If this were a Magic card, I would've laughed much harder.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Printable View
If this were a Magic card, I would've laughed much harder.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
McCain accepted their endorsements for political gain after writing them off as nutjobs. That sits a lot easier with me (especially since I know McCain will never even talk to them again once he gets elected). If McCain went to Robertson or Falwell's sermons for twenty years, credited them with saving his soul, got married by them, had his kids baptized by them, titled his book after one of their sermons, had a wife that was parroting their bullshit, etc. only to turn around and say "I had no idea they said hateful things" his campaign would already be a lost cause. Obama's an inspiring figure and a brilliant orator but he's demonstrated himself to be just another politician with all this nonsense. He's not bringing home the troops or changing NAFTA but he'll promise to if you'll vote for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
All too easy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/6035/racecardwx6.jpg
I almost used that one but I liked the text and picture on the other one better. If only they could be united.
I've never heard it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Yeah, totally. I'd much rather have a candidate with no convictions whatsoever than one that is confident enough in his own that he doesn't need to unilaterally put everyone into the "accept" or "reject" piles.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
McCain has no convictions? Now you're just being silly. I'd rather elect a guy that will pretend he doesn't hate certain insignificant figures to get elected than a guy that will blatantly lie about his policy plans to get elected. If Obama were as honest and forthcoming as McCain he'd say "I maintain that going into Iraq was dumb but now we're there and we have to stay until the job is done." Instead he's promising to yank out the troops knowing fully that in his re-election campaign he'll say "I cared more about doing the right thing than political expediency, which is why I haven't taken the troops out of Iraq."Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Well if he does, they're not terribly important to him. He's had no problem swallowing the Bush administration agenda, buddying up to people he hates, and generally being a grovelling worm.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
We don't though.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Pretty much right there is why he's no longer the awesome "I will shit on both parties to get my point across" candidate. He lost me when he suddenly decided we were winning in Iraq, claimed it on the Daily Show, made statements lumping those who don't support the war in Iraq as not giving a shit about the troops, got absolutely owned by John Stewart for saying such a thing, apologized, then seemingly out of the blue, embraced that mongrel idiot's presidency like it was the second coming of fucking fairytale Jesus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
I thought Republicans hated public Flip Floppers?
Fucking hypocrites.
What do you honestly think would happen if we left Iraq tomorrow? Hillary and Obama know we can't leave, they're just pandering to you until Bush is out of office so they can claim ownership of the issue. I will bet anyone here a thousand dollars that we'll still have troops in Iraq during the 2012 election if Obama or Hillary wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Settle down, it's not like he voted for the war then tried to argue that he didn't know what he was voting for or that Bush tricked him. He lobbied to get Rumsfeld and Bremer shitcanned, succeeded, then advocated a strategy to turn things around that has worked so far. He still puts policies before parties, as evidenced by the stands he takes on issues like global warming and illegal immigration that send the Republican establishment into a frothing rage. He publicly buried the hatchet with Bush and the religious right so they won't stand in the way of his election, that's not flip flopping. It's politics. McCain isn't the candidate claiming he'll reinvent politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
McCain gets a lifetime pass imo. I don't want him as prez but the man is fucking A-OK in my book.
nah, its probably more because no one really listens to angry white preachers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
People do listen to angry black ones though.
Hey, he's not the candidate he once was in my mind. Nor should he be. I understand its fucking politics and they all have to get fucked by the devil in the ass to have any kind of chance, but I have a massive, massive, problem with the devil he's letting fuck him right now, because its the actual devil (Dick Cheney) and he is very quickly losing credibility with the people that would have gotten him elected (Democrats, Centrists) because he's trying to win back the people that hate him (most Republicans) and therefore making him hypocritical.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Also I suggest you take that quote out of your signature. The man who said the solution to the middle east is simply to nuke the whole place is not the most reliable source when it comes to the character and conviction it takes to be realistic.
Angry rich white people listen to both apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
For the record, Obama's preacher is completely insane and inflammatory, but I've heard a lot worse out of Falwell's mouth over the years than I have out of this guy so far.
