What will Obama "Change"? What particular "Hope" does he offer?
- Thread starter achilles28
- Start date
Buffett & Gates gave away more than the top 40 rock stars have made in their whole careers. Soros would be easily #1 on the Forbes list if not for his 3 decades+ of charitable giving. Many of the very best sportsmen were real team players and held in high regard by their peers. Free countries are richer than dictatorships and repressive regimes.
Some people are assholes, others aren't. In general, being "good" is more profitable and successful than being "bad". It's the most retarded thing ever to be a cynic - little supporting evidence, and it makes you sad & bitter.
Okay, that was less than ideal, and the Democrats could have played it better:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/04/mccains_100year_war.html
However, the above reference also notes:
Actually, McCain has not been entirely consistent on his thoughts about a long-term U.S. military occupation of Iraq. Interviewed on the Charlie Rose show last November, he rejected the Korea/Germany analogy.
ROSE: Do you think that this -- Korea, South Korea is an analogy of where Iraq might be, not in terms of their economic success but in terms of an American presence over the next, say, 20, 25 years, that we will have a significant amount of troops there?
MCCAIN: I don't think so.
ROSE: Even if there are no casualties?
MCCAIN: No. But I can see an American presence for a while. But eventually I think because of the nature of the society in Iraq and the religious aspects of it that America eventually withdraws.
So, while McCain would like a "presence" there for up to 100 years if necessary (sans American casualties), he recognizes that the very presence of an American military contributes to the instability (which, in this region, characteristically leads to casualties). Quite the conundrum, eh?
But it seems that Obama did get this one right:
While McCain and Republicans say that Obama is trying to "swindle voters" with "dishonest smears" by repeating the remark, the Illinois senator remains undeterred.
"Senator McCain has been saying I don't understand national security, but he's the one who wants to keep tens of thousands of United States troops in Iraq for as long as 100 years," he told reporters yesterday in Pennsylvania.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/04/02/foes_target_mccains_100_year_war_remark/
Pabst, for every tick down in value that The Dog takes you, I'll gladly take the other side of the buy. He's hoping for a market value decline that just ain't there. Anytime you need a wingman....
You are dead on about the Obama connections. The trouble here is no one in the Obama camp wants to acknowledge that the qualification resume that he sports is extremely thin (and rightfully so). Take away asbestos abatement, stopping a potiential fight at a tenants meeting, a few government check releases for programs (questionable), and several political speeches, and you're quickly back to college accomplishments for references.
Exactly. But I must admit that I do wish the Democrats had specifically framed it that way.
Great answer.
Quote from canyonman00:
You are dead on about the Obama connections. The trouble here is no one in the Obama camp wants to acknowledge that the qualification resume that he sports is extremely thin (and rightfully so). Take away asbestos abatement, stopping a potiential fight at a tenants meeting, a few government check releases for programs (questionable), and several political speeches, and you're quickly back to college accomplishments for references.
Also take away his teaching of constitutional law, take away his state Senate experience, and take away the books that he wrote and he's got no experience.
Meanwhile, take away McCain's clothes and he's naked.
I agree. But then I'm holding the Democrats to a higher standard than the Republicans.
I principally trade off of sub-one-minute charts (at least for entries). Do you really think I care about longer-term or even intermediate trends? Perhaps, but it has absolutely no bearing on my day-to-day trading. I have no personal agenda here, so please don't measure me by using your own yardstick as a reference.Quote from canyonman00:
Pabst, for every tick down in value that The Dog takes you, I'll gladly take the other side of the buy. He's hoping for a market value decline that just ain't there. Anytime you need a wingman....
And speaking of ticks, I'm the guy who doesn't like ES because its tick size is proportionately larger than the tick size for the large S&P contract. And yet, I was the one who was accused of "tick fucking" earlier in this thread. Go figure.
You're displaying some real ignorance about SA.
Blaming 'Saudi Arabia" for being homeland to the hijackers would be akin to blaming the U.S. if Tim McVeigh had bombed a building in Europe.
The Saudi government is the numero uno target of Al queda. Just because the wife of a prince has cut them a check ect. has nothing to do with the big picture reality.