And we wouldn't have these same problems if a DEMOCRAT was in office? So the almighty democrat can prevent terrorist from attacking (yeah, right-Bill did-(not)? They can prevent oil prices from rising, and the economy facing a recession? Let's see, am I really any better off with a democrat in office-no. I can look forward to more of my tax dollars going to pay for lazy people who don't work, I can look forward to socialized medicine-if Obama has his way, and I can look forward to someone who, if we were attacked again, would try to "talk sweet to the terrorists, or ignore it," instead of taking action. I can look forward to the moral values of America going to heck, as gay marriage and late term abortions are supported. We can probably look forward to having the American falg removed, as it may be "offensive" to some. We can probalby look forward to having "In God We Trust," taken off our currency, because that too, may be "offensive." Had a DEMOCRAT acted responsibly back in the 90's, it's possible we may never had had 9/11 to begin with. Do I support Bush-yes, he is the leader of my country, but I do not support EVERYTHING he does, nor do I agree with him on every matter. Should Obama win in November (God help us all), will I support him? Yes, he will be the leader of my country, but I will not like everything he says or does either.
I wonder why every single political discussion on this forum - no matter how it starts out or what the topic is - always ends up with a screaming variation of "Obama will ruin our country!!!" peppered with a bunch of stuff he supposedly believes in but doesn't. But when I guess you think someone is the Anti-Christ, you'll think he's capable of anything.
What makes it especially odd is that Bush really HAS ruined our country but supporters always give him a pass. Cause, you know, he's the PRESIDENT. As though "President" is synonymous with "God".
Well, actually dsm brought up the Obama when they mentioned selling t-shirts from a van on Schillinger's Rd. Did I "scream" that Obama would ruin the country? I stated, that is what we can expect with a DEMOCRAT-and since OBAMA is the democratic nominee, it stands to reason, that is what we have to look forward to. He has already stated he would like to "meet" with leaders in Iran and other foreign countries. Great, meet with them, but don't kiss a** when you do. He's already stated that he wants some national health-care plan, which looks to me like socialized medicine. Suppose you don't have private insurance-do you want to wait a year to see a doc, or have all these doc in a box places popping up, to meet demands. Or do you want quality health-care? My thoughts would have been the same, had Biliary been the nominee, because she stands for some of the same things. My question was, instead of Bush bashing, can anyone honestly say that we would be in any better situation right this minute, had a democrat been in office? I think the answer to that is a resounding NO. There is no Democrat, that can wave there magic wand to make oil prices and grocery prices come down. The only Democrat, that may could have (somewhat) prevented the terrorist attacks of 9/11, failed to do so during his terms in office. Remember, Clinton had warnings that something would happen, that Al Quedia was a real threat, yet did nothing but continue to blow and get blown. I am not putting Bush on a pedestal, goodness knows he's a human just as you and I. But, I do question why the people who do not want to support the leadership of our country, think that we would be better off today had a Democrat been in office. We would-imo-be in the same, if not worse shape. Sure, we may be sitting in Iraq and Afghanistan, singing to Allah, instead of defending our country. We may be without the Sear tower, or the Golden Gate bridge,or perhaps New York would be entirely obliterated from the map, as Democrats continued to "talk" and "warn" these rogue leaders, instead of actually stepping up to the plate to DO something. Again, tell me how we would be better off today, had a democrat won 8, even 4 years ago.
I have never said Obama was the Anti-christ. I posed that in a post as to what was going around. What do I believe he is? I believe he is a slick, smooth talker, who will say anything to get a vote. I believe he has been caught in so many deceptions, that anyone who still believes in him is a fool. I believe he changes his stance on what he says about as much as he changes his underwear. I have not heard one decisive statement from him. It is always avoidance or back-pedaling to correct something that he, or someone else associated with him has said. I believe he is young and ambitious and may have some good visions, but so far has offered no evidence that he knows how to get those ambitions to reality. I believe he is inexperienced at best. I believe that people see HIM as some sort of "god" because he is young, and charismatic, and yes black. In fact, in one report I heard, and I do not remember the source-when black Americans were questioned who they were voting for, and they said Obama, and then they were asked why, it was because he was BLACK. Great reason to elect a president. And that IS NOT to say not to elect him, because he is-so don't misconstrue my statement. But if you are going to vote for someone, vote for what they stand for, vote for them based on their proven experience or some other thing that really matters, and not on the basis of the color of their skin.
Why can't a politician change his/her mind on something? Things are changing so fast these days I wouldn't want an old man president that couldn't handle change. I know there is also a lot of maneuvering by candidates, we will always have that, but the world is becoming more dynamic everyday, and you need to praise change when justified. That is why a man that is 70 plus years old running for president is insane. Look how badly past presidents have aged in office. They age in dog years, even Bush, and he has taken more vacation days than any president on record, did somebody mention lazy people earlier? Anyhow, something much worst than not being able to keep up with change is one of Bush's worst problems. He surrounds himself with yes men, excluding Cheney. Once the devil plants a seed, Bush stays the course. Nobody will tell him there are different options, and he doesn't want to hear it. Then he starts with the "YOU ARE EITHER WITH US OR WITH THE TERRORISTS". Basically he's telling us that if you don't agree with his "personal" agenda, you are a bad guy and will be hunted down. Hitler would have been very impressed with this little man. One of my favorite is "Endorsing Bush's reelection at the Republican National Convention on September 1, Democratic Senator Zell Miller charged that the very act of campaigning against Bush in an election year was unpatriotic and dangerous". Did somebody mention an Antichrist earlier? Only an Antichrist could have such incredible power.
i went back and corrected my grammer i suppose it's my typing skill more than my gramatical errors. i asked a simple question that the obvious answer to for many americans will be "No", in my opinion. and it is also my opinion that many who voted and supported him also may not be in a better position than they were 8 years ago. i remember many of his supporters being so arrogant about it, hs election, like it was going to bring about real change. republicans always do bring real change, like the savings and loan deregulation/debacle (Neil bush and charles keiting) and the housing credit crisis, and has anyone looked at the value of thier pension lately? I just don't get the idea the administration has my best interest at heart with the actions they take. the rich get richer (Halliburton and exxon style) and they are trying to extract more of what i have and have worked for, they say they are spending less but the deficit always increases when they are in power.
on the democratic side of the house, i prospered under jimmy carter, interest rates were 14% but my college fund was earninng 5600 a year. enough extra for a small car. i saw my portfolio increase in value from 150,00 to 473,000 when i cashed out in 99 with most of the growth in the 91-99 time line. my 35,000 house is now worth over 300,00 and almost paid off. (Because i didint bite into the deal to extract value and pay that back later) (Real estate is wehre you live, its not an asset to speculate or gamble with, if you gambeled with it you should be out out on the street, except that would create a glut of real estate. )
i generally agreed with the job president clinton was doing, but i saw action by the minority vocal opposition (Republican leadership, trent lott and newt gingrich, each of who has some answering to do) to continually distract him with imaginary or trivial issues to keep him from accomplishing his goals which were somehow contradictory to the republican ideas.
rmseek, you didint answer my question, you just asked more questions to spin mine out. are you better off now than you were 8 years ago. consider just the three things i asked in my original post, the price of gasoline and the impact on your life, the declining value of your home and the fact you are going to have to face some type of huge tax to pay for the money the unscrupulious realtors, developers, and bankers took from you in order to keep the housing market afloat, or when you try and sell it you find you are upside down in it, and how many of your children have been to war and how many times to support this overseas action. I lost two years of my daughters life over there, thank goodness she is home and safe from that danger now. i suppose if you dont drive, dont have any children that will be placed in harms way, ande your house is paid for you might be in a better position, but my suspicion is at least one of the above items affects you in a negative way and you are really worse off than you were in 2000. and i am not even asking you to consider the vlaue of your 401K, the security of your company pension, (Enron, mci, ual) and going from a budget surplus to deficit spending, nor am i mentioning that retroactie immunity to att and verizion for providing our private information to them. if they want retroactive immunity they must have done something real bad and underhanded. anyway just wondering.
your followers are just beating a drum
