Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What does Bush have to do with anything. The topic is Democrats are anti white. BTW in case you didn't know, there were other people running for President than McCain and Obama. Don't assume that someone is Republican just because they oppose Democrats.
I take it, then, that you have not been a Bush supporter since he has shown himself to be aligned with terrorists and practicing socialism.
You've convinced yourself. Now, offer up something besides your opinion to back it up.
An antiwhite president who is treated like a savior says it all. Now convince yourself that your country will progress as a multiracial, multicultural stew of people who are divided more than ever.
I don't believe in the 2 party system and neither did the founders. The Republicans have no backbone and the Democrats are pure evil aided by the marxist media and marxist schools. The most hateful and intolerant people are on the left.
I don't believe in the 2 party system and neither did the founders. The Republicans have no backbone and the Democrats are pure evil aided by the marxist media and marxist schools. The most hateful and intolerant people are on the left.
I can tell by your post that you are a force to be reckoned with and have a great deal to teach.
I can tell by your post that you are a force to be reckoned with and have a great deal to teach.
Did you watch the video?
Whatever was said isn't very clear on this video and she seems to be concentrating on her speech. There are whites who hate blacks but this only proves what is wrong with this country - multiracial and multiculturalism keeps everyone divided. Not the way to progress. THe left has aided this division.
I don't believe in the 2 party system and neither did the founders. The Republicans have no backbone and the Democrats are pure evil aided by the marxist media and marxist schools. The most hateful and intolerant people are on the left.
WHAT Marxist media? The Daily Worker? Just where in the Hell is this Marxist media?
Really? If I hadn't read your posts I would not have known that.
Quote:
but this only proves what is wrong with this country - multiracial and multiculturalism keeps everyone divided. Not the way to progress. THe left has aided this division.
First of all thank you for writing such a thoughtful response. It's really refreshing after getting so many mindless emotional rants in response to a thoughtful post.
Please don't take the gullible thing personally. I think anyone voting for Obama is gullible. I've been through this too many times to believe that a single person, and especially one who's a little new to DC, can really do much. I don't buy into the intelligence thing either. We've seen exceptions to this. Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein come to mind, but these are the rare exceptions. I hear "he's so intelligent" and to me it's just marketing. They said the same thing about Sen. Clinton, but I'm not buying it.
"their own incompetence and lack of ideas"
Ideas are nice if you think that with all the smart people we have in Washington that someone is going to think of something that hasn't come to anyone else's mind. But that's not real. Carter tried the experimentation approach. He really screwed things up in a big way. And speaking of gulible, he thought he could negotiate with the Iranians. They told him to go jump in a lake. If he only would have installed a government in 1979 the Iran-Iraq war would have never taken place and 1.2 million people would have not died in it. Most likely the Russians would have stayed out of Afghanistan too thereby saving another two million lives provided Carter hadn't come off as such an appeaser. They never tried crap like that after Reagan came in or when Nixon was in office. They took those two very seriously. If Obama comes off as a weak president, it could be a long four years.
I believe there is one reason for Obama's backpedaling and that is the reality of the situations the nation faces dictates our policies irregardless of who is president. America is still in complete denial about the nature of the enemies we have who are determined to kill us and destroy our way of life. In the end, PC will be the death of us because we'll alway be looking for that common ground that we share with people who feel it their Islamic duty to kill those of us they cannot force to convert to Islam.
Don't worry about the Republicans, we'll be back in two years with a voting public just chompin' at the bit to vote for conservatives. The Obama, Reid and Pelosi team will assure a great election 2012,
I both agree and disagree with this I think Obama is reasonably skillful as a stratigist because he was able to out-manuver the Clinton's at their own game. I believe that does take intellegence and compitance. As with the seventies and Carter, I do not think things are as black and white as you make it. I believe Carter definitly could have done a better job, but hindsight is 20/20. The Iranian people are become far more secular now then they were in the 1970s because they have a fundamentalist government. I believe the situation would be much worse if we had gotten rid of the Ayatollah because in that case we would have had to spend lots of money to prop up an unpopular authoritarian regime, similar to Saudi Arabia, the people, like in Saudi Arabia, would become more radically religious because the Imams would be promoting a how great fundamentalism is rather than showing how terrible it is and it would be yet another breeding ground for terrorism against the United States, like Saudi Arabia. I also do not buy that Bush is responsible for not having another attack on the US. I think those kinds of things take decades to plan and implement and Al Qaeda is simply not yet ready to try again. As such I do not think we should pat GW on the back yet, but remain ever vigilent against any kind of potential threat.
Also Reagan and Nixon did not deter any of that kind of stuff. You seem to be forgeting that the Arabs launched the Yom Kippur war against Isreal under Nixon and Israel, and Syria invaded secular and pseudo-democratic Lebanon under Reagan. It was also under Reagan that the radical anti-Israeli groups Hamas and Hezbollah formed and remained largely unchecked thoughout his and George HW's term. Additionally Reagan spent considerable reasources under his term to back the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. On the other hand Carter established peace treaty between Egypt and Israel and Clinton established a similar one between Israel and Jordan. These treaties have yet do be broken and are some of few lasting achievements the US has gained in sorting out the Middle East mess. I believe that foreign policy success is not one sided and Democrats have had their share of success and Republicans have had their share of failure.
As to whether the Republicans will win in 2010 and 2012 who knows that is a long way a way and I will decide who to vote for when we get there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
