Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.


Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.
Sign in to follow this  

OBAMA OR MCCAIN WHO DO YOU CHOSE

Recommended Posts

Are all of these lists of things from both of you actually FACTs..?

or did you guys copy & paste them from a source, which ANY source can be wrong, & make mistakes.

 

Believe what you want to believe, & take from it what you want, but i NEVER 100% believe anything unless i see it with my own two eyes.! (and sometimes im still skeptical) ;)

 

I'm not trying to be an ass, but you guys do realize that everyone has an agenda, & you have to take everything with a grain of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.


Don't Like the Ads? Upgrade your experience to remove the ads for only $20.00 per year.

Sure Chili, journalism is just as corrupt as anything else. But instead of typing up something that can't be bounced against what is suppossed to be a reputable source, well that's like posting on the Huffington Post or Daily Kos.

 

People can choose to believe what they will. But if someone learns about something they weren't previously aware of, or causes them to do their own homework, then the effort is worth it.

 

I'm not telling anyone how to vote. I recommend that everyone be informed of the issues on both sides and vote for what they believe in. Participate in the process, just make the effort to be informed is my advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A point made from overseas, I do love a free press:

 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/columnists/fergus_shanahan/article1647092.ece

 

Democrats and their Lefty media backers had been sneering that Palin is a small-town nobody, a hick from Alaska put into a job way beyond an inexperienced woman.

 

The Euro's give me little reason to agree with them, but this is one of those times.

 

Even the Euro's think the American news reporters are unfairly biased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HogWild ]

Sure Chili, journalism is just as corrupt as anything else. But instead of typing up something that can't be bounced against what is suppossed to be a reputable source, well that's like posting on the Huffington Post or Daily Kos.

 

People can choose to believe what they will. But if someone learns about something they weren't previously aware of, or causes them to do their own homework, then the effort is worth it.

 

I'm not telling anyone how to vote. I recommend that everyone be informed of the issues on both sides and vote for what they believe in. Participate in the process, just make the effort to be informed is my advice.

Yea i totally agree, How about we debate on where to get such RELIABLE info..? ;D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yea i totally agree, How about we debate on where to get such RELIABLE info..? ;D

 

We can start with MSNBC, NBC, CNN, NY Times, and any news reports from Washinton State - Oregon State - San Francisco - or Berkley are out. Don't consider Loose Change. I prefer video's over "quotes". Anything that is edited or taken out of context is off limits.

 

PS, if the New SOCOM Beta is a preview of things to come, I'm not happy. I played two maps tonite and spent the rest of the time on CA and talking politics because I couldn't stay connected to the New SOCOM. I'm depressed now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chili-Palmer ]
MaluNYMets ]

Hello guys! - SOCOMS OUT!!

Then why are you here posting..?

 

Im playing and posting.. I can chew gum and walk at the same time.. SO i can play socom and post on the forums at the same time...

 

 

LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just from my own recollection, but Obama Opposed the surge 'at the time that it was NOT working'. Going over there was done under 'mismanagement', and there was the idea of us being over there without any resolve whatsoever! That was damaging to the US, as terrorism was not even rooted there! So, I understand 'At That Time' why Obama felt it was a bad idea.

 

In fact, it was the prospect of an early U.S. withdrawal, NOT THE SURGE, that prompted the 'Sunni insurgents' to change sides, deminishing the provocation of a civil war over there!

 

It's like we would be paying for a car that never has a final price to it! Things just 'happened' to work out, but it was still planned completely wrong by President Bush. McCain just wanted to do it, because he likes to flex our authority, SO IF ANYONE SAYS that we had a 'plan'...I would say that they are misinformed of the process of how we wound up over there! Even though it started to work AFTER THE SUNNI INSURGENTS WITHDREW THEMSELVES "FIRST!"...it is 'far from over', as the Irakii's still aren't doing things on their own. This is all, just from my recollection

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CritiKiL ]

This is just from my own recollection, but Obama Opposed the surge 'at the time that it was NOT working'.

 

That's not what happened. I will try to be brief as possible.

 

The infighting in Iraq should not have been a suprise for the US government and military, hindsight being 20/20 and all. During Desert Storm (1991 liberation of Kuwait) the Shi-ites in the south of Iraq rose up against Saddam Hussien thinking the US was going to remove him from power. We didn't and Saddam made those who rose up against him pay a very heavy price. Plus Saddam was always pitting Shi-ites against Sunni's and he crapped all over the Kurds in the North. Add in al Queda, Syrians, Saudi's, and Iranians coming into Iraq to continually stir things up, the infighting in Iraq can be better understood. The lack of trust the Iraqi people had for the US for what they percieve as the US leaving them hanging after Desert Storm is justifiable, so they let the terrorists and insurgents operate freely. One can hardly blame the Iraqi people for their lack of trust for the US government given that history.

 

Obama was against the war from the beginning. Nothing to add to that or berate the man for his point of view. He gave his point of view before being elected to the US Senate.

 

Once in the Senate years later, the surge was pushed by McCain and General Petreaus. Almost all Democrats and quite a few Republicans oppossed it. Obama made the mistake of saying on television that the surge wouldn't ever work, and then refused to admit the surge was working when it was obvious, and now only with the caveat that the surge didn't work in the original time from admits the surge was a success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KillerV ]

1) I will NEVER vote for anyone that has not served in the military.

 

2) I also read somewhere that during the Pledge of Allegiance he(Obama) does not cover his heart.

 

1) I understand. Clearly only President Bill Clinton (in our time), is the only one who did not serve. Here is a good list:

 

a) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidents_by_military_service

 

2) You 'read wrong'. No where, does it say that you should hold your hand over your heart...during the 'National Anthem'. It was NOT...the Pledge of Allegiance:

 

REFERENCES:

 

a) Proof of Obama was at the 'National Anthem':

 

B)Proof that some of our past 'Presidents', have not saluted during the 'Pledge of Allegiance':

 

 

"Please check ALL the links 'above', so that we can disspell the lies away from the truths."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CritiKiL ]
KillerV ]

1) I will NEVER vote for anyone that has not served in the military.

 

2) I also read somewhere that during the Pledge of Allegiance he(Obama) does not cover his heart.

 

1) I understand. Clearly only President Bill Clinton (in our time), is the only one who did not serve. Here is a good list:

 

a) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidents_by_military_service

 

2) You 'read wrong'. No where, does it say that you should hold your hand over your heart...during the 'National Anthem'. It was NOT...the Pledge of Allegiance:

 

I stated I saw that somewhere, it doesn't mean anything to me at all since I won't vote for him anyway because of no military service. Oops I meant the National Anthem.

 

REFERENCES:

 

a) Proof of Obama was at the 'National Anthem':

 

B)Proof that some of our past 'Presidents', have not saluted during the 'Pledge of Allegiance':

 

 

"Please check ALL the links 'above', so that we can disspell the lies away from the truths."

 

Also I did not vote for Bush the second time around either, I didn't vote at all because both of them were fucked up.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I could give two squirts of piss about Obama but....

 

I have stood at the position of attention since July 24, 1994 which makes it impossible for me to put my hand on my heart. Ohh Rah!!!

 

As long as he isn't picking his ass and wearing a hat during the National Anthem then he is fine. To be honest with you it pisses me off to no end to see a woman wear a hat during the playing of the National Anthem.

 

It's like saying your prayers don't get heard unless you kneel, close your eyes and bow your head. :-\

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MaCoo_ ]

Not that I could give two squirts of piss about Obama but....

 

I have stood at the position of attention since July 24, 1994 which makes it impossible for me to put my hand on my heart. Ohh Rah!!!

 

As long as he isn't picking his ass and wearing a hat during the National Anthem then he is fine. To be honest with you it pisses me off to no end to see a woman wear a hat during the playing of the National Anthem.

 

It's like saying your prayers don't get heard unless you kneel, close your eyes and bow your head. :-\

 

Good for you, I served from 1992 to 1998. In my opinion every male should serve for a minimum of 3 years after high school. Does that make me sound like a communist??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, McMain is catching up!

 

I have seen where this election (with the addition of 'Palin'), has turned from a 'What do We want'...to a 'WHO, do you want'. This may not be noticed by a few people, but thats the new direction the RNC has taken this election process, in regards to McCain capturing the 'Mid-States' which are still up for grabs.

 

'Governor Sarah Palin' seems to identify 'more' with some people in those regions, and I personally think that it was a damn-good strategy...because it's working!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only reason he picked a woman is to give the party a chance of winning. If he would have picked some old white guy that knowbody knows it would have already been over with Obama having a sweeping victory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KillerV ]

The only reason he picked a woman is to give the party a chance of winning. If he would have picked some old white guy that knowbody knows it would have already been over with Obama having a sweeping victory.

 

Yeaaa riiiight. It couldn't have possibly have nothing to do with the fact that she's a sitting Governor of a state with a 80% approval rating. Governor that has a record fighting corruption in government. A record of being fiscally responsible. A record of reducing taxes on taxpayers. A record of fighting wasteful spending by the government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...A Governor, who was first 'for the bridge to nowhere', before she was against it ('Congress' stopped it, not Palin), a Governor who rejects the countries 'only plan' to help out on Alaska having one of the 'highest' school drop-out rates, a Governor who fights to prevent abortions in the case of 'rape and incest' (guess its just the womans fault, and she has to live with raising the child of here attacker, huh?), who gets paid 'tax dollars' for living in her own home, Yea, right. :o

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'm back and I see everyone has had some fun without me. First of all Palin and the McCain campaign are right now out and out LYING about her record and it is going to come back to bite her in the ass, like everyone here would like to do. ;D

 

Links to her distortions:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/gop_convention_spin_part_ii.html

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/mccain-palin_distorts_our_finding.html

 

 

As for KillerV's comment about Military service. I 1000% disagree. Thank god we didn't do this in our great country. I can respect that, that's your opinion... and would love to know more of WHY, you feel that is pretinent or means anything to running our country? There are only TWO requirements to running for office:

 

The president must be a natural born citizen of the United States (or a citizen of the United States at the time the U.S. Constitution was adopted), at least 35 years of age, and a resident of the United States for at least fourteen years. On assuming office the new president must take an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," to the best of his or her ability. Too bad Bush didn't know shit about doing this! :D

 

I hope this NEVER changes myself. And for the record, I'm NOT a left-wing anything. I look at things from a independent perspective. I've never been aligned with any party. ;)

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this