In article ,
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:29:15 -0500, Kurt Ullman
wrote:


Wake up, Kurt. This is not the same Democratic party, and Obama was
far from a typical Democratic Presidential candidate. McCain wasn't
exactly typical of the Republican party, either.

It is pretty much the same Dem party. Barney Franks, Pelosi and same
old timers are in control. Obama is hardly the only Democrat involved,
even assuming he turns out to be different in the long run. Which the
cynic in me is waiting to see.

On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:04:33 -0500, Kurt Ullman
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:29:15 -0500, Kurt Ullman
wrote:


Wake up, Kurt. This is not the same Democratic party, and Obama was
far from a typical Democratic Presidential candidate. McCain wasn't
exactly typical of the Republican party, either.

It is pretty much the same Dem party. Barney Franks, Pelosi and same
old timers are in control.

Look again. They just got a new honcho. Lets wait and see how the
first few confrontations go before we go jumping to completely
unfounded conclusions about who is in charge and what direction we are
headed. I didn't vote for Obama, but I'm very hopeful that he works
out. We need to do much better than we have on so many fronts. Maybe
he's the answer, and maybe he's a dud. We really don't know yet.Not
even his biggest supporters know that yet. Lets give him a little
breathing room to show us what he can do before we decide to bury him.

Obama is hardly the only Democrat involved,
even assuming he turns out to be different in the long run. Which the
cynic in me is waiting to see.

Yep, cynicism is a very positive outlook that always gets things done,
and in the best way.

wrote in message
news
out. We need to do much better than we have on so many fronts. Maybe
he's the answer, and maybe he's a dud. We really don't know yet.Not
even his biggest supporters know that yet. Lets give him a little
breathing room to show us what he can do before we decide to bury him.

+1

In article ,
"Lisa BB." wrote:



The way republicans like to name call by misspelling names is so
disgusting. That name calling is the stuff little children do.
Oh, and a Dem never used "Shrub", etc. The misspellings are much more
of a indication of the level of the poster, not the party they may (or
more likely may not) belong to.

In article ,
wrote:


Look again. They just got a new honcho. Lets wait and see how the
first few confrontations go before we go jumping to completely
unfounded conclusions about who is in charge and what direction we are
headed. I didn't vote for Obama, but I'm very hopeful that he works
out. We need to do much better than we have on so many fronts. Maybe
he's the answer, and maybe he's a dud. We really don't know yet.Not
even his biggest supporters know that yet. Lets give him a little
breathing room to show us what he can do before we decide to bury him.

We'll see. The honcho is at one end of Pennsylvania Ave and I am
talking about the other end. Hard to think that old dogs will change
their stripes (hopelessly muddle the metaphor).



Obama is hardly the only Democrat involved,
even assuming he turns out to be different in the long run. Which the
cynic in me is waiting to see.

Yep, cynicism is a very positive outlook that always gets things done,
and in the best way.

Worked for me through both Dem and GOP administrations. Lots easier to
be pleasantly surprised that way.

clipped


get out of "campaign mode". The campaign is now OVER and the fat lady
has sung. Watch John McCain and follow his example.





Ditto...and well said.

Olddog




Now that one of Obama's most trusted advisors - Rahm Emanuel - is
heading transition team
and possibly the next Chief of Staff, wonder if the "closet Muslim" sect
still believes? Seems
more like just an excuse for racism to me. And so what if he was a
Muslim ... more Christian
than a lot of Christians ) But, gotta have someone to hate - Japs,
gooks, etc. Running out
of groups unless the Martians come soon )

Kurt Ullman wrote:

In article ,
wrote:



On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:29:15 -0500, Kurt Ullman
wrote:


Wake up, Kurt. This is not the same Democratic party, and Obama was
far from a typical Democratic Presidential candidate. McCain wasn't
exactly typical of the Republican party, either.



It is pretty much the same Dem party. Barney Franks, Pelosi and same
old timers are in control. Obama is hardly the only Democrat involved,
even assuming he turns out to be different in the long run. Which the
cynic in me is waiting to see.


