General Chat / Obama Elected President

So I pretty much cant read anything you write anymore kev, you're making my brain hurt with the stupidity.


On another note, if these four idiots are the best we can do for p/vp, then we deserve what we get.

I find it hilarious that both sides are talking about national universal healthcare, increased spending on education...etc etc. etc., yet none of them realize that our dollar is failing, the world economy is blowing up, and social security has all but become a black hole on the budget. There was a congressional report in 2000, that essentially said just to ensure benefits for the next ten years, we would need to raise taxes by over 100%, and decrease spending by a similar amount.

Translation, and I really hate to admit this, but we need to start looking at ourselves in terms of a global competitor. For too long the United States has enjoyed a superpower status that has allowed us to have a relatively stable way of life. With emerging economies that for years were unable to compete with us, we are no slowly but surely losing this status. This would have happened whether Bush was president or not, though his actions regrettably accelerated this. Sadly, the American people are unwilling to accept this change, and instead we are too quick to blame the only person we can think of. Yes, Bush has made mistakes, but so has congress. The American people are also to blame for allowing us to get to this point.

We are at a crossroads right now. We need real leaders who can shrewdly navigate us through the coming storm. Sadly, we do not have this. We have a populist who is all talk and no substance, two old guys who are us much to blame for the problems as Bush, and a milf from alaska. Yeah, we truly are screwed. I am truly scared for what the future holds. Rather than looking at the central problem (that being the two-party bullshit that is American politics), we are going to have the same old partisan politics and get stuck with someone who is not the right person. Granted, none of them are the right person.

Furthermore, didnt the Republican controlled govt show us what happens when one party controls everything?

dleeted

mkay

just clarifying

I'm acknowledging that you clarified his confirmation of your correction of his quotation.

the misquoting of gandhi was sarcasm.

hey guys, i thought i would pop in here to tell ya the real story:

1) The problem is much more severe than anyone on capitol hill is letting on, that problem being...

2) Our government has no money. Zip, zero, zilch.

This really isn't surprising since the US has been in debt since the 1930's, but now, we are all fucked for sure. See yall on the flip side.

P.S. - oh, and to clarify, when they say "700 billion" what they MEAN is they are going to PRINT 700 billion dollars worth of paper money, and pray no one notices.

We are now go for hyper inflation, bolivia style.

we need to get a new currency

deleted

sort of funny.

id have to say D & E

actually black slavery wasn't a bad idea at the time. you have to realize that back then the general opinion (while morally terrible) of blacks allowed for something such as this to take place. not only was it acceptable, but it was very helpful to the people who had slaves at the time. economies greatly benefited from slavery.

i'm not saying i'm racist, or that black slavery is ok, just that at the time it seemed like a good idea. then again, you could make that arguement for just about any of those choices. (ex. the Holocaust started as a way for the German society to let out frustrations/angers of the recent past on scapegoats - the Jews, which would seem fine for someone who was experiencing it all at the time, even though it isn't actually acceptable)

now, to stay on topic, Maverick.

actually black slavery wasn't a bad idea at the time. you have to realize that back then the general opinion (while morally terrible) of blacks allowed for something such as this to take place. not only was it acceptable, but it was very helpful to the people who had slaves at the time. economies greatly benefited from slavery.

Please, please do your research before you say anything, Gwazi.

Slavery was not, initially, drawn along racial lines. It was adapted from the various forms of indentured service in western Europe at the time (slavery itself has existed since ancient times, but in a form that's barely recognizable next to American slavery. Europe had somewhat less need of it because there were less massively labor-intensive tasks--such as those on a plantation--to deal with.)

It really didn't become racist until after it's establishment in the colonies. It was simply easier to capture Africans from their homes and ship them to the Americas than to hold the pretense of indentured servants (yes, you get your freedom in ten years--if you live that long.) Once that system was in place, the racist segment of it was played up to justify the inhumane treatment of the slaves.

And no, it wasn't economically viable. Look at it this way: a plantation exists to grow a crop and sell it for a profit. Your initial investment buys you assets: land and slaves. If you mistreat your slaves (starve them, for example) they don't produce as much. If you provide for them fully, you go bankrupt. When a slave dies, you'd need to replace them, which means more expenditure. The only ones who profited from the slave trade were slave traders. (Until the Royal Navy took to hanging them.) Even if slavery had never been outlawed, it would have collapsed under its own economic weight.

-ACE

Here's my overview in a nutshell:

Obama: Has lots of experience, specialized in occidental college, primarily in International Relations. Former president of Harvard Law. Years upon years of knowledge. Very appealing self-less campaign calling for massive change throughout America. Rallying cry: Yes We Can. Appeal factor > 9x10^4

McCain: About a year's worth of experience. Born in a Naval Station in the Panama Canal, practically born on the battlefield. I don't know much about his education other than he was constantly active in the military. Shot down in Vietnam, tortured as a P.O.W. When liberated or released, whichever it was, entered politics for a year before entering house of reps. Constantly disagrees with his own party, a lying fucking bastard, bases his campaign as a PITY party to get his ass into the Oval Office for four years or less, given the significant chances of him dying IN office due to his old age, and if he makes it, America's gonna boot him out and put a Democrat in. Appeal Factor < -infinity

Edited by ClockworkMyr, 10 October 2008 - 11:20 PM.

ACE, actually I have done my research. i wasn't talking about slavery when it began. i realize it didn't use to be drawn along racial lines. i was purely talking about the racism that stemmed from black slavery in the american colonies, and how that led to an acceptable system.

i realize that hundreds of years ago when slavery started, it wasn't for racial reasons. in fact, europeans valued black people (as slaves). they were intrigued by them, and wanted to have one. they treated them well.

but blacks weren't the only ones who were enslaved back then. there were slaves from all parts of the known world. so how then, am i saying that slavery stemmed purely from racist values?

maybe you should understand what i'm saying better before saying i need to do my research.

P.S. - i've got a college-level textbook on European history with me if you need me to reference anything directly

EDIT: about the economic portion of your post, well maybe you are right. but i'm sure i would have learned about that in my american history class if you are (rather than what i said). who knows, maybe my school just sucks

Edited by Gwazi, 11 October 2008 - 09:04 AM.

Sorry, I must have misinterpreted your post. Your phrasing suggested that widely-held negative opinions of blacks predated racial slavery -- which is false. (It existed, but more on the level of social snubs than claiming them to be outright subhuman.)

-ACE

mkay, i thought that might have been what happened. sorry if my wording was a little off.

Last presidential debate is on Wednesday of next week, which sucks becuase a brand new South Park is on at 10PM, and the debate doesn't end until 10:30PM. Damn you, CNN!

So... Slavery.


It's important to look at Africa and Portugal for this subject. 1300's, you've got Portugal running all around the coast of Africa trying to get to India, setting up trading posts all over Africa.

In Africa, you've got a bunch of nations/tribes that are constantly fighting wars. Except the standard operating procedure there was to capture as many people as you could. Get it? Slaves.

So Portugal comes down, and they're just looking to get to India to get rich, but why ignore Africa? The only problem being, Africa didn't have much of anything in the way of products or resources to barter with. So, they traded their slaves for the Portuguese goods. So now you've got Africa black slaves living in the Iberian Pennisula in the 1300-1400s.

Spain goes conquest happy and ends up with all of the New World except Brazil. They start by eploiting the native Aztecs and Incas into doing their labour for them through programs like the "encomienda", but most of them are dying of disease, or running away or resisting the Spanish's exploitation. They need somebody to do all their backbreaking labour for them, and God forbid the Spanish do any work for themselves. So, they start importing slaves like mad from Africa.

My point is this: Africans captured their own people. They sold them to the Portguese, who sold them to everyone else. We make it out to be this great monstrocity where they're running into villages and grabbing all the people they can find. Africans tried boosting their own economy by selling them, which eventually destroyed it because their population was dwindling.

And you say it originally wasn't racist? Oh, it most definatly was. The Spanish were assholes, to say the least. They were racist towards everyone. At the top were the peninsulares, Spaniards born in Spain. Below them, the creoles, Spaniards born in America. And then it just went to shit with different layers of mixed race going down to the blacks and Indians. They had two different sets of laws for the Spanish and for everyone else. A freed black person in Spain/Latin America had about as much of a chance to move up the ladder as blacks in 1950 in the South.

Slave owners in North America took their brutality to whole new levels, which is why it's such a sore subject now. Personally, I think if they had not been so cruel and inhuman, there'd still be slaves in some form today.



I can't believe I actually learned something from a general education requirement. Fuck.

Edited by Midnight Aurora, 12 October 2008 - 11:12 AM.

I can't believe I actually learned something from MA. Fuck.

Interestingly enough, there are still instances of Africa slavery continuing today...