http://www.wranglerforum.com/f6/the-next-president-22847.html)

4point 11-04-2008 12:20 PM

The next President
 
Just watching the news and they stated "whoever is elected we as a country will have to back him".

Will you back the next guy even if he is not who you voted for? Knowing myself as well as I do I know I wont.

whiteyj 11-04-2008 12:27 PM

It doesn't matter which candidate ends up in office. We as a country are in a pretty screwed position. The sooner everyone just sucks it up, shuts up, rolls up their sleeves, and asks, "What the hell can I do to help?" the sooner we can pull together and work ourselves out of this economic and political mess.

skeeter 11-04-2008 12:27 PM

Depends on the situation.
I back no one 100%

4point 11-04-2008 12:34 PM

True enough Skeeter, I wouldn't even back McCain 100% :eek:

kEat 11-04-2008 12:35 PM

I might not agree with whoever gets elected, but he's still my boss.

jupiterboy 11-04-2008 12:37 PM

Backing is a funny term. The country was built on second-guessing authority and expressing dissent. I don't see any reason to stop. We should, however, keep a constructive sense about our destruction.

tiny terror 11-04-2008 12:41 PM

Back him how? Once he's elected, he should still be held up to the scrutiny EVERY elected official deserves. Plus, he works for me, so, he needs to have my back, not the other way around.

richp 11-04-2008 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiny terror (Post 279232)
Plus, he works for me, so, he needs to have my back, not the other way around.

That is the problem, in a nutshell, from the federal right on down to the county levels in the US now and in quite a few cases the local town govt too.

Barrie 11-04-2008 01:23 PM

I will up to the point I feel my civil libertys' are being infringed upon.:)

txjustin 11-04-2008 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whiteyj (Post 279220)
It doesn't matter which candidate ends up in office. We as a country are in a pretty screwed position. The sooner everyone just sucks it up, shuts up, rolls up their sleeves, and asks, "What the hell can I do to help?" the sooner we can pull together and work ourselves out of this economic and political mess.

We need more people who think like this...I know i do

4point 11-04-2008 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by txjustin (Post 279257)
We need more people who think like this...I know i do

I am far from an political activist. I spend what little time and money i have on defending the rights of my interest.

ygohome 11-04-2008 02:16 PM

depending on who it is, I'm taking my jeep and moving to the bahamas. lol. maybe I'll take a life vest too for the huricane season.

whitebuffalo 11-04-2008 02:32 PM

Voting Machines Elect One Of Their Own As President | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

id back this up :flipoff:

Darton 11-04-2008 02:33 PM

Funny they say that. How many of "them" are backing G. W. Bush right now? He's still the President.

jgano23 11-04-2008 02:36 PM

lets all move to mexico. there's great offroading there i hear. cancun here we come.

cavediverjc 11-04-2008 02:41 PM

Cancun's a dump. Let's move to Panama!! Bocas Del Toro here we come!! Even though I voted against him, I think Obama is going to win this election. I'm not happy about it, but technically he'll be my new boss when he takes over from GW. I don't have to back him......he's here for us, and I think we should put him on the hotplate like all the Democrats have been doing to GW and McCain and see if he comes through with a single campaign promise. My guess is that all those promises will be conveniently forgotten.

txjustin 11-04-2008 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cavediverjc (Post 279280)
Cancun's a dump. Let's move to Panama!! Bocas Del Toro here we come!! Even though I voted against him, I think Obama is going to win this election. I'm not happy about it, but technically he'll be my new boss when he takes over from GW. I don't have to back him......he's here for us, and I think we should put him on the hotplate like all the Democrats have been doing to GW and McCain and see if he comes through with a single campaign promise. My guess is that all those promises will be conveniently forgotten.

Conversely, do you think McCain would/will back any of his campaign promises?

skeeter 11-04-2008 03:20 PM

Yes, McCain has a documented history of doing, or at least trying to do what he says. Obama does not.

txjustin 11-04-2008 03:27 PM

Lol, ok chief

skeeter 11-04-2008 03:33 PM

Want to have a contest to see who can prove their point without resorting to childish comments like that?

txjustin 11-04-2008 03:41 PM

Not really because I never had a point. If it makes you feel better to keep backing McCain...go for it. But after tonight, most likely, he will fade back out of the spotlight.

jupiterboy 11-04-2008 03:43 PM

So why did McCain compromise on torture. That was a total surprise. I know it was "just the CIA" but that is so his issue.

I think it would be a much tighter race had he been more himself, or his persona, or whatever.

txjustin 11-04-2008 03:47 PM

Also, I thought McCain was against earmarks? Why, then, did he so adamently push the bailout package with so many earmarks?

jupiterboy 11-04-2008 04:00 PM

^ I don't think the bailout has earmarks. It is more of a blank check. However McCain has always been pro deregulation, and I have not heard him defend that position throughout the campaign.

orange05tj 11-04-2008 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgano23 (Post 279275)
lets all move to mexico. there's great offroading there i hear. cancun here we come.

Then we can come back here and get free stuff, drive ford exploders with Pennsylvania plates. get fake Oregon licenses, take all the jobs that Americans dont want to do, have 15 free babies at the best hospitals, take all the cash we made and run back to Mexico and buy a big farm. Thats the American dream

skeeter 11-04-2008 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jupiterboy (Post 279314)
So why did McCain compromise on torture. That was a total surprise. I know it was "just the CIA" but that is so his issue.

I think it would be a much tighter race had he been more himself, or his persona, or whatever.

He didn't compromise, he voted against a bill he disagreed with.

Quote:

Mr. McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, has led the battle in recent years on a number of bills to end torture by the United States. He said he voted against the bill Wednesday because legislation he had helped to pass already prohibits the C.I.A. from “cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment.”

Mr. McCain, of Arizona, said he believed it would be a mistake to limit C.I.A. interrogators to using only those techniques that were enumerated in the Field Manual, which he noted was a public document.

“When we passed the Military Commissions Act, we said that the C.I.A. should have the ability to use additional techniques,” Mr. McCain told reporters Friday in Oshkosh, Wis. “None of those techniques would entail violating the Detainee Treatment Act, which said that cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment are prohibited.”
Quote:

Mr. McCain, according to a Senate aide of his, believes that while the C.I.A. should be — and is — prohibited from using cruel and inhumane and degrading tactics, it should have the flexibility to use acceptable tactics that are not listed in the Field Manual.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/us...17torture.html
For the record, I disagree with his stance on water boarding.

jupiterboy 11-04-2008 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange05tj (Post 279324)
Then we can come back here and get free stuff, drive ford exploders with Pennsylvania plates. get fake Oregon licenses, take all the jobs that Americans dont want to do, have 15 free babies at the best hospitals, take all the cash we made and run back to Mexico and buy a big farm. Thats the American dream

And get your a$$ thrown in jail for pot whenever whitey needs his job back.

jupiterboy 11-04-2008 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeeter (Post 279325)
He didn't compromise, he voted against a bill he disagreed with.

I disagree. I know what the official statements said, and I also know what he said in the ramp up to that vote. I think he did what was politically expedient, and that he well knows that language about what the CIA can do is extremely weak. Could you imagine anyone in the CIA being prosecuted based on that stated standard? It would take years of precedent to even roughly define it.

skeeter 11-04-2008 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by txjustin (Post 279316)
Also, I thought McCain was against earmarks? Why, then, did he so adamently push the bailout package with so many earmarks?

He tried to broker a compromise to get the bill passed. Both candidates did. To oppose it would have caused a deadlock and McCain believed it was necessary.
Politics is all about compromise, sometimes you have to do things you don't agree with to accomplish things you feel are important.

For the record, I oppose the bailout.

txjustin 11-04-2008 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jupiterboy (Post 279323)
^ I don't think the bailout has earmarks. It is more of a blank check. However McCain has always been pro deregulation, and I have not heard him defend that position throughout the campaign.

It does, in fact it has a lot of earmarks. I will give McCain credit for not wanting to accept it with earmarks, but he stated that the economy is on the brink of collapse so he did.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:52 AM.