| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
Congradulations Mr. President!
Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time!
Op |
Congradulations Mr. President!
"Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote in message ... Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time! Op If there was sound judgment, we would have had neither of these doofus to choose from. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen wrote:
Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time! Op I am glad to see that Obama won. I think his election will be good not only for the US, but the rest of the world, including Canada/ Tim Lysyk |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 23:03:46 -0500, "Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote: Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time! Op Indeed, and it's so much more than just electing Obama as President. Between this election and the mid-terms of 2006, the Republican Party has suffered tremendous losses at all levels of government - basically, it has had its head removed and handed back to it. Such is the cost of their having run the country into a financial, moral and ethical ditch while they were in control. Now they have two choices: sit on the sidelines and snipe, while hoping things get worse, or change their stripes, moderate their dogma, and join in the effort to extricate the country from the abyss that the neocons sank it in. But, for me at least, the very best part of this election: it was a wholesale repudiation of those who would divide this country through hate. The list of losers is long and utterly undistinguished, but to mention just a few, kicked to the curb were the likes of Karl Rove, Phyllis Schlafly, William Bennett, Laura Schlessinger, Newt Gingrich, Rudi Guiliani, James Dobson, Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rupert Murdoch and the entire Fox News organization...and on and on. The whole collection of bad actors got their hineys roasted, and cannot escape the reality that if they ever actually held sway over any significant part of the American electorate, they've been diminished to near irrelevance. And it's about time. Meanwhile, for the sake of good order, props to John McCain, for a magnificent speech to close out his campaign - and the wisdom to keep Sarah Palin quiet. The irony is, of course, that this signified the return of the man that most people once knew and had some respect - the John McCain of 1999 - instead of the 2008 candidate that not only allowed his campaign to get rolled into the wingnut/neocon mud hole, but contributed with his cynical selection of Sarah Palin ("Country First" my white shiney ass!) One can only wonder, had McCain taken the high road through this presidential campaign, if the outcome could have been different. Perhaps not - clearly, the electorate was disgusted with the Republican Party and may not have shown any quarter. In any case, there is reason to be hopeful that McCain will provide a positive contribution to the raising of the ship of state, before he rides off into retirement. And so now we wait and watch as the next Administration is formed - and hope that the current, disgraced Administration goes away quietly... /daytripper (Tonite is a better nite, and tomorrow will be a better day) |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen wrote:
Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time! Op The same judgment of the American public to elect Bush twice. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
daytripper wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 23:03:46 -0500, "Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote: Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time! Op Indeed, and it's so much more than just electing Obama as President. Between this election and the mid-terms of 2006, the Republican Party has suffered tremendous losses at all levels of government - basically, it has had its head removed and handed back to it. Such is the cost of their having run the country into a financial, moral and ethical ditch while they were in control. Now they have two choices: sit on the sidelines and snipe, while hoping things get worse, or change their stripes, moderate their dogma, and join in the effort to extricate the country from the abyss that the neocons sank it in. But, for me at least, the very best part of this election: it was a wholesale repudiation of those who would divide this country through hate. The list of losers is long and utterly undistinguished, but to mention just a few, kicked to the curb were the likes of Karl Rove, Phyllis Schlafly, William Bennett, Laura Schlessinger, Newt Gingrich, Rudi Guiliani, James Dobson, Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rupert Murdoch and the entire Fox News organization...and on and on. The whole collection of bad actors got their hineys roasted, and cannot escape the reality that if they ever actually held sway over any significant part of the American electorate, they've been diminished to near irrelevance. And it's about time. Meanwhile, for the sake of good order, props to John McCain, for a magnificent speech to close out his campaign - and the wisdom to keep Sarah Palin quiet. The irony is, of course, that this signified the return of the man that most people once knew and had some respect - the John