No, Obama voters will be stomping and kicking
Posted By: soon if they dont get their checks.nm on 2009-02-05
In Reply to: How juvenile...why don't you throw yourself on the floor and kick your feet - sm
nm
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
Obama has played the voters for fools...
http://exposingliberallies.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-has-played-voters-for-fools.html
To think that conservatives have viewed Bill and Hillary Clinton as unethical politicians who would do anything to get elected. When we are as disgusted as we think we possibly can be, on to the political stage steps Barack Obama. The senator from Illinois makes Bill and Hillary look “not quite so bad”.
Though they enjoyed paling around with Yasser Arafat, we didn’t have the all-consuming fear that they would completely sell-out Israel, nor did we have to worry about them supporting infanticide, though they saw nothing wrong with partial-birth abortion.
Yes, Obama keeps his pants on when away from his “bitter-half,“ Michelle, but that’s not much comfort when he has campaigned for Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga who made a pact with Kenyan Muslims to institute Sharia law.
http://exposingliberallies.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-funds-odinga-who-promises-sharia.html
Thomas Sowell has written an article in National Review describing how Obama has played the American people for fools.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTQ5YTM3M2UzMjY3N2M3YWRiMDI0NzNmMTNhNjJlNTc=
“Although Senator Barack Obama has been allied with a succession of far-Left individuals over the years, that is only half the story. There are, after all, some honest and decent people on the Left. But these have not been the ones that Obama has been allied with — allied, not merely ‘associated’ with.
ACORN is not just an organization on the left. In addition to the voter frauds that ACORN has been involved in over the years, it is an organization with a history of thuggery, including going to bankers’ homes to harass them and their families, in order to force banks to lend to people with low credit ratings.
Nor was Barack Obama’s relationship with ACORN just a matter of once being their attorney long ago. More recently, he has directed hundreds of thousands of dollars their way. Money talks — and what it says is more important than a politician’s rhetoric in an election year.
Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger are not just people with left-wing opinions. They are reckless demagogues preaching hatred of the lowest sort — and both are recipients of money from Obama.
Bill Ayers is not just ‘an education professor’ who has some left-wing views. He is a confessed and unrepentant terrorist, who more recently has put his message of resentment into the schools — an effort using money from a foundation that Obama headed.
Nor has the help all been one way. During the last debate between John McCain and Barack Obama, Senator McCain mentioned that Sen. Obama’s political campaign began in Bill Ayers’s home. Obama immediately denied it and McCain had no real follow-up.
It was not this year’s political campaign that Obama began in Bill Ayers’s home but an earlier campaign for the Illinois state legislature. Barack Obama can match Bill Clinton in slickness at parsing words to evade accusations.
That is one way to get to the White House. But slickness with words is not going to help a president deal with either domestic economic crises or the looming dangers of a nuclear Iran.
People who think that talking points on this or that problem constitute ‘the real issues’ that we should be talking about, instead of Obama’s track record, ignore a very fundamental fact about representative government.
Representative government exists, in the first place, because we the voters cannot possibly have all the information necessary to make rational decisions on all the things that the government does. We cannot rule through polls or referendums. We must trust someone to represent us, especially as President of the United States.
Once we recognize this basic fact of representative government, then the question of how trustworthy a candidate is becomes a more urgent question than any of the so-called ‘real issues.’
A candidate who spends two decades promoting polarization and then runs as a healer and uniter, rather than a divider, forfeits all trust by that fact alone.
If Ronald Reagan had attempted to run for president of the United States as a liberal, the media would have been all over him. His support for Barry Goldwater would have been in the headlines and in editorial denunciations across the country.
No way would he have been able to get away with using soothing words to suggest that he and Barry Goldwater were like ships that passed in the night.
If Barack Obama had run as what he has always been, rather than as what he has never been, then we could simply cast our votes based on whether or not we agree with what he has always stood for.
Some people take solace from the fact that Senator Obama has verbally shifted position on some issues, like drilling for oil or gun control, since this is supposed to show that he is ‘pragmatic’ rather than ideological.
But political zigzags show no such moderation as some seem to assume. Lenin zigzagged and so did Hitler. Zigzags may show no more than that someone is playing the public for fools.
Some people who see the fraud in what Obama is saying are amazed that others do not. But Obama knows what con men have long known, that their job is not to convince skeptics but to enable the gullible to continue to believe what they want to believe. He does that very well.”
Right on, brother! Right on! It’s refreshing to see a black conservative who stands on principle and doesn’t support Obama just because of his dark pigment. I’m speaking of you, General Powell.
I think Obama will ask his voters to vote for who he wants in; I hope not though! nm
If it weren't for uninformed voters, Obama wouldn't have a chance.
Did you happen to catch John Stossel's report on 20/20 last night?
Uninformed Obama voters....brought to you by the biased media...sm
Unfortunately, I know a lot of people who voted for Obama, several of my relatives included....and they don't know even half of the answers to these questions either. They believe exactly what the media tells them to believe (or not to believe....)
Young Voters Fall for Obama’s Promises Without Any Historical Perspective..sm
Election 2008: Young Voters Fall for Obama’s Promises Without Any Historical Perspective
By Liz Peek
Financial Columnist
Today we will almost surely elect Barack Obama President of the United States. A new generation will vote for Mr. Obama –- a generation that has grown up with the Internet. This new crop of voters has access to more information than any that came before, and yet has swallowed Obama’s impossible campaign promises and contradictory policies just as trustingly as those who in earlier times looked for a chicken in every pot.
Welcome to the disillusionment of another generation. I don’t anticipate this inevitable consequence of today’s election with any glee, believe me. To see young people turning out in droves to vote for this eloquent, attractive young man is inspiring. To hear them buy into his promises, though, is sobering.
For instance, we are told that the image of the United States has suffered mightily under George Bush, and that Obama is going to usher in a veritable global love-fest. Would those falling over themselves to herald our new president include the peoples of South Korea and Colombia –- allies both — whose much-needed free trade agreements with the U.S. Obama has opposed?
How about our neighbors in Canada or Mexico; will Obama’s promised re-write of NAFTA endear them to the U.S.? Is it possible that Obama’s opposition to free trade demonstrates his gratitude to labor unions –- groups that aroused his ire by donating to the Clinton and Edwards campaigns but suddenly were much more warmly welcomed when they began shifting funds his way?
Over a year ago I wrote a tongue-in-cheek column defending the status quo against the pressing demand for “Change” writ large. While politicians of all stripes were heralding new directions, they were ignoring, for example, that the U.S. has been blessed for many years with low inflation. Voters in their 30s and 40s could not be expected to remember the devastating inflation of the 1970s. They couldn’t be expected to understand how double-digit price hikes threw the fear of God into retirees on fixed incomes and created the same kind of paralysis in lending that we are witnessing today.
They might not connect the dots between Obama’s enthusiasm for the Employee Free Choice Act, a resurgence of unionization, and wage-driven inflation. They might not realize that restricting trade with China, re-writing NAFTA and barring adoption of free trade agreements with Colombia and South Korea will indeed drive prices higher.
The United States has also enjoyed a period of stable employment. The new generation has never seen serious unemployment. True, they have witnessed shifts in employment as manufacturing jobs have been lost to lower-priced locales. But they have never seen unemployment rates go much above 6%, where it is now. In 1982, when unemployment reached 9.7%, Obama was 21 years old. I doubt he was much focused on the dismal state of the economy. Voters, however, were focused, and gave Ronald Reagan a mandate to set the country on a new course –- one which encouraged growth through lower taxes, expanded trade and deregulation.
That program was adopted by both Democrats and Republicans because it worked. People in their thirties and forties cannot imagine that raising taxes on successful people might harm the economy. That’s because they weren’t around to witness the exodus of talent from England –- a country wherein punitive marginal tax rates squashed incentives and drove out anyone who could locate elsewhere. Margaret Thatcher didn’t just join the Reagan Revolution –- she clung to it for dear life.
What young voters have seen, and have responded to, is the collapse of Wall Street. Because bankers, politicians and speculators conspired to create the worst investment bubble in modern times, we are about to abandon the policies that brought millions of people around the world into the middle class. Policies that gave people real hope –- not just its rhetorical facsimile. This is a tragedy.
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/04/lpeek_1104/#more-2415
No need... they've been kicking our @SS
Probably has something to do with the fact that
A) we pulled our fighter planes out too soon, and our troops were getting picked off one by one by IED's, and
B) we're fighting in the WRONG country.
WOW. I've even tried kicking myself in the butt for posting it...sm
It adds nothing to the debate, really, except sidetracking the issue at hand.
throwing himself on the floor kicking because Scooter didn't get his pardon.......
nm
Where were all the voters before?
Good point. I vote in every election, whether it be for president or town dog catcher. It is really pathetic to see the low turnout time after time unless it is the presidential election or a tax overide on the ballot. And I live in a town with a majority of senior citizens, can't imagine how low the turnout would be without them.
When my Dad was alive and we lived in the same town, he would check the list when you first signed in to make sure our names were crossed off indicating that we had voted. Look out if you had not. He was a big bad Boston police officer and you did not want to cross him!
It also comes down to those voters
who had no clue what they were voting for and did no research at all and just voted for the celeb candidate. How many people did interviewers stop and question about Obama and McCain and they had no clue who was for what or who their VPs were, etc......but they were voting for Obama.
I know that all people have a right to vote but I think sometimes we should really restrict that. LOL! Too may ignorant people not knowing who they are voting for but they are voting just to vote.
All voters should consider this regardless of which side
It should be very troubling that the mainstream media has been in the tank for Obama since day one. Ask Hillary Clinton or anyone else who ran (again, R, D, or I).
With that in mind, who gave them the right to choose our next President?
Incidentally, the media (left-wing, of course) actually selected McCain, too. They were absolutely certain that he would be the weakest candidate. Mitt scared the holy hanna out of them. I personally hoped for a Rudy-Fred ticket, in no particular order.
It should be interesting as to how many honest people there are reading this stuff to see how they'll react. Based on what I've read since Palin's speech, she's certainly changed quite a few minds.
The thing that surprises me the most is that the bulk of people on this board is women, yet so many of them put party above the person. I personally don't vote by genitalia. I think it's foolish.
tell that to the voters who are only voting for O
There were thousands of voters........ sm
who voted in this election who were not informed or educated on the issues or the candidates. I don't see much of a difference, do you?
American voters do not trust
the fact that this is a real "crisis". Don't want to allow Bush to force congress into another debacle like the funding for the war before he is dragged from the WH kicking and screaming. McCain is asking for time out so he can rest and catch his breath.
the voters don't decide the election- sm
Perhaps you forgot, or don't even know, that it isn't the voters who actually decide the election anyway. It is the electoral college. We could all boycott (although that would be stupid beyond belief as our voices would not be heard at all) and it would not affect the election results anyway. Get it??
If it weren't for uninformed voters
NEITHER candidate would have a chance.
VOTING BY WRITE-IN VOTE FOR LOU DOBBS!!!!!!!!!
Too bad that over half the voters disagree with you.
.
There are a lot of voters across America who make
$250,000 or more who are voting for Obama. These are the same folks who will pay more taxes under Obama's tax plan. It goes to show even the wealthy who will be taxed more by Obama's tax plan, still want him to be President. I hear JTP complain but he is not making much money and he owes back taxes. There must be something right about Obama if the wealthy who are going to get a tax increase, are voting for him.
Of course they did. But at issue here is showing voters
I did not call you an imbecile. I said your posts are imbecilic. Being a hot-headed Obama supporter, according to the red camp, I have no character to degrade, so evidently I have nothing to lose by calling it like I see it. BTW, I've probably done all the growing I'm gonna do by age 64.
Belittling intelligent voters
just end up making you and yours look very, very small. It is sad to see the other party's apparent complusion to tear down something they cannot quite understand. Better luck next time with your candidate, your campaign strategy and your capacity to muster up the hope and inspiration so many Americans are feeling today. Maybe you too can find a way to feel a bit more proud of who you are and who seeks to represent you.
Speaking of stupid voters....(sm)
http://www.break.com/index/redneck-woman-rails-on-obama.html
stupid voters are an embarrassment to all of us huh!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUC3ORbhjTg
Voters Send a Pro-Choice message
I read this in my local paper this evening. The entire column is a bit too long to post, but I personally found it interesting. Some highlights:
In three states, abortion was literally on the ballot. In South Dakota, a ban amounting to outright criminalization of the procedure was defeated soundly, going down by a yawning margin in a deeply red state. In California and Oregon, voters turned back efforts to mandate parental involvement in abortions for teenagers -- it's the second time California has rejected the proposal.
---
As Democrats seized control of the Senate, abortion-rights supporters gained ground. Incoming Sens. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Jon Tester of Montana, Claire McCaskill of Missouri and Jim Webb of Virginia all support abortion rights. They all are set to replace anti-abortion Republicans -- and will vote in the chamber that decides on the fate of nominees to the Supreme Court.
In the House, at least 22 new pro-choice members are to replace lawmakers whose records were either anti-abortion or mixed on the issue, according to a count by NARAL Pro-Choice America. Final results in a few races still are unknown.
---
In Arizona's 5th Congressional District, where anti-abortion Republican incumbent J.D. Hayworth was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell, residents received fliers mocking Hayworth's support for letting pharmacists who say they personally oppose contraception to refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions. ``Sleeping pills? I don't believe in sleeping pills,'' a genial-looking middle-aged man in a white coat says in the flier. ``Try counting sheep.'' Tying incumbents to the pharmacist-refusal issue, as well as to their widespread opposition to emergency contraception, showed these lawmakers to be precisely where they are: Outside the mainstream.
Any comments?
Voters do this when candidates spout fvalues.
nm
I do not think there will be anything negative from family values voters...
I do not believe they will react negatively to this. What kind of man would McCain have been to decide not to choose her just because her daughter was pregnant and not married. What if she was pregnant and married? This whole thing just reeks. Like Obama said...children should not be involved in politics and this will not affect her ability to function as governor or as vice president. At least one on the left is being decent about this.
Yeah, and a large number of those new voters are
coming out saying they will vote for McCain now.
to foster relations with the Muslim voters...
both campaigns are needing those votes - not just Obama. There are Muslims in this country that are American citizens and they do get a vote too.
Probably because after 35 years, voters probably feel confident
Guess Biden's appearance in front of 3875 University of Northern Colorado students earlier today was just our/their collective imaginations. Tune in tomorrow for his 8:30 am stop in Colorado Springs, his afternoon stump in Pueblo or perhaps Thursday's in Raleigh NC rally. There is no reason whatsoever for Biden or the campaign to blink an eye over Biden stating the obvious about a new president being tested. He can also comfortably shine light on the experience issue (double-digit lead an all) since McCain gave up any credibility on that subject the minute he picked SP. Did you see the new polls top pick regarding what McCain's greatest liability is? But there should be no suprise there. Voters would have to be crazy to think she is ready to lead when she does not even understand her own job description and didn't have the sense to read the Constitution after the last 2 times she botched that question.
Typical pub. Underestimates the intelligence of US voters.
x
To all well-educated voters and free thinkers...
On Tuesday night, If and when Barack Hussein Obama wins the 2008 United States Presidential Election, please join me in announcing that "The tribe has spoken, and that John McCain, Sarah Palin, and the ubiquitous Sam have officially been voted off the island!"
Voters who actually read party platforms and plans
the distinctions between $250,000, $200,000 and $150,000. The figures apply to a variety of tax structures which have been clearly laid out for those interested in something other than basing their vote on dead-end issue-dodging, obsfucation, misinformation, character slurs and the like. You can read up or not. The information is there for the taking.
The voting machines is a must to make voters confident their votes are counting...sm
But the Democrat party needs to delineate what separates them from the republican party as terms of what direction they will take the country. That is definitely uncertain. The chances of them getting their voters out to the polls will be better, I think.
It's a dark day in America when voters dare to feel inspired and hopeful?
rasberries
to clarify - NO to fed laws superseding laws of State of California against voters
nm
This post really makes me WANT to vote for Obama. I am undecided, but this pushes me closer to Obama
...Thanks for the info!
Obama was cool, while grouchy man steamed. Obama!!!
I'm so happy. The dippy people on here who are haters and racists and mccain lovers must be so po'd today. HAHAHAHAHAHA
If Obama gets elected, then it was meant to be! Go, Obama!
nm
Go Obama/Biden! I don't like it and will VOTE OBAMA/BIDEN!
Obama has shown great judgment in the people who surround him. He picked a great VP choice, and his wife is impeccable as a helpmate and is a fantastic role model for the American children.
Obama
I believe Obama has an awesome political future. He sure is a bright light, and he would be someone I would seriously consider voting for.
Someone I like even better is Rep. Harold Ford from Tennessee. Every time I hear this man speak, I like him more and more and more.
I think there are lots of good candidates out there who don't fit the profiles you outlined, which I also believe to be true, and I think we're well overdue in considering those candidates because, in my opinion, what we've been offered in the last several elections -- on BOTH sides -- has been pretty pitiful. The "box" isn't working, and it's time to look outside of it.
Obama is the man!!!
I think he will make an excellent president some day. Maybe Hillary/Obama would be a good ticket choice.
obama
FYI - he never attended a midrasha. This was later corrected.
Obama 08...nm
Obama et. al.
If we get Obama or any of the other candidates we will get more of the same. War and taxes. Empire building. If you like that kind of stuff, vote for any of the candidates EXCEPT.......... RON PAUL. The only candidate for peace, limited government and minding our own business. 
Obama
As I posted on the other board, it is crazy that in one breath people are freaking out saying he is a Muslim, and in the next one, they are freaking out because of his stand on abortion. Being pro-choice really does not go with being a Muslim.
I like Obama, and I like his stance on choice. I really could care less if he is a Muslim. But, he belongs to a Christian church and has for over 20 years, before he had a political career.
People never cease to amaze me!
Obama
My husband just returned from Iraq, we support the war-- but if I had to vote democrat, definitely Obama, please!! But I vote republican, hee hee.
Go Obama!
What a great victory for Obama!
Did anyone see the Kennedy’s endorsement for Obama and his speech this morning? I have never been more excited and inspired in politics. In my life I’ve voted both sides (usually not voting for a candidate but rather voting for the other side as a vote against a candidate). I usually tune out in politics because of outright lies. Barack is the first candidate that I finally understand what he stands for, what his plans are, and he is someone who can connect with everyone in every walk of life. He is a trustworthy, inspiring, and humble person and his voting record and other aspects of his government life give me the confidence that he would be a great president. Listening to his speeches gives me hope for a better country/future for everyone.
I respect everyone’s choice for who they think would be a better president, but I’m sick to death of Clinton and what she stands for. All you have to do is read up on the history of her and what she did when she resided in Oakland California (who her mentors/ colleagues were and what her motives/plans are). She claims to have all this “experience” but doesn’t have it. She takes what her husband accomplished and if it was something good she claims credit to it and if it was bad she had nothing to do with it. Meanwhile her husband is so consumed/greedy (not sure which word best suits him – maybe consumed with greed) to get back into the white house that he is purposely destroying the opponents (even Ted Kennedy had to call and admonish him), but that is the Clinton legacy, destroying other people’s lives. Then when someone does call him on something he will point his finger at them in a threatening way and plays the victim role. It makes me ill just thinking of having someone as corrupt as both of them back in the white house.
If Bill was such a great president they should bring up all the great things that happened under his presidency, but we are not hearing any of it, why? Because there is none. In my opinion he was one of the worst presidents in history. Not one thing he did was for the good of the country. And if anyone believes that she was such a “good wife” while he was out messing around with other women think again. She had her mind set on being president a long time ago. She just uses him to get what she wants. Everything she does has always been calculated.
As for his presidency, I think people are forgetting….he lied under oath and he was impeached for it. Which brings me to another question…why does anyone believe anything he has to say now? Remember the phrase “that all depends on what the meaning of is, is”. Then there was Waco Texas – people were burned alive. But they called them members of a cult, so I guess that made it okay. Then let’s see…Somalia, Bosnia, Monica (and no it wasn’t just about having an affair with her or all the other women), receiving illegal contributions, Vince Foster, and the list goes on and on and on.
An article I just read said it better than I can….
“The problem for Hillary Clinton is that, as usual, she wants it both ways. She wants to be judged on her own merits and not be treated as Bill's Mini-Me. But she also wants to reap the benefits of Bill's popularity, and offers voters the reassuring suggestion that if there's a crisis while she's in the White House, there will be someone around who really does have executive branch experience - namely, Bill - to lend a hand. But the Clintons are playing a dangerous game. The more they remind us of what we liked about Act I of the Bill and Hillary Show, the more they also remind us of what we hated.
If you are interested in reading the whole article this is the link…
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/op_ed/hc-brooks0128.artjan28,0,7018385.story
Obama
He would be better than the one that has been there for 8 years. No matter who is elected, it will take a long time to fix what Bush as screwed up!
<3 Obama too!!
:)
Obama
If she keeps lying from today until November she might actually catch up with Obama!
Go Obama
Haven't seen any posts here for awhile. Very excited about the outcome of tonight's election. I am so glad to see that people are not buying the "gimmicks" Hillary proposed. Gas tax holiday?...give me a break! Someone needed to ask her, "So what happens when the holiday is over", you charge back up the gas price!
The big joke is that Bill Clinton raised the gas tax in his first year in office. It was included in a package of tax increases that amounted to the biggest tax increase in history. It was raised by 4.3 cents. Not only did he raise the gas tax, but he wanted to raise it even higher.
So you should all get this straight...Hillary is "claiming" she would give drivers 3 whole months (wow - imagine that) 18 cent a gallon cut after her husband forced drivers to pay an extra 5 cents for 15 years.
Unfortunately there were some people who bought into her pandering (which by the way is another word for lying), but thank goodness enough people with an education and most important most of the with common sense could see right through her lies.
Way to go North Carolina - I'm so pleased. And Indiana too. It was a close race thank goodness.
Now she needs to step down. Why? Because its the right thing to do. Do the numbers. There is no way she can win and anyone who believes so needs to wake up. What we need is for her to support Barack Obama (that is if she's telling the truth about the most important thing is nominating a democrat for president). Somehow though I do not believe she has the best interest of the party or the american people in mind. Her goal is to serve herself. She needs to graciously bow out and put all her efforts into getting a democrat in the office.
P.S. - Note to the "ditto heads". Maybe we should rename Limbaugh followers "dumbo heads". Not only did your little plan fail Mr. Limbo, but it failed badly. In a poll taken (and yes I know polls can be misleading), but not only did the republicans change parties to vote for a democrat but the majority of them voted for Obama. Then on top of that over 75% of republicans that voted as democrats said that Obama could be McCain (or as I am hearing him being referred to as McBush), but only around 25% said they believed Hillary could win. So not only does Hillary need to do the math, so does Mr. Limbo.
Obama
Is Barack Hussein Obama the Antichrist?
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=94d_1202965504
|
!["](http://www.blogger.com/img/icon18_edit_allbkg.gif"){kind=icon}
0 comments:
Post a Comment