Topic: Barack to the Future!

[OSU Buckeye]

 

[monstertruck]

Obama is smart at least.  That's more than most of them can say.

So smart he's going to rewrite our Constitution.

By enforcing it? Better than denying people's rights like with a certain prison in Cuba?

Nope.  That's not it.

Obama believes there's a flaw in the Constitution based on race and gender.
He intends to correct that flaw by removing personal property rights
in order to bring about redistributive change.  This cannot be accomplished legally through the judicial or executive branches, hence the move by Pelosi to establish a filibuster-proof Democartic majority.

One could argue that since the Oath of Office of the President of the United States says that the president is supposed to uphold the Constitution, President Obama lied during the inauguration when he pledged to do that.

[monstertruck]

The best way to annoy a "Conservative" is to make them think.     They are, after alll, lead by Rush Limbaugh (a known drug addict) and Sean Hannity (the single most annoying person on Earth).  This is what they are.  These are the folks who are leading their movement.  It's no wonder they are losing ranks with young people.

Can you call them Republicans? It just gets confusing for us Brits, because our Conservatives (our right-wing party) are more left-wing than your democrats, and are actually quite sensible, as opposed to the Republican's over in US, who've been lead by somebody with the IQ of a farmyard animal for 8 years.

Ha ha....  Conservatives are basically Republicans, but they may be a little more right wing.  "Republican" is an actual political party, while Conservatism is more of a philosophy.  I actually used to be a so-called Conservative until I realized they were dead wrong on just about every important issue facing mankind and they were being hijacked by an overzealous religious right wing radical philosophy. 

Certainly some truth to that statement!
Similar to Liberals/Democrats being stereotyped as pot smoking hippies.

I don't think either party is entirely right 100% of the time.  Both sides have good ideas to contribute.
Finding the balance is the trick.

[jeffrx]

The best way to annoy a "Conservative" is to make them think.     They are, after alll, lead by Rush Limbaugh (a known drug addict) and Sean Hannity (the single most annoying person on Earth).  This is what they are.  These are the folks who are leading their movement.  It's no wonder they are losing ranks with young people.

Can you call them Republicans? It just gets confusing for us Brits, because our Conservatives (our right-wing party) are more left-wing than your democrats, and are actually quite sensible, as opposed to the Republican's over in US, who've been lead by somebody with the IQ of a farmyard animal for 8 years.

Ha ha....  Conservatives are basically Republicans, but they may be a little more right wing.  "Republican" is an actual political party, while Conservatism is more of a philosophy.  I actually used to be a so-called Conservative until I realized they were dead wrong on just about every important issue facing mankind and they were being hijacked by an overzealous religious right wing radical philosophy. 

Certainly some truth to that statement!
Similar to Liberals/Democrats being stereotyped as pot smoking hippies.

I don't think either party is entirely right 100% of the time.  Both sides have good ideas to contribute.
Finding the balance is the trick.

I will agree with that.

[Babblelot]

Obama is smart at least.  That's more than most of them can say.

So smart he's going to rewrite our Constitution.

By enforcing it? Better than denying people's rights like with a certain prison in Cuba?

Nope.  That's not it.

Obama believes there's a flaw in the Constitution based on race and gender.
He intends to correct that flaw by removing personal property rights
in order to bring about redistributive change.  This cannot be accomplished legally through the judicial or executive branches, hence the move by Pelosi to establish a filibuster-proof Democartic majority.

One could argue that since the Oath of Office of the President of the United States says that the president is supposed to uphold the Constitution, President Obama lied during the inauguration when he pledged to do that.

Check you sources.

Rs and Conservative think tanks are notorious for floating out subterfuge right before an important election or vote. They seize on a crisis and force a vote before Congress has had time to evalute the proposals (see rush to war and bailout). I'm sure you read this right before the election, as always, designed to scare the poop out of the easily spooked.

You'll get nowhere here if your souce is Casandra    You've got to back this garbage up.

[dmastous]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inaguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

[jeffrx]

Obama is smart at least.  That's more than most of them can say.

So smart he's going to rewrite our Constitution.

By enforcing it? Better than denying people's rights like with a certain prison in Cuba?

Nope.  That's not it.

Obama believes there's a flaw in the Constitution based on race and gender.
He intends to correct that flaw by removing personal property rights
in order to bring about redistributive change.  This cannot be accomplished legally through the judicial or executive branches, hence the move by Pelosi to establish a filibuster-proof Democartic majority.

One could argue that since the Oath of Office of the President of the United States says that the president is supposed to uphold the Constitution, President Obama lied during the inauguration when he pledged to do that.

Check you sources.

Rs and Conservative think tanks are notorious for floating out subterfuge right before an important election or vote. They seize on a crisis and force a vote before Congress has had time to evalute the proposals (see rush to war and bailout). I'm sure you read this right before the election, as always, designed to scare the poop out of the easily spooked.

You'll get nowhere here if your souce is Casandra    You've got to back this garbage up.

Karl Rove politics....that guy is a scum.

[Babblelot]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inaguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

I agree   

[monstertruck]

Obama is smart at least.  That's more than most of them can say.

So smart he's going to rewrite our Constitution.

By enforcing it? Better than denying people's rights like with a certain prison in Cuba?

Nope.  That's not it.

Obama believes there's a flaw in the Constitution based on race and gender.
He intends to correct that flaw by removing personal property rights
in order to bring about redistributive change.  This cannot be accomplished legally through the judicial or executive branches, hence the move by Pelosi to establish a filibuster-proof Democartic majority.

One could argue that since the Oath of Office of the President of the United States says that the president is supposed to uphold the Constitution, President Obama lied during the inauguration when he pledged to do that.

Check you sources.

Rs and Conservative think tanks are notorious for floating out subterfuge right before an important election or vote. They seize on a crisis and force a vote before Congress has had time to evalute the proposals (see rush to war and bailout). I'm sure you read this right before the election, as always, designed to scare the poop out of the easily spooked.

You'll get nowhere here if your souce is Casandra    You've got to back this garbage up.

Obama is the source.
You forget, I don't trust anybody.

[Babblelot]

Obama is smart at least.  That's more than most of them can say.

So smart he's going to rewrite our Constitution.

By enforcing it? Better than denying people's rights like with a certain prison in Cuba?

Nope.  That's not it.

Obama believes there's a flaw in the Constitution based on race and gender.
He intends to correct that flaw by removing personal property rights
in order to bring about redistributive change.  This cannot be accomplished legally through the judicial or executive branches, hence the move by Pelosi to establish a filibuster-proof Democartic majority.

One could argue that since the Oath of Office of the President of the United States says that the president is supposed to uphold the Constitution, President Obama lied during the inauguration when he pledged to do that.

Check you sources.

Rs and Conservative think tanks are notorious for floating out subterfuge right before an important election or vote. They seize on a crisis and force a vote before Congress has had time to evalute the proposals (see rush to war and bailout). I'm sure you read this right before the election, as always, designed to scare the poop out of the easily spooked.

You'll get nowhere here if your souce is Casandra    You've got to back this garbage up.

Obama is the source.
You forget, I don't trust anybody.

That makes your job a lot easier, right? It's as if you've read it right out of the WSJ or Washington Post or off his website. It should be a piece of cake for you to provide us a link, right?

[BGT]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inaguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

Think of all the people who got to work that day -- the police officers who got some overtime, the interior decorators who probably got the biggest paycheck of their lives, the people who constructed the stage, the businesses that printed the tickets....

[dmastous]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inaguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

Think of all the people who got to work that day -- the police officers who got some overtime, the interior decorators who probably got the biggest paycheck of their lives, the people who constructed the stage, the businesses that printed the tickets....

Ahhh so trickle down economics work for you now! 

[monstertruck]

How about several links Babs?

First he will take away our right to defend ourselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERoQhtvOlF4

Then he will 'redistribute the wealth'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Then comes mandatory service to The State.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FdyqlPl_90

Now why do you suppose we'd need a civil para military force?  I can tell you.

Straight from the horses mouth.
Or better yet, read 'em and weep!

[monstertruck]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inaguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

Think of all the people who got to work that day -- the police officers who got some overtime, the interior decorators who probably got the biggest paycheck of their lives, the people who constructed the stage, the businesses that printed the tickets....

So my taxes went to fatten the wallet of some I.D. for a fancy setup when 'times are tough' when a more functional staging would have accomplished the task?
You're killin' me girl.

[BGT]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inaguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

Think of all the people who got to work that day -- the police officers who got some overtime, the interior decorators who probably got the biggest paycheck of their lives, the people who constructed the stage, the businesses that printed the tickets....

Ahhh so trickle down economics work for you now! 

It's not like the money went nowhere. Probably hundreds to thousands of hotesl were completely booked for days, not mention the restaurants and the car rentals.... I'm pretty sure those companies aren't complaining. I'm sure you wouldn't have turned down a photography job for that day.

[Babblelot]

How about several links Babs?

First he will take away our right to defend ourselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERoQhtvOlF4

Then he will 'redistribute the wealth'.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Then comes mandatory service to The State.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FdyqlPl_90

Now why do you suppose we'd need a civil para military force?  I can tell you.

Straight from the horses mouth.
Or better yet, read 'em and weep!

Republicans are such drama queens   Graphics and soundeffects, oh my! They are spliced so many times, I can't even determine if they are continuous. And in the Fox report, when Obama is explaining himself, the reporter talks right over him.

But that is neither here nor there, it just makes for mild amsusement. Now remind me what he's done that's upset your tea pot?

[monstertruck]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inaguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

Think of all the people who got to work that day -- the police officers who got some overtime, the interior decorators who probably got the biggest paycheck of their lives, the people who constructed the stage, the businesses that printed the tickets....

Ahhh so trickle down economics work for you now! 

It's not like the money went nowhere. Probably hundreds to thousands of hotesl were completely booked for days, not mention the restaurants and the car rentals.... I'm pretty sure those companies aren't complaining. I'm sure you wouldn't have turned down a photography job for that day.

Doesn't that happen at every inauguration?   Nothing to see here, move along.

[dmastous]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inauguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

Think of all the people who got to work that day -- the police officers who got some overtime, the interior decorators who probably got the biggest paycheck of their lives, the people who constructed the stage, the businesses that printed the tickets....

Ahhh so trickle down economics work for you now! 

It's not like the money went nowhere. Probably hundreds to thousands of hotesl were completely booked for days, not mention the restaurants and the car rentals.... I'm pretty sure those companies aren't complaining. I'm sure you wouldn't have turned down a photography job for that day.

Given the Obama-mania I'm seeing, the local venders would have had a field day whether they spent $100 or $100 million. The teeming millions would have come either way. Including photographers.
My point is, in these economic times, is there room for excess? With the all the TRILLIONS of dollars the government is spending trying to right the economic ship, is a $100 million for an inauguration a good way to spend? Is it responsible? Go back and look at the guy Obama is being compared to, FDR. What did he do for his inauguration? He took the oath, had a chicken dinner and got to work (not that he did the right things once he got to work).
There is discussion, rightly so, about the CEOs of the banks for their excess, like the Merril Lynch CEO (now unemployed) who first tried to justify his $10 million bonus, then when he couldn't get that spent around a million redecorating his office (using the same interior decorator that Obama is using btw, Obama is getting him a lot cheaper though). Also the CEOs of the auto companies coming to Washington to beg for money in their private jets.
Now is not the time for conspicuous consumption. Now is the time for belt tightening.

[monstertruck]

I think raping the Constitution, impinging individual rights, things are upsetting enough for right now.

I don't think this country was founded and built upon a collective mentality.
At every turn, as our Republic has grown, individual rights are at the heart of every struggle.  Witness the act of Obama himself becoming President.

[monstertruck]

Change we can believe in.

$170 million for an inauguration, and $100,000 to redecorate the White House. 

Think of all the people who got to work that day -- the police officers who got some overtime, the interior decorators who probably got the biggest paycheck of their lives, the people who constructed the stage, the businesses that printed the tickets....

Ahhh so trickle down economics work for you now! 

It's not like the money went nowhere. Probably hundreds to thousands of hotesl were completely booked for days, not mention the restaurants and the car rentals.... I'm pretty sure those companies aren't complaining. I'm sure you wouldn't have turned down a photography job for that day.

Given the Obama-mania I'm seeing, the local venders would have had a field day whether they spent $100 or $100 million. The teeming millions would have come either way. Including photographers.
My point is, in these economic times, is there room for excess? With the all the TRILLIONS of dollars the government is spending trying to right the economic ship, is a $100 million for an inauguration a good way to spend? Is it responsible? Go back and look at the guy Obama is being compared to, FDR. What did he do for his inauguration? He took the oath, had a chicken dinner and got to work (not that he did the right things once he got to work).
There is discussion, rightly so, about the CEOs of the banks for their excess, like the Merril Lynch CEO (now unemployed) who first tried to justify his $10 million bonus, then when he couldn't get that spent around a million redecorating his office (using the same interior decorator that Obama is using btw, Obama is getting him a lot cheaper though). Also the CEOs of the auto companies coming to Washington to beg for money in their private jets.
Now is not the time for conspicuous consumption. Now is the time for belt tightening.

I think the belt tightening needs to come at all levels.
Enough of the unlimited credit mentality that pervades every aspect of our society.
From the Ponzi scheme called social security to the morgage companies that enticed financially insecure individuals into purchasing homes.
Until the mindset changes from 'buy now, pay later' to 'save and buy' there can and will be no real 'hope' or 'change'.