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: 3196
Comments: 286
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
This is a very good speech.
"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 wonder how long it will take before somebody shows up here and says that.
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.
hmmmmm..that's an interesting hypothesis that i hadn't thought of. regardless, i give the speech an A. he's a class act. i think it might win him the nomination assuming that votes of the people are counted.
What would be even more amazing is if he wrote it himself. And I think it is quite likely that he did. Imagine the Chimp writing his own speeches.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
"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 sure looked as though he did. not one time did i see him look down at notes. how refreshing is that compared to the chimp moron or even hillary.
He was making minor alterations -- almost always improvements -- to the written text as he was speaking. That strongly suggests that most -- if not all -- of the authorship was his.
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.
"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)‡
"The mendacity of hope." Great speech though, from a technical perspective.
Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!
Naah. But he's a step ahead of his opposition (and his allies.)
Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!
Thanks cristine. I hope it becomes a milestone speech. God bless America, with all its glory and warts.
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)‡
"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)‡
Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren't always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism. Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding. Passages like that could win white working class votes.
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.
"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)‡
Inside joke?
Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!
"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)‡
agree. Obama stopped the clinton kitchen sink and threw it back at them. i don't think they can overcome this, but, but then, it all depends on who is the PTB selection....and it could still be mcCain. i'm thinking that because of his association with lieberman who is accompanying mcCain to Israel and the ME.
Judging by the way Limbaugh is demonizing Obama on the race issue right now I'd say the speech was very effective.
.
"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)‡
Outstanding speech.
Rush is now telling the goobers that Obama's speech is "Presidential Politics". We'll now see yukon posting that when Obama stumps for President it's just Presidential politics. Maybe Limbaugh should tell the goobers that when Obama takes a breath, he's just "sucking air". It is kind of hard to defend against this sort of stuff when there's a pack of morons out there just waiting to lap it up.
.
If the Stupid party thinks Joe is going to corral a bunch of Jewish votes for them in November then they learned nothing from 2000. The Jewish vote was not influenced one iota by the presence of him on the Dim ticket. Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Race Speech yeah.......... I see this whole "race" matter being the same as the "gay marriage" issue from '04. Both are polarizing factors to divert Americans' attention away from the fact that the economy is in the toilet, there is an evil foreign occupation going on, the middle class is being systematically crushed, and the taxable earnings of the next 4 generations are being looted by off-shore "defense" contractors. Neither issue has any real substance and neither issue can be resolved by our elected officials. Both are cultural issues and will never be changed by any government. JMHO
Resist!
Excellent point.
Please take no offense if have at a slight editing stab, christine. Obama stopped the clinton kitchen sink and threw candidness, truthfulness, sincerity and decency back at them. I still insist that this man will continue to take the high road all the way to November, regardless of how much mud he has to slog through.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
thanks, you're kind.
Resist!
Both are polarizing factors to divert Americans' attention away from the fact that the economy is in the toilet, there is an evil foreign occupation going on, the middle class is being systematically crushed, and the taxable earnings of the next 4 generations are being looted by off-shore "defense" contractors. Obama is not the one dragging race into the contest. Indeed, even in this "race" speech he attempted to bring the issues you mention back into the debate. Read it and think about it, it won't change your color. Heck, the next time we hear from you, you might even be calling yourself AmericanGuy.
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)‡
"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)‡
bass ackwards Increasing scarcity increases the importance of kinship.
Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!
Did you read the speech? no, I haven't. I'm certain that it's a very good speech, though. I am commenting only on racial divisiveness being used as a diversion.
Resist!
Increasing scarcity increases the importance of kinship. Please explain
Resist!
Although BHO is far from my first choice for the presidency, to my knowledge, he doesn't have a 'body-count' website devoted to him.
The first association I made with "Ashley" was "Montagu". Boy did I laugh.
Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!
"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'd love to, but the folks at American Renaissance can explain it much better than me.
Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!
Indeed. What Obama did is to call on the people to responsibility. From this speech 'we the people' will not be able to vote for chimperor (twice) and not be considered responsible for the consequences of their act.
"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)‡
That's the most patriotic bag of horse puckey I've ever seen handled by a Black Panther Marxist quisling Council on Foreign Relations puppet...
Our last hope for peace I agree. I'm waiting to see Fox News (who were laughing about him before the speech started) to begin extracting statements from this morning's speech out of context so they can start more controversy.
'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
Who knew that a mustard and relish sandwich could ever be used to make a wonderful statement.
'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 pretty much what Obama says in his speech, too. Yes indeed.
'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 pretty much what Obama says in his speech, too. Oh, I see, thanks for filling me in. I'll read it later.
Resist!
"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)‡
Jesus Christ, because he changed my heart®
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 wonder if Queen Hitlery and her exTRIMPOTUS hubby will love us as much as the Bush side of the family did?
Our last hope for peace His conversion to Christianity was real, and it shows.
'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)‡
I hate political speeches but I forced myself to listen to the entire speech. My opinion? It was a blockbuster.
"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)‡
The Stalinist lesbian witch was selected a long time ago. There's no Black Panther Marxist named Hussein with permission to actually change that, no matter how good the game looks. It is funny though, that people actually pay attention to the 3 remaining pre-selected turds...
Our last hope for peace Did you get sucked in by the last chimperor, too?
Our last hope for peace I agree. Unfortunately, as we can see here, it won't sway those who have already made up their minds about race and politics.
'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's not easy to change culture through law. But a president can influence it by using his bully pulpit.
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.
In 2000, I considered Gore another Clinton. But in '04 I voted Constitution Party. I might have voted for Kerry, but CA was clearly going his way. Bush/Cheney have been the most evil monsters in our nation's history. A McCain presidency will be another Cheney presidency.
'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
RACE and POLITICS!???? My God you are SUCKER!!!!! If I hadn't watched all of this unfold with my own eyes (transformation from Ron Paul supporters into Black Panther Marxist CFR supporters) I would have difficulty believing it. Unreal
Our last hope for peace agree...and i will give credit where credit is due.
If you can vote for a Skull and Bones, One World Monopolist, Council on Foreign Relations quisling, you're capable of anything...sad.
Our last hope for peace Both are grassroots campaigns, with a lot of support from young people. IMO, Obama is more out of the establishment (I know about CFR), than the other two possibilities. So who will you be voting for? One of the candidates who has no chance of winning?
'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
I'm a realist, and I see no value in allowing others to elect Hillary or McCain. They are far worse than Obama, IMO.
'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
VOTE FOR THE WINNNER argument next!? LOLOL Do you even listen to yourself????
Our last hope for peace It was, and hopefully it will help him win the nomination over Hillary. He will have a tough fight with the corrupt warmonger, McCain.
'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 one of, if not THE, biggest sucker I've encountered on this or any forum that support(ed) Ron Paul...that's saying a LOT.
Our last hope for peace McNuts is a warmonger but the CFR-D people aren't!? THIS IS TOO GOOD!!!!
Our last hope for peace You're a lot of things, realist not being one of them...
Our last hope for peace It's not easy to change culture through law. But a president can influence it by using his bully pulpit. Perhaps, but even if we all agree that cultural change is possible with the right leadership and a true desire for evolution, this issue in this presidential race is still only a diversion. This is just my perspective.
Resist!
Your description fits Bush II and Kerry (not Obama, by the way, as he never attended Yale, and thus had no opportunity to join Skull & Bones). So you would appear to be describing almost everybody who voted in the 2004 election. As someone who voted for Nader (also not Skull & Bones) in '04, let me say, I think you're being unfair to 99% of the American electorate. (I didn't vote for a Skull & Bones candidate in 2000 either, as I voted for Buchanan that year.)
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.
That's not what I posted. I guess you did not really read what I posted. I said I do not want Hillary or McCain; especially McCain. He will be worse than Cheney (according to Pat Buchanan). Voting for Obama is our best chance, far from perfect, but far better than Hillary or McCain. Voting for Ron Paul at this point, is pointless (unless you just want to make what will end up a meaningless statement). I voted for Ron Paul in the CA primary, there was some hope then.
'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
for me it's not about race at all. it's about establishment selections and, i don't think one can argue that Obama is not. he's CFR.
You make rude statements w/o any supporting evidence. Obama is not in any way as corrupted as Hillary and McCain. Nor is he a war monger.
'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
Are those the words of a warmonger?
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.
I'm aware he is CFR, and stated so on this thread. But Hillary and McCain are also corrupt. McCain is an insane warmonger. McCain was part of the Keating Five. He is completely bought by lobbyists of every kind. He just helped a foreign country take away a huge Airbus contract from Americans.
'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
Again, another statement lacking any supporting evidence, just more rude words.
