Obama supporters. I have one question

zman1

Active Member
Suzy, not all republicans follow the same doctine
Theodore Roosevelt, Jr - He was the first U.S. president to call for universal health care and national health insurance. He distrusted wealthy businessmen and dissolved forty monopolistic corporations as a "trust buster". After 1906 he attacked big business and suggested the courts were biased against labor unions.
As an outdoorsman, he promoted the conservation movement, emphasizing efficient use of natural resources. Create the National Park Service.
President Richard Nixon - Created the EPA.
 

zman1

Active Member
Scare tactics of the past - for things we all can't live without today...President Franklin D. Roosevelt -- Democrats supported rural electrification.... The REA's task was to promote electrification in rural areas, which in the 1930s rarely were provided with electricity due to the unwillingness of power companies to serve farmsteads. Private electric utilities argued that the government had no right to compete with or regulate private enterprise, despite many of these utilities having refused to extend their lines to rural areas, claiming lack of profitability. Instead, REA made loans available to local electrification cooperatives, which operated lines and distributed electricity. By 1939 the REA served 288,000 households, prompting private business to extend service into the countryside and to lower rates. By the end of the decade, forty percent of rural homes had power, up from around 10% in 1930. From 1949, the REA could also provide assistance to co-operative telephone companies.
Proposal for an Interregional Highway System

On April 27, 1939, Roosevelt transmitted the report to Congress. He recommended that Congress consider action on:
[A] special system of direct interregional highways, with all necessary connections through and around cities, designed to meet the requirements of the national defense and the needs of a growing peacetime traffic of longer range.
The president's political opponents considered the "master plan" to be "another ascent into the stratosphere of New Deal jitterbug economics," as one critic put it.
 

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2521406
BDhutier covered the other issues nicely. with actual facts, so let me get this one: I wasn't aware Robert Novak was part of the Bush Administration. You are aware he's actually the guy that outed Plame, right? (In a beautiful twist of irony, btw, the investigator of "PlameGate" is now prosecuting Obombus' buddy Rezko....)
Iraqi war critic (and deputy Secretary of State) Richard Armitage is the one who told Novak about Plame. Fitzpatric knew that 18 months before draging Libby into court. Joe Wilson should have been charged in the incident. It was well known who and what his wife was because he introduced her as such at numerous beltway functions. He also flat lied in that editorial about who recomended him (they have the E-mail Plame send plus testamony of other who she spoke with) and Wilson lied when he said he turned up no evidence Iraq tried to buy yellowcake. The President of Niger told Wilson he believed Iraq wanted to buy it. After debriefing Wilson our intellegence analysts concluded Wilson information bolstered the case Iraq had attempted a buy.
 

zman1

Active Member

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2521391
But the very reason for a pastor is help guide you in defining yourself
...
You give too much power to the pastor - that is the problem. Now I understand where you are coming from! Most likely some of the others as well.
For me it's my family and personal experiences.
 

reefraff

Active Member
Nobody that gave a damn about their kids would subject them to that crackpot. Unless of course they agree with what he has to say.
Just more poor judgment we Hope wont end up in the white house.
 

oscardeuce

Active Member
Suzy;2520907 said:
Z, you gotta give these guys a break! They have to grab at innuendo, baseless accusations and phoney baloney! Look what they got:
[list type=decimal][*]Shock n Awe
Wiped out Iraq's military in days
[*] "We'll be greeted as liberators"
If the liberal press will let you see our good work. Remember the woman with the blue thumb who voted for the fist time?
[*] " WMD that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud" "from Africa"
Still need to look in Syria, dirty bombs may have already come across the Mexican border
[*] Enron/ Secret energy meeting we still can't know about
Hillary's secret healthcare meetings
[*] Haliburton/ no bid contracts
When you need it doen now, maybe you should start a similar company to give competition
Katrina
Blame the great society programs for dependance. Blame the local and state response. THe feds are not supposed to be there for 48-72 hours. Which they did. What about Mayor Ray's flooded school buses? The democrat governor?
9 trillion in debt
7.6 trillion of that in the war on poverty, pull out of DC now!
A failed tax cut that now has our economy in the toilet
Tax cuts that INCREASED revenue?
Abu Ghraib
A bunch of loserers? No one to blame but them.
Telegate, spying on Americans and giving the phone companies immunity
Bill Clinton and project Eschilon?
[/list type=decimal]
 

