Is this gonna be our new President?
- Thread starter PJ-Hunter
- Start date
How's that any different than this?
http://letsgoeverywhere.files.wordpress.com/2006/11/silkysmooth.jpg
You go somewhere, and they offer you their traditional dress as a showing of ............respect.
http://letsgoeverywhere.files.wordpress.com/2006/11/silkysmooth.jpg
You go somewhere, and they offer you their traditional dress as a showing of ............respect.
Last edited:
K
khaddon2110
Well-known member
It's not any different.... Obama is a camel jockey and Bush.... Well....I'm not quite sure how to respond to that picture.
and the winner for the most reliable information goes too
pjthemunchkin
Hey, I just copied what I read to share it! Nothing we can do about Bush, that mistake already happened. But we can do something about Obama and Clinton!
K
khaddon2110
Well-known member
Don't worry about it... lots of people think he is the Messiah or something.
Come this fall, He won't have a chance... Not after he actually has to bring out his agenda.
Come this fall, He won't have a chance... Not after he actually has to bring out his agenda.
you voting for Ron Paul too? sweet.
Actually I don't know who I am voting for.... I like what Paul, McCain, and Obama all have to say. I don't get this whole us vs. them republican vs. democrat thing. Personally I wish there were neither party as they are both part of the problem and go to an actual democracy. Would be interesting to see what would happen, at least something would........
oh and one more thing,
I will take fallacy for 100, Alex.
Last edited:
Nope! I am voting for Huckabee until he can't go any further. Then who knows?
O
Ollie
ACCOUNT CLOSED
K
khaddon2110
Well-known member
I may be voting "None of the Above" as a write in this year as it looks right now.
I will vote!
If you look back at every major problem that exists in this country over the last 50 years, it can be attributed to liberal (Socialistic) policies. Notice I didn't blame it on the demacrats even though it originates deep in their party, there are still a few good ones on this planet. Not many, but a few.
I will vote!
If you look back at every major problem that exists in this country over the last 50 years, it can be attributed to liberal (Socialistic) policies. Notice I didn't blame it on the demacrats even though it originates deep in their party, there are still a few good ones on this planet. Not many, but a few.
I am assuming here, but we will see where it goes.
I assume socialistic policies were utilized to solve problems that were happening in the US. I am curious that if those policies were replaced with inaction, what the outcome would be. Better/Worse, I don't know, hard question to ask.
It seems that when the free markets / free government fails, the obvious method of change is socialistic and doesn't work in a market dominated society. (note a slash means and or, not equal to, nor divide)
Every problem due to liberal policies? It will take more than one statement to make me believe that is remotely true. Maybe this is the same as driving on the highway, people only notice when they are passed, and don't pay attention when they are passing people. (ie bad due to liberal policies, yet no good is seen, or if not good aversion from bad)
Too bad that a vote for "none of above" is like a vote for Ross Perot, Ralph Nader. It may be a good idea, but it just means it helps one of the 2 front runners. You gotta pick the lesser of the two evils. Whether you are a dem or GOP. IMO
O
Ollie
ACCOUNT CLOSED
Kind of depends on which problems you are talking.
Social security came out of the great depression.
Since then, the dems were the ones that voted to allow the government to go from voluntary to mandatory on the SS tax.
From there the Dems were the ones that voted to allow the government to "borrow" from the SS trust fund. That is a major part of our national deficet (sp?).
Interior, infrastructure. Let the enviro's worry about it. They have pretty much sold our enviromental legislation to the enviros. All you need to do is look at what they have done to the Endangered Species and Wilderness legislation. There has never been one brought forward that the dems haven't loved. Doesn't matter if it is good or not. They have their marching orders.
Now if you are talking about illigal immigration.
The dems are all for granting amnesty to every illigal in this country. If that happens the illigals can then bring in every kid, relative or family member from their original country. Every one of them will instantly be eligible for SS, medicare, medicaid and evey other type of social program. Since most of them come from poorer 3rd world countries they have major medical problems that will push the cost of medical treatment thru the roof. Hospitals in texas and arizona are closing because they are being overrun with illigals demanding free treatment. Plus this will push the US population from 230 mil now to over 450 mil by the year 2050. The dems solution to illigal immigration is simply make everything legal. Problem solved.
Now if you are talking terrorism. The Dems solution is surrender. Convert to islam and don't worry about it.
K
khaddon2110
Well-known member
That is good......let me jump out on a limb here and say that you lean left of center in your political views. If not, you sure sound like it.
Why is it, that libs can't just say it like it is and always have to make everyone feel good. They are masters at saying a lot, yet saying nothing at all.
Have you listened to Sen. Obama speak? Give me a break!
This is going to be my new political party slogan; just need to get some members
Self reliance..... Get some!
Depends on the issue, most of it though I lean up or down (complete opposite of either left or right).
I agree with the republican view point of self reliance, but I believe that there is a point were that statement does the individual more harm than good. I am not sure where that point is, but I know democrats view it as closer while republicans view it as further away.
K
khaddon2110
Well-known member
I would love to learn more about this theoretical point at which self reliance can become a problem.
If a person is capable, they should do for themselves what libs want to do for them. the problem starts when we cloud the issue of what people are capable of. People are capable of incredible things, I have seen it in my life and the lives of others around me. When taught to do things for yourself rather than rely on others, how can this do and individual harm?
government handout recipiants have no idea what a hard life is about with there cell phones, multiple vehicles, Big screens, houses.
If a person is capable, they should do for themselves what libs want to do for them. the problem starts when we cloud the issue of what people are capable of. People are capable of incredible things, I have seen it in my life and the lives of others around me. When taught to do things for yourself rather than rely on others, how can this do and individual harm?
government handout recipiants have no idea what a hard life is about with there cell phones, multiple vehicles, Big screens, houses.
Obama is the Black Kennedy.
The press loves him. Massive swooning from all sides. Yet, what has offered in terms of actual policy? A lot of lofty rhetoric, and that's about it. JFK was the same way. He's known for a couple of sound bites (man on the moon, ask not what your country can do for you), the Cuban Missile Crisis (where we secretly offered a missile deal to the Soviets), and not much else. He signed off on the Bay of Pigs and, had he lived, would have been known as the Architect of the Viet Nam War. Unfortunately, being assassinated made him untouchable in terms of criticism.
I certainly don't want to see Obama killed, but I feel that a lot of his actions parallel JFK in terms of long on talk, short on substance. Once he has to actually match up his agenda with a Republican, it will be interesting to see how exactly he starts nailing down his plan of action. He could end up looking like a McGovern leftist more than a moderate "reach across the aisle" type of prez.
(BTW- I can't stand this "bipartisan" kick both McCain and Obama go on about. I would rather see inaction than more ineffectual laws, or higher taxes, passed in the name of "bipartisanship" )
The press loves him. Massive swooning from all sides. Yet, what has offered in terms of actual policy? A lot of lofty rhetoric, and that's about it. JFK was the same way. He's known for a couple of sound bites (man on the moon, ask not what your country can do for you), the Cuban Missile Crisis (where we secretly offered a missile deal to the Soviets), and not much else. He signed off on the Bay of Pigs and, had he lived, would have been known as the Architect of the Viet Nam War. Unfortunately, being assassinated made him untouchable in terms of criticism.
I certainly don't want to see Obama killed, but I feel that a lot of his actions parallel JFK in terms of long on talk, short on substance. Once he has to actually match up his agenda with a Republican, it will be interesting to see how exactly he starts nailing down his plan of action. He could end up looking like a McGovern leftist more than a moderate "reach across the aisle" type of prez.
(BTW- I can't stand this "bipartisan" kick both McCain and Obama go on about. I would rather see inaction than more ineffectual laws, or higher taxes, passed in the name of "bipartisanship"
)Similar threads
