PDA

View Full Version : Congrats to the new President & VP



SarasotaRepub
11-05-2008, 08:23 AM
ConservativeUnderground.com offers its congratulations to President
elect Barack Obama and VP Joe Biden.

The election is over and the people have spoken. He will be our new
President starting next year. Congrats to both, their families, and
their supporters.


SR

jinxmchue
11-05-2008, 09:53 AM
Congratulations, President-elect Obama. You will be in my prayers, as will any evil you intend to do against this nation and world.

Lars1701a
11-05-2008, 10:09 AM
He is no President of mine.

I will show the same amount of respect to obama as they showed My President. :p


I am not one of those people that wish ill on the Country so as to get more Republicans in power but I have nothing but disgust for the people that voted for this person.

GrumpyOldLady
11-05-2008, 10:53 AM
He is no President of mine.
I will show the same amount of respect to obama as they showed My President.

DITTO.

I can't even look at him let alone congratulate him.

aerojarod
11-05-2008, 12:30 PM
DITTO.

I can't even look at him let alone congratulate him.

Come on, people... we can be better than those at the DUmp have been to President Bush the previous 8 years. We are the folks who are supposed to have RESPECT for the office of the President by calling whom-ever occupies it by their proper title of "Mister President" or "President Obama". We cannot allow ourselves to stoop to the level of hatred and disprespect shown by those at DU who resort to "Shrub", "*", or "Bushitler".

If we do, then we are no better than them.

Our focus now is to oppose with all our might the policies of this new administration. Not to practice 4 years of character assassination. We need to demonstrate our moral high-ground, respect for the traditions set forth by our founding fathers in the Constitution, and hold those in office accountable when they propose legislation that defies their oath to "uphold and defend" it.

We need to be unyeilding guardians of our country and what it was established to stand for and represent.
We need to be the opposition to those who think that our Country and out Constitution are inherently flawed and need to be changed.

Keep your wits about you. Mind your tongue.

Be respectful, but forceful.

Walk softly and carry a big stick.

Goldwater
11-05-2008, 12:32 PM
Come on, people... we can be better than those at the DUmp

Correction, some of us can, others belong in a DU style setting.

d_va
11-05-2008, 12:34 PM
Meh.

Which Obama will govern? There's been so many of them these past two years :p:rolleyes:

InspiredHome
11-05-2008, 01:02 PM
God bless our new leaders. I will be constant prayer over them.

biccat
11-05-2008, 01:06 PM
If we do, then we are no better than them.
Not saying I disagree with you, but why not insult and engage in character assassination? It worked for the Left, both in '06 and in '08. Call your opponents Nazis, threaten riots if you don't win, blame the economic situation on your opponents, and win the election.

Like 'em or not, the tactics of the Left worked.

Gingersnap
11-05-2008, 01:26 PM
I'll add my congratulations to Obama. He's not my pick but most them of them haven't been. ;)

Odysseus
11-05-2008, 01:39 PM
I posted this over at the Veterans' Forum, but this is as good a place as any for a reminder:

I know that the veterans' forum is supposed to be apolitical, and I'm saying this, not because I have any love for our new Commander-In-Chief, but because all of us took an oath and, regardless of the whims of the electorate, that oath is what makes us who we are. Towards that end, I am reminding all currently serving military personnel, myself included, of the text of Articles 88 and 94 of the UCMJ:



ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

ART. 94. MUTINY OR SEDITION
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who--
(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;
(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition;
(3) fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.
(b) A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court- martial may direct.

I have no doubt that the executive branch will now be scrutinizing the armed forces for breaches of conduct in this area. I advise all military personnel to ensure that our disagreements with the policies and positions of our new chain of command be expressed in a respectful and professional manner, and that we remember that we speak only for ourselves and not our branches of service.

megimoo
11-05-2008, 01:48 PM
I'll add my congratulations to Obama. He's not my pick but most them of them haven't been. ;)

Ditto's Congratulations Mr President . but only so far.The election was tough and the opposition used many dirty tactic's including theft,treason and fraud to win ,but :

.....................We aren't Done Yet ,The fight goes on.

Postmordem: How We Got Here and What We Need To Do To Get Back From The Wilderness.
...............Andrew G. Horvet

Well, the election is over. I am disappointed in the American people that they would buy the empty-suit kool-aid of a man with 183 days of experience. We knew that it would be a rough road to the White House. We lost. Life goes on.

Now Conservatives are in the wilderness. The only good thing we have going is that there is not a rubber stamp congress and that we can block legislation still. Also, that smug jackass, Al Franken, won't be a senator. We can not be bitter and we can not hang our heads in defeat. We must fight.

How did we get here? Frankly, Senator McCain is a war hero but as exciting as a dead fish as a presidential candidate. This is Bob Dole all over again. The only thing that McCain has over Dole is that he didn't refer to himself in the third person or sound like Simon Barsinister.

Sarah Palin energized us but scared people with inexperience in executive office. They were not ready for on the job training if something happened to a President McCain. Then again, they voted for a man who has only slightly more executive experience then I do.

The main reason we lost was the media. They framed the entire campaign. "And now we need to punish them for their treasonous Anti-American Behavior!"

They controlled the facts and the perspective. The media came out in full force to back their messiah with all the enthusiasm of a midget orgy.

Sadly, McCain hardly had a chance. The other reason we did not win was that the money wasn't there.

Barack ran a blitzkrieg of fundraisers, so that he could swamp the media with his ads. For every ten ads I saw for Obama, I saw one for McCain. It wasn't really that America rejected our message, it was that they didn't hear it.

So what do we do now? Now is not the time to embrace nihilism.

We must organize and build a grass roots campaign like we did during the Carter years. The seeds we sowed during the late 1970's were reaped in the form of President Reagan during the 1980's.

We went off message with President Bush's campaign in 1992 and were sent off into the corn fields again. We must organize our message and hold on to it.

Our main problem is the media. The only way to get our message out is to take down the liberal media.

How? Boycotting the media itself does not help. We must go to its lifeblood which is advertising.

We need have an army of people from all conservative groups knit together to call and threaten the liberal media's advertising with boycotts.

If we take away their money, they can not function. They are already hurt, let's finish the job. Let's find out the network's advertisers and call them. we must all work together.

Now is not the time to sulk. We need to clean off our wounds and fight. This is just a battle. This is not the War. The fight goes on.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2125840/posts

Zeus
11-05-2008, 01:49 PM
"Fight to clean up the mess of corruption, infighting and selfishness in Washington,". "Fight to get our economy out of the ditch and back in the lead. Fight for the ideals and character of a free people. Fight for our children's future. Fight for justice and opportunity for all. Stand up to defend our country from its enemies. Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight.

"America is worth fighting for. Nothing is inevitable here. We never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history

~ Senator John McCain~

Lars1701a
11-05-2008, 05:50 PM
On second thought maybe i was wrong and i am going to send him a house warming basket made up of colt 45 and packs of Kools :D:D

Teetop
11-05-2008, 05:58 PM
Congrats to SnObama and megagaffomatic.:D

Just beware of pushing your far left agenda, you might not have congress or the POTUS for another 30 years, if you do...

jendf
11-05-2008, 07:57 PM
*burp*....

lacarnut
11-05-2008, 08:15 PM
I am not here to praise or bury the new President. I will watch his actions and if he moves to the left I will come down on him like CW, LP, Wilbur, Eyelids, etc castigated Prez. Bush. Seems fair to me.

Aaron Burr
11-05-2008, 08:21 PM
Hmm. So we can't insult the President elect? Is Ho Bama still fair Game?

megimoo
11-05-2008, 08:36 PM
Hmm. So we can't insult the President elect? Is Ho Bama still fair Game?

It's bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bi gotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigo try,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotr y,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry, bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bi gotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigo try,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotr y,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry, bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry,bi gotry,bigotry,bigotry,bigotry !

jan_ky
11-05-2008, 09:40 PM
Come on, people... we can be better than those at the DUmp have been to President Bush the previous 8 years. We are the folks who are supposed to have RESPECT for the office of the President by calling whom-ever occupies it by their proper title of "Mister President" or "President Obama". We cannot allow ourselves to stoop to the level of hatred and disprespect shown by those at DU who resort to "Shrub", "*", or "Bushitler".

If we do, then we are no better than them.

Our focus now is to oppose with all our might the policies of this new administration. Not to practice 4 years of character assassination. We need to demonstrate our moral high-ground, respect for the traditions set forth by our founding fathers in the Constitution, and hold those in office accountable when they propose legislation that defies their oath to "uphold and defend" it.

We need to be unyeilding guardians of our country and what it was established to stand for and represent.
We need to be the opposition to those who think that our Country and out Constitution are inherently flawed and need to be changed.

Keep your wits about you. Mind your tongue.

Be respectful, but forceful.

Walk softly and carry a big stick.
I couldn't agree with you more. Lead by example. We must roll up our sleeves and get to work. We must protect our Constitution and our country. As Todd Beamer said, "Let's Roll!"

lacarnut
11-06-2008, 06:47 PM
Hmm. So we can't insult the President elect? Is Ho Bama still fair Game?

For the time being we have free speech but that may change with the fairness doctrine plus Fags may be a protected class like the idiotic laws in Canada.

Elspeth
11-06-2008, 07:14 PM
I refuse to congratulate this piece of crap. I respect the office but not the ass that holds it. Hopefully, his tenure will be one term and a better person will send him back to Chicago "to spend more time with his family" in 2012.

marinejcksn
11-07-2008, 01:06 AM
Come on, people... we can be better than those at the DUmp have been to President Bush the previous 8 years. We are the folks who are supposed to have RESPECT for the office of the President by calling whom-ever occupies it by their proper title of "Mister President" or "President Obama". We cannot allow ourselves to stoop to the level of hatred and disprespect shown by those at DU who resort to "Shrub", "*", or "Bushitler".

If we do, then we are no better than them.

Our focus now is to oppose with all our might the policies of this new administration. Not to practice 4 years of character assassination. We need to demonstrate our moral high-ground, respect for the traditions set forth by our founding fathers in the Constitution, and hold those in office accountable when they propose legislation that defies their oath to "uphold and defend" it.

We need to be unyeilding guardians of our country and what it was established to stand for and represent.
We need to be the opposition to those who think that our Country and out Constitution are inherently flawed and need to be changed.

Keep your wits about you. Mind your tongue.

Be respectful, but forceful.

Walk softly and carry a big stick.

Aero, you are a class act and 100% exactly right on this one. I don't want him, I didn't vote for him but Barack Obama is our President-Elect and the office deserves our respect.

Glenn Beck (http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/17858/)had a caller today become militant, saying "he's not my president" and Beck put it beautifully why we can't act like that, why we must never act like that. It's the same thing they did in 2000 when the libs said Bush was "selected, not elected" and "he's not our President". That behavior is shameful and our icons like Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater wouldn't stand for it, we shouldn't either.

Now, that doesn't mean we give up and lay down. Oh no, we need to be vigilant now more then ever. The best way to enact real change in 4 years is to get the Conservative/Libertarian message out there and we do that by showing we're a cut above, rather then stooping down to the Leftist level. :cool:

marinejcksn
11-07-2008, 01:16 AM
Glenn GOMP's 'un-American' caller (http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/17858/?ck=1)

**Snip**

GLENN: He is the -- say it, Joe. He is the American President, right?

CALLER: He is the President of America. However, at this point I don't accept --

GLENN: Say the words, he is the American President.

CALLER: I can't accept him as the American President.

GLENN: Well, Joe, then you're un-American because this is the way our system works, and this is -- you are exactly the kind of person that caused so much trouble with George W. Bush. When the Supreme Court decided the way our system works, when the Supreme Court decided, "You count the way you are supposed to count the votes, you guys set this up", the Democrats were the ones who set it up. So you've got to play by those rules. When they counted the votes the way they were supposed to be counted and then even when they counted them the way that they were trying to get them to count to you know, change the rules, George Bush still won. And they still said, "Well, he's not my President; he was selected, not elected." No, the facts are he was elected the President of the United States through the Supreme Court and then the New York Times -- that crazy -- I mean, you might as well be reading the National Review. That crazy newspaper went back and counted them again and Al Gore still lost. And yet people said he's not my President. Well, that was the problem. And Joe, you are now the person that you most likely railed against in 2000. Barack Obama won. He is now our President. We do not sacrifice our values. We are not required to now become a socialist. We're now not required to stand up and fight for the things that he believes in if we disagree, but we understand that he is the President of the United States.

PoliCon
11-07-2008, 02:49 AM
If you can't stand behind him - you are no better than the lefties. No better than Nancy Pukelosi or Michael Moore or any of the other shills and hacks on the left. I find the thought of what he MIGHT do - terrifying - but until he does it, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

That being said - I don't want to congratulate Barry. I want to congratulate the puppet masters and image doctors that turned this two dimensional political hack into a superstar and convinced how many million Americans to throw away standards and values and vote for an image.

Barry, Please grow a spine and some values and I pray that you always do what is right even if it's unpopular.

PoliCon
11-07-2008, 02:50 AM
Glenn GOMP's 'un-American' caller (http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/17858/?ck=1)

**Snip**

GLENN: He is the -- say it, Joe. He is the American President, right?

CALLER: He is the President of America. However, at this point I don't accept --

GLENN: Say the words, he is the American President.

CALLER: I can't accept him as the American President.

GLENN: Well, Joe, then you're un-American because this is the way our system works, and this is -- you are exactly the kind of person that caused so much trouble with George W. Bush. When the Supreme Court decided the way our system works, when the Supreme Court decided, "You count the way you are supposed to count the votes, you guys set this up", the Democrats were the ones who set it up. So you've got to play by those rules. When they counted the votes the way they were supposed to be counted and then even when they counted them the way that they were trying to get them to count to you know, change the rules, George Bush still won. And they still said, "Well, he's not my President; he was selected, not elected." No, the facts are he was elected the President of the United States through the Supreme Court and then the New York Times -- that crazy -- I mean, you might as well be reading the National Review. That crazy newspaper went back and counted them again and Al Gore still lost. And yet people said he's not my President. Well, that was the problem. And Joe, you are now the person that you most likely railed against in 2000. Barack Obama won. He is now our President. We do not sacrifice our values. We are not required to now become a socialist. We're now not required to stand up and fight for the things that he believes in if we disagree, but we understand that he is the President of the United States.


EXACTLY. Like it or not - he is the president of this Nation. No matter how I feel about the man, the office will always have my respect.

PoliCon
11-07-2008, 02:54 AM
Congrats to SnObama and megagaffomatic.:D

Just beware of pushing your far left agenda, you might not have congress or the POTUS for another 30 years, if you do...SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! Let them push it. And lets ourselves stand up to the idiots on our side of the isle who were dumb enough to pick a leftie rather than a real conservative for our nominee.

Step one - CLOSE OUR PRIMARIES! No more open primaries especially in early primary states. And no more instant registrations either. THEN we go after term limits.

xavierob82
11-07-2008, 10:02 AM
Hypothetically, just imagine Barack Obama had lost the popular vote, and only won the White House because a liberal Supreme Court decided to stop a recount of a state like say, Pennsylvania, where it showed that McCain only lost by a couple hundred votes, from millions cast.

I can only imagine the frenzied hatred on the right, and then you'd understand the immense distaste that Democrats had for Fake-President Bush.;)

asdf2231
11-07-2008, 10:07 AM
Hypothetically, just imagine Barack Obama had lost the popular vote, and only won the White House because a liberal Supreme Court decided to stop a recount of a state like say, Pennsylvania, where it showed that McCain only lost by a couple hundred votes, from millions cast.

I can only imagine the frenzied hatred on the right, and then you'd understand the immense distaste that Democrats had for Fake-President Bush.;)

Wow.

Except that EVERY recount they did (Scrutinized by media groups that were salavating at the chance of finding something) determined that Bush narrowly won.

EVERY recount using EVERY suggested criteria.

Play another tune on your retard fiddle woudlja?

Because you sound stupid even for... Well, you.

PoliCon
11-07-2008, 10:13 AM
Hypothetically, just imagine Barack Obama had lost the popular vote, and only won the White House because a liberal Supreme Court decided to stop a recount of a state like say, Pennsylvania, where it showed that McCain only lost by a couple hundred votes, from millions cast.

I can only imagine the frenzied hatred on the right, and then you'd understand the immense distaste that Democrats had for Fake-President Bush.;) Go ta hell. You totally just get off on causing pain and baiting people. Wallow in your own filth if you want - but don't spread it around here.

PoliCon
11-07-2008, 10:14 AM
Wow.

Except that EVERY recount they did (Scrutinized by media groups that were salavating at the chance of finding something) determined that Bush narrowly won.

EVERY recount using EVERY suggested criteria.

Play another tune on your retard fiddle woudlja?

Because you sound stupid even for... Well, you.It's a meme now. They will never let go. It's like the line they trot out every election that the republicans are going to take away social security that they feed to the elderly. No grounds at all in facts - but being repeated endlessly makes it truth in their minds.

lacarnut
11-07-2008, 10:36 AM
Hypothetically, just imagine Barack Obama had lost the popular vote, and only won the White House because a liberal Supreme Court decided to stop a recount of a state like say, Pennsylvania, where it showed that McCain only lost by a couple hundred votes, from millions cast.

I can only imagine the frenzied hatred on the right, and then you'd understand the immense distaste that Democrats had for Fake-President Bush.;)

I don't have to imagine; I know that you are the dumbest left wing nut job on this board. Go play with the wackos over at DU.

zBoots
11-07-2008, 10:46 AM
Hypothetically, just imagine Barack Obama had lost the popular vote, and only won the White House because a liberal Supreme Court decided to stop a recount of a state like say, Pennsylvania, where it showed that McCain only lost by a couple hundred votes, from millions cast.

I can only imagine the frenzied hatred on the right, and then you'd understand the immense distaste that Democrats had for Fake-President Bush.;)

Well after all these years, I think I'm starting to understand. ..

Now that we have a goat sacrificing chanting Muslim & fake American for a president elect.

Odysseus
11-07-2008, 03:04 PM
Hypothetically, just imagine Barack Obama had lost the popular vote, and only won the White House because a liberal Supreme Court decided to stop a recount of a state like say, Pennsylvania, where it showed that McCain only lost by a couple hundred votes, from millions cast.

I can only imagine the frenzied hatred on the right, and then you'd understand the immense distaste that Democrats had for Fake-President Bush.;)

We do understand it. You hated him because he won Florida, then had the unmitigated gall to insist that the rules be followed while Gore tried to change them in midstream. And, as scary as we find Obama's positions and associations, you won't find any of the vitriolic garbage here that you guys spewed at Bush on a daily basis. Unlike you, we want America to succeed, not just our party. If Obama governs effectively and strengthens the nation, we'll actually support him in that. If he governs like a liberal, and weakens America, then we'll oppose him, but it's not a visceral loathing like what you felt for Bush.

Lager
11-07-2008, 03:21 PM
Hypothetically, just imagine Barack Obama had lost the popular vote, and only won the White House because a liberal Supreme Court decided to stop a recount of a state like say, Pennsylvania, where it showed that McCain only lost by a couple hundred votes, from millions cast.

I can only imagine the frenzied hatred on the right, and then you'd understand the immense distaste that Democrats had for Fake-President Bush.;)

Since you "hypothetically" misrepresent what actually happend in 2000, hypothetically, one can't honestly respond to your "hypothetical" scenario.
And, as a far left lib, you certainly know that the hatred for Bush would exist, regardless of what happened in Florida.

quirites
11-08-2008, 06:47 PM
I can remember my days as a McGovernite, so I know what my reply to these congratulations to Obama and Biden would be.

Back then I would have thought how false can you get - typical right wing phoniness - and my contempt would only have increased for this holier-than-thou fakery on your part.

I doubt that dynamic has changed - all you do is alienate your friends.

I suspect that deep down you know that.

My color on the political litmus strip may have changed but not the contempt I feel for such gestures.

What will stay with me is that the sacrifice of a man like John McCain meant so little in the end.
His virtue came second to the American Idol fashionable pap thinking that has prevailed in this election.
I see nothing to be congratulating there - quite the contrary.

The genie is out of the bottle; the people will begin voting themselves money, and it will be every man for himself.

Come to think of it seems that attitude came around before Obama.

So no congrats from me Barak - you aren't half the man John McCain is - and I have no doubt the truth offends you as much as fake congratulations.

Darwinsright
12-02-2008, 04:17 PM
"The election was tough and the opposition used many dirty tactic's including theft,treason and fraud to win,..."

Dirty tricks? Of course, the Repubs have never used 'em.

1. How did Bush win the 2000 South Carolina Primary?
2. Just who are the REAL Americans, huh?
3. Is Obama a Muslim? If so, what's wrong with being a Muslim in the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. Here's an excerpt from the First Amendment Article VI Section Three:
‘....but No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or any public trust under the United States’. Senator Barack Obama seems to be held accountable even for what his pastor thinks or preaches.

Need more Repub dirty tricks? Just ask.

Both parties suck. The major difference is the Republican Party has morphed into the Theocratic Party; and, the Democratic Party has morphed into the NoNads Party. FEH to them both!

PoliCon
12-03-2008, 11:24 PM
"The election was tough and the opposition used many dirty tactic's including theft,treason and fraud to win,..."

Dirty tricks? Of course, the Repubs have never used 'em.

1. How did Bush win the 2000 South Carolina Primary?
2. Just who are the REAL Americans, huh?
3. Is Obama a Muslim? If so, what's wrong with being a Muslim in the UNITED STATES of AMERICA. Here's an excerpt from the First Amendment Article VI Section Three:
‘....but No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or any public trust under the United States’. Senator Barack Obama seems to be held accountable even for what his pastor thinks or preaches.

Need more Repub dirty tricks? Just ask.

Both parties suck. The major difference is the Republican Party has morphed into the Theocratic Party; and, the Democratic Party has morphed into the NoNads Party. FEH to them both!

Typical. Rather than dealing with the evidence that your agent of "change" is more corrupt than you continuously accuse Bush of being - you try to throw out your accusations against bush and you try to deflect from the truth about Obama.

marinejcksn
12-03-2008, 11:54 PM
Typical. Rather than dealing with the evidence that your agent of "change" is more corrupt than you continuously accuse Bush of being - you try to throw out your accusations against bush and you try to deflect from the truth about Obama.

Watch how many morons are gonna come out bashing Bush for giving over 170 pardons to his "criminal buddies"....when Clinton pardoned over 470 turds, 140 on his last day in office.

Nah, only Bush is bad. Bubba was great. :rolleyes:

PoliCon
12-04-2008, 12:01 AM
Watch how many morons are gonna come out bashing Bush for giving over 170 pardons to his "criminal buddies"....when Clinton pardoned over 470 turds, 140 on his last day in office.

Nah, only Bush is bad. Bubba was great. :rolleyes:It's always okay when they do it because with the left - the ends justify the means.

JAG-in-TX
01-20-2009, 06:28 PM
If what Obama promised during his campaign will be implemented (and liberals never lie, do they?), then we are witnessing a historic event: the day America began the decline as a superpower, or the beginning of the end of the Greatest Nation on the face of the Earth.

I am not one of those that want to give him the benefit of the doubt: there is no doubt where Obama and his cronies want to take this country, and I don't want to go there. Socialism has been tried in many a latitude and it has been found wanting. Countries have become poorer and more prone to corruption when misery is spread around.

I hope Karl Rove is right, and Obama's pre-election rhetoric will have to give way to a more austere and serious approach to the reality of the office and task in front of him. Whenever I feel he is right, he will have my support, but whenever I feel he is wrong, he will have my unwavering opposition. So far, he has only given me reason to oppose him vigorously.

lacarnut
01-20-2009, 06:34 PM
If what Obama promised during his campaign will be implemented (and liberals never lie, do they?), then we are witnessing a historic event: the day America began the decline as a superpower, or the beginning of the end of the Greatest Nation on the face of the Earth.

I am not one of those that want to give him the benefit of the doubt: there is no doubt where Obama and his cronies want to take this country, and I don't want to go there. Socialism has been tried in many a latitude and it has been found wanting. Countries have become poorer and more prone to corruption when misery is spread around.

I hope Karl Rove is right, and Obama's pre-election rhetoric will have to give way to a more austere and serious approach to the reality of the office and task in front of him. Whenever I feel he is right, he will have my support, but whenever I feel he is wrong, he will have my unwavering opposition. So far, he has only given me reason to oppose him vigorously.

A great first post which mirrors my opinion of the Magic Negro. The Robin Hood approach will bring this country down to its knees.

Odysseus
01-20-2009, 07:12 PM
I hope Karl Rove is right, and Obama's pre-election rhetoric will have to give way to a more austere and serious approach to the reality of the office and task in front of him. Whenever I feel he is right, he will have my support, but whenever I feel he is wrong, he will have my unwavering opposition. So far, he has only given me reason to oppose him vigorously.

I'll give him props for keeping Gates on as SECDEF, and anyone who puts Hillary Clinton into a diplomatic position is obviously ensuring that we won't be able to cut defense any time soon. Other than that, his appointments have run the gamut from "what is he thinking?" (Leon Panetta as DCI) to "not again" (Holder as AG).

PoliCon
01-20-2009, 08:18 PM
his appointments have run the gamut from "what is he thinking?" (Leon Panetta as DCI) to "not again" (Holder as AG).I guess Marion Barry isn't the only politician in DC smoking crack. :rolleyes:

cat714
01-20-2009, 08:46 PM
So how did the stock market do today???

I don't care much for Obama and certainly didn't vote for him, but I don't want anything bad to happen to our country or him. To be honest, I would hate to be in his shoes...he made a lot of promises and sold his soul to the LEFT (aka: devil).

lacarnut
01-20-2009, 09:19 PM
So how did the stock market do today???

I don't care much for Obama and certainly didn't vote for him, but I don't want anything bad to happen to our country or him. To be honest, I would hate to be in his shoes...he made a lot of promises and sold his soul to the LEFT (aka: devil).


The market was down 332 points/4.1%. Not a good day for the longs. The shorts had a field day. Those financial institutions that the 350 billion was supposed to save were down around 20%.

Odysseus
01-20-2009, 10:24 PM
I guess Marion Barry isn't the only politician in DC smoking crack. :rolleyes:
Hey! He promised to get crack off of the streets of Washington if he had to do it one gram at at time! That's commitment. :D

So how did the stock market do today???

I don't care much for Obama and certainly didn't vote for him, but I don't want anything bad to happen to our country or him. To be honest, I would hate to be in his shoes...he made a lot of promises and sold his soul to the LEFT (aka: devil).
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2008-08-01-virgin.jpg
He's in over his head, no doubt about it.

The market was down 332 points/4.1%. Not a good day for the longs. The shorts had a field day. Those financial institutions that the 350 billion was supposed to save were down around 20%.
Why, that just means that we need to do another bailout! And then bail out the bailout. And then another, and another, and another.... :rolleyes:

Mythic
01-20-2009, 10:32 PM
Congrats to him for (unfortuntately) winning. Not/Never will be my pick, but he won anyway.:(

And for all you saying he isn't our president, he is, you can't change that, so deal with it.

You could try and move to Canada like Ayers if you can't call him your president.

Gingersnap
01-20-2009, 10:42 PM
Congrats to him for (unfortuntately) winning. Not/Never will be my pick, but he won anyway.:(

And for all you saying he isn't our president, he is, you can't change that, so deal.

You could try and move to Canada like Ayers if you can't call him your president.

Absolutely correct. Unless you are willing to stage an armed insurrection to remove him as President and declutter Congress, you need to acknowledge the blindingly obvious: he won.

Hoping that our country prospers and becomes safer under his watch isn't an endorsement of his leftie agenda. Many presidents have floated naive or absurd concepts during campaigns only to be violently cured by the reality of the office.

We will all support his recovery and reject his relapses.

