Give me at least 1 reason to NOT vote for Obama...

[QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"]He'll spend money we don't have.swizz-the-gamer

Site may be biased due to the fact that it's his campaign site, but I'm sure you'll get the messege:

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/

Basically, he's a libertiarian running under the Republican nomination who favors small government, minimal spending, isolationism, and abolishing the IRS [taxes].

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"]He'll spend money we don't have.Trashface

He was a black transvestite who had one hit song and a talk show.

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"]He'll spend money we don't have.Trashface

He was a black transvestite who had one hit song and a talk show.

Ron Paul is a Texan congressman who is a true republican and as such, his views border on libertarianism. He's for small government, low taxes, and ending the war. He's one of the few true statesmen our country has left.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"]He'll spend money we don't have.Katafran

He was a black transvestite who had one hit song and a talk show.

Ron Paul is a Texan congressman who is a true republican and as such, his views border on libertarianism. He's for small government, low taxes, and ending the war. He's one of the few true statesmen our country has left.

The person I was typing of is indeed Ru Paul and no one got it.

The person I was typing of is indeed Ru Paul and no one got it.

Trashface

I still thought it was a funny joke even as the true humor in it flew right above my head.

swizz-the-gamer

Anyway, the main thing I find ridiculous about his statement is 'And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.'

That statement isblatantlyfalse, no one has every claimed Iraq would invade America. Iraq invading America? Also, try not to use a smily in every single post it's very obnoxious.

Highlighted portion actually sounds like you're a conservative, my friend. You may in fact be a liberal, but what you said with less government implies you believe in Laissez-faire liberalism, or classical liberalism (which was the stance of many of our founding fathers).

You're right in saying nobody ever claimed Iraq would invade the US, everyone knows that. The Middle East isn't going to produce some vast Islamic army to march into the west and cause war, everyone knows that part of the world will continue to undermine western ideals by carrying out jihadist attacks, using our own ridiculous political correctness against us, etc. etc. etc.

Think about it: we have a separation of church and state in America. Yet how many public schools are currently putting in Muslim prayer rooms because of fear of lawsuits. Yesterday 6 Somali women claimed religious discrimination for refusing to wear work uniforms that they called "immodest by Muslim standard". Here's hoping that the company doesn't fold to the pressure of this hypocricy, and guess who's representing the women? Who else? Hamas front group CAIR. It's such BS, this huge double standard exists in our country and the sheeple just keep tuning in to watch American Idol. Sickening.

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]MarineJcksn

Anyway, the main thing I find ridiculous about his statement is 'And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.'

That statement isblatantlyfalse, no one has every claimed Iraq would invade America. Iraq invading America? Also, try not to use a smily in every single post it's very obnoxious.

Highlighted portion actually sounds like you're a conservative, my friend. You may in fact be a liberal, but what you said with less government implies you believe in Laissez-faire liberalism, or classical liberalism (which was the stance of many of our founding fathers).

You're right in saying nobody ever claimed Iraq would invade the US, everyone knows that. The Middle East isn't going to produce some vast Islamic army to march into the west and cause war, everyone knows that part of the world will continue to undermine western ideals by carrying out jihadist attacks, using our own ridiculous political correctness against us, etc. etc. etc.

Think about it: we have a separation of church and state in America. Yet how many public schools are currently putting in Muslim prayer rooms because of fear of lawsuits. Yesterday 6 Somali women claimed religious discrimination for refusing to wear work uniforms that they called "immodest by Muslim standard". Here's hoping that the company doesn't fold to the pressure of this hypocricy, and guess who's representing the women? Who else? Hamas front group CAIR. It's such BS, this huge double standard exists in our country and the sheeple just keep tuning in to watch American Idol. Sickening.

[QUOTE="MarineJcksn"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]AmyMizuno

I'm voting for Obama, because I actually understand economics and fiscal policy enough to know the direction this country needs to go. We need less spending on extravagent foreign policy, and more spending on infastructure in the United States. We need a better educational system, and a fairer economic system for all.