Watched c-span today, discussing Obama. Cut the British accents and it
could have been a
Rep/Dem fight ) Claimed they had the worst housing market in the
world.....I'm sure they
were Brits )

On Nov 5, 4:11*pm, "Lisa BB." wrote:
"retired54" wrote :







"BobR" wrote in message
.
.. On Nov 5, 7:48 am, "retired54" wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message

..
.

In article , Chris wrote:

badgolferman wrote:
wrote:

Now we have hope that our new President, governing
from the center, will nominate centrist Justices who
don't cynically interpret the Constitution for the
benefit of religious fanatics, corporate thieves
and anti-environmental hatchetmen.

I think you have been drinking the MoveOn kool-aid too much.
Obama is the most socialist senator in the Congress and his
policies have reflected such. If you're happy that's great but I
will be even happier when you share your wealth with me because
I certainly will need it when there are no more jobs to go
around and energy costs skyrocket. Let us know if you're still
happy in two years.

Promised, I will. Until then, how about you start using your own
brains?
Try it, thinking on your own is a wonderful feeling, better than
sex.

Never have understood why people on both sides get so upset with
the other that they just can't abide by the fact that maybe the
other dude came to the decision on their own. This is a bipartisan
indication of the effects of cognitive dissonance.

When Bush43 got elected the first time I thought the world had come
to an end but *my life* carried on in a normal fashion. That doesn't
excuse all the pointless carnage in Iraq but the point is; McCain
supporters will probably come to the same conclusion on their own
eventually.

Olddog- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are absolutely right, we survived Carter, we survived Clintoon,
and we will survive Obamarx too. *I promise to give him the same
respect and support that you Dumbcraps have given Bush for the last
eight years.

================================================

Respectfully, I'm a registered republican.

Olddor.

The way republicans like to name call by misspelling names is so
disgusting. *That name calling is the stuff little children do.


Yep, I intentionally misspelled their names but I learned it from you
craps so just give it a break or would you like for me to post the
many misspellings for Bush, McCain, and Palin?

We all saw the hate coming from the McCain campaign. *In the end, McCain
gave a great speech. *Where was that during the campaign? *When he selected
his VP, I lost a lot of respect for McCain. *As his negative slings and
arrows shot out, I lost nearly all respect for him. *His campaign was
extremely divisive. * Toward the end, the republicans looked silly
scratching and clawing at anything. *They saw the writing on the wall.


There was no more hate coming from the McCain campaign than from the
Obama campaign. Anyone who says otherwise suffers from a case of
blinders.

The people have spoken.
Yes we can and did!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Nov 5, 1:52*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 11:40:45 -0800 (PST), BobR





wrote:
On Nov 5, 9:26*am, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:34:39 GMT, "retired54" wrote:

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
...
I cried also. Because the nation I love so much just elected a far left
socialist who may not even be a US citizen. Who will likely continue the
failed policies of the Clinton Regime. Tax the people, spend on social
programs. Encourage immorality and perversion. Separate the nation with
two
sets of laws, one set of laws for the powerful and the other set of laws
for
the proletariat.

For a democrat Obama is quite conservative. That's why so many conservatives
jumped ship and voted for him. Even "The Economist" endorsed him. Calm down
and take a deep breath. Give him a chance to straighten the mess your
neocons left.

Olddog

Agreed. Don't forget for a moment that one of McCains oft repeated
phrases was about putting America first. I fully expect that MCCain,
himself will have no problem working with OUR new president. NOt
everybody will be a big enough person to do the same. It's really up
to each individual whether they want to bitch and moan, or work
towards a better United States. Every person has two choices right
now. Either help, or get out of the way for those that want to put
America FIRST.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Spoken like someone who went out of their way to do likewise during
the current administration. *You did didn't you? *I didn't think so!

Bush made it quite clear that his idea of bi-partisan was when
everybody agreed to go along with his position. He was not interested
in any other viewpoints.

You'll either figure out that things are going to be different, or you
will be miserable. Maybe you just enjoy being a victim.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I wouldn't know, I have never been a victim and always taken
responsibility for my own life instead of asking big government to
wipe my ass for me. You might try it sometime, it really works quite
well.

On Nov 5, 2:29*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
wrote:



Bush made it quite clear that his idea of bi-partisan was when
everybody agreed to go along with his position. He was not interested
in any other viewpoints.

