OK churchill, roosevelt, and mccain. They knew american history.
And, although one of them was patently not American, many other people knew and know American history too.
Obama doesn't know why alaska is strategic. He doesn't want to touch the soil.
This statement is - unless I am missing something fundamental here - almost tantamount to implying that he doesn't even know or care where it is - and if that would have been utterly implausible at the commencement of the electoral campaign, the all-too-well-publicised antics of Ms Palin would surely have cemented that state's location beyond any doubt in his mind...
I'd rather have matter-of-fact taking care of our own needs by our own resources. Obama doesn't have a clue of the strategic resources most anywhere in our entire land. And, if he does - he'd probably as soon give them away. He is most unresourceful to grab money from 'richer people' to give to the poor. Who does he think he is? Robinhood?
I am not about to speak out in favour of either candidate, but do please remember that the fact that America is not and cannot be self-sufficient in everything is not the fault of either, nor can it be changed by either.
Why doesn't he go into wal-mart and wonder why that isn't working before he tries it out on the entire country? Ok - ask someone in wal-mart where anything is. Or...on second thought - do as i do sometimes and just do something unusual. Like take one color of each paint swatch for 100 colors. It's normal behavior in wal-mart.
I really have parted company with any sense of what you're talking about here; what has the paint swatch stock of any branch of Wal-mart got to do with either candidate?
Funniest of all though, he promises health care for children and babies - but really doesn't want them around in the first place. So...what kind of healthcare are they going to get when they are in 1000th place and around the corner when very very sick.
What? Without the former around, who would there be to vote for him? What a bizarre statement! I don't know what your views on public and private healthcare are, but I would have been somewhat surprised were McCain, whom you evidently favour, to be better disposed towards more state-funded healthcare than Obama would be.
Preventative health care for children -means that mother's have a right (and tax breaks) to be home and take care of their own children so that they don't get sick in the first place. This starts with pre-pregnancy on to giving anti-bodies to children through breast feeding. The whole idea that 'it takes a village' is buying into the notion that feminism means ignoring your family for the common good of your workplace. Who cares about the workplace as much as your own personal family and their health. That is what will solve the health crisis. Taking care of your family first!
Whilst your apparent avowed ideals here are not unreasonable, your implied dismissal of the economic considerations affecting many American families seems to me to be profoundly inconsiderate, especially coming as they do from a self-confessed Christian; you must surely realise that most mothers cannot afford to stay at home and look after their children, especially nowadays (this fact is, of course, by no means exclusive to America) and most households need two, three or more salaries in order to survive.
Who deserves a voice in our children's education? The government? They've ruined everything else. Now you want them to ruin your children's minds? It's just crazy because they think they're god. They're not. THey're humans like everyone else. I think Obama is off his rocker in terms of thinking he can create more government 'projects.' Why doesn't he just lay off, chill, and think about another job? Our country is broke. It doesn't need more things to pay for. He's not an economist by any sense of the rational word.
And McCain is? By the way, words themselves cannot be "rational" - only people can use them in rational ways (when they do!). Not know Mr Obama, I cannot voich for his motives personally, but I would venture to suggest to you that he "doesn't he just lay off, chill, and think about another job" because his many supporters want him to continue doing the one that he is now doing; that seems to me good enough reason, irrespective of whether or not he is successful in his bid for the presidency.
Best,
Alistair
Topic: How do you deal with irrational people?