The Daily Obamanation .... ALL ROLLED INTO ONE

:doh:

 

dsimon writes:

:: :: Indeed.

 

-Well since Paul turned out to be nothing more than a pimple on the country's ass he had to come with a different spin to keep his name up on board daily.

 

dsimon writes:

Yeah I can see loyalty to a candidate but I am hoping and praying we don't collectively see the dumbest argument in politics: That all the candidates are the same anyway. There is a real fight for the democratic nomination and it is a fight worth fighting!

As a strategy OBama has decided to bring people together and propose some decent programs that can be worked out. I don't agree with all his programs but so what? He has shown that he can bring people together which is the most important thing in the world (yes in the world) right now. I say this because Bush has caused such global problems that we need a leader who can bring people together to solve problems.

Obama has shown that he is electable as well. That was the big question mark with his candidacy.

meanwhile Clinton's strategy is to use ad hominum attacks against Obama, to pander to people who should represent their districts (super delegates) and who instead are hijacking the democratic process and the voice of their constitutes. Clinton is awful. She is as derisive as Busch and only slightly more intelligent. She would say or do anything to get the nomination. She has no ethical boundries.

My point is that Petre, and others.... make no mistake about it, if Clinton gets that nomination it is unjust. If Clinton had any concern for the party she would concede the race to Obama and help him defeat the latest evil Caucasian silver fox, for the sake of this country. Obama has shown he has the broad based appeal to be elected the Democrats simply would rather use the nomination for their own synocured purposes and out of fear for the morally bancrupt Clintons.

I am frankly sick to my stomach with fear that Clinton will be rewarded for her derisive, morally bancrupt campaign.

 

liberals are fascists

 

Conservatives are pick-pocketing Jesus freaks.

 

i neither steal nor am i a christian

i win

 

::

 

:bears:

 

Yup, yup. I do not have the energy now, but the length which rich nations go to, to keep, oh yes, to keep developing nations down and forever independent like perennial cows to be milked is shocking beyond belief.

Anyone savvy on world trade would know where I am coming from. Nothing new, humans have always strove to maximise advantage to the detriment of the others and others have always fought back to survive somehow. The <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1:country-region><st1lace>USA</st1lace></st1:country-region> was a nation formed solely on economic migration … ironically.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
<o></o>
Anyway, economic migration is the prime consequence of this. Nothing happens in isolation or a vacuum.
<o></o>
<o></o>
It is hilarious when folks discuss the effects of immigration from the "undesirable world" without appreciating the drivers.<o></o>

 

if you want to help nations you should trase freely and fairly with them, not tax the people then give their money to others

 

Exactly, you should tax people to kill others.

 

where did i say that?

 

That's what you do when you go to war. You don't like the liberal way of taxing, so I figure you must like the more noble approach of spending peoples money :clap:

 

cant have one without the other

in case you missed it, im a libertarian (or a republican with libertarian leanings anyways)

 

War taxes are not that big of issue to you than taxes for the needy, interesting.

Well thank God for Petre giving us Ron Paul ::

 

we arent talking about that right now so i dont know what your point is

 

Your issues with liberals and taxes have been played out here, let's not play....."whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis"

 

not all revenues come from taxes

2nd of all depends on why your killing those people

 

More taxes are for war than giving to the needy, yet I see no critisism about this from your fingers.

Please tell me why we are opcorn:

 

well i was trying to stay on topic

again, if those taxes are spent on national defense i dont see the problem, though if you dont have a welfare state, might not even need to tax for that so much

 

Actually, Anglos were invited by the Mexican government to establish industry because the area was sparsely populated.

 

Remember ole Larry Sinclair ?

Looks like he's gonna take the Pepsi Challenge ::

============

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width="96%" background=images/story_header_center.jpg></TD><TD vAlign=top width="2%"></TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top colSpan=3><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top> </TD><TD class=body_main vAlign=top align=left>The truth will set you free they say, but the truth plus $100,000 will set you even freer. That's the conclusion our good friend Larry Sinclair has come to after considering the offer we made him yesterday: $10,000 to take a polygraph test over his Barack Obama sex and drugs claims, and $100,000 if he passes it.

After communicating via email to work out the logistics of the challenge, we were able to reach an agreement. Now, the plan is to get together with Sinclair and one of the best polygraph experts in the country, and ask him some questions – with the camera rolling, of course. As more details are made available we will post it here.

The results of the whole thing will be posted right here on Whitehouse.com. Our pockets lighter by either ten grand or ten times that amount, we'll all have a better sense of what to make of Sinclair's almost-too-unbelievable-to-be-unbelievable allegations against a Senator who is poised, perhaps, to make history.






</TD></TR><TR><TD class=body_main colSpan=2>Mr Sinclair has put up instead of shutting up so we will see which way the chips fall.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

You don't actually mean that, do you?

 

And look how they got repaid, .

Beaners stupid, gringos smart.

::

 

I love it when people talk of raising taxes to "give to the needy". I'm not rich, just middleclass. My "needy" is my family. And I don't need anyone telling me I need to give anywhere else but right here in my home. My son "needs" a college education. I need to ensure mine and my wife's retirement. I see so many talking about all the lives you could save and drinking water for this country. Take a look in the mirror pal. If you cared so much you would donate 50% of your income to charity and live off top ramen, but instead you would rather sound all righteous on a message board. Grow up Peter Pan.

 

I seriously doubt that many people would trek across the world knowing that they couldn't work, had no medical care, housing, education etc. and would be jailed and deported for their efforts-and they certainly wouldn't have political lobbies on their behalf. There is a reason that Chinese and Mexicans are coming to the U.S.. We've traditionally controlled immigration, and I'm sure that we could do the same now.

Also, Mexico and China aren't poor nations. Why should we give money to corrupt nations? And one of the reasons that China has the ability to harm the U.S. so badly now is that the U.S. economy has been allowed to become dependent on China- another example of not doing what's best for the whole nation.

 

This is actually true.

Both China and Mexico are in the top dozen of world's largest economies.

But Mexico is one goddamned corrupt motherfucking country...a country of extremes. You have the world's richest man in Mexico, shitloads of other billionaires...but the vast majority gets fucked.

Revolution time, baby.

 

Few Americans have ever agreed with the immigration. The few people who profit bludgeon the rest of us with speech codes, slurs, and ultimately government-backed violence or sanctions if we don't walk the line on immigration and race issues. Unfortunately, our 'betters' are too stupid, greedy and/or short-sighted to see that they (or their descendants) will go down with the rest of us. I wouldn't necessarily call taking advantage smart.