President Obama!

Rule breaker!  Paul/Plumber for 2012!

 

Hahaha you know it's only a matter of time before Joe the Plumber has his own reality show :-P

 

isnt he running for congress in 2012 now or something?

 

Yeah. Great idea imo, elect people who don't understand basic tax policy.

 

i thought it was funny when he started talking foreign policy too.

 

You mean theft policy.
 

 

I refuse to be ruled by someone who supports terrorists and is a communist. I hope all patriotic and intelligent Americans call for a swift impeachment. I've lost my faith in democracy after witnessing the corruption of this election by the Hussein campaign and his thug supporters with the blessing of our national media. It now seems like America needs the help of the UN in order to ensure a fair and open election. This isn't the nation I grew up in... We've forgotten what it means to be Americans and what made this country great.

 

LOLUMAD?

 

To be American is then to be white? Is that what you're saying? I thought America was founded based upon things like equality and freedom speech. "Hussein campaign"? Supports terrorists and is a communist? Give me definite proof that he literally supports terrorists (no, his name being the same as a former dictator does not count) and that he is a communist (and no, increasing taxes for those with higher income does not make him a communist).

 

 

William Ayers founded the terrorist organization "The Weather Underground" with his wife in the late 1960s. It remained active until the early 1980s and carried out dozens of terrorist attacks including the bombing of the Pentagon, the U.S. Capital building and domestic residencies. They also carried out various other acts suck as armed bank robberies where several police were murdered and they blinded people with acid. They also planned to overthrow the U.S. government and take over the country and send everyone to re-education centers to adopt their communist revolutionary ideals. 

Anyone who remained a supporter of capitalism was going to be killed which would be around 25 million Americans according to their estimates. They were finally caught and arrested but their trials had to be stopped because the FBI was spying on them without warrents which was against the law so all charges were dropped and they were set free. After several years of hiding they reemerged and were given jobs as professors at liberal universities that they still work and teach at today. They carried on their radical teachings and objectives through various grass roots organizations such as community organizing and school reforms that emphaized radicalism and political enlightment over traditional subjects such as science math and reading.

They created activist institutions and boards such as Project Vote and ACORN which Obama was handpicked by Ayers to run. Obama gave out millions to Ayers radical revolutionary "alternative" schools and trained ACORN activists and represented them in legal cases. He was also a great admirer of William Ayers writing glowing reviews of his books and teachings. William Ayers lauched Obama's political campaign and molded him to do well politically. He also closely linked with Rashid Khalidi - a PLO activist. The PLO is a Muslim terrorist organization which carried dozens of terrorist attacks which killed Americans.

They were close friends and had conversations about the Middle East on a regular basis which Obama described as enlightening and something the rest of the world should know. Obama talked about seeking out Marxist professors in college and talking about it with his far leftist friends on a regular basis in college while smoking weed and snorting crack I'd imagine. The radical left are openly Marxist including the "black liberation theology" proponents he subscibed to at his church. He's also made numerous remarks about the virtues of wealth redistribution and "fairness". Very common rhetoric amongst supporters of Marxists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay4cgdq6g-o

To give you an idea of who the Weather Underground were. My father worked at the Pentagon.

 

Let me correct my comment about ACORN tomake it more clear. I didn't mean to imply that William Ayers created that particular organization. I was trying to make the point that Project Vote was a sister organization of ACORN.

 

Here's some more links to give you more information about the content in my comment.

Here's a video about the LA times covering up a video of Obama attending a Khalidi toast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c0LylEV4z0

Here's an article about the Weather Underground planning to kill 25 million Americans.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/eyewitness-to-the-ayers-revolution/

Audio tape of Obama making Marxist remarks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

More information on the Khalidi / Obama relationship and how the LA times tried to cover it up.

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/10/confirmed-msm-holds-video-of-barack.html

More on Khalidi.

http://sandbox.blog-city.com/khalidi_of_the_plo.htm

A video complilation of some of Obama's Marxist-esqe remarks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akLlxxWaJZM

A video on the Ayers / Obama connection.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvROBLortBQ

Obama giving a gushing review of William Ayers book.

http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=64

There you go.

 

You don't "snort crack" you nut job.  If you can't even get the basics of a long mocked drug right, how much else did you **** up in this essay?

 

Sorry. I don't know much about drug use.

 

Go ahead and down vote me. You elected a terrorist supporting communist without doing any research. I guess that says a lot about his supporters.

 

Chisea, you're a moron. You do realize equality means NOT VOTING FOR SOMEONE BECAUSE THEY ARE BLACK? Or making a big deal out of someone because they're the first black president. ******* idiot democrat and your ass backwards standards that make no ******* sense. If you believe in equality, then you shouldn't need to put so much emphasis on race. The simple fact is you don't and you're a hypocritical idiot.

 

lol get the **** out then u ******* delusional inbreed

 

this was a good day

 

Yes it was.

 

Needs to be at the top

 

And the rest of the world breathes a sigh of relief..

 

seriously, I bet the rest of world is more excited than Murica

 

yup, countries like Iran, Pakistan, Russia, N. Korea and China all now know we got a ***** for a President.

 

having just moved to the states from australia, i'm absolutely stoked obama got in, ******* great stuff! =D

 

Dumb idea

 

I'm sorry, wat?

Do you know what this is? c[_]

It's gameriot's care cup, and it's ******* empty.

 

 

good one, except that "somebody had to say it." totally ruins it

 

i totally posted this in the original president thread =/

 

owned ******

 

this blog sucks dick

 

no i will NOT take my pants off

 

like ym

 

Agreed

 

=D Yes We Did! woot Obama 08!

 

Axiom
Birthday:
August 19, 1982

Â

Wasn't Reagan the best president America ever had? From what little I know, Clinton was a good president too.

**** THAT WENT WRONG. WHY DID IT **** UP GOD. Why cant I delete stuff, god I hate this text editor.

 

I can't tell if you're being serious or not!  Reagan nearly destroyed this country with his theory of trickle-down economics, which basically bankrupt the middle class (and therefore the country).  Clinton was a good president, but could've done a lot more than he did.

Obama is in a league that can really only be shared with JFK and FDR, yet perhaps even more inspirational and generation-defining. 

 

Before your hero can change the world he has to deal with some serious econimcal problems.

 

Obama is inspirational but he has yet to actually DO anything. It's crazy to compare him with JFK and FDR at this juncture - he has the charisma, but he has to execute, too.

Hopefully in a few years those comparisons are valid.

 

It's crazy to think JFK and FDR are "Great Presidents".

 

The same FDR, who imprisoned over a hundred thousand Japanese-Americans in camps. The US economy was turned around by the War, not by any of his inane statist policies. JFK was in power for a few years, so I fail to see how he was generationally defining, particularly as his own party filibustered the civil rights act.

As for economic theories, you glibly opine about "trickle-down economics". This indicates that you are a hardcore democrat. I will enjoy watching people like you pretend,over the coming weeks, to care about unifying your fractured country.

I look forward to your retort contradicting basic economic laws, and suggesting the same protectionism that failed for so long here in Europe.

 

Poor Zenbot.  How do you contain all your angst?

 

While I don't agree in the imprisonment, it's still widely agreed that it was also in the best interest for many of those Japanese.

Take trickle down economics. It's comparable to feeding mice by giving a dog food and them eating what he leaves behind. Sure if you give the dog more food it will benefit the mice, but it will disproportionately benefit the dog.

It is not basic economic law. It's theory that sits basically at the opposite end of the table facing redistribution of wealth, which has significant footing in microeconomic law. But wait, I thought you were the economics expert?

 

I see your point pertaining trickle down theory. However, I never said it was an economic law.

Pertaining your comments on trickle down theory. Who is in charge of the feeding? Where does this dog get his food from? Did he/she work to acquire the food? Does the food then belong to them?
Is the food supply limited?
What is redistribution of wealth? What is an acceptable amount of money for an average citizen to have? Is it the job of the government to decide that? Are their liberty related ramifications to such judgements?

 

Sorry, I thought your comment about "basic economic laws" referred specifically to trickle down theory.

You raise some very good points that have bugged economists for years. I love economics because it's a science that you can endlessly theorize but can never entirely experiment with. Unfortunately the dog analogy can't be reasonably taken beyond what I used it for so I won't really try. The food supply is limited though, so you have to ask yourself who deserves the food more.

Economists have been bothered for a long time trying to measure a person's marginal contribution to society. There is a lot of debate as to the contributions of, say, a house cleaner. If she is cleaning the house of a man who makes $50 000 000 a year and saves him 5% of his time every day, what is her contribution? Is it worth more than the 30 000k she makes a year? There are so many factors that come into play it's very hard to say. How many other people could fill his job? There are very strong arguments that if you took the top 5% of the income earners out of society (except doctors) you wouldn't see a loss in productivity equal to the difference in salaries when compared to those in the bottom 5%. Barriers to entry and social networking throw a lot of economics out the window.

Redistribution of wealth is, as you insinuate, a slippery slope. You're working on the premise that you can't measure anyones direct contribution to society, so you're going to instead make the point of trying to reasonably decide when one person's marginal benefit from their earnings is reduced to the point where they can pay an increased rate on that and not lose benefit. This is the "marginal utility" concept from microeconomics. 100 years ago this wasn't necessary. Increasing goods production meant more jobs for working class. With manufacturing being shipped out of the country, the investment becomes foreign and while it might lead to cheaper goods too much is being shifted elsewhere.

If they don't want to raise taxes on the wealthy and balance wealth, they'd need to tarriff and quota imported goods. This leads to a net societal productivity loss though, which is why it fails harder. Free trade and higher tax on upper brackets > regulated trade and no higher tax. If the government really wanted to fix wealth distribution problems the solution would be to greatly increase funding for post-secondary education and crack down on illegal immigration.

 

He might be in that highly prestigious league shared with JFK...

 

What the hell are you talking about? Our economy grew by over 20% during the Reagan administration. The only reason the liberals hate him so much and brainwashed you with their propoganda is because they care more about "fairness" than growth and because he was openly hostile to the Soviet Union and thought we should kick their ass rather than appease them like the liberals wanted. The average family income grew by over $6,000 during his administration and unemployment plummeted. "Trickle down economics" works. It worked in Reagan's America and in Thatcher's Britain. Both economies were on the verge of collapse before they made Keynesian reforms. Maybe you should open a book that wasn't written by Noam Chomsky. The only thing Reagan screwed up was our debt.

Stop posting.

 

"Our economy grew by over 20% during the Reagan administration [...] The only thing Reagan screwed up was our debt."

Do you see a connection? Every government can boost the economy by mounting dept. Your education really is in the toilet, isn't it?

 

 

"You can, until nobody will buy your debt anymore. Then the shell game ends."

Yep, some fun times ahead.. have you seen this?

http://www.chrismartenson.com/crash-course/chapter-1-three-beliefs

nothing terribly new, but still well explained.