Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

wellendowed1911 · 11-05-2011, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Why does it matter who WW voted for? Let's just say, hypothetically, that he voted for Obama. Can't he change his mind? It's not like Obama kept any campaign promises, and a lot of people who voted for him feel let down. We all knew McCain was an idiot, but we were told Obama would be different. He's not. Pisses me off.

COG you should be old to know it's all rhetoric every election- there's not a President that you can name that promised something and couldn't keep it whether intentional or unintentional. As far as Obama change is never easy that's the fact because you are always going to have some people who like the status quo- prime example- Insurance companies made billions before Obamacare- they could deny you for a pre-existing conditions and there was nothing you could do- we can all agree that Health care was in shambles and needed a "change" of course you are going to have those who benefit from the status quo in this case insurance companies be resistant to change.
COG- take Afghanistan prior to 9-11 they had one of the most oppressive govt in modern school- women could not leave the house unless accompanied by a man- girls could only be educated up to the age of 8- no playing of any type of music- men could not shave-banning of many traditional sports etc- when the Karzai govt took over and allowed women to be educated- allowed women to work and not force the burka- men could shave without penalty- these were all CHANGES that many people accepted but there are some (TALIBAN) who do not like the changes and have bombed girls schools- kidnap innocent people- all because they are against change- so change is never easy.
Now back to WW- my whole point is he's full of shit and can't even argue his points so it's useless debating him- he's a typical jerk that thinks everything the GOP says is right and the DEMS always wrong- that's being a zombie. On the flip side if you have a Democrat who believes only they have the solutions they are no better. I honestly have seen things Obama proposed that I didn't like- I honestly believe he has good intentions and good will- I didn't feel that way about Bush- I honestly think Bush has set this country back so far it's unreal. Again how do you get handed a booming economy and low UE and 8 years have record deficits- 2 wars and a failed economy????

waverunner234 · 11-05-2011, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Again how do you get handed a booming economy and low UE and 8 years have record deficits- 2 wars and a failed economy????

Well 1 war over at the end of this year, but if Romney would be elected I guess in no time we'll have our second war again. Iran

wellendowed1911 · 11-05-2011, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waverunner234

Well 1 war over at the end of this year, but if Romney would be elected I guess in no time we'll have our second war again. Iran

I agree and did you read Romney's latest economic plan he proposed yesterday- first most critcs and these are non-partisan critcs said Romney's plan would have little to no chance of coming into law because they would be so unpopular with Dems and GOP alike that it would never get through either houses. There's just something about Romney I don't trust- he has flip flopped too much for me to view him as credible- I olve how this person summed up Romney's economic plan:

Romney's plan (Verbatim from Mitt Romney)
- Re-structuring Social Security and Medicare, including letting seniors choose between federal coverage and private health insurance plans
- Reducing foreign aid to countries that don't need it and countries "that oppose American interests."
- Cutting the size of the federal workforce and linking government salaries to private sector salaries
- Combining wasteful government agencies"
----–
Translation:
- Killing Social Security and Medicare by duping seniors into believing their money is as safe and dependable if invested privately with the same Wall Street firms that blew up our economy.
- Reducing foreign aid to countries that don't need it and countries "that oppose American interests." = Substanceless rhetorical blather that is intended to sound nice and is targetting people angry about the necessity of foreign aid as part of our foreign relations and NATIONAL SECURITY policies.
- Eviscerating the ferderal gov't but reducing workforce and therby threatening gov't efficacy and efficiency and capability of carrying out its enforcement duties pursuant to various statutes and regulatory schema and thereby engaging in de facto deregulation. Making sure the federal employees who are left get just as screwed as private emplyees under the plutocratic new world order the GOP is constructing is jus icing on the cake.
- Combining wasteful government agencies = Going Bain all over the federal gov't, merging all sorts of agencies so that workforce can be reduced and thereby not reducing the ability of those agencies to carry out their duties as a result of workforce reductions but also because they now are trying to do the jobs of multiple agencies with a fraction of the workforce.

waverunner234 · 11-05-2011, 10:55 AM

Well said.
To me the only GOP guy that makes any sense is Newt Gringrich.
Besides that he might be a good debate party for Obama, he has proven in the past that he is able and willing to NEGOTIATE. The rest has no clue what that word means.

(I do like Huntsman and Ron Paul but they have no chance)

Whirlaway · 11-05-2011, 11:17 AM

Newt? Yes...we agree here ! And a Lincoln/Douglass debate between Obama and Gingrich would be worth the price of admission on Pay TV !

Obama would never agree to it.......

Quote:

Originally Posted by waverunner234

Well said.
To me the only GOP guy that makes any sense is Newt Gringrich.
Besides that he might be a good debate party for Obama, he has proven in the past that he is able and willing to NEGOTIATE. The rest has no clue what that word means.

