Obama: Headed for a Landslide?

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Interesting in that FL is a huge state for candidates and SC is NEVER considered in actual races for Democrats.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama: Headed for a Landslide? (http://news.yahoo.com/obama-headed-landslide-094500953.html)
By Michael Tomasky | The Daily Beast – 4 hrs ago

How can Barack Obama, as this new NBC/Marist poll has it, be beating Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney in South Carolina, of all places? The leads are narrow—it’s just 45-42 over Romney and 46-42 over Gingrich. But still, this is South Carolina, the home state of a senator (Lindsey Graham) who, just this past Sunday on Meet the Press, was talking nullification of federal laws in the shameful style that is his state’s benighted tradition. Is it conceivable that 10 months and three weeks from now, Obama could actually win the state? If it happens, we will know that the Republicans are headed off the cliff. And that is precisely where we should all hope they go.

http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/Qj_0maSNUyT3MQ6DX7kZ.w--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9OTA7Y3I9MTtjdz0xMzU7ZHg9MDtkeT 0wO2ZpPXVsY3JvcDtoPTEyNztxPTg1O3c9MTkw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/TheDailyBeast/michael-tomasky-could-obama-be-headed-for-a-landslide.scaled.small.1323742492022.jpg
Obama: Headed for a Landslide?


Everyone wants sanity and civility restored to our politics. Some moderate Democrats and a smattering of Republicans have this fantasy that a centrist third party will do it. Nonsense. As I’ve written before, all a centrist third party will accomplish is ensure the election of the right-wing candidate. The only thing that might bring back sanity and civility is the destruction of the current GOP. If Republicans wake up next Nov. 7 to see that their extremist-obstructionist posture of the last four years has only reelected a president who started the year below 50 percent (as he will) and whom they should have been able to beat, then they might finally return to earth.

Nothing would say that the American people thought Republicans had vacated our planet like losing South Carolina. Everything was going gangbusters for the GOP there recently, even more than usual. The last remaining Democratic federal-level officials were all wiped out, except for James Clyburn, the congressman who represents the one majority-black district. The Democrats’ last Senate candidate was a laughingstock. And the Palmetto State had this hot new governor, Nikki Haley: right wing; a Sikh, of all improbable things (by birth—she's a fervent Christian now); a heavyweight endorsee of Sarah Palin; and a rising star.

Now? Well, the Democrats aren’t going to take over state politics anytime soon. But Haley’s star is very much on the wane. Her approval rating in the state, 36 percent, is 8 points lower than Obama’s. A state agency of her administration—get this—voted to grant Savannah, Ga., the right to deepen its port channels, thereby potentially putting the port of Savannah in a position to take business away in the future from the port of Charleston. Haley’s appointees to the board voted with Georgia.

There are various allegations flying about. But on the central question of why the appointees of a governor of South Carolina would side with Georgia’s interests and against their own state’s, one South Carolina politics website, linked to above, has this to say: “According to our sources, moneyed Georgia interests with connections to the Port of Savannah threw a big fundraiser for Haley in Atlanta last month. Also, our sources say that the chairman of the Georgia Ports Authority—a major GOP donor who will select speakers for next year’s Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida—has been negotiating with Haley and her political consultant to land the governor a coveted prime time speaking gig at the event.”

Haley is sinking like a stone. Meanwhile, South Carolina Republicans surely know deep down that Gingrich is unelectable, and they find Romney unpalatable. The state’s black voters, about 30 percent of the total, have no such reservations about the Democratic candidate. And his 45 or 46 percent in the new poll suggests he’s getting some white support, too—more than he got in 2008, arguably, when he won just under 45 percent of the vote against John McCain.

OK. Realistically, South Carolina is a reach. But nobody cares about South Carolina, really—it is assumed to be in the red column just as Massachusetts is assumed to be in the blue. But now let’s look at the Florida numbers from the NBC/Marist poll. There Obama is beating both Romney and Gingrich by outside the margin of error. He leads Romney 48-41 and Gingrich 51-39.

Again, all politics is local. Republican Rick Scott is the least popular governor in the United States—right now at 26 percent and still sinking. Scott and Haley are prime examples of governors who were supposed to show a new and better way, with politics forged in the cauldron of Tea Party fervor about an absence of accountability, and so on. But these politicians have turned out to be just like all the old ones, except less competent. And if Obama holds Florida, he can afford to lose—take note of this list—Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, Nevada, New Mexico, and either Michigan or Pennsylvania, and still rack up a winning 270 electoral votes. (Here, go click the states yourself.) But of course, if he’s winning Florida, he’s likely not losing any of those other states, with the exception of Indiana. Indeed, if he’s winning Florida by around double digits, he’s winning Missouri, Arizona, and maybe Georgia (yes, even—I’d say especially—against Gingrich).

Ten months and three weeks is a long, long time. But today’s poll suggests that a wipeout of such proportions is not unimaginable. By a president whose anemic approval rating is just 44 percent! But I am not here to say the GOP had better grow up fast. Quite the contrary. If this tantrum lasts through the election, and if 2012 is for the Republicans what 1984 was for the Democrats, then finally our polity stands a chance of functioning again. The Tea Party will be dead and buried. Grover Norquist’s vise lock on the GOP will loosen. Someone will start a centrist Republican Leadership Council, just as people started the centrist DLC back in 1985. A certain number of elected Republicans will understand that being the Party of No didn’t get them much of anywhere. So this poll should not be a wake-up call for Republican voters. Hit the snooze button, folks, and keep fuming away.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Looks like Gingrich is widening his lead over Romney...

-------------------------------------------------------------
Gingrich worse against Obama than Romney: Reuters/Ipsos poll (http://news.yahoo.com/gingrich-surges-ahead-republican-race-nbc-wsj-poll-040605616.html)
Reuters By Andy Sullivan | Reuters – 3 hrs ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Newt Gingrich holds a 10-point lead in the fight for the Republican presidential nomination, but he would fare worse against President Barack Obama than Republican Mitt Romney, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll.

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/GT0TO7MwRFs19ZQ0BGtmrg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MzAwO2NyPTE7Y3c9NDUwO2R4PTA7ZH k9MDtmaT11bGNyb3A7aD0xMjc7cT04NTt3PTE5MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2011-12-14T040605Z_1_BTRE7BD0BEG00_RTROPTP_2_USA-CAMPAIGN.JPG

With the first nominating contest in Iowa less than three weeks away, Gingrich leads Romney among Republican voters nationwide by 28 percent to 18 percent, the poll found.

However, the poll raises questions about whether Gingrich -- a former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives who has shot to the top of Republican opinion polls in recent weeks -- would be able to defeat Obama.

The poll found that if the November 2012 presidential election were held today, Obama would defeat Gingrich, 51 percent to 38 percent. By contrast, Obama would defeat Romney by a narrower margin, 48 percent to 40 percent.

Analysts say the results reflect the risk that Republicans could face if they nominate Gingrich, whose strong performances in debates have won him support among conservatives seeking an alternative to Romney.

Gingrich has a long record of making provocative statements that could alienate independent voters, such as when he recently referred to Palestinians as an "invented" people.

CONT...

[Taco John]

Gingrich is doomed. The descent has already started in Iowa and NH. I'm looking for Perry to make a resurgence. The liberals will howl, but they're tightening him up over there and with Paul surging, Perry is best positioned to look like a "moderate" in the gap between Newt Romney and Paul.

[peacepipe]

Gingrich is doomed. The descent has already started in Iowa and NH. I'm looking for Perry to make a resurgence. The liberals will howl, but they're tightening him up over there and with Paul surging, Perry is best positioned to look like a "moderate" in the gap between Newt Romney and Paul.you can't be serious.

[Rohirrim]

I think Perry has become the national clown. About ten percent of the mouth breathers might vote for him, but that's about it.

[Bob]

I think Taco is right about Newt -- as people learn more about him, I think he will lose steam.

[Atwater 27]

Newt is a toad, Ron is a nut and Romney is a ken-doll. Obama is a marxist. Sad sad state of the nation when we have these losers as the best leaders available.

[Bob]

Newt is a toad, Ron is a nut and Romney is a ken-doll. Obama is a marxist. Sad sad state of the nation when we have these losers as the best leaders available.

Amen! So why is everyone been so quick to jump on the next bandwagon every other month? Folks especially during the primaries should back who they honestly believe would represent their values with integrity -- not who the media tells them has the best chance – or has been properly vetted and approved by them.

[Bob]

Newt is a toad, Ron is a nut and Romney is a ken-doll. Obama is a marxist. Sad sad state of the nation when we have these losers as the best leaders available.

But in fairness -- what makes Ron a nut? I dont see eye to eye with him on several issues, but in terms of understanding limited constitutional government, he has some decent qualities. I wonder if at times we are parroting what the mainstream media says we should think about various canidates?

[Atwater 27]

But in fairness -- what makes Ron a nut? I dont see eye to eye with him on several issues, but in terms of understanding limited constitutional government, he has some decent qualities. I wonder if at times we are parroting what the mainstream media says we should think about various canidates?

I love alot of what Ron Paul says about the fed and the economy and such. But his foreign policy would be disastrous and we can't just put our heads in the sand and detatch from the world like he wants to.

[barryr]

With more and more people in this country going on government aid, the chances increase of any president who promises more and more of it. Does that make us a better country? No, but that does not matter to those who want people like Obama president, who want God out of all public places and abortion clinics in their place, not to mention clinics to hopefully in their eyes, get the now legal drugs easier. Yes, such a true paradise.

[Atwater 27]

"Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse out of the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefit from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a dictatorship, and then a monarchy."
--Alexander Tytler

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." - Dr. Adrian Rogers

[Rohirrim]

At many stages in the advance of humanity, this conflict between the men who possess more than they have earned and the men who have earned more than they possess is the central condition of progress. In our day it appears as the struggle of freemen to gain and hold the right of self-government as against the special interests, who twist the methods of free government into machinery for defeating the popular will. At every stage, and under all circumstances, the essence of the struggle is to equalize opportunity, destroy privilege, and give to the life and citizenship of every individual the highest possible value both to himself and to the commonwealth. That is nothing new. All I ask in civil life is what you fought for in the Civil War. I ask that civil life be carried on according to the spirit in which the army was carried on. You never get perfect justice, but the effort in handling the army was to bring to the front the men who could do the job. Nobody grudged promotion to Grant, or Sherman, or Thomas, or Sheridan, because they earned it. The only complaint was when a man got promotion which he did not earn. - Teddy Roosevelt

[Arkie]

I love alot of what Ron Paul says about the fed and the economy and such. But his foreign policy would be disastrous and we can't just put our heads in the sand and detatch from the world like he wants to.

The military disagrees. There’s a difference between an isolationist and a non-interventionist, and the military understands this. They don’t want to be tricked into wars not related to direct territorial self-defense. It’s not like RP wants to control trade and cultural exchange with foreigners.

[Garcia Bronco]

I won't vote for Obama
Or Newt
Maybe Romney
And noone of the other GOP candidates.

I would vote for Ron Paul in a second.

[Bob]

"Democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse out of the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefit from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy, always to be followed by a dictatorship, and then a monarchy."
--Alexander Tytler

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." - Dr. Adrian Rogers

And that is why the Founders established a Republic -- there have been several changes to our system of government that has pushed it toward a democracy -- I think it was the 17th Amendment that was passed in 1913 that made the election of Senators a direct vote from the people of that state rather than the state legislature...

[Bob]

I love alot of what Ron Paul says about the fed and the economy and such. But his foreign policy would be disastrous and we can't just put our heads in the sand and detatch from the world like he wants to.

I have concerns here as well -- I need to read up on what he thinks about Israel and our past support for them

[Bob]

I won't vote for Obama
Or Newt
Maybe Romney
And noone of the other GOP candidates.

I would vote for Ron Paul in a second.

Is it because you dont think they have a chance, or is it becuase of their stances on the issues?

[epicSocialism4tw]

I think that Obama will lose in a landslide as well.

[Atwater 27]

The military disagrees. There’s a difference between an isolationist and a non-interventionist, and the military understands this. They don’t want to be tricked into wars not related to direct territorial self-defense. It’s not like RP wants to control trade and cultural exchange with foreigners.

He doesn't think Iran is a threat to us and the world. You gotta be crazy or blind to not see the massive threat posed by Iran, who have stated they want to wipe us and Israel off the map.

[Bob]

He doesn't think Iran is a threat to us and the world. You gotta be crazy or blind to not see the massive threat posed by Iran, who have stated they want to wipe us and Israel off the map.

It is hard to believe crazy folks -- but if the nuts get nukes our options become even more severe.

When Hitler grew in power was it because people thought he was too radical to pose a serious threat?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Obama is a marxist.

Hilarious!

A "Marxist" whose record of selling government power to private interests is even worse than that of G.W. Bush?

You must watch a LOT of Fox News.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

With more and more people in this country going on government aid, the chances increase of any president who promises more and more of it.

Why would you have a problem with this?

After all, you're a proponent of the Wal-Mart business model, i.e., one in which workers have no choice but to seek public assistance for health care and other basic necessities.

Why don't these workers have any other choice?

Because idiots like you believe putting as much $$$ as possible in the coffers of the Waltons (and their ilk) and as little as possible in the bank accounts of working Americans is the key to a successful economy.

[Atwater 27]

Hilarious!

A "Marxist" whose record of selling government power to private interests is even worse than that of G.W. Bush?

You must watch a LOT of Fox News.

You must listen to a LOT of MSLSD. Bama's mom was an activist commie like you and you love them for it. Don't hide from that fact, wear it like a badge.

http://www.foundry.org/wp-content/uploads/fed-job-gains.jpg

http://obamaism.blogspot.com/

[Garcia Bronco]

Is it because you dont think they have a chance, or is it becuase of their stances on the issues?

I don't feel comfortable with them on most issues or find them to be incapable leaders.

[Rohirrim]

You must listen to a LOT of MSLSD. Bama's mom was an activist commie like you and you love them for it. Don't hide from that fact, wear it like a badge.

http://www.foundry.org/wp-content/uploads/fed-job-gains.jpg

http://obamaism.blogspot.com/

All that tells me is that as more and more so called "American" industries **** their countrymen over by sending jobs overseas (weakening their country and making our enemies like China stronger just so they can stuff more money in their own pockets) there are some in America who try to take up the slack by helping their countrymen out with jobs. Meanwhile, traitorous bastards celebrate the downfall of America by supporting the accumulation of wealth by the already wealthy over the welfare of their own countrymen.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You must listen to a LOT of MSLSD. Bama's mom was an activist commie like you and you love them for it. Don't hide from that fact, wear it like a badge.

http://www.foundry.org/wp-content/uploads/fed-job-gains.jpg

http://obamaism.blogspot.com/

Heritage.org?

Now there's a credible and unbiased source. Ha!

I know how much neo-McCarthyists and Fox News lemmings like you love to throw terms like "commie" and "socialist" around, but you really should learn the meanings of these terms at some point.

[Atwater 27]

Actually, numbnutz, the graph is from the U.S. Dept of Labor;Bureau of Labor Statistics. Open your eyes, jackass!

[Arkie]

He doesn't think Iran is a threat to us and the world. You gotta be crazy or blind to not see the massive threat posed by Iran, who have stated they want to wipe us and Israel off the map.

Do not fall for the fear mongering. Iran is no more a threat than Iraq was in 2003. Ron Paul owns Bachmann.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sW9-RRRD14I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Arkie]

Michele Bachmann says Iran has threatened to launch nuclear attack against Israel, United States

http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/rulings%2Ftom-false.gif

Responding to a hypothetical question about whether the United States should support an attack against Iran by Middle East-ally Israel, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann noted that Iran already has announced plans to strike Israel.