reefraff

Active Member
Halliburton
Over a 2 year period Haliburtons Deparntment of Defense contracts doubled. It was from 1998 to 2000 under the clinton administration.
More fun Halliburton facts
"When Factcheck.org checked the facts about allegations by Democrats that there was a scandal because of the "no-bid" contracts awarded to Halliburton they stated, "It is false to imply that Bush personally awarded a contract to Halliburton. The ‘no-bid contract’ in question is actually an extension of an earlier contract to support U.S. troops overseas that Halliburton won under open bidding. In fact, the notion that Halliburton benefited from any cronyism has been poo-poohed by a Harvard University professor, Steven Kelman, who was administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy in the Clinton administration. ‘One would be hard-pressed to discover anyone with a working knowledge of how federal contracts are awarded...who doesn't regard these allegations as being somewhere between highly improbable and utterly absurd,’ Kelman wrote in the Washington Post last November." (Emphasis added.)
The Center for Public Integrity another public interest group also investigated the purported scandal of the Halliburton "no-bid" contracts. They wrote:
In Iraq, Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) has been awarded five contracts worth at least $10.8 billion, including more than $5.6 billion under the U.S. Army's Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) contract, an omnibus contract that allows the Army to call on KBR for support in all of its field operations. When the Army needs a service performed, it issues a "task order," which lays out specific work requirements under the contract…From 1992 to 1997, KBR held the first LOGCAP contract awarded by the Army, but when it was time to renew the contract, the company lost in the competitive bidding process to DynCorp after the General Accounting Office reported in February 1997 that KBR had overrun its estimated costs in the Balkans by 32 percent (some of which was attributed to an increase in the Army's demands). KBR (obtained) the third LOGCAP contract in December 2001…n November 2002 the Army Corps of Engineers tasked KBR to develop a contingency plan for extinguishing oil well fires in Iraq…[O]n March 24, 2003, the Army Corps announced publicly that KBR had been awarded a contract to restore oil-infrastructure in Iraq, potentially worth $7 billion. The contract KBR received…would eventually include 10 distinct task orders. KBR did not come close to reaching the contract ceiling, billing just over $2.5 billion…The contract was awarded without submission for public bids or congressional notification. In their response to congressional inquiries, Army officials said they determined that extinguishing oil fires fell under the range of services provided under LOGCAP, meaning that KBR could deploy quickly and without additional security clearances.
Neither the Center for Public Integrity nor Factcheck.org determined anything sinister about Halliburton’s no-bid" contracts for the Iraq war. Two nonpartisan, nonaligned, public interest organizations have investigated the Halliburton allegations and found them to be specious allegations made for purely political purposes.
An L.A. Times op-ed of April 22 said, "Halliburton Received No-Bid Contracts During Clinton Administration For Work In Bosnia And Kosovo." An October 2003 article in the (Raleigh, NC) News & Observer quoted Bill Clinton's Undersecretary Of Commerce William Reinsch as saying "'Halliburton has a distinguished track record,' he said. 'They do business in some 120 countries. This is a group of people who know what they're doing in a difficult business. It's a particularly difficult business when people are shooting at you.'"
If Democrats want to investigate a scandal involving Iraq they should devote their efforts to the UN "Oil-for-Food" program instead of Halliburton. However, they will not because Saddam Hussein is not a candidate in this presidential election.
 

suzy

Member
You guys are a hoot! Spin, spin. spin! Your "facts" are very interesting, I'll give you that!
The country is in much worse shape than before the Republicans took over. Economy in the toilet, the Feds even cut interest rates on a Sunday. Large companies being sold for $2 a share.GM shutting down for weeks to save money. Consumer confidence at an all time low.
2 wars where our death toll is reaching 4,000 and the death toll of Iraqi civilians is "unknown". We've spent billions on this failed Republican blunder, and the Red candidate is saying we will be there for a hundred years. The majority of Americans want to end the war, they are not viewers of Faux "news" where news "facts" are spun into Red propaganda.
Scandal after scandal, failed policy after failed policy. The electorate can have a short memory, but there might be a few reminders coming up this summer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71V5QiZqlr8
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Suzy
http:///forum/post/2521548
You guys are a hoot! Spin, spin. spin! Your "facts" are very interesting, I'll give you that!
The country is in much worse shape than before the Republicans took over. Economy in the toilet, the Feds even cut interest rates on a Sunday. Large companies being sold for $2 a share.GM shutting down for weeks to save money. Consumer confidence at an all time low.
2 wars where our death toll is reaching 4,000 and the death toll of Iraqi civilians is "unknown". We've spent billions on this failed Republican blunder, and the Red candidate is saying we will be there for a hundred years. The majority of Americans want to end the war, they are not viewers of Faux "news" where news "facts" are spun into Red propaganda.
Scandal after scandal, failed policy after failed policy. The electorate can have a short memory, but there might be a few reminders coming up this summer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71V5QiZqlr8
Suzy, I do have to thank you, the more you post, the easier it is to help liberal-brainwashed in college roommate understand the fallacy and lack of any logic of the extreem left and their democrat party. Since you have started posting, I've made more headway into the brainwashing than ever before. He now wants to vote republican because they still believe in the constitution. So keep posting for all to see, it is vital for as many as possible to see the true colors of the liberal party.
 

suzy

Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2521577
Suzy, I do have to thank you, the more you post, the easier it is to help liberal-brainwashed in college roommate understand the fallacy and lack of any logic of the extreem left and their democrat party. Since you have started posting, I've made more headway into the brainwashing than ever before. He now wants to vote republican because they still believe in the constitution. So keep posting for all to see, it is vital for as many as possible to see the true colors of the liberal party.
I'll bet. *********posts a comment, you were able to change this guys mind. He must be a bit easily swayed! Maybe you could convince him to buy some of my really cool rock anenomes? I'll split the take with you.
Weird thing I see? You think your party is protecting the constitution! Our country can now spy on it's citizens, have prisoners held indefinately and they don't get a lawyer. Really, what constitution are you talking about? You've been able to convince your room mate that the Reds want to protect our Constitution?
BS.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Suzy
http:///forum/post/2521599
I'll bet. Just because some blonde on a right wing fish forum posts a comment, you were able to change this guys mind. He must be a bit easily swayed! Maybe you could convince him to buy some of my really cool rock anenomes? I'll split the take with you.
Weird thing I see? You think your party is protecting the constitution! Our country can now spy on it's citizens, have prisoners held indefinately and they don't get a lawyer. Really, what constitution are you talking about? You've been able to convince your room mate that the Reds want to protect our Constitution?
BS.
I'm now confused, why is it now, as if this is the first time in history?
 

stdreb27

Active Member
I don't have to talk much, he can just read your posts, see how wrong what you say is, then I just have to show him how you echo Nancy, hary, Obama, Murtha, the Clintons and the rest of the I hate america crowd. I don't have to say a word that is why you should keep posting.
 

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2521612
I'm now confused, why is it now, as if this is the first time in history?
She has a point... we all know that there have been several violations in the past... but there have been a few things that have occured during these last 8 years that can be considered unconstitutional...
 

rylan1

Active Member

Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2521472
Obama has proposed billions in new spending he says will be paid for in repealing tax cuts to the rich. But it appears his basic grasp of our economy and tax system is somewhat cloudy.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2007/...as-tax-policy/
Obama’s “Tax Policy”
Presidential candidate Barack Obama introduced his tax plan in a speech yesterday. Unfortunately, it overflowed with bad ideas. First, Obama’s plan to increase dividend and capital gains taxes is out of step with global tax realities. Virtually all of the 30 major industrial nations provide relief for capital gains and dividend taxes. Indeed, a dozen major nations have capital gains tax rates of zero percent. And if the current dividend tax cut expires, the United States would have the highest dividend tax rate among major nations.
Second, Obama hasn’t got his math right. He claims that there is “$1 trillion worth of loopholes in the corporate tax code.” That is ridiculous. The entire corporate income tax collected only $372 billion in 2007.

