PA Drive for Obama, this Sunday, 10/19 (Ambler, PA)

[TheRedMenace]

Here's everything you'll ever need to know about Democrats and their thought process (or lack thereof):

Breitbart.tv ‘Howard Stern Show’ Quizzes Obama Supporters in Harlem on Candidate Policies

No thought involved, just repeatin' what the authorities tell you to say. It's easy and makes you feel smart. The only difference for glb is that Harlem is a helluva lot nicer than New Jersey.

[ZAMMY1]

gilbert, you do know how to stir a pot.
i'd feel a lot better about obama if his past was known, his school info, his thesis, his real birth certificate and more.....muslim?
on the other hand, MC is really pretty much a lefty, not a hard conservative like i am.
i'm not happy with either of them.
my best, sam

[lotusforsale]

Originally Posted by glb

It is not irrational to dislike a liar, -g

So then you're NOT supporting Obama?

[ezmoney]

Originally Posted by Tracktimeplz

Ignorance + arrogance is dangerous, and thats all I am going to say.

Promise?

[Z-dculus]

i bet obama loses.......discuss

[lotusforsale]

Originally Posted by glb

I shouldn't be surprised we have so many "low information" voters here, yet I am.

Aren't you the same guys who haven't yet come up with an answer to my repeated question: Name your top ten policy decisions made by the Republican Congress and White House; ones that worked out for us and the world? Ah, how I wish this party had a senses of guilt and embarrasment.




My canvassing technique will be quite simple. Perhaps you'd like to respond to these questions:

Are you better off now than you were 8 years ago? (or 8 months, weeks, days ago?)

Is the country? The world?

Don't you feel that voting Republican is simply rewarding failure?


Hey, how much do you want for this house?

Amazing what people do with 'facts.' From the glb school of critical thinking:

Fact: Rooster crows in the morning.
Fact: The Sun comes up in the morning.
Conclusion: The Rooster's crowing makes the Sun come up.

[ericwgexige]

Originally Posted by Kjakk

Yea, almost as fast as Sarah Palin's approval ratings.

Or the Democratic Congress's approval ratings.
The Democrat congress wish that they had the President's "low" approval ratings...ya know, being the lowest rated congress ever recorded. HAHAHA I think their approval rating is in the single digits now. (for you Obama voters out there, single digits means numbers 1 through 9)

[glb]

Originally Posted by TheRedMenace

Here's everything you'll ever need to know about Democrats and their thought process (or lack thereof):

Breitbart.tv ‘Howard Stern Show’ Quizzes Obama Supporters in Harlem on Candidate Policies

No thought involved, just repeatin' what the authorities tell you to say. It's easy and makes you feel smart. The only difference for glb is that Harlem is a helluva lot nicer than New Jersey.

1. I love Howard.

2. Actually, I cringe when listening to most voters discuss their choices, no matter for which candidate. Many on LT are just as funny...and clueless.

3. I like NJ better. Why do you prefer Harlem? Been to both a lot?

thx

=gb=

[glb]

Originally Posted by lotusforsale

Amazing what people do with 'facts.' From the glb school of critical thinking:

Fact: Rooster crows in the morning.
Fact: The Sun comes up in the morning.
Conclusion: The Rooster's crowing makes the Sun come up.

LFS -

You may not agree w/me, but I guarantee my thinking is superior to yours, given what I've seen you post. If you wish to be insulting, I can do it passively, simply by showing people your posts.

do you wish to maintain there is little or no connection between your party's failed, misguided, discredited policies and the state of our nation and the world?

