| Author | Post |
|---|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 16th, 2008 04:37 pm |
|
| Hey Helen here- i caught it and you're right. When pushed he does not think well on his feet. I just wish I could be a "fly on the wall" when he goes to iraq and meets with Petraeus (sp?). BHO is all fluff and very little substance. As I have said before he has mastered the game of being able to tell folks whatever they want to hear, but that does not him presidential material. Last edited on Wed Jul 16th, 2008 04:38 pm by
|
Helen here
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 16th, 2008 04:20 pm |
|
If any of you can , watch fox 25 now!
I'm am watching BHO fumbling, He is just not ready to be President now . He is speaking on foreign policy.
I see him reading a script and trying to act as he understands and believes what he is reading.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 11:50 pm |
|
A Congressional subpeona holds no weight in a court of law. Contempt of Congress is like pissing in the Presidents soup. You feel better, but no harm, no foul.
Ben Franklin wrote:
Ok I sit informed now. And more power to him. I beleive Bush has committed treason and he should hang just likek we hung the judges in Nuerenburg and in Japan. That will send a message to the political class they wont soon forget. And Rove needs to be thrown in jail for contempt of Congress. yes i know we all fell contempt for Congress these days, but we didnt ignore a subeona.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 11:06 pm |
|
Ben Franklin wrote: Ok I sit informed now. And more power to him. I beleive Bush has committed treason and he should hang just likek we hung the judges in Nuerenburg and in Japan. That will send a message to the political class they wont soon forget. And Rove needs to be thrown in jail for contempt of Congress. yes i know we all fell contempt for Congress these days, but we didnt ignore a subeona.
Don't hold back Ben. Speak your mind on this one.
|
Ben Franklin
Member
| Joined: | Tue Dec 20th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1422 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 04:27 pm |
|
| Ok I sit informed now. And more power to him. I beleive Bush has committed treason and he should hang just likek we hung the judges in Nuerenburg and in Japan. That will send a message to the political class they wont soon forget. And Rove needs to be thrown in jail for contempt of Congress. yes i know we all fell contempt for Congress these days, but we didnt ignore a subeona.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 04:21 pm |
|
Ben Franklin wrote: The simple fact is Obama just voted for the Spy bill AKA the FISA amendment Act. He votes just like a neocon. Correct me if I am wrong but he continues to vote away our rights instead of fighting to secure them and he votes to continue funding the US being in 130 countries, troops that is, and to fund the illigitamate war in Iraq. So how is he our new Messiah? That question is for Doc miller. We basically have no more choice than we did last election or the one before that.
For the love of our country check your canidates voting record to see if you agreee with what s/he has voted for. Do NOT listen to their lip service. the eminent domain bill in this state is a perfect example. Some of those jerks voted for the bill knowing that minner would veto it, but then did not vote yes to override her veto. They put on a show thats it.
Dennis Kenichi or what ever his name is a perfect example. He has had years to bring impeachment proceedings against Bush but waits till hes up for reelection to do so. Thats nothing more than a stunt to convince the sheeple to elect him again. Thats not to say Bush should not be impeached and held for his crimes. Oh wait I mean hung for his crimes.
Dennis Kucinich has been trying to get impeachment legislation passed for a long time. This is not a stunt. This is just hi most recent attempt. He has been tireless in his effort.
|
Ben Franklin
Member
| Joined: | Tue Dec 20th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1422 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 04:01 pm |
|
The simple fact is Obama just voted for the Spy bill AKA the FISA amendment Act. He votes just like a neocon. Correct me if I am wrong but he continues to vote away our rights instead of fighting to secure them and he votes to continue funding the US being in 130 countries, troops that is, and to fund the illigitamate war in Iraq. So how is he our new Messiah? That question is for Doc miller. We basically have no more choice than we did last election or the one before that.
For the love of our country check your canidates voting record to see if you agreee with what s/he has voted for. Do NOT listen to their lip service. the eminent domain bill in this state is a perfect example. Some of those jerks voted for the bill knowing that minner would veto it, but then did not vote yes to override her veto. They put on a show thats it.
Dennis Kenichi or what ever his name is a perfect example. He has had years to bring impeachment proceedings against Bush but waits till hes up for reelection to do so. Thats nothing more than a stunt to convince the sheeple to elect him again. Thats not to say Bush should not be impeached and held for his crimes. Oh wait I mean hung for his crimes.
|
Ben Franklin
Member
| Joined: | Tue Dec 20th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1422 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 03:53 pm |
|
Playing the Game wrote: I had to chuckle when I read this article. It reminded me of how Islamics took to the streets demanding the head of the cartoonist who portrayed Muhammed in a satirical cartoon in Denmark.
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07/14/obama-camp-slams-satirical-new-yorker-magazine-cover/
At first I thought their reaction was assinine as well (the muslims) I mentioned this to one of my friends and he looked at me in shock and said arent you the guy who lectures us all the time about not violating sacred space and stuff like that? You know i do slappy I replied. after another incredulous look he said you dont get it do you? I am like no what am i missing. He replies to a muslim that is a violation of what they hold sacred. its part of their religious tenants not to protray Muhammed. Its like having a false idol in christianity. Why did Moseus destroy the golden calf? he asked.
then I got it. Even I think that cover streatched the boundries a bit.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 03:12 pm |
|
Fred wrote: Sorry, but I do not insult people. I may insult the thought process or the "logic" one tries ,but I have tried time and time again to discuss the facts. It is the right wingers here who feel the need time and time again to throw slurs, insults, or mischaracterizations into the mix. As a perfect example, take CR's response to my presentation of Obama's health care plan. There were several directions that a logical, thoughtful person could have taken it....instead, he went against the person(and McCain, as well). That kind of "argument" will get us nowhere.
We are all entitled to our opinion, but we are not entitled to our own facts. Some people here have a problem with telling the difference between the two. Obama's plan, to carry the discussion from above, may or may not work....but it requires a few more brain cells to figure out why then simply labeling everything you don't like as socialist.
You may think Obama is not going to make a good President...and that is fine. I personally think that both candidates CAN do the job as President, and am not worried about either one winning. I feel that the job of President is one that if they surround themselves with the right people, an idiot can do well. Conversely, the wrong people in the wrong positions will lead even the best meaning person to disaster.
While you wait for fools to respond honestly and rationally, I'll be out working on getting an anvil to levitate. I'm guessing I'll have better results.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 6154 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 01:48 pm |
|
Sorry, but I do not insult people. I may insult the thought process or the "logic" one tries ,but I have tried time and time again to discuss the facts. It is the right wingers here who feel the need time and time again to throw slurs, insults, or mischaracterizations into the mix. As a perfect example, take CR's response to my presentation of Obama's health care plan. There were several directions that a logical, thoughtful person could have taken it....instead, he went against the person(and McCain, as well). That kind of "argument" will get us nowhere.
We are all entitled to our opinion, but we are not entitled to our own facts. Some people here have a problem with telling the difference between the two. Obama's plan, to carry the discussion from above, may or may not work....but it requires a few more brain cells to figure out why then simply labeling everything you don't like as socialist.
You may think Obama is not going to make a good President...and that is fine. I personally think that both candidates CAN do the job as President, and am not worried about either one winning. I feel that the job of President is one that if they surround themselves with the right people, an idiot can do well. Conversely, the wrong people in the wrong positions will lead even the best meaning person to disaster.
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 01:16 pm |
|
PTG I agree. I had a chuckle too.
RW I too wonder about the VP selection.I really don't think that BHO will Take HC because as you said he'd have to watch his back.This election process has gone on wayyyyy too long.
I feel it should have a maybe 6 months,max! from start to finish. Just once I wish the 4th estate would publish both sides of the story without prejudice. No wonder people are so apathetic re: the voting process. With all the backbiting and stupid stuff and fluff heads telling me what someone "said" esp: after I just heard them speak.The candidates promise the moon to whom the crowrd they are pandering too but, I don't hear much reported about the answer (and I am sure it's been asked) "How do you propose we are going to pay for this". I blame congress and all the old fuddy-duddies who should be voted out. Maybe the best thing would be term-limits.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 01:36 am |
|
I am guessing that both candidates will select more of the same. It must be time to start planning for 2012.
It was 4 years ago the Dems started planning for this election wasn't it?
|
Rightwinger
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 01:33 am |
|
I am still anxiously awaiting the VP selections.
Obama is caught between a rock and a hard place. If he chooses Hillary, it will
secure his win, but then he will have to hire food tasters and body doubles!
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 01:07 am |
|
I had to chuckle when I read this article. It reminded me of how Islamics took to the streets demanding the head of the cartoonist who portrayed Muhammed in a satirical cartoon in Denmark.
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07/14/obama-camp-slams-satirical-new-yorker-magazine-cover/
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 15th, 2008 12:40 am |
|
Playing the Game wrote: I love these discussions where liberals only believe what they believe and the rest of us are just rocks.
O well, rocks endure and the wind just blows on and on.
I do too. If only Fred would get the hint, then MAYBE this blog could have a serious discussion re: the issues and the candidates. I am truly tired of the backbiting and name calling etc that goes on. Liberals will NEVER-EVER admit there may be another point of view. They take everything as a personal attack on their character and that us semi conservatives are pure idiots. This too shall pass.(Just wait for the responses- they will be a assassination on those who may disagree.) 
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 11:29 pm |
|
I love these discussions where liberals only believe what they believe and the rest of us are just rocks.
O well, rocks endure and the wind just blows on and on.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 09:36 pm |
|
Dum Dum and Nasty are in a league of their own. I suggest that they be left there. Responding to them only gives them some legitimacy and encouragement. When people can't distinguish between what was at stake during WWII and what Bush has done, that's the time to reevaluate why you are bothering to respond to them at all.
I will try to ignore them forever. I know it will be hard at times, but that's my plan. There is more to be gained from talking to a rock.
|
Ben Franklin
Member
| Joined: | Tue Dec 20th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1422 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 07:32 pm |
|
Playing the Game wrote: Kind of like we have now with Terrorists trying to destroy freedom, China controlling thought in the East and Iran threatening to end our way of life.
I guess you agree with what President Bush is leading us toward, a spread of freedom and democracy.
You can not be that naive. You think Bush is spreading freedom and democracy? Hes spreading an Oiligarchies freedom to steal thats it.
Answers freds question how the heck is Iran or anyone labeled a terrorist threatening to end our way of life? Utter BS. Bush et al hate Iran cos they said they would flood the world market with cheap oil. Same reason they hate Hugo Chavez.
It wasnt a terrorist that said I cant sue the gov for spying on me it was congress. It wasnt Iran that passed the Patriot act (7 parts now ruled unconstitutional) the military commisions act aka the torture act or any of the other unconstitutional police state laws. It was our elected offcials. You keep chasing that terrorist boogy man little chumpy and playing your bipartisan 'everyones wrong but us and be afraid of the big bad wolf'. I am going for who is actually removing my freedoms our politicians!
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 06:39 pm |
|
If FDR "saved" our country by sending tens of thousands of Americans to their death in Europe and the Pacific, I think the same can be said for GWB and it has cost far fewer American lives.
In case you haven't heard Fred Iran has vowed to the destruction of Israel which would definitely threaten the way of life for untold millions of us.
BTW our energy policy is in the hands of tree huggers and Liberals. Look where it has gotten us.
Fred wrote:
Playing the Game wrote: Kind of like we have now with Terrorists trying to destroy freedom, China controlling thought in the East and Iran threatening to end our way of life.
I guess you agree with what President Bush is leading us toward, a spread of freedom and democracy.
