Official Stop OBAMA Express!!!

 
Hi Everyone, 

Look at the Great News below. As more and more votes are counted, the President won by even more than we had thought over his rival, Mr. Romney.

 I am respectfully submiting this.


Obama’s victory was more decisive than Bush’s in ’04
Per the [excellent work by the Cook Political Report’s David Wasserman], Obama’s national lead over Romney continues to expand as votes keep on coming in. It’s now Obama 50.9%, Romney 47.4%. That’s a bigger (and more decisive) margin than Bush’s victory over John Kerry in 2004 (which was Bush 50.7% and Kerry 48.2%). What’s more, the president’s lead has grown to close to 3 points in Ohio, 4 points in Virginia and 6 points in Colorado. One doesn’t win Colorado by six points without winning swing voters; there isn’t a big-enough Democratic base to make that argument

I think the Cheney evil thing is far over played, but playing your game, blackmailed them with what?

I thought it was nearly common knowledge that Cheney's office wrote the speech that Powell gave to the UN.

 I'm 100% positive they are rooted in Obama being a Democrat...

 and Obama being black has nothing to do with it.  

..anyone else here making a "100%" statement and you're attacking them like they stole something from you...but its fine for you to do it...

Then why doesn't he ever focus on any of the systematic racism in this country?...

...#1, why are you asking me to focus on what YOU believe should be focused on, I DO ME....you DO YOU, if you don't mind....and why are you asking a 3rd party about my motives and intentions, as if he or YOU can speak for me, and for what I choose to say or do here???...and FYI, the systematic racism in this country primarily has come from "POLICY" from government on the federal, state and local levels for nearly 250 years...and those "policies" have been created, and implemented often for the intent and purpose of creating those disparities...and as I have consistently said here, those decisions have almost unanimously been driven by an old, white male mentality, viewpoint, and agenda, which leads to the results that we see today...so perhaps my focus is where you think it it should be, but I just choose to get there MY WAY, and not the same path you may choose to use...again, IF YOU DON'T MIND...

Nathan--I have to agree with secfan here.  Waht tipped the scale for me was when Obama was addressing Congressand soem GOP idiot yelled out "you lie".  Tothis day there are those nationally as well as on this thread that contend the outburst wasn't racially motivated.  And yet that had NEVER been done to any other president. 

I cannot agree that, just because something happens for the first time, during a black man's presidency, it has to be racist.

It can't just be that Joe Wilson is a giant doosh, and just couldn't hold back his dooshiness any longer?

(Though more than anything, can you believe he ran unopposed this last election?)

ANyhow, point is, I will contend that him yelling "YOU LIE," which contains no racist implications, after a comment that contained no racist implications, and being something that has been said about the president over and over outside of a SOTU address, was not racially motivated.

I'm not a "screaming liberal"--I have some very conservative views that might even surprise secfan or bb, but I will tell you that in my heart of hearts I believe what that jackass said was racially motivated.  There is alot of covert racism yet in this country BUT there is also STILL alot of overt racism not only in the populace of this country but in Congress as well.

How can that be labelled "overt racism?"  I thought that meant the racism was obvious.  I mean, there wasn't even the implication of race in his comments, much less what I know as "overt racism," where the there is no room for guesswork. 

However, as I've said countless times, I completely agree that there is both covert and overt racism in this country.  I just don't see how calling the president a liar equates to either.  But trust me, as a white person in the south, I hear plenty.  White people don't watch what they say as much when there's only other white people around...  I've heard more disgusting racist shjt than I care to remember, so I'm not pretending it doesn't exist. 

I guess, for me, it's that there is enough racism to fight out there already - there's no need to play fast and loose with reason and evidence to find more.  No searching is needed.  There is enough that we know exists, that we know how to correct even, rather than addressing things like this.

At best, even if Joe Wilson's comment was racially motivated, all we can do is guess.  His motivation is his secret, and he may take it to his grave.  Could it be racism?  Absolutely, it could be.  Can we say we KNOW that it is, for a fact?  I don't see how - not by any standard of proof that I think either of us would find acceptable, for most other situations.

toy  I know I missed many, but the point is made

The only poiny you have ever made is that you are a racist

 

I'm 100% positive they are rooted in Obama being a Democrat, just like the attacks they leveled at all the democrats in any position of power over the past 30 years.

Nathan--To borrow a tactic that was used on me..........you need to visit Webster's and look up 'rooted' .   The starting point should not be D or R......to a great extent it is and has been for 30 years--I'll grant you that.   No matter the polarity of the 2 big sides of the big government coin, the principles that guide these 2 Parties are the 'root' cause of disagreement.   Obama's principles are at the root of the 'attacks' that Republicans make against him.   I put 'attacks' in quotes because even using that word attempts to put a negative spin on things.   What you might call an 'attack' might very well be a rational and reasonable expression and reaction to the Great One's principles or lack of them.  

oh toy  I do know how to spell point, bigot

..anyone else here making a "100%" statement and you're attacking them like they stole something from you...but its fine for you to do it...

What are you talking about?

Then why doesn't he ever focus on any of the systematic racism in this country?...

...#1, why are you asking me to focus on what YOU believe should be focused on

I didn't ask you, I asked Sec.

and why are you asking a 3rd party about my motives and intentions

Which apparently you figured out for yourself... 

and FYI, the systematic racism in this country primarily has come from "POLICY" from government on the federal, state and local levels for nearly 250 years...

FYI, that's incorrect.  Most of the policy that is the problem today is from the past 50-60 years.  The policy of 250 years ago has been stamped out already, I figured you heard.

and those "policies" have been created, and implemented often for the intent and purpose of creating those disparities

Some of them.  Some others, not really.  If so, why do so many black people support the war on drugs?

and as I have consistently said here, those decisions have almost unanimously been driven by an old, white male mentality, viewpoint, and agenda, which leads to the results that we see today.

Yes, because ALL old white men have the same agenda...  But you wouldn't stereotype or anything...

BB and Rush Limbaugh, brothers in arms...

but I just choose to get there MY WAY, and not the same path you may choose to use...again, IF YOU DON'T MIND...

I didn't know your memory was so bad, but if you take a look back, you can easily see that this back and forth about what are the real issues of today began when YOU told me that I don't know anything about racism in this country - not the other way around.

but that includes the democrats...

NEWSFLASH...there are racist Democrats, racist liberals, racists on the left...who here has stated that racists are only Republicans??...

  Frankly, it is almost entirely along class lines ...

true class lines exist,  even along class divisions, it still divides distinctly along racial lines...call it class, just a clever way to avoid the obvious race issue on the table...been done forever...

though IMO, it targeted likely democratic voters, because they vote democrat - not black voters because they are black...

..OK...you stick with that...lol

not black voters because they are black..

...not black voters because they are black (thats a color) or because they  exercise their right to vote vote (they (Repubs) all champion the democratic voting process) ....but black voters  because they are black and don't vote Republican...it might help if you stop trying to explain "black", and "focus" on the people that make the decision to suppress in the ways that they do....analyze the decision makers, the policy makers , the ones ACTUALLY doing the wrong, WITH INTENT, and the ones that are put in those offices and supported by the national campaigns for that very devious purpose...and maybe it will lead you to the "sytemic problems" that exist today...250 years of running the same offensive and defensive scheme will tend to get you the results you are looking for...you think??

Nathan--To borrow a tactic that was used on me..........you need to visit Webster's and look up 'rooted' . 

Is that so.

The starting point should not be D or R......to a great extent it is and has been for 30 years--I'll grant you that. 

So I can only assume, as this was my point, that you won't continue on to disagree with me.

No matter the polarity of the 2 big sides of the big government coin, the principles that guide these 2 Parties are the 'root' cause of disagreement.   Obama's principles are at the root of the 'attacks' that Republicans make against him.

How does that make sense?  They have the same principles, but the difference in principles is the root of the problem?

I put 'attacks' in quotes because even using that word attempts to put a negative spin on things.  What you might call an 'attack' might very well be a rational and reasonable expression and reaction to the Great One's principles or lack of them.  

Calling him a socialist, communist, or facist are not reasonable in any way shape or form.  Unless the person saying such a thing has no idea what any of those words actually mean.

BB and Rush Limbaugh, brothers in arms....

when YOU told me that I don't know anything about racism in this country - not the other way around.

...somewhere along the way, you seem to have put me and BB in the same mix....would charge it to old age, but at only 26, 27, thats a little early  for memory failure...lol

so you think all administration officials always agree with the consensus??....what Powell did may have been similar to what Susan Rice did...they read the prepared statement given to them...I doubt all of the Bush administration was in agreement about WMD's and going to war

No.. Powell by virtue of his post and past posts was intertwined in the intelligence community.  no member of the administration had a longer relationship with the active intelligence members, or more credentials to interpet the information.  For Powell to claim he was duped is simply not believable.

Rice has never been in such a role, and is not qualified to make such a determination.  The problem with the whole Rice issue is the story keeps changing.  In a 72 hour span we have heard 3 different stories.  Rice was given unaltered documents.  The State Department removed segments of the documents.  The CIA removed segments of the documents.  Rice may very well be just a victim in all this.  She may not be.  The problem is we do not know the truth.

nathan   He complains all the time    just not about how the attacks against him are racially motivated

I thought that is what we were talking about

Yes Obama complains about the GOP   Thanks for pointing that out

I'm saying that Bstings claim, that the GOP's attacks are racial in motivation, is a bunch of crap

I dont think, unless I missed it, that he claims that is the only reason he gets attacked, but rather one reason

That doesn't mean the people they vote for are racist

Again, I never said there isn't any racism in this country, especially within the populace

I hear and understand that  I have never claimed you dot think there is racism in America

I just think it is naive to believe that there are no racists in the government

Rush isn't the head of the GOP

Rush and a lot of repubs dont seem to know that

back in the 60's and 70's there was plenty of blatant racism in government

reagan railed against 'welfare queens' in the 80's

About when would you say that racists quit being elected

Newt as a presidential candidate this very year, used racism as a tool to get votes with an all white audience

People? Sure I've said plenty of times now that there are plenty of racist people out there

geez Nate,you left out the part where newt and romney used race before white audiences

anyhow we're beating a dead horse

You have your ideas of what is crap in regards to race and government and I have mine

Problem is, that's not what happened.  Powell stood up, and made the case for us to go to war - and then afterwards admitted it was the single biggest mistake of, and black mark on, his career.  Unless I'm entirely mistaken, he said that he didn't believe the speech, but read it on behalf of the administration for which he worked.

 

Which plays out in scenarion #2.  He was asleep at the wheel, either intentionally or unintentionally.  Professor said Powell lied, while I am not willing to go quite to that extreme, if what you (and Powell) claim is true, then he did.  He talked the nation into a war he himself believed was not justified. 

The reflects well on Powell how?

Here is another question.  When Rumsfield called for contingency plans on 8 possible scenarios that could occur in Iraq, one being no WMD are discovered, where was Powell?  Nearly every member of the administration has confirmed he sent such a memo, yet no one, not even Powell himself has ever indicated Powell had any response to it.  If he didn't believe in what he sold the nation on, why was he not for planning for a possible no WMD scenario?

gas  So but no real debate on race can take place without both points of view

well said

well said

Must be more of that sarcarsm!

Wonder how the Romney lunch went?  What was discussed.  Obviously no beer at this summit.

jury is still out , i think it would only be fair to discuss this point after Obana 2nd term 

And what?  Ignore the past 4 years?
===============

my argument should be taken only in the way that his entire body of work needs to be judged after his two terms are up. So one can see from where he started and how many gains were made. I do not automatically assume your point is correct either, only that it is too early to judge the man's work as President until his time is served, as there is not enough data to compare 4 years of Obama Presidency vs Clinton's 8

Correct me if I am wrong, but Gingrich did manage to 'shut down' Government during Clinton term, and I recall that under Obama a deal was made to avoid the same.

 

BB  nathan, I cannot put myself in Bsting and Sec's experience growing up.  I have opinions on race but I do believe that they have more right to talk about their experiences

Not according to twisted, but consider the source   again well said and thank you

It is a little irritating when white people try to explain to me what it is to be black, or even understand it better

There's still racism in politics in America    I think Bsting and I have a more unique position to detect it

(Roosevelt was never a General) 
===========

i kinda thought that was true after I posted, but was too lazy to go back and look it up.
Maybe not a Genera;, but a great ,military leader nonetheless.

But , i was wrong, sorry for that. 

Gas  More right to talk about race as a topic?

Who has said that?  Every person in America has a right to say any damn thing or believe any damn thing they want

But no white person is ever going to convince me they are in a better position to know when race is being used covertly for political gain