I can prove otherwise, and have many times. So, let's hear your excuses how the past 8 yrs have gone so badly. Proclaim your support for not upholding the Constitution, Iraq, no energy policy at a time of utmost importance, ruining FEMA, screwing up DOJ, letting the Gulf languish, 965 lies about Iraq, lying about Medicare costs, ignoring Palestine-Israel problem until it was too late, not making India sign non-proliferation treaty, squandering our operating surplus and creating the biggest deficit in history, ignoring the credit/housing crisis warnings for 7 frigging years, more poor citizens, more children w/o food or health care, forgetting about Afghanistan, not going after Bin Laden, outing an active, undercover CIA operative to get back at her husband, neglecting our troops' care, not sending enough troops to Iraq (why didn't McCain back Shinseki??), not equipping our troops properly, signing statements, spying on US citizens, torture, rendition, empowering Iran, environmental rules relaxed or not applied, etc.

Bad foreign policy, terrible domestic policy, ruinous economic policy, bad environmental policy. More terrorists than before, reduced allied support and US image.

wow, at least they didn't fu*k up outer space.

C'mon, buddy, give it a go.


lfs- meet Reality. Reality- meet...oh, sorry, he ran out.

-g

[glb]

Originally Posted by Z-dculus

i bet obama loses.......discuss

HOW MUCH?

I couldn't really take your $$.

[pla_time]

Originally Posted by glb

HOW MUCH?

I couldn't really take your $$.

This was posted on CNN.com today (10/16/08)

Bookie pays out on Obama win

DUBLIN, Ireland (AP) -- Ireland's major betting company Paddy Power is so sure that Barack Obama will win the U.S. presidential election next month that it will pay up on more than &euro1 million ($1.35 million) of pro-Obama bets.

"We declare this race well and truly over and congratulate all those who backed Obama -- your winnings await you," said a company spokesman.

Paddy Power has a long record of attracting media attention by paying out early, particularly on political contests -- and also a recent record of getting the result spectacularly wrong.

In June, the company paid out early in favor of people who had bet that Ireland would approve the EU's latest treaty in a referendum. The next day, a surprise "no" result sent shock waves throughout the 27-nation bloc, and cost the Powers that be a hefty sum.

The company explained Thursday it was paying out early on Obama to reward its customers and acknowledge the inevitable. The spokesman said the company had been taking "one-way traffic for Obama since the start of the summer."

The biggest winner: Someone who gambled &euro100,000 ($135,000) and collected &euro150,000 ($202,000).

The most visionary: A &euro50 ($67) bet placed in 2005 that, because Obama was rated a 50-to-1 no-hoper at the time, paid out &euro2,550 ($3,417).

Nonetheless, the Dublin-based company is still taking new bets on the winner -- and a John McCain upset on November 4 on a bet placed today would collect 6 euros for every euro wagered.

By contrast, a winning &euro1 bet on Obama would net just 1.11 ($1.11).

The company's range of other U.S. presidential bets include whether McCain will drop Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate (a 10-to-1 long-shot), and whether Obama might dump his running mate Joe Biden in favor of Hillary Clinton (an even more distant 66-to-1 chance).

There are also odds on whether each of the 50 U.S. states and District of Columbia will go Republican red or Democratic blue.

[ericwgexige]

Originally Posted by glb

but I guarantee my thinking is superior to yours

Wow! , spoken like a true elitist. Maybe those that don't agree with you are simply "bitter clingers".

Originally Posted by glb

Proclaim your support for not upholding the Constitution, Iraq, no energy policy at a time of utmost importance, ruining FEMA, screwing up DOJ, letting the Gulf languish, 965 lies about Iraq, lying about Medicare costs, ignoring Palestine-Israel problem until it was too late, not making India sign non-proliferation treaty, squandering our operating surplus and creating the biggest deficit in history, ignoring the credit/housing crisis warnings for 7 frigging years, more poor citizens, more children w/o food or health care, forgetting about Afghanistan, not going after Bin Laden, outing an active, undercover CIA operative to get back at her husband, neglecting our troops' care, not sending enough troops to Iraq (why didn't McCain back Shinseki??), not equipping our troops properly, signing statements, spying on US citizens, torture, rendition, empowering Iran, environmental rules relaxed or not applied, etc.

nice lib talking points

[Exigent]

Originally Posted by Z-dculus

i bet obama loses.......discuss

My only hope for that happening is:

1) Jeremiah Wright runs his racist mouth some more.
2) Farrakahn runs his racist mouth in support of B.H.O.
3) All those "undecided" people (I mean, c'mon - how can you still be undecided?) are just being sly because they don't want to deal with the "you're racist" crap they'd get if they stated that they were not going to support B.H.O.
4) Some hard evidence (no pun intended) surfaces to support the claims of Larry Sinclair regarding Obama being a bi-sexual crack user.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L6w4Dl8QcY0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L6w4Dl8QcY0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/88V3F6_iUus&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/88V3F6_iUus&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LvVEzb0edPE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LvVEzb0edPE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[pla_time]

Here's today's Washington Post Editorial

Barack Obama for President

Friday, October 17, 2008; A24

THE NOMINATING process this year produced two unusually talented and qualified presidential candidates. There are few public figures we have respected more over the years than Sen. John McCain. Yet it is without ambivalence that we endorse Sen. Barack Obama for president.

The choice is made easy in part by Mr. McCain's disappointing campaign, above all his irresponsible selection of a running mate who is not ready to be president. It is made easy in larger part, though, because of our admiration for Mr. Obama and the impressive qualities he has shown during this long race. Yes, we have reservations and concerns, almost inevitably, given Mr. Obama's relatively brief experience in national politics. But we also have enormous hopes.

Mr. Obama is a man of supple intelligence, with a nuanced grasp of complex issues and evident skill at conciliation and consensus-building. At home, we believe, he would respond to the economic crisis with a healthy respect for markets tempered by justified dismay over rising inequality and an understanding of the need for focused regulation. Abroad, the best evidence suggests that he would seek to maintain U.S. leadership and engagement, continue the fight against terrorists, and wage vigorous diplomacy on behalf of U.S. values and interests. Mr. Obama has the potential to become a great president. Given the enormous problems he would confront from his first day in office, and the damage wrought over the past eight years, we would settle for very good.

The first question, in fact, might be why either man wants the job. Start with two ongoing wars, both far from being won; an unstable, nuclear-armed Pakistan; a resurgent Russia menacing its neighbors; a terrorist-supporting Iran racing toward nuclear status; a roiling Middle East; a rising China seeking its place in the world. Stir in the threat of nuclear or biological terrorism, the burdens of global poverty and disease, and accelerating climate change. Domestically, wages have stagnated while public education is failing a generation of urban, mostly minority children. Now add the possibility of the deepest economic trough since the Great Depression.

Not even his fiercest critics would blame President Bush for all of these problems, and we are far from being his fiercest critic. But for the past eight years, his administration, while pursuing some worthy policies (accountability in education, homeland security, the promotion of freedom abroad), has also championed some stunningly wrongheaded ones (fiscal recklessness, torture, utter disregard for the planet's ecological health) and has acted too often with incompetence, arrogance or both. A McCain presidency would not equal four more years, but outside of his inner circle, Mr. McCain would draw on many of the same policymakers who have brought us to our current state. We believe they have richly earned, and might even benefit from, some years in the political wilderness.

OF COURSE, Mr. Obama offers a great deal more than being not a Republican. There are two sets of issues that matter most in judging these candidacies. The first has to do with restoring and promoting prosperity and sharing its fruits more evenly in a globalizing era that has suppressed wages and heightened inequality. Here the choice is not a close call. Mr. McCain has little interest in economics and no apparent feel for the topic. His principal proposal, doubling down on the Bush tax cuts, would exacerbate the fiscal wreckage and the inequality simultaneously. Mr. Obama's economic plan contains its share of unaffordable promises, but it pushes more in the direction of fairness and fiscal health. Both men have pledged to tackle climate change.

Mr. Obama also understands that the most important single counter to inequality, and the best way to maintain American competitiveness, is improved education, another subject of only modest interest to Mr. McCain. Mr. Obama would focus attention on early education and on helping families so that another generation of poor children doesn't lose out. His budgets would be less likely to squeeze out important programs such as Head Start and Pell grants. Though he has been less definitive than we would like, he supports accountability measures for public schools and providing parents choices by means of charter schools.

A better health-care system also is crucial to bolstering U.S. competitiveness and relieving worker insecurity. Mr. McCain is right to advocate an end to the tax favoritism showed to employer plans. This system works against lower-income people, and Mr. Obama has disparaged the McCain proposal in deceptive ways. But Mr. McCain's health plan doesn't do enough to protect those who cannot afford health insurance. Mr. Obama hopes to steer the country toward universal coverage by charting a course between government mandates and individual choice, though we question whether his plan is affordable or does enough to contain costs.

The next president is apt to have the chance to nominate one or more Supreme Court justices. Given the court's current precarious balance, we think Obama appointees could have a positive impact on issues from detention policy and executive power to privacy protections and civil rights.

Overshadowing all of these policy choices may be the financial crisis and the recession it is likely to spawn. It is almost impossible to predict what policies will be called for by January, but certainly the country will want in its president a combination of nimbleness and steadfastness -- precisely the qualities Mr. Obama has displayed during the past few weeks. When he might have been scoring political points against the incumbent, he instead responsibly urged fellow Democrats in Congress to back Mr. Bush's financial rescue plan. He has surrounded himself with top-notch, experienced, centrist economic advisers -- perhaps the best warranty that, unlike some past presidents of modest experience, Mr. Obama will not ride into town determined to reinvent every policy wheel. Some have disparaged Mr. Obama as too cool, but his unflappability over the past few weeks -- indeed, over two years of campaigning -- strikes us as exactly what Americans might want in their president at a time of great uncertainty.

ON THE SECOND set of issues, having to do with keeping America safe in a dangerous world, it is a closer call. Mr. McCain has deep knowledge and a longstanding commitment to promoting U.S. leadership and values.

But Mr. Obama, as anyone who reads his books can tell, also has a sophisticated understanding of the world and America's place in it. He, too, is committed to maintaining U.S. leadership and sticking up for democratic values, as his recent defense of tiny Georgia makes clear. We hope he would navigate between the amoral realism of some in his party and the counterproductive cocksureness of the current administration, especially in its first term. On most policies, such as the need to go after al-Qaeda, check Iran's nuclear ambitions and fight HIV/AIDS abroad, he differs little from Mr. Bush or Mr. McCain. But he promises defter diplomacy and greater commitment to allies. His team overstates the likelihood that either of those can produce dramatically better results, but both are certainly worth trying.

Mr. Obama's greatest deviation from current policy is also our biggest worry: his insistence on withdrawing U.S. combat troops from Iraq on a fixed timeline. Thanks to the surge that Mr. Obama opposed, it may be feasible to withdraw many troops during his first two years in office. But if it isn't -- and U.S. generals have warned that the hard-won gains of the past 18 months could be lost by a precipitous withdrawal -- we can only hope and assume that Mr. Obama would recognize the strategic importance of success in Iraq and adjust his plans.

We also can only hope that the alarming anti-trade rhetoric we have heard from Mr. Obama during the campaign would give way to the understanding of the benefits of trade reflected in his writings. A silver lining of the financial crisis may be the flexibility it gives Mr. Obama to override some of the interest groups and members of Congress in his own party who oppose open trade, as well as to pursue the entitlement reform that he surely understands is needed.

IT GIVES US no pleasure to oppose Mr. McCain. Over the years, he has been a force for principle and bipartisanship. He fought to recognize Vietnam, though some of his fellow ex-POWs vilified him for it. He stood up for humane immigration reform, though he knew Republican primary voters would punish him for it. He opposed torture and promoted campaign finance reform, a cause that Mr. Obama injured when he broke his promise to accept public financing in the general election campaign. Mr. McCain staked his career on finding a strategy for success in Iraq when just about everyone else in Washington was ready to give up. We think that he, too, might make a pretty good president.

