PDA

View Full Version : 2008 Election Gameday Thread


Pages : 1 [2]

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 01:13 AM
oh well.... in the words of our newly elected president Obama .. Good night, and God bless America

augustashark
11-05-2008, 01:14 AM
Obama may have to select 3 supreme court justices during his term.... and it still will not make a difference

That will not happen. The GOP will have IV's and on call nurses at the supreme court to make sure that they don't lose their edge.

MACH1
11-05-2008, 01:14 AM
okay so the people we are voting in really havent done anything about it...... and most likely no president ever will .... so why base your candidate on this issue....
I appologize if i offended you by saying get over it.... but as i just mentioned a candidate says ya or nay on abortion and both sides jump on that candidate and elect him....(or her).... but nothing is being done either way..... so why worry so much about their beliefs on abortion when there not going to do anything about it anyway..

Because I think there's going to be 2 or 3 supreme court seats up for nomination soon and whoever is pres. can nominate people who lean their way. Possibly overturning Roe vs. Wade.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 01:20 AM
Because I think there's going to be 2 or 3 supreme court seats up for nomination soon and whoever is pres. can nominate people who lean their way. Possibly overturning Roe vs. Wade.

Yes. that will be Obama....

augustashark
11-05-2008, 01:20 AM
Because I think there's going to be 2 or 3 supreme court seats up for nomination soon and whoever is pres. can nominate people who lean their way. Possibly overturning Roe vs. Wade.

I see Ginsburg leaving within the next year, but the GOP will try like hell to keep all of their guys in there till 2012. Don't know if they can get it done, but they will try. Ginsburg has held off retiring for awhile now and you know it was for only one reason.

MACH1
11-05-2008, 01:22 AM
Yes. that will be Obama....

Umm...Guess again

augustashark
11-05-2008, 01:22 AM
Hey Tony, say goodbye to your boy Richardson. Hope the Lt gov is someone you all like.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 01:24 AM
I see Ginsburg leaving within the next year, but the GOP will try like hell to keep all of their guys in there till 2012. Don't know if they can get it done, but they will try. Ginsburg has held off retiring for awhile now and you know it was for only one reason.

Yep. that is exactly what will happen.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 01:42 AM
Hey Tony, say goodbye to your boy Richardson. Hope the Lt gov is someone you all like.
hey augusta, say goodbye to your unabashed pride. i hope humility and crow is something you like.:drink:

:sofunny:

augustashark
11-05-2008, 01:51 AM
hey augusta, say goodbye to your unabashed pride. i hope humility and crow is something you like.:drink:

:sofunny:

My pride will be fine, but the pie at your house will as always taste so good. Congrats on your guy winning.:drink:

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 02:11 AM
My pride will be fine, but the pie at your house will as always taste so good. Congrats on your guy winning.:drink:well im not even sure richardson will even get a seat (even though he is deserved regardless of who won).

only thing ive read is him as a possible candidate for secretary of state. :noidea:

we'll see. just like domenici, id hate to see em go. great for the state and great for america.:drink:

steelwall
11-05-2008, 03:06 AM
hey augusta, say goodbye to your unabashed pride. i hope humility and crow is something you like.:drink:

:sofunny:

Come on Toney your guy won fairly, no need to rub it in. Besides ever tasted crow? Ain't half bad:wink02:

Preacher
11-05-2008, 03:09 AM
well im not even sure richardson will even get a seat (even though he is deserved regardless of who won).

only thing ive read is him as a possible candidate for secretary of state. :noidea:

we'll see. just like domenici, id hate to see em go. great for the state and great for america.:drink:


I'm not familiar with the Richardson issue. What's going on there?

augustashark
11-05-2008, 03:14 AM
I'm not familiar with the Richardson issue. What's going on there?

Could be wrong, but I think it's term limits.

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 03:20 AM
Reversing the roles, do you honestly believe this thread wouldn't have been a McCain bash fest if he had won? :doh:

No...there wouldn't be a thread bashing McCain if he had won...Not to this extent anyway...There aren't enough of us Obama supporters on here to achieve the lengths that you have (McCain supporters).

I'm proud...very proud that Obama won...but I'm also proud of how gracious McCain was in his consession speech. I think if he had ran his campaign as equally gracious, the outcome might have been different.

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 03:23 AM
It's too bad bitter grown adults have to root for someone to fail and thus putting this country in an even deeper hole, affecting everyone and even yourselves, all just to sound right. It doesn't have to be this way.

This is BY FAR the best post I have seen in this entire thread!!!! Props to you for making such a profound point!:applaudit::hatsoff:

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 03:31 AM
LOL!:toofunny::rofl::toofunny::rofl:

You guys are the ones that cried for years about the 2000 election. "It was stolen"!!!

Now you want us to just move on and "talk football"

Whats good for the goose...............

The difference is in 2000 the election was stolen from Gore.....And thus stolen from the american people.
Obama won by a landslide..How does that compare??????????

THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 03:39 AM
.but I'm also proud of how gracious McCain was in his consession speech. :applaudit::drink::applaudit:

me too. mccain showed why he was a viable candidate. i sure wish it were him in "00.

as far as richardson, no it isnt term limits, and it isnt "rubbing it in"..

it was just a comeback to augustas cheap shots knocking a great politician (who he really has no clue about) in the past as an attempt to goad me and get under my skin. while he was so sure richardson would never sniff the whitehouse (again) i remained confident.

secretary of state is a logical choice. he's got the experience, and the know how, and proved to be a "maverick" by turning his back on the clinton (who put him on the national radar in the 1st place) machine and throwing his support to barack.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 03:50 AM
The difference is in 2000 the election was stolen from Gore.....And thus stolen from the american people.
Obama won by a landslide..How does that compare??????????

:rolleyes:

No, it wasn't. A bunch of News organizations hired an accounting firm... and they came out with the fact that the election in Florida was correct. There are multiple sources.

http://articles.latimes.com/2001/feb/27/news/mn-30743

And if the method Gore wanted was used... Bush wins by three times the amount he did.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2001-04-03-floridamain.htm

Even if overvotes were NOT counted, Bush wins in every scenario of counting but one... that is, Real loose, pretty loose, reg. etc. etc.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html

Knight Ridder news corp. agrees as well.

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-8390932_ITM

So no.

The election wasn't stolen. Let's put that to bed now.

The fact is, Everything the dems have been saying and doing for 8 years, will be done TO them now. Everything the Repubs. have been doing for 8 years, will be done TO them now.

Nothing changes.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 03:54 AM
:applaudit::drink::applaudit:

me too. mccain showed why he was a viable candidate. i sure wish it were him in "00.

as far as richardson, no it isnt term limits, and it isnt "rubbing it in"..

it was just a comeback to augustas cheap shots knocking a great politician (who he really has no clue about) in the past as an attempt to goad me and get under my skin. while he was so sure richardson would never sniff the whitehouse (again) i remained confident.

secretary of state is a logical choice. he's got the experience, and the know how, and proved to be a "maverick" by turning his back on the clinton (who put him on the national radar in the 1st place) machine and throwing his support to barack.

Tony... explain to me the issue with Richardson... Are you saying you want him in Barack's cabinet? Is there a reason he won't be governor anymore? If you want him as president.... the BEST way to make that jump is from a governorship. Especially someone who has been on the national stage before.

Enlighten me, because I seem to have missed something here concerning Richardson.

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 03:54 AM
I think it was very nice for Obama to send this email to all of his supporters before he made his speech tonight. Here it is....

Melanie --

I'm about to head to Grant Park to talk to everyone gathered there, but I wanted to write to you first.

We just made history.

And I don't want you to forget how we did it.

You made history every single day during this campaign -- every day you knocked on doors, made a donation, or talked to your family, friends, and neighbors about why you believe it's time for change.

I want to thank all of you who gave your time, talent, and passion to this campaign.

We have a lot of work to do to get our country back on track, and I'll be in touch soon about what comes next.

But I want to be very clear about one thing...

All of this happened because of you.

Thank you,

Barack

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 04:00 AM
:rolleyes:

No, it wasn't. A bunch of News organizations hired an accounting firm... and they came out with the fact that the election in Florida was correct. There are multiple sources.

http://articles.latimes.com/2001/feb/27/news/mn-30743

And if the method Gore wanted was used... Bush wins by three times the amount he did.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2001-04-03-floridamain.htm

Even if overvotes were NOT counted, Bush wins in every scenario of counting but one... that is, Real loose, pretty loose, reg. etc. etc.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html

Knight Ridder news corp. agrees as well.

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-8390932_ITM

So no.

The election wasn't stolen. Let's put that to bed now.

The fact is, Everything the dems have been saying and doing for 8 years, will be done TO them now. Everything the Repubs. have been doing for 8 years, will be done TO them now.

Nothing changes.

One thing...I didn't bring this up..I merely responded to it.....Secondly, for every source link you can come up with supporting your theory that Gore lost legitimatly, I can come up with two defying it...so doing this is redundant....Thirdly, I find it a bit ironic that a preacher of all people would promote and advocate a continued division in this country.

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 04:15 AM
To all of you who are disgusted with how this election turned out, I plead with you to just give Obama a chance...
This was a clean sweep for democrats....Let's see what they can accomplish this first two years...If they do nothing, or god forbid screw up, they can't blame anyone but themselves, and don't think the media, the country and the world won't be watching. Let's just see if all the bitching for the past 8 years pans out to action and improvements!

Preacher
11-05-2008, 04:22 AM
One thing...I didn't bring this up..I merely responded to it.....Secondly, for every source link you can come up with supporting your theory that Gore lost legitimatly, I can come up with two defying it...so doing this is redundant....Thirdly, I find it a bit ironic that a preacher of all people would promote and advocate a continued division in this country.

The core of the story is simple. 6 MAJOR news organizations went in to find out the truth, and came out with the truth that Bush won.

2. Where do I "Promote and Advocate" division? Let's go back to my post.

The fact is, Everything the dems have been saying and doing for 8 years, will be done TO them now. Everything the Repubs. have been doing for 8 years, will be done TO them now.

Nothing changes.


Do you REALLY think that is advocating? I call it simply calling out what I have observe happen now going into my fourth switch of parties in the white house.

I challenge you sometime, (if you have the resources, though the internet makes it easier), to go find what the dems said while Reagan was in office. Then again when Bush was in office. THEN... go and find what the Repubs said when Carter was in office, then when Clinton was in office.

You will find... all they do is switch shots.

The other thing I am interested in, is how you think the country should get over its divisions.

What should the democrats give up to attract the Republicans? What should the Republicans give up to join the democrats?

Because if a division will be removed, they will have to meet in the middle. Who gives up what?

xfl2001fan
11-05-2008, 05:58 AM
To all of you who are disgusted with how this election turned out, I plead with you to just give Obama a chance...
This was a clean sweep for democrats....Let's see what they can accomplish this first two years...If they do nothing, or god forbid screw up, they can't blame anyone but themselves, and don't think the media, the country and the world won't be watching. Let's just see if all the bitching for the past 8 years pans out to action and improvements!

Unfortunately, we don't have a choice in this. He's soon to be the next President and my Commander In Chief. So, like Clinton before him, no matter how I feel, he's in my Chain of Command which means I am obliged to really watch what I say.

GBMelBlount
11-05-2008, 06:27 AM
So who wants to start a pool on when the first terrorist attack occurs in the US under Obamas reign. Since they invited it to happen.

Hopefully it's one of the newer states that gets attacked, you know, states 51-57. :chuckle:

stillers4me
11-05-2008, 06:31 AM
So in two years you automatically voting for a republican....
Please vote on the candidate not the party...
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahaha! From the mouths of the "third Bush term" club!

You people never even looked at your candidate.......... or decided to ignore his"qualifications" completely because he was a Democrat.

GBMelBlount
11-05-2008, 06:33 AM
Originally Posted by Edman
It's too bad bitter grown adults have to root for someone to fail and thus putting this country in an even deeper hole, affecting everyone and even yourselves, all just to sound right. It doesn't have to be this way.

Preacher
I agree.. and have been wondering the same thing for the past 6 years.

Ding Ding Ding. Great post Preacher.

It's funny that Edman could say that when the unabashed hatred, vitriol and wrongful blame, spewed by Pelosi and democrats in congress towards a sitting president they are supposed to be working with, is the most disrespectful, disgusting and sickening thing I have EVER seen in my life.

revefsreleets
11-05-2008, 08:48 AM
Whew! Glad I did something else last night...this thread looks a little crazy!

KeiselPower99
11-05-2008, 08:59 AM
Welcome to 4 years of libral hell.

Godfather
11-05-2008, 09:30 AM
To all of you who are disgusted with how this election turned out, I plead with you to just give Obama a chance...
This was a clean sweep for democrats....Let's see what they can accomplish this first two years...If they do nothing, or god forbid screw up, they can't blame anyone but themselves, and don't think the media, the country and the world won't be watching. Let's just see if all the bitching for the past 8 years pans out to action and improvements!

I'll give Obama a chance. I'm not disgusted, just disappointed. Especially because I wanted McCain 8 years ago.

Personally, I think Obama will be a major disappointment to his supporters--people are looking at superficial qualities and not realizing that he's as establishment as it gets. To me, he's the Democratic George W. Bush.

I hope I'm wrong, because a failed President is bad for America.

revefsreleets
11-05-2008, 09:40 AM
He's got my support because it would be foolish NOT to support my president when the country is in deep trouble.

I can tell you this, though: He already started backpeddling on his promises last night (stating that it may take longer than his 4 years to get things fixed), and that will continue on. You simply cannot please everyone, and he reached too far into the magic bag of campaign promises to get elected.

TSDMedic
11-05-2008, 09:42 AM
we both disagree on abortion.. but i dont think i or you or anyone has the right to tell another person what to do

So you mean to tell me that if your wife, gilfriend, etc got pregnant with your child and she wanted to have an abortion, but you wanted to keep the baby, she should be allowed to abort a baby that you helped create and want to care for?!?!?!? That's ridiculous! I don't have an issue with abortion if it's medically necessary...i.e. the doctor can tell from tests that the fetus will not live outside of the womb...etc...but I DO NOT agree with women being able to use abortion as a form of birth control, like so many are doing today!

The 2 people that created the baby need to stand up and take responbility for their actions. Those aborted babies did not ask to be brought into this world, yet they don't get a fair chance at life because somone decides that abortion is fair?!?!?!?!

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 09:49 AM
This is the dawn of a new era in American History.

Ladies and Gentlemen.... I present to you the United Socialist States of America.

Leftoverhard
11-05-2008, 10:43 AM
Whew! Glad I did something else last night...this thread looks a little crazy!

Me too!

MACH1
11-05-2008, 10:47 AM
One thing...I didn't bring this up..I merely responded to it.....Secondly, for every source link you can come up with supporting your theory that Gore lost legitimatly, I can come up with two defying it...so doing this is redundant....Thirdly, I find it a bit ironic that a preacher of all people would promote and advocate a continued division in this country.

I guess you still believe gore invented the internet too. :wink02:
Bottom line is Gore lost fair and square. Get over it.

MACH1
11-05-2008, 10:49 AM
Hopefully it's one of the newer states that gets attacked, you know, states 51-57. :chuckle:

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 10:59 AM
He's got my support because it would be foolish NOT to support my president when the country is in deep trouble.

I can tell you this, though: He already started backpeddling on his promises last night (stating that it may take longer than his 4 years to get things fixed), and that will continue on. You simply cannot please everyone, and he reached too far into the magic bag of campaign promises to get elected.

Actually, I specifically remember Obama saying this several times before tonight. Did you watch all three of the debates? It would be foolish for anyone to insist we could fix all of the problems we have in 4 years.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 11:07 AM
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ahahaha! From the mouths of the "third Bush term" club!

You people never even looked at your candidate.......... or decided to ignore his"qualifications" completely because he was a Democrat.

Al Gore, Kerry???
Where were they lacking?

Leftoverhard
11-05-2008, 11:08 AM
TSDMedic - I understand you're passionate about the abortion issue but *just a suggestion* maybe we should save that argument for the dry days ahead. Seriously though, I'm just making a suggestion.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 11:09 AM
McCain lost the election becuase he tried to with the Christian rights group by selecting Palin as VP....

However, the rest of the country was so frustrated that they went out and voted.

When was the last time a president won by millions of votes in the popular election? This was truely a landslide.....

fansince'76
11-05-2008, 11:13 AM
McCain lost the election becuase he tried to with the Christian rights group by selecting Palin as VP....