McCain of 1999 - instead of the 2008 candidate that not only allowed his campaign to get rolled into the wingnut/neocon mud hole, but contributed with his cynical selection of Sarah Palin ("Country First" my white shiney ass!) One can only wonder, had McCain taken the high road through this presidential campaign, if the outcome could have been different. Perhaps not - clearly, the electorate was disgusted with the Republican Party and may not have shown any quarter. In any case, there is reason to be hopeful that McCain will provide a positive contribution to the raising of the ship of state, before he rides off into retirement. And so now we wait and watch as the next Administration is formed - and hope that the current, disgraced Administration goes away quietly... /daytripper (Tonite is a better nite, and tomorrow will be a better day) You're so fos and hate. The outcome of this election was decided by the press a year ago. My daughter, the grad student in journalism, was actually embarrassed by the unequal treatment of the two candidates by the press. One needs to consider why, with the negative approval for the president, the election was as close as it was. We can only hope that Obama and his three vice-presidents don't actually start implementing Obama's promises. Or maybe we should just to prove how clueless they really are. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 5, 12:12 am, daytripper wrote:
[little snip] One can only wonder, had McCain taken the high road through this presidential campaign, if the outcome could have been different. Perhaps not - clearly, the electorate was disgusted with the Republican Party and may not have shown any quarter. Ironically, I think his whole approach to the campaign (including choosing Palin) was an effort on his (or his handlers') part to try to win back the rabid right element who never really supported him in the first place. In pandering to them, he just alienated moderates even more. In any case, there is reason to be hopeful that McCain will provide a positive contribution to the raising of the ship of state, before he rides off into retirement. And hopefully Palin goes back to doing whatever it is she was doing before, never to be heard from again on the national scene. And so now we wait and watch as the next Administration is formed - and hope that the current, disgraced Administration goes away quietly... My only concern is that the current administration has no reason to care about what they leave behind for the new administration. Chuck Vance |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Conan The Librarian wrote:
My only concern is that the current administration has no reason to care about what they leave behind for the new administration. Are you suggesting that they might have the same kind of transition as Clinton did with with the handover to Bush? |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Peaceful Bill wrote:
Conan The Librarian wrote: My only concern is that the current administration has no reason to care about what they leave behind for the new administration. Are you suggesting that they might have the same kind of transition as Clinton did with with the handover to Bush? Yeah, we're going to see the pardons come fast a furious. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Peaceful Bill wrote:
You're so fos and hate. The outcome of this election was decided by the press a year ago. ... LOL !! What a tool. This election was decided when Lehman Bros. was allowed to go belly up. From that point on it was just one unstoppable domino after another. The press didn't have a damn thing to with the outcome. There was no way to portray an erratic and incompetent campaign as anything other than erratic and incompetent. This 2008 presidential campaign was the biggest organization McCain had ever tried to run and he was just plain bad at it. He gave a nice concession speech though. -- Ken Fortenberry |
Congradulations Mr. President!
daytripper wrote:
snip /daytripper (Tonite is a better nite, and tomorrow will be a better day) Can we please have our Constitution back now ? -- Ken Fortenberry |
Congradulations Mr. President!
"Peaceful Bill" wrote in message ... Conan The Librarian wrote: My only concern is that the current administration has no reason to care about what they leave behind for the new administration. Are you suggesting that they might have the same kind of transition as Clinton did with with the handover to Bush? Why is it that some right wingers' only response to anything is to whine, "yeah but Klinton was just as bad"? Chuck Vance |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 5, 3:36*pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: daytripper wrote: snip /daytripper (Tonite is a better nite, and tomorrow will be a better day) Can we please have our Constitution back now ? -- Ken Fortenberry A constitution, or indeed any other similar document, is quite meaningless to a person like you who has no respect at all for morals, freedom, free speech, or even a trace of honour. It remains to be seen what changes, for better or worse, may occur. Relying on one man to work miracles is foolish, considering the problems facing the new administration. Hopefully, at least one thing will change, and that is that we will be spared from the continuous bombardment of bull**** in all media about American problems. Problems incidentally that start with the people themselves, not with their presidents. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Peaceful Bill wrote: You're so fos and hate. The outcome of this election was decided by the press a year ago. ... LOL !! What a tool. This election was decided when Lehman Bros. was allowed to go belly up. From that point on it was just one unstoppable domino after another. The press didn't have a damn thing to with the outcome. There was no way to portray an erratic and incompetent campaign as anything other than erratic and incompetent. This 2008 presidential campaign was the biggest organization McCain had ever tried to run and he was just plain bad at it. He gave a nice concession speech though. How naive of you to think so. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
daytripper wrote: snip /daytripper (Tonite is a better nite, and tomorrow will be a better day) Can we please have our Constitution back now ? Not with the Dems in office. If they put in their choices for the Supreme Court, the Constitution will be rewritten by their decisions. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Conan The Librarian wrote:
"Peaceful Bill" wrote in message ... Conan The Librarian wrote: My only concern is that the current administration has no reason to care about what they leave behind for the new administration. Are you suggesting that they might have the same kind of transition as Clinton did with with the handover to Bush? Why is it that some right wingers' only response to anything is to whine, "yeah but Klinton was just as bad"? Chuck Vance Why do left wingnuts give their p[oliticians a free pass while harshly criticizing and blaming conservatives for everything that goes wrong (In spite of who is actually at fault)? |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 4, 10:12*pm, daytripper wrote:
Meanwhile, for the sake of good order, props to John McCain, for a magnificent speech to close out his campaign - and the wisdom to keep Sarah Palin quiet. The irony is, of course, that this signified the return of the man that most people once knew and had some respect - the John McCain of 1999 - instead of the 2008 candidate that not only allowed his campaign to get rolled into the wingnut/neocon mud hole, but contributed with his cynical selection of Sarah Palin ("Country First" my white shiney ass!) One can only wonder, had McCain taken the high road through this presidential campaign, if the outcome could have been different. Perhaps not - clearly, the electorate was disgusted with the Republican Party and may not have shown any quarter. In any case, there is reason to be hopeful that McCain will provide a positive contribution to the raising of the ship of state, before he rides off into retirement. I truly hope that the lesson was obvious enough for the Republicans: McCain quote from 2000: "Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right. " I would have voted for the McCain of 2000. He obviously did the math that he couldn't win this time around without getting the far right out to vote. In doing so, he surrendered the center. I couldn't vote for the McCain of 2008. If Obama stays in the center it's going to be a long couple election cycles for the Republicans. I hope he's smart enough to do so. - Ken |
Congradulations Mr. President!
"Peaceful Bill" wrote in message ... Conan The Librarian wrote: "Peaceful Bill" wrote in message ... Are you suggesting that they might have the same kind of transition as Clinton did with with the handover to Bush? Why is it that some right wingers' only response to anything is to whine, "yeah but Klinton was just as bad"? Why do left wingnuts give their p[oliticians a free pass while harshly criticizing and blaming conservatives for everything that goes wrong (In spite of who is actually at fault)? Non sequitur. You *were* whining. I wasn't blaming anyone for anything. Re-read the thread and try again. BTW, I don't recall seeing anything about flyfishing from you. Are you just a troll? Chuck Vance |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 10:42:45 -0600, Peaceful Bill
wrote: Ken Fortenberry wrote: daytripper wrote: snip /daytripper (Tonite is a better nite, and tomorrow will be a better day) Can we please have our Constitution back now ? Not with the Dems in office. If they put in their choices for the Supreme Court, the Constitution will be rewritten by their decisions. Amen. I still can't believe the American people were taken in by that unAmerican waste of breath. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Conan The Librarian wrote:
"Peaceful Bill" wrote in message ... Conan The Librarian wrote: "Peaceful Bill" wrote in message ... Are you suggesting that they might have the same kind of transition as Clinton did with with the handover to Bush? Why is it that some right wingers' only response to anything is to whine, "yeah but Klinton was just as bad"? Why do left wingnuts give their p[oliticians a free pass while harshly criticizing and blaming conservatives for everything that goes wrong (In spite of who is actually at fault)? Non sequitur. You *were* whining. I wasn't blaming anyone for anything. Re-read the thread and try again. BTW, I don't recall seeing anything about flyfishing from you. Are you just a troll? Chuck Vance Chuck you. Maybe you have trouble finding fishing posts. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 5, 11:02*am, Peaceful Bill
