| Author | Post |
|---|
Helen here
Member
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13th, 2008 09:40 pm |
|
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/uk-paper-claims-obamas-father-a-drunk-and-polygamist
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/07/31/save-the-neglected-obama-school-in-kenya/
http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/why-did-obama-campaign-for-a-pro-islam-candidate-in-kenya/
|
Helen here
Member
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13th, 2008 09:17 pm |
|
In the next few days there will be a report that Obama may have funneled some of America's tax payer money to sponsor terrorism in his father's native country.
Now I'm not sure how this will affect this election , but surely with the knowledge that is out there about his ring of friends and band of political thieves this country's undecided voters will lean to wards Uncle John and Aunt Sarah
Think of it this way , if something happens to
Obama McCain
Biden Palin
_____________________________________________________________________
Pelosi Pelosi do you really want her running this country ?
_______________________________________________________________________
Obama needs to reveal all his supporters , all of his tax records for the past 20 years.
Last edited on Mon Oct 13th, 2008 09:27 pm by Helen here
|
BugsMe
Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 68 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13th, 2008 06:13 pm |
|
I'm sorry, but I'm not running for office. Personally, I wouldn't vote for Elmer Fudd. I think we need a change.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13th, 2008 04:21 pm |
|
Ah, CC...I said best qualified, not best candidate. Big difference, and I'll admit that when we've elected the best qualified, it hasn't always worked out well, either.
I like some of Paul's ideas, but not all. We could do far worse than him as President, however...at least for a few years.
|
counting coup
Member
| Joined: | Fri Feb 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 207 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13th, 2008 03:50 pm |
|
| I don't know who you are referring to when you say "we" but I would not agree with Richardson being the best candidate in any form. Ron Paul had and has the most reasonable approach to the majority of the problems facing this country including the war and illegal aliens. As far as the Dems are concerned Mrs. Clinton would have been a far superior choice to B.O. both in leadership and experience. It's very unfortunate for this country that we will wake up Nov. 5th with McBush or B.O. as the President elect after suffering through 8 years of King George and his reign of terror. The Republicans have no one but George and Dickey to blame if B.O. unfortunately is our next POTUS.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13th, 2008 03:15 pm |
|
First, I agree that there are candidates I would much rather have. I think we both agree that Richardson was probably the best qualified person on either ticket.
However, this is what we are left with, and realize that we don't vote on one particular thing, and you tend to emphasize those areas where your particular candidate is strong. Obama won the primary by getting people to vote for him, just as McCain did. Conservatives don't like the process, and it will be interesting to see what happens to the Republican party over the next 4 years...especially if the economy improves (as I think it will, regardless of who gets elected) and the Dems build on their lead the next time around.
I think the American people vote for some combination of vision, leadership, appearance, experience, character, AND the satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the status quo (call it change, hope, whatever you want to call it). I'll admit that McCain has a big edge on experience, and I'll even give you the edge on leadership based on his long time Senate AND military career.
However, I don't buy the character attacks, and never have. You can, and you are free to do so, but recognize that many Americans simply tune out at this time when they hear McCain's campaign try these tactics. It looks desperate, and the people sense that.
I think most would say, however, that Obama is the clearest change from the Bush administration that we have, and I think the Palin pick IS beginning to remind people of Bush more so than the change mantra. I would also say that Obama gets a small edge on vision, because it does point in a different direction than we've had under Bush.
|
BugsMe
Member
| Joined: | Sat Oct 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 68 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 13th, 2008 12:39 am |
|
| I like anyone who likes rabbits.
|
Habanero
Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | DelMarVA, USA |
| Posts: | 4056 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 12th, 2008 11:19 pm |
|
Fred wrote: I also think the voters don't think of this as much of a concern as things such as the economy.
So why don't we look at not only his associations, but his votes in regard to the current state of the economy..........
Face it Fred, the others are correct the current and past associations of yours and ours really matter nothing as none of us are running for POTUS.
I have always been outspoken in my opposition to McCain/Feingold, but McCain's push on that type of reform stemmed from the Keating 5 situation, so at least he made an effort at reform. McCain also called for more oversight on Fannie and Freddie, yes prior to Obama being in the Senate, but among those who thwarted McCain's efforts are supporters of Obama, including Barney Frank whose "spouse" (Frnk's terminology, not mine) was head of one of them at the time.
Compared to his associations, friendshipos, supporters, and mentors, anything in your past or mine, or probably anyone on this forum would not raise as many red flags as should have been raised a year ago about Obama.
This man should not be where he is. Clinton, Richarson, or even Biden, should be where Obama is right now.
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 01:29 pm |
|
| I respectfully disagree with you Fred, for reasons already stated below. And NO, I don't have associations like that. I.E: Radical, left wing, bomber, terrorist, socialist liberation church teachings, corrupt chicago politics, organizations indicted, convicted and raided for charges pertaining to voter fraud, etc, etc, etc..........
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 01:23 pm |
|
| Fred- while these various associations may serve to make you an interesting and complex character- we are the sum of our parts, afterall- unless you decide to run for public office they will be neither the source of scrutiny nor investigation.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 01:23 pm |
|
My point is that I am a relatively average person, and if most of us thought about it, we probably have similiar associations, especially the older we get.
I also think the voters don't think of this as much of a concern as things such as the economy.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 01:11 pm |
|
| You're not running for POTUS Fred..............big difference to the voters
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 01:08 pm |
|
| I am a few years younger than Obama, and I can tell you that my associations include quite a list of characters, including bankruptcies, small time criminals, and even a few I served with who spent time in the Federal Pen. Now, I've also got more than a few "good guys" I've worked with along the time, but if someone wanted to smear me because a very good friend of mine 15 years ago got caught up in defrauding the government (heck, I went to school with him, worked with him, even worked out with him) I guess I would be a very easy target.
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 01:01 pm |
|
| yessssssss.........I, too, am Obama's age & I had to laugh when he was interviewed by Bill O'Reilly. When specifically asked about his "associations", Obama said- "Oh, I have lots of freinds, don't you?" To which O'Reilly bluntly replied- "Not like that. No I don't." The economy being the central issue with the military a close number two (in my mind) YES I do care about judgement and character, how an individual deals with crisis and conflict AND WHO they will turn to for wisdom and WHAT those individuals' basis for experience (since Barak himself has little) is.
|
Habanero
Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | DelMarVA, USA |
| Posts: | 4056 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 01:12 am |
|
Smyrna Mom wrote: Comparing associations and scandals equally, I would have to say McCain's so-called wrongdoings would be like jumping in to a tub of lukewarm water. Whereas, Obama's associations and wrongdoing would be like jumping into a tub of hot, hot water.
A vat of boiling oil is more like it 
I will make no comment on possible wrong doing by Obama, but his associations and friendships definitely should give one pause about the man's judgement. I'm only a year older than he is, yet I knew exactly who and what William Ayers was when I was 8, and I definitely knew his history by the time I was 30.
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 11th, 2008 01:09 am |
|
| Is this the best "dirt" to be had on John McCain?......Charles Keating may be a crook, but he's definitly not a terrorist (unrepentant or otherwise) neither have I heard anyone making any claims that he is a communist facilitator of any sort. If this is all we've got- a more than 20 year old scandal, than let's prosecute the other guy who was cleared- John Glenn, supporter of Barak Obama........
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 05:04 pm |
|
Smyrna Mom wrote: This story about the Keating 5 is 30 years old AND the Senate Ethics Committee which was made up of 3 Democrats and 3 Republicans plus a special outside council, Robert Bennet, who defended Clinton in the Lewinsky affair, that both MCain (R) and John Glenn (D) exercised poor judgment but their involvement was entirely too minimal to prosecute.
Comparing associations and scandals equally, I would have to say McCain's so-called wrongdoings would be like jumping in to a tub of lukewarm water. Whereas, Obama's associations and wrongdoing would be like jumping into a tub of hot, hot water.
Maybe you should try jumping into a tub of cold water. It might wake you up.Last edited on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 05:04 pm by Terrance
|
Smyrna Mom
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 7th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 45 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:58 pm |
|
This story about the Keating 5 is 30 years old AND the Senate Ethics Committee which was made up of 3 Democrats and 3 Republicans plus a special outside council, Robert Bennet, who defended Clinton in the Lewinsky affair, that both MCain (R) and John Glenn (D) exercised poor judgment but their involvement was entirely too minimal to prosecute.
Comparing associations and scandals equally, I would have to say McCain's so-called wrongdoings would be like jumping in to a tub of lukewarm water. Whereas, Obama's associations and wrongdoing would be like jumping into a tub of hot, hot water.
|
Peekaboo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 262 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:46 pm |
|
`Fred wrote: Proof, of course, that Obama is hiding the fact he is a Muslim by trying to not look as if he is going overboard to make an outreach to Muslims....
Sheesh. Give it a break. No, he is not a Muslim and I haven't seen anybody here saying he was or is. His connections and associations being called into question are very legit. All you guys can come up with is the keating 5 where McCain was cleared of it. Even the prosecutor said he shouldn't have even been in the indictment.
|
counting coup
Member
| Joined: | Fri Feb 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 207 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:30 pm |
|
countrynow wrote: yesss.........and the factual evidence against BHO is so strong and yet, again- People want what they want & want to believe what they want.......I am not 100% sold on McCain but I wouldn't vote for BHO if it were part of an ACORN bribe. Ha, ha......
How about if it were part of a Keating bribe, oops I mean campaign contribution?
Ha, ha......Hee, hee.....
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:18 pm |
|
Proof, of course, that Obama is hiding the fact he is a Muslim by trying to not look as if he is going overboard to make an outreach to Muslims....
Sheesh. Give it a break.
|
Peekaboo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 262 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:15 pm |
|
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122360316634321799.html
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDZiMjkwMDczZWI5ODdjOWYxZTIzZGIyNzEyMjE0ODI==
Last edited on Fri Oct 10th, 2008 04:16 pm by Peekaboo
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 11:58 am |
|
| yesss.........and the factual evidence against BHO is so strong and yet, again- People want what they want & want to believe what they want.......I am not 100% sold on McCain but I wouldn't vote for BHO if it were part of an ACORN bribe. Ha, ha......
|
counting coup
Member
| Joined: | Fri Feb 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 207 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 02:58 am |
|
| Habanero, finally you've said something I almost agree with, they both disgust me.
|
Habanero
Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | DelMarVA, USA |
| Posts: | 4056 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 02:50 am |
|
Terrance wrote:
Political record? Why don't you start with just one "political record" item that you think speaks well for McCain?
Unlike Obama, McCain did not vote against protections for babies that were actually born alive following an abortion.
I'm pro-choice and always have been, but Obama's repeated voted against the Born Alive legislation absolutely disgusts me.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 10th, 2008 01:28 am |
|
I want to save this so I can laugh at your inanity in a few weeks.
joeschulte wrote:
On Nov. 4 th the results will not be close . Obama will win more than 300 electoral votes . And McCain will have ruined his reputation with the most negative campaign in recent history .
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 10:15 pm |
|
joeschulte wrote: On Nov. 4 th the results will not be close . Obama will win more than 300 electoral votes . And McCain will have ruined his reputation with the most negative campaign in recent history .
You know things are getting really ugly out there and you seem not to understand that Obama has yet to win the election.
|
joeschulte
Member
| Joined: | Wed Apr 4th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 238 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 10:08 pm |
|
| On Nov. 4 th the results will not be close . Obama will win more than 300 electoral votes . And McCain will have ruined his reputation with the most negative campaign in recent history .
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 09:53 pm |
|
| you are absolutely correct. thank you for sharing this truthful information regarding who the real crooks are
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 07:19 pm |
|
Bixby wrote: Terrance wrote: no one else wrote: I still don't understand why anyone would vote for this guy. Because he is smart. He is better suited to the task at hand. He has not run the sleaziest campaign in our lifetime. He has not just finished telling a pack of lies in a speech as recent as ten minutes ago. You obviously hadn't read NOE's post below. By what political record do you know that he is "best suited" to be president?
Political record? Why don't you start with just one "political record" item that you think speaks well for McCain?
|
Bixby
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1630 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 06:56 pm |
|
Terrance wrote: no one else wrote: I still don't understand why anyone would vote for this guy. Because he is smart. He is better suited to the task at hand. He has not run the sleaziest campaign in our lifetime. He has not just finished telling a pack of lies in a speech as recent as ten minutes ago. You obviously hadn't read NOE's post below. By what political record do you know that he is "best suited" to be president?
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 06:24 pm |
|
no one else wrote: I still don't understand why anyone would vote for this guy.
Because he is smart. He is better suited to the task at hand. He has not run the sleaziest campaign in our lifetime. He has not just finished telling a pack of lies in a speech as recent as ten minutes ago.
|
no one else
Member
| Joined: | Sun Dec 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 404 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 06:22 pm |
|
I still don't understand why anyone would vote for this guy. Put all the Ayers and Rezco and Wright and all those other questionable associations he has with all those questionable people aside, and look at the facts:
1. He is NOT going to lower middle class taxes. He just signed on to a $700 Billion bail out package (as I realize McCain did, but I don't think anyone had a choice. So I'm not blaming Barack for that, just stating a fact for my point). There's no money left to give tax breaks. You people have to understand, that unless he wants to borrow more money from China (which he also says he'll put an end to), there's no money left for tax breaks. Thats a fact. It doesn't grow on trees. You have to take from one place to give it to another and right now, there's nothing left to shuffle around.
2. He is NOT going to give health care to everyone in the US. Again, $700 Billion bail out. No money left for programs like that.
3. He hasn't even finished his FIRST TERM as Senator. He has NO economic experience - never introduced or co-sponsored any economic legislation. He has no foreign affair experience. This is not the time for "on the job training". I know you lefties hate to think about it, but Sarah Palin has WAY more pertinant experience, having been govenor of Alaska, than Barack Obama has from being a one-term senator.
4. He is #3 - REPEAT #3 - on the list of taking campaign contributions from Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac. More money than others that have been in politics for DECADES. You'll recall that those institutions, along with the help of Barney "Rubble" Frank, Chris "DoDoBird" Dodd, and Chris Cox, are the reason for the financial meltdown of the economy.
This state is going to go for McCain, so your vote doesn't really matter anyway. I just want all of you who are thinking of voting for this charlatan Obama to look yourself in the mirror, and ask yourself if you can really sleep well at night knowing that you are going to cast a vote for this guy. Because if he does win, he's going to raise YOUR taxes in time of economic depression and it'll send this country over the brink. History has shown, in times like these, the democrat strategy DOES NOT WORK, and the republican strategy does. I'm just looking out for your well being. You need to have a clear conscience, as I will, if Obama gets elected and this country becomes economically decimated because of his policies.
I really hope that McCain comes out in the next few days, flanked by Mitt Romney (whom I supported in the primaries) and Rudy Guliani, and tells the American people, "these are the guys I'm sending after those who STOLE YOUR MONEY. Guliani will find all those who had to do with the disaster (Frank, Dodd, Cox to name a few), and hold them accountable and punish them appropriately. Romney would come up with a plan to revive the economy in a sensible manner and get us back on the right track so we can compete with China, instead of living in fear of being absorbed by them because we can't repay our debt. If that happens, McCain wins in a landslide.
Nancy Pelosi announced the other day that she intends to convene a special session of the house after the election to introduce a bill to add an ADDITIONAL $150 billion dollars into the bailout program. Her intention is to give another tax rebate stimulus check to lower income families. This is not only an irresponsible use of funds, but an unconscionable act as well. This is not free money and has to come from somewhere, which means that my children and my children's children will have to pay for this. I believe the only reason Pelosi has announced this now, before the elections, is because she thinks it will give an edge to the dems running for office or for re-election. Nancy Pelosi and people like her need to go. They are not democrats in the true sense of the word, just a group of socialists with communists leanings, who want government to interfere in every aspect of our lives. Whether its housing or government sponsored welfare, food programs and even medical care, this amounts to communism and our forefathers never intended for the government to be this involved in the day to day lives of our country's citizens. This is disgraceful.
Have at it.
rks1 & ajwatchdog
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 04:28 pm |
|
countrynow wrote: tsk, tsk Terence.......the truth is out there.....just like Empire State Building, it is in fact- right in front of you and you are questioning my vision? ha, ha...On a serious note- I have a question- I would like to know where the funding for Bil Ayers $50M Annenburg project which he placed administration of with Barak Obama, came from......What individuals or association are behind the money for this particular grant? l
Was there more to your question FTW?
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 04:25 pm |
|
tsk, tsk Terence.......the truth is out there.....just like Empire State Building, it is in fact- right in front of you and you are questioning my vision? ha, ha...On a serious note- I have a question- I would like to know where the funding for Bil Ayers $50M Annenburg project which he placed administration of with Barak Obama, came from......What individuals or association are behind the money for this particular grant? l
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 02:14 pm |
|
| Countrynow, I predict you will fit in just fine on this blog. Your inability to distinguish your opinion from fact will serve you well here. I don't know that kissing up to the right is necessary.
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 01:59 pm |
|
| Thank You, Vindicator. I am still asking the question as to what republicans pursued, promoted and created the housing and banking reforms that have led us to this economic catastrophe. Anyone?
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 01:47 pm |
|
| Playing the Game- I agree with you here- Obama will indeed be Carter II....I'm just not convinced this country can stand four years of liberal left wing policies when the evidence shows us to be on the doorstep of socialism currently.....
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 04:02 am |
|
Footloose wrote: Terrance wrote: Cobra wrote: ajwatchdog2008 wrote: Obama's goal is to make the low class the new middle class at the expense of what's left of the current middle class, who will then become the low class.
Obama's goal is to become President as is McCain's. The question is why. The issue for us is what candidate has the most reasonable plan for what is happening and how to deal with it.
Obama's goal is to institute a complete socialist state. His past history and associations with communists and radicals prove it.
What exactly have you done for your country? You have clearly demonstrated your lack of understanding when it comes to politics. McBush has stepped on our civil rights at every turn and shown complete contempt for our Constitution and our laws, yet I do not hear you complaining about totalitarianism.
|
Footloose
Member
| Joined: | Tue Nov 22nd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 332 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 02:43 am |
|
Terrance wrote: Cobra wrote: ajwatchdog2008 wrote: Obama's goal is to make the low class the new middle class at the expense of what's left of the current middle class, who will then become the low class.
Obama's goal is to become President as is McCain's. The question is why. The issue for us is what candidate has the most reasonable plan for what is happening and how to deal with it.
Obama's goal is to institute a complete socialist state. His past history and associations with communists and radicals prove it.
|
countrynow
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 284 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 01:09 am |
|
| you are absolutely correct about this. I find it a disgrace that objectivity in journalism seems to be a virtue lost and few even notice. What people really want is not the truth, but- the truth as they see or wish to believe it.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 9th, 2008 12:59 am |
|
Cobra wrote: ajwatchdog2008 wrote: Obama's goal is to make the low class the new middle class at the expense of what's left of the current middle class, who will then become the low class.
Obama's goal is to become President as is McCain's. The question is why. The issue for us is what candidate has the most reasonable plan for what is happening and how to deal with it.
|
Cobra
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 24th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 352 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 8th, 2008 11:30 pm |
|
ajwatchdog2008 wrote: Obama's goal is to make the low class the new middle class at the expense of what's left of the current middle class, who will then become the low class.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 8th, 2008 03:55 pm |
|
| I don't mind her cute sayings until she dials it up to 11. One Gosh darn it or similar phrase per sentence. Check out her public speaking BEFORE she was running for VP and you don't see her being so colloquialistic (if that is a word). She dials it up for the audience...which, if they respond to and send money, is great for the campaign.
|
counting coup
Member
| Joined: | Fri Feb 29th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 207 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 8th, 2008 03:13 pm |
|
Two Cents wrote: joeschulte wrote: McCain can not win , but if he stepped aside for some reason , the republicans would have a better chance with Palin .
You really shouldn't use these forums to throw that sort of a fright into people. We have enough to be truly afraid of without adding a Palin into the mixture.
Your doggone right by golly.
|
Two Cents
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 668 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 8th, 2008 01:01 pm |
|
joeschulte wrote: McCain can not win , but if he stepped aside for some reason , the republicans would have a better chance with Palin .
You really shouldn't use these forums to throw that sort of a fright into people. We have enough to be truly afraid of without adding a Palin into the mixture.
|
joeschulte
Member
| Joined: | Wed Apr 4th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 238 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 8th, 2008 11:25 am |
|
| America will not elect an angry old man president . Did his campaign coach him that way or is he really so full of anger that he can not contain it ? McCain can not win , but if he stepped aside for some reason , the republicans would have a better chance with Palin .
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 8th, 2008 03:48 am |
|
Habanero wrote: Terrance wrote: you know when Bush was elected the Republicans had the Executive Office and both Houses of Congress. There was a surplus and the economy was good. So, 8 years later, we are in the toilet. How do you figure this is a Democratic thing? The Democrats did regain control of Congress in 2006, but they did not have enough of a majority to sustain anything.
Just like the Republicans didn't have enough of a majority in the prior 6 years. So how is this a Republican thing?
The Republicans didn't need a veto proof majority. They had Bush.
|
Habanero
Member
| Joined: | Wed Sep 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | DelMarVA, USA |
| Posts: | 4056 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 8th, 2008 02:08 am |
|
Terrance wrote: you know when Bush was elected the Republicans had the Executive Office and both Houses of Congress. There was a surplus and the economy was good. So, 8 years later, we are in the toilet. How do you figure this is a Democratic thing? The Democrats did regain control of Congress in 2006, but they did not have enough of a majority to sustain anything.
Just like the Republicans didn't have enough of a majority in the prior 6 years. So how is this a Republican thing?
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 8th, 2008 01:59 am |
|
Something about the twin towers and a war got in the way. How soon lip stick laced parrots forget.
Terrance wrote:
you know when Bush was elected the Republicans had the Executive Office and both Houses of Congress. There was a surplus and the economy was good. So, 8 years later, we are in the toilet. How do you figure this is a Democratic thing? The Democrats did regain control of Congress in 2006, but they did not have enough of a majority to sustain anything.
|
Current time is 02:15 am | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...   |
|