Obama supporters. I have one question

scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2494449
Why not go mess with the democratic primaries, the liberal press basically chose our candidate, and sadly republicans were so scared of hillary they took the bait.
No thanks...I'm skeered I would faint
Change for the Light Headed
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2495268
Zman, I think your observations are more in line with the crazy high costs of a barrel of oil right now.
Inflation is still low. Oil prices are what's driving everything up, and I agree we're all feeling it.
Correct..and as soon as barry surrenders in Iraq..the negative impact of doing so will drive the price of oil even higher.
Change at the Gas Pump
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
In a meeting with Chicago Tribune reporters at the Democratic National Convention, Obama said, “On Iraq, on paper, there's not as much difference, I think, between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration as there would have been a year ago. […] There's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage.” [Chicago Tribune, 07/27/04]
CHANGE YOU CAN FLIP FLOP ON
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2495733
So I've discussed your topic, and gave you an educated argument why this statement is asinine, and a whole day later, the democrat is no where to be found.
Did I blow you out of the water?

Please go easy ...he/ she might have been the designated fainter at today's Barry Hope Rally
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by bdhutier
http:///forum/post/2495118
As for impact, I'm really nrevous about this one...
As of mid-2006, China owned $321B of our $8.3T in debt. As our largest lender, China could induce an American economic meltdown if things got too hairy between us. The problem is, now that we're in their hold, do we really think (even if the govt had the discipline/fortitude to balance the budget and pay off the debt) they're going to just let us? What do you think China would do when they saw Washington cutting the economic apron-strings?
Well, Barry some time ago stated if China gets outta line he will nuke them...I can find the article if you'd like. Please keep in mind...this is contingent upon him having the skill to find the right button to push.
OOPSS...sorry Japan...I pushed the blue one by mistake.
CHANGE VIA MISTAKE
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2495365
And now we have 2 democrat candidates that are looking to implement a "universal healthcare plan" that quite simply has the potential to cost as much if not more than any other major entitlement program like social security. And we can't even keep social security solvent. It just doesn't make sense. From an economic standpoint I'm totally baffled.
Both know universal obama/hillary care is too expensive.
Please note Barry implements his Barry CAre towards the end of his 4th year in office. Convenient timetable...don't ya think? It will never happen...that's why I'm not too concerned about it.
With all the gum flappin about it you would think it would be pushed sooner rather than latter. Why at the end of year 4? Why no later than 2010 or 2011? I'm sure you can figure it out.
Presidential candidate Sen. Obama calls for universal healthcare by 2012
Healthcare Finance News
By Diana Manos, Senior Editor 01/29/07
WASHINGTON - At the Families USA Health Action conference last Thursday, 2008 presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill. ) called for universal healthcare in the U.S. by no later than 2012.
CHANGE YOU CAN WAIT ON
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2495302
AP 2/28/08
"Bernanke, however, is hopeful that previous rate reductions and the $168 billion economic aid plan of tax rebates for people and tax breaks for business will energize the economy in the second half of 2008.
A gauge of inflation linked to the GDP report showed that "core" prices — excluding food and energy — grew at a rate of 2.7 percent in the fourth quarter. The inflation reading — although unchanged from the government's initial estimate — showed that inflation had picked up sharply from the third quarter's 2 percent pace.
The inflation figure is above the Fed's comfort zone — the upper bound of which is a 2 percent inflation rate.
With inflation rising as the economy slows, fears are increasing that the country may be headed for a bout of stagflation. That's a scenario the country hasn't experienced since the 1970s."
I really don't need this AP comfirmation so I can feel it, I felt it before Bernanke had to say it..

Make a listing of petroleum products...the impact is far-reaching regarding oil.
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
http:///forum/post/2473892
Instead, Obama says, U.S. efforts in the Middle East should focus on empowering “forces of moderation” by increasing “access to education and health care, trade and investment” and support for civil society.

Please note how Barry will fight terrorism. THought I would bring this to the current page since I commented on his "fighting terrorism plan"

CHANGE THAT DEFIES LOGIC
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
This is an interesting article.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7629b522-e...0779fd2ac.html
"In addition to attacking the North American Free Trade Agreement, which Mr Obama says has cost the US “millions of jobs”, both candidates have alarmed America’s neighbours by threatening to opt out of Nafta."
But advisers to Mr McCain believe that Mr Obama would present a juicy target as nominee. “We see him as a classic liberal whose proposals come straight out of the 1970s,” says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, senior McCain adviser. “It is hard to understand his stance on trade. Access to the US market is a vital element of our foreign policy.”
Campaign veterans say much of the rhetoric can be discounted as classic primary season politicking that will be diluted when it comes to the general election. But sympathetic economists have expressed concern about proposals Mr Obama has unveiled in the past two weeks since campaigning began in earnest to woo the workers of Ohio.
Some interesting points to ponder.
 
oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Who said this?
" WE DEMAND THAT THE GOVERNMENT UNDERTAKE THE OBLIGATION ABOVE ALL OF PROVIDING CITIZENS WITH ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITIES FOR EMPLOYMENT AND EARNING A LIVING.
THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INDIVIDUAL MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO CLASH WITH THE INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY, BUT MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN ITS CONFINES AND BE FOR THE GOOD OF ALL ...
WE DEMAND THE NATIONALIZATION OF ALL BUSINESSES WHICH HAVE BEEN AMALGAMATED (INTO TRUSTS).
WE DEMAND THAT THE STATE SHALL SHARE IN THE PROFITS OF LARGE INDUSTRIES.
WE DEMAND THAT PROVISION FOR THE AGED SHALL BE MADE ON A VERY GREATLY INCREASED SCALE.
WE DEMAND A LAND-REFORM SUITABLE TO OUR NATIONAL REQUIREMENTS, THE PASSING OF A LAW FOR THE CONFISCATION OF LAND FOR COMMUNAL PURPOSES; THE ABOLITION OF INTEREST ON MORTGAGES, AND PROHIBITION OF ALL SPECULATION IN LAND.
WE DEMAND AN AGRARIAN REFORM SUITABLE TO OUR NATIONAL REQUIREMENTS; THE ENACTMENT OF A LAW TO EXPROPRIATE WITHOUT COMPENSATION THE OWNERS OF ANY LAND THAT MAY BE NEEDED FOR NATIONAL PURPOSES; THE ABOLITION OF GROUND RENTS; AND THE PROHIBITION OF ALL SPECULATION IN LAND.
...THE STATE SHALL ORGANIZE THOROUGHLY THE WHOLE CULTURAL SYSTEM OF THE NATION . . . THE CONCEPTION OF THE STATE IDEA (THE SCIENCE OF CITIZENSHIP) SHALL BE TAUGHT IN THE SCHOOLS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. WE DEMAND THAT SPECIALLY TALENTED CHILDREN OF POOR PARENTS, NO MATTER WHAT THEIR STATION OR OCCUPATION, SHALL BE EDUCATED AT THE COST OF THE STATE.
IT IS THE DUTY OF THE STATE TO HELP RAISE THE STANDARD OF THE NATION'S HEALTH BY PROVIDING MATERNITY WELFARE CENTRES, BY PROHIBITING JUVENILE LABOUR, BY INCREASING PHYSICAL FITNESS THROUGH THE INTRODUCTION OF COMPULSORY GAMES AND GYMNASTICS. . . .
(WE) COMBAT THE MATERIALISTIC SPIRIT WITHIN AND OUTSIDE US, AND ARE CONVINCED THAT A PERMANENT RECOVERY OF OUR PEOPLE CAN ONLY PROCEED WITHIN ON THE FOUNDATION OF "THE COMMON GOOD BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL GOOD."
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
Who said this?...
My first guess is Stalin.
Second guess is Hitler.
However, on these comments:
*WE DEMAND THAT THE STATE SHALL SHARE IN THE PROFITS OF LARGE INDUSTRIES.
*THE PASSING OF A LAW FOR THE CONFISCATION OF LAND FOR COMMUNAL PURPOSES; THE ABOLITION OF INTEREST ON MORTGAGES, AND PROHIBITION OF ALL SPECULATION IN LAND
*IT IS THE DUTY OF THE STATE TO HELP RAISE THE STANDARD OF THE NATION'S HEALTH
*THE COMMON GOOD BEFORE THE INDIVIDUAL GOOD
Both Obombus and Hillary fall into lockstep.
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member

Originally Posted by zman1
http:///forum/post/2494318
A couple interesting recent Gallup polls... I just hope supporters of each candidate can remain positive about their candidate without stooping to traditional nasty attacks of what could be their opponents in a general election.
Public Views Obama, McCain as Unifying Candidates
http://www.gallup.com/poll/104515/Pu...andidates.aspx
Democrats, Republicans: Obama Likely to Win Nomination
http://www.gallup.com/poll/104554/De...omination.aspx
McCain Competitive With Democrats in Latest Trial Heats
http://www.gallup.com/poll/104548/Mc...ial-Heats.aspx
I agree with this your comments.
 
zman1

zman1

Active Member
Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2496207
Who said this?
Mao Zedong? - Communist Red China, Red terrorism. NOW Exporter of cheap poison and counterfeit products, human rights violator. Importer of capitalist wealth, creditor to capitalist debtors and intellectual property thieves.
The communist are sneaky, they just walk through the front door. I wish they would give up and go for democracy and free elections. Maybe we can bankrupt them like Regan did to the Soviets...
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
http:///forum/post/2496029
Please note how Barry will fight terrorism. THought I would bring this to the current page since I commented on his "fighting terrorism plan"

CHANGE THAT DEFIES LOGIC
Well he was highly criticized about his comments on Pakistan... which now, is something the Bush Admin just did.. I agree w/ his comments that war hasn't made us more safe... there needs to be political steps taken.. not just war...
The same course isn't giving us the desired results...
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2496525
Well he was highly criticized about his comments on Pakistan... which now, is something the Bush Admin just did.. I agree w/ his comments that war hasn't made us more safe... there needs to be political steps taken.. not just war...
The same course isn't giving us the desired results...
Wait, we bombed Pakistan without telling Genral Musharref? Did I miss a news story?
We're not talking about Pakistan, anyway. We're talking about Obombus, at the recent debate, saying he would go back into Iraq if Al Qaeda was establishing a base of operation there. We're trying to point out ot him AL QAEDA IS ALREADY THERE. Hence, if we withdraw now, by his own admission, we'll turn around and go right back in...
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2496525
Well he was highly criticized about his comments on Pakistan... which now, is something the Bush Admin just did.. I agree w/ his comments that war hasn't made us more safe... there needs to be political steps taken.. not just war...
The same course isn't giving us the desired results...
Terrorists use weakness against their enemiies..they understand strength. barry's position is one of wekness. I've already posted letters from AQ leaders in Iraq..and what happened in the face of strength. They either joined us or cut and ran.
No attacks sine 9/11 here at home . Facts indicate we are safe since 9/11 here in the USA

I don't think you can combat terrorism with socialprograms including health care.

Political recocilaition benchmarks are now being met in Iraq and the security is improving weekly.
Liberals said
Stop the war we cannot win-now looks like we can..which changed too
Stop the war Iraq is in the middle of a civil war-it no longer is which change to
Stop the war the surge will not work-it's working which changed to
Stop the war the political reconciliation is not taking place-it now is whcih change to
Stop the war it is costing too much-how much will it cost in surrender..this will eventually change to.....

I just wish liberals would at least stick to a reason why they are against the war....it changes based on the situation.
Of course..all of the above is an indication we are succeeding..which is why the mantra changes based on the situation..and it looks like they were wrong every time..

SITUATIONAL CHANGE YOU CAN BELEIVE IN
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2496551
Wait, we bombed Pakistan without telling Genral Musharref? Did I miss a news story?
We're not talking about Pakistan, anyway. We're talking about Obombus, at the recent debate, saying he would go back into Iraq if Al Qaeda was establishing a base of operation there. We're trying to point out ot him AL QAEDA IS ALREADY THERE. Hence, if we withdraw now, by his own admission, we'll turn around and go right back in...
I have to question his wisdom and cognitive skill regarding international matters. That statment defies logic.
While I've joked around I do not beleive the barry is ignorant...but I do have to call to question his judgement..which he has admitted sometimes is lacking.
Again, that statment defies logic.

CHANGE FOR THE ILLOGICAL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top