President Obama promisses federal support for rebuilding hurricane destructed areas in America. (741)
montecito: Dude, I'm wondering why you care about what goes on in America, particularly American politics.
Why do you have such a strong opinion about things that are none of your concern. Whether our politics are good or bad, you can't do anything about it.
Can you?
Why do you have such a strong opinion about things that are none of your concern. Whether our politics are good or bad, you can't do anything about it.
Can you?
Maybe the warmonger Obama will attack Denmark next. He seems to be on a "hate America" campaign of late. He'll have everyone hating us if we keep invading foreign countries.
Why don't you worry and talk about your own country. It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about.
Never forget to have a great laughter once in a while... Relaly good for you all:
such a boso
May the force be with you all
such a boso
May the force be with you all
grayhair: Why don't you worry and talk about your own country. It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about.
Maybe it's time the USA does the same thing huh?
After two years of Obama...Here's your change!
January 2009 TODAY % chg Source
Avg.. Retail price/gallon gas in U.S. $1.83 $3.104 69.6% 1
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel) $43.48 $99.02 127.7% 2
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel) $38.74 $91.38 135.9% 2
Gold: London (per troy oz.) $853.25 $1,369.50 60.5% 2
Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL $3.56 $6.33 78.1% 2
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL $9.66 $13.75 42.3% 2
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. Fob $13.37 $35.39 164.7% 2
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall 7.6% 9.4% 23.7% 3
Unemployment rate, blacks 12.6% 15.8% 25.4% 3
Number of unemployed 11,616,000 14,485,000 24.7% 3
Number of fed. Employees, ex. Military (curr = 12/10 prelim) 2,779,000 2,840,000 2.2% 3
Real median household income (2008 v 2009) $50,112 $49,777 -0.7% 4
Number of food stamp recipients (curr = 10/10) 31,983,716 43,200,878 35.1% 5
Number of unemployment benefit recipients (curr = 12/10) 7,526,598 9,193,838 22.2% 6
Number of long-term unemployed 2,600,000 6,400,000 146.2% 3
Poverty rate, individuals (2008 v 2009) 13.2% 14.3% 8.3% 4
People in poverty in U.S. (2008 v 2009) 39,800,000 43,600,000 9.5% 4
U.S. . Rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings 5 9 n/a 10
Present Situation Index (curr = 12/10) 29.9 23.5 -21.4% 11
Failed banks (curr = 2010 + 2011 to date) 140 164 17.1% 12
U.S. . Dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate 89.76 82.03 -8.6% 2
U.S. . Money supply, M1, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) 1,575.1 1,865.7 18.4% 13
U.S. . Money supply, M2, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) 8,310.9 8,852.3 6.5% 13
National debt, in trillions $10..627 $14..052 32.2% 14
Just take this last item: In the last two years we have accumulated national debt at a ratemore than 27 times as fast as during the rest of our entire nation's history.. Over 27 times as fast. Metaphorically speaking, if you are driving in the right lane doing 65 MPH and a car rockets past you in the left lane. 27 times faster, it would be doing over 1700 MPH!
Sources:
(1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. Of Labor; (7) FHFA; ( Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC; (13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. Treasury
January 2009 TODAY % chg Source
Avg.. Retail price/gallon gas in U.S. $1.83 $3.104 69.6% 1
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel) $43.48 $99.02 127.7% 2
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel) $38.74 $91.38 135.9% 2
Gold: London (per troy oz.) $853.25 $1,369.50 60.5% 2
Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL $3.56 $6.33 78.1% 2
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL $9.66 $13.75 42.3% 2
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. Fob $13.37 $35.39 164.7% 2
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall 7.6% 9.4% 23.7% 3
Unemployment rate, blacks 12.6% 15.8% 25.4% 3
Number of unemployed 11,616,000 14,485,000 24.7% 3
Number of fed. Employees, ex. Military (curr = 12/10 prelim) 2,779,000 2,840,000 2.2% 3
Real median household income (2008 v 2009) $50,112 $49,777 -0.7% 4
Number of food stamp recipients (curr = 10/10) 31,983,716 43,200,878 35.1% 5
Number of unemployment benefit recipients (curr = 12/10) 7,526,598 9,193,838 22.2% 6
Number of long-term unemployed 2,600,000 6,400,000 146.2% 3
Poverty rate, individuals (2008 v 2009) 13.2% 14.3% 8.3% 4
People in poverty in U.S. (2008 v 2009) 39,800,000 43,600,000 9.5% 4
U.S. . Rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings 5 9 n/a 10
Present Situation Index (curr = 12/10) 29.9 23.5 -21.4% 11
Failed banks (curr = 2010 + 2011 to date) 140 164 17.1% 12
U.S. . Dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate 89.76 82.03 -8.6% 2
U.S. . Money supply, M1, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) 1,575.1 1,865.7 18.4% 13
U.S. . Money supply, M2, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) 8,310.9 8,852.3 6.5% 13
National debt, in trillions $10..627 $14..052 32.2% 14
Just take this last item: In the last two years we have accumulated national debt at a ratemore than 27 times as fast as during the rest of our entire nation's history.. Over 27 times as fast. Metaphorically speaking, if you are driving in the right lane doing 65 MPH and a car rockets past you in the left lane. 27 times faster, it would be doing over 1700 MPH!
Sources:
(1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. Of Labor; (7) FHFA; ( Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC; (13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. Treasury
Hot_Single_Dude: You worked and so freaking what? Switzerland got Universal health care and retirenment for all and so on Exactly as most other civilized european countries and you too are enjoying the same kind of benefits and have received much more than you ever have paid I asure you... and that is why you are living there. Other wise you would keep staying in those right winged hilly billy places in America where your brain got trained being this careless and selfish and so out of touch with what ever decency like most other endorsers of the Damn GOP!
Uninformed again,Dude?I pay for Healthinsurance,and am still stuck with 10% of the Bill!
Dude you slipping!
Obama's Oil Man By: Tait Trussell
FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, September 02, 2009
President Obama is adept at rewarding those who put him into office. And hard-left financier George Soros is emerging as a leader of the patronage pack.
A payback to Soros was due. As the chief moneyman behind left-wing political action committees like MoveOn.org, Soros, an early supporter of Obama, played an instrumental role in drumming up voter mobilization and political advertising on the novice candidate’s behalf. In no small part, Obama’s triumph in the Democratic primary over better-known rivals was a testament to Soros’s deep pockets and his political commitment.
Now it’s time for Soros to collect on his investment. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the Obama administration has committed up to $10 billion to Brazil’s state-owned oil company Petrobras to finance oil exploration off of Brazil’s coast.
Yet Obama historically has opposed expanded oil drilling. This was not only a strategic decision, aimed at pleasing the environmental Left, but also a personal choice, since Obama sincerely believes that drilling is deeply destructive to the natural environment. Thus, as a Senator, Obama voted against permitting the U.S. to drill for oil and natural gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on the grounds that it would be a crime to despoil such “beautiful real estate.” Similarly, during last year’s presidential campaign, he warned of the “environmental consequences” of oil drilling, and insisted that “we cannot drill our way out of the problem.”
But apparently George Soros can. The president has elected to help another nation with the same type of drilling that he opposes so vehemently for this country, and the reason seems to be Soros’s $811-millon investment in Petrobras. The company just happens to be the largest holding in Soros’s investment fund. Soros’s connection to the company is no secret; he has been investing in Petrobras since 2007. A profitable venture, Petrobras has estimated recoverable reserves for the so-called Tupi oil field of between 5 and 8 billion barrels. With his billion-dollar loan, Obama has taken patronage politics to striking new level.
The Petrobras loan may be a windfall for Soros and Brazil, but it is a bad deal for the US. The administration is prepared to lend up to $10 billion to a foreign company to drill off its coast, when it could bring in $1.7 trillion in government revenue, as well as create thousands of new jobs, by allowing drilling off the coast of the United States.