* Which is pretty much the Dem's view of bipartisanship too. GW's trust
in the concepts of bipartisanship were forged in Daddy's administration,
especially the outcome of the Budget Mugging... er Summit 1990. The Dems
said they wouldn't come to the table without a "bi-partisan" agenda that
included both tax increases and budget cuts. When Daddy responded in a
bipartisan manner and gave in on tax cuts, the Dems proceeded to pound
him soundly about the face and head with "read my lips". Oh, and they
sorta forgot to get around to the cuts.
* Both sides have for a long time viewed bipartisanship as "you lay down
and take it whilst I do whatever I want". *And this was pretty much
independent of the party's majority or minority status at the time.

Sort of reminds me of those great Texas Democrats a few years back who
left the state to hide out rather than compromise. The democratic
answer is always to run from responsibility.

On Nov 5, 2:07*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:

I know very few people who would buy all of their party's positions. Most
of them are like me, who agree with aspects of both.... but not
all. *The parties need to move closer to us instead of expecting us
to come to them.

The political parties accurately reflect the views of their membership. If
you want them to change, get active in the party of your choice and become
an advocate.

It's the "independent" voter who's the most dependent of all. He has no say
in who the candidates will be, he has no voice in the platform, policies, or
practices of either party. After the election, he has no influence or power
over the elected officials.

To a politician, an independent voter is like a dust storm. He shows up once
every four years, creates a mess and much confusion, and has to be dealt
with. After that, he's ignored until next time.

That is something that the majority of people in this country totally
ignore. You are not participating in the process by just voting in
the presidential election every four years. Just the opposite, you
are in effect supporting the worst that the two parties have to
offer. If you really want a government that represents you...you must
get involved at every level from the local precinct to the oval
office.

Chris wrote:

Stormin Mormon wrote:

I cried also. Because the nation I love so much just elected a far
left socialist who may not even be a US citizen. Who will likely
continue the failed policies of the Clinton Regime. Tax the people,
spend on social programs. Encourage immorality and perversion.
Separate the nation with two sets of laws, one set of laws for the
powerful and the other set of laws for the proletariat.

More party talking points? Why am I not surprised? Even McCain stopped
using this .... (four letter word here). You didn't get the memo,
obviously.

Everyone wants the pie but NOBODY wants to pay for it.........we want
great health care, low deductible, everything covered and low
premium. Ain't gonna happen. Every new care produced in US costs about
$1200 or more.........just the fighting over whether
a given health problem is to be paid, or is work related, costs huge
sums for employers. I'd like to see a system that covers basic
health issues - no catastrophic, no transplants, no life-style
crap.......then give workers the option of having such a plan with a
waiver for work-related stuff. If someone wants catastrophic or work
related coverage, pay higher premium. I read about
people in their seventies having transplants of various sorts - I don't
insist on living forever, never wanted a litter of babies,
etc. We need more competition in healthcare? Rubbish - that means a
lot more dollars going for advertising. The CEO
of United Healthcare (adverts on TV every 30 seconds) made more than 120
million bucks. They send out so much
junk mail we will need to build another landfill. McCain wanted to tax
employer paid health plans, as goofy as it gets.
HC is going up fast and the 2500/5000 "tax credit" would soon kill off
such plans.

On Nov 5, 1:39*pm, "retired54" wrote:
"BobR" wrote in message

...
On Nov 5, 7:48 am, "retired54" wrote:





"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message

...

In article , Chris wrote:

badgolferman wrote:
wrote:

Now we have hope that our new President, governing
from the center, will nominate centrist Justices who
don't cynically interpret the Constitution for the
benefit of religious fanatics, corporate thieves
and anti-environmental hatchetmen.

I think you have been drinking the MoveOn kool-aid too much. Obama is
the most socialist senator in the Congress and his policies have
reflected such. If you're happy that's great but I will be even
happier when you share your wealth with me because I certainly will
need it when there are no more jobs to go around and energy costs
skyrocket. Let us know if you're still happy in two years.

Promised, I will. Until then, how about you start using your own
brains?
Try it, thinking on your own is a wonderful feeling, better than sex..

Never have understood why people on both sides get so upset with the
other that they just can't abide by the fact that maybe the other dude
came to the decision on their own. This is a bipartisan indication of
the effects of cognitive dissonance.

When Bush43 got elected the first time I thought the world had come to an
end but *my life* carried on in a normal fashion. That doesn't excuse all
the pointless carnage in Iraq but the point is; McCain supporters will
probably come to the same conclusion on their own eventually.

Olddog- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are absolutely right, we survived Carter, we survived Clintoon,
and we will survive Obamarx too. *I promise to give him the same
respect and support that you Dumbcraps have given Bush for the last
eight years.

================================================

Respectfully, I'm a registered republican.

Olddor.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, ment to say "that the dumbcraps have given Bush".

"badgolferman" wrote in message
...

Not only Putin but the Iranian mullahs. They are just as crafty and
even more ruthless than Putin. But of course Obama wants to sit down
and have tea and goat cheese with them while they're murdering brave
young American soldiers behind his back.

Do you have any idea how stupid this kind of statement makes you look?

Have another glass of the kool-aid.

BobR wrote in
:

On Nov 5, 10:22*am, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:17:19 GMT, "joe" wrote:
Just a centrist party? *How about a five party system? *the current
left and
right would occupy the extremes, then just fill the inbetween. *You
co
uld
get your party, then a liberal/conservative and a
conservative/liberal.
*It
would be interesting, anyway.

I won't hold my breath for it however.

jc

You guys both need to take a deep breath and read what I wrote a
second time. Despite the hysterics, Obama is, in fact, within a
stones throw of the center, as is John McCain. That's precisely why
the vote was as close as it was. I think you are going to see John
McCain doing his best to work with Obama for the common goal of
moving us forward and fixing some of the damge wrought in the past 8
years. You will also see all those who really want to "put America
first" doing the same.

get out of "campaign mode". *The campaign is now OVER and the fat
lady has sung. Watch John McCain and follow his example.



"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 23:07:37 -0800, "Zoot"
wrote: The popular vote split indicates that we all average out
near the center. That's not divided - it's unified. All we lacked
was a leader who undferstands that.

The political parties need to understand it as well. *This
pandering
to
the extremes of the left and right are what's divided the country.
*
I
would love to have a centrist party.

The Republicans left me behind when they started kissing
fundamentalis
t
ass. And the Democrats conspire to deprive me of my God given
right to defend myself by their attempts to redefine the 2nd
Amendment.

I know very few people who would buy all of their party's
positions.
*Most
of them are like me, who agree with aspects of both.... but not
all.
*The
parties need to move closer to us instead of expecting us to come
to t
hem.

--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

What...you don't want to follow the example that the Democrats have
set for the last eight years? OK, I will give him a chance but I will
also be keeping score on the number of promises that he breaks.

Politicians don't break promise. They just delay them because of
unforeseen circumstances. Eventualy it's "I still commit to that promise
and will get it done next term."

Yep, I intentionally misspelled their names but I learned it from you
craps so just give it a break or would you like for me to post the
many misspellings for Bush, McCain, and Palin?

We all saw the hate coming from the McCain campaign. In the end, McCain
gave a great speech. Where was that during the campaign? When he selected
his VP, I lost a lot of respect for McCain. As his negative slings and
arrows shot out, I lost nearly all respect for him. His campaign was
extremely divisive. Toward the end, the republicans looked silly
scratching and clawing at anything. They saw the writing on the wall.


There was no more hate coming from the McCain campaign than from the
Obama campaign. Anyone who says otherwise suffers from a case of
blinders.

================================================== =

I agree and I think IMHO it's time to put all that behind us. We'll pick it
back up where we left off in 2012. ;-)

Olddog

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:17:19 GMT, "joe" wrote:

Just a centrist party? How about a five party system? the current left and
right would occupy the extremes, then just fill the inbetween. You could
get your party, then a liberal/conservative and a conservative/liberal. It
would be interesting, anyway.

I won't hold my breath for it however.

jc


You guys both need to take a deep breath and read what I wrote a
second time. Despite the hysterics, Obama is, in fact, within a stones
throw of the center, as is John McCain. That's precisely why the vote
was as close as it was. I think you are going to see John McCain doing
his best to work with Obama for the common goal of moving us forward
and fixing some of the damge wrought in the past 8 years. You will
also see all those who really want to "put America first" doing the
same.

get out of "campaign mode". The campaign is now OVER and the fat lady
has sung. Watch John McCain and follow his example.

It is nice to see someone who actually knows what he is talking about still
surviving among the kool-aid drinkers here.

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
Obama was ranked as the MOST LEFTIST of the entire Senate.
OTOH,McCain is considered a RINO,that would make him "centrist".

By eactly who? You are trying to tell me that he is left of Bernie Sanders? You
are an idiot.


Interestingly(and ironically),Obama would not have qualified for a security
clearance,but now he's got access to all US secrets.

Says who? You? You are an Idiot.

"BobR" wrote in message
...
On Nov 5, 10:22 am, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:17:19 GMT, "joe" wrote:
Just a centrist party? How about a five party system? the current left and
right would occupy the extremes, then just fill the inbetween. You could
get your party, then a liberal/conservative and a conservative/liberal. It
would be interesting, anyway.

I won't hold my breath for it however.

jc

You guys both need to take a deep breath and read what I wrote a
second time. Despite the hysterics, Obama is, in fact, within a stones
throw of the center, as is John McCain. That's precisely why the vote
was as close as it was. I think you are going to see John McCain doing
his best to work with Obama for the common goal of moving us forward
and fixing some of the damge wrought in the past 8 years. You will
also see all those who really want to "put America first" doing the
same.

get out of "campaign mode". The campaign is now OVER and the fat lady
has sung. Watch John McCain and follow his example.



"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 23:07:37 -0800, "Zoot" wrote:
The popular vote split indicates that we all average out near the
center. That's not divided - it's unified. All we lacked was a leader
who undferstands that.

The political parties need to understand it as well. This pandering to
the extremes of the left and right are what's divided the country. I
would love to have a centrist party.

The Republicans left me behind when they started kissing fundamentalist
ass. And the Democrats conspire to deprive me of my God given right to
defend myself by their attempts to redefine the 2nd Amendment.

I know very few people who would buy all of their party's positions. Most
of them are like me, who agree with aspects of both.... but not all. The
parties need to move closer to us instead of expecting us to come to them.

--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Obama is no where near the center except when he is trying to get
elected. If you had really looked into Obama's past and what he
stands for you would know that. Instead you listened only to the
election lies and fell for them hook line and sinker.

************************************************** ****8

Yep. All of america just "fell for the lies". Either that, or you're a wacko.

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:17:19 GMT, "joe" wrote:

Just a centrist party? How about a five party system? the current
left and right would occupy the extremes, then just fill the
inbetween. You could get your party, then a liberal/conservative
and a conservative/liberal. It would be interesting, anyway.

I won't hold my breath for it however.

jc


You guys both need to take a deep breath and read what I wrote a
second time. Despite the hysterics, Obama is, in fact, within a stones
throw of the center, as is John McCain. That's precisely why the vote
was as close as it was. I think you are going to see John McCain doing
his best to work with Obama for the common goal of moving us forward
and fixing some of the damge wrought in the past 8 years.

I didn't get the memo. What damage over the last eight years? If you're
talking about the financial mess, everything was fine until the Democrats took
over Congress.


LOL! you guys are clueless.

"badgolferman" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Now we have hope that our new President, governing
from the center, will nominate centrist Justices who
don't cynically interpret the Constitution for the
benefit of religious fanatics, corporate thieves
and anti-environmental hatchetmen.

I think you have been drinking the MoveOn kool-aid too much. Obama is
the most socialist senator in the Congress and his policies have
reflected such.

If you believe that, you are ignorant. Do some research rather than parroting
the wacko talking heads.

In article ,
Norminn wrote:

C
etc. We need more competition in healthcare? Rubbish - that means a
lot more dollars going for advertising. The CEO
of United Healthcare (adverts on TV every 30 seconds) made more than 120
million bucks.

Actually he was probably paid around a million in salary, that is the
most that can be deducted. The rest is most likely in bonuses and stock
options that receive favorable tax treatment (and have for years, back
to the early 90s) because these kinds of things align the interests of
the boss with the shareholders according to the wiz kids in Congress who
write the laws.
The upshot is that CEOs now receive orders of magnitude more money
than even the most out of control board would have had the balls to give
them and the CEOs are remotely in line with the shareholders because so
much of their pay comes from options and bonuses that they feel the need
to cook the books. Most of the really nasty things where they play with
the books have been since the tax lawyers were changed. Oops.
They send out so much
junk mail we will need to build another landfill. McCain wanted to tax
employer paid health plans, as goofy as it gets.
HC is going up fast and the 2500/5000 "tax credit" would soon kill off
such plans.

For most of the last 30 years, the annual report on a health care
expenditures have consistently found that less than 20% of all
expenditures for healthcare come out of the pocket of the individual
(including the o-o-p part of the premium). When you have something that
is 80% subsidized, let alone the weirdness that ensues because of the
divorce from the entity paying for a service (your employer) and the
person actually using the service (you), then you hardly have a market
in any sense of the word.
I have long thought that before we give up on free markets in
healthcare, maybe we should actually TRY it first.

"Lisa BB." wrote in message news:0369f614$0$17658
The way republicans like to name call by misspelling names is so
disgusting. That name calling is the stuff little children do.

We all saw the hate coming from the McCain campaign. In the end, McCain
gave a great speech. Where was that during the campaign? When he selected
his VP, I lost a lot of respect for McCain. As his negative slings and
arrows shot out, I lost nearly all respect for him. His campaign was
extremely divisive. Toward the end, the republicans looked silly
scratching and clawing at anything. They saw the writing on the wall.

The people have spoken.
Yes we can and did!

It's a good thing the McCain that gave the concession speach wasn't the same one
that we were running against. He might have had a chance. The McCain in the
election was a completely different person, and a clear loser.

"BobR" wrote in message
...


There was no more hate coming from the McCain campaign than from the
Obama campaign. Anyone who says otherwise suffers from a case of
blinders.


************************************************** 8

It is you with the blinders.

"Bob F" wrote in message ...

"Lisa BB." wrote in message
news:0369f614$0$17658
The way republicans like to name call by misspelling names is so
disgusting. That name calling is the stuff little children do.

We all saw the hate coming from the McCain campaign. In the end, McCain
gave a great speech. Where was that during the campaign? When he
selected
his VP, I lost a lot of respect for McCain. As his negative slings and
arrows shot out, I lost nearly all respect for him. His campaign was
extremely divisive. Toward the end, the republicans looked silly
scratching and clawing at anything. They saw the writing on the wall.

The people have spoken.
Yes we can and did!

It's a good thing the McCain that gave the concession speach wasn't the
same one that we were running against. He might have had a chance. The
McCain in the election was a completely different person, and a clear
loser.


Absolutely.

"Chris" wrote in message ...
badgolferman wrote:
Chris wrote:

badgolferman wrote:
wrote:

Now we have hope that our new President, governing
from the center, will nominate centrist Justices who
don't cynically interpret the Constitution for the
benefit of religious fanatics, corporate thieves
and anti-environmental hatchetmen.
I think you have been drinking the MoveOn kool-aid too much. Obama
is the most socialist senator in the Congress and his policies have
reflected such. If you're happy that's great but I will be even
happier when you share your wealth with me because I certainly will
need it when there are no more jobs to go around and energy costs
skyrocket. Let us know if you're still happy in two years.

Promised, I will. Until then, how about you start using your own
brains? Try it, thinking on your own is a wonderful feeling, better
than sex.


Using your own brains please tell me how you envision President Obama
and Pelosi/Reid making the world and especially America a better place.
If possible piggyback on the points made by original poster or just
raise your own.

I can't divine the future, so I don't know if the world will be a better place
two years from now or not, but I am not going to say it won't just because of
my political conviction. Are you?

Besides, PE Obama has said repeatedly that it's not just up to him but also
and mainly up to us to make our future better. Can we stop repeating political
talking point from either party and start working on solutions? I am ready.

More than half of this country is ready. They made that clear. I don't have much
hope for the bitter old men here though.

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
...
I cried also. Because the nation I love so much just elected a far left
socialist who may not even be a US citizen. Who will likely continue the
failed policies of the Clinton Regime. Tax the people, spend on social
programs. Encourage immorality and perversion. Separate the nation with two
sets of laws, one set of laws for the powerful and the other set of laws for
the proletariat.


LOL!!

I fell sorry for you.

wrote in message
...
when obama takes away our guns,allows gays to marry and we get his
soocialist society ,everything will be better i think . theres no reason
for the wealthy not to have their wealth redistributed to us poor folks
it will be better . people really need to get over their guns and
religion and let real progress happen. amos


LOL!

You are an idiot. Do you believe everything the talking heads tell you? Go you
ever have a fantasy about actually being able to think?

Kurt Ullman wrote in
:

In article ,
Jim Yanik wrote:


Interestingly(and ironically),Obama would not have qualified for a
security clearance,but now he's got access to all US secrets.
I'll bite. Why not?


His close associations with felons,terrorists,and communists/Marxists.
Ayers/Dorhn alone would kill the deal.Or Rashid Khalili.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Frank wrote in
:

cm wrote:
Mortimer,

You don't think the Democrats had anything to do with our current
situation? Both sides have created this mess. The left and right only
get further apart. Scary stuff.
Good luck President elect Obama.

cm

That would essentially be my response.

I do not wish good luck to Obama unless he is not the radical
socialist he ran as.


He's MORE radical than what he ran as.
He and the mainstream media hid much about Obama.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Kurt Ullman wrote in
:

In article ,
"retired54" wrote:


Russia has severe internal problems. Putin views America's new
president elect as a threat because he knows if he tries to move into
the Ukraine or Georgia it will be MORE difficult for Russia to hold
due to political strife. IMHO
Nah. Putin moved into Georgia because we were tied up in Iraq and
Afghan and nature abhors a vacuum. With a less aggressively minded
president, if anything that vacuum increases. Not weak, per se, but
the different mindset of relying on diplomacy until too late (as
opposed to the current tendencies to bring in the armed forces too
early). The political strife that would come about from entry into
either, would be internal to the country and we (as Europe) would have
little to do with it. As he learned from Georgia.



Obama's presidency only strengthens democracy through-out the world.

there's no such thing as "strength through weakness".
Obama is going to cut many military programs,allow "gays" in the
military,destroying it's effectiveness,and not consider the military as a
option in any way.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Chris wrote in :

Stormin Mormon wrote:
I cried also. Because the nation I love so much just elected a far
left socialist who may not even be a US citizen. Who will likely
continue the failed policies of the Clinton Regime. Tax the people,
spend on social programs. Encourage immorality and perversion.
Separate the nation with two sets of laws, one set of laws for the
powerful and the other set of laws for the proletariat.

More party talking points? Why am I not surprised? Even McCain stopped
using this .... (four letter word here). You didn't get the memo,
obviously.

These are NOT "party talking points".
that's just Alinsky 101,straight out of Rules for Radicals.



Obama has said publicly that he considers the Constitution a "flawed
document",and wants to install judges "not constrained by the
Constitution",instead basing judgments on popular opinion and
feelings,instead of Written Law. He would put judges OUTSIDE the Supreme
Law of the land. Our rights will mean nothing.

IOW,he wants to render the Constitution useless.
To me,that is the destruction of the United States of America.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Cheri" wrote in
:

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
news:kurtullman-DDAE9B.08431405112008@70-3-168-

Never have understood why people on both sides get so upset with the
other that they just can't abide by the fact that maybe the other
dude came to the decision on their own. This is a bipartisan
indication of the effects of cognitive dissonance.


Me either, it's as if you happen to like somebody else for prez, then
you're brainwashed if you don't think the same way as that person, or
these people that tell you..."I just want you to think about it," as
if you hadn't.




Many HAVEN'T -thought- about it.
They failed to investigate or were denied the information to make any
reasoned,informed opinion.Some disdained info because it was contrary to
their beliefs,despite it being public record.
All they heard was "hope and change",not what sort of change,and little or
nothing on record and background.

Did you see the on-the-street interview with blacks where the interviewer
asked about Obama and his running mate Palin? and the fools went for it.

Mainstream media was essentially part of Obama's campaign,and they KNOW it.

(and ask the wrong questions,and you and your station get banned or kicked
off the plane.Don't be surprised when Obama (mis)uses his government power
to do more of the same.)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Kurt Ullman wrote in news:kurtullman-
:

In article ,
"Lisa BB." wrote:



The way republicans like to name call by misspelling names is so
disgusting. That name calling is the stuff little children do.
Oh, and a Dem never used "Shrub", etc. The misspellings are much more
of a indication of the level of the poster, not the party they may (or
more likely may not) belong to.




Bu****ler is another excellent example of Dem hate.

you want hate,examine the Daily Kos. Or the false calls on "racism".

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
...
Kurt Ullman wrote in
:

In article ,
"retired54" wrote:


Russia has severe internal problems. Putin views America's new
president elect as a threat because he knows if he tries to move into
the Ukraine or Georgia it will be MORE difficult for Russia to hold
due to political strife. IMHO
Nah. Putin moved into Georgia because we were tied up in Iraq and
Afghan and nature abhors a vacuum. With a less aggressively minded
president, if anything that vacuum increases. Not weak, per se, but
the different mindset of relying on diplomacy until too late (as
opposed to the current tendencies to bring in the armed forces too
early). The political strife that would come about from entry into
either, would be internal to the country and we (as Europe) would have
little to do with it. As he learned from Georgia.



Obama's presidency only strengthens democracy through-out the world.

there's no such thing as "strength through weakness".
Obama is going to cut many military programs,allow "gays" in the
military,destroying it's effectiveness,and not consider the military as a
option in any way.




That just sounds homophobic. There are gays in the military now.

Olddog

Jim Yanik, 11/5/2008,7:52:36 PM, wrote:

Many HAVEN'T -thought- about it.
They failed to investigate or were denied the information to make any
reasoned,informed opinion.Some disdained info because it was contrary
to their beliefs,despite it being public record.

Why were Obama's birth records sealed?

"badgolferman" wrote in message
...
Jim Yanik, 11/5/2008,7:52:36 PM, wrote:

Many HAVEN'T -thought- about it.
They failed to investigate or were denied the information to make any
reasoned,informed opinion.Some disdained info because it was contrary
to their beliefs,despite it being public record.

Why were Obama's birth records sealed?

That's it. You got him. Wow. How soon will he be impeached? Good job!

In the words of the great John McCain: "Get a Life!"

olddog

"badgolferman" wrote in message
...
Not only Putin but the Iranian mullahs. They are just as crafty and
even more ruthless than Putin. But of course Obama wants to sit down
and have tea and goat cheese with them while they're murdering brave
young American soldiers behind his back.

This type of thinking, is exactly why McCain got crushed.

I'll bet you're still asking why.

"badgolferman" wrote in message
...

He will also raise taxes on the middle class because he won't be able
to pay for all the new social programs the Democrats have proposed even
if the cut back defense spending by 25% as Barney the Frank has
promised. By the way, does anyone know what this Civilian National
Force that will be just as powerful, just as well-funded as the
military going to be?

Out of all these "new" social programs, surely you can name one. Oh wait,
Rush didn't list any, he was just blabbering as usual.

"retired54" wrote in message
...

"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
...
Kurt Ullman wrote in
:

In article ,
"retired54" wrote:


Russia has severe internal problems. Putin views America's new
president elect as a threat because he knows if he tries to move into
the Ukraine or Georgia it will be MORE difficult for Russia to hold
due to political strife. IMHO
Nah. Putin moved into Georgia because we were tied up in Iraq and
Afghan and nature abhors a vacuum. With a less aggressively minded
president, if anything that vacuum increases. Not weak, per se, but
the different mindset of relying on diplomacy until too late (as
opposed to the current tendencies to bring in the armed forces too
early). The political strife that would come about from entry into
either, would be internal to the country and we (as Europe) would have
little to do with it. As he learned from Georgia.



Obama's presidency only strengthens democracy through-out the world.

there's no such thing as "strength through weakness".
Obama is going to cut many military programs,allow "gays" in the
military,destroying it's effectiveness,and not consider the military as a
option in any way.




That just sounds homophobic. There are gays in the military now.

The point is that these guys can believe anything they want. Reality never
affects them.