Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

I read the first 20 or so posts, and felt all that needed to be said had been said.

It really wouldn't bother me if Obama was born outside the US, to US parents, etc.

What I find disturbing is the fact he wasn't entirely "raised" within the US. I believe he spent a fair portion of his childhood absorbing the Phillipine atmosphere. If given a choice between a Phillipino born overseas and educated American and Obama, I'd pick the Phillipino (assuming I was choosing between mirror candidates [if only on the surface.])

parenthesii

At 4/28/11 12:42 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: I read the first 20 or so posts, and felt all that needed to be said had been said.

It really wouldn't bother me if Obama was born outside the US, to US parents, etc.

What I find disturbing is the fact he wasn't entirely "raised" within the US. I believe he spent a fair portion of his childhood absorbing the Phillipine atmosphere. If given a choice between a Phillipino born overseas and educated American and Obama, I'd pick the Phillipino (assuming I was choosing between mirror candidates [if only on the surface.])

parenthesii

There is also like a 10 year residency requirement as well so you've at least been back in the country for a while before running. The fact that he may have been raised in another country could be useful if it wasn't for the fact that he was educated back here in the US for college and his formative career years have been in the US. And I believe he went to an American School while his mom taught English...so there's that

The only time I would even be concerned with a natural born candidate who "grew up" somewhere else would be if that candidate was also an official for another government that wasn't exactly democratic.

Either way, Obama only spent 4 years of his childhood in the Philippines before moving back to Hawaii. oooo, I can only imagine the insidious, socialist, anti-American brainwashing he went through in between learning letters and long division.

Yeah he got into law school through affirmative action.. where he.. excelled ...
.... .
. ... ....

That's kind of like saying Rocky is a piece of shit because he only ever got to beat the heavy weight champion of the world twice in a row because he was chosen by lottery instead of rising through the ranks like the other guys.

Even if you're right you're still an idiot for trying to use that as an argument against him.

Birthers are idiots, but its pretty obvious that it was merely a means to an end. They wanted obama gone, and this was their best hope.
Obama is still a fucking dreadful president, and America is still on a fast track to collapse. The 'other side' being idiots changes nothing.

At 4/28/11 12:42 AM, aviewaskewed wrote:

Yeah, but I tend to think that, again, given Obama's credentials, this is just as silly, if not sillier, then the birther thing. I mean, I know Bush wasn't exactly an academic wiz kid, and he got the presidency...but he was also massively connected politically. Obama came from nothing and nowhere. I tend to think this is just Trump making another (pardon the pun) trumped up charge to mobilize the ignorant radicals on the right.

Bush was connected politically, but, Obama had 4 things doing for him.
1. Timing. the wars, economy, and media's 8 years of pounding on Bush put the republicans in a position that a stale bags of corn chips could have beaten them in an election.

2. media. they praised and worshipped Obama like.. well... some sort of political gift from heaven. Not to mention the media protected him and even went so far as to throw out an entire deck of race cards, first against Hillary, then against McCain.

3. Race. yes I said it.

4. one hell of a teleprompter writer. You never saw him without when he was campaigning and of course the media made damned sure to stay silent on the issue.

True, but if Obama thinks Trump is going to be serious competition for him...I think Obama may be one of those people who once again proves book smarts doesn't always make one smart.

You never can tell. People said Obama didn't stand a chance.

You really think he's seriously trying to run? I don't. I think this is all a great big goddamn publicity stunt and cash grab on Trump's part.

Or maybe he's just a liberal plant put in there to derail the election and make sure Obama wins.

I don't think he seriously wants to run because his platform so far looks ignorant and alienating to all but the most ill-informed and rabid on the right. I think he's looking to build an audience for his current television efforts, and maybe work some new angles coming out of this.

yeah, how dare someone not have a liberal platform...

Oh no, Vince would NEVER be anybody's VP! He needs to be "the guy" or nothing at all!

That's what would make it SO entertaining. it would be a 4 year feud at the white house with plenty of media coverage... only thing is the media would probably cover it to the extent that little else gets in the news for the next four years.

Well, unless Trump agrees to let people think it's like Bush and Cheney, where people think Vince is actually the evil genius pulling all the strings. On second thought, that ticket might be fun to elect just to watch them bicker and try to prove who's got the bigger dick and is actually in charge.

yup.

At 4/28/11 01:02 AM, Malachy wrote: Either way, Obama only spent 4 years of his childhood in the Philippines before moving back to Hawaii. oooo, I can only imagine the insidious, socialist, anti-American brainwashing he went through in between learning letters and long division.