How exactly is Iran threatening to end our way of life?
As for your Bush comment...wrong on both counts.
Last edited on Mon Jul 14th, 2008 06:40 pm by Playing the Game
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 6154 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 06:30 pm |
|
Oh, no...you don't give yourself enough credit. I am sure you could stuff as many or more half-truths and lies in a paragraph as this guy did if you tried really hard.
1. We had 6 years of conservative rule, and 2 years of non-rule. We certainly are not better off then we were when GWB took office.
2. It is called the "slippery slide" argument, and you fell for it hook, line and sinker. Sure, there are areas that we can dictate public policy, but there are limits. Should we dicate where on public lands we should drill? Absolutely...they are public, after all, and the public, NOT THE OIL COMPANIES, is who they are for.
3. No one is saying to force people to do anything. Public transportation makes sense for some areas and should be encouraged...and if it means discouraging private cars, so be it...but the price of gas in and of itself seems to be working pretty darn well. The same goes for all the other false choices you listed. Some may be better
4. Energy policy in charge of liberals? Well, it certainly coudln't be any worse then having it in charge by the oil companies, or not having one at all. And, to answer your question, open drilling is not the same as having an energy policy.
As one of the more liberal members here, I can tell you that there are plenty of areas that I do not want government control, and would resist their attempts to do so. I do think there are too many laws and regulations, and we should review them and remove them. This does not mean, however, that new regulations are necessarily bad in and of themselves. Liberals are like conservatives in that we come in all varieties and beliefs We are not monolithic, and the fact there is no equivalent to "dittohead" is proof of that.
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 05:42 pm |
|
I could not have said it any better.
Don’t think that a few years of liberals in charge is that dangerous? Just take a moment to consider what liberals dream of doing once they gain absolute power. There is no aspect of our lives—none—that today’s liberals concede is off limits to the meddling use of government power. In their vision there is no dividing line between the public sphere and the private sphere. Limited government is a concept that makes no sense to them... Energy policies are just the tip of the iceberg—although control over energy gives government control over pretty much the entire economy already. In a world run by liberals literally no aspect of our lives will be outside the legitimate regulation of government. That is because anything—even what temperature you like to keep your house—can be turned into a matter of legitimate public concern. Everything we do, including breathing, eating and of course procreating, can be argued to have an impact on those around us or the great mother earth. And if it affects others, it can and should be regulated by those who know best, at least according to the liberals. Liberals want to regulate just about everything: where we live, what fuels we use, what car we drive, whether we can drive or be forced to use government mass transit, where we send our kids to school, what doctor we see, and even to what extent we express our approval or disapproval of others’ lifestyles. It’s hard to find something liberals don’t want to regulate. Is that a world you want to live in?” —David Strom
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 6154 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 05:18 pm |
|
Playing the Game wrote: Kind of like we have now with Terrorists trying to destroy freedom, China controlling thought in the East and Iran threatening to end our way of life.
I guess you agree with what President Bush is leading us toward, a spread of freedom and democracy.
How exactly is Iran threatening to end our way of life?
As for your Bush comment...wrong on both counts.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 6154 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 05:18 pm |
|
Playing the Game wrote: Kind of like we have now with Terrorists trying to destroy freedom, China controlling thought in the East and Iran threatening to end our way of life.
I guess you agree with what President Bush is leading us toward, a spread of freedom and democracy.
How exactly is Iran threatening to end our way of life?
As for your Bush comment...wrong on both counts.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 05:02 pm |
|
Kind of like we have now with Terrorists trying to destroy freedom, China controlling thought in the East and Iran threatening to end our way of life.
I guess you agree with what President Bush is leading us toward, a spread of freedom and democracy.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 04:49 pm |
|
Playing the Game wrote: Whether FDR "saved" this country or not is quite debatable. He was President when we emerged from the Depression. He also involved us in WWII at an extremely high cost, especially when you consider how much it has cost us since. Had he not involved us in Europe on behalf of our allies and friends, the Japanese would not have attacked Pearl Harbour. His socialist policies have led to the demise of individual accountability in this country.
