To Anyone considering voting for OBAMA

[Voice of Reason]

Whatever believe what you want, the videos are WORD FOR QUOTED WORD...


...

[Carlos_E]

Whatever believe what you want, the videos are WORD FOR QUOTED WORD...


...

As I said. The videos are not a complete sermon. They're pieces from different sermons edited together to make it look like one long sermon full of hate speech.

[thegodfather]

As I said. The videos are not a complete sermon. They're pieces from different sermons edited together to make it look like one long sermon full of hate speech.

So multiple sermons with occasional hate speech is somehow less offensive?



I still wonder why everyone who has said they're voting for Obama for "change" has ignored my request to articulate exactly what change they are talking about, what Obama's platforms are for those changes, and how Obama plans to bring those changes to fruition?

No, it much easier for everyone to bicker about a bunch of stupid quotes that really have nothing to do with the issue I presented. People blindly voting for the candidate that their CNN host tells them to at 6pm everynight after work while they much down on a tv dinner.

[thegodfather]

I got Obama as well. Hillary looks like she will do anything even kill someone to be the first lady president.

Did you find it convienient to completely ignore my request for you to describe the type of changes you believe that Obama will bring for the country? I mean, if you are going to support a candidate, please dont make baseless remarks like "lets try something different," when you are unable to even identify what it is you would like to try. Perhaps you would like to try Communism, or Facism, I mean we have really no way to know unless you point out the issues with which you would like to see change. If you are voting for a Democrat, it is safe to say that you support Socialism...prove me wrong.

i think i would vote for obama just to piss people like rotary and thegodfather off. that would be a good enough reason for me. i think they don't realise the more squealing and posturing that people like that do the more people think it is TIME FOR A CHANGE. haha

You'd like to piss people like me off? A strict Constitutionalist? So apparently you have a problem with the Constitution of the United States of America? See, I have a problem with Socialists like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton who feel it's appropriate to disregard the Constitution, and support higher taxes and redistribution of wealth to people who do not want to work, and would rather live off of the hard working citizens. Too many people in this country are worried about what hand outs they can get out of politicians.

Few people realize, like you, that this money has to come from somewhere. It comes from one of either two sources.

1. Higher taxes, which penalizes people who work hard, and make a lot of money in order to pay for social programs for those who don’t work hard, or at all.

2. Printing money out of thin air. In this case, all Americans are hurt, because of the inflationary effect this has. It degrades the purchasing power of the dollar, and this is a convenient way for politicians to fund their pet projects while taxing American citizens. They are able to pay for whatever project they want, without having to raise taxes directly; this is a hidden inflationary tax. This specifically hurts the middle class.


Unfortunately, I don’t really agree with the Republican candidate we have running either. He is a Neocon gun grabber, with many liberal leaning tendencies. Unfortunately, both Obama and Clinton have very hard line SOCIALIST policies. America is not a socialist nation, and no true American would ever support socialist policies. Also, I didn’t want to be rude, but your location lists you as being in Australia, so unless you are an American citizen who just happens to reside in Australia, why don’t you keep YOUR opinions about OUR political system to yourself. The citizens of Australia and England may be ok with acquiescing their rights to the government, and having 50% of your salary taken to fund socialist programs, but here in America, we're not.

[jbonez19]

So multiple sermons with occasional hate speech is somehow less offensive?



I still wonder why everyone who has said they're voting for Obama for "change" has ignored my request to articulate exactly what change they are talking about, what Obama's platforms are for those changes, and how Obama plans to bring those changes to fruition?

No, it much easier for everyone to bicker about a bunch of stupid quotes that really have nothing to do with the issue I presented. People blindly voting for the candidate that their CNN host tells them to at 6pm everynight after work while they much down on a tv dinner.

how about a change from insane semi-illiterate war-profiteering scumbags with no interest for the welfare of their citizens, the planet or the world in general. that might be a good start no?! sounds like grounds for a change to me.

[Carlos_E]

So multiple sermons with occasional hate speech is somehow less offensive?

I guess you did not read my previous post. He was quoting Ambassador Edward Peck.

The media fails America once again

Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 07:11:04 AM PDT

The truth about the Reverend Wright controversy is now starting to be revealed: The media manufactured it for ratings. How else can one explain the fact that anyone who actually takes the time to watch any of the videos would have a different impression from the one being pushed by ABC/NBC/CNN/MSNBC and most especially FOX?