I don't care where he was born, but how is he was raised is extremely distrubing.

At 4/28/11 07:16 AM, Korriken wrote: Bush was connected politically, but, Obama had 4 things doing for him.
1. Timing. the wars, economy, and media's 8 years of pounding on Bush put the republicans in a position that a stale bags of corn chips could have beaten them in an election.

I'll grant you timing, if you grant me that Bush was a pretty bad president with some of the things he perused that I mentioned earlier in the thread. Any Democrat following Bush probably would have won. In fact, Obama had a close race until McCain picked Palin. I remember some democratic organizers I knew calling the race in McCains favor in August because they couldn't see how Obama could make up the points needed to win. I think Palin is one of the main reasons Obama won. People chose the *not crazy* person to go to the white house.

2. media. they praised and worshipped Obama like.. well... some sort of political gift from heaven. Not to mention the media protected him and even went so far as to throw out an entire deck of race cards, first against Hillary, then against McCain.

There was some use of race in the election. But I also remember Republicans going on and on and on about "Real Americans" and I remember some fairly racist campaign stops where Republicans were hurling racial epitaphs at Obama. I don't buy that Obama was 100% protected by the media. Frankly, all Fox News did was rail against him. Unless you're admitting Fox News isn't "News."

3. Race. yes I said it.

Fuck you?

No, sincerely, from a guy who voted for Obama for almost every reason I could think of, and never once did race enter the equation.

Fuck you.

4. one hell of a teleprompter writer. You never saw him without when he was campaigning and of course the media made damned sure to stay silent on the issue.

Yeah, whatever. I'm not going to overly defend a guy who's reneged on so many things he said he'd do on the campaign trail. But teleprompters aren't exactly new to politics. Every politician has been using them or note cards since their invention. Maybe you missed out on speech/debate class, but its a standard thing for public speaking to have a reference on you. For a guy doing speeches every day of his life, whose scrutinized left and right, it is strategic to have such a thing in order to stay on message, and I'll say that for republicans as well.

The only reason you keep bringing this up is because Palin wrote basic fundamental points she should have been able to remember in magic marker on her hand, for a short interview.

You never can tell. People said Obama didn't stand a chance.

People were saying Obama was an interesting guy 2 years before he showed up. That was calculated. People didn't know who he was. For Trump its something else. Everyone knows his name. Everyone recognizes him. It makes for a very different situation.

Could he be elected? Sure. Reagan the actor was elected. Should he be? God, I hope not.

Or maybe he's just a liberal plant put in there to derail the election and make sure Obama wins.

That would require trump to care about more than something other than Trump. I don't buy it.

Nah, he's trying to gin up attention for himself, his show, etc. He did the same thing in the 80s and didn't follow through. Yeah, he's got some liberal background, but he's a sycophant. He'll do anything to get more attention, increase his ratings, and make more money. He'll drop out just before he has to declare. If he doesn't, I will be genuinely surprised. Then I'll watch him lose. I know more moderates that are afraid of Trump than are afraid of Palin, and what does that tell you?

yeah, how dare someone not have a liberal platform...

He's not fiscally conservative or socially conservative. So I don't know what platform he's running on in all honesty. Its not liberal, but I wouldn't call it conservative either. The guy's been pro-abortion, pro-universal health care, etc.

At 4/28/11 01:02 AM, Malachy wrote:

At 4/28/11 12:42 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: I read the first 20 or so posts, and felt all that needed to be said had been said.

The only time I would even be concerned with a natural born candidate who "grew up" somewhere else would be if that candidate was also an official for another government that wasn't exactly democratic.

Like a government that would require mandatory purchase of a good or service under penalty of law?

I'm confused by what you mean, with what you said. What is "not exactly democratic"?

Either way, Obama only spent 4 years of his childhood in the Philippines before moving back to Hawaii. oooo, I can only imagine the insidious, socialist, anti-American brainwashing he went through in between learning letters and long division.

If only those were the only things young boys learn.

Didn't McCain grow up in panama and spend 5 years living in Viet Nam? OMG, he's a drug dealing communist! Oh wait, his complection is too white.

You people have got to be kidding me. You can try to nitpick his background all you want, but picking ethnic, religious, or foreigner reason to go after Obama is just another way to cover your racism. Obama has live for well over 4 decades, isn't there enough ACTIONS for you people to talk about?

At 4/28/11 02:56 AM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 4/27/11 09:01 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote: Oh my, I'm dreadfully sorry, I didn't know that. In light of this new, hard-hitting, CONCLUSIVE rebuttal, I'll just be on my way.

Your sarcasm sucks.

Aw, you think so? Even after I spent HOURS coming up with that retort.... all that work, wasted.... I'm sorry bro, I'll try to do it better next time.

And here I was thinking that the right wing Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to stop the Florida recount

There was no good reason to do a recount. Just because a few butthurt lefties were mad that their guy didn't win isn't good enough reason to recount every vote.

Well, darn. You got me again. I guess that a difference of 00.01% in the vote totals is a margin far too great to overcome through a recount, because you say so. I once again apologize a thousandfold.

By the way, how's Senator Norm Coleman doing nowdays? I stopped paying attention after I heard that he won overwhelmingly in Minnesota over that kooky Al Franken... I guess Franken WASN'T good enough or smart enough! Am I right?!

BUT DURR HURR, TEH EXIT POALS DIDUNT MATSH TEH VOATAING RESULTZ!!!!!11!!

That could be for millions of reasons. For instance, you can't honestly believe that those polls account for 100% of the population of Florida. Screw-ups like that happen.

Besides, Bush won 2004 by a CLEAR majority which (unlike the Florida incident) can't be disputed in any way, shape, or form. So even if Bush won Florida by as little as 50 votes or lost it by as much as 500,000 (depending on the source), he still won 2004 without a shadow of a doubt, so he still gained office with a democratic majority.

Good point man. People do screw up sometimes. It's only human.

Now, thank GOD machines never screw up or malfunction. Take the voting machines in Ohio; flawless. Truly a testament to the genious of modern technology.

And I was about to point out that the only earthly reason why George Bush was around in 2004 to win that election was BECAUSE of the stolen 2000 election, but shucks, as you so expertly demonstrated, there was absolutely nothing at all shady about the 2000 election. Gee, you must be the smartest right-winger on the internet! How do you know so much??

At 4/28/11 08:58 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: Like a government that would require mandatory purchase of a good or service under penalty of law?

Ever owned a car? Do you think mandatory registration, title and insurance legislation is repressive? What about public schools? If you own land, you are required to pay school taxes even if you don't have kids in that district. Mail. Ever want to send a letter? You're required to buy a good or service (stamps). If anything, you should be more concerned with the Selective Service requirements of all males when they turn 18. Yeah, you don't pay anything...except with your life. At least the health care law is there to help you not send you to a military meat grinder in some foreign land.

I'm confused by what you mean, with what you said. What is "not exactly democratic"?

I meant if he were an official in a corrupt foreign government. I'd be concerned with a guy trying to run for President if he used to be a participant in say Chinese government or a former USSR governor, etc. Somebody who may otherwise meet all the criteria but rather than spending 4 years as a child in another country instead lived and worked there his adult life and made a career in a corrupt government before coming back, hanging around for 10 years and then trying to run for President here.

At 4/28/11 12:38 AM, Angry-Hatter wrote:

Are you kidding? An Obama Vs. Trump race would be the easiest landslide ever won by the Dems. That'd be even more of a slaughter than an Obama Vs. Palin matchup. It'd be like nominating Krusty the Clown to take on Obama.

This naivete is the reason Bush won in 04.

Never underestimate the power of hate. It's out there, and it's largely untapped, but if you think people aren't willing to use it for personal gain you're being dangerously negligent.

At 4/28/11 01:42 PM, FUNKbrs wrote:

At 4/28/11 12:38 AM, Angry-Hatter wrote:

Are you kidding? An Obama Vs. Trump race would be the easiest landslide ever won by the Dems. That'd be even more of a slaughter than an Obama Vs. Palin matchup. It'd be like nominating Krusty the Clown to take on Obama.

This naivete is the reason Bush won in 04.

Never underestimate the power of hate. It's out there, and it's largely untapped, but if you think people aren't willing to use it for personal gain you're being dangerously negligent.

Hate isn't a means for personal gain. Tolerance for people's 'piss poor' decisions is.
Instead of worrying about that guy who just don't like people for whatever reason, how about we put more interest into why a person thinks it's okay to have 7 kids on assisted living and continues to be supported by the rest of us. Priorities people....priorities. Let's put accountability back where it belongs, people's poor decisions. I'm tired of paying for "Obama Money".

At 4/28/11 02:42 PM, RightWingGamer wrote: And lol @ "the stolen election". You STILL think I can't call you a conspiracy theorist when the first explanation you jump to to explain a lost election is "Zomg, teh VAST Right-Wing CONSPEERUSAW!!!!"

Let's see, recounts for the 4 counties in Florida with the most amount of disputes were shot down by the help of Bush & Co, 20ish percent of overseas ballots were found to be fraudulent (Just so happened to go to Bush), and ballots that were sent in past the deadline.

At 4/28/11 03:32 PM, Madwon wrote: Hate isn't a means for personal gain.

Tell that to Poland.

Tolerance for people's 'piss poor' decisions is.

Intolerance=hate.

Instead of worrying about that guy who just don't like people for whatever reason, how about we put more interest into why a person thinks it's okay to have 7 kids on assisted living and continues to be supported by the rest of us. Priorities people....priorities. Let's put accountability back where it belongs, people's poor decisions. I'm tired of paying for "Obama Money".

It's ok to admit you're motivated by hate, because that clearly seems to be happening from my perspective. Hate is not only perfectly natural, but it helps DEFINE what human nature IS.

I realize that the anti-hate propaganda machine rolled really hard after WWII and during the Civil Rights movement, but being in public denial about the purest part of being human is just unrealistic policy.

Bush said "TERRORISTS HATE OUR FREEDOM!! THEY TRIED TO KILL MY DADDY!!"
.. and then the power of hate got him through the election, because democrats couldn't appeal to hate without going against everything they (naively) stand for based on lies they were told in the 60's and 70's (when all the people who are the big movers and shakers today were kids).

At 4/28/11 07:42 AM, gumOnShoe wrote:

I think Palin is one of the main reasons Obama won. People chose the *not crazy* person to go to the white house.

There was some use of race in the election.

Some? SOME? The media dug hard and deep for any perceived sign of racism they could find. some even went so far to say that "Racism could cause Obama the election". Which to me sounds like an attempted guilt trip to vote for em. Yeah, some white people are racist against blacks. Of course, there are just as many people who refused to vote for McCain because he was white. no one ever mentions that. Its a widespread thing down here in Louisiana. The mayor of my hometown only wins elections because of his skin color (and its not white btw) the black majority in this town makes DAMNED sure white people stay out of local politics... unless they have deep enough pockets to throw the right amount of money in the right way, and even then its only so long as a prominent black person doesn't want the position.

But I also remember Republicans going on and on and on about "Real Americans"

had nothing to do with race.

and I remember some fairly racist campaign stops where Republicans were hurling racial epitaphs at Obama.

so? people are people and some people are stupid. doesn't mean everyone on the right of a bunch of bigoted idiots, though that is what the left and the media want you to think.

I don't buy that Obama was 100% protected by the media. Frankly, all Fox News did was rail against him. Unless you're admitting Fox News isn't "News."

There will always be one dissenter. Fox is only 1 network.
I'll just leave this here.

3. Race. yes I said it.

Fuck you?

I don't play for that team.

No, sincerely, from a guy who voted for Obama for almost every reason I could think of, and never once did race enter the equation.

you're just one person. You gotta look at the bigger picture. 96% of black people voted for Obama? hmm. I wonder if that had ANYTHING to do with the color of his skin?

Hell, the race card is already being put into play for the 2012 election... and we're not even there yet! Tavis Smiley is right, this is gonna one NASTY election cycle. however it won't be because "people are racist against Obama's skin color" It's gonna be because the media is going to put the big rubber RACIST stamp down on anyone who tries to stand up and run against Obama.

"at this rally some idiot yelled a slur, this one person is an obvious indication of how racist the republican candidate and his entire party is and is representative of anyone who does not vote for Obama. If you don't to be thought of as a racist, vote for Obama and do your civic duty to keep the first black president in power!"

Fuck you.

again, no.

Yeah, whatever. I'm not going to overly defend a guy who's reneged on so many things he said he'd do on the campaign trail. But teleprompters aren't exactly new to politics.

I'm sure the videos have been shown plenty of times. Poor Barry is a whole other person when that thing shorts out.

Every politician has been using them or note cards since their invention. Maybe you missed out on speech/debate class, but its a standard thing for public speaking to have a reference on you.

yeah, this is true. However, you shouldn't rely on them so much that you can't speak without one.

For a guy doing speeches every day of his life, whose scrutinized left and right, it is strategic to have such a thing in order to stay on message, and I'll say that for republicans as well.

The only reason you keep bringing this up is because Palin wrote basic fundamental points she should have been able to remember in magic marker on her hand, for a short interview.

You never can tell. People said Obama didn't stand a chance.

People were saying Obama was an interesting guy 2 years before he showed up. That was calculated. People didn't know who he was. For Trump its something else. Everyone knows his name. Everyone recognizes him. It makes for a very different situation.

the fact everyone knows his name

Could he be elected? Sure. Reagan the actor was elected. Should he be? God, I hope not.

I kinda hope not, but It couldn't be much worse than 4 more years of Obama.

Or maybe he's just a liberal plant put in there to derail the election and make sure Obama wins.

That would require trump to care about more than something other than Trump. I don't buy it.

That is a very good point. Actually, You just hit the nail on the head. Trump is in this for himself to head off tax hikes that will harm his business. that's my new theory on it.

Nah, he's trying to gin up attention for himself, his show, etc. He did the same thing in the 80s and didn't follow through. Yeah, he's got some liberal background,

:but he's a sycophant.
Sycophant vs Sycophant. next year is gonna be fun!

He'll do anything to get more attention, increase his ratings, and make more money. He'll drop out just before he has to declare. If he doesn't, I will be genuinely surprised. Then I'll watch him lose. I know more moderates that are afraid of Trump than are afraid of Palin, and what does that tell you?

but are they more afraid of Trump or more afraid of reelecting Obama? world's going to hell and we're here to see it off. wave big now.

He's not fiscally conservative or socially conservative. So I don't know what platform he's running on in all honesty. Its not liberal, but I wouldn't call it conservative either. The guy's been pro-abortion, pro-universal health care, etc.

I'm just trollin :P. Personally... I feel the need to run for president myself. Shit's gotten too out of whack. I think a person like myself would make for a damned fine president.

It seriously doesn't matter who is sitting their rinkly old rich ass in the oval office. If you are worried that the election of one guy over another is going to send the country veering to collapse then you likely failed middle school social studies.

The president is the symbolic head of his party and when his party has a majority he usually puts his name on the agenda but ultimately the agenda is controlled by the leaders in Congress, not the President.

He has a bully pulpit to deliver his message but he can't control what happens to a bill or agenda once it gets into the legislative branch of government. The only real effect a President has is on descretionary executive branch management. He can appoint new people to head agencies.....so long as they are confirmed by the Senate...and so long as they get funding from the House...

You should be more worried about the outcome of Congressional elections, not Presidential.

At 4/27/11 06:10 PM, Korriken wrote: sit back, grab some popcorn, enjoy the show. That's all politics are anymore.

Sigging this.

But seriously, far right, enough of these sideshows. If you're going to pin something on Obama, make it something relevant; say, the economic recovery. Oh, and while you're at it tell us what your guy would do differently and how that would be better.

And, despite all of this, I bet in about 30 years in school kids textbooks this crap will not even be mentioned. A fuss over bullshit is not even going to make a difference.

At 4/28/11 06:02 PM, Korriken wrote: Some? SOME? The media dug hard and deep for any perceived sign of racism they could find. some even went so far to say that "Racism could cause Obama the election". Which to me sounds like an attempted guilt trip to vote for em. Yeah, some white people are racist against blacks. Of course, there are just as many people who refused to vote for McCain because he was white. no one ever mentions that. Its a widespread thing down here in Louisiana. The mayor of my hometown only wins elections because of his skin color (and its not white btw) the black majority in this town makes DAMNED sure white people stay out of local politics... unless they have deep enough pockets to throw the right amount of money in the right way, and even then its only so long as a prominent black person doesn't want the position.

Well the black majority in your town is not the majority of Americans. And while you're whining that Obama was elected because of his race, and you're holding up a minority of people as evidence and yet denying that white racists have anything to do with it I'm laughing at you because you're a total contradiction. You're an example of an individual being willfully blind.

But I also remember Republicans going on and on and on about "Real Americans"

had nothing to do with race.

No, it has everything to do with xenophobia which is the real issue here. You brought up race and I don't think he was elected due to race so I could give a shit about racism. Xenophobia is the intolerance of someone who you deem to be different from you, be it for racist, bigoted, or other reasons.

Obama either wasn't the right kind of Christian, or was too black, or too white, or too liberal or what have you. Or he wasn't American enough. It all came down to the same thing, some people didn't like him for some reason other than his policy objectives and the deigned to think that was good enough without realizing they were being fucking ignoramuses.

And those people are birthers and people like birthers. They're the people who say they don't like him because there's something they can't name that makes them not trust him.

While you sit there and say Obama won because of race, I sit here and say you're full of shit. He won because the Republicans put up a piss pore candidate, who in turn put up an even pissier candidate and because Americans like "hope" and "change" over war war war.

so? people are people and some people are stupid. doesn't mean everyone on the right of a bunch of bigoted idiots, though that is what the left and the media want you to think.

And it doesn't mean everyone on the left voted for him because he was black you fucking idiot.

I'll give you that some people didn't vote for him because he wasn't a conservative that shared their views. I don't mind saying that, but you said he won due to the race card and race as two whole points. If you don't understand how that could possibly wrong and how that could possibly make you look like a fucking dick, then I can't help you.

There will always be one dissenter. Fox is only 1 network.

And yet how many news stations played that Reverend Wright shit? All of them?

There were plenty of other networks that weren't so cheery on Obama. But most of the negativity from the news was focused on Palin, who didn't know that Africa was a continent and whose foreign policy credentials is that she can see Russia. Scccoooofffffff.

I'll just leave this here

Petty is as petty does. I never cared much for criticisms against bush with vacation time or parties...

I don't play for that team.

As in go to hell. Go fuck yourself. You are a low life piece of shit. Eat vomit and die you fucking biggot?

Help you understand what I mean homophobe?

you're just one person. You gotta look at the bigger picture. 96% of black people voted for Obama? hmm. I wonder if that had ANYTHING to do with the color of his skin?

There wasn't even a 96% turn out rate in the black community. Stop pulling numbers out of your ass. And Black people generally vote democratic anyways. I'm not saying there wasn't a higher turn out in the black community, and that it didn't help, but urban centers already swing democratic and it wouldn't have changed which districts Obama won that much. He had support outside of that community or he couldn't have possibly won.

BTW

Overall, whites2 made up 76.3% of the record 131 million people3 who voted in November's presidential election, while blacks made up 12.1%, Hispanics 7.4% and Asians 2.5%

I kinda hope not, but It couldn't be much worse than 4 more years of Obama.

But it could be. I'd rather have a mediocre guy who doesn't like to piss people off than a guy who burns bridges and purposefully lies to get his way. What kind of president is that? A guy who only care about himself. That'd be no good for this country or our place in the world.

That is a very good point. Actually, You just hit the nail on the head. Trump is in this for himself to head off tax hikes that will harm his business. that's my new theory on it.

Lol, no. Its to give himself more money, mostly by making people know his name and brand more so that someone walks into Macy's and buys a suit or tie with the word "Trump" on it. If he managed to get elected and rig the system in his favor that'd be bonus points for him. Chances are he won't run. He'd have to reveal too much about his finances and his business. He won't do that if he thinks he'll make more money by holding onto everything he has. A president's salary isn't much compared to what he supposedly has.

Sycophant vs Sycophant. next year is gonna be fun!

Eh sycophant's not the right word for Trump. Narcisist is the word I was looking for. Obama may actually be a bit of a sycophant the way he bows down to the right all the time...

but are they more afraid of Trump or more afraid of reelecting Obama? world's going to hell and we're here to see it off. wave big now.

Most people are more afraid of Trump. Obama's a known entity. We know what the worst is he's willing to do. Republicans know how to handle him. If it came down to it, Obama would win against Trump. I have doubts on this.

I'm just trollin :P. Personally... I feel the need to run for president myself. Shit's gotten too out of whack. I think a person like myself would make for a damned fine president

...

At 4/28/11 02:42 PM, RightWingGamer wrote:

At 4/28/11 10:44 AM, Angry-Hatter wrote: Aw, you think so? Even after I spent HOURS coming up with that retort.... all that work, wasted.... I'm sorry bro, I'll try to do it better next time.

Seriously, it's getting annoying. Just use normal people talk.

But pretending to throw the ball and watching the dumb bastard run after it is so much fun!

Tch... fine! We'll do it YOUR way.

Well, darn. You got me again. I guess that a difference of 00.01% in the vote totals is a margin far too great to overcome through a recount, because you say so. I once again apologize a thousandfold.

The recount called for ridiculous things like hand-counting and absentee ballots. The Dems were just desperate.

Madness! Utter madness! (I tried, sorry.)

How would you propose a recount should be conducted then? I literally don't understand how you would go about counting votes without doing it by hand.

By the way, how's Senator Norm Coleman doing nowdays? I stopped paying attention after I heard that he won overwhelmingly in Minnesota over that kooky Al Franken... I guess Franken WASN'T good enough or smart enough! Am I right?!

I am aware Coleman lost by recount. What's your point.

I dunno, something along the lines of, "close elections can flip after a recount". But you knew that.

Good point man. People do screw up sometimes. It's only human.

Now, thank GOD machines never screw up or malfunction. Take the voting machines in Ohio; flawless. Truly a testament to the genious of modern technology.

Lol, you misspelled genius.

Oh my God... no.... NO.... and after I spent HOURS upon HOURS proof-reading my post... How could I have overlooked such a glaring error... I am dishonored.

Either way, Ohio is a very special case, voter fraud there is like breakfast everywhere else. Applying that same logic to Florida just because of a tiny issue that likely involved Butterflies is ridiculous.

Woah... did you just agree with me? I think you did.

And I was about to point out that the only earthly reason why George Bush was around in 2004 to win that election was BECAUSE of the stolen 2000 election,

Even though everyone knows that candidates are allowed to run more than once, so he still would have run in 2004 regardless of the 2000 results.

You DO know that, right?

Right...

Riiight... That's quite an assumption though. The last person to come back for a second try after winning his party's nomination but losing the presidential race was George McGovern, and he didn't try again until 12 years after losing the first time. The last one before him was Nixon who lost in 1960 but came back to win in 1968. No unsuccessful general election candidate has tried to run again in over 35 years. Further, if Bush had been the nominee again in 04' it would essentially have been a rematch of 00', another rarity that hasn't occurred since the 1956 Eisenhower vs. Stevenson race.

But forget all of that! Bush shouldn't have won in the first place! You seem to be implying that the 2004 election somehow redeemed Bush and validated the 2000 theft.

And lol @ "the stolen election". You STILL think I can't call you a conspiracy theorist when the first explanation you jump to to explain a lost election is "Zomg, teh VAST Right-Wing CONSPEERUSAW!!!!"

There you go with the false equivalency. Have I taught you nothing? Yes.

The PDF has been taken apart and the document looks to be a compilation of documents like a crude cut and paste job. Seriously?

OH NO IT HAS LAYERS

At 4/28/11 10:28 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote: No unsuccessful general election candidate has tried to run again in over 35 years.

Ah, my mistake, that should be 27 years.

Man, maybe I should be proof reading a bit more, huh?

At 4/28/11 07:16 AM, Korriken wrote: 1. Timing. the wars, economy, and media's 8 years of pounding on Bush put the republicans in a position that a stale bags of corn chips could have beaten them in an election.

True. I was mostly talking about the issue of Obama's academics though. But I'll grant your point here to a degree...the economy is what won it for him though. Because if the collapse hadn't happened right before that election, his victory either would have been a squeaker, or not at all. McCain was very much in it until the collapse that October.

2. media. they praised and worshipped Obama like.. well... some sort of political gift from heaven. Not to mention the media protected him and even went so far as to throw out an entire deck of race cards, first against Hillary, then against McCain.

They did indeed. But Hillary DESERVED to be attacked for the way she campaigned. The stealth Muslim shit started from her camp, and the Birther type garbage is a result of the can of worms she initially opened. Hillary deserves every bit of shit she got, and probably a bunch more she didn't. I don't say that because I slob Obama's knob, I say it because people don't seem to remember how much of the ridiculousness that keeps getting trotted out is a result of idiot shit her campaign did.

3. Race. yes I said it.

I don't think it's as big an issue as a help or a hindrance to him as a lot of people want it to be. Certainly it factors in, but I think both sides have blown it's impact out of proportion.

4. one hell of a teleprompter writer. You never saw him without when he was campaigning and of course the media made damned sure to stay silent on the issue.

I'm sorry, I don't get why the teleprompter is such a gigantic issue. David Letterman uses it, newscasters use it. Other people on television use one. Why does a teleprompter automatically mean you're a crappy speaker? I mean, basically every president has somebody else writing their speeches for them so...whether they're reciting somebody else's words from memory or with a teleprompter I honestly have a hard time seeing the difference. It seems like such a dumb thing to quibble about, on the level of the stealth muslim stuff.

You never can tell. People said Obama didn't stand a chance.

You misunderstand. I believe people would vote for Trump. I don't believe Trump however is serious about running or will put real effort into it. I believe this is a stunt.

Or maybe he's just a liberal plant put in there to derail the election and make sure Obama wins.

I think the stunt idea is way more likely then this. Certainly Trump is doing a 180 from past statements.

yeah, how dare someone not have a liberal platform...

That's not my issue at all. I'm only taking issue with the fact that some of what he says he wants to do (re: China) is actually not something he can do because of treaties and such. It's not a liberal or conservative thing, it's a "I don't much care for shameless glomers who contribute to the idiotic circus that the american media is". That's it, I think he's wasting people's time for his own benefit.

That's what would make it SO entertaining. it would be a 4 year feud at the white house with plenty of media coverage... only thing is the media would probably cover it to the extent that little else gets in the news for the next four years.

Oh yeah. Both those guys certainly know how to fuck up in entertaining ways.

At 4/28/11 11:06 PM, aviewaskewed wrote: I'm sorry, I don't get why the teleprompter is such a gigantic issue. David Letterman uses it, newscasters use it. Other people on television use one. Why does a teleprompter automatically mean you're a crappy speaker? I mean, basically every president has somebody else writing their speeches for them so...whether they're reciting somebody else's words from memory or with a teleprompter I honestly have a hard time seeing the difference. It seems like such a dumb thing to quibble about, on the level of the stealth muslim stuff.

Well, the view is that Obama is meticulous about his image and is so protective of it, he stands to get in trouble with voters because they might see him as too "fake" or at least manufactured. I've heard complaints about over-reliance on his teleprompter use since the 08 campaign.

Of course a good republican candidate will try to cast himself as an everyman and Obama as an ivy league elitist, much as Bush did in 04 against Kerry. Unlike, say, Biden who will say stuff off-the-cuff that is bad, Obama has been a pretty good impromptu public speaker and I believe people will want to see more of that, especially after such a constrained first 4 years as President.

It can be a legitimate issue but not a major issue. It is still something Obama will want to think about.

At 4/28/11 01:28 PM, Malachy wrote:

At 4/28/11 08:58 AM, LazyDrunk wrote: Like a government that would require mandatory purchase of a good or service under penalty of law?

At least the health care law is there to help you not send you to a military meat grinder in some foreign land.

How can a law help me by penalizing me for not participating? How is that helpful, at all?

At 4/28/11 11:26 PM, Malachy wrote: Well, the view is that Obama is meticulous about his image and is so protective of it, he stands to get in trouble with voters because they might see him as too "fake" or at least manufactured. I've heard complaints about over-reliance on his teleprompter use since the 08 campaign.

This really gets to me. This is just one of those rose colored glasses things.
If it's a Republican...
...who speaks with teleprompters Republicans will say he's dignified, Democrats will say he's a corporate elitist snob.
...who speaks in an off the cuff, impromtu manner Republicans will say he's a man of the people, Democrats will say he shoots from the hip and doesn't think before he speaks.
If it's Democrat...
...who speaks with teleprompters Republicans will say he's an empty suit who cannot think for himself, Democrats will say he's distinguished and in control of himself.
...who speaks in an off the cuff, impromptu manner Republicans will say he's sleazy, Democrats will say he's a man of the people.

This issue is nothing more than a completely biased way for both side to take potshots and create an issue where there is not.

It can be a legitimate issue but not a major issue. It is still something Obama will want to think about.

Legitimate as in 'legitimate'? Hell no. legitimate as in something that could actually (sadly) make a difference? Yep.

The Republican party and the Tea party have a right to question and they are actually being very noble people in doing this (even though they have done stupid things before I agree). This is very serious and the government is being extremely slack in not helping out with this and getting this sorted out because this could be a serious offense and Obama needs to be caught if he's pulling shit like this.

Good on Trump for asking for his school grades and being bold and upfront, nothing like a bit of Republican determination (Republicans unlike Democrats are determined and don't give up even when they are wrong and they are very rarely wrong. They do their research.)

If Obama is bullshitting this then he deserves to get his ass fucking fired.

At 4/29/11 02:35 AM, Saren wrote: The Republican party and the Tea party have a right to question and they are actually being very noble people in doing this (even though they have done stupid things before I agree). This is very serious and the government is being extremely slack in not helping out with this and getting this sorted out because this could be a serious offense and Obama needs to be caught if he's pulling shit like this.

Good on Trump for asking for his school grades and being bold and upfront, nothing like a bit of Republican determination (Republicans unlike Democrats are determined and don't give up even when they are wrong and they are very rarely wrong. They do their research.)

If Obama is bullshitting this then he deserves to get his ass fucking fired.

Obama released his birth certificate during the election, but becasue it wasn't the long form, it wasn't good enough for them. This is not good enough for them. This is a stupid distraction what is actually happening, and for all the genuine criticism one can make of Obama, to insinuate that he's not from this country when he very clearly is, or to say that there no way one of THOSE TYPES could get into Harvard without affirmative action is polarizing at best and racist at worse.

Also, not giving up even when you are wrong? That is a terrible trait. I would say a worse trait then, say, being a spineless pushover.

Trump must be pissed. That's a downright shame, I was hoping for someone to find a peaceful way of exploiting Obama. I'm not sure what it is about him, but he gives me the creeps. Oh yeah, he's Muslim.