Barack Obama, our next President

[Lynn]

Sloppy Joe wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm sure you can find another Republican to analyze instead of Sunshine Charlie Crist. Even though he's more liberal than conservative, he's a nut.

Why don't you give me the exact name of the republican you want me to investigate. I have no problem checking any of them out, but you seem to be particular in who I look up, so to save me some time give me a name. My original post only listed a democrat because the original poster said that republicans were the ones who bow to lobbyists. I was just making a point that it is both parties who are indebted to lobbyists and not the will of the people they serve.

[lily boca raton fl]

Realtime wrote:

<quoted text>It is what it is Lynn, Wal-Mart found a better way__many Americans had an issue with Sears, particularly in the way they offered credit willy nilly to everyone at the cashiers stand. That was then, this is now. If GM had "taken better care of business," the government would not have had to step in eh?
Pray that Wal-Mart never needs a bailout__

Why would they need a bailout? They have been receiving government money all along, free land, tax subsidies, healthcare, allowed to keep the sales taxes, etc.

[okboston]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
What the hell does that mean or have anything to do with what I posted?
Obama not allowing a few Air Force planes flying over a patriotic gathering which they have done for 42 years just because the festival is called "God and Country" is just plain stupid!! I don't have any idea what you are talking about with "how he feels" about fly overs except his own stupid mistake in New York.
Maybe you should think before you put your brain in gear. And make some sense for a change.

What does that have to do with what you posted?

You posted that the President would not allow.....

That is way below his paygrade. Ask your dad if you can. Mine jumped on Corregidor (503rd Regimental Combat Team, Airbourne) but left me several years ago.

[carol]

Sloppy Joe wrote:

<quoted text>
Dear Goober,
You responded to one of your "fans" by mistake, so I furnished clarification. Please try to keep up. Isn't this like the third time you've responded to the wrong message? I liked it better when you stopped responding to my posts.

Post #12499.

I have no idea what you're talking about other than post #12499. I replied to Nobama by mistake when I was distracted.

You are the one who is getting confused, I'm afraid, and confusing yourself.

What exactly are you talking about?

The name, by the way, is carol.

[okboston]

Nobama wrote:

<quoted text>
The Socialists are scared of war crimes trials because they know such trials will be very unpopular and result in voter backlash.
So what matters liberals, your principles or winning the next election?

When it comes to liberals though, we don't mind them. Evidently we are also smarter. We are also very principled. We just have different principles.

As an example, liberals know that if you are not in power, you can not influence the things you care about in a direction that you would like to see. So one of our principles is to remain in power.

On the other hand, Republicans care so much about things the like, that they could care less if they are in power and consequently they lose the power to influence the things they care about in a direction they like.

[carol]

okboston wrote:

<quoted text>
What does that have to do with what you posted?
You posted that the President would not allow.....
That is way below his paygrade. Ask your dad if you can. Mine jumped on Corregidor (503rd Regimental Combat Team, Airbourne) but left me several years ago.

Okay, well answer this. If the Pentagon says something involving the Air Force is a no go (such as the fly over at that festival), does or does not the president end up making the final decision when it involves the military?

[Realtime]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks. I like bantering with you too.
This is the source of my information. "Robertson built on Falwell's work." Pretty much the same organization. Not near as important as it once was.
Falwell's Moral Majority was most active in the early years of Reagan's first term, closing its doors in 1987. Two years later, Pat Robertson would launch Christian Coalition, the next major Christian right organization, which built on Falwell's work by going beyond pastors to build a true grass-roots network populated by political professionals.

My opinion only Carol. Falwell owes no apologies, he took and then gave back in worthwhile ways, Liberty University for instance accepts students from various walks of life and turns out model citizens. Before it was a University, it was a college and before that it was a bible school in a ten thousand square foot metal building. Pat Robertson took plenty and gave back zilch. Pat Robinson was no friend to Christians as he put them center stage in an embarrassing way__not long ago I mentioned Ralph Reed, apparently you didn't take the time to check that link__too bad for you.

[Lynn]

Realtime wrote:

<quoted text>It is what it is Lynn, Wal-Mart found a better way__many Americans had an issue with Sears, particularly in the way they offered credit willy nilly to everyone at the cashiers stand. That was then, this is now. If GM had "taken better care of business," the government would not have had to step in eh?
Pray that Wal-Mart never needs a bailout__

I just feel that Walmart's "better way" made the playing field uneven and this goes for any big company. I feel these big corporations destroy capitalism. They make the playing field uneven by getting into bed with the government. They have the money to lobby and get regulations passed to help them and hurt their competitors who do not have the money to lobby congress. We don't really have capitalism in this country anymore because government is way too involved in the everyday aspects of the private sector. Big corporations are bipartisan and they give money to whatever party is in control. I think the true way for capitalism to work is to be efficient, provide products people want at a reasonable cost, but do these things without a partner who makes the laws that can benefit one company over another.

[Sloppy Joe]

Lynn wrote:

<quoted text>
Why don't you give me the exact name of the republican you want me to investigate. I have no problem checking any of them out, but you seem to be particular in who I look up, so to save me some time give me a name. My original post only listed a democrat because the original poster said that republicans were the ones who bow to lobbyists. I was just making a point that it is both parties who are indebted to lobbyists and not the will of the people they serve.

I don't care who you choose. I only ask that you be as thorough as you were with Dodd. That's fair.

[Sloppy Joe]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
I replied to Nobama by mistake when I was distracted.

So I posted to make sure everyone knew you meant to reply to me. For some reason, you felt like responding to that post.

carol wrote:

<quoted text>You are the one who is getting confused, I'm afraid, and confusing yourself.

Not so, Tet Offensive. It's you. We all understand that.

carol wrote:

<quoted text>What exactly are you talking about?

How goofy you are?

[carol]

Grand Obsolete Party wrote:

<quoted text>
When has a Republican ever been 'about us'??

Lowering your taxes and getting out of your way. What else would you expect from your government?

Or are you actually admitting you need a nanny state and would rather the government take your money and make your decisions about what's best for you? Wow.

[Realtime]

lily boca raton fl wrote:

<quoted text>Why would they need a bailout? They have been receiving government money all along, free land, tax subsidies, healthcare, allowed to keep the sales taxes, etc.

I was kidding about the bailout, no one has that much money LOL. Years ago lily, cities, counties and states formed economic development departments, the rest is history and the math ain't real good.

[carol]

okboston wrote:

<quoted text>
What does that have to do with what you posted?
You posted that the President would not allow.....
That is way below his paygrade. Ask your dad if you can. Mine jumped on Corregidor (503rd Regimental Combat Team, Airbourne) but left me several years ago.

My dad is no longer here either. Air Force, retired Captain.

[Grand Obsolete Party]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Wal-Mart is a prime example of meeting public demand. I understand the problem they present to small businesses but, like you say, it is what it is.
You don't believe Obama would be a good CEO of Wal-Mart as well?

There you go agaon Carol
Obama is not CEO of any company or anything like it.
So I guess that you are fine paying for the healthcare of Wal Mart workers while the Walton family make out like bandits.

[Grand Obsolete Party]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Lowering your taxes and getting out of your way. What else would you expect from your government?
Or are you actually admitting you need a nanny state and would rather the government take your money and make your decisions about what's best for you? Wow.

So you make more than $250,000 a year?
I sure didn't see any tax decrease during Bush's terms, but I know Paris Hilton enjoyed hers.
Here in Florida, Republicans keep raising taxes through fees on everything...

[Grand Obsolete Party]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
You are wrong about that. The fact that you still believe Obama is going to make everything all better is all that needs to be said about who and who does not know the truth.
But please tell me what was posted that was not factual. I'd love to know.

I have never said Obama is 'going to make it all better'...that's just more Republcan talking point blather.
I am, however, confident that he is an intelligent and pragmatic President and that we are a heckuva lot better off than we would have been with McGranda and his kooky quitter sidekick.

[carol]

Sloppy Joe wrote:

<quoted text>
So I posted to make sure everyone knew you meant to reply to me. For some reason, you felt like responding to that post.
<quoted text>
Not so, Tet Offensive. It's you. We all understand that.
<quoted text>
How goofy you are?

Here you go again...

Don't you ever let anything go? Or forgive anything? I admitted to that mistake a very long time ago as soon as it was pointed out to me. And promptly corrected it.

Do you want me to formally apologize. Okay, here goes. Please forgive me, Sloppy, for making a human error. I promise it will never happen again as far as it is within my power to humanly avoid it. I am extremely sorry for my unforgivable stupidity on getting that date and place mixed up in history and upsetting you so.

Okay? Can we move on now?

(And you call ME goofy...)

[carol]

Grand Obsolete Party wrote:

<quoted text>
There you go agaon Carol
Obama is not CEO of any company or anything like it.
So I guess that you are fine paying for the healthcare of Wal Mart workers while the Walton family make out like bandits.

Oh, my mistake. Since he was now in the business of firing CEOs of major companies (GM), I suppose that would make him the President on the Board of Directors. Thanks for the clarification.

[Realtime]

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Okay, well answer this. If the Pentagon says something involving the Air Force is a no go (such as the fly over at that festival), does or does not the president end up making the final decision when it involves the military?

Carol, with all due respect, why do you get caught up in all these teensy perceived problems. The Toledo, Ohio air National Guard has a compliment of aircraft that most nations can't afford. The whole shebang, B-1's, F 115's of every kind and a stealth or two. Old guys like me are flying these aircraft all over the place, every day, to air shows and wherever, maybe to see their girlfriends in Arizona. Do you "really think" that the president of the US, at any given time, keeps up with all this stuff? Obama probably couldn't find Toledo on a map__Bush couldn't find Ohio on a map.

[carol]

Realtime wrote:

<quoted text>My opinion only Carol. Falwell owes no apologies, he took and then gave back in worthwhile ways, Liberty University for instance accepts students from various walks of life and turns out model citizens. Before it was a University, it was a college and before that it was a bible school in a ten thousand square foot metal building. Pat Robertson took plenty and gave back zilch. Pat Robinson was no friend to Christians as he put them center stage in an embarrassing way__not long ago I mentioned Ralph Reed, apparently you didn't take the time to check that link__too bad for you.

I did check out that link. And responded to you about it. Frankly, didn't find Reed all that interesting. I try not to make it a habit to talk bad about other Christians (Robertson in this case) when I don't know anything about any wrongdoing myself.