wrote: I would like to see some of the rightwing traitors and war profiters put on trial and shot. :+8 Dave HeeHaw |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On 2008-11-05, Conan The Librarian wrote:
And hopefully Palin goes back to doing whatever it is she was doing before, never to be heard from again on the national scene. What was that quote in Time mag? "Palin and Fey have one thing in common. They're both better entertainers than politicians" ....or something to that effect. Maybe she could get a job on SNL. FrankTV already has a BO clone, but Frank is so unfunny as to be too painful to endure. nb |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 06:56:54 -0600, Peaceful Bill
wrote: daytripper wrote: On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 23:03:46 -0500, "Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote: Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time! Op Indeed, and it's so much more than just electing Obama as President. Between this election and the mid-terms of 2006, the Republican Party has suffered tremendous losses at all levels of government - basically, it has had its head removed and handed back to it. Such is the cost of their having run the country into a financial, moral and ethical ditch while they were in control. Now they have two choices: sit on the sidelines and snipe, while hoping things get worse, or change their stripes, moderate their dogma, and join in the effort to extricate the country from the abyss that the neocons sank it in. But, for me at least, the very best part of this election: it was a wholesale repudiation of those who would divide this country through hate. The list of losers is long and utterly undistinguished, but to mention just a few, kicked to the curb were the likes of Karl Rove, Phyllis Schlafly, William Bennett, Laura Schlessinger, Newt Gingrich, Rudi Guiliani, James Dobson, Ralph Reed, Pat Robertson, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rupert Murdoch and the entire Fox News organization...and on and on. The whole collection of bad actors got their hineys roasted, and cannot escape the reality that if they ever actually held sway over any significant part of the American electorate, they've been diminished to near irrelevance. And it's about time. Meanwhile, for the sake of good order, props to John McCain, for a magnificent speech to close out his campaign - and the wisdom to keep Sarah Palin quiet. The irony is, of course, that this signified the return of the man that most people once knew and had some respect - the John McCain of 1999 - instead of the 2008 candidate that not only allowed his campaign to get rolled into the wingnut/neocon mud hole, but contributed with his cynical selection of Sarah Palin ("Country First" my white shiney ass!) One can only wonder, had McCain taken the high road through this presidential campaign, if the outcome could have been different. Perhaps not - clearly, the electorate was disgusted with the Republican Party and may not have shown any quarter. In any case, there is reason to be hopeful that McCain will provide a positive contribution to the raising of the ship of state, before he rides off into retirement. And so now we wait and watch as the next Administration is formed - and hope that the current, disgraced Administration goes away quietly... /daytripper (Tonite is a better nite, and tomorrow will be a better day) You're so fos and hate. The outcome of this election was decided by the press a year ago. My daughter, the grad student in journalism, was actually embarrassed by the unequal treatment of the two candidates by the press. One needs to consider why, with the negative approval for the president, the election was as close as it was. We can only hope that Obama and his three vice-presidents don't actually start implementing Obama's promises. Or maybe we should just to prove how clueless they really are. Ah - so rather than actually debate a single point, you go with the intellectually lazy response, play the "hate card" - and make my point for me. Nice work! But...I am a Pisces. Excellent lover, lousy hater. Heck, I don't "hate" Bush, Cheney, Rove - or even Sean Hannity (sure, I've love to see Hannity get run over by a speeding bus, but I don't "hate" him ;-) Bottom line: *You* are the reason why the Republican Party has taken it in the shorts for the last two election cycles. And unless you - and your party - wake the **** up, you're both heading to the dustbin of political history... /daytripper (hth - or not) |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 5, 1:02 pm, Peaceful Bill
wrote: Conan The Librarian wrote: Non sequitur. You *were* whining. I wasn't blaming anyone for anything. Re-read the thread and try again. BTW, I don't recall seeing anything about flyfishing from you. Are you just a troll? Chuck you. Maybe you have trouble finding fishing posts. That's the best you can do, eh? Predictably, no response to my point about your whining and non sequitur. BTW, a quick Google groups search shows you with a couple of fishing related posts compared to a couple of dozen trolls on political topics. But I must admit, you've got quite the history of posting on NASCAR related groups. Chuck Vance (kind of ironic that your expertise seems to be *left* turns, eh?) |
Congradulations Mr. President!
