100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: The President who told the Truth | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20KDBELD20I&feature=endscreen&NR=1 Who do you think better matches the ideals of this great President? Romney? Perry? Cain? Bachman? Santorum? Gingrich? Maybe Huntsman? Closer, but STILL a lesser of other evils. How about the only one who actually mentions and defends our constitution, our Rights, and speaks out against the warmongers and profiteers who are sending/keeping our children, our freedoms and economy into a constant state of war and fear? Which will you cast your vote for? Liberty or continued Tyranny? RON PAUL 2012!  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican...
a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll take Ron Paul FTW Alex!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. LadyL, in the wish for freedoms and Liberty, and a chance for someone who actually respects those principles, how can you not consider the "person" over the party? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peccy
on
Thu 12/01/11 07:55 AM
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. There is no such thing as a true liberal or a true republican anymore. The truckloads of money in DC have seen to that. It's about the "me" factor. People have seen that. Barry promised hope and change, but hope is lost and the only change is down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. There is no such thing as a true liberal or a true republican anymore. The truckloads of money in DC have seen to that. It's about the "me" factor. People have seen that. Barry provided hope and change, but hope is lost and the only change is down. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Seakolony
on
Thu 12/01/11 07:52 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Imagine a world "not at war" and the possibilities of creative thinking and actions towards prosperity in life, liberty and the pursuits of happiness..... Yer right.... re-elect King Barry.... we can't handle the truth!  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no such thing as a true liberal or a true republican anymore. Exactly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no such thing as a true liberal or a true republican anymore. Exactly. The parties mean nothing. We are all doomed. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Thu 12/01/11 11:18 PM
|
|
continued potential,,,,,still voting Obama,,,,at this point,,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/02/11 04:23 AM
|
|
Have you ever seen the number of former goldman sachs employees who run the bush and obama administrations?
Dianna Farrell: Obama Administration: Deputy Director, National Economic Council Former Goldman Sachs Title: Financial Analyst Stephen Friedman: Obama Administration: Chairman, President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005-) Gary Gensler: Obama Administration: Commissioner, Commodity Futures Trading Commission Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Co-head of Finance Robert Hormats: Obama Administration: Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State Department Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs Group Philip Murphy: Obama Administration: Ambassador to Germany Former Goldman Sachs Title: Head of Goldman Sachs, Frankfurt Mark Patterson: Obama Administration: Chief of Staff to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner Former Goldman Sachs Title: Lobbyist 2005-2008; Vice President for Government Relations John Thain: Obama Administration: Advisor to Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geitner Former Goldman Sachs Title: President and Chief Operating Officer (1999-2003) Henry Paulson: Bush II Administration: Secretary, Treasury 2006 - 2009 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Chairman and CEO (1998-2006) Neel Kashkari: Bush II Administration: Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability, Treasury (2008 – 2009) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice President, San Francisco; led Information Technology Security Investment Banking Practice Reuben Jeffery III: Bush II Administration: Undersecretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs, State Department (2007 –2009) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Managing Partner Paris until 2002 Security Investment Banking Practice Robert Steel: Bush II Administration: Under Secretary for Domestic Finance, Treasury, (2006 – 2008) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman – 2004 Steve Shafran: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson 2008 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Private equity business in Asia until 2000 Edward C. Forst: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson 2008 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Co-head of Goldman’s investment management business Dan Jester: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson 2008 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Deputy CFO Kendrick R. Wilson III: Bush II Administration: Advisor on setting up TARP to Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson 2008 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Chairman of Goldman’s financial institutions groups Joshua Bolten: Bush II Administration: White House Chief of Staff (2006 – 2009) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Executive Director, Legal & Government Affairs (1994-99) Gary Gensler: Bush II Administration: Undersecretary, Treasury (1999-2001) and Assistant Secretary, Treasury (1997-1999) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and Co-head of Finance Robert Rubin: Bush II Administration: Secretary, Treasury 1995-1999 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman (1987-90) Robert Zoellick: Bush II Administration: United States Trade Representative (2001-2005), Deputy Secretary of State (2005-2006), World Bank President (2007 -) Former Goldman Sachs Title: Vice Chairman, International (2006-07) William C Dudley: NY Federal Reserve: Current President/CEO Former Goldman Sachs Title: Partner and managing director – 2007 Stephen Friedman: NY Federal Reserve: Former Chairman of the Board – 2009 Former Goldman Sachs Title: Board Member (Chairman, 1990-94; Director, 2005-) The names may change but the "alliances/alligences" DON'T! Now someone please tell me again how Obama changed the way things work in Washington D.C.. Gensler and cronies are now under investigation for the CFTC and MF Global mess where clients have LOST an estimated $1.2B to "misplacement" of their funds. It is suspected MFG added these "funds" to their own in bad investments and it is unrecoverable.... but supposedly backed by FDIC.....I mean....YOU AND ME! The problem is..... it wasn't illegal thanks to banking deregulations! Thank Congress and King Barry! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. LadyL, in the wish for freedoms and Liberty, and a chance for someone who actually respects those principles, how can you not consider the "person" over the party? It's not about a 'party' for me at all, which is why i said I wish there would be a third option ...for those of us we wish to NOT have to pick a party. Paul lacks a sense of compassion and that is as important (to me) as freedom and liberty... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/02/11 05:00 AM
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. LadyL, in the wish for freedoms and Liberty, and a chance for someone who actually respects those principles, how can you not consider the "person" over the party? It's not about a 'party' for me at all, which is why i said I wish there would be a third option ...for those of us we wish to NOT have to pick a party. Paul lacks a sense of compassion and that is as important (to me) as freedom and liberty... Might I ask what in particular he lacks compassion in? And you are right! How about NO POLITICAL PARTY'S..... just Americans with preferences? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. LadyL, in the wish for freedoms and Liberty, and a chance for someone who actually respects those principles, how can you not consider the "person" over the party? It's not about a 'party' for me at all, which is why i said I wish there would be a third option ...for those of us we wish to NOT have to pick a party. Paul lacks a sense of compassion and that is as important (to me) as freedom and liberty... Might I ask what in particular he lacks compassion in? And you are right! How about NO POLITICAL PARTY'S..... just Americans with preferences? Well..i don't want to get into a political debate with you, gives me a headache, specially at 5AM. 
In particular his stance on the medical care system. As an obstetrician and gynecologist and having delivered some 4,000 babies (in the past) i would hope he would be more concerned about the sick and uninsured...having a general concern for human life. I don't understand how one can see a baby being born and not fall in love with ALL of life. Maybe he saw too many and the affect had worn off... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. There is no such thing as a true liberal or a true republican anymore. I agree, is why a third party or more..is needed. I didn't say I AM a liberal.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. LadyL, in the wish for freedoms and Liberty, and a chance for someone who actually respects those principles, how can you not consider the "person" over the party? It's not about a 'party' for me at all, which is why i said I wish there would be a third option ...for those of us we wish to NOT have to pick a party. Paul lacks a sense of compassion and that is as important (to me) as freedom and liberty... Might I ask what in particular he lacks compassion in? And you are right! How about NO POLITICAL PARTY'S..... just Americans with preferences? Well..i don't want to get into a political debate with you, gives me a headache, specially at 5AM.
In particular his stance on the medical care system. As an obstetrician and gynecologist and having delivered some 4,000 babies (in the past) i would hope he would be more concerned about the sick and uninsured...having a general concern for human life. I don't understand how one can see a baby being born and not fall in love with ALL of life. Maybe he saw too many and the affect had worn off... I guess I'm missing something here...... He wants to get the gov't out of health care.....ok....that will drive the cost down. He likes "medical accounts" as options, but is not going to mess with medicaid or medicare for those who rely on it. He is PRO-LIFE, but he also feels the gov't has NO SAY in what you decide is best for your own life or body. His stance is.."I don't like people telling me what is best for me, and I don't think it's right for government to demand it of others." He wants to take the "waste" out of gov't spending and apply support where it is needed most.....back to the people! States (local gov't) will handle a lot of these things, but cut the FED out. Things always work better on a local level. The people of the "community, city, county, state" can best decide what is best for them, rather than a FED body with to many issues to deal with it properly. I just can't grasp your opinion for lack of compassion as you have stated it. He feels the gov't just shouldn't be involved in decisions that effect your health. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. LadyL, in the wish for freedoms and Liberty, and a chance for someone who actually respects those principles, how can you not consider the "person" over the party? It's not about a 'party' for me at all, which is why i said I wish there would be a third option ...for those of us we wish to NOT have to pick a party. Paul lacks a sense of compassion and that is as important (to me) as freedom and liberty... Might I ask what in particular he lacks compassion in? And you are right! How about NO POLITICAL PARTY'S..... just Americans with preferences? Well..i don't want to get into a political debate with you, gives me a headache, specially at 5AM.
In particular his stance on the medical care system. As an obstetrician and gynecologist and having delivered some 4,000 babies (in the past) i would hope he would be more concerned about the sick and uninsured...having a general concern for human life. I don't understand how one can see a baby being born and not fall in love with ALL of life. Maybe he saw too many and the affect had worn off... I guess I'm missing something here...... He wants to get the gov't out of health care.....ok....that will drive the cost down. He likes "medical accounts" as options, but is not going to mess with medicaid or medicare for those who rely on it. He is PRO-LIFE, but he also feels the gov't has NO SAY in what you decide is best for your own life or body. His stance is.."I don't like people telling me what is best for me, and I don't think it's right for government to demand it of others." He wants to take the "waste" out of gov't spending and apply support where it is needed most.....back to the people! States (local gov't) will handle a lot of these things, but cut the FED out. Things always work better on a local level. The people of the "community, city, county, state" can best decide what is best for them, rather than a FED body with to many issues to deal with it properly. I just can't grasp your opinion for lack of compassion as you have stated it. He feels the gov't just shouldn't be involved in decisions that effect your health. Not asking anyone to grasp my opinion, it is after all just that..my opinion. I'm not referring to his political stance, as far as defending the constitution, I'm referring to his personal opinions on human need....that he has expressed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. LadyL, in the wish for freedoms and Liberty, and a chance for someone who actually respects those principles, how can you not consider the "person" over the party? It's not about a 'party' for me at all, which is why i said I wish there would be a third option ...for those of us we wish to NOT have to pick a party. Paul lacks a sense of compassion and that is as important (to me) as freedom and liberty... Might I ask what in particular he lacks compassion in? And you are right! How about NO POLITICAL PARTY'S..... just Americans with preferences? Well..i don't want to get into a political debate with you, gives me a headache, specially at 5AM.
In particular his stance on the medical care system. As an obstetrician and gynecologist and having delivered some 4,000 babies (in the past) i would hope he would be more concerned about the sick and uninsured...having a general concern for human life. I don't understand how one can see a baby being born and not fall in love with ALL of life. Maybe he saw too many and the affect had worn off... I guess I'm missing something here...... He wants to get the gov't out of health care.....ok....that will drive the cost down. He likes "medical accounts" as options, but is not going to mess with medicaid or medicare for those who rely on it. He is PRO-LIFE, but he also feels the gov't has NO SAY in what you decide is best for your own life or body. His stance is.."I don't like people telling me what is best for me, and I don't think it's right for government to demand it of others." He wants to take the "waste" out of gov't spending and apply support where it is needed most.....back to the people! States (local gov't) will handle a lot of these things, but cut the FED out. Things always work better on a local level. The people of the "community, city, county, state" can best decide what is best for them, rather than a FED body with to many issues to deal with it properly. I just can't grasp your opinion for lack of compassion as you have stated it. He feels the gov't just shouldn't be involved in decisions that effect your health. Not asking anyone to grasp my opinion, it is after all just that..my opinion. I'm not referring to his political stance, as far as defending the constitution, I'm referring to his personal opinions on human need....that he has expressed. I won't press, for now , but I would like to see some links that brought you to your opinion when you can please. That totally takes me off guard, for in the many years I have followed his career I have never heard that as an issue, and I would like to view your source. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am just far to liberal to vote republican... a third choose would be ideal for me, yet that just isn't going to happen. LadyL, in the wish for freedoms and Liberty, and a chance for someone who actually respects those principles, how can you not consider the "person" over the party? It's not about a 'party' for me at all, which is why i said I wish there would be a third option ...for those of us we wish to NOT have to pick a party. Paul lacks a sense of compassion and that is as important (to me) as freedom and liberty... Might I ask what in particular he lacks compassion in? And you are right! How about NO POLITICAL PARTY'S..... just Americans with preferences? Well..i don't want to get into a political debate with you, gives me a headache, specially at 5AM.
In particular his stance on the medical care system. As an obstetrician and gynecologist and having delivered some 4,000 babies (in the past) i would hope he would be more concerned about the sick and uninsured...having a general concern for human life. I don't understand how one can see a baby being born and not fall in love with ALL of life. Maybe he saw too many and the affect had worn off... I guess I'm missing something here...... He wants to get the gov't out of health care.....ok....that will drive the cost down. He likes "medical accounts" as options, but is not going to mess with medicaid or medicare for those who rely on it. He is PRO-LIFE, but he also feels the gov't has NO SAY in what you decide is best for your own life or body. His stance is.."I don't like people telling me what is best for me, and I don't think it's right for government to demand it of others." He wants to take the "waste" out of gov't spending and apply support where it is needed most.....back to the people! States (local gov't) will handle a lot of these things, but cut the FED out. Things always work better on a local level. The people of the "community, city, county, state" can best decide what is best for them, rather than a FED body with to many issues to deal with it properly. I just can't grasp your opinion for lack of compassion as you have stated it. He feels the gov't just shouldn't be involved in decisions that effect your health. Not asking anyone to grasp my opinion, it is after all just that..my opinion. I'm not referring to his political stance, as far as defending the constitution, I'm referring to his personal opinions on human need....that he has expressed. I won't press, for now , but I would like to see some links that brought you to your opinion when you can please. That totally takes me off guard, for in the many years I have followed his career I have never heard that as an issue, and I would like to view your source.
Appreciate the not 'pressing' wouldn't do ya any good anyway... 
It isn't just him, I dislike them all. I don't trust any of them. Besides I'm a dreamer...I'll keep sending the love and light,you guys worry about the politics. 
|
|
|
|
|