McCain lost the election because he failed to separate himself enough from Bush in the minds of the electorate, bottom line. He simply didn't do enough to overcome the "McSame" BS.

xfl2001fan
11-05-2008, 11:15 AM
So you mean to tell me that if your wife, gilfriend, etc got pregnant with your child and she wanted to have an abortion, but you wanted to keep the baby, she should be allowed to abort a baby that you helped create and want to care for?!?!?!? That's ridiculous! I don't have an issue with abortion if it's medically necessary...i.e. the doctor can tell from tests that the fetus will not live outside of the womb...etc...but I DO NOT agree with women being able to use abortion as a form of birth control, like so many are doing today!

The 2 people that created the baby need to stand up and take responbility for their actions. Those aborted babies did not ask to be brought into this world, yet they don't get a fair chance at life because somone decides that abortion is fair?!?!?!?!


I know that this has been discussed in the past.

The two sides will never likely agree because they see one specific point of view that (in their opinion) trumps all others.

Pro-Abortion see it from the Woman's perspective.
Pro-Life see it from the child's perspective.

I'm Pro-Life and while I can understand that there are some instances where an abortion is medically necessary...I'll never see it as the Woman's perspective trumps the innocent child's perspective.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 11:16 AM
McCain lost the election because he failed to separate himself enough from Bush in the minds of the electorate, bottom line. He simply didn't do enough to overcome the "McSame" BS.

so it was Bush's fault

fansince'76
11-05-2008, 11:19 AM
so it was Bush's fault

No, it was McCain's fault for not hammering home that he wouldn't be a Dubya clone.

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 11:33 AM
so it was Bush's fault

No way to say whos fault it is. Why is anyone trying to find blame. The tragedy is that a majority of americans voted for a man with Obamas radical ideas, radical and racist friends with beliefs that are opposite of traditional americans such as wealth redistribution, open borders, singing Kumbaya with evil dictators. This is the man who now represents our country along with his proud to be an american wife. Well atleast she is proud twice now. There is no doubt Obama is a great speaker and well polished. He captivated a lot of americans, ran a great campaign using one word CHANGE. Have you guys heard the term "polishing a turd". Thats what I think when I see Obama.

HometownGal
11-05-2008, 11:36 AM
Al Gore, Kerry???
Where were they lacking?

Where do you want to begin?

Want to discuss the great president Jimmy Carter too? :chuckle:

lamberts-lost-tooth
11-05-2008, 11:43 AM
so it was Bush's fault

I agree with the previous comment about it being McCains fault for not making that distinction about how he was different....

Look at it this way...Congress had a lower approval rating then Bush....But the Democratic party was able to demonize Bush and make the comparison to McCain...while STILL adding a few seats to congress by avoiding the same comparisons...NOT an easy job...but they pulled it off.

Was the Media complicit in this...in my opinion...yes....but still a very well orchestrated campaign.

HometownGal
11-05-2008, 11:48 AM
McCain lost the election becuase he tried to with the Christian rights group by selecting Palin as VP....

However, the rest of the country was so frustrated that they went out and voted.

When was the last time a president won by millions of votes in the popular election? This was truely a landslide.....

Palin had absolutely NOTHING to do with McCain's loss last night. McCain lost this election because the stock market corruption and its collapse was brought to the forefront by the liberal media in the heat of the campaign. Ironically, McCain warned and predicted this would happen with Wall Street several years ago. Obama got the vast majority of the AA and Hispanic vote which played a huge role in his securing the victory, as well, so YES - race played a huge role in this election. Minorities who had never bothered to vote before suddenly registered to vote by the drones. Finally - there were voters out there who cast their vote on the "anything but Republican" ticket without even considering his recent associations with unsavory characters and not bothering to take a look at Obama's platform (not that there really is much of one to peruse) to see if it mirrored theirs.

The minorities and the liberal media got their guy. Unfortunately, those of us who didn't support him are stuck with him for at least 4 years. Oh well - at least I have something to look forward to in 2012.

lilyoder6
11-05-2008, 11:49 AM
this election was pretty ridiculous.. not trying to be mean here.. but yesterday i seen more black ppl voting than i have since they were allowed to vote... i mean if u voted 4 obama b/c he is ur right choice i'm fine with that.. but A LOT of black ppl just came out and voted for obama b/c he is black and had nothing to do with politics.. in my eyes it's a shame that our president got elected b/c of his color instead of what he can do for this country i doubt that obama will be able to fix our economy that CLINTON effed up...

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 12:00 PM
this election was pretty ridiculous.. not trying to be mean here.. but yesterday i seen more black ppl voting than i have since they were allowed to vote... i mean if u voted 4 obama b/c he is ur right choice i'm fine with that.. but A LOT of black ppl just came out and voted for obama b/c he is black and had nothing to do with politics.. in my eyes it's a shame that our president got elected b/c of his color instead of what he can do for this country i doubt that obama will be able to fix our economy that CLINTON effed up...

That is one reason why I am resistant to Obama. It seems more like a cult following. You see these people with glossy eyes, and basically saying our savior is here. I really don't think they are voting for the man inside, I don't think they even see his past or his radical views. I wouldn't be surprised if he plagiarized MLK's I have dream speech for his inauguration.

Leftoverhard
11-05-2008, 12:05 PM
but yesterday i seen more black ppl voting than i have since they were allowed to vote

Allowed???

Yesterday was about rising above apathy. Black people have largely been liberal, especially recently. They just didn't vote before because they haven't felt like anyone spoke for them. Black people aren't the only ones who've been apathetic when it comes to voting. Young people voted in droves for Obama. If you have a problem with black people voting, then you know what's it feels like to be the GOP right now. They have ignored that group for so long until it just hit them in the face last night. Sorry, you can't just blanket statement sit there and say that black people didn't have a perfectly good reason for voting for Obama. You can be as high and mighty as you want and say you have five hundred reasons for voting how you did but when it comes down to it, there are single issues and general feelings that cause people to vote. I voted for Obama because he represents what I think America (and the world)needs - him being a black man is a huge part of that.

Leftoverhard
11-05-2008, 12:15 PM
That is one reason why I am resistant to Obama. It seems more like a cult following. You see these people with glossy eyes, and basically saying our savior is here. I really don't think they are voting for the man inside, I don't think they even see his past or his radical views. I wouldn't be surprised if he plagiarized MLK's I have dream speech for his inauguration.

Over half the country proved last night that what you call "glassy eyed cult followers" have voiced OUR disapproval with the last 8 years and our hope that we can come together and rise above the fear and regain our voices and be heard. You call the U.S.A a cult, I call it a team.

lamberts-lost-tooth
11-05-2008, 12:17 PM
I voted for Obama because he represents what I think America (and the world)needs - him being a black man is a huge part of that.

I can honestly say that I could not car less what color Obama is...It has neither a positive nor negative effect on my feelings.

You are an intelligent person...and really should be beyond that in ALL respects.....it is RACIST to vote for a person according to the color of his skin...regardless of how we justify it...and the United States should be at a place in history where it is a non-issue EITHER way.

That being said...its time to back our current President and the future President and put away all the things that divide us.

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 12:21 PM
Allowed???

Yesterday was about rising above apathy. Black people have largely been liberal, especially recently. They just didn't vote before because they haven't felt like anyone spoke for them. Black people aren't the only ones who've been apathetic when it comes to voting. Young people voted in droves for Obama. If you have a problem with black people voting, then you know what's it feels like to be the GOP right now. They have ignored that group for so long until it just hit them in the face last night. Sorry, you can't just blanket statement sit there and say that black people didn't have a perfectly good reason for voting for Obama. You can be as high and mighty as you want and say you have five hundred reasons for voting how you did but when it comes down to it, there are single issues and general feelings that cause people to vote. I voted for Obama because he represents what I think America (and the world)needs - him being a black man is a huge part of that.

If only the same apathetic people would now get off there rears and get jobs and have accountability. 75-80 percent of black children are raised without a father. You can't blame Bush for that. That is very sad statistic. A lot of these kids don't have a chance. Vicious cycle. I really hope Obama inspires people to better themselves. That would be monumental, but it appears his policies are handouts. Counterproductive. I hope I am wrong. All I know is Bush the punching bag won't be around to blame anymore and that is a good thing.

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 12:24 PM
Over half the country proved last night that what you call "glassy eyed cult followers" have voiced OUR disapproval with the last 8 years and our hope that we can come together and rise above the fear and regain our voices and be heard. You call the U.S.A a cult, I call it a team.
you should run for office, saying I called USA a cult. Totally misquoted me. Do you work for CNBC.

Godfather
11-05-2008, 12:36 PM
All I know is Bush ... won't be around ... anymore and that is a good thing.

Fixed that for you.

The silver linings for me are that Jesse and Al are now irrelevant, that there won't be any more commercials on my TV, that all the America-haters have to STFU about calling us a racist country, and that we'll probably never hear from the Bush family again.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 12:37 PM
No way to say whos fault it is. Why is anyone trying to find blame. The tragedy is that a majority of americans voted for a man with Obamas radical ideas, radical and racist friends with beliefs that are opposite of traditional americans such as wealth redistribution, open borders, singing Kumbaya with evil dictators. This is the man who now represents our country along with his proud to be an american wife. Well atleast she is proud twice now. There is no doubt Obama is a great speaker and well polished. He captivated a lot of americans, ran a great campaign using one word CHANGE. Have you guys heard the term "polishing a turd". Thats what I think when I see Obama.

The tragedy is that you believe this

Leftoverhard
11-05-2008, 12:44 PM
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3070/3003343938_6ee83c68e0_o.jpg

GBMelBlount
11-05-2008, 12:46 PM
Allowed???

Yesterday was about rising above apathy. Black people have largely been liberal, especially recently. They just didn't vote before because they haven't felt like anyone spoke for them.

What exactly has Obama said that leads you to believe that black people feel he speaks for them? I mean do they have special needs or requirements that have never been spoken to before?

Vis
11-05-2008, 01:02 PM
damn those voting black people. get a job. this is the tone of this thread for some. wow. love to see a reasonable conservative address this sad tangent

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 01:11 PM
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3070/3003343938_6ee83c68e0_o.jpg

I didn't realize it was about race with you until now. Now it all makes sense.

xfl2001fan
11-05-2008, 01:54 PM
damn those voting black people. get a job. this is the tone of this thread for some. wow. love to see a reasonable conservative address this sad tangent

You are mis-construing the intent of the posters in this. Whether it's through ignorance or it's purposeful has yet to be determined.

Why are there "suddenly" record numbers of black voters in this election that have not bothered to try to go to the polls in the last 5 elections? There is only one theme common to the previous 5 elections, no "strong" black candidate to support. This is a historic election in that there was someone available who had a chance at becoming the President and the democratic party was making waves one way or another (Hillary or Obama.)

But if you are so naive as to believe that race played no part in this...well...that's on you. And yes, I do believe that there were people who voted for McCain because Obama is black. The race card does work both ways...but if Obama doesn't run 4 years from now and it's Hillary vs a White Republican...what do you think are the odds of there being less voters next time around? I'd say pretty good.

Of course, there might also be a record number of women voters in that campaign...which is also a sad state of affairs.

Voting "black or white" is racist...which is stupid. Recognizing that it happens doesn't make anyone here a racist...just reporting on what we're seeing. Maybe it really is circumstantial and there would have been a record number of black voters voting for Hillary if she were the democratic nominee...but I doubt it.

As for the "get a job" snide remark you have...which group of people are most likely to be found at/below the poverty level or on welfare? Recognizing that the statistics show it's black people doesn't make any of us racist. However, they can get jobs. There are jobs available. Racism is still a part of this great nation in part because the black community and the government won't let it go.

The government has rules that force people to hire a specific number of black people...the Rooney Rule in the NFL, etc... You are singling out black people based on race. The only true minority in the states is the White Male because we are the only group of people who don't have our own special programs. Women activists, black heritage month, hispanic heritage month, etc...All these programs that promote racism/sexism in this nation.

So spare us your rediculous comments. If you're going to act like that, stay out of these threads and stick to football...because you are in way over your head in here.

SteelFist
11-05-2008, 01:58 PM
this election was pretty ridiculous.. not trying to be mean here.. but yesterday i seen more black ppl voting than i have since they were allowed to vote... i mean if u voted 4 obama b/c he is ur right choice i'm fine with that.. but A LOT of black ppl just came out and voted for obama b/c he is black and had nothing to do with politics.. in my eyes it's a shame that our president got elected b/c of his color instead of what he can do for this country i doubt that obama will be able to fix our economy that CLINTON effed up...

:blah:

1st, Where you around when Blacks were first allowed to vote???

2nd, Its also a shame that there were many White ppl voting for McCain because the opposition was Black. If you believe Blacks were the ONLY race guilty of this, then you are LOST.

HometownGal
11-05-2008, 02:30 PM
:blah:

1st, Where you around when Blacks were first allowed to vote???

2nd, Its also a shame that there were many White ppl voting for McCain because the opposition was Black. If you believe Blacks were the ONLY race guilty of this, then you are LOST.

SteelFist - whether you want to acknowledge it or not - that's your call, but race indeed played a factor in this election on BOTH sides of the coin, and if you can't see that, I don't know what else to tell you. However, the results clearly show that in this particular election, there was record turnout among blacks, Hispanic and other minorities. As xfl2001fan correctly stated - why hasn't there been this kind of a turnout among minorities in the last 5 or so decades? :doh: Many AA's will make no bones about the fact that they voted for Obama simply because he is AA. It aint rocket science, bud.

Yes - it is indeed a shame that people in this day and age are shallow enough to not take a good, hard look at the candidate they are throwing their allegiance to and basing their vote (or non-vote) on race alone. Unfortunately, however, as the numbers show, I believe the minority voters in this election did just that more so than the other way around. I didn't support Mr. Obama because I had a problem with the color of his skin - I didn't support him because his stances on certain issues (at least the issues he didn't flip flop on) don't parallel with mine and also because I just don't trust the guy for a whole lot of reasons which I've already stated in prior threads.

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 02:47 PM
If it is INDEED all about race, then why didn't Jesse Jackson, or Alan Keyes fair better when they ran for the presidency?????
I'd like to point out that it wasn't just minorites that voted for Obama.................

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 02:48 PM
However, the results clearly show that in this particular election, there was record turnout among blacks, Hispanic and other minorities. As xfl2001fan correctly stated - why hasn't there been this kind of a turnout among minorities in the last 5 or so decades? :doh:
.

there has been tons of research on this. many reasons and many examples of blacks being charged to vote, turned away at polls, given misinformation, taught that their vote dont count etc. pretty much been socialized into thinking their vote dont count and its not worth the trouble. they have seen a broken system and were disinfranchised with it. but weve come a long way in the last 5 cycles, let alone the last 5 decades.

http://www.activoteamerica.com/Home2/History_of_Voting/history_of_voting.html

The history of voting in America is a story of ever-increasing voting rights. The rules for eligibility have changed substantially since America's founding, and continue to change today. When America was young, only white males over the age of 21 were allowed to vote. Some of the landmark changes since then:

Black Suffrage
The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution were passed following the Civil War, in the later 1860s. They outlawed slavery and extended civil rights and suffrage (voting rights) to former slaves. The LEGAL right to vote for African-Americans was established, but numerous restrictions kept many blacks from ACTUALLY voting until the 1960s Voting Rights Act.
Direct election of Senators
.

but this disinfranchisement isnt just seen with voting. check out some of the amazing research on how the tuskeegee syphylus experiments made so much of the black population distrust the medical establishment. people would risk death rather than to go see a doctor for things that were routine.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 02:55 PM
theres tons of research and legitimate reasons why blacks historicaly dont get out there and flood the polls.-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_American_history

When President Hayes withdrew Union troops from the South in 1877 as a result of a national compromise on the election, white Democratic southerners acted quickly to reverse the groundbreaking advances of Reconstruction. To reduce black voting and regain control of state legislatures, Democrats had used a combination of violence, fraud, and intimidation since the election of 1868. These techniques were prominent among rifle clubs and paramilitary groups in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida prior to the 1876 elections. In South Carolina, for instance, one historian estimated that 150 blacks were killed in the weeks before the election.[17] Massacres occurred at Hamburg and Ellenton.

European American mob violence against African Americans intensified. Many blacks were fearful of this trend, and men like Benjamin "Pap" Singleton began speaking of separating from the South. This idea culminated in the 1879-1880 movement of the Exodusters, who migrated to Kansas.


