Bye Bye Obama

Things that don't fit anywhere else...

Postby Joseph » Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:40 am

coldbeer wrote:Well hell, Joesph, the least you could do is leave the irish whisky for the rest of us!
Where's the picture?

Right here. :thumbsup:

Joseph
User avatar
Joseph
Teardrop Pirate
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 5:21 am
Location: Excelsior Springs, MO

Postby Bobgorilla » Sat Jan 20, 2007 4:36 pm

I'd vote for a poodle over hiliary, Obama over the poodle, Edwards over Obama (I would have voted Edwards/Kerry but not Kerry/ Edwards). I would consider any other woman, but I'll likely vote the lesser of 2 evils just like I have since Reagan 2! 8)
if you're not bleeding you're not really working
User avatar
Bobgorilla
Teardrop Dreamer
 
Posts: 1155
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 4:34 pm
Location: St. Pete, Florida (tell MK Fairbanks,Alaska)

Postby angib » Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:36 pm

Is the original post about Obama actually true or just a smear?

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/b ... muslim.htm

It was the Wahhabism comment that made me look, as the Wahhabis are a big section of Islam - many tens of millions - so clearly the writer didn't mind bending the truth.

Andrew
User avatar
angib
5000 Club
5000 Club
 
Posts: 5783
Images: 231
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 2:04 pm
Location: (Olde) England
Top

Postby Elumia » Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:39 pm

I think the truth is that Barak went to a muslim school as a kid (like he had a choice) and his parents probably have some Muslim heritage. He also has a name that sounds Muslim.

I think he is getting "swiftboated". I have read some opinions that think Hillary is afraid of him taking all the attention away from her. Apparently she polls behind him and Edwards in Iowa. She keeps trying to sound moderate while running on a lefty social agenda as opposed to Edwards and Obama who run openly left.

It certainly looks like a tactic to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt in order to have him keep answering this question rather than talk about something relevant.

Inexperience is likely to also be a downfall in his bid. I will be an interesting season no doubt.

Mark
User avatar
Elumia
500 Club
 
Posts: 641
Images: 15
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:02 am
Location: Napa, CA
Top

Postby Miriam C. » Sat Jan 20, 2007 6:56 pm

Elumia wrote:I think the truth is that Barak went to a muslim school as a kid (like he had a choice) and his parents probably have some Muslim heritage. He also has a name that sounds Muslim.

I think he is getting "swiftboated". I have read some opinions that think Hillary is afraid of him taking all the attention away from her. Apparently she polls behind him and Edwards in Iowa. She keeps trying to sound moderate while running on a lefty social agenda as opposed to Edwards and Obama who run openly left.

It certainly looks like a tactic to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt in order to have him keep answering this question rather than talk about something relevant.

Inexperience is likely to also be a downfall in his bid. I will be an interesting season no doubt.

Mark


Lets have a little femine paranoia here. Hillary is down with her party and no one trusts her. So---throw the dogs a bone. Let them chew and she makes it all the way to the White House with Edwards in tow. :thinking:

I bet Mike and some friends before George Bush won that he would win and serve two terms and Hillary would be next.

Think I will be right. ;)
“Forgiveness means giving up all hope for a better past.â€
User avatar
Miriam C.
our Aunti M
 
Posts: 19675
Images: 148
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: Southwest MO
Top

Postby wolfix » Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:49 pm

Here in Iowa Hilary is strong...... It will be between Hilary and Edwards. Obama is not even a choice. It's way too early to even look at the polls. Hilary is the Democratic party. She has the party by the balls.
The questions the Democrats have to ask themselves is "How are they going to screw it up this time?"
They were handed the election in 2004. If they could not win in 2004, they may not win this time around....
Hilary has carried herself well, but is the country ready for a women President yet?

I do know the average person has turned away from the Republicans, but McCain will show strong if he distances himself from the war and Bush....
"I am the guy our parents warned us about."
User avatar
wolfix
Teardrop Master
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:21 am
Location: Iowa
Top

Postby Laredo » Sat Jan 20, 2007 8:01 pm

Six years ago I'd've probably voted for John McCain.
Six years ago I did vote for Al Gore.
Two years ago I worked my tail off pushing Wes Clark and Howard Dean.
I like Hillary as a person.
As a politician, the baggage of her name is a huge liability. Seriously.
Obama is where John Edwards was in 2004: bright, capable, young -- and green as grass. A whipping in a primary or a main election might do him a world of good, or it might do for him what the Dubya campaign did for McCain in 2000 (and that's one of the saddest things I've ever seen, and I've been watching Presidents since JFK).

Edwards having been thru the wars and wanting to go again impresses me. I think he learnt some hard lessons, and I think he's still mad that Kerry quit on the recount. I'd like to see him on the ticket with Clark. I don't much care which order.

But ideally, for me, the next President shouldn't come from either of the existing parties. Both parties have too much cultural baggage for my taste, and too big an investment in "inside Beltway ball" political drama. Neither party has as big an investment in the average citizen as in the average K Street bigmouth-with-big-bucks, and that, to me, opposes what the Constitution stands for.

Not that I'm going to back up and say Bush isn't the WORST President Ever. "Our long national nightmare of peace and economic growth is finally over," somebody declared on Jan. 22, 2000, and boy was that a prophetic statement.
Mopar's what my busted knuckles bleed, working on my 318s...
User avatar
Laredo
Donating Member
 
Posts: 2017
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:42 pm
Location: West Texas
Top

Postby wolfix » Sat Jan 20, 2007 8:15 pm

Laredo wrote: J

Edwards having been thru the wars and wanting to go again impresses me. I think he learnt some hard lessons, and I think he's still mad that Kerry quit on the recount. I'd like to see him on the ticket with Clark. I don't much care which order.


Edwards really looks electable. He seems to have a clean image.

But ideally, for me, the next President shouldn't come from either of the existing parties. Both parties have too much cultural baggage for my taste, and too big an investment in "inside Beltway ball" political drama. Neither party has as big an investment in the average citizen as in the average K Street bigmouth-with-big-bucks, and that, to me, opposes what the Constitution stands for.


I believe most Americans would agree with you.

Not that I'm going to back up and say Bush isn't the WORST President Ever. "Our long national nightmare of peace and economic growth is finally over," somebody declared on Jan. 22, 2000, and boy was that a prophetic statement.


Jimmy Carter has that honor. His world is now crashing around him. He can build all the houses*** he wants to, but he still is not welcome in many Democratic Party meetings in the midwest.

**** Habitat for Humanity....Another failed program that disguises itself in wolf clothes......
"I am the guy our parents warned us about."
User avatar
wolfix
Teardrop Master
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:21 am
Location: Iowa
Top

Postby Laredo » Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:42 pm

Um, yeah, when you buck the Christian Right in this country, they make you suffer for it. Carter also made the (politically incorrect) true statement that Israel isn't playing altogether fair in Palestine.

Now, understand -- I'm not knocking Israel. But just like we don't need to be having a war in Iraq, Israel doesn't need to be p*$$*ng off the Palestinians to no purpose.

Both are lose-lose endeavors.
Mopar's what my busted knuckles bleed, working on my 318s...
User avatar
Laredo
Donating Member
 
Posts: 2017
Images: 0
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:42 pm
Location: West Texas
Top

Postby halfdome, Danny » Sat Jan 20, 2007 11:34 pm

I found this in my email today. It goes along the lines of this discussion. I don't know how accurate it is but in any case it's an interesting read. Danny

The Peaceful Majority
I used to know a man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War Two. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.
"Very few people were true Nazis "he said," but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."
We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace.
Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.
It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of
50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority" is the "silent majority" and it is cowed and extraneous.
Communist Russia comprised Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people (actually it was more like 56 million people-TCM). The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China 'S huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.
The average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet. And, who can forget Rwanda , which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?
History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:
Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.
Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up, because like my friend from Germany , they will awake one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.
Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.
As for us who watch it all unfold; we must pay attention to the only group that counts; the fanatics who threaten our way of life.
Lastly, I wish to add: At the risk of offending someone, I sincerely think that anyone who rejects this as just another political rant, or doubts the seriousness of this issue or just deletes it without sending it on, is part of the problem. Lets quit laughing at and forwarding the jokes and cartoons which denigrate and ridicule our leaders in this war against terror. They are trying to protect the interests and well being of the US and it's citizens. Best we support them. P.S. Hitler was good for about 11 million deaths....TCM
ImageImage
"Conditions are never just right. People who delay action until all factors are favorable do nothing". William Feather
Don't accept "It's Good Enough" build to the best of your abilities.
Image
Teardroppers Of Oregon & WashingtonImage
User avatar
halfdome, Danny
*Happy Camper
 
Posts: 5894
Images: 252
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:02 pm
Location: Washington , Pew-al-up
Top

Postby wolfix » Sun Jan 21, 2007 12:34 am

Your post is right on...... I 've spent many hours studying the situation facing the Germans back then....... Very few of them were Nazi's.

Even closer to home, how many of us sit back and allow the politicians to lie to us, then we respond."Well, they all do it." We accept it. We need to make our politicians responsible for the decisions they make.
We have become tolerant of other cultures pushing themselves on us. I think we need to respect other cultures, as we deserve to be respected.
The American people need to wake up and realize how the media lies to us.It doesn't matter what side of the fence you sit, it is lying to you and I.

A case in point...... The US Border Guards that shot the drug dealer in Texas. The right wing media has twisted the case around. They report that 2 US Border Guards are sent to prison because they shot an illegal drug dealer. That is true.
However , the US Border Guards in reality did not know he was an illegal, nor a drug dealer. They shot him after he pulled an imaginary gun, a gun no one but them ever saw, and only later did they realize he had dope in his car.
So when an American jury found them guilty, they did the right thing. We cannot have US Border Guards shooting unarmed people for traffic stops.
If the truth came out, I bet the US Border Guards probably did not get a bribe from him......
{And then they tried to cover everything up.}

But FOX reports it as a honest American cop shooting an illegal drug dealer...... Twisted....
{ Before I am called a liberal for calling FOX a twisted news organization, I have voted Republican most of my life and watch FOX every day..]

I am sick of the media twisting things..... We deserve as Americans to know the truth......
"I am the guy our parents warned us about."
User avatar
wolfix
Teardrop Master
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:21 am
Location: Iowa
Top

Postby Elumia » Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:12 am

Iowa Poll, Dec 21

Caucus Outlook
The poll asked Iowa Democrats which candidates they would vote for if the 2008 Democratic caucus were held today.

The top three candidates were Sen. John Edwards at 22 percent, Democratic U.S. Sen. Barack Obama at 22 percent and Vilsack at 12 percent. U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton of New York came in fourth at 10 percent.

http://www.kcci.com/politics/10585392/detail.html
User avatar
Elumia
500 Club
 
Posts: 641
Images: 15
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:02 am
Location: Napa, CA
Top

Postby Lazybones » Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:52 am

I wouldn't vote for Clinton in a million years. I don't trust her. Just like her husband she says one thing and does another. She is too polarizing

Kerry is a wimp. Not a snowballs chance in hell he would win. Especially with the wife he has; I think she cost him the election last time.
I know don't want her as first lady!

Obama can pull in the votes from all sides. If he runs I believe Republicans as well as Democrats will vote for him.
Is it true? Is it necessary? Is it kind? Ask yourself these simple questions every time you are in doubt about any action.
User avatar
Lazybones
500 Club
 
Posts: 607
Images: 49
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:29 pm
Location: Willits California
Top

Postby wolfix » Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:03 am

Elumia wrote:Iowa Poll, Dec 21

Caucus Outlook
The poll asked Iowa Democrats which candidates they would vote for if the 2008 Democratic caucus were held today.

The top three candidates were Sen. John Edwards at 22 percent, Democratic U.S. Sen. Barack Obama at 22 percent and Vilsack at 12 percent. U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton of New York came in fourth at 10 percent.

http://www.kcci.com/politics/10585392/detail.html


The reason I say Obama will never be considered is that the Democrats I know are not talking about him....... My girlfriend is a Delegate for the Democratic Party. A relative of mine is involved with the UAW, which is the heavyweight in Iowa politics[Democrats] The serious Democrats feel it will come down to Hilary and Edwards.

The poll taken in DesMoines would not be a true representation of the state caucuses..... The Des Moines poplulation demographics are no where near what Iowa represents. DesMoines would have a urban based demographics. DesMoines has a demographic with diversity. Iowa is not. [The actual caucus's anyway.]

The polls at this time would show the politicians that are in the news. Hilary has just announced her exploratory committee, but she is a regular fixture in the news... Obama is just a name that has a new buzz about it..... It will show up early, but not when it matters.

I am not sure Hilary can be elected because of the "women " status. But the Republicans better be concerned with John Edwards. During 2004 I heard many times that many people wished that Edwards was the canidate. I believe he can fire up the party.

He could also pull many Republican fence sitters.

Just my opinion.
"I am the guy our parents warned us about."
User avatar
wolfix
Teardrop Master
 
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:21 am
Location: Iowa
Top

Postby mrainey » Sun Jan 21, 2007 8:06 am

A case in point...... The US Border Guards that shot the drug dealer in Texas.


This is part of the statement from the United States Attorney. Fox and Lou Dobbs never mention these details in their nightly rants.

"Agent Compean and Ramos were not railroaded by some over-zealous prosecutor, they were unanimously found guilty by a jury in a United States Federal District Court after a trial that lasted more than two and a half weeks. The two agents were represented by experienced and aggressive trial attorneys, both of whom vigorously challenged the Government’s evidence through cross examination. Both agents told their stories from the witness stand and had full opportunities to explain their version of events and to offer their own evidence. The jury heard everything including the defendant’s claims of self defense. The problem for Mr. Compean and Mr. Ramos is that the jury did not believe their stories because they were not true.

The trial evidence showed that around 1:00 p.m. Aldrete (the Mexican alien) initially ran from the agents, but surrendered with his empty hands raised over his head after Agent Compean pointed his shotgun at him. As Agent Compean tried to push Aldrete down to the ground with the butt of his shotgun, Compean tripped and fell and Aldrete took off again toward the Rio Grande River and Mexico. Compean chased Aldrete firing at him with his pistol fourteen times, pausing once to reload and then shoot some more. Agent Ramos shot once and struck Aldrete in the buttocks. Neither agent made any further effort to apprehend him. After the shooting, Compean and Ramos decided to lie to their supervisors about the shooting and picked up and threw away the fired shell casings. Next they filed a false investigative report leaving out any mention of the confrontation with the alien."

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/txw/press_rel ... mt_lon.pdf
User avatar
mrainey
Teardrop Advisor
 
Posts: 64
Images: 35
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 4:17 pm
Location: Spartanburg, South Carolina
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest