Who is worse Republicans or Terrorists?

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by salty blues
http:///forum/post/3047902
Well, Republicans don't cut folks' heads off or fly airliners into tall buildings, so I say terrorists are certainly worse
Please name the Democrat that has cut someone's head off and/or flown a plane into a building????
I don't believe Republicans are killing the planet either, but I do know that many Democrats/liberals facilitate the killing of unborn children.
uhhh...
Non sequitur as well.
Unless you can equivocate the two, I'm not sure where you're going here either.
I'm not saying either belief is valid or invalid. I just don't see the relationship between them.
Please elucidate.
 

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by mantisman51
http:///forum/post/3047906
The Sudanese offered to give OBL to the U.S, and the Clinton administration turned him dow. That was stupid, but he was still considered, at that time, to be a minor player in the two embassy bombings. Yes, Bush was stupid for not sending 125,000 men to Afghanistan to hunt OBL first. They both blundered badly. There are 3 things that Obama is persuing that have me quite concerned: 1) Unilateral disarmament and ending new military projects-the F 22 comes to mind first. 2) Pushing our only true ally in the middle east to give more land to terrorists-the Palestinians (they elected a Hamas govt, don't tell me the majority are peace-loving) 3) Having his underlings in the ATF, FBI and Homeland Security put out more and more gun control trial balloons. I was open to giving him a chance, but the left-hand swerve is making the Republicans predictions look more legitimate all the time.
ok
In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Please continue...
 

mantisman51

Active Member
I don't know how to copy quotes. The reply was to bionicarm. Since it seems difficult to understand: I think both parties suck and Obama is starting to go so far left, I am getting very uneasy about him. He seems to be going to the fringe left. So, I guess George Soros got what he paid for.
 

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by mantisman51
http:///forum/post/3047945
I don't know how to copy quotes. The reply was to bionicarm. Since it seems difficult to understand: I think both parties suck and Obama is starting to go so far left, I am getting very uneasy about him. He seems to be going to the fringe left. So, I guess George Soros got what he paid for.
Thing is Obama ran as a centrist and was portrayed that way by many in the media. The general public who doesn't follow politics all that close bought into him as a centrist hook, line and sinker. Early on I had as well and I am a political junkie but once I started looking at his voting record it became obvious he was extreme left.
I think by the time 2010 comes around there are going to be a lot of Republicans elected as a result of people coming to realize they were fooled into voting for the wrong candidate. And I am talking more about Hillarbeast vs Obama, not D vs R. The majority of the country still holds right of center beliefs, Obama's march to the left will wear thin really fast.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3047956
Thing is Obama ran as a centrist and was portrayed that way by many in the media. The general public who doesn't follow politics all that close bought into him as a centrist hook, line and sinker. Early on I had as well and I am a political junkie but once I started looking at his voting record it became obvious he was extreme left.
I think by the time 2010 comes around there are going to be a lot of Republicans elected as a result of people coming to realize they were fooled into voting for the wrong candidate. And I am talking more about Hillarbeast vs Obama, not D vs R. The majority of the country still holds right of center beliefs, Obama's march to the left will wear thin really fast.
I agree with you on this one. If Obama keeps leaning left too long, it's going to tick off all the voters who did believe he would run somewhere in the middle. It would be nice if you could find a politician that would stay in the middle as much as possible, but we know that'll never happen.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3048011
I agree with you on this one. If Obama keeps leaning left too long, it's going to tick off all the voters who did believe he would run somewhere in the middle. It would be nice if you could find a politician that would stay in the middle as much as possible, but we know that'll never happen.

It was called John McCain, and we all know how that went down.
 

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3048011
I agree with you on this one. If Obama keeps leaning left too long, it's going to tick off all the voters who did believe he would run somewhere in the middle. It would be nice if you could find a politician that would stay in the middle as much as possible, but we know that'll never happen.

I had hoped he would move to the center once he took office but it didn't happen. I don't see him changing directions now but we will see. If the press will do it's job with Pelosi that could maybe still happen cause that POS is a left wing loon and has been setting the tone for the most part. If the flap over her claims against the CIA is allowed to die she will still be powerful enough that Obama wont be able to shift directions if he wanted too.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3048036
I had hoped he would move to the center once he took office but it didn't happen. I don't see him changing directions now but we will see. If the press will do it's job with Pelosi that could maybe still happen cause that POS is a left wing loon and has been setting the tone for the most part. If the flap over her claims against the CIA is allowed to die she will still be powerful enough that Obama wont be able to shift directions if he wanted too.
I wonder why he turned out to be that much of a leftist. IT couldn't have been Wright and Ayers influencing him at all...
 

ironeagle2006

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/3048046
I wonder why he turned out to be that much of a leftist. IT couldn't have been Wright and Ayers influencing him at all...
Lets see here we have a group that Attacked the USA from within aka Democrats and the Liberals then the Terrorists attacked us from the outside. However the Republicans are trying to keep us safe by fighting them there. Here is a clue would you rather have a suicide BOMBER blow up a Market place in Bagdhad or the MALL OF AMERICA. I pefer OVERTHERE THANK YOU. Of the 2 I can not distingsh anymore between the Democrats since most of them were the Bombers in the 60's against the Millitary or the Terrorists See Ayers and others.
 

jdl

Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3047882
Not sure what you mean by the statement 'letting bin ladin go'. You saying it was the Dems who didn't take the initiative to go after Bin Ladin directly by declaring war on Afghanistan? Wasn't it your buddy 'W' who was so adamant about getting rid of Hussein, that he let Bin Ladin slip through the cracks and go hiding in the rugged terrain of Afghanistan? I'd really like to know how that was the Dems fault.
my understanding of this is Mr. Clinton had the opportunity to eliminate Bin Laden when a drone had pictures of him (real time), but didnt do anything about it. But this may not be what the op meant at all.
 

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/3047951
And who is turning it more toward the cliff and sticking the pedal to the metal

I don't disagree. I'm just saying it didn't start w/ Obama, nor will it end w/ his Republican successor.
Come the mid-term election, if history is any indication, the Congress will shift to R, and nothing will change.
 
Top