Obama

[Cole]

I say that he should run for president. He's very charismatic and has views from both sides of the spectrum. This guy's just awesome! I wasn't sure who I wanted to win the 2008 presidential election, but now I am. Go Barack!

[cellardoor6]

At 10/20/06 10:47 PM, Cole wrote: I say that he should run for president. He's very charismatic and has views from both sides of the spectrum. This guy's just awesome! I wasn't sure who I wanted to win the 2008 presidential election, but now I am. Go Barack!

Hes inexperienced and a deceptive politician. Though I agree with some of the things he has said about bipartisanship, I think its all an act.

Plus, just when he talks he looks like hes acting rather than speaking. He just looks and talks like hes plotting something. I don't like him.

[Dash-Underscore-Dash]

Obama... Is that like a rasta version of Osama or something?

[Cole]

At 10/21/06 01:31 AM, Dash-Underscore-Dash wrote: Obama... Is that like a rasta version of Osama or something?

He's a senator from Illinois. Close, though.

[Buddhist]

Yeah, I saw he was on the cover of TIME Magazine about how he could probably be the next President, but I have yet to read it.

But to be honest, we have expectations that are too high for the majority of our Presidents, and requirements that make it even tougher for a good person to become President. Just my opinion, of course.

[Cole]

At 10/21/06 04:33 PM, Buddhist wrote: Yeah, I saw he was on the cover of TIME Magazine about how he could probably be the next President, but I have yet to read it.

It's a great article. I suggest reading it.

[Buddhist]

At 10/21/06 04:44 PM, Cole wrote:

At 10/21/06 04:33 PM, Buddhist wrote: Yeah, I saw he was on the cover of TIME Magazine about how he could probably be the next President, but I have yet to read it.

It's a great article. I suggest reading it.

Yeah, I have a subscription to TIME, but now I just gotta figure out where I left that issue. Will do though.

[Begoner]

I think its all an act.

You mean that a politician is just...acting?! Certainly not -- after all, all politicians are out to do whatever is in the best interest of the people, right?!

Get used to it -- all politicians "act," some more than others. Obama is less of an actor than many other presidential candidates, such as Clinton or McCain. I would never vote for him, but he's not that bad.

[JoS]

At 10/21/06 01:06 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Hes inexperienced and a deceptive politician.

You mean as opposed to electing a governor to be President, someoen who has neither a passport nor an understanding of federal politics and how the federal system works? One who lies to his peopel to convince them to go to war?

[bluepariah]

Its still to early to tell. Let some time fly and when he's actually running, lets hear how he's gonna solve America's problems.

[MoralLibertarian]

At 10/21/06 05:14 PM, JoS wrote:

At 10/21/06 01:06 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Hes inexperienced and a deceptive politician.

You mean as opposed to electing a governor to be President, someoen who has neither a passport nor an understanding of federal politics and how the federal system works? One who lies to his peopel to convince them to go to war?

That's hardly truthful.

[cellardoor6]

At 10/21/06 05:14 PM, JoS wrote:

At 10/21/06 01:06 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Hes inexperienced and a deceptive politician.

You mean as opposed to electing a governor to be President, someoen who has neither a passport nor an understanding of federal politics and how the federal system works? One who lies to his peopel to convince them to go to war?

JoS you are so full of shit, so often, I don't even know why I bother with you.

1) First of all, governors have become President in the US before. That means nothin

2) President Bush doesn't have a passport? Hmm I wonder how he made all those trips to around the world when he was younger??? You love to just make up bullshit don't you???

3) No understanding of federal politics and 'how the federal system works'? Thats interesting coming from you, considering all the nonsense you have spouted in the recent past. It seems like YOU don't have an understanding of REALITY, therefore you are no credible judge for the governmental comprehension of President Bush, who graduated from Yale. Thats REALLY funny coming from you, a complete dipshit.

4) The 'lies' that you accuse Bush were also stated by 123 member countries of the UN and over 30 heads of state of different countries. Not only that, but Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Barrack Obama!!, and many, many more Democrats who you love so much. So I guess according to you, almost the entire world, the entire Democratic party, they are all lied about Iraq for their own reasons...

JoS, kill yourself. You're a completely dysfunctional and worthless human being.

[Cole]

Does anything really matter for a president than good leadership skills, intelligence, and charisma? I mean really. Look at George Washington! John Hancock was a shoe-in for president, but Washington, a little-known Leiutenant General, comes to the meeting in full fatigues. Everyone was shocked when Ben Franklin suggested him!

[cellardoor6]

At 10/21/06 08:00 PM, Cole wrote: Does anything really matter for a president than good leadership skills, intelligence, and charisma? I mean really. Look at George Washington! John Hancock was a shoe-in for president, but Washington, a little-known Leiutenant General, comes to the meeting in full fatigues. Everyone was shocked when Ben Franklin suggested him!

You have a point there. The President is really just a visionary, kind of the ideaological glue that holds everything together. The President has plently of experienced, incredible educated and intelligent people all around him to give him the technical support. George Washington was a perfect example, he was really intelligent, but he wouldn't really be considered president material by today's standards. But his vision for America was more important than his experience with politics.

[Cole]

At 10/21/06 08:33 PM, mofomojo wrote:

mostly because their power structure isn't so concentrated around their loyalty to the President, who himself is an incompetent ex-alcoholic

Well, my choice for 2008 (Obama, duh) is an ex-pot user and has used cocaine on some occasions in his past. That's behind him now, just like Bush being an alchoholic. If you ask me, the decisions that leaders made in thier youth don't have much to do with their current ones. Just look at Winston Churchill! He used HEROIN in college! We didn't see everyone bickering over that, did we?

[cellardoor6]

At 10/21/06 08:33 PM, mofomojo wrote: Yet another ridiculous rant that is filled with innacuracies and childish logic.

Mofomojo, you don't have ANY clue what you're talking about. I especially liked the whole "Ronald Reagan started Neo-conservatism" claim, that was deliciously WRONG and humorous for you to say.

[JoS]

At 10/21/06 06:07 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: 1) First of all, governors have become President in the US before. That means nothin

I know. You seem to misinterpert what I was saying. Someone said he is inexperienced, despite the fact he served as a US Senator. It was a comparison. Would you say a governor is inexperienced?

2) President Bush doesn't have a passport? Hmm I wonder how he made all those trips to around the world when he was younger??? You love to just make up bullshit don't you???

I wasnt refering to Bush. I know Bush has been abroad before ebing President. He went to Mexico a couple of times and two trips abroad. He didnt have a valid passport when he entered the Oval office. Ther ehave been believe it or not other Presidents than Bush.

3) No understanding of federal politics and 'how the federal system works'? Thats interesting coming from you, considering all the nonsense you have spouted in the recent past. It seems like YOU don't have an understanding of REALITY, therefore you are no credible judge for the governmental comprehension of President Bush, who graduated from Yale. Thats REALLY funny coming from you, a complete dipshit.

After the prestigioush University of Michigan rejected him. BTW wasn't there a guy with the last name Bush sitting on the Yale board of directors?

4) The 'lies' that you accuse Bush were also stated by 123 member countries of the UN and over 30 heads of state of different countries. Not only that, but Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Barrack Obama!!, and many, many more Democrats who you love so much. So I guess according to you, almost the entire world, the entire Democratic party, they are all lied about Iraq for their own reasons...

Again, why do you consistantly think I am refering to Bush? There have been several cases where the President ahs lied to get a war going. Because no President would ever pretend that a naval ship had been attacked as a pretense to going to war against another country.

JoS, kill yourself. You're a completely dysfunctional and worthless human being.

\
Maybe you shoudl just STFU?

[ImmoralLibertarian]

Well, people voted for a guy named after the hairs on a woman’s vagina, who had a vice president named Dick, and a original Secretary of State with a normal name like Colin, but wanted it pronounced Colon.

[JakeHero]

I doubt this guy would win. According to his voting record: it seems he is among the kind of people we were fighting against indirectly in the 50s. So if he does run his campaign advisers are going to have to employ moderation and some good ol' fashion bullshitting.

[wwwyzzerdd]

At 10/23/06 10:28 PM, Pro-American wrote: Barack Obama has a last name that rhymes with Osama. Do you really think you could entrust your country's security in a man who brings thoughts of Osama into mind when you hear his name?

Oh, I thought everyone would flip out about the whole "black" thing rather than another pitiful reason like that.

Then again, voters did elect JFK over Nixon simply on account of appearence.

[wwwyzzerdd]

At 10/24/06 12:02 AM, BanditByte wrote: I doubt this guy would win. According to his voting record: it seems he is among the kind of people we were fighting against indirectly in the 50s.

Once again, is this on par with the whole "black" thing, or communism?

[JakeHero]

At 10/24/06 01:39 AM, wwwyzzerdd wrote:

At 10/24/06 12:02 AM, BanditByte wrote: I doubt this guy would win. According to his voting record: it seems he is among the kind of people we were fighting against indirectly in the 50s.

Once again, is this on par with the whole "black" thing, or communism?

No, I was committing him being black is a big no no for politics.

What the fuck do you think?

[EnragedSephiroth]

At 10/21/06 06:07 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: JoS you are so full of shit, so often, I don't even know why I bother with you.

Cellardoor I don't know why you always have to come off so condescending towards anyone who says something you don't agree with. I appreciate your right-winged views and your skepticism and scrutiny of the left, however, you do not have to go and personally attack people all the time for things they say. If you want to troll or challenge them with debate that is fine but you're always stepping over the line. You see something you don't like and you tear into the person with personal insults to the point where you want to nullify their existance. It's people like you on both sides of the political spectrum which make it hard for anything to get done because it's impossible to reach a compromise.

2) President Bush doesn't have a passport? Hmm I wonder how he made all those trips to around the world when he was younger??? You love to just make up bullshit don't you???

I believe he was talking about Schwarzenegger not being U.S. born and contemplating running for president...

Thats REALLY funny coming from you, a complete dipshit.

See what I mean? At what point did JoS attack you with such voracity?

JoS, kill yourself. You're a completely dysfunctional and worthless human being.

Yep. You're just as bad as O'Reily...if not worse... You actually attacked me personally as well in the Foley thread when I said FOX was utterly biased because I talked about Outfoxed. In no way did I personally or directly insult you but like always you take it upon yourself to verbally and childishly tear a new one to anyone you don't agree with. In another thread you attacked another person arguing from the left (was it MortifiedPenguins?) and now you seek to attack yet another regular, JoS, seriously dude, go ahead and keep it up, your distasteful insults won't be missed when you get banannaed >=P

[EnragedSephiroth]

At 10/21/06 08:13 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: George Washington was a perfect example, he was really intelligent, but he wouldn't really be considered president material by today's standards. But his vision for America was more important than his experience with politics.

K so Obama for teh win right? Or am I asking too much?

[Altarus]

If Obama runs for president, I really hope that Alan Keyes runs too. It would completely destroy any race advantage that Obama might have over a white opponent. He would be unable to say that he understands black issues more, and people would not vote for him just to make the first black president. Also, just for the plain fact that Keyes > Obama.

[Demosthenez]

I think it is kinda bullshit that Obama is only being pushed forward because he is black. But he does seem like a decent guy and the earlier you can get them out of Congress and President the better. Congress changes people for the worse and the earlier you get them out of there the better.

At 10/21/06 09:27 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Mofomojo, you don't have ANY clue what you're talking about. I especially liked the whole "Ronald Reagan started Neo-conservatism" claim, that was deliciously WRONG and humorous for you to say.

Ronald Reagans adminstration did start neo conservativism. Is it any suprise all the big names from this administration had ties back to Reagan? No. Cellardoor, its fine if you want to be super Republican. But to ignore history is another thing.

Let me ask you this. If Reagan didnt start neo conservativism, then who did. If you are going to refute something, you have to provide proof and not just claim its wrong.

At 10/21/06 04:56 PM, Begoner wrote: McCain.

McCain acting? No. The only acting he does is to try to garner the evangelical vote, like he did when he spoke at Falwells Liberty University shit. God, you think he is acting to try to be bipartisan I would hate to know who you think isnt acting.

At 10/21/06 08:33 PM, mofomojo wrote: There were in fact several protests on the days and weeks following and preceding the invasion, these voices, were of course silenced and ignored by the media, politicians, and the general suburban consensus and were deemed and discarded as "hippies".

They were not ignored. They were reported on and no one cared because they were an extreme minority. If you view isnt supported in by the majority and no one cares about it why should it be on the news? The news is for everyone, not just leftists. And a minority viewpoint doesnt deserve the same airplay. Thats why it didnt get it.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 10/24/06 03:56 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

Let me ask you this. If Reagan didnt start neo conservativism, then who did. If you are going to refute something, you have to provide proof and not just claim its wrong.

Wasn't Reagan small government and small spending.

But generally, Obama would probally be great, but he probally wont' get elected so soon. Let him get a couple of years under his belt, then he will be good to go.

Me, I'm personally somewhat pushing for Romney.

Because I really think we need a business man in office.

And by Republicans, he's pretty moderate.

[goozebump]

At 10/24/06 08:59 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 10/24/06 03:56 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

Let me ask you this. If Reagan didnt start neo conservativism, then who did. If you are going to refute something, you have to provide proof and not just claim its wrong.

Wasn't Reagan small government and small spending.

Are you serious?

But generally, Obama would probally be great, but he probally wont' get elected so soon. Let him get a couple of years under his belt, then he will be good to go.

NAh if ure goignt o elect him do it now, like one of the above psoter said, congress changes people for the worse.

Me, I'm personally somewhat pushing for Romney.

Because I really think we need a business man in office.

We already had a business man in office., he's called "bush." Plus u idiot, almost everyone in congress and hosue of rep. are "business" people. Not to mention the fact that they are all controlled by corporations. Whata notehr business persong oing to do? take away welfare, lowr the minimum wage and outsource some more?

And by Republicans, he's pretty moderate.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 10/25/06 03:13 PM, goozebump wrote:

At 10/24/06 08:59 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 10/24/06 03:56 PM, FAB0L0US wrote:

Are you serious?

If you run by the principales of Reaganomics, then yes he was.

NAh if ure goignt o elect him do it now, like one of the above psoter said, congress changes people for the worse.

So because the obove poster said that, it must be proof.

Or that I disagree with the above poset on that point and believe that people come in crappy.

We already had a business man in office., he's called "bush." Plus u idiot, almost everyone in congress and hosue of rep. are "business" people. Not to mention the fact that they are all controlled by corporations. Whata notehr business persong oing to do? take away welfare, lowr the minimum wage and outsource some more?

Your a dumbass.

And by Republicans, he's pretty moderate.

[NihonjinStud]

Obama never get East Asian man vote. He never getWhite or Ratino vote too! He just going be rike new Ar Shalpton onry not as fat.