Depends on who he campaigned or voted for
Posted By: Backwards typist on 2009-01-30
In Reply to: Anderson Cooper is hosting "economic sumit" on CNN tomorrow night....sm - Cyndiee
If he wanted O in, it will probably be one-sided like all the rest. If he wanted McC in, it will be one-sided, too. If he remained neutral, like newspeople SHOULD be, then it should be interesting. I do like him, though.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Exactly! I think Obama campaigned since birth.
nm
Why do you think Obama campaigned in Europe/Germany last year? sm
Were they voting for him?
Huge red flag went up for a lot of us on that one.
The writing was on the wall, but so many refused to see it.
You hope it's wrong, and so do I. But only time will tell.
Dems voted for it, Biden voted for it....
Bill Clinton signed it into law. Plenty of blame to go around. McCain asked for regulation of Fannie/Freddie in 2005. Dems blocked it. The Dem record is slightly worse in the regulation/deregulation arena.
But...plenty of blame to go around.
It all depends on how you look at it....
Obama actually has 166,186 vote lead over Clinton in the popular vote -- 17,267,658 to 17,101,472. If Michigan's primary is included, where Clinton received 328,307 votes and Obama none due to the fact he removed his name from the ballot, Clinton takes a 162,123 vote lead.
It depends on who you believe.
nm
Depends on who you ask. It is okay according
nm
All depends on what you think a nut is, eh.
He is a well-respected researcher and author, who has gained a lot of confidence and respect of some of the finest minds on this planet. Sure he may have some books you don't agree with, but there are a lot of authors like that. Some books you enjoy others you don't. And if you don't do the research yourself how can you discount anything anyone who has spent 20 years researching has to say. Probably the same crowd that discounts scientists and climatologists who have been at their jobs for 40 and 50 years as kooks because they come out and tell you Algore doesn't know what the he!! he's talking about. I guess people would consider them "nuts" too. David Icke has a website where you can learn a lot of useful information.
I guess before JFK was assassinated if people were told there would be an assassination and it would come from within, people would have called them nuts too.
Actually, the people I consider nuts are the ones who will only listen to what is fed to them through the boob tube (Olberman, Matthews, Maddow, Limbaugh, Hannity, Colmes, etc) and the ones who will not listen to issues of importance but just follows the leader with their eyes closed, and anything they don't agree with or like they call nuts. I guess in their own minds by making fun and ridiculing others who don't agree with them they must feel elevated above all others - just another elite nut to me.
Sometimes you have to look with both eyes open to get to the truth.
Depends
what the definition of 'lobbyist' is. Same as it depended what the definition of 'is' is.
depends on what poll you are looking at
I've seen recent polls that put both Clinton and Obama about even with McCain when matched up together and others that show both of them come out ahead of McCain 5-10 points. Others then show McCain ahead. Polls are so subjective that you have to take them with a grain of salt. The most telling thing to me is that Democratic vote turnout has been twice that of Republican turnout in some areas, so no matter what people are saying in the polls, getting them to the voting booths in November is a different matter. The Democrats are energized and enthusiastic, flocking to the polls. The Republicans overall are leukwarm on McCain (and the party in general) and it's showing in unenthusiastic turnouts. This will play very well for whomever the Democratic candidate is in November.
It depends on the situation
I voted for Bush the first term. He was running against Gore. The country could not afford another 4 years of Clintons. I voted for Bush and I'm proud I did because it helped keep a known bafoon who didn't know squat diddly out of the white house. After Bush was elected a lot changed. I didn't want to vote for him again, yet the best the dems could do was give us Kerry???????? There were so many qualified people running. How that ninny got in there (must have been all those purple hearts). So I voted for Bush again. However I wasn't voting for Bush, I was voting against Kerry. That doesn't make me and others morons, it makes us well-informed voters. If it meant four more years with Bush in there then so be it, but I'll tell you something. With everything that has happened in the world these past eight years the US is lucky that Gore and Lerch were not in office. That's the way a lot of people feel.
Now we're in a totally different election. Both McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden are very different from their usual party people. This year is an unusually difficult election. Times are quite different than they were 4 and 8 years ago.
To tell someone they are a moron because they didn't vote for democrats? The other choice would have been even more moronic to vote for.
With everything that has happened I'll take Bush over Gore or Kerry anyday. And before anyone goes blaming him for everything that's happened - He's just a talking head being told what to do. If you want to blame anyone, blame the bafoons in his party (Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc to include the people who tell Bush what he's going to do).
I suppose it depends on who says it...sm
If she said it referring to herself....who cares.
If someone says it about Sarah Palin.....who cares, it will bounce off, as she is neither of those words.
What about when Obama talked about all the small town bitter people holding on to their guns and religion, in his San Francisco speech?
Was that bad? I think it was, and he disenfranchised a whole group of voters, to this day, who would not consider voting for him....
That is perhaps, the phrase that deRothchild was comparing to...not sure, but perhaps...
Sooooo.....to answer your question? which word is worse? Well, both of them are, and there's been plenty of name calling lately. It's getting tiresome, really.
Petty, spiteful, little name calling, which has run entirely too rampant lately in the media, not to mention on this board from time to time.
depends in which poll you look at....
and all within the margin of error.
I think that depends on your definitition (sm)
of a *nice neighborhood.* I don't judge neighborhoods by the cost of the houses, I judge them by the people who live there. At present I live in an average-to-small house on a double lot. Plenty of room for the backyard garden, cookouts, etc. I have neighbors who I would not trade for the world. So, if I had that kind of money I would probably stay right where I am. I may, however, change that tile in the bathroom to marble and put that koi pond out back that I've been wanting for years....LOL.
I guess it depends on how you look
at it. There are so many things that I don't agree with Obama on that I want him to fail. If he is succeeds, I feel that our country will fail because we will go down a path that I don't agree with. I want America to succeed but if Obama does everything he wants.....I don't see how America can succeed. I mean no ill will to him and do not wish him any harm. I just do not like the way he is handling things, spending money, etc. The ideas that he has and the government assisted programs he wants to institute will not only bankrupt us even more but I feel are bad ideas because people shouldn't rely on government to live. They need to rely on themselves. I feel that these programs will not encourage personal responsibility or hard work. It will reward irresponsible and lazy people. It will crush the American dream. So yes....in that sense....I want him to fail. I don't want Americans to have to rely on government for everything. I don't like the idea of our government getting bigger and controlling more and more things.
I look at Obama and I see a typical politician. He did nothing but try and make everyone feel all warm and tingly about change and hope and all he has done since he has been in office is lie one right after another.
I feel that if Obama succeeds in his personal agenda....America will fail.
Depends on location.
If it is Podunk, Nowheresville--probably. If it is NYC or Boston or even someplace like Wichita--not so much.
It all depends upon the culture.
The hand-holding custom among Arab men as they walk does not signify that they are on a 'date' but is a symbol of mutual respect and/or friendship.
As far as greetings go, a handshake with direct eye contact is becoming more acceptable, but some ethnic customs do persist. The European double-air-kiss is a greeting between equals (and pretentious New Yorkers). Among Japanese the relative depth of bows acknowledges who has the superior rank, but both bow. Bowing of one Arab to another or one European to another (not to be confused with a smart click of the heels and bob of the head, a sort of antiquated European salute) is a sign of subjugation. I am acknowledging you as my superior in rank. I am your humble subject.
There was only one guy bowing. It was our president, and his upper body was nearly horizontal to the ground, far lower than shaking hands with a shorter man would seem to require. I don't mind if Obama thinks he needs to appear friendly, I just don't want him acknowledging subservience.
It depends on the legs! Why should and would
a woman with ugly legs expose them? Then it gets indecent and fugly. If the legs are nice it's acceptable.
Regarding what you state that the IQ depends
solely on the DNA, similar to the color of the eyes, height, etc.... ..I disagree. disagree. Therr is this theory that the realtive IQ score is already set at the age of 7 and cannot be improved. In my opinion it can be improved by ongoing education.
You should definitely try it.
When life begins depends on
someone's religious beliefs. Not all people believe that life begins at conception.
I don't think the beliefs of any religious group over another religious group should be shown preference when it involves the law.
I guess it depends on your perspective...
if you are as far left as Obama, I guess CNN WOULD look conservative...lol. I guess it is in perspective. The point I was trying to make but obviously failed is that no one is going to learn anything if they only listen to one side...and people who automatically yell yeah you got that from Fox or Rush Limbaugh are exactly the kind of people I am talking about. You give an opinion, and if it differs from theirs it automatically came from Fox or Rush Limbaugh and that makes it wrong. I just wish people would not listen to the party line on either side and would use due diligence and research for themselves. The Obama website is not where to go to learn about Obama. The McCain website is not where to go to learn about McCain. Voting the party line is just too Pied Piperish for me. Although I am not and never was a Democrat, I have to applaud that PUMA bunch for having the gall to buck the system and fight for what they think is right. I am not crazy about their candidate either, but I admire their guts, and that is what America is about, by golly. Hil has every right to put her name in nomination at the convention and people who support her have their say. That being said, I noticed Obama caved on that and came out with that placating and to MY thinking condescending thing of "letting women and Clinton supporters feel vindicated." Yeah right...lol. He wants their votes. Period. Go PUMA!
guess it depends where you live because...
where we live, the entire region, all I see are small businesses starting up, then they are gone within a year, one after another, ghost towns in all the cities of empty businesses being literally destroyed by Wal-Mart et al.
There has to be a middle ground, and there has to be more tolerance or there will always be division more and more, rich or poor, and there will always be revolution and unrest.
and what are you talking about 'sharing' with people. you think paying taxes and contributing to road work, infrastructure, everything paid by taxes should be on the backs of poor people and middle class, which excuse me if I am wrong, but does middle class even exist anymore in reality or just in people's own truths of what they want to see.
we see every day more and more people down scaling their lifestyles, sacrificing whether to buy groceries or gas, more and more people cannot even get jobs because of credit checks and background checks (guess working now is also only for the elite, well-off people, and no one should ever be forigven for their past or allowed to progress). who then is promoting social programs - seems to me right now people are being pushed into eventually making all the same pay, fixed income.
...and excuse me forefathers but do did they think they could enslave people, force them to leave their own countries and families, tie them up and bring them to America, abuse them, torture them, treat them less than animals, and then have no responsibility for them.
this what people are calling 'sharing' with people less fortunate than ourselves was created here and we are left to resolve it.
I would rather have a leader in this country who would at least recognize it, try to fix it, then to just have the same old rhetoric and division, pushing people farther and farther apart so only a few people can make profits..
gotta run -
I am not sure what your family above would have to 'share' but I do respect your point of view...
Depends on what part of California - sm
it's like 2 states sometimes. The central portion of the state: Central Valley in the north, Orange County in the south, chock full of narrow-minded midwest transplants, many of whom are evangelical christians. The coast and mountains have more progressive and free-thinking people. (Also the more highly-educated, as a rule). You couldnt pay me to live anywhere but on the Calif. coast.
I guess it depends on what affiliation you have.
It seems to me that there is just as much, if not more, bashing by Republicans/conservatives as I see directed towards them. In actuality it is probably fairly evenly split.
depends on how you measure success I guess....
He only got a 4-5 point bounce in the polls and lost that the next week. Not all Americans were impressed with his "citizen of the world" speech. There are those of us who wonder where his real allegiance lies. No wonder.
By the way, when I say "hoohah" I don't mean the word you refer to. Apparently it does not mean the same thing in my neck of the woods. If I want to intimate the 4-letter word I would certainly do it more directly...not my style.
There is no way that little speech in Germany was "diplomacy." And gee, call me old-fashioned, but I think if you are running for Pres of the US, you should give your political speeches HERE.
I did not demand, nor have I heard anyone else demand that Obama admit the surge is working. It is obvious that it is. The fact that he chooses to ignore it does not give me any more faith in his ability to run the country or take care of national security issues, and makes me doubt his honesty. As to being true to his beliefs...didn't take him long to throw his lifelong friend and mentor the Reverend Wright under the bus for political expediency. There's that trust thing again.
How anyone can say, faced with all the info out there about him and how he handled the Wright thing (which was in name only, you don't stay in a church for 20 years that is built on black liberation theology if you don't believe it)...and say with a straight face he is being true to his beliefs.
Well, I take that back...he IS being true to his hard left socialist/Marxist beliefs. Already wants to redistribute wealth aka economic parity, a big element of the black liberatin theology...by taxing oil companies and redistributing their profits to people who did nothing to earn it. How much more socialist approaching Marxist could you possibly be? In that, yes, I would agree...he is being true to his socialist/Marxist beliefs. You got me there.
I guess it depends on your view of the beginning of
is life. I'm not advocating third or even second trimester abortions but believe me it's far better for a woman to abort a child than have one that won't care for it. Take Casey Anthony, for example...
We need to vote as if our entire future depends on it,
x
All depends on what news you watch, polls
are all over the place
Depends on what you call racist I suppose
@
I didn't say that depends on what the definition of "IF"
There is a big difference between IF and WHEN. IF I said "...If I go to the store" or "...when I go to the store" IF means I may go to the store, WHEN means I WILL go to the store.
The other poster said that Mccain was saying he was going to be president and I pointed out that so did Obama and I gave PROOF from his OWN site.
It all depends on what news station you listen to
I talked to my best friend the other day (whom I met when I was in the Army). Her husband is in Iraq. Her son is in Afghanastan, and her daughter is in Iraq. None of them like war (who does) but the consensus among them and their fellow soldiers is that it is worth it. Do they want the war to end, heck yeah. Do they want to come home, heck yeah. Do they want to give up everything they've been fighting for. NO WAY! They say if they leave now everything they have done to help the people of Iraq will all have been for nothing. They want to stay until the job is finished and not any sooner. They say if we don't do this it will be left up to our children, our nieces and nephews to take care of when they get older.
It all depends on who you listen to for news. Of course MSNBC, CNN and other liberal news agencies say its a mistake we should not be there, need to come home now. But my freinds said her husband and two kids and all their fellow soldiers say stay until the job is done. For every soldier on video saying we shouldn't be here, etc, etc., there is another soldier like the one in the OPs link that say, don't tell us its not worth it.
Depends on the mistake. Making the case for war in Iraq on a stack of
lies from Curveball, not your everyday ooops.
As if.
Diaper Dave in airport rage "Do You Know Who I Am?" umm...depends
Report Of Vitter In Airport Rage: Do You Know Who I Am?!!
Roll Call reports that Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), the staunch social conservative whose career became bogged down in the 2007 D.C. Madam prostitution scandal, was sighted this past Thursday night having an incident of airport rage at Dulles Airport.
Vitter arrived 20 minutes before the plane was scheduled to depart, and found the gate locked. He then opened the door, setting off the alarm and inviting the attention of an airline worker:
Vitter, our spy said, gave the airline worker an earful, employing the timeworn "do-you-know-who-I-am" tirade that apparently grew quite heated.
That led to some back and forth, and the worker announced to the irritable Vitter that he was going to summon security.
Vitter, according to the witness, remained defiant, yelling that the employee could call the police if he wanted to and their supervisors, who, presumably, might be more impressed with his Senator's pin.
But after talking a huffy big game, Vitter apparently thought better of pushing the confrontation any further. When the gate attendant left to find a security guard, Vitter turned tail and simply fled the scene.
Late Update: Vitter is now responding to the story, after a spokesman declined to comment in the initial reports:
"After being delayed on the Senate floor ensuring a vote on my anti-pay-raise amendment and in a rush to make my flight home for town hall meetings the next day, I accidentally went through a wrong door at the gate," Vitter said in a statement. "I did have a conversation with an airline employee, but it was certainly not like this silly gossip column made it out to be."
You're entitled to your opinion. I guess it depends on what side of the spectrum you're on.nm
x
Think again - nothing has been voted on yet
I guess you really don't get it, do you. I don't care if McCain or Obama is ahead but these polls mean absolutely nothing. Nothing has been settled yet. If Obama wins on 11/4 then that's fine. If McCain wins on 11/4 then that's fine, but for pete's sake stop acting like children spinning that your candidate has already won and they have more this or that. I've been watching the news on every station and reading all the websites and I have not found anything yet to say one has more votes than the other. Polls mean diddly. The real thing will happen on 11/4. Til then it would be a good idea to put a lid on your arrogance.
Like I say either way I don't care. Whoever gets in gets in. Either way the country is really really screwed! The question now is do you want someone to tell you your screwed to your face or do you want some to hide it in fluff and make you feel good while your being screwed.
They all voted against us
No one in Washington is standing up for us. You are being pitted against each other by CNN and Fox. There is no difference between the two candidates at all. They are both wimps.
Had he done so I would have voted for him most likely
x
but he could have voted against it -
He did not have to sign that bill; even if it was for show because he knew it was going to pass, he could have not signed it just to prove the point that he does not support any pork barrel spending. Just goes to show, he is going to do whatever he wants to do when he gets in office - no matter what he promised. If he wants something done and he has to give away a lot of money to get it, he is going to give away a lot of money. He's no different than anyone else.
He voted against it, and he said why...
he said he was afraid that people would use the bill to somehow circumvent abortion rights. And for that he was willing to sacrifice even those babies who survived that heinous procedure. Does it matter WHY he voted against it? Does that change the fact that he DID?
i voted against O, however...
i strongly opposed obama in the white house. however, i do believe that now he is pres-elect, that we should be respectful and supportive in as much as possible. he may well surprise even me and change some of his positions and prove to be a much better leader than i would expect. i for one, will be praying for his wisdom and judgment.
or maybe he voted the way he said he voted
nm
Why they voted for him...
obama fan: "I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage because if I help him[Obama], he’s gonna help me.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI
Any questions? Get a grip, I am happy not to be associated with voters like this.
Like I said, the ones who voted for him
either think he is their precious EVERYTHING, were too scared about the economy and were willing to vote for ANYTHING, or the ones who just voted for him because he is BLACK! Not too much of an intelligent vote either way!!
Flame all you want!
You mean he voted something besides
Who knew?
I do believe that it was voted
on whether or not we went to war in Iraq and I do believe that many Dems were on board at that time as well as many Americans. It only became a problem with some when they realized how much money it was costing.
Personally, I feel we should leave the middle east alone and let them kill each other. However, when they strike on US turf.....they best get ready for a strike back.
As for the stuff that Obama has been handed.....I know his job can't be easy and I wouldn't take it no matter how much money I was offered......but I still cannot condone what he is doing. Taking the rights away from Catholic hospitals and making them perform abortions or lose their funding. The continued bailing out of banks with big bonuses being slipped in there. So many people in our government who have been appointed to positions and getting caught for not paying taxes but getting a get out of jail free card.
Obama not crooked? I'm sorry but look at the state he comes from. Illinois is full of crooked politicians. His associations alone make me question his morality. His attendance to a church of hate was overlooked as nothing. There are just so many things stacked against this man and yet so many people refuse to see it or just let it slide like it is nothing.
Obama has had enough free passes. This is my country and I have a right to question my government. To me this is not the time to be going to other countries and telling them how arrogant the US is and how everything is our fault. Just like every time Obama opens his mouth about his spending....he continually brings up Bush's spending instead of admitting his own excessive spending.
I'm tired of the government giving CEOs crap for having private jets when government officials waste more taxpayer money on planes, etc. It is just ridiculous. It is like the whole lot of them preaching "do as I say and not as I do." Absolutely ridiculous.
I just hope that come election time, we get some of these people out of office.....Frank, Dodd, Pelosi, Reid........
They may have voted for what some
people want, but not everyone agrees with SSM.
we actually voted in 2004....SM
http://ideamouth.com/voterfraud.htm
state by state, counties too..........
I voted in our primary
on Tuesday. As soon as I put the card in the electronic machine it said invalid card even though I watched the woman run it through her little machine to clear it and saw it say clear twice. It took 3 people about 5 minutes to figure out how to get the card out of the machine. Then I got a new one. Everything went along fine until one choice. There were 4 people on the ballot; it would let me vote for 3 of them but not the 4th which was the one I wanted to vote for. I told them about this but nothing will happen. I think we should either have a paper trail or write them out long hand. Even if these machines were not suspect to begin with as far as tampering goes, just plain not working makes a huge difference in the vote.
I know that Bush did not win Florida in 2004. Thousands of African Americans did not stand in lines for hours to vote for Bush. You can take that to the bank and bet the farm on it too. My personal favorite though is a county that counted something like 10,000 votes for Bush and there are only 5,000 registered voters in the entire county !!! Go figure.
I never voted Democrat, but...
For one thing, Clinton WAS impeached. He just was not convicted. The Republicans caved. Shame on them! With that being said, while Obama did not actually "change" the seal, his campaign thought it would be cute to copy it for the meeting, Isuppose they did not have sense enough to realize what a firestorm it would cause. Well, duh, folks. Not everyone in the US is mesmerized by Obama the Pied Piper. The man is not nearly as eloquent without prompters. Can't think on his feet really well. Someone has their hand up his back pulling ALL the strings. I am tempted to think the initials are GS. THAT being said, I agree whole-heartedly about the Jeremiah Wright thing. I don't think I want a man as President who sat in the pew for 20 years and never heard the man "preach like that." Either he wasn't paying a bit of attention (which is highly unlikely as intelligent as he is supposed to be, right), or he was lying through his teeth (I vote for that one). But, just on the offchance he really "missed" that kind of preaching over 20 years, if he does get elected, my suggestion is someone else attend the cabinet meetings to take notes so he actually realizes what went on. lol. Not to mention security and intel briefings. I can't WAIT, if he is elected, to see who is his chief of staff and cabinet are. That will tell the tale I am thinkin, but by then it will be too late for buyers remorse. lol.
A lot of dems voted for the war too....
including Kerry and Hillary and untold others...including your VP candidate, Biden. Can't you tell the truth? What about the truth is so scary to you? You can go on line and see the roll call vote. Many, Many D's there. No war can ever be waged without a 2/3 vote of Congress. War is not a "conservative" thing. What a ridiculous lie. Do you ever go research anything or are you afraid lightning will strike you if you stray from Dem talking points??
I voted for Bush
The people who are campaigning are not the same people once they get into the white house. I voted for Bush. I also voted for Clinton. Both presidents turned out to be Bozo's but not until after they got into the position.
I think you need to stop accusing Sarah Palin of having no experience because that is going to backfire big time. Obama does not have any expereince either. The only two people expereinced are McCain and Biden. Also you want to talk about no experience think back to our forefathers. George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, John Adams. Those people had no experience and yet they went on to be great leaders. Both Barack and Sarah do not have experience. The difference in my opinion is that Sarah is running for VP while Barack is running for President. Two candidates - both with no experience. Except that Sarah has balanced a budget, cut out wasteful spending, and stood up to the big oil people. She also gave money back to the citizens of Alaska who paid to much in gas/oil prices. I'll go for that over someone who did some community organization.
so every single pub voted for it and no pub
I've answered several of your questions. Now try 2 of mine. Did every single pub vote to pass it and did no pub receive any type of benefit from this situation?
|