Sign for "Colored waiting room", Georgia, 1943White Democrats first passed laws to make voter registration and elections more complicated. Most of the rules acted against blacks, but many poor whites were also disfranchised. Interracial coalitions of Populists and Republicans in some states succeeded in controlling legislatures in 1894, which made the Democrats more determined to reduce voting by poorer classes. When Democrats took control of Tennessee in 1888, they passed laws making voter registration more complicated and ended the most competitive political state in the South. Voting by blacks in rural areas and small towns dropped, as did voting by poor whites.[18][19]

From 1890 to 1908, starting with Mississippi and ending with Georgia, ten of eleven Southern states adopted new constitutions or amendments that effectively disfranchised most blacks and many poor whites. Using a combination of provisions such as poll taxes, residency requirements and literacy tests, states dramatically decreased black voter registration and turnout, in some cases to zero.[20] The grandfather clause was used in many states temporarily to exempt illiterate white voters from literacy tests. As power became concentrated under the Democratic Party in the South, the party positioned itself as a private club and instituted white primaries, closing blacks out of the only competitive contests. By 1910 one-party white rule was firmly established across the South.


"poll taxes" that sure was a doozie. isnt it strange how the south has the highest concentration of blacks but mccain still won those states by a landslide. its all about the socialization of these people.

xfl2001fan
11-05-2008, 02:56 PM
If it is INDEED all about race, then why didn't Jesse Jackson, or Alan Keyes fair better when they ran for the presidency?????
I'd like to point out that it wasn't just minorites that voted for Obama.................

I dont' know who siad it was all about race...but it played a bigger part in this election than it has in past elections. Without doing further research, I'll trust to Tony's post (just below yours and above mine) for that piece of information.

But even with Tony's post...why does it take a black candidate to suddenly get rid of the "disenchantment" from the "minority" community?

I can understand from '60-'80 why voting might be down...and even heading into the 90's...but we're talking nearly 50 years (half a century) of freedom to vote. How long has the NAACP been around?

As for Jesse Jackson or Alan Keyes? Like I mentioned before..."Strong" black candidate. Obama was probably the first legit black candidate to hit the scene. But most of that was because of his campaign plan of attack. He went after early voters, minority voters and appealed to a large mass of people who saw his wealth redistribution as a way out of their misery...

He played a tune to the masses...and that tune often changed depending on which group of masses he played to.

I hope he's as good a President as he is a campaigner...because he did a masterful job campaigning.

revefsreleets
11-05-2008, 02:59 PM
I think what some people are trying to say is that many black people had no idea what Obama stood for, they just voted for him because he was black.

Hey, this is America. It's a free country. It's not like the votes count less or something.

The GOP conceded the balck vote (understandable, I guess) but also the HIspanic vote before the convention. The latter was a horrible strategic mistake. All that work Bush did to court that voting bloc was undone.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 03:05 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/28/liggins.vote/index.html

And as insulting as it is to assume that all women vote for female candidates, it is equally inaccurate and offensive to say that blacks simply cast their ballots for people of color. Like all Americans, black folks vote on the issues they care about, and today those issues are less likely to be linked to race than they are to the economy, health care, education and a whole spectrum of social issues.

As Georgetown University sociology professor Michael Eric Dyson recently said, "black people don't vote for candidates just because they are black. If Clarence Thomas ran for president, he would get five black votes."

Given Black America's extreme diversity today (the study identified 11 specific groups) it is easy to misunderstand who they are and how they can be reached. Yes, discrimination and racial issues are still incredibly important, particularly to middle-age and older blacks. But the younger populations are more concerned about starting their own businesses, paying for their education, taking care of their children and creating a better work/life balance.

So how do politicians penetrate the multiple segments of Black America? In 1992, when Bill Clinton wooed African-Americans in church, he understood how to effectively reach that population. But that was before social networking sites attracted millions of teenage and young black adults.

Now that the digital divide has faded, with roughly the same percentage of blacks online as the general population, ignoring black Web sites and social networking sites would be a big mistake.

Although the history of black oppression in America is not the radioactive issue it once was, trust in the community -- whom blacks trust -- is still paramount. Of all institutions, they are least likely to trust credit card companies but also remain seriously wary of the mainstream media and tend to trust black media more than traditional media outlets.

It has been almost a century and a half since blacks in America won the right to vote. It makes all the sense in the world that the black community has evolved and diversified over the years, but too often politicians make the mistake of assuming that blacks are still a monolithic group fixated on all of the same issues

revefsreleets
11-05-2008, 03:09 PM
Nope, can't go there, sorry...it's been estimated that something like 96-98% of blacks voted for Obama. That's race based, and the data (if it turns out to be accurate) says as much.

But again, who cares? Like I said, it's not like this is a Jim Crow law issue and the votes count less or something.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 03:14 PM
Nope, can't go there, sorry...it's been estimated that something like 96-98% of blacks voted for Obama. That's race based, .and in the past, 100% of voting whites always voted for the white dude. :noidea:

also imortant to note the percentage of blacks who are actually registered to vote vs. whites. those who are registered probably know enough to feel obama had earned the right to represent them and the rest of us.

lamberts-lost-tooth
11-05-2008, 03:27 PM
and in the past, 100% of voting whites always voted for the white dude. :noidea:



:link:

I'll ask for it...but I have my doubts if you would provide it...even if your statement had any truth to it....but what the heck...maybe after the election you will be willing to talk actual facts...its worth a try.

revefsreleets
11-05-2008, 03:29 PM
and in the past, 100% of voting whites always voted for the white dude. :noidea:

also imortant to note the percentage of blacks who are actually registered to vote vs. whites. those who are registered probably know enough to feel obama had earned the right to represent them and the rest of us.

100% whites voted for 100% white dudes...there was no other option.

Leftoverhard
11-05-2008, 03:29 PM
I didn't realize it was about race with you until now. Now it all makes sense.

Because I posted a poster of our new president along with the other 43 before him? To deny that Obama's race has played a role in this election and the historical context of it would be a huge mistake. To simplify things the way you consistently do, without any perspective is just plain ignorant.
Did some black people vote soley on race? Yes, we can assume that.
Did some white people vote soley on race? Yes, we can assume that too.
Whatever - to think that everyone who votes has uniformly valid reasons to vote for their candidate is naive. People vote for so many different reasons. I have defended my reasons for supporting Obama so many times here that I lost count - none of which were ever *validated* by anyone I was defending them to. Why would skin color be any different at that point? And here's the best part. My reasons for voting are my own personal reasons. No one has to explain that to you or anyone.

lamberts-lost-tooth
11-05-2008, 03:32 PM
and in the past, 100% of voting whites always voted for the white dude. :noidea:

.

Here you go.

[BLACK AND WHITE; How Jesse Jackson Made History While Losing Wisconsin
By E. J. DIONNE JR.
Published: April 10, 1988
.................In the end, Wisconsin pulled back: It gave Gov. Michael S. Dukakis a decisive 5 to 3 victory. But Mr. Jackson won nearly a quarter of the white vote, the most he has got in any major primary. In a near-record turnout of a million voters, and in a state whose population is only 4 percent black, he drew more ballots in losing than Gary Hart did in carrying the state four years ago. Exit polls showed that more than half of Wisconsin's white voters had a favorable view of Mr. Jackson, though less than half of these people actually voted for him....

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE2D7173AF933A25757C0A96E9482 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 03:36 PM
100% whites voted for 100% white dudes...there was no other option.exactly! :wink02:

LLT were not talking about primaries. or senators or mayors. all people on the final ticket FOR PRESIDENT have been white males.

do you still NEED a link?

or a clue?

xfl2001fan
11-05-2008, 03:36 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/28/liggins.vote/index.html

Consider the source and the slanting going on with this Tony. I don't believe that there is anybody here that said that all Blacks/Minorities were voting for Obama because he is black...but to suddenly have a surge of Blacks/Minorities at the polls is...circumstantially hard-core "evidence."

What you quoted makes it seem like everyone believes that all blacks voted for black and that's the only reason why. However, there are a large number who did. I don't know what the percentages are and how they would play out if we discounted all racist votes (for/against Obama). But to make a blanket statement that says black didn't vote for black because of black is every bit as ludicrous as saying that black only voted for black because of black.

The statement that racist votes likely occurred has been rehashed a number of times in this thread...and almost always backed up (by the poster saying it) with the conclusion that it wasn't all based on racism.

Take your extremely liberal media source with it's hard core slanting and post it where it's actually applicable. That place (where ever it may be) is not on this board, in this forum or in this thread.
******************ADDITION TO AVOID DOUBLE POSTING****************
and in the past, 100% of voting whites always voted for the white dude. :noidea:

also imortant to note the percentage of blacks who are actually registered to vote vs. whites. those who are registered probably know enough to feel obama had earned the right to represent them and the rest of us.
The first part has already been torn apart for the feeble paper-thin argument it is.

Registering to vote does not mean that you've looked at the issues. If someone has decided to vote based on race (again whether that's for/against Obama) they have already made up their mind who they plan on voting for and therefor don't need to look at the issues.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 03:48 PM
you and htg have wondered why there has been a surge in black votes (and other minorities in the past 5 decades/examples.

i gave plenty of sociological reasons why. you can poo-poo sociology all you want. it doent change nothing.

for the first time they musta felt there was something to get excited about, that there vote would count and go to a good cause, and that there was a viable candidate.

also more money, time and effort has been dedicated by the campaigns to reach these people. they have been ignored for years. registration campaigns have been monumental. like the article said new technology has been used to reach these people on social networks. there are programs designed to attract them and get them active..

obama didnt invent this stuff. it was just effectively utilized and maximized this go around.

look at what clinton did to reach the young voters, and the monumental turnout he drew from them.

rock the vote.

HometownGal
11-05-2008, 04:12 PM
If it is INDEED all about race, then why didn't Jesse Jackson, or Alan Keyes fair better when they ran for the presidency?????
I'd like to point out that it wasn't just minorites that voted for Obama.................

I didn't say it was "just minorities" who voted for Obama, Steel Duck, but I'd bet my life on it that a good number of AA's and Hispanics didn't vote for Obama on the issues but because they share his minority status. Of course there were white voters who didn't vote for Obama because they don't share his minority status, but the final categorical numbers support my assertion. Take a look at the exit polls and you'll clearly see that the biggest surge in new voters in decades was right before this election - the biggest percentages being AA and Hispanic. Without the heavy AA and Hispanic new voter registrations, I think it's a safe bet that McCain would have INDEED trounced Obama.

As for Jackson and Keyes - many black folks (including XT) will tell you that overall, the Rev. isn't well liked or respected among the AA community, especially the working class. He ran for the White House in '84 and again in '88 - 20+ years ago - quite a different time and place in our nation. As for Keyes - up until this election, he was a GOP'er. How many AA Repubs do you know? LOL! Keyes couldn't secure the GOP party nomination and decided to try his luck as an Independent. Having worked within the Democratic party and researching the demographics for many years, I can state with certainty that most AA's are registered Democrats.

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 04:24 PM
As for Jackson and Keyes - many black folks (including XT) will tell you that overall, the Rev. isn't well liked or respected among the AA community, especially the working class. He ran for the White House in '84 and again in '88 - 20+ years ago - quite a different time and place in our nation. As for Keyes - up until this election, he was a GOP'er. How many AA Repubs do you know? LOL! Keyes couldn't secure the GOP party nomination and decided to try his luck as an Independent. Having worked within the Democratic party and researching the demographics for many years, I can state with certainty that most AA's are registered Democrats.

I was just trying to assert that there is more to Obama than his skin color. Something Jackson and Keyes didn't have. So I do believe that it wasn't just about skin color for the black community....
Of course it's making history...and of course it's wonderful that a final barrier was broken last night! But that barrier could not have been broken by anyone else other than Barack Obama. He has got that special something....That something reminds me of how Bill Clinton use to make us dems feel. It's amazing to me that we have yet another democrat who can make me believe in him! I am truly thankful for that.

xfl2001fan
11-05-2008, 04:28 PM
That something reminds me of how Bill Clinton use to make us dems feel. It's amazing to me that we have yet another democrat who can make me believe in him! I am truly thankful for that.

He's a smooth talker and charismatic guy just like Clinton. Unfortunately, I was very unimpressed with Clinton and fear the same of Obama. We wouldn't need to be searching Afghanistan/Pakistan for Bin Laden and w/e else if Clinton had the "brass" to deal with him properly when he had the chance. This affects 9/11 too. Without Bin Laden, the organization takes a huge hit to it's power base.

This is why your statement scares me (and many other conservatives) so very much.

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 04:32 PM
He's a smooth talker and charismatic guy just like Clinton. Unfortunately, I was very unimpressed with Clinton and fear the same of Obama. We wouldn't need to be searching Afghanistan/Pakistan for Bin Laden and w/e else if Clinton had the "brass" to deal with him properly when he had the chance. This affects 9/11 too. Without Bin Laden, the organization takes a huge hit to it's power base.

This is why your statement scares me (and many other conservatives) so very much.


http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_bill_clinton_pass_up_a_chance_1.html


Q: Did Bill Clinton pass up a chance to kill Osama bin Laden?
Was Bill Clinton offered bin Laden on "a silver platter"? Did he refuse? Was there cause at the time?
A: Probably not, and it would not have mattered anyway as there was no evidence at the time that bin Laden had committed any crimes against American citizens.
Let’s start with what everyone agrees on: In April 1996, Osama bin Laden was an official guest of the radical Islamic government of Sudan – a government that had been implicated in the attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993. By 1996, with the international community treating Sudan as a pariah, the Sudanese government attempted to patch its relations with the United States. At a secret meeting in a Rosslyn, Va., hotel, the Sudanese minister of state for defense, Maj. Gen. Elfatih Erwa, met with CIA operatives, where, among other things, they discussed Osama bin Laden.

It is here that things get murky. Erwa claims that he offered to hand bin Laden over to the United States. Key American players – President Bill Clinton, then-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and Director of Counterterrorism Richard Clarke among them – have testified there were no "credible offers" to hand over bin Laden. The 9/11 Commission found "no credible evidence" that Erwa had ever made such an offer. On the other hand, Lawrence Wright, in his Pulitzer Prize-winning "The Looming Tower," flatly states that Sudan did make such an offer. Wright bases his judgment on an interview with Erwa and notes that those who most prominently deny Erwa's claims were not in fact present for the meeting.

Wright and the 9/11 Commission do agree that the Clinton administration encouraged Sudan to deport bin Laden back to Saudi Arabia and spent 10 weeks trying to convince the Saudi government to accept him. One Clinton security official told The Washington Post that they had "a fantasy" that the Saudi government would quietly execute bin Laden. When the Saudis refused bin Laden’s return, Clinton officials convinced the Sudanese simply to expel him, hoping that the move would at least disrupt bin Laden’s activities.

Much of the controversy stems from claims that President Clinton made in a February 2002 speech and then retracted in his 2004 testimony to the 9/11 Commission. In the 2002 speech Clinton seems to admit that the Sudanese government offered to turn over bin Laden:

Clinton: So we tried to be quite aggressive with them [al Qaeda]. We got – well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we'd been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, 'cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn't and that's how he wound up in Afghanistan.

Clinton later claimed to have misspoken and stated that there had never been an offer to turn over bin Laden. It is clear, however, that Berger, at least, did consider the possibility of bringing bin Laden to the U.S., but, as he told The Washington Post in 2001, "The FBI did not believe we had enough evidence to indict bin Laden at that time, and therefore opposed bringing him to the United States." According to NewsMax.com, Berger later emphasized in an interview with WABC Radio that, while administration officials had discussed whether or not they had ample evidence to indict bin Laden, that decision "was not pursuant to an offer by the Sudanese."

So on one side, we have Clinton administration officials who say that there were no credible offers on the table, and on the other, we have claims by a Sudanese government that was (and still is) listed as an official state sponsor of terrorism. It’s possible, of course, that both sides are telling the truth: It could be that Erwa did make an offer, but the offer was completely disingenuous. What is clear is that the 9/11 Commission report totally discounts the Sudanese claims. Unless further evidence arises, that has to be the final word.

Ultimately, however, it doesn’t matter. What is not in dispute at all is the fact that, in early 1996, American officials regarded Osama bin Laden as a financier of terrorism and not as a mastermind largely because, at the time, there was no real evidence that bin Laden had harmed American citizens. So even if the Sudanese government really did offer to hand bin Laden over, the U.S. would have had no grounds for detaining him. In fact, the Justice Department did not secure an indictment against bin Laden until 1998 – at which point Clinton did order a cruise missile attack on an al Qaeda camp in an attempt to kill bin Laden.

