So, how many.....
jlmarta
Everyone, Registered Users Posts: 3,440
How many of you actually watched O'Bummer give his speech tonite? I did - at least until the batteries in my B.S. detector died! It was actually an amazing performance. Usually, when any other president gives his speech, people in the audience do their required standing ovation at the appropriate times, for at least 30 seconds or so. Did you notice that, tonight, it was like, maybe, 10 seconds? Even his own people seemed like they were in a hurry to sit down.
Another thing I noticed was that in the past, while a standing ovation was going on, the president stopped talking because he couldn't be heard over the crowd noise. Tonight, the head yo-yo in charge kept right on talking because you could still hear him over the crowd.
I finally had to call it quits after almost 50 minutes of his boolshit . I mean, a guy can stand only so much, right? Maybe I should just quit pussyfooting around and say what I really think, ya s'pose?
Another thing I noticed was that in the past, while a standing ovation was going on, the president stopped talking because he couldn't be heard over the crowd noise. Tonight, the head yo-yo in charge kept right on talking because you could still hear him over the crowd.
I finally had to call it quits after almost 50 minutes of his boolshit . I mean, a guy can stand only so much, right? Maybe I should just quit pussyfooting around and say what I really think, ya s'pose?
Comments
The fact is, he and Mitt Romney both have the same financial supporters behind their campaign. And if you are the kind of logical person who thinks that one of the biggest problems with this country is the fact that private interest groups are basically running the show via campaign contributions and lobbying efforts, then you can imagine why people are so pissed off when they see that our current financial *** hole was created by the same people giving said contributions.
Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase and Co, UBS AB, Citigroup, etc. ALL gave HUGE contributions to Romney and Obama. So, my reason for hating Obama is that he comes of with huge messages about "hope and change" (Whatever the f*** that means), and is actually the exact same thing. Sure, he stirs up the media frenzy with things like health care, or the stimulus package, but at the end of the day, He, along with the rest of the democrats and republicans are all doing the same thing, and are all on the same team.
/rant
Ahh, someone gets it!
.
I don't know who "Obummer is, but I do know that we have a President of the United States whose last name is Obama. In the military, it is understood that you may not like or even respect your superior officer, but you will damn sure respect the rank. Unfortunately, too many people no longer recognize that regarding our elected "representatives".
You are entitled to hate anyone you like and to voice that hatred as much as you like, but it is my opinion that the uncivil nature of our political differences has as much to do with the gridlock and ineffectiveness in Congress as anything else. When our political discourse becomes so visceral and shrill that it is impossible for our elected "representatives" to compromise in order to find practical solutions to the very real problems we are facing, then that discourse becomes a very real danger to the well being of our Republic.
The "liberal" / "conservative" argument is destroying the mechanisms of compromise that are necessary for our deliberative bodies to function, and may well result in the destruction of the Republic itself. Partisian ideology must not take prescedence over the needs of the country, but that's the way things are now. "Conservatives" must quit viewing "liberals" as their enemies (and vice versa). We are not at war withone another, but if things continue on the way they are going, we may well be, because we have not been this badly divided since the 1850's, and we all know how that one worked out.
Frankly, I think the only people making those arguments and being serious about them are the voters. I really cannot believe that 99% of politicians care at all about fixing issues. They are all caught up in making millions of dollars from private interest groups, and they know that so long as they keep bickering over stupid stuff time and time again, then things won't change too quickly, and they can all continue making that money. Both parties expand government, both increase spending, both increase our militarism, both suck up to corporate lobbyists, both take away our liberties, etc. etc. etc. There really isn't a "right" or "left" anymore, when it comes to the politicians. We've got a one party system.
Fox and CNN bicker over the "right vs left" nonsense, while the politicians get away with murder.
If their not vowing to undo the absolute corruption there, they are of absolutely no use to me or the greater good of this country! If you look back through history you'll find that this same strain of bankers and financiers financed both sides of the wars between England and France, both sides of the Revolutionary War, both sides of the Civil War, and continue to finance both sides of political opinion today which may very well end in CWII someday as JDH so adequately stated.
The Fed is not our friend! Our founders knew this and so did the citizens of this country who were still alive who knew who these people were and what they did to England, what they're still doing to England! They finally slithered their way into power in 1913 and thus began the end. We never stood a chance and we never will until we rid ourselves of them.
While I respect the meaning of your message it is also important to note that elected "representatives" are here to serve the needs of the people.
We do not live in a top down despotism where the rank encourages a certain approbation.
It is only natural for people to voice discontent at feelings of betrayal.
And in doing so attach names and comparisons that are fitting.
To other ends I think we need find ways to encourage personal freedoms as to let people live their liberal or conservative lives without feeling that one is detracting from the other.
God bless you, Stephen. I think the only way for this to happen is to focus on ourselves, our problems here at home, and how we can work together for the betterment of all, which means not following the distractions that both sides keep throwing up to keep US, the people, at odds with one another.
The things I say must seem a little crazy (OK, maybe a lot) sometimes, in that I support Ron Paul, but defend President Obama. My thing is that both these men, though seemingly at opposite ends of the political spectrum, seem to be interested in the good of the American People, as a whole, and not just in line with whoever has the most $, or other leverage.
What bothers me most about the Status Quo as it's stood for a long time now can be paralled to the Romans; The Romans rose, and during the rise the State spent time, energy and money on things like clean water for everyone, rule of law, transportation of goods and services under safe conditions, and works of art and social structure. As Rome expanded, however, the focus became increasingly on the political goings on and nation building efforts in distant lands, while the center was left to crumble. Also, Romans learned that they could vote for someone else to do the work, and for that work to support the voters.
So, two problems we need to avoid, and Liberals see one, the Conservatives see the other, and we need for everyone to see both, and put a stop to it. If we continue to focus all our money and resources on things happening on the other side of the planet, we cannot help but crumble. It seemed to me that the main point of President Obama's speech was to focus on our problems here, and that sounds right to me. If plan A doesn't work, let's try plan B, but let's keep the focus here, we need it.
BTW Obama should get a lot of credit for bringing back a lot of manufacturing, especially the Auto industry which he fought to keep. Giving them a loan to restructure and now it has paid off hugely. Now on the other hand, the GOP pushed for a 800B, bailout to the financial institutions which didn't do anything but keep things as usual. Sure the Dems should have fought it but they didn't as usual. I find it really odd that some of the same people here defend anything that is anti-obama. The new GOP has nothing to offer. Sure Obama and even the dems don't have all the answers but at least they are trying to get things set straight.
The EU is coming to the same unavoidable conclusion; you cannot have a common currency among "United States" without common laws, a central governing authority, a central banking authority, and regulations governing the currency as well as the inter-state commerce, all of which are equally applicable to all member states.
1) The Articles of Confederation were rejected in favor of a more central government over the States,
2) The central bank was adopted because the Founders realized that without a centralized banking authority capital markets in the fledgling country would never be strong.
3) The EU is a contemporary Confederation of independent Nation States, and they are learning that a Confederation with no central government that can provide economic regulatory powers along with a central bank that can influence and regulate monetary policy for all members equally will fail. In short, the EU is at about the same place the US was when the Articles of Confederation were rejected, and our central bank was estblished in conjunction with our central government.