BF2S Forums Obama may not be able to follow up on his promises...

462nd NSP653 wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

I guess Feos + co. would rather have Obama lying about the truth.  As opposed to McCain, who has basically tried promising everything Obama was talking about first?  "Change", for example?

None of this would've happened if we had just bowed and took it up the ass for the motherland like we should've in during the Cold War.  Now its too late.  jk.

Oh...I'd come down off that pedestal.  Obama does NOT have a copyright on promising "Change" during a campaign.  Almost EVERY politician running for office promises change.  Even incumbents often promise change...how ridiculous is that.   Very few come claiming "more of the same".  When they do...they usually don't fare very well.

Obama was talking about change in the way we do politics, not just the way politics of the president, and working with the other party, etc., while at the same time McCain ditched his old profile of being a moderate and a maverick in order to win the GOP nomination.

No words can say anything to change my mind about this.  You don't vote only on the issues.  I'd rather have an honest person I disagree with in office than a liar who I agree with in office.

McCains character and judgement and attitude in the past 5 months has proven he does not really believe in changing politics as usual.  Is Obama perfect?  No, but he looks damn good compared to how much McCain fucked up his campaign.

More partisan-culture war bullshit the GOP has used as an advantage for the past two elections.  And "undecideds" like Feos are eating it right up. 

Just because Obama says some of the stuff he wants done won't get done because the economy is royally fucked doesn't mean he still wouldn't be a good president.  It's always about the lesser of two evils when there are only two political parties with an real power.  So the "undecideds" and "moderates" and "centrists" can go F themselves.  Not voting for the lesser of two evils will accomplish nothing.  Voting for what you perceive to be the lesser of two evils, in theory, would prevent the greater evil from winning. 

The entire history of the world and human rights and government has been a long list lesser of two evil type decisions.  We had to end slavery before we could allow those people to vote.  There are actually millions of other things you could list.

so stfu if anyone ever calls you partisan just because you're voting for someone.  Its not always that simple.  And being a moderate and a centrist only shows you dont have the balls to really deal with politics, but all the sheep love you for it.  Like a slut.

Last edited by Spearhead (2008-09-25 20:46:59)

GJ with fixing a country that will be soon "unfixable".

usmarine wrote:

GateKeeper{NL} wrote:

GJ with fixing a country that will be soon "unfixable".

lol....did your history book start in 2000 or what?  god i would love to see a euro text book.

William Wallace saved Europe, right?

He can't follow up on a great deal of his promises, mainly because the economy is fucked up and it will need a few years to repair itself. Lots of jobs are at risk now. There's no way in hell that he can push through a social healthcare network with how things are going, atleast not in his first term.

deeznutz1245 wrote:

usmarine wrote:

GateKeeper{NL} wrote:

GJ with fixing a country that will be soon "unfixable".

lol....did your history book start in 2000 or what?  god i would love to see a euro text book.

William Wallace saved Europe, right?

Was William Wallace Russian?