The ..2012.... Political thread
-
[quote="21st Century Paul"]
deKooningartist:
The same people in other countries that condemn America for capitalism are the same people that have benefited from it too I think he needs to ask himself if, has the UK ever had a black prime minister?
I don't know what you mean, but if someone benefiting for something critizes it, his opinion is much more relevant than the one of someone benefited for that and favouring it, cause he would be biased.
Did you watch his video Oliver?
-
mustangsally10:
deKooningartist:
Someone's race, sex or age does not dictate their common sense with regards to intelligence. Political Charisma, Political Poetry, Ivy League Intelligence - that's great. That makes anyone with those qualities an effective speaker- star like qualities. These are a plus. The problem with some of us that could not vote for him was there was no history that proved that what he pointificated infront of an audience, he actually could follow through with. That was one of my main problems with him. To me he felt 'manufactured' by the Democratic Party. Within the Democratic Party there are some great people there with good records but unfortunately for the Liberals they come from the DLC. And for me what is an immediate alarm bell, is all the promises he made being erased from his website. That should send a signal to anyone
You're saying that the democratic party decided to 'manufacture' a black candidate most had not heard of, with the middle name of Hussen because he would be the package deal that everyone really wanted. That is one of the most hilarious things I have ever read
Then tell me why would they not release any of his school records? He claims to be smart. People around him are always telling us he is. But yet we have no records of his claims? The press and his campaign kept pushing on his high intelligence but yet we can't confirm any of it. Yes he reads a great speech written by others, but can he write one himself??? Now McCain released his records both medical, school and military service. Even 1.200 pages of medical. Obama submitted a one page letter from his Doctor We have barely a voting record. Mostly he has voted present. The few times he did make a decision was to vote yes to close the session. That's what I'm talking about being manufactured.
-
False comparison. McCain released his 1200 pages for a window of three hours. That's as much time as the American press had to inspect the documents and no copies were allowed. What does this tell us? As for Obama's records, how much is there to say about a fit and healthy 47yo? The difference between the weight of the documents alone tells us a lot. Regarding Obama's school work, who are you going to believe, some decades-old old assignments or your own lyin' eyes and ears? I know a smart person when I hear them. I might also take this opportunity to remind everyone that the election was LAST week! All the scaremongering and conspiracy theories are utterly irrelevant because the people have spoken in the clearest result in 20 years. Those who disapprove of the decision are just going to have to deal with it. Or move to Canada.
-
Bill:
False comparison. McCain released his 1200 pages for a window of three hours. That's as much time as the American press had to inspect the documents and no copies were allowed. What does this tell us? As for Obama's records, how much is there to say about a fit and healthy 47yo? The difference between the weight of the documents alone tells us a lot. Regarding Obama's school work, who are you going to believe, some decades-old old assignments or your own lyin' eyes and ears? I know a smart person when I hear them. I might also take this opportunity to remind everyone that the election was LAST week! All the scaremongering and conspiracy theories are utterly irrelevant because the people have spoken in the clearest result in 20 years. Those who disapprove of the decision are just going to have to deal with it. Or move to Canada.
It wasn't that clear. If there's nothing to hide, just show the darn records!!!
-
Obama polled 52.5% of the popular vote which was the biggest margin on 20 years. In 2004, Bush won 50.73% of the vote. In 2000, Bush won 47.87% of the vote. In 1996, Clinton won 49.23% of the vote. In 1992, Clinton won 43.01% of the vote (you can thank Ross Perot for that one. In 1988, Bush 41 won 53.37% of the vote. Based on my calculations, that was 20 years ago. http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/ It was that clear. Deal with it.
-
beatlefan4ever:
Bill:
False comparison. McCain released his 1200 pages for a window of three hours. That's as much time as the American press had to inspect the documents and no copies were allowed. What does this tell us? As for Obama's records, how much is there to say about a fit and healthy 47yo? The difference between the weight of the documents alone tells us a lot. Regarding Obama's school work, who are you going to believe, some decades-old old assignments or your own lyin' eyes and ears? I know a smart person when I hear them. I might also take this opportunity to remind everyone that the election was LAST week! All the scaremongering and conspiracy theories are utterly irrelevant because the people have spoken in the clearest result in 20 years. Those who disapprove of the decision are just going to have to deal with it. Or move to Canada.
It wasn't that clear. If there's nothing to hide, just show the darn records!!!