daytripper wrote:
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 23:03:46 -0500, "Mr Opus McDopus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote: Thank goodness sound judgement won out this time! Op Indeed, and it's so much more than just electing Obama as President. Between this election and the mid-terms of 2006, the Republican Party has suffered tremendous losses at all levels of government - basically, it has had its head removed and handed back to it. Such is the cost of their having run the country into a financial, moral and ethical ditch while they were in control. Now they have two choices: sit on the sidelines and snipe, while hoping things get worse, or change their stripes, moderate their dogma, and join in the effort to extricate the country from the abyss that the neocons sank it in. snip I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen in the past several elections talked a conservative game during their campaigns and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office. The party's choice to run for POTUS this time was a lame-assed attempt at trying to prop up a moderate to draw in independent and moderate voters while retaining their conservative base. Yeah, *that* will work! IMHO, the party either has to get back to its conservative roots, present conservative ideas in a way that draws people to the party, or just get off the stage. Also, "conservative" shouldn't be confused with "neocon", 'cause they don't have anything to do with each other. In fact, they're opposing viewpoints entirely. Well, boys and girls (I *really* miss Nancy Anderson (Cyli) during the recent roff **** storms), that's just about all you'll get out of me regarding politics. It's all over now and the US needs to stand behind their president in unity. The new administration and congress certainly have their hands full and will need all the prayers and good vibes we can send their way. Congrats to my Democrat friends here on roff for their party's victory. God bless the USA. -- TL, Tim ------------------------- http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 5, 6:03*pm, Conan The Librarian wrote:
* *But I must admit, you've got quite the history of posting on NASCAR related groups. * * * Chuck Vance (kind of ironic that your expertise seems to be *left* turns, eh?) Boy I did not catch that. His expertise is in LEFT turns? . . . and he is a RED republican? This whole damn thing is like this TV thing I saw when i was a kid. "The show starred someone names "Philbrick," and was titled something like "I Led Three Lives." It was all about Communists. Communists that lived right under your nose. Like maybe right here on ROFF! Dave |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Tim J. wrote:
I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen in the past several elections talked a conservative game during their campaigns and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office. This tired, lame argument is absurd. "If only we'd elected a REAL conservative to get spending under control!" Name one. Reagan, maybe? It's instructive to look at this graph of the national debt since WWII: http://zfacts.com/p/318.html Under Truman (Democrat) and Eisenhower (moderate Republican) it went down, down, down. Under Nixon, Ford, and Carter it held pretty much steady. Under Reagan and G.H.W. Bush it rocketed up. Under Clinton it plummeted. Under G. W. Bush it went way up. The so-called conservatives are incapable of getting the debt under control because their only economic plan is to decrease taxes on the rich and to borrow money to cover the nut. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
rw typed:
Tim J. wrote: I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen in the past several elections talked a conservative game during their campaigns and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office. This tired, lame argument is absurd. "If only we'd elected a REAL conservative to get spending under control!" snip The so-called conservatives are incapable of getting the debt under control because their only economic plan is to decrease taxes on the rich and to borrow money to cover the nut. So you agree with me. I knew it would happen sooner or later. -- TL, Tim ------------------------- http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Tim J. wrote:
rw typed: Tim J. wrote: I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen in the past several elections talked a conservative game during their campaigns and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office. This tired, lame argument is absurd. "If only we'd elected a REAL conservative to get spending under control!" snip The so-called conservatives are incapable of getting the debt under control because their only economic plan is to decrease taxes on the rich and to borrow money to cover the nut. So you agree with me. I knew it would happen sooner or later. By your way of thinking the last true conservative was Bill Clinton. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
"rw" wrote in message ... Tim J. wrote: rw typed: Tim J. wrote: I think there's a third and better choice. As George said is some other thread, this isn't the same Republican Party I signed on with. I think conservative ideas hold a lot of water and need to be presented by a conservative. The latest batch of republicans-come-lately that we've seen in the past several elections talked a conservative game during their campaigns and then spent money like drunken sailors once in office. This tired, lame argument is absurd. "If only we'd elected a REAL conservative to get spending under control!" snip The so-called conservatives are incapable of getting the debt under control because their only economic plan is to decrease taxes on the rich and to borrow money to cover the nut. So you agree with me. I knew it would happen sooner or later. By your way of thinking the last true conservative was Bill Clinton. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. Actually no. Newt and the Republican Congress got spending under control for a couple years, and the dot.bomb boom brought in almost more money than the Feds could spend. Clinton was a lucky POTUS. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Calif Bill wrote:
"rw" wrote in message ... By your way of thinking the last true conservative was Bill Clinton. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. Actually no. Newt and the Republican Congress got spending under control for a couple years, and the dot.bomb boom brought in almost more money than the Feds could spend. Clinton was a lucky POTUS. The I guess Bush must have been the unluckiest mother ****er who ever lived in the White House. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
"rw" wrote in message m... Calif Bill wrote: "rw" wrote in message ... By your way of thinking the last true conservative was Bill Clinton. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. Actually no. Newt and the Republican Congress got spending under control for a couple years, and the dot.bomb boom brought in almost more money than the Feds could spend. Clinton was a lucky POTUS. The I guess Bush must have been the unluckiest mother ****er who ever lived in the White House. -- Cut "to the chase" for my email address. No Bush and the Congress, Republican and Democrat controlled over the last 8 years sucked. I did not vote for Bush, I actually voted for Badnarik as both the candidates were bad choices. I voted for Obama in the primaries as I am a registered Dem and think the Hillary is a pox on the nation. Was Obama the best candidate? Not by a long shot, neither was McCain. Obama ran a better campaign, lots of it because he had 2x the money. The scary part is who gave the money? A billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. He owes some groups big time. I actually liked the Libertarian platform better. I just hope he controls Pelosi, the 2nd dumbest pol from Calif. (Boxer carries that title.) He most likely is only going to be President for 4 years, as the troubles are beyond fixing quickly and he is most likely going to look bad at the next election. Plus the Dem's will lose a lots of seats in Congress in midterm elections, and there is still going to be a lot of economic problems. As well as the open borders will likely not be addressed. People losing their jobs to an illegal will not play well. I just do not think Obama is ready for primetime. No seasoning. Is sad that these two are what we had to choose from. Obama in 10 years in the Senate, would most likely be a lot more ready to be the leader. Bush inherited a crashing economy, and actually came out ok on that point. It is the rest of the points where he failed and biggest point was the failure of the veto pen. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 7, 10:41*am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
*The scary part is who gave the money? *A billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. *He owes some groups big time. * http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...&cid=N00009638 Pretty serious list of malcreants, there. --riverman |
Congradulations Mr. President!
"riverman" wrote in message ... On Nov 7, 10:41 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: The scary part is who gave the money? A billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. He owes some groups big time. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...&cid=N00009638 Pretty serious list of malcreants, there. --riverman Sad that to see universities, et al on top contributor list. Obama's handlers removed most checks and balances on the contributions page. Name of the donor did not have to match the credit card, etc. Lyndon LaRouche went to jail for the same thing. Between those top contributors there is a large gap to be filled to $1 Billion bucks. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 8, 3:43*am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"riverman" wrote in message ... On Nov 7, 10:41 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: The scary part is who gave the money? A billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. He owes some groups big time. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...&cid=N00009638 Pretty serious list of malcreants, there. --riverman Sad that to see universities, et al on top contributor list. *Obama's handlers removed most checks and balances on the contributions page. *Name of the donor did not have to match the credit card, etc. *Lyndon LaRouche went to jail for the same thing. *Between those top contributors there is a large gap to be filled to $1 Billion bucks. LOL. Larouche went to jail for tax fraud. He was tried for fraud associated with fundraising, but that did not stick. The charges were based on his allegedly claiming that book sales and 'loans' were reported as donations so he could claim matching federal monies. (BTW, I got this from wikipedia...if you have more accurate facts, I am happy to hear them). AFAIK, Obama specifically did not claim any federal monies, nor did he misrepresent any donations as anything else. If you are making the claim that Obama ran a scam or was somehow in the same category as Lyndon Larouche, history awaits you and your lawsiut, my man. --riverman |
Congradulations Mr. President!
"riverman" wrote in message ... On Nov 8, 3:43 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: "riverman" wrote in message ... On Nov 7, 10:41 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: The scary part is who gave the money? A billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. He owes some groups big time. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...&cid=N00009638 Pretty serious list of malcreants, there. --riverman Sad that to see universities, et al on top contributor list. Obama's handlers removed most checks and balances on the contributions page. Name of the donor did not have to match the credit card, etc. Lyndon LaRouche went to jail for the same thing. Between those top contributors there is a large gap to be filled to $1 Billion bucks. LOL. Larouche went to jail for tax fraud. He was tried for fraud associated with fundraising, but that did not stick. The charges were based on his allegedly claiming that book sales and 'loans' were reported as donations so he could claim matching federal monies. (BTW, I got this from wikipedia...if you have more accurate facts, I am happy to hear them). AFAIK, Obama specifically did not claim any federal monies, nor did he misrepresent any donations as anything else. If you are making the claim that Obama ran a scam or was somehow in the same category as Lyndon Larouche, history awaits you and your lawsiut, my man. --riverman I am just stating that a Billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. He owes some people big time. We are going to be screwed anyway. We have the Fed driving the interest rates down, at the same time Obama and the next administration are promising Billions, towards of a 1000 billion in new spending. Driving the interest rates down and printing money will cause massive inflation. Maybe, most likely Carter years inflation. 18%. This will do a couple of things. Some slightly OK, but most bad. The governments will get a big increase in tax revenue. About 1.2% for every 1% of inflation. Houses will go up in value, so the loans may not be upside down. This will be the somewhat OK part, but the real value will have decreased. Probably the best thing Obama could do would be to kill the Federal Reserve System. It has no reserves and is not Federal, but controls the money supply. The only way we are going to really get out of the mess, is for the governments to quit overspending. Is not the Iraq war as lots claim. That is less 4% of the Federal Budget and we would be spending part of that money on the military anyway. It is the other 96% that needs control. We have not been fixing the infrastructure for many, many years. Lots more than the last 3 administrations. The Federal Department of Education controls education in the USA. Has not done a good job, but an expensive poor job. Most of the controls are via grants of money taken from a state and sent back at maybe 76% with strings attached. Look at the dismal graduation rates, and the poor performance of lots of those graduates. We did not even have a DOE until 1980. I actually liked the Libertarian platform the best. If were are going to do income redistribution, lets bring back the WPA. At least we will get something for our money. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
On Nov 8, 12:05*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"riverman" wrote in message ... On Nov 8, 3:43 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: "riverman" wrote in message .... On Nov 7, 10:41 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: The scary part is who gave the money? A billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. He owes some groups big time. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...&cid=N00009638 Pretty serious list of malcreants, there. --riverman Sad that to see universities, et al on top contributor list. Obama's handlers removed most checks and balances on the contributions page. Name of the donor did not have to match the credit card, etc. Lyndon LaRouche went to jail for the same thing. Between those top contributors there is a large gap to be filled to $1 Billion bucks. LOL. Larouche went to jail for tax fraud. He was tried for fraud associated with fundraising, but that did not stick. The charges were based on his allegedly claiming that book sales and 'loans' were reported as donations so he could claim matching federal monies. (BTW, I got this from wikipedia...if you have more accurate facts, I am happy to hear them). AFAIK, Obama specifically did not claim any federal monies, nor did he misrepresent any donations as anything else. If you are making the claim that Obama ran a scam or was somehow in the same category as Lyndon Larouche, history awaits you and your lawsiut, my man. --riverman I am just stating that a Billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. *He owes some people big time. *We are going to be screwed anyway. *We have the Fed driving the interest rates down, at the same time Obama and the next administration are promising Billions, towards of a 1000 billion in new spending. *Driving the interest rates down and printing money will cause massive inflation. *Maybe, most likely Carter years inflation. *18%. *This will do a couple of things. *Some slightly OK, but most bad. *The governments will get a big increase in tax revenue. *About 1.2% for every 1% of inflation. *Houses will go up in value, so the loans may not be upside down. *This will be the somewhat OK part, but the real value will have decreased. *Probably the best thing Obama could do would be to kill the Federal Reserve System. *It has no reserves and is not Federal, but controls the money supply. *The only way we are going to really get out of the mess, is for the governments to quit overspending. *Is not the Iraq war as lots claim. *That is less 4% of the Federal Budget and we would be spending part of that money on the military anyway. *It is the other 96% that needs control. *We have not been fixing the infrastructure for many, many years. Lots more than the last 3 administrations. *The Federal Department of Education controls education in the USA. *Has not done a good job, but an expensive poor job. *Most of the controls are via grants of money taken from a state and sent back at maybe 76% with strings attached. *Look at the dismal graduation rates, and the poor performance of lots of those graduates. *We did not even have a DOE until 1980. *I actually liked the Libertarian platform the best. *If were are going to do income redistribution, lets bring back the WPA. *At least we will get something for our money.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You realize that you are babbling, of course. I haven't heard such stream-of-consciousness anxiety since my roommate in college got some bad acid. --riverman |
Congradulations Mr. President!
" bad acid ' is nothing compaired to the economic
storm brewin' straight ahead......fastin your seat belts..... |
Congradulations Mr. President!
"riverman" wrote in message ... On Nov 8, 12:05 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote: "riverman" wrote in message ... On Nov 8, 3:43 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: "riverman" wrote in message ... On Nov 7, 10:41 am, "Calif Bill" wrote: The scary part is who gave the money? A billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. He owes some groups big time. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...&cid=N00009638 Pretty serious list of malcreants, there. --riverman Sad that to see universities, et al on top contributor list. Obama's handlers removed most checks and balances on the contributions page. Name of the donor did not have to match the credit card, etc. Lyndon LaRouche went to jail for the same thing. Between those top contributors there is a large gap to be filled to $1 Billion bucks. LOL. Larouche went to jail for tax fraud. He was tried for fraud associated with fundraising, but that did not stick. The charges were based on his allegedly claiming that book sales and 'loans' were reported as donations so he could claim matching federal monies. (BTW, I got this from wikipedia...if you have more accurate facts, I am happy to hear them). AFAIK, Obama specifically did not claim any federal monies, nor did he misrepresent any donations as anything else. If you are making the claim that Obama ran a scam or was somehow in the same category as Lyndon Larouche, history awaits you and your lawsiut, my man. --riverman I am just stating that a Billion bucks does not come from $5 donations. He owes some people big time. We are going to be screwed anyway. We have the Fed driving the interest rates down, at the same time Obama and the next administration are promising Billions, towards of a 1000 billion in new spending. Driving the interest rates down and printing money will cause massive inflation. Maybe, most likely Carter years inflation. 18%. This will do a couple of things. Some slightly OK, but most bad. The governments will get a big increase in tax revenue. About 1.2% for every 1% of inflation. Houses will go up in value, so the loans may not be upside down. This will be the somewhat OK part, but the real value will have decreased. Probably the best thing Obama could do would be to kill the Federal Reserve System. It has no reserves and is not Federal, but controls the money supply. The only way we are going to really get out of the mess, is for the governments to quit overspending. Is not the Iraq war as lots claim. That is less 4% of the Federal Budget and we would be spending part of that money on the military anyway. It is the other 96% that needs control. We have not been fixing the infrastructure for many, many years. Lots more than the last 3 administrations. The Federal Department of Education controls education in the USA. Has not done a good job, but an expensive poor job. Most of the controls are via grants of money taken from a state and sent back at maybe 76% with strings attached. Look at the dismal graduation rates, and the poor performance of lots of those graduates. We did not even have a DOE until 1980. I actually liked the Libertarian platform the best. If were are going to do income redistribution, lets bring back the WPA. At least we will get something for our money.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You realize that you are babbling, of course. I haven't heard such stream-of-consciousness anxiety since my roommate in college got some bad acid. --riverman WTF? Most of the posts here are babbling, and not a brook. And the anxiety is real. Especially for my 30 something kids. Dem's and Repub's have had an orgy of spending for years. Only thing that made Clinton's look OK was the excess funds from the dot.bomb stock option money. Not from a real robust economy. Both parties have caused the current economic meltdown. And since the Dem's have had Congress the last ~2 years, they get to share a bigger part of the blame. Probably one of the best things we could do is kill the Federal Reserve System. It has no reserves, controls the money supply, and is not Federal. Lots of people made fortunes on the mortgage debacle. Borrow money from the Fed at 3% and loan at 6% and sell the loan to the government for 5% and pocket 1% for selling a loan. Then sell a bunch of securities based on the underlying loan. That part is OK, but selling securities 50 times on the same loan, should be cause for fraud convictions and loss of all assets and jail time. And where did the Fed get it's 3% money to loan? They printed it. No assets underlying the money. The hyper inflation we are looking at is going to hurt the younger people, more than us old farts. We have less time here to be concerned about it. Unless the younger generation decides to try us for theft from them and then line us up against the wall with a firing squad. |
Congradulations Mr. President!
Calif Bill wrote:
You realize that you are babbling, of course. --riverman WTF? Most of the posts here are babbling, and not a brook. snipped babble ... We have less time here to be concerned about it. Unless the younger generation decides to try us for theft from them and then line us up against the wall with a firing squad. "unless"...??? ...uh...and in your world of hyperbole that gives us more time? even you have to admit you make no sense... jeff |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:00 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter