Building on the darkness theme, which I thought was hilarious by the way, I'd like to see a "kick me" pin that would be given to our foes when we view their profile, or something to that effect.
I'd also really like a Thomas Jefferson pin, and if you want you could try and give the Libertarian party a logo (akin to the Donkey and The Elephant).
Shrugged,
I liken it to the abused girlfriend scenario as well. Those are actually exact words I've used. I have no idea what I'm going to do if Clinton takes office though. Because after that shouldn't Jeb be in the running? I heard on NPR one guy bash Bush and then say he really like Jeb though, and was hoping he'd run in a few years. What the hell!?
China is a much bigger threat to us than Iran, or Iraq, or "Islamo-fascists" ever could be. Why?
- China is committed to building a nuclear class aircraft carrier that rivals our own, every year for the next 16 years.
- China owns most of our debt through treasury bonds.
- China is quickly becoming a capitalist country, and while their economy thrives, ours struggles.
They could easily call in their debts. We of course couldn't pay and so they would accept payment in the form of our land. We'll try and fight them, but they foot the bill for our wars, and at this stage we'll have no money anyway, so they'll easily take it. And we're worried about a "nuclear Iran." Ridiculous.
How can anyone support the death penalty?
I use to be a big "eye-for-an-eye" guy, but I've recently changed my ways. I think it can best be summed up by this quote:
Until you can prove man is infallible, I will oppose the death penalty.
A war that we're really losing
joshmcintosh says:
"True, but it can offer treatment as an alternative to punishment. You sure you're a libertarian? I though you guys wanted half the laws thrown off the books."
Where is he saying he wants a law put in place? He's agreeing with the original post, which is to end a stupid law.
It's about time for a Kucinich/Paul 'debate'!
I think you have to look at Paul's entire message. He looks like he's against a lot of good things, when in actuality he's against government involvement in those things. For example, on abortion, while personally against that himself he thinks the states should decide. He says that because of the high complexity of the issue, and certain extreme circumstances where an abortion would be warranted (according to him), that it would be better dealt with on a state level.
This isn't a working on thing, so much as a new idea thing. Could you guys implement something that allows us to put in the full transcript of speeches and then we can comment on each paragraph point by point? I think it would do a lot of good in the way of political discourse. For an example go here: http://www.rebutter.com . Also are you guys using Ruby on Rails to develop this website?
I'm in the same boat Dave. I too don't like the abortion stance (I know leave it up to the states... still he's an OB/GYN how does he not support abortion?), and I agree with him on Net Neutrality. I think regulation of the internet, which is what it is, is going to leave the internet worse off than the dangers of not having it pose.
