IT.COM
Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

Who is to Blame for the Troubled US Economy?

  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.
  • Both Parties

    268 
    votes
    44.7%
  • Neither Party

    57 
    votes
    9.5%
  • Democrats

    134 
    votes
    22.3%
  • Republicans

    141 
    votes
    23.5%
  • This poll is still running and the standings may change.

Impact
8,557
Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun :)

:wave:
 
8
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
so on the one hand you are al bent out about people being "racist" agaisnt whites, but then you blantently put all "Minorities" in a boat together. Ok , thats for explaining that.
 
1
•••
Some people understand what's going on:

marine.jpg



More pics is here http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress....n-open-rebellion-against-obamas-war-in-syria/

---------- Post added at 04:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:41 PM ----------

Obama now says::"I Didn't Set a Red Line" on Syria. What else can you expect from a Liberal President... the truth??? .:laugh:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-i-didnt-set-red-line-syria_752712.html

Yeah... "The world set a red line..."

Here is a nice picture about the position of the world:

DPan1q1.png
 
4
•••
I'm sure Oblameless will get nominated for a second Nobel Peace Prize


I'm no fan of Vladimir Putin, but in this press conference he talks about Obama's present stand on Syria, in a pretty reasonable. logical and coherent way.... without the use of a teleprompter, naturally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNKm3TsJ9Ks
 
Last edited:
2
•••
Summary:

Don't mess with Russia's gas future.

The danger is not from the fringe.. Not even from the fringe that can feign centrism.... but how easily people buy into it.

Putin is a narcissist sociopath.
 
0
•••
John Kerry reveals Arab countries have offered to PAY America to carry out full-scale invasion of Syria

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...on-Syria-says-Secretary-State-John-Kerry.html

:O Amazing!!. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and a few other Arab countries are now paying the US to destroy their enemy with American Oil Money. American troops will become mercenaries to do the cowardly Arabs dirty work?

Qatar and Saudi Arabia want to control Syria to run a pipeline through Syria and Turkey to Europe and it appears that Obama is gonna bend down and comply. He had already bent down to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt but got his a$$ kicked really hard :kickass:
 
1
•••
Exactly. Unlike liberals, I don't pretend to be another color or try to hide the truth

How would you know what the truth is? I remember asking you the same question a year ago, and you had no answer

Besides, the post was about the importance of civil rights and lack of conservatives in attendance to celebrate the occasion.

That lack of involvement by Republicans to celebrate such a major event sends a clear "We-don't-give-a-shit-about-minorities" message.
 
1
•••
How would you know what the truth is? I remember asking you the same question a year ago, and you had no answer

Easy. I know that the lies comes from the brainwashed Liberals and their Obama ass-kissing media, so the truth is easy to find.

Here's an example of my favorite US politician Ron Paul, being interviewed by a totally brainwashed female version of Chris Mathews at MSNBC, who tries her hardest to defend and spread Obama's lies and discredit any reason to oppose it.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrHW9PpqBO0"]Ron Paul Squares Off Against Alex Wagner About Syria on MSNBC - Must Watch - September 5, 2013 - YouTube[/ame]

That lack of involvement by Republicans to celebrate such a major event sends a clear "We-don't-give-a-shit-about-minorities" message.

Why would some Republicans want to do amongst a hostile crowd that voted 96% for a black President and "don't-give-a-shit-about-Republicans"

From what I hear most of them received late invitations to attend, but not to speak... Here's an example.

The nation’s only black Senator, Tim Scott (R-SC) was not invited to speak at the rally today commemorating the 50th Anniversary of MLK’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech.

http://www.tpnn.com/discrimination-only-black-senator-kept-out-of-ceremony-honoring-mlk/

Why is every Black Conservative denigrated by the Democrats?

According to Cornel West, Martin Luther King would turn over in his grave if he saw the present crop of Civil Rights Leaders and amongst some other very strong criticism, he called Al Sharpton "The Bonafide House Negro Of The Obama Plantation”

Listen to Video below:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6rgilu1oP8"]Cornel West Says Civil Rights Leaders Have Failed The Movement - YouTube[/ame]
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Applies to the US (everywhere imo):
For those w/ extremely short attention spans: time 1:58 - 3:21
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVJsIWRUKkk"]Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd Launches Passionate Gay Marriage Defence - YouTube[/ame]
 
1
•••
2
•••
Easy. I know that the lies comes from the brainwashed Liberals and their ass-kissing media, so the truth is easy to find.

Once again, you indiscriminately lump together and define all "liberals" by calling them names. Good job.

Why would some Republicans want to do amongst a hostile crowd that voted 96% for a black President and "don't-give-a-shit-about-Republicans"

Because, unlike you, they are all Americans. And Americans, liberal or conservative, should be able to appreciate and support that little line in the Declaration of Independence that states "All men are created equal." And all Americans, liberal or conservative should recognize the hardships and sacrifice that their forefathers endured to gain their civil rights in the last 200 years past, back when they would have been considered immigrants and risked their lives to travel to America for a fresh start, to escape their own problems of oppression and inequality in their native countries in search of their own dream of an equal opportunity to establish a better life for their families. And Americans should not let politics cheapen the humiliation of other Americans being hanged and beaten and shunned only a few decades ago because of skin color. Amerians should celebrate civil rights not as a political entity, but as a human right. To not unite behind a cause so fundamental to the freedom and opportunity the United States stands for is not only petty, it is truly an affront to the ideals the United States were founded upon. All of the politicians who did not attend, liberal and conservative, are spitting in the face of the very people they have sworn to serve.

From what I hear most of them received late invitations to attend, but not to speak...
From what you hear? Late invitations? Good grief.

According to the Washington Post and other sources, of the 233 republicans in the House of Representatives, 46 republicans in the senate and 30 republican governors of states, not a single one of them attended. Zero. That's right, not a single elected republican politician attended the MLK anniversary. Not one had the dignity to attend and honor a man of peace who died for his dream of equality and helped change the course of America.

Organizers of the event stated that every member of congress, including Senator Tim Scott, was invited to attend. They were not all invited to speak, but they were invited. Scott was not invited to speak, probably because his Tea Party beliefs fly in the face of MLK's message. But other Republican leaders were invited to speak. Instead, they chose not to attend. Boehner had no scheduling conflicts, but chose to not speak in favor of headlining fund raisers in Wyoming. Eric Cantor was touring an oil field in North Dakota. The MLK anniversary organizers said Cantor tried to find a replacement speaker for himself but was unsuccessful in finding a single republican willing to attend and speak.

So you can whine about Scott not attending, but in fact none attended. That's not a coincidence, it's just disgusting.


Here's an example.

The nation’s only black Senator, Tim Scott (R-SC) was not invited to speak at the rally today commemorating the 50th Anniversary of MLK’s ‘I Have a Dream’ speech.
That's true. He was not invited to speak. But he was invited. He still chose not to attend, just like every other invited republican.

Why is every Black Conservative denigrated by the Democrats?

You must be kidding.

According to Cornel West, Martin Luther King would turn over in his grave if he saw the present crop of Civil Rights Leaders and amongst some other very strong criticism, he called Al Sharpton "The Bonafide House Negro Of The Obama Plantation”

I’m betting you hadn’t even heard of Cornel West before a few days ago. And now you’re using him to “denigrate” liberal African-Americans? Classy.
 
1
•••
Once again, you indiscriminately lump together and define all "liberals" by calling them names. Good job.

Thanks :D

All of the politicians who did not attend, liberal and conservative, are spitting in the face of the very people they have sworn to serve.

If they hadn't invited the top race-baiters like Al Sharptongue and Jesse Jackson, then perhaps some of them may have gone. Who in his right mind would want to be around those 2 snakes.

I don't even understand why you're making such a big deal of this. I'll bet that deep down, the MLK 50th anniversary organizers and liberals were really happy that the Republicans didn't come... and so was I :D

I’m betting you hadn’t even heard of Cornel West before a few days ago. And now you’re using him to “denigrate” liberal African-Americans? Classy.

Wrong you are. You really underestimate my knowledge of American politics. I've seen Cornel dozens of times being interviewed by CNN and elsewhere for several years now. I may not agree with everything he says, but I agree with most of what he says. I especially admire his straight forward honesty, something lacking in most people nowadays, especially people in the limelight.
 
1
•••
Thanks :D

If they hadn't invited the top race-baiters like Al Sharptongue and Jesse Jackson, then perhaps some of them may have gone. Who in his right mind would want to be around those 2 snakes.
Name-calling again, as always. Atta boy. You and West have that in common.

I don't even understand why you're making such a big deal of this. I'll bet that deep down, the MLK 50th anniversary organizers and liberals were really happy that the Republicans didn't come... and so was I :D.

I'm sure you truly don't understand why I think the whole republican party refusing to turn out to support civil rights for minorities is a big deal. Apparently, the republicans don't think it was a big deal, either. I'm hoping 40% minorities making up of all U.S. voters think it is a big deal, too.

Even so, it's a perfect example republican logic to make sure not a single nationally elected republican attends the anniversary, yet they then single out and complain when the only black senator (an appointed republican) wasn't invited to speak, even though other republicans that were invited to speak declined. Senator Tim Scott chose not to attend anyway. (After the other republicans declined, how could he? To have only one republican politician (the Black one) to attend out of nearly 300 would have been even worse for the republican party than they already made it. Such irony isn't found anywhere else.)

Wrong you are. You really underestimate my knowledge of American politics. I've seen Cornel dozens of times being interviewed by CNN and elsewhere for several years now. I may not agree with everything he says, but I agree with most of what he says. I especially admire his straight forward honesty, something lacking in most people nowadays, especially people in the limelight.

I don't underestimate your knowledge of American politics; I am simply astounded that as being as obsessed with them as you apparently are, that you fail to comprehend and correlate political cause and effect relationships as badly as you do. As for "non-Marxist socialist" Cornel West, the guy is all over the place. It's no surprise you could find a quote to use to zoom in on Sharpton, but I am surprised you haven't used quotes from him before, considering he likes to call people names, too.

Any way, you failed to mention West was a supporter and advisor to Sharpton's 2004 presidential campaign but now calls him derogatory names. In 2008, he served On Senator Obama's Black Advisory Committee, but now calls Obama derogatory names, etc. On the other hand, he is a great admirer of Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, not to mention Louis Farrakhan, Hugo Chavez and other nice people. He also co-directs the Network of Spiritual Progressives which views capitalism as a destructive force and rejects private property rights but is in favor of government health care, etc. If you want a quote for anything, West is your man. Notice how politically correct he is, though, in using "negro" instead of something a little more sociably unacceptable. He can't afford that. Literally.
 
1
•••
Name-calling again, as always. Atta boy. You and West have that in common.

Learned that from the Liberals, .... though I have to admit I still have a ways to go, to be as good as them, .... in name-calling. But I'm trying my hardest :]

John Kerry today said that a U.S. military strike on Syria would be "limited" and "unbelievably small," words that must have struck fear in the heart of Syrian President Bashar Assad

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z93xlgsxEco"]John Kerry: "Unbelievably Small" Strike On Syria - YouTube[/ame]

Give it a couple more days and the whole thing will fizzle out. Kerry can then be hired as a clown (no need for a mask) in a Texas Rodeo.

Yes I know it was an "unbelievably nasty" thing to say about Kerry.... but I just couldn't resist. :laugh:
 
1
•••
1
•••
3
•••
Obama gives his speech tonight on Syria.

Yes, that was some speech wasn't it? The first speech ever made by a US President informing the nation of what's he's NOT going to do.

Obama just keeps re-affirming to the world how much of a indecisive and weak leader he really is.. And we have Putin capitalizing on it, reminds me of when Khrushchev walked all over JFK.
Only instead of having missiles in Cuba aimed at the US, we have nerve gas in the hands of Hezbollah, with the Russians running the show.

I should perhaps cut Obama a break, he's not the only naive and incompetent President we had, We had Jimmy Carter who actually believed and still believes to this day that we can negotiate with ruthless dictators.

Liberals, they don't learn by past mistakes, they repeat them.
 
1
•••
"Obama just keeps re-affirming to the world how much of a indecisive and weak leader he really is"

So did you want us to strike Syria? Show em how tough we are? I myself think he screwed up at the beginning, with publically declaring a red line etc. But we'll see how things play out.

I guess you want to forget about Osama, winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, talking about his leadership?

There is a bigger issue. What should be done if another country violates International Law?

Should the world do nothing?

Should somebody do something? When we choose this, it's usually us (America) and I think most Americans are tired of that role, of being the "World's Policeman"

The problem is, who else is going to step to the plate? What we talked about earlier, that documentary I watched about what would happened if we pulled out all our military bases.

I don't see any European army ready to take the lead on anything.

It's at the point now, because of the mistakes of the previous President, that if somebody wanted to start something, now would be the perfect time. I'm talking about a situation where boots would be needed on the ground. The public just doesn't want that it seems, regardless of the situation unless the mainland was directly attacked or something.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
"we have nerve gas in the hands of Hezbollah, with the Russians running the show"

No, Hezbollah does not have any chemical weapons. Russians do not control Hezbollah or Syria. Please refrain from claming that I am pro Obama or a liberal for pointing these 2 facts out.


-
" What should be done if another country violates International Law?"
Yea well that is an interesting question. Lets take a closer look at that. First of all what internation law was broken?? Syria did not radifiy the convention on chemical weapons, therefore it is perfectly legal under international law for them to have chemical weapons. -There is 0 proof that has been brought forward in the UN that the Syrian military used chemical weapons, so what violation?
However in Syria there are 3 very clear violations of international law. First of all Israel occupying the Golan Heights and creating settlements there. This is in clear violation of UN mandate.So thier it is a clear violation, not a , supposed violation that has not been proved, but a clear violation - I ask :" What should be done if another country violates International Law?"
Second of all foreign mercenaries are being funneled in by the gulf Monarch´s via Turkey is a clear violation of national sovereignty as any military invasion is. The question remains "What should be done if another country violates International Law?" , again this is not theoretical, SA, Qutar, Turkey do not hide or deny that they support and cordinate the flow of mercenaries into Syria. This is clearly against international law.
Third, Israel recently shot missles into Syria. No decleration of war, no nothing, they just did it. This is a violation of international law plain and simple. This is not a theory, this is "the truth". I ask again "What should be done if another country violates International Law?"
--
Also lets put the put the possession of chemical weapons in context. One neighboring country has not radified the convention on chemical weapons, and is known to have nukes (Israel), not only that they occupy part of Syira. Chemical weapons and any "WMD" are deturents, I am by no means playing how horrible these weapons are, they are horrible. However they are a deturent. Having Syria give up its chemical weapons and Israel can keep its chemcial and nukes , is not only unlogical and "unfair" but creates a country that can not defend itself against "WMDs" (if that is even possible).
But are "WMDs" really a deturent? I think Germany is the only country that the USA has ever attacked that had chemical weapons or any WMD. (really having one or more WMD, not suspected of having one) ,maybe I am forgetting an attack or invasion.
-
What is simply ubsurd is that the USA is the one drawing red lines in regards to chemical weapons and WMDs. The USA radified the convention on chemical weapons but used Agent Orange and still uses White Phosphorus and CS gas (yes that is a chemical weapon and I think it is in the convention). Not to mention spreading out massive ammounts of unexploded cluser bombs and a little radio active material here in there in the form of depleted uranium, who knows if there is or howmuch depleated uranium are in the so called "bunker busters". The country that does all of these things gets to say who and who should not have this or that weapon?! - If something would be done about these 3 violations of international law, then we would be on the right track and not on the brink of a possible WWIII.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Well, here we go again. Time to do the shut-down-the -government dance. It's really getting old.
 
1
•••
What is this "shut down the goverment" dance?
 
1
•••
1
•••
1
•••
Will they also be closing Obama's favorite golf courses?

How about the NSA... will they also shut down and stop spying on us?
 
Last edited:
1
•••
0
•••
Do you think the "Affordable Care Act" is better than " Obamacare"... or vice-versa?

Here are some interesting opinions on the "Obamacare vs. The Affordable Care Act"

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx2scvIFGjE"]Six of One - Obamacare vs. The Affordable Care Act - YouTube[/ame]
 
1
•••
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the page’s height.
Back