| Author | Post |
|---|
Newshound
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 26th, 2008 03:22 am |
|
FBI Issues Warning: al Qaida Makes WMD Threat
The FBI issued a bulletin to 18,000 law enforcement agencies recently warning that al-Qaida has made new threats to use weapons of mass destruction against U.S. targets.
ABC News also reported that intelligence sources have confirmed that al-Qaida plans to release a new video on the web sometime tomorrow. U.S. intelligence believes the terror group will advise its "jihadists to use biological, chemical and nuclear weapons to attack the West."
An FBI spokesman confirmed the threat "calling for the use of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) against civilians." The U.S. has no "intelligence of any specific plot or indication of a threat to the U.S.," the Bureau spokesman said. Still, the FBI has taken the precautionary step of alerting other agencies of the potential threat.
Special: Terror Chatter High, Protect Your Family
Important: Homeland Security has advised every family to have an emergency radio -- and one not dependent on electric outlet power. Please check out our free offer for one of the best emergency radios available -- Go Here Now
Such threats are not unusual for the Bureau. Earlier this year, Dr. Vahid Majidi, the bureau's assistant director in charge of the WMD Directorate, told Newsmax that the FBI gets at least several dozen cases a year involving weapons of mass destruction.
The Bureau takes such threats seriously.
In a separate interview with Newsmax's Ronald Kessler last year, FBI Director Robert Mueller said Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group were actively seeking to obtain nuclear devices with the intent to explode them in American cities.
Mueller conjectured how al Qaida might acquire one or more nuclear devices. "One is to obtain a nuclear device that's already been constructed from one of the former Iron Curtain countries, and the other way is to put together the fissile material and the expertise and do an improvised nuclear device," Mueller said.
"And there's no doubt that al Qaida, if it had the capability, would go down either route to get a nuclear device."
Mueller also had little doubt as to al Qaida's likely targets.
"It would be someplace in the United States, in most likely Washington and or New York, depending on how many devices they have. Or both cities," Mueller said.
Special: The Coming Obama Stock Market Crash
OBAMA or MC CAIN?
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 11:11 am |
|
Hartlyboy wrote: No, it's not possible to whine more about the SCOTUS decision on the election than the Democrats do. It must be part of the morning ritual, take a shower, brush teeth, whine about the Supreme Court not letting me steal the election, have breakfast.
Do you feel better now? I'm glad you're not a whiner like them Democrats.
|
Hartlyboy
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 03:46 am |
|
| No, it's not possible to whine more about the SCOTUS decision on the election than the Democrats do. It must be part of the morning ritual, take a shower, brush teeth, whine about the Supreme Court not letting me steal the election, have breakfast.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 03:18 am |
|
Fred wrote: Well, Terrance....glad to see you have "met" PTG,......Welcome, and keep posting.
I'll try. This is like shooting fish in a barrel. I might get bored.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 03:13 am |
|
| Well, Terrance....glad to see you have "met" PTG,......Welcome, and keep posting.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 03:04 am |
|
Playing the Game wrote: In America we call it Clintonizing.
Let me get this straight - you're Clintonizing?
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 03:02 am |
|
| In America we call it Clintonizing.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 03:00 am |
|
Playing the Game wrote: Nice try Terrance, I am being real, you are being a left "wingnut" as your side likes to call folks.
You're obfuscating, quibbling, and distorting. On my side we call that being a "dunce".
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:58 am |
|
| Nice try Terrance, I am being real, you are being a left "wingnut" as your side likes to call folks.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:55 am |
|
Playing the Game wrote: I said they upheld states rights, not fellow judges on the Florida court.
Get real.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:51 am |
|
| I say that history will tell. It was a bad situation that no matter how it turned out it would have been questioned. If Gore had prevailed, we would have had 8 years of Rush whining about it...and the right wing would have whined much, much more then the Dems did.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:49 am |
|
| I said they upheld states rights, not fellow judges on the Florida court.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:41 am |
|
Playing the Game wrote: The Electoral vote was the only reason Florida was pinpointed. The Supreme Court upheld State's rights, they did not give GWB the election. Please Remember this was not the GWB Court, it was the Bill Clinton Court that decided the outcome of the appeal.
Terrance wrote:
The arguement that Bush stole the election from Gore had nothing to do with the electoral votes. It had to do with the Supreme Court overruling the Florida Court and preventing a recount. Get with the program. Next time you take the time to explain something you might want to get your facts straight first.
