Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|5712|USA

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

So you're sick of fear yet you're trying to scare people into thinking McCain is Bush...

Contradict much?
There is no difference in McCain policy and Bush policy. Thats not fear, thats fact son. I don't have to say it, people are already scared of it.
That must be why one of obamas latest ads uses footage from the last debate when McCain said he wasn't Bush.

In fact, I urge you to find one congressional race in the entire country where the democratic canidate doesn't link the republican canidate to Bush, whether it be showing a picture of the canidate next to Bush or showing what percentage of the time they voted with Bush.

Get real. The only reason the democrats are in office right now is entirely because of fear tactics.


Wow. Contact me when you get back to earth and we'll talk.

Last edited by Mason4Assassin444 (2008-10-25 07:35:19)

Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|5712|USA

FEOS wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

[TUF]Catbox wrote:

I agree... using fear sucks... It does baffle me that because everyone hates Bush so much... they are giving a pass to a really inexperienced guy that has ideas that are known to slow down economies and not create new jobs...
  McCain is not perfect... but he is really nothing like Bush... they have been at odds as much as they have agreed... and at the end of the day...
  I think McCain is an honest guy...it's his campaign advisors that are asking him to do the dirty things and you can tell he feels uncomfortable doing them...     and after living through 76-80 with Carter... it sucked... lol
If this were the 2000 McCain, it would be a very close race. I agree, the RNC is in his ear and he has abandoned his own persona. That makes him a sellout.

You can blame Bush and 6 years of Republican Congress for Obama getting a free pass.
Yet you can't see that this country is about to vote in exactly the same situation with a Democrat Congress and Obama?

Change = back to 1976-1980.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.
But take comfort when it all goes to hell after Obama is elected you can blame democrats. Its in no way the fault of failed Bush policy and incompetent irresponsible leadership (lack of maybe).

Republicans had their shot and blew their load. Democrats turn.

I'm not apologizing for supporting the intelligent candidate.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|5812

so who is Joe "the gaff" biden supposed to be?
rdx-fx
...
+955|5641

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Yet you can't see that this country is about to vote in exactly the same situation with a Democrat Congress and Obama?
And whose fault is that?
I would say it's the Democrats that vote for Obama.

But, somehow, I still think the liberals here would read what you wrote as "It's Bush fault!" for that too.

LMAO.  It's Bush's fault we're electing Obama!

That, in a nutshell, describes what the political scene in the USA has devoled into.
Emotionalism and finger-pointing that rarely has any more analytical basis than "Attack other side - find evidence to support presupposed idea"
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,610|5671|London, England
What's the point of this topic? All it seems is everyone blaming everyone else for situations that haven't even happened yet. The guy hasn't even won yet.

It seems you people just like to talk shit for no other reason other than you want to talk down on someone else.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5461|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Yet you can't see that this country is about to vote in exactly the same situation with a Democrat Congress and Obama?
And whose fault is that?
The electorate who doesn't investigate any further than sound bites. Those who look at immediate issues, rather than longer term strategic issues. Politicians who are more concerned about consolidating party power than doing the right thing.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5461|'Murka

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:


If this were the 2000 McCain, it would be a very close race. I agree, the RNC is in his ear and he has abandoned his own persona. That makes him a sellout.

You can blame Bush and 6 years of Republican Congress for Obama getting a free pass.
Yet you can't see that this country is about to vote in exactly the same situation with a Democrat Congress and Obama?

Change = back to 1976-1980.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.
But take comfort when it all goes to hell after Obama is elected you can blame democrats. Its in no way the fault of failed Bush policy and incompetent irresponsible leadership (lack of maybe).

Republicans had their shot and blew their load. Democrats turn.

I'm not apologizing for supporting the intelligent candidate.
Why would I blame Obama for something he inherited? That's a liberal tactic. I'm a realist.

I'm saying there never should have been a situation (for more than two years, anyway) where a single party controlled both the Executive and Legislative branches. We've seen nothing but bad come of that...regardless of which party it is.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5461|'Murka

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:


There is no difference in McCain policy and Bush policy. Thats not fear, thats fact son. I don't have to say it, people are already scared of it.
That must be why one of obamas latest ads uses footage from the last debate when McCain said he wasn't Bush.

In fact, I urge you to find one congressional race in the entire country where the democratic canidate doesn't link the republican canidate to Bush, whether it be showing a picture of the canidate next to Bush or showing what percentage of the time they voted with Bush.

Get real. The only reason the democrats are in office right now is entirely because of fear tactics.


Wow. Contact me when you get back to earth and we'll talk.
And again, you can't point to which issues he agreed on and which he didn't. You can't do the same for Obama. You can't point to a single piece of legislation where Obama went against his party.

Rubberstamp ftl.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|5697

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:


There is no difference in McCain policy and Bush policy. Thats not fear, thats fact son. I don't have to say it, people are already scared of it.
That must be why one of obamas latest ads uses footage from the last debate when McCain said he wasn't Bush.

In fact, I urge you to find one congressional race in the entire country where the democratic canidate doesn't link the republican canidate to Bush, whether it be showing a picture of the canidate next to Bush or showing what percentage of the time they voted with Bush.

Get real. The only reason the democrats are in office right now is entirely because of fear tactics.


Wow. Contact me when you get back to earth and we'll talk.
Shall I find a youtubube video of Hilary and Biden bashing Obama during the primaries and then show you how they've changed now? It's called party politics you tool. They're all guilty of it.

Still doesn't change the fact that you didn't even attempt to address what I wrote. And hell, that video only further proves my point.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|5651|132 and Bush

Harmor wrote:

So who's going to be our generation's Ronald Reagan?  Any Governors that you can think of right now?  Palin perhaps?
Palin?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,920|5682|949

Kmarion wrote:

Harmor wrote:

So who's going to be our generation's Ronald Reagan?  Any Governors that you can think of right now?  Palin perhaps?
Palin?
I don't think anyone wants to be a reincarnated Ronald Reagan.  The guy was a horrible president.
CaptainSpaulding71
Member
+119|5407|CA, USA

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I don't think anyone wants to be a reincarnated Ronald Reagan.  The guy was a horrible president.
...why do you believe that Reagan was a 'horrible' president?
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,920|5682|949

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I don't think anyone wants to be a reincarnated Ronald Reagan.  The guy was a horrible president.
...why do you believe that Reagan was a 'horrible' president?
Let's see - realized more than anyone the Carter Doctrine regarding Middle East policy - which has had direct negative implications since Reagan left office; ballooned national debt; supported the Taliban's rise to power in Afghanistan; needlessly expanded Carter Doctrine-esque policy to Central Asia; expanded bureaucratic government by about 5%; supported positive relations with a number of ruthless dictators, including Saddam Hussein...I could go on.

To quote Andrew Bacevich, who uses neocon Norman Podhoretz-type reasoning, "Reagan-era exertions undertaken to win WWIII [the Cold War] inadvertently paved the way for WWIV [Global War on Terror], while leaving the United States in an appreciably weaker position to conduct that struggle.

You think he was a good Pres?  Tell me why.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-10-25 14:34:56)

Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|5588|Long Island, New York

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I don't think anyone wants to be a reincarnated Ronald Reagan.  The guy was a horrible president.
...why do you believe that Reagan was a 'horrible' president?
Let's see - realized more than anyone the Carter Doctrine regarding Middle East policy - which has had direct negative implications since Reagan left office; ballooned national debt; supported the Taliban's rise to power in Afghanistan; needlessly expanded Carter Doctrine-esque policy to Central Asia; expanded bureaucratic government by about 5%; supported positive relations with a number of ruthless dictators, including Saddam Hussein...I could go on.

To quote Andrew Bacevich, who uses neocon Norman Podhoretz-type reasoning, "Reagan-era exertions undertaken to win WWIII [the Cold War] inadvertently paved the way for WWIV [Global War on Terror], while leaving the United States in an appreciably weaker position to conduct that struggle.

You think he was a good Pres?  Tell me why.
'coz he killed da soviet you-nyun!

It's funny you mention the "meeting with foreign dictators" ploy as well...the same people who says Obama's a fool for wanting to meet with leaders of nations like Iran and North Korea think Reagan was a godsend..
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5461|'Murka

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I don't think anyone wants to be a reincarnated Ronald Reagan.  The guy was a horrible president.
...why do you believe that Reagan was a 'horrible' president?
Let's see - realized more than anyone the Carter Doctrine regarding Middle East policy - which has had direct negative implications since Reagan left office; ballooned national debt; supported the Taliban's rise to power in Afghanistan; needlessly expanded Carter Doctrine-esque policy to Central Asia; expanded bureaucratic government by about 5%; supported positive relations with a number of ruthless dictators, including Saddam Hussein...I could go on.

To quote Andrew Bacevich, who uses neocon Norman Podhoretz-type reasoning, "Reagan-era exertions undertaken to win WWIII [the Cold War] inadvertently paved the way for WWIV [Global War on Terror], while leaving the United States in an appreciably weaker position to conduct that struggle.

You think he was a good Pres?  Tell me why.
Don't forget about reversing the economic collapse handed to him, the boom of the 80s-early 2000s, end of the Cold War, deregulation of telecommunications, travel, and other key industries (NOT the financial industry, btw).

Don't worry about all that stuff. Just focus on the non-tangibles.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
SealXo
Member
+309|5586

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Good article.

I'll still take the chance with Obama than accept 4 more years of Bush.

One candidate has a plan. One has nothing. One is candid. The other is a liar.

America is done with the politics of fear.
Bush isn't running.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,920|5682|949

FEOS wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

...why do you believe that Reagan was a 'horrible' president?
Let's see - realized more than anyone the Carter Doctrine regarding Middle East policy - which has had direct negative implications since Reagan left office; ballooned national debt; supported the Taliban's rise to power in Afghanistan; needlessly expanded Carter Doctrine-esque policy to Central Asia; expanded bureaucratic government by about 5%; supported positive relations with a number of ruthless dictators, including Saddam Hussein...I could go on.

To quote Andrew Bacevich, who uses neocon Norman Podhoretz-type reasoning, "Reagan-era exertions undertaken to win WWIII [the Cold War] inadvertently paved the way for WWIV [Global War on Terror], while leaving the United States in an appreciably weaker position to conduct that struggle.

You think he was a good Pres?  Tell me why.
Don't forget about reversing the economic collapse handed to him, the boom of the 80s-early 2000s, end of the Cold War, deregulation of telecommunications, travel, and other key industries (NOT the financial industry, btw).

Don't worry about all that stuff. Just focus on the non-tangibles.
I won't worry- because Spaulding asked me why I thought he was a horrible president.  That's why I quoted his post - I thought it was easier for other people to see what/who I was addressing.

Non-tangibles? 
The PC and technology revolution - and said boom (which Reagan was not responsible for; if anything it was WW2 and immediate postwar spending that led to that) stimulated the economy, not Freidman-championed tax cuts. 
Reagan contributed to the end of the Cold War by outspending the Russians, that's about it.  Bad Soviet management of assets, land, and differing ethnic groups led to the end of the Cold War - they were more responsible for their own downfall than Reagan. 
Telecom deregulation happened under Clinton, Airlines under Carter.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2008-10-25 16:02:00)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|5651|132 and Bush

[google]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1777069922535499977&ei=kLgDSY7oLY6qrgKt5bwD&q=reagan[/google]

We should be so lucky. Nothing in this race compares.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|5461|'Murka

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:


Let's see - realized more than anyone the Carter Doctrine regarding Middle East policy - which has had direct negative implications since Reagan left office; ballooned national debt; supported the Taliban's rise to power in Afghanistan; needlessly expanded Carter Doctrine-esque policy to Central Asia; expanded bureaucratic government by about 5%; supported positive relations with a number of ruthless dictators, including Saddam Hussein...I could go on.

To quote Andrew Bacevich, who uses neocon Norman Podhoretz-type reasoning, "Reagan-era exertions undertaken to win WWIII [the Cold War] inadvertently paved the way for WWIV [Global War on Terror], while leaving the United States in an appreciably weaker position to conduct that struggle.

You think he was a good Pres?  Tell me why.
Don't forget about reversing the economic collapse handed to him, the boom of the 80s-early 2000s, end of the Cold War, deregulation of telecommunications, travel, and other key industries (NOT the financial industry, btw).

Don't worry about all that stuff. Just focus on the non-tangibles.
I won't worry- because Spaulding asked me why I thought he was a horrible president.  That's why I quoted his post - I thought it was easier for other people to see what/who I was addressing.

Non-tangibles? 
The PC and technology revolution - and said boom (which Reagan was not responsible for; if anything it was WW2 and immediate postwar spending that led to that) stimulated the economy, not Freidman-championed tax cuts. 
Reagan contributed to the end of the Cold War by outspending the Russians, that's about it.  Bad Soviet management of assets, land, and differing ethnic groups led to the end of the Cold War - they were more responsible for their own downfall than Reagan. 
Telecom deregulation happened under Clinton, Airlines under Carter.
I see. We're supposed to limit our responses to only those directed at us? I'll remember that next time.

Post war spending? Forty years later? Get real, KJ.

Your selective memory of history is quite astounding.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
PureFodder
Member
+225|5336
Reaganomics was the marker after which the wages of the US workforce became almost entirely decoupled from productivity and became essentially stagnant.
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|5712|USA

SealXo wrote:

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

Good article.

I'll still take the chance with Obama than accept 4 more years of Bush.

One candidate has a plan. One has nothing. One is candid. The other is a liar.

America is done with the politics of fear.
Bush isn't running.
Literally, no. Good eye son. John McCain is running with Bush's policies. That is the point. John Sidney McSame sold his soul to the RNC.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|5812

osama hussein sold his soul to the liberals
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|5712|USA

usmarine wrote:

osama hussein sold his soul to the liberals
I know. Damn those tax cuts for the middle class. Fucking liberals.


/rolleyes
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|5812

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

usmarine wrote:

osama hussein sold his soul to the liberals
I know. Damn those tax cuts for the middle class. Fucking liberals.


/rolleyes
well, i am not middle class and i dont want my money spread around.
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|5588|Long Island, New York
You make more than $250,000 a year?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2021 Jeff Minard