KaskadskyjKozak Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 No, surprisingly what you appear to not know is that you're gonna get fucked either way Porter. Thats the fact. Ask all the Woodrow Wilson supports how it goes down when political expediency gets in the way. Your man just tipped his hat that he's no different, only the packaging on the outside has changed. If he can change his position so easily on this on this, it will be easy to switch opinions on every other issue or thing he professes to believe (that today) are right and true. I really had hopes for the guy, but I can see that this is the same bus line, and in fact, perhaps now much less certain to reach a professed destination than the other bus, which has been reliably in service for many many more years than what appears on the outside to be a better "new" improved bus. A new bus that has some HUGE (for me) unseen problems. My original "sheeple" comment is for those cow-eyed morons who attend rallies, jump up and down cheering and squeeling like little girls in support of their candidate. It seems the Obama camp has many more of these types than the McCain camp. They take the propaganda at face value like the clueless suckers that they are. Obama and McCain will undoubtedly have very different administrations. You have to support one of the two. Duh. But the sheeple are embarassing at best, and dangerous at worst. History repeats itself, and one too many movie clips of cheering herds from the past comes to mind. Quote
olyclimber Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 btw, the HOPE i mention has nothing to do with anyone's appropriated campaign slogon, but rather with a faith in this country to turn its self around from the havoc that has been brought about by the current administration. perhaps time will tell that things were not so bad and bush jr. will be viewed as a visionary president and put on a coin or something...but the chances of that happening are pretty much null imo. and out of the two POLITICIANS you have to choose from this time around, who do you think has the better chance of doing that? i think you can make arguments for either, depending on what your point of view is. but to not vote for for either, well that is your choice...but one of these two WILL win. You can always vote for Nader, at least then you wouldn't be throwing away your vote and giving up on the country. Quote
billcoe Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Yeah, well you're still young Porter. And btw, I believe that WE, We the people, can and do make a difference. In fact, most of the time, most of the stuff your elected representatives do is create needless conflict and issues. If they would do less, we would be better off. All these new laws are actually in their totality counterproductive. I find it especially difficult to read some of the crap allegedly normal folks post about here on CC.com about how wretched our country is on occasion. Because we're are not like that as a country. We are generally a good and just people who try to do good, and sometimes we do trip on our dicks and do mean spirited things anyway, cause were not perfect. Quote
olyclimber Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 No, surprisingly what you appear to not know is that you're gonna get fucked either way Porter. Thats the fact. Ask all the Woodrow Wilson supports how it goes down when political expediency gets in the way. Your man just tipped his hat that he's no different, only the packaging on the outside has changed. If he can change his position so easily on this on this, it will be easy to switch opinions on every other issue or thing he professes to believe (that today) are right and true. I really had hopes for the guy, but I can see that this is the same bus line, and in fact, perhaps now much less certain to reach a professed destination than the other bus, which has been reliably in service for many many more years than what appears on the outside to be a better "new" improved bus. A new bus that has some HUGE (for me) unseen problems. My original "sheeple" comment is for those cow-eyed morons who attend rallies, jump up and down cheering and squeeling like little girls in support of their candidate. It seems the Obama camp has many more of these types than the McCain camp. They take the propaganda at face value like the clueless suckers that they are. Obama and McCain will undoubtedly have very different administrations. You have to support one of the two. Duh. But the sheeple are embarassing at best, and dangerous at worst. History repeats itself, and one too many movie clips of cheering herds from the past comes to mind. well that changes things! enthusiasm is a dangerous thing! but then imagine if no one had it...perhaps the world would be a better place? some of those people there may not be sheeple at all, but people who recognize that supporting the apparent winner can be financially advantageous if they are correct how is that for cynicism? Quote