We have to be careful about engaging in what historians call "Whig history," which is the practice of assuming that historical figures value exactly the same things that we do today. It's a fancy term for those "why didn't someone just shoot Hitler in 1930?" questions that one hears in dorm-room bull sessions. The answer, of course, is that no one knew quite how bad Hitler was in 1930. The same is true of bin Laden in 1996.

Correction: We originally answered this question with a flat 'yes' early this week, based on the account in "The Looming Tower," but an alert reader pointed out to us the more tangled history laid out in the 9/11 Commission report. We said flatly that Sudan had made such an offer. We have deleted our original answer and are posting this corrected version in its place.

xfl2001fan
11-05-2008, 04:38 PM
Thank you for that information. Unfortunately, our government is more than capable of detaining people on flimsier claims...but apparently Osama was just as slippery then as he is now. It's a sad state of affairs. I'd retract my former statement...but it's already quoted...and shouldn't need to be changed (except to fix any spelling errors.)

MACH1
11-05-2008, 04:41 PM
The markets will rocket tomorrow... Why?

Because the elections are over, PERIOD. Markets do not like indecision.

So much for that theory. :rolleyes:

lilyoder6
11-05-2008, 04:44 PM
:popcorn:

clinton is also the reason y our economy is so bad right now

lilyoder6
11-05-2008, 04:44 PM
So much for that theory. :rolleyes:

i was thinking that gas was gonna increase again after the election.. but.. we'll see

KeiselPower99
11-05-2008, 04:46 PM
I give him a year before his inexperiance shows up. Just to prove a point about the black voter turnout. Most blacks didnt even care about policy but just there was a black man running.Need proof??? Howard Stern went around New york and asked Black voters who they was supporting. When they said Obama he brought up Obamas policies and they disagreed with them but only when they was told it was McCains policies.Ill give him a chance but I dont like it. He has Socialism written all over him. Need more proof??? That poster of the red white and blue old timey thing. Thats Communist China and NaziGermany. Look it up. Do a lil research. Most Americans hated Bush so much that the word change captivated them and resisted anything Republican, Obamas beliefs are radical and dangerous.4 years of radical librealism is a scary thought. Congrats America we are screwed.

Steel Duck
11-05-2008, 04:47 PM
:popcorn:

clinton is also the reason y our economy is so bad right now

Ummm.NO Our country's economy is in shambles because of deregulation. AND it's not the fault of any ONE person.

KeiselPower99
11-05-2008, 04:47 PM
:popcorn:

clinton is also the reason y our economy is so bad right now

Best statement told right there. Its called tax exemptions to companies who sent work overseas.

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 04:55 PM
THis is where we are headed....


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=united+socialist+states+of+america&btnG=Google+Search&aq=1&oq=%22united+socialist


http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34253

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 05:03 PM
I was just trying to assert that there is more to Obama than his skin color. Something Jackson and Keyes didn't have. So I do believe that it wasn't just about skin color for the black community....
Of course it's making history...and of course it's wonderful that a final barrier was broken last night! But that barrier could not have been broken by anyone else other than Barack Obama. He has got that special something....That something reminds me of how Bill Clinton use to make us dems feel. It's amazing to me that we have yet another democrat who can make me believe in him! I am truly thankful for that.
I guess you and Monica Lewinsky have something in common then, Slick Willie made her feel good as well. That kool aid must me something. lol

lilyoder6
11-05-2008, 05:04 PM
steel duck,, u may be right for some parts.. but Clinton is the biggest reason y..

and thank u keisalpower for that response.. lol

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 05:06 PM
I give him a year before his inexperiance shows up. Just to prove a point about the black voter turnout. Most blacks didnt even care about policy but just there was a black man running.Need proof??? Howard Stern went around New york and asked Black voters who they was supporting. When they said Obama he brought up Obamas policies and they disagreed with them but only when they was told it was McCains policies.Ill give him a chance but I dont like it. He has Socialism written all over him. Need more proof??? That poster of the red white and blue old timey thing. Thats Communist China and NaziGermany. Look it up. Do a lil research. Most Americans hated Bush so much that the word change captivated them and resisted anything Republican, Obamas beliefs are radical and dangerous.4 years of radical librealism is a scary thought. Congrats America we are screwed.

I saw that I was going to say it was funny, but really it isn't. I was shaking my head in disbelief at the ignorant people. If so much wasn't at stake it would have been hilarious.

lilyoder6
11-05-2008, 05:13 PM
it could be dod when obama is slated in the white house... and what bidden said is taken into account

Preacher
11-05-2008, 06:01 PM
So much for that theory. :rolleyes:




DOW (javascript:GoURL(dowURL,''))
486.01
-5.05%
9,139.27

NASDAQ (javascript:GoURL(nasdaqURL,''))
98.48
-5.53%
1,681.64

S&P 500 (javascript:GoURL(sandpURL,''))
52.98
-5.27%
952.77

Normally, what I said was true... that once the indecision is over, there is an upward bump.

These numbers, IMO, are quite damning to Obama from wall street. I was expecting something different...

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 06:03 PM
imagine how bad they woulda tanked had mccain won...

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 06:09 PM
Over half the country proved last night that what you call "glassy eyed cult followers" have voiced OUR disapproval with the last 8 years and our hope that we can come together and rise above the fear and regain our voices and be heard. You call the U.S.A a cult, I call it a team.

:applaudit::applaudit:

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 06:14 PM
DOW (javascript:GoURL(dowURL,''))
486.01
-5.05%
9,139.27

NASDAQ (javascript:GoURL(nasdaqURL,''))
98.48
-5.53%
1,681.64

S&P 500 (javascript:GoURL(sandpURL,''))
52.98
-5.27%
952.77

Normally, what I said was true... that once the indecision is over, there is an upward bump.

These numbers, IMO, are quite damning to Obama from wall street. I was expecting something different...

It wont be long until Obama is blamed for this

Preacher
11-05-2008, 06:14 PM
imagine how bad they woulda tanked had mccain won...

I think they would have gone down, but not as far. There is a legitimate fear concerning Obama raising taxes.

I have to hope (though I don't put much stock in the hope) that what I heard last night it true. Obama's people have studied Clinton's first two years and realized how far Clinton overreached, causing the massive turn-around in the elections. Therefore, Obama will govern centrist-left.

I don't know if I believe it, but it will sure get interesting.

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 06:14 PM
I, for one, am excited for the "radical liberal" that Obama is. Couple that with more Democrats taking over in Washington and this could be something great. Hopefully this is just the start of pushing the extreme right-winged out of power, they've polluted this country enough with their ideals. Of course, I can't place the blame on them alone, the blame can go many places. I was disgusted to see Prop 8 passed today, along with similar ballot measures in other states. THAT is the work of the extreme conservatives.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 06:15 PM
He's a smooth talker and charismatic guy just like Clinton. Unfortunately, I was very unimpressed with Clinton and fear the same of Obama. We wouldn't need to be searching Afghanistan/Pakistan for Bin Laden and w/e else if Clinton had the "brass" to deal with him properly when he had the chance. This affects 9/11 too. Without Bin Laden, the organization takes a huge hit to it's power base.

This is why your statement scares me (and many other conservatives) so very much.

Take your extremely conservative views with it's hard core slanting and post it where it's actually applicable. That place (where ever it may be) is not on this board, in this forum or in this thread.


much obliged.... :applaudit:

Preacher
11-05-2008, 06:16 PM
Hey, Obama won the popular vote and the electoral votes..... now hes president (fair and square).. Bush didnt win either in 2000... and he somehow became president (not so fair)


:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Its over.

And the major news corps. agree.. He did win it. Let it go already. We are talking about Obama, and I am talking about the markets...


Then again.. you may not have read my post to find that out... Just glanced and saw percentages.

The Patriot
11-05-2008, 06:17 PM
Republicans, please atleast give Obama a chance to break all his promises. No president could possibly break all their promises in the first six months of office. I urge you to respectfully and patiently wait for your predictions to come true, but who knows, you may be disapointed. :noidea:

Preacher
11-05-2008, 06:18 PM
i was thinking that gas was gonna increase again after the election.. but.. we'll see

Again, I would be real surprised... at the gas bubble has popped.

The thing that would affect gas prices is OPEC screwing with it.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 06:18 PM
:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Its over.

And the major news corps. agree.. He did win it. Let it go already. We are talking about Obama, and I am talking about the markets...


Then again.. you may not have read my post to find that out... Just glanced and saw percentages.

Hey, I had to throw it out there....

NO I read your post and now Im waiting for you to blame Obama for our economy

NJarhead
11-05-2008, 06:20 PM
Republicans, please atleast give Obama a chance to break all his promises. No president could possibly break all their promises in the first six months of office. I urge you to respectfully and patiently wait for your predictions to come true, but who knows, you may be disapointed. :noidea:

As upset and afraid as I am, I will give him a chance. Not that I have a choice, but I'm trying to keep an open mind. Besides, who says I would have been able to sell my house within the next four years anyway (referring to capitol gains)?

NJarhead
11-05-2008, 06:21 PM
Hey, I had to throw it out there....

NO I read your post and now Im waiting for you to blame Obama for our economy

Obviously can't blame him for that. I just hope you don't try to credit him for the troop withdrawls that have already been determined.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-05-2008, 06:25 PM
Obviously can't blame him for that. I just hope you don't try to credit him for the troop withdrawls that have already been determined.


Bush can have all the credit for the Iraqi war...Thats fine with me..
We just have to wait to see the decisions Obama makes once he gets in

NJarhead
11-05-2008, 06:26 PM
Bush can have all the credit for the Iraqi war...Thats fine with me..
We just have to wait to see the decisions Obama makes once he gets in

That's not what I said. But I think you know that.

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 06:40 PM
I, for one, am excited for the "radical liberal" that Obama is. Couple that with more Democrats taking over in Washington and this could be something great. Hopefully this is just the start of pushing the extreme right-winged out of power, they've polluted this country enough with their ideals. Of course, I can't place the blame on them alone, the blame can go many places. I was disgusted to see Prop 8 passed today, along with similar ballot measures in other states. THAT is the work of the extreme conservatives.

I was extremely pleased to see prop 8 pass in the most liberal state out of the 57. That says something. Even some libs see the traditional marriage of a man and woman.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 06:45 PM
Hey, I had to throw it out there....

NO I read your post and now Im waiting for you to blame Obama for our economy

Well, if I followed suit with the democrats in 01, then yes, I could. However, I choose to be more honest with the situation.

Unless Obama and the new congress undertakes some MAJOR changes in the first 6 months, the economy, UP OR DOWN will not be a reflection of him until his first budget and tax plan is implemented.

The only caveat to that is if he talks up or talks down taxes or interference, as the markets will react to it.

Furthermore, I have said that this economy is cyclical, riding on eight year cycles since Reagan came to office. So most of what is happening is out of any president's hands. It is the degree of up or downturn that the president can affect.

As long as Obama stays within the economic model of capitalism, that remains true.

If he moves to a different economic model outside of capitalism (such as fascism, which is allowed for in declared war, Then he controls the economy with a heavy hand, as did FDR, and the previous paragraphs are not applicable.

MACH1
11-05-2008, 06:46 PM
Republicans, please atleast give Obama a chance to break all his promises. No president could possibly break all their promises in the first six months of office. I urge you to respectfully and patiently wait for your predictions to come true, but who knows, you may be disapointed. :noidea:

I'm waiting for my free handouts. Make my car payments or house payments, whichever don't matter to me. Both if I qualify or lazy enough. :doh:

KeiselPower99
11-05-2008, 06:48 PM
I, for one, am excited for the "radical liberal" that Obama is. Couple that with more Democrats taking over in Washington and this could be something great. Hopefully this is just the start of pushing the extreme right-winged out of power, they've polluted this country enough with their ideals. Of course, I can't place the blame on them alone, the blame can go many places. I was disgusted to see Prop 8 passed today, along with similar ballot measures in other states. THAT is the work of the extreme conservatives.



If you are serious then you my friend are a idiot. Liberalism is a mental disorder and a complete loss of common sense.

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 06:51 PM
I was extremely pleased to see prop 8 pass in the most liberal state out of the 57. That says something. Even some libs see the traditional marriage of a man and woman.

Please explain to me how you see this as beneficial to society. I don't even know ONE gay person, yet I can see how wrong this is. I'd be interested to hear you defend your view.

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 06:55 PM
If you are serious then you my friend are a idiot. Liberalism is a mental disorder and a complete loss of common sense.

Now now, are the personal insults needed? Don't be such a sore loser, mister.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 07:06 PM
Please explain to me how you see this as beneficial to society. I don't even know ONE gay person, yet I can see how wrong this is. I'd be interested to hear you defend your view.

I know a number of gay people and over the years, been privileged to call some of them my friends.

I voted for prop 8. I am sick and tired of the courts trying to usurp the will of the people.

What I find disingenuous, is your labeling of over 53 percent of CALIFORNIA extreme right wing.

It is not extreme. It seems to be mainstream.

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 07:19 PM
I, for one, am excited for the "radical liberal" that Obama is. Couple that with more Democrats taking over in Washington and this could be something great. Hopefully this is just the start of pushing the extreme right-winged out of power, they've polluted this country enough with their ideals. Of course, I can't place the blame on them alone, the blame can go many places. I was disgusted to see Prop 8 passed today, along with similar ballot measures in other states. THAT is the work of the extreme conservatives.

[full blown rant mode ON]

I'm gonna guess that you're a younger person who hasn't married yet and doesn't have kids. You probably haven't truly worked a hard day in your life yet. Judging from your posts here, you're probably not far out of high school, maybe into college. If you are in college I'd guess you're into a liberal art type of education. You may even hope for legalized marijuana someday.

Come back and talk to me in 20 years if you've settled into a career that doesn't involve saying "Do you want fries with that?"

Last night was for me the saddest day in American history. Last night Americans thumbed their noses at freedom and embraced socialism. They reached out to a man who cannot possibly deliver everything he promised and even if he could, those promises are wrong. Instead of offering a hand up to the poor he's offering a hand out in the form of a check at the expense of those who work hard.

He's going to punish those who work hard and earn money. He's going to "steal from the rich and give to the poor". While that sounds great in a fairy tale, it's wrong. It is flat out wrong.

I said it before, I'll say it again.... Our economy needs the wealthy. Rich people invest their money into businesses and properties. Rich people provide the capital to fund new projects. Rich people fuel the economy. (Keep in mind I currently drive a school bus, but I do have a college degree. I'm not "rich".)

We can't all work our way to being filthy rich. Most of us don't have the drive or knowledge to do that. Most of us are apathetic fools who keep thinking if only I can win the lottery.

Stop looking for a hand out from Uncle Obama and try being self reliant. I've been dirt poor. I've been so hungry that I took and ate a hand full of ketchup packets from McDonalds. I've lived for a week on a loaf of bread, a jar of peanut butter and tap water, but I had my rent, books and tuition paid for. I've worked 2 jobs and gone to school full-time.

I'll be damned if I'm gonna let someone take my money and just hand it over to people who sit at home watching Jerry Springer and bang out kids they can't afford or are too stupid to say, "Do you want fries with that?" That's what I envision with Obama. He's wants to give everyone, who doesn't earn enough money to even pay income taxes on, a check for $1,000 every year.

What happened to the American Dream, to working hard, putting in the hours and earning your own way? The dream is dead... He'll give you money, pay for your home and give you free medical care all at someone else's expense.

Last night is truly the saddest day in our history. Welcome to the U.S.S.A.

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 07:21 PM
I know a number of gay people and over the years, been privileged to call some of them my friends.

I voted for prop 8. I am sick and tired of the courts trying to usurp the will of the people.

What I find disingenuous, is your labeling of over 53 percent of CALIFORNIA extreme right wing.

It is not extreme. It seems to be mainstream.

Good, I'm glad you offered your 2 cents, and I mean that in a respectful way. Can YOU explain how gay marriage is harmful to society? I perhaps worded the last part wrong in my previous post, it's not as extreme (unpopular) as my words would indicate I believe it to be, but the bans on gay marriage are mostly the work of conservatives. Honestly, I was shocked it passed in California.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 07:22 PM
[full blown rant mode ON]

I'm gonna guess that you're a younger person who hasn't married yet and doesn't have kids. You probably haven't truly worked a hard day in your life yet. Judging from your posts here, you're probably not far out of high school, maybe into college. If you are in college I'd guess you're into a liberal art type of education. You may even hope for legalized marijuana someday.

Come back and talk to me in 20 years if you've settled into a career that doesn't involve saying "Do you want fries with that?"

Last night was for me the saddest day in American history. Last night Americans thumbed their noses at freedom and embraced socialism. They reached out to a man who cannot possibly deliver everything he promised and even if he could, those promises are wrong. Instead of offering a hand up to the poor he's offering a hand out in the form of a check at the expense of those who work hard.

He's going to punish those who work hard and earn money. He's going to "steal from the rich and give to the poor". While that sounds great in a fairy tale, it's wrong. It is flat out wrong.

I said it before, I'll say it again.... Our economy needs the wealthy. Rich people invest their money into businesses and properties. Rich people provide the capital to fund new projects. Rich people fuel the economy. (Keep in mind I currently drive a school bus, but I do have a college degree. I'm not "rich".)

We can't all work our way to being filthy rich. Most of us don't have the drive or knowledge to do that. Most of us are apathetic fools who keep thinking if only I can win the lottery.

Stop looking for a hand out from Uncle Obama and try being self reliant. I've been dirt poor. I've been so hungry that I took and ate a hand full of ketchup packets from McDonalds. I've lived for a week on a loaf of bread, a jar of peanut butter and tap water, but I had my rent, books and tuition paid for. I've worked 2 jobs and gone to school full-time.

I'll be damned if I'm gonna let someone take my money and just hand it over to people who sit at home watching Jerry Springer and bang out kids they can't afford or are too stupid to say, "Do you want fries with that?" That's what I envision with Obama. He's wants to give everyone, who doesn't earn enough money to even pay income taxes on, a check for $1,000 every year.

What happened to the American Dream, to working hard, putting in the hours and earning your own way? The dream is dead... He'll give you money, pay for your home and give you free medical care all at someone else's expense.

Last night is truly the saddest day in our history. Welcome to the U.S.S.A.


PNP...

I need some clarification...

Could you tell me how you feel about obama? :wink02:

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 07:25 PM
As for Prop 8 out in CA. I'd vote YES in a heart beat. A marriage is between a man and a woman. I'm not religious at all. Aside from teaching some good moral stories I have little use for religion. But I do strongly believe in the union of man and woman.

Give gay couples all the same legal rights as married men and women, but call it a civil union, domestic bond, or whatever....

The word marriage already has a definition.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 07:27 PM
Good, I'm glad you offered your 2 cents, and I mean that in a respectful way. Can YOU explain how gay marriage is harmful to society? I perhaps worded the last part wrong in my previous post, it's not as extreme (unpopular) as my words would indicate I believe it to be, but the bans on gay marriage are mostly the work of conservatives. Honestly, I was shocked it passed in California.

The issue for me was two fold.

1. It was the court system reversing the will of the people. My vote was to smack down the courts and those who try to use the courts to impose their will on the majority.

2. I believe that the govt. should ONLY produce civil unions. It is the church's place to do marriages. All tax codes, rights of visitation, rights of survivorship, etc. should be based on civil unions.

Marriage, IMO, is a rite of the church which has been taken from the church by the state. It is a violation of my freedom of religion. Then, for the state to NOW redefine the rite of the church, is a violation of separation of church and state.

You want equal rights? Fine. Civil unions for all. I would vote for it. But you redefine marriage, I will vote against it every time.

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 07:28 PM
PNP...

I need some clarification...

Could you tell me how you feel about obama? :wink02:

I wouldn't want to go a rant or anything but the scares the hell out of me. I can honestly say that I fear the direction this country is headed.

Too many people expect the government to take care of them and fix their problems so long as it doesn't interfere with American Idol. :doh:

anyway...

Preacher
11-05-2008, 07:39 PM
I wouldn't want to go a rant or anything but the scares the hell out of me. I can honestly say that I fear the direction this country is headed.

Too many people expect the government to take care of them and fix their problems so long as it doesn't interfere with American Idol. :doh:

anyway...

:chuckle:


Honestly... I am as hopeful today as I was 4 and 8 years ago.

When Clinton was elected, I thought the sky was falling. Then I realized that in the end, he had no REAL affect on my life. The sun still rose today. Time continues. I still breath. This country is strong enough to withstand the left and the right. It has an internal inertia, Hegel calls it a "Geist" that continues our path.

In 4 or 8 years, the Republicans will be ecstatic, and the dems will be mourning the death of America, just like many on the right are doing now, just like many on the left did 4 years ago.

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 07:45 PM
[full blown rant mode ON]

I'm gonna guess that you're a younger person who hasn't married yet and doesn't have kids. You probably haven't truly worked a hard day in your life yet. Judging from your posts here, you're probably not far out of high school, maybe into college. If you are in college I'd guess you're into a liberal art type of education. You may even hope for legalized marijuana someday.

Come back and talk to me in 20 years if you've settled into a career that doesn't involve saying "Do you want fries with that?"

Last night was for me the saddest day in American history. Last night Americans thumbed their noses at freedom and embraced socialism. They reached out to a man who cannot possibly deliver everything he promised and even if he could, those promises are wrong. Instead of offering a hand up to the poor he's offering a hand out in the form of a check at the expense of those who work hard.

He's going to punish those who work hard and earn money. He's going to "steal from the rich and give to the poor". While that sounds great in a fairy tale, it's wrong. It is flat out wrong.

I said it before, I'll say it again.... Our economy needs the wealthy. Rich people invest their money into businesses and properties. Rich people provide the capital to fund new projects. Rich people fuel the economy. (Keep in mind I currently drive a school bus, but I do have a college degree. I'm not "rich".)

We can't all work our way to being filthy rich. Most of us don't have the drive or knowledge to do that. Most of us are apathetic fools who keep thinking if only I can win the lottery.

Stop looking for a hand out from Uncle Obama and try being self reliant. I've been dirt poor. I've been so hungry that I took and ate a hand full of ketchup packets from McDonalds. I've lived for a week on a loaf of bread, a jar of peanut butter and tap water, but I had my rent, books and tuition paid for. I've worked 2 jobs and gone to school full-time.

I'll be damned if I'm gonna let someone take my money and just hand it over to people who sit at home watching Jerry Springer and bang out kids they can't afford or are too stupid to say, "Do you want fries with that?" That's what I envision with Obama. He's wants to give everyone, who doesn't earn enough money to even pay income taxes on, a check for $1,000 every year.

What happened to the American Dream, to working hard, putting in the hours and earning your own way? The dream is dead... He'll give you money, pay for your home and give you free medical care all at someone else's expense.

Last night is truly the saddest day in our history. Welcome to the U.S.S.A.

You'd be right in your assumptions that I am a young person, and am in college. However, I disagree on the notion that the rich are ones who drive our economy. They account for a small small percentage of the population, they cannot POSSIBLY be the backbone of this country, that would be the middle class. Not to be cliche and quote straight from Obama, but the "trickling down" theory HAS NOT worked. I will go as far as to say we need to be careful about how we distribute the money, though. You are right in this regard, giving government handouts to those who are not contributing to society isn't going to be very beneficial at all. I'm hopeful this can be minimized, though. Also, I didn't vote Obama for simply economic reasons. I voted Obama for the issues we face here and abroad. McCain would have taken this country to shit with his "foreign policy".

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 07:52 PM
The issue for me was two fold.

1. It was the court system reversing the will of the people. My vote was to smack down the courts and those who try to use the courts to impose their will on the majority.

2. I believe that the govt. should ONLY produce civil unions. It is the church's place to do marriages. All tax codes, rights of visitation, rights of survivorship, etc. should be based on civil unions.

Marriage, IMO, is a rite of the church which has been taken from the church by the state. It is a violation of my freedom of religion. Then, for the state to NOW redefine the rite of the church, is a violation of separation of church and state.

You want equal rights? Fine. Civil unions for all. I would vote for it. But you redefine marriage, I will vote against it every time.

You know, your statements would be fine and all if before yesterday the government had forced churches to marry gay couples and then overturned it to become neutral on the matter. To just simply stay out of it. I could live with that, actually I would probably support that. Even though I am not religious in the least, for the principle of the matter, I couldn't support government telling the church how to practice their faith. But that's not the case, Prop 8 has straight up BANNED any gay marriage. Why can't the individual church have the final say? Isn't that what you really want? What's even worse, they're trying to nullify those 18,000 couples in Cali who had married over those 6 months.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 07:54 PM
I wouldn't want to go a rant or anything but the scares the hell out of me. I can honestly say that I fear the direction this country is headed.

...dont worry, its not all doom and gloom. we need a few years (about 8) to "recharge" our military before the next republican administration (maybe not for another 16-20 years) can foolishly plunge into a 3 pronged attack against china, russia, and iran.

even venezueala's hugo chavez is offering congrats and talking about talks. check out what some of the other prominent world leaders are saying on this ISLAMIC :horror: website- :chuckle:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2008/11/20081155293464248.html


News Americas
World reacts to Obama's victory

Obama's victory was celebrated around the world, and not just by Americans [AFP]

Barack Obama: [To] all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world - our stories are singular but our destiny is shared. A new dawn of American leadership is at hand.



China

Hu Jintao, China's president, congratulated Obama on his victory in the US presidential poll, saying a closer relationship btween the two nations would be "for the benefit of Chinese and American people, and people around the world".

"In a new historical era, I look forward to ... taking our bilateral relationship of constructive co-operation to a new level," Hu said in a written message, according to a statement on the Chinese foreign ministry's website.

Wen Jiabao, China's prime minister, also congratulated Obama, while Xi Jinping, the vice-president, sent a message of congratulations to Joe Biden, Obama's running mate and America's next vice-president.

Britain

Gordon Brown, the UK's prime minister, congratulated Obama, hailing his "energising politics ... his progressive values and his vision for the future".

"I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to Barack Obama on winning the presidency of the United States," he said in a statement.

"The relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is vital to our prosperity and security ... Barack Obama ran an inspirational campaign, energising politics with his progressive values and his vision for the future."

India

India's ruling Congress party hailed Obama's victory, saying his "youthful energy" was in tune with the energy of emerging India.

"Obama represents youthful energy, exuberant dynamism and a forward-looking progressive mindset which is also the spirit animating India," Abhishek Manu Singhvi, spokesman for India's Congress party, said.


plus many others

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 07:59 PM
BUo0_uTGRuE

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 08:01 PM
Please explain to me how you see this as beneficial to society. I don't even know ONE gay person, yet I can see how wrong this is. I'd be interested to hear you defend your view.

I never said it was beneficial to society to ban gay marriage. I don't claim to know how it would effect Social Security or other fiscal aspects although common sense tells me it will further hurt the already sinking SS program. I also don't claim to know the social repercussions but I am not willing to take a chance on that gamble being a husband, and father to a 5 year old. I do know traditional marriage is between a man and woman and with that institution comes children which equates to family. I don't like gays forcing there way into traditional marriage. Where does it end. I do think they are entitled to rights with a civil union though. They have the same rights they choose not to use them. A gay man can marry if he wants, its just he would have to marry a woman. Same rights we do. Its the same kind of crap with secularists, they feel like they are a minority and have to take any sort of religion and tradition out of this country. I have no problem with peoples views or sexual preference, but quit jamming it down the throats of american with traditional values. Maybe someday if you marry and have kids you will think a little differently.

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 08:01 PM
Obama is a socialist. His agenda is socialist.

That right there should be enough to piss off any American.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 08:05 PM
Obama is a socialist. His agenda is socialist.

That right there should be enough to piss off any American.

just post lots of these... its sort of soothing.

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 08:05 PM
Obama is a socialist. His agenda is socialist.

That right there should be enough to piss off any American.

....ahem! Hannity?!?!

The Patriot
11-05-2008, 08:08 PM
Obama is a socialist. His agenda is socialist.

That right there should be enough to piss off any American.

Yeah, it didn't seem to piss many people off when Bush nationalized the banks a couple weeks ago. You should probably know what socialism is before you label someone as one. :wave:

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 08:10 PM
I never said it was beneficial to society to ban gay marriage. I don't claim to know how it would effect Social Security or other fiscal aspects although common sense tells me it will further hurt the already sinking SS program. I also don't claim to know the social repercussions but I am not willing to take a chance on that gamble being a husband, and father to a 5 year old. I do know traditional marriage is between a man and woman and with that institution comes children which equates to family. I don't like gays forcing there way into traditional marriage. Where does it end. I do think they are entitled to rights with a civil union though. They have the same rights they choose not to use them. A gay man can marry if he wants, its just he would have to marry a woman. Same rights we do. Its the same kind of crap with secularists, they feel like they are a minority and have to take any sort of religion and tradition out of this country. I have no problem with peoples views or sexual preference, but quit jamming it down the throats of american with traditional values. Maybe someday if you marry and have kids you will think a little differently.

So then tell me, if you're so afraid of social security drying up because of gays marrying, how come you are fine with civil unions? Also, I am a secularist. I'm agnostic. I believe the "jamming it down the throats" is happening on both sides. To believe otherwise is naive.

stillers4me
11-05-2008, 08:13 PM
DOW (javascript:GoURL(dowURL,''))
486.01
-5.05%
9,139.27

NASDAQ (javascript:GoURL(nasdaqURL,''))
98.48
-5.53%
1,681.64

S&P 500 (javascript:GoURL(sandpURL,''))
52.98
-5.27%
952.77

Normally, what I said was true... that once the indecision is over, there is an upward bump.

These numbers, IMO, are quite damning to Obama from wall street. I was expecting something different...

Obama made history for a second day in a row. This was the worst post-election stock market plunge in history.

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 08:15 PM
So then tell me, if you're so afraid of social security drying up because of gays marrying, how come you are fine with civil unions? Also, I am a secularist. I'm agnostic. I believe the "jamming it down the throats" is happening on both sides. To believe otherwise is naive.

read my post, I am not worried about SS. I don't claim to know the repercussions. I wouldn't know about people forcing religion down secularists throat. If you don't want to say the pledge of allegiance then don't. But trying to shut down xmas because you don't celebrate is wrong. If you don't like manger scenes then don't stop and look, but don't take away for people who do celebrate or enjoy them. I am not religious by any means by the way.

I don't claim to have a great reason, its about tradition and values for me. This in not black and white stuff.

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 08:20 PM
Yeah, it didn't seem to piss many people off when Bush nationalized the banks a couple weeks ago. You should probably know what socialism is before you label someone as one. :wave:

The "bank bailout" pissed me off too. I wrote my congressmen to let them know it too. LEt the markets decide which banks fail and which survive. If you make bad loans to people have no hope of paying them off then you have to live with it.

When was the last time you wrote to your congressmen?

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 08:20 PM
Obama made history for a second day in a row. This was the worst post-election stock market plunge in history.
thats suprising, considering how fantastic the market has been doing lately.

TSDMedic
11-05-2008, 08:21 PM
I know that this has been discussed in the past.

The two sides will never likely agree because they see one specific point of view that (in their opinion) trumps all others.

Pro-Abortion see it from the Woman's perspective.
Pro-Life see it from the child's perspective.

I'm Pro-Life and while I can understand that there are some instances where an abortion is medically necessary...I'll never see it as the Woman's perspective trumps the innocent child's perspective.

I agree with you. I do not believe that an innocent child should die. I know this is a lesser important issue, but as a single parent I feel so strongly about it. Not to mention that I have been in the medical field for the past 12 years and have seen a lot of women who used abortion as birth control and it kills me because I have also seen a lot of women who have miscarried and been devastated because they wanted nothing more than a beautiful baby.

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 08:22 PM
read my post, I am not worried about SS. I don't claim to know the repercussions. I wouldn't know about people forcing religion down secularists throat. If you don't want to say the pledge of allegiance then don't. But trying to shut down xmas because you don't celebrate is wrong. If you don't like manger scenes then don't stop and look, but don't take away for people who do celebrate or enjoy them. I am not religious by any means by the way.

I don't claim to have a great reason, its about tradition and values for me. This in not black and white stuff.

Well, I still want to know how you think gay marriage *might* damage society. You say you're a father, well, I think that's a big reason people are afraid of gay marriage. Afraid if the kids are exposed to it, they're going to instantly morph into a homosexual transformer style. I really don't think it's a choice for them, I figure if it were, many would have said "to hell with this" and gone straight and saved themselves this trouble.

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 08:22 PM
/stands up and gives Obama a one *fingered* salute.

"I pledge apathy to the flag of the Socialist States of America and to the handout for which I now stand, one Nation, over taxed, defenseless, with civilian security forces and green cards for all."

stillers4me
11-05-2008, 08:28 PM
thats suprising, considering how fantastic the market has been doing lately.

I expected it to rally becaue the saviour is on the way to the White House.

PisnNapalm
11-05-2008, 08:32 PM
I expected it to rally becaue the saviour is on the way to the White House.

He's only the saviour of those with little or nothing to lose financially.

GBMelBlount
11-05-2008, 08:50 PM
Good, I'm glad you offered your 2 cents, and I mean that in a respectful way. Can YOU explain how gay marriage is harmful to society? I perhaps worded the last part wrong in my previous post, it's not as extreme (unpopular) as my words would indicate I believe it to be, but the bans on gay marriage are mostly the work of conservatives. Honestly, I was shocked it passed in California.

Yes, isn't that how attorneys are created?

NJarhead
11-05-2008, 08:52 PM
Yes, it is my opinion that through fudge packing, attorneys are created. :thumbsup:

:laughing:

My uncle is a lawyer (Property Attorney). He's got a book in his office: "Lawyers and other Reptiles." Always thought that was funny.

GBMelBlount
11-05-2008, 08:54 PM
Just having fun. I know many attorneys who are great people.

The Patriot
11-05-2008, 09:02 PM
When was the last time you wrote to your congressmen?

In 2003 and 2005, both reguarding the CA/Tunnel Project fiasco.

NJarhead
11-05-2008, 09:04 PM
Just having fun. I know many attorneys who are great people.

Well, I love my Uncle.., I may be a little biased, but I think he's a great guy. Other than that, I think attorneys are a bunch of snakes too. :laughing: :drink:

I think he feels the same

NJarhead
11-05-2008, 09:06 PM
In 2003 and 2005, both reguarding the CA/Tunnel Project fiasco.

The "Big Dig?" But didn't they recover some of the original sea chests that had at one time contained tea for some party up there a while back? :wink02:

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 09:13 PM
I expected it to rally becaue the saviour is on the way to the White House.so you really thought tons of investors who have lost billions would just throw money at the market because it was election day?

its not quite working like that these days.

not only has over a trillion been lost but theres gonna be a significant ammount of cash just sitting on the sidelines for a little while.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 09:26 PM
so you really thought tons of investors who have lost billions would just throw money at the market because it was election day?

its not quite working like that these days.

not only has over a trillion been lost but theres gonna be a significant ammount of cash just sitting on the sidelines for a little while.

Actually, no real 'Money" has been lost.

That idea that so much is "lost" is part of the fear that is driving a bad economy worse.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 09:48 PM
Actually, no real 'Money" has been lost.

That idea that so much is "lost" is part of the fear that is driving a bad economy worse.

holy shit, here we go with the semantics. gold, greenbacks, stock value, call it what ever you want... peoples savings and values of their assets have plummeted i.e. "have been lost".

im pretty sure you are aware of the world we live in preach. in our capital driven society, credit companies even sell those little plastic cards as "real money".

stillers4me
11-05-2008, 09:49 PM
So Barry is our new President. So be it.

Now on to more important things like........why on earth did Michelle choose that gawd awful dress on the most important night of their lives????????? :chuckle:

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 09:52 PM
So Barry is our new President. So be it.

Now on to more important things like........why on earth did Michelle choose that gawd awful dress on the most important night of their lives????????? :chuckle:

she picked it out of her own closet as opposed to having the DNC send her on a $150K shopping spree..............? :noidea:

:applaudit::chuckle::applaudit:

stillers4me
11-05-2008, 10:01 PM
she picked it out of her own closet as opposed to having the DNC send her on a $150K shopping spree..............? :noidea:

:applaudit::chuckle::applaudit:

This from a supporter of man who spent nearly $700,000 for a stage and lighting for a speech in Berlin. Plus $9000 for limo services to get him there. :coffee:

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 10:05 PM
This from a supporter of man who spent nearly $700,000 for a stage and lighting for a speech in Berlin. Plus $9000 for limo services to get him there. :coffee:this from a supporter of a potential 1st lady who wore a horrible $300,000 turquoise and pearl enemble for their innauguration. :wink02:

you asked. i answered.

next.

iloveben7
11-05-2008, 10:08 PM
Congratulations Barack Obama

xfl2001fan
11-05-2008, 10:14 PM
Congratulations Barack Obama

:jawdrop:

That politcally neutral and positive post has no place in this thread.

:wink:

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 10:24 PM
So then tell me, if you're so afraid of social security drying up because of gays marrying, how come you are fine with civil unions? Also, I am a secularist. I'm agnostic. I believe the "jamming it down the throats" is happening on both sides. To believe otherwise is naive.

Let me ask you a question now college student. You and 9 others in your class of 50 work your ass off and get A's. The other slugs drink, sleep in, smoke weed and basically F off for the semester and get F's. Your professor thinks you know what thesed kids who worked their ass off and got A's can give part of their grade to the slugs and they can all get C's , because no one should get an F, its not fair. How would you feel. That is how Professor Obama would be if he taught your class. Welcome to the real world kid. Thats what we are now going to deal with. I am one of the classmates who gets a B, I don't quite make 250,000 but do make 6 figures plus and some day will get penalized. Not a good taste in mouth.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 10:29 PM
Let me ask you a question now college student. You and 9 others in your class of 50 work your ass off and get A's. The other slugs drink, sleep in, smoke weed and basically F off for the semester and get F's. Your professor thinks you know what thesed kids who worked their ass off and got A's can give part of their grade to the slugs and they can all get C's , because no one should get an F, its not fair. How would you feel. That is how Professor Obama would be if he taught your class. Welcome to the real world kid. Thats what we are now going to deal with. I am one of the classmates who gets a B, I don't quite make 250,000 but do make 6 figures plus and some day will get penalized. Not a good taste in mouth.
i believe obama actually held a job classification as a professor for the university of chicago so why dont you just go find some links to back up this rediculous post. :noidea:

MACH1
11-05-2008, 10:30 PM
Actually, no real 'Money" has been lost.

That idea that so much is "lost" is part of the fear that is driving a bad economy worse.

Ummm...Explain that to my 401. If its not real money then I must be a fool. :doh:

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 10:32 PM
i believe obama actually held a job classification as a professor for the university of chicago so why dont you just go find some links to back up this rediculous post. :noidea:

You don't see the correlation Tony, don't play this game. I am giving a serious analogy in terms this student could relate to. If you don't see the similarities to Obamas plan than you are being obtuse.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 10:36 PM
You don't see the correlation Tony, don't play this game. I am giving a serious analogy in terms this student could relate to. If you don't see the similarities to Obamas plan than you are being obtuse.im being obtuse :tt02:

although im not seeing things through the same glasses as you :cool:

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 10:42 PM
im being obtuse :tt02:

although im not seeing things through the same glasses as you :cool:

Since I was asking the kid, and he is in college lets see if he can relate. Its an analogy Tony. I am not say Hussein ran his class that way. I thought you could be a little more open minded than that. Wouldn't the example I gave be grade redistribution, not much difference to me than wealth redistribution. I really don't think you are capable of normal conversation. I wasn't slamming your man. I am trying to put this into perspective to a college student who is probably not earning money yet.

MACH1
11-05-2008, 10:50 PM
You'd be right in your assumptions that I am a young person, and am in college. However, I disagree on the notion that the rich are ones who drive our economy. They account for a small small percentage of the population, they cannot POSSIBLY be the backbone of this country, that would be the middle class. Not to be cliche and quote straight from Obama, but the "trickling down" theory HAS NOT worked. I will go as far as to say we need to be careful about how we distribute the money, though. You are right in this regard, giving government handouts to those who are not contributing to society isn't going to be very beneficial at all. I'm hopeful this can be minimized, though. Also, I didn't vote Obama for simply economic reasons. I voted Obama for the issues we face here and abroad. McCain would have taken this country to shit with his "foreign policy".

What you are failing to understand is Obama's plan is to raise business's taxes to 49% from 20%. That alone will put business's under and the ones that can will move out of the country. There goes the job market that drives the economy. Then add to that the bankrupting of coal plants. There goes a few thousand more jobs and electric prices going through the roof. Then again add on the price of what its going to cost employers to pay into the socialized medical for employees or the fines for not buying into it. Whoops, there goes countless jobs.
Great way to jump start the economy. :thumbsup: And that my friend is going to trickle down to you.

As far as Obama's foreign policy experiance. He has absolutely NONE. Tea with that cracker.

steelcity_88
11-05-2008, 10:50 PM
Let me ask you a question now college student. You and 9 others in your class of 50 work your ass off and get A's. The other slugs drink, sleep in, smoke weed and basically F off for the semester and get F's. Your professor thinks you know what thesed kids who worked their ass off and got A's can give part of their grade to the slugs and they can all get C's , because no one should get an F, its not fair. How would you feel. That is how Professor Obama would be if he taught your class. Welcome to the real world kid. Thats what we are now going to deal with. I am one of the classmates who gets a B, I don't quite make 250,000 but do make 6 figures plus and some day will get penalized. Not a good taste in mouth.

Isn't that essentially what Bush did with the "no child left behind"? UH-OH! Maybe Bush is an "education socialist"! But really, hasn't welfare always been a "socialist" idea all along? How long has that been around, hm? He's shaving a little extra off the top of the wealthy, helping out the guys at the bottom of the pyramid. Of course you're going to have those "students" who slack off and sit around smoking dope all day, contributing absolutely ZIP to society. Nobody likes taxes, but the idea here is we are in a financial crisis and those who can afford to help us out of this slump are going to have to chip in a little extra. Is it fair? No. It's not fair that a small percentage of people screwed it up for us right now, but most people are going to have to suffer in one way or another because of it.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 10:54 PM
Since I was asking the kid, and he is in college lets see if he can relate. Its an analogy Tony. I am not say Hussein ran his class that way. I thought you could be a little more open minded than that. Wouldn't the example I gave be grade redistribution, not much difference to me than wealth redistribution. I really don't think you are capable of normal conversation. I wasn't slamming your man. I am trying to put this into perspective to a college student who is probably not earning money yet.
i get that and already admitted i was just being obtuse. what more do you want? :noidea:

carry on w/ the college kid. (assuming that is what he is and not just some wild stereotyping speculation)

oh, and im very open minded. i voted for barack who supposedly had absolutely no experience whatsoever. im pro capitalism, anti socialism, pro gun, pro death penalty, anti union, pro military, anti gay marriage, and all that good stuff.

but thats just me.

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 11:07 PM
i get that and already admitted i was just being obtuse. what more do you want? :noidea:

carry on w/ the college kid. (assuming that is what he is and not just some wild stereotyping speculation)

oh, and im very open minded. i voted for barack who supposedly had absolutely no experience whatsoever. im pro capitalism, anti socialism, pro gun, pro death penalty, anti union, pro military, anti gay marriage, and all that good stuff.

but thats just me.

my bad, I didn't read it slowly enough to understand what you meant. I just saw the response and thought it was typical Tony sarcasm. I am not trying to change anyones mind, I am just trying to give the kid my perspective. I by no means think I have the answers, I tend to vote on principle because for one I don't think any of these guys can keep all their promises. Only time will tell. The more time that passes, the less us McCain supporters will be upset.

cubanstogie
11-05-2008, 11:09 PM
i get that and already admitted i was just being obtuse. what more do you want? :noidea:

carry on w/ the college kid. (assuming that is what he is and not just some wild stereotyping speculation)

oh, and im very open minded. i voted for barack who supposedly had absolutely no experience whatsoever. im pro capitalism, anti socialism, pro gun, pro death penalty, anti union, pro military, anti gay marriage, and all that good stuff.

but thats just me.

Thats funny because I am all the above except the Obama part. who would have thunk it.

augustashark
11-05-2008, 11:10 PM
Lets see what the markets do tomorrow. Don't think for a second that this will not have an effect.

Sorry preach but I think you will see a different story taking place. Obamas plan on capital gains will spark a wave of sell offs.

I really don't like to gloat, but I told you so.:drink:

MasterOfPuppets
11-05-2008, 11:16 PM
THE SHY IS FALLING !!! ....THE SHY IS FALLING !!! ....:willy:

geez people....we've been thru sucky ass presidents before and survived.....as long as obama doesn't get us into , ANOTHER trillion dollars worth of wars, we'll be ok..

Godfather
11-05-2008, 11:28 PM
Obama will be better than Bush. But that's like being a better quarterback than Mark Malone.

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 11:31 PM
I really don't like to gloat, but I told you so.:drink:you call a 1 day drop of 5% a "wave of sell offs"? (especially in this economy) :chuckle:

you dont follow the market much, do you?

augustashark
11-05-2008, 11:36 PM
you call a 1 day drop of 5% a "wave of sell offs"? (especially in this economy) :chuckle:

you dont follow the market much, do you?

It will continue.

Not my fault if you don't make enough money to understand this, but if you pm me I will be happy to bring you up to speed.

I think it was also noted that this was the worst day after a presidental election for the market. Blaming the current economy is simplistic (which I know is good for you) if you don't know that Obama has said and will raise capital gains taxes then you did'nt vett your canidate very well.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 11:39 PM
Ummm...Explain that to my 401. If its not real money then I must be a fool. :doh:

Where you depending on that money this week or this month to buy your food? Your electricity? Your gas? No.

It is only to a very specific segment of socieity, the ones that depend on the 401k ONLY (or retirement, ONLY) that this affects. And frankly, most of them, if they listened to ANY financial advisor, won't be affected that bad. Because they are told to take money from risk and put it into non-risk funds/fdic insured accounts.

So back to you and me. We lost a bunch of numbers. What does that do? That means that for the next few months, Our money that is put into retirement will actually buy MORE stock of that mutual. over the next few years, because of this situation now, we will actually end up more stock at a higher value.

it simple. My mutual was (example) $30 a share. my $600 a month was buy 20 share every month. Sure, that 1000 share I have equaled $30,000. Now, it is worth lets say, half, $15,000. However, that means that my next paycheck, with $600 going into retirement, will buy 40 share instead of 20 share. Lets say that continues for a year. At the end of that year, I will have bought 480 share, instead of 220 share. Thus, I would have an excess 220. Now, when the mutual DOES go back up to $30 a share, my mutual will be worth $6600 MORE than if it stayed at $40.00 a share the entire time.

In other words, if you are under 53 and can hold out for 2-4 years, while still paying the same amount into your retirement, THIS IS THE BEST DANG THING THAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED TO YOUR RETIREMENT.


Trust me, I am hoping my funds stay where they are for about 5-7 years, for that very reason.

Preacher
11-05-2008, 11:43 PM
It will continue.

Not my fault if you don't make enough money to understand this, but if you pm me I will be happy to bring you up to speed.

I think it was also noted that this was the worst day after a presidental election for the market. Blaming the current economy is simplistic (which I know is good for you) if you don't know that Obama has said and will raise capital gains taxes then you did'nt vett your canidate very well.

come on...

We've all been a bit overboard in our posts... but is attacking another person in this manner really necessary?

Tony was just skipping school with his buddy the day of HighSchool economics!

http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w266/aeconomos/hillbillies.jpg



Wait a second... Maybe THATS WHY HE DOESN'T LIKE BUSH!!!!!!


(Tony, Shhh.. don't tell em that's me with you. I wouldn't wanna ruin my rep. around my fellow conservatives on this board!!!)

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 11:45 PM
but if you pm me I will be happy to bring you up to speed..

:rofl:...:rofl:....:rofl:....:rofl:....:rofl:....

yeah, im gonna take economic advice from "joe the plumber" :rolleyes:

:rofl:.....:rofl:.....:rofl:....:rofl:....:rofl:.. ..:rofl:....:rofl:

augustashark
11-05-2008, 11:58 PM
Joe the plumber- Now a national fiqure, on Hannity and Colmes tonight, done many tv and radio interviews, will get a job anywhere he wants now, will be taken care of for a long time.

Tony (fumonda) hipchest- The resident clown of SF, over 19k in useless posts, can't get a date, subcribes to JUGS.

Due to JUGS, I have to go with fumonda:chuckle:

tony hipchest
11-05-2008, 11:59 PM
Where you depending on that money this week or this month to buy your food? Your electricity? Your gas? No.

It is only to a very specific segment of socieity, the ones that depend on the 401k ONLY (or retirement, ONLY) that this affects. And frankly, most of them, if they listened to ANY financial advisor, won't be affected that bad. Because they are told to take money from risk and put it into non-risk funds/fdic insured accounts.

