100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Are you willing to follow Obama into Socialism and the NWO? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
have you ever wondered why there are so many sides to all of these stories? it's just kind of funny to me that so many people are complaining about what's happening around us, yet they don't want to believe that it's on purpose. that it's just what happens. they distance theirselves from anyone that promotes a possibility that even though all of these things are happening in some sort of order that it can't possibly be contrived from people that want to hurt us. it's crazy. there is always multiple sides to every story . always has been . but to throw an administration off a cliff before they have a chance to get off the ground . especialy when they inherited a big mess from the previous administration i THINK is crazy .  You go doc! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dragoness, thank you again for your wisdom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No doubt.
Thank you dragoness for shooing the chickens for awhile. I needed the break! Good night!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The poor have not done that at all. They are willing to accept some hard times here for a while to come. It is the economists who are advising for the government to spread money around. It has nothing to do with Obama. He is following those who have studied the recessions and depression of the past. On the contrary, take the health-care, for instance. Both, in the past, and in what is debated as a plan for the future, the poor are offered to vote themselves some money. By voting for the universal health care, poor would be voting themselves services that they now wouldn't need to spend money to get. This is only one example. Consider housing measures, education, or practically any proposition designed "to help the people". Remember, we are not discussing if this is moral or not. We're only looking at the Ben's quote, and trying to determine if this is the case today. Hogwash, the poor cannot be voting themselves money when they are doing without healthcare for the most part. The education? We are failing in educating our children, something needs to be done at this level. Housing, well that one is a big big mess, I don't know what can be done to help that situation. All in all the "money" you named is not money for the poor, it is help for a nation that needs it all the way around. Are you serious? This is not money, this is the help? Are you on drugs or something? Have you read what you have typed? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No doubt. Thank you dragoness for shooing the chickens for awhile. I needed the break! Good night!! Nite Fanta 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No doubt. Thank you dragoness for shooing the chickens for awhile. I needed the break! Good night!! Nite Fanta dragoness, what he means is the will be basically like voting for a coupon when it comes to healthcare. the federal reserve will foot the bill for you as long as you pay it back in forced taxes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there is always multiple sides to every story . always has been . but to throw an administration off a cliff before they have a chance to get off the ground . especialy when they inherited a big mess from the previous administration i THINK is crazy . This is reasonable. But, look at some instances where an administration wasn't thrown off a cliff, and got their chances to get off the ground... Hitler's Germany comes to mind. Millions wish Hitler was thrown off the cliff, before he got his chance to get off the ground. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Mon 03/02/09 10:44 PM
|
|
The poor have not done that at all. They are willing to accept some hard times here for a while to come. It is the economists who are advising for the government to spread money around. It has nothing to do with Obama. He is following those who have studied the recessions and depression of the past. On the contrary, take the health-care, for instance. Both, in the past, and in what is debated as a plan for the future, the poor are offered to vote themselves some money. By voting for the universal health care, poor would be voting themselves services that they now wouldn't need to spend money to get. This is only one example. Consider housing measures, education, or practically any proposition designed "to help the people". Remember, we are not discussing if this is moral or not. We're only looking at the Ben's quote, and trying to determine if this is the case today. Hogwash, the poor cannot be voting themselves money when they are doing without healthcare for the most part. The education? We are failing in educating our children, something needs to be done at this level. Housing, well that one is a big big mess, I don't know what can be done to help that situation. All in all the "money" you named is not money for the poor, it is help for a nation that needs it all the way around. Are you serious? This is not money, this is the help? Are you on drugs or something? Have you read what you have typed? Nope, no drugs, straight as an arrow every day and night. It is not money for the poor. The tax cuts that are being given to the lower class are barely anything to speak of anyway and the other things listed do not just help the poor they help the nation as a whole. We need healthcare so all members of this nation can get what they need to be healthy. Education is of utmost importance to any nation. To be a world power you have to be well educated. Housing will always be an issue at one level or another. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Mon 03/02/09 10:42 PM
|
|
there is always multiple sides to every story . always has been . but to throw an administration off a cliff before they have a chance to get off the ground . especialy when they inherited a big mess from the previous administration i THINK is crazy . This is reasonable. But, look at some instances where an administration wasn't thrown off a cliff, and got their chances to get off the ground... Hitler's Germany comes to mind. Millions wish Hitler was thrown off the cliff, before he got his chance to get off the ground. Yea, I have made that comparison with Bush and Hitler also. Not a very popular comparison but hey it fits. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you're right no games. but i'm learning that trying to argue with or teach fanta and dragoness is like trying to incubate a golfball to its term.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The poor have not done that at all. They are willing to accept some hard times here for a while to come. It is the economists who are advising for the government to spread money around. It has nothing to do with Obama. He is following those who have studied the recessions and depression of the past. On the contrary, take the health-care, for instance. Both, in the past, and in what is debated as a plan for the future, the poor are offered to vote themselves some money. By voting for the universal health care, poor would be voting themselves services that they now wouldn't need to spend money to get. This is only one example. Consider housing measures, education, or practically any proposition designed "to help the people". Remember, we are not discussing if this is moral or not. We're only looking at the Ben's quote, and trying to determine if this is the case today. Hogwash, the poor cannot be voting themselves money when they are doing without healthcare for the most part. The education? We are failing in educating our children, something needs to be done at this level. Housing, well that one is a big big mess, I don't know what can be done to help that situation. All in all the "money" you named is not money for the poor, it is help for a nation that needs it all the way around. Are you serious? This is not money, this is the help? Are you on drugs or something? Have you read what you have typed? Nope, no drugs, straight as an arrow every day and night. It is not money for the poor. The tax cuts that are being given to the lower class are barely anything to speak of anyway and the other things listed do not just help the poor they help the nation as a whole. We need healthcare so all members of this nation can get what they need to be healthy. Education is of utmost importance to any nation. To be world power you have to be well educated. Housing will always be an issue at one level or another. darling, the rich already have healthcare. it is only effecting the poor. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, no drugs, straight as an arrow every day and night. It is not money for the poor. The tax cuts that are being given to the lower class are barely anything to speak of anyway and the other things listed do not just help the poor they help the nation as a whole. We need healthcare so all members of this nation can get what they need to be healthy. Education is of utmost importance to any nation. To be world power you have to be well educated. Housing will always be an issue at one level or another. You do realize that I keep quoting you, so that people can read it? It just doesn't make sense to try to squiggle your way out of something you should have simply admitted as true. Imagine how stupid would I look, if I have rejected your statement that rich vote themselves money, and instead, started to apologize by saying how that is not really the money, because it helps the country, it is only fair, and so forth? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you're right no games. but i'm learning that trying to argue with or teach fanta and dragoness is like trying to incubate a golfball to its term. You can't argue with people, who at the moment do not want to argue. If they wanted to argue, meaning to honestly find out if their opinion makes sense, they would have happily admitting where they went wrong. All you can do is to entice them to make a statement. Their next step will be limited to: -changing a topic. -posting smirks and childish play. -posting huge cut and paste jobs to bury the content. -other tricks? (hiding behind each other) -accusing you in lack of patriotism |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obama will do well. He has a good head on his shoulders. What he doesn't know he asks the right people for the answers, that is a sign of a good leader. hes a con artist. if you dont see it...seriosuly..take off your blinders. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obama will do well. He has a good head on his shoulders. What he doesn't know he asks the right people for the answers, that is a sign of a good leader. Yes, he's a very smart man. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hes a con artist. if you dont see it...seriosuly..take off your blinders. Yes, he's a very smart man. These two quotes are not in contradiction to each-other. You can't be a very successful con artist if you're not very smart. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obama is the wrong person for the job. I know there are many Obama supporters but they have been misguided with their vision of him blured. I am for MCCAIN all the way. Even though I know he burried himself when Sarah Palin became his V.P.... you know that no one is perfect. But YA YA MCCAIN.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 8 years of Bush, I like many Americans, simply were ravenous for a change.
They say that a President and thier policies can only be faily judged many years later but in current history and public support Bush was an abject failure for the American People. It is hard to imagine that his Wars and shredding of Constitutional rights and values, will ever be remembered as any type of "success." Obama is where the majority of American citizens have placed thier hope for a restored America, from the economy to social issues to our respect among other nations. Can he do it? I don't know but I am behind my President. Obama inherited quite a mess and took on the challenge voluntarily. Who among us posesses the will, aptitude and determination to do the same? There will always be critics. Sometimes critics are right and leaders listen... Other times they "stay the course" despite all evidence that it is a course to disaster. As an American citizen I do share the hope and admiration of others that maybe Obama can mitigate the troubles curently upon our nation. If not Obama now then who? Non of the other candidates inspired me but McCain for his heroic War service to our country. He didn't win, Obama did so I will follow him unless logic overcomes me into despair like it did with Bush. Until then I remain loyal to my President. RW |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok many Americans wanted Obama to be our president?
53%of our voters wanted him 46% didnt I dont call that to much of a majority. but then again it seems like majority doesnt matter any more in our country. All the special interest groups and the "minority" get every thing they want. Screw the hard woring person and take what they have earned and give it to those who dont try to earn a honest living! I'm so proud of my counrty 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think your President is 'hot'...Give the man a chance...
|
|
|
|
|