"They've stated, as recently as August just before President (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad came ... to the U.N. General Assembly. He said that he wanted to eradicate Israel from the face of the Earth," Bachmann said during the Nov. 22, 2011, CNN debate.

"He has said that if he has a nuclear weapon he will use it to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. He will use it against the United States of America."

The claim from Bachmann isn’t new -- she said something similar during an Iowa campaign event in October.

But is it correct?

The genesis appears to be an hourlong August interview Ahmadinejad gave to Al-Manar TV, a network based in Lebanon. This is a link to the interview. Ahmadinejad’s comments appear to be translated from Persian into Arabic.

We could not find a copy of the entire interview that had been translated in English, but there are a few English-language news reports that translate selected comments from the Iranian leader. We reached out to Bachmann’s campaign but did not hear back.

The website Haaretz.com, an online edition of an Israeli newspaper, quoted Ahmadinejad as saying Iran was determined to eradicate Israel.

The website wrote:


"Iran believes that whoever is for humanity should also be for eradicating the Zionist regime (Israel) as symbol of suppression and discrimination," Ahmadinejad said in an interview with a Lebanese television network, carried by ISNA.

"Iran follows this issue (the eradication of Israel) with determination and decisiveness and will never ever withdraw from this standpoint and policy," the Iranian president added in the interview with the Al-Manar network.


In both quotes Israel is included in parentheses, which means Ahmadinejad never said the word. The "ISNA" the report refers to is likely the Iranian Student's News Agency.

We should also note that there has been some concern over how Ahmadinejad’s statements have been translated into English. In 2005, several sources reported Ahmadinejad as saying Israel should "be wiped off the map."

However, several experts believed Ahmadinejad’s actual comments to be inflated.

"Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to wipe Israel off the map because no such idiom exists in Persian," Juan Cole, a Middle East specialist at the University of Michigan told the New York Times. "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."

For this fact-check, we’re not saying these most recent comments are translated accurately, or inaccurately. We’re simply saying you should read them with a note of caution.

However, where Bachmann misstepped was by accusing Ahmadinejad of saying he planned to use a nuclear weapon against Israel or the United States.

Iran and Ahmadinejad have maintained that they are not pursuing nuclear weapons, and that they are only pursuing nuclear energy.

Here’s how Ahmadinejad put it during an October interview with CNN.

"We have already expressed our views about nuclear bombs. We said those who are seeking to build nuclear bombs or those who stockpile, they are politically and mentally retarded. We think they are stupid because the era of nuclear bombs is over," he said.

"Iran, for example, should continue its efforts and tolerate all international treasures only to build a nuclear bomb or a few nuclear bombs that are useless? They can never be used? And is not capable of confronting with the U.S. nuclear arsenals? The overall budget of our national atomic energy agency is $250 million, and the whole budget is aimed at peaceful activities.

"But the government of the United States only allocated $80 million for rebuilding the nuclear bombs. I think Iranians are clever enough to see that with this limited amount of money, $250 million, we are not able to be at war with the other side."

Many westerners, and most Republicans, think Ahmadinejad is lying.

Ahmadinejad has said that he believes the U.S. government orchestrated the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to "reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime." He also has criticized the United States abducting Africans and turning them into slaves, has said some European countries are still using the Holocaust to "pay ransom" to Jews living in Israel and said the United States economy relies on waging wars and selling weapons.

But we’re focusing on Bachmann’s actual statement during the Nov. 22 debate. She paraphrased Ahmadinejad as saying, "He has said that if he has a nuclear weapon he will use it to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. He will use it against the United States of America."

Ahmadinejad has said some tough things about the United States and Israel, but we find no evidence that he has said he would use a nuclear weapon against either country. In fact, he has maintained Iran has no interest in building one. We rate this claim False.

[DBruleU]

Ron Paul is like that crazy uncle you have over every Christmas and can't wait to get rid of. I don't have a problem with him per se, but he just comes across as detached from reality on some things. He completely lost me when he said who cares if Iran has a nuke. Just nutso on a few things that really make me cringe.

I'm warming up to Romney more and more only because I think he is our best bet to get rid of this massive failure we have right now.

[Arkie]

It makes me cringe to think of enduring the same losses against Iran as we did against Iraq. Both of them are preemptive wars based on lies.

[DBruleU]

I don't want war as much as the next guy doesn't but Paul doesn't live in reality when he says things like that. To say it's based on lies is a bit of a stretch. Lying is one thing, being given inaccurate info from various intelligence agencies and acting on it is another.

[mhgaffney]

Ron Paul a crazy uncle?

Hilarious.

[mhgaffney]

If Gingrich is nominated -- then Obama -- despite everything -- could win by a landslide.

The GOP would have to be insane to pick Newt.

[Atwater 27]

Yeah, Iran doesn't have ANY plans with their newfound Nuclear power. Get a ****ing clue libtards.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CUezKsBCRbk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_9zcElqetqk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Actually, numbnutz, the graph is from the U.S. Dept of Labor;Bureau of Labor Statistics. Open your eyes, jackass!

No sh*t, Sherlock.

It's the way your graph is being cherry picked by a right-wing think tank like Heritage that should give you pause, ass monkey. :welcome:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yeah, Iran doesn't have ANY plans with their newfound Nuclear power. Get a ****ing clue libtards.



This from a right-wing idiot who bought into BushCo's "mushroom cloud" scare tactics during the run-up to the court-appointed pinhead's illegal invasion of Iraq, no doubt.

[Arkie]

Yeah, Iran doesn't have ANY plans with their newfound Nuclear power. Get a ****ing clue libtards.


Don't be a pussy. Iran doesn't have a nuke. The US has 8,500 nukes. No country except the US has ever use these weapons.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Don't be a p***Y. Iran doesn't have a nuke. The US has 8,500 nukes. No country except the US has ever use these weapons.

There you go confounding the fear mongers with facts again. ;)

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Don't be a p***Y. Iran doesn't have a nuke. The US has 8,500 nukes. No country except the US has ever use these weapons.Not quite accurate as almost, if not every nation that has them, has lit one off, just not against other countries.

[Atwater 27]

No sh*t, Sherlock.

It's the way your graph is being cherry picked by a right-wing think tank like Heritage that should give you pause, ass monkey. :welcome:

How's the view from the ivory tower of your left wing think tank?

[Spider]

How's the view from the ivory tower of your left wing think tank?

give it up .you got owned

[Atwater 27]

I'm sorry, I wasn't speaking liberese. Here's a story from NPR that is more readable to moonbats.

Donilon Says Iran Nukes Program Is 'Undeniable'
http://www.npr.org/2011/11/23/142710558/donilon-says-iran-nukes-program-is-undeniable


http://ivarfjeld.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/iran-nukes.jpg?w=450&h=333

[Atwater 27]

give it up .you got owned

wattup homo?

[Spider]

wattup homo?

homo .......... Oh shiat what a burn , someone take me to the burn unit .....nothing much is up , just watching you get owned in this thread ...... :rofl:

[Spider]

oh great another bedwetter ....... so Iran is going to be the next Hitler hey ...... so many 3 rd world Hitlers , so little time

[Atwater 27]

Still haven't changed, huh spidey... still a blowhard bombthrower without a clue. Every site has one. How's that hairy truck stop action been treating you?

[Arkie]

I don't want war as much as the next guy doesn't but Paul doesn't live in reality when he says things like that. To say it's based on lies is a bit of a stretch. Lying is one thing, being given inaccurate info from various intelligence agencies and acting on it is another.

I don't think it's a stretch that politicians lie. Especially in that video in the original post. It's entertaining watching them defend their Big Government records with lies. At one point, Newt claimed he was from the private sector. That got a chuckle from the audience, and Newt had trouble keeping a straight face. These guys make opposite promises to the likes of Lockheed Martin than the promises they make to the people. Politicians have to decide which promises to break, and it would be political suicide to break the promises of those who fund your campaign. Keep in mind that the people fund Ron Paul's campaign and special interests fund the other candidates. These guys are trying to promote a new trillion dollar war without getting the basic facts right. Deja vu

[Rohirrim]

The idea that anyone can seriously blame Obama for all the **** that has happened to this country over the last ten years, and what is happening now, is troglodyte fool's gold. Sure it's easy to pick up from the ground, and it's all nice and shiny, but it ain't worth ****. Some people just need simple explanations. What's simpler than, "It's that black guy in the WH?"

What has happened to America is the result of a systemic failure. Placing another talking head in the White House without engaging in major systemic reform is just the propagation of denial.

[Garcia Bronco]

The idea that anyone can seriously blame Obama for all the **** that has happened to this country over the last ten years, and what is happening now, is troglodyte fool's gold. Sure it's easy to pick up from the ground, and it's all nice and shiny, but it ain't worth ****. Some people just need simple explanations. What's simpler than, "It's that black guy in the WH?"

What has happened to America is the result of a systemic failure. Placing another talking head in the White House without engaging in major systemic reform is just the propagation of denial.

Of course Obama is to blame. He served in the Senate and the PResidency that helpped pilot these mess. He's just far from the only one.

[greg]

We can never deny the fact that United States is in the midst of financial crisis. Lots of people are now having a hard time coping up with the present situation. Politicians and the leaders of our government must pursue to solve the current problem of the state. Forty-three U.S. states documented drops in unemployment figures for Nov. That is the biggest amount of states to report declining numbers since 2003. Many who are unemployed have gotten financial help from personal loans. Article source: Unemployment rates drop in most states (http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2011/12/20/unemployment-rates-drop/)

[Bob]

Ron Paul is like that crazy uncle you have over every Christmas and can't wait to get rid of. I don't have a problem with him per se, but he just comes across as detached from reality on some things. He completely lost me when he said who cares if Iran has a nuke. Just nutso on a few things that really make me cringe.

I'm warming up to Romney more and more only because I think he is our best bet to get rid of this massive failure we have right now.

What else besides the Iran Nuke statement that concerns you? I really like Paul on spending -- maybe someone shoudl put him in charge of the treasury department?

[Bob]

No sh*t, Sherlock.

It's the way your graph is being cherry picked by a right-wing think tank like Heritage that should give you pause, ass monkey. :welcome:

What stats are being cherry picked?

[Bob]

We can never deny the fact that United States is in the midst of financial crisis. Lots of people are now having a hard time coping up with the present situation. Politicians and the leaders of our government must pursue to solve the current problem of the state. Forty-three U.S. states documented drops in unemployment figures for Nov. That is the biggest amount of states to report declining numbers since 2003. Many who are unemployed have gotten financial help from personal loans. Article source: Unemployment rates drop in most states (http://personalmoneynetwork.com/moneyblog/2011/12/20/unemployment-rates-drop/)

My concern with most unemployment stats is that they ignore those who have given up looking for employment. I believe that the real unemployment number is much closer to 20% right now.

[cutthemdown]

Anyone who has followed politics knows that whoever wins the repub nomination will get a 5% point boost in the polls. Then Obama will get his bump after the dem convention. Then it will even out and 6-7 swing states will decide the election.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

My concern with most unemployment stats is that they ignore those who have given up looking for employment. I believe that the real unemployment number is much closer to 20% right now.U-6 numbers, which include people who consider themselves underemployed, are probably around 13% right now.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Obama has been so terrible...its just astounding that anyone would consider voting for him.

I mean...he has already bailed on the presidency and is using his final year to campaign on the taxpayer dollar.

Why would anyone vote for that?

[barryr]

Obama has been so terrible...its just astounding that anyone would consider voting for him.

I mean...he has already bailed on the presidency and is using his final year to campaign on the taxpayer dollar.

Why would anyone vote for that?

Because they are conditioned to vote for a certain party, not an individual.

[Requiem]

^ How mother****in' ironic.

[W*GS]

^ How mother****in' ironic.

Yep - epicFail, barryr, Hobo, Bronx, &c &c don't even realize it when their rhetoric is aimed right at their own dittoheads...

They've (rhetorically) blown their own brains out (no great loss there) so many times it's just pathetic.