�
 |
|
 |
|
|
| Change we can't stand - |
| View previous topic
:: View next topic |
dithers
 Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 9:19 am |
|
|
|
Change we can't stand
George Bush has been in office for 7 1/2 years. The first six the economy was fine.
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) the unemployment rate was 4.5%;
4) the DOW JONES hit a record high--14,000 +
5) American's were buying new cars, taking cruises, vacations overseas, living large...
But American's wanted 'CHANGE'! So, in 2006 they voted in a Democratic Congress and yes--we got 'CHANGE' all right. In the PAST YEAR:
1) Consumer confidence has plummeted;
2) Gasoline is now over $4 a gallon & climbing;
3) Unemployment is up to 5.5% (a 10% increase);
4) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $12 trillion dollars and prices still dropping;
5) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure;
6) THE DOW is probing another low....$2.5 trillion dollars has evaporated from stocks, bonds and mutual funds investment portofolios.
Yes, in 2006 America voted for change...and we sure got it ....
Remember the President has no control over any of these issues, only Congress.
Now the Obama claims his going to really give us change along with a Democratic Congress.
Just how much more change can we stand?
|
|
Pretty in Blonde
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 3468
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
| annie13
Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:11 am |
|
|
|
Bush Administration Fails to Jumpstart Economy
As of May, 2005, there have been 893,000 jobs created over the first 52 months of the Bush presidency - a gain that is due solely to the 917,000 jobs created in the government sector that offset the 24,000 jobs lost in the private sector. Since the Great Depression, no other president who served at least 52 months has overseen a net loss in private sector jobs through this point. In addition to lack of job growth, real weekly and hourly wages have declined since the start of the recession. At a time when middle-class Americans are experiencing stagnant wages and vanishing benefits, CEO pay continues to rise.
Source: Center for American Progress, Economic Policy Weekly, Jenna Churchman, June 6, 2005
Bush Budget Slashes Education, Veterans' Health Care, Law Enforcement, and Environmental Protections
The Bush administration's budget for the 2006 fiscal year will cut non-defense discretionary spending, including education, veteran's health care, law enforcement, and environmental protections. In all, President Bush's fiscal 2006 budget plan calls for elimination of or drastic cuts from 154 programs. Funding for the Iraq war, however, was recently increased. A House subcommittee approved an initial $45 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan next year, two weeks after Congress approved $82 billion for this year's costs of the conflicts. Although President Bush argues that it is too early to request money for the wars during the 2006 budget year, which starts Oct. 1, with no timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, war costs are certain and many lawmakers are reluctant to wait for his request.
Source: Washington Post, "Bush's '06 Budget Would Scrap or Reduce 154 Programs," Judy Sarasohn, February 22, 2005; Washington Post, "House Bill Would Provide $45B More for War," Liz Sidoti, May 24, 2005
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance33.html
Four Years Growth
by Laurence M. Vance
"The American people have been overcharged for Government, and they deserve a refund." ~ President George W. Bush (The Budget Message of the President, 2002)
The year 2000 Platform of the Republican Party implied that the Republican Party was the party that held the supposedly conservative ideas of fiscal responsibility and smaller government:
"Since 1994, with Republicans leading the House and Senate, spending has been held to an annual 3.1 percent rate of growth, and the nation’s debt will be nearly $400 billion lower by the end of this year. The federal government has operated in the black for the last two years and is now projected to run a surplus of nearly $5 trillion over the years."
"We intend to downsize this mess and make government actually do what it is supposed to."
"A Republican president will run the federal government much as the Republican governors run state agencies. Bureaucracy will be reduced and trimmed in size at its upper echelons."
Nothing could be further from the truth, for as has been documented, the idea that the Republican Party is the party of conservatism is a myth. The Republican Party has always been the party of big government, plunder, and sellouts. A look at the "four years growth" of the federal government under the presidency of George Bush confirms and amplifies these facts.
The Republicans gained control of the Congress in the third year of Clinton’s first term. They had complete control of the 104th Congress (1995–1997), held on to control in the 105th Congress (1997–1999), and remained in power during the 106th Congress (1999–2001) through the end of Clinton’s presidency. After George Bush was inaugurated in 2001, he had a Republican-controlled 107th Congress (2001–2003) until May 24, 2001, when Jim Jeffords (R-VT) switched from Republican to Independent, changing the Senate from 50/50 to 50 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and 1 Independent. The House remained in Republican hands. The 108th Congress (2003–2005) was once again solidly Republican, giving the Republicans an absolute majority in Congress and the White House for the last two years of Bush’s first term.
This means that the Republican Party has no excuse for the size and scope of the federal government as it exists right now. Republicans can’t blame anything on the Democrats like they did for the fifty years before they gained control of the Congress.
Now that we are at the end of Bush’s first four years, a simple question needs to be asked: Is the government at the end of Bush’s first term in any way smaller or less expensive than the government at the beginning of his first term. If it is, then Bush and the Republican Party told the truth, but if it isn’t, then Bush’s rhetoric was just hot air and the 2000 Republican Party Platform wasn’t worth the paper it was written on.
The Federal Budget
According to the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, the president must annually submit a budget to Congress by the first Monday in February. The government’s fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30. This means that the budget submitted in February is actually for the next fiscal year that begins in October. An outgoing president is not required to submit a budget. And because it is not practical for a new president, who takes office on January 20, to submit a budget within a few days of taking office, he is given extra time to submit a budget his first year in office. On February 28, 2001, President Bush submitted to Congress a FY 2002 summary budget plan called A Blueprint for New Beginnings – A Responsible Budget for America’s Priorities. In his message to the Congress that begins this document, two comments by the president stand out:
Excessive taxation is corroding our prosperity.
Government spending has risen too quickly.
And what did Bush propose to do about these things? He proposed an increase in the federal budget from $1.856 trillion in FY 2001 to $1.959 trillion in FY 2002. That is an increase of $103 billion over Clinton’s last budget. Then, on April 9, 2001, Bush submitted his FY 2002 budget to Congress. But the actual budget he proposed was up to $1.961 trillion. "A Note to the Reader" at the head of one of the budget’s accompanying documents, A Citizen’s Guide to the Federal Budget, puts this figure in perspective: "Next year, your Federal Government will spend nearly $2.0 trillion. Needless to say, that’s a lot of money. In fact, that’s almost $7,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country; nearly $5.4 billion per day; and about $3.7 million per minute. And most of that money comes from taxes on the American people." But it gets worse, for according to the "Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits" in the FY 2005 budget, the federal government actually spent $2.011 trillion in FY 2002.
In the FY 2002 budget, the estimate for the FY 2005 budget (the last budget of Bush’s first term) was $2.169 trillion. But by the time this budget was actually submitted to the Congress on February 2, 2004, it had grown to $2.4 trillion. It was only ten years ago that the federal budget was about a trillion dollars less than it is now. Will the federal budget shrink or even stay the same during the next four years that Bush is in office? The answer should be quite obvious. The projected budget for FY 2009 is a whopping $2.853 trillion.
Finding what to cut in the federal budget is not a difficult matter. The series of LRC articles by Jim Grichar on "Cutting the Federal Budget To Prevent U.S. Bankruptcy" should be required reading for all members of Congress.
The Federal Deficit
The federal deficit is the amount by which the government’s spending exceeds its revenues for a fiscal year. Clinton had a budget surplus his last four years in office. When FY 2001 ended during Bush’s first year in office (9/28/2001), there was a surplus of $127 billion. Bush turned that into a budget deficit of $157 billion for FY 2002, $375 billion for FY 2003, and $413 billion for FY 2004. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated last September that the deficit for FY 2005 would be $348 billion.
The Federal Debt
The federal debt is the total of all the deficits and surpluses that the federal government runs each year. The daily change in the debt can be seen on the website of the Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Public Debt. At the time of Bush’s first inauguration in 2001, the federal debt stood at $5,727,776,738,304.64. At the time of his second inauguration on January 20, 2005, the federal debt stood at $7,613,772,338,689.34. Thus, the federal debt increased almost $2 trillion under the first four years of Bush’s reign. The federal debt at the end of the last three fiscal years is as follows:
Fiscal Year Federal Debt
FY 2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
FY 2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62
FY 2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
As anyone with high credit card balances knows, maintaining a high debt level costs a lot of money in the form of interest payments. The interest expense for the last three fiscal years is as follows:
Fiscal Year Interest Expense
FY 2002 $332,536,958,599.42
FY 2003 $318,148,529,151.51
FY 2004 $321,566,323,971.29
The interest expense for the first three months of FY 2005 (Oct., Nov., & Dec.) was $120,248,160,823.07. The interest expense on this massive debt is the third largest expense in the federal budget.
The Federal Bureaucracy
According to the FY 2005 budget, the estimated total of executive branch full-time equivalent (FTE) federal employees (excluding postal employees) at the end of FY 2005 is 1,875,000. This is up substantially from the number of 1,737,000 at the end of FY 2001. The federal bureaucracy mainly consists of the executive branch departments, the offices under the Executive Office of the President (EOP), and other assorted federal agencies and commissions.
Executive Branch Departments
When Bill Clinton was president, Republicans talked about eliminating some executive branch departments. As usual, their actions did not match their speech. However, at least no new departments were added under Clinton’s rule. It is too bad that the same thing cannot be said about no new departments being added on Bush’s watch.
The following is a list of the executive branch departments along with the dates of their creation:
Department of Agriculture (1862)
Department of Commerce (1913)
Department of Defense (1947)
Department of Education (1979)
Department of Energy (1977)
Department of Health and Human Services (1979)
Department of Homeland Security (2002)
Department of Housing and Urban Development (1965)
Department of the Interior (1849)
Department of Justice (1789)
Department of Labor (1913)
Department of State (1789)
Department of Transportation (1966)
Department of the Treasury (1789)
Department of Veterans Affairs (1989)
[The Department of Commerce was originally the Department of Commerce and Labor (1903); the Department of Defense was originally the Department of War (1789); the Department of Health and Human Services was originally the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1953); the Department of Labor was originally the Department of Commerce and Labor (1903)]
No one is saying that all of these departments should be eliminated – just the majority of them. The original four (Justice, State, Treasury, and War) might conceivably serve some useful purpose – if they were scaled down considerably. But what about the other departments? What did we do in this country without a Department of Education until 1979? Were people not being educated properly until then? Is it the job of the government to provide health and human services? Is it the job of the government to oversee housing and urban development? And to those who say that we need the new Department of Homeland Security to defend us from terrorist attacks, I say: What about the Department of Defense? If U.S. troops were not scattered all over the globe then perhaps they might be able to guard our borders, patrol our coasts, and defend us from terrorist attacks.
Executive Office of the President
The EOP consists of individuals and agencies that directly assist the president. The EOP is a New Deal increase in the federal bureaucracy. It was created by Congress in the Reorganization Act of 1939, at the instigation of President Roosevelt. Here is the official list from the White House EOP website:
Council of Economic Advisers
Council on Environmental Quality
Domestic Policy Council
National Economic Council
National Security Council
Office of Administration
Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives
Office of Management and Budget
Office of National AIDS Policy
Office of National Drug Control Policy
Office of Science & Technology Policy
Office of the United States Trade Representative
President’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Board
President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
USA Freedom Corps
White House Military Office
The number and size of EOP agencies varies from administration to administration. President Bush could have eliminated any one of the above agencies.
Federal Agencies and Commissions
And then there are the numerous federal agencies and commissions. Here is the official list from the White House "Federal Agencies and Commissions" website:
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
African Development Foundation
Agency for International Development
American Battle Monuments Commission
AMTRAK
Appalachian Regional Commission
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms
Bureau of Arms Control
Bureau of Engraving & Printing
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Bureau of the Census
Bureau of Transportation Statistics
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Central Intelligence Agency
Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigations Board
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Commission on Civil Rights
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Consumer Product Safety Commission
Corporation For National Service
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Defense Information Systems Agency
Defense Intelligence Agency
Defense Logistics Agency
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
Defense Security Service
Defense Threat Reduction Agency
Drug Enforcement Administration
Environmental Protection Agency
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Export-Import Bank of the U.S.
Farm Credit Administration
Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Federal Communications Commission
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Federal Election Commission
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Housing Finance Board
Federal Labor Relations Authority
Federal Maritime Commission
Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service
Federal Mine Safety & Health Review Commission
Federal Railroad Administration
Federal Reserve System
Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board
Federal Trade Commission
Food & Drug Administration
General Accounting Office
General Services Administration
Ginnie Mae
Immigration & Naturalization Services
Institute of Museum and Library Services
Inter-American Development Bank
Inter-American Foundation
Internal Revenue Services
International Bank for Reconstruction & Development
International Labor Organization
International Monetary Fund
International Trade Commission
Legal Services Corporation
Medicare Payment Advisory Commission
Merit Systems Protection Board
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Archives and Records Administration
National Bioethics Advisory Commission
National Capital Planning Commission
National Commission on Libraries and Information Science
National Council on Disability
National Credit Union Administration
National Endowment for the Arts
National Endowment for the Humanities
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
National Imagery & Mapping Agency
National Institute of Justice
National Institute of Mental Health
National Institute of Standards & Technology
National Institutes of Health
National Labor Relations Board
National Mediation Board
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
National Park Service
National Science Foundation
National Security Agency
National Skill Standards Board
National Technology Transfer Center
National Telecommunications Information Administration
National Transportation Safety Board
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight
Office of Government Ethics
Office of Personnel Management
Office of Special Counsel
Office of Thrift Supervision
Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development
Organization of American States
Overseas Private Investment Corp.
Pan American Health Organization
Patent & Trademark Office
Peace Corps
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
Postal Rate Commission
Railroad Retirement Board
Securities Exchange Commission
Securities Investor Protection Corp.
Selective Service System
Small Business Administration
Smithsonian Institution
Social Security Administration
Substance Abuse & Mental Health Services Administration
Surface Transportation Board
Tennessee Valley Authority
Trade and Development Agency
U.S. Customs Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Forest Service
U.S. Government Printing Office
U.S. Institute of Peace
U.S. Office of Government Ethics
U.S. Treasury
United States Holocaust Memorial Council
United States Postal Service
United Nations Information Center
Voice of America
Walter Reed Army Medical Center
White House Fellows
White House Commission on Remembrance
Women’s History Commission
Are all these agencies and commissions necessary? Are any of them constitutional? Most Americans have probably never even heard of half of them.
Conclusion
This brief look at the four years growth of the federal budget, deficit, debt, and bureaucracy shows without a doubt that a Republican president and a Republican Congress cannot be trusted to roll back the welfare/warfare state even one-tenth of an inch. Given their track record, you can count on them to increase it substantially during the next four years. Never, never, never trust any document written by the Republican Party or anything that comes out of the mouth of any Republican president, congressman, or politician about reducing the size and scope of government. And yes, the same thing goes for the Democrats.
George Bush was right when he said a few years ago: "The American people have been overcharged for Government, and they deserve a refund." The only problem with his statement is that it is now Bush and the Republicans who have overcharged the American people for government, and there is no refund in sight.
Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] is a freelance writer and an adjunct instructor in accounting and economics at Pensacola Junior College in Pensacola, FL. His new book is Christianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State. Visit his website.
|
|
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 1576
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| yankee-in-france
Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 11:55 am |
|
|
|
Nothing stays the same forever. People who fail to change, fail to survive.
|
|
YIF
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6598
Location: France
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| dithers
Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 2:31 pm |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | yankee-in-france" Nothing stays the same forever. People who fail to change, fail to survive. |
We don't need a bigger and more powerful federal government. It's already too big.
|
|
Pretty in Blonde
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 3468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Need2Know
Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 2:38 pm |
|
|
|
| yankee-in-france wrote: | | Nothing stays the same forever. People who fail to change, fail to survive. |
It is really hilarious that you (and others) think this one man with zero experience will be the savior of our country. This country needs to take stock and make changes but continuing to view Obama as some kind of savior is beyond belief to me and that is what many are doing. If you are REALLY interested in change, don't just vote for a production, get involved, vote out all incumbents and have your voices heard, don't sit on the sidelines cheering for "change" just for the sake of it.
|
|
N2K
Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 8894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| woebedamned
Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:02 pm |
|
|
|
edit -- too negative
Last edited by woebedamned on Mon Sep 29, 2008 6:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
Damn it All!!!!
Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 6287
Location: pathetic joke of an American, bitter, gun clinging, God loving, racist cracker
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Need2Know
Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 3:09 pm |
|
|
|
| woebedamned wrote: | | Congressional approval rating is even less than Bush's approval rating. Bush comes in at around 22%, congress at 17%. |
I know, and is the main reason we are in the shape we are in. We all need to send a strong message by voting out all incumbents and continuing that trend unless they work for us in moderation and taking all aspects of all issues into account or serve only one term. It should not be a life long career, which is a very big part of this problem. I believe what is going on now is a huge wake up call to many, many people.
|
|
N2K
Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 8894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| dithers
Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:13 pm |
|
|
|
| Need2Know wrote: |
I know, and is the main reason we are in the shape we are in. We all need to send a strong message by voting out all incumbents and continuing that trend unless they work for us in moderation and taking all aspects of all issues into account or serve only one term. It should not be a life long career, which is a very big part of this problem. I believe what is going on now is a huge wake up call to many, many people. |
Ditto, ditto, ditto!!!
Harry Reid came right out the other day and said "No one knows what to do." Can you imagine, N2, how would you have felt if your higher-ups in the military had expressed that feeling to the troops? Especially in the middle of a battle that promised to wipe you all out. But then, what more could we expect from someone who pronounced "the war is lost" whilst it was still being waged and troops were in the field. Unbelievable.
If people choose not to see the fact that so many of these incumbents are corrupt at least they should be able to recognize they are incompetent.
We keep hearing about how politicians need to reach across the aisle or do this, that or the other. Time for the citizenry to do likewise, as well.
People need to be responsible for their decisions. I'm becoming more and more angry at those who continue to vote these useless jerks back into office time and time and time again. And probably for no better reason than they recognize the name on the ballot.
At this point it's obvious we could have an entire staff of freshman in both the House and Senate and not be any worse off. Term limits for these clowns really need to be put back on the table - but that won't happen as long as the entrenched ones are in power.
|
|
Pretty in Blonde
Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 3468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| olympic
Posted:
Fri Sep 26, 2008 6:27 pm |
|
|
|
| Need2Know wrote: |
It is really hilarious that you (and others) think this one man with zero experience will be the savior of our country. This country needs to take stock and make changes but continuing to view Obama as some kind of savior is beyond belief to me and that is what many are doing. If you are REALLY interested in change, don't just vote for a production, get involved, vote out all incumbents and have your voices heard, don't sit on the sidelines cheering for "change" just for the sake of it. |
ditto!
people are looking at obama as some jesus christ the saviour
|
|
Joined: 18 Dec 2006
Posts: 1651
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Need2Know
Posted:
Mon Sep 29, 2008 6:59 am |
|
|
|
I have had the privilege of traveling throughout the world, and have visited many countries, including a few communist nations. But I am always glad to come home to the United States of America, because I believe it is the greatest nation on Earth.
Imagine what kind of world we would live in today if there never had been a United States of America. There would have been no one to turn back the Nazis and their allies in World War II, no one to stand up against the tyranny of communism over the years, and no one to stand up for the small nations that are unable to help themselves. That is not to mention the billions of dollars in foreign aid that has been sent to help those in need.
As you know, in 1776, our founding fathers signed a document called the Declaration of Independence. Among other things, this declaration says, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Our Declaration of Independence states that we have the right to pursue happiness. Yet, are we a happy people?
Some of us might think, "I would be happy if I could just be rich and famous and have disposable income." But if that were the case, why are there miserable wealthy people? One philosopher has observed, "The search for happiness is one of the chief sources of unhappiness."
In the United States today, the accumulation of material goods are at an all-time high. So is the number of people who feel emptiness in their lives. What has gone wrong? Even the person on the lowest rung of the economic ladder in America has it better than the majority of the people living in many other countries today.
Yet there is emptiness. As the Bible says, "They sow the wind, and reap the whirlwind . . . " (Hosea 8:7 NKJV).
We have what you might describe as "trouble in paradise." According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide is the 11th leading cause of death in the United States and the third leading cause among U.S. residents ages 10 to 24, comprising 11.7 percent of all deaths in this age group.
Why is there hopelessness in the hearts of America's youth? The answer is that we have forgotten God. In our pursuit of freedom, we have lost sight of the Creator who gave us clear parameters to live by. For many, that pursuit of freedom has led to a life of bondage and despair.
But in all fairness, what did we expect? After all, this is a generation that has been raised to believe we are all products of the evolutionary process. They are told there is no God, there is no plan or purpose for their lives, and they are the masters of their own destinies. They are taught they are good inside and are products of their environment.
Yet in the Bible's assessment of the problems of man, it doesn't say we are all victims, as some would assert. It doesn't say we all have diseases, as others would tell us. It doesn't say we are merely dysfunctional.
It says, "The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked . . . " (Jeremiah 17:9 NKJV). That is why we do the things we do.
Because of this, we need to realize that no politician will save us. No act of Congress will turn America around. Even the president cannot solve all of our problems.
The answer to America's problems is not political; it is spiritual. Although we have forgotten God, He has not forgotten us. We need to turn back to God, and I think we had better do it soon.
We need to get back to the God our founding fathers believed in when they established this nation. We need to get back to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. We need to get back to the God who sent His Son Jesus Christ to die on the cross for our sin. We need to get back to the true and living God who can save America.
It is my belief that our nation has two choices before her today. One is judgment. The other is spiritual awakening or revival. That is what we need to pray for in the United States of America.
|
|
N2K
Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 8894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| yankee-in-france
Posted:
Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:30 am |
|
|
|
| Need2Know wrote: |
It is really hilarious that you (and others) think this one man with zero experience will be the savior of our country. This country needs to take stock and make changes but continuing to view Obama as some kind of savior is beyond belief to me and that is what many are doing. If you are REALLY interested in change, don't just vote for a production, get involved, vote out all incumbents and have your voices heard, don't sit on the sidelines cheering for "change" just for the sake of it. |
I do NOT think that Obama is a savior nor do I think that he walks on water, but I do believe that he is the best hope we have right now for many of America's troubles. I know that we disagree, and I respect your views. 
|
|
YIF
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6598
Location: France
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Need2Know
Posted:
Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:33 am |
|
|
|
| yankee-in-france wrote: |
I do NOT think that Obama is a savior nor do I think that he walks on water, but I do believe that he is the best hope we have right now for many of America's troubles. I know that we disagree, and I respect your views. |
As I respect yours and my love for you and our friendship will never change because of it or anything else. 
Although your trust in Obama concerns me   
|
|
N2K
Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 8894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| yankee-in-france
Posted:
Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:15 am |
|
|
|
| Need2Know wrote: |
As I respect yours and my love for you and our friendship will never change because of it or anything else.
Although your trust in Obama concerns me |
True love survives all, doesn't it.
|
|
YIF
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6598
Location: France
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| yankee-in-france
Posted:
Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:16 am |
|
|
|
| yankee-in-france wrote: |
True love survives all, doesn't it. |
ETA -- trust, you say??? I don't trust any politician.
|
|
YIF
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6598
Location: France
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Need2Know
Posted:
Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:23 am |
|
|
|
| yankee-in-france wrote: |
ETA -- trust, you say??? I don't trust any politician. |
Good for you, so stop "believing" in Obama and we will then love each other even more 
|
|
N2K
Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 8894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
�
Jasidogdotcom template v.1.0.4 © jasidog.com
Powered by phpBB
© 2001, 2004 phpBB Group
|