(I do like Huntsman and Ron Paul but they have no chance)

waverunner234 · 11-05-2011, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Newt? Yes...we agree here ! And a Lincoln/Douglass debate between Obama and Gingrich would be worth the price of admission on Pay TV !

Obama would never agree to it.......

Wow really? is it possible? We agree?
I'm stunned!!!!

wellendowed1911 · 11-05-2011, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Newt? Yes...we agree here ! And a Lincoln/Douglass debate between Obama and Gingrich would be worth the price of admission on Pay TV !

Obama would never agree to it.......

Didn't Cain and Newt agree to a Linclon/Douglass type debate- if so Cain is out of his league.

Fast Gunn · 11-05-2011, 01:58 PM

If that arrogant and tubby Newt could not even hold his campaign team together, what chance does he have of holding the United States together?

CuteOldGuy · 11-05-2011, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

COG you should be old to know it's all rhetoric every election- there's not a President that you can name that promised something and couldn't keep it whether intentional or unintentional. As far as Obama change is never easy that's the fact because you are always going to have some people who like the status quo- prime example- Insurance companies made billions before Obamacare- they could deny you for a pre-existing conditions and there was nothing you could do- we can all agree that Health care was in shambles and needed a "change" of course you are going to have those who benefit from the status quo in this case insurance companies be resistant to change.
COG- take Afghanistan prior to 9-11 they had one of the most oppressive govt in modern school- women could not leave the house unless accompanied by a man- girls could only be educated up to the age of 8- no playing of any type of music- men could not shave-banning of many traditional sports etc- when the Karzai govt took over and allowed women to be educated- allowed women to work and not force the burka- men could shave without penalty- these were all CHANGES that many people accepted but there are some (TALIBAN) who do not like the changes and have bombed girls schools- kidnap innocent people- all because they are against change- so change is never easy.
Now back to WW- my whole point is he's full of shit and can't even argue his points so it's useless debating him- he's a typical jerk that thinks everything the GOP says is right and the DEMS always wrong- that's being a zombie. On the flip side if you have a Democrat who believes only they have the solutions they are no better. I honestly have seen things Obama proposed that I didn't like- I honestly believe he has good intentions and good will- I didn't feel that way about Bush- I honestly think Bush has set this country back so far it's unreal. Again how do you get handed a booming economy and low UE and 8 years have record deficits- 2 wars and a failed economy????

First of all, Obama promised open and transparent government. Secrecy is now worse than the Nixon administration. Second, he promised to close Gitmo within one year. Gitmo is still open. Third, he promised to end the wars. He got involved in more wars, and is only leaving Iraq because the Iraqis are tired of us. Fourth, he promised bipartisan health care reform. Obamacare was passed on mainly a party line vote, only after threats and sweetheart deals with Democrats. These are serious lies, and ought not be tolerated.

How much better is Afghanistan now? How will it be once we leave? If ever. When did it ever become our problem? We didn't go to war to free the Afghan people, we were chasing OBL. American lives and money are not worth fighting in Afghanistan.

And he is half right, when he says the DEMS are always wrong. He just needs to add that the REPS are always wrong, too.

TexTushHog · 11-07-2011, 06:17 PM

Flawed poll:

My guess if the Republicans stay on the same track that they're on now is back to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

CuteOldGuy · 11-07-2011, 10:53 PM

Unfortunately, TTH, I do believe you're right. And I'm not sure we'd be any better off with one of those Republican "electable" clowns, so it really doesn't matter.

TexTushHog · 11-07-2011, 11:18 PM

Actually, I think that Hunstman would make a decent President. But he has about as much chance of getting the Republican nomination for President as I have of catching on as a free agent in the NBA this summer.

CuteOldGuy · 11-07-2011, 11:38 PM

It's amazing how bad the crop of Republicans can make Huntsman look good. But he is "unelectable." I'm starting to think we might as well quit the charade, re-elect Obama, and hopefully when the country collapses, as it certainly will under either party (Obama is just quicker at bringing on the inevitable), there will be enough left to rebuild.

canoodle · 11-08-2011, 08:38 AM

Newt is the man!!!

timpage · 11-08-2011, 09:01 AM

I'm not as confident about Obama's chances....the economy will dictate, as it always does. If the economic situation remains stagnant or gets worse, Obama could be in trouble.....but only if Romney is the GOP nominee. If it's one of the outer space wingnuts (Cain, Perry, Gingrich, Bachmann), Obama will coast to an easy win, no matter the economic outlook. Luckily, the majority of Americans are not right-wing fringe lunatics like Whirly and Marshall.

BTW, is there any way the mods can disable Marshall's H and A keys on his keyboard? That would be good....