Maybe the worst is still coming, but christ, Religion needs to go bye, bye when it comes to any kind of common sense decisions that have to be made in this country, because at this point in history all fucking religion is divisive, petty, morally bankrupt, and juvenile.
nuking it would fix a lot of things. But we would lose a lot of women. I can not support the loss of so many boobs.
Sure would I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
But it isn't, "realistic."
I agree with you completely that McCain's walking a delicate tightrope trying to unite conservatives while maintaining his support from Democrats and Independents. He'll win if he can diffuse the Iraq issue by pointing out that Hillary and Obama aren't yanking out the troops (if the troops are staying most people would rather have McCain commanding them).Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
whats not realistic about it? We got nukes, we drop em.Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
I won't dignify this with an answer, just a response stating that I won't dignify this with an answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
I think what you want to say is that "it would be problematic for the US to nuke the snot of any one country or nation"
STFU cheeks. YAWA's right. No nukes dumbass
A whole lot of Iraqis scrambling to figure shit out on their own, fighting amongst their selves and finally going through the processes that will be the only way to bring eventual stability to the region. It will be ugly and I will not give a fuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
The same one Bush takes, you mean?Quote:
as evidenced by the stands he takes on issues like ... illegal immigration
You people are not metal at all
You seem to be under the impression Bush is some sort of arch-conservative; he parrots the religious right to keep their support but his policies are pretty liberal (far more so than the Democratic administration before him). Don't you remember last summer when right-wing talk radio was calling for Bush's head over his support for McCain-Kennedy? If you go by policy Bush is FDR, Hillary is Nixon, Obama is Carter, and McCain is Teddy Roosevelt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
I'm way too drunk to argue this, but I am hoping for some points to explain these assumptions.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Well, that is about the biggest load of bullshit you've ever posted on this board. Congratulations. There is no way to even conceivably compare FDR with Bush. Franklin Roosevelt was a patriot who fought for the working man, brought us out of the Great Depression, and won WWII. He was also one of our most prolific orators and writers, able to communicate clearly and concisely to both the ivory tower intellectual and the salt of the earth farmer.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
George W. Bush is a barely literate simpleton who let himself be led by the nose into a war he didn't understand for purely economic and political reasons. He has done nothing with his time in office but hurt the status of the working man and bend over backwards to appease his corporate and theocratic backers. When he leaves office his legacy will only be the marvel of future generations at how this shaved chimp was able to get into and remain in office. His presidency is not just a shame on himself, but a shame on America.
No, I'm under the impression that he is a fuck up and that McCain is following in his fuck up footsteps. I don't give a shit about labels.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
holy flame bate batmanQuote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
The "shaved monkey" matches FDR when it comes to wiretapping, adding tremendous government bloat, and propagandizing a foreign attack. But you're right, he's no FDR. To be FDR he'll have to ship every American Muslim to Guantanamo, orchestrate a plan to nuke civilian targets in Iran for Dick Cheney to execute, illegally run for President in 2008 and again in 2012, try to take over the judicial branch of government by packing the Supreme Court with extra judges, prolong an economic depression by doubling taxes and crushing private business, and appease southern racists by obstructing anti-lynching legislation and redirecting government aid from urban blacks to less-needy whites. It'll also help if he hijacks the education system so that in 50 years ignorant kids will recite falsehoods and propaganda about GWB's accomplishments the way you're reciting falsehoods and propaganda about FDR's accomplishments.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
You're right. If he was white, he'd be considered racist not militant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
I doubt it.Quote:
2) I'm sure it will blow over long before the real race starts.
yepQuote:
Originally Posted by Gooch
pretty speeches and all that, but he is pretty much a liar now.
He's either lying in the things he says in response to the rev, or he lied in the past about how serious he was about his faith.
You've got to be kidding me.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
So is the race card still in play or can we continue?
If it'll shut up spo's insanity I say we put it back in play.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...douchebag2.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
lol is that your desktop at work?
is it centered or titled? anyone want to place bets?
No, googled it.
we didn't ask how you found your desktop
LOL cheeks!
"Stretched" confirmed.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Hotlinked, silly.
Back on Topic, GWB sent me a nice letter stating I was getting 600 dollars back. I await my american allowance with baited breath.
Good thing they spent 41 million dollars for postage and supplies to mail out those letters. Great use of the Tax dollar.
I was going to say that and forgot.
I can honestly use an extra pile of cash. $600 is rent for a month.
Tell them you have like 5 kids bro, get some extra cheddar.
You see? This seems like a bad idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
I can just see the "America came into our country. Ruined our resources. And then left." And a sharp increase of insane, militant, anti-American hate going on the world over.
Oh, I promise Frog would bitch about that too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
It's a terrible Idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frog
Could you not help please?
Is the word militant replacing nigger in the 21st Century? Please let me know, I need to update the wiki.
Trust me, it doesn't matter how clearly you state your opinion with Frog. You'll still be wrong and he'll just out verb you for the perceived win.
I can't help you here.
It could be worse, you could be arguing with gozen. His fav is coming into arguments with insults and cusswords. Oh, and ending all his points with your name.
"blah blah blah, biff is an asshole blah blah blah blah blah, it is quite obvious, biff."
Quit being such a miltant prick.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
Whose awesome?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
:( your awesome...
Stop whining, IronPlant. It really annoys me..IronPlant.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Those are fighting words.
Nope, FDR did all of those things. Look it up. I'd tell Biff to read a book too but we all know he's from Cleveland.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
Yeah, we burn them dumb books up here.
That's what I gathered from the smell.
Naturally, Spo backed up a lie with more lies and flagrant distortions. He might as well have just C&Ped the FDR entry from Conservapedia so that we could all lawl at the sauce.
FDR locked Japanese Americans in concentration camps, illegally ran for four terms, tried to hijack the Supreme Court (and successfully intimidated them into accepting his unconstitutional New Deal programs), developed the plan to nuke Japan, admitted to Winston Churchill and many others that he was antagonizing the Germans to try to incite an incident that he could use to lead the country into World War II (I don't buy the conspiracy theory that he knew Pearl Harbor was coming because I require evidence), used the FCC and other government entities to shut down media outlets that criticized him, embraced racist policy (such as obstructing anti-lynching legislation) to court dixiecrats, and prolonged the great depression by turning the government into a bloated shakedown cartel that handcuffed business. All facts, which I know you're allergic to.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
All that AND he was an amazing basketball player.
What a dude.
He never put Japanese Americans in concentration camps, only internment camps. They were never tortured, unlike Bush's Gitmo, and they were released and have since gained compensation, unlike unlawful War on Terror detainees. He ran for four terms with the overwhelming support of the American people and the Congress who saw the need to avoid politicking in the middle of a world war. He never admitted any such thing to Churchill, that's a completely discredited lie. All he did say was that he made his support for England clear with Lend-Lease, and even though the people of the US were isolationist at the time he would have never let England be overrun. He used the FCC the way it was designed, to make sure licensees are working in the public interest. He never embraced racist policy, he simply put aside the civil rights movement because he felt the war and economic depression took precedence. A policy, I might add, that continued through the Republican Eisenhower, who while having the strength to integrate the armed forces became weak-kneed and mild-mannered in terms of confronting segregation in the South. No politician or either party had the will to confront that issue until Kennedy and LBJ, two democrats who even had the will to stand up to their own party. Something Bush has never had the stones for, unless it's to make his campaign donors more money, then suddenly he'll adopt whatever policy no matter how it looks to the base. FDR never prolonged the depression for a second, he brought America out of it after the unrestrained free-market policies of the past sunk us into it.
Those are the facts, and they're completely divorced from the bias and entirely conflated picture revisionists like you try to paint.
Gozen pretty much covered it I believe. Although he didn't bother to point out one thing.
How exactly did he illegally run for 4 terms when it wasn't illegal at the time? There was nothing in the constitution that prevented it. You do know the 22nd ammendment wasn't till 1951 right?
Its was a gentleman's honor thing. And he had no gentleman's honor. (I am a fan of both Rooses)
There is evidence of exactly three Gitmo detainees being tortured (waterboarded), including the 9/11 mastermind and the man who beheaded Daniel Pearl. More importantly, the detainees at Gitmo are foreign terror suspects. FDR imprisoned every Japanese American for no reason other than their ethnicity, and for you to defend that action while condemning Gitmo is the height of hypocrisy. By your logic it's ok for Bush to imprison every Muslim as long as they aren't tortured and get paltry reparations forty years after losing their businesses and property.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
He ran amid cries from Congress that he was an entrenched dictator until Pearl Harbor happened and the country rallied around him (those that didn't, such as radio commentator James Gillis, were censored by the FCC). He used propaganda and censorship to build support for his lawbreaking; again, your hypocrisy is astounding. If Bush used 9/11 or the war on terror to illegally run for two extra terms you'd be drafting assassination schemes.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
The Greer was dropping depth charges on a german submarine and signaling the British Air Force to do the same for four hours before the sub returned fire. The Germans desperately wanted to keep the US out of the war for as long as possible because they already had their hands full fighting a two-front war in Europe. Enlighten us on how that information has been "discredited"?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
And criticizing FDR is not in the public interest therefore it's justified to censor political speech? Are any of your principles independent of political parties? By the way, the FCC was not designed to force radio stations to work in the "public interest". It was designed to set up a technical standard of operation, content had nothing to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
The excuses continue. He stood in the way of anti-lynching legislation because other issues took precedence? That's what you call "putting aside" the civil rights movement, obstructing the passage of laws that would have protected innocent African Americans from being murdered by the KKK?Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
I'm not jerking off to Eisenhower mythology or calling him a great president. There's also a huge difference between not confronting segregation and actively obstructing the passage of anti-murder legislation to court racist southern democrats.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Kennedy put a clansman on the Supreme Court and LBJ was one of the most bigoted Presidents we've ever had; they developed the "will" to go along with the civil rights movement because in the 1960's it behooved them to court the black vote in northern cities.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Bush has placed more African Americans and members of other minority groups in positions of power than any President in history. Bush is a colossal fuckup but he's not a racist, that's just an age-old liberal cheap shot. Incompetence and lack of foresight is not racism.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
That's a sweet story but unfortunately it's not based in reality. FDR for some idiotic reason believed that the reason for the depression was low prices for consumer goods so he had the government slaughter livestock and destroy crops to artificially raise prices. FDR doubled taxes and bullied the Supreme Court into letting him use the commerce clause to artificially regulate every aspect of business. In 1939 (seven years after Roosevelt began "saving Capitalism from itself") the unemployment rate was 17.2 percent (before the depression it was 3 percent). Per capita GDP was $847 in 1939 as opposed to $857 in 1929. Personal consumption expenditures amounted to $67.6 billion in 1939 as opposed to $78.9 billion in 1929. Net private investment was minus $3.1 billion from 1930–1940.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
The Great Depression happened because of widespread poor investments. The solution would have been to allow private businesses with too much capital to liquidate and reinvest. FDR doubled the monetary base in only five years, which forced overcapitalization to continue. The New Deal programs also artificially increased the cost of labor, which not only prevented job growth but actually reduced the number of jobs available. The economy didn't recover until most of FDR's New Deal policies were struck down as unconstitutional in the 1940's, allowing business to function properly again. Study macroeconomics instead of sociology if you want to understand these things.
The two-term limit was established by Washington and accepted for almost two centuries in the commonlaw tradition (suspension of habeas corpus also wasn't technically illegal for the same reason, commonlaw tradition). The 22nd amendment was drafted to prevent another FDR from coming along.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
Fuck, I just ran out of tin foil!
It was precedent. It wasn't illegal. There's a big difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
And Suspension of Habeas Corpus wasn't technically illegal? Huh, what's that in the second paragraph there?
This is the biggest pile of shit I've heard all week. I don't even know how the fuck you got this statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
He's serious about his faith, but he disagrees with many of Wright's political views. He says that now, he said that in his book... he's always said that.
He'd be a liar if he got on TV and was like "Look, I had no idea he ever said stuff like this and now I hate him after 20 years" like every other politician has done in this situation. Instead he said "Wright is an important person to me, but I'm a thinking individual and I disagree with him sometimes."
It's the most honest response to controversy I've ever seen.
FDR isn't the first time the educational establishment whitewashed history. Look into Christopher Columbus if you really want your mind blown.
I was referring to commonlaw tradition; suspension of habeas corpus wasn't technically illegal outside of commonlaw tradition in Britain and wasn't originally in the constitution of the United States because it was understood to be a given. The same is true of the two-term limit; it was understood that an honorable man wouldn't violate the accepted standard and not thought to be necessary to amend the constitution until FDR came along.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
Frog drinks entirely too much of the obama flavored fruit punch.
Yes, I like Obama, but do you really care to explain what the fuck cheeks was talking about? It's a nonsense statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
I'm not sure exactly what Cheeks was getting at but I suspect he was trying to call Obama out for first saying he had no idea Wright made those comments.
He's a politician frog, don't think they didn't cover this angle in detail before he took the stage.
It wasn't originally in the constitution? REALLY????Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
You continue to prove that you don't know what you're talking about. The two-term limit was accepted precedent set by Washington when he stepped down after two terms. It comes down simply to the fact that it was not illegal, so your statement there is complete bullshit.
He's serious about being a typical politician. He started going to that church because it had a large delegation to back his political aspirations at the time. Faith had dick to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Frog acts like he never played his way out of a mistake.
Citizens were not guaranteed habeas corpus until 1866 (before that common law was supposed to guarantee it to non-federal prisoners). As for the term limit you're being obtuse; Grant and Teddy Roosevelt sought third terms and lost precisely because the public was outraged that anyone would violate the established precedent. If you insist on calling what FDR did honorless, corrupt, and sleazy instead of illegal that's fine; it's hardly FDR's most serious offense.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
TR lost because he split his Republican base. It had nothing to do with public outrage. In fact, he was nominated again in 1916.
It's delicious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/3...laidmanbs9.jpg
He split the Republican base because he went back on his pledge to not run for a third term and ran against Taft. There was outrage over it, which is why the party stood by Taft. He wasn't nominated again in 1916, Charles Evan Hughes was. TR campaigned for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
This thread is an amazing journey through history now.
Here's a pic of William J. hanging out with Obama's preacher, pre-fringe. Bill, no doubt, commenting on the pretty ladies just out of frame. The holy man simply gave his hand another hard shake and offered a quick grin, secretly agreeing.
In another life, they could have been great friends, thought the reverend.
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/a...1&d=1206064645
It seems like McCain is just resting on his laurels... It reminds me of the 2006 season Buckeyes' football team.
There was outrage that he split the party and challenged Taft, who was his hand-picked successor. He actually got more popular and electoral votes than Taft.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Also, going against his pledge wasn't illegal. :p
...after he refused the nomination and endorsed him.Quote:
He wasn't nominated again in 1916, Charles Evan Hughes was. TR campaigned for him.
As a life long Gator fan, I appreciate the reference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tones
Back on topic, anyone check out Hillary's first lady papers yet? She's repeatedly claimed in this campaign that she was a staunch opponent of NAFTA from the start. According to the official documents she organized at least five strategy meetings about getting NAFTA through Congress and obstructed environmental and labor organizations that were trying to get human rights and pollution statutes written into the agreement.
UF represent
McCain's staying quiet so as not to take any attention away from Hillary and Obama ripping each other's throats out. At this rate by the time the august convention rolls around everyone will be disgusted with both of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tones
Meanwhile, the general public recalls, "wasn't there some old white dude running too?"
McCain's still very much in the public eye. Obama and Hillary both mention him by name constantly in their campaign speeches.
Good point.
lol, I went to Michigan. Total and utter failure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tones
Man TR was awesome.
Racist much Obama?
The rest of the interview - http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news.../16849076.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Philadelphia Inquirer and on 610 WIP this morning
What's a typical white person? Are you assuming that all white people FEAR black people? I know its a shallow argument, but he used the wrong words here my friends.
I was going to mention the "typical white person" thing but I'm tired of talking about Obama and race. The bloom is off the rose, Obama has been revealed to be just another shameless politician.
IBTN, no super hero here.
As a typical white person, I would like to totally confirm his words at this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
Advocate, if you're talking about old white women that are old enough to be Obama's grandmother (aka dead), then it's at least 50% true, especially in the south.
There is a pretty broad line between "fear" and "don't trust".
Well, at least you kicked our ass in the Capital One Bowl this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff