Macain now leads in the polls!

[brown-raider]

Macaine has now overtaken Obama in the polls..... Obama plans to have meeting with Bill Clinton........ seems like the Dems are getting worried.. time to dust off o' Bill and bring him out of the closet
On a side note Chris Mathews and Keith Olberman were fired today as anchors at MSNBC for having biased reporting and reporting liberal slanted news reports on the election.
Seems like the wheels are falling off for the Dems and the liberal left...:lol:

[1amongmany]

now let's see how many jump over the fence to get on this bandwagon

[brown-raider]

hopefully enough to beat the lefties:becky:now let's see how many jump over the fence to get on this bandwagon

[Sveta's Hero]

Let's not forget the undecided voters. They are the ones who are going to decide this election when they make up their minds.

[Voobrazheniye]

Polls don't mean much at this point, except to the media. Neither party should be overly complacent if their candiate is ahead at this point, nor overly worried if he or she is behind (unless it is WAY behind). Things can change in a heartbeat.

The only poll that matters is the one on election day.

[brown-raider]

Maybe so Paul but they matter enough to get the Democrats worried, and there are some people who don't take time to know much about the issues and will vote for who ever seems to be the favorite.:yo:

[slkasop]

"On a side note Chris Mathews and Keith Olberman were fired today as anchors at MSNBC"

If this is true and I have no reason to doubt you, You have made my morning.

On a side note: Some political commentator noted that as a whole Americans will vote on party lines because of their family history. 40% of Americans will vote democratic even if Joseph Stalin were the nominee. 40% will vote republican even if Adolf Hitler were the nominee. It is the 20% who are independent who decide the elections. Note that Bill Clinton won with about 42% of the vote in '92 because 19% of the people voted for Ross Perot.

The last democrat of any worth was Truman.

My two cents...if you dont want it, leave them in the change ashtray at the Shell station.

[huney]

"On a side note Chris Mathews and Keith Olberman were fired today as anchors at MSNBC"

If this is true and I have no reason to doubt you, You have made my morning.


They were replaced as anchors for the debates and election night.

Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann

Tribune wire reports 10:16 AM CDT, September 8, 2008 After months of accusations of political bias and infighting, MSNBC decided over the weekend that NBC (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/economy-business-finance/media/television-industry/nbc-ORCRP004494.topic) News correspondent David Gregory would anchor news coverage of the coming debates and election eight.

Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, had been in the anchor chair, will remain as analysts.

The change is a result of tensions associated with the channel's perceived shift to the political left.

When vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/sarah-palin-PEPLT0007504.topic) lamented media bias in her speech, attendees of the Republican convention loudly chanted "NBC."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/business/media/08msnbc.html?_r=2&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

[zoroooo]

tis topic is actual again a borring propaganda..

Dan can you tell me what the republicains think about cultural heritage of other cultures?

lavvun

[slkasop]

And here I was, hoping that they had been sent to a strict regime labor camp at Nizhni Tagil. But, their rabid following makes money for MSNBC. As they say, $$ talks and BS walks.

[huney]

tis topic is actual again a borring propaganda..

Dan can you tell me what the republicains think about cultural heritage of other cultures?

lavvun

In the rare moments they think of the cultural heritage of other cultures Republicans think they might be a good business opportunity :becky:

[brown-raider]

of course Waffle, things don't look as rosy now for your boy Bam Bamtis topic is actual again a borring propaganda..

Dan can you tell me what the republicains think about cultural heritage of other cultures?

lavvun

:becky:

[fbibob]

The funny thing is that Oberman and Matthews also got accused of bias by the left during the Democrat nominations, when they were singing in the Obama choir and the Hillary crowd got angry.

[brown-raider]

maybe finally justice has been served... it's a slippery slope for their carrers nowThe funny thing is that Oberman and Matthews also got accused of bias by the left during the Democrat nominations, when they were singing in the Obama choir and the Hillary crowd got angry.

[zoroooo]

of course Waffle, things don't look as rosy now for your boy Bam Bam

:becky:

brown thats quiet insulting..Bam bam boy...my feelow we have been talking since a few years and I feel it pitty you still feel to talk on that way to me..I feel been "mama pipi"

in a railway station..

thanks

lavuun

[brown-raider]

sorry whitemencantjump didn't know you were so serious about bam bam obama. he should be greatful to you!:yo:brown thats quiet insulting..Bam bam boy...my feelow we have been talking since a few years and I feel it pitty you still feel to talk on that way to me..I feel been "mama pipi"

in a railway station..

thanks

lavuun

[kentuckydan]

tis topic is actual again a borring propaganda..

Dan can you tell me what the republicains think about cultural heritage of other cultures?

lavvun

I am just passing through my on my way to house sit and do the dog walk thing so I don't have time to go into your question in depth, but I will try to address it later, I will be tied up most of the week

[fbibob]

tis topic is actual again a borring propaganda..

Dan can you tell me what the republicains think about cultural heritage of other cultures?

lavvun

Basically, the question is not logical. Republicans, in the political sense, are concerned with low taxes and a small US government that does only those functions that the people are unable to do for themselves, like national defense or testing new pharmaceuticals. Republicans want US citizens to be as independent as possible from government regulation and control.

If somebody's cultural heritage causes them to be a threat to the security of the US, then there is a reason for Republicans to care about this cultural heritage. Otherwise, there is no reason to be interested.

[fbibob]

To return to the topic thread, McCain now has a 15 point lead in independents in the current polls.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110137/McCain-Now-Winning-Majority-Independents.aspx

Historically, independents are the group that both parties try to win over.

The numbers may continue, or fade as the post-convention excitement fades. The numbers that matter will be the numbers a few days before the election.

[brown-raider]

To return to the topic thread, McCain now has a 15 point lead in independents in the current polls.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110137/McCain-Now-Winning-Majority-Independents.aspx

Historically, independents are the group that both parties try to win over.

The numbers may continue, or fade as the post-convention excitement fades. The numbers that matter will be the numbers a few days before the election.good info Bob... never the less even if numbers fade, it brought bam bam oboma back down to earth:lol:

[slkasop]

" Republicans, in the political sense, are concerned with low taxes and a small US government that does only those functions that the people are unable to do for themselves, like national defense or testing new pharmaceuticals. Republicans want US citizens to be as independent as possible from government regulation and control."

To further clarify...Conservatives (not radical) believe that the essence of the constitution is to be found in the Preamble and the following articles and amendments are merely the how-to....Much like the meaning of the Tao is found in the first verse...everything else is an attempt at explanation. The Preamble states:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. (Underlining mine)

Notice that the mandatory verbs were Form a more perfect union, Establish Justice, Insure Domestic Tranquility, and PROVIDE for the common defense. The soft verb is to Promote the general welfare. (this means encourage, not mandate) Without a Union, Justice, domestic tranquility, and the defense of the country, it would be impossible to promote the general welfare or secure the blessings of liberty.

The liberal left in the US believes that we should provide for the general welfare and let everything else slide. This is socialism or more. The government should only be responsible for the items listed in the Preamble and do that by following the rules set forth in the Articles and Amendments.

As to other cultures. Most Americans resent foreigners telling them how to vote or whom to vote for. The fact that Europe and Russia do not like a candidate would make most people predisposed to vote for the other guy.

The preamble interpretation comes from law school, everything else is my opinion, which can be discarded as usual. :becky:

[kentuckydan]

Polls don't mean much at this point, except to the media. Neither party should be overly complacent if their candiate is ahead at this point, nor overly worried if he or she is behind (unless it is WAY behind). Things can change in a heartbeat.

The only poll that matters is the one on election day.

Quite true the only polls that counts is election day and individual polls are only of so much value

BUT

TRENDS are a different matter, they exist independent of any biases in poll taking

and the over all trends so far are very promising if you are a Conservative that is.

[Voobrazheniye]

Quite true the only polls that counts is election day and individual polls are only of so much value

BUT

TRENDS are a different matter, they exist independent of any biases in poll taking

and the over all trends so far are very promising if you are a Conservative that is.

I agree, Dan. And what is most interesting in the trends is the way that the more the media and the hollywood types carp at McCain and Palin, the more the image of the Republican ticket improves with the average voter. Perhaps this tells us two things:

1. The people who don't pay attention until after the conventions are beginning to pay attention, and a majority of them prefer McCain to Obama, and...

2. A majority of people are really disgusted with the media, realize that many "independent" media organizations have simply made themselves into promotional vehicles for the Democrats, and resent being told how they should think. And as they become disenchanted with the media, they become less accepting of the media's darling.

[kentuckydan]

Dan can you tell me what the republicains think about cultural heritage of other cultures?

lavvun

I am just passing through my on my way to house sit and do the dog walk thing so I don't have time to go into your question in depth, but I will try to address it later, I will be tied up most of the week


This User Says Thank You to kentuckydan : zoroooo (09-09-2008)


OK I will take a stab. First off IMO there is no magical line in the American Political Spectrum past which can be labeled

Here be Monsters.

Neither to the Right or the Left,

Now there may be monsters in those regions but they earn that label by their individual activities not as a group entitlement.

So the Republican subgroup of Americans contains a continuum of philosphies not a homogenous set.

For example the label NecCon is often used as a synonym for "Very BAD DOG" with no regard for some of the origins of the label. Which again IMO means New Conservative.

Conservative/Liberal are relative terms you see. As the political leadership moved further and further to the Left over the last generation, a large portion of it's Moderate Base became isolated or purged,

In their words "They did not leave the Democratic Party, it left them"

Those people either ended up as Independents, not affilated with any Party or registered as Republican, since they had not other viable options

So your question "what the republicains think about cultural heritage of other cultures?"
has no simple answer.

Republicans as individual people are much like other normal people they spend most of their time, thinking about how to raise their families, get along with their neighbors or their jobs and not a whole lot of time pondering other cultures, except as the facets of other cultures impact their personal lives,

For instance after 3000+ were killed on 9/11 there was a lot more thought among Americans, Republicans included on Muslim Culture.

Another complicating factor is , unlike other more homogenous Nations America is a melting pot of many different cultures.

Cultures that in the Old World seem to be still killing each other over wrongs that heppened a millenium ago, seem to co-exist here for the most part in a fair approximation
of harmony and I do not believe this is an accident, but an adaptation of living in a society which enfolds many different cultures,

However there are a few diffences in how the Conservative and the Progressive ends of our polity react to different cultures.

To the Far Left there appears more of an acceptance of cultural differences in the sense that all cultures are percieved as equivalent and there are not may attempts to place moral judgements on some facets. That is taken at times IMO to extremes.

Conservatives DO place moral judgements on activities they perceive as either Right or Wrong, Good or Evil.

This dicotomy can sometimes result in paradixical and insane IMO results

For example William and Mary College, the third oldest learing institution in the US, some time back decided to remove the Chalise from the altar of the Wren Chapel.

The reason given was, because the Chapel was sometimes used for other functions than Christian Religous ones, that someone of another faith or relgious persuasion, might be offended by the sight of the Cross, this was presented in the spirit of tolerance and inclusion.

But was that really the case?

If, I myself, found it necessary to enter a building of any Faith and found it offensive to see an emblem of that religion displayed, I might and with good cause be labeled a Xenophobic Religous Bigot and would have earned that label

So in the most bizare manner the action of William and Mary includes an unspoken assumption that all persons not Christian may be Xenophobic Relious Bigots, for they would be the only ones who would find a Christian Cross on an Altar in a Christians Chapel offensive.

What is tolerant and inclusive about that,

The Far Left agreed with the Ban , the Far Right was outraged at it,

The Left seems to be overly tolerant of any culture with the exception of Western Culture

The Right, Republicans IMO doesn't really care that much what other cultures do, they consider that the perview of those cultures, with a few exceptions,

As it effects them

Those activities that the Conservative milleu perceives as Immoral or Evil

An example of that it the aprocraphal story of the British Governor General and a Rajah
on the subject of Suttee,

The Rajah told the Governor General that the Sutee was part of their Cultrual Heritage and should for that reason be respected.

The Governor General Replied that the British had their own Cultural Traditions and one of which was if anyone burned a Woman alive they got hung.

So he told the Rajah you may build your Funeral Pyres and we will build our Scaffolds and we can both fulfill our individual Cultural Traditions

As one who considers himself more of a Conservative Libertarian I find myself in agreement with the Governeor General

Now I cannot speak for "Republicans" enmasse, but I think a fair amount would agree with my presentation

May be continued later

[kentuckydan]

Here is something to ponder, found on a website called Winds of Change in a post by
Armed Liberal (who supports Obama so not really a NeoCon or Republican)

Cowboys and Liberals (http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/cowboys_and_liberals.php)

Jonathan Haidt, an associate professor of moral psychology at the University of Virginia, argues in an essay this month, “What Makes People Vote Republican?”, that it’s liberals, in fact, who are dangerously blind.

Haidt has conducted research in which liberals and conservatives were asked to project themselves into the minds of their opponents and answer questions about their moral reasoning.

Conservatives, he said, prove quite adept at thinking like liberals, but liberals are consistently incapable of understanding the conservative point of view.