I was very interested in the thoughts of the wrestling community on the upcoming presidential election.

For some reason the topic was removed.  I am guessing it was removed because it was in the wrestling forum and not the general forum.

If I am not mistaken this forum (general) is where such debates should occur. 

We are about to witness a historical event in U.S. History this November.  We will either have our 1st non-white president or have our 1st non-male vice president.

With this groundbreaking event I believe it is important to see what our youth are thinking at this time.  I say we continue the Oboma, McCain debate.  But lets make sure we keep it respectable.

So far I am impressed with both candidates as to their campaigns.  Neither have really poured on the negative campaigning.

Yeah. Neither have ran dirty campaigns...oh wait. Barack just called Mrs. Palin a 'pig' and then tried to tuck his tail between his legs and act like he never said it. Actually, not like he didn't say it, but like he didn't mean it the way that the American people took it. Yeah right. He's as sleezy as they come. He's slowly digging his political grave. He's going to get it handed to him.

The dirt will come eventually.  But it is still not as bad as it has been in the past, at least yet.

Obama seems to lead the charge in education however.  But, how is he going to pay for it?  He wants school vouchers, this is a rich get richer and poor get poorer idea.  He also want a merit system for teachers.  Again a rich get richer and poor get poorer scheme.  In both cases the suburban schools will pull better scores (because of the parents) while the inner school kids will score low (because of the parents).  The suburban schools will pull those few kids that rise to the occasion in urban schools, and also those great teachers in the urban schools.  The urban schools will need to close down and then we are right back where we started.

McCain leads the charge in U.S. drilling.  Great for the near future (will take 10 years to feel the impact).  We still will have the problem of a fossel fuel that will be depleated at some time.  We need an alternate energy source.  The world has them but does not use them efficiantly enough. 

Talking politics is fine... it's just that it usually leads to personal attacks and everything gets out of hand fast

OK danger those are pretty strong words.

I believe that both of these candidates are the real deal.  I believe that both have a good heart and have what they believe is the best interest for the country.  They both have different ways of going about it.

I personally wish that they both were not running against each other.  I think that both have what it takes to lead this country and do a good job.  Unfortunately one will lose and in politics today if you lose once in an election you don't get another chance at it. 

I would have felt better if Obama would have waited 4 or 8 years before attempting this.  That way he could have gotten more experience and he would not have been running against McCain.

GOO is wise. He post as if he were a politician.

To bring this on topic, to date, only Palin has stated anything that would be relevant to our sport. In her interview on ABC she stated she was a Title-9 product.

I'm fine with that because I believe in equal opportunity. The problem is, in that same interview she also demonstrated that frankly, she could be smarter. Therefore, I doubt she understands it is the proportionality prong of Title-9 that needs to be refined.

If we keep educating on ourselves on the issues with these candidates, I don't think the election will be as close as the pundits are predicting.

GOO is wise. He post as if he were a politician.

Ok sound the horns, the apocalypse is upon us. :mrgreen:  I will cherish this post for all time.  :-D :-D

Seriously though I like what each candidate wants to do.  What we have to decide is which do we want to do first. Which of the candidates can truly accomplish what he says he wants to do?

But as I have said before.  What exactly can the president do. He cannot make laws but he does has veto power. Therefore he only has the true power to stop laws from become a reality.  Even then the Legislature can over rule him. 

His only true power is over the military (commander and chief) but only for 30 days (war powers act) then legislature takes over again. 

He also is our greatest foreign diplomat and is expected to interact with other leaders. 

Which of these candidates fit this role.  Unfortunately at this time I would have to lean toward McCain. 

How does this affect wrestlers?  I know this sounds corny but they are the future.  What we decide today (or November) will affect them for the rest of their lives and possibly influence their political beliefs in the future.

Aww man listen to me.  Someone help me.  Ranger, PP, even you IPEA help me. What am I becoming? :? :-o

Ok sound the horns, the apocalypse is upon us. :mrgreen:  I will cherish this post for all time.   :-D :-D

Seriously though I like what each candidate wants to do.  What we have to decide is which do we want to do first. Which of the candidates can truly accomplish what he says he wants to do?

But as I have said before.  What exactly can the president do. He cannot make laws but he does has veto power. Therefore he only has the true power to stop laws from become a reality.  Even then the Legislature can over rule him. 

His only true power is over the military (commander and chief) but only for 30 days (war powers act) then legislature takes over again. 

He also is our greatest foreign diplomat and is expected to interact with other leaders. 

Which of these candidates fit this role.  Unfortunately at this time I would have to lean toward McCain. 

How does this affect wrestlers?  I know this sounds corny but they are the future.  What we decide today (or November) will affect them for the rest of their lives and possibly influence their political beliefs in the future.

Aww man listen to me.  Someone help me.  Ranger, PP, even you IPEA help me. What am I becoming? :? :-o

You're becoming a man. You'll soon notice that your body is beginning to change but don't worry. It's perfectly normal.

:-D

Ok sound the horns, the apocalypse is upon us. :mrgreen:  I will cherish this post for all time.   :-D :-D

I meant GOO as in ectoplasmic residue.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

YOU SAID IT. YOU CAN'T TAKE IT BAKE NOW. :-D :evil:

GO MCCAIN!!!

John McCain and Sarah Palin make a great campaign. I really hope they win. Sarah is a very strong and intelligent women. Not many females can step up to the plate and speak as well as she does. People wanted her to step down, and she refused.

Now she has Obama afraid of her. He was throwing blows at her, when he should have been going after Mccain, and alot of people looked down upon him for that. Also a good thing about Palin is that she makes it known her faith in god. I really respect that.

both parties are horrible. But McCain however takes the cake. Anyone who trys to get elected because of his military background is an idiot, especially when he supports the side that he does.

But McCain however takes the cake. Anyone who trys to get elected because of his military background is an idiot

Oh so misinformed soul.

Lets take a look at some of the presidents that used military to get elected.

William Harrison ----Whig party----1841 (died in office)  was a career soldier, was elected because of his part in the battle of Tippecanoe

Andrew Jackson---Dem party---1829-1837-- Served in Rev. War and War of 1812,  His victories in the War of 1812 is what got him elected.

OK on to a few more popular presidents.

Ulysses S. Grant--Rep. party--1869-1873--Civil War Hero for the Union (enough said).

Dwight D. Eisenhower--Rep party--1953-1961---Leader of Allied Forces in WWII--Is what got him elected.

JFK (John F. Kennedy just in case you didn't know)---Dem party--1961-1963--Used his incident on a P-T boat to help his election.

Finally

GEORGE WASHINGTON---1st president, father of our country---Federalist---1789-1797---Umm lets see I believe he served as one of the generals in the revolutionary war----Defiantly what got him elected unanimously (only president to do so)

especially when he supports the side that he does.

Umm I'm not sure what side you support but I support the same side McCain and Obama support. The side of the United States of America.

:-o :? Next time think before you type.  Or at least spout what you have heard from people supposedly more intelligent than yourself. Or at least pay more attention during history class.

as much as i hate to say it, i think i agree with GOO on this (please excuse me so i can go wash my hands after typing that) i don't think Obama has the experience or ability to do what needs to be done

Oh so misinformed soul.

Lets take a look at some of the presidents that used military to get elected.

William Harrison ----Whig party----1841 (died in office)  was a career soldier, was elected because of his part in the battle of Tippecanoe

Andrew Jackson---Dem party---1829-1837-- Served in Rev. War and War of 1812,  His victories in the War of 1812 is what got him elected.

OK on to a few more popular presidents.

Ulysses S. Grant--Rep. party--1869-1873--Civil War Hero for the Union (enough said).

Dwight D. Eisenhower--Rep party--1953-1961---Leader of Allied Forces in WWII--Is what got him elected.

JFK (John F. Kennedy just in case you didn't know)---Dem party--1961-1963--Used his incident on a P-T boat to help his election.

Finally

GEORGE WASHINGTON---1st president, father of our country---Federalist---1789-1797---Umm lets see I believe he served as one of the generals in the revolutionary war----Defiantly what got him elected unanimously (only president to do so)

Umm I'm not sure what side you support but I support the same side McCain and Obama support. The side of the United States of America.

:-o :? Next time think before you type.  Or at least spout what you have heard from people supposedly more intelligent than yourself. Or at least pay more attention during history class.

First off you sir are ignorant. I know more about what goes on in this country than most. And by regurgitating a list of past presidents that have gotten elected due to their military background does not excuse them from being complete idiots. We live in a country where the two major factions are owned by the same people and place two puppets up to run for election so that the innocent majority feels like they have a say in their own life. And to answer the other side of your question about supporting america in the war, no i do not support americas decision. When the country creates reasons for itself to enter wars so that they can make money off of selling firearms and fossil fuels back to the opposing side, while claiming a dominant role in said country just to make themselves richer, i do not agree. or how we pay 161.8 billion dollars a year for the so called war on terror, when only about 70 americans die per year from terrorism. More americans die per year from a peanut allergy. And its funny that the leading cause of death in america (heart disease if you didn't know) is only funded 2.9 billion a year for researching the cure when 450,000 die per year. And the richer get richer and the poorer get poorer the whole time while they tax this money out of us. Then the federal reserve has the decency that drastically decrease the value of the dollar, just to make more money and more debt. I love this country but that does not mean i have to support the people who run it/follow them.

First off you sir are ignorant. I know more about what goes on in this country than most. And by regurgitating a list of past presidents that have gotten elected due to their military background does not excuse them from being complete idiots. We live in a country where the two major factions are owned by the same people and place two puppets up to run for election so that the innocent majority feels like they have a say in their own life. And to answer the other side of your question about supporting america in the war, no i do not support americas decision. When the country creates reasons for itself to enter wars so that they can make money off of selling firearms and fossil fuels back to the opposing side, while claiming a dominant role in said country just to make themselves richer, i do not agree. or how we pay 161.8 billion dollars a year for the so called war on terror, when only about 70 americans die per year from terrorism. More americans die per year from a peanut allergy. And its funny that the leading cause of death in america (heart disease if you didn't know) is only funded 2.9 billion a year for researching the cure when 450,000 die per year. And the richer get richer and the poorer get poorer the whole time while they tax this money out of us. Then the federal reserve has the decency that drastically decrease the value of the dollar, just to make more money and more debt. I love this country but that does not mean i have to support the people who run it/follow them.

OK Oliver.  Stone that is.  You must be one of those conspiracy believers, or did you just read 1984, or watch the movie "Wag the Dog"?  Both were good FICTION stories.

Yes both parties are run by the upper class.  If you know your history that is exactly what the founding fathers believed in.  They believed only the aristocrats IE. the educated, should make government decisions. 

Here lies the problem.  By reading your comment I can see that you believe that the government should SERVE the people.  This is exactly what has gotten us in the situation we are in right now.  Social Security (for those who did not plan for the future)  Welfare (For those that don't want to do things for themselves) which include Foodstamps, medical cards, section 8 housing, WIC. The list goes on and on.  This is exactly why many if not most Americans are lazy and will not work hard or smart. 

Why have the Asian population done so well in the U.S?  Because they work hard.  Why are the latin American people prospering in the U.S.?  Because they have learned to pool their money and live many under one roof and work hard until they can go off on their own.  How many people have you seen taking their welfare, whatever the form, and not working at McDonalds or several jobs? 

Why has minimum wage gone up?  Because people don't want to work hard to move up and get promoted or look for a higher paying job, that might require them to work harder. 

I believe that the Government is here to protect their citizens.  That means a military that is being used.  Like it or not we are the most powerful country on Earth.  With that we have a responsibility to police this Earth.  Terrorism does not have to be just against the U.S.  Remember isolationism was one of the reasons WWI and WWII was as big as it was.  We (The U.S.) refused to interfere with what was going on in Europe and Asia. 

There must be a rich and a poor, along with a middle class for a society to work. Utopian societies have been tried and they don't work.  Socialism has been tried, It doesn't work.  What we have left is exactly what we have here in the United States.  Not a perfect society, but one that works better than any other in the world.

Just remember this.  "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" (George Santayana) derived from Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. 

As for me being ignorant.  Well if you believe that those leaders listed above are idiots then I agree with your statement and I am in good company.

Forever yours

GOO AKA presidential candidate for 2012 running on the Kentucky Wrestling ticket. My slogan.  "If you need someone to wrestle your concerns with Congress I'm your man"

Live long and prosper.

Like it or not we are the most powerful country on Earth.  With that we have a responsibility to police this Earth. 

I would say being the most powerful country in the world would be debatable considering we are practically owned by the Chinese (like it or not) they own some ridiculous amount of our national debt and we are barely able to keep up on the interest payments to them.  As far as a responsibility to police the Earth, why do we have that responsibility?  I think we have a responsibility to protect our country...not the world.  And even if we did, I think that responsibility gets put on hold when we are in the middle of a financial crisis.  Bush supporters will argue that we had to go on the offensive and go after the terrorists, but why coincidentally in Iraq?

when only about 70 americans die per year from terrorism. More americans die per year from a peanut allergy.

does that count the thousands of people that die in attacks on america like 9/11

As far as a responsibility to police the Earth, why do we have that responsibility?

Because neither the United Nations nor the World Court seem to be able to do this.

I think we have a responsibility to protect our country...not the world.  And even if we did, I think that responsibility gets put on hold when we are in the middle of a financial crisis.

Actually just the opposite is true.  After the stock market crash in 1929 ,which also affected the rest of the world, the United States started focusing more energy on internal needs.  This led them to lend a blind eye on the rest of the world (isolationism).  This allowed Germany to rebuild and Hitler to gain economic control then military control over Germany.  When he was not held in check by European countries and the United States did not step in, we all know what happened next.  We also turned a blind eye on Asia at the same time.  Japan was annexing and controlling large portions of China.  This also was left unchecked and we had a war on two fronts in which we were lucky we were able to hold off. 

When a country is in a financial crisis (if that is what you want to call what we are in now), that is when more attention needs to be paid to the world market and its stability both economically and socially. 

Bush supporters will argue that we had to go on the offensive and go after the terrorists, but why coincidentally in Iraq?

Terrorism is not just physical it can be economically also.  By holding us ransom with oil is a form of terrorism.  Everyone is in fear of the middle eastern countries and what they may do to the price of oil.

We didn't start in Iraq, we started in Afghanistan, then jumped over to Iraq to finish the job that we didn't finish the first time.  I might also add that according to the war powers act of 1972 or 3.  The president only has the power to send troops for 30 days, after which he may ask for an extension from congress.  After the 60 days the Congress is in control. 

No matter what either candidate says about the troops they do not have the power to pull them out.  Only congress has this power, unless they give that power to the presidents.

Because neither the United Nations nor the World Court seem to be able to do this.

So because they (UN & world court) can not, we must?  I'll go along within reason that protecting our country includes being aggressive overseas.  But at what cost?  How much is it worth to us as tax payers to stabilize the middle east by helping establish a democratic state in Iraq?  A trillion dollars?  Maybe to you, but not to me.  Screw the Iraqis.  Let them defend themselves.

Actually just the opposite is true.  After the stock market crash in 1929 ,which also affected the rest of the world, the United States started focusing more energy on internal needs.  This led them to lend a blind eye on the rest of the world (isolationism).  This allowed Germany to rebuild and Hitler to gain economic control then military control over Germany.  When he was not held in check by European countries and the United States did not step in, we all know what happened next.  We also turned a blind eye on Asia at the same time.  Japan was annexing and controlling large portions of China.  This also was left unchecked and we had a war on two fronts in which we were lucky we were able to hold off. 

I think this happened out of necessity more so then by choice.  We were broke.  It's kind of hard to take care of our world policing duties when people can't feed their families. 

When a country is in a financial crisis (if that is what you want to call what we are in now), that is when more attention needs to be paid to the world market and its stability both economically and socially.

"IF"?  Is there any doubt as to if we are in a financial crisis these days?  Money market funds are losing money.  This is something in the financial services industry that people used to say "your money is safe in a money market fund...beleive me...if you start losing money in a money market fund, then our economy is in the tank!  it'll be a cold day in hell before that happens!!"  Guess what, that cold day is here.  I'm not saying I dont think we'll recover, but I don't think there's any doubt we are currently having a financial crisis. 

We didn't start in Iraq, we started in Afghanistan, then jumped over to Iraq to finish the job that we didn't finish the first time.

Ok, I agree with you there that we are over there to finish the job George senior didn't finish the first time.  But I thought it was about the war on terrorism?  lol

Alright, i've had my fun for the day with you GOO.  If you got any more responses, you win.  Gotta get back to work.

OK Oliver.  Stone that is.  You must be one of those conspiracy believers, or did you just read 1984, or watch the movie "Wag the Dog"?  Both were good FICTION stories.

Yes both parties are run by the upper class.  If you know your history that is exactly what the founding fathers believed in.  They believed only the aristocrats IE. the educated, should make government decisions. 

Here lies the problem.  By reading your comment I can see that you believe that the government should SERVE the people.  This is exactly what has gotten us in the situation we are in right now.  Social Security (for those who did not plan for the future)  Welfare (For those that don't want to do things for themselves) which include Foodstamps, medical cards, section 8 housing, WIC. The list goes on and on.  This is exactly why many if not most Americans are lazy and will not work hard or smart. 

Why have the Asian population done so well in the U.S?  Because they work hard.  Why are the latin American people prospering in the U.S.?  Because they have learned to pool their money and live many under one roof and work hard until they can go off on their own.  How many people have you seen taking their welfare, whatever the form, and not working at McDonalds or several jobs? 

Why has minimum wage gone up?  Because people don't want to work hard to move up and get promoted or look for a higher paying job, that might require them to work harder. 

I believe that the Government is here to protect their citizens.  That means a military that is being used.  Like it or not we are the most powerful country on Earth.  With that we have a responsibility to police this Earth.  Terrorism does not have to be just against the U.S.  Remember isolationism was one of the reasons WWI and WWII was as big as it was.  We (The U.S.) refused to interfere with what was going on in Europe and Asia. 

There must be a rich and a poor, along with a middle class for a society to work. Utopian societies have been tried and they don't work.  Socialism has been tried, It doesn't work.  What we have left is exactly what we have here in the United States.  Not a perfect society, but one that works better than any other in the world.

Just remember this.  "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" (George Santayana) derived from Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. 

As for me being ignorant.  Well if you believe that those leaders listed above are idiots then I agree with your statement and I am in good company.

Forever yours

GOO AKA presidential candidate for 2012 running on the Kentucky Wrestling ticket. My slogan.  "If you need someone to wrestle your concerns with Congress I'm your man"

Live long and prosper.

i do no think the government should serve me, i just don't like them exploiting me. And ok work hard thats all well and good, i am for it. But when you have a a money system that has no other value except for a certain percent of the rest of the money in circulation. And the more of it there is, if you are doing your math decreases the value. And no i am not for a utopian/socialist society, i know that doesn't work, but neither does what we are dealing with right now and its getting worse. If that bailout bill would have passed then our currency was going to be a tenth of its already low value.

i do no think the government should serve me, i just don't like them exploiting me. And ok work hard thats all well and good, i am for it. But when you have a a money system that has no other value except for a certain percent of the rest of the money in circulation. And the more of it there is, if you are doing your math decreases the value. And no i am not for a utopian/socialist society, i know that doesn't work, but neither does what we are dealing with right now and its getting worse. If that bailout bill would have passed then our currency was going to be a tenth of its already low value.

I think we should all get a little pow-wow goin' at state this year between rounds and have a nice little political discourse section.

no offense, but i'm so burnt out on politics already, i could not think of anything more boring than talking politics at state.  :-D  i just can't wait for this election to be over and the world to move on.  i'm beat down, don't care who wins.

i'd rather talk about marine corps basic training with you.  if you want a preview of what your life is going to be like, watch Full Metal Jacket.  the actor in there was an actual marine corps drill sargeant.  i doubt they actually hit recruits anymore, but who knows who knows in the marine corps.  i thought that was a pretty accurate movie.  just the mind games they play and the constant getting in your face.