See other Religion Articles
Title: Obama Race Speech: The Full Text
Source:
Huff Po
URL Source: [None]
Published: Mar 18, 2008
Author: Barack Obama
Post Date: 2008-03-18 11:13:50 by ghostdogtxn
Keywords: None
Views: 3566
Comments: 286
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-108) not displayed.
.
.
.
#109. To: FOH (#106)
If Hillary or McCain are elected, bringing their decades corrupt and/or warmongering presidencies to power, just remember you could have voted for Obama. In your dream world, do you actually believe someone who is NOT CFR could ever be elected? If there is a "sucker" on this thread, it is you.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
So now you're going to shill for the One World Monopolists...I'm not surprised.
Our last hope for peace I almost posted this, but was afraid I might give the game away. ;p
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
Do you ever just take a step back and listen to yourself, then take the time to think about what you've said? You're admitting you're playing a crooked game but somehow you honestly believe you are going to straighten out the outcome from the outside of rigged machine. Maybe you're just not as bright as I pegged you before...
Our last hope for peace
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
Amd you think NOT voting for the candidate who will very likely do the least damage is better? That's not very bright.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
If somebody were deliberately trying to stir up animosities on this site and at the same time post things on it that could be used to discredit it, it would be hard to do a better job of it than FOH is doing.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
very plausible that this is the reason for BO's candidacy...
I almost posted this, but was afraid I might give the game away. ;p A CONSPIRACY INSIDE A CONSPIRACY! THAT'S IT!! /s LOLOL!!!!!! Our last hope for peace
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
Yeah, I don't understand why ALL of this site doesn't just flip from Ron Paul, patriot-anti-Establishment-candidate to one of the 3 OWM puppets. You really are transparent and shallow there ari...
Our last hope for peace lol, all true - it's a fine line he must walk
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
ghostdogtxn = OWM Barrack Hussein Obama Supporter I guess everyone just likes playing the game, eh Chris? Sick.
Our last hope for peace
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
Another example of stirring up animosities.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
You prefer Henry Kissinger? ZBig was Carter's foreign policy adviser, there are far worse choices. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_Brzezinski Who would you pick?
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
You're a classic worker's party Communist stain. I'll stand by that until I can't stand anymore. You've got a nice little group of useful idiots formed up here on 4um, ari.
Our last hope for peace
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
Different sides of the same ass, both joined by the hole in the middle. Don't you worry yourself though, you're doing something very important.
Our last hope for peace Or living in a dream world where Ron Paul gets elected President.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
An interesting charge to make against someone who voted for Buchanan in 2000. But perhaps to be expected from someone who wants to stir up trouble.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
don't fret, FOH. their votes aren't counted anyway. ;)
FOH's loyalty to Ron Paul, such as it was, was severely shaken when I pointed out that Ron Paul and Kucinich are friends.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Don't worry, I've already lost all respect I had for you. You went from supporting the anti-establishment to joining the establishment. Sucker.
Our last hope for peace This is a very good speech, but it has the typical Obama signature to it. So...what to do now? Invariably, Obama leaves that out. I'll refrain from commenting further.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
Wrong, not because they're friends. Rather, because Kucinich is a Commie Fruit Loop that hit a couple notes just right but still had no place even being considered on a ticket with Ron Paul...you know that, though. I have friends that are bigger losers, politically speaking, than you or Dennis K combined, ari.
Our last hope for peace You went from Ron Paul to Obama. You have no credibility left...
Our last hope for peace
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
I'm not fretting, I'm just wondering how many RP supporters are really smart enough to be part of the solution...
Our last hope for peace I read platforms to decide who I vote for; rhetoric and charisma carry zero weight here. If what is under the hood is undesirable, it doesn't get my vote, regardless of what else is going on. So far, no Democrat has a platform that I would vote for.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
It is going to be interesting to see how the media handles the speech since the Clinton campaign started accusing the media of Obama bias 3 or 4 weeks ago. The Clintons have deep and powerful media ties especially in the NY media, and even managed to get SNL to do a long skit regarding the bias two weeks ago (Hillary made a "surprise" guest appearance), and then last week a long opening skit portraying Obama as inexperianced and inept.
THIS IS TOO GOOD!!!! According to a variety of sources, the following presidential candidates are either members of one of the groups or have strong ties: Hillary Rodham Clinton, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, John McCain, John Edwards, Fred Thompson, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson. Mike Huckabee, though not a member, spoke to the CFR in September. Since then, his political star has risen to the point that he has become a top-tier candidate. So often throughout recent history it has been the case. Ever since Democrat Adlai Stevenson challenged Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956, the odds have significantly favored those with membership in the elite groups. In 1960, both John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon were members. In 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson was not a member. Neither was his opponent, Barry Goldwater. But Johnson had already staffed his administration with plenty of insiders. In 1968, it was Nixon versus club member Hubert H. Humphrey. In 1972, it was Nixon again against Democratic Party CFR member George McGovern. In 1976, it was CFR Republican Gerald Ford losing to CFR Democrat Jimmy Carter. In 1980, Ronald Reagan was not a member, but his running mate, George H.W. Bush, was. So were both of his opponents – Carter and independent John Anderson. Assuming office, however, Reagan quickly named 313 CFR members to his team. In 1984, another CFR member, Walter Mondale, was nominated by the Democratic Party to challenge Reagan. In 1988, CFR member Bush took on CFR member Michael Dukakis. In 1992, Bush was challenged by an obscure governor from Arkansas, Bill Clinton, who won the "trifecta" by being a member of the CFR, Trlateral Commission and Bilderberg Group. He was also a Rhodes scholar – another favored credential of the worldwide elite. In 1996, Clinton was challenged by CFR member Bob Dole. In 2000, CFR member Al Gore ran against non-member George W. Bush, but his running mate, Dick Cheney, was. In 2004, Bush was challenged by CFR member John Kerry. www.alipac.us/article2888.html The CFR most certainly has more influence than any of us would desire, or put up with if we could help it. But, IMO, a reading of the above would leave anyone to conclude that the listing presents politicians falling within a range of full-hearted CFR'ers down to suck-ups to the elitists. Given that, sad as that may be, I refuse to relinqish my right to particate in the process. Frankly sir, and meaning no offense, it is also my opinion that thosee that do fall within a spectrum also .... from zany to childish.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡
Oops ......... haste rears its head again. See 144
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Reading Bush's served you well.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I guess aristeides was correct about you.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
That's what it boils down to. Out of 300M people, what a 'choice.'
Comments (150 - 286) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#110. To: ghostdogtxn (#108)
(Edited)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#111. To: ghostdogtxn (#108)
It's always possible that Obama is using the CFR as much as they intend to use him, you know.
#112. To: robin (#109)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#113. To: FOH (#110)
#114. To: FOH, robin (#112)
#115. To: FOH (#112)
#116. To: ghostdogtxn, FOH (#114)
#117. To: ghostdogtxn (#93)
Because either HRC will steal the nomination at the convention or they'll put a bullet in Obama before/after he gets it. In either event you're going to see riots that'll make the Rodney King deal look small-time, a possible declaration of martial law, possible rule by presidential decree under emergency powers, and major, major incursions of the ancient Chinese curse.
#118. To: robin, ghostdogtxn (#111)
It's always possible that Obama is using the CFR as much as they intend to use him, you know.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#119. To: robin, FOH (#111)
#120. To: aristeides (#116)
If somebody were deliberately trying to stir up animosities on this site and at the same time post things on it that could be used to discredit it, it would be hard to do a better job of it than FOH is doing.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#121. To: ghostdogtxn (#119)
Well, I was very much encouraged by the Jewish media attacks on him a couple of weeks ago. I also find it encouraging that the lefty Zionist Jews, like Alex Bennett, Lynn Samuels, etc, etc, hate Obama. It goes without saying that the righty Zionists hate him. I think it goes beyond the typical Jewish disdain for Shwartzes, and speaks of a real insecurity about the sincerity of his fealty oaths to Israel. After all, if anyone knows insincerity, it's the Zionists.
#122. To: aristeides, FOH (#116)
#123. To: ghostdogtxn, christine (#119)
So I'll support him (Obama) for now, given my lack of other choices.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#124. To: christine (#117)
#125. To: FOH (#120)
#126. To: FOH (#118)
Brzezinski also became a leading critic of the Bush administration's "war on terror." Some painted him as a neoconservative because of his links to Paul Wolfowitz and his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard. Brzezinski wrote The Choice in 2004 which expanded upon The Grand Chessboard but sharply criticized the Bush administration's foreign policy. He has defended the paper The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. He has been outspoken in his criticism of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the subsequent conduct of the war.
#127. To: aristeides (#125)
Another example of stirring up animosities.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#128. To: christine, lodwick (#117)
#129. To: robin (#126)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#130. To: aristeides, FOH (#125)
Another example of stirring up animosities.
#131. To: FOH (#127)
You're a classic worker's party Communist stain.
#132. To: FOH (#123)
#133. To: robin, FOH (#130)
Or living in a dream world where Ron Paul gets elected President.
#134. To: robin (#130)
Or living in a dream world where Ron Paul gets elected President.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#135. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
#136. To: FOH, aristeides, christine, robin (#123)
#137. To: aristeides (#133)
FOH's loyalty to Ron Paul, such as it was, was severely shaken when I pointed out that Ron Paul and Kucinich are friends.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#138. To: ghostdogtxn (#136)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#139. To: mirage (#135)
#140. To: christine (#132)
don't fret, FOH. their votes aren't counted anyway. ;)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#141. To: ghostdogtxn (#139)
#142. To: FOH, aristeides, robin, christine, lodwick, all (#138)
#143. To: christine (#62)
i will give credit where credit is due.
#144. To: FOH (#69)
McNuts is a warmonger but the CFR-D people aren't!?
#145. To: mirage (#141)
#146. To: All (#144)
#147. To: mirage (#141)
I read platforms to decide who I vote for; rhetoric and charisma carry zero weight here. If what is under the hood is undesirable, it doesn't get my vote, regardless of what else is going on.
#148. To: FOH (#134)
#149. To: ghostdogtxn (#145)
Of the 3 he's POTENTIALLY worth a shit. The others aren't, and that's certain.
.
.
.