Author Topic: Obama President Of the USA. (Read 1749 times)

Fred M · « **on:** January 29, 2008, 03:35:16 PM »

Is it possible, I have discounted the Clinton woman.

But Obama is it real or just a bad dream?

Glanceblamm · « **Reply #1 on:** January 29, 2008, 04:15:51 PM »

It is a Nightmare. I really do look for Hitlary to prevail for the demons though which will still be a bad dream.

nomosendero · « **Reply #2 on:** January 29, 2008, 05:09:57 PM »

I think it would be virtually impossible for him to be elected. I think the odds are against him being nominated barring a miracle, but I hope he is nominated. I see no way he could be Pres, but I believe if Butch is nominated, she will probably win.

deltecs · « **Reply #3 on:** January 29, 2008, 05:44:30 PM »

Ogama is making a good showing but in the end it will be Hitlery. Of the states predominately Democrat, most have not voted yet. The ones that have, also have a high black population which voted for Obama. When Super Tues roles around, just look at the blue states and you will see she will have not only more delegates, she'll have a majority of the delegates in the primary elections on that date. Obama will put up resistance but not effectively after that. We'll soon see if my predictions have merit in a week or so.

Heavy C · « **Reply #4 on:** January 29, 2008, 06:37:26 PM »

I think you're right. Although after his most recent win he is feeling pretty cocky. As the Republican side starts to thin it will be interesting to see how things end up after the primaries.

Fred M · « **Reply #5 on:** January 29, 2008, 07:03:53 PM »

I sure wished I had some more understanding of the process. How these two
people ever got into the running is simply incredible and for me very hard to
comprehend. I saw the fracas in Washington on TV it was something I never would have believed possible.

I was all for G Bush in the beginning but changed my mind when he ran the ecconmy into the ground with his spending causing a hard time for America.
What ever possessed him to start this war in Iraq.

magooch · « **Reply #6 on:** January 30, 2008, 03:37:38 AM »

Well, it just might have been Islamo terrorism and the desire to deny the extremists a sympathetic supporter (Saddam). Anyone who believes that we could effectively go after al Qaida without also addressing Iraq are not being real. There are several other cesspools that need some attention, but all in due time.

~Ace~ · « **Reply #7 on:** January 30, 2008, 03:48:11 AM »

Preemptive wars are Illegal under the Constitution of the United States... Period

I believe MANY of Osama's Votes are people voting Against Klintoon.. If Either get elected it will be our worst Nightmare X 10.. And the reason for the Second Amendment will become Clear.

I WILL Vote for the ONLY 100% Pro Gun and Pro Constitution candidate.. Ron Paul

muskeg13 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 30, 2008, 08:23:21 PM »

Quote

Preemptive wars are Illegal under the Constitution of the United States... Period

Where in the Constitution is this prohibition? Quote specifically where, so I can look it up. I don't think you're going to find it.

So, you don't agree that it's better to for us strike an enemy before they hit us? If we had believed the radar intercepts, I guess you would have rather had us sit on our thumbs (like we did) while the Japanese fleet sent in the planes to bomb Pearl Harbor?

Mikey · « **Reply #9 on:** January 31, 2008, 01:17:07 AM »

Ace: Pre-emptive? Naw! They hit us first and we struck back. Just because we hit them more than once and in more than one place doesn't make anything pre-emptive. JMTCW. Mikey.

~Ace~ · « **Reply #10 on:** January 31, 2008, 04:08:03 AM »

You seem to be confusing "Anticipatory" self-defense with Preemtive War.. We can Defend ourselves against a Nation when an attack is immenint, We can also defend ourselves from Terrorists in the same respect. But, we can Not launch a "War on Terror" as to be a WAR, Congress has to declare a War against a Nation, Constitutionally speaking, "war" is a very specific set of legal relations between two or more independent nations. For the most obvious example, in an actual "war" soldiers of one nation may, within certain limits, intentionally kill soldiers of another nation without thereby being guilty of murder. Thus, according to strict constitutional logic, a "war on terror" is an existential impossibility--if only because "terror" is a tactic, not a country; and "terrorists" do not constitute one or more independent nations, but at most are mere bands of private criminals.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution establishes that ratified treaties, such as the U.N. Charter, are the "supreme law of the land." Now you can Google The Article 1 and 2 of the UN Charter..

We can Not pick and choose what parts of the Constitution to support, if we want the Second amendment, we have to take it ALL, even if we do not totally agree with what it entails. Allowing the President, Congress, or anyone else to Ignore parts of it is reckless... And we already see what it leads to.

magooch · « **Reply #11 on:** January 31, 2008, 04:09:25 AM »

Yeah, and while you're at it, when did the North Koreans attack us. Also, when and where did North Vietnam strike us. What part of our country did Panama under Noriega attack. I could go back to an earlier century and find lots of wars and military campaigns that we initiated without first having been attacked. If the Constitution does forbid preemptive military engagement, then there is a long tradition of ignoring such a provision and rightly so.

The notion that we should be a punching bag to any aggressor who imagines they have a problem with us is stupid at best and ridiculous, ludicrous and any other adjective you want to apply. And while I'm at it, this inane idea that the United States has lost all respect in the world is just nuts. I get so mad when I hear these silly Dumbycrats repeating that crap that I want to put a preemptive attack on their chicken asses.

Doublebass73 · « **Reply #12 on:** January 31, 2008, 12:39:50 PM »

Quote from: ~Ace~ on January 31, 2008, 04:08:03 AM

You seem to be confusing "Anticipatory" self-defense with Preemtive War.. We can Defend ourselves against a Nation when an attack is immenint, We can also defend ourselves from Terrorists in the same respect. But, we can Not launch a "War on Terror" as to be a WAR, Congress has to declare a War against a Nation, Constitutionally speaking, "war" is a very specific set of legal relations between two or more independent nations. For the most obvious example, in an actual "war" soldiers of one nation may, within certain limits, intentionally kill soldiers of another nation without thereby being guilty of murder. Thus, according to strict constitutional logic, a "war on terror" is an existential impossibility--if only because "terror" is a tactic, not a country; and "terrorists" do not constitute one or more independent nations, but at most are mere bands of private criminals.

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution establishes that ratified treaties, such as the U.N. Charter, are the "supreme law of the land." Now you can Google The Article 1 and 2 of the UN Charter..

We can Not pick and choose what parts of the Constitution to support, if we want the Second amendment, we have to take it ALL, even if we do not totally agree with what it entails. Allowing the President, Congress, or anyone else to Ignore parts of it is reckless... And we already see what it leads to.

Well, said Ace. We have to be consistent with the Constitution if we want to protect it and ourselves.

wareagleguy · « **Reply #13 on:** January 31, 2008, 01:43:36 PM »

McCain is the one that scares the crap out of me.

nomosendero · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2008, 03:58:55 PM »

Quote from: wareagleguy on January 31, 2008, 01:43:36 PM

McCain is the one that scares the crap out of me.

Me too!!! A Socialist Demoncrap in sheep's clothing no doubt.

magooch · « **Reply #15 on:** February 01, 2008, 03:16:33 AM »

I am no McLame supporter, and I agree that he wouldn't make a pimple on a real conservatives butt, but if you're afraid of him, you should be petrified of Hitlary, or Osama. Be afraid, be very, very afraid!!!

Oh, unless you are al Qaeda.

buffermop · « **Reply #16 on:** February 01, 2008, 05:13:53 AM »

I would much rather have McCain in than Hillary.

gypsyman · « **Reply #17 on:** February 01, 2008, 05:32:44 AM »

The government of this country has been picking and choosing what laws it chooses to enforce or ignore, almost since it's inception. It's what ''right'' for the situation at hand. Not the right thing to do, but that's the way it is. I hope that O'slama does get the Dem's nomination for pres. I don't think he has nearly the chance to get elected as Bilary. No matter what you hear on any news channel, most Americans,when they get in the voting both, will consider his race. Is it ''right''- no, but it's a fact of life. gypsyman

nomosendero · « **Reply #18 on:** February 01, 2008, 06:39:52 PM »

Quote from: magooch on February 01, 2008, 03:16:33 AM

I am no McLame supporter, and I agree that he wouldn't make a pimple on a real conservatives butt, but if you're afraid of him, you should be petrified of Hitlary, or Osama. Be afraid, be very, very afraid!!!

Oh, unless you are al Qaeda.

I would be afraid of all three of these clowns. I believe McCain is the most dangerous. Butch or Yomama stand a chance of creating a backlash by their 2nd year & we might get conservative Congressmen elected if the country & gun owners are still alive in 2 years. If McCain is elected he would finish off the Rep. party & then we lose everything permanately & I believe he would sign any gun bill the Demoncraps offer. And from that point on the Rep. would be labeled as the part that took the guns, due to this clown. I am no Prophet, but this is a likely situation to me. And no, that does not mean that I would vote for a Socialist Demoncrap, that will never happen. But I might write in somebody, I am sick of voting for the lessor of 2 evils.

30-06man · « **Reply #19 on:** February 01, 2008, 07:22:44 PM »

At least with Hillary you know what to expect. With Obama you have no idea what to expect. Vote Ron Paul.

plumberroy · « **Reply #20 on:** February 02, 2008, 07:08:07 AM »

Quote

Now you can Google The Article 1 and 2 of the UN Charter

All the u.n. is interested in is is bilking every last dime out of the United States And bringing us under their socialist rule and short of a miricle they may get it done the way this election is shaping up All the U.S. did in Iraq, was do what the un threaten we as a world group where going to only two reasons most the un nations where against it, was the fact it cut off there illegal money coming out of Iraq and since American Soldiers would be there they could not rape the 13-14 year old girls at will like they are doing in Africa
We would be a whole lot better off if we told the un to get the F#$% out of our country .besides with the loss of the twin towers we could us the office space
The un is a joke for 10 years it told Iraq if you do that we're going to use force Iraq would do it and the u n would say okay but if you do it again ....... Once an ultimatum is given you have to follow through or you are just a wind bag. there again all they were really interested in was U.S.money (can you say globel warming) illegal money from saddom and raping little African girls......

nomosendero · « **Reply #21 on:** February 02, 2008, 04:05:28 PM »

Quote from: 30-06man on February 01, 2008, 07:22:44 PM

At least with Hillary you know what to expect. With Obama you have no idea what to expect. Vote Ron Paul.

I will likely do that Tuesday in the AR primary because Duncan Hunter & Tancredo have dropped out. What I mean by write in someone is that by the time the gen. election rolls around in Nov. RP will be out to. But I will write in some name most likely.

30-06man · « **Reply #22 on:** February 02, 2008, 07:04:00 PM »

If all else fails Mitt Romney is better than McCain or any other Dem.

blackpowderbill · « **Reply #23 on:** February 02, 2008, 10:36:28 PM »

This election cycle blows. The Repulicrats are on the verge of committing suicide by nominating McCain. If they do that the DemocRats win by default. A President McCain is a democRat in all but name, so the dems win by virtue of having a champion for their policies. If McCain loses and the Hildabeast or Obama win, well then we shall know what life was like in the old Soviet Union. Dr Paul is the only good choice we have but I fear he stands no chance.
I spent twenty two years of my life serving my country but now I fear I may live to see its death by internal rot.

countryrebel8174 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 02, 2008, 10:38:10 PM »

i would vote ron paul or mike huckabee...mclame, osama bin bama, and hitlery are the devil....

DakotaElkSlayer · « **Reply #25 on:** February 03, 2008, 05:10:26 PM »

Quote from: Fred M on January 29, 2008, 03:35:16 PM

Is it possible, I have discounted the Clinton woman.

But Obama is it real or just a bad dream?

I would say that Obama is real and has a pretty good shot at the Presidency...he's got the brains and charisma to spare.

Jim

DakotaElkSlayer · « **Reply #26 on:** February 03, 2008, 05:13:18 PM »

Quote from: blackpowderbill on February 02, 2008, 10:36:28 PM

Hildabeast or Obama win, well then we shall know what life was like in the old Soviet Union.

Ya gotta' explain that one to me!

Jim

bluebayou · « **Reply #27 on:** February 03, 2008, 05:43:45 PM »

Anyone who thinks that invading Iraq has to do with terrorism hasn't been paying attention to current events for the last 5 years. Was Hussein loathsome? Yes. Are there plenty of loathsome rulers in the world? Yes. We invaded Iraq because of WMDs, no because of terrorism, no because they were part of an axis of evil...........Please.

What is with making fun of everyone's name, by the way? To me, these people are all scary as crap. Here we have a 2 year tenure Senator running for Pres as a full time job. If I was from Illinois I would want him removed from office. On the other hand is a Senator from New York who isn't from New York and obviously chose New York because the state has a large number of electoral votes and is sympathetically aligned to her. She wasn't popular enough to run in California, and God knows that she wouldn't get elected in Texas..........Anyway, again, she is running for office fulltime and is acting as Senator.

McCain..........what EXACTLY does he believe/want to accomplish? So he was a POW. I salute you. How does that qualify you to be the leader of the free world?

You want to see an unstoppable combination? How about Huckabee as VP and McCain as Pres, IF McCain shut up and went to the left as most of us seem to think that he will anyway?

Like the comedian Lewis Black said, every year, every election, I think that it can't get any worse....and it does.

At least maybe the next president won't be a fundamentalist with some weird desire to trigger the Apocalypse.

AND I VOTED FOR HIM!!!!! I am 37 years old and have voted Republican for 19 years. The man has driven me from my own party for God's sake.

rockbilly · « **Reply #28 on:** February 03, 2008, 06:11:17 PM »

For those that think Obama doesn't stand a chance, you better wake up and smell the roses...............he has just about ensured all the black votes are his, he just made a major move to secure the vote of all Hispanic voters by saying he will push for drivers license and eventually citizenship for the 18-20 million illegal immigrants, and he has a very strong following among the 18-20 year old collage students. An example, there are three collages here (Abilene, TX), a recent poll indicated that better than 70 percent of the students polled said they would vote for him. In addition, among the dumbodraps he has a very strong following from those who are opposed to Hillary. The endorsement by Drunk Daddy (Ted Kennedy) will earn a ton of votes, so never say never to his possibility of becoming President.

In my opinion, the only candidate left that won't sell us out is Huckyabee. McCain will give this country away just like any liberal democrat would do. It will be interesting to see if he carries AZ. where the Mexican population is very high and will be split between he and Obama. The same is true in Kalofornia, the mayor of LA, a Mexican has endorsed Obama, while the Governor has endorsed McCain. Another state with the Mexican population split on their vote.

Bottom line, makes no difference if it is Hillary, Obama, or McCain this country is in a heap of SH!+ when this is the best we can do to elect a President. Brother, if there were ever a time in history when it was important to keep your powder dry, this is it.

doc_kreipke · « **Reply #29 on:** February 03, 2008, 11:21:03 PM »

Quote

Hildabeast or Obama win, well then we shall know what life was like in the old Soviet Union.
...
Ya gotta' explain that one to me!

I think that Blackpowder means that both Hillary and Obama want a more centrally controlled economy rather than a market/consumer controlled economy. The Soviets micromanaged the economy from the national level, and because of the inherent inefficiency in the system, everybody's standard of living was depressed while the elite Politburo lived high on the hog at everybody's expense.

Whenever I hear Obama or Hillary speak, F.A. Hayek's The Road to Serfdom comes to mind.