Don't forget to vote later today.

Thank You for all the info! Sounds like The Swiss have a better political system in place.


Maybe that is why they aren't involved in BS wars and trying to police the world

Two party system is a joke in America! And the way we decide who runs for president is absurd.



Iowa and New Hampshire should not have more say deciding than California, though the way things are going for the Republicans, It may be a three way race to the finish with McCain, Huckabee and Romney, four if that idiot Rudy G gets going!



Hilary may not win it until the end either! With Obama and Edwards

bobrob2004 wrote:

catbox_9 wrote:

I didn't get to vote

Luckily I do get to vote later (I think in February) in the California primary. This really sucks that this is my first election to vote in. Every candidate sucks - more than usual!

I think of myself as a democrat I guess but don't care for either major candidate. I won't vote republican and I won't vote for a third party so it's going to be a tough choice.

I consider myself a Democrat also. I was going to vote for Edwards, but I couldn't! And if you're going to vote "uncommitted" then why even bother to vote? So I went with they only guy that promises jobs in Michigan, Mitt Romney. (Just because I voted Republican in the primaries doesn't mean I'll vote Republican in the main election in November. The people on tv told me that I can switch parties if I wanted to). :lol:

No uncommitted choice here (I don't think - I've never voted in a primary...or presidential election at all for that matter). That seems like the vote for me because I really don't have a clue who I want to pick. Oh well. It's not like it matters anyways.

gs78 wrote:

Thank You for all the info! Sounds like The Swiss have a better political system in place.


Maybe that is why they aren't involved in BS wars and trying to police the world

Nonsense! We do a good job making the world a better place. It's not like the US has ever done any harm to the rest of the world

I feel sorry for the youth of today who have not really been taught history. What is taught in our schools of "higher education" is a re-writing of true history. I've been able to have discussions with people who lived through WW2 an forward to today, and we have been on a slippery slope downhill for years until we see how open people are to communism.

I'm just glad we can still own our own homes, and at least in the area I live in, not have a camera on every pole monitoring our every move. It starts in some countries, and some cities in the US as a way of fighting crime...terriorists.., and now many are used to monitor what you eat and do...

and give out traffic tickets

gs78 wrote:

and give out traffic tickets

Yep, that too, although many courts have thrown those out saying the machines used were not announced first before the cities used them... Yea civil liberties!

Still people had to miss work to fight them. How many people sent a check without a second thought?

Need less Government, Not More

GoGetEmTigers wrote:

fighting terriorists..

But you could argue our government is full of terrorists, too. People make a huge deal out of *cough* (don't want to mention it by name...several thousand died) *cough* but you could argue that that's not the worst terrorist attack the US has been involved in - not even close.

I mean surely killing 200,000+ people, most of whom civilians, is pretty bad. Then add all the other injuries and long-term damage (i.e., radiation poisoning, severe birth defects, cancer, etc.) and it's only worse.

Surely a couple nuclear bombings is terrorism.

Does that make President Harry S. Truman a terrorist? I guess so

KABOOM!

Mushroom Cloud Time

all in the name of peace. He had quite a decision, though...who knows how many more would have died had the war gone on any longer? The Japanese were not willing to surrender. Their civilians were prepared to withstand an invasion by US forces (planned for fall 1945). It was as if they were so into fighting, and so sure they would still win, they forgot what peace was like...

laprimamirala wrote:

all in the name of peace. He had quite a decision, though...who knows how many more would have died had the war gone on any longer? The Japanese were not willing to surrender. Their civilians were prepared to withstand an invasion by US forces (planned for fall 1945). It was as if they were so into fighting, and so sure they would still win, they forgot what peace was like...

While true, it could probably have been avoided. I'm not a history expert so I don't want to try and spew out a bunch of facts since I'm mostly ill-informed. This debate has gone on for 60 years and there's plenty of arguments much better than I could give both for and against the attacks and they can be found quite easily.

Agreed. I wish he would not have done it either, but it was interesting to learn the other side of the coin. Either way, many would die, and I think everyone was so sick of the war, they wanted it overwith asap.