I decided to pull of the video of Reverend Wright's sermon in which he allegedly made the comments blaming America for 9/11, and guess what I found? He was quoting Ambassador Edward Peck, who made those comments on FOX NEWS (oh, the irony) the day after the 9/11 attacks. Here is the evidence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdln...eature=related

Around the 3-minute mark, Reverend Wright asks the church members if they saw the ambassador on Fox News, and what he had said. Then he proceeds to pull out a sheet of paper, and read the words of ambassador Peck.

This is another example of how the media has manufactured a controversy in order to sway the American public. We all should be very concerned about the media in the country, because after all...this is the same crowd that gave us the Iraq war.

[jbonez19]

Did you find it convienient to completely ignore my request for you to describe the type of changes you believe that Obama will bring for the country? I mean, if you are going to support a candidate, please dont make baseless remarks like "lets try something different," when you are unable to even identify what it is you would like to try. Perhaps you would like to try Communism, or Facism, I mean we have really no way to know unless you point out the issues with which you would like to see change. If you are voting for a Democrat, it is safe to say that you support Socialism...prove me wrong.









You'd like to piss people like me off? A strict Constitutionalist? So apparently you have a problem with the Constitution of the United States of America? See, I have a problem with Socialists like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton who feel it's appropriate to disregard the Constitution, and support higher taxes and redistribution of wealth to people who do not want to work, and would rather live off of the hard working citizens. Too many people in this country are worried about what hand outs they can get out of politicians.

Few people realize, like you, that this money has to come from somewhere. It comes from one of either two sources.

1. Higher taxes, which penalizes people who work hard, and make a lot of money in order to pay for social programs for those who don’t work hard, or at all.

2. Printing money out of thin air. In this case, all Americans are hurt, because of the inflationary effect this has. It degrades the purchasing power of the dollar, and this is a convenient way for politicians to fund their pet projects while taxing American citizens. They are able to pay for whatever project they want, without having to raise taxes directly; this is a hidden inflationary tax. This specifically hurts the middle class.


Unfortunately, I don’t really agree with the Republican candidate we have running either. He is a Neocon gun grabber, with many liberal leaning tendencies. Unfortunately, both Obama and Clinton have very hard line SOCIALIST policies. America is not a socialist nation, and no true American would ever support socialist policies. Also, I didn’t want to be rude, but your location lists you as being in Australia, so unless you are an American citizen who just happens to reside in Australia, why don’t you keep YOUR opinions about OUR political system to yourself. The citizens of Australia and England may be ok with acquiescing their rights to the government, and having 50% of your salary taken to fund socialist programs, but here in America, we're not.

no i have a problem with people like you who have stood by while the constitution has been systematically undermined to serve the interest of a war criminal and his evil administration. i mean you're throwing all your quotes and shit around like your some kind of political scholar, "perhaps you would like to try communism or facism". jesus, you sound like a six grader who just got their first history text. stop ****ing talking down to people. you are the one who's not even presenting what your positive view for the future is. at least other people have presented their views on why they might vote for whatever person. the way you're randomly attacking people for not agreeing with you is very reminicent of a short oily brown haired gentleman with a walruss moustache and a loud voice. all i can gather from what you are saying is that you don't want change, so the war in iraq, the response to hurricane katrina, the sub-prime market slump, your failing economy and half dead health system are all shining examples of the precious things that you would like to so desperately hold on to are they?
stop bullying people! people are allowed to make whatever remarks they see fit, you "a strict constitutionalist" (give me a break) should know that better than anyone. who do you think you are condoleeza rice? you're the only facist around here my friend. oh, and by the way as a citizen of an allied country that has been dragged into one to many of the u.s.'s ill conceived wars, i will state my opinion on your countries politics whenever and wherever i feel, is that o.k. with you mr. bully boy. it sounds like no-ones allowed to have an opinion unless they agree with your view, which is what? remind me again? oh that anyone who doesn't agree with thegodfather is an idiot and should be publicly ridiculed especially if they are from a "foreign" country. guess you think there should be more wars, in fact why don't we bomb those smartass australians, they can't keep their opinions to themselves. you sir are a big ****ing tool, with only a moderate understanding of your own political system (you live in a democratic capitalist society you dick and all of your presidential candidates fall under that banner, you obviously don't understand the definition of a socialist goverment) and limited, to no, understanding of your two closest allies. why don't you **** off back to grade school and bully the kids there, you might have an easier time convincing them that you are not a total dipshit.

[jbonez19]

I guess you did not read my previous post. He was quoting Ambassador Edward Peck.

The media fails America once again

Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 07:11:04 AM PDT

The truth about the Reverend Wright controversy is now starting to be revealed: The media manufactured it for ratings. How else can one explain the fact that anyone who actually takes the time to watch any of the videos would have a different impression from the one being pushed by ABC/NBC/CNN/MSNBC and most especially FOX?

I decided to pull of the video of Reverend Wright's sermon in which he allegedly made the comments blaming America for 9/11, and guess what I found? He was quoting Ambassador Edward Peck, who made those comments on FOX NEWS (oh, the irony) the day after the 9/11 attacks. Here is the evidence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdln...eature=related

Around the 3-minute mark, Reverend Wright asks the church members if they saw the ambassador on Fox News, and what he had said. Then he proceeds to pull out a sheet of paper, and read the words of ambassador Peck.

This is another example of how the media has manufactured a controversy in order to sway the American public. We all should be very concerned about the media in the country, because after all...this is the same crowd that gave us the Iraq war.

bravo Carlos.

[Carlos_E]

We have a no flame rule. You can disagree but keep it civil.

[novastepp]

no i have a problem with people like you who have stood by while the constitution has been systematically undermined to serve the interest of a war criminal and his evil administration. i mean you're throwing all your quotes and shit around like your some kind of political scholar, "perhaps you would like to try communism or facism". jesus, you sound like a six grader who just got their first history text. stop ****ing talking down to people. you are the one who's not even presenting what your positive view for the future is.

did he say he had a positive view of the future? actually from what i've read many agree that the future is looking even more grim.

at least other people have presented their views on why they might vote for whatever person.

actually this is the very thing he was complaining about people not doing.

the way you're randomly attacking people

where? all he said is he wants people who make a position for Obama to explain what change they want.

for not agreeing with you is very reminicent of a short oily brown haired gentleman with a walruss moustache and a loud voice.

father time?

all i can gather from what you are saying is that you don't want change, so the war in iraq, the response to hurricane katrina, the sub-prime market slump, your failing economy and half dead health system are all shining examples of the precious things that you would like to so desperately hold on to are they?

erroneous! where did he say this or even lead you to believe that?

stop bullying people!

and you call him immature?

people are allowed to make whatever remarks they see fit, you "a strict constitutionalist" (give me a break) should know that better than anyone. who do you think you are condoleeza rice? you're the only facist around here my friend.

if you remark about him not being a constitutionalist you should back that up. he didn't take a shot at your personal character.

oh, and by the way as a citizen of an allied country that has been dragged into one to many of the u.s.'s ill conceived wars, i will state my opinion on your countries politics whenever and wherever i feel, is that o.k. with you mr. bully boy.

exactly what he is doing. how are you any different?

it sounds like no-ones allowed to have an opinion unless they agree with your view

you've definitely shared yours with us.

which is what? remind me again? oh that anyone who doesn't agree with thegodfather is an idiot and should be publicly ridiculed especially if they are from a "foreign" country. guess you think there should be more wars, in fact why don't we bomb those smartass australians, they can't keep their opinions to themselves. you sir are a big ****ing tool, with only a moderate understanding of your own political system (you live in a democratic capitalist society you dick and all of your presidential candidates fall under that banner, you obviously don't understand the definition of a socialist goverment) and limited, to no, understanding of your two closest allies. why don't you **** off back to grade school and bully the kids there, you might have an easier time convincing them that you are not a total dipshit.

and this last paragraph totally sums up your argument. you make stupid and unwarranted remarks about bombing countries, something about workshop supplies, and again you say he doesn't understand government, but no where in your rambling incoherent response did you mention anything about it. oh and again with the grade school banter. this might have been one of the all time worst rebuttal's i have ever seen. congratulations.

[thegodfather]

no i have a problem with people like you who have stood by while the constitution has been systematically undermined to serve the interest of a war criminal and his evil administration..

If we are going to start laying down credentials and speaking about who has done what. I support Ron Paul for President, he is the only strict Constitutionalist running for President. In so far as I have stood by...I have donated money, become a precinct leader who canvassed my area to secure votes for Dr.Paul, and put my name on the ticket to become a Republican Delegate to the RNC. See, when I talk about the change that I want to see in the country, I dont just complain about it and expect others to do something, I actually do something.

i mean you're throwing all your quotes and shit around like your some kind of political scholar, "perhaps you would like to try communism or facism". jesus, you sound like a six grader who just got their first history text. stop ****ing talking down to people. you are the one who's not even presenting what your positive view for the future is. .

I dont recall talking down to anyone. I am simply asking people who say they are going to support a certain candidate to state what their candidates platform is (assuming they even know it) and help me to understand why they would vote for such a candidate. While this may come off as condescending to someone like you, it actually helps me to better understand what kind of issues are important to people, and maybe even a little bit more about their candidate that I didn't know before. Furthermore, because of the present situation in America regarding civil liberties, it is quite prudent to ask if when someone referrs to change, they are talking about Facism, because that is certainly the direction the country is heading towards, ever so subtly.

at least other people have presented their views on why they might vote for whatever person. the way you're randomly attacking people for not agreeing with you is very reminicent of a short oily brown haired gentleman with a walruss moustache and a loud voice. .

I have not seen one person in this thread articulate what change they are looking for. All I have seen is back and forth arguing about quotes Obama may or may not have made. That detail is rather inconsequential to me, as several people said they were voting for Obama in order to bring about "Change," and I asked them to support their position with evidence of that candidates platforms, ideas, policies, past voting record, etc, etc... I fail to see the correlation to Hitler, a facist dictator who killed 6 million innocent people, and myself, someone asking others to back up their political ideologies with facts.

all i can gather from what you are saying is that you don't want change, so the war in iraq, the response to hurricane katrina, the sub-prime market slump, your failing economy and half dead health system are all shining examples of the precious things that you would like to so desperately hold on to are they?.

Well you must not be gathering much then. Let me help you to understand a particular American political viewpoint. I am a Republican, libertarian/strict constitutionalist. That means that I believe in decentralized government which abides strictly by the constitution and does not exercise powers not specifically given to it in that document. I disagree with ANY foriegn intervention that is unnecessary and that does not threaten the United States national security. The response to Hurricane Katrina was DUE to big government agencies like FEMA, that states could have handled that situation much better, and had hundreds of thousands of our troops not been overseas fighting a pointless war, I dont believe it would have happened at all. The sub-prime market slump, and failing economy, are not government issues. The governments role (in America) is not to regulate the constitution. In a truely free market capitolist society, the government does not interfere and "bail out" failing markets and companies. This only seeks to perpetuate BAD BANKING&lending practices. The idea is that the free market and competition yield the best deal for the consumer, not big government intervention and big bail outs which the American tax payer has to foot the bill for. There is also no provision in the Constitution to interfere in the free market. The economy as a whole is a hard issue to touch on briefly, but I will do so. Basically a few major issues contributing to the downfall of the economy, 1)That we are off of the Gold standard, and money is inflated at will by the Federal Reserve(a privately owned bank) which has no Constitutional authority to print money, 2)A war which costs 3 billion dollars a day and has no end in sight, 3)The governments bail outs which perpetuate and reward bad banking&lending practices, and 4) A large welfare state which is unsustainable, welfare, social security, medicare/medicaid, HUD, these are all socialist policies and have no business being in a capitolist society. If you had bothered to ask what my positions are on the issues, I would have gladly shared them with you, and then you would have realised that I am not as you suggested, trying to hold onto the things which are destroying my country.

stop bullying people! people are allowed to make whatever remarks they see fit, you "a strict constitutionalist" (give me a break) should know that better than anyone. who do you think you are condoleeza rice? you're the only facist around here my friend. oh, and by the way as a citizen of an allied country that has been dragged into one to many of the u.s.'s ill conceived wars, i will state my opinion on your countries politics whenever and wherever i feel, is that o.k. with you mr. bully boy. it sounds like no-ones allowed to have an opinion unless they agree with your view, which is what? remind me again?

I never "bullied" anyone on the forums. As state previously, I merely asked them to support their political positions with facts, and demonstrate to me that they understand and comprehend the issues that are causing them to vote for a certain candidate. You're entitled to your opinion, but as a foreigner it is a lot more difficult for you to understand the intracacies of our political system and the issues at hand in our society, that is not a bad thing, it is just impossible to understand a lot of the issues unless you live in the country. The majority of Americans dont even understand the issues, as evidenced by the lack of responses to my challenge to present relevant information on their candidates platforms.

you sir are a big ****ing tool, with only a moderate understanding of your own political system (you live in a democratic capitalist society you dick and all of your presidential candidates fall under that banner, you obviously don't understand the definition of a socialist goverment) and limited, to no, understanding of your two closest allies. why don't you **** off back to grade school and bully the kids there, you might have an easier time convincing them that you are not a total dipshit.

Well Jbonez, you're right, I am a Political Science major and I posess only a moderate understanding of my political system. Which is why, as I'm sure you already know, that I live in a REPUBLICAN captialist/free market society. America is not a democracy as you suggested, it is a Republic, a federation of states. America is a certain MODEL of democracy, but it is not by definition of the word, a democracy. I understand quite well the definition of a Socialist soceity, and have no problem identifying and calling out such policies when I see them trying to pollute our political system. So it is my hope, that I have convinced Jbonez I am not a total dipshit in the hopes I might be able to goto sleep at night, and that I just mighttttttttttttttt know what I'm talking about.....

[thegodfather]

P.S.- Also note that during my entire rebuttal to your attacks on me, I did not need to resort to name calling or profanity. But, since you are more well educated than me, you already know that including such things in your rebuttal makes your argument much less legitimate and detracts from your overall message, if there even was one there.

[jbonez19]

did he say he had a positive view of the future? actually from what i've read many agree that the future is looking even more grim.
if it continued under the current admin no doubt.


actually this is the very thing he was complaining about people not doing.
just because people don't bother articulating doesn't mean they don't have a valid view.


where? all he said is he wants people who make a position for Obama to explain what change they want.

isn't it obvious, from the last 3 republican admins

father time?
i think we all know who i was referring to


erroneous! where did he say this or even lead you to believe that?
it's an observation


and you call him immature?

what's immature about telling someone to stop trying to browbeat everyone

if you remark about him not being a constitutionalist you should back that up. he didn't take a shot at your personal character.

no, just attacked my right to have an opinion.

exactly what he is doing. how are you any different?

oh, i'm different

you've definitely shared yours with us.

as is my right

and this last paragraph totally sums up your argument. you make stupid and unwarranted remarks about bombing countries, something about workshop supplies, and again you say he doesn't understand government, but no where in your rambling incoherent response did you mention anything about it. oh and again with the grade school banter. this might have been one of the all time worst rebuttal's i have ever seen. congratulations.
to highlight his ridiculous stand that someone outside of the country can't have a valid opinion and should "keep it to themselves". congratulations to you for achieving absolutely nothing and big noting yourself instead of leaving it up to other people to decide. gee i'm clever, i really love myself, i really owned that guy.

you're supposed to let other people decide when you have owned someone fool. you don't own shit anyway. you've said absolutely nothing.
it's not a rebuttle. i don't buy into his argument at all. just got sick of him ridiculing people for not sharing his views.

[jbonez19]

P.S.- Also note that during my entire rebuttal to your attacks on me, I did not need to resort to name calling or profanity. But, since you are more well educated than me, you already know that including such things in your rebuttal makes your argument much less legitimate and detracts from your overall message, if there even was one there.

it's not a rebuttle, and i never claimed to have attained any level of education. the reason i included profanity in my answer is becuse you pissed me off by saying that i had no right to an opinion. to be honest, i'm glad i did. by shoving you back it seems to have brought the best out of you and we have finally got to hear about what you believe in and why. all you were doing before was chastising people for not being as into their politics as you. to be honest i'm not really excited about politics at all. i think a large proportion of poiticians have questionable motives for getting into it. it just that idiots like reagan and dubbya throw it in your face all the time by being sooooo stupid. i think that times are changing for the better and senator obama is a representative of that change for me, just as tony blair was in the u.k. and as kevin rudd is in australia. i don't have the time or the inclination to disect every one of their policies and decide whether i agree or disagree. what i do is decide (like lots of other people) does this person broadly represent my ideals on social justice and concern for my fellow global citizens and the environment. i applaud you for supporting ron paul, he seems IMO to be a good alternative to some of the corrupt and uncaring administrations that we have seen. all i care about is that our countries are run by intelligent, caring individuals that have respect for the planet that we all share as our home. that's all. it is also my right to not give a crap if i feel like it. sorry about the profanity, but hey, i'm a hothead and you pissed me off, i'm not going to edit it, coz then i would look like a bigger jerk than i already do haha. just go easy on people who don't agree with you, or do not bother to have a full list of policies of the candidates that they support in front of them. not everone is as interested as you, but that doesn't mean they don't have a right to their opinion. their vote counts just as yours does. peace. j

[thegodfather]

I didn't think I was asking them all to be politicians. But if someone says they would like to see change, I'd at least hope they could point to 1 or 2 areas of policy where they would like that change and in what manner.

If we wanted to dive into the issue on the other candidates and why I dont support them picking apart all of their policies, would probably take days. So, I will instead sum it up for you.

1)Senator Obama: I disagree with Senator Obama based on his socialist leaning policies, and the fact that he voted for the Patriot Act. He also has several policies in his platform which directly contradict the Constitution of the United States.

2)Senator Clinton: I disagree with Senator Clinton because she advocates universal healthcare, which we already have in the form of Medicaid/Medicare. This again is a socialist ideology mostly of liberals who believe that healthcare is a right, which I happen to disagree with. She also voted for the Patriot Act, and to continue funding to the war in Iraq. Her policies and platform are in direct contradiction with the Constitution of the United States.

3)Senator McCain: I disagree with Senator McCain as a candidate because he has voted for amnesty for illegal aliens, he has voted for tighter gun controls, and is generally a flip flopper on issues. He also recently voted against banning torture. In addition to this he supports big centralized government and would like to commit generations of American citizens who have not been born yet to a war that they did not start. In addition to that he advocates US imperialism; maintaining bases and troops around the world in 130 of 190 countries. He is not conservative, and he does no represent ANY of the ideals that the Republican party was founded on. His policies directly contradict the US Constitution.

[yamahar1]

you guys talk about change. did you know that both clinton and obama have voted to change the national language to spanish!!!!!. how about that kind of change. mcain same as bush!!!! were fighting a losing battle. no matter who gets in were f**cked

[LawMan018]

you guys talk about change. did you know that both clinton and obama have voted to change the national language to spanish!!!!!. how about that kind of change. mcain same as bush!!!! were fighting a losing battle. no matter who gets in were f**cked

When the hell did they vote on that? And I'm sorry guys, I just find it hard to believe that only a few steroid board members seem to know the truth and this whole thing is a huge conspiracy... Give me a fvckin break...

[yamahar1]

of coarse it's a conspiracy who in the right mind would spend millions or billions of dollars to get a job that pays a couple of hundred thousand.

[jbonez19]

I didn't think I was asking them all to be politicians. But if someone says they would like to see change, I'd at least hope they could point to 1 or 2 areas of policy where they would like that change and in what manner.

If we wanted to dive into the issue on the other candidates and why I dont support them picking apart all of their policies, would probably take days. So, I will instead sum it up for you.

1)Senator Obama: I disagree with Senator Obama based on his socialist leaning policies, and the fact that he voted for the Patriot Act. He also has several policies in his platform which directly contradict the Constitution of the United States.

2)Senator Clinton: I disagree with Senator Clinton because she advocates universal healthcare, which we already have in the form of Medicaid/Medicare. This again is a socialist ideology mostly of liberals who believe that healthcare is a right, which I happen to disagree with. She also voted for the Patriot Act, and to continue funding to the war in Iraq. Her policies and platform are in direct contradiction with the Constitution of the United States.

3)Senator McCain: I disagree with Senator McCain as a candidate because he has voted for amnesty for illegal aliens, he has voted for tighter gun controls, and is generally a flip flopper on issues. He also recently voted against banning torture. In addition to this he supports big centralized government and would like to commit generations of American citizens who have not been born yet to a war that they did not start. In addition to that he advocates US imperialism; maintaining bases and troops around the world in 130 of 190 countries. He is not conservative, and he does no represent ANY of the ideals that the Republican party was founded on. His policies directly contradict the US Constitution.

yeah sorry mate couldn't disagree with you more about healthcare and gun control. sorry but you just don't sound like a very compassionate person to me, and it is frankly obvious why you thought it o.k. to start ridiculing people. just because you are a political science student doesn't mean that automatically your opinions are "right" because they are more informed. i think everyone has a right to healthcare and education and it is the responsibility of those who prosper from that society to contribute to it's improvement. and the world would be a much better place if there were NO guns at all. don't pin me as a pacifist as such, i love fighting, love to watch it, and love to fight myself, but i ****in' hate people with guns. anyway that's about all the energy i can justify expending on this stuff. after a while it just becomes blah blah blah to me. good luck to mr. paul, you know he's never going to win right?!? talk about flogging a dead horse....

[Carlos_E]

I didn't think I was asking them all to be politicians. But if someone says they would like to see change, I'd at least hope they could point to 1 or 2 areas of policy where they would like that change and in what manner.

If we wanted to dive into the issue on the other candidates and why I dont support them picking apart all of their policies, would probably take days. So, I will instead sum it up for you.

1)Senator Obama: I disagree with Senator Obama based on his socialist leaning policies, and the fact that he voted for the Patriot Act. He also has several policies in his platform which directly contradict the Constitution of the United States.

2)Senator Clinton: I disagree with Senator Clinton because she advocates universal healthcare, which we already have in the form of Medicaid/Medicare. This again is a socialist ideology mostly of liberals who believe that healthcare is a right, which I happen to disagree with. She also voted for the Patriot Act, and to continue funding to the war in Iraq. Her policies and platform are in direct contradiction with the Constitution of the United States.

3)Senator McCain: I disagree with Senator McCain as a candidate because he has voted for amnesty for illegal aliens, he has voted for tighter gun controls, and is generally a flip flopper on issues. He also recently voted against banning torture. In addition to this he supports big centralized government and would like to commit generations of American citizens who have not been born yet to a war that they did not start. In addition to that he advocates US imperialism; maintaining bases and troops around the world in 130 of 190 countries. He is not conservative, and he does no represent ANY of the ideals that the Republican party was founded on. His policies directly contradict the US Constitution.

I PMed you months ago why I support Obama.

[Carlos_E]

you guys talk about change. did you know that both clinton and obama have voted to change the national language to spanish!!!!!.

That is a load of bull.

of coarse it's a conspiracy who in the right mind would spend millions or billions of dollars to get a job that pays a couple of hundred thousand.

Shhh.. adults are talking.

[Amorphic]

you guys talk about change. did you know that both clinton and obama have voted to change the national language to spanish!!!!!. how about that kind of change. mcain same as bush!!!! were fighting a losing battle. no matter who gets in were f**cked

lol, i highly doubt anyone is going to support changing the national language to spanish, that in itself is a total joke.

[yamahar1]

ok, keep on believing what they tell you. you think 1 president has ever done everything he has said he was going to do!!!!!! as far as obama and clinton voting to change the language do so reasearch online before you tell me to shhhhh...you think you know it all huh. thats cool

[Amorphic]

ok, keep on believing what they tell you. you think 1 president has ever done everything he has said he was going to do!!!!!! as far as obama and clinton voting to change the language do so reasearch online before you tell me to shhhhh...you think you know it all huh. thats cool

i never stated that i 'know it all'

i didnt tell you to 'shhhhh' either

i support ron paul btw.

now, stop acting immature.

[yamahar1]

look for instance miami florida it is 95% spanish speaking it is spreading like wildfire across the usa

[hugovsilva]

I am with Atomini. You americans can discuss as much as you please but the truth is only one: There is not one single decent candidate for you guys to vote for. Whoever gets the chair he (her) will only be a puppet for the guys who really have the power.

Like we say in Portugal: "You can change teh flies but the sh*t will remain the same."

P.S. - At our own small scale we are in no better situation than you.

[yamahar1]

no you personally didn't but carlos e did. i respect everyones opinions and i'am just saying what i have found out, i didn't belief it either but i did some digging in to it and found indeed they did vote for language change. anyways i think ron paul is the smart choice even though he doesn't have chance.

[yamahar1]

hugovsilva you are definetly right

[jbonez19]

look for instance miami florida it is 95% spanish speaking it is spreading like wildfire across the usa

haha, did you pull that stat out of your arse too? can you hear yourself, do your research on the internet? good one. see who you have aligned yourself with godfather.

[Carlos_E]

lol, i highly doubt anyone is going to support changing the national language to spanish, that in itself is a total joke.

It's a nice scare tactic. Ewww the scary immigrants are coming and taking over.

I think the reason Republicans are afraid of Obama he gets 90% of the Black vote, pulls in the youth vote and the well educated Whites.

It's why I think Richardson's endorsement is important. If he were to get the a high percentage of the Hispanic vote, "change" can happen.

[Carlos_E]

no you personally didn't but carlos e did. i respect everyones opinions and i'am just saying what i have found out, i didn't belief it either but i did some digging in to it and found indeed they did vote for language change. anyways i think ron paul is the smart choice even though he doesn't have chance.

Then back up your statements with proof. A URL or document showing they voted to change the national language to Spanish. Until you do so, it's bull.

[Carlos_E]

look for instance miami florida it is 95% spanish speaking it is spreading like wildfire across the usa

So what. FL primary language is English. It sounds to me like you have a problem with Spanish speaking people.

[yamahar1]

anyways talking politics with thousands of other people online is like pissing in the wind you'll never win. because everyone has a different opinion. if we were all the same life would be any fun right!! anyways it been fun talking to you guys, have a good night i'am going to bed.

[Carlos_E]

anyways talking politics with thousands of other people online is like pissing in the wind you'll never win. because everyone has a different opinion. if we were all the same life would be any fun right!! anyways it been fun talking to you guys, have a good night i'am going to bed.

When you wake in the morning I'll be waiting for the URL to back your silly comment.

Buonas noches. Buen sueño.

[yamahar1]

of course, obama's getting the black vote he's black. just like clinton getting the women's vote.

[thegodfather]

yeah sorry mate couldn't disagree with you more about healthcare and gun control. sorry but you just don't sound like a very compassionate person to me, and it is frankly obvious why you thought it o.k. to start ridiculing people. just because you are a political science student doesn't mean that automatically your opinions are "right" because they are more informed. i think everyone has a right to healthcare and education and it is the responsibility of those who prosper from that society to contribute to it's improvement. and the world would be a much better place if there were NO guns at all. don't pin me as a pacifist as such, i love fighting, love to watch it, and love to fight myself, but i ****in' hate people with guns. anyway that's about all the energy i can justify expending on this stuff. after a while it just becomes blah blah blah to me. good luck to mr. paul, you know he's never going to win right?!? talk about flogging a dead horse....

Unfortunately you have misunderstood the philosophy behind why I oppose government healthcare. When government gets involved in anything, quality goes down. The free market is what encourages competition and improvements, therefore resulting in a better product. The government cannot even smoothly issue drivers licenses, and you want to entrust them with your healthcare? In addition, it also makes a free society, LESS free. Now, you would instead take the control of your healthcare out of your hands, and place it into big brothers? The burden that government healthcare puts on the taxpayers is also unsustainable. Many countries suffer as far as quality of life because they have an unsustainable welfare state that taxes its citizens to unimagineable levels. When you lower taxes, and allow citizens to keep more of thier money their quality of life goes up, and they are able to purchase health insurance on their own. The remaining people who are not covered can be covered by state run healthcare programs, and then what is left from that can be covered by charitable organizations and programs. Many hospitals treat patients without health insurance under charity.


On Guns. I agree that idealy the world would be a better place without guns. However, man has been killing each other with some form of weapon since the dawn of time. The oldest preserved dead body was found with an arrow head in his ribs. Guns are here to stay, just as nuclear weapons are. In addition, the gun is the great equalizer, it gives a weaker person a fighting chance against someone who is much bigger or better skilled fighter. It gives a poor little old lady who lives alone, a fighting chance against a young robber or serial killer. In Rawanda, 1,000,000 people were killed with Machedes. So, like I said if we are speaking ideally then yes a world free of guns would be ideal. However, the unfortunate reality is that guns are here to stay. Statistics prove that the states in the United States where gun ownership and conceal&carry is permitted for law abiding residents, have significantly lower violent crime rates than the states who forbid their citizens to have a means to protect themselves. The truth of the matter is that laws banning guns only take guns out of the hands of the good guys, as criminals do not care about gun bans, they break the law already. The final, and most important reason that the 2nd amendment exists, and that we Americans value guns so highly, is that our guns are our last resort against a tyrannical government. A disarmed populace is a very dangerous thing, they are easily controlled by oppressive governments.


I never said that my opinions were right. I'm obviously very opinionated, but it is only because I am passionate about politics and helping people to realize what is wrong with the present path of things in this country. I ask that people present their ideas about Senator Obama and any other candidate they vote for, in hopes of having a discourse with them that can help them see the other sides of the argument, and maybe open their minds to other possibilities. You think that I do these things out of spite, or make "snide" remarks, when in actuality I only want to have a discourse so that I can help to inform people about what the Constitution says, what the founders of the country had in mind, and how some of the candidates they are supporting may not be adhering to the Constitution and what it says.

[yamahar1]

dude chill are you having roid rage . i guess this is not a good board to talk politics.

[Amorphic]

dude chill are you having roid rage. i guess this is not a good board to talk politics.

man, your comments do nothing but antagonize people

roid rage ?

maybe you should look into the fact that godfather is an extremely intelligent individual who is well educated in politics. he backs up what he says and he always speaks in a totally professional, mature manner.

your comments on the other hand....

[Carlos_E]

of course, obama's getting the black vote he's black. just like clinton getting the women's vote.

Another silly comment. Have you stopped to think that maybe Obama's platform is attractive to the Black community? If it was a Black thing then explain why Whites vote for him. Oh wait, maybe White people support his platform.

[yamahar1]

as i said earlier i respect everyones opinions, and have no problem with blacks,whites or spanish speaking people ect.... i will find the website tommorrow where i read that and post it have agood night dude