The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Expect plenty of disagreement. Just keep it civil.
Bennett Cerf
Posts: 736
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:54 pm

The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Bennett Cerf » Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:13 pm


User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4585
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby lukpac » Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:13 pm

It's the white people, stupid.

Can somebody point out to me who has called Obama "the chosen one", "the messiah", or "an African god"?
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

the 801
Posts: 71
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2003 10:04 pm

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby the 801 » Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:02 pm

White folk have been oppressed for 50 years and they're not gonna take it anymore after a year-and-a-half of Obama? Yeesh...

Frank said it best: "I'm not black, but there's a whole lot of times I wish I could say I'm not white."

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4384
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Rspaight » Mon Aug 02, 2010 8:04 am

Whew, I'm glad he spoke down to us in language we can understand.
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
Lance Hall
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Lance Hall » Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:16 pm

lukpac wrote:It's the white people, stupid.

Can somebody point out to me who has called Obama "the chosen one", "the messiah", or "an African god"?


Well Obama did say something like "WE are who you've been waiting for..." which I took to mean he sees himself as the Liberal Messiah (in political terms not religous)... ie, the ONE to finally finish the work started by FDR and others.

---

As far as the Black community goes... They are making a mistake assuming this guy "has their back". He has no family connection to Amercian Slavery or the American Black man's struggle being that he's a Kenyan-Caucasian American, not "African-American" (meaning those connected to the historical African American experience and the baggage of all that). His connection is academic, what he was told as a youth (indoctrinated if you will), and what he experienced in Illinois. In other words it's not something that's part of his identity... his soul. Note that he never presented himself as the Black candidate either.

User avatar
Lance Hall
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Lance Hall » Sat Aug 07, 2010 5:39 pm

Who should be the 2012 Repub nominee?? I don't care since I'm voting Libertarian as usual.

Both sides are just corporate stooges anyways, bought and paid for.

Bennett Cerf
Posts: 736
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:54 pm

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Bennett Cerf » Mon Aug 09, 2010 11:45 pm

Lance Hall wrote:Well Obama did say something like "WE are who you've been waiting for..." which I took to mean he sees himself as the Liberal Messiah (in political terms not religous)... ie, the ONE to finally finish the work started by FDR and others.


The line was "We are the ones we've been waiting for." But even if he had said it your way, I'd find your interpretation bizarre.

Lance Hall wrote:I don't care since I'm voting Libertarian as usual.


Which type are you?

Image

User avatar
Lance Hall
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Lance Hall » Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:19 pm

Bennett Cerf wrote:Which type are you?


cute graphic.

I'm the kind that's fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I'm the kind that want's government out of our wallets and out of our bedroom. I'm the kind that wants to see the Corporatist Party and the Socialist Party loseing power all around. The fact is any vote for the two established parties IS the "wasted vote" because it's a vote for more of the same crap from both sides. While you guys are just swinging the pendulum to the opposite side every 4 years I'm actually supporting a different way and have since 1990s.

User avatar
Lance Hall
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Lance Hall » Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:30 pm

Bennett Cerf wrote:The line was "We are the ones we've been waiting for." But even if he had said it your way, I'd find your interpretation bizarre.


you've/we've... same thing, it all goes to a self-delusion of greatness and importance was my point.

User avatar
Lance Hall
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Lance Hall » Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:50 pm

I saw an interesting show on PBS where a Liberal guy pointed out that what we have in America is a form of Corporate Facism. It's not overt from the top down like Hitler but is from the bottom up with a few large corporations and banking interests having total influence on the political leaders.

Notice how Obama (the left wing corporatist, ie facist) is trying to put in policies that only the largest corps can afford leaving the smaller businesses struggling? They are destroying small competition leaving only a few at the top (ie. those that are part of the plan and those that will have to pay political protection money to the ruling class). The "Chicago Way" I guess.

User avatar
Lance Hall
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Lance Hall » Thu Aug 12, 2010 8:10 pm

lukpac wrote:It's the white people, stupid.

Can somebody point out to me who has called Obama "the chosen one", "the messiah", or "an African god"?


Limbaugh and Hannity jokingly call him the Messiah often but that's just making fun of his demeanor based on things he's actually said multiple times (no I don't have quotes but I have heard all the clips). I have not heard either Limbaugh or Hannity use "African God" although Limbaugh did say Obama sees himself as an "African dictator" or some such. And no that's not racist.

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4384
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Rspaight » Fri Aug 13, 2010 11:38 am

I'm the kind that want's government out of our wallets and out of our bedroom.


The US currently has the lowest taxation it's had since Truman was President, which is reflected in the towering debt. How much farther "out of our wallets" should it go?

I'm the kind that wants to see the Corporatist Party and the Socialist Party loseing power all around.


Who's the Socialist Party?

While you guys are just swinging the pendulum to the opposite side every 4 years


Yes, if its a pendulum that goes from right of center to just a little right of center.

I'm actually supporting a different way and have since 1990s.


How's that worked out?

it all goes to a self-delusion of greatness and importance


I don't think it's a delusion for the President of the United States to consider himself important. But honestly, I don't see any more out-of-control ego coming from Obama compared to any other politician at the national level. You have to be a raging egomaniac to get into that business in the first place.

Limbaugh and Hannity


Speaking of raging egomaniacs...

Limbaugh did say Obama sees himself as an "African dictator" or some such. And no that's not racist.


If you say so. Why do you think Limbaugh said "African" instead of "Third World"?
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
Lance Hall
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 7:41 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Contact:

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby Lance Hall » Sat Aug 14, 2010 4:34 pm

Rspaight wrote:The US currently has the lowest taxation it's had since Truman was President, which is reflected in the towering debt. How much farther "out of our wallets" should it go?


Well I doubt most people (especially ones that acheived a certain level) feel they are undertaxed. The income, property, and sales taxes are the ones you see directly. We are entering a period of huge taxation (unless the People stop it) that we won't see except through increased costs of good and services. Don't think this is not deliberate. The "rich" will pass all this on to consumers as usual. It's the spending that's the problem, not the lack of taxing.

Our modern consumer economy is based on people having the discretionary income to purchase good and services. When I buy a burger or TV those thing have to be replaced and that demand ripples through manufacturing, transporation, advertising, retail and then all the ancillary things that THEY demand. You suck more money out that system (overtly and subvertly) then all you do is shrink it.

That 780 billion dollar stimulus (or part of it) could have been given in tax rebates directly to the People (even just the non "rich" if you will). It's me and you spending our little dollars (magnified by millions of people) that makes the economy work, NOT some park project in Rep. Blojawb's district. If you take that 780 billion and divide between the 100 million tax payers then that comes to like $7,000 each. Imagine the tremendous demand that would have put on the real economy of this country and how much personal debt could have been wiped. This country was literally ripped off by Pelosi & Ried with that so-called Stimulus. It was deliberate and had little to do with stimulating the economy as has been proven by the economic indicators.

Who's the Socialist Party?


If you believe the Federal government should be an increasing (and eventually sole) deliverer of good and services then you are by definition a socialist. Their goal is to get 51% plus of the electorate to be completely dependant on the State so that they will be in power forever. Shouldn't our goal be to have FEWER people dependant on the State?? I'm not talking about the retired, or the elderly, or the disabled, or the most poor who clearly need assistance, I'm talking about middle class and lower class people. I think they should be able to keep enough money and there be enough opportunity (via an economy constantly needing demand filled as stated above) to be able to climb up the economic ladder and save. You can't progress to a higher rung on the ladder if the higher rungs are not there. In a Stateist system everyone stagnates while the Leaders wax eloquently about their "compassion" and the "fairness and equity" they've brought forth to the People. Of course Stateism it's a false ideology put forth by people who ultimately have no real compassion for the Poeple but only an insatiable thirst for total power. Stateists have destroyed all the economic systems they have got their hands on. While the public debt skyrockets, the real economy shrinks and the People suffer. History has seen these people many times before, most with disasterous results.

Yes, if its a pendulum that goes from right of center to just a little right of center.


Eh, I'd think most people would agree the pendulum is pretty far left of center right now. Maybe you guys up in Wisconsin would call Obama moderate-centrist but that's because y'all live in your own little ideological bubble like the Berkley crowd and the People's Republic of Massachusets.

How's that worked out?


Pretty dang good so far. Libertarians are on more and more ballots every year, gaining votes, and have actually won in a few places.

I don't think it's a delusion for the President of the United States to consider himself important. But honestly, I don't see any more out-of-control ego coming from Obama compared to any other politician at the national level. You have to be a raging egomaniac to get into that business in the first place.


Definately. You have to believe you are basically right about most things and the country is better if you serve. They are all arrogant. The only issue is how well your ideology meshes with the majority of the voters. If the voters think the people in power largely reflect their views then they will keep them in power. If not, Goodbye!

David R. Modny
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Parma, OH

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby David R. Modny » Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Lance Hall wrote:If you believe the Federal government should be an increasing (and eventually sole) deliverer of good and services then you are by definition a socialist. Their goal is to get 51% plus of the electorate to be completely dependant on the State so that they will be in power forever. Shouldn't our goal be to have FEWER people dependant on the State?? I'm not talking about the retired, or the elderly, or the disabled, or the most poor who clearly need assistance, I'm talking about middle class and lower class people. I think they should be able to keep enough money and there be enough opportunity (via an economy constantly needing demand filled as stated above) to be able to climb up the economic ladder and save. You can't progress to a higher rung on the ladder if the higher rungs are not there. In a Stateist system everyone stagnates while the Leaders wax eloquently about their "compassion" and the "fairness and equity" they've brought forth to the People. Of course Stateism it's a false ideology put forth by people who ultimately have no real compassion for the Poeple but only an insatiable thirst for total power. Stateists have destroyed all the economic systems they have got their hands on. While the public debt skyrockets, the real economy shrinks and the People suffer. History has seen these people many times before, most with disasterous results.


Sorry, Lance, but I find this to be a somewhat limited and pessimistic view of a government-as-provider model. Unless your prepared to sit in a shack on the top of a hill, defending yourself with a rifle, it's that same so-called "Statist system" that provides you with the comforts and safety net of the life you lead. That is, unless your hell-bent on privatizing nearly every facet of society - or worse yet, totally eliminating this net. Personally, I like drinking clean water, knowing that my roads are safe and my fire department is only a phone call away. I like knowing that even morsels of government funding and tax dollars are going to schools and libraries. I like knowing that if I'm disabled, I won't be thrown into debtor's prison and may be able to stay afloat for a while with a Social Security check. And while the corporate influence in our political system is definitely disheartening, a free-market, unregulated and truly heartless model has been shown to be just as "disastrous" IMHO. Furthermore, on a related note, you can't separate the "retired, elderly and disabled" from the lower and middle class. If making pre-existing conditions a thing of the past for (hopefully one day) all Americans makes me a "slave to the Statists" ...color me guilty in my glee! This isn't socialism...it's common sense.

Is the system perfect, or is government greed and corruption non-existent? Of course not. Are corporations and CEOs still profiting needlessly? Yes. Yet, I'd like to believe that we (including our President) have at least made baby strides in trying to help those who truly may have never had a fighting chance. This isn't a "dependency" issue. Rather, it's unstacking the cards a little so that the "higher rung" becomes a little more attainable.


Eh, I'd think most people would agree the pendulum is pretty far left of center right now. Maybe you guys up in Wisconsin would call Obama moderate-centrist but that's because y'all live in your own little ideological bubble like the Berkley crowd and the People's Republic of Massachusets.


Well, I live in the heart of the Midwest, and I can assure you that my perception of President Obama's policies being generally representative of the "far left" are no more true for him than they would be for Atilla the Hun's...lol.

And, yes, I'm obviously a dyed-in-the-wool liberal. I've also never been to Berkeley. :)

David R. Modny
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 8:58 am
Location: Parma, OH

Re: The 2012 Republican Nominee?

Postby David R. Modny » Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:10 pm

David R. Modny wrote: Unless your prepared...

your hell-bent...


Also, because it's one of my pet peeves, I should take my public lumps for this.
You're, you're, you're, David! :lol:

What's the message edit time these days, Luke?