Obama Abroad

NEWSWEEK

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 10:14:10 PM

    JOHN MCCAIN IS AN INSULT TO THE HIGHLY ELITE & REVERED (CFR)

    CFR: THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

    NOTE: THE BLOODY ANBAR AWAKENING HAPPENED IN 2006...

    THOUGH MCCAIN SAYS IT WAS DURING "THE SURGE" OF 2007 AN THAT "THE SURGE" PROTECTED THE SHEIKS IN THE AWAKENING AT ANBAR.

    NOTE: "THE SURGE" TOOK PLACE IN 2007 AND IT HAPPENED IN BAGDAD, NOT (ANBAR), WHICH WAS IN 2006 & MANY SHIEKS WERE KILLED, NOT PROTECTED, BY MCFARLAND'S SURGE..

    NOT MCCAIN'S MILITARY STRATEGY, WHICH HE'S TRYING TO TAKE CREDIT FOR.

    MCCAIN JUST VOTED YES ON "THE SURGE". ITS MCCAIN'S GLASS SLIPPER, OR SO HE THINKS. "THE SURGE" IS GENERAL MCFARLAND'S MILITARY STRATEGY AND BUSH SIGNED OFF ON IT IN 2007...FACT

    MCCAIN JUST VOTED YES, ONLONG WITH OTHERS, WHO AGREED ON AN ADDITIONAL 20,000 TROOPS, TO BAGDAD, NOT ANBAR.

    BIG NOTE: JOHN MCCAIN SAYS "HE KNOWS HOW TO WIN WARS"...

    PLEASE NAME A MILITARY STARATEGY, THAT JOHN MCAIN CONCIEVED, CREATED, AND THE MILITARY JOINT CHEIFS OF STAFF, SIGNED OFF ON, HAD IMPLEMENTED IN A WAR(S) THAT PROVED TO BE SUCCESSFUL. THE HIGHLY MENTIONED "SURGE" WAS NOT JOHN MCCAIN'S CONCEPT, CREATION OR MILITARY STRATEGY, HE VOTED YES TO IT, AS OTHERS, THE MILITARY STRATEGY WAS GENERAL MCFARLAND'S, NOT JOHN MCCAIN'S, THOUGH HE PRETENDS LIKE "THE SURGE" WAS HIS MILITARY STRATEGY, IT WAS'NT IT WAS GENERAL MCFARLAND'S CREATION.

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 10:10:03 PM

    McCain is Beyond Inept...He's in the Mid Stages of Dementia or Alzheimers !!!!


    ABC's Sam Donaldson on McCain's "Tough Week" its Hysterical !!

    Because he is telling the Undisputed Truth ...

    http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=5442129...

    Sam Donaldson is in Rare Form as he Disects McCain's Hard Week, in the Political Trenches.

    You will Die laughing at all the Gaffe's, Dibacles and Blunders of John "Semi-Senile McCain !!!

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 9:08:34 PM

    From Russia with No Love: President Medvedev Says Russia will Protect its Inerest Abroad....

    John Mccain said that "Russia should be Kicked out of the G-8" Lets See...

    Russia Supplies the World with Gas and even Oil and Recently Kicked BP Out of Russia...

    John McCain will cause (World War 3)


    MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia will robustly defend its interests abroad, President Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday in a speech that made clear he would not soften the assertive policies that irked the West under his predecessor.


    Russia-watchers scrutinise statements from the Kremlin leader, who took office in May, for any indication of changes from his mentor and previous president Vladimir Putin.


    Putin re-asserted Russia as a major power after a decade in which the country saw its Soviet-era influence sharply reduced. In the process, Putin irked the West by confronting it on issues from Kosovo to Iran.


    Some observers predicted that 42-year-old former lawyer Medvedev would take a softer line.


    But addressing a gathering of Russia's top diplomats, he said he would stick to Putin's doctrine of seeking a role for Russia on the world stage worthy of its resurgent power.


    "Russia has become stronger and is capable of assuming greater responsibility for solving problems on both a regional and global scale," Medvedev told a meeting with over 200 Russian ambassadors and senior foreign ministry officials.


    Ex-KGB spy Putin, has stayed on as prime minister and continues to help shape policy.


    "The world, which got rid of the Cold War, still cannot achieve a new balance," Medvedev said in his, speech delivered in the foreign ministry's Stalin-era building still decorated with the Soviet emblem.


    "Moreover, a trend towards the use of force (in international relations) has become stronger."

  • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 07/28/2008 9:03:10 PM

    Hello Sky, I got your posts, thank you. Will reply later. It's been a long tiring day. Got in a little while ago. Catch you here later, Azzurro.

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 8:36:04 PM

    Condoleeza Rice Military Adviser "Iraq War was F-N Stupid"


    Source: www.thehuffingtonpost.com

    Over at the Washington Independent, Spencer Ackerman continues his enlightening "Rise of the Counterinsurgents" series with "A Counterinsurgency Guide for Politicos." The Indy has obtained a copy of a forthcoming manual on counterinsurgency strategy written by David Kilcullen, a "former Australian Army officer who is now an adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice."

    The handbook seeks to provide a framework for considering whether Washington should intervene in foreign countries' counterinsurgency operations, raising difficult questions about whether such nations deserve U.S. support; under what conditions that support should occur, and whether success is possible at acceptable cost. No systematic approach to strategic-level questions in counterinsurgency currently exists for senior U.S. government officials.
    And how difficult are the questions being raised? Well, in what's sure to be the pull-quote of the piece for those media outlets who still consider anything other than Surge Logic (TM) important, Kilcullen provides a little color:

    More bluntly, Kilcullen, who helped Petraeus design his 2007 counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, called the decision to invade Iraq "stupid" -- in fact, he said "*** stupid" -- and suggested that if policy-makers apply the manual's lessons, similar wars can be avoided in the future.

    "The biggest stupid idea," Kilcullen said, "was to invade Iraq in the first place."

  • Posted By: Skypoint @ 07/28/2008 8:31:56 PM

    Pia Z - I left you a few posts below. The last one aroung Lago Como!

    Have a good evening!

    -Sky

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 7:15:33 PM

    JOHN MCCAIN IS AN INSULT TO THE HIGHLY ELITE AN REVERED (CFR)

    NOTE: THE BLOODY ANBAR AWAKENING HAPPENED IN 2006...

    THOUGH MCCAIN SAYS IT WAS DURING "THE SURGE" OF 2007 AN THAT "THE SURGE" PROTECTED THE SHEIKS IN THE AWAKENING AT ANBAR.

    NOTE: "THE SURGE" TOOK PLACE IN 2007 AND IT HAPPENED IN BAGDAD, NOT (ANBAR), WHICH WAS IN 2006 & MANY SHIEKS WERE KILLED, NOT PROTECTED, BY MCFARLAND'S SURGE..

    NOT MCCAIN'S MILITARY STRATEGY, WHICH HE'S TRYING TO TAKE CREDIT FOR.

    MCCAIN JUST VOTED YES ON "THE SURGE". ITS MCCAIN'S GLASS SLIPPER, OR SO HE THINKS. "THE SURGE" IS GENERAL MCFARLAND'S MILITARY STRATEGY AND BUSH SIGNED OFF ON IT IN 2007...FACT

    MCCAIN JUST VOTED YES, ONLONG WITH OTHERS, WHO AGREED ON AN ADDITIONAL 20,000 TROOPS, TO BAGDAD, NOT ANBAR.

    BIG NOTE: JOHN MCCAIN SAYS "HE KNOWS HOW TO WIN WARS"...

    PLEASE NAME A MILITARY STARATEGY, THAT JOHN MCAIN CONCIEVED, CREATED, AND THE MILITARY JOINT CHEIFS OF STAFF, SIGNED OFF ON, HAD IMPLEMENTED IN A WAR(S) THAT PROVED TO BE SUCCESSFUL. THE HIGHLY MENTIONED "SURGE" WAS NOT JOHN MCCAIN'S CONCEPT, CREATION OR MILITARY STRATEGY, HE VOTED YES TO IT, AS OTHERS, THE MILITARY STRATEGY WAS GENERAL MCFARLAND'S, NOT JOHN MCCAIN'S, THOUGH HE PRETENDS LIKE "THE SURGE" WAS HIS MILITARY STRATEGY, IT WAS'NT IT WAS GENERAL MCFARLAND'S CREATION.

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 7:04:57 PM

    All Presidents are Chosen-Selected by the CFR, Thats the Council on Foreign Relations and David Rockefeller Controls Both Political Parties and the Media, the CFR allows you to Think that you Choose the next President, but they do the Choosing...

    Sorry You Suckers

    Oh by the way Both John F. Kennedy, Ronald Wilson Reagan (Mr. 666) Himself George Bush Sr and Jr. and Slick Billy Himself Bill Clinton were all CFR Members...

    So its Obvious Banking, Oil and Big Business Elite, Control who will be President...Their All "Puppets"...

    You A!! Holes !!!

    My statements below, still... STAND

    I know the Game and Don't be Surprised that John McCain Drops Out of the Race and Huckabee, Jindal Or Romney is Selected to Replace McCain, based on his Chronic Skin Cancer...

    McCain has Really Irrepresents the CFR....

    Wait on those McCain Lymph Node Test Results...OK


    1. John F. Kennedy: 43 Yrs Old, Youngest American President

    2. D'Mitry MedVedev 42 Yrs Old, Today's Young... Russian President

    3. Brack Obama 46-47 Yrs Old..Democrat Presidential Candidate

    4. John McCain 71-72 yr Old, republican Presidential Candidate.

    You can Vote for this 71-72 yr Old, Semi-Senile Old Man....

    Give Me the 46-47 Yr. Old Visionary...

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 6:31:18 PM

    OBAMA'S "57 STATES" MISSATEMENT MEANT.....

    IT FEELS LIKE... I'VE BEEN OR HAVE TRAVELED TO... "57 STATES"

    ANYONE CAN HAVE A FEW MOMENTS OF MISSTATEMENTS, BUT JOHN MCCAIN HAS ACCUMULATED DOZENS WITHIN 1 WEEK !!!

    DAMN !!!

    • Posted By: raddave @ 07/28/2008 6:42:34 PM

      Misstatements are exactly that, MISSTATEMENTS.

      If John McCain forgot his wife's name or something like that, then you could make an argument for him being senile.

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 6:02:30 PM

    Note: All Presidents are Chosen-Selected by the CFR, Thats the Council on Foreign Relations and David Rockefeller Controls Both Political Parties and the Media, the CFR allows you to Think that you Choose the next President, but they do the Choosing...

    Sorry You Suckers

    Oh by the way Both John F. Kennedy, Ronald Wilson Reagan (Mr. 666) Himself George Bush Sr and Jr. and Slick Billy Himself Bill Clinton were all CFR Members...

    So its Obvious Banking, Oil and Big Business Elite, Control who will be President...Their All Puppets...

    You A!! Holes !!!

    My statements below, still... STANDS


    1. John F. Kennedy: 43 Yrs Old, Youngest American President

    2. D'Mitry MedVedev 42 Yrs Old, Today's Young... Russian President

    3. Brack Obama 46-47 Yrs Old..Democrat Presidential Candidate

    4. John McCain 71-72 yr Old, republican Presidential Candidate.

    You can Vote for this 71-72 yr Old, Semi-Senile Old Man....

    Give Me the 46-47 Yr. Old Visionary...

    • Posted By: raddave @ 07/28/2008 6:25:37 PM

      So, in your words then only the CFR decides who is going to be president, then why are you trying so hard to promote Obama? If, accrding to you, the CFR decides who is going to be president, then I am sure they have already made up their minds

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 6:22:07 PM

    SEMI-SENILE JOHN MCCAIN SAID YESTERDAY, THAT GENERAL PATRAEUS WAS HEAD OF THE (JOINT CHEIFS OF STAFF) THAT IS A CLEAR CUT LIE, OR IN MCCAIN'S CASE IT'S HARD TO DISTINGUISH WHETHER ITS A LIE OR A SEMI-SENILE, OR SENIOR MOMENT...

    WHICH MCCAIN HAS HAD A SLEW OF, RECENTLY, WHICH IS A VERY BAD SIGN.

    DO NOT COMPARE RONALD WILSON REAGAN, (MR.666 HIMSELF) TO JOHN "SEMI-SENILE" MCCAIN...

    MR. 666 RONALD WILSON REAGAN WAS A THESPIAN-ACTOR, A MAN WITH A GREAT MEMORY, REAGRDING REMEMBERING LINES, DIALOG OR SCRIPTS....

    THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO JOHN 'SEMI-SENILE" MCCAIN...SORRY

    ITS AN INSULT TO MR. 66 RONALD WILSON REAGAN...HE REMEMBERED HIS LINES, UNTIL ALZHEIMERS DEFEATED HIM, JUST LIKE CHARLTON HESTON, HESTON LASTED FAR LONGER, BECAUSE OF THE MEMORIZATION SKILLS AS AN ACTOR...


    JOHN MCAIN, CAN'T COMPETE WITH EITHER OF THOSE 2 MEN MENTIONED ABOVE...SORRY

    BUT THANKS FOR PLAYING THE GAME.

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 6:09:06 PM

    JOHN F. KENNEDY YOUNGEST PRESIDENT AGE (43) AN RUSSIA'S NEW PRESIDENT D'MITRY MEDVEDEV IS AGE (42) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BARACK OBAMA IS AGE (46-47) SO MUCH FOR AGE AND EXPERIENCE...

    MCCAIN IS TOO OLD, FEEBLE MINDED, SEMI-SENILE, HE CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT HE SAYS, EVEN ONE DAY AFTER STATING WITH SURETY THAT HE KNOWS WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, ONLY TO CHANGE IT THE NEXT DAY, LIKE "THE SURGE' AND SAYING THAT OBAMA'S "TIMELINE" SOUNDS RIGHT !!

    THEN SUNDAY CHANGES IT, AGAIN. ALSO IN (PA) LYING ABOUT REMEMBERING THE NAMES OF THE PITTSBURG STEELERS WHILE A POW , THOUGH IN HIS BOOK & MOVIE, MCAIN SAYS EXPLICITLY, THAT IT WAS THE GREEN BAY PACKERS NAMES HE REMEMBERS.

    BUSH AGREES TO A "TIME HORIZON" & THIS WEEKEND STATED THAT THE IRAQI PEOPLE, LIKE OBAMA HAS SAID, SHOULD CONTROL THEIR OWN DESTINY.

    THE BLOODY ANBAR AWAKENING HAPPENED IN 2006, THOUGH MCCAIN SAYS IT WAS DURING "THE SURGE" OF 2007 AN THAT "THE SURGE" PROTECTED THE SHEIKS IN THE AWAKENING AT ANBAR. "THE SURGE" TOOK PLACE IN 2007 AND IT HAPPENED IN BAGDAD, NOT (ANBAR), WHICH WAS IN 2006 & MANY SHIEKS WERE KILLED, NOT PROTECTED, BY MCFARLAND'S SURGE.. NOT MCCAIN'S MILITARY STRATEGY, WHICH HE'S TRYING TO TAKE CREDIT FOR. MCCAIN JUST VOTED YES ON "THE SURGE". ITS MCCAIN'S GLASS SLIPPER, OR SO HE THINKS.

    JOHN MCCAIN SAYS "HE KNOWS HOW TO WIN WARS" NAME A MILITARY STARATEGY, THAT JOHN MCAIN CONCIEVED, CREATED, AND THE MILITARY JOINT CHEIFS OF STAFF, SIGNED OFF ON, HAD IMPLEMENTED IN A WAR(S) THAT PROVED TO BE SUCCESSFUL. THE HIGHLY MENTIONED "SURGE" WAS NOT JOHN MCCAIN'S CONCEPT, CREATION OR MILITARY STRATEGY, HE VOTED YES TO IT, AS OTHERS, THE MILITARY STRATEGY WAS GENERAL MCFARLAND'S, NOT JOHN MCCAIN'S, THOUGH HE PRETENDS LIKE "THE SURGE" WAS HIS MILITARY STRATEGY, IT WAS'NT IT WAS GENERAL MCFARLAND'S CREATION.

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 12:49:37 PM

    1. John F. Kennedy: 43 Yrs Old, Youngest American President

    2. D'Mitry MedVedev 42 Yrs Old, Today's Young... Russian President

    3. Brack Obama 46-47 Yrs Old..Democrat Presidential Candidate

    4. John McCain 71-72 yr Old, Republican Presidential Candidate.

    You can Vote for this 71-72 yr Old, Semi-Senile Old Man....

    Give Me the 46-47 Yr. Old Visionary...

    • Posted By: raddave @ 07/28/2008 4:24:20 PM

      Omaar, why do you continue to use Dmitry Mdvedev as an example of a young president? Mdvedev is nothing but a puppet of Vladimir Putin, who is the Prime Minister of Russia and who really controls the Russian Government.

