Which team are you going to hire to run your country?

green26

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Posts
751
Media
0
Likes
346
Points
283
Location
New York
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
the bottom line here is he would be a half-black president, not a black president.

I am not ready for a far-left president.

black, or half black, or 1/4 black, or super black, mega black, i can handle and am ready for...

Far left tax raiser and confiscator/re-dsitributor of my wealth? No thanks....not ready for it.

I Wasn't ready for Carter, Wasn't ready for Dukakis, and i won't be ready for Obama.

thank you no.

give me a red, yellow, black, blue or white centrist any day over a far left or far right any color.
People don't see someone as half-black, 1/4 black, etc. One drop of black blood and you know the rest
 

D_Bob_Crotchitch

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Posts
8,252
Media
0
Likes
108
Points
193
No it doesn't, it real is that simple

No it isn't that simple. There are people who will vote based on the issues of abortion, gay marriage, taxes, the war in Iraq, the economy. It isn't just white or black like you are trying to make it out to be. There are people who would vote for Colin Powell who will not vote for Obama.
 

D_Davy_Downspout

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Posts
1,136
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
183
give me a red, yellow, black, blue or white centrist any day over a far left or far right any color.

Then take Obama. He'll likely lower your taxes unless you're super rich, and a progressive tax policy is not "far left", despite what your buzzword-laden talking points have told you.


Obama is most definitely a moderate, unless you're incredibly conservative. And the farthest left person in the US goverment is at best a centrist if you were in any other country but the US. We're very conservative.
 

green26

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Posts
751
Media
0
Likes
346
Points
283
Location
New York
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
No it isn't that simple. There are people who will vote based on the issues of abortion, gay marriage, taxes, the war in Iraq, the economy. It isn't just white or black like you are trying to make it out to be. There are people who would vote for Colin Powell who will not vote for Obama.
Sure you are right, but we know what this election is going to come down too, people will have to decide once they get into that booth if they are ready for a Black President.
 

B_starinvestor

Experimental Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
4,383
Media
0
Likes
3
Points
183
Location
Midwest
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
LOL....wrong. He was reprimanded for his poor judgement. He didn't break the law, but he wasn't free and clear.

Since that particular scandal has clear parallels to the current banking mess, I think it's pertinent...but really I'm just making a point how it's more of an issue than Obama's non-relationships with the other people Starinvestor listed and then ran from.

I ran from....? Are you kidding, Sin?

20 years of worship with Rev Wright? Non-issue. Laughable.

On a board with Ayers, neighbors....WTF?

Traveling internationally with Farrakhan...um, yeah. Coincidence. Get real, dude.
 

green26

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Posts
751
Media
0
Likes
346
Points
283
Location
New York
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
If life were that simple, we wouldn't need a government. I still say it isn't just race, a huge part of it is issues.
Of course the issues are important, I won't dispute that, what I am saying is that people's prejudice will supercede the main issues and anyone who lives in America can't dispute that race is a major issue
 

D_Davy_Downspout

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Posts
1,136
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
183
I ran from....? Are you kidding, Sin?

20 years of worship with Rev Wright? Non-issue. Laughable.

On a board with Ayers, neighbors....WTF?

Traveling internationally with Farrakhan...um, yeah. Coincidence. Get real, dude.

Yes, none of those are issues. That's exactly what I'm saying.


Stop being such a pussy and make your accusations. I'm not sure if you know this, but guilt by association is bullshit. If it weren't, your boy McCain would be in prison over the Keating 5 thing. He lucked out on that.
 

green26

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Posts
751
Media
0
Likes
346
Points
283
Location
New York
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
If race was going to be the main determining factor, he would not have won the nomination from Hillary Clinton.
That was more of a response to Bill rather than Hillary, also America may not be ready for a Black President but are we really ready for a female president?
 

tripod

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Posts
6,687
Media
14
Likes
1,894
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
To refresh everyone's memory of the Keating Five...

The Senate investigation into the Keating Five was a classic tale of the wolf guarding the henhouse.

Fred Wertheimer, the president of Common Cause (whose mission focused on making U.S. political institutions more open and accountable) who angrily demanded the Senate investigation, thought that the investigation was far too leniant on the senators. He told the Chicago Tribune on Feb. 28th, 1992 that, "The action by the Senate Ethics Committee is a cop-out and a damning indictment of the committee, and The U.S. Senate remains on the auction block to the Charles Keatings of the world."

In an article in Newsweek magazine written on 10-25-1993, Jonathan Alter wrote that, "Perhaps the most shameless permanent institution of this kind (when the government tries to investigate itself) is the Senate Ethics Committee, which let four of the infamous Keating Five off with a wrist tap."

