PDA

View Full Version : The official Election 2012 discussion thread...


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Taco John
01-18-2012, 12:22 PM
This is the only politics thread designated for the front page during the offseason. All others will be moved to the WRP forum...

Post away!

bronco militia
01-18-2012, 12:33 PM
:TJnPopps:

alkemical
01-18-2012, 12:34 PM
Your oppressor sucks!

DeuceOfClub
01-18-2012, 12:35 PM
http://curezone.com/upload/Members/new03/white.jpg

TonyR
01-18-2012, 12:36 PM
It's Romney's GOP nomination to lose.
It's Obama's election to lose.

alkemical
01-18-2012, 12:37 PM
It's Romney's GOP nomination to lose.
It's Obama's election to lose.

Does this mean I lose?

RhymesayersDU
01-18-2012, 12:39 PM
POLITICS!

bendog
01-18-2012, 12:45 PM
There goes the neighborhood.

DomCasual
01-18-2012, 12:57 PM
See my adopt-a-Bronco.

Ray Finkle
01-18-2012, 01:00 PM
In before Socal rants about his favorite candidate only for them to fall flat on their face!


oh wait, Huntsman.....too late.

BABronco
01-18-2012, 01:00 PM
See my adopt-a-Bronco.

Serious question, why? I've never actually ran into a romney supporter.

Bronco Boy
01-18-2012, 01:01 PM
Does this mean I lose?

We all do.

teknic
01-18-2012, 01:02 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NWMDF92ZE7c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

A true free-market world would be great.

TheReverend
01-18-2012, 01:11 PM
Don't bother voting as I am not yet eligible to run due to age restrictions.

Binkythefrog
01-18-2012, 01:15 PM
With all of the incorrect, carefully manipulated information coming from both sides on virtually every issue, I hope people take a little bit of time to research their views (that includes me)! And I also hope we see more voter participation, it's sad that only half of eligible voters take the time to actually participate.

I know, I know a pipe dream, but one can dream eh?

24champ
01-18-2012, 01:38 PM
See my adopt-a-Bronco.

Hope we wrap this up on Saturday.

gyldenlove
01-18-2012, 01:39 PM
In the grand tradition started in 2007 when I lost my right to vote I will not be voting this year - but I will be laughing my ass off at the rest of you when the results come in and it has all gone horribly wrong.

BABronco
01-18-2012, 01:42 PM
RP 2012

SonOfLe-loLang
01-18-2012, 01:43 PM
oh no

gyldenlove
01-18-2012, 01:43 PM
Don't bother voting as I am not yet eligible to run due to age restrictions.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Tucson05_TitanICBM.jpg

Get yourself a few handfuls of these bad boys, make a call to whoever is in charge of these things and negotiate your place on the ballot and how many votes you think you deserve in return for not vaporating Tom Brady and everyone else who lives within 300 miles of his house.

Shotgun Willie
01-18-2012, 01:46 PM
Gotta love this election. You have a guy in Romney, who in 2008, would've come in at best 4th place. He then proceeds to do nothing of real value for 4 years and comes in as the frontrunner for the GOP.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-18-2012, 01:51 PM
Gotta love this election. You have a guy in Romney, who in 2008, would've come in at best 4th place. He then proceeds to do nothing of real value for 4 years and comes in as the frontrunner for the GOP.

More of a reflection on his opponents than him

Houshyamama
01-18-2012, 01:52 PM
I'm going to vote for myself

BroncoBeavis
01-18-2012, 01:54 PM
Gotta love this election. You have a guy in Romney, who in 2008, would've come in at best 4th place. He then proceeds to do nothing of real value for 4 years and comes in as the frontrunner for the GOP.

Romney finished 2nd in the '08 primaries.

bendog
01-18-2012, 01:55 PM
Gotta love this election. You have a guy in Romney, who in 2008, would've come in at best 4th place. He then proceeds to do nothing of real value for 4 years and comes in as the frontrunner for the GOP.

Ah, Mitt's got nothing ... unless you count tying the irish setter to the roof of his station wagon, driving down the highway and then trying wash the poor stupd traumatized dog's crap off the car with his kids watching. I mean, I need some ****ing video HERE.

But with my boy Obama ... Look this dude went into the caucus states and got these yuppie white women baking cookies in their birkenstocks telling them how he's so much more a L-I-B-E-R-A-L than Hillary and how hillary just by the way had only one qualification, she married Bill, and they shouldn't have to put up with guys like him. So he gets the nomination and proceeds to give Wall Street HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS while the real estate markets implode ... along with Sarah Jane Birkenstock's precious little Samantha's college savings ... and he tells them "hey, what can I say, I was raised by an old white banker and I'm breaking it off in a better ass than J-Lo...."

It warms my cold old heart.

Shotgun Willie
01-18-2012, 02:04 PM
Romney finished 2nd in the '08 primaries.

I'm talking 4th overall in the general election rankings (he was well behind Hillary too).

Smiling Assassin27
01-18-2012, 02:07 PM
http://ireporters.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/funny-political-party-choice.jpg

Smiling Assassin27
01-18-2012, 02:10 PM
http://nicedeb.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/the-race-card1-e12994424353501.jpg

bendog
01-18-2012, 02:12 PM
Where's militia?

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_los34vzaXS1qg2mip.gif

Archer81
01-18-2012, 02:13 PM
This thread will be epic. I'm taking it that we are officially in offseason mode?


:Broncos:

Miss I.
01-18-2012, 02:15 PM
:tebow:I am voting for Tebow. He's too young, but then again, he's Tebow.:tebow:

SonOfLe-loLang
01-18-2012, 02:15 PM
This thread will be epic. I'm taking it that we are officially in offseason mode?


:Broncos:

I have a feeling that this will be less contentious than the 08 election? I think people are just tired of everything and realize, no matter who gets elected, not much will change because of a gridlocked congress. My best guess is that Obama will win a close election. Maybe he wont even win the popular vote.

Archer81
01-18-2012, 02:19 PM
I have a feeling that this will be less contentious than the 08 election? I think people are just tired of everything and realize, no matter who gets elected, not much will change because of a gridlocked congress. My best guess is that Obama will win a close election. Maybe he wont even win the popular vote.


This election will see nearly $2 billion raised. For an election, which is just obnoxious. It will get nasty on both sides, because that is what politics is.

This is what I think will happen. Obama will win a 2nd term. The GOP will take control of the senate and retain control of the house. The next 4 years do not look particularly rosy.

:Broncos:

DomCasual
01-18-2012, 02:20 PM
Gotta love this election. You have a guy in Romney, who in 2008, would've come in at best 4th place. He then proceeds to do nothing of real value for 4 years and comes in as the frontrunner for the GOP.

Um, that's most elections - especially in the GOP.

Popps
01-18-2012, 02:20 PM
This is the only politics thread designated for the front page during the offseason. All others will be moved to the WRP forum...

Post away!

Thanks for keeping the rest of the forum safe from this stuff!

SonOfLe-loLang
01-18-2012, 02:20 PM
This election will see nearly $2 billion raised. For an election, which is just obnoxious. It will get nasty on both sides, because that is what politics is.

This is what I think will happen. Obama will win a 2nd term. The GOP will take control of the senate and retain control of the house. The next 4 years do not look particularly rosy.

:Broncos:

I meant the public opinion will be a bit more subdued, not the infighting.

Yeah, i don't have much hope for anything good happening period. We are what we are at this point.

Houshyamama
01-18-2012, 02:26 PM
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/files/2011/09/Loud-Noises.jpeg

Archer81
01-18-2012, 02:26 PM
I meant the public opinion will be a bit more subdued, not the infighting.

Yeah, i don't have much hope for anything good happening period. We are what we are at this point.


I agree about this election being closer. The 18-24 year olds and white womyns will divide more or less evenly between the dems and the GOP. Its going to be a long year.

:Broncos:

DomCasual
01-18-2012, 02:27 PM
Hope we wrap this up on Saturday.

I think so. I hope so! He's up by 10 points in the latest polls. It's nice that so many are still in the race. I'd hate to see where we'd be if it was just Mitt, Paul, and one of the three stooges (Newt, Santorum, and Perry).

Archer81
01-18-2012, 02:28 PM
I think so. I hope so! He's up by 10 points in the latest polls. It's nice that so many are still in the race. I'd hate to see where we'd be if it was just Mitt, Paul, and one of the three stooges (Newt, Santorum, and Perry).


Newt bugs the **** out of me. He's like a grown up Martin from the Simpsons.


:Broncos:

DomCasual
01-18-2012, 02:29 PM
In the grand tradition started in 2007 when I lost my right to vote I will not be voting this year - but I will be laughing my ass off at the rest of you when the results come in and it has all gone horribly wrong.

You HAVE to give us some explanation on this! :)

DomCasual
01-18-2012, 02:31 PM
Newt bugs the **** out of me. He's like a grown up Martin from the Simpsons.


:Broncos:

I just think it's strange that he got his feelings hurt so badly in Iowa. The guy is a career politician. What was he expecting, I wonder?

bendog
01-18-2012, 02:31 PM
I hope Santorum stays for awhile. telling pregnant rape victims to lay still and enjoy it, in vitro folks to keep their eggs safe and gays to get back into the closets if not camps while simultaneouslty dancing for the Pope .... is entertainment.

bendog
01-18-2012, 02:32 PM
You HAVE to give us some explanation on this! :)

Let wildlife be involved, please.

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 02:32 PM
Vote for me.

bendog
01-18-2012, 02:34 PM
I just think it's strange that he got his feelings hurt so badly in Iowa. The guy is a career politician. What was he expecting, I wonder?

bag of cash and a thirty year old woman into old fat guys and oral sex?

Smiling Assassin27
01-18-2012, 02:35 PM
I hope Santorum stays for awhile. telling pregnant rape victims to lay still and enjoy it, in vitro folks to keep their eggs safe and gays to get back into the closets if not camps while simultaneouslty dancing for the Pope .... is entertainment.

yeah, this thread's gonna be chock full of rhetoric and fact challenged lunacy. getcha popcorn ready.

Archer81
01-18-2012, 02:35 PM
I just think it's strange that he got his feelings hurt so badly in Iowa. The guy is a career politician. What was he expecting, I wonder?


The primaries are just a preview of what we will see going forward. If Newt wins the nomination (I hope not...) he might be locking himself in his bedroom listening to EMO music when the DNC gets a crack at him.

:Broncos:

Chris
01-18-2012, 02:36 PM
http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/239/cache/storm-clouds-south-dakota_23945_990x742.jpg

bendog
01-18-2012, 02:36 PM
The primaries are just a preview of what we will see going forward. If Newt wins the nomination (I hope not...) he might be locking himself in his bedroom listening to EMO music when the DNC gets a crack at him.

:Broncos:

Mitt the Twit v. 'The One'

BABronco
01-18-2012, 02:39 PM
I think so. I hope so! He's up by 10 points in the latest polls. It's nice that so many are still in the race. I'd hate to see where we'd be if it was just Mitt, Paul, and one of the three stooges (Newt, Santorum, and Perry).

Again, sincere question here, why do you support Romney? Which policies do you believe separate him from the rest of the candidates? Which polices of his do you find more appealing than any of Obamas policies?

Personally, I think Romney is Obama with more skeletons in his closet. I've never ran into a Romney supporter and I would appreciate your or any Romney supporter to answer a few questions about why they support him.

Pseudofool
01-18-2012, 02:40 PM
Meh. Obama will win in a proverbial landslide.

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 02:48 PM
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4ePTWhu3J64/ScLTdhpsNHI/AAAAAAAAPsk/b97C2a9kGPo/s400/marx-lennon.jpg

Kaylore
01-18-2012, 02:50 PM
Meh. Obama will win in a proverbial landslide.

No President has won reelection with unemployment at where it is going into the December before the election year in more than half a century.

Miss I.
01-18-2012, 02:51 PM
Obama will win, largely because the Republican candidates thus far are very weak. Seriously , Newt go crawl back under the rock. I still don't forgive you for shutting down the USG you freaking dumbass. And don't get me started on how well you treated your last wife as she was sick with cancer, you tool. Sheesh.

Find a real candidate. Hell at this point, even at 97 I'd vote for McCain as long as they don't put that dumbass on the ticket with him.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-18-2012, 02:52 PM
No President has won reelection with unemployment at where it is going into the December before the election year in more than half a century.

i think in this case, he might win because the other side is so incredibly uninspiring.

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 02:52 PM
Romney has secured the Michael Vick vote.

myMind
01-18-2012, 02:54 PM
Its really a shame that Ron Paul gets the cold shoulder from the GOP.
I am more liberal leaning, but I would vote for Paul over Obama.
However, since it seems like the GOP will once again put forward the candidate most willing to play ball...Obama for four more.

Miss I.
01-18-2012, 02:54 PM
okay I say run Donald Trump vs his bad hair piece and see who wins.

Archer81
01-18-2012, 02:54 PM
Obama will win, largely because the Republican candidates thus far are very weak. Seriously , Newt go crawl back under the rock. I still don't forgive you for shutting down the USG you freaking dumbass. And don't get me started on how well you treated your last wife as she was sick with cancer, you tool. Sheesh.

Find a real candidate. Hell at this point, even at 97 I'd vote for McCain as long as they don't put that dumbass on the ticket with him.


Obama is not exactly going to be running from a position of strength...thus why I think its going to be an ubernasty election cycle. Lots of cash on hand, rhetoric amped up...there can be only one.

:Broncos:

bendog
01-18-2012, 02:54 PM
I'm just disappointed there wasn't footage recovered of Bachman and her husband in a threesome with another man.

Smiling Assassin27
01-18-2012, 02:55 PM
I don't really want 'inspiring', we supposedly already have that. I'm going more for a plant, mineral, or animal that exhibits common sense and an iota of ethics.

bendog
01-18-2012, 02:56 PM
Romney has secured the Michael Vick vote.

Sadly that might be true; however, I think most crack smoking dog fighters don't vote.

Smiling Assassin27
01-18-2012, 02:56 PM
And for the record, I'd write in Calvin Coolidge before I vote for this president.

Tombstone RJ
01-18-2012, 02:56 PM
i think in this case, he might win because the other side is so incredibly uninspiring.

nah, BO won't get the indy votes...

Kaylore
01-18-2012, 02:57 PM
Obama is not exactly going to be running from a position of strength...thus why I think its going to be an ubernasty election cycle. Lots of cash on hand, rhetoric amped up...there can be only one.

:Broncos:

The irony of course is how bad they'll go at it and how similar either option will be. It won't be Kurgan Vs Macleod. It will be Richie Vs. Late series Richie.

Miss I.
01-18-2012, 02:59 PM
Obama is not exactly going to be running from a position of strength...thus why I think its going to be an ubernasty election cycle. Lots of cash on hand, rhetoric amped up...there can be only one.

:Broncos:

Maybe, but honestly, he's pulled the troops from Iraq and killed Osama Bin Laden (whatever your spin on it is, that's how his team will spin it). The economy was bad when he got it, what did people expect exactly? A miracle? We import everything and build nothing anymore of course we are hosed. Our last President embroiled us in a war that got us into so much debt it will take us decades to recover. I don't agree with everything Obama does, but I also realistically understood any President who inherited this crap was going to have problems (EDITED).. As far as I am concerned, whether it's him or another guy it's still going to be years before this ship is righted. I will stick by this guy unless a better option presents itself, kind of like how I feel about Tebow. He's my guy, unless Tom Brady says he wants to be the Broncos starting QB. Unfortunately, in the Presidential election we are not being presented with Tom Brady figures, we are getting at best Kyle Orton and actually more along the lines of Ryan Leaf for lack of a better analogy.

bendog
01-18-2012, 03:00 PM
Well, I'd actually vote for 'the One' if I thought Silent Cal was any threat. But, we have a guy who really can't guide, let alone control, the legislation out of his own party, much to the dismay of guys like Emmanual and Daley who are economic centrists v. the party of tea that simply opposes the economic center.

I think the dims will do better in the House than many suspect right now, and Obama will win, but the gop will take the Senate.

Tombstone RJ
01-18-2012, 03:03 PM
Maybe, but honestly, he's pulled the troops from Iraq and killed Osama Bin Laden (whatever your spin on it is, that's how his team will spin it). The economy was bad when he got it, what did people expect exactly? A miracle? We import everything and build nothing anymore of course we are hosed. Our last President embroiled us in a war that got us into so much debt it will take us decades to recover. I don't agree with everything Obama does, but I also realistically understood any President who inherited this crap was going to have a long road to hoe. As far as I am concerned, whether it's him or another guy it's still going to be years before this ship is righted. I will stick by this guy unless a better option presents itself, kind of like how I feel about Tebow. He's my guy, unless Tom Brady says he wants to be the Broncos starting QB. Unfortunately, in the Presidential election we are not being presented with Tom Brady figures, we are getting at best Kyle Orton and actually more along the lines of Ryan Leaf for lack of a better analogy.

that's pretty weak and akin to your basic apathetic attitude and is the exact reason why people wonder why this country is in such a mess...

Miss I.
01-18-2012, 03:03 PM
Dunno after the cluster **** the congress and senate made of last year's budget, nearly shutting down the USG, I am inclined to vote for anyone else but the incumbents, so if currently Dem I will vote Republican or Independent depending on who's available. Hell, I will vote for Tebow, oh wait he's yet too young for that too isn't he? But he's Tebow, he can do it. ;D

Archer81
01-18-2012, 03:04 PM
Maybe, but honestly, he's pulled the troops from Iraq and killed Osama Bin Laden (whatever your spin on it is, that's how his team will spin it). The economy was bad when he got it, what did people expect exactly? A miracle? We import everything and build nothing anymore of course we are hosed. Our last President embroiled us in a war that got us into so much debt it will take us decades to recover. I don't agree with everything Obama does, but I also realistically understood any President who inherited this crap was going to have a long road to hoe. As far as I am concerned, whether it's him or another guy it's still going to be years before this ship is righted. I will stick by this guy unless a better option presents itself, kind of like how I feel about Tebow. He's my guy, unless Tom Brady says he wants to be the Broncos starting QB. Unfortunately, in the Presidential election we are not being presented with Tom Brady figures, we are getting at best Kyle Orton and actually more along the lines of Ryan Leaf for lack of a better analogy.


Economy is worse since he's had it. We left Iraq under Bush's original timeline. Afghanistan is becoming a bloodbath. Gitmo is still open. We added more debt in four years of Obama than we added from 1783 to 2001...

Its sad we already know the script for the next 10 months.

:Broncos:

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 03:06 PM
Maybe, but honestly, he's pulled the troops from Iraq and killed Osama Bin Laden (whatever your spin on it is, that's how his team will spin it). The economy was bad when he got it, what did people expect exactly? A miracle? We import everything and build nothing anymore of course we are hosed. Our last President embroiled us in a war that got us into so much debt it will take us decades to recover. I don't agree with everything Obama does, but I also realistically understood any President who inherited this crap was going to have a long road to hoe. As far as I am concerned, whether it's him or another guy it's still going to be years before this ship is righted. I will stick by this guy unless a better option presents itself, kind of like how I feel about Tebow. He's my guy, unless Tom Brady says he wants to be the Broncos starting QB. Unfortunately, in the Presidential election we are not being presented with Tom Brady figures, we are getting at best Kyle Orton and actually more along the lines of Ryan Leaf for lack of a better analogy.

It's "row to hoe."


Or, "ho to row."


One of those. ;D

Archer81
01-18-2012, 03:06 PM
that's pretty weak and akin to your basic apathetic attitude and is the exact reason why people wonder why this country is in such a mess...


Her reaction is typical. Not one politician inspires confidence in their doing what they are saying at election time. Not Obama, and none of the GOP field to this point.

I do not care to hear WHO made the mess. Frankly I dont care. I want to hear HOW they intend to fix it. To this point neither party has done much more than point fingers and take on half measures.

Shenanigans.

:Broncos:

pricejj
01-18-2012, 03:08 PM
RP 2012

Punisher
01-18-2012, 03:08 PM
Ron Paul Ron Paul Ron Paul

bendog
01-18-2012, 03:09 PM
that's pretty weak and akin to your basic apathetic attitude and is the exact reason why people wonder why this country is in such a mess...

Nah I don't agree with that. It's not like the gop is showing anything better.

I mean there are better ways to get working Americans healthcare, and better ways to regulate banking, and better ways to raise revenue than "tax the rich," but there's no one in the gop willing to stand up to the tea party (hey let's default on the debt and see what happens, it'll be a party) and gover norquist (get back to work polishing my boots and send your wife upstairs I need something cleaned). For all his warts, Newt took a stab and it went nowhere.

Jeb may be waiting to see if the name gets the ****e washed off and Christe's being groomed.

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 03:11 PM
Economy is worse since he's had it. We left Iraq under Bush's original timeline. Afghanistan is becoming a bloodbath. Gitmo is still open. We added more debt in four years of Obama than we added from 1783 to 2001...

Its sad we already know the script for the next 10 months.

:Broncos:

Abraham Lincoln couldn't have fixed Junior's massive **** ups. Or the crashing of Wall Street's casino. We'll be lucky if this stuff gets fixed in two or three president's terms. Given that the Right Wing in Congress not only refuses to do anything about it, but blocks anybody who does try and fix it, reasons for hope are slim.

Miss I.
01-18-2012, 03:11 PM
Economy is worse since he's had it. We left Iraq under Bush's original timeline. Afghanistan is becoming a bloodbath. Gitmo is still open. We added more debt in four years of Obama than we added from 1783 to 2001...

Its sad we already know the script for the next 10 months.

:Broncos:

Your response I understand. the last one was just a personal attack on me, but I appreciate the intelligent response I got from you.

But again, what is our option right now, if you had to vote between the candidates, give me a pitch, I will listen, who is our best chance to turn this around?

The first part of my post is correct, that is the tact the Obama team will emphasize, it just makes good PR sense to do that.

I am not apathetic, I just chose to take the lesser of two evils which from what I see over here in the press is not any of the Republican or Independent candidates and I truly hope the Teabaggers rot in hell.

The press slant over here in Europe and UK is generally pretty Pro-Obama so that 's what I see. At any rate, whatever, I should know better than to enter one of these threads. It's only a matter of time before someone makes it personal.

Tombstone RJ
01-18-2012, 03:14 PM
Her reaction is typical. Not one politician inspires confidence in their doing what they are saying at election time. Not Obama, and none of the GOP field to this point.

I do not care to hear WHO made the mess. Frankly I dont care. I want to hear HOW they intend to fix it. To this point neither party has done much more than point fingers and take on half measures.

Shenanigans.

:Broncos:

I disagree. People are sheep, not only are they sheep they are scared pathetic sheep. There's one guy who could make a huge change and people are scared to vote for him. Why? Becuase underneath their facade of caring, underneath all their supposed want of change, the reality is they just want bury their heads in the sand. Voting for BO is akin to saying "I don't care."

He's the most corrupt president elected in the last 50 years and he's bought and paid for by special interest groups. His cabinet is a joke.

People voted for him for "change" but nothing has changed. Now there's is a candidate that really wants to change how DC operates and people still don't like him even though he has a proven track record. Whatever. People are scared and are sheeps and they don't really want change.

Archer81
01-18-2012, 03:15 PM
Your response I understand. the last one was just a personal attack on me, but I appreciate the intelligent response I got from you.

But again, what is our option right now, if you had to vote between the candidates, give me a pitch, I will listen, who is our best chance to turn this around?

The first part of my post is correct, that is the tact the Obama team will emphasize, it just makes good PR sense to do that.

I am not apathetic, I just chose to take the lesser of two evils which from what I see over here in the press is not any of the Republican or Independent candidates and I truly hope the Teabaggers rot in hell.

The press slant over here in Europe and UK is generally pretty Pro-Obama so that 's what I see. At any rate, whatever, I should know better than to enter one of these threads. It's only a matter of time before someone makes it personal.


I should have phrased it better. What I meant was we already know what Obama's team will say, and we already know what the right will say.

I was agreeing with you. At this moment, I do not see a reason to vote for the GOP candidate. He would just be another Obama. And if that's the case, we already have Obama.

:Broncos:

Miss I.
01-18-2012, 03:19 PM
I disagree. People are sheep, not only are they sheep they are scared pathetic sheep. There's one guy who could make a huge change and people are scared to vote for him. Why? Becuase underneath their facade of caring, underneath all their supposed want of change, the reality is they just want bury their heads in the sand. Voting for BO is akin to saying "I don't care."

He's the most corrupt president elected in the last 50 years and he's bought and paid for by special interest groups. He's cabinet is a joke.

People voted for him for "change" but nothing has changed. Now there's is a candidate that really wants to change how DC operates and people still don't like him even though he has a proven track record. Whatever. People are scared and are sheeps and they don't really want change.

All right, leaving the obvious sheep jokes aside, who is the candidate you think people should consider and why? And give me some material, like stuff to read so I can make an informed decision. You finger point at me and call me weak, but you DON'T KNOW me. If I am presented a good argument without the bull**** rhetoric and name calling with substantial supporting data I will listen and consider it. So go for it, give me your alternative and let me research it and make a choice based on that input. Maybe I will change my mind, maybe I won't. But I AM NOT WEAK!

bendog
01-18-2012, 03:19 PM
I disagree. People are sheep, not only are they sheep they are scared pathetic sheep. There's one guy who could make a huge change and people are scared to vote for him. Why? Becuase underneath their facade of caring, underneath all their supposed want of change, the reality is they just want bury their heads in the sand. Voting for BO is akin to saying "I don't care."

He's the most corrupt president elected in the last 50 years and he's bought and paid for by special interest groups. His cabinet is a joke.

People voted for him for "change" but nothing has changed. Now there's is a candidate that really wants to change how DC operates and people still don't like him even though he has a proven track record. Whatever. People are scared and are sheeps and they don't really want change.

Oh Ron Paul. Now I understand.

Archer81
01-18-2012, 03:21 PM
Ron Paul...those newsletters bother me.


:Broncos:

bendog
01-18-2012, 03:24 PM
No diss intented. If someone likes Paul that's their cup of tea so to speak, but I wasn't understanding him. If he's a Paul guy, his post makes sense.

Paul's not for me, though imo he's less disengenuous than those very rich that initially pushed the tea party. Those freshman congressemen are vulnerable imo.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-18-2012, 03:24 PM
Economy is worse since he's had it. We left Iraq under Bush's original timeline. Afghanistan is becoming a bloodbath. Gitmo is still open. We added more debt in four years of Obama than we added from 1783 to 2001...

Its sad we already know the script for the next 10 months.

:Broncos:

http://www.trcommons.org/2011/07/visual-learning-the-charts-say-it-all/

I agree it's pointless to say who caused it (but well, it was the Bush years), but how to fix it is the more important question.

And the answer is "none of the above" because congress barely moves, which will annoy the liberals and the conservatives who both agree major action needs to be taken (even if they dont agree on what the action is). I've pretty much lost hope at this point, and America will have to learn how to take more of a backseat in world politics than we're used to. And this isn't necessarily a bad thing, there are plenty of countries that arent the "leaders of the free world" that are content and fine.

Tombstone RJ
01-18-2012, 03:25 PM
Ron Paul...those newsletters bother me.


:Broncos:

this newsletter stuff is nothing more than a classic smear campaign by the left...

bendog
01-18-2012, 03:26 PM
http://www.trcommons.org/2011/07/visual-learning-the-charts-say-it-all/

I agree it's pointless to say who caused it (but well, it was the Bush years), but how to fix it is the more important question.

And the answer is "none of the above" because congress barely moves, which will annoy the liberals and the conservatives who both agree major action needs to be taken (even if they dont agree on what the action is). I've pretty much lost hope at this point, and America will have to learn how to take more of a backseat in world politics than we're used to. And this isn't necessarily a bad thing, there are plenty of countries that arent the "leaders of the free world" that are content and fine.

But what will become of our aircraft carriers? (-:

BABronco
01-18-2012, 03:26 PM
Ron Paul...those newsletters bother me.


:Broncos:

If they are him, at worse its 4-5 quotes from a 10 year span.

Rigs11
01-18-2012, 03:27 PM
notice how the repubs have no viable candidate. they'll scream 'anyone but obama'. yet their circus of candidates is so flawed, they can't even answer why any of them would be better.

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/e/5/4/Best-Selling-Republican-But.jpg

Requiem
01-18-2012, 03:29 PM
this newsletter stuff is nothing more than a classic smear campaign by the left...

Except that Paul's primary challengers are the ones bringing it up.

And what is his track record of success? He has one of the lowest percentage rates re: legislation passing of any House member.

Tombstone RJ
01-18-2012, 03:30 PM
uh-oh, the democratic machine peanut gallery has arrived...

Archer81
01-18-2012, 03:30 PM
If they are him, at worse its 4-5 quotes from a 10 year span.


Paul is an older gent. Older people usually are less inclined to change their opinions.

I dont know enough about Paul to say I'd vote for him or not. I'm going to have to research him, but the newsletter thing and his response to it concerns me a bit.

:Broncos:

BABronco
01-18-2012, 03:31 PM
notice how the repubs have no viable candidate. they'll scream 'anyone but obama'. yet their circus of candidates is so flawed, they can't even answer why any of them would be better.

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/e/5/4/Best-Selling-Republican-But.jpg

Answer
-Cut 1 trillion in actual spending his first year in office
-Bring troops home while still keeping actual defense spending
-restore rights that are being trampled by the federal gov
-downsize federal government

I could keep going or I could direct you to http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/.

Tombstone RJ
01-18-2012, 03:31 PM
Except that Paul's primary challengers are the ones bringing it up.

And what is his track record of success? He has one of the lowest percentage rates re: legislation passing of any House member.

and that's bad?? You're so twisted you actually like Congress and think they work for you?

bendog
01-18-2012, 03:32 PM
notice how the repubs have no viable candidate. they'll scream 'anyone but obama'. yet their circus of candidates is so flawed, they can't even answer why any of them would be better.

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/e/5/4/Best-Selling-Republican-But.jpg

Reagan broaded the portion of the economy that was taxed in each of 7 years while overall reducing rates. (He also increased spending and left us with structural deficits that have come home to roost). Boehner tried it, coupled with the spending cuts Reagan didn't make, and got shouted down by Norquist and the Teaparty. The people who have the ability to govern cannot win in their own party. THAT is why the gop cannot field a candidate whose best attribute is more than shape shifting. That is today's republican party.

We're left with Newt and Haley Barbour ... and it sucks.

Archer81
01-18-2012, 03:32 PM
notice how the repubs have no viable candidate. they'll scream 'anyone but obama'. yet their circus of candidates is so flawed, they can't even answer why any of them would be better.

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/e/5/4/Best-Selling-Republican-But.jpg


The image of Obama being an unbeatable monolith is a false one. His flaws are glaring and will be exploited in the next year. The GOP field is just as flawed, and neither base is going to abandon either candidate. The fight will be for the middle. Just like in 2008.

:Broncos:

Rigs11
01-18-2012, 03:34 PM
Answer
-Cut 1 trillion in actual spending his first year in office
-Bring troops home while still keeping actual defense spending
-restore rights that are being trampled by the federal gov
-downsize federal government

I could keep going or I could direct you to http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/.

and you think congress is going to support these?paul seems to me as very unwilling to work with congress. screaming about how gubmint is to blame is not going to help you get anything done.

bendog
01-18-2012, 03:35 PM
The image of Obama being an unbeatable monolith is a false one. His flaws are glaring and will be exploited in the next year. The GOP field is just as flawed, and neither base is going to abandon either candidate. The fight will be for the middle. Just like in 2008.

:Broncos:

That is interesting because Romney has NOTHING in common with his base: ether the tea party or or the religious right or the old white working guys like me in the South. But I suppose you're right. If one voted McCain, one will vote Mitt.

PS, though I suspect team obama will run against the gop house and taxes/debt and show lots of film of Mitt supporting obamacare and calling for higher taxes .....

Requiem
01-18-2012, 03:39 PM
and that's bad?? You're so twisted you actually like Congress and think they work for you?

Bills hardly ever make it out of committee, but his rate is extremely low. Neither parties are good for anything, but it's pretty bad when you can hardly get anyone to play along with you. You'd think he would have some sort of backing or respect in the legislature by now, but he doesn't.

Why?

Miss I.
01-18-2012, 03:40 PM
Answer
-Cut 1 trillion in actual spending his first year in office
-Bring troops home while still keeping actual defense spending
-restore rights that are being trampled by the federal gov
-downsize federal government

I could keep going or I could direct you to http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/.

I'll read Ron Paul's site, but so far from what I read on it, it's basically campaign material without a substantive plan of action. If you have anything else I'd like to read it. And perhaps some (as unbiased as any journalism is these days) analysis of his action plans for recovery, etc. It will be interesting to see.

I do agree with one bit, though I think the interpretation of ObamaCare he states on his site is built on a false premise, I do think it needs to be either chucked or made workable. As it stands, the medical care plan proposed is neither financially sustainable nor will it achieve the goals it proposed. I've seen socialized medical in the UK and it is not effective.

bendog
01-18-2012, 03:41 PM
and you think congress is going to support these?paul seems to me as very unwilling to work with congress. screaming about how gubmint is to blame is not going to help you get anything done.

For me it's "fiat money." Tying the value of currency to gold (or corn or wool or seashells) is proven to be a really bad idea whose time is gone.

gunns
01-18-2012, 03:41 PM
I think so. I hope so! He's up by 10 points in the latest polls. It's nice that so many are still in the race. I'd hate to see where we'd be if it was just Mitt, Paul, and one of the three stooges (Newt, Santorum, and Perry).

I'm counting 5 stooges there.

Tombstone RJ
01-18-2012, 03:42 PM
The image of Obama being an unbeatable monolith is a false one. His flaws are glaring and will be exploited in the next year. The GOP field is just as flawed, and neither base is going to abandon either candidate. The fight will be for the middle. Just like in 2008.

:Broncos:

2008 BO was the candidate of "change" and got the indy vote. Independents won't make the same mistake twice. Dems can pretend that the race is in the bag, but at the very least it will be extremely close no matter who is on the gop platform.

BO can't keep blaming bush for the last 3 years and if he tries, he'll be exposed for what he is, a stool pigeon.

BABronco
01-18-2012, 03:43 PM
Paul is an older gent. Older people usually are less inclined to change their opinions.

I dont know enough about Paul to say I'd vote for him or not. I'm going to have to research him, but the newsletter thing and his response to it concerns me a bit.

:Broncos:

I could direct you to http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/. I also like this read. Its a little long Ron Pauls 1984 speech when he left congress.

Before the US House of Representatives, September 19, 1984

Mr. Speaker, I shall be soon leaving the House and have asked for this special order to make a few comments regarding the problems our nation faces and the actions needed to correct them. Having been honored by the 22nd District of Texas to represent them for four terms, I have grown to appreciate the greatness of this institution. I only wish the actions performed by the Congress in recent years could match the historic importance of this body.

Thousands of men and women have come and gone here in our country's history, and except for the few, most go unnoticed and remain nameless in the pages of history, as I am sure I will be. The few who are remembered are those who were able to grab the reins of power and, for the most part, use that power to the detriment of the nation. We must remember that achieving power is never the goal sought by a truly free society. Dissipation of power is the objective of those who love liberty. Others, tragically, will be remembered in a negative way for personal scandals. Yet those individuals whose shortcomings prompted the taking of bribes or involvement in illicit sexual activities, have caused no more harm to society than those who used "legitimate" power to infringe upon individual liberty and expand the size of government. Morally the two are closely related. The acceptance of a bribe is a horrible act indeed for a public servant, but reducing liberty is an outrageous act that causes suffering for generations to come.

Since the time of our founding, few who have come to the Congress have been remembered for championing the cause of freedom. This is a sign of a declining nation and indicates that respect for freedom is on the wane.

Serving here has been a wonderful experience, and the many friendships will be cherished. I am, however, the first to admit the limited impact I've had on the legislative process. By conventional wisdom, I am "ineffective," unable to trade votes, and champion anyone's special privilege — even my own district's. It places me in a lonely category here in Washington. If the political career is not the goal sought, possibly the measuring of "effectiveness" should be done by using a different standard.

The most I can hope for is that someday a suggestion I've made is remembered: that the debate would shift to a different plane. Instead of asking which form of intervention and planning government should impose, perhaps someday Congress will debate intervention versus nonintervention, government versus voluntary planning, U.S. sovereignty versus internationalism — the pros and cons of true liberty. Today the debate basically is only that of deciding who will be the victims and who the beneficiaries. I hope the hours of debate over the mechanisms of the political system orchestrated by the special interests will give way to this more important debate on freedom. The lack of this debate was my greatest disappointment. Only rarely did I see small fragments of this discussion, and then merely as a tactic for short-term gain rather than because of a sincere belief in the principles of liberty and the Constitution.

Some have said my approach is not practical, but most concede, "At least he's consistent." Since I first came here in 1976, the number of lobbyists has doubled and the national debt has tripled — $550 billion to $1.59 trillion — to me a most impractical trend. Business cycles, unemployment, inflation, high interest rates, and trade wars are the real impracticalities brought about by unwise political and economic policies. I've been impressed over the years by those who concede to me the consistency of my views, yet evidently reject them in favor of inconsistent views. Who, I might ask, is served by the politicians of inconsistency, the special interests or the general welfare?

The petty partisan squabbles that are today more numerous and more heated serve no useful function. The rhetoric now becoming personal is not designed to solve problems, nor does it show a correct perception of our country's problems. All are motivated by good intentions, but that cannot suffice. The narrow partisan squabbles are a natural consequence of an intellectual bankruptcy, whereby correct solutions are not offered for our economic problems. The "good intentions" prompts those involved to "do something." It seems that narrow partisanship on the House floor contributes nothing to the solutions of today's problems.

Sadly, I have found that individual Members, even though we represent our half-million constituents, are much less important than most of us would like to believe. The elite few who control the strings of power are the only ones who really count in the legislative process. Votes, of course, occur routinely after heated debate by all those who want to ventilate. But as C. Northcote Parkinson pointed out, the length of debate on an issue is inversely proportional to the importance of an issue. Many times debate is done either for therapy or as a ritual to force Members to make public commitments to those who wield the power, a mere litmus test of loyalty, thus qualifying some quietly to receive largess for their particular district.

More often than not, the floor debates are a charade without real issues being dealt with — a mere chance for grandstanding. Budgetary votes are meaningless in that continuing resolutions and supplemental appropriations are all that count. If covert aid to a nation is voted down, the CIA and the administration in power can find the means to finance whatever is desired. Emergencies are declared, finances are hidden, discretionary funds are found, foreign governments are used, and policy as desired is carried out, regardless of the will of the people expressed by Congress.

On occasion, a program requested by the administration is "stopped" or voted down. But this doesn't really change the course of events — the "price" is merely raised. The vote can be reversed on the House floor or in the conference, and the "enlightened" Member who cast the crucial vote will receive an ample reward for his or her district. These arrangements or deals are routine and accepted practice. The better one is at making them, the higher is one's "effectiveness" rating and the easier the next election.
More at http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul433.html

BABronco
01-18-2012, 03:57 PM
I'll read Ron Paul's site, but so far from what I read on it, it's basically campaign material without a substantive plan of action. If you have anything else I'd like to read it. And perhaps some (as unbiased as any journalism is these days) analysis of his action plans for recovery, etc. It will be interesting to see.

I do agree with one bit, though I think the interpretation of ObamaCare he states on his site is built on a false premise, I do think it needs to be either chucked or made workable. As it stands, the medical care plan proposed is neither financially sustainable nor will it achieve the goals it proposed. I've seen socialized medical in the UK and it is not effective.

Cutting 1 trillion
\http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/9410-ron-paul-releases-the-only-presidential-candidate-balanced-budget-proposal
Support from troops
http://www.examiner.com/conspiracy-in-denver/support-the-troops-by-supporting-ron-paul

In the second quarter of the 2012 election cycle alone, of those who stated their employer as being one of the branches of the US military, Ron Paul received a whopping 50% of the entire total dished out to the candidates. Obama only received 32% of the entire total, and the other 18% was divvied out between the other GOP candidates. Herman Cain received only about 5.7% of the total, Mitt Romney 5.5%, Michelle Bachmann 4.5%, Newt Gingrich only 1%, and Tim Pawlenty and Rick Santorum each holding up the rear with only .5% of the entire purse.

gunns
01-18-2012, 04:25 PM
I'm just not interested or nothing has gotten me interested in this election. I'm much calmer than I was 4 years ago after 8 years of McDBush.

bendog
01-18-2012, 04:33 PM
I'm just not interested or nothing has gotten me interested in this election. I'm much calmer than I was 4 years ago after 8 years of McDBush.

maybe it was losing tens of thousands of jobs a month. oh wait, hundreds of thousands a month

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/09/news/economy/jobs_december/

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 04:43 PM
Didn't take long for the Right Wingers to resort to race baiting in this campaign. Obama is the "food stamp president." I'm sure South Carolina finds it natural to respond to this stuff. Today, a woman told Gingrich that she was proud of the way he put Juan Williams "in his place." :oyvey:

gunns
01-18-2012, 04:48 PM
Oh I thought Bush was the food stamp President. We finally get welfare reform where people have to do something for the stamps but Bush comes in and removes the blocks and institutes "barriers". If having barriers were like having a job there would be no welfare recipients.

ColoradoDarin
01-18-2012, 04:49 PM
Dunno after the cluster **** the congress and senate made of last year's budget, nearly shutting down the USG, I am inclined to vote for anyone else but the incumbents, so if currently Dem I will vote Republican or Independent depending on who's available. Hell, I will vote for Tebow, oh wait he's yet too young for that too isn't he? But he's Tebow, he can do it. ;D

FYI the Democrat controlled Senate hasn't passed a budget in 1,000* days.



(*it'll be 1,000 days on the day of the President's SOTU address)

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 04:52 PM
FYI the Democrat controlled Senate hasn't passed a budget in 1,000* days.



(*it'll be 1,000 days on the day of the President's SOTU address)

How many budget bills have been blocked by the Republicans?

ColoradoDarin
01-18-2012, 04:56 PM
Didn't take long for the Right Wingers to resort to race baiting in this campaign. Obama is the "food stamp president." I'm sure South Carolina finds it natural to respond to this stuff. Today, a woman told Gingrich that she was proud of the way he put Juan Williams "in his place." :oyvey:

Are you trying to claim that there are fewer people on food stamps today than Jan 20th, 2009? Or you just think that is some kind of racist dog-whistle?

FYI there are more people on food stamps than there are African-Americans in the US.

Tombstone RJ
01-18-2012, 04:56 PM
Bills hardly ever make it out of committee, but his rate is extremely low. Neither parties are good for anything, but it's pretty bad when you can hardly get anyone to play along with you. You'd think he would have some sort of backing or respect in the legislature by now, but he doesn't.

Why?

Because his bills are NOT writting by and for lobbyists??

ColoradoDarin
01-18-2012, 04:58 PM
How many budget bills have been blocked by the Republicans?


google.com

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 05:04 PM
Are you trying to claim that there are fewer people on food stamps today than Jan 20th, 2009? Or you just think that is some kind of racist dog-whistle?

FYI there are more people on food stamps than there are African-Americans in the US.

Let's put it this way, it's the same thing the Atwater/Reagan campaign pulled when they opened the campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi talking about "welfare queens in Cadillacs."

ColoradoDarin
01-18-2012, 05:06 PM
Let's put it this way, it's the same thing the Atwater/Reagan campaign pulled when they opened the campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi talking about "welfare queens in Cadillacs."

http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q227/dhaus5650/race_card.jpg

TonyR
01-18-2012, 05:09 PM
No President has won reelection with unemployment at where it is going into the December before the election year in more than half a century.

Actually the direction of unemployment is significantly more important than the rate of unemployment. Unemployment isn't declining fast enough but it is declining.

ant1999e
01-18-2012, 05:26 PM
Didn't take long for the Right Wingers to resort to race baiting in this campaign. Obama is the "food stamp president." I'm sure South Carolina finds it natural to respond to this stuff. Today, a woman told Gingrich that she was proud of the way he put Juan Williams "in his place." :oyvey:

What does welfare have to do with race???

Rohirrim
01-18-2012, 05:48 PM
What does welfare have to do with race???

Yeah, I know. Gee, what could that mean?

DomCasual
01-18-2012, 05:52 PM
Again, sincere question here, why do you support Romney? Which policies do you believe separate him from the rest of the candidates? Which polices of his do you find more appealing than any of Obamas policies?

Personally, I think Romney is Obama with more skeletons in his closet. I've never ran into a Romney supporter and I would appreciate your or any Romney supporter to answer a few questions about why they support him.

Sorry, I didn't see this earlier.

I first became a Romney fan when he got involved with the SLC Olympic games. I know some of his kids and their families. I won't get into a pissing match over it, but I think he's as good a man as we've ever had in the White House.

More importantly, I am in business for myself. I have been for my entire adult life. I believe in Romney's business experience - especially in this economy. It's not just Obama. I think most politicians, in general, are a mess when it comes to understanding business.

Most importantly, I believe, for a number of reasons, that Romney is the best realistic option on either side of the political spectrum to rebuild some of the bridges that have been burned in government, over the past few decades. People rip him for flip-flopping. I understand that concern. What I know about him is that he is adept at making compromises that get things accomplished. He has some experiences in life in which he couldn't have been successful, had he not been an absolutely-incredible problem solver. He focuses on a challenge, and he attacks it. The solutions aren't always quick. But he's patient and tireless.

Honestly, he's the first presidential candidate in my adult life about which I've felt real passion. I love the guy!

Requiem
01-18-2012, 06:46 PM
Because his bills are NOT writting by and for lobbyists??

Just a bit outside. Try again?

Agamemnon
01-18-2012, 06:48 PM
Can't believe how many people think any of this **** matters. The corporate oligarchy chooses the candidates and controls the voting machines, and all you fools keep believing it means something.

gunns
01-18-2012, 07:22 PM
Are you trying to claim that there are fewer people on food stamps today than Jan 20th, 2009? Or you just think that is some kind of racist dog-whistle?

FYI there are more people on food stamps than there are African-Americans in the US.

I wonder if that has anything to do with the economy. Didn't it start tanking big right around the end of 2008. Gee....

ColoradoDarin
01-18-2012, 07:27 PM
I wonder if that has anything to do with the economy. Didn't it start tanking big right around the end of 2008. Gee....

Yeah and this guy says he should have it done by now.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/q-0ecuS8tWs?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/q-0ecuS8tWs?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

TonyR
01-18-2012, 07:36 PM
...the worst month for job losses in this recession happened to be Bush's last month. At that point, we were losing something like 750,000 jobs a month, with an annualized drop in GDP approaching 9 percent! Within a year of that, the US had gone back into job creation. Since then, we've added 2.4 million jobs or so - almost all in the private sector. As for debt, the notion that Obama gave us $15 trillion of it is something most Republicans seem now to believe.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/01/why-obama-should-be-reelected.html

TonyR
01-18-2012, 07:37 PM
Under Bush, new policies on taxes and spending cost the taxpayer a total of $5.07 trillion. Under Obama’s budgets both past and projected, he will have added $1.4 trillion in two terms. Under Bush and the GOP, nondefense discretionary spending grew by twice as much as under Obama. Again: imagine Bush had been a Democrat and Obama a Republican. You could easily make the case that Obama has been far more fiscally conservative than his predecessor—except, of course, that Obama has had to govern under the worst recession since the 1930s, and Bush, after the 2001 downturn, governed in a period of moderate growth. It takes work to increase the debt in times of growth, as Bush did. It takes much more work to constrain the debt in the deep recession Bush bequeathed Obama.http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/andrew-sullivan-how-obama-s-long-game-will-outsmart-his-critics.html

gyldenlove
01-18-2012, 08:12 PM
You HAVE to give us some explanation on this! :)

Think of every reason you can that would make a 31 year old male ineligible to vote, now exclude every reason you thought of that does not involve me urinating on Bill O'reilly - now exclude that as well.

gyldenlove
01-18-2012, 08:13 PM
It's "row to hoe."


Or, "ho to row."


One of those. ;D

It is Soh-Cah-Toa

gyldenlove
01-18-2012, 08:16 PM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/JFf2k_XqPIY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Why you should vote for Obama.

DomCasual
01-18-2012, 08:37 PM
Think of every reason you can that would make a 31 year old male ineligible to vote, now exclude every reason you thought of that does not involve me urinating on Bill O'reilly - now exclude that as well.

:) If I was to try and imagine all the possible answers you might have given me for this, the answer you gave probably wouldn't have been on the list. :)

Willynowei
01-18-2012, 09:19 PM
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NWMDF92ZE7c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

A true free-market world would be great.

I agree with the overall direction of what he's saying, but over half of what this guy says is straight ****ing crazy.

Vegas_Bronco
01-18-2012, 09:36 PM
Do we need higher taxes or fewer ppl that cheat on their taxes?
Do we need more jobs or less greed in this country?
Do we need to cheapen our dollar ir just learn to live with a little excess and not 'reality show' lifestyles.
Do we need more monorail/prison jobs or more and improved teachers?
Do we need unions or do we really have fair working conditions in good lighting and temp control?
Do we need a president to fix this country or do you believe in your friends and families?

Im tired of waiting for the right president to fix my living conditions...I made up my mind to never fall victim to that train of thought...its a deceiving trap. This country has more in excess and opportunity than any other 10than in the world combined. Don't let a little hard work and thrifty planning prevent you from living happy.

24champ
01-18-2012, 10:36 PM
I think so. I hope so! He's up by 10 points in the latest polls. It's nice that so many are still in the race. I'd hate to see where we'd be if it was just Mitt, Paul, and one of the three stooges (Newt, Santorum, and Perry).

Mitt is hitting Newt pretty hard in S.C. and FL. Several ads have hit the airwaves blasting Newt.


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CFBPW6-AKR0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DtYR_t6Yw-I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Pseudofool
01-18-2012, 11:26 PM
No President has won reelection with unemployment at where it is going into the December before the election year in more than half a century.History is consistent until the moment it's not. The rhetoric favors Obama. Romney doesn't have a track record of job creation, much less the background that will inspire the unemployed to vote for him. I haven't seen the issue of wealth disparity so prominently mainstreamed in an election cycle before, and that works against Romney. It will be dominant electoral college victory; just watch.

(What exactly is the Republican plan for job creation? Tax breaks? Ha!)

Blart
01-18-2012, 11:34 PM
Ron Paul only reads econ journals published before he was born.

Miss I.
01-19-2012, 12:13 AM
FYI the Democrat controlled Senate hasn't passed a budget in 1,000* days.



(*it'll be 1,000 days on the day of the President's SOTU address)

What are you talking about? The FY12 budget was signed into law in December 2011. The senate and house passed it and Obama signed it before the end of the year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget

It was FY 2011 those chowderheads waited until about April of 2011 to sign. And Maybe I am wrong, but I was under the impression that was a Republican controlled Senate and House that hosed that up, but to be honest I don't really care if it was Democrat or Republican. The morons who were in there for the the financial fiasco of the FY2011 have no business being in there anymore.

KCStud
01-19-2012, 12:36 AM
I agree with the overall direction of what he's saying, but over half of what this guy says is straight ****ing crazy.

I trust Ron Paul. He has the respect of a veteran and he's extremely smart. He is almost always right and has proven it for over 20 years.
I feel like is the only true leader in the republican party this election.

ColoradoDarin
01-19-2012, 05:04 AM
What are you talking about? The FY12 budget was signed into law in December 2011. The senate and house passed it and Obama signed it before the end of the year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget

It was FY 2011 those chowderheads waited until about April of 2011 to sign. And Maybe I am wrong, but I was under the impression that was a Republican controlled Senate and House that hosed that up, but to be honest I don't really care if it was Democrat or Republican. The morons who were in there for the the financial fiasco of the FY2011 have no business being in there anymore.

I believe those are Continuing Resolutions (rolled into one, they had been broken out previously) not the full budget (and FYI, Wikipedia is a poor source for anything controversial, especially politics).

The fact that you believe Republicans control the Senate when the Democrats do says a lot about your political knowledge. Harry Reid (D-NV) is the Majority Leader.

Paladin
01-19-2012, 05:10 AM
I trust Ron Paul. He has the respect of a veteran and he's extremely smart. He is almost always right and has proven it for over 20 years.
I feel like is the only true leader in the republican party this election.

Talk about irrelevance.......


Snowball's chance in h3ll.......

Hilarious!

alkemical
01-19-2012, 06:45 AM
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/guess-politician-and-follow-money

Guess The Politician... And Follow The Money

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/16/2012 19:39 -0500

alkemical
01-19-2012, 06:47 AM
http://www.dangerousminds.net/images/uploads/mittenshatejfjsdhsus.jpg

:D

alkemical
01-19-2012, 06:47 AM
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/bain-capital-owns-clear-channel-rush-limbaugh-sean-hannity-glenn-beck-michael-savage-etc

Bain Capital Owns Clear Channel (Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Etc.)
..

alkemical
01-19-2012, 06:48 AM
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/12/white-coke-cans-befuddle-american-consumer.html

White Coke Cans Befuddle the American Consumer

Coke is pulling its special white holiday cans from the shelves months earlier than originally planned because of a backlash from consumers. According to The Wall Street Journal, some felt that the Coke "tasted different in the white cans" — it doesn't — while others "have returned opened white cans ... after realizing, too late, that they weren't drinking Diet Coke," because actually reading the can was too much of an effort.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204012004577070521211375302.html

While the company has frequently rung in the holiday with special can designs, this was the first time it put regular Coke in a white can. Some consumers complained that it looked confusingly similar to Diet Coke's silver cans. Others felt that regular Coke tasted different in the white cans. Still others argued that messing with red bordered on sacrilege.

..

Maybe this helps explain our problem(s). :)

alkemical
01-19-2012, 06:51 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

Astroturfing is a form of advocacy in support of a political, organizational, or corporate agenda, designed to give the appearance of a "grassroots" movement. The goal of such campaigns is to disguise the efforts of a political and/or commercial entity as an independent public reaction to some political entity—a politician, political group, product, service or event. The term is a derivation of AstroTurf, a brand of synthetic carpeting designed to look like natural grass.

Like other advocates, astroturfers attempt to manipulate public opinion by both overt (outreach awareness, etc.) and covert (disinformation) means. Astroturfing may be undertaken by an individual promoting a personal agenda, or by organized professional groups with money from large corporations, unions, non-profits, or activist organizations. Services may be provided by political consultants who also provide opposition research and other services. Beneficiaries are not "grass root" campaigners but the organizations that orchestrate such campaigns.

What you read/hear/see on the news - isn't what you're really hearing/reading/seeing on the news.

alkemical
01-19-2012, 06:53 AM
http://www.opensecrets.org/

Also, use that resource to help "follow the money".

alkemical
01-19-2012, 06:54 AM
Democracy is participatory. Those of you whom love and support Ron Paul, please understand that you will be required to do more of the heavy lifting locally. If you aren't willing to accept that responsibility, or your neighbors - it might be something that has to be eased into.

For those of you who don't - you have two wonderful candidates to (s)elect.

BroncoFanatic
01-19-2012, 07:21 AM
Romney = Obama

Ron Paul is the only candidate that takes his Oath to the Constitution seriously.

Status quo or Ron Paul, that is the only choice to be made

alkemical
01-19-2012, 07:25 AM
https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSeaLrQLjUQmuhgYU4IdMuDM0gpYzhXe EEjr1e72yJ4V041kWNafw

alkemical
01-19-2012, 07:25 AM
https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS9UVOMOaOid-DKl2TpKymse_Ir9Mdn63tbIHAVFVGpfdWG0mO94w

That One Guy
01-19-2012, 07:54 AM
Romney = Obama

Ron Paul is the only candidate that takes his Oath to the Constitution seriously.

Status quo or Ron Paul, that is the only choice to be made

The girl in your avatar has terrible salute form.

That One Guy
01-19-2012, 08:01 AM
People have already said most of what there is to say but I'll contribute thoughts anyways.

Paul is an idealist but probably wouldn't actually achieve anything. Just getting elected wouldn't make all the GOP candidates fall in and support him. If Obama can't control the Senate, Paul surely wouldn't get the needed support from his congressmen.

All of the other candidates spend their entire terms making sure they're further electable in the next election. People spew rhetoric but really just try to avoid negative publicity for as long as they can. Nobody has a plan in mind for the country because I'm not even sure anyone has a real vision for what they want the country to be.

And, finally, the country can't maintain any standing in the world if we keep voting for someone else. If we're turning over congress and the presidency every election just to get a new face, no ideas will ever come to fruition and changing schemes will make us a laughing stock on the international front. Changes to the trade environment and our interventionalist policies need to either be made permanently with solid support of the people or not at all. We can't do stuff like that and then change our minds in a few years.

Pony Boy
01-19-2012, 08:03 AM
There are more people on food stamps than any time in our history.

The National Debt has risen form $10 Trillion to $16 Trillion

Unemployment has stayed above 8% during the Obama term in office.

The national price for a gallon of gas at the pump has doubled.

So how’s that “Hope and Change” worked out for everyone.

alkemical
01-19-2012, 08:03 AM
People have already said most of what there is to say but I'll contribute thoughts anyways.

Paul is an idealist but probably wouldn't actually achieve anything. Just getting elected wouldn't make all the GOP candidates fall in and support him. If Obama can't control the Senate, Paul surely wouldn't get the needed support from his congressmen.

All of the other candidates spend their entire terms making sure they're further electable in the next election. People spew rhetoric but really just try to avoid negative publicity for as long as they can. Nobody has a plan in mind for the country because I'm not even sure anyone has a real vision for what they want the country to be.

And, finally, the country can't maintain any standing in the world if we keep voting for someone else. If we're turning over congress and the presidency every election just to get a new face, no ideas will ever come to fruition and changing schemes will make us a laughing stock on the international front. Changes to the trade environment and our interventionalist policies need to either be made permanently with solid support of the people or not at all. We can't do stuff like that and then change our minds in a few years.


Can you run through this for me:

We need to elect a president who works with congress? Like what, Supporting SOPA, Citizens UNITED, NDAA, TAARP?

Those are just examples, but just something i'm chewing on.

Goobzilla
01-19-2012, 08:05 AM
So let me say this is a serious question. How do you know what your party affiliation is? Is there a quiz I can take? I like some things about both parties but I've never really said "Hey that guy's just like me, I can relate to him". I used to not care, but in CO now you have to register a party affiliation for voter registration. I do think Ron Swanson is pretty much the ****, does that make me a Libertarian?

BroncoFanatic
01-19-2012, 08:06 AM
Paul is an idealist but probably wouldn't actually achieve anything. Just getting elected wouldn't make all the GOP candidates fall in and support him. If Obama can't control the Senate, Paul surely wouldn't get the needed support from his congressmen.

I am a firm believer in the axiom that "a government governs best that governs least". We need our politicians at all levels to adhere to their Oaths of office and to the Constitution. No one of either party has been doing this, except for the very few like Ron Paul.

As President, he would not have a lot of support in Congress, you are correct. That is ok by me, because he would at least put a check on ridiculous spending, as well as shed light on it.

Bronco Rob
01-19-2012, 08:07 AM
.

alkemical
01-19-2012, 08:07 AM
So let me say this is a serious question. How do you know what your party affiliation is? Is there a quiz I can take? I like some things about both parties but I've never really said "Hey that guy's just like me, I can relate to him". I used to not care, but in CO now you have to register a party affiliation for voter registration. I do think Ron Swanson is pretty much the ****, does that make me a Libertarian?

There's all sorts of "political quizzes" if you google them - but what does this really mean? Just helps you define which box you fit in. I live in a Commonwealth that also requires party affiliation for primaries. Thus, I cannot vote in primaries. You could pick the party you dislike the most - to vote more harshly to weed out the crap.

gyldenlove
01-19-2012, 08:08 AM
:) If I was to try and imagine all the possible answers you might have given me for this, the answer you gave probably wouldn't have been on the list. :)

I moved from Denmark to Canada and they only let you vote in Denmark if you have a permanent residence there which I don't, and since I am not a landed immigrant in Canada, but only on a temporary student visa they won't let me vote either.

That One Guy
01-19-2012, 08:11 AM
Can you run through this for me:

We need to elect a president who works with congress? Like what, Supporting SOPA, Citizens UNITED, NDAA, TAARP?

Those are just examples, but just something i'm chewing on.

I don't mind the idea of Paul just because he'd bring government to a gridlock. I just said his ideas wouldn't actually happen. Congress isn't going to approve dissolving the Fed, going to the gold standard, etc. Even things like making the cuts he promised would be rough as someone would be willing to fight the process and grind government to a halt while letting Paul dig his own grave. Think the recent gridlock x1000.

Again, not saying it would be bad. Just saying we could expect the Federal Government to just stop in place for 4 years.

That One Guy
01-19-2012, 08:13 AM
I moved from Denmark to Canada and they only let you vote in Denmark if you have a permanent residence there which I don't, and since I am not a landed immigrant in Canada, but only on a temporary student visa they won't let me vote either.

Not very exciting. Total letdown.

alkemical
01-19-2012, 08:15 AM
I don't mind the idea of Paul just because he'd bring government to a gridlock. I just said his ideas wouldn't actually happen. Congress isn't going to approve dissolving the Fed, going to the gold standard, etc. Even things like making the cuts he promised would be rough as someone would be willing to fight the process and grind government to a halt while letting Paul dig his own grave. Think the recent gridlock x1000.

Again, not saying it would be bad. Just saying we could expect the Federal Government to just stop in place for 4 years.

Well, that's where WE have to take responsibility. Listen to us - blaming DC. We should be blaming ourselves for "gridlock", out of control pork products, etc.

I read a report/story once - and it was interesting. Most people find congress to be corrupt, yet most people re-elect their representative.

That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it.

alkemical
01-19-2012, 08:18 AM
I "love" ron paul - I do - but my problem is that most people I know - that want ron paul to win...I don't trust them to do the required heavy lifting to live in that world.

****, i had a conversation with someone here who wanted to complain about local schools/teacher contracts - but when asked why he doesn't run for local school board - it was just a list of excuses.

In order to "live" in that world - WE are going to have to do more - without thinking of what it pays, etc - it's because it's REQUIRED.

That One Guy
01-19-2012, 08:23 AM
Well, that's where WE have to take responsibility. Listen to us - blaming DC. We should be blaming ourselves for "gridlock", out of control pork products, etc.

I read a report/story once - and it was interesting. Most people find congress to be corrupt, yet most people re-elect their representative.

That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it.

I've always been a proponent of taking almost all of the power out of DC. At state levels, voices can be heard. At the federal level, 1/300,000,000th of the population isn't very loud. You really have to have quite a forum to spread ideas to if you want to even be heard. The entire internet is coming together to fight SOPA and that's where their livelihoods could be at stake. What exactly do we do to stop pork and whatnot?

That One Guy
01-19-2012, 08:25 AM
I "love" ron paul - I do - but my problem is that most people I know - that want ron paul to win...I don't trust them to do the required heavy lifting to live in that world.

****, i had a conversation with someone here who wanted to complain about local schools/teacher contracts - but when asked why he doesn't run for local school board - it was just a list of excuses.

In order to "live" in that world - WE are going to have to do more - without thinking of what it pays, etc - it's because it's REQUIRED.

I think the world needs weeded out some so I invite a world where that heavy lifting is required. Those willing to lift might just have to be willing to walk on the bodies of those unwilling to lift in the early stages. People would be falling by the wayside at a rate probably unimaginable if the government security net was instantly removed.

Kaylore
01-19-2012, 08:33 AM
People have already said most of what there is to say but I'll contribute thoughts anyways.

Paul is an idealist but probably wouldn't actually achieve anything. Just getting elected wouldn't make all the GOP candidates fall in and support him. If Obama can't control the Senate, Paul surely wouldn't get the needed support from his congressmen.

All of the other candidates spend their entire terms making sure they're further electable in the next election. People spew rhetoric but really just try to avoid negative publicity for as long as they can. Nobody has a plan in mind for the country because I'm not even sure anyone has a real vision for what they want the country to be.

And, finally, the country can't maintain any standing in the world if we keep voting for someone else. If we're turning over congress and the presidency every election just to get a new face, no ideas will ever come to fruition and changing schemes will make us a laughing stock on the international front. Changes to the trade environment and our interventionalist policies need to either be made permanently with solid support of the people or not at all. We can't do stuff like that and then change our minds in a few years.

This is a really solid post.

People want radical changes, probably because it really sucks right now and we are accustomed to getting things immediately. This is why guys like Obama and Paul have appeal. They represent a seeming real change.

The problem is major flaws with this country are institutionalized. There is an entire bureaucracy that changes at a snails pace and an outsider lacks the political capital to move congress on his ideas in any major level. If a party holds the White House, the opposition will shoot down everything that President does just to stymie them politically. If that party wins both congress and the White House then the minority party blames everything that goes wrong on the other to gain ground politically.

So you can have an ineffectual outsider who says the right things but then either becomes worthless once he's in, or settles into a pragmatist role that takes baby steps like Obama, but pisses off his base for not "doing more."

Paul would be the same way. All his plans would get railroaded except the media would make him seem crazy because he's a Republican.

Romney is really not much different than Obama in the grand scheme of things. He's a moderate Republican who would change very little in a big picture sense.

BABronco
01-19-2012, 09:03 AM
Romney is really not much different than Obama in the grand scheme of things. He's a moderate Republican who would change very little in a big picture sense.

This

Rohirrim
01-19-2012, 09:20 AM
This is a really solid post.

People want radical changes, probably because it really sucks right now and we are accustomed to getting things immediately. This is why guys like Obama and Paul have appeal. They represent a seeming real change.

The problem is major flaws with this country are institutionalized. There is an entire bureaucracy that changes at a snails pace and an outsider lacks the political capital to move congress on his ideas in any major level. If a party holds the White House, the opposition will shoot down everything that President does just to stymie them politically. If that party wins both congress and the White House then the minority party blames everything that goes wrong on the other to gain ground politically.

So you can have an ineffectual outsider who says the right things but then either becomes worthless once he's in, or settles into a pragmatist role that takes baby steps like Obama, but pisses off his base for not "doing more."

Paul would be the same way. All his plans would get railroaded except the media would make him seem crazy because he's a Republican.

Romney is really not much different than Obama in the grand scheme of things. He's a moderate Republican who would change very little in a big picture sense.

Yep. What we need is major, systemic change. The American Republic has always suffered from the same malady: Powerful special interests use their economic power to create the government that benefits them. This isn't the first time it's happened. The first thing we need to do, as a people, is seize contol of our government. Write a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United and institute public financing for elections. Outlaw direct lobbying to representatives. Right now we have a special interests government. What do they want? To pay no taxes, have no regulations on their conduct, and get subsidies from the government. As long as any candidate of either party goes along with that agenda, they can get elected.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 09:29 AM
This is a really solid post.

People want radical changes, probably because it really sucks right now and we are accustomed to getting things immediately. This is why guys like Obama and Paul have appeal. They represent a seeming real change.

The problem is major flaws with this country are institutionalized. There is an entire bureaucracy that changes at a snails pace and an outsider lacks the political capital to move congress on his ideas in any major level. If a party holds the White House, the opposition will shoot down everything that President does just to stymie them politically. If that party wins both congress and the White House then the minority party blames everything that goes wrong on the other to gain ground politically.

So you can have an ineffectual outsider who says the right things but then either becomes worthless once he's in, or settles into a pragmatist role that takes baby steps like Obama, but pisses off his base for not "doing more."

Paul would be the same way. All his plans would get railroaded except the media would make him seem crazy because he's a Republican.

Romney is really not much different than Obama in the grand scheme of things. He's a moderate Republican who would change very little in a big picture sense.

whatever and complete bs too. I generally like your posts but sometimes you have your head up your rear end.

My business has LOST 60% OF OUR CUSTOMERS over the last 3 years.

**** OBAMA!!

pricejj
01-19-2012, 09:29 AM
I "love" ron paul - I do - but my problem is that most people I know - that want ron paul to win...I don't trust them to do the required heavy lifting to live in that world.

****, i had a conversation with someone here who wanted to complain about local schools/teacher contracts - but when asked why he doesn't run for local school board - it was just a list of excuses.

In order to "live" in that world - WE are going to have to do more - without thinking of what it pays, etc - it's because it's REQUIRED.

Thanks for making me think about getting more involved with local affairs.

Government spending on public employees is out of control, and out of line with the real world.

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 09:41 AM
My business has LOST 60% OF OUR CUSTOMERS over the last 3 years.

**** OBAMA!!

Which specific policy or policies of Obama are to blame for your business losing 60% of its customers?

alkemical
01-19-2012, 09:42 AM
I've always been a proponent of taking almost all of the power out of DC. At state levels, voices can be heard. At the federal level, 1/300,000,000th of the population isn't very loud. You really have to have quite a forum to spread ideas to if you want to even be heard. The entire internet is coming together to fight SOPA and that's where their livelihoods could be at stake. What exactly do we do to stop pork and whatnot?

We have accountability to hold accountability. Does that make sense?

alkemical
01-19-2012, 09:43 AM
I think the world needs weeded out some so I invite a world where that heavy lifting is required. Those willing to lift might just have to be willing to walk on the bodies of those unwilling to lift in the early stages. People would be falling by the wayside at a rate probably unimaginable if the government security net was instantly removed.

Funny thing happened with guns & automobiles: Darwin's theory didn't/doesn't apply.

Are you going to go to a sperm bank, and start donating. You'd be better off doing that route, genetic warfare will have a much larger impact on the future.

ColoradoDarin
01-19-2012, 09:45 AM
Yep. What we need is major, systemic change. The American Republic has always suffered from the same malady: Powerful special interests use their economic power to create the government that benefits them. This isn't the first time it's happened. The first thing we need to do, as a people, is seize contol of our government. Write a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United and institute public financing for elections. Outlaw direct lobbying to representatives. Right now we have a special interests government. What do they want? To pay no taxes, have no regulations on their conduct, and get subsidies from the government. As long as any candidate of either party goes along with that agenda, they can get elected.

2 questions for you:

1. Do you believe that a single person can spend their money as they see fit to produce political materials (Vote for Ron Paul! Don't for for Ron Paul!) in the form of letters, pamphlets, youtube videos, TV commercials, infomercials, and other acts of political speech?

and

2. Do you believe that people of like minds can associate together to produce the stuff mentioned in #1?

alkemical
01-19-2012, 09:47 AM
Thanks for making me think about getting more involved with local affairs.

Government spending on public employees is out of control, and out of line with the real world.

YOU/ME/WE need to start looking at ourselves and taking the responsibility. You see how "enabled" we are by thinking we are so powerless to do something?

The moment you start to act, is the moment you start creating that world.

Start or participate in recall movements to remove corrupt politicians. if WE want change, then - well - lets do it. What are we waiting for?

Rohirrim
01-19-2012, 09:48 AM
2 questions for you:

1. Do you believe that a single person can spend their money as they see fit to produce political materials (Vote for Ron Paul! Don't for for Ron Paul!) in the form of letters, pamphlets, youtube videos, TV commercials, infomercials, and other acts of political speech?

and

2. Do you believe that people of like minds can associate together to produce the stuff mentioned in #1?

Corporations aren't people. Money isn't speech. In a democratic republic, the integrity of elections is fundamental.

Rohirrim
01-19-2012, 09:51 AM
I worked in corporate law offices for many years. Want to see what a corporation looks like?

https://protect.iu.edu/sites/default/files/img/dpd_2008_1.png

There ya go. That's a corporation.

alkemical
01-19-2012, 09:52 AM
Have you seen my stapler?

Rigs11
01-19-2012, 09:53 AM
Which specific policy or policies of Obama are to blame for your business losing 60% of its customers?

Repugs like tombstone like to say that government cant create jobs,and they should leave it to the private sector.then they blame the government when the private sector doesnt pull through for them.its hilarious really

ColoradoDarin
01-19-2012, 09:55 AM
Corporations aren't people. Money isn't speech. In a democratic republic, the integrity of elections is fundamental.

So you're saying that people don't have the right of freedom of association? Or at least they shouldn't have that right?

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 10:01 AM
Which specific policy or policies of Obama are to blame for your business losing 60% of its customers?

The only businesses that have any money are the big businesses who have huge capital reserves. The mom and pop shops are gone. Why?? NONE OF THE DAM BANKS ARE LENDING ANY DAM MONEY that's why.

**** Obama.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 10:06 AM
Repugs like tombstone like to say that government cant create jobs,and they should leave it to the private sector.then they blame the government when the private sector doesnt pull through for them.its hilarious really

First of all I'm an Indy, not a repub. BO is not doing anything to inspire the private sector to grow and spend money. I thought he was the candidate of the middle class? Instead, only the big boys are doing well under BO.

Rohirrim
01-19-2012, 10:09 AM
So you're saying that people don't have the right of freedom of association? Or at least they shouldn't have that right?

People can associate however they please. And the people also have a right to protect the integrity of our elections. I'm not talking about regulating how people associate. I'm talking about regulating the influence special interests can have on elections.

TonyR
01-19-2012, 10:38 AM
The only businesses that have any money are the big businesses who have huge capital reserves. The mom and pop shops are gone. Why?? NONE OF THE DAM BANKS ARE LENDING ANY DAM MONEY that's why.

**** Obama.

LOL Curious how the banks not making risky loans is Obama's fault? This country is a mess right now, as the economy. Hell, the world economy is a mess. I suppose it simplifies things for people like you to have someone to blame and direct your anger at. So if hating Obama and blaming him for your problems positively impacts your mental health then I suppose you're doing the right thing for yourself. Just know that it's wrongheaded and misguided.

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 10:39 AM
First of all I'm an Indy, not a repub. BO is not doing anything to inspire the private sector to grow and spend money. I thought he was the candidate of the middle class? Instead, only the big boys are doing well under BO.

According to your boy Ron Paul, that's not the job of the government.

ColoradoDarin
01-19-2012, 10:50 AM
People can associate however they please. And the people also have a right to protect the integrity of our elections. I'm not talking about regulating how people associate. I'm talking about regulating the influence special interests can have on elections.

So people can associate, but if they get a lot of people persuaded to their point of view, that's too many and we need to regulate it if not outlaw it completely?

How about a better solution, more freedom and liberty, those who associate together can, and those who oppose them can associate together and bring their own message.

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 11:10 AM
So people can associate, but if they get a lot of people persuaded to their point of view, that's too many and we need to regulate it if not outlaw it completely?

How about a better solution, more freedom and liberty, those who associate together can, and those who oppose them can associate together and bring their own message.

When a corporation like Goldman Sachs can buy influence in our government, that isn't "freedom and liberty," it's an oligarchy.

bendog
01-19-2012, 11:37 AM
According to your boy Ron Paul, that's not the job of the government.

ouch. I think you can make an argument that some of Obama and the dems actions have increased uncertainty amongst start up biz, though since until recently there's been no reason to anticipate more than just limping along as we have been doing, so I haven't seen any real distinction between Obama and the party that fed the housing bubble with wars and deficits and tax cuts.

But Ron Paul? If someone wants to believe in invisible hands and markets that's their free choice, though I think its not only beyond simplistic but also a gross distortion of what Hayak was saying about markets, but ....

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 11:40 AM
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h318/gomilehigh/RSR7443-2.jpg

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 11:40 AM
LOL Curious how the banks not making risky loans is Obama's fault? This country is a mess right now, as the economy. Hell, the world economy is a mess. I suppose it simplifies things for people like you to have someone to blame and direct your anger at. So if hating Obama and blaming him for your problems positively impacts your mental health then I suppose you're doing the right thing for yourself. Just know that it's wrongheaded and misguided.

define "risky" loans please.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 11:42 AM
According to your boy Ron Paul, that's not the job of the government.

talk about weak...

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 11:44 AM
talk about weak...

Oh? Then Ron Paul does advocate that the government take proactive measures to stimulate business? I'm sure he'd be shocked to know! ROFL!

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 11:44 AM
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h318/gomilehigh/RSR7443-2.jpg

Hilarious!

Pseudofool
01-19-2012, 11:57 AM
The only businesses that have any money are the big businesses who have huge capital reserves. The mom and pop shops are gone. Why?? NONE OF THE DAM BANKS ARE LENDING ANY DAM MONEY that's why.

**** Obama.

Sounds like your problems is with the Banks. What should the government do exactly to help Banks loan money?

This is a result of the credit bubble, not public policy...though keep thinking if McCain won your business ventures would somehow be different.

bendog
01-19-2012, 11:59 AM
Corporations aren't people. Money isn't speech. In a democratic republic, the integrity of elections is fundamental.

Oh come now, did you NOT find Justice Roberts reasoning Historical Genius that James Madison and Thomas Jefferson would approve of corporations having an unlimited free speech power to influence elections.

BABronco
01-19-2012, 12:02 PM
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h318/gomilehigh/RSR7443-2.jpg

So your supporting one of the most corrupt senators for president.. interesting.

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 12:09 PM
Hilarious!

http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h318/gomilehigh/large.gif

Hilarious!

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 12:10 PM
So your supporting one of the most corrupt senators for president.. interesting.

In complete detail since you said he was corrupt please explain.

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 12:33 PM
So your supporting one of the most corrupt senators for president.. interesting.

Corrupt you say? Review Obama's record he's the most corrupt President in American history.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/obama_the_mask_is_off.html

bendog
01-19-2012, 12:37 PM
I hear he's not only championing recess appoints while the gop refuses to recess, or enact any legislation for that matter, but he also intends to suspend the right to habeus and impose media censorship!

Taco John
01-19-2012, 12:41 PM
According to your boy Ron Paul, that's not the job of the government.

That's not exactly accurate. Ron Paul sees the role of the government to facilitate trade as freely as possible, thus inspiring growth in the private sector.

TonyR
01-19-2012, 12:42 PM
define "risky" loans please.

The big banks are in business to make money. If they think you're a good bet that will be profitable for them they'll make that bet. But relative to the free lending era that helped get us into this mess the bar has been raised considerably. Obama certainly isn't advising the banks on their lending policies.

Taco John
01-19-2012, 12:42 PM
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h318/gomilehigh/RSR7443-2.jpg

I will stay home before I would cast a vote for the hate candidate.

TonyR
01-19-2012, 12:44 PM
The GOP better have a plan for reinventing its base in the near future...

Put simply, the Christian Right is getting old. According to the largest and most recent study we have of American religion and politics, by Robert D. Putnam and David E. Campbell, almost twice as many people 18 to 29 confess to no faith at all as adhere to evangelical Protestantism. Young people who have attended college, a growing percentage of the population, are more secular still. Catholicism has held its own only because the Church keeps gathering in newcomers from Latin America, Africa, and Asia, few of whom are likely to show up at a Santorum rally. To their surprise, Putnam and Campbell discovered that conservative preachers infrequently discuss polarizing issues from the pulpit. Sermons about hunger and poverty far outnumber those about homosexuality or abortion. On any given Sunday, just one group of Christians routinely grapples with divisive political issues: black Protestants, the most reliably Democratic constituency of them all.http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/99679/whose-afraid-the-christian-right-the-precipitous-political-decline-conservati

That One Guy
01-19-2012, 12:49 PM
Maybe the answer to fair elections is actual ethics standards. If the NRA helps a candidate get elected and then the candidate spends his term working on favorable gun legislation, how hard is that to spot? Politicians are constantly getting treated like kings just to turn around and do favors.

I know it'd be murky at times and the Obama/UAW deals will still be inevitable at times but they could do more than they currently do.

That One Guy
01-19-2012, 12:52 PM
The GOP better have a plan for reinventing its base in the near future...

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/99679/whose-afraid-the-christian-right-the-precipitous-political-decline-conservati

Good. Focus on fiscal conservatism and drop the religious side. That side often leaves them looking like fools anyways.

gunns
01-19-2012, 12:55 PM
Corrupt you say? Review Obama's record he's the most corrupt President in American history.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/obama_the_mask_is_off.html

What a stupid article, if he was trying to prove a point. Appointments? What appointments?

"I saw a man who could single-handedly destroy the country and someone with no respect for the history, the Constitution, or the people of the United States. The specter of a megalomaniac who was a stranger to the truth and would or say or do anything to achieve or retain power overcame me."

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/obama_the_mask_is_off.html#ixzz1jwHyyK3X

I thought he was talking about Bush but kept reading to see if we could find his point. Never happened, except for the mention of the color of his skin. Where was this guy when Bush/Cheney were in office? And he wants the Republicans to get this guy out office before he does further damage? With Mitt Romney? Hilarious!

SonOfLe-loLang
01-19-2012, 12:57 PM
Corrupt you say? Review Obama's record he's the most corrupt President in American history.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/obama_the_mask_is_off.html

WOW that is a ****ing joke.

bendog
01-19-2012, 12:58 PM
The GOP better have a plan for reinventing its base in the near future...

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/99679/whose-afraid-the-christian-right-the-precipitous-political-decline-conservati

Ironically, the latino vote is (percentage wise) more open to socially conservative messages. Of course the gop has a problem there.

I really think that ultimately this year it will come down to whether Romney can somehow reach the soc sec age vote by disassociating himself from the gop's stance. The gop took the House in large part by running Medicare scare ads in blue dog districts where dem reps had voted for Obama care withthe ads saying "X rep voted to cut your medicare for the president's healthplan for others." Yet, for two years the gop's been signing a different tune, and imo oldsters pay attention more than other groups. A pol might be able to spin a 180 global warming or heathcare mandate because those issues aren't front and center when Ma and Pa Kettle go to the doc twice a week and then meet with their frieds at Cracker Barrell.

Longterm thouug I sort of disagree with you. I think the gop is walking away from the social conservatives. I'm not sure where it's going, and I really think it doesn't know itself. But when Obama goes into Camelback and talks about a church's mission to serve the hungry, and the gop serves up McCain (whom I voted for in 2000) or a Romney .... it's over.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-19-2012, 01:11 PM
Ironically, the latino vote is (percentage wise) more open to socially conservative messages. Of course the gop has a problem there.

I really think that ultimately this year it will come down to whether Romney can somehow reach the soc sec age vote by disassociating himself from the gop's stance. The gop took the House in large part by running Medicare scare ads in blue dog districts where dem reps had voted for Obama care withthe ads saying "X rep voted to cut your medicare for the president's healthplan for others." Yet, for two years the gop's been signing a different tune, and imo oldsters pay attention more than other groups. A pol might be able to spin a 180 global warming or heathcare mandate because those issues aren't front and center when Ma and Pa Kettle go to the doc twice a week and then meet with their frieds at Cracker Barrell.

Longterm thouug I sort of disagree with you. I think the gop is walking away from the social conservatives. I'm not sure where it's going, and I really think it doesn't know itself. But when Obama goes into Camelback and talks about a church's mission to serve the hungry, and the gop serves up McCain (whom I voted for in 2000) or a Romney .... it's over.

I really think the GOP is fractured and has no clue where its going. Right now, they aren't woven by a common ground in ideology, only in one that suggests they need to beat Obama. Until they regain identity, i dont know who will take them all that seriously.

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 01:11 PM
Corrupt you say? Review Obama's record he's the most corrupt President in American history.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/obama_the_mask_is_off.html

LOL

Keep the laughs comin', buddy.

Rick Santorum indeed.

Hilarious!

BroncoFanatic
01-19-2012, 01:17 PM
The girl in your avatar has terrible salute form.

I agree, she should be chastised :~ohyah!:

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 01:19 PM
I will stay home before I would cast a vote for the hate candidate.

Brilliant. That's what many say; anyone and I mean anyone of the candidates running against Obama is an improvement including Santorum. Stay at home, that'll help secure a victory for the biggest hater of all.

Obama has done more damage to this country in 3 years, broken more promises, told more lies, created more division than any other political figure in American history and you call Santorum a hater? So you don’t agree with some his of positions on some social issues he isn’t perfect (which none of the candidates are) but at least he’s the one true conservative left in the field who doesn’t apologize for his principles.

I don’t agree with some his views either but at the very least he’ll attempt to reverse course and he’s an enormous upgrade over BO. He probably isn't going to win the nomination but I'll support him as long as he stays in the race based his whole of his record.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-19-2012, 01:23 PM
Brilliant. That's what many say; anyone and I mean anyone of the candidates running against Obama is an improvement including Santorum. Stay at home, that'll help secure a victory for the biggest hater of all.

Obama has done more damage to this country in 3 years, broken more promises, told more lies, created more division than any other political figure in American history and you call Santorum a hater? So you don’t agree with some of positions on some social issues he isn’t perfect (which none of the candidates are) but at least he’s the one true conservative left in the field who doesn’t apologize for his principles.

I don’t agree with some his views either but at the very least he’ll attempt to reverse course and he’s an enormous upgrade over BO. He probably isn't going to win the nomination but I'll support him as long as he stays in the race based his whole of his record.

Id ask where you got your insane BS info from...but you posted that article, so i can gather. Keep screaming in your echo chamber though

Paladin
01-19-2012, 01:27 PM
Brilliant. That's what many say; anyone and I mean anyone of the candidates running against Obama is an improvement including Santorum. Stay at home, that'll help secure a victory for the biggest hater of all.

Obama has done more damage to this country in 3 years, broken more promises, told more lies, created more division than any other political figure in American history and you call Santorum a hater? So you don’t agree with some his of positions on some social issues he isn’t perfect (which none of the candidates are) but at least he’s the one true conservative left in the field who doesn’t apologize for his principles.

I don’t agree with some his views either but at the very least he’ll attempt to reverse course and he’s an enormous upgrade over BO. He probably isn't going to win the nomination but I'll support him as long as he stays in the race based his whole of his record.

What a bs post. That was Bush who did that shyte....

It was in all the papers....

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 01:29 PM
Obama has done more damage to this country in 3 years, broken more promises, told more lies, created more division than any other political figure in American history

I take it you were in a coma between Jan. 2001-Jan. 2009?

Goobzilla
01-19-2012, 01:36 PM
Good. Focus on fiscal conservatism and drop the religious side. That side often leaves them looking like fools anyways.

Now this is something I could get into. As a guy trying to learn more about this stuff, that has always been something I've associated with the GOP. I like a lot of their stances, but the religious stuff is a turnoff to me personally. That could actually be a game changer for me.

BroncoFanatic
01-19-2012, 01:38 PM
It is hilarious, and yet pathetic, that people argue

"Obama sucks, x Republican is better!"

and

"Republicans suck, Democrats are better!"

When both parties have been doing exactly the same crap, raping the tax payer and ignoring the Constitution. Until both sides see that you are really supporting the one and only side in a single party system effectively, we will just get more of the same.

TonyR
01-19-2012, 01:39 PM
Newt is back in the picture, and in a big way.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/01/and_gingrich_takes_the_lead.php?ref=fpblg

Monday's debate, and support from Perry and Palin, have propped him back up. Very frightening to say the least. The right wing conservatives don't like Romney and it looks like Newt is the horse they'll ride.

TonyR
01-19-2012, 01:41 PM
Id ask where you got your insane BS info from...but you posted that article, so i can gather. Keep screaming in your echo chamber though

From this:

In the latest Pew poll, FNC is both the most trusted and the least trusted of media outlets. It's most trusted because Republicans trust it; it's the least trusted because Democrats don't trust it at all. But here's what's interesting. Republicans won't touch any other outlet at all apart from their propaganda channel. 73 percent of Republicans trust Fox, with only 17 percent not, which gives FNC a positive rating +54. The next most trusted outlet for Republicans, PBS, comes in at - 30. And that helps explain the complete disconnect between the GOP and, er, reality.

But the real danger for the GOP's propaganda channel is that Independents, the fastest growing political identity, side with Democrats more than Republicans on Fox. 73 percent of Republicans trust it, while only 36 percent of Independents do - closer to the Democratic number of 25 percent.

No other media outlet has this kind of distrust from non-Republicans. And no other media outlet has this kind of trust from Republicans. The more paranoid they get, the more closed their media cocoon.http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/01/how-trusted-is-fox-news.html

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 01:42 PM
Id ask where you got your insane BS info from...but you posted that article, so i can gather. Keep screaming in your echo chamber though

Wake up Obama supporters please read and get the facts about Obama’s failed Socialist, Marxist, or Statist fill in the blank agenda. Turn off MSLSD, the Daily Show, quit reading the New York Slimes and get another prospective you’re become brainwashed drones.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/andrew-sullivan-how-obama-s-long-game-will-outsmart-his-critics.html

http://www.examiner.com/social-issues-in-tampa-bay/broken-promises-from-obama-turning-voters-jaded-critics-claim

SonOfLe-loLang
01-19-2012, 01:48 PM
Wake up Obama supporters please read and get the facts about Obama’s failed Socialist, Marxist, or Statist fill in the blank agenda. Turn off MSLSD, the Daily Show, quit reading the New York Slimes and get another prospective you’re become brainwashed drones.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/andrew-sullivan-how-obama-s-long-game-will-outsmart-his-critics.html

http://www.examiner.com/social-issues-in-tampa-bay/broken-promises-from-obama-turning-voters-jaded-critics-claim

I'm a leftist thats disappointed in Obama. The funny thing is people like you think he's marxist, socialist, or,gulp, Stalinist even though he's proven to be nothing but a moderate who tried to appease conservatives way too much. I identify as a socialist and, trust me, there's nothing socialist about his agenda...at all. His healthcare plan was a giveaway to the healthcare industry (though it can be improved) and ummm...he's slashed government jobs since getting into office...not to mention he increased defense spending (you guys should love him!)

As for your dumb article, the reason he made recess appts with congress "in session" (something every pres does) is because republicans, during time off, were calling BS sessions for like 45 seconds for the sole pupose to block them. And why? Because they feel like being pains in the asses and have said PUBLICALLY that their sole mission is to get Obama out of office. Wayto work together!

You'd think Obama changed this entire country by the way you talk, when, essentially, NOTHING REALLY GOT DONE! He inherited a bull****, ****ty economy and we still have that (though its on a tad bit of an upswing lately).

So take your "communist" rhetoric and shove it up your ass. You guys called him this before he even took the oath. I've got my issues with him, but you are just WAY off.

24champ
01-19-2012, 01:49 PM
Newt is back in the picture, and in a big way.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/01/and_gingrich_takes_the_lead.php?ref=fpblg

Monday's debate, and support from Perry and Palin, have propped him back up. Very frightening to say the least. The right wing conservatives don't like Romney and it looks like Newt is the horse they'll ride.

He might be back in the picture but it looks like he will be out of the picture again...all this "open marriage" talk that his ex-wife is all over the airwaves discussing is pretty damaging.

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 01:49 PM
Newt is back in the picture, and in a big way.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/01/and_gingrich_takes_the_lead.php?ref=fpblg

Monday's debate, and support from Perry and Palin, have propped him back up. Very frightening to say the least. The right wing conservatives don't like Romney and it looks like Newt is the horse they'll ride.

As an SC resident, I've been skeptical that the Evangelicals that comprise the vast majority of the state's GOP base would get behind Romney. If Newt or even Santorum takes the SC primary, it would not shock me in the least.

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 01:51 PM
I'm a leftist thats disappointed in Obama. The funny thing is people like you think he's marxist, socialist, or <gulp> Stalinist even though he's proven to be nothing but a moderate who tried to appease conservatives way too much. I identify as a socialist and, trust me, there's nothing socialist about his agenda...at all. His healthcare plan was a giveaway to the healthcare industry (though it can be approved) and ummm...he's slashed government jobs since getting into office...not to mention he increased defense spending (you guys should love him!)

As for your dumb article, the reason he made recess appts with congress "in session" (something every pres does) is because republicans, during time off, were calling BS sessions for like 45 seconds for the sole pupose to block them. And why? Because they feel like being pains in the asses and have said PUBLICALLY that their sole mission is to get Obama out of office. Wayto work together!

You'd think Obama changed this entire country by the way you talk, when, essentially, NOTHING REALLY GOT DONE! He inherited a bull****, ****ty economy and we still have that (though its on a tad bit of an upswing lately).

So take your "communist" rhetoric and shove it up your ass. You guys called him this before he even took the oath. I've got my issues with him, but you are just WAY off.

Great post, but you're wasting your breath. Anybody who supports a lunatic like Santorum is beyond all hope of reason.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-19-2012, 01:51 PM
He might be back in the picture but it looks like he will be out of the picture again...all this "open marriage" talk that his ex-wife is all over the airwaves discussing is pretty damaging.

Newt would get KILLED in a general election with all his personal past. Best chance is Romney. Even if thats a bitter pill to swallow. He's like SUPREME WHITE GUY

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 01:54 PM
Sounds like your problems is with the Banks. What should the government do exactly to help Banks loan money?

This is a result of the credit bubble, not public policy...though keep thinking if McCain won your business ventures would somehow be different.

It's the middle classes problem brosef, the peeps that BO supposedly reps. If BO isn't not controlled by the banks then explain this:

[url]http://i.imgur.com/PVpFY.jpg

It's funny how Goldman Sachs is locked hand in hand with BO. I wonder how this is affecting banking decisions...

houghtam
01-19-2012, 01:57 PM
I'm a leftist thats disappointed in Obama. The funny thing is people like you think he's marxist, socialist, or,gulp, Stalinist even though he's proven to be nothing but a moderate who tried to appease conservatives way too much. I identify as a socialist and, trust me, there's nothing socialist about his agenda...at all. His healthcare plan was a giveaway to the healthcare industry (though it can be improved) and ummm...he's slashed government jobs since getting into office...not to mention he increased defense spending (you guys should love him!)

As for your dumb article, the reason he made recess appts with congress "in session" (something every pres does) is because republicans, during time off, were calling BS sessions for like 45 seconds for the sole pupose to block them. And why? Because they feel like being pains in the asses and have said PUBLICALLY that their sole mission is to get Obama out of office. Wayto work together!

You'd think Obama changed this entire country by the way you talk, when, essentially, NOTHING REALLY GOT DONE! He inherited a bull****, ****ty economy and we still have that (though its on a tad bit of an upswing lately).

So take your "communist" rhetoric and shove it up your ass. You guys called him this before he even took the oath. I've got my issues with him, but you are just WAY off.

Co-signed. I'm for keeping religion the *** OUT of the discussion in politics, secular humanism socially, and economically I have no problem paying my taxes as long as I have good schools, roads, etc. I voted for Obama out of hope for change, and got about 0.5% of the change I voted for.

He's not any different than any other candidate that's come around for the past 100 years, he's in the business of getting re-elected. I'm thoroughly disappointed and still wish someday that a candidate will come along that refuses to go along with the system.

Never happen.

bendog
01-19-2012, 02:01 PM
It's the middle classes problem brosef, the peeps that BO supposedly reps. If BO isn't not controlled by the banks then explain this:

[url]http://i.imgur.com/PVpFY.jpg

It's funny how Goldman Sachs is locked hand in hand with BO. I wonder how this is affecting banking decisions...

facts are pesky things

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10856612/1/goldman-leans-republican.html

24champ
01-19-2012, 02:06 PM
Newt would get KILLED in a general election with all his personal past. Best chance is Romney. Even if thats a bitter pill to swallow. He's like SUPREME WHITE GUY

His past of corruption and scandals will do him in. That and I actually think Newt is bipolar, his family has a history of it.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 02:07 PM
facts are pesky things

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10856612/1/goldman-leans-republican.html

This does nothing to change the fact the BO is heavily enfluenced by GS. nothing.

My point is RP is not in bed with the banks. BO, not so much.

bendog
01-19-2012, 02:08 PM
This does nothing to change the fact the BO is heavily enfluenced by GS. nothing.

My point is RP is not in bed with the banks. BO, not so much.

But Ron Paul will not be the nominee, and Mitt will be and Goldman is giving the $ to him not obama. I'm sorry i was mean. But honestly, I'm not tracking here. I have lots of doubts about the One, and one of them is his heavy handed regulator approach. But Goldman Sachs is giving TO THE GOP because their nominee so far favors NO regulation. You really want a return to credit default swaps 2000's style? That's the issue. Paul's toast. If he wanted to start a third party maybe. But you're complaints are "obama is bad," yet Paul is not a credible alternative. If you want to complain about Obama, and you want to appear to have any even handed credibility, you have to take on Romney, and thus far you choose not to, and that leads me to believe you are less than honest and open minded.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 02:18 PM
But Ron Paul will not be the nominee, and Mitt will be and Goldman is giving the $ to him not obama. But again don't let facts get in the way.

The facts are that RP is the only candidate I support so I'm not sure what your point is other than both dems are repubs and your boy BO are a bunch of criminals.

If that's your point I agree. If not, then you have no point.

bendog
01-19-2012, 02:21 PM
The facts are that RP is the only candidate I support so I'm not sure what your point is other than both dems are repubs and your boy BO are a bunch of criminals.

If that's your point I agree. If not, then you have no point.

Actually my pt is that given the money trail, Obama is actually less a crook than Romney, yet you are more upset with obama, which leads me to question your credibiltiy/objectivity.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 02:24 PM
Actually my pt is that given the money trail, Obama is actually less a crook than Romney, yet you are more upset with obama, which leads me to question your credibiltiy/objectivity.

because BO is the president? I could give a rats azz about Romney. Get over to the War/Rel/Poli thread and see all my posts on Romney. You might learn something...

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 02:28 PM
Actually my pt is that given the money trail, Obama is actually less a crook than Romney, yet you are more upset with obama, which leads me to question your credibiltiy/objectivity.


Obama is less than a crook than Romney? Really? Here’s a small list of Obama’s magnificence accomplishments in the last 3 years.

• Obamacare, of which 70% Americans said they didn’t want

• With the help of Bush, Big Bank and Investment firm Bailouts

• With the help of Bush, Bailing out GM and Chrysler

• Cash for Clunkers

• Epic Failure of a massive stimulus program that didn’t create private sector jobs

• The Nonsensical Wall Street reform bill

• Fast and Furious arms sales

• Banning off shore drilling

• Banning drilling in Alaska

• Halting the TransCanada oil pipeline

• Denying a Coal mining lease in West Virginia

• The massive waste of taxpayers’ money on (Solyndra) the “Green Jobs” agenda

• With the help of big labor stopping the Boeing plant in SC

• Total disregard for border security in the SW

• Justice department didn’t proceed and prosecute Black Panther intimation at the polls

• Supported trying in court CIA agents for keeping our country secure

• Supported bringing the slimy terrorists to NY for a jury trail

This is all I can come up with off the top of my head. I guess the biggest indicator that he is very unpopular was the massive landslide in the US House and Governors races nationwide. Democrats forget all about that one. 4 more years of Obama? No thank you!

bendog
01-19-2012, 02:33 PM
because BO is the president? I could give a rats azz about Romney. Get over to the War/Rel/Poli thread and see all my posts on Romney. You might learn something...

Gee I'm sorry. I thought this thread was ABOUT THE ELECTION! Pardon me all to hell for wonder WTF you are doing wandering around with Rand Paul's daddy

bendog
01-19-2012, 02:34 PM
Obama is less than a crook than Romney? Really? Here’s a small list of Obama’s magnificence accomplishments in the last 3 years.

• Obamacare, of which 70% Americans said they didn’t want

• With the help of Bush, Big Bank and Investment firm Bailouts

• With the help of Bush, Bailing out GM and Chrysler

• Cash for Clunkers

• Epic Failure of a massive stimulus program that didn’t create private sector jobs

• The Nonsensical Wall Street reform bill

• Fast and Furious arms sales

• Banning off shore drilling

• Banning drilling in Alaska

• Halting the TransCanada oil pipeline

• Denying a Coal mining lease in West Virginia

• The massive waste of taxpayers’ money on (Solyndra) the “Green Jobs” agenda

• With the help of big labor stopping the Boeing plant in SC

• Total disregard for border security in the SW

• Justice department didn’t proceed and prosecute Black Panther intimation at the polls

• Supported trying in court CIA agents for keeping our country secure

• Supported bringing the slimy terrorists to NY for a jury trail

This is all I can come up with off the top of my head. I guess the biggest indicator that he is very unpopular was the massive landslide in the US House and Governors races nationwide. Democrats forget all about that one. 4 more years of Obama? No thank you!

gimme another american thinker link. that said it all, man.

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 02:39 PM
gimme another american thinker link. that said it all, man.

So do you deny that any of the things I just posted are not true? If so wake up, you're a drone.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 02:50 PM
Gee I'm sorry. I thought this thread was ABOUT THE ELECTION! Pardon me all to hell for wonder WTF you are doing wandering around with Rand Paul's daddy

no apology necessary, I genuinely feel sorry for anyone who supports BO, your stupidity absolves you of any responsibility for your posts.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-19-2012, 03:04 PM
So do you deny that any of the things I just posted are not true? If so wake up, you're a drone.

the funny thing is while some of those things are FALSE others arent even BAD things that you claim them to be

BroncoInferno
01-19-2012, 03:05 PM
Obama is less than a crook than Romney? Really? Here’s a small list of Obama’s magnificence accomplishments in the last 3 years.

• Obamacare, of which 70% Americans said they didn’t want

• With the help of Bush, Big Bank and Investment firm Bailouts

• With the help of Bush, Bailing out GM and Chrysler

• Cash for Clunkers

• Epic Failure of a massive stimulus program that didn’t create private sector jobs

• The Nonsensical Wall Street reform bill

• Fast and Furious arms sales

• Banning off shore drilling

• Banning drilling in Alaska

• Halting the TransCanada oil pipeline

• Denying a Coal mining lease in West Virginia

• The massive waste of taxpayers’ money on (Solyndra) the “Green Jobs” agenda

• With the help of big labor stopping the Boeing plant in SC

• Total disregard for border security in the SW

• Justice department didn’t proceed and prosecute Black Panther intimation at the polls

• Supported trying in court CIA agents for keeping our country secure

• Supported bringing the slimy terrorists to NY for a jury trail

This is all I can come up with off the top of my head. I guess the biggest indicator that he is very unpopular was the massive landslide in the US House and Governors races nationwide. Democrats forget all about that one. 4 more years of Obama? No thank you!

Everything on your list is simply policy decisions you don't like, with your own bat-**** crazy right-wing spin thrown in for good measure (i.e. "Supported trying in court CIA agents for keeping our country secure" LOL goddamn, you are stupid). Of course, you support Santorum, so no surprise that you're basically brain-dead.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 03:10 PM
Everything on your list is simply policy decisions you don't like, with your own bat-**** crazy right-wing spin thrown in for good measure (i.e. "Supported trying in court CIA agents for keeping our country secure" LOL goddamn, you are stupid). Of course, you support Santorum, so no surprise that you're basically brain-dead.

oh for **** sake it is not. The friggen Fast and Furious scandal alone is unprecedented. The actions of this adminstration has resulted in the deaths of federal agents, the distribution of arms into hostile and criminal factions and has directly affected the rights of the average citizen in the USA due to stricker gun laws because the FEDS BROKE THE LAW.

Any other president would be crawling under a rock for this crap. Reagan got blasted for Iran-contra but this crap is ignored and the ramifications have directly affected US citizens.

for **** sake people.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-19-2012, 03:15 PM
oh for **** sake it is not. The friggen Fast and Furious scandal alone is unprecedented. The actions of this adminstration has resulted in the deaths of federal agents, the distribution of arms into hostile and criminal factions and has directly affected the rights of the average citizen in the USA due to stricker gun laws because the FEDS BROKE THE LAW.

Any other president would be crawling under a rock for this crap. Reagan got blasted for Iran-contra but this crap is ignored and the ramifications have directly affected US citizens.

for **** sake people.

Its a definite oops on their part, but more than...i dunno, invading an entire country and overthrowing their government under the "assumption" that they had weapons of mass destruction?

hmmmm

Blart
01-19-2012, 03:17 PM
People who think the deficit is the biggest problem facing the USA, even though interest and inflation are low:

Wealthy elite

People who think a lack of jobs is the biggest issue:

Everyone else



(this is an actual stat I just read in Harper's, I'll see if I can pull it up)

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 03:20 PM
Everything on your list is simply policy decisions you don't like, with your own bat-**** crazy right-wing spin thrown in for good measure (i.e. "Supported trying in court CIA agents for keeping our country secure" LOL goddamn, you are stupid). Of course, you support Santorum, so no surprise that you're basically brain-dead.

This isn't spin this is reality take hold of it and maybe you can release yourself from Obamabondage and off the charts liberal Democrat party that’s in the WH and in congress. It’s a failed experience in bringing a Utopian society to the masses.

It’s been an epic failure, dealt in reality not a fantasy. Government cannot be all things to all people. Less government is a far better idea than letting bureaucrats from both sides of the aisle telling us what they think is best for us. A massive centralized government isn't going to improve our lot, they’ve proven that all they do is make it much much worse.

Tombstone RJ
01-19-2012, 03:21 PM
Its a definite oops on their part, but more than...i dunno, invading an entire country and overthrowing their government under the "assumption" that they had weapons of mass destruction?

hmmmm

well golly gee Gomer. I guess congress wasn't involved in that decision? I guess the US did all this in secret? I guess the international community wasn't involved?

You are comparing apples to oranges.

This is what I can't stand about lefty morons. They pull the Bush crap out and say "well look what HE did." I DON'T CARE WHAT BUSH DID. We are talking about BARAK OBAMA and HIS administration.

Bush was a ****up, yes. That doesn't change the fact that BO is a criminal and a complete ****up.

Blart
01-19-2012, 03:31 PM
We know that conservatives have less formal education (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/03/the-conservative-states-of-america/71827/) than liberals, but their fear of learning goes beyond schools.


A Yale study in 2008 shows that when conservatives (moreso than liberals) hear facts and evidence that conflict with their worldview, they dig in to their false beliefs even deeper.

In other words, arguing with a conservative by calmly using facts and evidence just makes things worse.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/14/AR2008091402375_pf.html

Could this be a social problem, where a lack of school funding results in a populace without critical thinking, who vote against school funding? Or is this simply the way conservatives are born?

BABronco
01-19-2012, 04:00 PM
In complete detail since you said he was corrupt please explain.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/09/20/20-most-corrupt-members-o_n_29863.html

there is a reason many in Pennsylvania didn't want him back.

BABronco
01-19-2012, 04:03 PM
Brilliant. That's what many say; anyone and I mean anyone of the candidates running against Obama is an improvement including Santorum. Stay at home, that'll help secure a victory for the biggest hater of all.

Incorrect. As bad as Obama is most the candidates up there are clones of him.

Mile High Mojoe
01-19-2012, 04:12 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/09/20/20-most-corrupt-members-o_n_29863.html

there is a reason many in Pennsylvania didn't want him back.

I guess you just forgave and or plain forgot or have ignored all the crappola Obama's perpetrated on us huh? The media sure has. See no evil, speak no evil or hear no evil. Obama is a God or something like that right? Total an innocent man of the plain folks isn't he?