Barack Obama described Pennsylvania voters as being "bitter"

[Coolbreezing]

By Hans Nichols and Kristin Jensen

 

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said her rival, Barack Obama, was repeating the mistakes of the party's last two losing presidential campaigns by describing some voters as ``bitter'' over their economic status.

 

Obama responded that while his phrasing was ``clumsy,'' the furor over the remarks was a distraction. Many voters are angry because they ``don't think that government is listening to them,'' he said.

[metsfan]

Well, i live in PA and i KNOW the prez is ignoring issues. Not just an opinion. Prices of everything going up, impossible to find work.... Things are worsening, and it isn't a recent thing.

 

- Andy

[Coolbreezing]

"Well, i live in PA and i KNOW the prez is ignoring issues. Not just an opinion. Prices of everything going up, impossible to find work.... Things are worsening, and it isn't a recent thing."

 

What happen here Andy is that Obama mistakenly used the word bitter instead of a more appealing word or perhaps he thought the word bitter was appropriate. The word bitter reveal to me that Obama is some what honest about the economic situation of the country. I don't think he intended to offense any of the Pennsylvania voters. None the less, no one can blame Hillary for quickly trying to use that word against him, after all that's what a campaigning is all about.

 

You right Andy but It hurt to here it from someone in a different state. The economy still continue to decline. It seem like we loosing our middle class Americans, this is the worse thing that could happen. Although it happen before during the grate depression. However, when a country looses it's middle class, it will began to sink. A high percentage of middle class people in a country signified a strong economy. Middle class people are usually the one to start a family business, giving other folks jobs in the neighborhood. Once the middle class start shrinking, it usually means to prepare for worst to come.

 

The food problem Andy is a result of this ethanol fuel which is the same type of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages. In 2007, biofuels consumed one third of America's corn. If you want to fill up one large vehicle fuel tank one time with 100% ethanol you would use enough corn to feed one person for a year. It takes more input to produce than what you get out of it. One report stated: Thirty million tons of U.S. corn going to ethanol in 2007 greatly reduces the world's overall supply of grain. This is a crime against humanity. Haven't you realized that some countries has begun to go hungry because of food shortages. The Island of Haiti, Jamaica which been in the news lately are two good examples. So when you see food is going up the above mentioned are some of the additives. Plus diesel fuel just went up $ 3 - 4.00 a gallons. That will also contribute to the price of food. The truckers will transfer that extra bill to their suppliers which then will transmit it to the distributors that will then add it to the price you'll pay at the supermarket. I don't know but whoever get elected in office will have to do something about this.

[metsfan]

"Well, i live in PA and i KNOW the prez is ignoring issues. Not just an opinion. Prices of everything going up, impossible to find work.... Things are worsening, and it isn't a recent thing."

 

What happen here Andy is that Obama mistakenly used the word bitter instead of a more appealing word or perhaps he thought the word bitter was appropriate. The word bitter reveal to me that Obama is some what honest about the economic situation of the country. I don't think he intended to offense any of the Pennsylvania voters. None the less, no one can blame Hillary for quickly trying to use that word against him, after all that's what a campaigning is all about.

 

You right Andy but It hurt to here it from someone in a different state. The economy still continue to decline. It seem like we loosing our middle class Americans, this is the worse thing that could happen. Although it happen before during the grate depression. However, when a country looses it's middle class, it will began to sink. A high percentage of middle class people in a country signified a strong economy. Middle class people are usually the one to start a family business, giving other folks jobs in the neighborhood. Once the middle class start shrinking, it usually means to prepare for worst to come.

 

The food problem Andy is a result of this ethanol fuel which is the same type of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages. In 2007, biofuels consumed one third of America's corn. If you want to fill up one large vehicle fuel tank one time with 100% ethanol you would use enough corn to feed one person for a year. It takes more input to produce than what you get out of it. One report stated: Thirty million tons of U.S. corn going to ethanol in 2007 greatly reduces the world's overall supply of grain. This is a crime against humanity. Haven't you realized that some countries has begun to go hungry because of food shortages. The Island of Haiti, Jamaica which been in the news lately are two good examples. So when you see food is going up the above mentioned are some of the additives. Plus diesel fuel just went up $ 3 - 4.00 a gallons. That will also contribute to the price of food. The truckers will transfer that extra bill to their suppliers which then will transmit it to the distributors that will then add it to the price you'll pay at the supermarket. I don't know but whoever get elected in office will have to do something about this.