The New York Times had a big ol' investigative piece of journalism that was the combined product of four writers (Jim Rutenberg, Marilyn W. Thompson, David D. Kirkpatrick and Stephen Labaton). The article recanted the events of the late eighties and nineties when McCain was involved in the Keating Five. Here is an excerpt from that article.

During Mr. McCain’s four years in the House, Mr. Keating, his family and his business associates contributed heavily to his political campaigns. The banker gave Mr. McCain free rides on his private jet, a violation of Congressional ethics rules (he later said it was an oversight and paid for the trips). They vacationed together in the Bahamas. And in 1986, the year Mr. McCain was elected to the Senate, his wife joined Mr. Keating in investing in an Arizona shopping mall.

Mr. Keating had taken over the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association and used its federally insured deposits to gamble on risky real estate and other investments. He pressed Mr. McCain and other lawmakers to help hold back federal banking regulators.

For years, Mr. McCain complied. At Mr. Keating’s request, he wrote several letters to regulators, introduced legislation and helped secure the nomination of a Keating associate to a banking regulatory board.

By early 1987, though, the thrift was careering toward disaster. Mr. McCain agreed to join several senators, eventually known as the Keating Five, for two private meetings with regulators to urge them to ease up.

Some people involved think Mr. McCain got off too lightly. William Black, one of the banking regulators the senator met with, argued that Mrs. McCain’s investment with Mr. Keating created an obvious conflict of interest for her husband. (Mr. McCain had said a prenuptial agreement divided the couple’s assets.) He should not be able to “put this behind him,” Mr. Black said. “It sullied his integrity.”

Hmmm... with the facts all out there, how innocent is Johnny now?
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
LOL....wrong. He was reprimanded for his poor judgement. He didn't break the law, but he wasn't free and clear.

Since that particular scandal has clear parallels to the current banking mess, I think it's pertinent...but really I'm just making a point how it's more of an issue than Obama's non-relationships with the other people Starinvestor listed and then ran from.

1. sorry, you are wrong...only CRANSTON was reprimanded...McCain was not and neither was Glenn. They were simply said to have used poor judgement. They were cleared of impropriety and criticized for poor judgment. they were not, in fact, reprimanded. Sorry, you are wrong.

Glenn and McCain: cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment

The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of Glenn in the scheme was minimal, and the charges against him were dropped.[54] He was only criticized by the Committee for "poor judgment."[57]
The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.[55][54][7] The report also said that McCain's "actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him....Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate."[58] On his Keating Five experience, McCain has said: "The appearance of it was wrong. It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do." McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf.



2. How exactly does that scandal have clear parallels to the banking mess?
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
People don't see someone as half-black, 1/4 black, etc. One drop of black blood and you know the rest

that maybe the way you see it, or some others see it. But that is not the way all see it, and it does not matter about "one drop of black blood", since Obama was not in fact created from black blood. he was conceived in a white woman, between the egg of a white woman and the sperm of a black man.

there was no blood involved.


He is half black and half white. That is a fact and that is the end of it.

To say he is only black, is an insult to the fact that part of this allegedly great man's success who everyone is swooning over, is in fact just as important, interesting and vital as the other part.

deal with it.

Obama is half black and half white. Not black.

he is bi-racial.

*FACT*
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Then take Obama. He'll likely lower your taxes unless you're super rich, and a progressive tax policy is not "far left", despite what your buzzword-laden talking points have told you.


Obama is most definitely a moderate, unless you're incredibly conservative.

1. no he will not lower my taxes. I am over the Obama "rich" limit.

"Unless i am super rich"? sorry...he considers 250k a year "rich". that hardly makes one super-rich does it?. I am over it, so of course, i am evil.

what is "super rich" to you? huh?

2. I do not need talking points to tell you that i paid 39.6% in taxes to the federal government from the late Clinton years to the early Bush years, and now pay 33-35% depending. that is not progressive, when others are paying 10,15,25 and 28 percent. That is punitive...sorry to burst your bubble.

I am all for progressive taxation. there is a difference between that and soaking the rich...you want progressive? Here,

instead of the current

10% - 0 to $8025
15% - $8025 to $32550
25% - $32,550 to $78,850
28% - $78,850 to $164,550
33% - $164,550 to $357,700
35% - $357,700 and up

change it to

0% - 0 to $20,000
5%- $20,000 to $45,000
10%- $45,000 to $90,000
15%- $90,000 to $200,000
20%- $200,000 to $400,000
25%- $400,000 and up


nobody should have to pay more then a quarter of their yearly work to this government...nobody. I don't care how much you earn.


I don't need buzzwords or talking points...I pay the facts, every year. Talking points are in fact used by folks like yourself, who say i should give my "contribution" and pay my "fair share".

3. Obama is not for progressive taxation...he is for soak the rich policies. Very different. the only "progressive" in his tax plan is to moderately tax everyone up to 250k just a bit and then to progess up to slamming all the "rich" into the wall and taking their money and giving it to everyone else. That's really progressive.

Call me when you have to pay my tax bill....then you will know why i would never vote for Obama.

( i do not vote for either party anyway, but if someone held a gun to my head, to vote democrat or republican, it would not be for Obama)

4. Obama is most definitely not a "moderate", in any sense of the word. Sorry, and i am not conservative. I am a liberal libertarian.

And the farthest left person in the US goverment is at best a centrist if you were in any other country but the US.

We are not in any other country.

We're very conservative.

we are center-right. Always have been.

JFK was centrist/slight left. Clinton was Centrist/slight left.

Obama is not at all centrist/slight left.

Obama is far left. Like Dukakis.
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Sure you are right, but we know what this election is going to come down too, people will have to decide once they get into that booth if they are ready for a Black President.

half black half white, or "biracial" president, please.

it is the only correct terminology.

Ignoring the fact that a huge part of his life, including his mother, and a whole side of his family that helped raise him are white, is ignorant, not to mention, totally incorrect...and i dare say, even racist.

Everyone considers him to be so intelligent, so charismatic, so committed, it is utterly pathetic that people then want to dismiss half of this person that helped to contribute to the making of this whole person, merely for the sake of race politics.

he is bi-racial, i.e. - half black, half white.

fact.

If he is elected president, he will not be the first black president. He will be the first half black, half white president. That is an achievement in and of itself.

For those who are so concerned with how people see him racially, why are those same people so determined to ignore that which helps make him what he is?

His white side is just as important as is black side in creating the man that many harbor such passion for. Seems silly to literally deny a whole part of him just because a certain segment of people wants to perpetuate an image, and not perpetuate a fact.

there is obviously, enough racism on both sides to make it an unpalatable choice to some.

some can't abide the thoughts of a "black" president
some can't abide the thoughts that their "black" hero is in fact, half white and just as much of what makes him great is due to him being white as well as black.

to say anything otherwise is racist. pure and simple. the definition of racist is "racially discriminatory"

to call him black, but not white, is discriminatory towards what he is. fact. it demeans, ignores, and demotes a part of him that is just as important as the black part.

he could never have existed, one without the other.

plain and simple.

He will become america's first biracial president if he is elected, not america's first black president.

there is absolutely no disputing that fact.
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
No it isn't that simple. There are people who will vote based on the issues of abortion, gay marriage, taxes, the war in Iraq, the economy. It isn't just white or black like you are trying to make it out to be. There are people who would vote for Colin Powell who will not vote for Obama.


bingo.

i would have voted for Colin Powell, absolutely. I hoped he would run in 2000.
I would not vote for Obama.
 

Puntie

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Posts
76
Media
0
Likes
2
Points
153
Age
42
Sexuality
69% Gay, 31% Straight
Gender
Male
bingo.

i would have voted for Colin Powell, absolutely. I hoped he would run in 2000.
I would not vote for Obama.


Why would you vote for someone that you know had lied to not only the American people and the Security Council but to the whole world about an illegal and extremely costly war??
 

Flashy

Sexy Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Posts
7,901
Media
0
Likes
27
Points
183
Location
at home
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Why would you vote for someone that you know had lied to not only the American people and the Security Council but to the whole world about an illegal and extremely costly war??

did he lie in 2000? No.

did the war begin pre-2000 election? No.

did you read my post and pay attention? No.

reread it then get back to me.

this is what it says "i would have voted for Colin Powell, absolutely. I hoped he would run in 2000."

how exactly did he lie to the whole world about an "illegal and extremely costly war", when that war had not yet started?

maybe you should rephrase things.

as for the Iraq War, i have zero problem with the launching of the war. I have a problem with the occupation.

We should have smashed the shit out of them as we did, then left, which we didn't.

Then we should have moved on and smashed the shit out of Iran and left.

Then we should have turned back the rest of the forces used, back to Afghanistan.


But that is another story entirely.
 

tripod

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Posts
6,687
Media
14
Likes
1,894
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
McCain is fucking crooked... this shit is pretty funny.

He has ridden on his daddy's coattails all through his life... he is also as dumb as a box of rocks and a horrible pilot... in fact, he is a loser and a rich fucking crybaby with the temper of an 8 year old.