billcoe Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 ....and out of the two POLITICIANS you have to choose from this time around, who do you think has the better chance of doing that? .... Earlier I had thought Obama and was leaning towards him as the recipient of my vote, but was unsure, as he's a new commodity. Now I see that my reservations were spot on. I am beginning to lean towards McCain, who has been around long enough and on top of the visible pile to be examined 6 ways to Sunday including having the inside of his rectum damn near checked with a spotlight. The change in attitude shifted based on this one thing which Obama lied about. Again, I don't think this is a good choice and somewhat do not like either. Quote
billcoe Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 You and I are posting and typing at the same time. I'm taking a break, good talking to you. Cya! BTW, Semantics, as Scott says, is a motherfucker. Quote
olyclimber Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 i suggest you look into precisely what went down. the media isn't communicating this clearly (big surprise there!) i'm sure both sides are spinning it like crazy. i'm not saying he isn't a politician, and i'm not saying he isn't full of it but i think it was basically a "he said/she said" situation regarding the negotiation between the two campaigns on the matter. the one thing that didn't sit well with me though was how fast he made the decision. it sounds like he didn't give it all a chance to be brought in front of the public such that both campaigns had to make a clear choice in the public eye. but then again was there some sort of deadline they were against? Quote
prole Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 I am beginning to lean towards McCain, who has been around long enough and on top of the visible pile to be examined 6 ways to Sunday including having the inside of his rectum damn near checked with a spotlight. Your unconscious scatological analysis speaks volumes about your chosen candidate. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 maybe, he just knows his shit especially from shinola Quote
prole Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 "Relax and take a deep breath, Senator. This will only take a second." Quote
canyondweller Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 I hope I have some change left over, after Obama's tax increases... Quote
prole Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 HA! I get it..."change"! Ha, that's a good one! Amazing. Really. You really have been under a rock. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 HA! I get it..."change"! Ha, that's a good one! Amazing. Really. You really have been under a rock. lick sack, commie Quote
prole Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 Seriously, I think that was Guiliani's line. Look where it got him. Quote
canyondweller Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 HA! I get it..."change"! Ha, that's a good one! Amazing. Really. You really have been under a rock. Were you locked a woodshed and beaten with an extension cord, as a child? I think I saw you on Springer. Quote
kevbone Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 I hope I have some change left over, after Obama's tax increases... I hope I have change left over after the 19 billion a month spent in Iraq that comes out of our current taxes. Quote
billcoe Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 i suggest you look into precisely what went down. the media isn't communicating this clearly (big surprise there!) i'm sure both sides are spinning it like crazy. i'm not saying he isn't a politician, and i'm not saying he isn't full of it but i think it was basically a "he said/she said" situation regarding the negotiation between the two campaigns on the matter. the one thing that didn't sit well with me though was how fast he made the decision. it sounds like he didn't give it all a chance to be brought in front of the public such that both campaigns had to make a clear choice in the public eye. but then again was there some sort of deadline they were against? Well, I'm sure you'll be gratified and thrilled that Obama will be reviving the George Bush "Faith Based Inititives' that Bush started pre first elections. LA times today I find it interesting that when most people evaluate Bush pre-presidential election - that is, as a Governor, he was a very good Governor by most accounts, a gov who listened to good advisors and mostly did the will of the people while maintaining a tight budget. VS Obama, who looks to have none of that as a pre-presidential candidate Senator. Bush stacks up as a much better Governor than Obama was or is as a senator. You though, believe that although Bush went to hell after he was elected, Obama will somehow magically improve. Like you, I had this hope as well until the dude played the semantic card we are discussion. The first comment on the artical I linked was this: "Oh come on folks - let's just admit it and face it -- Obama (and Axelrod) are using the Karl Rove Playbook to Getting Elected. Obama is going to turn out to be the ultimate panderer and will be known as the "Say Anything Do Anything Kid" -- he's not going to be able to fulfull any of these promises - he has the thinnest resume, the least experience, knowledge and his abilities are totally unknown and untested. So the way to win is to do what Rove did for Bush - and that's what's working for Obama. Its a shame, its sad and its sickening. But too many people keep buying into this - so they are getting the government they deserve and the rest of us stuck with it. " Hmmmmmmmmm, I would have called BS till his flip flop on public funding. Now I see him differently. Quote
prole Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 HA! I get it..."change"! Ha, that's a good one! Amazing. Really. You really have been under a rock. Were you locked a woodshed and beaten with an extension cord, as a child? I think I saw you on Springer. Yes, and I don't want you lib-tards and your big government telling people how to raise their kids either. Quote
prole Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 i suggest you look into precisely what went down. the media isn't communicating this clearly (big surprise there!) i'm sure both sides are spinning it like crazy. i'm not saying he isn't a politician, and i'm not saying he isn't full of it but i think it was basically a "he said/she said" situation regarding the negotiation between the two campaigns on the matter. the one thing that didn't sit well with me though was how fast he made the decision. it sounds like he didn't give it all a chance to be brought in front of the public such that both campaigns had to make a clear choice in the public eye. but then again was there some sort of deadline they were against? Well, I'm sure you'll be gratified and thrilled that Obama will be reviving the George Bush "Faith Based Inititives' that Bush started pre first elections. LA times today I find it interesting that when most people evaluate Bush pre-presidential election - that is, as a Governor, he was a very good Governor by most accounts, a gov who listened to good advisors and mostly did the will of the people while maintaining a tight budget. VS Obama, who looks to have none of that as a pre-presidential candidate Senator. Bush stacks up as a much better Governor than Obama was or is as a senator. You though, believe that although Bush went to hell after he was elected, Obama will somehow magically improve. Like you, I had this hope as well until the dude played the semantic card we are discussion. You're so right. I mean we only have to look at how many retarded people Bush executed as governor compared to Obama to see that McCain would make a better president! Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 i suggest you look into precisely what went down. the media isn't communicating this clearly (big surprise there!) i'm sure both sides are spinning it like crazy. i'm not saying he isn't a politician, and i'm not saying he isn't full of it but i think it was basically a "he said/she said" situation regarding the negotiation between the two campaigns on the matter. the one thing that didn't sit well with me though was how fast he made the decision. it sounds like he didn't give it all a chance to be brought in front of the public such that both campaigns had to make a clear choice in the public eye. but then again was there some sort of deadline they were against? Well, I'm sure you'll be gratified and thrilled that Obama will be reviving the George Bush "Faith Based Inititives' that Bush started pre first elections. LA times today I find it interesting that when most people evaluate Bush pre-presidential election - that is, as a Governor, he was a very good Governor by most accounts, a gov who listened to good advisors and mostly did the will of the people while maintaining a tight budget. VS Obama, who looks to have none of that as a pre-presidential candidate Senator. Bush stacks up as a much better Governor than Obama was or is as a senator. You though, believe that although Bush went to hell after he was elected, Obama will somehow magically improve. Like you, I had this hope as well until the dude played the semantic card we are discussion. You're so right. I mean we only have to look at how many retarded people Bush executed as governor compared to Obama to see that McCain would make a better president! too bad he missed you and kevboner Quote
billcoe Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 You're so right. I mean we only have to look at how many retarded people Bush executed as governor compared to Obama to see that McCain would make a better president! I don't know what that has to do with anything. I also do not mean to come off sounding like McCain is so damn much better. I think that the Keating 5 thing should be drug out and beat on with hammers in public by both sides of the isle....one more time! Loudly and publicly. Quote
prole Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 too bad he missed you and kevboner Ouch. You got me there. Quote
prole Posted July 1, 2008 Posted July 1, 2008 You're so right. I mean we only have to look at how many retarded people Bush executed as governor compared to Obama to see that McCain would make a better president! I don't know what that has to do with anything. I also do not mean to come off sounding like McCain is so damn much better. I think that the Keating 5 thing should be drug out and beat on with hammers in public by both sides of the isle....one more time! Loudly and publicly. Would that be Gilligan's Isle? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.