Obama: '10,000 People Died' in Kansas

**Carlos_E** · 05-11-2007, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by roidattack

I bet it didnt come with double the pay though...I know how that works.

Originally Posted by Logan13

Perhaps that is because you do a good job!

Off topic...

My coworker had an accident and has been in the hospital since the beginning of April. He won't be back until the end of June. I'm covering his work until he gets back.

**Logan13** · 05-11-2007, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by BgMc31

Another Republican actor elected to office!!! Boy you guys are really in need of imaginery heroes!!! LOL!!!!

Seriously, what the hell does the Democratic ticket have to offer in 2008?

**BgMc31** · 05-11-2007, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

Seriously, what the hell does the Democratic ticket have to offer in 2008?

Change!! The Republicans, IMO, have divided the country more than ever and they have ruined our perception on the world stage. What does the Republicans have to offer? More of the same as the past 7 years? The US public is tired of the same ole same ole!

**gigem** · 05-12-2007, 10:26 PM

im voting for willie nelson if he runs if not anyone thats a republican. we dont need a pres who cant count and dang sure dont need another clinton in office bush is still fixing his fvckups

**RamyGras** · 05-13-2007, 12:43 AM

Originally Posted by Logan13

Seriously, what the hell does the Democratic ticket have to offer in 2008?

Stereotype me all you want, but I really like the prospect of Barack Obama in the oval office.

What the hell does the Republican ticket have to offer in 2008? Guiliani? Please.

**dabigcheese** · 05-13-2007, 02:30 AM

Originally Posted by BgMc31

Change!! The Republicans, IMO, have divided the country more than ever and they have ruined our perception on the world stage. What does the Republicans have to offer? More of the same as the past 7 years? The US public is tired of the same ole same ole!

Fascinating discussion. The reality which a lot of people ignore very easily is that there is very little difference between Republicans and Democrats. Hype and spin don't change the facts on the ground (question: do the Democrats or the Republicans really differ on any of the following: free trade, rising debt, mass immigration, over-regulation, uncontrolled government spending, crony corporate favours, government waste, expansion of the American empire etc etc? - their rhetoric may differ but the reality of what they will do when in power doesn't).

It's the same here too - Blair, Brown, Cameron, its all the same. Each as capable at lying and spin as the other.

**bigboy003** · 05-13-2007, 02:43 AM

The truth is both rebublicans and democrats dont know what the hell to do in the white house... every cantidate is human and regaurdless of which party is elected they will be screwed.... as a country we are so diverse that no matter who is elected people will bitch about the decisions they make... its time as americans that we unite and back the president, republican or democrat its time to re-unite!

**RamyGras** · 05-13-2007, 02:55 AM

Garbage is garbage, whether it is red or blue. However, there are differences between Republicans and Democrats. And, while Bigboy's hope of uniting both parties is good spirited and optimistic, sometimes it's just not possible. The Dems are quick to blast the Republicans right now, but what they might not realize is that George W is not a representation of what Republicans are. I hate to state the obvious, but our current president is an embarassment to the office. This does NOT mean that Republicans can't hold the office successfully.

**gigem** · 05-13-2007, 08:08 AM

i think bush has done the best job anyone could have done given the circumstances that the terrorist have put in his lap heck clinton would have sit back and slapped a patsy on the hand and the terrorist would still be over there lau***ng at us with no consequences but if you love terrorist then i guess hes your man, and his wife im sure is much the same since i feel she was the real pres when he was in office. heck monica kept bill too distracted lol. thats what gets me a pres can admit he smoked **** but didnt inhale have an affair in the whitehouse and thats ok hes a dem

**mcpeepants** · 05-13-2007, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by Logan13

Seriously, what the hell does the Democratic ticket have to offer in 2008?

the leading republicans are just offering "stay the course" and ronald reagen is second coming of jesus while the leading democratics are complaining but still offering "stay the course" and triangulation. so the lead presidential candidates in both parties are offering nothing new.

**mcpeepants** · 05-13-2007, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by dabigcheese

Fascinating discussion. The reality which a lot of people ignore very easily is that there is very little difference between Republicans and Democrats. Hype and spin don't change the facts on the ground (question: do the Democrats or the Republicans really differ on any of the following: free trade, rising debt, mass immigration, over-regulation, uncontrolled government spending, crony corporate favours, government waste, expansion of the American empire etc etc? - their rhetoric may differ but the reality of what they will do when in power doesn't).

It's the same here too - Blair, Brown, Cameron, its all the same. Each as capable at lying and spin as the other.

spot on

**mcpeepants** · 05-13-2007, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by bigboy003

The truth is both rebublicans and democrats dont know what the hell to do in the white house... every cantidate is human and regaurdless of which party is elected they will be screwed.... as a country we are so diverse that no matter who is elected people will bitch about the decisions they make... its time as americans that we unite and back the president, republican or democrat its time to re-unite!

i think that is just wishful think and I kind of like divided government because it provides checks and balances. also a lot of bad legislation since 9-11 has been bi-partisan.

**BgMc31** · 05-13-2007, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by gigem

i think bush has done the best job anyone could have done given the circumstances that the terrorist have put in his lap heck clinton would have sit back and slapped a patsy on the hand and the terrorist would still be over there lau***ng at us with no consequences but if you love terrorist then i guess hes your man, and his wife im sure is much the same since i feel she was the real pres when he was in office. heck monica kept bill too distracted lol. thats what gets me a pres can admit he smoked **** but didnt inhale have an affair in the whitehouse and thats ok hes a dem

Obviously you didn't read much about Clinton's presidency!! Your response of is the typical Republican response... "Vote for the Democrats is a vote for the terrorists!!" That's simply bullshit! Just like the 'Dang Democrats' thread you started Gigem, you have no idea what you are talking about. I would much rather have a president smoke **** and get a blow job than someone who admitted using cocaine and took us to an unjustified war (Iraq, not Afganistan) that has cost us over 3000 American lives.

Both parties are corrupt, liars, and beuracracy will never change. But regardless of the excuses you make for President Bush, our country is headed in the wrong direction. I don't know if the Democrats can or will change that, but this 'stay the course' rhetoric republicans are spouting won't do our country well. It's time for a change even if it is very small. I'm sick of how divided this country is today. And that is not just because of the war. Say what you want about former President Clinton, but the country was less divided during his presidency than any other time since WWII.

**gigem** · 05-13-2007, 03:37 PM

yeahi guess no matter whos in there were not all going to be happy i just didnt like clinton. everyone blames the attacks of 9 11 on bush but that was in the making way before bush was president. i just feel clinton could and should have done more on terrorism. i dont keep track of who did what i just know who i like or dislike and its entertaining to talk about . we really dont have anyone who i thinks should be the next pres on either side but i know who im not voting for.

**Logan13** · 05-13-2007, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by RamyGras

Stereotype me all you want, but I really like the prospect of Barack Obama in the oval office.

What the hell does the Republican ticket have to offer in 2008? Guiliani? Please.

I like Obama as well, but not for the Oval office yet. Even if he does not get the Dem nomination, which will go to Hillary, he has one hell of an opportunity to play a leadership role through the Senate until 2012. If he stays in a postive public light while gaining more foreign policy experience, he will have a good chance in 2012.
Carlos posted an article a while ago which talked about the percentage of people who would vote for Obama, even though he is black.
We heard planty about the fact that there still is racism in the US. What no one stated was that Obama first has to get the Democratic nomination before he can enter the Presidential race. So.....if he does not get the Dem. nomination, is anyone going to yell that the Dems didn't elect him because they are racist or is this a broad brush that can only be used on Republicans?

**BgMc31** · 05-13-2007, 08:55 PM

[QUOTE=Logan13]I like Obama as well, but not for the Oval office yet. Even if he does not get the Dem nomination, which will go to Hillary, he has one hell of an opportunity to play a leadership role through the Senate until 2012. If he stays in a postive public light while gaining more foreign policy experience, he will have a good chance in 2012.
Carlos posted an article a while ago which talked about the percentage of people who would vote for Obama, even though he is black.
We heard planty about the fact that there still is racism in the US. What no one stated was that Obama first has to get the Democratic nomination before he can enter the Presidential race. So.....if he does not get the Dem. nomination, is anyone going to yell that the Dems didn't elect him because they are racist or is this a broad brush that can only be used on Republicans?[/QUOTE]

No it's not a broad stroke painted on republicans. I've posted earlier about a poll that said only 53% of whites would vote for a black presidential candidate. This poll is an indication of all whites, not just republicans. I don't know if it's really overt racism, I just don't think they are ready for a black president... yet.

**Carlos_E** · 05-13-2007, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

I like Obama as well, but not for the Oval office yet. Even if he does not get the Dem nomination, which will go to Hillary, he has one hell of an opportunity to play a leadership role through the Senate until 2012. If he stays in a postive public light while gaining more foreign policy experience, he will have a good chance in 2012.
Carlos posted an article a while ago which talked about the percentage of people who would vote for Obama, even though he is black.
We heard planty about the fact that there still is racism in the US. What no one stated was that Obama first has to get the Democratic nomination before he can enter the Presidential race. So.....if he does not get the Dem. nomination, is anyone going to yell that the Dems didn't elect him because they are racist or is this a broad brush that can only be used on Republicans?

Correction. It was posted by BgMc31.

**BgMc31** · 05-13-2007, 08:59 PM

Originally Posted by Carlos_E

Correction. It was posted by BgMc31.

Doesn't matter Carlos, we all look alike anyway, remember?

**Logan13** · 05-13-2007, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by BgMc31

Doesn't matter Carlos, we all look alike anyway, remember?

I know that you are not saying that I said that.........

**BgMc31** · 05-13-2007, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by Logan13

I know that you are not saying that I said that.........

Of course not Logan. I don't make assumptions I respond over what was 'actually' said. I consider this a 'no spin zone!!' LOL!!! I was merely making a joke with Carlos. Don't be oversensitive!!!

**Carlos_E** · 05-13-2007, 11:23 PM

Originally Posted by BgMc31

Doesn't matter Carlos, we all look alike anyway, remember?

Originally Posted by BgMc31

Of course not Logan. I don't make assumptions I respond over what was 'actually' said. I consider this a 'no spin zone!!' LOL!!! I was merely making a joke with Carlos. Don't be oversensitive!!!

**Logan13** · 05-14-2007, 12:36 AM

Originally Posted by Carlos_E

A wise man in today's PC world needs to be oversensitive. Perhaps if you were the victim of minority accusations, you'd understand that. But since you are not white you probably have no idea what it is like..............

RA · 05-14-2007, 07:20 AM

Originally Posted by BgMc31

Change!! The Republicans, IMO, have divided the country more than ever and they have ruined our perception on the world stage. What does the Republicans have to offer? More of the same as the past 7 years? The US public is tired of the same ole same ole!

Bush has sincerely tried to come together with Democrats. Ted K wrote the education bill...signing that disgusting bloated farm bill...etc, etc, etc Hes been far too "agreeable" for me...hes only vetoed like 2 bills since being elected!

If/when Fred Thompson gets in there you will see a true conservative president...not someone who tries to appease the democrats.

RA · 05-14-2007, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by manwithin

You sound like my dad, lol... and you both might be right

Sounds like a good man

RA · 05-14-2007, 07:24 AM

[quote=BgMc31]

Originally Posted by Logan13

I like Obama as well, but not for the Oval office yet. Even if he does not get the Dem nomination, which will go to Hillary, he has one hell of an opportunity to play a leadership role through the Senate until 2012. If he stays in a postive public light while gaining more foreign policy experience, he will have a good chance in 2012.
Carlos posted an article a while ago which talked about the percentage of people who would vote for Obama, even though he is black.
We heard planty about the fact that there still is racism in the US. What no one stated was that Obama first has to get the Democratic nomination before he can enter the Presidential race. So.....if he does not get the Dem. nomination, is anyone going to yell that the Dems didn't elect him because they are racist or is this a broad brush that can only be used on Republicans?[/QUOTE]

No it's not a broad stroke painted on republicans. I've posted earlier about a poll that said only 53% of whites would vote for a black presidential candidate. This poll is an indication of all whites, not just republicans. I don't know if it's really overt racism, I just don't think they are ready for a black president... yet.

Condi Rice!

**RamyGras** · 05-14-2007, 10:19 AM

I don't recall anybody stating that Republicans have a problem with voting black. So, you can bring up Condi, you can bring up Keyes, you can bring up Powell, but it's a dead argument.

**gigem** · 05-14-2007, 11:41 AM

does anyone find all of this as funny as i do? if a democrat gets in there were screwed period. i just had to post lol i know yall love it when i post on political stuff by the way is anyone here a poly sci major?

**BgMc31** · 05-14-2007, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by roidattack

Bush has sincerely tried to come together with Democrats. Ted K wrote the education bill...signing that disgusting bloated farm bill...etc, etc, etc Hes been far too "agreeable" for me...hes only vetoed like 2 bills since being elected!

If/when Fred Thompson gets in there you will see a true conservative president...not someone who tries to appease the democrats.

That's absolutely absurb!!!! It wasn't until this year that the Dems had much say in what Congress decided. Remember the Congress was controlled by the Republicans until this year. That is the real reason Bush has only vetoed 2 bills. He and his party members kept in step with each other. Bush has not tried to appease Democrats, that argument holds no validity.

RA · 05-14-2007, 12:40 PM

Teddy wrote the education bill which was very liberal, look it up. Its not absurd at all bro. Bush is like his father...too liberal for my taste.

Originally Posted by BgMc31

That's absolutely absurb!!!! It wasn't until this year that the Dems had much say in what Congress decided. Remember the Congress was controlled by the Republicans until this year. That is the real reason Bush has only vetoed 2 bills. He and his party members kept in step with each other. Bush has not tried to appease Democrats, that argument holds no validity.

RA · 05-14-2007, 12:40 PM

Read his post, then read my post.

Originally Posted by RamyGras

I don't recall anybody stating that Republicans have a problem with voting black. So, you can bring up Condi, you can bring up Keyes, you can bring up Powell, but it's a dead argument.

**gigem** · 05-14-2007, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by BgMc31

Obviously you didn't read much about Clinton's presidency!! Your response of is the typical Republican response... "Vote for the Democrats is a vote for the terrorists!!" That's simply bullshit! Just like the 'Dang Democrats' thread you started Gigem, you have no idea what you are talking about. I would much rather have a president smoke **** and get a blow job than someone who admitted using cocaine and took us to an unjustified war (Iraq, not Afganistan) that has cost us over 3000 American lives.

Both parties are corrupt, liars, and beuracracy will never change. But regardless of the excuses you make for President Bush, our country is headed in the wrong direction. I don't know if the Democrats can or will change that, but this 'stay the course' rhetoric republicans are spouting won't do our country well. It's time for a change even if it is very small. I'm sick of how divided this country is today. And that is not just because of the war. Say what you want about former President Clinton, but the country was less divided during his presidency than any other time since WWII.

as usual your souting off bullshit the war in iraq and any other country that harbors or aids terrorist in any way. not once did bush say were going to afg and only there to wipe out terrorism. he said ANY where they are we will find them well its proven saddam was helping them so anywhere our troops need to go to kick some ass so be it hell we lost more in a single day in just about everyother war weve been in than we have in this one. alot of those soldiers are proud to fight and die i would be there if i could. look at pat tillman a fvckn millionaire proud to serve i get tired of listening to democrat pansies whine hell this country was built on war bloodshed to get and keep our freedom hell go to france

**BgMc31** · 05-14-2007, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by gigem

as usual your souting off bullshit the war in iraq and any other country that harbors or aids terrorist in any way. not once did bush say were going to afg and only there to wipe out terrorism. he said ANY where they are we will find them well its proven saddam was helping them so anywhere our troops need to go to kick some ass so be it hell we lost more in a single day in just about everyother war weve been in than we have in this one. alot of those soldiers are proud to fight and die i would be there if i could. look at pat tillman a fvckn millionaire proud to serve i get tired of listening to democrat pansies whine hell this country was built on war bloodshed to get and keep our freedom hell go to france

Not even worth a response. It's obvious you don't do much research and your anger indicates that you are too emotional to have a rational discussion about this issue. Go ahead and believe what you are told. There was absolutely no evidence Saddam was harboring terrorists. But again, you'll believe anything the republicans tell you.

And please don't invoke Pat Tillman's name is this. I played with Pat in Arizona (Cardinals). Great guy, heroe, and great patriot. No one is knocking the troops so again, don't even go there since it's apparent, again, that you have no idea what you are talking about.

**gigem** · 05-14-2007, 05:20 PM

i never said anyone was knocking the troops i was just stating that some people actually believe in why were there i could care less who you played what with hell i played hs ball with andy pettit and bucky richardson at deer park hs that has nothing to do with all the cry baby terrorist lovers over here in this country crying bring em home so they can rebuild . so you dont go there since you apparently love them enough to want to bring our troops back and not do whatever it takes to whipe out as many as we can. hell everyone know well never kill em all but sitting over here waiting on the next time doesnt sound like a good option to me

**BgMc31** · 05-14-2007, 05:31 PM

Originally Posted by gigem

i never said anyone was knocking the troops i was just stating that some people actually believe in why were there i could care less who you played what with hell i played hs ball with andy pettit and bucky richardson at deer park hs that has nothing to do with all the cry baby terrorist lovers over here in this country crying bring em home so they can rebuild . so you dont go there since you apparently love them enough to want to bring our troops back and not do whatever it takes to whipe out as many as we can. hell everyone know well never kill em all but sitting over here waiting on the next time doesnt sound like a good option to me

Just because someone wants to bring the troops home doesn't make them a terrorists lover. Your refusal to even look at the other side of the coin shows that you aren't capable of having a logical discussion about the issue. You have proven with your previous thread (ie the 'Dang Democrats, thread), and the fact that you refuse to believe the evidence that Saddam had no dealings with Bin Laden or Al Quaida (as a matter of fact Bin Laden considered Saddam an infadel and an enemy of Islam), shows that you don't do research or are capable of presenting a debatable argument.

I could care less about who you played with either, especially at the high school level (name dropping is a joke to someone like me!!!). I was just saying I knew the guy. You attempted to invoke his name as a way to justify your argument. That won't work because I knew the guy and I know his family and I share their anger for the way the government has used him as a recruiting tool and the way the tried to cover up real circumstances of his death. But that is another discussion that I can tell you aren't capable of having.

**gigem** · 05-14-2007, 06:56 PM

the reason we went to iraq because saddam refused inspectors to go in as agreed in the past conflict i brought up tilman just to prove that some people love this country and are willing to shed blood for it . im sure everyone knows everyone that has died over there. i realize how he died what the Fvck does that have to do with the fact that he give his life for his country because he loved his country and his president. saddam killed alot of innocent people and thats why hes dead today and bush saved alot of innocent lives making that happen but the dems wont talk about how many lives hes saved heck your probably one of those people that would walk by the salvation army to the give it to the rebuild afganistan foundation

**BgMc31** · 05-14-2007, 10:16 PM

Originally Posted by gigem

the reason we went to iraq because saddam refused inspectors to go in as agreed in the past conflict i brought up tilman just to prove that some people love this country and are willing to shed blood for it . im sure everyone knows everyone that has died over there. i realize how he died what the Fvck does that have to do with the fact that he give his life for his country because he loved his country and his president. saddam killed alot of innocent people and thats why hes dead today and bush saved alot of innocent lives making that happen but the dems wont talk about how many lives hes saved heck your probably one of those people that would walk by the salvation army to the give it to the rebuild afganistan foundation

Since you insist upon throwing out insults, I'm done trying to have a rational discussion with you. There is no need for me to continue this as you are overly emotional with no sense of logic when you are angry. Have a great day!!!