(See? It pays to watch Invention - it's really enlightening. :D)

GOP Congress
01-21-2009, 12:04 AM
I'm chiming in late here... but I have noticed two things.

1. First of all, this is probably the first media-elected president in history. Nothing short of an unprecedented support by supposedly neutral reporters have rendered the 4th Estate completely biased. We should accept the fact that, for all intents and purposes, we should treat the mainstream media as a full-fledged subsidiary of the Democratic National Committee, and all conservatives should understand this distinction. The bottom line: the media needs to be treated as the prosecution for the State when it comes to any interview process.

In fact, my recommendation is to adopt the democratic model and avoid all previously normal media contacts, and in fact understand that it is more of a situation of avoiding the "gotcha" moments as it is to promote the conservative and libertarian agenda.

2. I don't know if it was noticable, but...

Shortly after the election, President Elect Obama got his first national security briefing. I have sensed a subtle, but seemingly complete turnaround of his mentality when it comes to national security issues since that briefing, and probably sustained through subsequent briefings. If you notice his politicking and his liberal positions have been tempered with the realities that up to then had been restricted to extremely few people. I know he's a liberal, I know he's an FDR socialist, but I hope...I HOPE...he's not suicidal.

PoliCon
01-21-2009, 12:39 AM
2. I don't know if it was noticable, but...

Shortly after the election, President Elect Obama got his first national security briefing. I have sensed a subtle, but seemingly complete turnaround of his mentality when it comes to national security issues since that briefing, and probably sustained through subsequent briefings. If you notice his politicking and his liberal positions have been tempered with the realities that up to then had been restricted to extremely few people. I know he's a liberal, I know he's an FDR socialist, but I hope...I HOPE...he's not suicidal.I noticed. I can prolly guess as to the exact moment in the briefing when his butthole puckered up tight with fear! :) The left might just wake up now and realize that Bush was not as evil as they wanted him to be after all.

JAG-in-TX
01-21-2009, 09:19 AM
2. I don't know if it was noticable, but...

Shortly after the election, President Elect Obama got his first national security briefing. I have sensed a subtle, but seemingly complete turnaround of his mentality when it comes to national security issues since that briefing, and probably sustained through subsequent briefings. If you notice his politicking and his liberal positions have been tempered with the realities that up to then had been restricted to extremely few people. I know he's a liberal, I know he's an FDR socialist, but I hope...I HOPE...he's not suicidal.

I am sure by now he is realizing his pre-election postures were campaign rhetoric to galvanize the fringe groups on the left in his party.

The reality is, regardless of W's faults, Bush set the bar very high for all next presidents: 7+ years of no attacks to the US, its embassies or military installations overseas. And for Obama to go for at least another 4 years without a hitch, he will have to listen to the SecDef, National Security Advisor, CIA and FBI.

Now Obama is tacitly acknowledging that Bush's course of action was right all along. Time to stop yelling from the sidelines, and start playing in the field for real!

Odysseus
01-21-2009, 01:29 PM
I'm chiming in late here... but I have noticed two things.

1. First of all, this is probably the first media-elected president in history. Nothing short of an unprecedented support by supposedly neutral reporters have rendered the 4th Estate completely biased. We should accept the fact that, for all intents and purposes, we should treat the mainstream media as a full-fledged subsidiary of the Democratic National Committee, and all conservatives should understand this distinction. The bottom line: the media needs to be treated as the prosecution for the State when it comes to any interview process.

In fact, my recommendation is to adopt the democratic model and avoid all previously normal media contacts, and in fact understand that it is more of a situation of avoiding the "gotcha" moments as it is to promote the conservative and libertarian agenda.
It's not that this was the first media-decided election in history (the media has always had a disproportionate influence compared to its numbers), it's that the mainstream media abandoned even the pretense of objectivity in their open cheerleading for Obama. They won this battle, but their reputation has been seriously damaged, and unless Obama is everything that they claimed that he is (and how could anybody be all that?), the disappointment will fuel a huge backlash against them. The leson for Republicans is that they run against the Democrats and the media and that the media must be engaged as a partisan opponent, not as a neutral disseminator of information. Treat them that way. A few rules:

Interviews should be live, so that answers can't be edited in order to subject the candidate to ridicule, and unedited transcripts must be made available to the campaign prior to the publication/airtime.
Buy ads in the major media to counter their spin. For example, if an NY Times article appears on Monday with a false lead or rumor, an ad should appear in the Times on Tuesday that debunks the article and points out the necessity of having to correct the Times' reporting because they can't be trusted to do it. This will cost lots of money, which means that:
The campaigns must outraise their Democratic opponents in order to counter both paid and unpaid media attacks (campaign ads and editorial bias in reporting) and ensure that the message gets out.
McCain ran one of the most civil, least rancorous campaigns in history and he was constantly reamed by the media for going negative, while the Obama campaign allowed the most vicious rumor-mongering and character assassination imaginable, and the media either ignored his campaign's conduct, or repeated the smears. Remember that anything said by a Republican about a Democrat will be attacked as divisive, while anything said by a Democrat about a Republican will be repeated as a fact. Since we're going to be accused of negative campaigning, we might as well negatively campaign.


I am sure by now he is realizing his pre-election postures were campaign rhetoric to galvanize the fringe groups on the left in his party.

The reality is, regardless of W's faults, Bush set the bar very high for all next presidents: 7+ years of no attacks to the US, its embassies or military installations overseas. And for Obama to go for at least another 4 years without a hitch, he will have to listen to the SecDef, National Security Advisor, CIA and FBI.

Now Obama is tacitly acknowledging that Bush's course of action was right all along. Time to stop yelling from the sidelines, and start playing in the field for real!
Latest Mad Magazine cover shows a panicked, chain-smoking Obama on day one in the Oval Office, dealing with crisis after crisis. He reminds me of the dog that loved to chase cars, but when he finally caught one, he was in way over his head.

lacarnut
01-21-2009, 04:28 PM
It's not that this was the first media-decided election in history (the media has always had a disproportionate influence compared to its numbers), it's that the mainstream media abandoned even the pretense of objectivity in their open cheerleading for Obama. They won this battle, but their reputation has been seriously damaged, and unless Obama is everything that they claimed that he is (and how could anybody be all that?), the disappointment will fuel a huge backlash against them. The leson for Republicans is that they run against the Democrats and the media and that the media must be engaged as a partisan opponent, not as a neutral disseminator of information. Treat them that way. A few rules:



It is imperative that we start electing politicians that understand that. Many of our Repubs in Congress have been there too long; they have gotten too accustomed to how the game of politics is played.

I am hopefull that S. P. will be our nominee in 012. She is not a whimp like many Repubs politicians are. Bush and McCain let the media ride roughshod over them.

xavierob82
01-21-2009, 05:08 PM
He is no President of mine.

I will show the same amount of respect to obama as they showed My President. :p


I am not one of those people that wish ill on the Country so as to get more Republicans in power but I have nothing but disgust for the people that voted for this person.



Well, look at the bright side: at least he won the popular vote and wasn't selected by the Supreme Court. Imagine that. The right would have gone batshit.

Zathras
01-21-2009, 05:10 PM
Well, look at the bright side: at least he won the popular vote and wasn't selected by the Supreme Court. Imagine that. The right would have gone batshit.

Only in the drug addled minds of the Obamatrons like you.

Odysseus
01-22-2009, 12:35 PM
It is imperative that we start electing politicians that understand that. Many of our Repubs in Congress have been there too long; they have gotten too accustomed to how the game of politics is played.

I am hopefull that S. P. will be our nominee in 012. She is not a whimp like many Repubs politicians are. Bush and McCain let the media ride roughshod over them.
Agreed. Reagan had the best approach to them. He didn't take them too seriously and spoke above them from the bully pulpit. It was hard for the media to spin him when he spoke directly to the American people. Had Bush done the same thing, and as often, he'd have had a much stronger connection to the electorate than he did. Instead, the media defined his presidency.

Well, look at the bright side: at least he won the popular vote and wasn't selected by the Supreme Court. Imagine that. The right would have gone batshit.

No, we actually believe in the rules and follow them. It's the left that keeps trying to litigate everything that they dislike out of existence.

OldDude201
02-27-2009, 09:20 PM
President Barack Obama and his politics scare the everlivingdaylights out me. It's politic, not color/gender, I'd vote for the right person even if s/he were turquoise. The fact remains that he won the election, he is your, mine and every other Americans' President and Commander in Chief. Laws passed under his administration are still law. We are a country governed by the rule of law. As a citizen you are duty bound to abide and uphold any and all laws until you can get them rewritten to fit/fulfill your personal conviction. The extreme left practice lawlessness and rebellion, if you want to be likened to them then do the same. I for one will pray that G*D give our President the spiritual guidance needed to reestablish our country, the United States Of America, as the preeminent morally right guiding influence in the world. If that doesn't come about, I can always vote for Sarah Palin in 2012.

Lars1701a
02-27-2009, 09:28 PM
Well, look at the bright side: at least he won the popular vote and wasn't selected by the Supreme Court. Imagine that. The right would have gone batshit.

Well when winning the popular vote matters in a Presidential election you let me know ok?

lacarnut
02-27-2009, 11:51 PM
Well when winning the popular vote matters in a Presidential election you let me know ok?

Draw xaveriob82 a picture so that he can understand how Presidents are elected. :rolleyes:

PoliCon
02-28-2009, 01:11 AM
I heard recently that a couple of states are making it so that the states electoral votes are to be pledged not to who won their state - but to who wins the national popular vote.