      McCain is old, but that does not mean he is senile or even "semi-senile" McCain's reference to Czechoslavakia proves McCain to be senile as much as Obama referring to the 57 states proves that he is undeducated. BOTH candidates have made mistatements. It happens. Stick to the issues and stop trying to portray as an old horse that needs to be put down, and stop comparing Obama to Medvedev, because that only hurts your argument.

      • Posted By: Skypoint @ 07/28/2008 5:36:52 PM

        Age really has nothing to do with ability to do the job. When Reagan was quizzed about his age he said: "I want you to know that I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience." Priceless



  • Posted By: Cloudosmoke @ 07/23/2008 8:35:11 AM

    As I said yesterday, VISION, VISION, VISION. It's all about setting policy through a vision which McCain does not have. All McCain has is defending his nonvision. All McCain has is old Bush tactics, nothing new. If anyone here that keeps bringing up Obamamohammad or Barry, you need to get a clue. You obviously do not care about our soldiers, domestic policy or national interest. All you care about is eating your old bread.

    • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 07/23/2008 9:21:13 AM

      That's low even from you....so now let me count...if you don't back Barry then you are: Racist, Bigoted, Ignorant, now you hate the Troops? Is there no low that you Obama supporters won't go to?
      I do care about the soldiers, I have friends over there....so screw you...I want them home, they want to be home but, and this is coming from them too, We (the US) has a responsibility to the Iraqi people, we started this mess and we have to clean it up.
      As for Domestic Policy, you only have to take a look at the Obama energy plan to see Obama doesn't care about the people. Why did Obama vote FOR the Cheney Energy Plan? McCain voted against it...in that Cheney Energy plan that Obama voted FOR is the Enron Loophole that all the Dems are up in arms about...Why did Obama vote FOR that plan?
      McCain has solutions although not pretty but a broad spectrum energy plan. I'm sure it would surprise you that in McCain plan are incentives for Alternative energy sources; WInd, GeoThermal, Solar, and Hydro....he isn't betting the Farm or Tax Payers money on Corn EtOH like Barry did. Barry voted for the Farm Bill....a cash cow for CORN EtOH, and look at the price of grain. Thank you Barry and the rest of the Dems for higher food prices.....Oh wait there is Sugar EtOH....Brazil is a big producer...oh but wouldn't you know it Barry is AGAINST Free Trade.....or is he for it now...can't tell...what the position of the moon? I don't know which Barry to believe, Primary Barry where free trade is bad or GE Barry where it's ok?

      All you care about is getting back at Bush, it evident by your Bush bashing on this board. I don't like him either but that isn't the ONLY reason to vote for or against someone....Your playing FEAR the fear of Bush....for that your NO better than Rove in 2006. He is scum, now your taking up his mantle....thank you for driving a good many people out of the Democratic Party.....McCain appreciates it.
      So much for Unity.....Ha

      • Posted By: sjpersonal @ 07/23/2008 4:31:48 PM

        Hi Z,

        You are clumping all Obama supporters together. Remember all (3) candidates have their share of ignorant individuals supporting them.

        • Posted By: raddave @ 07/23/2008 9:28:12 PM

          Three candidates?

          • Posted By: sjpersonal @ 07/28/2008 3:17:58 PM

            They will not let Hillary go away! LOL! The Puma's etc are still under the delusion that they can force the DNC and Super delgates to make her the nominee! So in their minds she is still in the running, in their minds LOL!

        • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 07/23/2008 8:13:56 PM

          Yeah sorry Clouds comments just really "P"d me off for some reason.

      • Posted By: Cloudosmoke @ 07/23/2008 9:48:19 AM

        "We (the US) has a responsibility to the Iraqi people, we started this mess and we have to clean it up."

        There you said it. I don't have to say anything else on the subject. You obviously voted for Bush which caused "this mess." No more comment on that.

        Now for domestic energy issues. Give me the legislation on how the Cheney energy plan was related to Enron with Obama's supposed support of it. That should prove interesting.

        Cheney doesn't even know how the internet works and here you are spewing how he has the alternative energy measures in his agenda. He probably doesn't even know what photosynthesis is.

        As for the rest of your stance, I have no clue where you are going with it. It went straight to the "moon." But I still appreciate you.

        • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 07/23/2008 10:11:29 AM

          Yes we as in We the People....as much as you want to wash your hands of Bush, his mess is still the mess of the US...so what are you Canadian? I didn't not vote for that crook Bush, thank you ....so don't try that one...it won't work. Hillary was the best choice, now that she isn't in the running the second best is McCain....its not all about Partisan lines as it is with you....Partisans like you are what got us into this mess in the first place....so thanks.
          White House Plan Reflects Enron Recommendations: http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?id=285
          http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/54921_energy18.shtml
          Chaired by a Waxman...so hopefully you won't think it's too partisan.

          Obama: 'You can look at how Dick Cheney did his energy policy???he met with oil and gas companies forty times, and that's how they put together our energy policy': "The one thing I have to remind folks, though, of ??? we???ve been talking about this through Republican administrations and Democratic administrations for decades. And the reason it doesn???t change ??? you can take a look at how Dick Cheney did his energy policy. He met with environmental groups one, he met with renewable energy folks once, and then he met with oil and gas companies forty times, and that???s how they put together our energy policy. We???ve got to put the national interest ahead of the special interest, and that???s what I???ll do when I???m President of the United States." [Democratic Presidential Debate, 7/23/07]

          Obama voted for it.

          I agree Cheney doesn't know crap...but I'm sure you mean McCain....well he has advisers for the internets...so if you want to start that debate on why he needs advisers...maybe you should check out why Obama needs 300 foreign policy advisers.

          I'm sure it went over your head....since by your lack of knowledge of the 22nd Amendment indicates that politics and government aren't your strong subjects.

          • Posted By: Cloudosmoke @ 07/23/2008 10:18:34 AM

            I think you grabbed that info from a Hillary site am I not correct? Stop trying to politic and speak truth. If you are a disgruntled Hillary supporter, then I'm sorry she lost. If you are crossing over to the Republican side because Barack Obama was supported by the Democratic base then you have no loyalties because the party sticks together based on their beliefs and Obama's beliefs were a reflection of Clinton's. If Hillary had won the primary I would vote for her. Get over it.

            • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 07/23/2008 10:51:38 AM

              Since you can't debate the issue and resort to personal attacks, I see that my job is done here.... thanks.
              Since you can't defend why Obama voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill, yet Clinton voted against it...is very telling.
              Yet again you show how Partisan you really are...you and people like you are whats wrong with this country.

              • Posted By: Cloudosmoke @ 07/23/2008 11:04:46 AM

                Listen, I know you are smarter than me, have more credentials than me, blah blah blah blah but the truth hurts and that's what I'm giving you, is truth. All you have supplied is untruth that has no debate. I asked you to give me info concerning how Cheney's energy connection to Enron (which collapsed before Obama took office). You can't make a connection because it is politics you have created in your own head. Just stop. Cast your vote, but before you do, think hard about what you represent. And oh yeah, watch the debates. Still appreciate you though. Good healthy dialogue.

                • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 07/23/2008 2:19:24 PM

                  lol Read the links I provided...It's not my job to spoon feed you the information....look it up yourself... I did the hard part looking for the info...now do the easy part and read it....the Enron connection is there in Waxman's report.
                  I agree good dialog....seriously the debates are going to rock.

            • Posted By: News and Notes @ 07/23/2008 10:34:42 AM

              Your comments are presumptuous and over simplified. It is a complex election

          • Posted By: News and Notes @ 07/23/2008 11:24:13 AM

            Is the DNC and democratic elites having buyer's remorse yet after pushing through the weaker candidate?

    • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 07/23/2008 8:49:19 AM

      Good comment, Cloudofsmoke. These same people here villifying Obama are the ones who have supposedly been crying to get out of Iraq. IMO they don't care. 'Supposedly' is the key word here.

      • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 07/23/2008 8:47:20 PM

        I'd like to add to my above comments that I don't believe McCain supporters do not care about our troops. They do care.

        • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 07/25/2008 9:52:27 AM

          Only 12 hours to retract part of your statement....your almost as fast as Obama and McCain.....lol

  • Posted By: Davole @ 07/27/2008 12:05:29 AM

    Senate approves sweeping housing-rescue bill
    Bolsters Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, creates $300B homeowner rescue fund

    Rich Pedroncelli / AP file

    The Senate on Saturday passed a housing rescue aimed at sparing homeowners from foreclosure and providing emergency financing to mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

    MSNBC News Services
    updated 12:30 p.m. ET, Sat., July. 26, 2008

    WASHINGTON - The Congress approved a massive housing market rescue bill Saturday, offering emergency financing to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, creating a new regulator for the mortgage titans and setting up a $300 billion fund to help troubled homeowners.

    The bill was approved by the Senate in a 72-13 vote. It was passed by the House of Representatives Wednesday.



    Now, my comment -

    Was this problem created by a democrat party which felt (as opposed to believed) that every American should have a house, whether or not he or she could actually afford one?

    Was undue pressure forced on the mortgage industry to grant mortgages to applicants who could not satisfy previous background qualifier checks?

    How much will this decision of the democrat controlled House and Senate cost the current and future American taxpayers?

    If I go to Vegas, and lose 10 - 50 thousand dollars playing the slot machines, will the democrat Congress ???bail me out????

    Wow - these politicians also want to introduce universal health care - now what will that cost, and do you trust those politicians to administer it in a financially responsible manner?

    • Posted By: raddave @ 07/27/2008 10:34:54 PM

      Davole, first of all, it is the Democratic party, not the Democrat Party. The current housing situation was not caused by the democratic party. It was caused by the de-regulation of the financial istitutions which created the predatory lending practices of the sub-prime mortgage companies. It was caused by speculation in the housing market.

      The republicans were quick to bail out the morgage giants who were going under by the housing crunch and did not seem to care about the people who were about to lose their houses.

      There was no undue pressure on the mortgage industry to give loans to people who could not afford them. Yes, there were people who got in over their heads and they share alot of the blame in their situations. There was a report of a single woman with no children, she had a job, but not making great money and she bought a 6 bedroom house. Clearly more than she could afford. But, she bought it and was given a morgage that when the interest rates adjusted, she could not afford the payments. The mortgage company knew that she would not be able to afford it, but gave her the loan anyway.

      • Posted By: Davole @ 07/28/2008 5:22:19 AM

        raddave -

        If I believed that the democrat party were truly democratic, then I would refer to that party as such.

        With regard to the current housing situation, why should the government bail out the people who are about to lose their houses? They assumed variable rate mortgages, suposedly read, understood, and signed the contracts, and now when the rates increase, they suddenly become a great source of concern for Congress.

        Should the individuals who have responsibly managed their own financial affairs be unduly penalized by having to support the irresponsible mortgage holders?

        Should Congress also bail out individuals who have lost money through involvement in various other investment ventures, such as stocks, bonds, and mutual funds?

        How about investors who have financed shopping malls, and transportation companies, when their businesses suffer due to competition and the increased cost of gas and heating oil?

        How about the food production and retail operations?
        If a grocer has to discard spoiled fruit and vegetables, should he or she also be reimbursed for losses by the government?

        Does the government have a duty to reimburse individuals who have bet and lost on the ponies at Pimlico, Kentucky Downs, or any other racetrack?

        How about people who have lost money by betting on their local sports team?

        Should people who have purchased non-winning lottery tickets also be recipients of reimbursement from the government?

        I believe that Congress is attempting to expand the size and scope of government to ridiculous proportions, all with the hidden agenda of keeping the public overly dependent on government.

        What ever happened to the concepts of individual freedom and responsibility?

        BTW - I believe that about a week ago, in a reply to one of my posts advocating increased exploration and drilling for oil, you asked me why the oil industry doesn't just drill according to its already obtained site leasing agreements. I believe (correct me if I am wrong here) that you replied that you would research the reasons which I had provided as to why those leases were unduly restrictive. Have you done and completed your research? If so, do you have any further pertinent comments?

        Raddave, I commend you for being one of the few members on this political website who actually contributes to constructive intelligent meaningful discourse, Keep up the good work!

        Hoping to hear from you sometime again!
        .

        • Posted By: raddave @ 07/28/2008 2:59:49 PM

          Davole,
          How do you feel that the democratic party is less or more democratic than the Republican party? I was just informing you that the name of the party is the democratic party, not the democrat party, which is used by certain ultra-conservatives because they know that it is disrespectful to use it. I am sure the party has been called far worse names though. LOL

          Normally, I would agree that the government should not get involved in these types of matters, but because of the size of this issue, something must be done, not only to protect the people who may lose their houses, but it is also affecting the housing market as a whole.

          People who have managed their finances well are being "punished" now because the value of their property has also gone down. Let's say I bought a house in San Diego, Ca for $700,000 two years ago. I have to relocate for my job and want to sell this house and the most I could get for it is $400,000 That means that I would still owe money on a house that I do not own anymore. This is what is happening now in America. The government already helped the large financial companies from going under, then they should help the individuals out as well.

          I believe the opposite of what you think. I do not feel that the Government is trying to keep the public overly dependant on it, but it is trying to protect the individual from getting screwed by large cooperations that only have their profits in mind. The Sub-prime industry knew that a lot of the people they were giving home loans to would have problems meeting their payments when their mortgage rates reset, but gave them the loans anyway because these companies passed the rights and risks to these mortgages to third party investors.

          As for indivitual freedoms, I feel that the Republican party has done more to restrict individual freedoms fare more than the Democratic party has done.

          Actually I had forgotten about that post and for that I apoligize. I did remember it once, but could not locate it again as this blog has become enormous. I will look for it and try to answer your questions.

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 12:51:58 PM


    1961: John F Kennedy sworn in as US president

    The Democrat John F Kennedy has been sworn in as the youngest ever elected president of the United States.

    The (43-Year-Old) Roman Catholic was inaugurated as the 35th president on a snow-covered Capitol Hill in Washington. He takes over from the oldest president in American history, General Dwight Eisenhower, who is bowing out aged 70.

    The president's Republican rival, Richard Nixon, who came a close second in the race for the White House, also attended the inauguration ceremony.

    Millions watched the swearing-in of the new president on television. He chose to wear formal dress, including a top hat, for the occasion.


    Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country


    President John F Kennedy


    President Kennedy began his speech by addressing "my fellow citizens" - the term first used by President George Washington but rejected by later presidents in favour of the less formal "my fellow Americans".

    His ten-minute address appealed to Americans to unite in the fight against the common enemy of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.

    For the people of the world struggling against the "bonds of misery", the president pledged, "our best efforts to help them help themselves".

    He continued: "If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich."

    He also appealed to the Soviet Union to begin a new quest for peace.

    "Let both sides for the first time, formulate serious and precise proposals for the inspection and control of arms and bring the absolute power to destroy other nations under the absolute control of all nations," he said.

    President Kennedy closed his speech with the words: "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country. My fellow citizens of the world, ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man."

    His words were greeted with rousing applause.





  • Posted By: Omaar @ 07/28/2008 12:50:46 PM

    1. John F. Kennedy: 43 Yrs Old, Youngest American President

    2. D'Mitry MedVedev 42 Yrs Old, Today's Young... Russian President

    3. Brack Obama 46-47 Yrs Old..Democrat Presidential Candidate

    4. John McCain 71-72 yr Old, republican Presidential Candidate.

    You can Vote for this 71-72 yr Old, Semi-Senile Old Man....

    Give Me the 46-47 Yr. Old Visionary...

  • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 07/28/2008 10:20:15 AM

    Sky, the posts I left you are past your Iraq war comment. You wouldn't want to miss out on those now would you, miele? Please ,when you get time, thanks.

  • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 07/28/2008 10:36:46 AM

    Cielo, Italian lessons, Youtube-Patrizio Buanne-IL Mondo. Check it out. Lol.

    How are the R's coming along? Been practicing? I'm sure you sound fine. Carry on.
    Ok, got to get back to my work, bye for now.........

    • Posted By: Skypoint @ 07/28/2008 12:21:40 PM

      Thanks... I'll look him up! Still working on the R's. Little success. : (

  • Posted By: Cloudosmoke @ 07/28/2008 11:33:45 AM

    I find it funny that you posted something that anyone could read elsewhere, but I have noticed that you post stories instead of translating it to make a stance. But I will translate this story for you. The media post stories on the people's concerns. The candidate, Barack Obama, has a policy in development to address the Social Security situation in which Bush and McCain tried to Privatize which would have made the taxpayer lose more money over the long run since they would not know how to invest.

    McCain has no economic policy to report about!!!!! He has nothing in development because he does not know what to do with the economy since he wants to go to war with Iran, whom I might add is ready to sit down and talk with the world community.

    Cast your vote for change.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse