"We are 5 days away from "TRANSFORMING" the USA back to the USA !!!!

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re:

    In response to seabeachfred's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The usual back and forth , right vs. left political arguments , with a lot of name calling thrown in.  I have always been " results oriented ."   When all is said and done, results are what matters in government , business , education , medicine , sports , etc.  That is what we need. RESULTS. Presently , there are many things wrong in this nation , and also in Red Sox nation.  As a law-abiding , taxpaying citizen , I expect to see some results in improving things in this country.   As a long time loyal Red Sox fan , I expect to see some results in improving the ballclub.  I would support whatever it takes to get these results.  Right now , I am not seeing it. 

    [/QUOTE]  Bad day today for the "BIG O"  !!! They are all jumping Ship like rats.....  General Peatreas in BED with the wrong women..... What a way to run the greatest country in the world...... BIG O is happy, it all gets us closer to the 3rd world country in the east !!!!   Wake up all !!!   It's later than you think !!!

    [/QUOTE]


    Bill, Boeing and another company just laid off 20,000 workers and word is out that a recession is coming.  We are near the fiscal cliff and the Repblicans can start showing some balls by refsing to extend the debt limit.  That wold keep u s from going off the fiscal cliff and wold necessitate massive cts in programs by Obama.  That would lead to massive unemployment.  Since most of those fired wold be Democratic voters they wold get what they richly deserve and others will learn that when 2014 comes arond they need to finally get their heads ot of their btts and put some real conservtives in office.  No more kicking the problems down the road.  cut ct ct---and if that means jobs lost too bad. It was O'spolicies that broght that on so let those people sffer.  They deserve it.  Mean spirited and damn prod of it.

     

    I don't have the letter U working on my computer .....bear with me on that.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    What an idiotic statement.  Not extending the debt limit is in fact the fiscal cliff, which once we go over it will mean that America will have to pay more in interest after its credit rating is downgraded, and will be unable to fund its debt, most of which is the result of two wars and massive tax cuts during the Bush years, destroying not just our economy, but the world's.  The resulting massive cuts to federal programs and the military will be the result of the deal Republicans made with Obama in order to kick the problem down the road until after the election they thought they would win because they had a message no one could resist--cut taxes for the rich and we will all benefit. 

    Ooops, not enough rich guys to buy the argument and sell it on to the rest of us.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re:

    In response to SFBostonFan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Thesemenarecowards' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Softy and Billy Boy, our 2 resident old, ranting, out of touch white guys are also our 2 most vocal Obama bashers. 

    A perfect microcosm of the current GOP base.

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Ya Know...your reference to older people is a bit disrespectful. I am a Septuagenarian who liked Romney as a nice God fearing family man who had traditional values. Illegal aliens drawing too much welfare money from taxpayers & commiting majority of crimes, same sex marriages and women having abortions as he believed in Pro-Life as the Catholic Church but he did feel a girl raped could get an abortion. But, I now see his mistake.  He needed to reach out to get the young vote, the Latins & Blacks because their pro-creation rates are increasing and the former continue to come across our borders. I agree with Romney on all these social issues but this old guy is not running for office
    For the first time in my life, I a™m really feeling my age. Aches and pains, military service and sports injuries aside, I feel that America has moved out from under my feet. My sense of right and wrong and logical thinking patterns do not seem to match up with so many citizens of this country. I too, thought the conservatives had a shot.


    To me it is so obvious what Obama is about. He is not about the America that I grew up in. Obama's socialist agenda, his disregard for the rule of law, his re-distribution of wealth, his apology tour around the world, bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia disgusting!  In the four years that he has been president, his campaign promises fell by the wayside. He authored a $900 billion stimulus package that rewarded labor and put money in the hands of his supporters under the guise of trying to stimulate the economy(œI guess there were not as many shovel-ready jobs as we thought... heh heh.) The auto bailout --- how many know the details of that transaction included leaving the bond holders with no money? How would you like it if you loaned somebody money and they came back to you after signing a promise to pay you back and said  œSorry  I am not going to pay you what I owe you but I am going to give your money to my friends?
    Yes, he inherited an economy that was in a downturn and losing jobs, yet he chose to pursue his healthcare agenda, his cap and trade agenda and green energy agenda that has cost this country millions of dollars ( Solyndra - $500 million lost ) while this economy went deeper into recession, he paid lip service to job creation and blamed Bush for the poor economy and did nothing to address the number one thing that was needed--- jobs. And while this was happening, he managed to play some golf, take expensive vacations, appear on TV ( The View, MTV, Letterman, Leno ).
    And where is the press in this country?  One of most treasured things about our democracy is the freedom of the press. Remember when the press sought out the truth and let the chips fall where they may?  remember Watergate? Those days are gone. The American press cannot be trusted to tell you the whole truth, nothing but the truth so help us God. The majority of the press has a liberal agenda and you will not  see them digging up the truth about a story that does not reflect well on the Left. Will we ever get the truth about the Mexican gun smuggling debacle or Benghazi? If we do it will be because the task will be undertaken by someone with no vested interest in the outcome.
    With Obama as our president, for the next four years, America as I know it is going away. As I approach 74 years of age, I know I will never see again, the America that I once knew.
     
    What do the majority in this country see in Obama that makes them want him to be their president? He does not love this country like I do, why do others not see that?

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Another sad example of an old person using his age as an excuse for being an ignoramus. The 900 billion dollar bailout was authored in September of 2008. Obama was elected president two months later, and took office in January of 2009. The 900 billion went to banks, not labor. What Obama did was save two car companies from extinction, and their debt has been paid back, not given to workers, although the jobs saved were very important to Ohioans and is why Romney's vision was not too attractive to the 1 in 8 citizens whose jobs depended on the money the Obama administration loaned the car companies to keep them in business.

    What on earth are you complaining about the press?  You have an entire "news" channel run by Republican strategist Roger Ailes that broadcasts Republican slanted coverage of the days events 24/7.

    And on what do you base your assumption that you love your country more than anyone, let alone the President of the United States?  You love your ability to remain intellectually lazy and misinformed, not your country.  If you loved your country you would work hard to be well informed and not get basic truths entirely wrong and still insist on using these false assumptions to justify your hatred of all non-white, non-male members of society.

    You aren't feeling your age, you are feeling the results of a lifetime of intellectual laziness and moral decrepitude.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from seabeachfred. Show seabeachfred's posts

    Re:

    In response to mryazz's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    heard a good one this evening. what do the republican party and the beach boys have in common?

    answer: both their fan bases are dying.

     

    This is why I try to stay away from political discussions and try to stick to baseball.  That was a totally ridiculous post I made out of anger and stupidity a few hours ago.  Personally I cannot understand how Obama could have been re-elected with such a lousy economy, a recession predicted for early next year, the Middle East coming apart and our debt going through the roof.  Well we ate it in 2008 too and came back in 2010.  Want to bet that we will make a nice recovery in 2014?  We will.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re:

    In response to mryazz's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    heard a good one this evening. what do the republican party and the beach boys have in common?

    answer: both their fan bases are dying.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a general disclaimer, I wrote in for Ron Paul, so i got no dog in this discussion, but-

    1-The total vote was 51/49.  The amount that Obama won by was almost identical to the amount Bush beat Kerry by.  Which means Obama has as much a mandate as Bush did.

    2-African-Ameicans voted in a virtual block for another African American.  Romney won > the non-African American vote by ~ 55-45.

    It's like the left just won a one-run extra inning game with a check-swing opposite field double and are now printing WS tickets.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re:

    The current tax code is to the Right of Eisenhower's. As a result, your statement appears, at least on the surface, to be patently false.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re:

    In response to softlaw's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    fund its debt, most of which is the result of two wars and massive tax cuts during the Bush years

    Folks, we have a mental midget. Take a look at the cost of "fudning entitlements" and the debt.

    Anyone in favor of saving entitlements and their expansion by simply appropriating the entire prviate property of the few hatefully greedy rich people who aren't paying their fair share. That should save the Wards of the welfare State for at least a number of months. Only a mental midget is so prideful and prejudiced that he gets all red faced when when the demagogues sends him an Email about how the rich don't pay enough taxes to keep the poor from starving.

    As for Clinton, the man who says we need a President who won't lie to the American people but will fib under oath, he capitulated to the Republican Congress on policies that he opposed when he was elected by the entitlement loving national electorate.

      

     
    A History of Surpluses and Deficits in the United States

    Deficits/Surpluses From 1940 Until 2012 (*fiscal years)

    1* - Presidential control
    2* - Senate control
    3* - House control

    D = Democrat R = Republican

    Year Nominal Dollars Inflation Adjusted 1* 2* 3* 1940 $2.9 Billion Deficit $47.54 Billion Deficit D D D 1941 $4.9 Billion Deficit $76.56 Billion Deficit D D D 1942 $20.5 Billion Deficit $288.73 Billion Deficit D D D 1943 $54.6 Billion Deficit $728 Billion Deficit D D D 1944 $47.6 Billion Deficit $618.18 Billion Deficit D D D 1945 $47.6 Billion Deficit $610.26 Billion Deficit D D D 1946 $15.9 Billion Deficit $187.06 Billion Deficit D D D 1947 $4 Billion Surplus $41.24 Billion Surplus D R R 1948 $11.8 Billion Surplus $112.38 Billion Surplus D R R 1949 $0.6 Billion Surplus $5.77 Billion Surplus D D D 1950 $3.1 Billion Deficit $29.52 Billion Deficit D D D 1951 $6.1 Billion Surplus $53.98 Billion Surplus D D D 1952 $1.5 Billion Deficit $12.93 Billion Deficit D D D 1953 $6.5 Billion Deficit $56.03 Billion Deficit R R D 1954 $1.2 Billion Deficit $10.26 Billion Deficit R R D 1955 $3 Billion Deficit $25.64 Billion Deficit R D D 1956 $3.9 Billion Surplus $32.77 Billion Surplus R D D 1957 $3.4 Billion Surplus $27.64 Billion Surplus R D D 1958 $2.8 Billion Deficit $22.22 Billion Deficit R D D 1959 $12.8 Billion Deficit $100.79 Billion Deficit R D D 1960 $0.3 Billion Surplus $2.33 Billion Surplus R D D 1961 $3.3 Billion Deficit $25.38 Billion Deficit D D D 1962 $7.1 Billion Deficit $53.79 Billion Deficit D D D 1963 $4.8 Billion Deficit $36.09 Billion Deficit D D D 1964 $5.9 Billion Deficit $43.7 Billion Deficit D D D 1965 $1.4 Billion Deficit $10.22 Billion Deficit D D D 1966 $3.7 Billion Deficit $26.24 Billion Deficit D D D 1967 $8.6 Billion Deficit $58.9 Billion Deficit D D D 1968 $25.2 Billion Deficit $165.79 Billion Deficit D D D 1969 $3.2 Billion Surplus $20 Billion Surplus R D D 1970 $2.8 Billion Deficit $16.57 Billion Deficit R D D 1971 $23 Billion Deficit $129.94 Billion Deficit R D D 1972 $23.4 Billion Deficit $128.57 Billion Deficit R D D 1973 $14.9 Billion Deficit $76.8 Billion Deficit R D D 1974 $6.1 Billion Deficit $28.37 Billion Deficit R D D 1975 $53.2 Billion Deficit $226.38 Billion Deficit R D D 1976 $73.7 Billion Deficit $297.18 Billion Deficit R D D 1977 $53.7 Billion Deficit $203.41 Billion Deficit D D D 1978 $59.2 Billion Deficit $208.45 Billion Deficit D D D 1979 $40.7 Billion Deficit $128.39 Billion Deficit D D D 1980 $73.8 Billion Deficit $205.57 Billion Deficit D D D 1981 $79 Billion Deficit $199.49 Billion Deficit R R D 1982 $128 Billion Deficit $304.04 Billion Deficit R R D 1983 $207.8 Billion Deficit $478.8 Billion Deficit R R D 1984 $185.4 Billion Deficit $409.27 Billion Deficit R R D 1985 $212.3 Billion Deficit $452.67 Billion Deficit R R D 1986 $221.2 Billion Deficit $462.76 Billion Deficit R R D 1987 $149.7 Billion Deficit $302.42 Billion Deficit R D D 1988 $155.2 Billion Deficit $300.78 Billion Deficit R D D 1989 $152.5 Billion Deficit $281.89 Billion Deficit R D D 1990 $221.2 Billion Deficit $388.07 Billion Deficit R D D 1991 $269.3 Billion Deficit $453.37 Billion Deficit R D D 1992 $290.4 Billion Deficit $474.51 Billion Deficit R D D 1993 $255.1 Billion Deficit $404.92 Billion Deficit D D D 1994 $203.2 Billion Deficit $314.55 Billion Deficit D D D 1995 $164 Billion Deficit $246.62 Billion Deficit D R R 1996 $107.5 Billion Deficit $157.16 Billion Deficit D R R 1997 $22 Billion Deficit $31.43 Billion Deficit D R R 1998 $69.2 Billion Surplus $97.33 Billion Surplus D R R 1999 $125.6 Billion Surplus $172.76 Billion Surplus D R R 2000 $236.4 Billion Surplus $314.78 Billion Surplus D R R 2001 $127.3 Billion Surplus $164.9 Billion Surplus R D R 2002 $157.8 Billion Deficit $201.02 Billion Deficit R D R 2003 $377.6 Billion Deficit $470.82 Billion Deficit R R R 2004 $413 Billion Deficit $501.21 Billion Deficit R R R 2005 $318 Billion Deficit $373.24 Billion Deficit R R R 2006 $248 Billion Deficit $282.14 Billion Deficit R R R 2007 $161 Billion Deficit $178.1 Billion Deficit R D D 2008 $459 Billion Deficit $488.82 Billion Deficit R D D 2009 $1413 Billion Deficit $1509.62 Billion Deficit D D D 2010 $1294 Billion Deficit $1360.67 Billion Deficit D D D 2011 $1299 Billion Deficit $1324.16 Billion Deficit D D R 2012 $1100 Billion Deficit $1100 Billion Deficit D D R 2013 $900 Billion Deficit $884.96 Billion Deficit D D R[/QUOTE]


    Absolutley worthless data.  One, it is unreadable.  Two, it is in raw numbers.  The size of deficits can only be appreciated when you know the total GDP.  Deficits as a % of GDP is the number economists use to evaluate the true burden of debt.  Only a mental midget would pretend  that hiding the truth behind unreadable data and raw numbers without meaningful context represents a legitimate argument.  The truth is, over the last century deficit as a percent of GDP has always been smaller during Democratic administrations than during GOP administrations.  AND, it is always higher during war time and lower during peace time.  I presented that data previously. 

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re:

    And never, ever has cutting taxes to the rich increased the revenue stream OR improved the debt to GDP ratio, which is why Reagan raised taxes in every year of his presidency after his first year in office (when he cut taxes and saw the ecomony tank and the deficit balloon), a total of 18 tax hikes in all, actually.  A FACT that Republicans conveniently forget whenever they subsequently try to sell the same "voodoo economics"* to the public.

     

    *a title given to Reaganomics by none other than George HW Bush, during the Republican primary of 1980.  That Bush was actually quite smart and the last Republican president to understand and operate under the understanding that reducing the deficit means raising taxes AND getting spending under control.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re:

    Funny how people are calling Obama a Socialist hell bent on redistributing wealth, when the Bush tax cuts to the rich have gone unchecked thus far. If you think Obama is the worst, take a gander at this...

    1951 tax rate on Married filing seperately:

    90% over 150K/ 75% over $50K/ 51% over $16K/39% over $10K

     

    1956:

    90% over 150K/ 75% over $50K/ 50% over $16K/38% over $10K

     

    1959:

    90% over $1.2M/75% over 385K/38% over 77K

     

    1964:

    75% over $650K/50% over $145K/38% over $86K

     

    1968:

    70% over $100K/50% over $22K/39% over $14K

     

    1972:

    70% over $100K/50% over $22K/39% over $14K

     

    1978:

    70% over $102K/50% over $24K/39% over $14

     

    1984:

    50% over $81K/38% over $23K/22% over $10K

     

    1989:

    28% over $28K

     

    1994:

    40% over $125K/36% over $70K/28% over $19K

     

    1999:

    40% over $142K/28% over $22K

     

    2004:

    35% over $160K/25% over $29K/15% over $7K

     

    2009:

    35% over $195K/25% over $35K/15% over $9K

     

    2011:

    35% over $190K/25% over $35K/15% over $9K

     

    Looks like another softy strawman.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re:

    Ya Know...your reference to older people is a bit disrespectful. I am a Septuagenarian who liked Romney as a nice God fearing family man who had traditional values. Illegal aliens drawing too much welfare money from taxpayers & commiting majority of crimes, same sex marriages and women having abortions as he believed in Pro-Life as the Catholic Church but he did feel a girl raped could get an abortion. But, I now see his mistake.  He needed to reach out to get the young vote, the Latins & Blacks because their pro-creation rates are increasing and the former continue to come across our borders. I agree with Romney on all these social issues but this old guy is not running for office
    For the first time in my life, I a™m really feeling my age. Aches and pains, military service and sports injuries aside, I feel that America has moved out from under my feet. My sense of right and wrong and logical thinking patterns do not seem to match up with so many citizens of this country. I too, thought the conservatives had a shot.


    To me it is so obvious what Obama is about. He is not about the America that I grew up in. Obama's socialist agenda, his disregard for the rule of law, his re-distribution of wealth, his apology tour around the world, bowing to the King of Saudi Arabia disgusting!  In the four years that he has been president, his campaign promises fell by the wayside. He authored a $900 billion stimulus package that rewarded labor and put money in the hands of his supporters under the guise of trying to stimulate the economy(œI guess there were not as many shovel-ready jobs as we thought... heh heh.) The auto bailout --- how many know the details of that transaction included leaving the bond holders with no money? How would you like it if you loaned somebody money and they came back to you after signing a promise to pay you back and said  œSorry  I am not going to pay you what I owe you but I am going to give your money to my friends?
    Yes, he inherited an economy that was in a downturn and losing jobs, yet he chose to pursue his healthcare agenda, his cap and trade agenda and green energy agenda that has cost this country millions of dollars ( Solyndra - $500 million lost ) while this economy went deeper into recession, he paid lip service to job creation and blamed Bush for the poor economy and did nothing to address the number one thing that was needed--- jobs. And while this was happening, he managed to play some golf, take expensive vacations, appear on TV ( The View, MTV, Letterman, Leno ).
    And where is the press in this country?  One of most treasured things about our democracy is the freedom of the press. Remember when the press sought out the truth and let the chips fall where they may?  remember Watergate? Those days are gone. The American press cannot be trusted to tell you the whole truth, nothing but the truth so help us God. The majority of the press has a liberal agenda and you will not  see them digging up the truth about a story that does not reflect well on the Left. Will we ever get the truth about the Mexican gun smuggling debacle or Benghazi? If we do it will be because the task will be undertaken by someone with no vested interest in the outcome.
    With Obama as our president, for the next four years, America as I know it is going away. As I approach 74 years of age, I know I will never see again, the America that I once knew.
     
    What do the majority in this country see in Obama that makes them want him to be their president? He does not love this country like I do, why do others not see that?

    [/QUOTE]

    SF -Your post is riddled with so many errors....Parhunter has addressed them quite well, so I'll just ask you to name these friends of Obama that were enriched by the auto bailout?  Be specific - name names - or retract it for the absurdity that it is.

    Your attitude is also wrong, IMO.  My paternal grandmother died at 99.5, her kid sister at 105, and even at the end both had a more vibrant, positive outlook on life than you do.

    They didn't long for the days of their youth when women didn't have the right to vote....or the brutality of the two World Wars.  They embraced medical and scientific advances like penicillin instead of longing for the halcyon days of high child mortality.  They recognised that the world had changed around them - largely for the good - and tried to change with it instead of b1itching and moaning about how nobody else could see what they could see.

    You could have 25 years left, maybe more....why not try to embrace change, maybe even make it, instead of retreating into this:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe1a1wHxTyo

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re:

    Combining the Bush tax cuts (extended by Obama) and the cost of 2 wars are by far the biggest contributions to the deficit.

    We've had about 10 years of massive tax cuts mostly to the rich. We are still waiting for the "trickle down", but all we are getting is "trickled on".

    Like Romney with the Auto industry, softy is now advocating: "Ley the USA go bankrupt".

    I hope congress is not listening.

    I'm curious what their excuses will be when the economy improves over the next 4 years. One can sense the likes of softy hope we go into a depression just to make a point.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Combining the Bush tax cuts (extended by Obama) and the cost of 2 wars are by far the biggest contributions to the deficit.

    We've had about 10 years of massive tax cuts mostly to the rich. We are still waiting for the "trickle down", but all we are getting is "trickled on".

    Like Romney with the Auto industry, softy is now advocating: "Ley the USA go bankrupt".

    I hope congress is not listening.

    I'm curious what their excuses will be when the economy improves over the next 4 years. One can sense the likes of softy hope we go into a depression just to make a point.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    You know as well as I do what Softy ad nauseum will say when the economy improves "It took too long".

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Combining the Bush tax cuts (extended by Obama) and the cost of 2 wars are by far the biggest contributions to the deficit.

    We've had about 10 years of massive tax cuts mostly to the rich. We are still waiting for the "trickle down", but all we are getting is "trickled on".

    Like Romney with the Auto industry, softy is now advocating: "Ley the USA go bankrupt".

    I hope congress is not listening.

    I'm curious what their excuses will be when the economy improves over the next 4 years. One can sense the likes of softy hope we go into a depression just to make a point.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm normally very optimistic.  I stayed fully invested during the recession, and fortunately recovered all my losses and then some.

    But for the first time I can remember, I'm a little leery of the economy and the markets.  Not pessimistic, per se, but I certainly would not over-invest.  We are running $1T+ deficits each year.  That amounts to handing close $4,000 to every single person in this country to spend.  Yet, even with this increased availability of money, the economy barely ekes along.

    What happens when we can no longer afford to give everyone $4,000?

    What happens if/when Greece exits the Euro, and the rate drops to 1.14?  Did our exports not just get priced up 10%?

    It's not just us, but think about the number of countries we export to that are incurring unsustainable deficits.  I think we are in for a very long, very slow, very tepid, recovery.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re:

    In response to mryazz's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mryazz's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    heard a good one this evening. what do the republican party and the beach boys have in common?

    answer: both their fan bases are dying.

    [/QUOTE]

    As a general disclaimer, I wrote in for Ron Paul, so i got no dog in this discussion, but-

    1-The total vote was 51/49.  The amount that Obama won by was almost identical to the amount Bush beat Kerry by.  Which means Obama has as much a mandate as Bush did.

    2-African-Ameicans voted in a virtual block for another African American.  Romney won > the non-African American vote by ~ 55-45.

    It's like the left just won a one-run extra inning game with a check-swing opposite field double and are now printing WS tickets.

    [/QUOTE]

    you miss the point. a black man beat the whitest man in america. i'd call that a grand slam.

    btw, as long as you're bringing in the ethnic results, mitt won the racist vote 100-0.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm still waiting for someone to explain how Obama, who had a white mother, a very white mother from Kansas, is more black than white. Want to take a stab at it yaz..... Anyone?

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from J-BAY. Show J-BAY's posts

    Re:

     Obama has origins of both black and white, which makes him part of a mixed race. As equal to one, as the other. He's more black than any past President, but not enough to be considered the first black one, IMO.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share