 

Exactly.

 

- Andy

[R32 3348]

I hope people don't change their vote for him just because he called them bitter. You vote for someone based on their potential or what they will do for this country.

[metsfan]

I hope people don't change their vote for him just because he called them bitter. You vote for someone based on their potential or what they will do for this country.

 

Oh, i'm voting for Obama. Not ashamed or scared to say it, even online where everyone can see. I am registered unaffiliated though, so no primary for me. Just means one less trip.

 

- Andy

[Coolbreezing]

I hope people don't change their vote for him just because he called them bitter. You vote for someone based on their potential or what they will do for this country.

 

That's the spirit guys ....to talk about things that really matters to us is the key for change. I am not promoting any particular candidate, but I'm glade to see that people are considering learning more about the issues that surround the candidates. As I said before, if we want change we must get involve.

 

Unfortunately some people will have a change of hart. It will not be because of what Obama said. Instead it will be because Hillary's campaign was smart enough to furiously diverted the issue to create a distraction in the voter's thought process. That tactic can in fact win Hillary some votes.

[DOB2RTO]

Hillary and Obama aren't going to become President. Here is why I think not. Both of them have provided too much ammo for McCain to use against either of them. With them attacking one another, do they think McCain's cronies isn't taking notes to use against them. All McCain has to do, is just use their ammo that they are using against themselves, and just add, it must be true since the person from their own party said it.

 

Much as I would hate McCain to become President of GLI STATI UNITI, I do think my fellow voters are stupid enough to buy it, and would elect him.

[R68 Subway Car]

More proof of Barack Obama's radicalism. Dont vote for Barack or Hillary.

[SubwayGuy]

Well in my opinion, Hillary is being a clueless vindictive c-word by continuing to "declare war" on Obama... And she damn well better not win the presidency, because if she does, the next Democratic president won't be for 50 years, giving the Republicans all the time in the world to run this country into the ground a la George W. Bush.

 

STOP worrying about international crap and fix problems HERE. People didn't hate us as much when we MINDED OUR BUSINESS. and OUR BUSINESS NEEDS MINDING today.

 

And this running on who "does the least negative" or running on political correctness technicality is ridiculous. Give the media an excuse to vilify democratic candidates and they will - media is big business, Republicans support big business. By waging a "civil war" within the Democratic Party, Hillary and her brand of PERSONAL ATTACKS are opening the door for McCain to swoop in and send us off to war with the entire Middle East.

 

These wars are STUPID, we CAN'T win. That's why Britian with their ridiculous army and navy couldn't beat us in the Revolution. Because our army was plain clothsed, hidding, everywhere, and capable of attacking at any time. You can't win a war like that. Because there is no surrender. Because a bunch of "contrabands" don't just "get the memo" and stop fighting. We are wasting lives by continuing to fight an unwinnable war, and we will continue to if we don't get out.

[Coolbreezing]

Hillary and Obama aren't going to become President. Here is why I think not. Both of them have provided too much ammo for McCain to use against either of them. With them attacking one another, do they think McCain's cronies isn't taking notes to use against them. All McCain has to do, is just use their ammo that they are using against themselves, and just add, it must be true since the person from their own party said it.

 

Much as I would hate McCain to become President of GLI STATI UNITI, I do think my fellow voters are stupid enough to buy it, and would elect him.

 

Both Hillary & Obama are at each other's throat because their have reasons to believe that MC Cain stands no chance. After the way President Bush ran this country, for most Americans to consider another Republican for office, would take a lot. And to be frank with you, I don't think Mc Cain is that republican. Mc Cain is a well respected guy in the military, I mean the guy is a hero in terms of his status as a militant. He was a war prisoner in Vietnam, he received purple harts and hole lot more. The people of Arizona loves and respect him but that doesn't mean taking advantage of this battle between Hillary's and Obama will help him wins some votes.

 

Mc Cain and the media has good relation, that is why the public has not yet here about Mc Cain dirty laundry. Mc Cain is a veteran and he is well connected. However, all that don't mean nothing until November comes. Mc Cain will have to answer all the issues his been trying to avoid. Issues such as Gay marriage, The War, Illegal Immigrant, Abortion and The Keating five scandal. Both Hillary's and Obama's campaign knows Mc Cain weaknesses, it is the public unfortunately who relied on the media to bring these issues out. If the media doesn't talk about those issues most of the voters will not know about it as a result Mc Cain will have a greater chance.

 

Mc Cain agreed to Ban Gay Marriage but refused to give a logical reason why he opposed it. I believe if a man is against a certain belief or ideal he should have a reason why he is against it. I am for gay marriage but I have no problem with Mc Cain opposition. I just think that the public deserve an explanation that reveal why he's against it. Mc Cain view on Illegal Immigration when he ran for congress in 1982 will come back to hunt him. For some of us who are not aware of this, Mc Cain was involved in a scandal where he accepted campaign contribution from Charles Keating which somehow ended up costing the American taxpayers a sum of $ 3 billion. Which contributed to this $ 45 trillion debt we have right now. Some of us know that most Americans are too distracted to pay attention but a small percentage of us are watching. In addition. during an interview with NBC, Mc Cain requested an increase in U.S Troops in Iraq. That is a total no, no for most Americans. The financial situation of the country makes Americans more aware of their contribution to the war. What I've been hearing on some websites is that their want to cut funding to this war and divert that money to other programs such as education, health care, Jobs and green energy. For Mc Cain to asked for more Troops when Americans wants out of this war is an illustration that Mc Cain is obviously out of touch with the American people.

 

Me personally, I don't think we should just end the war immediately and just pack up and leave. No, no, no it can't happen this way. We have to consider the members of our troops. We must understand that once we retrieve from Iraq, some of our militants will be left without a job. That's important, that is why we must have a back up plan. Otherwise, we going to have a bunch of hungry Marines running the street looking for jobs. That situation can be dangerous. This is a question we should asked our potential chefs. What are their plan for our militants once we get out of this war?

[SubwayGuy]

Gay marriage = a distraction and a sensationalist non-issue that is being played up to distract from the main issue. Just like all this religious bullshit. No one REALLY cares whether or not someone is religious or not, hell I'd vote atheist if the guy would be a good president. Same as no one REALLY cares whether or not gay people are getting married or civil unioned (Except those righteous a**holes in that damned Bible belt). The average person cares about the economy, jobs, inflation and fuel prices, not sending our young men and women overseas to die, not having the rest of the world hate us, and being in some measure safe at home without hunting down every threat out of paranoia. And about half of us care about the economy and alternative fuels, and most of us want to REDUCE our foreign dependency.

 

And these are the issues no one's really talking about.

[Coolbreezing]

Gay marriage = a distraction and a sensationalist non-issue that is being played up to distract from the main issue. Just like all this religious bullshit. No one REALLY cares whether or not someone is religious or not, hell I'd vote atheist if the guy would be a good president. Same as no one REALLY cares whether or not gay people are getting married or civil unioned (Except those righteous a**holes in that damned Bible belt). The average person cares about the economy, jobs, inflation and fuel prices, not sending our young men and women overseas to die, not having the rest of the world hate us, and being in some measure safe at home without hunting down every threat out of paranoia. And about half of us care about the economy and alternative fuels, and most of us want to REDUCE our foreign dependency.

 

And these are the issues no one's really talking about.

 

 

I agree ...Gay marriage is in fact a distraction to avoid talking about the issues that matter's most. However, for those who are gay, it is an important issue. It is as important as the right to vote or women right to abortion, those are sensible issues. Since it effect a portion of the population, we must gives it value like any other important issues. It is a distraction in the sense that the government should have never held this right against it's citizens. Therefore, by holding on to this right causes a disturbance that could have been avoided. That disturbance offset other more important issues because it must now be discuss among members of congress.

 

I couldn't agree with you more. Those are the issues that our government refuse to focus on. Foreign policies, very important issue. Most countries think that our foreign policy suck. We need to listen and stop being a bully then we'll stop being paranoid. This is a country of immigrants, it is that very fact that makes us vulnerable. As the say goes you shouldn't eat where you shi_t. Those we hurt have relatives who lives right here on our home land.

 

I'm sorry to say but we are far away from reducing foreign dependency. We're moving toward a more unified way of life. Our dollar with Canadian plus Mexico's money is yet to become one monetary system like the Euro. I'm not sure yet but maybe it may be it will be good for us. It may help strengthen our currency.

[East New York]

I agree ...Gay marriage is in fact a distraction to avoid talking about the issues that matter's most. However, for those who are gay, it is an important issue. It is as important as the right to vote or women right to abortion, those are sensible issues. Since it effect a portion of the population, we must gives it value like any other important issues. It is a distraction in the sense that the government should have never held this right against it's citizens. Therefore, by holding on to this right causes a disturbance that could have been avoided. That disturbance offset other more important issues because it must now be discuss among members of congress.

 

I couldn't agree with you more. Those are the issues that our government refuse to focus on. Foreign policies, very important issue. Most countries think that our foreign policy suck. We need to listen and stop being a bully then we'll stop being paranoid. This is a country of immigrants, it is that very fact that makes us vulnerable. As the say goes you shouldn't eat where you shi_t. Those we hurt have relatives who lives right here on our home land.

 

I'm sorry to say but we are far away from reducing foreign dependency. We're moving toward a more unified way of life. Our dollar with Canadian plus Mexico's money is yet to become one monetary system like the Euro. I'm not sure yet but maybe it may be it will be good for us. It may help strengthen our currency.

 

Well the way I see it, as long as there is a democrat in office, we wont even have to look for a monetary system like the EURO, and I don't see how they could possibly add Mexico into the system when the valiue of a peso is no where remotely close to a dollar. There are much more important things to worry about, and not every one who is gay even gives a damn about the marriage issue. I think it is about equally important to straights and gays. My oldest brother is gay and he would never get married because he knows it is flat out wrong. I personnaly don't care because I will never be getting married to a man. I don't support it, but I'm not against it either, even though I don't think it should be allowed. You can do what you do, and still not have to get married. As far as Iraq, I don't think they should immediately withdraw troops, but maybe do it over a 20 month time period from like early 2010 through late 2011. As far as McCain goes, bush is going to put every resource he has into making sure that McCain takes the presidency.

[DOB2RTO]

Both Hillary & Obama are at each other's throat because their have reasons to believe that MC Cain stands no chance. After the way President Bush ran this country, for most Americans to consider another Republican for office, would take a lot. And to be frank with you, I don't think Mc Cain is that republican. Mc Cain is a well respected guy in the military, I mean the guy is a hero in terms of his status as a militant. He was a war prisoner in Vietnam, he received purple harts and hole lot more. The people of Arizona loves and respect him but that doesn't mean taking advantage of this battle between Hillary's and Obama will help him wins some votes.

 

Mc Cain and the media has good relation, that is why the public has not yet here about Mc Cain dirty laundry. Mc Cain is a veteran and he is well connected. However, all that don't mean nothing until November comes. Mc Cain will have to answer all the issues his been trying to avoid. Issues such as Gay marriage, The War, Illegal Immigrant, Abortion and The Keating five scandal. Both Hillary's and Obama's campaign knows Mc Cain weaknesses, it is the public unfortunately who relied on the media to bring these issues out. If the media doesn't talk about those issues most of the voters will not know about it as a result Mc Cain will have a greater chance.

 

 

All politicians have dirty laundry that is going to come out, when running for such a high office. Picking the lesser of two-three evils is all we get now. Again for me, Obama has no chance (yes due to his race). Hillary has the better chance of defeating McCAIN. America has come along way, but I don't believe that long of a way. Not just yet. We will find out soon enough. I could be wrong though.

 

Who to vote for? The woman, the black, or the geriatric. Decisions, decisions, decisions...........

[Harry]

I believe Obama has an excellent chance to pull this off. First things first, he needs to take care of Hillary. After that hurdle I think he has a great chance to beat McCain or any Republican thrown at him. And no, I am not dreaming. I am wide awake sitting at my desk in my office.

[DOB2RTO]

My oldest brother is gay and he would never get married because he knows it is flat out wrong. I personnaly don't care because I will never be getting married to a man. I don't support it, but I'm not against it either, even though I don't think it should be allowed. You can do what you do, and still not have to get married.

 

I agree with you there. Right now NY does have domestic partnership laws. So "partners" do get right equal to or nearly equal to married people. I don't go to church regularly, but i do have my convictions also. I don't support gay marriage. Marriage is something that is (actually, was this day in age), sacred for man and woman, to start a family and bind that family together. Regardless of the fact that some straight couples have problems having children, man and woman were meant to procreate. Until science comes up with something, two women or two men can't.

 

I am all for two men dating, or two women dating. I have no problem with gays. Heck, I've been hit on several times. Doesn't offend me either. Besides they are the best (non-drunk) tippers.

[DOB2RTO]

And no, I am not dreaming. I am wide awake sitting at my desk in my office.

 

I am going to crack up, if your boss walks in and rips you a new one. Being productive at work isn't you cruising your message-board. If your boss does rip you a new one, type what he says as quickly as you can. It would be like instant chat.......B)

[Coolbreezing]

ENY

"Well the way I see it, as long as there is a democrat in office, we wont even have to look for a monetary system like the EURO, and I don't see how they could possibly add Mexico into the system when the valiue of a peso is no where remotely close to a dollar."

 

ENY

"I personnaly don't care because I will never be getting married to a man. I don't support it, but I'm not against it either, even though I don't think it should be allowed."

 

DOB

"I don't support gay marriage. Marriage is something that is (actually, was this day in age), sacred for man and woman, to start a family and bind that family together. Regardless of the fact that some straight couples have problems having children, man and woman were meant to procreate. Until science comes up with something, two women or two men can't."

 

ENY .....A union with Canada can result in a bilateral interaction which can be positive. However, to involve Mexico would be a mismatch. Mexico infrastructure, resource and Energy resources are not up to par with the US and Canada. The only benefit I foresee in this union with Mexico would be a total control of the little resources that they have left. Mexico really have nothing to offer us. Why should we be interested in sharing currency ( Amero ) with Mexico. Perhaps the benefit is cheap labor which could destroy the American working class. I'm also not sure whether Canada would consider sharing the Amero with us. We're in a state of a declining economy and no one truly knows how long it's going to last. Canada sees that as a weakness and therefore skeptic about sharing currency with us. This idea if come true will strengthen our monitory system for a short term but I don't see too much promise in it for the long term. If you look at the EURO over a long term economic growth it's not that strong. Therefore we have reason to assumed a unified currency may not be to our benefit. If you really think about it the system could cause a domino effect if one country economic system is unbalance. Or it may result in hyperinflation which is a condition in where prices increase rapidly as currency loses its value. Yes I agree ENY it may very well be a problem.

 

In regard to your second quote ENY ....it's an oxymoron conflict between your own ideas. If you don't support it, you must be against it ...and that's the end of the story which is OK because you're entitle to your own opinion. Having a democrat or a republican in office doesn't change a thing. Our constitution has been violated and I'm sure some of them occurred while a democrat was in office. Take for example the right to declare war .....our constitution state that congress has the right to declare war when was the last time that happen.

 

DOB .....you argued that marriage is something that is sacred and that it is only for a man and woman to share and start a family. At one time, I though the same thing until I educated myself by during research on the subject. What I found that is that marriage is not just to have a family. Some people get married for simply companionship. To think that people married for the purpose of procreation is untrue. Marriage in fact has very little to do with family. My wife and I have one child together which defines us as a family. If I were to divorce my wife today would I no longer be part of the family. Can two men living together under one roof sharing the same common interest be considered family. From your point of view the family you described is to the perspective of children, the family is a family of orientation. (blood ) However, they are different type of family in existence which are: Matrifocal family which consists of a mother and her children. A consanguineal family consists of a mother and her children, and other people — usually the family of the mother, like her mistress husband. A conjugal family consists of one or more mothers and their children. I think those family types are new but I may be wrong. I never new about them until I became more aware of my society then I new I had to adjust my way of thinking.

