I like the part where Obama talks about McCain and the company he keeps... that is priceless.
:)
Fdubya247
Quote: Originally posted by Stonedwall I like the part where Obama talks about McCain and the company he keeps... that is priceless.
Yeah, McSame is surrounded by an army of corporate lobbyist brownshirts.
Disgusting.
:hitler::ps:
Reverend Tyler
Hate to break it to you, but America already knows about Reverend Wright, you already blew your wad
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler Hate to break it to you, but America already knows about Reverend Wright, you already blew your wad
No doubt unless something new comes out the Wright issue is over for Obama in the Dem. nomination process. But, it has not even begun yet in the general election campaign. Then it will be taken to new levels because it shows his lack of judgment and/or and his complete dishonesty.
You must remember Willy Horton? Well, the Dems brought that up during their nomination process and had dealt with it there. Then it was dealt with in the national election and some say it was a crippling blow to Dukakis in 1988.
So, while the Dems might be done with this, the Republicans have not even begun yet.
Reverend Tyler
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall No doubt unless something new comes out the Wright issue is over for Obama in the Dem. nomination process. But, it has not even begun yet in the general election campaign. Then it will be taken to new levels because it shows his lack of judgment and/or and his complete dishonesty.
You must remember Willy Horton? Well, the Dems brought that up during their nomination process and had dealt with it there. Then it was dealt with in the national election and some say it was a crippling blow to Dukakis in 1988.
So, while the Dems might be done with this, the Republicans have not even begun yet.
Right, well in 1988 there was no such thing as the internet - or a shitload of 24 hour cable news shows that would talk about Willie Horton non-stop 24 hours a day for about a month and a half straight.
SaintJimmy
Yeah, because when the ecomony is in the shitter, and you're in danger of losing your job and your home, the most important thing on your mind is whether or not the next President's former pastor is wrapping himself in the flag tightly enough.
I know this for certain:
I will vote for whoever can get me some fucking work.
McCain has said numerous times:
"I'm not a educated on this economic stuff as I should be."
That sounds like the guy you want digging us out of this hole, right?
riiiight.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler Right, well in 1988 there was no such thing as the internet - or a shitload of 24 hour cable news shows that would talk about Willie Horton non-stop 24 hours a day for about a month and a half straight.
True.
But, the conversation was amongst the Democrats. The Republicans did not put out any campaign commercials. Did not deal with it.
In the general election campaign they certainly will because it goes to judgment and honesty. Both of which were absent in Obama within this issue. They will take this along with many other things.
The media have given Obama a pass and that will just not be true among the Republicans and the 527's. They will do what the media should have done a year ago. Had Rev. Wright come out a year ago, when it should have, then this campaign would have been over in Feb. and Hillary would be the Dem. nominee today.
When the Dems lose this thing, you can thank the Obama love fest within the media, they quit looking into him whenever they decided they liked him. Not exactly what the third estate is tasked for.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy Yeah, because when the ecomony is in the shitter, and you're in danger of losing your job and your home, the most important thing on your mind is whether or not the next President's former pastor is wrapping himself in the flag tightly enough.
I know this for certain:
I will vote for whoever can get me some fucking work.
McCain has said numerous times:
"I'm not a educated on this economic stuff as I should be."
That sounds like the guy you want digging us out of this hole, right?
riiiight.
Economic experience in this election is a wash, neither know about the economy.
Obama knows nothing about anything.
Reverend Tyler
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall True.
But, the conversation was amongst the Democrats. The Republicans did not put out any campaign commercials. Did not deal with it.
In the general election campaign they certainly will because it goes to judgment and honesty. Both of which were absent in Obama within this issue. They will take this along with many other things.
The media have given Obama a pass and that will just not be true among the Republicans and the 527's. They will do what the media should have done a year ago. Had Rev. Wright come out a year ago, when it should have, then this campaign would have been over in Feb. and Hillary would be the Dem. nominee today.
When the Dems lose this thing, you can thank the Obama love fest within the media, they quit looking into him whenever they decided they liked him. Not exactly what the third estate is tasked for.
How did that race turn out? Remember, this was a veery, very conservative district. Not San Francisco.
And John McCain has gotten a major pass by the media. Where was a national story about his wife's past? Keating Five?
Reverend Tyler
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall Economic experience in this election is a wash, neither know about the economy.
Obama knows nothing about anything.
Because graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law is something thousands a year do with no effort.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall Economic experience in this election is a wash, neither know about the economy.
Obama knows nothing about anything.
Well put - the ability to learn and adapt will play heavily into this election.
Another point for Obama.
Thanks.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler Because graduating Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law is something thousands a year do with no effort.
All that shows is he can be a lawyer. A well paid one.
What the American people are expected to believe is that for 20 years this guy went to a church, was married by this pastor, kids baptized by this pastor, and he did not know that this person was spewing racial hatred? He gave money. He is a friend.
He did not quit the church and find another. He did not even talk to this guy about his views.
He only gave him up when this guy showed up on live TV and gave a scaled down sermon. A spectacle in front of the whole world. A small scale spectacle... considering his sermons in his church.
He gave him up to save his skin.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall All that shows is he can be a lawyer. A well paid one.
What the American people are expected to believe is that for 20 years this guy went to a church, was married by this pastor, kids baptized by this pastor, and he did not know that this person was spewing racial hatred? He gave money. He is a friend.
He did not quit the church and find another. He did not even talk to this guy about his views.
He only gave him up when this guy showed up on live TV and gave a scaled down sermon. A spectacle in front of the whole world. A small scale spectacle... considering his sermons in his church.
He gave him up to save his skin.
All of the people who are stupid enough to base thier vote on that are already on your side.
Got anything new?
Billyfromsphily
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy Well put - the ability to learn and adapt will play heavily into this election.
Another point for Obama.
Thanks.
Unlike Bush who went to both HARVARD and YALE and still doesn't know how to learn
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy All of the people who are stupid enough to base thier vote on that are already on your side.
Got anything new?
People base their votes on different things. Certainly the Republicans will use this again and again because it goes to honesty and judgment.
I do not have anything new.
But, because Obama is new and has not been properly vetted... there will be new things and things made new.
Is it stupid to base your vote on someones lack of honesty? Lack of judgment... for 20 years?
I thought Obama was supposed to have 'the ability to learn and adapt'? All that I have seen him do is throw his pastor to the side after he said he would not. Remember? He can no more disown his pastor than his white grandmother.
Watch out Granny...
All I have seen him do is not hold one hearing on Afghanistan... because he had to campaign.
All I have seen him do is deal with Rezko and somehow on the same day they both buy adjacent property and then make a deal. A guy who was known as corrupt. A guy who helped Obama for longer than he was in politics. But, apparently just another mystery to Obama... just like his Pastor.
All I have seen Obama do is campaign for the Senate on the promise that he will repeal the Patriot Act, and then when elected he voted to re-Authorize it.
All I have seen Obama do is lie, lie and lie some more. It has come to the point where you try to figure out what has he not lied about? That I do not know.
There is plenty of reason not to vote for Obama... That is not even the question. The question is why would people vote for Obama?
Billyfromsphily
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall All that shows is he can be a lawyer. A well paid one.
What the American people are expected to believe is that for 20 years this guy went to a church, was married by this pastor, kids baptized by this pastor, and he did not know that this person was spewing racial hatred? He gave money. He is a friend.
He did not quit the church and find another. He did not even talk to this guy about his views.
He only gave him up when this guy showed up on live TV and gave a scaled down sermon. A spectacle in front of the whole world. A small scale spectacle... considering his sermons in his church.
He gave him up to save his skin.
Oh and every one who wants to be a lawyer can get into Harvard and graduate with highest honors?
All those Dept Of Justice lawyers from Jerry Fawell U, would breeze through Harvard?
The Bush family haven't thrown anyone under the bus??
Check the playing field again Stoney.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall People base their votes on different things. Certainly the Republicans will use this again and again because it goes to honesty and judgment.
I do not have anything new.
But, because Obama is new and has not been properly vetted... there will be new things and things made new.
Is it stupid to base your vote on someones lack of honesty? Lack of judgment... for 20 years?
I thought Obama was supposed to have 'the ability to learn and adapt'? All that I have seen him do is throw his pastor to the side after he said he would not. Remember? He can no more disown his pastor than his white grandmother.
Watch out Granny...
All I have seen him do is not hold one hearing on Afghanistan... because he had to campaign.
All I have seen him do is deal with Rezko and somehow on the same day they both buy adjacent property and then make a deal. A guy who was known as corrupt. A guy who helped Obama for longer than he was in politics. But, apparently just another mystery to Obama... just like his Pastor.
All I have seen Obama do is campaign for the Senate on the promise that he will repeal the Patriot Act, and then when elected he voted to re-Authorize it.
All I have seen Obama do is lie, lie and lie some more. It has come to the point where you try to figure out what has he not lied about? That I do not know.
There is plenty of reason not to vote for Obama... That is not even the question. The question is why would people vote for Obama?
I'll you exactly why - He's not Bush, and he's not being endorsed by Bush.
Plain as day, my friend.
You can sit here and examine his lack of experience, his choice of pastors, whatever - It doesn't matter - what matters is that Bush and the republicans have fucked up so badly - so completely, that Obama doesn't have to be good, just different.
Now, is this a good thing? Absolutely not.
It is, however, what you reap when you sow shit like Bush.
You want the dems to field better candidates? Try fielding better candidates.
See what happens.
All of that being said, Obama is the least dangerous choice right now - not because we know what he'll do - but because we know what he won't do - he won't act like Bush.
It's not a lot, but it's more than McCain has.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy I'll you exactly why - He's not Bush, and he's not being endorsed by Bush.
Plain as day, my friend.
You can sit here and examine his lack of experience, his choice of pastors, whatever - It doesn't matter - what matters is that Bush and the republicans have fucked up so badly - so completely, that Obama doesn't have to be good, just different.
Now, is this a good thing? Absolutely not.
It is, however, what you reap when you sow shit like Bush.
You want the dems to field better candidates? Try fielding better candidates.
See what happens.
All of that being said, Obama is the least dangerous choice right now - not because we know what he'll do - but because we know what he won't do - he won't act like Bush.
It's not a lot, but it's more than McCain has.
The Dem strategy to make people believe that McCain is Bush does not make that a true thing. You believing that...
But, even if that strategy is somewhat a success that does not mean votes for someone who is known only as a liar.
Obama acts as if he can take on the responsibility of two wars and yet has not even held one hearing on Afghanistan. Has he even been to Afghanistan?
Don't believe that things cannot get worse than Bush...
When Obama pulls out of Iraq and that region explodes you will be looking back at todays gas prices and these will be the good old days. Believe me things can get much much worse.
But, we have to destroy globalization and destroy our economy in order to fix it. So, Obama would probably make my wish true although I would not drift into that or stumble into it as he will. There is a proper way to do it. He will do it by mistake and unintentionally. Like Gorbachev.
:)
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall
Don't believe that things cannot get worse than Bush...
:)
It's really fuckin' sad that this is what you guys have to hang your hats on this year.
Good luck - you're gonna need it.
Reverend Tyler
Hi Stoney :hw:
It’s worth reiterating: the Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on European Affairs doesn’t have primary jurisdiction over the campaign in Afghanistan. The Armed Services Committee (on which Senator Clinton serves) does.
The Subcommittee on European Affairs doesn’t have secondary jurisdiction over the campaign in Afghanistan. The full Foreign Relations Committee (which has held hearings on Afghanistan) does.
The Subcommittee on European Affairs doesn’t even have tertiary jurisdiction over the campaign in Afghanistan. The Subcommittee on Near East and South and Central Asian Affairs does.
Quote: Originally posted by Reverend Tyler Hi Stoney :hw:
It’s worth reiterating: the Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on European Affairs doesn’t have primary jurisdiction over the campaign in Afghanistan. The Armed Services Committee (on which Senator Clinton serves) does.
The Subcommittee on European Affairs doesn’t have secondary jurisdiction over the campaign in Afghanistan. The full Foreign Relations Committee (which has held hearings on Afghanistan) does.
The Subcommittee on European Affairs doesn’t even have tertiary jurisdiction over the campaign in Afghanistan. The Subcommittee on Near East and South and Central Asian Affairs does.
What does Obama's subcommittee do? What do the lower subcommittees do? They hold hearings, create a record, and they supply those things to higher committees. They exist for a reason.
A junior Senator should feel honored to have his chairmanship and he should make the most of it. Not Obama, he can't hold hearings cause he must campaign. According to him.
Obama wants power and that is all he wants, all he ever wanted. The Senate was merely to create a platform. He said himself he would not run for President in '08. Just another lie from Obama.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy It's really fuckin' sad that this is what you guys have to hang your hats on this year.
Good luck - you're gonna need it.
I agree it is sad that your defense of Obama is that he is not Bush.
I wonder if that will carry the day?
mingmen
:drool:
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall I agree it is sad that your defense of Obama is that he is not Bush.
I wonder if that will carry the day?
It's not a defense - it's a reason.
NCMike06
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy It's not a defense - it's a reason.
WOnderful reasoning there genius.... Ahmadinejad is not Bush either, so is every other person on earth...so by that reasoning....you would vote for anyone who was not GWB.....
Such are the effects of BDS.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06 WOnderful reasoning there genius.... Ahmadinejad is not Bush either, so is every other person on earth...so by that reasoning....you would vote for anyone who was not GWB.....
Such are the effects of BDS.
Not quite.
Such are the effects of living under the Bush administration for eight years.
You want to call it BDS - I prefer to call it conscience.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy Not quite.
Such are the effects of living under the Bush administration for eight years.
You want to call it BDS - I prefer to call it conscience.
First we have to understand the policies before we can judge the policy.
Much of the complaints in regard to FISA and military tribunals and Gitmo are based on feelings and hysteria instead of rational thought.
Obama has tapped into that ignorance. Like when he talks of restoring habeas rights. Enemy combatants captured during war have never enjoyed habeas rights. Not under the U.S. or any other country that has habeas rights. Saying the enemy should have these things restored seems quite incredible.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall First we have to understand the policies before we can judge the policy.
I don't even think we understand the same language.
Much of the complaints in regard to FISA and military tribunals and Gitmo are based on feelings and hysteria instead of rational thought.
Prove it.
Obama has tapped into that ignorance. Like when he talks of restoring habeas rights. Enemy combatants captured during war have never enjoyed habeas rights. Not under the U.S. or any other country that has habeas rights. Saying the enemy should have these things restored seems quite incredible.
That would be fine and dandy if that was the case - it is not - "the enemy" as you say, is ANYONE WHO GEORGE BUSH SAYS IT IS. That little group of potential "enemies" includes you.
You may not think so, but as the law clearly states, what you think doesn't amount to shit - it's what Georgie thinks that counts. If George, by some bizarre twist of fate, decides that your children need to have their testicles crushed with pliers, THERE IS NO LAW THAT PROTECTS THEM. There used to be one - but that's history, now. Congratulations, guys. You've killed the Constitution - you should be proud. By electing George Bush, you've made major advances in the Conservative War On Everything American. Again, congratulations.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy I don't even think we understand the same language.
Prove it.
That would be fine and dandy if that was the case - it is not - "the enemy" as you say, is ANYONE WHO GEORGE BUSH SAYS IT IS. That little group of potential "enemies" includes you.
You may not think so, but as the law clearly states, what you think doesn't amount to shit - it's what Georgie thinks that counts. If George, by some bizarre twist of fate, decides that your children need to have their testicles crushed with pliers, THERE IS NO LAW THAT PROTECTS THEM. There used to be one - but that's history, now. Congratulations, guys. You've killed the Constitution - you should be proud. By electing George Bush, you've made major advances in the Conservative War On Everything American. Again, congratulations.
I have proved it many times over. If you wish to discuss any one of those things than tell me your opinion on them.
George Bush is not putting just anyone in prison. Not only that he does not have the authority to. The enemy has to be tied to al Qaeda.
The Constitution is as strong as it has been at any time during the last 50 years. Not that the Left cares about the Constitution. They are perfectly happy to let the Supreme Court attach any meaning they wish to it's provisions. As long as the Leftist agenda is followed. It's hard to say what will happen when if the Court ever becomes stacked with right wing justices who believe the Constitution is theirs to have their way with. I wonder if the Left will be as happy then as they are now. I hope they are happy because they will be the ones responsible having created this theory of the 'living constitution'.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall I have proved it many times over. If you wish to discuss any one of those things than tell me your opinion on them.
George Bush is not putting just anyone in prison. Not only that he does not have the authority to. The enemy has to be tied to al Qaeda.
The Constitution is as strong as it has been at any time during the last 50 years. Not that the Left cares about the Constitution. They are perfectly happy to let the Supreme Court attach any meaning they wish to it's provisions. As long as the Leftist agenda is followed. It's hard to say what will happen when if the Court ever becomes stacked with right wing justices who believe the Constitution is theirs to have their way with. I wonder if the Left will be as happy then as they are now. I hope they are happy because they will be the ones responsible having created this theory of the 'living constitution'.
You have proven nothing other than the fact that you're a raving fucking lunatic.
There is not one statement in the post above that is even slightly true.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy You have proven nothing other than the fact that you're a raving fucking lunatic.
There is not one statement in the post above that is even slightly true.
I'll concede the first point if you can prove the second.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall I'll concede the first point if you can prove the second.
I don't give two shits what you concede, you weirdo.
NCMike06
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy Not quite.
Such are the effects of living under the Bush administration for eight years.
You want to call it BDS - I prefer to call it conscience.
Yes, quite.
Faulty, simpleminded reasoning, because you are a simpleton who suffers from BDS.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06 Yes, quite.
Faulty, simpleminded reasoning, because you are a simpleton who suffers from BDS.
wow - is this really gonna degenerate into a childish game of "yes, you did!!! no, I didn't!!"?
Do all of your arguments end up at that level?
NCMike06
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy wow - is this really gonna degenerate into a childish game of "yes, you did!!! no, I didn't!!"?
Do all of your arguments end up at that level?
Unfortunately when talking to a moron like yourself, thats what it boils down to. That's the simpleminded reasoning that you understand.
Billyfromsphily
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06 Unfortunately when talking to a moron like yourself, thats what it boils down to. That's the simpleminded reasoning that you understand.
Thats your shortsighted opinion.
MIKEY loves to win semantic battles when its obvious he has lost the war!
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06 Unfortunately when talking to a moron like yourself, thats what it boils down to. That's the simpleminded reasoning that you understand.
You certainly seem adept to it.
Stonewall
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy wow - is this really gonna degenerate into a childish game of "yes, you did!!! no, I didn't!!"?
Do all of your arguments end up at that level?
Is this where I'm supposed to call you a "Weirdo"?
:)
NickNuke
SaintJimmy tends to name call when his witty cynicism goes out the window in favor of true logical reasoning.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by Stonewall Is this where I'm supposed to call you a "Weirdo"?
:)
Well, I could do like you, and attribute all sorts of stupid logic and ridiculous reasoning to you, and then refute it, even though you never actually said anything of the sort.
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by NickNuke SaintJimmy tends to name call when his witty cynicism goes out the window in favor of true logical reasoning.
Yeah - you're the local champion of true logical reasoning.
That's why you don't see a problem with invading a muslim country and then using the koran for target practice.
Because there's no logical reason to assume that would hinder us in any way.
wow.
NCMike06
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy You certainly seem adept to it.
On this board, one gets much practice talking to morons like you. maybe you should call me a 'wierdo' as you did to someone else...then you can chastise me again for arguing like a child..... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
spankysxxx
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06 On this board, one gets much practice talking to morons like you. maybe you should call me a 'wierdo' as you did to someone else...then you can chastise me again for arguing like a child..... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Weirdo isn't right, you're a NEOCON and special at that.
mingmen
Quote: Originally posted by NickNuke true logical reasoning.
:jj: :jj: :jj: :jj: :jj:
SaintJimmy
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06 On this board, one gets much practice talking to morons like you. maybe you should call me a 'wierdo' as you did to someone else...then you can chastise me again for arguing like a child..... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Sorry I don't have any of those nifty "Obama Derangment Syndrome" pictures all cued up and ready to post at a moment's notice, like you with the Bush ones.
Maybe if I had one of those, and posted it in every thread, you'd be whistling a different tune.
"Wow, look at SaintJimmy - he's put up the ODS picture AGAIN!!! He's so astute and witty."
NCMike06
Quote: Originally posted by SaintJimmy Sorry I don't have any of those nifty "Obama Derangment Syndrome" pictures all cued up and ready to post at a moment's notice, like you with the Bush ones.
Maybe if I had one of those, and posted it in every thread, you'd be whistling a different tune.
"Wow, look at SaintJimmy - he's put up the ODS picture AGAIN!!! He's so astute and witty."
Yeah, you could do that, and then criticize someone for doing it....which would fit into the hypocritical pattern you have carved out for yourself...
spankysxxx
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06 Yeah, you could do that, and then criticize someone for doing it....which would fit into the hypocritical pattern you have carved out for yourself...
Oh yah, I know about those hypocrites, thanks for pointing that out...
Billyfromsphily
Quote: Originally posted by NCMike06 Yeah, you could do that, and then criticize someone for doing it....which would fit into the hypocritical pattern you have carved out for yourself...
How long did you take to craft that stupid response?
Stonewall
Obama should change his slogan.
"Change we can believe in"
???
What has he told the truth about? What is to be believed?
Fdubya247
Quote: Originally posted by Stonedwall What has he told the truth about? What is to be believed?
This website is not affiliated with the Howard Stern Show. It is produced by fans for fans. We share no connection with Howard Stern, Sirius Radio, On Demand, CBS Broadcasting, E! TV or Infinity Broadcasting.
All posts and attachments are the responsibilities of their owners and not of this site.
