Obama Link

Off-topic Discussions (politics, current events, sports, music, etc..)

Moderators: MorGrendel, hypo

User avatar
MorGrendel
Warlord
Posts: 5208
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Obama Link

Post by MorGrendel »

ahrimen wrote:more over.........
not to get to hard on your boy Jeff but Ron Paul, f*'ed him self when he acceped money from a nazi orginzation. hes not a nazi as Obama may or maynot be a communist but to accept money or aid from such people reflects appon you and a candidate should make it thier buisness (or atleast hire some one to) to know these things and denounce them when they find themselves worked into his/her campaign.
He did not ask for nor accept the donation. The accusations are based on that a Nazi SAID he donated to the campaign. You spread misinformation, that angers the JeffCo! I'm sure if the networks gave him some air time he'd fix that up. If you don't like McCain, there are still two Republicans left. Join the revolution. And again did you see where his money is coming from, the troops and retirees, what's more american than that.

Yes, I read what you write, I just can't always make it out :) hilarius clintonious :?:
Mor Grendel
If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy.

Noli nothis permittere te terere.
Fritz
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 1577
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:14 am

Re: Obama Link

Post by Fritz »

Wow that's a real reliable site...

The flag pin I completely support and agree with. It is ridiculous that you have to wear a stupid pin or else be called unpatriotic. Patriotism is in actions, words and deeds, not what we wear. I'll take a man that talks about reunifying the country, but doesn't wear a flag pin over someone who does, but is dedicated to lowering trade barriers which will result in more out sourced jobs.

The hand over the heart thing, I have not heard before, so I am declining to comment until I have further knowledge.

Of course there is no possibility that this fantastically unbiased site could have fabricated the whole thing. /end sarcasm If it is true, my guess is that they're unofficial idiots. That flag simply makes no sense. Exactly who are you trying to appeal to? Exiled Cubans? Ok, then why the hell is Che Guevara on it? Cuban exiles in American hate Castro, to which Guevara is very closely associated. Are they trying to appeal to Central Americans, to whom Guevara is much more popular? Then why the hell is it the Cuban flag? Looks to me like a botched attempt by a bunch of amateurs trying to appeal to a demographic they know nothing about, or a poorly fabricated piece of conservative propaganda against Obama (Muslim emails anyone?). Either case, I doubt the Obama campaign had any hand in it, nor would they approve. Guevara is nothing more than a mass murderer.

This seems oddly appropriate:
http://jasonjeffrey.files.wordpress.com ... tshirt.jpg
Last edited by Fritz on Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."

Captain Tightpants
Fritz
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 1577
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:14 am

Re: Obama Link

Post by Fritz »

MorGrendel wrote:Oh, and for you Obama lovers, here is his top 15:

Goldman Sachs $421,763
Ubs Ag $296,670
Lehman Brothers $250,630
National Amusements Inc $245,843
JP Morgan Chase & Co $243,848
Sidley Austin LLP $226,491
Citigroup Inc $221,578
Exelon Corp $221,517
Skadden, Arps Et Al $196,420
Jones Day $181,996
Harvard University $172,324
Citadel Investment Group $171,798
Time Warner $155,383
Morgan Stanley $155,196

See above for subprime scandal.
Source please.

*Edit*
Nevermind found it. Jeff, you did not read the column to the left. It reads "The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families." Money directly given to a candidate by a company would fall under a Political Action Committee, or PAC. Combined with this link you can see Obama is indebted to hardly anyone but individual donors: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summa ... cycle=2008

Oh and the link for Jeff's post: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contr ... cycle=2008
You spread misinformation, that angers the JeffCo!
Go get mad at yourself now :D
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."

Captain Tightpants
Fritz
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 1577
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:14 am

Re: Obama Link

Post by Fritz »

Sorry to keep pounding on you Jeff, but I just plain can't sleep and picking apart your posts seems like a solution to insomnia.
MorGrendel wrote: I think Obama is pompous.


Umm...ok. To each his own. The man's constant message has been unity and change, that we should reach across the isle to get things done. He attempted to do that with John McCain, who slapped him in the face when Obama didn't do exactly what he wanted him to do in his exact way. I fail to see the pompous in attempting to heal the red state/ blue state divide.
The Dems have bred him for this. He has no political experience, and yet everyone (the media, rivals in the party, other politicians) can just seem to ignore that. He is the Annoited One, the Golden Boy, the Black Candidate with Fries on the Side; he can do no wrong.
The Democratic party is hardly behind Obama. If anything, the core of the party is scared shit less of him. He is strongest where independents are allowed to vote for him. Hillary is the candidate of the establishment. If she wins the nomination, it will probably be because the superdelagates (ie the party leadership) decided to go against the popular will. Obama right now has far more pledged delagates, but is still barely beating Hillary because more of the party leadership has sided with her.

Honestly Jeff you sound like someone from the Hillary campaign. The media and especially Clinton have been pounding him on this issue. People that are voting for him just don't care. His counter-argument is that there is the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of experience. What matters is judgment. He called the war in Iraq, and he called the Iran situation. Hillary voted to give Bush more room to push toward war with Iran by declaring their Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Obama did not. A few weeks later, a National Intelligence Estimate came out saying that with a "high degree of certainty" that Iran had discontinued its Nuclear weapons program 4 years ago. Hillary has also said that she would put National Security before human rights. Obama realizes that they are the exact same thing. By suppressing human rights in the name of national security (ie by funding dictators that suppress democracy), you are sacrificing long term security for a short term solution. This is major thing I would like to see changed in our dealings with the world, and it is clear Clinton would not do that.
I think he has a smug urban bias. I think he and the Democrat party look down on rural America. America includes the mid-west as much as it does California, New York, and Florida.
California, New York and Florida voted for Clinton. Look at where Obama is winning. Iowa, Georgia, Louisiana, Kansas, Nebraska. He lives in Illinois, was born in the Mid-west and grew up in Hawaii. Obama is winning the nomination because he is attractive to those outside the traditional Democractic strongholds. Look at where Clinton is winning. Massachusetts, New York, California, New Hampshire, New Jersey; the homes of the liberal elite.

Also, there is no need to resort to such nasty name calling. "Smug" and "pompous" have no place in reasoned discussion if you don't back up your feelings with a specific action of the candidate. If you have a reason for doing so, by all means say why. If you're going to insult a candidate's character, do it right.

For example: I think John McCain is a sell-out because he stopped supporting the positions that made him such a maverick so that he could shore up the conservative voting bloc. What happened to Jerry Falwell being an agent of intolerance just the same as Al Sharpton? As someone who used to admire his principles even if I disagreed with specific policies, I was dejected to see him blatantly pandering to the conservative base for so much of this election. What, are you too good for independents now Mr McCain? GET YOUR ASS BACK ON THE DAILY SHOW FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME OLD MAN! :mrgreen:
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."

Captain Tightpants
User avatar
MorGrendel
Warlord
Posts: 5208
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Obama Link

Post by MorGrendel »

Grrr. I will crush you later. Soft money bad. Companies that put together 527's bad!
Mor Grendel
If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy.

Noli nothis permittere te terere.
ahrimen
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 1063
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:59 pm

Re: Obama Link

Post by ahrimen »

Obama is for the future :? and change :? and the people :? i havent heard him stick to one solid policy except to get the troops out by 09 so that i think would make him for magic too. cause thats an imposibility! moving the entire state of road island 5000 miles while an equal number of people are trying to kill them :shock: not gona happen in 1 year unless we abandon all our equipment and run for the kuwait border like hell....... so that would be great leave all tha high tech shit for the Irainans and al quada, nice policy!


remember if you believe Obama believes what you believe
or if you're for the future,
or if you're for change (any kind, doesn't have to be good)
vote for Obama :lol:
It’s not arrogance when you’ve bled for it.
Ahrimen Rex - Former Warlord of Galatia
ahrimen
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 1063
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:59 pm

Re: Obama Link

Post by ahrimen »

so ............

if you're for thing to go on a steady downward spiral..................mccain
if you're for lies and scandal and stupid excuses......................clinton
and if you're for udder randomness lacking any position...............obama

i may stay home in nov. :cry:
It’s not arrogance when you’ve bled for it.
Ahrimen Rex - Former Warlord of Galatia
User avatar
hypo
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 2072
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 9:23 am
Location: Columbia, MD

Re: Obama Link

Post by hypo »

<Robot Voice> THAT IS WHY WE VOTE FOR RON PAUL! </Robot Voice>
hýÞö, Aka-Guðmundr Feitrháls Þórsson, Aka-Nugget. Aka-Cramman Ruithais
The Order of Ansuz
Citizen of Galatia
Fritz
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 1577
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:14 am

Re: Obama Link

Post by Fritz »

MorGrendel wrote:Grrr. I will crush you later. Soft money bad. Companies that put together 527's bad!
Agreed, but presidential campaigns rarely take money from companies or PACs directly. In the most recent presidential campaigns the vast majority of funds come from individual contributors. What I wouldn't mind seeing are the names of the top people who gave money, but I think that would be too much for opensecrets.org to keep track of. Where you should be concerned as far as soft money is congressional campaigns. That is where the PACs come into play and where loyalty is bought and sold.

As for Dan's messages, first, I have yet to see Obama totally contradiction himself. For that matter Clinton has not changed positions during this campaign (plenty of contradictions in her past though). What I typically see from Obama is nuance, which can often be taken as contradicting himself. One of Obama's big weaknesses early on was debates. He preferred (and still prefers) to give long complicated answers, not short simple sound bites which are favored in debates.

Second, Obama has just as many concrete plans out there as McCain and Clinton. Just have a look at their websites. Just as many policies as Clinton, not to mention incredibly similar. The difference between the two candidates in not what they believe or what they would do, but how they would do it. Clinton would pursue the usual partisan approach and divide the country 51-49. Obama I believe truly wants to bring the country back together. Anyways, what I think is happening is McCain and Clinton are both attacking Obama on a similar route, so it's starting to sink in to the television media's coverage. It is actually fairly cleaver of McCain to follow Clinton's lead in attacks on Obama, as Obama as of right now looks like he could easily beat him in a national election, where Clinton and McCain run dead even against each other.

Now for a tangential rant about the television media. I swear the internet is better than these morons, despite the crazies all over the place. They're mindless lemmings. I can not physically stand to watch the 24 hour news networks. I miss the good ol' nightly news coverages. They didn't have to fill every hour of every day, so they could do real journalism. The point is, stop getting your news exclusively from CNN, Fox, or MSNBC because they all suck ass. If you want real news, mix and match multiple papers, preferably one with more conservative editorials and one with more liberal editorials. I find that the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal (both of which can be viewed online for free that day) are the best places for full view of what's going on, the Post for a more liberal point of view, the Wall Street Journal for the conservative. Both are more moderate than other national papers and are well written (I find the New York Times quite elitist and condescending and the Washington Times is just plain poorly written and edited). If you wanna get even crazier (like me) use google news. It links to thousands of papers throughout the world. It can be kinda fun to read something from India or some such every so often. If you think the New York Times is anti-American, wait until you read some of that stuff. Wow, just wow.

Anyways, back to the topic of the presidential race. Start throwing some concrete examples at me guys (or in Jeff's case look at your sources more closely). I'd love to hear them. I'm fairly hard behind Obama, but I'm always trying to keep an open mind. You could get me back to voting Colbert-Stewart '08: Truthiness and Justice for all. Then again Clinton could win the nomination, in which case that is my vote. Dan, I staunchly believe that you should always vote. If you don't want to vote for a candidate, I say write in someone you like, or follow my lead and do a joke write in. I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils ever again (the one good lesson that came from John Kerry's campaign), and you shouldn't either. It's a bad system and we deserve better.

*edit*
Wow am I on a high horse of late.

*edit2*
I forgot to mention, the Voice of America, the official newscast of the State Department, is another excellent place to get information. Despite its association with the State Department, it is remarkably unbiased, although that is in part because it does not tend to be terribly detailed. If you want the raw facts in a short, sweet format, VoA is the place to go.
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."

Captain Tightpants
User avatar
MorGrendel
Warlord
Posts: 5208
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Obama Link

Post by MorGrendel »

Anyways, back to the topic of the presidential race. Start throwing some concrete examples at me guys (or in Jeff's case look at your sources more closely). I'd love to hear them
Grrrrr... stupid work. Need more time to crush Fritz "Hussien" Fritz and the site was down last night. And call me a Clinton supporter one more time and I'm pooping in your tent next camping trip. I have said from day 1 that this was going to be McCain vs Obama. Hiliary is already an afterthought, because as you stated, she can not beat McCain. Finally, I want to continue this, and if we raise some awareness to how the Boomers have destroyed us or the corrupt ways of campaign finance, fine by me. And Fritz do you want to go down the road of reading the page. Your link shows Obama debts at around 750,000.
Mor Grendel
If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy.

Noli nothis permittere te terere.
Fritz
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 1577
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 11:14 am

Re: Obama Link

Post by Fritz »

If we're going to start throwing shut names at each other, you're now Jeff "Hitler" Kelly. Oh and I agree that the boomers have fucked us in every way imaginable. THANKS MOM AND DAD! However, campaign financing was just as corrupt before they were on the scene. If anything they did clean it up a little bit (not anywhere near enough though).

I'll call you a McCain supporter instead since he and Clinton are saying the same damned thing right now, happy? The problem is Hillary is not an afterthought because of the incredibly undemocratic nature of the democratic primary. Nearly 1/3 of the vote in the hands of the party elite?! Are you kidding me?! The possibility of them sticking with the special interest candidate is still quite high, despite how bad it would look in the general election and despite the fact that Clinton is now losing to McCain in national polls. These are democrats; they know how to pick a loser.

Oh and as for opensecrets, was that indeed the source you used? I only used it because it had the exact same information that you posted. It looks a little inconsistent to me. On one hand it says Obama has 18 million "cash in hand", but 750k in debts? One chart also shows Obama's PAC contributions as being only $25, but the chart right below implies that he recieved 12k from PACs. If that's not the site you used, then by all means let's ignore it.
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."

Captain Tightpants
User avatar
MorGrendel
Warlord
Posts: 5208
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Obama Link

Post by MorGrendel »

Yeah that the site I used. Some of the PAC discrepency you see is because of how they count 527's and Leadership PACs. The PACs (or SSF as the government calls them), have different rules for different ways of spending money. And so like you mentioned before, some PAC moneys can not be spent on this or that, but can be counted and spent on that other thing. All very confusing, and probably purposely so. Though PACs are not as ambigious as they once were, they still are a bit too crooked for my taste.

I want to right something more definite on PAC, and in particular Leadership PACs, but I just need to finish up some work projects first. I worked until 10:30pm Tues, and 8:00PM yesterday.
Mor Grendel
If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy.

Noli nothis permittere te terere.
User avatar
MorGrendel
Warlord
Posts: 5208
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Obama Link

Post by MorGrendel »

Oh and Hilter is no good; I want an armed populous and I like Bagels.

And why does Obama aways end his speeches with a poem? Discuss.
Mor Grendel
If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy.

Noli nothis permittere te terere.
User avatar
Berserker
Galatian Citizen
Posts: 2176
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:40 pm
Location: Hanover, MD
Contact:

Re: Obama Link

Post by Berserker »

I don't see that poems and Obama will lead to any interesting discussion. What i'm waiting for is your response to all the points Fritz made in his previous posts. That will be interesting discussion. =)
My love for you is like a truck..
User avatar
MorGrendel
Warlord
Posts: 5208
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:06 pm

Re: Obama Link

Post by MorGrendel »

Hmmm, so be it. I will make with the crushing, right after I run some errands for Dan's Party. Though it is hard for me to make out Fritz's points when they are so well mixed in with his college-hippy-knowitall-babble. I will have to e-bay up some Goggles of Truthiness. If you want to point out any highlights, I will take them under consideration. This will be easier than beating X3D Fritz, Deep Fritz, and Fritz 11, combined! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Fritz

Go Ron Paul!
Mor Grendel
If only I had an enemy bigger than my apathy.

Noli nothis permittere te terere.
Post Reply