Bush is a hero

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160114 Mar 11, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Is there supposed to be a point to this one besides evasiveness?
You really should see a neurologist. Only the left part of your brain seems to function.
There was nothing evasive about it, Lyndi.

You went off into a rant that started with Jeremiah Wright and went nowhere from there. I didn't and don't see the connection between that post and the one about the elites it was supposedly a reply to.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#160115 Mar 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>
You might be surprised at how much of what Cosby said I agree with, ditto with at least some of the things that you suggest Obama should use his star power/bully pulpit to point out.
And you know why he won't point them out?
He won't point them out Willie because it would work completely AGAINST his desire to have a bigger, liberal government. And a bigger, liberal government is of no use and won't work if you don't grow and cement in an underclass while simultaneously screwing those with money.

If he lived in Europe, he'd be the president of France.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160116 Mar 11, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
And you know why he won't point them out?
He won't point them out Willie because it would work completely AGAINST his desire to have a bigger, liberal government. And a bigger, liberal government is of no use and won't work if you don't grow and cement in an underclass while simultaneously screwing those with money.
If he lived in Europe, he'd be the president of France.
Uh-huh.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#160117 Mar 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>There was nothing evasive about it, Lyndi.
You went off into a rant that started with Jeremiah Wright and went nowhere from there. I didn't and don't see the connection between that post and the one about the elites it was supposedly a reply to.
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Neither pissy or pithy, just the way I feel about the notion that Obama is scary or out to "creat[e] a ruling class". Your examples don't support your fears, in my opinion - but since I think the fear was concluded before you started grabbing stuff to stoke it, that's not surprising.
You've reached WIR territory.
I explained to you that using Reverend Wright for 20 years as a mentor with his "God Damn America" speeches if not SCARY was disturbing and his lessons are deeply ingrained in Obama. He taught him to turn the tables on the white folk, level the playing field through whatever means necessary, get the money, build an underclass and keep the power.
And if you follow Obama's behavior he's throwing the little people scraps while he's running around living the high life like a kid in a candy store. Is that an elitist or should we just chalk it up to someone who falls into the category of nouveau-riche because having money and power is new to him and he's still in the giddy stage?

You can take the boy out of Chicago but you can't take Chicago out of the boy.

God, this is going to be a long 4 years.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160118 Mar 11, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
I explained to you that using Reverend Wright for 20 years as a mentor with his "God Damn America" speeches if not SCARY was disturbing and his lessons are deeply ingrained in Obama. He taught him to turn the tables on the white folk, level the playing field through whatever means necessary, get the money, build an underclass and keep the power.
And if you follow Obama's behavior he's throwing the little people scraps while he's running around living the high life like a kid in a candy store. Is that an elitist or should we just chalk it up to someone who falls into the category of nouveau-riche because having money and power is new to him and he's still in the giddy stage?
You can take the boy out of Chicago but you can't take Chicago out of the boy.
God, this is going to be a long 4 years.
It's always a long four years when the White House is held by the party you didn't vote for or don't belong to. The more you buy into the Chicken Little routines, the more you convince yourself that 'they' are going to take away everyone's birthday and attack motherhood, the longer they seem.

Wright, Beyonce, Jay-Z, Tiger Woods, Trayvon? They don't do a thing to establish the intent to create elites. Some of it MAY rise to the level of pandering to specific political constituencies, but that in itself is as American as apple pie. In order to make something sinister out of it, you have to a) really, really want to, or b) not know too awful much about American politics as it's practiced.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#160119 Mar 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>It's always a long four years when the White House is held by the party you didn't vote for or don't belong to. The more you buy into the Chicken Little routines, the more you convince yourself that 'they' are going to take away everyone's birthday and attack motherhood, the longer they seem.
Wright, Beyonce, Jay-Z, Tiger Woods, Trayvon? They don't do a thing to establish the intent to create elites. Some of it MAY rise to the level of pandering to specific political constituencies, but that in itself is as American as apple pie. In order to make something sinister out of it, you have to a) really, really want to, or b) not know too awful much about American politics as it's practiced.
He panders to a specific RACE. But in his defense, so do a whole lot of Americans!
If a white, democrat junior senator/community organizer named Bernard O'Reardon who no one ever heard of because he never accomplished anything ran for POTUS instead of Barack Obama, he never would have won.
Do you know why?

laughing-

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#160120 Mar 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>It's always a long four years when the White House is held by the party you didn't vote for or don't belong to. The more you buy into the Chicken Little routines, the more you convince yourself that 'they' are going to take away everyone's birthday and attack motherhood, the longer they seem.

Wright, Beyonce, Jay-Z, Tiger Woods, Trayvon? They don't do a thing to establish the intent to create elites. Some of it MAY rise to the level of pandering to specific political constituencies, but that in itself is as American as apple pie. In order to make something sinister out of it, you have to a) really, really want to, or b) not know too awful much about American politics as it's practiced.
"Sinister" is the wrong adjective. Rather, it's cynical, manipulative and vindictive.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160121 Mar 11, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
He panders to a specific RACE. But in his defense, so do a whole lot of Americans!
If a white, democrat junior senator/community organizer named Bernard O'Reardon who no one ever heard of because he never accomplished anything ran for POTUS instead of Barack Obama, he never would have won.
Do you know why?
laughing-
I don't think he does pander, Lyndi, but that probably means I'm pandering too.

One wonder's who's obsessed with race - Obama, or you?

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160122 Mar 11, 2013
Roberta G wrote:
<quoted text>
"Sinister" is the wrong adjective. Rather, it's cynical, manipulative and vindictive.
Call it cynical, manipulative and vindictive, or sum all those up as sinister, and it doesn't change the fact that the only proper adjective is fiction.
lisw

Georgetown, OH

#160123 Mar 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Call it cynical, manipulative and vindictive, or sum all those up as sinister, and it doesn't change the fact that the only proper adjective is fiction.
The problem I think is the way you look at "ruling class" If you compare it to France and England in the 17 and 1800's of course the idea of a ruling class seems ridiculous. Obama doesn't want lords and ladies and viscounts and kings. But the 21st century version is a class of special people. People who for whatever reason are not subject to what is happening to the country. Washington has little clue how things are in the rest of the country. Housing and salaries remain high and those in government and the special interests of Obama are not subject to his new rules. Roberta (or maybe it was Lyndi) is right. In order to make it work well for the government you need a big poor base. There will always be people who do fine in spite of Obama but unfortunately thats a smaller and smaller group.
bibleSays

AOL

#160124 Mar 11, 2013
.

_____Miracles & Healings_____ for AMERICA



.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160125 Mar 11, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>The problem I think is the way you look at "ruling class" If you compare it to France and England in the 17 and 1800's of course the idea of a ruling class seems ridiculous. Obama doesn't want lords and ladies and viscounts and kings. But the 21st century version is a class of special people. People who for whatever reason are not subject to what is happening to the country. Washington has little clue how things are in the rest of the country. Housing and salaries remain high and those in government and the special interests of Obama are not subject to his new rules. Roberta (or maybe it was Lyndi) is right. In order to make it work well for the government you need a big poor base. There will always be people who do fine in spite of Obama but unfortunately thats a smaller and smaller group.
No, that's not the problem. I know the difference between your fictional elites and the fictional elites of the likes of Occupy.

To put it another way, I know the difference between the songs "Joe Hill" and "Welfare Cadillac", and that's the tune I'm hearing hummed 'round these parts.

Hell, it worked for Nixon...
lisw

Georgetown, OH

#160126 Mar 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>No, that's not the problem. I know the difference between your fictional elites and the fictional elites of the likes of Occupy.
To put it another way, I know the difference between the songs "Joe Hill" and "Welfare Cadillac", and that's the tune I'm hearing hummed 'round these parts.
Hell, it worked for Nixon...
How in the h-e-double hocky sticks did you get that from my post. No, you're not paranoid, you're above all that.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160127 Mar 11, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>How in the h-e-double hocky sticks did you get that from my post. No, you're not paranoid, you're above all that.
How did I get there? It's pretty simple, really.

"In order to make it work well for the government you need a big poor base" is how I got there.

I'm not the one talking paranoid, lisw. You're the one talking about Obama "creating new elites", wanting to keep "a big poor base" so they'll keep voting Democratic.
lisw

Georgetown, OH

#160128 Mar 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>How did I get there? It's pretty simple, really.
"In order to make it work well for the government you need a big poor base" is how I got there.
I'm not the one talking paranoid, lisw. You're the one talking about Obama "creating new elites", wanting to keep "a big poor base" so they'll keep voting Democratic.
You looove quoting me. I'm flattered.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#160130 Mar 11, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Well by gosh I did say that, didn't I. I really don't think Obama has the power to create a true ruling class, but he is definitely working on it. He is shrinking the middle class for sure unless you believe that more people on medicaid makes them middle class. I'm going to be quoting a couple things about Obamacare in the next few weeks but here is the first one I found. I consider myself middle class with the exception that we've reached a point in our lives that we have very little debt. But we are also on a fixed income now. I recently found out that for the tax year of 2013 medical expenses must be 10% of income as opposed to 7.5%. That pushes us one step closer to being poor. I'll keep you updated on what else Obama has done to screw over me and other middle class people. We know he's going after the wealthy, I just never thought that would include me.
Obama considers "wealthy" anyone who isn't dependent on government handouts.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#160131 Mar 11, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>The problem I think is the way you look at "ruling class" If you compare it to France and England in the 17 and 1800's of course the idea of a ruling class seems ridiculous. Obama doesn't want lords and ladies and viscounts and kings. But the 21st century version is a class of special people. People who for whatever reason are not subject to what is happening to the country. Washington has little clue how things are in the rest of the country. Housing and salaries remain high and those in government and the special interests of Obama are not subject to his new rules. Roberta (or maybe it was Lyndi) is right. In order to make it work well for the government you need a big poor base. There will always be people who do fine in spite of Obama but unfortunately thats a smaller and smaller group.
Thanks, Lis. I tried to explain to Willie that the European aristocrat-style "ruling class" isn't what Obama is after, but I don't think I got the message across. That's not Willie's fault, because (at least for now) it's a fairly nebulous idea and specific description isn't possible. But I think you and I agree that that s.o.b. in the White House IS after some kind of group, a chosen few in whose hands most of the political, financial and economic power will be concentrated, and that he wants ordinary Americans, who have always been the TRUE source of real power in this nation, to be permanently weakened.

I wonder if it's possible somehow to call a Terminator from the future and have it neutralize either or both of Obama's parents?

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#160132 Mar 11, 2013
Roberta G wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, Lis. I tried to explain to Willie that the European aristocrat-style "ruling class" isn't what Obama is after, but I don't think I got the message across. That's not Willie's fault, because (at least for now) it's a fairly nebulous idea and specific description isn't possible. But I think you and I agree that that s.o.b. in the White House IS after some kind of group, a chosen few in whose hands most of the political, financial and economic power will be concentrated, and that he wants ordinary Americans, who have always been the TRUE source of real power in this nation, to be permanently weakened.
I wonder if it's possible somehow to call a Terminator from the future and have it neutralize either or both of Obama's parents?
That's rude and unbecoming, no matter what your political views are.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#160133 Mar 11, 2013
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Being in Jerimiah Wrights congregation and using him for his spiritual mentor for 20 years if not scary was extremely disturbing. Wright became Obama's father figure because as is too often the case with that segment of our population, Obama's father was MIA perhaps? Wright is another one who thinks the African American community has been gypped and the current white generation owes them. I think it's the foundation for the level playing field platform Obama keeps pushing. The African American community hasn't evened out the playing field on their own so factor in affirmative action and redistribution and entitlements up the ying yang and force a false perception of evening things out. Obama is sick of waiting for things to even out, so his plan is to force it.
==

My feeling on that subject is more emphasis needs to be placed on personal responsibility but that unfortunately doesn't sell at the polls as we discoved once again in November. The stats for African American girls/women are around 70% for unwed mothers and missing fathers. The numbers of incarcerated black men are lopsided. The numbers of high school drop-outs are lopsided. And that is a huge problem yet I don't see Obama addressing it. He just wants to bandaid it.

Bill Cosby addressed this forbidden topic when he said,
"People marched and were hit in the face with rocks to get an education, and now we've got these knuckleheads walking around...the lower economic people are not holding up their end of the deal. With names like Shaniqua, Taliqua and Mohammed and all that crap, and all of them are in jail....They are standing on the corner and they can't speak English."

Now maybe it's not politically correct to say such things but many truths in todays's world go unchecked because of political correctness and Cosby may have hit on what alot of people think.
Shoving unpleasant truths under the rug and pretending you don't have a problem is very scary to me. Eventually we're going to trip over it and do a face plant.
Oh wait, we already have!
TERRIFIC post, Lyndi :)

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#160134 Mar 11, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's rude and unbecoming, no matter what your political views are.
Are you kidding?? Given the way I feel about the current occupant of the White House, that was incredibly mild, so get over it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min Buck Crick 841,553
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 8 min RiccardoFire 4,766
I want to watch my wife flirt and get picked up... (Aug '12) 12 min LoveGback 81
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 23 min Charlie Sheen 271,464
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 24 min razz58 2,491
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 29 min Michael 591,330
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 32 min Just Think 100,199
More from around the web