In light of this, calling him a "saviour" is I guess similar to those who refer to Obama as a "messiah".
You may have been very comfortable in a world with Hitler in power in the West and The Emperor in power in the East. Yes, FDR could have just left things alone and we all could have been marching in rigid lockstep.
|
Ben Franklin
Member
| Joined: | Tue Dec 20th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1422 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 04:35 pm |
|
And he voted for the FISA amendments, otherwise known as the spy bill. Guess whos getting spied on? Oh but its all for national security cos the terrorist there so stupid as to think the NSA or CIA or some other 3 letter agency isnt listening.
This guy is just a little less than the other canidate. One party two factions.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 03:38 pm |
|
Whether FDR "saved" this country or not is quite debatable. He was President when we emerged from the Depression. He also involved us in WWII at an extremely high cost, especially when you consider how much it has cost us since. Had he not involved us in Europe on behalf of our allies and friends, the Japanese would not have attacked Pearl Harbour. His socialist policies have led to the demise of individual accountability in this country.
In light of this, calling him a "saviour" is I guess similar to those who refer to Obama as a "messiah".
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:03 pm |
|
Bixby wrote: Fred wrote: And getting back to the subject at hand...the only people who are calling him the Democratic Messiah are Republicans. I see a politician....one who I think will do a better job of running this country then his opponent. He represents a new way of thinking, as I have met people who plan on voting for him that I would never have thought would have done so. At this point, a landslide victory will not surprise me. A new way of thinking? I think not. His social welfare programs are nothing new at all. It appears that Obama is out to complete the total socialist nanny state begun by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. His unrealistic proposals will cost the taxpayer untold billions. Cradle to grave care was not a Hillary Clinton origination, it was Roosevelt's and now picked up by Barack Obama. Are you ready to embrace socialism? Looks like you are, Fred. I never considered yopu that far left, especially for a soldier.
FDR saved this country. How come I never hear you complain about the untold trillions Bush has already cost this country?
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:00 pm |
|
oop! wrote: http://www.democracyarsenal.org/2007/02/searching_for_a.html
Yet another blog posting.
|
Bixby
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1311 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 11:14 am |
|
Fred wrote: And getting back to the subject at hand...the only people who are calling him the Democratic Messiah are Republicans. I see a politician....one who I think will do a better job of running this country then his opponent. He represents a new way of thinking, as I have met people who plan on voting for him that I would never have thought would have done so. At this point, a landslide victory will not surprise me. A new way of thinking? I think not. His social welfare programs are nothing new at all. It appears that Obama is out to complete the total socialist nanny state begun by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. His unrealistic proposals will cost the taxpayer untold billions. Cradle to grave care was not a Hillary Clinton origination, it was Roosevelt's and now picked up by Barack Obama. Are you ready to embrace socialism? Looks like you are, Fred. I never considered yopu that far left, especially for a soldier.
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 661 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 04:09 am |
|
McCain is the right
one , for me.
There is no swing in my vote .
BHO and his supporters helped me in my decision.
Last edited on Mon Jul 14th, 2008 04:22 am by oop!
|
Rightwinger
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 03:20 am |
|
Let's hope and pray that we have a clear winner in November.
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 661 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 03:09 am |
|
| http://www.democracyarsenal.org/2007/02/searching_for_a.html
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 02:39 am |
|
oop! wrote: Not so fast Fred
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1980792/posts
This is just one but if need be I will find more.
Not just the republicans
Might I add they did use his First , Middle and Last name
BHO is shorter
You do know that this is a posting on another blog. Whoever posted it was probably just making it up.
|
oop!
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 661 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 02:36 am |
|
Not so fast Fred
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1980792/posts
This is just one but if need be I will find more.
Not just the republicans
Might I add they did use his First , Middle and Last name
BHO is shorter
Last edited on Mon Jul 14th, 2008 02:38 am by oop!
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 6154 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 02:24 am |
|
And getting back to the subject at hand...the only people who are calling him the Democratic Messiah are Republicans. I see a politician....one who I think will do a better job of running this country then his opponent. He represents a new way of thinking, as I have met people who plan on voting for him that I would never have thought would have done so.
At this point, a landslide victory will not surprise me.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 02:08 am |
|
dover_diva wrote: Ok "exaulted" terrance- you completely bypassed the original request as to how BHO got to be where he is today and it wasn't from having a better canpaign strategy. He couldn't have a better campaign strategy unless he had something to campaign for. So HOW DID HE THERE???? THAT IS THE QUESTION.
What does "HOW DID HE THERE????" mean. I don't understand the question. I gave you a complete answer. I guess you don't like it or disagree with it, so you decide to say I haven't given you an answer.
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 02:05 am |
|
| Ok "exaulted" terrance- you completely bypassed the original request as to how BHO got to be where he is today and it wasn't from having a better canpaign strategy. He couldn't have a better campaign strategy unless he had something to campaign for. So HOW DID HE THERE???? THAT IS THE QUESTION.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 02:01 am |
|
dover_diva wrote: I gave you a detailed answer. It's not my fault if you have trouble reading. Whine, whine, whine ...
Well----why don't you repeat it? Seems some of us wingnuts,morons,regurgitating idiots didn't quite get it. (And Terrance - as I said -if you ain't got something productive to say other than name calling and put downs - stop blogging because you offer nothing to the forums.)
Take two, just for you.
Oh exalted pamphlet reader. Let me answer this question. The CM is shorter than a standard comic book.
Barak organized his campaign and Hillary didn't. He set up grass roots organizations in states Hillary assumed she had. He won the Iowa Caucases and that gave him an incredible bump. Had he lost the Iowa Caucases he would have disappeared.
Hillary's organization was so sure of itself that it didn't wake up until it was too late. That's what comes from taking things for granted. She was entitled and she figured she had it. She didn't.
Barack started winning and he got on a roll that Hillary was never able to equal. Eventually he had the nomination sewed up to the satisfaction of anyone who could do basic math, but Hillary and her supporters just continued on.
The party super delagates are mostly elected officials. They are politicians and they were not about to reverse the will of the majority of the voters because they, like all politicians, don't want to anger the masses. They don't mind screwing the masses, but angering the masses is another thing. (I thought I'd use the term masses here because having read the CM, you are probably more comfortable with that term.
So, in the end, Barack got the votes. It really is that simple. Simple enough for even a simple person to figure out, but whackos who thrive on conspiracy theories have to read something more into it.
I don't think you are capable of a neutral exchange of opinions. You always insert a barb or two. You should call yourself Barby Doll.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 02:00 am |
|
dover_diva wrote:
"And what exactly in your opinion has Bush done for this country in his almost 8 years?"
And what does that have to do with the topic we are supposedly discussing?????
At least Bush led us thru the first recent radical attack on the USA ,on a major scale, (remember (9/11/2001) and the country pulled together as one.Non partisan,no blame on either side-flags flying- proud to be an American Kick Ass ideology.I really think if it had been Gore- HE would have run home to mama.
Bush led us into a war based upon false information. He led us into a recession. He led us into one scandal after another. I don't know what Gore would have done, but it's hard to imagine anyone doing worse.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 01:24 am |
|
dover_diva wrote: See,PTG------ as i stated before if they ain't got a real substantive comeback the terrances and freds resort to heckling. Terrance - YOU STILL did NOT answer my question re: WHO-HOW-WHY was a unknown put in our faces without rhyme or reason to be the Democrat backed candidate??? When you can give us a non- confrontational answer then you can continue with your tirades against us supposed right-wingers.
I gave you a detailed answer. It's not my fault if you have trouble reading. Whine, whine, whine ...
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 01:22 am |
|
Playing the Game wrote: I wasn't aware that President Bush was running for a third term.
I was responding to this part of your post.
"Obama frightens me, for what he might do in 4 years, just as Jimmy Carter all but destroyed this country in 4 years."
I was just wondering since you decided to go back into the past what you thought of Bush. It's okay to mention Carter, but not Bush?
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:44 am |
|
| I wasn't aware that President Bush was running for a third term.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:42 am |
|
Playing the Game wrote: That Senate seat you speak of is interesting. Before DPM (Daniel Patrick Moynihan) was RFK (Yes Robert F Kennedy). It seems that seat doesn't need to belong to a New Yorker. Moynihan was from MA, Kennedy was from MA, and Hillary is from Illinois and Arkansas.
I lived in NY during the time of of Kennedy and Moynihan, and we always wondered in Western NY how these Foreigners were elected to represent us. The other seat was always a D'Amato or Schumer or some other downstate schmuck. The last Senator who held the seat from anywhere but out of state or NYC was Ken Keating.
I think Hillary pissed off whomever when she decided to abandon the NY seat and run for President.
I think George Soros is the current whomever. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but there is too much money chasing too little talent this time around. I think McCain is destined to lose as was Dole. He is wishy washy and why would I think he will wake up and do something now after 20 years of nothing in the Senate.
Obama frightens me, for what he might do in 4 years, just as Jimmy Carter all but destroyed this country in 4 years.
Let's hope there is some talent in the shoot for the next election.
And what exactly in your opinion has Bush done for this country in his almost 8 years?
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:39 am |
|
That Senate seat you speak of is interesting. Before DPM (Daniel Patrick Moynihan) was RFK (Yes Robert F Kennedy). It seems that seat doesn't need to belong to a New Yorker. Moynihan was from MA, Kennedy was from MA, and Hillary is from Illinois and Arkansas.
I lived in NY during the time of of Kennedy and Moynihan, and we always wondered in Western NY how these Foreigners were elected to represent us. The other seat was always a D'Amato or Schumer or some other downstate schmuck. The last Senator who held the seat from anywhere but out of state or NYC was Ken Keating.
I think Hillary pissed off whomever when she decided to abandon the NY seat and run for President.
I think George Soros is the current whomever. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but there is too much money chasing too little talent this time around. I think McCain is destined to lose as was Dole. He is wishy washy and why would I think he will wake up and do something now after 20 years of nothing in the Senate.
Obama frightens me, for what he might do in 4 years, just as Jimmy Carter all but destroyed this country in 4 years.
Let's hope there is some talent in the shute for the next election.
Last edited on Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:43 am by Playing the Game
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:36 am |
|
dover_diva wrote: At least PTG you offer an opinion that merits a reply. I never heard of B Obama.I was from NYS. I saw how the" machinery " worked when Moynahan (sp)"retired" and lo and behold Hillary was the chosen one. The spot opened up miraculously (angels sing) and images of Hillary as the new "chosen one". People in NYS, other than NYC, had no chance.Then she backed off running for the presidency until 2008. She still thought she was the chosen one. Oh how the mighty fall.
Now "we" taxpayers, per Obama,are "asked" to "give" money to her, to "forgive" her personal debt of about 12million dollars - that she "spent" of "her own money" to try and become the Dem candidate for the Pres nomination. Well TS Elliot -let her millions be decreased by 12M. what chutzpah!!!
Now as far as I am concerned we the people have a real need to "investigate" why Obama was the "chosen one" for the presidency. If we can find that answer maybe WE the people can prevent our form of gov't (democracy ?) from perishing.
Our chosen form of government has never suffered so much as it has from this current administration.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:34 am |
|
Playing the Game wrote: You know d_d it is truly interesting how George Soros dropped Hillary like a date with herpes, to back Obama. Maybe the Clinton's thought they were getting too important for his support. Along comes a nobody from Illinois with no record, who packs some good demographics for the Soros machine and Viola!!!!
I guess George didn't realize that his puppet wouldn't just shut up and go with the flow. Do you really think that an Obama could have garnered all of the attention and money in the Democrat Party without the backing of Soros?
I'm glad you're not into conspiracy theories.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 631 |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:33 am |
|
dover_diva wrote: You know Terrance you are particularly tedious in your blogs. Can't find anything to really back up your position why Obama should lead this country-- so you continue to belittle the others that are REALLY trying to have an exchange of opinions. Why don't YOU read a marxist manual.(I have been accused of not knowing a marxist vs a communist but at least I can say I have read the manifestos. Have YOU???)
I posed the question a long while back re: HOW DID OBAMA get the backing from the Dems to go against H.Clinton and get all the "bigwigs" backing him when he was an unknown,had very little experience,NOBODY even knew you he was.You got the answer? So how do you think Obama was chosen from relative obscurity to where he is now.????? Who are is backers???? Why HIM????? Charisma goes so far but, lets discuss HOW, WHY, and WHO is going to benefit if he gets elected (God forbid).
Oh exalted pamphlet reader. Let me answer this question. The CM is shorter than a standard comic book.
Barak organized his campaign and Hillary didn't. He set up grass roots organizations in states Hillary assumed she had. He won the Iowa Caucases and that gave him an incredible bump. Had he lost the Iowa Caucases he would have disappeared.
Hillary's organization was so sure of itself that it didn't wake up until it was too late. That's what comes from taking things for granted. She was entitled and she figured she had it. She didn't.
Barack started winning and he got on a roll that Hillary was never able to equal. Eventually he had the nomination sewed up to the satisfaction of anyone who could do basic math, but Hillary and her supporters just continued on.
The party super delagates are mostly elected officials. They are politicians and they were not about to reverse the will of the majority of the voters because they, like all politicians, don't want to anger the masses. They don't mind screwing the masses, but angering the masses is another thing. (I thought I'd use the term masses here because having read the CM, you are probably more comfortable with that term.
So, in the end, Barack got the votes. It really is that simple. Simple enough for even a simple person to figure out, but whackos who thrive on conspiracy theories have to read something more into it.
I don't think you are capable of a neutral exchange of opinions. You always insert a barb or two. You should call yourself Barby Doll.
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 14th, 2008 12:11 am |
|
At least PTG you offer an opinion that merits a reply. I never heard of B Obama.I was from NYS. I saw how the" machinery " worked when Moynahan (sp)"retired" and lo and behold Hillary was the chosen one. The spot opened up miraculously (angels sing) and images of Hillary as the new "chosen one". People in NYS, other than NYC, had no chance.Then she backed off running for the presidency until 2008. She still thought she was the chosen one. Oh how the mighty fall.
Now "we" taxpayers, per Obama,are "asked" to "give" money to her, to "forgive" her personal debt of about 12million dollars - that she "spent" of "her own money" to try and become the Dem candidate for the Pres nomination. Well TS Elliot -let her millions be decreased by 12M. what chutzpah!!!
Now as far as I am concerned we the people have a real need to "investigate" why Obama was the "chosen one" for the presidency. If we can find that answer maybe WE the people can prevent our form of gov't (democracy ?) from perishing.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 1156 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 13th, 2008 11:14 pm |
|
You know d_d it is truly interesting how George Soros dropped Hillary like a date with herpes, to back Obama. Maybe the Clinton's thought they were getting too important for his support. Along comes a nobody from Illinois with no record, who packs some good demographics for the Soros machine and Viola!!!!
I guess George didn't realize that his puppet wouldn't just shut up and go with the flow. Do you really think that an Obama could have garnered all of the attention and money in the Democrat Party without the backing of Soros?
Last edited on Sun Jul 13th, 2008 11:21 pm by Playing the Game
|
Current time is 04:29 pm | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   |
|