[QUOTE=Dodger Bulldog][Jackson] is certainly a conservative, but he seems to be able to handle the back-and-forth of different opinions just fine.[/QUOTE]Yes, but I do find myself shaking my head a lot.
Printable View
[QUOTE=Dodger Bulldog][Jackson] is certainly a conservative, but he seems to be able to handle the back-and-forth of different opinions just fine.[/QUOTE]Yes, but I do find myself shaking my head a lot.
I would catch a bullet in the groin for Obama.
That is how much I despise Joe Biden.
I live in Illinois.
Geraldine Feraro (D) said it best.
"If this guy was not black he would not be here."
It is a shame that he is the first black Presidential canidate.
He is not qualified and without the help of the press he would have never made it. I think with the selection of Biden he has shown his true colors.
[QUOTE=Sidney]You Don't Know the Truth About.
Barack Obama Until You Read This Book.
The Case Against Barack Obama.
The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate.
In this shocking exposé, Freddoso builds his case by revealing what the nightly news hasn't told you, including:
* Obama's extensive connections to corrupt Chicago politics—while he claims to be a reformer.
* Obama's plans to increase taxes—amid rising fuel and food prices, he just voted to raise taxes for anyone making more than $32,000
* Obama's dangerous mix of inexperience and poor judgment—evident in his shifting policy positions and the Rev. Wright scandal.
* Obama's radical voting record—he repeatedly voted against legislation to protect babies born alive during failed abortions.
No doubt there will be other books about Barack Obama, but The Case Against Barack Obama is the first comprehensive and critical look at the man who would be president. Freddoso builds a rock-solid case against Obama's "bipartisan reformer" facade, going where most journalists—and books—refuse to tread. Paperback, 264 pages.[/QUOTE]Written by David Freddoso, hmmm writes for The National Review, published by Regnery who published that other fine piece of work "Unfit for Command" about John Kerry during the last election. Hmmmm seeing a pattern here, yup, yup definitely, definitely a pattern. Just once I pray thee o Lord just once in my life let them both just tell the truth and let us decide.
[QUOTE=Daddy Rulz] let them both just tell the truth.[/QUOTE][b]YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH![/b]
Now [I]there's[/i] an actor who I [I]would[/i] vote for.
"* Voted against a moratorium on earmarks."
Now I am definitely voting Obama / Biden because I would definitely support a moratorium on a moratorium on earmarks.
Ok, I admit it. I have no idea what a fucking earmark is.
[QUOTE=Dickhead]"* Voted against a moratorium on earmarks."
Now I am definitely voting Obama / Biden because I would definitely support a moratorium on a moratorium on earmarks.
Ok, I admit it. I have no idea what a fucking earmark is.[/QUOTE]You ’d vote for a fucking [b]“yaller dog” [/b]as long as it claimed to be a Democrat!
I am curious why you are quoting the national review--which is right of Dick Chaney and Carl Rove and the libertarian party which is right of the National Review for information on Obamah and team. It strikes me as not your typical way of doing things. I haven't always aggreed with you, but generally you quote from quality sources and I respect your analysis even if I disagree with it.
We all are learning more about the candidates. Let's not get "swift boated" here.
I never would accept Michael Moore as an authoritative source on W, although he tells an interesting and entertaining story which is biased and not always factually correct. I was also grossed out by Kity Kelley's book on W and the family which repeated in graphic detail about W learning how to drink at 19 as described by frat brothers. I personally despise W and think that he will be remembered by history not favorably, but I also think the swift boat type politics may lead to the end of the noble experiment that started in 1776. When a decorated two tour of duty viet vet is remebered as a coward and a daddy's boy whose air national guard records are all lost is painted as a great warrior something about our way of doing things is broken and needs mending. Syd this has nothing to do with you. I'm typing with the flue and getting ready to be served up bread and circus instead of information important to making vital decisions.
During my recent stay in BA, I had dental implants done. In the USA, I would have required major bone grafting. In Argentinia, the dentist could use new technology developed in Korea using stems cells to stimulate bone growth.
The dentist explained the delays in approval in the USA because of the rules on stem cells. We maybe really nearing the end of a great experiment if we do not closely watch our leaders and the deals they make to get elected. I remember when John McCain publically ridiculed an envangical leader for saying that 9/11 was God's punishment for condoning homosexuality in the USA. John McCain has made peace with this style of thought and embraced it's leadership and the people he once stood up and denounced.
[QUOTE=Dickhead]"* Voted against a moratorium on earmarks."
Now I am definitely voting Obama / Biden because I would definitely support a moratorium on a moratorium on earmarks.
Ok, I admit it. I have no idea what a fucking earmark is.[/QUOTE]Earmarks are requests for money by a specific legislator, usually for his constituency, added onto often unrelated government spending bills.
[url]http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/13/earmark.vote/[/url]
I.E. pork barrel or a "rider" which is the term I know this by.
[QUOTE=Miami Bob]I am curious why you are quoting the national review--which is right of Dick Chaney and Carl Rove and the libertarian party which is right of the National Review for information on Obamah and team. [/quote] I ’m curious how can you refer to the Libertarian Party as right of the National Review?
Would you call the democrat party to the right as well considering; The National Platform of the Libertarian Party indicates they are pro choice, anti war, even pro gay rights.
Do you just automatically describe everyone that doesn ’t like “Bo ” as being to the right, as if that was something inherently bad, if so would you also call the eighteen million Clinton voters as being to the right?
Perhaps you should read the platform of the Libertarian Party before you start bad mouthing them.
[url]http://www.lp.org/platform[/url]
The Libertarian Party Platform also says they favor Personal Liberty, and considering this is a monger ’s forum you should also look at their position on prostitution;
[I]“Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.”[/i]
[QUOTE=Miami Bob]We all are learning more about the candidates. Let's not get "swift boated" here.[/QUOTE]Bob perhaps you would like to give us a list of media we should accept information from.
You know like “MoveOn, USAction, Americans United for Change, ” or other George Soros Masterminded and supported groups.
How about other members of the “Democrat Attack Machine like, Main Stream Media outlets such as ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, PBS or newspapers such as The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post or Magazine like Time, Newsweek and the New Yorker ”
My point is debate your position if you like but "Don't shoot the messenger"!
Anyone know of a decent, public place with TV here that will broadcast the Democratic National Convention in English? Preferably the one in 2008.
[QUOTE=Bacchus9]Anyone know of a decent, public place with TV here that will broadcast the Democratic National Convention in English? Preferably the one in 2008.[/QUOTE]The Thursday night big shindig will be shown at Sugar-Costa Rica 4619, at Armenia. The festivities start at 7:30.
ongers-
El Alamo will be showing the Democratic National Convention live in English on both CNN, for the intelligent, liberal people, and on Fox News, for people like Jackson and Rush Limbaugh.
Suerte,
Rock Harders
Their views would lead to complete kaos--no regulation. The big fish eat the little fish, no securities regulation, no banking regulation. William.
Buckeley, the founder of the national review, was intellectually consistent and believed in not regulating gay life styles and marijuana. I watched him at a locale debate when he was asked about this issues and how they fit into his intellectual frame work. The logical answers were "do not regulate when in doubt". On a personal level he was concerned about government not regualting marijuana as it might be more dangerous than presented.
I dout that many people would consider the libertatian party as a moderate and dependable souce for basic information WITH A MINIMAL TILT. Why is it that the libertaians tend to support the same candidates that the neoconseveratives and far right wing evangelicals support. Libertarians, to be intellectually consistant, should not be pushing for constitutional amendments at the state level on issues such as: abortion rights and the teaching of evolution and natural selection in public schools? Yet the libertarians end up supporting candidates that favor these positions. Libertarianism as practiced in the real politic, either runs independent candidates that don't gather the support of ralph nader or get lumped in with the neoconvervatives and far Christian right. Fox news is more moderate than the libertarian party.
T. Boone Pickens financed the swift boaters. A hydrocarbons multi-billionaire.
He got his money's worth from the bushies.
I do not know you Punter and you may have whatever views please you.
Syd is someone that I know and I respect. I did not understand his choice of sourses.
[QUOTE=Rock Harders]Mongers-
El Alamo will be showing the Democratic National Convention live in English on both CNN, for the intelligent, liberal people, and on Fox News, for people like Jackson and Rush Limbaugh.
Suerte,
Rock Harders[/QUOTE]Ha ha, I never thought of CNN as neither liberal nor intelligent but I suppose 'es lo que hay.' So should I install myself on the left side of the bar?
I didn't make it past the part where he said Colin Powell would make a good president.
I think Clinton, Obama, and McCain all suck. But on the other hand the choice seems pretty clear:
If you want to country to continue down the same road it has for the last 8 years, vote for McCain. If not, vote for Obama.
Personally, I'll pick the latter.
[QUOTE=Schmoj]If you want to country to continue down the same road it has for the last 8 years, vote for McCain. If not, vote for Obama.[/QUOTE]I'm sure it has occurred to you that there is no guarantee that "new road" will not be worse. There is a case to be made that Obama could make things worse given the power he is going to be given and a government that gets things done is generally a Bad Thing (tm)
I'll vote for McCain simply because his enemies will prevent him from doing anything.
[QUOTE=Sidney]The article below was written by syndicated columnist, Thomas Sowell, a black man. [/QUOTE]I've read both Sowell's editorials and academic work and somehow this article does not sound like him. Then again maybe he's just getting old and cranky.
I did find this [1] but I still wonder.
[1] [url]http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/t/thomas-sowell.htm[/url]
[QUOTE=Darkme]I'm sure it has occurred to you that there is no guarantee that "new road" will not be worse. There is a case to be made that Obama could make things worse given the power he is going to be given and a government that gets things done is generally a Bad Thing (tm)
I'll vote for McCain simply because his enemies will prevent him from doing anything.[/QUOTE]Well, I don't think anything could be worse. But who knows. You may be right.
Either way, there are a lot of tough problems to solve by the next President. It's not a job I would want.
Anybody done her?
A foolhardy attempt to shore up Christian support for McCain?
Less foreign policy experience than one of Obama's kids?
Would a disaffected Hillary supporter actually vote for an anti abortion advocate?
Is this the most obvious, purely "marketing" choice for VP ever? Even more so than Geraldine Ferraro?
If its all about "marketing" and nothing else, why not go with Angelina Jolie?
If McCain gets elected and then kicks the bucket, the USA could have a royal couple in the White House.
I am guessing that Dan Quayle was booked for the next four.
Get used to having Obama as the president for the next 4 years. This chick is cute and all, but she's not gonna fly with either the left or the right.
Regards,
BM.
Thank you Sidney.
Jes
Just watch it.
[url]http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/39179-mccain-s-youtube-problem-just-became-a-nightmare[/url]
Same old song and dance
I think McCains new VP pick actually contridicts the whole GOP attack on Obama.
"Hes too young and inexperienced to run the country"
Is it not correct that if the President dies the VP becomes president?
The average male USA Life expectancy is around 75yrs.
McCain is 72 and if he passes on USA will have a 44ish female president with 2 years experience as a governor of one of the most unpopulated and out of touch states in the USA.
I guess now they better back off on the lack of experience attacks, as they are guilty of the same.
[QUOTE=Skifozo]I think McCains new VP pick actually contridicts the whole GOP attack on Obama.
"Hes too young and inexperienced to run the country"
Is it not correct that if the President dies the VP becomes president?
The average male USA Life expectancy is around 75yrs.
McCain is 72 and if he passes on USA will have a 44ish female president with 2 years experience as a governor of one of the most unpopulated and out of touch states in the USA.
I guess now they better back off on the lack of experience attacks, as they are guilty of the same.[/QUOTE]She's got quite a rack though. That's got to count for something. Soccer moms for president, what a novel idea.
Regards,
BM.