I'm Pre-Approved for an ObamaCard! - AnabolicMinds.com - Page 2

I'm Pre-Approved for an ObamaCard!

Page 2 of 2 First 12
  1. CDB
    CDB is offline
    Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2673

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982 View Post
    Agreed.. but in all honesty I think Ron Paul did shoot himself in the foot with that premise. He is not a Republican by any stretch of the imagination, and to run a campaign on the tainted party name was a kill shot for him.
    Actually, and sadly, it was his best shot. As a third party candidate he was guaranteed to be shut out of all the debate and would have been given even less respect by the media outlets. He is a Republican in terms of the old right a la Patterson, Taft, Goldwater, etc.

    I will always vote in the direction I believe, and that being third party. I only hope more and more of America will wake up to the idea that these two parties do not have our best interest in mind, and only further and further killing the sovereignty that made America great.
    I think more and more of American will first try and 'get theirs' from the system before they even think of trying freedom for a change.

  2. Board Sponsor
    DAdams91982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    7,407
    Rep Power
    700731

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB View Post
    Actually, and sadly, it was his best shot. As a third party candidate he was guaranteed to be shut out of all the debate and would have been given even less respect by the media outlets. He is a Republican in terms of the old right a la Patterson, Taft, Goldwater, etc.



    I think more and more of American will first try and 'get theirs' from the system before they even think of trying freedom for a change.
    One of the big problems across the board right now... the hand out mentality. Waiting for it to get filled. Masquerading as a humanity movement, essentially striping the youth of any type of need to pick up and do something for themselves.

    Adams
    The Historic PES Legend
  3. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,789
    Rep Power
    11678

    Reputation

    It's politics... Even if you had a Libertarian movement that worked and gained political power on the Hill it would only be a matter of time before we ended up right where we are now. People more worried about keeping their seat of power over what their constituants want.
    •   
       

  4. Never enough
    Board Moderator
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    46
    Posts
    31,830
    Rep Power
    768794

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    It's politics... Even if you had a Libertarian movement that worked and gained political power on the Hill it would only be a matter of time before we ended up right where we are now. People more worried about keeping their seat of power over what their constituants want.
    totally true. We'd have to establish 2-6 year terms in senate + house, and then a term limit of 1 term for anything to change. No more dynasties then, no more spending half your term campaigning for your next election, you have 1 shot to make a difference. We'll never see real change otherwise.
    This space for rent

    Phenadrol Log http://anabolicminds.com/forum/suppl...-hell-did.html - AMAZING fat loss results so far
  5. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,789
    Rep Power
    11678

    Reputation

    How do you get people to vote to have themselves limited to their jobs?
  6. Never enough
    Board Moderator
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    46
    Posts
    31,830
    Rep Power
    768794

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    I didn't say it would be easy but its the only way we can have our representatives actually represent us, rather than being career politicians. I mean seriously, after the obama presidency, what state do you think Hillary will try to become a senator in this time around? Arlen Specter anyone? He's changed parties then back again, solely to get past the PRIMARIES for his party. not so much even for the general election purposes, but just the primaries. Who does he represent? seems like mostly he represents Arlen Specter
    This space for rent

    Phenadrol Log http://anabolicminds.com/forum/suppl...-hell-did.html - AMAZING fat loss results so far
  7. Diamond Member
    Jayhawkk's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  230 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    39
    Posts
    12,789
    Rep Power
    11678

    Reputation

    Unfortunately, you're right
  8. CDB
    CDB is offline
    Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2673

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    How do you get people to vote to have themselves limited to their jobs?
    Well that's the kicker, ain't it? Which is why I don't support democracy in the end. One, the middle and lower half of the bell curve will always out vote the upper half which means legislation will always tend towards the moronic. Two, the incentive in an elected position is to serve the people who got you there, but that isn't 'the people' as we know them but the special interests who paid for your campaign. Hence, we have a bunch of dupes voting for a smaller bunch of dupes, and trusting that when in office and given the power to make law and grant special privileges they will become not only more intelligent, but altruists and serve the common good of all mankind. I call BS. They're gonna squeeze the system for all it's worth for as long as possible, and then bow out, hopefull before they've pissed off anyone to such an extreme that they resort to bullets to remove them from office. That's our system, take it or leave it. The only way to modify it is to mobilize enough people to outweigh the special intersts who really call the shots most of the time, or to start shooting at the politicians who don't abide by the constitution.
  9. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,381
    Rep Power
    956429

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB View Post
    Well that's the kicker, ain't it? Which is why I don't support democracy in the end. One, the middle and lower half of the bell curve will always out vote the upper half which means legislation will always tend towards the moronic. Two, the incentive in an elected position is to serve the people who got you there, but that isn't 'the people' as we know them but the special interests who paid for your campaign. Hence, we have a bunch of dupes voting for a smaller bunch of dupes, and trusting that when in office and given the power to make law and grant special privileges they will become not only more intelligent, but altruists and serve the common good of all mankind. I call BS. They're gonna squeeze the system for all it's worth for as long as possible, and then bow out, hopefull before they've pissed off anyone to such an extreme that they resort to bullets to remove them from office. That's our system, take it or leave it. The only way to modify it is to mobilize enough people to outweigh the special intersts who really call the shots most of the time, or to start shooting at the politicians who don't abide by the constitution.
    we need a lot of ammunition
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  10. lutherblsstt
    Guest
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by DAdams91982 View Post
    As in the Constitution Party is not a viable option, or are you saying strict adherence to the constitution is paramount to scientology? Written word is hard to decipher sometimes.

    Adams
    The Constitution is a historic document written in a language that requires the assistance of Professors of Law specialized in Constititutional Law to properly understand what the meaning is.
  11. Board Sponsor
    DAdams91982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    7,407
    Rep Power
    700731

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by lutherblsstt View Post
    The Constitution is a historic document written in a language that requires the assistance of Professors of Law specialized in Constititutional Law to properly understand what the meaning is.
    Constitution lawyers make their living trying to make the constitution say what they want it to say... for instance the second amendment. It is pretty clear, till you have someone wanting more restrictions, then apparently the right is only extended to a militia.

    Adams
    The Historic PES Legend
  12. lutherblsstt
    Guest
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB View Post
    Well that's the kicker, ain't it? Which is why I don't support democracy in the end. One, the middle and lower half of the bell curve will always out vote the upper half which means legislation will always tend towards the moronic. Two, the incentive in an elected position is to serve the people who got you there, but that isn't 'the people' as we know them but the special interests who paid for your campaign. Hence, we have a bunch of dupes voting for a smaller bunch of dupes, and trusting that when in office and given the power to make law and grant special privileges they will become not only more intelligent, but altruists and serve the common good of all mankind. I call BS. They're gonna squeeze the system for all it's worth for as long as possible, and then bow out, hopefull before they've pissed off anyone to such an extreme that they resort to bullets to remove them from office. That's our system, take it or leave it. The only way to modify it is to mobilize enough people to outweigh the special intersts who really call the shots most of the time, or to start shooting at the politicians who don't abide by the constitution.
    Rightintheface here,

    We all know there are puppets and puppet masters. I still reckon Obama is a step in the right direction.

    I am curious though -
    what would you propose as an alternative to democracy ?
  13. Board Sponsor
    DAdams91982's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    7,407
    Rep Power
    700731

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by lutherblsstt View Post
    Rightintheface here,

    We all know there are puppets and puppet masters. I still reckon Obama is a step in the right direction.

    I am curious though -
    what would you propose as an alternative to democracy ?
    For starters, a REAL democracy would be the ideal alternative. I really don't remember voting in my life time for congress to get a raise.... any of the times. This whole elected official to represent you is bull****. There are way to many people between myself and the commander in chief.

    Adams
    The Historic PES Legend
  14. CDB
    CDB is offline
    Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2673

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by lutherblsstt View Post
    The Constitution is a historic document written in a language that requires the assistance of Professors of Law specialized in Constititutional Law to properly understand what the meaning is.
    Quite the contrary, the constitution and the law in general in the US were written in plain English so that the law would not be some inaccessible thing to the general population. The only people who benefit from the 'legalese' view of the constitution are the lawers in congress and in the private market who then rake in millions 'interpretting' the meaning of the laws and/or bending them to fit their needs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rightintheface
    I am curious though -
    what would you propose as an alternative to democracy ?
    As a practical matter? Nothing. As a far reach, monarchy of some kind so the head of state in effect owns the state and is interested in preserving and increasing its long term capital value as opposed to just squeezing it for all it's worth in the present, which is what elected stewards tend to do. Chances of that happening in the US though are practically zilch.

    As a practical avenue, try and re educate people as to what many of the founders knew. That being, that the state is not a solution to life's imperfections and that its scope should be severely limited. That freedom is preferable than a possibly more cushy life but one in effect spent in bondage of some kind. A big part of this is recapturing the vocabulary. Rights used to mean restrictions on the state's power, these days it means government enablement. Freedom of speech meant the state couldn't stop you from speaking your mind, not that everyone was enabled to publish their own newspaper. These days the latter intepretation is more likely. Of old the free market meant just that, a market free from intervention. These days institutions like The Fed are considered 'free market', even though The Fed's job stated outright is to push interest lower than the market would have set it and to make money more freely available than the market would have. We live in a newspeak world where the operations of a government institution whose goal is to directly interfere with and change market prices for the direct benefit of a few politically connected bankers is considered 'free market' even though it's a page right out of the Marx/Engles play book, both of whom stated outright that a centralization and control of credit and capital would be instrumental in bringing about socialism/communism.

    So the first step I think is to take back the language, and then try and show people that by and large they are better off without the government sucking up half their income. To show them that a country where the government does just that on a regular basis is not properly considered free.
  15. lutherblsstt
    Guest
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by CDB View Post
    Quite the contrary, the constitution and the law in general in the US were written in plain English so that the law would not be some inaccessible thing to the general population. The only people who benefit from the 'legalese' view of the constitution are the lawers in congress and in the private market who then rake in millions 'interpretting' the meaning of the laws and/or bending them to fit their needs.



    As a practical matter? Nothing. As a far reach, monarchy of some kind so the head of state in effect owns the state and is interested in preserving and increasing its long term capital value as opposed to just squeezing it for all it's worth in the present, which is what elected stewards tend to do. Chances of that happening in the US though are practically zilch.

    As a practical avenue, try and re educate people as to what many of the founders knew. That being, that the state is not a solution to life's imperfections and that its scope should be severely limited. That freedom is preferable than a possibly more cushy life but one in effect spent in bondage of some kind. A big part of this is recapturing the vocabulary. Rights used to mean restrictions on the state's power, these days it means government enablement. Freedom of speech meant the state couldn't stop you from speaking your mind, not that everyone was enabled to publish their own newspaper. These days the latter intepretation is more likely. Of old the free market meant just that, a market free from intervention. These days institutions like The Fed are considered 'free market', even though The Fed's job stated outright is to push interest lower than the market would have set it and to make money more freely available than the market would have. We live in a newspeak world where the operations of a government institution whose goal is to directly interfere with and change market prices for the direct benefit of a few politically connected bankers is considered 'free market' even though it's a page right out of the Marx/Engles play book, both of whom stated outright that a centralization and control of credit and capital would be instrumental in bringing about socialism/communism.

    So the first step I think is to take back the language, and then try and show people that by and large they are better off without the government sucking up half their income. To show them that a country where the government does just that on a regular basis is not properly considered free.
    I understand what you mean.

    I too have concerns about the governmental form of democracy as I see it in so many countries.

    I have not problem with the concept of democracy itself, but with how in practice it has many problems.

    It too has corruption, often inefficient decision making that leads to compromises that often have little to do with the original idea. One of the biggest problems is that most democracies are democracies in process but not in content.

    Even the process is not really strictly democratic, but through representatives that act for the people rather than the people directly who participate. Of course there is justification. If we would have every nitwit in the country decide what is best for the country than that could be scary.

    However the problem is still process vs. contents. If for example through a new law it would be decided by the House and the Senate that half the government has to consist of the KKK then that clearly is a democratically taken decision, despite the content of the decision being very undemocratic.

    Governmental forms that differ from democracies in the end usually have far more abuses of human rights.

    One would have to search history to find a couple of absolutists whose ruling does not escalate.

    I can think of Frederick II of Prussia for example, a so-called "enlightened absolutist". There aren't too many others. Charles v, perhaps ? Charlemagne ?

    A pure monarchic form of government in reality only is fairer and better than the concept of democracy is that monarch approaches the perfection of God in terms of having the ability to do only good, be perfectly fair and having absolute wisdom and knowledge.

    The fallibility of man, the conditions of man being subject to beliefs, passions, culture make that almost per definition impossible. Thus in hindsight, I never say that democracy is the best way of the government but the least worse one.
  16. Elite Member
    suncloud's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  201 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Age
    37
    Posts
    6,352
    Rep Power
    3260

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Random181 View Post
    Just as hitler kicked out the jews so his native german people could prosper, soon the only way we will be able to prosper as a country again is to remove a large proportion of the immigrants. Every english person I know supports hitler style policies of england for english people, judging by the responses in this thread I would think a lot of americans share the same views.

    Hitler said "No jew shall feast while a german man goes hungry", now hitler was generally a nutcase, but the belief that germany should support german people above all others was an honourable belief, a belief that captured the hearts of millions of people and allowed him to gain power. It is only a matter of time before a similar extremist leader gains power again. That will be the day civil war begins.
    a rise of mccarthyism in america? i know that's a general consensus in america that immigrants are taking "our" jobs, but there's also the flipside, that we pay so much money for professionals that the best doctors from developing nations (malaysia, india, china) move to the US where they get paid the most. they also very rarely take "our" jobs - i know very few out of work doctors.

    what we have to be careful of here, is we have to make sure illegal immigrants are prosecuted, and not build up a fear of the legal immigrants. an old coworker of mine is an illegal immigrant and on his 5th DUI. they told him if he got another one, he MIGHT be deported. IMO it is the immigrants that create problems that have to be dealt with more harshly, and leave the rest alone.
  17. Diamond Member
    strategicmove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    10,754
    Rep Power
    774630

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Irish Cannon View Post
    ...
    It's apparent you're part of the DumbMasses. You're welcome to leave this country if you don't like it.
    Wow!
    Product Educator | USPowders
    Statements made by this online persona are the sole property of the owner, and do not necessarily reflect USPowders’ opinion as a whole.
  18. Diamond Member
    strategicmove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    10,754
    Rep Power
    774630

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayhawkk View Post
    .

    Immigrants are what made this country strong. It's the illegal ones that are giving the problems. Hitler didn't relocate Jews, he slaghtered them! Don't try and make what he did seem beneficial by choosing your words carefully. We've been in recessions before without a total world meltdown of anarchy and civil war. I think it's a bit too early to be sounding the trumpet of tribulation.
    Good post!

    There can be no justification for using Hitler's antisemitism, and the accompanying grave consequences, as an analogy or hint for a social paradigm. Besides, Hitler's Germany was a completely different historical setting, especially in the light of the World War I reparation payments Germany was burdened with, coupled with the high level of unemployment of the time. So, Hitler's lopsided, ethically and morally problematic approach to the social challenges of the Germany of his era, including his infamous Solution of the so-called Jewish Question, should not and cannot morally be cited, even in a very remote sense, as a prescriptive model for modern-day policy action.
    Product Educator | USPowders
    Statements made by this online persona are the sole property of the owner, and do not necessarily reflect USPowders’ opinion as a whole.
  19. Advanced Member
    Random181's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  0 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    674
    Rep Power
    409

    Reputation

    Hitler was a nutcase, I in no way support his policies of slaughtering the jews or anyone for that matter, the fact I was stating was that one of hitlers main policies was germany would support german people first- he believed that the jews and immigrants did nothing but make it harder for german people as a whole. Using this idea he convinced the german people that the answer to their problems was to be rid of the jews. In modern society a large proportion of the population is of the opinion that our countries would be better were it not for the illegal immigrants- there you have the hate of immigrants already set up, it is a very small step to move to believing that removing the illegal immigrants (and a large amount of the lazy legal ones) would solve our countries problems and again a large percentage of the population also believes this. The step to take measures to remove these immigrants will be a small one, it is a matter of time before such a situation occurs. Jayhawk I agree it is to soon at this time to be sounding the trumpet of tribulation, it is only a matter of time before a situation where the immigrants are removed occurs, every day that passes more move in and more strain is put on our countries already struggling systems.

    edit: @irish cannons last quoted comment, well said irish
  20. Elite Member
    suncloud's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  201 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Age
    37
    Posts
    6,352
    Rep Power
    3260

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Random181 View Post
    Hitler was a nutcase, I in no way support his policies of slaughtering the jews or anyone for that matter, the fact I was stating was that one of hitlers main policies was germany would support german people first- he believed that the jews and immigrants did nothing but make it harder for german people as a whole. Using this idea he convinced the german people that the answer to their problems was to be rid of the jews. In modern society a large proportion of the population is of the opinion that our countries would be better were it not for the illegal immigrants- there you have the hate of immigrants already set up, it is a very small step to move to believing that removing the illegal immigrants (and a large amount of the lazy legal ones) would solve our countries problems and again a large percentage of the population also believes this. The step to take measures to remove these immigrants will be a small one, it is a matter of time before such a situation occurs. Jayhawk I agree it is to soon at this time to be sounding the trumpet of tribulation, it is only a matter of time before a situation where the immigrants are removed occurs, every day that passes more move in and more strain is put on our countries already struggling systems.

    edit: @irish cannons last quoted comment, well said irish
    removing the illegal ones would help our country specifically with regards to rising health care costs (50% in the last 2 years) because we have to offset the costs of providing free emergency room services to an illegal population that we cannot bill because they don't "live here".

    i feel that illegal immigrants also tarnish the image of legal immigrants that work very hard to live in this country. you also are comparing hitler's "we have to remove all immigrants from our country" to the current "we have to remove all illegal immigrants from our country". i think we note a difference between those who followed the right steps to come here, and those that did not.

    i could be wrong though.
  21. Advanced Member
    Random181's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  0 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    674
    Rep Power
    409

    Reputation

    Suncloud I agree with you entirely, the point I was making was that if we as a country do not soon limit the illegal immigrants and begin giving harsher punishments to those who are here illegally already we risk creating a general feeling where society turns against immigrants as a whole, In my opinion this would be a huge loss, hell a lot of our doctors are immigrants, we rely on foreign foreign language teachers the list goes on...I apologize if my point came across badly in my earlier post ive been studying this whole day and im extremely tired..
  22. Diamond Member
    Irish Cannon's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"   lbs.
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Age
    27
    Posts
    12,615
    Rep Power
    74317

    Reputation Reputation

    I'll just sum it up...

    Legal Immigrants ARE the United States!

    ...illegal immigrants effing suck and need to leave.
  23. Advanced Member
    Random181's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  0 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    674
    Rep Power
    409

    Reputation

    Only to a certain degree my friend- I guess it depends on your views, if you dont mind me asking is there a "dole" in america? basically do the government give you money if you arent working?
  24. Never enough
    Board Moderator
    EasyEJL's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  205 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    46
    Posts
    31,830
    Rep Power
    768794

    Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Irish Cannon View Post
    I'll just sum it up...

    Legal Immigrants ARE the United States!

    ...illegal immigrants effing suck and need to leave.
    I heard one of the democrats calling them "undocumented immigrants" again. Its like calling a crack dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
    This space for rent

    Phenadrol Log http://anabolicminds.com/forum/suppl...-hell-did.html - AMAZING fat loss results so far
  25. Board Supporter
    kjkriston's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  224 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,165
    Rep Power
    1620

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Gutterpump View Post
    Hopefully he can undo the wrongs of the previous administration. The Republican party has been doing a good job of making America look like a neo-fascist police state. I am speaking as a non-American living in America, but of course I am sure a lot of American's won't agree with this view out of shear blind patriotism...one of the largest issues seemingly unique to America.
    If by unique to America you mean just like every other country in the world then yea I guess it's "blind" patriotism. Or maybe it like being the kid that's bigger stronger and faster and everyone hates them for it.
  26. New Member
    Jimmy Alto's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    68
    Rep Power
    102

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by kjkriston View Post
    If by unique to America you mean just like every other country in the world then yea I guess it's "blind" patriotism. Or maybe it like being the kid that's bigger stronger and faster and everyone hates them for it.
  27. CDB
    CDB is offline
    Registered User
    CDB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Age
    38
    Posts
    4,543
    Rep Power
    2673

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Alto View Post
    As in the same countries who spend half their time in the UN damning us for this or that spend the other half either begging us for money to support their economically assinine regimes and/or damning us for not giving enough when we usually end up giving more than the next ten contributing countries combined.
  28. lutherblsstt
    Guest
    lutherblsstt's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Irish Cannon View Post
    So I'm supposed to sit back and not say anything just because he's spent little time in office? That's retarded. You realize he's served about a ninth of his term?

    He said he was going to cut our deficit in half in his first term...So far he's nearly tripled it.

    He had no business even running for office. Obama said it himself back in 2004.




    You're calling the Republicans neo-fascists? I believe you're a little confused. The liberals are no longer liberals anymore. THEY'RE the fascists.

    Obama has not, and will not, do all that he said or even all that he wants. He certainly is not going to do all that you want. He's going to mess up and he's going to do things everyone disagrees with. To pretend he hasn't done anything he said is simply dishonest.

    On some of these things you can argue that he hasn't come through, but I can do the same for many of your points. The reason is simply: most of these are not simple issues and there are not going to be simple answers.

    By the way, there are many things I disagree with Obama on (guns) and things he should take a stand on (homosexual marriage). There are also things that McCain said I agree with.
  29. Registered User
    kwyckemynd00's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"   lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    5,324
    Rep Power
    2846

    Reputation

    Quote Originally Posted by Gutterpump View Post
    Irish Cannon, fascists/neo-fscists have been and always were extremely right wing. There are many people who fit this description in the States.

    I think the US should get rid of Cheney already.
    You absolutely failed to provide evidence for your claim that the Bush administration made this country "fascist" and failed even more in your description of fascism. Fascist =/= right wing.

    Here is a great introduction to fascism (thx wiki):
    Fascism comprises a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology[1][2][3][4] and a corporatist economic ideology.[5] Fascists advocate the creation of a single-party state.[6] Fascists believe that nations and/or races are in perpetual conflict whereby only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and by asserting themselves in combat against the weak.[7] Fascist governments forbid and suppress criticism and opposition to the government and the fascist movement.[8] Fascism opposes class conflict, blames capitalist liberal democracies for its creation and communists for exploiting the concept.[9] In the economic sphere, many fascist leaders have claimed to support a "Third Way" in economic policy, which they believed superior to both the rampant individualism of unrestrained capitalism and the severe control of state communism.[10][11] This was to be acheived by a form of government control over business and labor (called "the corporate state" by Mussolini)[12][13]No common and concise definition exists for fascism and historians and political scientists disagree on what should be in any concise definition.[14]

    This description is EERILY reflective of the Obama administration. The administration responds rabidly to criticism by critical media personalities (intimidation), his spending is all aimed at statist goals (that's why they had to urgently "rush" these "bailouts" which don't actually take effect until after the projected economic turnaround). The only one which doesn't fit the bill for Obama is opposition to class conflict--he encourages class conflict.

    The Bush admin sucked, but so did the previous 3 of 4 administrations [Clinton admin --> real estate bubble / stated income loans / high risk mortgages / etc = Clinton + Carter. If you deny that you're absolutely uneducated on the issue. While private corporations had disgusting people taking advantage of the situation, it ultimately came down to the Clinton + Carter + Fanny Mae (staffed by Clinton)]. And, just because his admin sucked doesn't mean we could have done better considering we only had two options in 2000 and 2004- Gore and Kerry are prime examples of self-serving idiots (although I'd take Kerry over Obama).
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. REDuction...Polish approved
    By CONTROLLED LABS in forum Controlled Labs
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-27-2009, 10:09 AM
  2. Low test and approved for HRT
    By IceT in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-11-2008, 07:44 PM
  3. MLB-approved supplements
    By DeerDeer in forum Supplements
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-20-2006, 05:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in