Amy, I believe you're viewing Conservatives solely on our poor representation in current Government, almost none in Washington hold true to real Conservative principles any more. I actually lean more towards Libertarianism, my vision of a future America is government at a level just enough to keep us from anarchy, and not one ounce more. Decreased government spending and involvement in the matters of our personal lives is the surest path to true free liberty in this nation.

Your second paragraph leads me to believe you wouldn't want to increase spending, due to the fact that you wish to increase funding for internal infastructure, something that will never happen under the liberal socialist control of our current congress. Think about it, increasing our national infastructure would be great, and I readily support it. But do you honestly believe we'll be able to expand and grow without some idiot environmentalists halting progess every which way? Why do you honestly think we can't get our own Natural resources in this country like we used to? Legal red tape forced our industry leaders into bondage by not allowing them to do their jobs. Meanwhile, our idiot congress wastes time dragging the heads of the oil companies before the floor to defend themselves AGAIN.

can someone please help me with this -

what party is Bush part of? and do his cock ups reflect in any way on that party when it comes to voting for the next president?

i ask this because obviously Gordon Brown representing Labour has dragged the whole party down (as shown by the council elections last week) and even if he was to go his tenure represents his party as a whole

[QUOTE="MarineJcksn"][QUOTE="AmyMizuno"]AmyMizuno

I believe your view of conservatism is about as idealistic as they come. The free-market types have a name in the political science of international relations, they're called idealists, and for good reasons. It will never happen. True free-market economies will never happen, and I'm not sure they're the answer to our problems either. I support a managed fiscal and monetary policy, that is reactionary based on economic situations.

As for your second paragraph, I think you look down too much on environmentalists. I would consider myself an environmentalist, and I am all for spending on infastructure. I think environmentalists are primarily caring people with a will to learn, and if they learn that spending on infastructure would be good for this economy, they will jump on board as well.

As for the oil companies, I do not have any sympathy for them whatsoever. OPEC says that oil should be around 70 dollars a barrel given their amount of supply; however, it's around 135 dollars a barrel because of speculative markets being fueled by the oil companies in order to increase their profits. Oil companies make a percentage off each dollar, so there is no incentive to lower the price of gas. What they are doing in indeed illegal.

I didn't quote anything out of context. So you're basically saying you don't support capitalism based on your first paragraph. Is this accurate?

What I have against environmentalists are the idiots who try to intentionally fool people, like those who recently pushed to make the Polar Bear a "threatened" species. The population of Polar Bears rose from an estimated 5000 in 1971 to current numbers at 25000. A species isn't "threatened" if it's population increases 5 fold. It's all bull**** and it's bad for ya.

As for Oil companies, no offense but your arguements sound like those of a liberally indoctrinated college student. If you understood supply and demand, you could do the research and see that world supply is around 85 Million barrels while demand is at 87 Million, it doesn't take a genius to see the cost is going to rise. You've been brainwashed if you believe what Oil Companies do is illegal. All you ever hear in the news is the billions of dollars in profits, what about the billions they pay in federal taxes? If you took the tax revenue from all the Oil Companies in the US and added it together (which I've done) and look at the federal income taxes paid by the lowest 1/3 of Americans, you'll find that US Oil Companies last year paid more taxes then 100 MILLION PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY.

Nothing particularly wrong with Obama, with the exception of that he is simply unexperienced. Though, I'd rather him or hilary than mccain. If he gets in office, America will be in a great depression. I'm sure of it. Gas is outragous, and these war funds just seem to keep getting bigger and bigger. It took clinton to fix the first bush's problem, so maybe it'd take another to fix this bush's problems. Obama 'could', but he seems to not have a good sense of what he really wants to do. I hate it hilary supports nafta, but honestly- all 3 electorers do.

Just keep John out. Thats all I'd like.

[QUOTE="MarineJcksn"][QUOTE="AmyMizuno"]AmyMizuno

As for the environmentalism, I don't think you completely understand the biology behind global warming. The polar ice caps, and the glaciers will not melt like an ice cube. Instead, it is a slow and laborious process of a 'mulan' forming (a layer of water underneath the ice.) Once the mulan becomes large enough, entire ice sheets begin to drift. If a lerge enough ice sheet drifts into the ocean, it could be catastrophic to the polar bears' environment. Once again, I'm not arguing that their environment will turn into mush. I am arguing their environment will begin to drift away into the ocean and will disappear overnight.

As for the supply and demand argument to oil consumption, it is largely false. Most people cannot cut back on their driving, and so instead they are simply cutting back in other areas. Oil is a very inelastic commodity. Our economy runs on it, so we will continue to consume more and more of it, reguardless of the price. In essence, we have an oil addiction, and the oil companies are equivelent to an unscrupulous drug dealer.

As for taxes, I don't completely agree with business taxes because they are simply passed onto consumers. I instead support a floating rate tax system. The more money you earn, the larger percentage of taxes you pay. It is similar to our current tax system, but it will be far less convoluted and have less loopholes. Brackets would be large, and consist of many different middle class, lower class, and upper class tax brackets each with benefits and downsides. If you plan on doing business in the United States, reguardless of residency you must pay taxes on your profits.

The environmentalist arguement I simply can't get behind. After watching that ridiculous Gore movie and reading reports from both sides of the isle, I'm convinced that no one knows what the heck they're talking about on either side on this one. The Earth naturally heats and cools, along with all the other planets in the solar system. Yet the fear is presented that if we don't all buy carbon credits and force bloated carbon taxes upon our US companies now, the world is going to experience massive changes and it'll all be the fault of the evil United States because we didn't sign Kyoto and buy into the hype. I'm on board with saying when China lowers it's emissions to our level, then we'll look at ways to fix this. 14 of the 20 most pollutant producing cities on earth are in China, yet you never hear Al Gore talking about they need to change. The guy's making money off this, SO many people are making money off this that I just simply smell a rat. I mean geez, Earth Day was co-organized by a stinking murderer for crying out loud. (Here comes the flame that it isn't true)

Your oil comments are not without merit, yes it is indeed a resource we're far too dependent on. But we're much to dependent on foreign sources, we currently pay nearly 750 billion dollars a year for oil from other nations. Why not advocate using America's vast energy sources to keep much of that money here, building jobs on American soil? We've got enough natural gas reserves to heat every home in America for over 100 years. We've got Coal to Liquid technology that'll allow us to make oil at roughly 40 bucks a barrel. We've got nuclear, hydrogen, wind, solar, all these different ways to help ease our current energy problems. And, contrary to what propaganda people might've told you, big oil companies are heavily investing in these alternative sources. Think about it, that's just smart business. Eventually the world will get off of Oil, and you can bet that BP and Exxon will want to supply a lot of the alternative sources we come up with.

Your tax system, I'm trying to understand where you're going here. Honestly I don't know where to go on taxes, I do feel the corporate tax rate is just insane in this country and pushes large companies to outsource jobs to other nations. I do like the idea you have of profit taxes to companies outside of the US that do business here, it makes sense to me.

u

HE'S BLACK!!!!!!!!!!!
[spoiler] j/k, im black too;) [/spoiler] Blitz_Nemesis

If he's black he may gain votes from ladies... The lenghtz!!!!1!!!!one!!!

[QUOTE="Xx_CYC756_xX"]He'll spend money we don't have.swizz-the-gamer

[QUOTE="Katafran"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Katafran"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Katafran"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Wait, your suggesting the 90,000 ish dead (there lives are over they will never think or breath or kiss another human again) civilians were planning on launching 'WMD's' at new york? All this war has done is made the Arabic world hate the western world even more.swizz-the-gamer

No, I'm not suggesting that at all. Perhaps you should read a bit closer. I am suggesting that we, as a nation, would have faced what Israel is going through (bombings and the like). I was acknowleding another posters comment about WMDs.

90,000 dead is awful. No one is saying otherwise.

Or do you mean they will fire rockets from Iraq? Because that is pretty ridiculous, and if they did that would be grounds for a war. But claiming that had WMD's then realising they didn't, and changing the reason to harbouring terrorists is not at all grounds for war.

Well, I was more talking about suicide bombers working from within.

And there's a reason we haven't had a domestic attack since 9/11. The terrorists didn't just suddenly repent.

Uhm...no. Not at all. Which is why the war must continue. Thanks for helping me out there.

[QUOTE="MarineJcksn"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]Fine. I will explain what I meant. Perhaps the word insane is a bit harsh, illogical maybe. Anyway. I meant that the only way to achieve a liberal free society is with less government control of the people, less laws.etc. Thats what I think, I think the government having serious control over our actions (gaymarriage.etc.) is aslipperyslope that willinevitablyend in atotalitariangovernment.

Anyway, the main thing I find ridiculous about his statement is 'And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.'

That statement isblatantlyfalse, no one has every claimed Iraq would invade America. Iraq invading America? Also, try not to use a smily in every single post it's very obnoxious.

AmyMizuno

Highlighted portion actually sounds like you're a conservative, my friend. You may in fact be a liberal, but what you said with less government implies you believe in Laissez-faire liberalism, or classical liberalism (which was the stance of many of our founding fathers).

You're right in saying nobody ever claimed Iraq would invade the US, everyone knows that. The Middle East isn't going to produce some vast Islamic army to march into the west and cause war, everyone knows that part of the world will continue to undermine western ideals by carrying out jihadist attacks, using our own ridiculous political correctness against us, etc. etc. etc.

Think about it: we have a separation of church and state in America. Yet how many public schools are currently putting in Muslim prayer rooms because of fear of lawsuits. Yesterday 6 Somali women claimed religious discrimination for refusing to wear work uniforms that they called "immodest by Muslim standard". Here's hoping that the company doesn't fold to the pressure of this hypocricy, and guess who's representing the women? Who else? Hamas front group CAIR. It's such BS, this huge double standard exists in our country and the sheeple just keep tuning in to watch American Idol. Sickening.

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]MarineJcksn

Anyway, the main thing I find ridiculous about his statement is 'And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.'

That statement isblatantlyfalse, no one has every claimed Iraq would invade America. Iraq invading America? Also, try not to use a smily in every single post it's very obnoxious.

Highlighted portion actually sounds like you're a conservative, my friend. You may in fact be a liberal, but what you said with less government implies you believe in Laissez-faire liberalism, or classical liberalism (which was the stance of many of our founding fathers).

You're right in saying nobody ever claimed Iraq would invade the US, everyone knows that. The Middle East isn't going to produce some vast Islamic army to march into the west and cause war, everyone knows that part of the world will continue to undermine western ideals by carrying out jihadist attacks, using our own ridiculous political correctness against us, etc. etc. etc.

Think about it: we have a separation of church and state in America. Yet how many public schools are currently putting in Muslim prayer rooms because of fear of lawsuits. Yesterday 6 Somali women claimed religious discrimination for refusing to wear work uniforms that they called "immodest by Muslim standard". Here's hoping that the company doesn't fold to the pressure of this hypocricy, and guess who's representing the women? Who else? Hamas front group CAIR. It's such BS, this huge double standard exists in our country and the sheeple just keep tuning in to watch American Idol. Sickening.

He is black, and we all know how everyones a closet racist anyway, and his name sounds abit liek OSAMA :(L-1992

I'm going to have to agree with this guy, im black and i say the guy wont make it because like what this guy said everyone is a "closet racist", America is just not ready for a "black" Commander in Chief, maybe in another 100 years but not now.

I don't agree in disliking the man though because of he's name, a name cannot really describe a person or tell you that persons intensions. Its like if you meet someone one with the name KOBE you don't just assume that he is going to rape young women because people associate KOBE with what Kobe Bryant did, yes hes name does sound like OSAMA but does that mean he is OSAMA or has OSAMA"s intrensions.... no

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="SunofVich"][QUOTE="smarb001"][QUOTE="cametall"][QUOTE="KreamBeav"][QUOTE="cametall"][QUOTE="KreamBeav"][QUOTE="cametall"]

I'm curious as to whether Obama could get the typically liberal Jewish vote. What with his name and all.

There's a reason why Democrats may be concerned about his name, if the Jewish vote goes Republican (who is Lieberman's best friend?) it could cost him them the race.

Trashface

As if the Jewish race is in any position to criticize people based on race! What hypocrisy!

Eh? I thought Judaism was a religion, not a race.

There is an ancestral relationship, but yes, you are correct- my bad, but do you have anything to contribute to this argument other than semantics?

Yeah, why/how are they hypocrites?

Judging based on race/religion? What are blacks doing this election then?

What are whites doing this election then?

LOL, I seen that on TV as well. West Virginians must think its still the 1900's. Oh and they believe he is Muslim and Muslims must be bad.

Thats right I am generalizing the entire state as a bunch of rascists just because of what a couple of people said on camera, what wanna fight about it:P

You kidding? Black voters are far more racist than white voters. %90 of black voters voted for Obama in the primary. I got no problem with him because of his race, it's because of all his warning signs. Also, it would be stupid to elect a Muslim to control our country when our most dangerous enemy are extremist Muslims. This is not racist, it's cautious. A white man being afraid to walk through Harlem at 3am would not be racist, it would be smart.

His views on Christianity are not involved at all. Also, I'm suspicious of him because of his campaign's blatant lying about his Muslim past. Go to the link I posted earlier.

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="Katafran"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Please show me a shred of evidence to suggest there where terrorists intending to attack America killed in the Iraq war.Trashface

Here's one outside of Baghdad."

Here's one that was run by the former regime..

And it sounds as if you are suggesting that there are no terrorists in Iraq who wish(or wished before the war) America or the western world harm. Is that true?

There weren't any before we were there.

Yes there were. An Al Queda leader stayed in an Iraqi hospital.

[QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Katafran"][QUOTE="killtactics"][QUOTE="whipassmt"][QUOTE="bman784"][QUOTE="Junkie_man"][QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"]

mccain wants to lower your taxes and win in Iraq and help Iran and North Korea and other rogue states make the transition to democracy.

yoshi-lnex

And he's going to do all that without talking to them?

World War II was about protecting our country and citizens. No war should ever be about spreading democracy. Nor do I believe or accept that as a reason for our war with Iraq. Do not think that governments ever take commiting soldiers to war lightly.

We went to war with Iraq because they supported and funded radical extremists. And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.

With all that said, if democracy is a byproduct of war, then it is perhaps one of the few goods wars can do.

Please explain what's wrong with his post if it's so wrong.

Also explain how what he said is worse than your belief that "anyone who is not a Liberal is insane" and that "Conservatives are on a slippery slope to fascism." You never really explained yourself in the other topic, except with a nice "A free, liberal world." :roll:

Anyway, the main thing I find ridiculous about his statement is 'And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.'

That statement isblatantlyfalse, no one has every claimed Iraq would invade America. Iraq invading America? Also, try not to use a smily in every single post it's very obnoxious.

He's talking about the terrorists that were being harbored in Iraq, and yes they were being harbored. You do know that issues such as gay marriage were meant to be handled by state governments, right? California voters voted no for gay marriage, but a judge legislated from the banch and overturned their votes. They were raped of their say.

You do know that liberals want more government through programs and socialization, right? Seems to me, you have this fantasy of a society based on borderline anarchy. It would never work.

Liberals pander to the lower cla$$ and discourage individualism. They believe people who earn more money should be forced to give money to people that don't deserve it. If a man works hard to finish college after 6 years, why should he have to pay for the welfare check of some crackhead who doesn't want to work at McDonalds, yet keeps having babies? Socialism is the antithesis of what this country was built on.

Right now, liberals tend to want to cut back on miliatary spending and increase spending on healthcare, if handled properly, it will just end with benefits. and no duh liberals help the middle and lower **** it's suppost to be, at least in part, a party for blue collar workers. and I don't think you understand how welfare works based upon what you've said.

They do not help middle and lower Cla$$ they pander to them. They make them think they are entitled to what people who earn more have without working for it. ODB (famous rapper) picked up his welfare check in a limo. If there was a citizen's vote, then yes whatever their vote was should have been upheld. Social issues were meant to be left to the state. It's why we have individual states.

I didn't state he was a Muslim. I was responding to Americans being paranoid about a Muslim President. His Christian sincerity is very much in question and could easily be a front for political reasons especially when his campaign blatantly lies about his past.