This is no empty speculation. The American Petroleum Institute estimates that oil exploration in the U.S. could create 160,000 new, well-paying jobs, as well as $1.7 trillion in revenues to federal, state, and local governments, all while fostering greater energy security. Federal data from the Minerals Management Service of the U.S. Department of Interior says the U.S. has enough oil and natural gas to fuel more than 65 million cars for 60 years, and enough natural gas to heat 60 million homes for 160 years. In fact, the government estimates that there are 30 billion barrels of undiscovered technically recoverable oil on federal lands currently closed to development. But rather than investing in the country’s energy future, the administration seems to be offering an expensive kickback to a political ally in a time of economic recession and high unemployment.
CONT.
FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, September 02, 2009
President Obama is adept at rewarding those who put him into office. And hard-left financier George Soros is emerging as a leader of the patronage pack.
A payback to Soros was due. As the chief moneyman behind left-wing political action committees like MoveOn.org, Soros, an early supporter of Obama, played an instrumental role in drumming up voter mobilization and political advertising on the novice candidate’s behalf. In no small part, Obama’s triumph in the Democratic primary over better-known rivals was a testament to Soros’s deep pockets and his political commitment.
Now it’s time for Soros to collect on his investment. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the Obama administration has committed up to $10 billion to Brazil’s state-owned oil company Petrobras to finance oil exploration off of Brazil’s coast.
Yet Obama historically has opposed expanded oil drilling. This was not only a strategic decision, aimed at pleasing the environmental Left, but also a personal choice, since Obama sincerely believes that drilling is deeply destructive to the natural environment. Thus, as a Senator, Obama voted against permitting the U.S. to drill for oil and natural gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on the grounds that it would be a crime to despoil such “beautiful real estate.” Similarly, during last year’s presidential campaign, he warned of the “environmental consequences” of oil drilling, and insisted that “we cannot drill our way out of the problem.”
But apparently George Soros can. The president has elected to help another nation with the same type of drilling that he opposes so vehemently for this country, and the reason seems to be Soros’s $811-millon investment in Petrobras. The company just happens to be the largest holding in Soros’s investment fund. Soros’s connection to the company is no secret; he has been investing in Petrobras since 2007. A profitable venture, Petrobras has estimated recoverable reserves for the so-called Tupi oil field of between 5 and 8 billion barrels. With his billion-dollar loan, Obama has taken patronage politics to striking new level.
The Petrobras loan may be a windfall for Soros and Brazil, but it is a bad deal for the US. The administration is prepared to lend up to $10 billion to a foreign company to drill off its coast, when it could bring in $1.7 trillion in government revenue, as well as create thousands of new jobs, by allowing drilling off the coast of the United States.
This is no empty speculation. The American Petroleum Institute estimates that oil exploration in the U.S. could create 160,000 new, well-paying jobs, as well as $1.7 trillion in revenues to federal, state, and local governments, all while fostering greater energy security. Federal data from the Minerals Management Service of the U.S. Department of Interior says the U.S. has enough oil and natural gas to fuel more than 65 million cars for 60 years, and enough natural gas to heat 60 million homes for 160 years. In fact, the government estimates that there are 30 billion barrels of undiscovered technically recoverable oil on federal lands currently closed to development. But rather than investing in the country’s energy future, the administration seems to be offering an expensive kickback to a political ally in a time of economic recession and high unemployment.
CONT.
Cont.
The oil deal stinks for other reasons, as well. For instance, there is the rank hypocrisy of Soros – an enthusiastic proponent of global warming theory and environmental liberalism – investing in the fossil fuels whose use he otherwise condemns – and doing so in part with the aid of taxpayer funds. For years, Soros has urged the adoption of a global carbon tax that would punish companies that contribute to global warming. But that didn’t prevent him from plowing money into Petrobras.
The cozy Soros-Obama alliance goes beyond favorable oil deals. It’s also playing a role in the health care debate. Huge demonstrations dedicated to enacting Obama’s universal health care are largely a Soros-financed operation. When tens of thousands of people rallied in the nation’s capital in support of Obama’s health care plan, the demonstrations were organized by Health Care for America Now! (HCAN), a new national grassroots movement of more than 1,000 organizations in 46 states encompassing 30 million people dedicated to winning health reform now.
The “grassroots” organization appears to be more like a gang of interconnected ultra-liberal pressure groups. Among the 21 members of its steering committee are such Soros-funded groups as ACORN, MoveOn.org, and the Center for American Progress (CAP), headed by Clinton former chief of staff John Podesta, who also has been a key adviser to Obama. Soros’s charity, the Open Society Institute, in 2007 gave CAP $1.75 million and approved added grants of $1.25 million.
Obama’s collusion with Soros and his agenda-driven squadrons is an unfortunate turn from an administration that entered office promising unprecedented transparency in the White House. Soros certainly did his share for Obama. Now, with his backing for a billion-dollar oil loan to a Brazilian company, the president has proven more generous to Soros than to the American voters who put him in office.
Obama is Soros' Puppet!
Deep in his pocket!
The True Manchurian Candidate!
The oil deal stinks for other reasons, as well. For instance, there is the rank hypocrisy of Soros – an enthusiastic proponent of global warming theory and environmental liberalism – investing in the fossil fuels whose use he otherwise condemns – and doing so in part with the aid of taxpayer funds. For years, Soros has urged the adoption of a global carbon tax that would punish companies that contribute to global warming. But that didn’t prevent him from plowing money into Petrobras.
The cozy Soros-Obama alliance goes beyond favorable oil deals. It’s also playing a role in the health care debate. Huge demonstrations dedicated to enacting Obama’s universal health care are largely a Soros-financed operation. When tens of thousands of people rallied in the nation’s capital in support of Obama’s health care plan, the demonstrations were organized by Health Care for America Now! (HCAN), a new national grassroots movement of more than 1,000 organizations in 46 states encompassing 30 million people dedicated to winning health reform now.
The “grassroots” organization appears to be more like a gang of interconnected ultra-liberal pressure groups. Among the 21 members of its steering committee are such Soros-funded groups as ACORN, MoveOn.org, and the Center for American Progress (CAP), headed by Clinton former chief of staff John Podesta, who also has been a key adviser to Obama. Soros’s charity, the Open Society Institute, in 2007 gave CAP $1.75 million and approved added grants of $1.25 million.
Obama’s collusion with Soros and his agenda-driven squadrons is an unfortunate turn from an administration that entered office promising unprecedented transparency in the White House. Soros certainly did his share for Obama. Now, with his backing for a billion-dollar oil loan to a Brazilian company, the president has proven more generous to Soros than to the American voters who put him in office.
Obama is Soros' Puppet!
Deep in his pocket!
The True Manchurian Candidate!
Hot_Single_Dude: You worked and so freaking what? Switzerland got Universal health care and retirenment for all and so on Exactly as most other civilized european countries and you too are enjoying the same kind of benefits and have received much more than you ever have paid I asure you... and that is why you are living there. Other wise you would keep staying in those right winged hilly billy places in America where your brain got trained being this careless and selfish and so out of touch with what ever decency like most other endorsers of the Damn GOP!
Sunshine,you better check your Sources again!“The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself… Almost inevitably, he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable.” — H.L. Mencken
Montana Stands Up Against Federal Government Tyranny
There is something about living in the wide open spaces of Montana which seems to lead men to understand the true nature of freedom more easily than those individuals who live in the crowded urban jungles of our Eastern seaboard.
The folks in Montana may have created a real problem for themselves this time. The state of Montana has signed an act into law which is purely constitutional, and by being so flies in the face of eighty years of tyrannical behavior by the federal government. As Voltaire wrote in 1764, “It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.” The good people of Montana may soon discover how true that still is.
The Bill in question is the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. This act explicitly exempts the territory of the State of Montana from the federal governments abusive misinterpretation of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.
The Commerce Clause, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, reads:
“ [The Congress shall have power] To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;”
Since Roosevelt’s threat to take over the Supreme Court in 1936 forced the justices into acquiescing to his unconstitutional demands, the states and the people have slowly lost freedom to the expanding powers of the federal government.
Section Four of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act begins:
A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce.
The Montana Firearms Freedom Act draws on Constitutional authority to make these statements:
(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.
(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
Cont.
There is something about living in the wide open spaces of Montana which seems to lead men to understand the true nature of freedom more easily than those individuals who live in the crowded urban jungles of our Eastern seaboard.
The folks in Montana may have created a real problem for themselves this time. The state of Montana has signed an act into law which is purely constitutional, and by being so flies in the face of eighty years of tyrannical behavior by the federal government. As Voltaire wrote in 1764, “It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.” The good people of Montana may soon discover how true that still is.
The Bill in question is the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. This act explicitly exempts the territory of the State of Montana from the federal governments abusive misinterpretation of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.
The Commerce Clause, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, reads:
“ [The Congress shall have power] To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;”
Since Roosevelt’s threat to take over the Supreme Court in 1936 forced the justices into acquiescing to his unconstitutional demands, the states and the people have slowly lost freedom to the expanding powers of the federal government.
Section Four of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act begins:
A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce.
The Montana Firearms Freedom Act draws on Constitutional authority to make these statements:
(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of Montana certain rights as they were understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the 9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.
(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
Cont.
Cont.
(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
This bill has been passed into law and goes into effect on 1 October. After that date, the citizens of the state of Montana will legally have rights which were guaranteed to them under the United States Constitution and later stolen from them by the federal government.
In 1928, Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis wrote “The makers of the Constitution conferred, as against the government, the Right to be let alone; the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized men.” That’s all the citizens of Montana are asking for — the right to live free from the tyrannical actions of an overreaching and power-mad federal government.
Unfortunately, Thomas Jefferson predicted this failure of our nation as early as 1821, when he wrote “When all government, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the Center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”
That’s the situation we are in today. It’s unconstitutional and it may be unstoppable — short of violent revolution.
(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists as it was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
This bill has been passed into law and goes into effect on 1 October. After that date, the citizens of the state of Montana will legally have rights which were guaranteed to them under the United States Constitution and later stolen from them by the federal government.
In 1928, Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis wrote “The makers of the Constitution conferred, as against the government, the Right to be let alone; the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized men.” That’s all the citizens of Montana are asking for — the right to live free from the tyrannical actions of an overreaching and power-mad federal government.
Unfortunately, Thomas Jefferson predicted this failure of our nation as early as 1821, when he wrote “When all government, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the Center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”
That’s the situation we are in today. It’s unconstitutional and it may be unstoppable — short of violent revolution.
Totally agree with you re the remark about the Government and one who is able to think for himself. 
Conrad73: “The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself… Almost inevitably, he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable.” — H.L. Mencken
grayhair: Why don't you worry and talk about your own country. It's obvious you don't know what you're talking about.
Yes Freddy listen to this gray haired gentleman from California
raphael118: HON you need to come back to reality. Jimmy Swaggart and many in the christian right as well as your conservative leaders made a living trashing and condemning gays.
Katt did never notice this sad stincky fact any way... she is in the damn Cocoon you see? 
Conrad73: Sunshine,you better check your Sources again!
And u better begin to have real sources instead of a load of BS provided by anti american militants 
Hot_Single_Dude: Yes Freddy listen to this gray haired gentleman from California
Interesting technique taking a post that was directed at you and pretending it was directed at Freddy.
Sad for you that anyone who cares to can scroll back and see what a pathetic little liar you are.
Don't you have any shame at all or are you so self involved you can't see how idiotic you are making yourself look?
katt1017: Interesting technique taking a post that was directed at you and pretending it was directed at Freddy.
Sad for you that anyone who cares to can scroll back and see what a pathetic little liar you are.
Don't you have any shame at all or are you so self involved you can't see how idiotic you are making yourself look?
Sad for you that anyone who cares to can scroll back and see what a pathetic little liar you are.
Don't you have any shame at all or are you so self involved you can't see how idiotic you are making yourself look?
Correction!
Yes Freddy and Katt and Kattsrose and Conrad particulary listen to this gray haired gentleman from California
katt1017: "Angry butch" came from Jvaski and Raphael, not the RNC. Your ongoing nonsense trashing any minority that does not pledge their lives to Obama did not come from the RNC, it came from you and you alone.
You and Raffy are wind-ups, Jvaski is a bitter, damaged overgrown little boy.
You and Raffy are wind-ups, Jvaski is a bitter, damaged overgrown little boy.
Watch this and learn some thing ... Never too late
I just adore Ellen... such a fabulous star and such a darling... her loved one is a true lucky woman
Never too late to learn:
Miav????????
Miav????????
Hot_Single_Dude: Watch this and learn some thing ... Never too late
At least we know that Ed has 3 viewers, you, his wife and the camera man.
Hot_Single_Dude: No Freddy... Ed show is wattched by millons of americans other wise he would be sent to exile as your STUPID Glenn Beck is
ED has those Empty Feedbag Blues!
Conrad73: ED has those Empty Feedbag Blues!
The should drop the "Ed Show" and put on Mr. Ed...the ratings might improve!
Hot_Single_Dude: yeah Freddy... what ever
Whenever you say "whatever", that's usually an acknowedgement that you have no idea what you're talking about OR you got caught in your own lie.
Surely the Puffington Post wouldn't provide false information.
More good news:
It's no secret that President Obama is on the downslope politically, and that includes the pivotal state of Pennsylvania.
A new poll from Susquehanna Polling and Research says that 48% of Pennsylvanians disapprove of Obama's performance, while 41% approve.
Also: Only 43% of registered voters in Pennsylvania say Obama has done well enough to deserve re-election, the poll said; 50% say " it is time to give a new person a chance."
Writes Jim Lee, president of Susquehanna Polling & Research:
"The fact that 1 in 2 voters are looking for someone else suggests that President Obama has little room to grow and that Pennsylvania will again be a toss-up state in next year's presidential election, particularly if the slow economic recovery continues to haunt the president."
Simply put, it's hard to see how Obama wins re-election without Pennsylvania.
It's no secret that President Obama is on the downslope politically, and that includes the pivotal state of Pennsylvania.
A new poll from Susquehanna Polling and Research says that 48% of Pennsylvanians disapprove of Obama's performance, while 41% approve.
Also: Only 43% of registered voters in Pennsylvania say Obama has done well enough to deserve re-election, the poll said; 50% say " it is time to give a new person a chance."
Writes Jim Lee, president of Susquehanna Polling & Research:
"The fact that 1 in 2 voters are looking for someone else suggests that President Obama has little room to grow and that Pennsylvania will again be a toss-up state in next year's presidential election, particularly if the slow economic recovery continues to haunt the president."
Simply put, it's hard to see how Obama wins re-election without Pennsylvania.
katt1017: "Angry butch" came from Jvaski and Raphael, not the RNC. Your ongoing nonsense trashing any minority that does not pledge their lives to Obama did not come from the RNC, it came from you and you alone.
You and Raffy are wind-ups, Jvaski is a bitter, damaged overgrown little boy.
You and Raffy are wind-ups, Jvaski is a bitter, damaged overgrown little boy.
Keep Going Katt.....we're all listening .......
jvaski: It's just another "Lull" between popularity surges like the Osama events.......hold your seat FUD, he'll do just fine in 2012.
Considering thr repubs have nothing for 2012 - I'de suggest you begin counseling now ...........he's gonna be around another 5 years doing all the things you hate.......
Considering thr repubs have nothing for 2012 - I'de suggest you begin counseling now ...........he's gonna be around another 5 years doing all the things you hate.......
fabulous post JV! Good to see you man
More Threads
Happy Birthday MysteriousGirl80
The Best of the GOP
other can see but not you
Feel Good Music
the way you look
Don Shits-In-Pants!!!
Sleepy Don!
your personality
1830's Music
Common Issues with the BMW X1
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
Why do you have such a strong opinion about things that are none of your concern. Whether our politics are good or bad, you can't do anything about it.
Can you?
Maybe for the very same reason that the USA sticks it nose in other countries business.