[sebbieprops]

More proof of Barack Obama's radicalism. Dont vote for Barack or Hillary.

 

I sure won't. I'm registered as an independent, but I'm voting for McCain.

[DOB2RTO]

 

DOB .....you argued that marriage is something that is sacred and that it is only for a man and woman to share and start a family. At one time, I though the same thing until I educated myself by during research on the subject. What I found that is that marriage is not just to have a family. Some people get married for simply companionship. To think that people married for the purpose of procreation is untrue. Marriage in fact has very little to do with family. My wife and I have one child together which defines us as a family. If I were to divorce my wife today would I no longer be part of the family. Can two men living together under one roof sharing the same common interest be considered family. From your point of view the family you described is to the perspective of children, the family is a family of orientation. (blood )

 

No one needs to marry for companionship. Two people can live together for that. Marriage is a ground for a stable family. Family is husband, wife, and offspring. Now there are some people that just can't procreate. That's an exception. They can still marry as far as I'm concerned. As a matter of fact anyone can marry as far as I care. Just not two men, or two women. As a matter of fact in the USA, marriage has lost all value. If you divorce your wife, it wouldn't matter. You and your child are still family, that was made when you were married to their mother.

 

This may surprise some, but I do have convictions. Marriage is one, and should not be toyed with. That's my stance on it.

[Coolbreezing]

No one needs to marry for companionship. Two people can live together for that. Marriage is a ground for a stable family. Family is husband, wife, and offspring. Now there are some people that just can't procreate. That's an exception. They can still marry as far as I'm concerned. As a matter of fact anyone can marry as far as I care. Just not two men, or two women. As a matter of fact in the USA, marriage has lost all value. If you divorce your wife, it wouldn't matter. You and your child are still family, that was made when you were married to their mother.

 

This may surprise some, but I do have convictions. Marriage is one, and should not be toyed with. That's my stance on it.

 

You right I was not clear enough. Two people can live together as companion. You also right about marriage in the United State, it is true that they is more divorce rate than most countries. However, the need to get married derived from a legal stand point. They need to be recognized in society as family because it allows them to be able to pass on wealth from one another. We must consider that it is not a matter whether we care or not. The concern here is that some sees this behavior as an act of discrimination. Therefore, when you say that two men or two women shouldn't get married, you're violating their right to choose ....you are discriminating.

 

I also have my own issues with gay couples. My view doesn't discriminate against their right to choose, at least I don't think so. Perhaps someone else may prove me wrong. It relates to adoption, I believe that gay couples should not raise children who doesn't have the full capability to understand what is being gay is about. I think it is unfair for those children who are placed in a gay family home without having the option to choose. They will be brought up to understand that it's OK to be gay which I have no problem with but it will not be an equal plane field. That child may reject the heterosexual lifestyle without having the option to understand it.

[metsfan]

You right I was not clear enough. Two people can live together as companion. You also right about marriage in the United State, it is true that they is more divorce rate than most countries. However, the need to get married derived from a legal stand point. They need to be recognized in society as family because it allows them to be able to pass on wealth from one another. We must consider that it is not a matter whether we care or not. The concern here is that some sees this behavior as an act of discrimination. Therefore, when you say that two men or two women shouldn't get married, you're violating their right to choose ....you are discriminating.

 

I also have my own issues with gay couples. My view doesn't discriminate against their right to choose, at least I don't think so. Perhaps someone else may prove me wrong. It relates to adoption, I believe that gay couples should not raise children who doesn't have the full capability to understand what is being gay is about. I think it is unfair for those children who are placed in a gay family home without having the option to choose. They will be brought up to understand that it's OK to be gay which I have no problem with but it will not be an equal plane field. That child may reject the heterosexual lifestyle without having the option to understand it.

 

This has been proven untrue by many exhaustive studies. Sexuality is determined by hormones and brain structure, not who their parents are. 2 of my closest friends (one now deceased due to the tragic events of 9/11) were lesbians and they adopted a child, he's 19 now, and very straight.

 

- Andy

[Coolbreezing]

This has been proven untrue by many exhaustive studies. Sexuality is determined by hormones and brain structure, not who their parents are. 2 of my closest friends (one now deceased due to the tragic events of 9/11) were lesbians and they adopted a child, he's 19 now, and very straight.

 

- Andy

 

This theory could have held some weight had it not been in conflict with the adoptive behavior theory. The adoptive behavior is a type of behavior that is used to adapt to another type of behavior or situation. For instant children learn from observing a constant repetitive action which could be re-directed or imitated. Therefore, they is no way in hell a child can be brought up by gay parents and yet never adopt their behavior or imitates them at one point or another. Now having said that, one must also consider that " it takes a village to raise one child." In the situation described by metsfan, it is possible that most of this child friends could have been straight which may have help him disassociate himself from his parents behavior. After all it was two lesbians who raise a boy child. The level of disassociation in this case is highly possible since the child is a different sex. Had it been two gay men raising a boy, the level of association would have been more apparent. In this case the child would have associate himself more with his parents to the point he would imitates their behavior which subsequently would result in experimenting.

[East New York]

ENY

"Well the way I see it, as long as there is a democrat in office, we wont even have to look for a monetary system like the EURO, and I don't see how they could possibly add Mexico into the system when the valiue of a peso is no where remotely close to a dollar."

 

ENY

"I personnaly don't care because I will never be getting married to a man. I don't support it, but I'm not against it either, even though I don't think it should be allowed."

 

DOB

"I don't support gay marriage. Marriage is something that is (actually, was this day in age), sacred for man and woman, to start a family and bind that family together. Regardless of the fact that some straight couples have problems having children, man and woman were meant to procreate. Until science comes up with something, two women or two men can't."

 

ENY .....A union with Canada can result in a bilateral interaction which can be positive. However, to involve Mexico would be a mismatch. Mexico infrastructure, resource and Energy resources are not up to par with the US and Canada. The only benefit I foresee in this union with Mexico would be a total control of the little resources that they have left. Mexico really have nothing to offer us. Why should we be interested in sharing currency ( Amero ) with Mexico. Perhaps the benefit is cheap labor which could destroy the American working class. I'm also not sure whether Canada would consider sharing the Amero with us. We're in a state of a declining economy and no one truly knows how long it's going to last. Canada sees that as a weakness and therefore skeptic about sharing currency with us. This idea if come true will strengthen our monitory system for a short term but I don't see too much promise in it for the long term. If you look at the EURO over a long term economic growth it's not that strong. Therefore we have reason to assumed a unified currency may not be to our benefit. If you really think about it the system could cause a domino effect if one country economic system is unbalance. Or it may result in hyperinflation which is a condition in where prices increase rapidly as currency loses its value. Yes I agree ENY it may very well be a problem.

 

In regard to your second quote ENY ....it's an oxymoron conflict between your own ideas. If you don't support it, you must be against it ...and that's the end of the story which is OK because you're entitle to your own opinion. Having a democrat or a republican in office doesn't change a thing. Our constitution has been violated and I'm sure some of them occurred while a democrat was in office. Take for example the right to declare war .....our constitution state that congress has the right to declare war when was the last time that happen.

 

DOB .....you argued that marriage is something that is sacred and that it is only for a man and woman to share and start a family. At one time, I though the same thing until I educated myself by during research on the subject. What I found that is that marriage is not just to have a family. Some people get married for simply companionship. To think that people married for the purpose of procreation is untrue. Marriage in fact has very little to do with family. My wife and I have one child together which defines us as a family. If I were to divorce my wife today would I no longer be part of the family. Can two men living together under one roof sharing the same common interest be considered family. From your point of view the family you described is to the perspective of children, the family is a family of orientation. (blood ) However, they are different type of family in existence which are: Matrifocal family which consists of a mother and her children. A consanguineal family consists of a mother and her children, and other people — usually the family of the mother, like her mistress husband. A conjugal family consists of one or more mothers and their children. I think those family types are new but I may be wrong. I never new about them until I became more aware of my society then I new I had to adjust my way of thinking.

 

I don't support it, but I am not against it. I'm neutral on the subject. I may support the person, but not the act.

 

I sure won't. I'm registered as an independent, but I'm voting for McCain.

 

So whats wrong with Obama now!? Any republican running for any office can kiss my grits! McCain is going to continue the majority of Bush's policies.