Trashface

[QUOTE="MarineJcksn"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]whipassmt

Just another excuse to impliment bs rules into society. I swear, people are so blind to these attempts to blur the lines of the seperation of church and state. Seems to be ok to keep the seperation when it deals with christianity or judaism:?

[QUOTE="L-1992"]He is black, and we all know how everyones a closet racist anyway, and his name sounds abit liek OSAMA :(Dub_c6969

I'm going to have to agree with this guy, im black and i say the guy wont make it because like what this guy said everyone is a "closet racist", America is just not ready for a "black" Commander in Chief, maybe in another 100 years but not now.

I don't agree in disliking the man though because of he's name, a name cannot really describe a person or tell you that persons intensions. Its like if you meet someone one with the name KOBE you don't just assume that he is going to rape young women because people associate KOBE with what Kobe Bryant did, yes hes name does sound like OSAMA but does that mean he is OSAMA or has OSAMA"s intrensions.... no

You don't have very much faith in your peers if you think everyone thinks that way. My friend, you are generalizing. I suppose that makes you no better than a closet racist yourself. Also, (considering how well Obama is doing in his campaign) it doesn't seem like your point is very valid.

I've had enough of Hussein.II-FBIsniper-II

[QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="SunofVich"][QUOTE="smarb001"][QUOTE="cametall"][QUOTE="KreamBeav"][QUOTE="cametall"][QUOTE="KreamBeav"][QUOTE="cametall"]

I'm curious as to whether Obama could get the typically liberal Jewish vote. What with his name and all.

There's a reason why Democrats may be concerned about his name, if the Jewish vote goes Republican (who is Lieberman's best friend?) it could cost him them the race.

yoshi-lnex

As if the Jewish race is in any position to criticize people based on race! What hypocrisy!

Eh? I thought Judaism was a religion, not a race.

There is an ancestral relationship, but yes, you are correct- my bad, but do you have anything to contribute to this argument other than semantics?

Yeah, why/how are they hypocrites?

Judging based on race/religion? What are blacks doing this election then?

What are whites doing this election then?

LOL, I seen that on TV as well. West Virginians must think its still the 1900's. Oh and they believe he is Muslim and Muslims must be bad.

Thats right I am generalizing the entire state as a bunch of rascists just because of what a couple of people said on camera, what wanna fight about it:P

You kidding? Black voters are far more racist than white voters. %90 of black voters voted for Obama in the primary. I got no problem with him because of his race, it's because of all his warning signs. Also, it would be stupid to elect a Muslim to control our country when our most dangerous enemy are extremist Muslims. This is not racist, it's cautious. A white man being afraid to walk through Harlem at 3am would not be racist, it would be smart.

His views on Christianity are not involved at all. Also, I'm suspicious of him because of his campaign's blatant lying about his Muslim past. Go to the link I posted earlier.

He was enrolled as a Muslim in a Catholic school. He recited from the Quran even though his campaign lies about it. His committe has ties with Farrakan and Hamas. I never stated he was a Muslim. I stated that these are reasons to be very, very suspicious. Also, Wright's church that Obama attends accepts Muslims into the congregation , which is strange seeing as how they don't believe in the cornerstones of Christianity such as Christ being the Son Of God and the Ressurrection.

As far as the prior Muslim talk, I was responding to someone implying that it was fine for a Muslim to be President. You won't find where I claimed he was one. Read more carefully next time.

[QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="Katafran"]

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"] Please show me a shred of evidence to suggest there where terrorists intending to attack America killed in the Iraq war.yoshi-lnex

Here's one outside of Baghdad."

Here's one that was run by the former regime..

And it sounds as if you are suggesting that there are no terrorists in Iraq who wish(or wished before the war) America or the western world harm. Is that true?

There weren't any before we were there.

Yes there were. An Al Queda leader stayed in an Iraqi hospital.

[QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Katafran"][QUOTE="killtactics"][QUOTE="whipassmt"][QUOTE="bman784"][QUOTE="Junkie_man"][QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"]

mccain wants to lower your taxes and win in Iraq and help Iran and North Korea and other rogue states make the transition to democracy.

yoshi-lnex

And he's going to do all that without talking to them?

World War II was about protecting our country and citizens. No war should ever be about spreading democracy. Nor do I believe or accept that as a reason for our war with Iraq. Do not think that governments ever take commiting soldiers to war lightly.

We went to war with Iraq because they supported and funded radical extremists. And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.

With all that said, if democracy is a byproduct of war, then it is perhaps one of the few goods wars can do.

Please explain what's wrong with his post if it's so wrong.

Also explain how what he said is worse than your belief that "anyone who is not a Liberal is insane" and that "Conservatives are on a slippery slope to fascism." You never really explained yourself in the other topic, except with a nice "A free, liberal world." :roll:

Anyway, the main thing I find ridiculous about his statement is 'And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.'

That statement isblatantlyfalse, no one has every claimed Iraq would invade America. Iraq invading America? Also, try not to use a smily in every single post it's very obnoxious.

He's talking about the terrorists that were being harbored in Iraq, and yes they were being harbored. You do know that issues such as gay marriage were meant to be handled by state governments, right? California voters voted no for gay marriage, but a judge legislated from the banch and overturned their votes. They were raped of their say.

You do know that liberals want more government through programs and socialization, right? Seems to me, you have this fantasy of a society based on borderline anarchy. It would never work.

Liberals pander to the lower cla$$ and discourage individualism. They believe people who earn more money should be forced to give money to people that don't deserve it. If a man works hard to finish college after 6 years, why should he have to pay for the welfare check of some crackhead who doesn't want to work at McDonalds, yet keeps having babies? Socialism is the antithesis of what this country was built on.

Right now, liberals tend to want to cut back on miliatary spending and increase spending on healthcare, if handled properly, it will just end with benefits. and no duh liberals help the middle and lower **** it's suppost to be, at least in part, a party for blue collar workers. and I don't think you understand how welfare works based upon what you've said.

They do not help middle and lower Cla$$ they pander to them. They make them think they are entitled to what people who earn more have without working for it. ODB (famous rapper) picked up his welfare check in a limo. If there was a citizen's vote, then yes whatever their vote was should have been upheld. Social issues were meant to be left to the state. It's why we have individual states.

No, it is pandering when the left cries that republicans want to punsih the lower cla$$ while giving tax breaks to the rich when the rich pay most of our taxes. They pander by implying that republicans are racists when the left pushes such blatantly racist ideas as affirmative action that gives jobs based on race instead of qualification. Obama himself exposed his true beliefs in saying that lower cla$$ people were bitter towards people with money. That is a leftist belief that is used as a tool for votes. I'm not bitter towards the wealthy. I had every opportunity to apply myself and make more. We are responsible for ourselves and the ones that do apply themselves should not be forced to hand out money to those who don't.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]

I didn't state he was a Muslim. I was responding to Americans being paranoid about a Muslim President. His Christian sincerity is very much in question and could easily be a front for political reasons especially when his campaign blatantly lies about his past.

yoshi-lnex

Did you even read the link I posted early where a school mate and principal gave actual witness of his Muslim past? And no, I did not state that he was currently a Muslim. There is certainly enough reason to be suspicious of his beliefs and I certainly wouldn't be foolish enough to take his word for it.

[QUOTE="Katafran"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"][QUOTE="Katafran"]



World War II was about protecting our country and citizens. No war should ever be about spreading democracy. Nor do I believe or accept that as a reason for our war with Iraq. Do not think that governments ever take commiting soldiers to war lightly.

We went to war with Iraq because they supported and funded radical extremists. And to be quite frank, if we don't kill them in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll be killing them in the streets of New York. I'd much rather kill them in Iraq.



With all that said, if democracy is a byproduct of war, then it is perhaps one of the few goods wars can do.

swizz-the-gamer

UH, They already hated us. Do you think the other countries give a rip about us taking out Sadam and going to war with Iraq. Please. Hell people are starving in Egypt as we speak and the other Muslim/Arab states haven't given hardly a dime. But the US has. Of course we don't get a thanks for that. Nor news coverage. We, the US, were hated before the war and will be hated after the war. The hate the fundamentalists have for us is because of our values and culture not for anything we did or didn't do.