But the stress of a campaign can reveal some essential truths, and the picture of Mr. McCain that emerged this year is far from reassuring. To pass his party's tax-cut litmus test, he jettisoned his commitment to balanced budgets. He hasn't come up with a coherent agenda, and at times he has seemed rash and impulsive. And we find no way to square his professed passion for America's national security with his choice of a running mate who, no matter what her other strengths, is not prepared to be commander in chief.

ANY PRESIDENTIAL vote is a gamble, and Mr. Obama's résumé is undoubtedly thin. We had hoped, throughout this long campaign, to see more evidence that Mr. Obama might stand up to Democratic orthodoxy and end, as he said in his announcement speech, "our chronic avoidance of tough decisions."

But Mr. Obama's temperament is unlike anything we've seen on the national stage in many years. He is deliberate but not indecisive; eloquent but a master of substance and detail; preternaturally confident but eager to hear opposing points of view. He has inspired millions of voters of diverse ages and races, no small thing in our often divided and cynical country. We think he is the right man for a perilous moment.

[ericwgexige]

Why didn't they just say: "We're a left-wing newspaper, so we're supporting the most left-wing US Senator for President"? Could have saved a lot of ink.

[LBC111]

Look at what right-wing lunacy has done to this country. Obama in not NEARLY left enough. Not NEARLY liberal enough. At least we may finally have someone with intelligence (or "elitism" as the gun-toting war-mongering hicks say) leading this country out of the destruction begun in the Reagan administration.

[Exigent]

Originally Posted by LBC111

leading this country out of the destruction begun in the Reagan administration.

You're a geologist? Go crawl back under that rock!


(nice car though ! )

[Z-dculus]

Originally Posted by glb

HOW MUCH?

I couldn't really take your $$.

lets make it a "friendly" bet. I'm pretty confident considering both al gore and john kerry were "going to win" the last two elections according to the media. we could throw in something lotus-related, like the loser washes the others car or something lol.

[lotusforsale]

Originally Posted by glb

LFS -

You may not agree w/me, but I guarantee my thinking is superior to yours, given what I've seen you post. If you wish to be insulting, I can do it passively, simply by showing people your posts.

do you wish to maintain there is little or no connection between your party's failed, misguided, discredited policies and the state of our nation and the world?

I can prove otherwise, and have many times. So, let's hear your excuses how the past 8 yrs have gone so badly. Proclaim your support for not upholding the Constitution, Iraq, no energy policy at a time of utmost importance, ruining FEMA, screwing up DOJ, letting the Gulf languish, 965 lies about Iraq, lying about Medicare costs, ignoring Palestine-Israel problem until it was too late, not making India sign non-proliferation treaty, squandering our operating surplus and creating the biggest deficit in history, ignoring the credit/housing crisis warnings for 7 frigging years, more poor citizens, more children w/o food or health care, forgetting about Afghanistan, not going after Bin Laden, outing an active, undercover CIA operative to get back at her husband, neglecting our troops' care, not sending enough troops to Iraq (why didn't McCain back Shinseki??), not equipping our troops properly, signing statements, spying on US citizens, torture, rendition, empowering Iran, environmental rules relaxed or not applied, etc.

Bad foreign policy, terrible domestic policy, ruinous economic policy, bad environmental policy. More terrorists than before, reduced allied support and US image.

wow, at least they didn't fu*k up outer space.

C'mon, buddy, give it a go.


lfs- meet Reality. Reality- meet...oh, sorry, he ran out.

-g

Methinks I hit thy hypocritical nerve....

[lotusforsale]

Originally Posted by LBC111

Look at what right-wing lunacy has done to this country. Obama in not NEARLY left enough. Not NEARLY liberal enough. At least we may finally have someone with intelligence (or "elitism" as the gun-toting war-mongering hicks say) leading this country out of the destruction begun in the Reagan administration.

I KNOW you have your tongue firmly planted in your cheek.