[quote]vroom wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
I take more shots at McCain and the GOP because they have done America immense harm over the past eight years and may have killed conservatism for good. There’s a chance Obama could do even more harm, but I tend to doubt it.
Life is going to go on when Obama wins. The two parties are far more alike than they are different. That is why we are getting screwed. I don’t get how educated, aware people don’t realize this.
Obama could even be the vehicle to revive conservatism… though hopefully it would at least include the notion of fiscal responsibility.[/quote]
No. That’s the idea peddled by star-addled folks like Andrew Sullivan. The only way Obama could revive conservatism would be by being a full-bore radical left-winger (unlikely) and being an even bigger disaster than Bush (unlikely but possible).
[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
No. That’s the idea peddled by star-addled folks like Andrew Sullivan. The only way Obama could revive conservatism would be by being a full-bore radical left-winger (unlikely) and being an even bigger disaster than Bush (unlikely but possible).[/quote]
Well, it’s not unlikely if you listen to the folks around here…
[quote]vroom wrote:
JD430 wrote:
If you can explain BHO’s statement, the floor is yours. If there is some alternative meaning behind it that would be good for America, please enlighten this nitwit.
If you want to take a clip out of context and get excited about it… I’d hate to be the one to stop you.
Maybe you can go and find out what this speech was about, prior to this particular clip, and relieve yourself of some panic.
Either that or you can go and find those old photos of him in Kenyan garb and declare him a muslim radical! I’m pretty sure Headhunter will be happy to supply these pictures if you ask him…[/quote]
Are you for real? Have you read what I wrote? I watched the speech and read a bunch of left wing blogs trying to explain it.
Before that 20 second clip, he makes nebulous references to teachers and diplomats. Then he refers to a “civilian national defense force as powerful and as well funded as the military.”. That is pretty aggressive language and I don’t see how teachers are related to a $600 billion a year nationalized defense force as powerful as the military. His words, vroom. At best, he is rambling about spending trillions on teachers and diplomats. That is the line the Obama bloggers are going with. As a US taxpayer, I shouldn’t be concerned about that ?
At worst, his peculiar choice of words implies something much more nefarious. How in the 9 hells can you not see this?
[quote]JD430 wrote:
vroom wrote:
JD430 wrote:
If you can explain BHO’s statement, the floor is yours. If there is some alternative meaning behind it that would be good for America, please enlighten this nitwit.
If you want to take a clip out of context and get excited about it… I’d hate to be the one to stop you.
Maybe you can go and find out what this speech was about, prior to this particular clip, and relieve yourself of some panic.
Either that or you can go and find those old photos of him in Kenyan garb and declare him a muslim radical! I’m pretty sure Headhunter will be happy to supply these pictures if you ask him…
Are you for real? Have you read what I wrote? I watched the speech and read a bunch of left wing blogs trying to explain it.
Before that 20 second clip, he makes nebulous references to teachers and diplomats. Then he refers to a “civilian national defense force as powerful and as well funded as the military.”. That is pretty aggressive language and I don’t see how teachers are related to a $600 billion a year nationalized defense force as powerful as the military. His words, vroom. At best, he is rambling about spending trillions on teachers and diplomats. That is the line the Obama bloggers are going with. As a US taxpayer, I shouldn’t be concerned about that ?
At worst, his peculiar choice of words implies something much more nefarious. How in the 9 hells can you not see this?
[/quote]
Thank you. I want an explanation. “National Defense force.” A…defense…force. Literally? As “powerful” and as “well funded” as the military… At the very least, it’ll be extremely expensive (along with his other proposals). But, as powerful as the military? When I think of power, and the military, I think of it’s ability to project force. All I’m asking is for someone to share the missing context that explains all of this.
[quote]vroom wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
No. That’s the idea peddled by star-addled folks like Andrew Sullivan. The only way Obama could revive conservatism would be by being a full-bore radical left-winger (unlikely) and being an even bigger disaster than Bush (unlikely but possible).
Well, it’s not unlikely if you listen to the folks around here… [/quote]
Write it down. If Obama wins disaster will follow on every level. If the leftists get a super majority in the senate it’ll be damn near apocalyptic. I would vote for this myself if he could not brand this country with a coupla 3 horrific supreme court judges that we will be stuck with for decades.
Obama, Reid and Pelosi, the unholy trinity, are at this moment drooling on themselves in anticipation of finally having unchecked control with which to usher in the dawn of their socialist utopia.
[quote]cyph31 wrote:
k so from 2000 to 2006 when the republicans had “supreme power” where were your apocalyptic arguments then?[/quote]
As bad as the GOP turned left during those years they ain’t Obama or the ultra left nutcases in congress, although they’re getting there. We got a couple passably decent SCOTUS justices at least. I haven’t really supported a major nominee since Reagan.
Obama will massacre this economy, get us laughed or bombed or both off the international stage and expand government intrusion in breakneck fashion. Mark my words.
Whatever you can say about Bush and the infringements on our civil liberties that have occurred under him at least he allowed the assault weapons ban to expire. Bush enfringed on liberties in one area but he rolled back the enfringement on our firewall against outright tyrany.
Biden was the author of the assault weapon ban. Obama is very much against gun ownership. If those two get into power they will take away guns. If you combine that with this video of Obama saying he will deploy some kind of armed domestic force that is as well armed as the military, it is something to be concerned about.
Obama/Biden will greatly compound all the damage that has been done over the last 8 years with their policies.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Whatever you can say about Bush and the infringements on our civil liberties that have occurred under him at least he allowed the assault weapons ban to expire. Bush enfringed on liberties in one area but he rolled back the enfringement on our firewall against outright tyrany.
Biden was the author of the assault weapon ban. Obama is very much against gun ownership. If those two get into power they will take away guns. If you combine that with this video of Obama saying he will deploy some kind of armed domestic force that is as well armed as the military, it is something to be concerned about.
Obama/Biden will greatly compound all the damage that has been done over the last 8 years with their policies.[/quote]
Agreed.
A disarmed citizenry is the seed bed of tyranny. These elitest babysitters cannot have armed private citizens.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Sifu wrote:
Whatever you can say about Bush and the infringements on our civil liberties that have occurred under him at least he allowed the assault weapons ban to expire. Bush enfringed on liberties in one area but he rolled back the enfringement on our firewall against outright tyrany.
Biden was the author of the assault weapon ban. Obama is very much against gun ownership. If those two get into power they will take away guns. If you combine that with this video of Obama saying he will deploy some kind of armed domestic force that is as well armed as the military, it is something to be concerned about.
Obama/Biden will greatly compound all the damage that has been done over the last 8 years with their policies.
Agreed.
A disarmed citizenry is the seed bed of tyranny. These elitest babysitters cannot have armed private citizens.[/quote]
They will have armed citizens. Citizens of their choosing. Citizens who are armed as well as the military…
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
vroom wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
No. That’s the idea peddled by star-addled folks like Andrew Sullivan. The only way Obama could revive conservatism would be by being a full-bore radical left-winger (unlikely) and being an even bigger disaster than Bush (unlikely but possible).
Well, it’s not unlikely if you listen to the folks around here…
Write it down. If Obama wins disaster will follow on every level. If the leftists get a super majority in the senate it’ll be damn near apocalyptic. I would vote for this myself if he could not brand this country with a coupla 3 horrific supreme court judges that we will be stuck with for decades.
Obama, Reid and Pelosi, the unholy trinity, are at this moment drooling on themselves in anticipation of finally having unchecked control with which to usher in the dawn of their socialist utopia.[/quote]
Of course. But you seem bewildered by all this. The goal IS destruction. Why do you think government programs are instituted anyway? To help the poor? LOL!!
Its all about power. The goal is a socialist utopia. It reflects our morality (altruism).
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
vroom wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
No. That’s the idea peddled by star-addled folks like Andrew Sullivan. The only way Obama could revive conservatism would be by being a full-bore radical left-winger (unlikely) and being an even bigger disaster than Bush (unlikely but possible).
Well, it’s not unlikely if you listen to the folks around here…
Write it down. If Obama wins disaster will follow on every level. If the leftists get a super majority in the senate it’ll be damn near apocalyptic. I would vote for this myself if he could not brand this country with a coupla 3 horrific supreme court judges that we will be stuck with for decades.
Obama, Reid and Pelosi, the unholy trinity, are at this moment drooling on themselves in anticipation of finally having unchecked control with which to usher in the dawn of their socialist utopia.
Of course. But you seem bewildered by all this. The goal IS destruction. Why do you think government programs are instituted anyway? To help the poor? LOL!!
Its all about power. The goal is a socialist utopia. It reflects our morality (altruism).
[/quote]
This is exactly what Obama means when he says he is gong to fundamentally change this country.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The only reason he uses the word “change” so extensively is that many of his followers probably can’t spell “proletarian revolution.”[/quote]
LOL!
And they also know ‘change’ more as in, “Hey mister, can you spare some change?”
Whatever happened to your idea of an independent country out west btw? Is Colorado in it? I have a vacation home there. Tired of mob rule here.
[quote]hedo wrote:
Apparently some of the civilian paramilitary forces for Obama were out today in Philadelphia intimidating voters in Fairmount.
Get used to it if he wins.[/quote]
Hopefully you saw that the problem they were creating was dealt with. I know you know this but let me reassure you that there are a good number of strong , decent Americans who will deal with such thuggery in the future.