I am so flucking sick of O'Bama's retarded way of talking in terms of his content and lack thereof (saying 'change' and 'hope' over and over sucks), and his clumsy style even though he tries his best to be sophisticated sounding. It sounds like he chipped a tooth on the Cracker Jack prize. Every 's' is ssssssssssssssssssssss.

MCCAINE will easily defeat these two democrat clowns.

Gahhhhhd Daaaaaam

LoL. :D

I am so flucking sick of O'Bama's retarded way of talking in terms of his content and lack thereof (saying 'change' and 'hope' over and over sucks), and his clumsy style even though he tries his best to be sophisticated sounding. It sounds like he chipped a tooth on the Cracker Jack prize. Every 's' is ssssssssssssssssssssss.

MCCAINE will easily defeat these two democrat clowns.

Gahhhhhd Daaaaaam

Its about time for you to flip flop again Snout, or are you losing your edge?

M.

hes tired of holding his mouth open (re:avatar)
Chi town scares me but I like Obama

o'bama, the black irishman!

I am so flucking sick of O'Bama's retarded way of talking in terms of his content and lack thereof (saying 'change' and 'hope' over and over sucks), and his clumsy style even though he tries his best to be sophisticated sounding. It sounds like he chipped a tooth on the Cracker Jack prize. Every 's' is ssssssssssssssssssssss.

MCCAINE will easily defeat these two democrat clowns.

Gahhhhhd Daaaaaam

Agreeing with a nonconformist, the modern equivalent of Socrates, is nothing to be ashamed of, Snouter.

I am so flucking sick of O'Bama's retarded way of talking in terms of his content and lack thereof (saying 'change' and 'hope' over and over sucks), and his clumsy style even though he tries his best to be sophisticated sounding. It sounds like he chipped a tooth on the Cracker Jack prize. Every 's' is ssssssssssssssssssssss.

MCCAINE will easily defeat these two democrat clowns.

Gahhhhhd Daaaaaam

I have to agree, He says nothing so eloquently. It's amazing how he draws people to him on such a flimsy platform of generalities. He also seems to forget, as do many Americans even more so, that he could have all sorts of grand schemes, but he still has to deal with Congress, and if they don't fly with Congress, they ain't happenin'.

I'm afraid that many people are so naive as to believe that the President is the "boss" of the country (especially many young voters) and that he can do anything he wants. It just doesn't work that way. Everyone blames Bush for the war, but the Congress is just as guilty, because they approved it, funded it, and are still funding it. They approved the building of permanent bases on Iraqui soil, as well as a whole reconstruction plan. They may speak out against it publicly, but what they actually do is another story. They understand how easily people are duped. We the people are guilty too, because we also supported it in the beginning in large numbers. It couldn't have happened without us, or the Congress.

Why do people now believe we'll just walk away from Iraq if Obama is elected, just because he wasn't in ther Senate at the time of the vote to go to war?? How do we really know he wouldn't have been convinced to vote for the war had he been there?? I don't believe that for a second, but he knows it's a particularly wonderful campaign ploy. Time was on his side regarding this issue, but he can't run away from it if he's elected. As far as Hillary pretending her vote for the war was a mistake ( conveniently after the fact), anyone who believes that will believe anything.

If he wins, the war will not come to an abrupt end. Congress won't allow it, and Obama will be under way too much pressure to order it, and tell the American people that he now has access to intelligence he didn't know about beforehand, and that we must remain there until such time as it will be more prudent to withdraw. It's all so predictable. It WILL eventually end and most of the troops will return home, but we'll have a significant presence there for the next 50 years (at least).

We promised the Saudis we would leave their soi immediately after Sadaam was removed from Kuwait. Guess what?? We're still there, and it's been 17 years already, and we had a Democrat in the White House for 8 of those years. Why do so may people believe that Obama is a different type of politician. He's not. He's a typical (to use his own word) politician, but he wants a successful Presidency, and he has to play ball in order to have that.

I supported Social Security privatization (always have, always will, because it's a lousy program with the absolute worst rate of return of any investment in the world), which is one of the primary reasons I voted for Bush in 2000, but Congress won't let anyone near that piggy bank, and he couldn't touch it. Privatizing it would take away yet another revenue source that can be raided by our "representatives". So, ther "boss" couldn't keep that campaign promise. he wasn't ALLOWED to. All presidents run into certain things that they aren't allowed to do, even though they want to.

I'm afraid Obama will have the same problem with any schemes he may come up with should he win. Major changes to the status quo are never well received by the US Congress.

I have to agree, He says nothing so eloquently. It's amazing how he draws people to him on such a flimsy platform of generalities. He also seems to forget, as do many Americans even more so, that he could have all sorts of grand schemes, but he still has to deal with Congress, and if they don't fly with Congress, they ain't happenin'.

I'm afraid that many people are so naive as to believe that the President is the "boss" of the country (especially many young voters) and that he can do anything he wants. It just doesn't work that way. Everyone blames Bush for the war, but the Congress is just as guilty, because they approved it, funded it, and are still funding it. They approved the building of permanent bases on Iraqui soil, as well as a whole reconstruction plan. They may speak out against it publicly, but what they actually do is another story. They understand how easily people are duped. We the people are guilty too, because we also supported it in the beginning in large numbers. It couldn't have happened without us, or the Congress.

Why do people now believe we'll just walk away from Iraq if Obama is elected, just because he wasn't in ther Senate at the time of the vote to go to war?? How do we really know he wouldn't have been convinced to vote for the war had he been there?? I don't believe that for a second, but he knows it's a particularly wonderful campaign ploy. Time was on his side regarding this issue, but he can't run away from it if he's elected. As far as Hillary pretending her vote for the war was a mistake ( conveniently after the fact), anyone who believes that will believe anything.

If he wins, the war will not come to an abrupt end. Congress won't allow it, and Obama will be under way too much pressure to order it, and tell the American people that he now has access to intelligence he didn't know about beforehand, and that we must remain there until such time as it will be more prudent to withdraw. It's all so predictable. It WILL eventually end and most of the troops will return home, but we'll have a significant presence there for the next 50 years (at least).

We promised the Saudis we would leave their soi immediately after Sadaam was removed from Kuwait. Guess what?? We're still there, and it's been 17 years already, and we had a Democrat in the White House for 8 of those years. Why do so may people believe that Obama is a different type of politician. He's not. He's a typical (to use his own word) politician, but he wants a successful Presidency, and he has to play ball in order to have that.

I supported Social Security privatization (always have, always will, because it's a lousy program with the absolute worst rate of return of any investment in the world), which is one of the primary reasons I voted for Bush in 2000, but Congress won't let anyone near that piggy bank, and he couldn't touch it. Privatizing it would take away yet another revenue source that can be raided by our "representatives". So, ther "boss" couldn't keep that campaign promise. he wasn't ALLOWED to. All presidents run into certain things that they aren't allowed to do, even though they want to.

I'm afraid Obama will have the same problem with any schemes he may come up with should he win. Major changes to the status quo are never well received by the US Congress.

So true, but the party faithful won't hear it. Obama's only hope of enacting bold initiatives is to do what Reagan did. Bypass Congress, go straight to the people and have them put pressure on Congress.

Its about time for you to flip flop again Snout, or are you losing your edge?

M.

No edges on that dude. Seriously. Have you ever seen his videos? Backfat. Yards of it.

I am so flucking sick of O'Bama's retarded way of talking in terms of his content and lack thereof (saying 'change' and 'hope' over and over sucks), and his clumsy style even though he tries his best to be sophisticated sounding. It sounds like he chipped a tooth on the Cracker Jack prize. Every 's' is ssssssssssssssssssssss.

MCCAINE will easily defeat these two democrat clowns.

Gahhhhhd Daaaaaam

As much as I despise neocons, I hope you are correct. If only to enjoy the bitter tears of these nuthuggers when the object of their man-crush loses.

As much as I despise neocons, I hope you are correct. If only to enjoy the bitter tears of these nuthuggers when the object of their man-crush loses.

That's the spirit! Determine the leader of the 'free world' with your hatred for people. Par for the course I suppose... That is what racists do best.

M.

That's the spirit! Determine the leader of the 'free world' with your hatred for people. Par for the course I suppose... That is what racists do best.

M.

Oh my god. Teh free world!@1!

There is not a man or woman in either American party worth choosing as a leader. Regardless of who wins the American election, Americans lose. There is a reason these weasels became politicians.

Oh my god. Teh free world!@1!

There is not a man or woman in either American party worth choosing as a leader. Regardless of who wins the American election, Americans lose. There is a reason these weasels became politicians.

That's the attitude I held for a long time - but it never blinded me enough to prevent me from seeing the positives in candidates, even though there was not enough to make me want to vote. Maybe that's why I'm not dumbly cynical like you seem to be: I never saw things in black and white. Our candidates are not evil to the core, and in this particular election, we have a candidate with more to respect than I have ever encountered to date.
If all you have to offer is negatives, and carbon-copy cynical stereotypes of how the system just doesn't work, excuse me if I don't feel you're actually seeing the candidates for what they are.

M.