Title: OBAMA GETTING HIGH ON THE DOWN LOW Source:
YOU TUBE URL Source:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVeFVtcdSYY Published:Jan 30, 2008 Author:HOUNDDAWG Q. SCHWARTZ Post Date:2008-01-30 23:36:37 by HOUNDDAWG Keywords:None Views:2269 Comments:122
Poster Comment:
The "respectable" media ignores this the same way they ignored Clinton's "bimbo eruptions" before he was elected.
#31. To: All, Tauzero, noone222, freepatriot32, iconoclast, aristeides, castletrash, ghostdogtxn, (#0)
ghostdogtxn wrote: "This video is bullshit and smacks of Clinton dirty tricks. Of course, it's convenient to blame it on Ron Paul folks instead, right Hillary?"
Well gang, Larry Sinclair took a 4 hour polygraph examination, and it included drug screening to verify that he didn't chemically alter his stress/physiological responses before the test.
Does this sound like bullshit, now?
HAH!
OBAMA'S ON DA DOWN LOW, OBAMA'S ON DA DOWN LOW, OBAMA'S ON DA DOWN LOW, OBAMA'S ON DA DOWN LOW, OBAMA'S ON DA DOWN LOW, OBAMA'S ON DA DOWN LOW, OBAMA'S........
"The only things I like better than receiving a stuffed brown paper bag from grateful constituents and the party faithful is smoking a fact rock while getting a "beej" from a sweet bird (a swallow in fact) for whom performing the act isn't simply obligatory (like my wife) but pleasurable! Smokin' rocks in, smokin' rocks out!!"__Barack Obama
Predominantly black areas have become an eyesore. The beautiful lawns and flowerbeds I noticed in some areas three years earlier now tell sad stories of degradation. Some of them have become open-air urinals.
Now that I've finally noticed where you're comin' from (tip, short, succinct tag lines have more impact), I think I'd rather have dinner at Obama's house than yours.
Keep 'em in their place, eh? Never mind their track record or accomplishments?
Now that I've finally noticed where you're comin' from (tip, short, succinct tag lines have more impact), I think I'd rather have dinner at Obama's house than yours.
My dear iconoclast. Elites like Obama wouldn't use your kind as lawn jockeys for their homes, never mind serving you a dinner.
My dear iconoclast. Elites like Obama wouldn't use your kind as lawn jockeys for their homes, never mind serving you a dinner.
I guess an old golf partner and attorney of mine just hasn't made it into your definition of "elitist", but Obama doesn't strike as me as a much different type.
No, your friend would miss the cut. To be an elitist one would either be a politician or a man who pushes politicians in front of the masses for the national 4 year presidential ritual. Obama is the flavor of the month; an empty vessel willing to be filled by those in power to be used as an offering to those without power. I can't think of one president in my lifetime who has changed the nation or my personal standing for the better. What I have and what I am is in spite of their gobs of socialism. The problem now is that the snowball is rolling down the hill at warp speed and government will soon be so large that personal options will be thought of as historical relics. Such thought shouldn't be welcomed by rational thinkers.
The problem now is that the snowball is rolling down the hill at warp speed and government will soon be so large that personal options will be thought of as historical relics.
We have elections every two years.
Don't be too hasty at cutting your throat, you're a pretty nice guy at heart.
I heard this same nonsense from el Rushbo, et al., in '92 (i.e. the red flag and hammer and sickle would be flying over the White House in the bat of an eye. Incidentally, though not nuts about Poppy, I never had a thought of voting for Bubba).
The real challenge is to recognize similar patterns in the current political situation.
Accept that there is motive for "continuity of the dynasty."
Understand that CFR affiliation is a sure sign of cooperation with the dynasty.
Realize that the press is dominated by CFR members.
Obama's wife is CFR. He's CFR. He's got Zbigniew Brzezinski on the team. (Did you know that possibly a half million Indonesians were killed with the joint British-US backed Islamic operations against communists in the 1960s? Zbig was involved, learning to play chess on the grand chessboard.)
Supporting Obama because he sounds good is just giving the CFR a mandate. Just by refusing to vote you are saying "no."
Which CFR member or members told Obama that war in Iraq was a dumb idea and why didn't they (apparently) tell the rest of the CFR politicians (who are legion)?
Which CFR member or members told Obama that war in Iraq was a dumb idea and why didn't they (apparently) tell the rest of the CFR politicians (who are legion)?
First you're assuming he means what he's saying. I wouldn't do that with a CFR-affiliated candidate. Second, you're assuming that he hasn't talked out of both sides of his mouth on this issue (he has). Just like the NAFTA commentary recently where he criticized Hillary for supporting it, but basically said we couldn't abolish it, he has also said that he would not give a timetable for our departure from Iraq.
First you're assuming he means what he's saying. I wouldn't do that with a CFR-affiliated candidate.
Obama, in Oct of 2002, as a young man, just turned 41, early into his political career spoke out vociferously against the war. He had the foresight and the political courage to say to the old establishment politicians that it was a mistake when virtually no one else said a mumbling word. What did that gain him politically at that moment?
McCain is CFR ... do you disbelieve him when he says we'll be there a hundred years?
he has also said that he would not give a timetable for our departure from Iraq.
He supports a plan to immediately begin troop withdrawal from Iraq at a pace of one or two brigades a month, to be completed by the end of 2008. It's right there on his website. Which other candidate has been more specific?
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said last night that fears of widespread sectarian and ethnic conflict in Iraq following a U.S. troop drawdown are not sufficient reason to justify the continued deployment of a large U.S. millitary force there.
The Illinois senator argued that logic, used by some supporters of the war in Iraq, was inconsistent with the U.S. military posture toward countries in the midst of genodical conflict, such as Congo and Sudan.
"Well, look, if that’s the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now — where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife — which we haven’t done,” Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press.
“We would be deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven’t done. Those of us who care about Darfur don’t think it would be a good idea,” he said.
Obama acknowledged it is likely there would be increased bloodshed if U.S. forces left Iraq.
“Nobody is proposing we leave precipitously. There are still going to be U.S. forces in the region that could intercede, with an international force, on an emergency basis,” Obama said between stops on the first of two days scheduled on the New Hampshire campaign trail. “There’s no doubt there are risks of increased bloodshed in Iraq without a continuing U.S. presence there.”
The greater risk is staying in Iraq, Obama said.
“It is my assessment that those risks are even greater if we continue to occupy Iraq and serve as a magnet for not only terrorist activity but also irresponsible behavior by Iraqi factions,” he said.
What does he mean, robin? He has said we should work to stop genocide in Africa. This will be under UN command. That's American troops fighting in blue helmets and taking orders from non-American commanders.