Must read on the Candidates

[Deersniper]

I'm pretty convinced that none of the candidates are worth voting for. These articles are why. Everyone here should read these articles!
The Clinton's upcoming Fraud trial.
IRN News
How the Clinton's will destroy McCain
IRN News
There are alot more articles about each one at the bottom highlighted in blue.
Of course we all know about Obama. Mercy, why did we throw Ron Paul under the train? He might not have great speaking skills, but he is a good man, not a criminal.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Deersniper

I'm pretty convinced that none of the candidates are worth voting for. These articles are why. Everyone here should read these articles!
The Clinton's upcoming Fraud trial.
IRN News
How the Clinton's will destroy McCain
IRN News
There are alot more articles about each one at the bottom highlighted in blue.
Of course we all know about Obama. Mercy, why did we throw Ron Paul under the train? He might not have great speaking skills, but he is a good man, not a criminal.

Exactly what do we all know about Obama? Enlighten me...

[Deersniper]

Not too much, only this:
Clinton: Lobbyists run Obama's S.C. campaign
Seems like they have all had their share of shady dealings to get where they are.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Deersniper

Not too much, only this:
Clinton: Lobbyists run Obama's S.C. campaign
Seems like they have all had their share of shady dealings to get where they are.

That's pretty feeble stuff, really. If it's the worst the Clinton campaign has managed to dig up for the Repblicans to spread on Obama, he's an innocent lamb...

Of course candidates have dealings with the real world. Unless they're born filthy rich into a politically-connected family like the Kennedys, they need people with power and money backing them before they can get anywhere. And even then, they sometimes need fat cats like the ones who picked Dubya and ran him first for governor, then for president. The question is whether they can transcend their backing, using it as a stepping stone to where they're headed without becoming a puppet.

Remember Reagan's response when someone pointed out the questionable background of one of his supporters? "I'm not supporting him; he's supporting me."

[soonerborn]

Originally Posted by troy2000

That's pretty feeble stuff, really. If it's the worst the Clinton campaign has managed to dig up for the Repblicans to spread on Obama, he's an innocent lamb...

Thats the problem with Obama, you dont have to dig. You can pick anyone of the numerous reasons why he isnt fit for the white house.

1. With so many contradictions in his voting, statements, campaign promises that its hard to really grasp what he is for or against.

2. The church he goes to is about as wacko as you get. Any person that claims association with any organization with demented racists views like that will never get a vote from me.

3. Absolutely ZERO experience at anything that is even remotely comparable to what is needed for a US president.

4. Any person that refuses to salute the flag is right out in my mind. In fact I cant believe that this guy has as many supporters as he does because there is just no excuse for not saluting the flag. I think this mentality reflects exactly how much his thought process has been polluted by to many sermons in reason #2.

5. He is way to anti gun for me.

6. His tax policy will increase my fed taxes by at least 50% at the very least and increase my savings taxes, and create new taxes on my 401k.

7. I like my health care just the way it is. Its expensive but at least I get it when I want it without some fed poser telling me when I can get it and what I can get. If you think government provided health care is a good thing then you need to take another look at how great our other fed projects are. Start with these ATF, IRS, transportation, education and energy. In fact I cant name a single fed entity that I can say runs a good ship. They all are overbloated red tape factories but its not their fault, its the nature of the beast.

For myself there really isnt anyone left that I gets me excited to go vote. All three of the people in the race now are disasters waiting to happen. If we had a republican senate or congress then I wouldnt feel so bad but to have these so called "modern" democrats in power across the board will spell doom for the economy and security of our nation.

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by soonerborn

Thats the problem with Obama, you dont have to dig. You can pick anyone of the numerous reasons why he isnt fit for the white house.

1. With so many contradictions in his voting, statements, campaign promises that its hard to really grasp what he is for or against.

2. The church he goes to is about as wacko as you get. Any person that claims association with any organization with demented racists views like that will never get a vote from me.

3. Absolutely ZERO experience at anything that is even remotely comparable to what is needed for a US president.

4. Any person that refuses to salute the flag is right out in my mind. In fact I cant believe that this guy has as many supporters as he does because there is just no excuse for not saluting the flag. I think this mentality reflects exactly how much his thought process has been polluted by to many sermons in reason #2.

5. He is way to anti gun for me.

6. His tax policy will increase my fed taxes by at least 50% at the very least and increase my savings taxes, and create new taxes on my 401k.

7. I like my health care just the way it is. Its expensive but at least I get it when I want it without some fed poser telling me when I can get it and what I can get. If you think government provided health care is a good thing then you need to take another look at how great our other fed projects are. Start with these ATF, IRS, transportation, education and energy. In fact I cant name a single fed entity that I can say runs a good ship. They all are overbloated red tape factories but its not their fault, its the nature of the beast.

For myself there really isnt anyone left that I gets me excited to go vote. All three of the people in the race now are disasters waiting to happen. If we had a republican senate or congress then I wouldnt feel so bad but to have these so called "modern" democrats in power across the board will spell doom for the economy and security of our nation.

4. Any person that refuses to salute the flag is right out in my mind. Funny, this is not in the media... wonder why ?

[soonerborn]

Originally Posted by LarryO1970

4. Any person that refuses to salute the flag is right out in my mind. Funny, this is not in the media... wonder why ?

If you can stomach the butchering of our anthem by this singer then here is the link.

YouTube - Obama Disrespecting the Flag and US...

He also refuses to wear a flag pin on his lapel. States "its a substitute for real patriotism" lol.

[Cyrille]

It doesn't bother me that he doesn't want to wear a Flag lapel pin but to not salute the flag That shows me that he doesn't give a rat's behind about this country and will most probably sell us out the first chance he gets.

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by Cyrille

It doesn't bother me that he doesn't want to wear a Flag lapel pin but to not salute the flag That shows me that he doesn't give a rat's behind about this country and will most probably sell us out the first chance he gets.

Agreed... pretty disrespectful in my opinion. I can't believe he's gotten as far as he has as a Senator and potential Presidential nominee... with that blatant disrespect...

My guess is that the liberal controlled media will hide this at all costs...

Troy2k, your thoughts?

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by LarryO1970

Agreed... pretty disrespectful in my opinion. I can't believe he's gotten as far as he has as a Senator and potential Presidential nominee... with that blatant disrespect...

My guess is that the liberal controlled media will hide this at all costs...

Troy2k, your thoughts?

Part of what I think is that I originally learned about this clip from a newspaper; it's been around for quite a while now. So if the liberal media is trying to hide it, someone screwed up. And I think it's time for conservatives to get off the victimization kick, and stop whining about how mean and unfair the press is.

Personally, I don't give a rat's patootie whether Obama makes the right little gestures of obeisance to the flag or not. I do it, but it's a non-issue. Look around you at the next ball game you go to, and count the number of people not standing up and placing their hands over their hearts. Do you honestly think they're un-American? I'd say that not worrying about paying the proper homage to people in authority, or symbols of authority, is about as American a trait as there is. We're not into pomp and circumstance, or meaningless rituals and gestures.

As far as experience goes, Obama has more than Abraham Lincoln had before he became president, and Abe did all right anyway. An entire lifetime of being a legislator doesn't qualify you as an executive leader. It doesn't disqualify you either, but it doesn't prove you can stand on the bridge giving orders to the helmsman and Fire Control.

Looking at the campaign Obama has run, I'd say he's certainly been a more effective leader, and better at motivating and guiding people working for him, than most of the other candidates this year. He's also been better so far at spending the campaign money he has in the right places, and for the right things. I was reading articles about Hillary's spending priorities, for example, and how much was wasted on appearances and looking properly (and expensively) "presidential," in everything from hotels to food and stages.

Mostly what I think though, Larry, is that the guy's a Democrat. He's half black, and he has a Muslim-sounding name. That means he could be the rolled-together reincarnation of Washington, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, and he'd still be getting slammed on here...

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by troy2000

Part of what I think is that I originally learned about this clip from a newspaper; it's been around for quite a while now. So if the liberal media is trying to hide it, someone screwed up. And I think it's time for conservatives to get off the victimization kick, and stop whining about how mean and unfair the press is.

Personally, I don't give a rat's patootie whether Obama makes the right little gestures of obeisance to the flag or not. I do it, but it's a non-issue. Look around you at the next ball game you go to, and count the number of people not standing up and placing their hands over their hearts. Do you honestly think they're un-American? I'd say that not worrying about paying the proper homage to people in authority, or symbols of authority, is about as American a trait as there is. We're not into pomp and circumstance, or meaningless rituals and gestures.

As far as experience goes, Obama has more than Abraham Lincoln had before he became president, and Abe did all right anyway. An entire lifetime of being a legislator doesn't qualify you as an executive leader. It doesn't disqualify you either, but it doesn't prove you can stand on the bridge giving orders to the helmsman and Fire Control.

Looking at the campaign Obama has run, I'd say he's certainly been a more effective leader, and better at motivating and guiding people working for him, than most of the other candidates this year. He's also been better so far at spending the campaign money he has in the right places, and for the right things. I was reading articles about Hillary's spending priorities, for example, and how much was wasted on appearances and looking properly (and expensively) "presidential," in everything from hotels to food and stages.

Mostly what I think though, Larry, is that the guy's a Democrat. He's half black, and he has a Muslim-sounding name. That means he could be the rolled-together reincarnation of Washington, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, and he'd still be getting slammed on here...

... no, actually I believe that a Presidential nominee would have more respect for his nation and the symbol of the nation than your average drunk baseball fan that doesn't even hear the national anthem. I would also believe that 98% of the Veterans on this board would feel the same way.

Apparently you are not much of a traditionalist...

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by LarryO1970

... no, actually I believe that a Presidential nominee would have more respect for his nation and the symbol of the nation than your average drunk baseball fan that doesn't even hear the national anthem. I would also believe that 98% of the Veterans on this board would feel the same way.

Apparently you are not much of a traditionalist...

You're right. I'm not much of a traditionalist. And if I'm not impressed by politicians who are ever-so-careful to always wear the flag lapel pin, and be properly respectful to the flag and kiss up to veterans, and always, always treat every occasion as a photo-op, why should I be offended by politicians who don't do it?

As I said, I think it's a non-issue.

[TXplt]

I think what concerns me most about Obama is where he stands on the issues when he does stand on them, and of his total lack of skill, ability, and knowledge when dealing with other countries or a coherent defense and energy policy. But at least he's not a clinton.

You can tell alot about a boss and a person when you look at how they treat others. As far as the clintons go, please don't take just my word for it -- ask anyone who worked for him. Ask any veteran who served during the clinton regime what he or she thought of either mr. or mrs. clinton (either professionally as a "commander-in-chief" or personally). I'll be willing to bet you'll not get a very favorable "approval rating."

Cheers, and Happy Easter Weekend to all !

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by TXplt

I think what concerns me most about Obama is where he stands on the issues when he does stand on them, and of his total lack of skill, ability, and knowledge when dealing with other countries or a coherent defense and energy policy. But at least he's not a clinton.

You can tell alot about a boss and a person when you look at how they treat others. As far as the clintons go, please don't take just my word for it -- ask anyone who worked for him. Ask any veteran who served during the clinton regime what he or she thought of either mr. or mrs. clinton (either professionally as a "commander-in-chief" or personally). I'll be willing to bet you'll not get a very favorable "approval rating."

Cheers, and Happy Easter Weekend to all !

Exactly... which is why I can't stand either of the Clinton's. In my mind, she would be worse that he was...

I'm sure there are a lot of Rangers and Delta Force guys who would love to get their hands on Clinton after Mogadishu...

There are a lot of families who lost loved ones at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia where Clinton completely interfered in the investigation and stifled the FBI. He stated at Eglin AFB, Florida that "we will find those responsible" ... he didn't do anything. At least I walked away from it... 19 were killed and over 500 were wounded and all Clinton could do was press the Saudi's for contributions for his Presidential Library.

Does anyone else see a problem with that?

Originally Posted by troy2000

You're right. I'm not much of a traditionalist. And if I'm not impressed by politicians who are ever-so-careful to always wear the flag lapel pin, and be properly respectful to the flag and kiss up to veterans, and always, always treat every occasion as a photo-op, why should I be offended by politicians who don't do it?

As I said, I think it's a non-issue.

check your messages. You say it's a non-issue whereas 99% of the veterans on this site believe it's a huge issue.

[billy]

Originally Posted by troy2000

You're right. I'm not much of a traditionalist. And if I'm not impressed by politicians who are ever-so-careful to always wear the flag lapel pin, and be properly respectful to the flag and kiss up to veterans, and always, always treat every occasion as a photo-op, why should I be offended by politicians who don't do it?

As I said, I think it's a non-issue.

+1

[LEE3370]

"You say it's a non-issue whereas 99% of the veterans on this site believe it's a huge issue."
I am a veteran and I think not saluting the flag is a very big issue.
As far as kissing up to the veterans goes, I think they should kiss the very feet (if they have not been lost in battle) of the veterans. With out those young folks giving up life and limb, the Country would not be here for them to strut around in.
I suppose there are people here who think burning the flag is a non-issue also.

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by LEE3370

"You say it's a non-issue whereas 99% of the veterans on this site believe it's a huge issue."
I am a veteran and I think not saluting the flag is a very big issue.
As far as kissing up to the veterans goes, I think they should kiss the very feet (if they have not been lost in battle) of the veterans. With out those young folks giving up life and limb, the Country would not be here for them to strut around in.
I suppose there are people here who think burning the flag is a non-issue also.

I like what seabeescotty said on that. If they want to burn the flag, they should at least wrap themselves in it first.

[LEE3370]

"I like what seabeescotty said on that. If they want to burn the flag, they should at least wrap themselves in it first."
I agree with that feeling.

[soonerborn]

Originally Posted by troy2000

Part of what I think is that I originally learned about this clip from a newspaper; it's been around for quite a while now. So if the liberal media is trying to hide it, someone screwed up. And I think it's time for conservatives to get off the victimization kick, and stop whining about how mean and unfair the press is.

Right, telling conservatives to "get off the victimization kick" is like the story about the pot and the kettle. The entire liberal agenda is about creating victims and then feed them a line of manure about how much they will do to provide for them. Everyone in the liberal world is a victim, of course except heterosexual white males.

Originally Posted by troy2000

Personally, I don't give a rat's patootie whether Obama makes the right little gestures of obeisance to the flag or not. I do it, but it's a non-issue. Look around you at the next ball game you go to, and count the number of people not standing up and placing their hands over their hearts. Do you honestly think they're un-American? I'd say that not worrying about paying the proper homage to people in authority, or symbols of authority, is about as American a trait as there is. We're not into pomp and circumstance, or meaningless rituals and gestures.

Well if its such a meaningless gesture then why do you do it? Just like wasting your time? I can tell you for a fact its not meaningless to all the soldiers this country has buried. I can tell you its not meaningless to their families either.

I dont give a rat's patootie what some knuckle head at a ball game does or doesnt do when they sing the national anthem, I do care what a guy does when he wants to be CIC of the people dying for that flag.

Relegating the Old Glory and the national anthem to a "symbol of authority" is about as far off the mark as you can get. Pardner if thats the way you think of those symbols of our nation then your one of those knuckle heads at those ball games.

Originally Posted by troy2000

As far as experience goes, Obama has more than Abraham Lincoln had before he became president, and Abe did all right anyway. An entire lifetime of being a legislator doesn't qualify you as an executive leader. It doesn't disqualify you either, but it doesn't prove you can stand on the bridge giving orders to the helmsman and Fire Control.

Well thats a great comparison. Comparing anybody today with one of the greatest Presidents 2 centuries ago is ridiculous. First off Lincoln was motivated to get into politics for one reason. To end slavery. That was his main goal, and he felt that the best way to accomplish this was via politics. So he had an overriding goal that was his main purpose in life. Lincolns inexperience in leadership cost the North dearly in early stages of the war.

What is Obama's motivation?

The difference between these two is that Lincoln clearly stated what he was for and what he was against. He did it in ways that left no room for backing out, because he believed in what he was saying. Obama on the other hand hasnt stated anything of substance. If you boil his speeches down you find that he doesnt take a position on anything, he just feels for you. That isnt Lincoln like at all.

The last president we had without much political experience was Jimmy Carter. Look at what that nutcase did and is now doing, traveling the world sucking up to every third world dictator he can find.

Originally Posted by troy2000

Mostly what I think though, Larry, is that the guy's a Democrat. He's half black, and he has a Muslim-sounding name. That means he could be the rolled-together reincarnation of Washington, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, and he'd still be getting slammed on here...

Right, when all else fails roll out the old Republicans are racist card. You got me with that one. No defense there.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by soonerborn

Right, telling conservatives to "get off the victimization kick" is like the story about the pot and the kettle. The entire liberal agenda is about creating victims and then feed them a line of manure about how much they will do to provide for them. Everyone in the liberal world is a victim, of course except heterosexual white males.

I'm the liberal here, not you. Since when do you tell me what my agenda is, instead of me telling you? I'm sorry, but I refuse to be defined by what you accuse me of believing.

Originally Posted by soonerborn

Well if its such a meaningless gesture then why do you do it? Just like wasting your time? I can tell you for a fact its not meaningless to all the soldiers this country has buried. I can tell you its not meaningless to their families either.

I dont give a rat's patootie what some knuckle head at a ball game does or doesnt do when they sing the national anthem, I do care what a guy does when he wants to be CIC of the people dying for that flag.

Relegating the Old Glory and the national anthem to a "symbol of authority" is about as far off the mark as you can get. Pardner if thats the way you think of those symbols of our nation then your one of those knuckle heads at those ball games.

Do you also believe someone's not a Christian unless he runs around kissing the cross, waving his Bible, and loading his conversation with references to Jesus?

Symbols are symbols, gestures are gestures. Don't mistake them for reality. That flag is a piece of cloth, not an idol to be worshiped.

It doesn't help your case to wave the bloody shirt at me. I'm willing to bet I lost more friends in combat than you did, and I'm not impressed when people invoke them to push their own opinions. What are you going to do next? Start telling me how my poor dear mom would feel, if she were alive to hear me now?

Originally Posted by soonerborn

Well thats a great comparison. Comparing anybody today with one of the greatest Presidents 2 centuries ago is ridiculous. First off Lincoln was motivated to get into politics for one reason. To end slavery. That was his main goal, and he felt that the best way to accomplish this was via politics. So he had an overriding goal that was his main purpose in life. Lincolns inexperience in leadership cost the North dearly in early stages of the war.

What is Obama's motivation?

The difference between these two is that Lincoln clearly stated what he was for and what he was against. He did it in ways that left no room for backing out, because he believed in what he was saying. Obama on the other hand hasnt stated anything of substance. If you boil his speeches down you find that he doesnt take a position on anything, he just feels for you. That isnt Lincoln like at all.

The last president we had without much political experience was Jimmy Carter. Look at what that nutcase did and is now doing, traveling the world sucking up to every third world dictator he can find.

I believe my comment was that Lincoln had no more experience than Obama has, not that Obama is the second coming of Lincoln. The smokescreen you're laying down doesn't change that fact.

Originally Posted by soonerborn

Right, when all else fails roll out the old Republicans are racist card. You got me with that one. No defense there.

Son, I'm old enough to remember when Southern whites were overwhelmingly Democrats. And I remember how they deserted the Democratic Party like rats from a sinking ship and ran to the Republican Party, after Kennedy and Johnson pushed through the Civil Rights Act.

So you're pretty much right; you'd have no defense if I said a lot of Republicans are racist. But I don't remember saying they all are, or that racism defines today's Republican Party.