Posters for Honour in Politics

[Kiljan Arslan]

I am sickened by these attacks on Candidates for their religious preferences, for their family, or even upon their families. It is disgusting that so many here resort to such attacks which in fact have no bearing whatsoever on the campaigns I am forming Posters for Honour in Politics for this very reason. the group is here. By signing you say that you will not attack a candidate for their religious convictions unless they have said that it will affect how they vote, you will also not attack their families unless it is something to specifically to do with the campaign, you will also not attack them if they have been divorced unless they say something about how people shouldn't get divorced or something like that. Finally it has a second objective of not attacking children who were used by their parents in political ads.

the group is here http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=234

[EpicJon]

And what do you hope to gain by this? This will achieve nothing. Politics is politics. its always dirty.

-EJon

[danzig]

ane what do you hope to gain by this? This will achieve nothing. Politics is politics. its always dirty.

-EJon

But it is that attitude that helps enforce that because it is difficult or nearly impossible to achieve that one shouldnt even try.

[Kiljan Arslan]

I'm sorry but I for one would like us to stick to the ing issues and not attack cannidates because they go to some church, been divorced, or have a child that is pregnant.

Also its to hold ourselves to some standards.

[EpicJon]

Even if its what you'd like to do, it won't happen. People will always have something to argue about in candidates. Thats the fighting that gets you into office. What do you want, Barrack Obama and John McCain having tea and debating whose flowerbed looks the best? No. Thats why they attack other issues.

-EJon

[the_mango55]

Joined

Even if its what you'd like to do, it won't happen. People will always have something to argue about in candidates. Thats the fighting that gets you into office. What do you want, Barrack Obama and John McCain having tea and debating whose flowerbed looks the best? No. Thats why they attack other issues.

-EJon

It doesn't have to be about changing all of American politics, just changing (or declaring) your own views about politics, to not let these unimportant things impact your own votes.

[attilavolciak07]

I joined!

[Каие]

Sorry Kiljan, this is a fools errand. You can no more change the nature of politics than change the nature of man, the animal kingdom and nature.

However, as Alexander the Great once said ; "Nothing is impossible to him who will at least try". So count me in!

[craziii]

I am sickened by these attacks on Candidates for their religious preferences, for their family, or even upon their families. It is disgusting that so many here resort to such attacks which in fact have no bearing whatsoever on the campaigns I am forming Posters for Honour in Politics for this very reason. the group is here. By signing you say that you will not attack a candidate for their religious convictions unless they have said that it will affect how they vote, you will also not attack their families unless it is something to specifically to do with the campaign, you will also not attack them if they have been divorced unless they say something about how people shouldn't get divorced or something like that. Finally it has a second objective of not attacking children who were used by their parents in political ads.

the group is here http://www.twcenter.net/forums/group.php?groupid=234

you obviously forgot about the entire year 2000 bush campaign. when you ran for president + vp, everything about you is politics.

[Shi Huangdi]

This is politics--political discussions are going to get dirty, no matter what. And discussing a candidates's religion or family is not always irrelevant. If Barack Obama goes to a hate-America church, that's cause for concern and discussion. If Sarah Palin has family problems that suggest she is an incompetant parent, it's worth discussing. We shouldn't rule out any issue for political debate.

[removeduser_487563287433]

This is politics--political discussions are going to get dirty, no matter what. And discussing a candidates's religion or family is not always irrelevant. If Barack Obama goes to a hate-America church, that's cause for concern and discussion. If Sarah Palin has family problems that suggest she is an incompetant parent, it's worth discussing. We shouldn't rule out any issue for political debate.

Is Barack Obama's hate-America church (you are so quaint, by the way, Beren) running for office, or is Palin going to be parent of America?

[Farnan]

Is Barack Obama's hate-America church (you are so quaint, by the way, Beren) running for office, or is Palin going to be parent of America?

You know whats funny? My grandfather, who is a Pastor and has been a Republican all his life, and mean a right-wing Republican who doesn't like Islam said he thinks people should stop talking about Obama's religon and personal life.

[Centurion-Lucius-Vorenus]

You know whats funny? My grandfather, who is a Pastor and has been a Republican all his life, and mean a right-wing Republican who doesn't like Islam said he thinks people should stop talking about Obama's religon and personal life.

Your pastor grandfather be damned, according to the vast majority of right-wingers and pundit's who are against Obama.

[spartan117]

This fairy tale notion of honor only is important when it is politically expedient.

Is Barack Obama's hate-America church (you are so quaint, by the way, Beren) running for office, or is Palin going to be parent of America?

But if people are concerned about preserving this "ideal" family structure and issues such as gay marriage, adoption, sex education, etc. are being discussed it would seem as if they should be interested in a candidate's family background.

[removeduser_487563287433]

But if people are concerned about preserving this "ideal" family structure and issues such as gay marriage, adoption, sex education, etc. are being discussed it would seem as if they should be interested in a candidate's family background.

Only if their families are running for public office or these people run their families like tyrants. I think it's acceptable for Cheny to be against gay marriage and have a lesbian daughter, because he does not dictate his daughter's sexuality.

[spartan117]

Only if their families are running for public office or these people run their families like tyrants. I think it's acceptable for Cheny to be against gay marriage and have a lesbian daughter, because he does not dictate his daughter's sexuality.

So you are suggesting that things that are considered family issues should only be a political issue if it is an "extreme" condition? (I.e. running their families like tyrants) Apparently some people do consider 17 year old to be an extreme condition.

People may consider a parent to be responsible in creating the environment that their child will live in. If the child participates in what is considered "unacceptable" then it would only lead to question what environment the parent has created. Obviously there are limits of course as everybody apparently agrees once a person is 18 then they are in fact liable for their actions. She is 17 and 5 months pregnant, one could question the environment the parent created for their child that could lead to her partaking it what is seen as "unacceptable", like having a child at a "young age."

I do not know of any studies or beliefs that shows any correlation or causation of environmental factors as it leads to a person being homosexual or heterosexual. (unless of course people mention the generally more socially liberal laws of San Francisco which is quite a stretch) Otherwise it would be difficult to draw a comparison. Except of course that Cheney's daughter is also considered an "adult" and hence is liable for any part of her life.

Not to mention that the image that some of these candidates want to portray is of this family orientated "American" family. By simply making speeches and having photo ops with the family, including talking about preserving this "ideal" family structure it can certainly be an issue to have a child being pregnant.

But I doubt republican pundits will make much fuss over Palin's kid as it is a Republican not exactly a Democrat. People who do wish to critize Palin will have to be careful as people are sensitive about families and criticisms can seem harsh and insensitive.

If anything I would expect this would enforce such ideas as this is not Palin's creation of her child's environment but the ever prevalent Hollywood, hip hop, over sexualized culture that is root of her child being pregnant.

[Каие]

Only if their families are running for public office or these people run their families like tyrants. I think it's acceptable for Cheny to be against gay marriage and have a lesbian daughter, because he does not dictate his daughter's sexuality.

But he doesn't mind blocking her life and rights? He goes thousands of miles to safeguard rights of foreigners and the rights of gays in Afghanistan, but not his own daughter? Pretty harsh guy.

[Kanaric]

The only thing i'm sick of is people int he forum spouting the same talking points as their parent party and not thinking for themselves. That is why I rarely, if ever, get involved in topics like that. I just hate arguing against 14 year olds repeating their parents, or adults with their parent party, point of view, regardless of party. And those kids are the most aggressive posters in those topics.

I find that most topics on this subject are just a rehash of what the party/media point of view..... nothing more.

I dont need to see talk radio or air america in text form.

[Каие]

The only thing i'm sick of is people int he forum spouting the same talking points as their parent party and not thinking for themselves. That is why I rarely, if ever, get involved in topics like that. I just hate arguing against 14 year olds repeating their parents, or adults with their parent party, point of view, regardless of party. And those kids are the most aggressive posters in those topics.

I find that most topics on this subject are just a rehash of what the party/media point of view..... nothing more.

I dont need to see talk radio or air america in text form.

I don't have a political or party allegiance although i wish i did...

[L'Afrique]

The only thing i'm sick of is people int he forum spouting the same talking points as their parent party and not thinking for themselves. That is why I rarely, if ever, get involved in topics like that. I just hate arguing against 14 year olds repeating their parents, or adults with their parent party, point of view, regardless of party. And those kids are the most aggressive posters in those topics.

I find that most topics on this subject are just a rehash of what the party/media point of view..... nothing more.

I dont need to see talk radio or air america in text form.

I hate arguing against 14 year olds for a different reason- they are by nature radical and stupid, and most often directly contradict their parents and whatever is the mainstream politics of their area no matter what the issue.