Bill here in the U.S. I can not think of one high level professional position where the applicant is not recurred to prove their academic qualifications and previous work experience. Why has he been held to a different standard for the most important job??? With regards to the overall totals from According to Associated Press today with 99% of the vote in, approximately 66 million people voted for Obama and 59 million voted against him. That's approximately an 8 million difference. That's about the size of New Jersey. http://hosted.ap.org/specials/election_night_2008/election_map_basic/index.html 59 million people disagree with you Bill. That's almost 3 times the population of your entire country or just shy of the populaton of the entire UK that have questions regarding Obama and or disagreed with his policy To quote Obama: "That ain't chump change"
-
Congressman Warns of Obama Dictatorship Monday, November 10, 2008 6:44 PM WASHINGTON ? A Republican congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship. "It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may ? may not, I hope not ? but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism." Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military. "That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist." Obama's comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado about building a new civil service corps. Among other things, he called for expanding the nation's foreign service and doubling the size of the Peace Corps "to renew our diplomacy." "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said in July. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." Broun said he also believes Obama likely will move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national police force. Obama has said he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms and favors "common sense" gun laws. Gun rights advocates interpret that as meaning he'll at least enact curbs on ownership of assault weapons and concealed weapons. As an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms generally. "We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential." Obama's transition office did not respond immediately to Broun's remarks. 2008 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed
-
OK so you are now proving that the esteemed congressman is a complete and utter idiot, because unless it escaped my notice i did not see that the Democratic party has the equivalent to the Brown Shirts or the Red Guard.
-
It's funny how we tag terms like wealthy and not wealthy around when there is a much better way to describe it as it relates to driving the economy and taxes. Think of it like this.. the wealthy could be called "Wealth Producers" while those not wealthy could be called "Wealth Consumers" Why? Well those that have the wealth invest it to make more wealth. They enable companies to invest capital to grow and create jobs. As they profit, their stock goes up and the benefits trickle downstream in paychecks, 401ks, 529s etc.. Meanwhile the Wealth Consumers generally spend their paycheck on things that don't create more money. What they do spend it on are basic needs and wants, not necessarily in that order. Eventually, the Wealth Consumers run out of wealth. That affects the Wealth Producers because now they can't afford to keep those employees. When a company lays off employees, their stock generally increases, because that helps their bottom line and attracts the Wealth Producers to put more money into their companies. So in a time of a bad economy, who would you want to have more money in hopes that it will turn into a good economy - the Wealth Producers or the Wealth Consumers?
-
peter:
OK so you are now proving that the esteemed congressman is a complete and utter idiot, because unless it escaped my notice i did not see that the Democratic party has the equivalent to the Brown Shirts or the Red Guard.
Don't judge based soley on appearance.. all it is saying is that a Civilian Army "as powerful and well funded.." is how this stuff starts. Not meaning another Holocaust, but an eye opener to the sort of control one wants.
-
[quote="deKooningartist"]
21st Century Paul:
deKooningartist:
The same people in other countries that condemn America for capitalism are the same people that have benefited from it too I think he needs to ask himself if, has the UK ever had a black prime minister?
I don't know what you mean, but if someone benefiting for something critizes it, his opinion is much more relevant than the one of someone benefited for that and favouring it, cause he would be biased.
sorry, what video? Did you watch his video Oliver?
-
[quote="21st Century Paul"]
deKooningartist:
21st Century Paul:
deKooningartist:
The same people in other countries that condemn America for capitalism are the same people that have benefited from it too I think he needs to ask himself if, has the UK ever had a black prime minister?
I don't know what you mean, but if someone benefiting for something critizes it, his opinion is much more relevant than the one of someone benefited for that and favouring it, cause he would be biased.
sorry, what video? Did you watch his video Oliver?
This video that Moggy linked to Oliver
-
USA treasure has announced that finally WON'T buy the famous "Toxic Debt" of banks and instead will do the "Soros way" and take control of banks to make sure they lend money "as usual". Some people is gonna like this, some don't (Stocks falling again :lol. Soros critized all since the money to Freddie and Fannie saying it will cause "the worst of all scenarios", etc. and what should be done is now it seems it's gonna be done now. I almost sent an e-mail to change.gov saying "just listen to this man www.georgesoros.com" but fortunately there's no need As I'm not American, I've never lived there and don't have plans to move either, I felt it wasn't right... Let's see if the government here has an e-mail too... : anyway I hope governments will copy each other.
-
[quote="deKooningartist"]
21st Century Paul:
deKooningartist:
21st Century Paul:
deKooningartist:
The same people in other countries that condemn America for capitalism are the same people that have benefited from it too I think he needs to ask himself if, has the UK ever had a black prime minister?
I don't know what you mean, but if someone benefiting for something critizes it, his opinion is much more relevant than the one of someone benefited for that and favouring it, cause he would be biased.
sorry, what video? Did you watch his video Oliver?
This video that Moggy linked to Oliver
and what do you want me to say about the video?
-
BandontheRun:
It's funny how we tag terms like wealthy and not wealthy around when there is a much better way to describe it as it relates to driving the economy and taxes. Think of it like this.. the wealthy could be called "Wealth Producers" while those not wealthy could be called "Wealth Consumers" Why? Well those that have the wealth invest it to make more wealth. They enable companies to invest capital to grow and create jobs. As they profit, their stock goes up and the benefits trickle downstream in paychecks, 401ks, 529s etc.. Meanwhile the Wealth Consumers generally spend their paycheck on things that don't create more money. What they do spend it on are basic needs and wants, not necessarily in that order. Eventually, the Wealth Consumers run out of wealth. That affects the Wealth Producers because now they can't afford to keep those employees. When a company lays off employees, their stock generally increases, because that helps their bottom line and attracts the Wealth Producers to put more money into their companies. So in a time of a bad economy, who would you want to have more money in hopes that it will turn into a good economy - the Wealth Producers or the Wealth Consumers?
This is really an excellent description!!!!! I have heard this civilian army thing Obama talked about just prior to his election. Is there anything from his campaign that explains this cause this statement of his is sort of strange
-
deKooningartist:
BandontheRun:
It's funny how we tag terms like wealthy and not wealthy around when there is a much better way to describe it as it relates to driving the economy and taxes. Think of it like this.. the wealthy could be called "Wealth Producers" while those not wealthy could be called "Wealth Consumers" Why? Well those that have the wealth invest it to make more wealth. They enable companies to invest capital to grow and create jobs. As they profit, their stock goes up and the benefits trickle downstream in paychecks, 401ks, 529s etc.. Meanwhile the Wealth Consumers generally spend their paycheck on things that don't create more money. What they do spend it on are basic needs and wants, not necessarily in that order. Eventually, the Wealth Consumers run out of wealth. That affects the Wealth Producers because now they can't afford to keep those employees. When a company lays off employees, their stock generally increases, because that helps their bottom line and attracts the Wealth Producers to put more money into their companies. So in a time of a bad economy, who would you want to have more money in hopes that it will turn into a good economy - the Wealth Producers or the Wealth Consumers?
This is really an excellent description!!!!! I have heard this civilian army thing Obama talked about just prior to his election. Is there anything from his campaign that explains this cause this statement of his is sort of strange
Here's the video of the Obama speech.. Obama has taken down all the policies from his web site saying what he said he was going to do. Funny thing in the video is people are hooting and hollaring so much, I'm not sure they understand what they are applauding. :
-
So how do you Obama supporters feel about the warrantless surveillance controversy?
-
BandontheRun:
peter:
OK so you are now proving that the esteemed congressman is a complete and utter idiot, because unless it escaped my notice i did not see that the Democratic party has the equivalent to the Brown Shirts or the Red Guard.
Don't judge based soley on appearance.. all it is saying is that a Civilian Army "as powerful and well funded.." is how this stuff starts. Not meaning another Holocaust, but an eye opener to the sort of control one wants.
Well that is precisely what you and the esteemed congressman have done. Personally I am amazed at the right wing nut jobs on here letting their paranoia go wild. What about your much vaunted ( by you not by me) control and checks and balances in your constitution.
-
peter:
BandontheRun:
peter:
OK so you are now proving that the esteemed congressman is a complete and utter idiot, because unless it escaped my notice i did not see that the Democratic party has the equivalent to the Brown Shirts or the Red Guard.
Don't judge based soley on appearance.. all it is saying is that a Civilian Army "as powerful and well funded.." is how this stuff starts. Not meaning another Holocaust, but an eye opener to the sort of control one wants.
Well that is precisely what you and the esteemed congressman have done. Personally I am amazed at the right wing nut jobs on here letting their paranoia go wild. What about your much vaunted ( by you not by me) control and checks and balances in your constitution.
I sense a trend.... Civilian Military funded by the government... Unwarranted surveillance funded by the government... Do you? Funny thing is that the Congressman is right in what he is saying relative to Marxist policies. More funny is that CNN only posted the story as he retracted the statement It all because of the politics around a Hitler reference.. if he left it at just Russia, it would have been OK.
-
No he probably retracted it when it was pointed out to him that he was an idiot. If one is going to use an example from the past make sure it stands up. Both the National Socialist and the Communists used a paramilitary wing in Germany in the 20' s and 30's. The Communists in russia and China used an army to garb power. Under your current administration wasn't surveillance on the civilian population increased!