Obama chooses Biden for VP

[BgMc31]

I am not eligible for government grants. I take unsubsidized private loans for my education. Why should I ask the tax payers of this country to subsidize my higher education? Choosing to pursue a higher education is a CHOICE made by an individual. There is no reason that I should ask the tax payers of America to pay for my education. There is also no reason that you have to put money out of your own pocket for your daughters education, that is YOUR CHOICE. She can easily get loans on her own with you as a co-signor, or even without you as a co-signor. But please, do not ask the tax payers fo this country to subsidize personal decisions made by individuals. Higher education is an investment in ones self. Yes it can be argued it benefits society as a whole, but it ultimately benefits the individual more. It should not be compulsory for the tax payers of this country to support higher education. They already subsidize the first 12 years of education, and now you want them to pay for more?

Entitlements will bankrupt this country. At some point the needed benefits will always outweigh available capitol given enough time.

Healthcare is not a right and higher education is not a right.

BgMc, it really bothers me that you are able to say you are voting for Obama partially because he is black, when if I, as a white man, said I was voting for McCain or Bob Barr "partially" because they are white, I would be branded a racist, the NAACP would be down my throat, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would be outside of my house with signs and protestors. It is a horrible double standard that needs to be eliminated from our society. What are your thoughts on that?

As usual godfather, you make very compelling arguments in regards to healthcare and higher education. But while I cannot dispute the fact that both of these are not rights, I feel that we all (and our government) have a certain level of social responsibilty when it comes to the uplifting of our own citizens less fortunate the rest of us. I firmly believe that as a country, we are measured by the way our less fortunate are treated and how competitive we are globally. Lets face it, everyday the world is getting smaller and we must educate our own citizens in order for us to stay at the top of the food chain in this growing global economy.

To answer your 2nd question, I do believe a double standard exists. But, I feel there is a difference in why I feel a racial kinship towards Obama as opposed to the whites who would vote for McCain strictly because he's white. And the reasoning has to do with my children. Now I don't expect whites to understand this and I surely don't expect anyone to agree with this either. But, in America, every parent has told their child that they can grow up to be anything they wish, if they work hard. Why can we say this? Because we can point to others as who we can relate to. Well, in the black community that hasn't always been true...until now! There has never been a black president (duh!) so there has never been an example os someone who looks like me to point to the possibilty of holding the most powerful position on the planet. If Barack wins, I can tell my children with complete honesty that there is absolutely nothing you cannot accomplish if you work hard enough.

Like I said before I don't expect whites to understand this. Nor do I speak for all blacks. This is MY reasoning. And there is no reason to get into a debate about the level of racism that exist. No one on this forum has shared my life experience 100%. Even other blacks have different experience than myself. But to me those whites who are voting for McCain because he's white are not voting for Obama because he's black. Check out this article from ABCnews.com: http://wireless.go.com/wireless/abcn...ries/5667266_1.

Hope that helps godfather.

[thegodfather]

As usual godfather, you make very compelling arguments in regards to healthcare and higher education. But while I cannot dispute the fact that both of these are not rights, I feel that we all (and our government) have a certain level of social responsibilty when it comes to the uplifting of our own citizens less fortunate the rest of us. I firmly believe that as a country, we are measured by the way our less fortunate are treated and how competitive we are globally. Lets face it, everyday the world is getting smaller and we must educate our own citizens in order for us to stay at the top of the food chain in this growing global economy.

To answer your 2nd question, I do believe a double standard exists. But, I feel there is a difference in why I feel a racial kinship towards Obama as opposed to the whites who would vote for McCain strictly because he's white. And the reasoning has to do with my children. Now I don't expect whites to understand this and I surely don't expect anyone to agree with this either. But, in America, every parent has told their child that they can grow up to be anything they wish, if they work hard. Why can we say this? Because we can point to others as who we can relate to. Well, in the black community that hasn't always been true...until now! There has never been a black president (duh!) so there has never been an example os someone who looks like me to point to the possibilty of holding the most powerful position on the planet. If Barack wins, I can tell my children with complete honesty that there is absolutely nothing you cannot accomplish if you work hard enough.

Like I said before I don't expect whites to understand this. Nor do I speak for all blacks. This is MY reasoning. And there is no reason to get into a debate about the level of racism that exist. No one on this forum has shared my life experience 100%. Even other blacks have different experience than myself. But to me those whites who are voting for McCain because he's white are not voting for Obama because he's black. Check out this article from ABCnews.com: http://wireless.go.com/wireless/abcn...ries/5667266_1.

Hope that helps godfather.

Well as a Libertarian we see everyone as an individual. We dont put people into groups where you say "Blacks" and "the Whites"...That just serves to perpetuate the division between people. You should see yourself, and your children, as American individuals, not as "blacks"...It is such a superficial assessment of a human being.

[BgMc31]

^^in a perfect world, godfather, you would be correct. Unfortunately, this country doesn't see myself or my children as simply human beings. Unfortunately, IMO, race will always be an issue in this country. Sad but true.

[thegodfather]

^^in a perfect world, godfather, you would be correct. Unfortunately, this country doesn't see myself or my children as simply human beings. Unfortunately, IMO, race will always be an issue in this country. Sad but true.

Thats a big leap you're making, speaking for 350,000,000 people....Race will continue to be an issue if those on BOTH sides of the issue continue to MAKE IT AN ISSUE.

[BgMc31]

you've made by point by assuming my posts were pointing the finger at just whites. When I speak of 'this country', I speak of all Americans. There is a issue with race across the board and if you look at the ABCNEWS article I sighted you will see the a large percentage of blacks continue to experience bouts of racism. All races and ethnicities have issues with both those inside and outside their groups and those issues will never go away, IMO. And therefore ideals by those who believe otherwise are not grounded in reality...whatever realized really is.

[SMCengineer]

But I agree with his stance on making good healthcare AFFORDABLE AND AVAILABLE for everyone. The right has misconstrued Barack's position on this. He's not trying to force healthcare on anyone, he wants to make it AVAILABLE to everyone. Medicade is only available to the poor and most private insurance is expensive and not affordable enough for people everywhere. If people don't believe that they are foolish.

Everyone wants healthcare to be affordable and available. Who wouldn't want that? The difference is the way in which we proceed from here. Our system of government run healthcare (a third party payer system facilitated by the government) is what's causing the millions of people that are uninsured. People don't seem to understand that adding more government into healthcare won't make it better. In fact, doing so might enable us decrease the amount of uninsured people (I'm one of them), but the quality of the healthcare system as a whole will decline. Only by eliminating the ERISA act and the HMO act will everyone truly be able to afford the best healthcare available. It goes against conventional wisdom, but our system is broken and the last thing we need to do is add fuel to the fire by exponentially increasing our debt and allowing the government to run our healthcare.

If I'm correct, the "Universal Healthcare" that Obama purposes uses Medicaid as a template. If you know anything about Medicaid you know just how inefficient and muddled with fraud it really is. Look to New York City for an example of it. Not only that, but Medicaid/Medicare is one of the programs that has the highest potentials for bankrupting us in the near future, which would cause unheard of poverty levels. So, while "Universal Healthcare" sounds like a way to solve many societal problems, it's really just a sugar coated promise that masks the real problem we face today, which is too much government intervention. It's also a way to garner votes and sound like the "good guy," while making people who are opposed to it the "evil ones." Apparently, it works. The only people Universal Healthcare really helps are those in government and the industries closely tied to them (ie pharmacetical, and insurance companies). They're the ones who seem to want it the most because they stand to benefit the most from it. Coincidentally, those same companies are also the most active in lobbying for Universal Healthcare. You still think they're putting the "common man" first or are you starting to see that there's enormous profits in it, none of which you'll see?

I believe, like Obama, everyone should be able to attend college. But again not everyone can or even want to but it should be available. My daughter is on her way off to Stanford nxt year and just about every dollar I saved from being a measely special teams/practice squad player for 4 yrs is going to her education. After that, I'm hoping/praying my boys are better athletes than I am so they could get scholarships. Because after my daughter, there isn't much left. And because I'm extremely middle class, I'm too successful for grants and such but not successful enough to pay for 2 other children to go to the colleges they want to attend (Michigan and Penn State). We are falling behind in terms of education to countries who subsidize higher education to their citizens.

Everyone should be able to attend college and everyone can. Sometimes you just have to accept a cheaper alternative. You can't expect someone else to pay for your schooling just because you want to go to a top private university, but can't afford it.

I feel that we all (and our government) have a certain level of social responsibilty when it comes to the uplifting of our own citizens less fortunate the rest of us. I firmly believe that as a country, we are measured by the way our less fortunate are treated and how competitive we are globally. Lets face it, everyday the world is getting smaller and we must educate our own citizens in order for us to stay at the top of the food chain in this growing global economy.

You make a good point. You do have a personal moral responsibility to give to the less fortunate. However, you don't have a right to take from me by force to give it to someone else who needs help, no matter how noble that sounds. Need I remind you that even though welfare seems like a decent "social" program, there are more people out on the street today than before we had these programs. Welfare/warfare is one of the reasons for our inflation, deficits, and boom/bust cycles that cause massive poverty. A decent state to look at as an example is New Hampshire. They have the lowest tax structure in the country and they also have the lowest poverty rate.

Bob Barr 2008 = Ralph Nader 2000

It will be ironic if McCain loses because of votes that went to Barr/Paul.

No it won't, it'll be a clear indicator that the Republican party needs to either return to it's original platform (small government, no nation building, constitutional governing, and personal responsibility) or prepare to continue loosing. It'll create clear schism between neoconservatives and real conservatives and hopefully deal a fatal blow to the neoconservative movement. A similar situation happened in 1964 with Barry Goldwater and the outcome was the Reagan re volution.

[DeputyLoneWolf]

Just curious DLW, what is your education level? Do you hold a degree?

No I do not hold a degree, I will be completing my associates next year and after that I plan on persuing my masters. I've worked full time (sometimes two jobs) since I was out of school and had to due to my parents finances. So It's all on my own and now that I make a good salary I can afford to take online classes.

I do like to think that I hold a degree in common sense

Also I agree with the libertarian way of thinking

[thegodfather]

No I do not hold a degree, I will be completing my associates next year and after that I plan on persuing my masters. I've worked full time (sometimes two jobs) since I was out of school and had to due to my parents finances. So It's all on my own and now that I make a good salary I can afford to take online classes.

I do like to think that I hold a degree in common sense

Also I agree with the libertarian way of thinking

Cool...You're a cop correct?

[DeputyLoneWolf]

Cool...You're a cop correct?

Yes that is correct.