Paul Jones Backing OBAMA!
- Thread starter Landis82
- Start date
obama references a guy in his book who was his best friend and one of the few black people in hawaii at his HS. so researches found him, and he turned out to have since been arrested a bunch of times for drug related charges. there's no mention of obama being in his life during those periods of his arrest.
in terms of policies, my ranking of who would have the in my opinion, ranking of candidates who would have the best-worst impact on our economy:
mccain - would cut fraud, and waste, pro business, jobs, taxes, trade, etc.
guilianni- good on tax, business, and trade, but not sure on spending and pork
obama - strong in waste and pork, probably trade since he's seen the damage subsidies have on africa. liberal on regulation, spending, taxes
romney: pro taxes, poor on spending with his nationalized health care plan.
hillary quotes karl marx, is a socialist. she would set our economy back a decade or more and take us toward's the european socialist model imo. she's trying to come off as centrist, but you don't change a philosophy you've had all your life, so i think she's just trying to appeal to voters and will move back towards socialist policies once elected.
foreign policy
obama - great for european allies
guilianni - strong leader, would unite country, and would at least try diplomacy
romney- probably somewhere in the middle
hillary - strong politcal and funding support from jewish population and very pro israel hawkish comments, could spell trouble with iran and syria
mccain - too hawkish in iraq unwilling to consider options
hopefully the debates will teach us more. i tend to vote for the economy over foreign policy and social issues, but as long as it's not hillary or romney, i'm ok with whoever. my favorite is probably gov richardson, but he has no shot. it's ironic that that europe, asia, and most everyone else are moving towards more capitalist policies because of the success in the US (even France might elect a pro business conservative!), lower taxes, free trade, weakened labor policies, while we are moving away from the policies that has brought our economy success and electing fiscal liberals and socialists while and getting closer to a large govt/quasi socialist-capitalist system with class warfare, more wealth distribution socialist policies etc. that includes republicans. i wouldn't even consider bush a conservative on the majority of fiscal policies. bill clinton was more of one.
in terms of policies, my ranking of who would have the in my opinion, ranking of candidates who would have the best-worst impact on our economy:
mccain - would cut fraud, and waste, pro business, jobs, taxes, trade, etc.
guilianni- good on tax, business, and trade, but not sure on spending and pork
obama - strong in waste and pork, probably trade since he's seen the damage subsidies have on africa. liberal on regulation, spending, taxes
romney: pro taxes, poor on spending with his nationalized health care plan.
hillary quotes karl marx, is a socialist. she would set our economy back a decade or more and take us toward's the european socialist model imo. she's trying to come off as centrist, but you don't change a philosophy you've had all your life, so i think she's just trying to appeal to voters and will move back towards socialist policies once elected.
foreign policy
obama - great for european allies
guilianni - strong leader, would unite country, and would at least try diplomacy
romney- probably somewhere in the middle
hillary - strong politcal and funding support from jewish population and very pro israel hawkish comments, could spell trouble with iran and syria
mccain - too hawkish in iraq unwilling to consider options
hopefully the debates will teach us more. i tend to vote for the economy over foreign policy and social issues, but as long as it's not hillary or romney, i'm ok with whoever. my favorite is probably gov richardson, but he has no shot. it's ironic that that europe, asia, and most everyone else are moving towards more capitalist policies because of the success in the US (even France might elect a pro business conservative!), lower taxes, free trade, weakened labor policies, while we are moving away from the policies that has brought our economy success and electing fiscal liberals and socialists while and getting closer to a large govt/quasi socialist-capitalist system with class warfare, more wealth distribution socialist policies etc. that includes republicans. i wouldn't even consider bush a conservative on the majority of fiscal policies. bill clinton was more of one.
You left out Edwards. Talk about a socialist! The guy belongs in Cuba.
Obama is to the left of Hillary (both of em too left for me. Bill was pretty centrist though).
Romney doesn't scare me at all. I think he'd do a great job just as he did in Mass and the winter olympics. I don't think he can win being Mormon though.
I don't think McCain can win either (war views). Its either Rudy or a Democrat in my opinion. If Rudy gets the nod for the Repubs, its all over. That is unless he says something crazy, which is entirely possible!
Obama is to the left of Hillary (both of em too left for me. Bill was pretty centrist though).
Romney doesn't scare me at all. I think he'd do a great job just as he did in Mass and the winter olympics. I don't think he can win being Mormon though.
I don't think McCain can win either (war views). Its either Rudy or a Democrat in my opinion. If Rudy gets the nod for the Repubs, its all over. That is unless he says something crazy, which is entirely possible!
So you have no problem with the current regime leader being a drunk driving, AWOL, coke head, bin laden business partner? you must be one of those 'godly' bible thumpers lol .
It is just a concidence that the CIA took out Noreiga, and that afghanistan still makes record drugs (under the watchful eye of the West)? LOL we are the biggest drug traffickers in the world.
How's that "War on Drugs" coming along?
Damn, some other old fart beat me to it.
Oh, you heard that, did you? And since you 'heard it', you know it's true?
What a load of bullshit. If Obama had a conviction for dealing, or even a charge, he wouldn't be running for the nomination. The guy was President of the Harvard Law Review, you dolt. What are you, besides an internet troll surfing porn and typing with his left hand?
The internet must be a Godsend for people like you - you can slander at will without having to worry about repercussions. Why do I think you watch Entertainment Tonight religiously?
What a ridiculous post. Your hero, GWB, is an alcoholic. He reformed himself, right?
By the way, I do NOT think Obama is the right guy for the job. No way. I doubt he'll even get the nomination. It just sickens me to see the type of cowardly attack exemplified by this post.