The U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Florida Supreme Court on the recount. So much for states rights. The U.S. Supreme Court divided it's vote 5-4 on partisan lines. In his dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said, “Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this year's presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the nation's confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law.” The 2000 election was a circus and Katherine Harris was the clown.
|
Cobra
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 24th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 352 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:25 am |
|
| Come on, Terrance. Get a grip! If Gore had only wone his own state of Tennessee he would have had the election in hand. Besides, how many recounts do you need? Hanging chads got you down?
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:11 am |
|
The Electoral vote was the only reason Florida was pinpointed. The Supreme Court upheld State's rights, they did not give GWB the election. Please Remember this was not the GWB Court, it was the Bill Clinton Court that decided the outcome of the appeal.
Terrance wrote:
The arguement that Bush stole the election from Gore had nothing to do with the electoral votes. It had to do with the Supreme Court overruling the Florida Court and preventing a recount. Get with the program. Next time you take the time to explain something you might want to get your facts straight first.
|
Newshound
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 01:37 am |
|
Obama plays race card
He's been doing it and he continues to show signs of painting Republicans as racist -- with no actual proof or past basis to go on -- Barack Obama said that 'the GOP is going to try and make you scared of me by saying I'm young...I have a funny name...and oh, did you notice he's black?'. Just another example of how Barack Obama continues to heal the wound that partisan politics has left on America with his uniting, comforting talk. Listen to the audio here
Obama Flip Flop?
Last week the cable news networks were airing banners that said "Obama Flip Flop?" about his reversal on accepting public financing--(with a question mark after it because I guess they weren't sure). But it was a flip flop so blatant that even liberal commentators are openly acknowledging it
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 11:58 pm |
|
Bixby wrote: dover_diva wrote: I think the question here is, how did a 1st term senator ,an unknown get the NOD from the powers that be to run against Hillary??? ...
What do you mean how did he get to be the nominee? He was SELECTED and not elected. Words mean nothing to liberals because they say whatever pushes their agenda at the given moment and they will switch midpoint at the drop of a hat. Think back when Gore won the popular vote (200 election cycle) by ½ of a percentage point. The thing is that he lost the electoral vote. Dems have been saying ever since that Bush “stole” the election completely ignoring the fact that the Electoral College is the constitutionally prescribed method of choosing the president. So we have a similar circumstance here because Hillary Clinton beat out Barack Obama in the popular vote while Obama won by the rules of the NDC. Hillary is in the position Gore was in back in 2000 and Obama is in the position Bush was in. The difference being is that Hillary has a far stronger argument than Gore did. The Constitution clearly states that the electors from each state are to choose the president and it is within the power of each state legislature to determine just how the electors are selected. So when you vote you won’t be voting for Obama or McCain but instead you will be voting for an elector who has pledged to cast his or her vote for either nominee.
The arguement that Bush stole the election from Gore had nothing to do with the electoral votes. It had to do with the Supreme Court overruling the Florida Court and preventing a recount. Get with the program. Next time you take the time to explain something you might want to get your facts straight first.
|
Bixby
Member
| Joined: | Fri Nov 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1630 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 10:06 pm |
|
dover_diva wrote: I think the question here is, how did a 1st term senator ,an unknown get the NOD from the powers that be to run against Hillary??? ...
What do you mean how did he get to be the nominee? He was SELECTED and not elected. Words mean nothing to liberals because they say whatever pushes their agenda at the given moment and they will switch midpoint at the drop of a hat. Think back when Gore won the popular vote (200 election cycle) by ½ of a percentage point. The thing is that he lost the electoral vote. Dems have been saying ever since that Bush “stole” the election completely ignoring the fact that the Electoral College is the constitutionally prescribed method of choosing the president. So we have a similar circumstance here because Hillary Clinton beat out Barack Obama in the popular vote while Obama won by the rules of the NDC. Hillary is in the position Gore was in back in 2000 and Obama is in the position Bush was in. The difference being is that Hillary has a far stronger argument than Gore did. The Constitution clearly states that the electors from each state are to choose the president and it is within the power of each state legislature to determine just how the electors are selected. So when you vote you won’t be voting for Obama or McCain but instead you will be voting for an elector who has pledged to cast his or her vote for either nominee.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 09:43 pm |
|
No confusion Fred, just an understanding that his seeming popularity has gone to his head. Must have taken lessons from Kerry. He needs to understand that his popularity is among the traditional non-voting segment of America.
If they don't hurry up and have an election, the children will grow tired of his issues and move on like they did with winning a war on terrorism that they were told up front would be a long and tedious process.
Something about attention span with the ipod generation.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 07:08 pm |
|
| He dropped it because it wasn't worth the hassle, but were you confused between the difference of a United States seal and something that looks like an advertising button?
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 04:58 pm |
|
| Obama has already dropped the seal, since even his media buddies blasted his arrogance last night.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 03:58 pm |
|
dover_diva wrote: OK Terrance here's the fact. Ths "seal" that is causing this big deal replicates the presidential seal in the eagle and arrows and olive branch and is illegal:according to the quote I put out.
My question was-- how did this man get to be a presidential candidate,given that not many people knew who he was and or is???? You know the answer??? HOW DID HE GET PICKED!!!!!!???????
If you want another view to american history read the "politically incorrect guide to am. history" by Thomas Woods . It was a NYTimes best seller.
Illegal? It's a pretty fair bet that you're not a legal scholar. People vote in primaries for candidates. The one with the most votes wins. It's a pretty fair bet you're not a political scholar. A lot of books have been on the NYT's best seller list. That doesn't make them factual or accurate. It's a pretty fair bet you're not a historian.
|
Hartlyboy
Member
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 03:54 pm |
|
We probably shouldn't get too upset that Obama is using an imitation presidential seal , if that's what you want to call it. This is all part of the Crazy Season that comes upon each election cycle, when people you wouldn't trust to cut your lawn right stand up and declare they can save the country and offer hope and change and security and prosperity and equality and ........
Ignore it. Pull the lever or press the button in November and start storing firewood and canned goods to weather the next administration. Doesn't matter who wins with the candidates we have out there. The country is screwed.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 03:30 pm |
|
| I didn't call you a name, unless you were confused by the seal....were you?
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 03:27 pm |
|
| Name calling bespeaks poorly of those who do it. I'll say amen.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 02:58 pm |
|
The seal is more then just the eagle, the olive branches, and the arrows. What is indicated below could only be confused for the presidential seal by a moron.
As for coming from no where....I seem to recall a phrase that states that anyone can grow up to be President, and this is living proof. He is not the first candidate to come from nowhere, and he probably won't be the last. Was he marketed? Sure.....his speech at the Democratic convention was certainly a chance to give him a chance to sign....and in a true American way, made the most of it.
He got picked because his ideas sound good to a majority of Democratic voters, he speaks well, and is young. He is certianly not Bush, and he contrasts with the oldness of John McCain, and we are a society that has favored youth.
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 01:50 pm |
|
OK Terrance here's the fact. Ths "seal" that is causing this big deal replicates the presidential seal in the eagle and arrows and olive branch and is illegal:according to the quote I put out.
My question was-- how did this man get to be a presidential candidate,given that not many people knew who he was and or is???? You know the answer??? HOW DID HE GET PICKED!!!!!!???????
If you want another view to american history read the "politically incorrect guide to am. history" by Thomas Woods . It was a NYTimes best seller.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 01:33 pm |
|
dover_diva wrote: I can tell a liberal when I read one. When "you all" have to start throwing around "names" and belittling people with childish comments,it's sad. My husband is a Vietnam vet. I have read Marx and a lot of other jibberish.I lived the 60's. History books today tell only one side of the story. Most, do not read nor do educators teach a fair overview.
Just like you could tell the difference between an advertisement and the Presidential Seal. What's a fair overview?
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 01:10 pm |
|
| I can tell a liberal when I read one. When "you all" have to start throwing around "names" and belittling people with childish comments,it's sad. My husband is a Vietnam vet. I have read Marx and a lot of other jibberish.I lived the 60's. History books today tell only one side of the story. Most, do not read nor do educators teach a fair overview.
|
Terrance
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1117 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 02:39 am |
|
dover_diva wrote: I think the question here is, how did a 1st term senator ,an unknown get the NOD from the powers that be to run against Hillary??? Remember Jimmy who? Remember his legacy. This man scares the bejesus out of me. He has the chutzpah to unveil a new presidential shield(?) Who does he think he is???? Are we Americans going to let our constitution and very foundation of our lives be taken into the hands of a marxist. Is that what the majority want for the country? Is it the press and the new youth movement going to control our destiny? Look what the 60's did for america.IT AIN'T PRETTY.( Yes, I am of that time.)Our schools and press and ultraliberals have managed in 40 some odd years to destroy a good portion of our lifestyle. If people can't handle the responsibilty of adulthood in the USA then, maybe they should go to a more wonderful place -like somalia,cuba,russia where the gov't does everything for them, including think.
Did you work hard to come up with all this nonsense or does this kinda stuff just roll off your tongue? Remember the political assassinations of the 60s? Remember Nixon's criminal house of cards? Remember Nam? Do you think any of those things had an influence on what's happened since then?
Do you know what a Marxist is or do you just drop that word on anyone who you disagree with or don't understand? I guess you're just tickled pink with what W has done over the last 8 years.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 24th, 2008 01:35 am |
|
Diva....thanks for showing that Obama is obviously NOT violating any law. Appreciate you showing the proof of that fact, since his advertising logo and the seal of the President of the United States could not be mistaken by anyone other then an idiot or a mouth breathing right winger (which, of course, are not mutually exclusive).
Were you really confused that this was a Presidential seal? If you were, I am sorry that you never graduated from eighth grade, either. Very few seals have a web site on them...
What is this "direct quote" of which you speak? Can you provide the context of it?
Last edited on Tue Jun 24th, 2008 01:55 am by Fred
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 10:00 pm |
|
| That is a direct quote. And Fred, I don't go around calling individuals wingnuts or whatever.
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 09:58 pm |
|
18 USC Sec. 713 …
(a) Whoever knowingly displays any printed or other likeness of the great seal of the United States, or of the seals of the President or the Vice President of the United States, or the seal of the United States Senate, or the seal of the United States House of Representatives, or the seal of the United States Congress, or any facsimile thereof, in, or in connection with, any advertisement, poster, circular, book, pamphlet, or other publication, public meeting, play, motion picture, telecast, or other production, or on any building, monument, or stationery, for the purpose of conveying, or in a manner reasonably calculated to convey, a false impression of sponsorship or approval by the Government of the United States or by any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
(b) Whoever, except as authorized under regulations promulgated by the President and published in the Federal Register, knowingly manufactures, reproduces, sells, or purchases for resale, either separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, any likeness of the seals of the President or Vice President, or any substantial part thereof, except for manufacture or sale of the article for the official use of the Government of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 09:55 pm |
|
Oh, Jeez.
He unveils a new advertising campaign, and you seriously think he was going to replace the Presidential seal with it? Talk about wingnuts....
He succeeded because he offers something different then the people have been offered. He may or may not do well, but one could say that about any President at this stage, but he is not McSame, and he wasn't named Clinton. Politics is odd, and sometimes things just work out for you. Sometimes, like Dole and McCain, you just miss the golden ring through no fault of your own.
|
dover_diva
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 09:40 pm |
|
| I think the question here is, how did a 1st term senator ,an unknown get the NOD from the powers that be to run against Hillary??? Remember Jimmy who? Remember his legacy. This man scares the bejesus out of me. He has the chutzpah to unveil a new presidential shield(?) Who does he think he is???? Are we Americans going to let our constitution and very foundation of our lives be taken into the hands of a marxist. Is that what the majority want for the country? Is it the press and the new youth movement going to control our destiny? Look what the 60's did for america.IT AIN'T PRETTY.( Yes, I am of that time.)Our schools and press and ultraliberals have managed in 40 some odd years to destroy a good portion of our lifestyle. If people can't handle the responsibilty of adulthood in the USA then, maybe they should go to a more wonderful place -like somalia,cuba,russia where the gov't does everything for them, including think.
|
aflyonthewall
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 28 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 09:11 pm |
|
Rightwinger wrote: The stock market has been down ever since Obama was confirmed as the
Democratic nominee. Pay attention folks, the baby boomer's retirement investments this time next year will be worth half of what they are today if Obama
is elected President. I have been talking to several financial planners and the
outlook is very grim if he is elected.
Totally agree with you. Look what is going to happen with the capital gains tax. Obama is frightening when it comes to taxes. Not to mention his affiliations with undesirables. He has no plan for energy, we will be weak under his defense plan. Wants to raise taxes on everyone. I'm lucky to have a job. I overheard the secretary in our office saying that if taxes go up for our employer, then some of us (if not all) will be let go. A lot of businesses will fail in an already faltering economy.
|
Newshound
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 08:25 pm |
|
Sen. Barack Obama has promised "change," and his campaign has already been hard at work changing one of the basic symbols of the nation — the Presidential Seal.
On Friday, the press was abuzz over the new seal, which was unveiled on Obama's podium when he spoke to a group of Democratic governors.
While the Obama seal does include the American bald eagle clutching arrows and an olive branch, the resemblance ends there.
The Latin phrase "E Pluribus Unum," which translates to "Out of many, one," now says "Vero Possumus." Press reports translate the Latin words as "Truly, we are able" — a rough translation of the Obama campaign slogan, "Yes we can."
The deletion of "E Pluribus Unum," long considered the de-facto motto of the United States, is not accidental for multiculturalists, who have long denigrated the concept that immigrants must strip away their old culture in favor of the "oneness" of American civilization.
In the 1990s, such activists promoted the alternative concept of the nation's ethnic "mosaic," rather than a single, overarching metaphor to describe American society. For example, Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan has pointedly criticized the "E Pluribus Unum" motto as not reflecting the nation's diversity.
Other Obama changes to the seal include the removal of the shield over the eagle's breast, representing the president's oath to defend the Constitution. The shield has been replaced with the letter "O" — presumably for Obama — and the image of a rising sun.
"This is too serious a contest about too serious of issues for a candidate to be playing make-believe on the trail," Brian Rogers, a spokesman for presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain, told The Los Angeles Times.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 08:09 pm |
|
| No, his policies would not do that. If you want to review his plans and provide specific reasons why his policies would not work, go ahead. Or, better yet, why not say why McCain's plans are so much different and so much better?
|
Newshound
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1027 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 08:05 pm |
|
Leave America Unprotected
Barack Obama's recollection of 9/11 events leaves one wondering if he is fit to be president. If he does win, Obama would leave America unprotected. [url=http://news.newsmax.com/?K64v.i5AjeIfqyZYOBvGYjPvDxyztJU1K&http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/?s=al&promo_code=64BA-1]Read the Full Story — Go Here Now.[/url]
|
Hartlyboy
Member
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 05:02 am |
|
| I wouldn't mind seeing a Powell/Obama ticket. At least there would be one person with a little experience on the ballot. MCCain/??? isn't going to do anything to help McCain. He'll either win or lose this one on his own recognizance. I'm thinking he'll lose on that basis.
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 03:46 am |
|
A McCain/Liberman ticket would not attract anywhere near the amount of Democratic votest that a Obama/Powell ticket would.
What is the "fear" that Obama brings up? Change from previous disaster responses would certainly be greeted by most Americans as one for the better.
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 09:38 pm |
|
I wonder if Obama is going to continue to run his campaign on fear? Gosh, I thought he was for change?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121407257933894511.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
|
Rightwinger
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 442 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 12:37 pm |
|
Fred wrote: 
How about McCain/Lieberman?
Mc Cain has been spending a lot of time with him. This ticket would not surprise
me. This could sway some of the Democratic votes, but it could also cause many
Republicans to stay home and not vote. Mc Cain needs someone younger than Joe.
He also needs someone with deep pockets, ROMNEY would be my pick.
I would be interested to hear what others have to say on this one!
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 03:57 am |
|
How about McCain/Lieberman?
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 12:41 am |
|
| When pigs fly............................. He blew those rumors away when he said that he would not submit his family to the scrutiny of the American Press.
|
Rightwinger
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 442 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 21st, 2008 09:45 pm |
|
Obama-Powell ticket?
I wouldn't bet the farm on that one!
|
joeschulte
Member
| Joined: | Wed Apr 4th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 238 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20th, 2008 10:59 am |
|
| Colin Powell may be asked to be VP...............by Obama
|
Skjuda
Member
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20th, 2008 05:35 am |
|
| Colin Powell - enough said
|
Fred
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 10th, 2005 |
| Location: | Dover, Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 7173 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20th, 2008 02:23 am |
|
And the article details a flip-flop that McCain made on the issue, as well. Circumstances change, and I don't consider this anywhere near as much of an issue as the whole-scale changes on issues that McCain has made.
I mean, jeez...If Republicans don't trust him because of his earlier positions (and they are not sure if he will go back on them), and Democrats don't like the new positions, and fans of McCain (and I am one) who are disapointed in his pandering to the hard core right wing.....Repubs have no chance.
I'll predict it now....McCain loses to Obama by the largest margin in 20 years.
However....there are some pundits on the right (and left) who think McCain will bow or get forced out due to "health" reasons this summer. I think it is just people speculating (the right wingers hoping against hope, the lefties filling column space), but is there anybody who has a better chance to beat Obama?
|
Playing the Game
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 30th, 2008 |
| Location: | Delaware USA |
| Posts: | 2671 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19th, 2008 07:17 pm |
|
Here is the latest of Obama's showing of his true colors. Nice of him to back off his commitment when he discovered how much cash he could raise on the side. He makes the Clintons look like amateurs.
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20080619/Obama.Money/
|
Current time is 02:13 am | Page:   ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   |
|