Political Discussion

[AngelinaCatHub]

obamawonder is a big fat loser...he sure did fool the fools for votes & plans much like bushboy did! lie after lie and dumb ass plans that an eight year old could explain clearly how they will never work...even a child could pick up on his lies.

A screwed up facist, in debt out of work country is what you get, when you have a bunch of idiots who keep voting for & believing in the same two party system every election. A system of freaks, out for themselves ONLY who only create more problems for the same people who elect them into congress & the white house!

[Bandit]

I don't see Obama doing what needs to be done.

His proposed budget for 2010 is 33% higher than the 2009 budget which is 8% higher than the 2008 budget when the rate of inflation was only 4%.

He failed to stand up to Congress and Veto a pork laden bill which had he vetoed it the government agencies would still have been funded but only a the previous years budget.

He has nominated more tax dodgers to his cabinet than any president in history.

In essence he's proving what I said all along, he's a politician and nothing more.

I believe Barr or Baldwin would have vetoed the stimulus bill (which isn't helping and won't for 3-4 years in most cases) and the budget bill. McKinney and Moore probably would have signed both as Obama has. You can't lump all the third party candidates into just one lump, as they were from vastly differing political beliefs.

Obama is on route to spend money even faster than George W. Bush did. If he continues to spend money as he has these first 50 some days then most likely by the time he leaves office the United States credit rating will be lowered which will cause hyperinflation in our nation as the dollar suffers deflation abroad. With politicians I don't go on what they promise I go on what they do.

I do agree the problem has been mounting for years, but it wasn't just the Bush Years. In the last 50 years our budget has only had positive numbers 4 times, once under Nixon and three times under Clinton. We have yet to pay off the debts from WWII which ended over 60 years ago. We have massive unfunded liabilities in medicare, medicaid and social security that is a greater economic problem than the current crisis.

At the present rate he's spending money Obama could well exceed the six fold increase of the national debt that was seen in the 1940s.

Well, when you can't pay the debts but keep foolish spending then just let it kill the children under its weight. That is what republicans and democrats do. After all, it is very important that democrat Nancy Poo keeps her $10,000 per airline ticket in tact.

[Bandit]

I dont believe jews are any more special or chosen than anyone else. Some do but I don't. These talk show hosts tell it the way it is really happening in a humorous way but I am afraid one day we wont even have that especially with how the government rep/dem controls what the media says and who you can vote for. Bammys wife is as racist as it gets but people were desperate to get away for the republicans not realizing the democrats are exactly the same thing and they think the only ones who can run it have to be of the two party system. It is just plain old blindness by believing lies and deceit out of fear. Kind of makes the Hitler agenda look like an ant hill.

[CoCoChanel]

Even Though All Politicians are Alike, We Vote for What We Want

I voted for the new president because he was african american. The way I figure it is this, we have allowed so many other president to do all types of things. We have had them getting blow jobs from interns, we have had them killing our children over an unecessary war, we have had them setting us up for 911 all the while knowing that this was coming to the US, we have had presidents with mistresses, we have had them with racial hate filled involvment when it came to Martin Luther King and yet, you say that this is the worst one. I think not.

[JRScott]

Voting for someone just because of the color of their skin, their religion, or such distinctions is really foolish.

My greatest fear is that Obama's policies to date will lead to such a future of heavy tax burden and higher cost of living for all Americans that future African Americans will be viewed unfavorably and thus have less chance of winning.

[CoCoChanel]

Couldn.t be any worst than some of the other presidents. And least we forget, we have had some presidents do some horrible things. People keep asking me about my choice and it is my choice to vote for someone because of their color. If I am able to tell the truth and say I did this because we have had so many white presidents that screwed up, what could the harm be? I can definitely tell you that just as you question me, there were many people who voted against him because he was african american and that to me is just as bad....so since we have a choice, I made mine.

[CompTweaker]

Color was not and has never been an issue with me. I was born in the 70's. I like Allen Keys, hes a little crazy with some of his issues and agendas, lol, but hes very intelligent.
Im giving Obama a chance. I didnt vote for him, but he was elected, therefore Im giving him a chance. Im disappointed and disagree with his strategy of throwing money at everything, and I know there will be long term consequences, but I think he legitimitaly wants to do the right thing to help this country.

Now about people coming out to vote because he was black, well, yea, it happened, of course it happened. It was an opportunity for history to be made and I'll say it.....it was inevitable. But again, Im not disappointed given what was in office the last 8 years and given what our options were as voters. I voted constitutional party (for those who want real change, take a gander...aka Chuck Baldwin). Obama has youth and poise and he speaks well, but so far, he has yet to be truly tested. I have a feeling that will soon change though.

[HRx]

Voting for someone just because of the color of their skin, their religion, or such distinctions is really foolish.

My greatest fear is that Obama's policies to date will lead to such a future of heavy tax burden and higher cost of living for all Americans that future African Americans will be viewed unfavorably and thus have less chance of winning.

lmao...this is comment is classic absurdity.

[JRScott]

Couldn.t be any worst than some of the other presidents. And least we forget, we have had some presidents do some horrible things. People keep asking me about my choice and it is my choice to vote for someone because of their color. If I am able to tell the truth and say I did this because we have had so many white presidents that screwed up, what could the harm be? I can definitely tell you that just as you question me, there were many people who voted against him because he was african american and that to me is just as bad....so since we have a choice, I made mine.

Voting against someone because of race is also foolishness.

For example in 2000 had he run I would have voted for Colin Powell over Bush. (I ended up voting for Harry Brown though). Powell though had a long record as a leader and distinguished career (sadly that has become stained some due to his involvement in the Bush administration).

Obama though has consistently both on the state level and federal level had far to many absences or votes for present rather than yes or no to have ever been effective. That was my reasoning for voting against him (and McCain....voted for Robert Barr this time...would have voted for Chuck Baldwin but North Carolina denied Baldwin write in status.). If you miss work a third of the time which both did in the 2 years leading up to the 2008 election, then if you worked in any other business you would have been fired. To me our leaders should stand up to the same standards we are expected to face.

In truth for President I have not voted for a Republican or Democrat in 21 years (I last voted for George H. W. Bush and Dan Quayle the first time they ran, they so disppointed me that the next two elections I voted for Ross Perot and have generally always voted for a third party candidate).

[JRScott]

lmao...this is comment is classic absurdity.

It might be to you, but sadly that is how many people do view performance. As the first non white to be President Obama will be held to a much higher standard in the eyes of the common man. And what he accomplishes for better or worse will affect future such candidates.

If he does well, they will do well.

If he does poorly, they will suffer but that doesn't mean they can't win it will just be harder.

I pray for the President often that he might not lose his life. I'm afraid of the kind of riots and such it would set off. The loss of life could be catastrophic.

It doesn't really matter to the common man that really the economic problems we face started back when Theodore Roosevelt was President. They don't understand that. Whoever is in office when we finally hit the brick wall, them and their party will suffer the most not necessarily the ones most responsible for the events. To me we should round up every member of Congress and every president who has continued deficit spending and drug this nation down so far and charge them with treason...but then I am fairly radical in that opinion. I mean have they not sold us out essentially to our enemies, is that not the definition of treason? To me they are all responsible for where we are especially since they've not been reading bills since the late 70s/early 80s, every single one of them that voted for the overbloated budgets, voted to rob social security, and failed to veto measures they knew we could not pay for without becoming slaves of our enemies should be rounded up and charged appropriately.

[Bandit]

Voting against someone because of race is also foolishness.

For example in 2000 had he run I would have voted for Colin Powell over Bush. (I ended up voting for Harry Brown though). Powell though had a long record as a leader and distinguished career (sadly that has become stained some due to his involvement in the Bush administration).

Obama though has consistently both on the state level and federal level had far to many absences or votes for present rather than yes or no to have ever been effective.

In truth for President I have not voted for a Republican or Democrat in 21 years (I last voted for George H. W. Bush and Dan Quayle the first time they ran, they so disppointed me that the next two elections I voted for Ross Perot and have generally always voted for a third party candidate).

I would also have voted for Powell. and I agree that to vote for someone or not vote for someone over skin color is unwise.

Americans are so brainwashed into believing they actually have two options/parties when there is only one party/option to vote on that can fairly win -
the Republicrats or as some others call the system, the Demolicans.

and I don't see them waking up to the deception any time soon.

[Brighterdays]

I vote none of the Above!!

and yes I do vote(so I can complain).

They all suck, I hated democrats the most for the longest time, but Now I think It's even(except for polosi(i hate her the most forever)). Throw all the bumbs out on their arses.

Welcome to the UNITED STATES OF FRANCE. Boy is it going to suck!!

[Billssuck]

What we need to do is to totally "can" our two party system and actually vote for someone based on their morals, actions, and behavior. We are forced to choose the worse of three evils (and yes that includes the independent party). Both the Republicans and Democrats have their own selfish agendas and that is proven by Obama's crappy stimulus bill full of pork.

[JRScott]

I think we should ban National Parties.

Parties should be on the state level to advance their state issues, not some national platform where representatives become beholden to out of stat interest.

Take Chris Dodd for instance, he's only had 5 people from his home state donate to him this year and the amount is very low (like under 10k from them), but yet he's received almost 600k in total donations mostly from out of state interests. Sad really. We don't allow the President to take donations from foreign governments and I don't think Senators or Representatives should take out of state donations as it creates conflicts of interest.

[JRScott]

Sources:Obama Sways Congressman to Pass on New York Senate Democratic Primary

If President Obama didn't have enough on his plate already, he's now thrust himself into the middle of a statewide race that has sparked growing resentment among some New York Democrats.

Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) asked Obama to implore Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) against challenging New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand in the Democratic primary next year, FOX News has learned.

Israel was poised to announce his candidacy until the president intervened with a Friday afternoon phone call in an effort to clear the field for Gillibrand, a source told FOX News, calling the move "messy."

"This is a tough, heartfelt decision for me. I have received encouragement to pursue this fight from all corners of our great state," Israel said in a statement.

The senators solicited Obama's assistance to help Gillibrand avoid a competitive primary in 2010, a Democratic New York source told FOX News.

Menendez heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the panel charged with electing party members to the Senate and led by Schumer in past years.

It's rare for a president to inject himself into statewide politics. And a host of New York political insiders with ties to several House Democrats say they're angry that the president even got involved.

"What? You can't have a primary? It's decided in backroom deals?" asked a source who spoke to FOX News on the condition of anonymity. "What if someone told Obama he couldn't have a primary and Hillary (Clinton) would just be the nominee? Where would he be? It's an outrage."

Gillibrand's appointment to the Senate has been controversial from the start. Many New York House Democrats were appalled that Gov. David Paterson tapped such a junior lawmaker to succeed Clinton in the Senate when she became secretary of state. Upstate New York voters first elected Gillibrand to the House in 2006 in an upset and Paterson appointed her to the Senate a little more than two years later.

Even New York Rep. Carolyn McCarthy warned that she would challenge Gillibrand in the Democratic contest before Paterson appointed her. Others have questioned whether the moderate Gillibrand would be viable in a statewide race.

Despite speaking with Israel, Obama did not make similar requests of other potential Gillibrand challengers such as McCarthy, and New York Reps. Carolyn Maloney or Rep. Jose Serrano.

"I can't imagine why (Obama) would do this," said one source, referring to the president's request to Israel to step aside. "I am sure that it will upset many (New York) delegation members."

In a statement, Menendez praised Israel as a "terrific Congressman" and said his panel looks forward to continuing working with (Gillibrand) to make sure she well-prepared for her race."

McCarthy, Maloney and Serrano all declined comment for this story.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/16/obama-sways-congressman-pass-new-york-senate-democratic-primary/

I find the above appalling. What business is it of the Senator of NJ who runs for the Senate in NY? What business is it of the President? Communist China's leaders choose who runs for each post? With actions like this how are we any different?

More and more the freedom to choose our leaders is taken away. If we do not wake up soon we will not be a free people. I would encourage every person of NY to write Rep. Steve Israel and encourage him to run for the seat. Even if you don't plan to vote for him in the end, he should have the ability to run to represent the people of New York without outside interference from other states or the President of the United States.