'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
They all belong to CFR. McCain is by far the most warmongering (and proud of it). McCain was part of the Keating Five, he is in bed with every lobbyist in town (he even sleeps with them - literally), he gives huge contracts to foreign nations - stealing them from unemployed/bankrupt Americans. You live in a dream world, where voting for a 3rd party at this point in time, has some meaning.
'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
The 2004 Democratic National Convention may be remembered most for a young and energetic senator that immediately drew comparison to the Kennedys. Obama's speech launched his name and image into the public spotlight, and his fresh style of rhetoric filled a growing anti-war political void – He voted against the Iraq war and wasn't afraid to criticize it's handling. Excitement and support for the senator eventually snowballed into his current presidential campaign. He enjoys a popular image as a liberal democrat, and his harsh criticism of the Iraq war has earned him support from a population united in it's discontent with the current government. To a select crowd of Americans, Obama preaches against the handling of the Iraq war. To other more private groups, Obama advocates military strikes on new middle eastern countries. Obama has aligned himself with several lobbying firms and nongovernmental organizations who seek further US militarization of the world. In several speeches and essays, Obama makes his foreign policy goals clear – and he is not anti-war. Is Obama intentionally sending a deceptive message to his constituency? In a recent speech given to the American Israeli Political Action Committee, Obama outlines a plan for U.S. hegemony. He suggests polarizing political alignments that are already breeding anti-U.S. sentiment. Specifically, Obama pledges unfaltering military support to Israel. The U.S. has long supported Israel – this year they were given $30 billion for defense of the young state. To put this in perspective, less than $7 billion has been federally granted to rebuild homes destroyed after hurricane Katrina. Although the U.S. has always given billions in aid to Israel, his alliance backs preemptive strikes against countries deemed a threat. Israel is unpopular in the region, and is threatened by Iran's desire for modern nuclear energy in the future. Regarding Iran's nuclear program, Obama states “We should take no option, including military action, off the table”. The US has already constructed massive permanent military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan to serve as hubs for such an operation. The fleet of aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf continues to grow, while politicians and media simultaneously hype a nonexistent enemy. This reckless policy leaves the U.S. on the brink of full scale war at all times. Obama differed from many of his peers by admitting the Iraq war was heavily motivated by Iraq's oil reserves. Iran's oilfields, and the military buildup of the Persian Gulf creates and incentive for military action. It has been questioned if the U.S. military even has the capability of securing the strategic oil reserve. Iran has some of the most lucrative oilfields in the region, and provides energy to Asia and Europe. International economies would be disenfranchised with the US military disruption of its energy supplies. Meddling in other countries' foreign affairs has spurred backlash against the U.S. This phenomenon is referred to as “blowback”, or, the consequences from provoking actions. Ignoring this cause and effect, Obama advocates troops in Iraq be redeployed to Pakistan and Afghanistan to fight amorphous groups of “terrorists”. Regarding the war on terror, Obama differs from his colleagues in that he does not believe nuclear weapons should be used – a small concession for an ambitious military operation. This policy still backs preemptive strikes and the further militarization of the middle east, all at the expense of US resources. Obama outlines his ambitious geopolitical plans in a recent essay for Foreign Affairs magazine. Foreign Affairs is published by the Council on Foreign Relations, which describes itself as a non-partisan group of which he is a member. Established in the 1920's and headquartered in New York, its membership includes prominent politicians and business elite, including heads of academia and media. The organization seeks to centralize both political power and market power to craft legislation outside the checks and balances of democracy. The CFR is rarely mentioned by the mainstream media, making it difficult to fully gauge its influence. When it is mentioned in the press, it is likely whitewashed as trivial or irrelevant. Notable members of the CFR include: Dick Cheney John Kerry Bill Clinton Al Gore Ronald Reagan (Honorary) George H. W. Bush Gerald Ford Richard Nixon John, David & Nelson Rockefeller Condolezza Rice Paul Wolfowitz Alan Greenspan Colon Powell Henry Kissinger Angelina Jolie (Yes, the actress has a five year term membership as an ambassador) Its membership list is a who's who of Washington and Wall St. elite going back nearly a century. It should not be surprising that most presidential candidates in the 2008 election are CFR members. Candidates do not advertise their CFR membership to the public. They pose as “liberals” and “conservatives” to control all aspects of the debate. The CFR has stacked the deck for the 2008 election with several members in the race from both sides of the isle: Democrat CFR Candidates: Barack Obama Hillary Clinton John Edwards Chris Dodd Bill Richardson Republican CFR Candidates: Mitt Romney Rudy Giuliani John McCain Fred Thompson Newt Gingrich The mainstream media's self-proclaimed “top tier” candidates are united in their CFR membership, while an unwitting public perceives political diversity. The unwitting public has been conditioned to instinctively deny such a mass deception could ever be hidden in plain view. Presidential Candidate & Congressman Ron Paul is the only “top tier” candidate who is not a member of the CFR. Although many politicians hold membership, It must be noted that the Council on Foreign Relations is a non-governmental organization. The CFR's membership is a union of politicians, bankers, and scholars, with several large businesses holding additional corporate memberships. Corporate members include: Halliburton of Dubai British Petroleum Dutch Royal Shell Exxon Mobile General Electric (NBC) Chevron Lockheed Martin Merck Pharmaceuticals News Corp (FOX) Bloomberg IBM Time Warner JP Morgan/ Chase Manhattan & several other major financial institutions Members are united in their interventionist intentions with the goal of a consolidated global governance. The CFR's mission is to influence policy through the reach of its members and publications. Those who study the CFR ideology are recruited and cultured for membership. The best and brightest university students are taught to propagate the CFR model. Individuals who both subscribe to the CFR ideology and can bring an element of capital (political status, business influence, money) to the group will be given membership. Members meet at the CFR headquarters in Manhattan and Washington DC, and round-table style discussions are held for its membership to discuss foreign affairs and make recommendations on policy. The CFR often creates “task forces” to report “findings and policy prescriptions” (cfr.org) for specific current world events, and also publishes the periodical Foreign Affairs magazine. CFR authors are often found in mainstream media publications. In a recent issue of TIME magazine, one CFR member writes: “The US should make (Pakistani President & US intelligence asset) Musharraf the best dictator he can be”. Another author, this time in Newsweek magazine objectively argues to the readers that the world really isn't all that bad in an article titled “Don't Worry, Be Happy”. Currently, the front page of CFR.org features essays on European anti-terrorism measures, radical Iranians, and the reemergence of the nuclear threat (CFR members in government control the nuclear football). Many prominent publications are influenced and controlled by the CFR: Time Newsweek US News & World Report Atlantic Monthly Forbes & several major publishing houses Members of the CFR in the media intend to inject it's pro-globalist arguments into the mainstream consciousness. Although the CFR is self-described as a non-partisan association, it unabashedly promotes a one-world-government agenda without regard for US sovereignty or the desires of the American people. The goals of the CFR is best described by its very own members. Bill Clinton's Georgetown mentor and CFR member Carroll Quigley states: “The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England... (and) ...believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one world rule established.”. Quigley differs from many of his CFR colleagues in that he believes their plan for a new world order should be more publicly disclosed. In his book Tragedy and Hope, Quigley concedes he is unique among his peers in that he believes the new world order plan of global government's “role in history is significant enough to be known”. Quigley also admits that the two-party system allows for both groups to be controlled at the highest level but operate like bitter rivals. As Quigley says, this gives the voters the chance to “throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound of extreme shifts in policy.”. Controlling Washington elite allowed private central banks to “dominate the political system... ...and economy of world as a whole” and implement a new system of “feudalist fashion” through “secret agreements”. Although he believes the CFR's intentions should be more public, Quigley understands the average person doesn't understand feudalism or serfdom and will never read his book. Surprisingly, many of its own members admit the CFR goal is to subvert the democratic process. CFR member and Judge Advocate General of the US Navy Admiral Chester Ward writes “The main purpose of the (CFR) is promoting the disarmament of US sovereignty and national dependence and submergence into and all powerful, one world government.”. This high ranking military officer went on to explain their procedures for influencing policy, claiming: “Once the ruling members of the CFR shadow government have decided that the US government should adopt a particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of the CFR are put to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy and to confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition.”. The CFR's strategy is also being used to promote world government as well as the new environmental agenda. Obama and most candidates have made the environment a major issue in the policy. The CFR has long suggested a global tax, specifically identifying the environmental movement as a means for its advancement. All CFR candidates align themselves with the position that the government has both the ability and responsibility to maintain the world's environment. Good intentioned individuals may genuinely seek environmental protection, but nongovernmental organizations are quickly capitalizing on land acquisitions and taxes in the name of global warming. While most scientist agree the planet earth is undergoing a degree of climactic change, the CFR admits the environmental argument will be used to erode national sovereignty and build up their global authority. Proposed “Carbon Taxes” place carbon expenditure ratings on mundane human activities. Contrary to popular misconceptions, CO2 is by no means a pollutant. As an essential gas for life, plants thrive on increased levels of CO2 which in turn they produce higher levels of oxygen. Furthermore, carbon based life forms emit carbon to the atmosphere, hence a “Carbon Tax” is a tariff for doing nothing but maintaining life. A popular movement lead by the CFR's own Al Gore would have you believe CO2 is the root cause of environmental woes while ignoring real industrial pollution in developing countries. There are serious environmental problems that are ignored in favor of issues that can be used to tax the broad population. Environmental protection has already lead countries to willingly surrender control of natural resources. The US has ceded control of natural resources to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in a land grab under the guise of environmental protection. UNESCO is part of the United Nations, an organization controlled by many CFR members like permanent US ambassador John Bolton. The CFR's President Richard N. Haass boldly admits “Some governments are prepared to give up elements of sovereignty to address the threat of global climate change.”. He adds that this “Globalisation thus implies that sovereignty... ...needs to become weaker.”. While it is important to be conscious of humans' effects on the earth, nongovernmental organizations like the CFR see an opportunity to redistribute wealth through selective enforcement targeting the US. The CFR openly states its intentions of using the environmental movement and other emotional arguments to build up global authority and undermine US sovereignty. The CFR backs other programs that promote regional governments. Another ambitious goal of the CFR is the implementation of regional unions under the control of a central world government. World leaders are moving towards a regional partnership of North America consisting of Canada, the US, and Mexico. In 2005, the CFR released a report titled “Building an American Community” which sought to eliminate borders between the three North American countries. One part of the plan called for decreasing government control of cross-border traffic in an effort to dissolve national borders. Robert Pastor, a vice chairman of the task force that released “Building a North American Community”, names the “Amero” as a hypothetical unified North American currency similar to the Euro. Carried out with precision, the private, run-for-profit federal reserve bank has massively devalued the US dollar, allowing foreign corporations to buy up US resources for literal pennies on the dollar. The European Union is a similar model to the North American partnership. The EU was hugely opposed by Europeans, and took a half century for the complicit European power elites to fully implement the union. During his time as Prime Minister, Tony Blair tried several times for the United Kingdom's adoption of the unpopular EU constitution that was also staunchly rejected by French and Dutch voters. The current Prime Minister Gordon Brown continues to advance a similar constitution under a new name. Like the EU, American countries would keep their governmental infrastructure but all policy would be superseded by a regional constitution. Already in place in North America is the Security and Prosperity Partnership (spp.gov) established in a meeting between Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin. The SPP consolidates protection of the North American Union by establishing a security perimeter extending north of Canada to the Mexican/ Guatemalan border. This measure was authorized under Bush's ambiguous executive authority, thus avoiding any congressional input or oversight. It is a precursor to a trilateral authority between the three North American economies. A similar measure to the SPP in the establishment of a unified North American region is the NAFTA “Superhighway” which eliminates border restrictions on shipping, allowing imported goods destined for the US to arrive in North America at ports in Mexico. Rather than arriving at the port of Long Beach, imported goods would enter the US via a “port” in the mid-west that lies along the shipping lane. This measure has been unanimously opposed by US cities in proximity of the highway, but the democratic voice is ignored as the government covertly advances. Congress has largely looked away from the issue. Members who are aware of this plan avoid this issue and prefer that it stay secret, and the CFR presidential candidates will not address it. The presidential candidates' association with the the self-described “shadow government” compromises the the voting process and defrauds the constituency. Barack Obama has captivated voters from all parties with his refreshing new style of rhetoric. He has the voting record to back his criticism of the Iraq war. But like his CFR colleagues, he vows to continue the pursuit of a shadowy enemy under the vague threat of “terrorism” - a policy that has cost citizens their personal liberties, trillions in debt and untold lives. The war on terror has been crafted to spend the US into bankruptcy and setup a domestic police state. Money continues to be being printed out of thin air by the private run-for-profit Federal Reserve, while China remains leveraged with over $1 trillion in US dollar holdings. In the middle east, the CFR's blank check for U.S. military operations will deplete U.S. resources while inciting sectarian strife and anti-U.S. sentiment, ignoring the history of blowback as documented by the CIA. Obama and other CFR candidates affiliation with the organization is not promoted on their websites or in any press releases because the organization has centralized political power and financial capital to set policy the public would otherwise oppose. The career politicians in the CFR know corporate sponsorship is frowned upon by voters. The Council is one of the major conduits between government and business leaders in the US. The CFR is guaranteeing power by owning all the horses in the race that is the 2008 election. Obama is captivating unlike most of his competition, undoubtedly intelligent enough to understand his political niche. Another CFR US president guarantees more of the same costly foreign policy that protects corporate interests and isolates the US. Like his colleagues, Barack Obama's stated foreign policy intentions foment the long term militarization and balkanization of the middle east while resources will continue to be spent in deficit to finance an illegal foreign policy. Only when the control of the CFR is fully exposed will the voters have a real democratic choice. You come from the bowels of the Commie/Left/Progressive/Deconstructionist pit of American politics. So understand I take everything coming from you with a large dose of salt. Skull and Bones, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateralists, Bilderbergs, etc. They all work under the banner of the anti-Christ and have prepared his coming. Who do you believe you're fooling, besides the gullible like robin?
Our last hope for peace LOLOL!! Now THAT's FUNNY!!
Our last hope for peace I've avoided this for a long time, but trust me it's not about you...
Our last hope for peace In a recent speech given to the American Israeli Political Action Committee, Obama outlines a plan for U.S. hegemony. He suggests polarizing political alignments that are already breeding anti-U.S. sentiment. Specifically, Obama pledges unfaltering military support to Israel. The U.S. has long supported Israel – this year they were given $30 billion for defense of the young state. To put this in perspective, less than $7 billion has been federally granted to rebuild homes destroyed after hurricane Katrina. Although the U.S. has always given billions in aid to Israel, his alliance backs preemptive strikes against countries deemed a threat. Israel is unpopular in the region, and is threatened by Iran's desire for modern nuclear energy in the future. Regarding Iran's nuclear program, Obama states “We should take no option, including military action, off the table”. Our last hope for peace So you're not admitting you were wrong in your suggestion that Obama is Skull & Bones?
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.
It's cute, though, that you believe there's some nefarious 'chance' out there...
Our last hope for peace I didn't say he was Skull and Bones, dipshiit. They're all the same is what I said, and he's in the club.
Our last hope for peace You might be a bigger sucker than robin...
Our last hope for peace Obama outlines his ambitious geopolitical plans in a recent essay for Foreign Affairs magazine. Our last hope for peace Are those the words of a tool of the establishment?
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.
Our last hope for peace S U C K E R
Our last hope for peace Well, I'm not the one who sticks one to one ideological line no matter what the facts turn out to be, am I?
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.
"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)‡
U C K E R In other words, you don't care what Obama has to say. You're going to stick to your preconceived idea of him, no matter what. Right?
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.
"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)‡
Ironic, considering what Obama was saying.
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.
I'm completely prepared. I admit I didn't see black violence leading to the next phase, what with all the other fodder on hand, however misdirection is the cabal's forte...
Our last hope for peace Patriots (notwithstanding PINOs) are not voting for Obama because he's got some pigment, is that what you're saying?
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)‡
IOW, the fact that you got sucked into the cabal's game is your problem, not mine.
Our last hope for peace Obama takes a more Christian view of other people's problems.
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.
Dick Cheney John Kerry Bill Clinton Al Gore Ronald Reagan George H. W. Bush Gerald Ford Richard Nixon John, David & Nelson Rockefeller Condolezza Rice Paul Wolfowitz Alan Greenspan Colon Powell Henry Kissinger Angelina Jolie (Yes, the actress has a five year term membership as an ambassador) Its membership list is a who's who of Washington and Wall St. elite going back nearly a century. It should not be surprising that most presidential candidates in the 2008 election are CFR members. Candidates do not advertise their CFR membership to the public. They pose as “liberals” and “conservatives” to control all aspects of the debate. The CFR has stacked the deck for the 2008 election with several members in the race from both sides of the isle: Democrat CFR Candidates: Barack Obama Hillary Clinton John Edwards Chris Dodd Bill Richardson Republican CFR Candidates: Mitt Romney Rudy Giuliani John McCain Fred Thompson Newt Gingrich The mainstream media's self-proclaimed “top tier” candidates are united in their CFR membership, while an unwitting public perceives political diversity. The unwitting public has been conditioned to instinctively deny such a mass deception could ever be hidden in plain view. Presidential Candidate & Congressman Ron Paul is the only “top tier” candidate who is not a member of the CFR. 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)‡
Yes he does.
'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
LOLOL!!!!! Why Jesus would not vote for Barack Obama © 2008 WorldNetDaily.com Michelle called partial-birth abortion "a legitimate medical procedure," and wouldn't supporters please pay $150 to attend a luncheon for her husband, who would fight against "cynical ploy[s]" to stop it? But that's not why Obama's opponent Alan Keyes said Jesus Christ wouldn't vote for him. Obama recalled Keyes' statement in a recent USA Today opinion piece but omitted his reasoning. I know his reasoning, because I was there. As a nurse at an Illinois hospital in 1999, I discovered babies were being aborted alive and shelved to die in soiled utility rooms. I discovered infanticide. Legislation was presented on the federal level and in various states called the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. It stated all live-born babies were guaranteed the same constitutional right to equal protection, whether or not they were wanted. BAIPA sailed through the U.S. Senate by unanimous vote. Even Sens. Clinton, Kennedy and Kerry agreed a mother's right to "choose" stopped at her baby's delivery. The bill also passed overwhelmingly in the House. NARAL went neutral on it. Abortion enthusiasts publicly agreed that fighting BAIPA would appear extreme. President Bush signed BAIPA into law in 2002. But in Illinois, the state version of BAIPA repeatedly failed, thanks in large part to then-state Sen. Barack Obama. It only passed in 2005, after Obama left. I testified in 2001 and 2002 before a committee of which Obama was a member. Obama articulately worried that legislation protecting live aborted babies might infringe on women's rights or abortionists' rights. Obama's clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me. I was naive back then. Obama voted against the measure, twice. It ultimately failed. In 2003, as chairman of the next Senate committee to which BAIPA was sent, Obama stopped it from even getting a hearing, shelving it to die much like babies were still being shelved to die in Illinois hospitals and abortion clinics. (As chair of that same committee, Obama once abruptly ended a hearing early, right before Scott and Janet Willis, the parents of six children killed as a result of Illinois' drivers licenses for bribes scandal, were to testify in favor of Choose Life license plate legislation. I was there for that one, too. The Willises had traveled three hours. Reporters filled the room. Obama stalled. He later killed the bill when no one was around.) So, the reason Keyes said Jesus Christ wouldn't vote for Barack Obama was because of Obama's fanatical support of abortion to the point of condoning infanticide. I have framed on my wall a Chicago Sun-Times cartoon published during the campaign. Obama is holding a sign with "LIVE BIRTH ABORTION" on it. God is reaching down from heaven to a baby in front of Obama, and the baby is reaching up to God. Obama is yelling at God, "You keep out of this!" In his USA Today opinion piece, Obama admitted being "nagged" by the Jesus-wouldn't-vote-for-him statement, but only because he wished he'd given a different comeback. Obama insinuated opposition to abortion is based only on religion, lecturing pro-lifers like me to "explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all." I don't recall mentioning religion when I testified against live-birth abortion. I only recall describing a live aborted baby I held in a hospital soiled utility room until he died, and a live aborted baby who was accidentally thrown into the trash. Neither do I recall religion being brought into the partial-birth abortion ban debate. I recall comparisons made to U.S. laws ensuring animals being killed are treated humanely. I recall testimony that late-term babies feel excruciating pain while being aborted. Obama stated pro-life proposals must be "amenable to reason." OK, Sen. Obama, let's reason. Explain why you support abortion for whatever rationale, at whatever gestation, by whatever means. Explain why you support infanticide, if banning it might interfere with abortion. Then, since you brought it up, explain how, despite all that, you think Jesus should vote for you, either now or in the hereafter, particularly given His statement, "It would be better to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around the neck than to face the punishment in store for harming one of these little ones." Our last hope for peace Yes he does. S U C K E R
Our last hope for peace Michelle called partial-birth abortion "a legitimate medical procedure," and wouldn't supporters please pay $150 to attend a luncheon for her husband, who would fight against "cynical ploy[s]" to stop it? WWJA? Who Would Jesus Abort?
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)‡
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.'
You do get carried away .... Ronald Reagan was not a CFR member,
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
So did voting for Badnarik last time. If you're going to throw an insult, at least get your facts right.
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 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 concerned about McCain *if* we have a Democrat Congress. I am concerned with Hillary and a Democrat Congress. Of the two Democrats, Obama is the best choice. He shows the capacity to learn and even the most cynical person has to admit he pays good lip service to issues at the very least. At Chez Mirage, we are "traditional New England Republicans" meaning we believe in a balanced budget, smaller government, and all that stuff. The only candidate that believes in that is Ron Paul and we will be voting for him until we are not allowed to any longer. We don't like RINOs and we don't like NeoCons. We do vote for Conservative (or Blue Dog) Democrats if they are better than the Republican. Color us "equal opportunity" here. Color us "wild-eyed independent" as well if you wish. But, again, I give Obama high marks for the speech. I just wish it recommended a solution or even outlined the pathway to the solution. I expect the grievance industry and the Black Community will, in some parts, come unhinged because Obama threatens their livelihoods. We will have to see what the fallout is from that.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
More to the point, I was correct about the lot of YOU...
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)‡
Obama's role in all of this was defined when Barack Hussein Obama was asked to address the '04 Democrat Convention...he's just another OWM puppet. Amazed at how many people are stupid enough to fall for it, especially the supposed Ron Paul supporters who are now playing the Establishment game.
Our last hope for peace Weren't you going to run as a "Ron Paul Democrat"? !!!! LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!
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)‡
How could an Obama supporter that pretended to support Ron Paul offend me?
Our last hope for peace Seriously, the whole lot of you faux RP supporters jumping to one of the establishment selections are sick little pups...
Our last hope for peace Even Ron Paul had the good sense to avoid endorsing the Establishment Traitor of his own Party...
Our last hope for peace Only at the difference in the target. Imagine Diversity and Grievance people attacking their own. Obama does "get" one very important thing. You cannot fight discrimination with discrimination. He is ahead of every other Democrat in that regard. Now he just needs to "get" that people self-segregate by choice in the modern age.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
As usual, mirage is looking to see who the Libertarians are running since the "top two" choices will be unacceptable.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
and made an appearance on Monday Night Football
I had no idea...amazing how many sheep (even supposed Ron Paul patriots...LOLOL) fall for all this.
Our last hope for peace Unfit to lead
"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 wholeheartely agree with you on this issue. But, I also believe, as Dr. Paul implied ... this American shame is not going to be corrected at the national level.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
They've been hooked back into the circus. Obama knows how to deliver some seriously strong Kool-Aid.
Our last hope for peace Remind me again why I fight for these stupid prigs? They run back to the CFR-D mud puddle like dressed up little piglets when a door to the house is left open...
Our last hope for peace Mrs. Barack would appear to be inflicted with a serious case of Feminist Flu. But at least she is not ostracizing cookie bakers. :-/
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
But, I also believe, as Dr. Paul implied ... this American shame is not going to be corrected at the national level. You put your big but in there and wrecked your attempt at rationalizing why you're voting for McHillobama the Black Panther Marxist baby butcherer...
Our last hope for peace As I mentioned earlier, after the havoc wreaked on the entire world by 'my generation' presidents, bentmember and smirk; I'm ready to let the younger generation have a go at it. My hope is that the awakening that Dr.Paul started across the country, and the world, will continue on the local level. That's where most all these criminal cretins that wind up in deecee got their start, after all.
But at least she is not ostracizing cookie bakers. :-/ There's your but again...
Our last hope for peace Fagee Over Hagee has the whole LOLOL-leet crypto-package where he can tell you if you left a light on in the attic and what your credit score will be next Tuesday. Either that, or he was dropped on his head as a baby.
If RP's support included as large of a % of latent McHillObama supporters as it appears, then truly the movement was MUCH smaller than anyone knew... Interestingly, it appears that MOST of the faux RP supporters came from the traditionally labeled Liberal wing of the CFR Party...
Our last hope for peace Excellent point - I hadn't even thought of the poverty-pimps reaction...maybe BHO should tap Bill Cosby as his veep, to really stir the pot.
As you know dog I emphatically agree with you this year. Even for those putting forth the lesser of evils argument, I don't see how anyone can fail to see the widening of the evil gap this time around.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
For EVERYONE that blew it and supported George W. Bush in either 2000 or especially 2004 - you are NOW not the sleaziest one in the room.
Our last hope for peace The 'Help America' voting machines could elect Christine's cat, who, knowing him personally, would do a fine job in the oval office. Dr.Paul had the support, the donors, just not the black box programmers.
Even knowing the outcome was rigged, I supported the anti-Establishment patriot and would never ever consider playing the McHilloBama goose step. Most of the stalwart RP supporters on 4um have proven to be frauds in their support now of the Marxist Mulatto Panther Barack Hussein Council on Foreign Relations member Obama...
Our last hope for peace If he does that, my only question is then "Where do I send the check?" Obama has set the stage now for real leadership. This is political brinksmanship at its best. If he does not seize the moment and emerge as a real leader with a solution and a plan, all is for naught. All eyes are on Obama now. It is "lead or die" for his campaign at this moment. I imagine the uproar at Jesse Jackson's mansion is deafening. Obama threatens Jackson's very existance. Ditto for Al Sharpton and the Diversity Mongers. Once Obama starts in, he will discover that Black America has withdrawn from the country in many parts. Whitey did his part - it is now time for Black America to do its part and join with the rest of us. Lunch with a friend of mine where we discuss these matters (let's just say his kids are mixed) should be very interesting this week.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
Is it your 'time of the month,' or what the heck's wrong with you today? You're not winning friends, nor influencing people with these mindless, groundless attacks.
Are you now supporting Obama as well?
Our last hope for peace The human equivalent of an "alley cat" already served two terms back in the '90s.
“I would give no thought of what the world might say of me, if I could only transmit to posterity the reputation of an honest man.” - Sam Houston
Another point in his favor. Who's the last President you could say that about. He's obviously got about a 65 point IQ edge on the Decider ... not a bad place to start from.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I understand some of our 4um stalwarts are considering an "Obama cheer leading club". Complete with pom poms.
As you know dog I emphatically agree with you this year. Even for those putting forth the lesser of evils argument, I don't see how anyone can fail to see the widening of the evil gap this time around. Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot Obama's the lesser weevil dis yeer...
Our last hope for peace Funny, I could have sworn you posted on this forum you would abandon your support for Ron Paul unless he publicly disowned Kucinich.
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.
I would like to cover every politician with BBQ sauce, for starters....
Complete with pom poms. Very telling.
Our last hope for peace Damned straight, if I found out that RP was a fraud like you Obamaphiles are, I'd have dropped him in a heart beat too.
Our last hope for peace He never did disown Kucinich, did he?
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.
That was Jefferson's suggestion every twenty years, or so. We're over-due a couple of centuries.
So far it looks like ghost, Ari and icon in the running for head cheer leader for Obama. Actually none of them were surprises.
He didn't have to, putz. He never said he'd be on the same ticket as DK either, did he?
Our last hope for peace Actually none of them were surprises. There's plenty more, and a couple of them were surprises to me. But you'd know far better than I...
Our last hope for peace two hundred
Our last hope for peace Well, I suppose he didn't have to, unless he paid attention to you. As you just admitted a few posts back, you demanded that he publicly disown Kucinich or you would drop your support of him. Some diehard support that is.
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.
Reading Bush's served you well. So did voting for Badnarik last time. Ho hum. Well, I s'pose that at least relieved your frustrations. Repeating the exercise when the choices are so starkly different may have a decidedly sour result.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
When confronted with the choice of "lesser of two evils" - recognize that you are still voting for evil and choose not to play.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
I received direct personal assurances that no watermelons like dk would ever be considered on a Ron Paul ticket.
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)‡
Why the hell not? Guys, you'll never be proven wrong by voting for no-chance candidates. Of course, you'll never know for sure if you were right, either.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
How did you manage to go from supporting the Constitution-candidate to whoring yourself for the Establishment selection(s)? (I already know the answer)
Our last hope for peace I certainly will never endorse, support or have a kind word for ANY of the Establishment candidates let alone put on the knee pads for one like you do...
Our last hope for peace If you bother to read Obama's speech, you may notice that he begins by talking about the Constitution, and ends by talking about the Constitution. In his previous speeches he has repeatedly spoken of his respect for the Constitution, denounced torture, called for restoring habeas corpus, etc. He occasionally mentions in his speeches that for years he taught constitutional law. Not just anywhere, but at the conservative University of Chicago Law School.
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.
Some of these pathetic folks wouldn't know what to do with themselves if they couldn't at least pretend to be playing in the game...
Our last hope for peace From Ron Paul? Oh really?
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.
"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)‡
Don't let me get in the way of you falling for a good line! "Jesus Christ, because he changed my heart"TM
Our last hope for peace You sound surprised.
Our last hope for peace Obama is going down, and with him will crash the faux hopes of millions of naive brainwashed, feminist, socialist UN lovers. Ah yes, I love the smell of false dreams crashing in the morning...
"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 certainly am. Ron Paul communicates with you?
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.
Deep down, they love the thought of the North America Union/Zone/Community...
Our last hope for peace I had the good pleasure of having breakfast with Ron on the campaign trail.
Our last hope for peace You'll have to excuse me if I wait for proof before I believe that. Ron Paul is obviously a very courteous gentleman, something very different from how you present yourself on this forum. And, as you admitted above, Ron Paul and Kucinich are friends. I very much doubt if he would speak of him in anything like the terms you indicated above.
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.
An awful lot of the elitists start at at least the Congressional level. Caveat emptor.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
ari, unlike you, I'm serious about what I do. As the blind man said to his wife after taking a dump: "Honey, can you proof read something for me". So I say to you.
Our last hope for peace Its the canard of "don't throw your vote away!" that gets them every time.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
In other words, you can't prove it.
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.
Still trying to decided what a "Ron Paul Democrat" believes in? You're a joke...a clown asitwere.
Our last hope for peace Sadly, my friend, outside our little cybernet world I have not had my pathway encumbered by great numbers of Dr. Paul supporters.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I don't have to prove it. I was there. My State Campaign Director was there. My wife was there. My partners were there. You're a nobody Left Wing Progressive Communist sh*t for brains that is now sucking the Establishment's knob. You deserve "proof"?! LOLOL You deserve what you continually get.
Our last hope for peace For some, but not for these particular clowns in my opinion. They just like 'the action'. That and they're Liberal Demopublicans to their core...
Our last hope for peace I try to act like a gentleman. Everybody on this forum can see what you are.
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.
Yes, you are a very polite Deconstructionist Communist Progressive Liberal Left Wing Marxist asswipe. But you are a polite one, ari.
Our last hope for peace I repeat: Everybody on this forum can see what you are. And it's certainly not a gentleman. Nor a credit to any cause you may support. Like Ron Paul's.
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.
Could be he's trying to hold his party together. If he gets a chance to go one on one with McInsane the picture may become clearer. He has hinted at bipartisanship, even to the point of implying non-Dims in his administration. I will be anxious to see if he expands on this at cutting time,
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I repeat, I'm not HERE to be a gentleman, a friend, a buddy or ANYTHING else. You Obamaphile knob polisher...
Our last hope for peace Sadly, you and I both know that when it comes to policies, you and Ron Paul have very little in common. He loves America. You love Liberalism.
Our last hope for peace Nor to win any supporters for the causes you support, apparently. Or should I say -- for the causes you say you support.
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.
And, since you admit you're no gentleman, I continue to have a hard time believing someone as courtly as Ron Paul would confide in you.
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.
Or should I say -- for the causes you say you support. I leave the subtleties to others. I'll take a patriot that is less gentlemanly over a polite traitor like you every day of the week and twice on Tuesdays...
Our last hope for peace The Democrat party is pretty much in a civil war right now. That much we know for a fact. If Obama is truly trying to be the "coalition" candidate, he will announce how he will deliver this. Many people are so cynical with regards to Government right now that they don't believe it until they see it. Obama bought himself a pass with his speech today, but the price is stepping up to the plate and being a leader. Delivering on his words begins with articulating a vision and then a plan. Without that, he falls on his face as being an empty suit. Thinking about some of his comments, his "My mother looked over her shoulders for ni**ers" echoes CHRIS ROCK. Is Obama going to blast Chris Rock now? I don't think so. As time goes on and people have time to think about this speech, more "WTF?" items like that will come out.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
I have several times flashed on the thought that FOH may have been a key member of Ron's crack campaign committee. ;-)
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Are you throwing in with these Establishment suckup Obama supporters too, lod?
Our last hope for peace It was his grandmother ... and he wasn't "blasting" her but was in the midst of professing his undiminished love for her.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Yeah, it was a good speech and it seems that some people are bound and determined to overlook the fact that he is an establishment puppet just like those they rail against. ONE decent man running but he didn't get much play in the establishment media. But notice how there is no shortage of it for this guy. Obama, Clinton, McCain, all just alike other than the obvious difference of gender and color.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Still, these are the questions that will be raised. Watch the blogosphere for reaction.
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
My friend, the frauds that have exposed themselves over this are the same type of stealth fake patriots that poisoned Ron Paul's campaign inner circle.... You summed it up nicely. Good to see you.
Our last hope for peace I suspect ghost did'nt.
One of the false-flag operators?
Our last hope for peace This lovefest by 4um members for Obama is downright laffable. White guilt? Hardshell democrats? Naive and or without a clue? We got sandbagged with Clinton and Bush from the same organization and now they offer up Obama and the sheep slobber all over themselves to be first in line for the slaughter. The elite in the back room must be having a real gut busting laff.
Talk is cheap. How did he vote on the funding for the war? Did he not vote in favor of the funding? He is allegedly against the war but votes for all the funding.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Some people are totally transparent.
White guilt? Hardshell democrats? Naive and or without a clue? We got sandbagged with Clinton and Bush from the same organization and now they offer up Obama and the sheep slobber all over themselves to be first in line for the slaughter. The elite in the back room must be having a real gut busting laff. I couldn't have said it any better...
Our last hope for peace I don't give a damn which of the three leading puppets wins the election.
There is, of course, a very simple way to prove your claims -- or at least to make them a lot more believable. If Ron Paul did confide his plans to you, surely you posted something about that here, or elsewhere on the Web. Or at least you must have made some mention of this breakfast meeting you claim to have had with him. You have only to point us to those earlier postings. If, however, this thread is the first time you have mentioned Ron Paul's assurance or your breakfast meeting with him, and that only in response to my challenge, you will have to accept the fact that no one will believe you.
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.
heheheheh
Our last hope for peace !!!!!!!!!!
Our last hope for peace Checkmate.
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.
ari, you're a legend in your own mind. I had lunch with Warren Buffet a few weeks ago, too. Want me to prove that as well? LOLOL I have nothing to prove to a false flag flying traitor like you...
Our last hope for peace Yeah, sure, and you have the time to spend all day posting on this forum. But you somehow never post anything about your meetings with these important people, until somebody challenges you. Yeah, sure. As if we are supposed to believe that somebody with your obvious lack of manners and breeding gets to meet all these important people.
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.
Now now Ari, your elitism is showing again.
I'm trying to provoke FOH into proving his claims. And you've got to admit, he's given me plenty of cause to provoke him. Look at the language he's used -- about me and about others -- in this thread.
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.
Ari... You are fair game here as is everyone else. I do give you credit for civility and manners. When is your fitting for your cheer leaders uniform??? I can hear it now, (Murrow) "rah rah for Old BO"....just kiddin
And very clearly.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" Agreed.
Red states? Blue states? It's an Obama nation!
They that swim with Teddy, become like Teddy.
"The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear." -- Herbert Sebastien Agar (1897-1980) Source: The Time for Greatness, 1942
You summed it up nicely. Good to see you. Likewise. Hope all is well 'round your 'hood. ;^)
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. White guilt? Hardshell democrats? Naive and or without a clue? We got sandbagged with Clinton and Bush from the same organization and now they offer up Obama and the sheep slobber all over themselves to be first in line for the slaughter. The elite in the back room must be having a real gut busting laff. It is sad to me when otherwise intelligent people can be snookered so easily by the establishment and its puppets.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You single thought CFR harranguers are those MOST controlled by the CFR. Ironic.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
uh huh. I didn't mention the CFR but talked about the establishment. You know, the establishment that owns the guy you are touting for president. The CFR is a part of it but only a part.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Evasive hairsplitting and hardly a reply at all. My old mind must be slipping faster than I feared ... I thought the establishment instigated and went ape shit over the illegal invasion of Iraq. Or as Obama puts it so fundamentally and right on, dumb.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
It is sad to me when otherwise intelligent people can be snookered so easily by the establishment and its puppets. Evasive hairsplitting and hardly a reply at all. My old mind must be slipping faster than I feared ... I thought the establishment instigated and went ape shit over the illegal invasion of Iraq. Or as Obama puts it so fundamentally and right on, dumb.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Iraq is not our only problem.
Clarification please. You are referring to McCain and his nefarious legislative couplings with the rotund one are you not?
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Of course it's not .... it's only the root from which the others sprung. Base portion of the Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Wrong, our slavery to the British Empire is the problem. Obama just sings a different anthem, but it's to the same queen.
You are referring to McCain and his nefarious legislative couplings with the rotund one are you not Yes, and Obama.
"The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear." -- Herbert Sebastien Agar (1897-1980) Source: The Time for Greatness, 1942
True, we have been neocon-hubristicly slavish of the British. It is to Likud that we are puzzlingly and totally submissive. But, I still submit that either all problems stem from the very early and ongoing obsessiveness with Iraq or the Bush administration is simply totally inept.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Obama serves the same masters. Iraq is done. Africa is next on their horizon.
You are referring to McCain and his nefarious legislative couplings with the rotund one are you not Yes, and Obama. Kennedy endorsed Obama ... something I have never seen attributed to any act/wish on Obama's part. Incidentally, it appears to have done no good whatsoever for Obama aside from some Kennedy-hagiographic photo-ops. OTOH, McCain and Kennedy have worked hand in glove legislatively.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Prescience here, prescience there, prescience everywhere.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
How odd they are both politicians. I've never seen that either./s Incidentally, it appears to have done no good whatsoever for Obama aside from some Kennedy-hagiographic photo-ops. Gee, I remember an inordinate amount of build up to the event, and the waiting for royalty to arrive. Can't quite remember so much free airtime given to any other candidate, other than the priestess herself. OTOH, McCain and Kennedy have worked hand in glove legislatively. Yes. McCain. Brought back from the dead to ensure no matter which party chummed the waters best, the sharks win. But on the other hand, he wore a glove. >grin
"The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear." -- Herbert Sebastien Agar (1897-1980) Source: The Time for Greatness, 1942
oops
"The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear." -- Herbert Sebastien Agar (1897-1980) Source: The Time for Greatness, 1942
"The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear." -- Herbert Sebastien Agar (1897-1980) Source: The Time for Greatness, 1942
That was my thought as I read that. This guy is certainly no dummie. I still have a gut feeling Hillary has been chosen for us.
Indeed. Anyone who thinks that one of the establishment puppets is the "cure" for the problems the establishment has created probably needs lots of help.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. icon is a part of the problem.
Anyone who really believes Obama is going to be that much better or that much different than what currently infests the White House is going to be badly disappointed IF he actually gets the nomination and "wins" the election.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. I may be getting off track, but do you really think RedNeck (oops! I mean RedState) Uhmurrica would sit still while either Hitlery or a black man became Prezodent? Obama's speech was a nice and commendable effort, and there isn't much in it with which to disagree (other than his shameful genuflection to the NeoCons on the issue of the source of the trouble in the Middle East), but I don't think that the people who need to be reached will ever give either the speech or speaker a fair chance.
#2. To: All (#0)
#3. To: ghostdogtxn (#2)
#4. To: ghostdogtxn (#2)
#5. To: christine (#1)
#6. To: aristeides (#3)
#7. To: Sam Houston (#5)
#8. To: Sam Houston (#5)
#9. To: christine (#4)
#10. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
#11. To: ghostdogtxn (#2)
Now who else thinks Obama engineered the whole Jeremiah Wright contraversy just so he could give this speech?
#12. To: christine (#1)
This is a very good speech.
#13. To: Tauzero (#10)
#14. To: Tauzero (#11)
#15. To: ghostdogtxn (#14)
In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.
#16. To: aristeides (#15)
#17. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
He simply says to everyone in the room, "I am here because of Ashley."
#18. To: Tauzero (#17)
#19. To: ghostdogtxn (#9)
#20. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
#21. To: christine (#19)
#22. To: ... (#20)
#23. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
#24. To: ghostdogtxn (#22)
#25. To: christine (#19)
and it could still be mcCain. i'm thinking that because of his association with lieberman who is accompanying mcCain to Israel and the ME.
#26. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
#27. To: WhiteGuy (#26)
Neither issue has any real substance and neither issue can be resolved by our elected officials. Both are cultural issues and will never be changed by any government.
#28. To: christine (#19)
(Edited)
Obama stopped the clinton kitchen sink and threw it back at them.
#29. To: lodwick (#27)
#30. To: WhiteGuy (#26)
I see this whole "race" matter being the same as the "gay marriage" issue from '04.
#31. To: lodwick (#23)
#32. To: WhiteGuy (#26)
#33. To: WhiteGuy (#26)
Both are polarizing factors to divert Americans' attention away from the fact that the economy is in the toilet
#34. To: ghostdogtxn (#32)
#35. To: Tauzero (#33)
#36. To: ghostdogtxn (#31)
#37. To: ghostdogtxn (#18)
You gotta read the context.
#38. To: WhiteGuy (#34)
#39. To: WhiteGuy (#35)
#40. To: christine (#1)
This is a very good speech.
#41. To: lodwick (#36)
#42. To: WhiteGuy, Tauzero (#35)
#43. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#44. To: christine, ghostdogtxn, aristeides, Brian S, Elliott Jackalope, iconoclast, Arator (#4)
#45. To: Tauzero (#37)
#46. To: ghostdogtxn, WhiteGuy (#38)
I am commenting only on racial divisiveness being used as a diversion.
#47. To: ghostdogtxn (#38)
#48. To: FOH (#43)
#49. To: ghostdogtxn (#48)
(Edited)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#50. To: FOH (#49)
#51. To: ghostdogtxn (#50)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#52. To: ghostdogtxn (#50)
#53. To: FOH (#51)
#54. To: christine (#4)
i give the speech an A
#55. To: robin (#52)
#56. To: ghostdogtxn (#53)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#57. To: robin (#52)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#58. To: ghostdogtxn (#55)
#59. To: WhiteGuy (#26)
Both are cultural issues and will never be changed by any government.
#60. To: FOH (#57)
#61. To: robin (#58)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#62. To: Arete (#54)
I hate political speeches but I forced myself to listen to the entire speech. My opinion? It was a blockbuster.
#63. To: robin (#60)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#64. To: FOH (#61)
#65. To: FOH (#63)
#66. To: robin (#64)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#67. To: Arete (#54)
It was a blockbuster.
#68. To: robin (#65)
They are far worse than Obama, IMO.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#69. To: robin (#67)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#70. To: robin (#65)
I'm a realist
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#71. To: aristeides (#59)
#72. To: FOH (#63)
If you can vote for a Skull and Bones, One World Monopolist, Council on Foreign Relations quisling, you're capable of anything...sad.
#73. To: FOH (#66)
#74. To: robin (#58)
#75. To: FOH (#68)
#76. To: FOH (#68)
This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should've been authorized and never should've been waged, and we want to talk about how we'll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.
#77. To: christine (#74)
#78. To: FOH (#70)
#79. To: FOH (#69)
#80. To: aristeides (#72)
(Edited)
Obama and the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations Member)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#81. To: robin (#79)
You live in a dream world,
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#82. To: robin (#78)
Again, another statement lacking any supporting evidence, just more rude words.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#83. To: All (#82)
To a select crowd of Americans, Obama preaches against the handling of the Iraq war. To other more private groups, Obama advocates military strikes on new middle eastern countries. Obama has aligned himself with several lobbying firms and nongovernmental organizations who seek further US militarization of the world. In several speeches and essays, Obama makes his foreign policy goals clear – and he is not anti-war. Is Obama intentionally sending a deceptive message to his constituency?
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#84. To: FOH (#80)
#85. To: robin (#73)
Voting for Obama is our best chance
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#86. To: aristeides (#84)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#87. To: aristeides (#76)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#88. To: All (#80)
Iran's oilfields, and the military buildup of the Persian Gulf creates and incentive for military action. It has been questioned if the U.S. military even has the capability of securing the strategic oil reserve. Iran has some of the most lucrative oilfields in the region, and provides energy to Asia and Europe. International economies would be disenfranchised with the US military disruption of its energy supplies. Meddling in other countries' foreign affairs has spurred backlash against the U.S. This phenomenon is referred to as “blowback”, or, the consequences from provoking actions. Ignoring this cause and effect, Obama advocates troops in Iraq be redeployed to Pakistan and Afghanistan to fight amorphous groups of “terrorists”. Regarding the war on terror, Obama differs from his colleagues in that he does not believe nuclear weapons should be used – a small concession for an ambitious military operation. This policy still backs preemptive strikes and the further militarization of the middle east, all at the expense of US resources.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#89. To: FOH (#80)
Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.
#90. To: All (#83)
Specifically, Obama pledges unfaltering military support to Israel.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#91. To: aristeides (#89)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#92. To: FOH (#87)
You might be a bigger sucker than robin...
#93. To: FOH (#56)
#94. To: FOH (#91)
S
#95. To: robin (#58)
#96. To: ghostdogtxn (#95)
Some folks need to obsess about race and can't imagine a world without negative racism.
#97. To: ghostdogtxn (#93)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#98. To: ghostdogtxn (#95)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#99. To: aristeides (#96)
#100. To: aristeides (#94)
In other words
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#101. To: FOH (#100)
In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world's great religions demand - that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother's keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister's keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.
#102. To: All (#80)
Foreign Affairs is published by the Council on Foreign Relations, which describes itself as a non-partisan group of which he is a member. Established in the 1920's and headquartered in New York, its membership includes prominent politicians and business elite, including heads of academia and media. The organization seeks to centralize both political power and market power to craft legislation outside the checks and balances of democracy. The CFR is rarely mentioned by the mainstream media, making it difficult to fully gauge its influence. When it is mentioned in the press, it is likely whitewashed as trivial or irrelevant. Notable members of the CFR include:
S U C K E R S
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#103. To: FOH, leveller (#98)
#104. To: aristeides (#101)
Obama takes a more Christian view of other people's problems.
#105. To: aristeides (#101)
Obama takes a more Christian view of other people's problems.
Posted: July 19, 2006
1:00 am Eastern
In February 2004, U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama's wife, Michelle, sent a fund-raising letter with the "alarming news" that "right-wing politicians" had passed a law stopping doctors from stabbing half-born babies in the neck with scissors, suctioning out their brains and crushing their skulls. 
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#106. To: robin (#104)
Obama takes a more Christian view of other people's problems.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#107. To: robin (#104)
In February 2004, U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama's wife, Michelle, sent a fund-raising letter with the "alarming news" that "right-wing politicians" had passed a law stopping doctors from stabbing half-born babies in the neck with scissors, suctioning out their brains and crushing their skulls.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#108. To: FOH (#102)
#109. To: FOH (#106)
#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.
#150. To: FOH (#80)
#151. To: iconoclast (#147)
Reading Bush's served you well.
#152. To: lodwick (#149)
#153. To: mirage (#151)
#154. To: ghostdogtxn (#145)
#155. To: robin, christine (#148)
I guess aristeides was correct about you.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#156. To: mirage (#154)
#157. To: mirage (#154)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#158. To: ghostdogtxn (#152)
No kidding. He's not my first choice, not even my second choice, but out of what's left, he's my ONLY choice.
FOFLOLOL!!! This is TOO GOOD!!!
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#159. To: FOH (#158)
#160. To: iconoclast (#144)
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.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#161. To: ghostdogtxn (#159)
You go to war with army you have, not the army you might wish to have at some future time....
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#162. To: ghostdogtxn (#159)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#163. To: ghostdogtxn (#156)
Would anyone notice a difference?
#164. To: FOH (#157)
Amazed at how many people are stupid enough to fall for it, especially the supposed Ron Paul supporters who are now playing the Establishment game.
#165. To: FOH (#157)
Obama's role in all of this was defined when Barack Hussein Obama was asked to address the '04 Democrat Convention..
#166. To: christine (#165)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#167. To: mirage (#164)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouKJixL--ms&NR=1
#168. To: FOH (#162)
#169. To: FOH (#105)
I discovered infanticide.
#170. To: FOH (#166)
#171. To: ghostdogtxn (#168)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#172. To: Vitamin Z (#170)
They've been hooked back into the circus. Obama knows how to deliver some seriously strong Kool-Aid.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#173. To: FOH (#107)
In February 2004, U.S. Senate candidate Barack Obama's wife, Michelle, sent a fund-raising letter with the "alarming news" that "right-wing politicians" had passed a law stopping doctors from stabbing half-born babies in the neck with scissors, suctioning out their brains and crushing their skulls.
#174. To: iconoclast (#169)
I wholeheartely agree with you on this issue.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#175. To: ghostdogtxn, the thread (#152)
He's not my first choice, not even my second choice, but out of what's left, he's my ONLY choice.
#176. To: iconoclast (#173)
Mrs. Barack would appear to be inflicted with a serious case of Feminist Flu.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#177. To: robin (#148)
#178. To: lodwick (#175)
(Edited)
My hope is that the awakening that Dr.Paul started across the country, and the world, will continue on the local level.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#179. To: mirage (#154)
I expect the grievance industry and the Black Community will, in some parts, come unhinged because Obama threatens their livelihoods. We will have to see what the fallout is from that.
#180. To: ghostdogtxn (#119)
So I'll support him for now, given my lack of other choices.
#181. To: iconoclast, ghostdogtxn, ALL (#180)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#182. To: FOH (#178)
#183. To: lodwick (#182)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#184. To: lodwick (#179)
maybe BHO should tap Bill Cosby as his veep, to really stir the pot.
#185. To: FOH (#181)
For EVERYONE that blew it and supported George W. Bush in either 2000 or especially 2004 - you are NOW not the sleaziest one in the room.
#186. To: lodwick (#185)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#187. To: lodwick (#182)
The 'Help America' voting machines could elect Christine's cat, who, knowing him personally, would do a fine job in the oval office.
#188. To: mirage (#135)
This is a very good speech, but it has the typical Obama signature to it.
#189. To: FOH, all (#183)
Most of the stalwart RP supporters on 4um have proven to be frauds in their support now of the Marxist Mulatto Panther Barack Hussein Council on Foreign Relations member Obama...
#190. To: lodwick, iconoclast, ghostdogtxn (#185)
#180. To: ghostdogtxn (#119)
So I'll support him for now, given my lack of other choices.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#191. To: FOH (#183)
Even knowing the outcome was rigged, I supported the anti-Establishment patriot and would never ever consider playing the McHilloBama goose step.
#192. To: ghostdogtxn (#0)
#193. To: Cynicom (#189)
I understand some of our 4um stalwarts are considering an "Obama cheer leading club".
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#194. To: aristeides (#191)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#195. To: FOH (#194)
#196. To: nobody (#192)
I would like to cover every politician with BBQ sauce, for starters....
#197. To: FOH (#194)
#198. To: aristeides (#195)
He never did disown Kucinich, did he?
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#199. To: Cynicom, aristeides, ghostdogtxn, iconoclast, robin, Brian (#197)
So far it looks like ghost, Ari and icon in the running for head cheer leader for Obama.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#200. To: All (#199)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#201. To: FOH (#198)
(Edited)
He didn't have to, putz.
#202. To: mirage (#151)
#203. To: iconoclast (#202)
Repeating the exercise when the choices are so starkly different may have a decidedly sour result.
#204. To: aristeides (#201)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#205. To: FOH (#181)
#206. To: ghostdogtxn, mirage (#153)
(Edited)
Hey, I voted for Bednarick last time, too.
#207. To: aristeides (#201)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#208. To: ghostdogtxn (#205)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#209. To: FOH (#207)
go from supporting the Constitution-candidate
#210. To: mirage (#203)
When confronted with the choice of "lesser of two evils" - recognize that you are still voting for evil and choose not to play.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#211. To: FOH (#204)
I received direct personal assurances
#212. To: iconoclast (#206)
#213. To: aristeides (#209)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#214. To: aristeides (#211)
From Ron Paul? Oh really?
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#215. To: FOH (#207)
#216. To: FOH (#208)
#217. To: FOH (#214)
You sound surprised.
#218. To: Vitamin Z (#215)
the faux hopes of millions of naive brainwashed, feminist, socialist UN lovers.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#219. To: aristeides (#217)
Ron Paul communicates with you?
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#220. To: FOH (#219)
I had the good pleasure of having breakfast with Ron on the campaign trail.
#221. To: lodwick (#175)
My hope is that the awakening that Dr.Paul started across the country, and the world, will continue on the local level. That's where most all these criminal cretins that wind up in deecee got their start, after all.
#222. To: aristeides (#220)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#223. To: FOH (#210)
Some of these pathetic folks wouldn't know what to do with themselves if they couldn't at least pretend to be playing in the game...
#224. To: FOH (#222)
#225. To: ghostdogtxn (#216)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#226. To: lodwick (#182)
Dr.Paul had the support, the donors, just not the black box programmers.
#227. To: aristeides (#224)
In other words, you can't prove it.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#228. To: mirage (#223)
Its the canard of "don't throw your vote away!" that gets them every time.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#229. To: FOH (#227)
You deserve what you continually get.
#230. To: aristeides (#229)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#231. To: FOH (#230)
(Edited)
#232. To: mirage (#184)
All eyes are on Obama now. It is "lead or die" for his campaign at this moment.
#233. To: aristeides (#231)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#234. To: aristeides (#231)
Nor a credit to any cause you may support. Like Ron Paul's.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#235. To: FOH (#233)
I repeat, I'm not HERE to be a gentleman, a friend, a buddy or ANYTHING else.
#236. To: FOH (#233)
I repeat, I'm not HERE to be a gentleman, a friend, a buddy or ANYTHING else.
#237. To: aristeides, buckeye (#235)
Nor to win any supporters for the causes you support, apparently.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#238. To: iconoclast (#232)
He has hinted at bipartisanship, even to the point of implying non-Dims in his administration.
#239. To: lodwick, FOH (#185)
You're not winning friends, nor influencing people
#240. To: iconoclast, lodwick (#239)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#241. To: mirage (#238)
Thinking about some of his comments, his "My mother looked over her shoulders for ni**ers" echoes CHRIS ROCK. Is Obama going to blast Chris Rock now? I don't think so.
#242. To: FOH (#43)
That's the most patriotic bag of horse puckey I've ever seen handled by a Black Panther Marxist quisling Council on Foreign Relations puppet...
Lord Acton
#243. To: iconoclast (#241)
#244. To: James Deffenbach (#242)
Yeah, it was a good speech and it seems that some people are bound and determined to overlook the fact that he is an establishment puppet just like those they rail against. ONE decent man running but he didn't get much play in the establishment media. But notice how there is no shortage of it for this guy. Obama, Clinton, McCain, all just alike other than the obvious difference of gender and color.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#245. To: FOH (#207)
How did you manage to go from supporting the Constitution-candidate to whoring yourself for the Establishment selection(s)?
#246. To: Cynicom (#245)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#247. To: James Deffenbach (#242)
#248. To: aristeides (#76)
Are those the words of a warmonger?
Lord Acton
#249. To: FOH (#246)
#250. To: Cynicom (#249)
This lovefest by 4um members for Obama is downright laffable.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#251. To: FOH (#237)
I leave the subtleties to others.
#252. To: FOH (#237)
#253. To: aristeides (#252)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#254. To: buckeye (#251)
I don't give a damn which of the three leading puppets wins the election.
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#255. To: FOH (#253)
#256. To: aristeides (#255)
What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...
#257. To: FOH (#256)
(Edited)
I had lunch with Warren Buffet a few weeks ago, too.
#258. To: aristeides (#257)
As if we are supposed to believe that somebody with your obvious lack of manners and breeding gets to meet all these important people.
#259. To: Cynicom, FOH (#258)
#260. To: aristeides (#259)
And you've got to admit, he's given me plenty of cause to provoke him. Look at the language he's used -- about me and about others -- in this thread.
#261. To: aristeides (#229)
Everybody on this forum can see what you are.
#262. To: FOH (#178)
Interestingly, it appears that MOST of the faux RP supporters came from the traditionally labeled Liberal wing of the CFR Party...
#263. To: FOH (#178)
Interestingly, it appears that MOST of the faux RP supporters came from the traditionally labeled Liberal wing of the CFR Party...
#264. To: FOH (#244)
My friend, the frauds that have exposed themselves over this are the same type of stealth fake patriots that poisoned Ron Paul's campaign inner circle....
Lord Acton
#265. To: Cynicom (#247)
This lovefest by 4um members for Obama is downright laffable.
Lord Acton
#266. To: James Deffenbach (#265)
It is sad to me when otherwise intelligent people can be snookered so easily by the establishment and its puppets.
#267. To: iconoclast (#266)
Lord Acton
#268. To: James Deffenbach (#267)
It is sad to me when otherwise intelligent people can be snookered so easily by the establishment and its puppets.
#269. To: James Deffenbach (#267)
uh huh. I didn't mention the CFR
#270. To: iconoclast (#269)
#271. To: Peppa (#263)
They that swim with Teddy, become like Teddy.
#272. To: buckeye (#270)
Iraq is not our only problem.
Midas Bush Touch .... everything he touched turned to shit.
#273. To: iconoclast (#272)
#274. To: iconoclast (#271)
They that swim with Teddy, become like Teddy. Clarification please.
#275. To: buckeye (#273)
our slavery to the British Empire is the problem
#276. To: iconoclast (#275)
#277. To: Peppa (#274)
They that swim with Teddy, become like Teddy. Clarification please.
#278. To: buckeye (#276)
Africa is next on their horizon.
#279. To: iconoclast (#277)
(Edited)
Kennedy endorsed Obama ... something I have never seen attributed to any act/wish on Obama's part.
#280. To: All (#279)
(Edited)
#281. To: All (#279)
Word Up
#282. To: Sam Houston, christine (#5)
Imagine the Chimp writing his own speeches.
#283. To: iconoclast (#269)
My old mind must be slipping faster than I feared...
Lord Acton
#284. To: James Deffenbach (#283)
#285. To: Cynicom (#284)
Lord Acton
#286. To: ghostdogtxn (#103)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest