No, I won't go third party. I'm just going to cry if Hillary is the nominee though usc. I don't know if I can vote for her, but, I will probably get up the stomach for it and just do it. It will be a very unpleasant vote for me though.
Romney v Clinton
- Thread starter Augustine
- Start date
No, I won't go third party. I'm just going to cry if Hillary is the nominee though usc. I don't know if I can vote for her, but, I will probably get up the stomach for it and just do it. It will be a very unpleasant vote for me though.
I don't see it in "immigration" terms, I see it in security terms. There is no possible way to fight a "War on Terror" without border security. We have to know who is coming here if we are going to ensure security, or we may as well just forget it altogether.
Let them in, just make sure we know who they are.
uscitizen
Villified User
Yeah I am in the same boat.
But it is as I have said , almost no one to vote FOR, just vote for the lesser of the evils.
Sucks, but that is what our country has become.
the country can't afford another republican. They're all insane (except for ron paul).
All of them say that, even knowing what they know now, they would still have invaded iraq.
And almost all of them don't accept evolution, or would support teaching creation science in public schools.
We simply cannot have this kind of insanity.
3 out of 10 is not "almost all of them". Too many, but it isn't "almost all of them".
If you'll note, I said that most of them either don't accept evolution, or are comfotable with creation science being taught in public schools. That was made clear in last weeks debate. If I recall correctly, both McCain and Romney were comfortable with creation science being taught alongside evolution.
There are only 10 current candidates. However, 3 out of 10 would be about the percentage that would support such a thing... They make big sound, but don't really do anything about it.
LOl Sometimes you make me just burst out and laugh usc.
Not as "science" they were both repetitive on this. "Not necessarily in science"....
Why? Because he couldn't read that the post was about the candidates?
uscitizen
Villified User
Was just wishful thinking on my part after over 6 years of Bush I consider politicide sometimes. All neos should die!
Yeah, I've heard republcan pundits try to spin those answers. That we can teach creation science - just not in science class. Be honest. It was tap dancing to please the base. Creation "Science" has no business being taught in school. Whether it's it biology class, or in woodshop class.
Damo, I knew what you were referring to, and I thought usc did too, and that he was just making a joke. No one thinks you were saying there were only 10 republicans left in the country. But...it was funny.
However, in philosophy class it does have a place. Be honest yourself. It is deliberately misleading to promote "Woodshop" as the only other alternative to science class, and then attempt to deflect from the realization that there is a class that such would be relative and actually proper.
uscitizen
Villified User
Just wishful thinking on my part.
C'mon damo. You know the republican candidates are not talking about a "philosophy" class. I never even had a philosophy class in high school. I doubt more than 5% of american high school students take a philosophy class.
I just googled. Google is rife with examples of McCain saying he is comfortable with intelligent design being taught in public schools (though he personally accepts evolution). This is code word, for saying that the TheoCons can have their whacked out scientific views taught alongside other academic subjects, and put forth as an "alternative" view to evolution.
Yep.