Dems Host Illegal Aliens at State of the Union
- Thread starter Clean
- Start date
CedarParkFan
1,000+ Posts
Just another example of the government's disregard for the law. The integrity of our system is eroding. As our governmental institutions continue to deteriorate we will continue on a path that will see us increasingly resemble that cesspool to the south called Mexico.
D
dillohorn
Guest
I thought it was going to be some of Obozo's family.
D
dillohorn
Guest
Obama is the most disgusting person that I can think of. I just can't think of much else to say about him.
H
Hu_Fan
Guest
H
Hu_Fan
Guest
The problem with Obama is that he's out of place in his job as POTUS.
He belongs in an academic community.
He's a philosopher and a beat writer and thinker.
He's 21st century attempt at Jack Kerouac.
He's the flip of Wm. F. Buckley.
He's quirky like Kurt Vonnegut.
He's no Will Rogers. He does NOT speak for everyday Americans.
He's no Mark Twain, not that funny when he tries to be flippant.
He belongs in an academic department.
His speaking out needs go no further than that.
He is terrible CEO Presidential material.
Has no idea what the office is all about.
He's taken it to a level of trite silliness.
He's an experiment in American history that ...well, been there, done that. Move on.
His public speeches are as meaningless as editorials in everyday newspapers.
His statements are as sigificant as a posts on Hornfans or essays on one of ten thousands blogs.
What he talks about is light years from what needs to be talked about.
And mostly... it's just a lot of malarkey, not even a good grade of baloney.
I am so emabarrassed to be an American with him in office.
Maybe I'm wrong. I dunno. Is he willing to make my entire life... free?
Maybe I've had it wrong. Can I apply for a completely free life? Hang the debt? Is that it?
Should we really be all about re-engineering all of American Society...by "experts" that know how all our lives should be?
And... Obama.. is.. an... expert?..that knows?
Really?
He belongs in an academic community.
He's a philosopher and a beat writer and thinker.
He's 21st century attempt at Jack Kerouac.
He's the flip of Wm. F. Buckley.
He's quirky like Kurt Vonnegut.
He's no Will Rogers. He does NOT speak for everyday Americans.
He's no Mark Twain, not that funny when he tries to be flippant.
He belongs in an academic department.
His speaking out needs go no further than that.
He is terrible CEO Presidential material.
Has no idea what the office is all about.
He's taken it to a level of trite silliness.
He's an experiment in American history that ...well, been there, done that. Move on.
His public speeches are as meaningless as editorials in everyday newspapers.
His statements are as sigificant as a posts on Hornfans or essays on one of ten thousands blogs.
What he talks about is light years from what needs to be talked about.
And mostly... it's just a lot of malarkey, not even a good grade of baloney.
I am so emabarrassed to be an American with him in office.
Maybe I'm wrong. I dunno. Is he willing to make my entire life... free?
Maybe I've had it wrong. Can I apply for a completely free life? Hang the debt? Is that it?
Should we really be all about re-engineering all of American Society...by "experts" that know how all our lives should be?
And... Obama.. is.. an... expert?..that knows?
Really?
H
Hu_Fan
Guest
One more thing while I'm in the mood... try to make this the last thing about it...
We do not need a President...man or woman... in position to constantly campaign for agendas, because the initiation of that, and the pursuit of that, belongs to the wide-spread representative branch of government, the Legislature, which by design passes laws. We do not need departments and agencies under the executive branch, to be constantly, in effect, writing law by massive quantities of rules and regulations.
And we do not need a President routinely addressing how society should live and behave. It is not the President's job to be engaged in social engineering, moral governing, and things of that matter -- otherwise what we have is a combination of King and High Priest, and that is NOT what the office of President of the United States is all about.
It is not an office for a single person in the land to lecture, preach, advise and comment on life of the citizens of the country. That is not only a stupid and vain thing to be doing, but is dangerous beyond belief.
Obama has taken the opportunity to be President and assumed it is his role in life to take advantage of that position to basically talk beer talk every week or so, and on specific occasions. You or I, or a taxi driver could do the same damn thing: run on and on about how we'd like everybody and the whole country to live.
I am amazed and appalled that the mainstream media from all outlets has not come down hard on this with shock and amazement. Who in hell ever said the President could issue edicts and proclamations and declarations on how life should or could be in the country? Where did that come from?
I do not want any President to make my life, his or her business. Leave my elevator alone! (Blast From The Past).
Statism is the worship of government. It is the belief that all things in life stem from the hand of the government: whatever matter there is at hand in the life of the society... more government is the answer. And now the President, the POTUS, has made it point that the President will speak regularly to the country about all such matters. Beg pardon? Huh?!
That is so far from the intent of the Founding Fathers who fashioned together a country to be free from nearly everything represented by this administration. If not both parties most of the time.
The idea from the start was just one thing: LIBERTY. Freedom to build and develop individual lives, and in doing so the whole of the country. It is about liberty, it is not about massive government rule.
Am I in the minority, along with Austrian Economics and Mises Institute, to grasp that?
Obama is a fine man. Like anyone else. You, me, people next door, down the street, across the country. But none of us are in position to know better how we all should live, and none of is the King or Queen or Bishop of the land. The three branches of government are designed to put chains on all who serve so they have to work like hell to impose anything on the rest of us.
In fact, It was designed NOT to work!! Duh! That WAS the idea!!! Small, un-intrusive, non-meddling. Both here and abroad. THAT is what Liberty is. It was never about The State. It was always about the people, the individual, a free society to work things out over time through day to day life and productivity. It was never about The State ruling as it were.
And certainly not from the office of single rule.
We do not need a President...man or woman... in position to constantly campaign for agendas, because the initiation of that, and the pursuit of that, belongs to the wide-spread representative branch of government, the Legislature, which by design passes laws. We do not need departments and agencies under the executive branch, to be constantly, in effect, writing law by massive quantities of rules and regulations.
And we do not need a President routinely addressing how society should live and behave. It is not the President's job to be engaged in social engineering, moral governing, and things of that matter -- otherwise what we have is a combination of King and High Priest, and that is NOT what the office of President of the United States is all about.
It is not an office for a single person in the land to lecture, preach, advise and comment on life of the citizens of the country. That is not only a stupid and vain thing to be doing, but is dangerous beyond belief.
Obama has taken the opportunity to be President and assumed it is his role in life to take advantage of that position to basically talk beer talk every week or so, and on specific occasions. You or I, or a taxi driver could do the same damn thing: run on and on about how we'd like everybody and the whole country to live.
I am amazed and appalled that the mainstream media from all outlets has not come down hard on this with shock and amazement. Who in hell ever said the President could issue edicts and proclamations and declarations on how life should or could be in the country? Where did that come from?
I do not want any President to make my life, his or her business. Leave my elevator alone! (Blast From The Past).
Statism is the worship of government. It is the belief that all things in life stem from the hand of the government: whatever matter there is at hand in the life of the society... more government is the answer. And now the President, the POTUS, has made it point that the President will speak regularly to the country about all such matters. Beg pardon? Huh?!
That is so far from the intent of the Founding Fathers who fashioned together a country to be free from nearly everything represented by this administration. If not both parties most of the time.
The idea from the start was just one thing: LIBERTY. Freedom to build and develop individual lives, and in doing so the whole of the country. It is about liberty, it is not about massive government rule.
Am I in the minority, along with Austrian Economics and Mises Institute, to grasp that?
Obama is a fine man. Like anyone else. You, me, people next door, down the street, across the country. But none of us are in position to know better how we all should live, and none of is the King or Queen or Bishop of the land. The three branches of government are designed to put chains on all who serve so they have to work like hell to impose anything on the rest of us.
In fact, It was designed NOT to work!! Duh! That WAS the idea!!! Small, un-intrusive, non-meddling. Both here and abroad. THAT is what Liberty is. It was never about The State. It was always about the people, the individual, a free society to work things out over time through day to day life and productivity. It was never about The State ruling as it were.
And certainly not from the office of single rule.
D
dillohorn
Guest
What Hufan said so well x 1000.
H
Hu_Fan
Guest
There's also the matter of Super Legislator !! one person that knows better than all 435 members of the House and all 100 Senators.
Super Legislator has "the skinny" that 535 legislators somehow cannot individually or collectively measure up to.
Therefore, once each small congressional district has elected said legislator, and each state has sent it's two senators to Capital Hill.... "I, Super Legislator still knows better than the collective body and will lead, admonish, direct and advise all 535 legislators to do the right thing. For I am Super Legislator acting as President and know best what each all of you together just can't get."
And I will annouce and direct what must be done -- and will do so weekly, monthly, and annually -- because, and until, you ******* get it.
(while the country somehow puts up with you short-sighted, aimless, incompetent Wannabe Legislators)
-- Barack Hussein Obama
Super Legislator and President of these United States
in that order, and sometimes the other way around
basically, whatever works
Super Legislator has "the skinny" that 535 legislators somehow cannot individually or collectively measure up to.
Therefore, once each small congressional district has elected said legislator, and each state has sent it's two senators to Capital Hill.... "I, Super Legislator still knows better than the collective body and will lead, admonish, direct and advise all 535 legislators to do the right thing. For I am Super Legislator acting as President and know best what each all of you together just can't get."
And I will annouce and direct what must be done -- and will do so weekly, monthly, and annually -- because, and until, you ******* get it.
(while the country somehow puts up with you short-sighted, aimless, incompetent Wannabe Legislators)
-- Barack Hussein Obama
Super Legislator and President of these United States
in that order, and sometimes the other way around
basically, whatever works
H
Hu_Fan
Guest
Overall I don't think Obama is interested in accomplishing anything as much as he is interested in polarizing, dividing and destroying.
His agenda all this year will cause the Republican-controlled legislative branch to thrash in the wind of what is now a 2-year campaign drive for the presidency. The outline of the #SOTU address will provide the battle lines by which Democrats can rail about the inaction of the House and Senate.
Tactic is this: throw something out there that likely will not be agreed upon. (In any year any decade any century, most things are not agreed upon other than by tough vetting and hard-fought compromise anyway -- even when it's not about sensitive issues). Elevate all the agenda to glorified "it's time, gotta do this."
Then blame "whomever" for not agreeing to something. Pick any half dozen to fifteen items and declare them all righteous and necessary. The outcome is not important. The CLASH is all important. The Chaos and Clash is what is needed; not any particular outcome.
This president is perfectly cut for revolution, banana republics, overturning of complete societies, whatever it takes to shred the public psyche and keep all the citizens distracted or preoccupied constantly and relentlessly. To the point they are whipped into submission and could give a damn one way or the other and basically no longer have an independent thought -- because how can you in a national atmosphere of such vitrol.
The Democratic Party with it's somewhat naive electorate in the younger demographic, was suckered into electing a real work for POTUS. Consider it a lesson, if the masses are capable of thinking for themselves and reading between the lines what is going on.
Because if we are this gullible and this insensitive as to not give a **** how we are treated and cannot sort through it, then we're one ****** up society. We are a nation of Sheeple. We don't deserve to be free. And then we rail about a society like Russia? You kidding me? China? Iran? What's the difference? If one is tyranny the other is Tyranny Lite. But it's all "I gotcha sucka."
Political power corrupts the morals and judgment. Sometimes the corrupting is more extreme, but it's all by degrees. Those are the only differences. How much this way or that way. No one can call the kettle black. Just one a little blacker than the others.
It's just worse to pretend to be a Savior above all the rest. The answer? For starters let the office of the President take on a slimmer more pointed role that has nothing to do with legislative matters. Leave all of that alone. Focus on Leadership. By style, manner, patience and above all... class and statesmanship. Work with world leaders in a calm resolute manner, but not as a cocky BMOC. Lead in a less granular way, focus more on Big Picture matters, and let the legislative body and courts do their job -- stay the hell out of what is not your job.
The President should not be such a defined position. Much less granular, more broad strokes. That kind of personage and leadership. But what Obama has been doing is playing like a Super Congressman, Super Senator, and Superior Judge.
Worst thing about it is most Americans go around like it's no big deal. No reaction. The media has sucked up for the whole nine yards (except Fox, WSJ).
The entire presidency says a lot about the nature of the society. A real indictment. Embarrassing.
His agenda all this year will cause the Republican-controlled legislative branch to thrash in the wind of what is now a 2-year campaign drive for the presidency. The outline of the #SOTU address will provide the battle lines by which Democrats can rail about the inaction of the House and Senate.
Tactic is this: throw something out there that likely will not be agreed upon. (In any year any decade any century, most things are not agreed upon other than by tough vetting and hard-fought compromise anyway -- even when it's not about sensitive issues). Elevate all the agenda to glorified "it's time, gotta do this."
Then blame "whomever" for not agreeing to something. Pick any half dozen to fifteen items and declare them all righteous and necessary. The outcome is not important. The CLASH is all important. The Chaos and Clash is what is needed; not any particular outcome.
This president is perfectly cut for revolution, banana republics, overturning of complete societies, whatever it takes to shred the public psyche and keep all the citizens distracted or preoccupied constantly and relentlessly. To the point they are whipped into submission and could give a damn one way or the other and basically no longer have an independent thought -- because how can you in a national atmosphere of such vitrol.
The Democratic Party with it's somewhat naive electorate in the younger demographic, was suckered into electing a real work for POTUS. Consider it a lesson, if the masses are capable of thinking for themselves and reading between the lines what is going on.
Because if we are this gullible and this insensitive as to not give a **** how we are treated and cannot sort through it, then we're one ****** up society. We are a nation of Sheeple. We don't deserve to be free. And then we rail about a society like Russia? You kidding me? China? Iran? What's the difference? If one is tyranny the other is Tyranny Lite. But it's all "I gotcha sucka."
Political power corrupts the morals and judgment. Sometimes the corrupting is more extreme, but it's all by degrees. Those are the only differences. How much this way or that way. No one can call the kettle black. Just one a little blacker than the others.
It's just worse to pretend to be a Savior above all the rest. The answer? For starters let the office of the President take on a slimmer more pointed role that has nothing to do with legislative matters. Leave all of that alone. Focus on Leadership. By style, manner, patience and above all... class and statesmanship. Work with world leaders in a calm resolute manner, but not as a cocky BMOC. Lead in a less granular way, focus more on Big Picture matters, and let the legislative body and courts do their job -- stay the hell out of what is not your job.
The President should not be such a defined position. Much less granular, more broad strokes. That kind of personage and leadership. But what Obama has been doing is playing like a Super Congressman, Super Senator, and Superior Judge.
Worst thing about it is most Americans go around like it's no big deal. No reaction. The media has sucked up for the whole nine yards (except Fox, WSJ).
The entire presidency says a lot about the nature of the society. A real indictment. Embarrassing.
I guess this means you guys don't like him?
Me either, but he's certainly no worse than W or Nixon or Carter.
My main problem with him is that he is tone deaf to what a huge portion of the country thinks and does not even try to dance around it-----Nixon was great at laying out the opposition's case to show he understood and then telling us why he thought we were wrong and what he was going to do instead,. I don't see Obama doing that much. All who don't agree with him are wrong and just need to straighten out their thinking and in the meantime he will do what he wants.
I like the immigrants individually, as a rule, but think having 10 million people here dragging down wages is kind of unkind to the lower working class which has to accept lower wages as a result. I have never seen anything that suggests Obama even gives lip service to the idea that my concern might have some validity. All his rich friends keep telling him how much we need all the cheap labor,
The south needed cheap labor to pick the cotton but they got millions of human beings. The social dysfunction arising from that class of cultures is with us still.
Me either, but he's certainly no worse than W or Nixon or Carter.
My main problem with him is that he is tone deaf to what a huge portion of the country thinks and does not even try to dance around it-----Nixon was great at laying out the opposition's case to show he understood and then telling us why he thought we were wrong and what he was going to do instead,. I don't see Obama doing that much. All who don't agree with him are wrong and just need to straighten out their thinking and in the meantime he will do what he wants.
I like the immigrants individually, as a rule, but think having 10 million people here dragging down wages is kind of unkind to the lower working class which has to accept lower wages as a result. I have never seen anything that suggests Obama even gives lip service to the idea that my concern might have some validity. All his rich friends keep telling him how much we need all the cheap labor,
The south needed cheap labor to pick the cotton but they got millions of human beings. The social dysfunction arising from that class of cultures is with us still.
Clean
5,000+ Posts
You say he is no worse than W or Carter or Nixon, but I don't agree. Although I never liked some of those Presidents, I never felt like they wanted to downgrade America's place in the world. I always thought everyone of them loved America and wanted it to be a world leader in their own way. I do think Obama wants America to not be a world leader anymore. He wants us to just be "one of the boys". He's downsizing our capability in every way he can, especially when it comes to the military.
D
dillohorn
Guest
I didn't have to worry about losing my country while W or Nixon were in office.
Horns11
10,000+ Posts
"And thanks to lower gas prices and higher fuel standards, the typical family this year should save $750 at the pump."
Not sure if this is him taking credit. Why wouldn't a president talk about better economic numbers during the SOTU? Isn't that par for the course for every single president, ever?
I think it's more telling that he left some pretty important stuff out of the SOTU, like Obamacare and actual immigration policies. Way too many vagueries for me.
Not sure if this is him taking credit. Why wouldn't a president talk about better economic numbers during the SOTU? Isn't that par for the course for every single president, ever?
I think it's more telling that he left some pretty important stuff out of the SOTU, like Obamacare and actual immigration policies. Way too many vagueries for me.
Apparently they host frauds as well. The "ordinary" person Obama featured in his speech is actually a democratic staffer.
Rebekah Erler was one of the 26 designated guests of First Last Michelle Obama during Tuesday’s State of the Union Address. The president presented Erler as a woman who had written him of the economic struggles she and her husband endured starting with the financial meltdown of 2008 and continuing through most of the Obama presidency. Obama pointed her out as an inspiration of how ordinary Americans could overcome any adversary through sacrifice and hard work. However, as the Washington Free Beacon reported, the president failed to mention that Erler is “a former Democratic campaign operative, working as a field organizer for Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.”
President Barack Obama 2015 State of the Union address
Photo by Pool/Getty Images
In addition, Erler has been used as a prop by Obama at a Democratic event in June 2014. The president wanted to “spend a day in the life’ of Erler and her family so that he might better communicate with ordinary American for whom he is said to be working. When Erler’s affiliations were outed, the Minnesota Republican Party pounced, stating that Obama, “so out of touch with reality that he thinks a former Democrat campaign staffer speaks for every Minnesotan.”
Nevertheless, the president was very eloquent about Erler and her story. The story included the collapse of her husband Ben’s construction business, Erler’s enrolling at a community college to train for a new career, and the birth of two children. Taken alone, without context, the story was properly inspirational.
“America, Rebekah and Ben’s story is our story. They represent the millions who have worked hard, and scrimped, and sacrificed, and retooled. You are the reason I ran for this office. You’re the people I was thinking of six years ago today, in the darkest months of the crisis, when I stood on the steps of this Capitol and promised we would rebuild our economy on a new foundation. And it’s been your effort and resilience that has made it possible for our country to emerge stronger.”
That the president would use a former Democratic political staffer as an example of an ordinary American seems brazen enough. The fact that he had used her before and that her backstory could be so easily checked by the media veers into hubris. But, the narrative was all that mattered.
Rebekah Erler was one of the 26 designated guests of First Last Michelle Obama during Tuesday’s State of the Union Address. The president presented Erler as a woman who had written him of the economic struggles she and her husband endured starting with the financial meltdown of 2008 and continuing through most of the Obama presidency. Obama pointed her out as an inspiration of how ordinary Americans could overcome any adversary through sacrifice and hard work. However, as the Washington Free Beacon reported, the president failed to mention that Erler is “a former Democratic campaign operative, working as a field organizer for Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.”
President Barack Obama 2015 State of the Union address
Photo by Pool/Getty Images
In addition, Erler has been used as a prop by Obama at a Democratic event in June 2014. The president wanted to “spend a day in the life’ of Erler and her family so that he might better communicate with ordinary American for whom he is said to be working. When Erler’s affiliations were outed, the Minnesota Republican Party pounced, stating that Obama, “so out of touch with reality that he thinks a former Democrat campaign staffer speaks for every Minnesotan.”
Nevertheless, the president was very eloquent about Erler and her story. The story included the collapse of her husband Ben’s construction business, Erler’s enrolling at a community college to train for a new career, and the birth of two children. Taken alone, without context, the story was properly inspirational.
“America, Rebekah and Ben’s story is our story. They represent the millions who have worked hard, and scrimped, and sacrificed, and retooled. You are the reason I ran for this office. You’re the people I was thinking of six years ago today, in the darkest months of the crisis, when I stood on the steps of this Capitol and promised we would rebuild our economy on a new foundation. And it’s been your effort and resilience that has made it possible for our country to emerge stronger.”
That the president would use a former Democratic political staffer as an example of an ordinary American seems brazen enough. The fact that he had used her before and that her backstory could be so easily checked by the media veers into hubris. But, the narrative was all that mattered.
AustinBat
2,500+ Posts
I don't know if any of you watched MSNBC last night (I didn't but hubby played it for me) but Chris "I feel a shiver running up my leg" Matthews and Andrea Mitchell were actually questioning whether BO was just making things up or was completely out of touch with reality. They both said it did seem that he was not living in reality.
I actually wonder if the people running the country are Valerie Jarrat and Eric Holder. This would leave BO free to do what he loves best - golf and campaign. He is lacking as an orator when the words are not written for him on the teleprompter, and never strays from what is written. Watching his head is like watching a tennis match. It would also explain his extreme reluctance to work with Republicans - it would look odd if he always sent VJ to negotiations.
But maybe he is as pathetic as he seems.
I actually wonder if the people running the country are Valerie Jarrat and Eric Holder. This would leave BO free to do what he loves best - golf and campaign. He is lacking as an orator when the words are not written for him on the teleprompter, and never strays from what is written. Watching his head is like watching a tennis match. It would also explain his extreme reluctance to work with Republicans - it would look odd if he always sent VJ to negotiations.
But maybe he is as pathetic as he seems.
This is seriously the funniest post to hit Hornfans. The level of craziness is allsome. The worst 8 years blah blah blah..you act like in the last 6 years we've had the worst financial collapses since the depression and the worst attack on the homeland since December 1941.
We all talk big about how great America is but apparently not so great that a lowly community organizer can bring it down in 6 years. It's a fascinating concept guys, I really have to hand it to you.
All the drama on here has led me to invest in tampons and Kleenex.
We all talk big about how great America is but apparently not so great that a lowly community organizer can bring it down in 6 years. It's a fascinating concept guys, I really have to hand it to you.
All the drama on here has led me to invest in tampons and Kleenex.
NJlonghorn
2,500+ Posts
While it is vastly overstated, I think there is some truth to many of the points made on this thread. But it's really hard to take your good points seriously when you go frothy-mouthed about nonsense like this:
D
dillohorn
Guest
^^^njlong....Yes I take it seriously. signed, dillohorn.
re Nixon or W destroying the country: Nixon made the country very vulnerable by overdoing things and getting himself run out of office. His vice president was a criminal who got to leave and his new vice president, Ford, got to inherit the office with a congress that was bent on undoing Nixonism and we got run out of Viet Nam early as a result. This led to a lot of people thinking they could get away with anything and the "Viet Nam Syndrome"
As for W, he got us into an unnecessary war that made Iran a regional power and gave it access to Iraq and an easy time in Syria, etc. The invasion of Iraq was a disaster because there was no contingency plan and no thinking about what would happen as a result.
It was like playing chess, taking a pawn and then proclaiming victory. This disaster continues to play out daily and Obama and our feckless allies have been unable to cap it. The fact that Obama would prefer to wash his hands of it and tee up for the next round does not help but it is not what created this ongoing disaster. And there is no end to it in sight and nobody has yet suggested how we can end it.
FDR famously said of the Somozas or Trujillo that he was an SOB but he was ours and better than the alternatives. Sometimes real bad is better than a lot worse and people who could not imagine anything worse than Hussein were just limited in their imaginations, just as those who could not imagine anybody worse than the Shah were lacking. That experience should have been a warning to us but W and his cohort paid no heed and we got this disaster. There is no end to it in sight.
I don't care for Obama and never voted for him in spite of the fact that I consider myself a life long democrat but blaming him for the disaster that is unfurling is akin to blaming Churchill for World War II.
As for W, he got us into an unnecessary war that made Iran a regional power and gave it access to Iraq and an easy time in Syria, etc. The invasion of Iraq was a disaster because there was no contingency plan and no thinking about what would happen as a result.
It was like playing chess, taking a pawn and then proclaiming victory. This disaster continues to play out daily and Obama and our feckless allies have been unable to cap it. The fact that Obama would prefer to wash his hands of it and tee up for the next round does not help but it is not what created this ongoing disaster. And there is no end to it in sight and nobody has yet suggested how we can end it.
FDR famously said of the Somozas or Trujillo that he was an SOB but he was ours and better than the alternatives. Sometimes real bad is better than a lot worse and people who could not imagine anything worse than Hussein were just limited in their imaginations, just as those who could not imagine anybody worse than the Shah were lacking. That experience should have been a warning to us but W and his cohort paid no heed and we got this disaster. There is no end to it in sight.
I don't care for Obama and never voted for him in spite of the fact that I consider myself a life long democrat but blaming him for the disaster that is unfurling is akin to blaming Churchill for World War II.
Keep following the pied piper regardless of what tune he plays. You say it all when you openly state you do not know the truth behind her story, but you believe your idol any way. Most Dems only listen when he starts a sentence with, " I plan to take X from others and give it to you...."
D
dillohorn
Guest
Do Obama supporters Think?
IF the vid of a new Iranian ICBM site with missile on launch pad is real then Iran will need that 11 bil. ( sarc)
BO's threat of veto against any Iran sanctions passed by Congress sure sounds like, as one GOP senator put it" sounds like talking points that come straight out of Tehran"
BO's threat of veto against any Iran sanctions passed by Congress sure sounds like, as one GOP senator put it" sounds like talking points that come straight out of Tehran"
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
Black Lives Matter; The Cerebral Warlords of Our Time
- Started by iatrogenic
- Replies: 1K
- West Mall
-
New Jaguar TV Commercial!?
- Started by WorsterMan
- Replies: 3
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