Third, Obama proposed special tax breaks for seniors, which would take 7 million more elderly completely off the tax rolls. But that would inject a very unfair element of age discrimination into the tax code. Old folks are already taking young folks to the cleaners in terms of federal fiscal policy. Obama would make the injustice worse, yet he had the chutzpah to claim in his tax speech: “It’s time to stand up to the special interest carve outs.”
Fourth, Obama proposed a new payroll tax credit, but the tax code already has a huge program designed to offset the payroll tax—the Earned Income Tax Credit. Adding a new low-income tax “cut” on top would result in millions of people who already don’t pay any income tax getting an added $500 check from the government. That’s not tax policy, that’s simply looting from the people who do pay the federal tax bill.
I’m amazed Obama found two former Treasury officials who signed on to his plan because this isn’t tax policy in the sense of following any rational economic principles. It’s just crass political pandering using the tax code to bait votes.
As bad as the Republicans in Congress have been on spending the Democrats have an even worse record. Leave them in control with a president with billions in campaign promises to keep and we're doomed.
The majority of economic gains in the 90's happened when conservative Republicans took control of congress in 95 and actually ran things like conservatives restraining spending. There is no chance of fiscal conservatives taking control of congress so our only hope it to elect one president. McCain certainly has a record of attacking pork barrel spending. If he lives up to his past record and rhetoric things could work out good.
When it comes to spending... I believe the democrats have a better record, even if they spend more... If you look at the last 60-70 years, I believe that it shows democrats to be much more fiscally responsible... they at least don't spend $ that we don't have, which is what the GOP has been doing for years... We can't continue to fight this was as we have been and expect to fix things at home.
We can see what the war and our foreign policy has done with gas prices...It is a direct coorelation. In the last year prices have risen by $0.73 a gallon and over $30 a barrel. Its not demand that is raising the prices....I believe that the powers that be are controling the supply and its not because of a lack of it.
Back to Obama, his economic plan is being endorsed by some key economic officials.. he is also being endorsed by some very high ranking generals whom all have good records.. As far as the tax loopholes go... I think what he is saying is these companies are supposed to be paying more taxes, I think its possible that certain compaines get out of paying at least 1/2 their taxes due to some loopholes in the system... I don't know if its Trillion$, but I bet that its at least 1/2 that.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2521834
When it comes to spending... I believe the democrats have a better record, even if they spend more... If you look at the last 60-70 years, I believe that it shows democrats to be much more fiscally responsible... they at least don't spend $ that we don't have, which is what the GOP has been doing for years... We can't continue to fight this was as we have been and expect to fix things at home.
We can see what the war and our foreign policy has done with gas prices...It is a direct coorelation. In the last year prices have risen by $0.73 a gallon and over $30 a barrel. Its not demand that is raising the prices....I believe that the powers that be are controling the supply and its not because of a lack of it.
Back to Obama, his economic plan is being endorsed by some key economic officials.. he is also being endorsed by some very high ranking generals whom all have good records.. As far as the tax loopholes go... I think what he is saying is these companies are supposed to be paying more taxes, I think its possible that certain compaines get out of paying at least 1/2 their taxes due to some loopholes in the system... I don't know if its Trillion$, but I bet that its at least 1/2 that.
How come you never responded to me after we "began discussing the issues?"
 

zman1

Active Member
I was wondering when the Media would pick up on the old Clinton line, saw it today. I wonder if Hilary will be using it soon against McCainBush...
From one Clinton to a Bush = "It's the economy, stupid".
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the only other senator whose presidential candidacy survived the initial round of primaries and caucuses this year, did not vote frequently enough in 2007 to draw a composite score. He missed more than half of the votes in both the economic and foreign-policy categories
.
McCain was bogged down in Iraq today, couldn't worry about anything else.....
MISSING LEADERSHIP
 

zman1

Active Member
Thinking about it further....
From one Clinton to a Bush = "It's the economy, stupid".
Daddy Bush, Baby Bush, and McCainBush. I am starting to make a connection to the Economy and Bush Doctrine. I hate to see that McCain has a automatic renewal to that failed subscription.
Vote Obama, Clinton, anybody other than a third term of Bush...
 
Top