Thread: Any Obama supporters? Lets talk about CHANGE.

I support Obama, but I'm to ignorant on politics to consider voting yet.

Maybe in four.

I'm voting Ron Paul come November even though it will likely be a wasted vote. All of the other candidates make no sense and seem to be douchebags in general.

Originally Posted by clemson357

I am personally of the opinion that if you want change, you shouldn't vote for the politically party that currently controls the Congress and controlled the Executive branch for 8 out of the last 15 years. But, its a small-minded, idealistic concept, so I am sure the slogan "change" will catch on very well.

Politicians use the word "change" because according to polling, the American public responds favorably to this slogan. Especially when the economy is weak.

-Cut and run from Iraq, no matter the consequence

"cut and run" is a slogan, first uttered by Hastert I believe. It's propaganda.

-Raise taxes on those who already carry the greatest tax burden

I think he will raise taxes. Not good. And taxes in the US will be going up no matter who is in office.

-Start another social entitlement program

I hope not. What program, specifically.

-Cut the military

The military is one of the biggest wasters of American taxpayer money. The Iron Triangle. The military is a socialist monopoly that wastes taxpayer money.

-Increase government spending

Obama will, IMO. And so did George W. Bush. A $9 trillion dollar debt. Selling T-bills to China. Reintroducing the 1-year Treasury Bill.

Any other "changes?"

No.

Obama is the same as George W. Bush. He just talks more eloquently, and sounds refreshing.

No matter who wins the election, expect the same.

Secondly, if you like the idea of the change, perhaps a more separationist foreign policy, or perhaps fiscal responsibility, have you ever considered third party?

Yes, I already have been voting for a 3rd party since 1996. It doesn't matter. Third parties are basically not allowed in US elections.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

Politicians use the word "change" because according to polling, the American public responds favorably to this slogan. Especially when the economy is weak.



"cut and run" is a slogan, first uttered by Hastert I believe. It's propaganda.



I think he will raise taxes. Not good. And taxes in the US will be going up no matter who is in office.



I hope not. What program, specifically.



The military is one of the biggest wasters of American taxpayer money. The Iron Triangle. The military is a socialist monopoly that wastes taxpayer money.



Obama will, IMO. And so did George W. Bush. A $9 trillion dollar debt. Selling T-bills to China. Reintroducing the 1-year Treasury Bill.



No.

Obama is the same as George W. Bush. He just talks more eloquently, and sounds refreshing.

No matter who wins the election, expect the same.




Yes, I already have been voting for a 3rd party since 1996. It doesn't matter. Third parties are basically not allowed in US elections.

Very well put.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

Politicians use the word "change" because according to polling, the American public responds favorably to this slogan. Especially when the economy is weak.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

"cut and run" is a slogan, first uttered by Hastert I believe. It's propaganda.

Even propaganda can be accurate in certain circumstances.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

I think he will raise taxes. Not good. And taxes in the US will be going up no matter who is in office.

Democrats love taxes. Forced charity.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

I hope not. What program, specifically.

Socialized health care.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

The military is one of the biggest wasters of American taxpayer money. The Iron Triangle. The military is a socialist monopoly that wastes taxpayer money.

I disagree. Military is one of the only things that could never be privatized, IMO. Its a dangerous world, there is no international 911 to call when you have a global-scale home invader. I would greatly prefer we be the biggest and baddest around, for as long as possible.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

Obama will, IMO. And so did George W. Bush. A $9 trillion dollar debt. Selling T-bills to China. Reintroducing the 1-year Treasury Bill.

Yep. One of the main reasons I dislike him.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

Yes, I already have been voting for a 3rd party since 1996. It doesn't matter. Third parties are basically not allowed in US elections.

I've convinced two other people already to vote third party this year. I have at least two more on the line. My goal is to talk everyone I can into voting third party. It doesn't matter to me who they vote for; the first step in getting a viable third party is showing that Americans are fed up with their choices.

Originally Posted by clemson357

I disagree. Military is one of the only things that could never be privatized, IMO. Its a dangerous world, there is no international 911 to call when you have a global-scale home invader. I would greatly prefer we be the biggest and baddest around, for as long as possible.


I don't mind us being the most powerful country in the world, but do we really need to be spending almost a trillion dollars on maintaining this ridiculous military? We could easily have the strongest military and national defense in the world on (comparatively) a paltry 150-200 billion dollars per year. Take all of that extra money saved and pay down some of our national debt which will in turn strengthen the dollar.


I've convinced two other people already to vote third party this year. I have at least two more on the line. My goal is to talk everyone I can into voting third party. It doesn't matter to me who they vote for; the first step in getting a viable third party is showing that Americans are fed up with their choices.

I thought you were a die-hard McCain Republican unless I'm remembering incorrectly? Something change your mind? Not that I'm against 3rd parties, I would like a traditional conservative party.

Originally Posted by clemson357

Even propaganda can be accurate in certain circumstances.

But not in this one. "Cut and Run" is a slogan designed influence the way the American public thinks. I have actually heard Americans say repeat this slogan.

Democrats love taxes. Forced charity.

I agree. And the GOP also loves taxes, but just raises them a little less than the Demos.

Socialized health care.

I haven't read his plan in many months. I don't think the money is there for this universal system. I don't know if his plan is "socialized medicine." Remember that the term "socialized medicine" is a propaganda slogan that started in the early 90s.

I disagree. Military is one of the only things that could never be privatized, IMO. Its a dangerous world, there is no international 911 to call when you have a global-scale home invader. I would greatly prefer we be the biggest and baddest around, for as long as possible.

I don't think the military should be privatized. I think the budget should be reduced a lot. The military is too wasteful.

911 was not about the military. And future terrorist attacks (if they happen, which I think they will) will be thwarted mostly by intelligence.

I've convinced two other people already to vote third party this year. I have at least two more on the line. My goal is to talk everyone I can into voting third party. It doesn't matter to me who they vote for; the first step in getting a viable third party is showing that Americans are fed up with their choices.

Americans may be "fed up" with choices. But what alternatives are there?

None.

Third parties are systematically prevented to participating in elections. This is mostly due to the laws.

In this way the two parties - which are monopolies - can maintain power. Both the Demos and Repubs collude together. They are more similar than different.

Change? A black racist president? That'll be a first.

Vote for change. Vote for Obama.

It's only racism if we do it DOMS. It's just called "racial pride" otherwise.

Jeez I thought you knew these things.

big smoothy i truely hope you served if not you are a disrespectful, ungreatful, fuck!!!! how dare you say anything about the military!!! i truly hope you have been to iraq, if not take a trip and let me know how wasteful those 3000+ lives were!!! and fuck obama too!!! he keeps whining about leave his wife alone, if she knew when to shut the f__ up noone would say anything about her ungreatful ass!!!!

Originally Posted by CORUM

big smoothy i truely hope you served if not you are a disrespectful, ungreatful, fuck!!!! how dare you say anything about the military!!! i truly hope you have been to iraq, if not take a trip and let me know how wasteful those 3000+ lives were!!! and fuck obama too!!! he keeps whining about leave his wife alone, if she knew when to shut the f__ up noone would say anything about her ungreatful ass!!!!

Here's what he thinks:

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

I support the insurgents. I support road-side bombs. I support snipers.

The Americans in Iraq are fascists.

uneducated, poorly read, no knowledge of Iraqi history,

they deserve what they get.

this mother fucker!!!!! that little communist shit, he needs to spend some time over there get hit with one of those bombs and see how much he supports them......... no wonder he supports another communist muslim fuck like obama!!!!

Originally Posted by CORUM

big smoothy i truely hope you served if not you are a disrespectful, ungreatful, fuck!!!! how dare you say anything about the military!!! i truly hope you have been to iraq, if not take a trip and let me know how wasteful those 3000+ lives were!!! and fuck obama too!!! he keeps whining about leave his wife alone, if she knew when to shut the f__ up noone would say anything about her ungreatful ass!!!!

The military is supposed to protect the American people. Has Iraq joined the Union? And the American people are suddenly obligated to spend at least another five years financing a military presence in Iraq, while Iraq pads its own oil money surplus and doesn't pay its own way. Sounds like a social entitlement program to me.

And while McSame is flying around on his wife's jet - while she refuses to release her own tax information and he violates the very FEC contribution regulations he claims to support all while suddenly discovering all of the lobbyists for foreign dictators he's had running his campaign.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Here's what he thinks:

It's ashame that people think like this, Obama would be out if all this shit came out in Jan no doubt

i would rather have mccain, than a muslim!!! obama dont even know what he is. he is raised muslim claims christian and then his pastor goes off the deep end about kill whitey so now obama doesnt know what he is. i dont speak politics, but i would rather have a blue blooded american in office than a confused muslim that cant control his wife and then whines about everyone talking about her idiotic statements........... welcome to the public life peckerhead!!!

and i am well aware of what the army's mission is. deffend from enemies FORIEGN and Domestic!! we invaded iraq, for whatever reason so we had a job to do and we shouldnt stop till its completed. if we just back out no and run it shows the rest of the world we will not follow through with anything when it gets hard we will just back out and run. obama is a push over and when do what ever people tell him to do just to keep them from being mad at him. hate to state the facts, its a harsh world and you cant make everyone happy!!!! STAND FOR SOMETHING OR YOU FALL FOR ANYTHING!!!

Originally Posted by Irons77

It's ashame that people think like this, Obama would be out if all this shit came out in Jan no doubt

Oh, it will come out. Odds are, Obama is going to be the Democrat nominee. During the elections all the Republicans need to do is play up how inexperience he is and how racist his preacher, whom he listened to every week for 20 years, is.

Like I've said before, with the "bringing democracy" war in Iraq and that numb nuts Bush, they've gift wrapped the election for the democrats. And what did the democrats do? They send a crazy white woman and a black racist to the elections.

If they don't want to win, why do they bother sending anyone?

Originally Posted by clemson357

I am personally of the opinion that if you want change, you shouldn't vote for the politically party that currently controls the Congress and controlled the Executive branch for 8 out of the last 15 years. But, its a small-minded, idealistic concept, so I am sure the slogan "change" will catch on very well.


My question is, what is Obama going to change? Give me something to like about him. I'll list the most obvious changes, none of which I like:

-Cut and run from Iraq, no matter the consequence

As opposed to stay in Iraq forever, no matter the consequence in lives or financial burden.

-Raise taxes on those who already carry the greatest tax burden

Obviously, you are only talking about income taxes here. At your young age, I'd wager that taxpayers have spent much more on your education and comfort than you've returned.

-Start another social entitlement program

The number one reason for bankruptcy is skyrocketing health care costs. How outrageous to imagine that a government supported by the tax monies of the people in the country would think of access to adequate health care as an "entitlement." Why spend money on that when we can be providing that as an entitlement for just the privileged, like the military and university students?

-Cut the military

How much more does the United States spend on military programs than the rest of the world? And yet for all of that money, we still have to use our National Guard in a foreign adventure, struggle to maintain enlistments to the point of signing up criminals, raising the age limits, and lowering standards.

-Increase government spending

Which, apparently, doesn't refer to increasing spending for the military, which you want. How much would government spending need to be increased if we weren't pissing it away in Iraq?

Any other "changes?"

Well, let's see. A President who actually acts like a leader capable of rallying the American people (and not just the 20% of neo-cons/American Taliban wingnuts who think they are the only real citizens). That sounds damn scary.

A President who might actually and skillfully practice diplomacy instead of one who, on the eve of the last Iranian election when centrists were poised to make huge gains in the Iranian government, decided to rail against Iran and rally the religious zealots in that country back into office.

A President who might actually try to tackle the environmental issues around energy use in this country, instead of licking the Saudi emperor's ass begging for more oil production? Who might also realize that when the dollar falls dramatically in world markets, our ability to exert economic influence diminishes? A President who at least recognizes that our trade deficit, which is now over $700 billion a year while jobs continue to be shipped overseas, might be at least partially linked to unpatriotic American companies whose profit margin is more important than serving the country which gave them the freedom to prosper?



Secondly, if you like the idea of the change, perhaps a more separationist foreign policy, or perhaps fiscal responsibility, have you ever considered third party?

Good luck. The electoral system was created (unconstitutionally) so that the existing two parties control the complete process. Third party candidates have to fight both parties to get on a state ballot, and then deal with party appointees in the judicial system to make their case. None of this is, of course, constitutional, but our country long ago decided to overlook that we had no system which limited the number of political parties holding power by manipulating that system to ensure that the two establishment parties controlled all branches of the government. On those rare occasions that an independent wins office, he/she is absorbed into one party or the other or told their effectiveness will be limited.

One of the reasons why voter turnout in this country is embarrassingly low (even in presidential election years) is that 25-35% of the eligible electorate feels they have nothing at stake or to represent their opinions in the process? Every country with multiple parties in parliamentary systems has higher voter turnouts.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Change? A black racist president? That'll be a first.

Vote for change. Vote for Obama.

Since he's half-white, I'm assuming that, when someone genetically comes from both skin colors, the black one must win out. Maybe the "racist"part will be the "white" side of him. In that case, he'll fit right in with a long line of. . .gosh. . .white male Presidents. But wait. . .in a country that only has a 35% white male population, we've only had white male presidents. How could that have been possible?

Originally Posted by kbm8795

Since he's half-white, I'm assuming that, when someone genetically comes from both skin colors, the black one must win out. Maybe the "racist"part will be the "white" side of him. In that case, he'll fit right in with a long line of. . .gosh. . .white male Presidents. But wait. . .in a country that only has a 35% white male population, we've only had white male presidents. How could that have been possible?

Well, it's nice to know that since he's half white, he's genetically immune from being racist.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Oh, it will come out. Odds are, Obama is going to be the Democrat nominee. During the elections all the Republicans need to do is play up how inexperience he is and how racist his preacher, whom he listened to every week for 20 years, is.

Like I've said before, with the "bringing democracy" war in Iraq and that numb nuts Bush, they've gift wrapped the election for the democrats. And what did the democrats do? They send a crazy white woman and a black racist to the elections.

If they don't want to win, why do they bother sending anyone?

This will be, of course, the worst approach for Republicans. But stupid is as stupid does. If they haven't already learned that attempting to tie Obama to Democratic candidates in stronghold Republican congressional districts using the Wright card and the inexperience argument has backfired, the GOP will set themselves up for a major blowout in the fall. The GOP has lost three out of four special congressional elections in their own stronghold districts.

Of course the GOP has giftwrapped the election for the Democrats because they've pretty much failed at most everything they've attempted and can't campaign successfully on policies. Worse, they ran a cabal of old white men promising more of the McSame, and then crippled themselves by having to kiss the crazy-ass televangelists, Rev. Moon, and the neo-con minorities running their party. But then, what other choice did Republicans have this time around?

Originally Posted by DOMS

Well, it's nice to know that since he's half white, he's genetically immune from being racist.

I thought you'd see it my way. The white side isn't being "racist". . .it's just "entitled." You know, just like the representatives of that 35% minority who have always been President - oh, wait - that same group who originally only allowed themselves to vote, too.

Originally Posted by kbm8795

I thought you'd see it my way. The white side isn't being "racist". . .it's just "entitled." You know, just like the representatives of that 35% minority who have always been President - oh, wait - that same group who originally only allowed themselves to vote, too.

As always, your blinded by your own shit.

Ever heard of indoctrination? 20 years of "whites are evil" and the "to hell with America". Plus, after 20 years, Obama claimed that he didn't know that his leader said that stuff. He's lying...and why would he lie? To hide something. What might that something be?

Originally Posted by DOMS

As always, your blinded by your own shit.

Ever heard of indoctrination? 20 years of "whites are evil" and the "to hell with America". Plus, after 20 years, Obama claimed that he didn't know that his leader said that stuff. He's lying...and why would he lie? To hide something. What might that something be?

Oh puh-leeze. . .one tiny clip from 20 years of sermons, and the candidate wasn't even there. Like conservatives take their own former ministers messages to heart. . .which of course would explain the multiple sexual crimes committed by the "family values" crowd after they leave church each week. So who really cares about the minister, except a bunch of faux "religious" Republican purists who pretend that "you are what your minister is" based on a tiny clip of a sermon. What a con-game. Especially when this church is affiliated with a long-established mainstream denomination that is a far cry from those mega political action committee "churches" with no denomination that conservatives have constructed to declare themselves in charge of "Christianity."

Of course, the point was made that some whites had been evil. . .and gosh...they haven't? And of course, we didn't get to hear any clips of sermons from those all-white churches two centuries of our white male presidents attended, even though we know some denominations were very supportive of slavery and adamantly opposed to interracial marriage based on their biblical scripture.

Such a non-issue. Next we'll see conservatives claiming that Obama maims the white half of his body by regularly flogging it in punishment for being so hated by the black half. . .

Originally Posted by DOMS

As always, your blinded by your own shit.

Ever heard of indoctrination? "to hell with America". Plus, after 20 years, Obama claimed that he didn't know that his leader said that stuff. ?

I've certainly heard such things coming from many white right wing ministers, particularly such spiritual advisers for John McSame as Hagee and Parsley. . .not to mention those wonderful broadcasts of Pat Robertson where he demands the U.S. State Department be nuked - right on television for millions of Americans to be "indoctrinated." Since Robertson has been around for over 20 years, this must mean that millions of Americans, including conservative public officials who regularly watch and appear on his program, are secretly terrorists. Why,the 700 Club moneymaking schemer is consulted by the Bush White House over everything from the war to social policy. . .and not one peep out of conservatives.

Keep telling yourself that. After the Dems lose the election, you can have fun asking yourself, "Why couldn't they have sent a black lesbian woman? Surely that would have won?"

Originally Posted by DOMS

Oh, it will come out. Odds are, Obama is going to be the Democrat nominee. During the elections all the Republicans need to do is play up how inexperience he is and how racist his preacher, whom he listened to every week for 20 years, is.

Like I've said before, with the "bringing democracy" war in Iraq and that numb nuts Bush, they've gift wrapped the election for the democrats. And what did the democrats do? They send a crazy white woman and a black racist to the elections.
If they don't want to win, why do they bother sending anyone?

God damn.

Weird, while reading this thread there was a KIA car commercial with somene posing as obama, did a pretty good job.

anyways, mccain/ republicans ftw.

Originally Posted by kbm8795

Which, apparently, doesn't refer to increasing spending for the military, which you want.

kbm, you are seriously an inarticulate, alarmist moron. You have to fabricate lies to make an argument. Show me where I said I want to INCREASE military spending, and I'll send you $100 in the mail.