|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
Trust me, I never lie where it matters. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
Have at it any time you'd like jOHN. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Perhaps these couple of links from the Daily Dish should have gone in the healthcare thread, but it's more about the 'strange anger' I guess:
Not Racism; Projection Not Racism; Projection? Ctd. They're only brief so I won't pull out quotes beyond the closing comment from Sullivan: Quote:
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
its a great explanation for why these knuckleheads toggle on the fly between Obama as Stalin and Obama as Hitler. It also explains the emotional satisfaction of using enemies of american culture from pop fiction like Obama as The Joker, It also pretty much explains Glenn Beck's blubbering white ass as a movement participant. If there's a segment of the american population who's got the furthest to fall when faced with the reality of American crimes, foreign and domestic, its mormon white suburbia.
But it doesn't lay enough blame on Glenn Beck as a movement demagogue. It would be interesting to research the attitudes of the great unwashed during the Carter administration. Because I know that Clinton was just as hated as Obama, and vilified in the same fashion by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, g gordon liddy, michael reagan, etc. A lot of factors muted the vitriol, but I remember plainly that corporate conservatives didn't just disagree with Clinton, they demonized him on similar emotional pleas and frothing abuse. To the point where I was happy Bush got elected so the lot of them might just STFU. I guess I'm saying that what I personally see happening is pyschological, but of a definite religious bent. The same psychological factors that shape a new religiion and its members seem to be at play in the authority driven movements against Obama. They have a creed. They have charismatic hero personalities. They have an eschatology. They have a body of myths about themselves and the world. They definitely have what they consider to be a code of ethics, and I think they are/will be more and more willing to sacrifice humanist principles to follow their ethics. In this sense they should be treated as a radical political cult, not unlike the nazis. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
Quote:
I would be more concerned if they didn't look like they were between visits to sizzler steakhouse. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
(you should be on TV ;) ) Interesting that you say Clinton was just as hated. I didn't really pick up on it at the time. Small mercies that blogs and youtube weren't around back then. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
However, Rush Limbaugh already had a rapt audience of gloomy nodders getting their marching orders daily, Ken Starr had the independent council seeking every angle from paula jones to vince foster as ways to bring down the clintons. And the neo con movement admit themselves that their new brand of conservatism was a response to the clinton era and what they deemed to be the straying of american foreign character. But bottom line, yeah, my impression is that it isn't specifically obama. the religious right will never be willing to compromise no matter how solidly they are demoted to the kids table. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
anyone in this thread mention yet how people hate being wrong and all the 'secret muslim' crap from before november has just found a new avenue along with giving regular cons an excuse to get pissy without it looking like racism?
people with batshit opinions form one or five or ten years ago dont go away, they just restructure the same thing. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
I've never seen anything like this in the U.S.A. on such proud display during my lifetime. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Is this interviewer being a racist for questioning why Obama is grinning like a fucking hyena:
http://www.youtube.com/v/jQK4sBVzg54 Another glaringly racist interview: http://www.youtube.com/v/OmWYIxfZr_w&hl http://www.youtube.com/v/a0b1LtsfKNU Good God, the racists are coming out of the fucking woodwork...and Obama's not even an "official member", so fucking biased that CFR is. I mean even Angelina Jolie is an official member, how racist!: http://www.youtube.com/v/D5fh-kl2nS4&hl=en http://www.youtube.com/v/_Qy97pFDLig&hl=en How dare this racist whitey clarify a freudian slip?!?: http://www.youtube.com/v/bMUgNg7aD8M&hl=en Bottom line, just remember that ONLY white people can be racists and liars!;) http://www.youtube.com/v/DKpnCrHWU4c&hl=en |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
ho ho ho
ohhh, if anyone still gives a shit about this thread this is gonna be good. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
My born again boss at lunch just explained to us that Barrack means "lightning" and bama means sky in aramaic, the language of jesus christ, and that in matthew it says that satan will come in the form of lightning from the sky. All I could choke out is well I guess that's worse than being born in Kenya. Chances are things will end up more despotic at the end of this, and the dollar really does have the ability to utterly collapse to a point where it will have to just be replaced, and there is a chance that what replaces it will be multinational. But I don't blame anyone for this more than I do people like Mongoose. Its on their shoulders because they simply *refuse* to go off script and actually face reality. NO no, its too much fun looking for subliminimiminibabable messages. The only comfort is the loons end up turning on themselves, like this quality video giving air tight proof that Ron Paul is just a NWO patsy to give the illusion that people of mongoose's ilk has a political ally. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x6inINzThw Quote:
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
OK.
I realised a long time ago that there are some seriously Loony Tunes people in the States. I just didn't realise quite how bad it was. So Obama is the anti-Christ? FFS. Those guys are off their heads. Seriously. :eek: |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
people are terrible. they were terrible against bush, they are terrible now. you can tell the tea-baggers that Rick Santelli, who originally suggested the "symbolic act" on CNBC, was paid off to lay the astroturf and they'll still think that they didnt just get chumped and made into pawns. since this is mostly 101 stuff, i'm just saying it so that me also saying that there's something more than just looney tunes at work isnt coming out of the blue. this still feels constructed, albeit differently. it's not the chaos of the news network's L.C.D., it feels more like the networks are the ones being marketed to based on their own formula. like a committee looked out to tap a natural resource of people too pissed off to think straight, sure, but also with a subfocus of exploiting the subtelties of racial relations that cant possibly be understood on a national level without inciting a reverse-victim complex. it works too well. white guys cannot talk about race, guys cannot talk about women, able-bodied people cannot talk about the disabled. most cant even address the idea of a cultural minority without soon feeling like they're being attacked, and then arguing with others' own perspective so that theirs still works. lecturing, socratic elenchus, and condescending to give them any other list of reasons because someone obviously needs to be educated. this happens everywhere on the internet and several times here. so: you start talking racism on tv, and do it long enough, the news stories of "white conservatives say it's time for their own empowerment" slime out and the topic will make people who'd rather not address anything substantial roll their eyes out of 'overexposure'. because it's easier to believe that you're just being put upon to feel guilty rather than face the interesting idea that your cultural approach to race, sex, and identity might completely play into a form of oppression. it's not hard to understand overexposure, you keep generating news stories about race, you let the smart and the dumb bat back and forth and make fun of each other, and eventually you kill the dialogue by making the topic fall out of favor. the astroturf that created what's generously being called a new political party was born out of corporate interest. these interests went through PR firms that went through news channels that became best-sellers. this kind of machination isnt a stretch, but it's definitely "strange" (as the thread title has it) because it's a new level in a very eerie way. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
What's a variable is just how much they can get away with, and how little people resist. Things like regulator capturing, lobby pressured law making, monopolies, favoring subsidies, etc have rose and fell in magnitude since the beginning. So the question has become what is it about now that has made this corporate take over so potent, and the resistance so withered, and the people who should be outraged at the particular, glaring corruption so devoid of common sense or reason. Not to pick on him, as he's clearly a drop in the bucket, but how does someone like mongoose, who obviously means well and wants to make things better, end up getting a hard on when obama says "muslim faith" but yawns at the all too real examples of corporate corruption that is literally beating him in the face on a daily basis. I firmly believe that americans, to stereotype, want to do the right thing. which is why they end up doing such awful things because someone succeeded in convincing them it was right and good. And that's only compounded by the fact that the government has so perfectly grafted the american christian church onto it and corporations have so perfectly grafted the government onto it, so that now its really easy to make it an ethical argument to say, not does it make uncle sam happy when you shop at walmart, it makes jesus happy too. Not only are liberals against capitalism, they are against God. This is *precisely* the reason why dialog has been so degenerated, and why talking to mongoose is not unlike talking to a street preacher about evolution. My interest is not to make fun or condescend or sneer at people like Mongoose. My interest is to shame them into dropping the bullshit. That convincing them of giving up the pretense they have it all figured out and it starts with the knights templar is what is really good and right and what will make jesus the happiest. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
As for Mongoose, I unfortunately hazarded a look at his last post, and I have to wonder who he's arguing against. Did someone here claim that any and all questioning of or opposition to Obama is motivated by racism? Most intelligent people raising racism have been clear that it's likely just one of many factors that influence opposition to Obama's policies. Not even Obama himself has claimed that racism is the overriding, motivating factor. Legitimate, thoughtful, constructive questions and criticisms are great. But the dumb-asses who attend rallies with signs depicting Obama as an African witch-doctor and the like should probably take a moment to look at themselves in the mirror while carrying said sign, and think long and hard about what's actually motivating them. I somehow doubt that in their case, it's a legitimate, thoughtful or constructive question or criticism. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
and you think these are bad things?????????????:eek: |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
And by the way, since you've chosen to use it Mongoose, what exactly motivates you to refer to Obama as "Barack Hussein Obama"? And keep in mind that we're not idiots, so just saying "well that's his name, isn't it?" is probably not going to be accepted as an honest answer. Obama himself doesn't generally go by that full name, and no one aside from his most fervent opponents refer to him by it, so realistically, it probably has nothing to do with just being thorough in identifying him. I know that in most cases, the name "Hussein" is raised in a blatantly transparent attempt to make him sound scary to people who are predisposed to being afraid of Muslims and various other middle-easterners (oddly enough, many of whom also do happen to have racist tendencies), but I really do want to know what your personal reasoning is behind using it. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
another dynamic in the states that I find interesting is our battered housewife relationship to government.
In canada I noticed that newspapers scream bloody murder at the emergence of levels of corruption that would simply just be shrugged off in the states. We tend to be more cynical and just act like that's the way governments are supposed to act. Part of the reason universal health care works in places like the UK and Canada at all is that the people take on a level of ownership of government and take responsibility for who they elect. It is understood that you must consider a candidate's ability to not turn a government program as their own personal gravy train. That's part of my reservation about single payer, universal healthcare in America. It will mean we have to take responsibility in our government, and participate in the management of its handlers by the democratic process, as opposed to just expecting it to work like a mcdonald's drive thru. We'll have to bag language like "track record" and "typical government waste" when dismissing the problems of government. And all of this is so far removed from the way americans relate to their government currently, that I wonder if it isn't best kept in the hands of corporations that are just better regulated and forced to provide unconditional healthcare. You can't vote out corporations, like you can a government that squandered health care and reduced the quality of service. That being said you don't have to work or put any effort into them either. just money. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
Short of admitting this, there's very little that the name-caller can do, beside: (a) disingenuously play dumb ("it's his name") (b) disingenuously backtrack ("it's just a joke... i'm winding you guys up...")(c) do a disappearing act. Let's see, shall we..... |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
i keep laughing at the phrase "radical anti-gun group." they want to pry that gun from your cold dead hands RADICALLY. with crowbars and barcode tattoos and acid spitting vipers!
also, every time i look at the title of this thread i read "stranger danger at obama..." |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Bit disturbed to read that there's been a 400 per cent surge in death threats against Obama since earlier this year.
Just bizarre. Seemingly one of the most intelligent, rational and calm presidents the US has had, still in the early stage of his time in the White House, yet for some, he's the most worthy of disdain. Can't help but wonder if Bush had this many death threats given his contribution to America - and the world - while in office. Presumably, mongo will tell us we only hear about Obama's death threats because he's black? Damn that PC commie liberal organization, the secret service. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
That being said, one big difference between liberals and conservatives is that conservatives are far more likely to be armed. Take for instance the morons who feel it's somehow appropriate to bring guns to townhall meetings about health care. Although an NPR article about it points out the upside of people showing up clearly armed: "By openly carrying their weapons, the gun toters are at least easily identifiable to law enforcement, including Secret Service sharp shooters who, for all we know, are watching them intently through the cross hairs of their scopes." Anyway, we saw tons of passionate anti-Bush protests, but no one ever showed up to them with a loaded gun that I recall. And I shudder to think what would have happened to them if they did. Beyond that, no matter how dishonest much of the opposition to Bush ever was, I don't recall anything on the level of the "birther" movement and others like it confronting him. So I guess I attribute it to a variety of factors, from legitimate opposition to Obama's policies, to revenge, to racism. And I'm definitely uneasy about where it's all headed. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Yeah, that's exactly it.
Liberals may have been sanctimonious and misguided at times during the Bush era, and I'll admit there was almost an enjoyment in presenting Bush as the neoconservative, Bible-bashing, fuckwit with evil Cheney pulling his strings - but (trying as hard as I can to be objective) I maintain we had rather a lot more to base that on than the right currently do with Obama! ( ^^sorry, too near bedtime for me to sort through the grammar) What seems to characterize the current mood of the right is (a) their sheer stupidity (b) their strangely visceral reaction, and the very real sense that it could tip over into violence. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
For example. Dick Armey will take any criticism that his tea-bagging movement shelters obama=hitler nuts by saying Moveon.org "ran those ads that compared bush to hitler" when 1. it was never created by moveon.org, it was created by a forum user for a contest, 2. it was never run by moveon.org but taken down from their website promptly after complaints about the ad started coming in. So I guess the equation for Dick Armey is for every one smug liberal film student we can brush off an army of hostile tea baggers as just part of the political environment? Sean you were right to object to the vitriol against Bush for this reason, as you saw how this would play out. I'm just frustrated because I think the conservative players and pundits like Armey are being very disingenuous passing the buck to past cases of liberal tastelessness - they don't see a connection as much as they see a convenient scapegoat for their own interests. Meanwhile, the GOP itself did in fact run ads against democratic senators juxtaposing them with pictures of osama bin laden when they simply didn't go toe to toe with Bush policies. And lets not forget what happened to the dixie chicks. I'm sure plenty of radio stations in berkeley have played toby kieth without any drama. So to be honest, my perspective was that even in the bush hay day years, there was a competition between mob justice against liberals who dared not fall in line and the liberal/anarchist demonstrators who screamed "baby killer." My thoughts are that all complaining, all attacks are great, so long as they aren't stupid. Regardless of where they point, they are a good thing. And that's part of my frustration with the mongooses of the world. We have to spend our time arguing about birth certificates and who's being more racist, the mixed race president or the angry marshmallow spewing hate 4 hours a day from florida? When really there are plenty of good reasons to get on Obama's case. Frankly Obama is a huge disappointment to me. He's like the popular easy going student body president in high school who just wants to get the goths and the preppies together for a year of unity. Fuck unity. And while we're at it, anybody realize we have more private military contractors on the government payroll now than we did under Bush? I mean jesus Mongoose, do I have to do your job for you? |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Case in point...
WASHINGTON (CNN) — A spokeswoman for a Republican congressman who called President Obama "an enemy of humanity" said Tuesday that he should have clarified that he was talking about the president's policies on abortion. Bethany Haley, a spokeswoman for Arizona Rep. Trent Franks, told CNN on Tuesday the congressman was actually referring to "unborn humanity" — a specific reference to the president's policies on abortion. Franks used the term in a speech to conservative activists Saturday in St. Louis, pointing to Obama's decision to aid international family planning clinics that perform abortions. "A president that has lost his way that badly, that has no ability to see the image of God in these little fellow human beings, if he can't do that right, then he has no place in any station of government and we need to realize that he is an enemy of humanity," Franks said. Franks' speech was recorded by the liberal group People for the American Way. In an interview with the Washington Independent after the speech, Franks also renewed a call for Obama to produce a copy of his birth certificate to end the questions by "birthers" who doubt the president's birthplace. Franks said he had once considered filing a lawsuit to get it, but did his own investigation and became convinced that the president was born in the United States. Haley called the controversy a "silly debate" and said it is "ridiculous that the president doesn't just produce [the birth certificate] and make it go away." In the interview, Franks implied that the president might be trying to hide something else. "Probably, Barack Obama could solve this problem and make the birthers, you know, back off, by simply showing us his long-form birth certificate," Franks said. "That'd solve the problem. There's some other issue, I don't know what it is, that he doesn't want people to see the birth certificate on." So in one speech, this tool calls the President an "enemy of humanity", and then feeds the "birther" movement's rabid idiocy. Has it occured to Franks that perhaps Obama hasn't accomodated "birthers" with his long-form birth certificate because doing so would mean then having to accomodate every nutty, unfounded demand of every group of idiotic whack-jobs out there trying to delegitimize the President? A legal copy of Obama's birth certificate that has been verified by Hawaii's director of the Department of Health, as well as the Registrar of Vital Statistics is available for anyone to see. If that's not enough for the dumb-ass "birthers", then nothing will be. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Obama Risks a Domestic Military Intervention
By: John L. Perry There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic. America isn't the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes: # Officers swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to "obey the orders of the president of the United States." # Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized. # They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office. # They can see that the economy -- ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation -- is financially reliant on foreign lender governments. # They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home. # They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America's troop strength is allowed to sag. # They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time. # They can see the nation's safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before. So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do? Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan's arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam? Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran's nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World? What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, "I'm not interested in victory") that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse? Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims? Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America's military leadership is lost in a fool's fog. Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a "family intervention," with some form of limited, shared responsibility? Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making. Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Gawd bless Murica, these are strange times indeed.
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
what a perceptive look into the minds of our top military leaders today. thanks internet.
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
Nice copy paste of an article that seems to have been posted on newsmax.com and then swiftly removed. wonder why :rolleyes: |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
Incidentally, as I'm sure most people have heard by now, Newsmax took down the article and claimed that they have no relationship with this writer other than him being an unpaid blogger who's post they hosted. Yet in the Newsmax biography about him, Perry is described as an "award-winning newspaper editor and writer" who "contributes a regular column to Newsmax.com." |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
I got news for you mongoose, if Obama were to get offed, your whole arcadian middle class white life style of malls and video games will probably be the most threatened its ever been. Anyhoo, Since its so fashionable to dress this current state of affairs like the 30's, take a look at this military coup plot that was targeting FDR in '34. A rough 80% of the news back then was controlled by monopoly just as it is now. Failed american capitalism spawns interest in socialism and fascism, each side polarizing away from the middle. A liberal, charismatic, populist president is in charge during economic hardship. Elite corporate interests are at loggerheads. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot Quote:
One thing I think is starkly different between FDR and Obama is FDR was genuinely liberal. Obama is just smarter than 99% of his critics and black, so he makes up with these two dynamics as far as stoking the fire beneath him. |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
Quote:
|
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
And once again, the idea that Obama has done nothing in his first year in office can only be thought of as "spot on" if you ignore those pesky facts. Feel free to peruse this comprehensive recap of everything the Obama administration has been doing so far in regards to the economy, energy, health care, education, military conflicts, diplomacy, and domestic security. Just click on any of the tab headings below "Progress Report" for more details on a particular subject. The amount of stuff that's been done is far too extensive for me to try to summarize here.
Or, you can just ignore the facts yet again and stick to your unfounded, preconceived conclusions. But you may be interested since one of the many things he's done is, on March 24th, to pass a $700 million plan to bolster security resources at the U.S./Mexican border - despite your assurances that he wants to "insure all of Mexico"! Strange that. But my personal favorite was his reversal of Bush's limits on federal funding for stem cell research. Or maybe it's his green energy initiatives, like putting control of additional emissions goals in the hands of State governments so they can legally require more improvements to emissions than federal law currently mandates. And of course, Republican Senator George Voinovich didn't like that, saying "I am fearful that today's action will begin the process of setting the American auto industry back even further," or in other words, "I am fearful that today's action will begin the process of me losing some political support from big businesses". Either way, it's impossible to factually claim nothing's been done. Not that facts ever seem to have gotten in your way before... |
Re: Strange anger at Obama for Tuesday speech to schools
snl should own up to the fact their grasp of political satire left with dennis miller back in the early 90's. Its a different game and one much better handled on the comedy network.
Here's a great breakdown of the assertions made in the skit versus reality Quote:
Its more nuanced, but it really doesn't look that great to be honest. But much of the standstill is clearly a result of things getting stuck in the mire of congress and the military. A congress that holds a super majority of democrats that should just allow his agenda to be steamrolled into being signed into law. I heard an activist talking in a church say this to his audience: "Not only is Obama not going to be able to save you, you're going to have to save Obama." I think that's God's gospel. My criticism of obama, if I were to think about it, is a criticism of american government in general and the democratic party in more particular. Jon Stewart did a much more precise job of owning the dems in this video. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_305948.html If you believe, as I do, that the health care mess is largely consequent of the insanity of the fox news backed tea party movement, then its largely consequent of Obama not stepping up and fighting for the cause. I've seen more fire from the comedy network than from the white house. Then there's the bailout. I don't think it was meant to be a conspiratorial pillaging of our country's wealth to the bankers, that's just what its turned out to be. |
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:42 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.