So back to you and me. We lost a bunch of numbers. What does that do? That means that for the next few months, Our money that is put into retirement will actually buy MORE stock of that mutual. over the next few years, because of this situation now, we will actually end up more stock at a higher value.

it simple. My mutual was (example) $30 a share. my $600 a month was buy 20 share every month. Sure, that 1000 share I have equaled $30,000. Now, it is worth lets say, half, $15,000. However, that means that my next paycheck, with $600 going into retirement, will buy 40 share instead of 20 share. Lets say that continues for a year. At the end of that year, I will have bought 480 share, instead of 220 share. Thus, I would have an excess 220. Now, when the mutual DOES go back up to $30 a share, my mutual will be worth $6600 MORE than if it stayed at $40.00 a share the entire time.

In other words, if you are under 53 and can hold out for 2-4 years, while still paying the same amount into your retirement, THIS IS THE BEST DANG THING THAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED TO YOUR RETIREMENT.


Trust me, I am hoping my funds stay where they are for about 5-7 years, for that very reason.

everything you say is true, which i s why i believe (along with warren buffet) that now is the time to put chips "all in".

however if you relied on drawing out now (or were forced to because of age) or were a day trader, it most certainly is "real money".

unlike the fear mongers like shark, i have faith in america and know our economy will rise again and our markets will NOT bottom out at ZERO and stay there for the rest of eternity.

this is america, after all. i laugh at all those who forget that just because a black democrat has been elected into office.

:horror: "welfare... 40% unemployed.... welfare" :horror:

MACH1
11-06-2008, 12:02 AM
Where you depending on that money this week or this month to buy your food? Your electricity? Your gas? No.

It is only to a very specific segment of socieity, the ones that depend on the 401k ONLY (or retirement, ONLY) that this affects. And frankly, most of them, if they listened to ANY financial advisor, won't be affected that bad. Because they are told to take money from risk and put it into non-risk funds/fdic insured accounts.

So back to you and me. We lost a bunch of numbers. What does that do? That means that for the next few months, Our money that is put into retirement will actually buy MORE stock of that mutual. over the next few years, because of this situation now, we will actually end up more stock at a higher value.

it simple. My mutual was (example) $30 a share. my $600 a month was buy 20 share every month. Sure, that 1000 share I have equaled $30,000. Now, it is worth lets say, half, $15,000. However, that means that my next paycheck, with $600 going into retirement, will buy 40 share instead of 20 share. Lets say that continues for a year. At the end of that year, I will have bought 480 share, instead of 220 share. Thus, I would have an excess 220. Now, when the mutual DOES go back up to $30 a share, my mutual will be worth $6600 MORE than if it stayed at $40.00 a share the entire time.

In other words, if you are under 53 and can hold out for 2-4 years, while still paying the same amount into your retirement, THIS IS THE BEST DANG THING THAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED TO YOUR RETIREMENT.


Trust me, I am hoping my funds stay where they are for about 5-7 years, for that very reason.

Is that in real money or monopoly money. :wink02:


Paying bills takes real money, the higher the bills the less I can put forward for retirement. As far as a "specific segment of society" Thats millions of people right now. My parents being two of them. Yes, they have taken care of their nest egg very well and still took a big hit.

augustashark
11-06-2008, 12:08 AM
everything you say is true, which i s why i believe (along with warren buffet) that now is the time to put chips "all in".

however if you relied on drawing out now (or were forced to because of age) or were a day trader, it most certainly is "real money".

unlike the fear mongers like shark, i have faith in america and know our economy will rise again and our markets will NOT bottom out at ZERO and stay there for the rest of eternity.

this is america, after all. i laugh at all those who forget that just because a black democrat has been elected into office.

:horror: "welfare... 40% unemployed.... welfare" :horror:


Wow, you are clueless. The markets will have to adjust. I never said they would go down and stay there.

There are alot of buisness owners who operate on a line of credit and much of the securtiy for that line is tied to stocks owned by the corp, llc or the owner themselves. Now if the markets are down what do you think happens? You get a call the next day from the bank (where the line of credit is) asking for you to make up the difference. Now I ask you preach and the clown, is that real dollars? Does that hurt employment? Where does the owner pass the cost to cover the lack of security?

tony hipchest
11-06-2008, 12:46 AM
can anyone tell me how much my taxes will go up for owning Jumingtha shark under the obama plan?

:toofunny:

i may wanna sell this worthless asset now and still save a few pennies.

Preacher
11-06-2008, 02:00 AM
Is that in real money or monopoly money. :wink02:


Paying bills takes real money, the higher the bills the less I can put forward for retirement. As far as a "specific segment of society" Thats millions of people right now. My parents being two of them. Yes, they have taken care of their nest egg very well and still took a big hit.

I am sure it has.

Here's the the question I have. Why would the nestegg still be in the markets? It should be in a fixed annuity or an FDIC insured account when it becomes the primary source of income. If they don't need it as a primary source of income, then it stays in the markets, and rides up and down.

augustashark
11-06-2008, 02:00 AM
can anyone tell me how much my taxes will go up for owning Jumingtha shark under the obama plan?

:toofunny:

i may wanna sell this worthless asset now and still save a few pennies.

expected reply. Well done.

Leftoverhard
11-06-2008, 10:42 AM
What happened to the American Dream, to working hard, putting in the hours and earning your own way?

The American dream was elected president on Nov. 4th 2008. :wave::usa:

lilyoder6
11-06-2008, 10:45 AM
i want to know how obama's.. share the wealth plan is going to work.. not rly happy bout making money and then giving it to ppl who won't work b/c of several reasons

HometownGal
11-06-2008, 11:15 AM
The American dream was elected president on Nov. 4th 2008. :wave::usa:

You DO mean the American nightmare, don't you? :freddy: :wink02::flap::chuckle:

As I said in another thread, I'm in the "wait and see" mode. I know Mr. Obama won't be able to keep the majority of his pie in the sky promises that got him the votes, but I'm not going to wrap him in manure when he hasn't served one day in office yet.

Begrudingly, I am going to give him a chance to prove me wrong and I hope for America's sake, and the sake of this younger generation who helped to put him into office, he does. :drink:

PisnNapalm
11-06-2008, 05:17 PM
The American dream was elected president on Nov. 4th 2008. :wave::usa:

Put down the weed and try breathing pure air for a while.

Read this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

lilyoder6
11-06-2008, 06:01 PM
hahaha... plz.. i am with u HTG... i just have my doubts with obama..

xfl2001fan
11-06-2008, 08:46 PM
Put down the weed and try breathing pure air for a while.

Read this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Etymologically, the English coinage socialism (1839) derives from the French socialisme (1832), the mainstream introduction of which usage is attributed, in France, to Pierre Leroux[7] and to Marie Roch Louis Reybaud; and in Britain to Robert Owen in 1827, father of the cooperative movement.[8][9]

It's French...no wonder it sucks so much.

MasterOfPuppets
11-06-2008, 08:54 PM
It's French...no wonder it sucks so much.
yeah....thats why i always order the freedom fries......:popcorn:

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-06-2008, 10:26 PM
:rofl:...:rofl:....:rofl:....:rofl:....:rofl:....

yeah, im gonna take economic advice from "joe the plumber" :rolleyes:

:rofl:.....:rofl:.....:rofl:....:rofl:....:rofl:.. ..:rofl:....:rofl:

It wont be long unitl they all see what a difference an intelligent man will make in the white house.

xfl2001fan
11-06-2008, 10:31 PM
It wont be long unitl they all see what a difference an intelligent man will make in the white house.

Pretty speeches do not make a man intelligent. Just well-spoken. I know a guy who has a 150+ IQ and couldn't give a speech worth a darn.

tony hipchest
11-06-2008, 11:03 PM
Pretty speeches do not make a man intelligent. Just well-spoken. I know a guy who has a 150+ IQ and couldn't give a speech worth a darn."you betcha"

does a harvard law degree make a man intelligent?

:doh:

who you know is kinda irrelevant. youre also a brownfan. :chuckle:

GBMelBlount
11-06-2008, 11:28 PM
It wont be long unitl they all see what a difference an intelligent man will make in the white house.

That is actually quite funny that you in particular, are talking down about anyones intellectual level...... And the sad thing is you will be teaching our children.

tony hipchest
11-06-2008, 11:40 PM
That is actually quite funny that you in particular, are talking down about anyones intellectual level...... And the sad thing is you will be teaching our children.doesnt sarah palin homeschool her children? :flap:

geography "class" must be a riot up in wasilla. :sofunny: what is sad about BBFW being a teacher? (other than the fact that you despise obama?)

GBMelBlount
11-06-2008, 11:47 PM
doesnt sarah palin homeschool her children? :flap:

geography "class" must be a riot up in wasilla. whats sad about BBFW being a teacher other than the fact that you despise obama?

Have you read some of his posts? Things that he has said indicate to me that he has strong opinions with little knowledge to back them up in most cases. I will gladly cull through his posts and cite several examples if you'd like. For someone like BBFW to talk down about our president who is likely much more intelligent than he is, troubles me. And I have seen and heard about one too many liberal teacher, like BF, present a liberal bias opinion as fact in our public school system.

Btw, I don't despise Obama. You will notice I haven't trash talked him much personally, just his views on government solutions as opposed to capitalism and free markets..

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 12:03 AM
doesnt sarah palin homeschool her children? :flap:

geography "class" must be a riot up in wasilla. :sofunny: what is sad about BBFW being a teacher? (other than the fact that you despise obama?)

The fear that I may teach children through knowledge, research, and science?

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 12:08 AM
Have you read some of his posts? Things that he has said indicate to me that he has strong opinions with little knowledge to back them up in most cases. I will gladly cull through his posts and cite several examples if you'd like. For someone like BBFW to talk down about our president who is likely much more intelligent than he is, troubles me. And I have seen and heard about one too many liberal teacher, like BF, present a liberal bias opinion as fact in our public school system.

Btw, I don't despise Obama. You will notice I haven't trash talked him much personally, just his views on government solutions as opposed to capitalism and free markets..

If you are talking about the fact that I believe that George Bush will end up being the worse president in history? Yes, I stand by my prediction.

I am not comparing his intelligence to mine, or anyone else.

My point as I have tried to make several times is that individuals select a candidate solely on party and automatically support their choice in VP. Then they go on to defend what a great person she/he is.

With the latest reports on Palin, I believe I was right about her, and thoes who have been defending her as a valid pick for VP are suddenly realizing that she may not have been the best candidate for VP.

MACH1
11-07-2008, 12:09 AM
The fear that I may teach children through knowledge, research, and science?

You could use two out of three. I'll let you guess which two.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 12:11 AM
Pretty speeches do not make a man intelligent. Just well-spoken. I know a guy who has a 150+ IQ and couldn't give a speech worth a darn.

Graduating top of his class in Harvard might make him somewhat intelliget???

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 12:12 AM
You could use two out of three. I'll let you guess which two.

Why do you fear science?
It is the same as saying ... dont teach math....

MACH1
11-07-2008, 12:15 AM
Why do you fear science?
It is the same as saying ... dont teach math....

:doh: Your hopeless.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 12:16 AM
:doh: Your hopeless.

Not hopeless. just taking your response and turning it a bit to benefit my point

SteelFist
11-07-2008, 12:16 AM
SteelFist - whether you want to acknowledge it or not - that's your call, but race indeed played a factor in this election on BOTH sides of the coin, and if you can't see that, I don't know what else to tell you. However, the results clearly show that in this particular election, there was record turnout among blacks, Hispanic and other minorities. As xfl2001fan correctly stated - why hasn't there been this kind of a turnout among minorities in the last 5 or so decades? :doh: Many AA's will make no bones about the fact that they voted for Obama simply because he is AA. It aint rocket science, bud.

Yes - it is indeed a shame that people in this day and age are shallow enough to not take a good, hard look at the candidate they are throwing their allegiance to and basing their vote (or non-vote) on race alone. Unfortunately, however, as the numbers show, I believe the minority voters in this election did just that more so than the other way around. I didn't support Mr. Obama because I had a problem with the color of his skin - I didn't support him because his stances on certain issues (at least the issues he didn't flip flop on) don't parallel with mine and also because I just don't trust the guy for a whole lot of reasons which I've already stated in prior threads.

What do you mean "if you can't see that"? I clearly stated that Blacks were not the ONLY ones who are guilty of this. That means that I am aware that many of Blacks voted for Obama because he is Black. I quoted lilyoder6 to let him know that it was not just Blacks guilty of this. And I'm not saying that I agree with the minority turnout this election because I don't believe its right. But I don't understand people who would be totally blind to the fact that their were many Whites who voted for McCain because Obama was Black......And you know it!

I didn't feel the need to put my business out there, but I will to prove a point. I am Black and so is my wife, and we voted for McCain. We live in a MD which, I'm sure you are aware, is a blue state. But we agreed to sit down, watch the debates and judge them based on what we thought they would bring to the table for the better of this country. We ignored any of the hype on both sides and stuck with the politics. We had our own personal checklist and game plan and we stuck with it. While I admit it was close, in the end we sided with McCain. Many of our family and friends that are black couldn't believe we voted for him but we could care less. Some of them voted for Obama for their own legitimate reasons which was fine. Others voted for him because he was Black, and we let them know that they were WRONG. Am I proud that history was made? Well, certainly. But I'm more proud of the fact that we stood for what we believed in and voted for whom we felt was the best person for the job, regardless of his race.

MasterOfPuppets
11-07-2008, 12:21 AM
doesnt sarah palin homeschool her children? :flap:

geography "class" must be a riot up in wasilla. :sofunny: what is sad about BBFW being a teacher? (other than the fact that you despise obama?)
Fox News Channel reporter Carl Cameron reported that within the McCain camp, there were serious doubts about her knowledge of civics and current events. “She didn't know the nations involved in the North American Free Trade Agreement. ... She didn't understand, McCain aides told me … that Africa was a continent and not a country.”

Newsweek’s “Special Election Project” reported other accusations being lobbed by campaign staffers, including new claims about Palin’s wardrobe expenditures.

Calling her shopping spree “more extensive than previously reported,” one aide told Newsweek it was like “"Wasilla hillbillies looting Neiman Marcus from coast to coast.”

Staffers also accuse her of spending “tens of thousands more than the reported $150,000,” and asking low-level staffers to put purchases on their credit cards. :toofunny:

MACH1
11-07-2008, 12:24 AM
Not hopeless. just taking your response and turning it a bit to benefit my point

Spin and deflect. Not much there to benefit your point, unless your trying to tell me your not the sharpest tool in the shed. :noidea:

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 12:24 AM
:toofunny:

What a great American.... I hope she runs for president in 2012:applaudit:

tony hipchest
11-07-2008, 12:26 AM
Have you read some of his posts? .actually i have. we both joined this board in september 2005. i see you joined in 2007. :noidea:

in fact, i can recall discussions we had on michaelangelo in regards to a paper he was writing for 1 of his courses (in 2006 i believe).

its funny how so many others here can forget what they (or others) have posted.

tony hipchest
11-07-2008, 12:29 AM
:toofunny:

:toofunny:

hey! i didnt say it. it was mccains own people. (well, i did say the part about homeschooling. :doh: i guess i am evil like that)

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 12:31 AM
actually i have. we both joined this board in september 2005. i see you joined in 2007. :noidea:

in fact, i can recall discussions we had on michaelangelo in regards to a paper he was writing for 1 of his courses (in 2006 i believe).

its funny how so many others here can forget what they (or others) have posted.

The great thing about this election is that Obama not only won the electoral college, he also won the popular vote (i call it by a landslide). So they really have nothing to argue about.

The point that I was trying to make when I got wrapped up in this particular post is that... had McCain chosen say.... Tom Ridge from PA.... I believe he would have had a better chance....may have even won the election.

I just found it funny how many individuals on this forum immediately jumped on the Palin bandwagon without even questioning the decision.... (aka....voting party...not candidate)

Preacher
11-07-2008, 01:09 AM
The great thing about this election is that Obama not only won the electoral college, he also won the popular vote (i call it by a landslide). So they really have nothing to argue about.

The point that I was trying to make when I got wrapped up in this particular post is that... had McCain chosen say.... Tom Ridge from PA.... I believe he would have had a better chance....may have even won the election.

I just found it funny how many individuals on this forum immediately jumped on the Palin bandwagon without even questioning the decision.... (aka....voting party...not candidate)


Um,, 4 percent of the popular vote isn't even a mandate, let alone a landslide.

Think about it. if only 2 percent changed their vote... 2 percent, then the popular vote goes the other way.

That is no where close to a landslide.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 01:13 AM
Um,, 4 percent of the popular vote isn't even a mandate, let alone a landslide.

Think about it. if only 2 percent changed their vote... 2 percent, then the popular vote goes the other way.

That is no where close to a landslide.

Would you go landslide in electoral votes?

Preacher
11-07-2008, 01:18 AM
Would you go landslide in electoral votes?

No.

I would say a solid win... even a mandate by electoral vote... though electoral vote is hard to count as a mandate. It does however show tremendous democrat momentum.

Don't forget.. I grew up in the 80's. I am use to a landslide having the losing candidate getting 15-30 electoral votes.

THAT was a landslide.

tony hipchest
11-07-2008, 01:22 AM
No.

Don't forget.. I grew up in the 80's. I am use to a landslide having the losing candidate getting 15-30 electoral votes.

THAT was a landslide.but that was when we had a hollywood celebrity running.

wait.. wasnt obama compared to a hollywood celebrity type? or was it a rock star? same difference. :chuckle:

Preacher
11-07-2008, 01:37 AM
but that was when we had a hollywood celebrity running.

wait.. wasnt obama compared to a hollywood celebrity type? or was it a rock star? same difference. :chuckle:

Why are you coming in here poking for a response?

Your post has no relevance to what we were discussing, and frankly, it looks like your just trying to provoke a response.

THAT Tony, is what I mean when I say your being an ass.

If you can't actually engage in the conversation itself, please, leave it well enough alone... Or do you want to provoke partisanship on this board? That act is getting real tiring Tony...

GBMelBlount
11-07-2008, 07:07 AM
BigBenFastWillie

It wont be long unitl they all see what a difference an intelligent man will make in the white house.


BigBenFastWillie

I am not comparing his intelligence to mine, or anyone else.

Wow, it didn't take long for you to completely contradict yourself.

"Teachers" like you are the reason our daughter is in a private school. She is only 8 years old yet tests as a 6th grader by todays standards thanks to our liberal educators and educational system.....I am scared as hell of the average teacher who is a liberal, received below average grades in school, is below average intelligence for their level of education, talks out of both sides of their mouth, and tries to pass off their beliefs which are often based on little fact, as gospel to our children in their formative yours. Shameful.

Also you suggested Bush will go down as the worst president in history. Carter, who you said was a great president, was arguably the worst president in recent history and much of your knee-jerk blame on Bush has been shown to be equally if not more the fault of liberal and government policies.

I say you have a biased opinion that is based on little or no fact at all. So put your money where your mouth is. Let's do this BBFW. Let's FACTUALLY discuss who will go down as a worse president. Carter or Bush.....

You first.....

fansince'76
11-07-2008, 07:23 AM
but that was when we had a hollywood celebrity running.

wait.. wasnt obama compared to a hollywood celebrity type? or was it a rock star? same difference. :chuckle:

Sure, but in that case it was a "Hollywood celebrity" with eight years of previous executive experience as the former governor of California on his résumé. Therein lies the (very big) difference - with Reagan, there was actually some substance behind the charisma as opposed to a smooth-talking empty suit.

fansince'76
11-07-2008, 07:32 AM
....I don't understand people who would be totally blind to the fact that their were many Whites who voted for McCain because Obama was Black......And you know it!

SteelFist - whether you want to acknowledge it or not - that's your call, but race indeed played a factor in this election on BOTH sides of the coin, and if you can't see that, I don't know what else to tell you.

I'd say HTG was anything BUT "blind to it."

stillers4me
11-07-2008, 07:41 AM
Sure, but in that case it was a "Hollywood celebrity" with eight years of previous executive experience as the former governor of California on his résumé. Therein lies the (very big) difference - with Reagan, there was actually some substance behind the charisma as opposed to a smooth-talking empty suit.


There can be a huge difference in being called a celebrity and and actor,

Reagan was a B movies actor.......who went on to have 8 years of executive experience
making him more than qualified to run for president..

Paris Hilton is a celebrity......famous but nobody quite knows why because she actually hasn't done anything. Sound familiar?

Barry has just won the political version of Americon Idol. :chuckle:

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 08:01 AM
Wow, it didn't take long for you to completely contradict yourself.

"Teachers" like you are the reason our daughter is in a private school. She is only 8 years old yet tests as a 6th grader by todays standards thanks to our liberal educators and educational system.....I am scared as hell of the average teacher who is a liberal, received below average grades in school, is below average intelligence for their level of education, talks out of both sides of their mouth, and tries to pass off their beliefs which are often based on little fact, as gospel to our children in their formative yours. Shameful.

Also you suggested Bush will go down as the worst president in history. Carter, who you said was a great president, was arguably the worst president in recent history and much of your knee-jerk blame on Bush has been shown to be equally if not more the fault of liberal and government policies.

I say you have a biased opinion that is based on little or no fact at all. So put your money where your mouth is. Let's do this BBFW. Let's FACTUALLY discuss who will go down as a worse president. Carter or Bush.....

You first.....

:buttkick::buttkick::buttkick::buttkick:

I am scared of these teachers too that do not take their education seriously. However, I graduate with my associates degree with a 4.0GPA and will soon be graduating with my bachelors with a 3.91 (one B). That sould be an over all GPA of around 4.978....... I was pretty pissed when I got a B in Calculus 2, but I tried the best I could.

Oh. as far as an average teacher.....This next semester (spring 09 will be my last). It will also be my my 5th year....(5 years for a 4 year degree plus summer classes every summer????). Let me explain. My major is Elementary Education. I also have a minor in math... (this is where my only B came from). Then I decided to go for a minor in Biology (got it) and this next semester I will be finishing my third minor (athletic coaching)

So as far as my below average intelligence goes for teaching children. I am doing my best so that I may have a great impression on my students both in and out of the classroom.

Now. Im lucky, The military is paying for my college because I am a disabled veteran. Lost my hearing in Iraq in (2004). This is the reason that I decided to become a teacher. It was the Iraqi children that helped me to realize the the American children do not know how good they have it and the opportuinites that lie ahead of them.

So, I do not blame you for taking your child to a private school. However, I think its wrong of you to judge my education, my intentions as an educator, my intelligence, and my dedication to young students to provide them with the best possible education to build the resilience they need to be successful in life.

:buttkick::buttkick::buttkick::buttkick:

fansince'76
11-07-2008, 08:05 AM
Wow, it didn't take long for you to completely contradict yourself.

"Teachers" like you are the reason our daughter is in a private school. She is only 8 years old yet tests as a 6th grader by todays standards thanks to our liberal educators and educational system.....I am scared as hell of the average teacher who is a liberal, received below average grades in school, is below average intelligence for their level of education, talks out of both sides of their mouth, and tries to pass off their beliefs which are often based on little fact, as gospel to our children in their formative yours. Shameful.

Also you suggested Bush will go down as the worst president in history. Carter, who you said was a great president, was arguably the worst president in recent history and much of your knee-jerk blame on Bush has been shown to be equally if not more the fault of liberal and government policies.

I say you have a biased opinion that is based on little or no fact at all. So put your money where your mouth is. Let's do this BBFW. Let's FACTUALLY discuss who will go down as a worse president. Carter or Bush.....

You first.....

It's OK to debate the issues, but please lay off the personal stuff.

GBMelBlount
11-07-2008, 08:33 AM
First of all BBFW, you are to be commended on your performance in school. Certainly better grades than I had. Secondly, when I stated "teachers like you" I was referring to what I perceive as a liberal bias. When I discussed grades and intelligence of the average teacher, you will notice I did NOT directly refer to you.

Also, had you not implied our president was not intelligent and said he was the worst president ever, I would not be focusing on these things. You will notice I tend to not bash Obama personally, but primarily on his positions on issues. You have made general accusations about my president without presenting facts to support them, so I feel this is fair game. So, would you like to apologize for implying our president, who I support, is stupid and the worst president ever, or do you want to start factually debating your accusations?

Btw, thank you for your service to our country, I am truly sorry to hear of your injuries.

GBMelBlount
11-07-2008, 08:37 AM
It's OK to debate the issues, but please lay off the personal stuff.

I agree Gary. BBFW made personal accusations about my president without discussing issues to support his accusations. As you know, I much prefer discussing issues.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 08:50 AM
First of all BBFW, you are to be commended on your performance in school. Certainly better grades than I had. Secondly, when I stated "teachers like you" I was referring to what I perceive as a liberal bias. When I discussed grades and intelligence of the average teacher, you will notice I did NOT directly refer to you.

Also, had you not implied our president was not intelligent and said he was the worst president ever, I would not be focusing on these things. You will notice I tend to not bash Obama personally, but primarily on his positions on issues. You have made general accusations about my president without presenting facts to support them, so I feel this is fair game. So, would you like to apologize for implying our president, who I support, is stupid and the worst president ever, or do you want to start factually debating your accusations?

Btw, thank you for your service to our country, I am truly sorry to hear of your injuries.

I believe my comment about Carter was when I was making a point that there were two democratic presidents in the last 20 years. I should not have said 2 great presidents...I should have said...One great president and another that was before my time. My point in that comment was that abortion is an issure during elections that is given way too much emphasis on selecting a candidate. Typically, the republican candidate is agains abortion and the democratic president is pro choice.

With that said, what i was implying is that with all the years of Republican rule... abortion is still not illegal.... And, most likely, no matter who is in office it will never change...(just my opinion) and again. I have said this many times, that I am against aboriton, but I am also for womens rights. But, why with so many republican presidents that are against it and during their campaign they say they are against it does it never go to the courts and become illegal?

As for Bush.... I support Bush as the president. I respect him for holding the highest postition in America. I hope that all americans support the president no matter who he or she is because this is the United States of America and we should stand united. Now, with that said, if i offened you by saying Bush is a horrible president. I apologize. I just look at hte last 8 years he has been in office and I personally can not think of how he made America a better place to live or a more prosperous country. Yes, you can say hes protecting us from terrorist. but lets face it. no matter what we do, if they want to do "anything", they will proubably be able to attack again. But besides the war on terrorist......which is being fought largely in the wrong places, what has he done?

GBMelBlount
11-07-2008, 08:55 AM
OK, so you retract your comment about Carter, arguable the worst president in history, being a great president. Now, are you going to take back your statement that Bush is the worst president ever, or do you want to start factually debating it? Also, are you going to apologize for implying my president is stupid?

PisnNapalm
11-07-2008, 09:05 AM
The great thing about this election is that Obama not only won the electoral college, he also won the popular vote (i call it by a landslide). So they really have nothing to argue about.

The point that I was trying to make when I got wrapped up in this particular post is that... had McCain chosen say.... Tom Ridge from PA.... I believe he would have had a better chance....may have even won the election.

I just found it funny how many individuals on this forum immediately jumped on the Palin bandwagon without even questioning the decision.... (aka....voting party...not candidate)


Popular vote landslide??? :doh: You want a "landslide victory" check out these numbers....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1980

And for a massive landslide... 1984 http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1984&f=0

landslide....:toofunny:


This could be a new sitcom on Fox. "Socialist in the White House"

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 09:15 AM
Popular vote landslide??? :doh: You want a "landslide victory" check out these numbers....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1980

And for a massive landslide... 1984 http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1984&f=0

landslide....:toofunny:


This could be a new sitcom on Fox. "Socialist in the White House"

Okay I was born in 80. and then 4 years during his second election?

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 09:17 AM
OK, so you retract your comment about Carter, arguable the worst president in history, being a great president. Now, are you going to take back your statement that Bush is the worst president ever, or do you want to start factually debating it? Also, are you going to apologize for implying my president is stupid?

I think Bush will go down as the worst president in history...
Did you hear what he said when a reporter asked how he felt about many americans believeing he will go down as the worse president in history..

He said.

"History...hah, we'll all be dead in history"

Leftoverhard
11-07-2008, 10:09 AM
This could be a new sitcom on Fox. "Socialist in the White House"


Stop calling our president-elect a socialist. It's seems like socialism is the only word you know and the ironic thing is that without Wikipedia, you probably wouldn't even know how to define it.

PisnNapalm
11-07-2008, 10:17 AM
Stop calling our president-elect a socialist. It's seems like socialism is the only word you know and the ironic thing is that without Wikipedia, you probably wouldn't even know how to define it.



Let me get this straight for you...


OBAMA IS A SOCIALIST


I'll call him whatever the hell I want. So kiss my ass and have a nice day.

BIGBENFASTWILLIE
11-07-2008, 10:21 AM
Let me get this straight for you...


OBAMA IS A SOCIALIST


I'll call him whatever the hell I want. So kiss my ass and have a nice day.

Now..... Thats not staying in the spirit of theis forum...
Do you know what you need???
Well... Here it is :hug:

RunWillieRun
11-07-2008, 10:22 AM
Jimmy Carter = Great President!!!


HAHAHAHA

PisnNapalm
11-07-2008, 10:44 AM
http://images.despair.com/products/demotivators/government.jpg

GBMelBlount
11-07-2008, 10:47 AM
I think Bush will go down as the worst president in history...
Did you hear what he said when a reporter asked how he felt about many americans believeing he will go down as the worse president in history..

He said.

"History...hah, we'll all be dead in history"

Wow, because he made a remark you didn't like? How about Obama thinking there are 57 states and stating he is a muslim. Again, if you are going to trash talk my president, state that you think he is the worst president and and imply he is stupid, I think it is fair for me to call you on the carpet.....

So, are you going to apologize for calling him stupid?

Also, would you like to start FACTUALLY debating who is the worst president in history, or will you retract that remark as well? If you choose to not retract it, I WILL take the time to get my facts and figures in order and take you to task for your accusations.

PisnNapalm
11-07-2008, 10:50 AM
http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn250/paawkx/obama-taxes-1223695309942.jpg

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn250/paawkx/obama-say-nothing-01.jpg

steelcity_88
11-07-2008, 10:58 AM
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Amazing.

GBMelBlount
11-07-2008, 11:11 AM
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Amazing.

Didn't look at your link but it apparently has to do with the usdebt. What about the contents of your link is so amazing?

steelcity_88
11-07-2008, 11:49 AM
Didn't look at your link but it apparently has to do with the usdebt. What about the contents of your link is so amazing?

Maybe you should look at it. It shows in a graph how sharply that number has shot up over the past 6-7 years.

GBMelBlount
11-07-2008, 12:04 PM
Maybe you should look at it. It shows in a graph how sharply that number has shot up over the past 6-7 years.

what number? also, what do you feel is the reason(s) that this "number" has shot up over the past 6-7 years?

steelcity_88
11-07-2008, 12:16 PM
what number? also, what do you feel is the reason(s) that this "number" has shot up over the past 6-7 years?

What number?..national debt. And, ohhhhh, I don't know. What's been one constant for these past 6-7 years? Can't blame it all on Bush, but I think you can safely attribute it to him for not taking steps to curb this problem.

GBMelBlount
11-07-2008, 12:36 PM
What number?..national debt. And, ohhhhh, I don't know. What's been one constant for these past 6-7 years? Can't blame it all on Bush, but I think you can safely attribute it to him for not taking steps to curb this problem.

I take a crap and a couple pees a day. THAT has been a constant these past 6-7 years. Is that the cause? What I am going to suggest before we get into this is that you look up the difference between a correlation and a causal relationship. Because you are simply talking about a correlation, at least to this point. You need to understand this if we are going to get into this and we can also discuss why the surplus prior to that was primarily because of capitalism and the private sector, NOT Clinton. Again, that is more of a correlation than a causal factor imo.

Preacher
11-07-2008, 05:37 PM
I take a crap and a couple pees a day. THAT has been a constant these past 6-7 years. Is that the cause? What I am going to suggest before we get into this is that you look up the difference between a correlation and a causal relationship. Because you are simply talking about a correlation, at least to this point. You need to understand this if we are going to get into this and we can also discuss why the surplus prior to that was primarily because of capitalism and the private sector, NOT Clinton. Again, that is more of a correlation than a causal factor imo.


Don't worry GBMel.

Correlation is absolute truth. Ask the liberals. Ask the scientists about the correlation of the animal kingdom MUST meaning evolution. Ask the master of correlation arguments, Michael Moore.

Correlation is the most often and accepted argument out there. Why should you not accept it?

By the way, did you notice the dow lost 160 points today from the beginning of Obama's press conference to the end? It was on the increase, at 240 (up) when he started, and was only at 70 something (up) when he finished

Correlation argument allows us to say Obama caused an almost complete wipeout in the dow's gains today with just a 20 minute press conference.

(For those of you about to jump down my throat, this is called an "Illustration." Illustrating WHY correlation has no factual basis.)

MasterOfPuppets
11-07-2008, 05:53 PM
I take a crap and a couple pees a day. .
good plumbing makes for a long and happy life.....kudos....:thumbsup: .....:toofunny: