Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby EsotericWombat » Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:39 am UTC

Anyone who was paying attention could see the differences between the two candidates. And to say that Gore's activism as a green liberal began within the past twenty years is to flatly deny history.
Image

User avatar
Solt
Posts: 1912
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:08 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Solt » Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:30 am UTC

Does anyone find it offensive that everyone is referring to the plumber in the context of "Oh me yarm he even wants to tax the lowly plumber."

The guy is a business owner for christ's sake.
"Welding was faster, cheaper and, in theory,
produced a more reliable product. But sailors do
not float on theory, and the welded tankers had a
most annoying habit of splitting in two."
-J.W. Morris

User avatar
Bakemaster
pretty nice future dick
Posts: 8933
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:33 pm UTC
Location: One of those hot places

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Bakemaster » Thu Oct 16, 2008 1:43 pm UTC

Plumbers make quite a lot of money, if they are at all competent.
Image
c0 = 2.13085531 × 1014 smoots per fortnight
"Apparently you can't summon an alternate timeline clone of your inner demon, guys! Remember that." —Noc

User avatar
frezik
Posts: 1336
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 pm UTC
Location: Schrödinger's Box

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby frezik » Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:00 pm UTC

booradley2785 wrote:I am in California so this is Obama's state. I don't think either candidate has visited here since the primaries. Regardless, I am voting for Nader. He spoke at my university not to long ago and he is man with passion. Loved hearing him speak. I really wish they would let him and the other 3rd party candidates debate. I think it would make the primary candidates look foolish.


Nader plays off his old accomplishments the same way McCain does. In both cases, what they did 30-40 years ago is notable, but that's the only thing they can point to. You should be able to say what you've done recently that makes you worthwhile.

Nader was interviewed on NPR for the 2004 elections (once again using the same rhetoric of "the two parties are the same" even when Bush made it clear by that point that they're not). A magazine editor had written an artical asking Nader not to run. Nader's response was that this artical was a violation of his freedom of speech. No, wrong, this is an all too common misconception of the first amendment. That editor had every right to say what he did. Nader has every right to ignore him. That's how freedom of speech works.

(I think it's this one, but I don't Windows Media Player or Real to listen to NPR's stream: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1643435)
I do not agree with the beer you drink, but will defend to the death your right to drink it

User avatar
iop
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:26 am UTC
Location: The ivory tower

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby iop » Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:13 pm UTC

Reading opinions about the debate I find it interesting how much agreeing with a candidate makes people lenient with respect to flawed arguments. They question only the arguments of the candidate they don't like, not the arguments of the candidate they like. Of course, it is not surprising, as they have already made up their mind. They only want additional justification of their decision, even if they claim they are open-minded.

User avatar
Okita
Staying Alive
Posts: 3071
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 7:51 pm UTC
Location: Finance land.

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Okita » Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:15 pm UTC

Something I just thought of during the debate... the flaming against Obama about how he was partially raised in a Muslim school and thus could potentially have radical Islamic tendencies... doesn't that apply to any other candidate who went to a christian/ catholic school? I wonder if the same logic applies, McCain could be a Klan supporter...?

I was interested in CNN's Ohio Uncommited Voter reaction levels. You'd get the sort of reactions you'd expect from each candidate's speeches on say the economy but sometimes you'd get these giant splits between men and women (for example, when McCain brings up Ayers) in which you get a large positive reaction from men but a negative reaction from women. Reverse that for abortion + Obama.

Other random note: I played the "blink along with McCain" game last night. I lost.
"I may or may not be a raptor. There is no way of knowing until entering a box that I happen to be in and then letting me sunder the delicious human flesh from your body in reptile fury."

User avatar
Indon
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 5:21 pm UTC
Location: Alabama :(
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Indon » Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:27 pm UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:Anyone who was paying attention could see the differences between the two candidates. And to say that Gore's activism as a green liberal began within the past twenty years is to flatly deny history.


Yes, but only after failing to win the presidential bid did he grow the beard, finally developing a public personality which people could see and like. During his campaign, he was extremely wooden, probably because he was afraid of scaring people away with Liberal Scaryness.
So, I like talking. So if you want to talk about something with me, feel free to send me a PM.

My blog, now rarely updated.

Image

AtlasDrugged
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:11 pm UTC

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby AtlasDrugged » Thu Oct 16, 2008 9:20 pm UTC

I'm as right-wing as you can be without being taboo, and McCain is starting to annoy the hell out of me. Congratulations Democrats and Republicans for once again choosing the most mediocre candidates from your respective parties! I thought Bush vs. Kerry was bad, but this is even worse. Grr.

EDIT, to be more specific: if you hadn't been following the news at all, and you picked up a random newspaper, what would you see? The global financial system in meltdown, the national debt expanding exponentially in an attempt to deal with it, and McCain's attacking Obama over... Ayers? Unlike most people here, I think the Ayers connection is relevant, but ffs could McCain have picked a worse time politically? He then cleverly manages to breathe death into a lifeless campaign by NOT mentioning Ayers during the second debate right after he had started airing ads about it, making himself look too cowardly to raise it with Obama.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby EsotericWombat » Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:58 pm UTC

Oh I'm not saying that Al Gore didn't have his failings as a candidate. But I was fourteen at the time and I knew about Gore's role in opening up the first Congressional hearings on global warming, pushing the Kyoto protocol, and his 1992 book Earth in the Balance, which at the time was being compared with the Unabomber's Manifesto. He did a shitty job of rebuffing that, with the result that there were people who voted against him because they thought he was a radical and people who voted against him or didn't vote because they didn't think he was any different.

I'm not laying this whole mess on Nader's door. I'm just saying that he was complicit. And I wouldn't say that he'd lost his value to our country if he didn't continue doing the same shit after it was proven wrong.
Image

Kachi
Publicly Posts Private Messages
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:53 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere except SB.

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Kachi » Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:06 pm UTC

I was interested in CNN's Ohio Uncommited Voter reaction levels. You'd get the sort of reactions you'd expect from each candidate's speeches on say the economy but sometimes you'd get these giant splits between men and women (for example, when McCain brings up Ayers) in which you get a large positive reaction from men but a negative reaction from women. Reverse that for abortion + Obama.


It seemed to me that the women were somewhat biased towards Obama, and the men were largely biased towards McCain.

Congratulations Democrats and Republicans for once again choosing the most mediocre candidates from your respective parties!


Obama is not mediocre by any means. No, he's not the "Messiah," but what are people expecting from these candidates? The executive office does not grant one the powers of a god. There's only so much they can do.

User avatar
CVSoul
Posts: 460
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:23 pm UTC
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby CVSoul » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:30 am UTC

Kachi wrote:Obama is not mediocre by any means. No, he's not the "Messiah," but what are people expecting from these candidates? The executive office does not grant one the powers of a god. There's only so much they can do.


I miss Huckabee.
Honestly, I think the reason Obama is getting so much support (the biggest reason at least) is because he's the anti-Bush. A lot of Obama supporters don't really know why they like him, except that McCain is almost completely another Bush.
McCain is running a terrible campaign. I can't argue with that. But even if he is the third term, you'd have to consider: Bush's moral compass may point east by northeast, but at least he has the sense to bludgeon a threat to the nation with it. With Obama's proposed policy concerning them, it's not good cop/bad cop. It becomes bad cop/kindergarten teacher. We'll get creamed.

Also, if he wants to cut taxes on the middle class AND increase spending on new energy and whatnot, where will that extra money come from? The rich?
Think of Joe the Plumber. Say he wants to buy his company and make 250 grand a year. Good for him! Problem is, if you effectively make him cover all his employees' taxes (that is, lower theirs and bump his bracket up), then he can't hire more employees for the business. That cuts out jobs. Also, if he has to pay 35% on his business, there's a good chance the whole thing'll go up in flames.
That seems like a pretty big hole to me.

Oh, and on the topic of violent supporters-- you'll notice McCain sticking up for Obama more than vice versa.

What's that? You all disagree with me? I wouldn't expect less on the Internet. For the record, I'm registered as a Democrat. I just thought ahead for a while. Obama scares me, plain and simple. It's a matter of opinion.
kellsbells wrote:My other car is a plain, unmarked white van.

Kachi
Publicly Posts Private Messages
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:53 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere except SB.

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Kachi » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:49 am UTC

Huckabee? Christian nation Huckabee?

Meh, pretty much everything you just said is the same things Republicans have always been saying. Joe the Plumber will be fine on his $200,000+ a year income. No, maybe he won't hire one more guy because he's paying more in taxes (even though Obama specifically said that he would get further tax breaks if he did use the money to create jobs), but that tax money will just as likely create a new job elsewhere. I know a lot of these "small business owners" don't invest their money in creating new jobs, and that is a major problem with the Republican tax platform.

I trust Obama to be smarter at foreign policy than either Bush or McCain.

And extra spending will probably come from a national deficit. I know, presidential candidates always talk about balancing the budget, but deficit spending is generally regarded as the secretly smart thing to do, as long as the money is being put towards sound investments. It's just like taking out a business loan today so that your business will increase revenue in the long run. McCain's "spending freeze" terrifies me. That's like not going to the hospital at all because you can't pay off the medical bills right away. It's like needing a car to get a job and go to work, but not taking out a loan to get one because you'd rather be jobless than in debt.

User avatar
clintonius
Posts: 2755
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 9:13 pm UTC
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby clintonius » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:55 am UTC

Kachi wrote:I trust Obama to be smarter at foreign policy than either Bush or McCain.
This. In many ways a President's greatest power is in international relations, and I think the differences between Obama and McCain are pretty clear on this issue. Obama is willing to engage in actual diplomacy (not like it ever works. After all, it's not as if the mere removal of North Korea from the "terror list" inspired them to continue their nuclear disarmament or anything silly like that), whereas McCain wants promises before meetings. That's not how diplomacy works. Obama also wants standards before he agrees to free trade pacts. I mentioned this earlier in the thread re: Colombia and won't bother repeating myself, except to say that I very much agree with him.

And, @CVSoul. . . Huckabee? You're kidding, right? Obama scares you -- but you wanted Huckabee?
kira wrote:*piles up some limbs and blood and a couple hearts for good measure*
GUYS. I MADE A HUMAN.
*...pokes at it with a stick*

User avatar
CVSoul
Posts: 460
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:23 pm UTC
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby CVSoul » Fri Oct 17, 2008 1:12 am UTC

clintonius wrote:
And, @CVSoul. . . Huckabee? You're kidding, right? Obama scares you -- but you wanted Huckabee?

Yes. I'm kidding.
kellsbells wrote:My other car is a plain, unmarked white van.

stapleface
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:38 am UTC

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby stapleface » Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:08 am UTC

CVSoul wrote:Honestly, I think the reason Obama is getting so much support (the biggest reason at least) is because he's the anti-Bush. A lot of Obama supporters don't really know why they like him, except that McCain is almost completely another Bush.
McCain is running a terrible campaign. I can't argue with that. But even if he is the third term, you'd have to consider: Bush's moral compass may point east by northeast, but at least he has the sense to bludgeon a threat to the nation with it. With Obama's proposed policy concerning them, it's not good cop/bad cop. It becomes bad cop/kindergarten teacher. We'll get creamed.


I agree with Obama being the anti-Bush. It's a campaign strategy that's been well-commented on, trying to associate McCain with the current administration as much as possible. The whole "you voted with Bush 95% of the time" adverts and being brought up in debates - it's a little unfair for obvious reasons. McCain's campaign has been pretty badly managed but he's in an unenviable position - he has to try to win over moderates without losing the republican base, and he really hasn't been able to do it. You can see him veering wildly across the political spectrum in debates, but the stuff that pleases the right-wing reminds the moderates of Bush, and the stuff that pleases the moderates makes the right-wing sigh for what could have been. Palin was meant to help, but it meant he couldn't talk as much about experience and foreign policy credentials as he would have liked to. Biden on the other hand helped to counteract most of the criticisms levelled at Obama - they've been pushing his 'ordinary guy' image and he comes with years of experience, especially concerning foreign policy.

The point I'm inarticulately trying to make is that I don't see how McCain could have done much different to be in a better position - his 'straight talk express' stuff was meant to galvanise voters in swing states but he's come up against someone who is much, much better at doing that.

Regarding the whole "Oh me yarm he'll negotiate without without preconditions" thing, I really get angry about it. It's as if people think that if you don't talk to people who won't drop their pants and bend over before you even get to a conversation, you end up in a stronger position. These countries are full of people who are patriotic and generally have pride in their culture, and they don't appreciate being told what to do without getting something out of it. North Koreans have been starving for years rather than take anything from the west, and calling them evil terrorists only strengthened their resolve to further their nuclear programme. Even ignoring all that, nobody gets to be president without strength of character. The idea that you can win the nomination, win the election and then Putin is going to intimidate you into swapping all your nukes for some magic beans is ridiculous.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Garm » Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:17 am UTC

stapleface wrote:The point I'm inarticulately trying to make is that I don't see how McCain could have done much different to be in a better position - his 'straight talk express' stuff was meant to galvanise voters in swing states but he's come up against someone who is much, much better at doing that.


Well... McCain could have offered some real solutions and actually talked straight. I think both those things would have helped him immensely. His lobbyist fighting campaign is run by lobbyists. His straight talk isn't straight and his attempts to differentiate his policies from Bush are unsuccessful. He's got nothing.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby EmptySet » Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:00 am UTC

McCain's education policy is completely deranged. "We need teachers to be more skilled and more professional... and to achieve this, we're going to allow ex-soldiers who aren't properly qualified to teach!" Wait, what? Does he think that American troops are just so badass they can perform any job perfectly, no certification required?
Last edited by EmptySet on Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:06 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
knight427
Worshipful Sycophant
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 6:45 pm UTC
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby knight427 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:06 am UTC

CVSoul wrote:Also, if he wants to cut taxes on the middle class AND increase spending on new energy and whatnot, where will that extra money come from? The rich?
Think of Joe the Plumber. Say he wants to buy his company and make 250 grand a year. Good for him! Problem is, if you effectively make him cover all his employees' taxes (that is, lower theirs and bump his bracket up), then he can't hire more employees for the business. That cuts out jobs. Also, if he has to pay 35% on his business, there's a good chance the whole thing'll go up in flames.
That seems like a pretty big hole to me.


Obama's plan lowers taxes on those under 200k, is even up to 250k, then ads 3% to the income over 250k. Joe's increased tax bill would be something like $900 (if we use the biggest number he gave which was $280k). Of course he never really specified if that was revenue or profit (if revenue, he'd probably get a tax cut under Obama). Also, he doesn't actually have a plan to buy the business (read: He was talking out of his ass, no way he's getting a loan to buy it in this market). Also, Joe the plumber owe's his state $1,200 in back taxes. He also stated he makes nowhere near $250k right now. Joe the plumber will do better under Obama's tax plan than under McCain's...maybe he could use the windfall to catch up on his back taxes.

Moving onto small businesses in general (since the Joe the plumber is kidding himself). 35% is the corporate tax rate. This is totally unrelated to the tax issues at hand. They are talking about small businesses that are NOT corporations (in most small businesses profits pass through to the owner(s) basically like income and are taxed under income tax laws, not corporate tax laws). McCain keeps harping on the 35% corporate tax being too high, which it would be if any corporation actually had to pay that rate without deductions/depreciation. But that's getting off-topic.

Am I the only one who thinks the whole "I won't hire b/c I have to pay higher taxes" is total bullshit? What kind of moron hires employees that don't increase the company profitability? If you need capitol to expand production, and you aren't willing pony up the extra 3% you now pay in higher taxes, do you really think any lending institution is going to find your expansion plan attractive? Keep in mind we are talking about a business owner who makes over $250k in profits (let's use $500,000). He'll owe an extra $7,500 in taxes under Obama. Now he's saying he's too poor to pony up $7,500 of his gross income (he won't pay taxes on his business investment) to expand his business? Give me a break!

CVSoul wrote:Oh, and on the topic of violent supporters-- you'll notice McCain sticking up for Obama more than vice versa.


That's because people at Obama rallies aren't yelling death threats towards McCain. Do you have one single instance where a supporter yelled a death threat directed at McCain while Obama was speaking? Using your argument, I might (if I was a total moron) conclude that McCain is a terrorist. Obama regularly refutes accusations of being a terrorist, yet McCain has never once denied being a terrorist.
Last edited by knight427 on Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:29 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.
knight427

If you GIVE a zombie a fish, you will feed him for minute.
If you TEACH a zombie to fish, he will be munching on you for hours.

User avatar
Solt
Posts: 1912
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:08 am UTC
Location: California

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Solt » Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:07 am UTC

EmptySet wrote:Does he think that American troops are just so badass they can perform any job perfectly, no certification required?


Well he is a former soldier running against a constitutional law professor for the presidency.

Coincidence?
"Welding was faster, cheaper and, in theory,

produced a more reliable product. But sailors do

not float on theory, and the welded tankers had a

most annoying habit of splitting in two."

-J.W. Morris

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby EmptySet » Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:47 am UTC

And yet, Obama is not suggesting that constitutional law professors should be allowed to perform heart surgery without appropriate certification. This is because most people actually realise that being trained for one job doesn't mean you're automatically qualified to perform an unrelated job. Hell, even in related fields this is the case - someone with a degree in geology won't typically get hired as an biochemist, even though they're both scientists. If McCain doesn't understand this (or understands it but is willing to overlook it) then that's a serious problem.

User avatar
CVSoul
Posts: 460
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:23 pm UTC
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby CVSoul » Fri Oct 17, 2008 6:59 am UTC

edit: holy crap, double post?
Last edited by CVSoul on Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:01 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
kellsbells wrote:My other car is a plain, unmarked white van.

User avatar
CVSoul
Posts: 460
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:23 pm UTC
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby CVSoul » Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:00 am UTC

OK, posting error. Here's my edit with the intended post.

Solt wrote:Well he is a former soldier running against a constitutional law professor for the presidency.
Coincidence?


Very true. There also remains the fact that they're --both-- US Senators. Politically, they're on mostly equal ground. Your choice is between a former soldier who inherited 95% of his DNA from Bush in an odd inbreeding duplication process in a dark genetic time travel lab, making him very conservative, versus someone who is on the opposite end of the spectrum, but farther down.
What we have here, gentlemen, is a choice between the lesser of two evils.

We have John McCain, who will most likely be like a Bush that actually learned from previous mistakes. His VP pick is a woman that I personally like better than Hillary Clinton, but also talks like a sorority girl from north dakota. His supporters are violent, but not actively just yet. He certainly has moronic ideas, but we can be fairly sure that mostly only good ones would get through the very liberal Congress we face during the next term.
PROS: STR, CON, EXP


We have Barack Obama, who came out of nowhere, has more charisma than a honey-baked ham. Nobody knows anything about Obama except that he is a superdemocrat (like superman is a super man). He might be a great leader; there's also a slight chance he will end up worse than Bush. There's no way of telling until he's actually elected. His VP pick is a man who hated him before being picked as a running mate. I lay even odds on Biden being trustworthy.
PROS: INT, CHR, SKL

The debates were fun to watch, but honestly I liked them both less after watching each one.
kellsbells wrote:My other car is a plain, unmarked white van.

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Quixotess » Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:08 am UTC

What the hell do you mean by "came out of nowhere" and "know nothing about him"? There's nothing mysterious or strange about Barack Obama.
Raise up the torch and light the way.

Kachi
Publicly Posts Private Messages
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:53 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere except SB.

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Kachi » Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:16 am UTC

McCain's education policy is completely deranged. "We need teachers to be more skilled and more professional... and to achieve this, we're going to allow ex-soldiers who aren't properly qualified to teach!" Wait, what? Does he think that American troops are just so badass they can perform any job perfectly, no certification required?


Aha, I was saying the same thing in my online journal.

Oh, McCain... you dumb bastard.

So after managing to have watched all three presidential debates and the one VP debate (not that there was ever any question who I would be voting for, honestly), I was glad that finally the subject of education got a little more play.

Ok, I admit, I had a proclivity for getting up and making grilled cheese sandwiches mid-debate (and burning them, goddammit), but I watched -most- of the debates. I even considered going to Obama "watch parties" if they weren't being held in some bar, but the prospect of watching the debate all alone while simultaneously surrounded by people didn't appeal to me. I know, I might have met some like-minded liberals and we could have become great friends, but my high opinion of liberal ideology does not necessarily speak to my opinion of everyone voting for Obama.

So now that we have my evident bias established, I just want to say that McCain is a dumb bastard. Now, "dumb" is a bit of a hyperbole, and I'm sure he's not -technically- a bastard, but that does nothing to tame my propensity for vilifying him.

McCain, voucher systems don't work for the same reason you can't shuffle the same resources around and turn shit into gold. Voucher systems won't get rid of bad teachers or administrators, and they won't solve the problem of underfunded schools and programs. Now, I'm all for paying teachers more, because its scandalous how we can hold educators to such high standards of professionalism while simultaneously keeping them just shy of qualifying for food stamps.

But tossing out a shiner of an idea like, "let's get rid of bad teachers," I liken to suggestions such as, "we should fix the economy!" No shit. Trust me, really bad teachers get fired all on their own, and if they don't, it's because no one is more qualified to take their place. Certainly not ex-military! What the hell kind of proposal is that?!

There are a dozen ways we could improve the U.S. standard of education, but for the one you did name (merit pay-- an arguable notion that could work, but probably not in the hands of your administration), you neglected several simpler initiatives in favor of huge reform efforts that would have an effect so minimal or neutral that it would be a waste of legislation.

Not that this one issue is the last straw. No, you seem determined to find out just how broken a camel's back can get.


Eh, I was ranting.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Dream » Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:22 am UTC

Quixotess wrote:What the hell do you mean by "came out of nowhere" and "know nothing about him"? There's nothing mysterious or strange about Barack Obama.


Probably that's what you think if your initial reaction to Obama's candidacy was "Holy FUCK! A black person is in Government! How'd that happen!?"
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Quixotess » Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:26 am UTC

Well, I wasn't going to *say* that sounded hell of racist, but...yeah. It sounds hell of racist.
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby cerbie » Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:48 am UTC

Quixotess wrote:Well, I wasn't going to *say* that sounded hell of racist, but...yeah. It sounds hell of racist.
I don't think it's racist as much as it is that McCain seems to have a life-long career of trying to run for President. I'm not saying racism is not an issue, here. But, I heard McCain got the nomination, and my thoughts were more or less, "wow, he's been trying this for a long time." McCain has been wanting this, in the national public eye, since before I was born; and, McCain has managed to get himself national attention here and there, as senator. I'd never heard of Barack Obama until I saw him and Hillary bickering.
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Quixotess » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:01 am UTC

*frown* So where are the same questions about Sarah Palin?
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
roc314
Is dead, and you have killed him
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:48 am UTC
Location: A bunker, here behind my wall
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby roc314 » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:14 am UTC

Quixotess wrote:*frown* So where are the same questions about Sarah Palin?
Quit being so sexist!

EDIT: Because, you know, criticizing Palin is the same as criticizing women everywhere.</sarcasm>
Hippo: roc is the good little communist that lurks in us all
Richard Stallman: Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.
suffer-cait: roc's a pretty cool dude

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby cerbie » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:26 am UTC

Quixotess wrote:*frown* So where are the same questions about Sarah Palin?
I think she's been transparent enough that we don't have to work at it. Or, at least, she hasn't smeared anyone trying to bring up her background.
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Xeio » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:29 am UTC

Quixotess wrote:*frown* So where are the same questions about Sarah Palin?
I think they're asked a lot, it's just that nobody seems to want to ask them in the same breath they use to ask them about Obama...

I think it was funny how The Daily Show mentioned that Joe the plumber has had more interviews than Palin at this point though. I find this the bigger issue.
roc314 wrote:Because, you know, criticizing Palin is the same as criticizing women everywhere.</sarcasm>
And yet, you knew that people would be confused if you didn't add the "</sarcasm>" tag. Scary (not you, but that idea in general). :|
cerbie wrote:I think she's been transparent enough that we don't have to work at it. Or, at least, she hasn't smeared anyone trying to bring up her background.
Clear as mud, in any case.

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Quixotess » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:45 am UTC

roc314 wrote:
Quixotess wrote:*frown* So where are the same questions about Sarah Palin?
Quit being so sexist!

"Mysterious" and "untrustworthy" are definitely narratives we have about women, but "coming out of nowhere" and "what do we know about this scary person" aren't really. Those are definitely narratives about foreigners, brown ones to be specific.

roc314 wrote:Because, you know, criticizing Palin is the same as criticizing women everywhere.

It's not, unless you're criticizing her using a sexist framework. Such as "she won't be able to be VP and take care of her baby at the same time."

Xeio wrote:
cerbie wrote:I think she's been transparent enough that we don't have to work at it. Or, at least, she hasn't smeared anyone trying to bring up her background.
Clear as mud, in any case

Seriously. Governor Palin is a liar many times over, and egregiously so.
Raise up the torch and light the way.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby cerbie » Fri Oct 17, 2008 8:52 am UTC

Xeio wrote:
cerbie wrote:I think she's been transparent enough that we don't have to work at it. Or, at least, she hasn't smeared anyone trying to bring up her background.
Clear as mud, in any case.
How so? I quickly got this gem from Google:
http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/electi ... 3470c.html
I'd seen it quite awhile ago, and haven't become awaere of any refutations of the majority of it. Where it's covered, Wikipedia's article on her appears to agree. I'm seeing very little muddiness.

Now, if you mean her actually talking...I've mostly only seen her talk in regard to issues...and that makes me want to go check the expiry dates on batteries and canned goods in my bunker.
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

User avatar
Quixotess
No. Cookies.
Posts: 3243
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 7:26 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Quixotess » Fri Oct 17, 2008 9:12 am UTC

Do your research on Troopergate, and on the bridge to nowhere.
Raise up the torch and light the way.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby EmptySet » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:27 pm UTC

roc314 wrote:
Quixotess wrote:*frown* So where are the same questions about Sarah Palin?
Quit being so sexist!

EDIT: Because, you know, criticizing Palin is the same as criticizing women everywhere.</sarcasm>


McCain, on the other hand, seems to have mastered the art of being implicitly sexist while praising Palin. Observe:

McCain wrote:She’s a reformer through and through. And it’s time we had that bresh of freth air (sic) — breath of fresh air coming into our nation’s capital and sweep out the old-boy network and the cronyism that’s been so much a part of it that I’ve fought against for all these years.

She’ll be my partner. She understands reform. And, by the way, she also understands special-needs families. She understands that autism is on the rise, that we’ve got to find out what’s causing it, and we’ve got to reach out to these families, and help them, and give them the help they need as they raise these very special needs children.


"Yeah, this is my candidate for VP. She understands politics. Also babies. Especially VERY SPECIAL babies."

Er, I'm sure that's great and all, but perhaps it would have been more appropriate when discussing education or health care, rather than reform of the political system?

McCain wrote:And she has ignited our party and people all over America that have never been involved in the political process. And I can’t tell how proud I am of her and her family.

Her husband’s a pretty tough guy, by the way, too.


<sarcasm>Well, it's nice to know she's got a tough husband to keep her in line. We wouldn't want women to get funny ideas just because they're vice president.

It's also good that he's a proper manly man. If he was one of those effete "kind-and-caring" types, he might join charity boards. And as we all know, that can only lead to Palin (sorry) around with terrorists.</sarcasm>

User avatar
Mercurius
Posts: 310
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:54 pm UTC
Location: Dorset
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby Mercurius » Fri Oct 17, 2008 12:48 pm UTC

I did not watch this debate.

Apparently McCain was quite wingnutty, however, so it is a shame I missed it.
You know, I'm not really sure what "socioeconomic class" I am. I'm richer than my parents, I don't have a real job, and my mannerisms tend to match up with whomever I'm talking to.

...is "con man" a social class?

User avatar
clintonius
Posts: 2755
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 9:13 pm UTC
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby clintonius » Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:21 pm UTC

Just a quick thing I'd like to correct here -- it may not be the biggest issue in this election, but it's one that's important to (and really ought to be important to people everywhere):

Kachi wrote:Now, I'm all for paying teachers more, because its scandalous how we can hold educators to such high standards of professionalism while simultaneously keeping them just shy of qualifying for food stamps.

But tossing out a shiner of an idea like, "let's get rid of bad teachers," I liken to suggestions such as, "we should fix the economy!" No shit. Trust me, really bad teachers get fired all on their own, and if they don't, it's because no one is more qualified to take their place. Certainly not ex-military! What the hell kind of proposal is that?!
I absolutely agree with you that military experience in no way qualifies someone to be a teacher, and McCain's proposal is about as generic and common sense as can be. There are two things I want to clarify. First, paying teachers more is a great idea -- but only when it's earned. Teachers earn a shamelessly low wage in many areas, but not all. I worked in Newark, and I can honestly say that many teachers were overpaid (not because educators in general don't deserve a good salary, but because these teachers weren't worth paper their contracts were printed on). Which leads to the second point -- when teachers are tenured, it can be unbelievably, shamefully difficult to fire them, even if they're horrible.

I have a good friend who teaches third grade, and one of her colleagues is quite possibly the worst teacher I've ever heard of. This woman would literally call kids "stupid" and all manner of variations of the word, would cuss at them, etc. She's ruined childrens' lives. She missed more days than she taught last year. Supposedly she was sick. She didn't have a doctor's note (which is typically required after three consecutive days of illness), and the school still wouldn't confront her because they were worried about repurcussions from the Union. Get this -- on one of the days she was present, she was caught snorting cocaine in the parking lot. The non-tenured teacher with her was fired; she was not. I wish I were making this up. She's currently succumbing to cancer in a hospice, and the school will not even try to find a replacement for her until she's passed away. It's fucked up.

Anyways, I suppose my point is that we do need strong intervention in the education system, because it's broken in some fundamental ways. I don't think McCain is the guy to fix it. I just wanted to air those points and perhaps add a little clarity to the issue.
kira wrote:*piles up some limbs and blood and a couple hearts for good measure*
GUYS. I MADE A HUMAN.
*...pokes at it with a stick*

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby EsotericWombat » Fri Oct 17, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

When the middle class is crumbling, it's hard to take sides against any union, but there you go. Tenure, if kept at all, should be contingent on excellence of performance. It should exist to protect good teachers from being canned over bullshit. Not to keep shitheads in classrooms.
Image

User avatar
segmentation fault
Posts: 1770
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:10 pm UTC
Location: Nu Jersey
Contact:

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby segmentation fault » Fri Oct 17, 2008 6:16 pm UTC

knight427 wrote:Obama's plan lowers taxes on those under 200k, is even up to 250k, then ads 3% to the income over 250k.


actually i thought that from 250-600K your taxes wont change.
people are like LDL cholesterol for the internet

User avatar
clintonius
Posts: 2755
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 9:13 pm UTC
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Third (Final) Presidential Debate

Postby clintonius » Fri Oct 17, 2008 6:28 pm UTC

It won't change up to $250k. Beyond there, taxes are increased.
kira wrote:*piles up some limbs and blood and a couple hearts for good measure*
GUYS. I MADE A HUMAN.
*...pokes at it with a stick*


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests