As a non-american, i'd like to wish for the best president the US can have.
So may you all have a good president, who'll do great things. When are the elections anyway ?

My feeling is that Mc Caine is gonna win. This is not what i want or my choice, i'm not american, i don't have to choose or vote.
The only thing i'm affraid of is that if Obamma wins, they migth be some extreme actions or laws done, by his administration. Who will complain will be accused of racism, so it's a good way of having strong things without complains.

I am not a social "conservative," which is where I differ from many Republicans, so you 're right there.  But I am very much Republican in the fiscal and "view of governing" mold.  I'm very much a "Wall Sreet" or "Northeastern" Republican.  I favor low taxes and less Federal services, e.g. smaller government.  For example, I think Federal government run healthcare is a terrible idea.  And I think Medicaid and Medicare are evidence of this.   My only objection to the Bush tax cuts were that he started a stupid war which costs money and he never cut services, so how do you do that and cut taxes?  Thats just further evidence of the administration's incompetence. 

I am personally pro-choice but I think Roe v. Wade is a horrendous decision which was result rather than law driven.  I think the abortion issue should be dealt with legislatively, on either the state or federal levels, similar to the way the death penalty is handled. 

But as I've stated my party allegiance is more ideological for me and I vote for the candidiate I think will be best.  I can find strengths and weakness on both sides of the positions.  I think Bush failed in no small part because he's a shitty republican, concerned more with planks in the platform than the platform itself.

As for my parents, both were Democrats when I was a kid.  My mom became a Regan Democrat and Bill Clinton drove her to the GOP.   So me (and my brother) would be exceptions to the rules you articulated.

Even if an exploratory drilling measure were approved, how many years would go by before the consumer would reap whatever benefits there might be?  "

The same arguments you're using here also apply to your suggested solution of alternate fuel exploration.

So your vote is more "less taxes" driven, and I can respect that.  As my husband and I became more successful, we started listening to the shock jock speak "dems equal more taxes" but the facts just haven't proven that. And I like the fact that we live in a country that provides so many services, I just don't like how badly some are handled.

I stated this in another post, my parents were both democrats, I am a dem, my brother is a republican and my sister is an independent.

"And then GW pipes in with the same stance -- which immediately makes me suspicious.  Is this just another agenda item for Bush to push through for his oil buddies or is there something genuine behind it?

We don't KNOW how much oil may or may not be under the ocean, but we'd sure have to spend a lot of money finding out."

OK, let me get this straight.  Bush is trying to pass an agenda so his buddies are going to make money, but then you state it's going to cost a lot to explore for the oil.  Yeah, it is going to make money for the companies IF IT WORKS.  That's the way capitolism operates.  Meanwhile, the companies are the ones taking the risks.

"Let's see some tax breaks for alternative fuel exploration.  Let's see some positive steps toward stopping out dependency on ANY oil, foreign or domestic.  Let's move on from slavery from black gold."

Agree on all issues.  However, what are we supposed to do in the meantime?  The world economy is currently built on running on oil.  And it will remain so until an alternative form of energy is both developed and distributed.  Until then, we will be at the mercy of the people currently in posession of the oil. 

The same arguments you're using here also apply to your suggested solution of alternate fuel exploration

Point taken -- but at least it would be a step AWAY from dependency on oil.

Meanwhile, the companies are the ones taking the risks.

You're right, Jeff.  Perhaps it's just because Bush is involved that makes it feel underhanded. 

Republicans want to change the constitution to ban gays from marrying, that is an issue you seem very passionate about and yet you vote to support that party.  They also wanted to ammend the constitution to stop flag burning. For a party that seems to be pro American they sure seem to think that constitution is sure lacking. This isn't an attack, I just am surprised by your posts and the party you identify with.

I wouldn't take it as an attack.  I'm first and foremost an American, and I base my positions on social issues on principles of fairness (bearing in mind what I think we should stand for) and constitutionality.  Lets take your examples though.

Gay marriage -- if there were a constitutional amendment banning it, would be constitutional, but that doesn't make it right.  Prohibition was constitutional, some think it was right, others not.  It was repealed.  Same with flag burning.

Now if congress passes a law (not amends the constitution) then you enter into a different analysis.  And I don't think my positions on civil liberties are so divergent from my political ideology as much as they diverge from the social agenda of some who share my political ideology.

The same arguments you're using here also apply to your suggested solution of alternate fuel exploration.

Private companies will bear most of the costs, they just want a foot in the door.   Alternative energy companies just want to have the same tax credits big oil has.

But solar energy in the seventies started to get pretty big then big oil companies came in bought out the companies and then just closed them down. You can't stop that with the profits oil companies are making, they can pretty much do what they want.

A thought on GWB.

I don't think he's been a good president, but I also don't think he is as devious as some believe him to be.  If he were its means he'd be good at that, and based on Iraq, Katrina, catching Bin Laden, etc. he's too fucking incompetent to be good at anything besides clearing brush.

Agree on all issues.  However, what are we supposed to do in the meantime?  The world economy is currently built on running on oil.  And it will remain so until an alternative form of energy is both developed and distributed.  Until then, we will be at the mercy of the people currently in posession of the oil. 

Then make a deal with the American Oil companies.  You can drill for 15 years, but you need to support a government requirement to all car manufacturers to have all cars sold in the US to get 40 mpg in the city by 2015.