- 11-05-2008, 02:07 AM
Anyone that will let go of there religion for a presidential campaign aint worth a flip... and thats our new leader
ud think americans would be smarter.........
obama-osama, A muslim for U.S. pres., and Hussein is his middle name
and thats our president
the only change that we will get will be the big great depression
- 11-05-2008, 02:11 AM
good luck to president Obama. He seems like a very smart person.
But to all of you who're talking about him raising taxes?
Isn't he giving a tax cut for couples who're earning less than 250k? from what I understood, his tax plans are more focused on higher taxes for the large corporations.
From an Aussie's perspective, I'm glad he won. I'm not a fan of McCain. I didn't like his support of his predecessor bush and the war, his approach to the economic crisis, constant attack on Obama's character nor especially his choice of Sarah Palin. If Ron Paul had been running for president, different story.
11-05-2008, 02:13 AM
11-05-2008, 02:35 AM
11-05-2008, 02:38 AM
11-05-2008, 02:42 AM
Meet Obama's Foreign Policy Advisor
YOUR NEW PRESIDENT, ZBIG BROTHER
by Alan Stang
October 29, 2008
As I write, little more than a week remains before E-Day, on which most Americans will vote. Nerves are being fearfully wracked. Even people who are usually somnolent say they can’t take the stress. There is a real danger that, unaddressed, the frustration of choosing between a Communist illegal alien raised by a Communist sex pervert and a POW traitor who is a Soviet front man could lead to an epidemic of Acid Reflux Disease or even an outbreak of Restless Leg Syndrome.
The purpose of this modest piece is to reassure you. Stop tormenting yourself. Further self-flagellation is pointless. Your next President has already been selected. Didn’t you know? Sure, go ahead and vote if you like, if you have nothing else to do, if you don’t mind standing in long lines between Obamatron morons and McCrud zombies, but enjoy the reassurance of knowing that the powers above Ponzi Paulson and Helicopter Ben Bernanke and Co. have already made their choice.
He is Zbigniew Brzezinski. What? Who? Is this some kind of Polish joke? Sadly, it is not. The lustiest enjoyer of Polish jokes in my experience was a remarkably gorgeous Polish lady I knew many years ago in the Bay Area. Every couple of years, I would come through on a speaking tour and she would press me for the latest Polish jokes I had heard. Again Zbigniew Brzezinski is not one of them. He is not just a victim of partial vowel deprivation.
In 1970, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote a book entitled Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era (New York, Viking Press). Let’s browse through it to find out what Zbigniew is. Zbig dedicates the book to Ian, Mark and Mika, his kids. A nice touch, don’t you think? He’s a family man. Starting on page 72 of my Penguin edition, he explains “why Marxism represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man’s universal vision.”
Marxism is “a victory of reason over belief. . . . To a greater extent than any previous mode of political thinking, Marxism puts a premium on the systematic and rigorous examination of material reality and on guides to action derived from that examination.” In other words, Marxism is a better system than our own. Marxism examines material reality and recommends action better than does the U.S. Constitution.
Page 83: Marxism “represented a major advance in man’s ability to conceptualize his relationship to his world.” It carried “an essentially ethical message.” It “was derived from a totally rational method of inquiry.” P. 123: Marxism “provided a unique intellectual tool for understanding and harnessing the fundamental forces of our time. . . . [I]t supplied the best available insight into contemporary reality; it infused political action with strong ethical elements . . . .”
By the way, as you see, I am making it easy for you. I am digging out the juicy nuggets. They are embedded in a prose the pompous turgidity of which recalls Isabel Paterson’s comment that the writing of John Foster Dulles compels the eyeball to rebound from the page. Subjecting the normal mind to such an aberration should be punished as a war crime or at least a species of torture.
I honestly believe that were we to strap your eyeballs to Zbigniew’s prose, you would run screaming from the premises, unless we had prudently tied you to a chair. The next time you feel like complaining about something you see in my columns, about my language or some joke, please remember that I am providing this onerous service at no extra charge.
Zbig Brother even excuses Stalin’s purges and mass murders. Page 134ff: “Yet though Stalinism may have been a needless tragedy for both the Russian people and communism as an ideal, there is the intellectually tantalizing possibility that for the world at large it was, as we shall see, a blessing in disguise. . . .” What? Yes. You see, “the internal violence employed by Stalin . . . had a restraining effect on unbridled nationalism.”
But isn’t Zbig today fanatically opposed to the continuing Soviet Union? Yes, he is, but not because he opposes Marxism. As we have seen, he is a lifelong Marxist. He opposes the Soviets precisely because he loves Marxism so much. He believes the Communists have misused it. He believes that he, Zbigniew Brzezinski, could impose it correctly, the way old Karl himself would have done it.
Enter David Rockefeller.
David is a confessed traitor, a conspirator who is working in a secret cabal to destroy the United States. What? David Rockefeller? How do we know that? In 2002, Random House, in New York, published his Memoirs. Remember, this is not someone accusing him of something. This is David Rockefeller himself talking on page 405:
For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
Because this sleazy extrusion of an unmarried female canine is a traitor – because he loves totalitarianism – he was naturally attracted to lifelong Marxist Zbigniew Brzezinski. Zbig became David’s prime minister. In 1973, under David’s direction, Zbig formed the Trilateral Commission, which is the foreign ministry of the Council on Foreign Relations, a preeminent founder of which was Marxist Edward M. House.
Both these groups work tirelessly to promote world government, which would mean the abolition of our own. Remember, the United States government and world government are mutually exclusive. You can’t have them both at the same time. If you are working for the latter, you are trying to destroy the former.
In 1976, Zbig and David literally interviewed dour peanut farmer Jimmy Carter at David’s Tarrytown estate. They liked what they heard and installed Democrat Jimmy as President of the United States. From the beginning, Jimmy was a Rockefeller factotum. Zbig Brother was his National Security Adviser. Jimmy came close to wrecking our economy. Okay, but what does all this have to do with the 2008 campaign?
In the 2000 campaign, Zbigniew Brzezinski, lifelong Marxist, was foreign policy adviser to Senator John McCain, who said this: “I am honored that Zbigniew Brzezinski will join my foreign policy team. As a former national security adviser and a highly respected foreign policy expert, his broad experience makes him an invaluable asset to my team.” So Zbig went from Democrat Jimmy to Republican John. Remember that at the top – above the candidates – you have one party with two branches.
What about this year? This year, Zbig is back, running foreign policy for Hussein. Indeed, remember Mark, son of Zbig? Mark was one of the sons to whom Zbig dedicated Between Two Ages in 1970. Mark is all grown up now and shaving. Can you imagine? Mark is foreign policy adviser to Senator Hussein. So who is foreign policy adviser to Senator McCain this year? The envelope please! El Senador Juan McCain’s foreign policy adviser this year is Ian Brzezinski, the other Zbigniew son.
That is correct. Lifelong Marxist Zbigniew Brzezinski – David Rockefeller’s Prime Minister - controls both sides of the forthcoming charade through his sons. Again, you can relax. It really makes no difference who wins. The only difference will be a difference in style, a difference in personality, natural differences peculiar to us all. Remember, David Rockefeller admits, boasts, that he and his family exercise inordinate influence over the United States. This is how he does it.
Do you need to know anything more to understand that a literal conspiracy controls both main political parties, and that at the top – above the candidates – both parties are the same? What was that you said about “change?” Remember, Zbig ran foreign policy for McCain in the 2000 campaign. This year, Hussein is just as much a factotum of Goldman Sachs and other instrumentalities of world government as McCain.
Notice that our Communist media say nothing about this. They understand perfectly well that if they sass David Rockefeller they could lose their jobs. So they specialize in arguing about lesser fry. So, sure, vote next week, but do so with the assurance that it makes no difference; that the conspiracy for world government has already chosen our next President. He is Rockefeller prime minister and Marxist Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Long live Zbig Brother!
11-05-2008, 02:45 AM
11-05-2008, 02:52 AM
11-05-2008, 02:58 AM
I highly doubt all you republicans whining about increased taxes are making the amount of money where you would get increased taxes. Are you all really making like over 150K?? cause if you are quit your whining. You really dont have much to worry about. You think its fair for you to be making that much when there are people who have lost their homes and are living in tents and on the street? oh and you may say
"well I worked hard for what I have so **** everyone else"
But Im sure you've all had a help up along the way. Whether it was growing up in a family that was financially comfortable, got scholarships, got hooked up with a job by somebody you knew or whatever. We dont all start out at the same level on the same playing field. Where you end usually depends a lot on where you start. I just don't think that If I am fortunate and benefitted because of what family I was born into or how much money my parents had or who I knew that I have any more right to live in a house than any other person. You all piss me off.
11-05-2008, 03:01 AM
And don't give me that "when you get some money you'll become a republican" Bull$h!t either. My grandparents were multi millionaires and were some of the biggest democrats Ive ever known. They gave away a **** ton of money to those less fortunate than them so that argument is a fallacy.
11-05-2008, 03:15 AM
11-05-2008, 03:20 AM
11-05-2008, 03:25 AM
11-05-2008, 03:34 AM
Its cause I havent been here in a while haha I moved to that other board last december... but I figure I might as well come back once in a while now that "the other board" is well established.
11-05-2008, 03:35 AM
11-05-2008, 04:11 AM
11-05-2008, 04:13 AM
11-05-2008, 07:11 AM
Well it was a mandate, with (depending on estimates) 364 electoral votes, this was truly a statement. I hope that Obama is as diplomatic as I think he is, and I hope he is what he says he is.
11-05-2008, 07:51 AM
11-05-2008, 08:30 AM
11-05-2008, 08:32 AM
11-05-2008, 08:35 AM
It equates to over $3500 more a year for me, and we only bring in a little over 100k in a 4 person household in the DC area. That's not exactly rich and we'll be paying taxes that basically amounts to an extra mortgage payment every year.
American Thinker: Senator Obama's Four Tax Increases for People Earning Under $250k
11-05-2008, 09:09 AM
Objectively claiming what a President-Elect will or will not do, several hours into his burgeoning presidency, is plain silly. How does that adage play out, "The best laid plans of mice and men"? The Democrats did not get 60 seats needed to break a filibuster, and Obama will need bi-partisan support to mend deep wounds created by bully-tactic foreign policy; he will need tact, class, and timing derived from both sides of the aisle to navigate an economic market which frightens those wearing both red and blue and; he will need to carry a soft and thoughtful touch when dealing with a collective American psyche which is bruised and battered as of now. If he is as intelligent and controlled as he labors every moment to appear, he will not undertake such uni-lateral, such close-minded, and such unrepresentative positions and tactics as occurred in these last eight years. To state unequivocally what actions will be carried out in the coming months and years is shamefully short-sighted, and in this early stage overwhelmed by personal biases - on both sides of the fence. Time, and not us amateur political pundits, will determine the consequences of this election.
11-05-2008, 09:10 AM
I'm reserving my judgement of our new president. I admit, I voted against him. But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt over the next year and see what he pushes, policy wise. In fact, I wish him the best of luck because I hope he can turn around the economy and become a great president. I really honestly hope the best for him, because if he turns out to be a wonderful president, my lot in life improves. Selfish, but honest.
But if he tells me that it's my patriotic duty to help those less fortunate and takes more of my money, I'll be pissed. Because I've seen where that money goes. Macon, GA has one of the largest areas of government subsidized housing in the United States. Guess what I saw. Escalade's with 22 inch rims sitting in the driveway of a house that the government is paying for. Four to five gentlemen sitting on the front stoop wearing nice new basketball jersey's and gold chains. And women in the welfare line with three children by three different men, but she doesn't care because each kid she pops out means a bigger welfare check. I've watched that same woman then take her welfare check to the counter, cash it and use half of it on lottery tickets and booze with her three kids running around like future convicts beating each other up.
Now I understand that it's a cultural thing and I have nothing against it what-so-ever. But my tax dollars are being spent so they can afford housing. Yet somehow, they are able to afford all those things? I went to college, got a degree in chemical engineering, and I make more money than the majority of American's at the ripe old age of 24. I can't afford an Escalade, or gold jewelry, or a bunch of throw-back jersey's without having nothing left. Yet that is where my tax money is going.
Don't get me wrong, there are people being helped by government money (my tax money) that deserve it. But do you really honestly believe, the government is the be all end all? Don't you think you'd rather portion out your money to charities of your choice, that you trust? Because I can't study welfare and decide whom my tax money goes to...but I can study Non-profit organizations that will use my money to better people's lives who ACTUALLY need it.
People are by nature selfish. If I make a bunch of money, it is not my responsibility to give that money to other people who need it. It is my right to decide what I do with my money. If I choose to be Ghandi and give it all away, so be it. But why is it my responsibility to take care of someone who decided to not finish high school, let alone college and lives on welfare? I didn't cause them to be in there current situation. I owe them nothing. Was I fortunate enough to have parents who were financially sound? Yes. My father is excellent with money and has sacrificed a lot to move up to where he makes plenty of money. It is his goal to leave his children and grandchildren better off than he was. Because believe it or not he came from a family just getting by in a rural town in northwestern PA. So he worked his ass off. Now tell me why it is his responsibility to not only guarantee his children's future, but also pay a high percentage of his income as taxes so that those "less fortunate" can have more. You can't, because it's not his responsibility.
The majority of those on welfare aren't there because circumstances kept them down. It's because they don't want to put in the effort. Because you'll find the majority of people do just enough to get by. And a small minority go above and beyond because they are driven and motivated. Yet when the reach the height of their success, and achieve the fruits of their labor. Someone in government tells them that "Sure, it's great that you've started a new business and employed dozens of other citizens. But...well since you've become successful we need to take more of your money so that we can give it to a bunch of lazy sons of *****es because "circumstances" have placed them in a place of poverty. In fact we're sure it was "circumstances" and not a lack of drive to better themselves or their families".
**** that. That's the bull**** our government spews to the masses. I hope against all reason that Obama decides to play the middle ground and doesn't increase welfare and/or taxes. Because putting more money in a broken system doesn't solve anything.
11-05-2008, 09:14 AM
However, that is down the road. I'm hopeful that Obama will see advantages to maintaining tax cuts for the lower and middle classes. Although his increase in Capital gains taxes are going to hurt the middle class more than those making over $250k because the rich will move their investments off shore thereby protecting their money. The rest of us don't have that option, so now I'll pay more taxes for spending time studying the market, making good decisions, and making money off my hard work.
Like I've said in previous posts this morning. I wish the best to Mr. Obama, our President-elect because I honestly hope he proves me wrong.
Similar Forum Threads
- By David Dunn in forum PoliticsReplies: 3Last Post: 02-19-2009, 12:44 PM
- By manny1010 in forum PoliticsReplies: 62Last Post: 01-23-2009, 10:58 AM
- By EasyEJL in forum PoliticsReplies: 0Last Post: 11-01-2008, 10:20 AM
- By msclbldrguy in forum General ChatReplies: 4Last Post: 03-19-2003, 02:27 PM