Obama

**Plastic Flute** · 05-09-2008, 09:07 PM

It seems like the longer this Dem. contest goes on. Obama is falling out of favor.

Captain Beefheart · 05-10-2008, 03:12 AM

Who told you, Tim Russert? The f!uck outta here. If anything Hilary has pretty much lost. I don't take her for being stupid as many would believe, she knows she has lost. Bill knows she lost. Chelsea knows she lost. You could see it in ther body language during her "victory" speech on a couple of weeks ago. She need to start repairing the damage that she has fone to the party instead of keeping this race that is over going.

And why are you so concerned about Obama anyways, if I were you I'd ask myself about the fact that US economic and political hegemony is basically on it's way out and that borrowing daily from China and United Arab Emirates isn't exactly problem solving at it's best. The US having some international clout would be good and I think having a president who can find Iraq on a map would go a long way toward regaining some clout, but realistically there may be too many problems for even the best of administrations to fix.

bigbear · 05-10-2008, 03:32 AM

People are making a big mistake in electing Obama!! He said it from his own mouth that

he supports talking to terrorist's!! He is such an A Hole!!

Captain Beefheart · 05-10-2008, 04:29 AM

Do you even know what terrorism means? What it stands for, how to combat it. Apart from the semantic meaning and granted I don't think most americans even understand terrorism given they've only faced it n the last 5 years so. I'll give you mulligan on that one.

But unnless you're clouded enuff to want to re-institute the draft, jack up military spending, dedicate yourselves to a long drawn out conflicts, and do away with all those pesky prohibitions against killing civilians then there's really no way but to sit down and talk. The fact that this continues to elude people demonstrates just how dumbed-down the worlds populace has become, and how constantly subjected to political propoganda we are. Just because the news media uses "terror" and "terrorist" as shorthand for militant Islamic extremism or violent Irish partisans does not mean that those are the only users of this tactic.

Terrorism has taken a big toll on America. It may not be in the form of mere loss of life in small acts of almost isloated destruction, but it is definately taking a toll strategically, monetarily and in your national image.

bigbear · 05-10-2008, 04:57 AM

Beefy, you made some good points! Thanks for the education!

Captain Beefheart · 05-10-2008, 05:32 AM

The global war on terror if you want to call it that will probably be looked down upon as American's biggest "failure" and most counter-productive action in it's history. I'd like to give the benefict of the doubt to high ranking officials because granted most of them have an understanding of history, but if their goals where to actually to eliminate/eradicate terrorist network/cells they were tripping. Those goals are politically, fiscally and militarily unsustainable.

But if the goals was to siphon as much tax-payer money into companies affiliated with those in power (oil, military and construction). How convenient that a lot of weapons are being used up to destroy stuff that is being rebuild by the same nation that destroyed them (oh, and oil is also involved, dont'cha know).

The reality is taht war on terrorism is the direct extension of the cold war in which an (imaginary) enemy was built up in order to justify all kinds of military expenditures. The current administration has just brought it to new heights by involving more companies into the mix to maximize cash flow away from the citizen.

**Jocasta** · 05-10-2008, 05:40 AM

The

Quote:

war on terror

...

I hate that expression, it does nothing to defeat terrorism, only heighten fear.

Captain Beefheart · 05-10-2008, 05:59 AM

The phrase "war against terrorism" and the policy it represents was first announced by Reagan. In a modern context it's just a ad hominem used FOX and other networks to simplify and make it easier to digest for the average person with no understanding of history past or present.

I mean it's pretty much a known fact that the US funded OBL extensively as well as giving him plenty of logistic support and training. They did so with absolutely no pro-Afghani sentiment, but purely anti-Soviet and when Russia gave up on Afghanistan the US turned around and said f!uck off, you've done what we wanted. Much the same can be said for a good many insurgency movements around the world. The US as a matter of policy creates terrorist groups to serve its purposes and discards them to do as they please when they're done with them.

Problem is most people in America probably think terrorism is something new which emerged in modern history. The constant cycle of making ordanance, destroying infrastructure, replacing ordanance, rebuilding infrastructure, yet the idea is still there.

Notice even that with the carpet bombing and massive loss of infrastructure in WWII the same people who ran the big industrial/military infrastructure emerged on top after the war. Losing a few factories and a few hundred thousand workers isn't so hard if these factories have brought in 100 times their cost in gold. And a few weeks later there are masses of unemployed just begging you to let them build mines and bombs again for the next round.

Nowadays that's even less of a risk. There are global players. If one country gets nuked they'll have profited by the whole affair enough to build similar factories in 5 others. For a global player a war is a marvellous opportunity to make money way in excess of any losses they may incur.

**Plastic Flute** · 05-10-2008, 04:45 PM

I care because its better for me to have Hillary run against MCain. I think the only way it could work for either of them is for Hillary to run as an independent than have obama claim her as VP.

Captain Beefheart · 05-10-2008, 05:04 PM

True, McCain doesn't stand a chance against Obama, you're right about that.

This is a great insight into the minds of republican voters. I think this little train of thought is exactly what goes through their head, language style and everything. It's also incredibly simplistic and shallow, like a neat piece of glittery wrapping paper and a bow around a big pile of rusty nails and chemical spills.

**Jocasta** · 05-10-2008, 05:52 PM

Quote:

The phrase "war against terrorism"

Yes, but not the phrase I was referring to.

Jim Halpert · 05-10-2008, 07:13 PM

"war on terror" or "war on terrorism", your media uses it just as the same.

How does one wage war on a concept?

Dennis · 05-10-2008, 07:13 PM

Bee Fart's comments are interesting. To me it seems that the Democrats are the one peddling simplistic rubbish and launching puerile attacks. The "McCain wants us in Iraq for 100 years", "3rd Bush term" slogans are pretty insulting to the intelligence of any balanced voter.

He's too smart to believe the **** his pastor said, but the whole Rev. Wright issue raises big questions about Obama's judgement. So too does his relatively far left situation on the political spectrum and his willigness to hug thugs.

Captain Beefheart · 05-10-2008, 07:55 PM

The idea that all your pastor or spiritual advisor's opinions and beliefs are by extension yours is ridiculous. Especially when it comes to political beliefs. Is that the underlying message here? That he's taking marching orders from the underground "black establishment?"

People seem to have made up their minds about Wright after the initial cycle of sound bytes a few weeks ago, and sadly all subsequent exposure seems to fan those flames, no matter the content.

It's odd that Obama has to spend so much time taking responsibility for his pastor while nobody's even allowed to talk about the more questionable acts of Hillary's husband (or Hillary herself, like Whitewater/Cattle Futures) without being treated like they're some kind of *******.

Nobody talks about Cindy McCain stealing medicine from children in third world countries to support her drug habit.

Nobody talks about McCain taking advice from, hugging, and campaigning with men (Rove/Bush) who slandered him AND his daughter by trying to foment the racist myth that he knocked up a black woman rather than adopted a poor Bangladeshi. That's gross! How could you give such a man a hug? And with no public apologies on their part.

Hell what about his pastor. I mean, for f!ucks sake, what about Ted Motherf!uckin Haggart?

**Plastic Flute** · 05-12-2008, 12:17 AM

Im glad Mcain finally mentioned that Hamas wants wants Obama to be Pres. It took approx 3 weeks but .. Obamas "you are old come back" is what I feel is how Obama deflected the fact.He chose to resort to negative character assaination . I feel this is how all his Presidential descisions will be made. (past behavior is a reflection of future behavior).Obamas lack of experiance and negatism means no resolve.
Im not a big fan of Mcain .I feel he is socialist. But I respect that he fought for my Country, and was a POW.A Hero.

Its very sad to say but . Its the lesser of 2 evils. OBAMA NO, HILLARY NO

Captain Beefheart · 05-12-2008, 12:41 AM

Obama is actually opposed to a palestinian unity government between Hamas and Fatah. He at least shows signs that he wants to take a more moderate stance. I think he'd really rather not get behind them as strongly as the gov have in the past. I don't think he would support every human rights violation. I think he's just trying to play the game to get to a position where he can start to try to do things differently. Where he's at right now a different stance would probably kill him politically. If he gets in office it would be far less damaging.

As I've said before no american president can't be anything but pro-Israel in American politics today. You especially can't be anti-Israel or against any of their policies, lest you be painted antisemitic. And again most average americans probably are stupid enuff to think there was a big conference after the Holocaust and they were like, "Where do we put all these Jews?" and then figured it out by throwing a dart at a map and politely asking the Palestinians to leave. It wasn't like that at all. The plan was not only in place, it was being actively executed and had a decent amount of international support. Nazism caused a large influx of Jews to Israel and the tragedy of the Holocaust helped further the cause, but it was not the reason Israel was created.

And now well yeah...

Obama will MASH McCain head to head.

McCain doesn't stand a chance. I'm predicting 60-40 for obama. Seriously, the republican party in it's current form is going to be irrelevant for the next 10 years. Not because the dems are better but simply because they have pissed too many people off. The religious right can't win on their own and the pro-business crowd is sick of the religious right.

Not to mention that the neo-cons and evangelists hate mccain anyway.

It's gonna be a matter of holding down the polling stations and voter irregularities particularly in Ohio and Florida... AGAIN... for the THIRD presidential election in a row.

**Plastic Flute** · 05-12-2008, 02:26 AM

You mean Barrack HUSSEIN Obama
FOOD FIGHT FOR SURE.
The Dem Party is irrevelent as we speak.
If Mcain wins ,you have to wear a Josh Hartnett Avi (My Choice) for 30 Days and 30Nights . With a sig. that reads . I love Josh Hartnett .

05-09-2008, 09:07 PM	#1 (permalink)
Plastic Flute ICHiBAN HoOT Join Date: May 2006 Location: New Jersey Posts: 12,866 My Profile	Obama It seems like the longer this Dem. contest goes on. Obama is falling out of favor.

05-10-2008, 04:29 AM	#4 (permalink)
Captain Beefheart Mu nótahu Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: In a West End town, a dead end world Posts: 3,677 My Profile	Do you even know what terrorism means? What it stands for, how to combat it. Apart from the semantic meaning and granted I don't think most americans even understand terrorism given they've only faced it n the last 5 years so. I'll give you mulligan on that one. But unnless you're clouded enuff to want to re-institute the draft, jack up military spending, dedicate yourselves to a long drawn out conflicts, and do away with all those pesky prohibitions against killing civilians then there's really no way but to sit down and talk. The fact that this continues to elude people demonstrates just how dumbed-down the worlds populace has become, and how constantly subjected to political propoganda we are. Just because the news media uses "terror" and "terrorist" as shorthand for militant Islamic extremism or violent Irish partisans does not mean that those are the only users of this tactic. Terrorism has taken a big toll on America. It may not be in the form of mere loss of life in small acts of almost isloated destruction, but it is definately taking a toll strategically, monetarily and in your national image. Last edited by Captain Beefheart : 05-10-2008 at 04:39 AM.

05-10-2008, 05:59 AM	#8 (permalink)
Captain Beefheart Mu nótahu Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: In a West End town, a dead end world Posts: 3,677 My Profile	The phrase "war against terrorism" and the policy it represents was first announced by Reagan. In a modern context it's just a ad hominem used FOX and other networks to simplify and make it easier to digest for the average person with no understanding of history past or present. I mean it's pretty much a known fact that the US funded OBL extensively as well as giving him plenty of logistic support and training. They did so with absolutely no pro-Afghani sentiment, but purely anti-Soviet and when Russia gave up on Afghanistan the US turned around and said f!uck off, you've done what we wanted. Much the same can be said for a good many insurgency movements around the world. The US as a matter of policy creates terrorist groups to serve its purposes and discards them to do as they please when they're done with them. Problem is most people in America probably think terrorism is something new which emerged in modern history. The constant cycle of making ordanance, destroying infrastructure, replacing ordanance, rebuilding infrastructure, yet the idea is still there. Notice even that with the carpet bombing and massive loss of infrastructure in WWII the same people who ran the big industrial/military infrastructure emerged on top after the war. Losing a few factories and a few hundred thousand workers isn't so hard if these factories have brought in 100 times their cost in gold. And a few weeks later there are masses of unemployed just begging you to let them build mines and bombs again for the next round. Nowadays that's even less of a risk. There are global players. If one country gets nuked they'll have profited by the whole affair enough to build similar factories in 5 others. For a global player a war is a marvellous opportunity to make money way in excess of any losses they may incur. Last edited by Captain Beefheart : 05-10-2008 at 05:59 AM.

05-10-2008, 05:04 PM	#10 (permalink)
Captain Beefheart Mu nótahu Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: In a West End town, a dead end world Posts: 3,677 My Profile	True, McCain doesn't stand a chance against Obama, you're right about that. This is a great insight into the minds of republican voters. I think this little train of thought is exactly what goes through their head, language style and everything. It's also incredibly simplistic and shallow, like a neat piece of glittery wrapping paper and a bow around a big pile of rusty nails and chemical spills. Last edited by Captain Beefheart : 05-10-2008 at 05:08 PM.

05-10-2008, 07:13 PM	#13 (permalink)
Dennis Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 67 My Profile	Bee Fart's comments are interesting. To me it seems that the Democrats are the one peddling simplistic rubbish and launching puerile attacks. The "McCain wants us in Iraq for 100 years", "3rd Bush term" slogans are pretty insulting to the intelligence of any balanced voter. He's too smart to believe the **** his pastor said, but the whole Rev. Wright issue raises big questions about Obama's judgement. So too does his relatively far left situation on the political spectrum and his willigness to hug thugs. Last edited by Dennis : 05-10-2008 at 07:14 PM.

05-10-2008, 03:12 AM	#2 (permalink)
Captain Beefheart Mu nótahu Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: In a West End town, a dead end world Posts: 3,677 My Profile	Who told you, Tim Russert? The f!uck outta here. If anything Hilary has pretty much lost. I don't take her for being stupid as many would believe, she knows she has lost. Bill knows she lost. Chelsea knows she lost. You could see it in ther body language during her "victory" speech on a couple of weeks ago. She need to start repairing the damage that she has fone to the party instead of keeping this race that is over going. And why are you so concerned about Obama anyways, if I were you I'd ask myself about the fact that US economic and political hegemony is basically on it's way out and that borrowing daily from China and United Arab Emirates isn't exactly problem solving at it's best. The US having some international clout would be good and I think having a president who can find Iraq on a map would go a long way toward regaining some clout, but realistically there may be too many problems for even the best of administrations to fix.

05-10-2008, 03:32 AM	#3 (permalink)
bigbear Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere In Europe Posts: 2,793 My Profile	People are making a big mistake in electing Obama!! He said it from his own mouth that he supports talking to terrorist's!! He is such an A Hole!!

05-10-2008, 04:57 AM	#5 (permalink)
bigbear Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Somewhere In Europe Posts: 2,793 My Profile	Beefy, you made some good points! Thanks for the education!

05-10-2008, 05:32 AM	#6 (permalink)
Captain Beefheart Mu nótahu Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: In a West End town, a dead end world Posts: 3,677 My Profile	The global war on terror if you want to call it that will probably be looked down upon as American's biggest "failure" and most counter-productive action in it's history. I'd like to give the benefict of the doubt to high ranking officials because granted most of them have an understanding of history, but if their goals where to actually to eliminate/eradicate terrorist network/cells they were tripping. Those goals are politically, fiscally and militarily unsustainable. But if the goals was to siphon as much tax-payer money into companies affiliated with those in power (oil, military and construction). How convenient that a lot of weapons are being used up to destroy stuff that is being rebuild by the same nation that destroyed them (oh, and oil is also involved, dont'cha know). The reality is taht war on terrorism is the direct extension of the cold war in which an (imaginary) enemy was built up in order to justify all kinds of military expenditures. The current administration has just brought it to new heights by involving more companies into the mix to maximize cash flow away from the citizen.

05-10-2008, 04:45 PM	#9 (permalink)
Plastic Flute ICHiBAN HoOT Join Date: May 2006 Location: New Jersey Posts: 12,866 My Profile	I care because its better for me to have Hillary run against MCain. I think the only way it could work for either of them is for Hillary to run as an independent than have obama claim her as VP.

05-10-2008, 07:13 PM	#12 (permalink)
Jim Halpert Asistnt. Regional Manager Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Scranton, PA Posts: 198 My Profile	"war on terror" or "war on terrorism", your media uses it just as the same. How does one wage war on a concept?

05-10-2008, 07:55 PM	#14 (permalink)
Captain Beefheart Mu nótahu Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: In a West End town, a dead end world Posts: 3,677 My Profile	The idea that all your pastor or spiritual advisor's opinions and beliefs are by extension yours is ridiculous. Especially when it comes to political beliefs. Is that the underlying message here? That he's taking marching orders from the underground "black establishment?" People seem to have made up their minds about Wright after the initial cycle of sound bytes a few weeks ago, and sadly all subsequent exposure seems to fan those flames, no matter the content. It's odd that Obama has to spend so much time taking responsibility for his pastor while nobody's even allowed to talk about the more questionable acts of Hillary's husband (or Hillary herself, like Whitewater/Cattle Futures) without being treated like they're some kind of ******. Nobody talks about Cindy McCain stealing medicine from children in third world countries to support her drug habit. Nobody talks about McCain taking advice from, hugging, and campaigning with men (Rove/Bush) who slandered him AND his daughter by trying to foment the racist myth that he knocked up a black woman rather than adopted a poor Bangladeshi. That's gross! How could you give such a man a hug? And with no public apologies on their part. Hell what about his pastor. I mean, for f!ucks sake, what about Ted Motherf!uckin Haggart? Last edited by Captain Beefheart : 05-10-2008 at 07:57 PM.*

05-12-2008, 12:17 AM	#15 (permalink)
Plastic Flute ICHiBAN HoOT Join Date: May 2006 Location: New Jersey Posts: 12,866 My Profile	Im glad Mcain finally mentioned that Hamas wants wants Obama to be Pres. It took approx 3 weeks but .. Obamas "you are old come back" is what I feel is how Obama deflected the fact.He chose to resort to negative character assaination . I feel this is how all his Presidential descisions will be made. (past behavior is a reflection of future behavior).Obamas lack of experiance and negatism means no resolve. Im not a big fan of Mcain .I feel he is socialist. But I respect that he fought for my Country, and was a POW.A Hero. Its very sad to say but . Its the lesser of 2 evils. OBAMA NO, HILLARY NO Last edited by Plastic Flute : 05-12-2008 at 12:32 AM.

05-12-2008, 12:41 AM	#16 (permalink)
Captain Beefheart Mu nótahu Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: In a West End town, a dead end world Posts: 3,677 My Profile	Obama is actually opposed to a palestinian unity government between Hamas and Fatah. He at least shows signs that he wants to take a more moderate stance. I think he'd really rather not get behind them as strongly as the gov have in the past. I don't think he would support every human rights violation. I think he's just trying to play the game to get to a position where he can start to try to do things differently. Where he's at right now a different stance would probably kill him politically. If he gets in office it would be far less damaging. As I've said before no american president can't be anything but pro-Israel in American politics today. You especially can't be anti-Israel or against any of their policies, lest you be painted antisemitic. And again most average americans probably are stupid enuff to think there was a big conference after the Holocaust and they were like, "Where do we put all these Jews?" and then figured it out by throwing a dart at a map and politely asking the Palestinians to leave. It wasn't like that at all. The plan was not only in place, it was being actively executed and had a decent amount of international support. Nazism caused a large influx of Jews to Israel and the tragedy of the Holocaust helped further the cause, but it was not the reason Israel was created. And now well yeah... Obama will MASH McCain head to head. McCain doesn't stand a chance. I'm predicting 60-40 for obama. Seriously, the republican party in it's current form is going to be irrelevant for the next 10 years. Not because the dems are better but simply because they have pissed too many people off. The religious right can't win on their own and the pro-business crowd is sick of the religious right. Not to mention that the neo-cons and evangelists hate mccain anyway. It's gonna be a matter of holding down the polling stations and voter irregularities particularly in Ohio and Florida... AGAIN... for the THIRD presidential election in a row. Last edited by Captain Beefheart : 05-12-2008 at 12:42 AM.

05-12-2008, 02:26 AM	#17 (permalink)
Plastic Flute ICHiBAN HoOT Join Date: May 2006 Location: New Jersey Posts: 12,866 My Profile	You mean Barrack HUSSEIN Obama FOOD FIGHT FOR SURE. The Dem Party is irrevelent as we speak. If Mcain wins ,you have to wear a Josh Hartnett Avi (My Choice) for 30 Days and 30Nights . With a sig. that reads . I love Josh Hartnett . Last edited by Plastic Flute : 05-12-2008 at 02:42 AM.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)