THE POLITICAL ARENA!!! Political Gladiators Inside!!
-
eightpointish
- Active Member
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Friday May 04, 2012
"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney earning 50% of the vote and President Obama attracting 43% support.
This is the first time Romney has reached the 50% level of support and is his largest lead ever over the president. It comes a week after a disappointing jobs report that raised new questions about the state of the economy."
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... cking_poll
This is the first time Romney has reached the 50% level of support and is his largest lead ever over the president. It comes a week after a disappointing jobs report that raised new questions about the state of the economy."
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... cking_poll
"Bill Clinton thought so little of President Obama — mocking him as an “amateur” — that he pressed his wife last summer to quit her job as secretary of state and challenge him in the primaries, a new book claims...
“The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating . . . You know better than Obama does,” Bill said.
Bill Clinton insisted he had “no relationship” with Obama and had been consulted more frequently by his presidential successor, George W. Bush.
Obama, Bill Clinton said, “doesn’t know how to be president” and is “incompetent.”"
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/b ... z1uaqp0UIm
OMG, I agree with a serial rapist.
“The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating . . . You know better than Obama does,” Bill said.
Bill Clinton insisted he had “no relationship” with Obama and had been consulted more frequently by his presidential successor, George W. Bush.
Obama, Bill Clinton said, “doesn’t know how to be president” and is “incompetent.”"
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/b ... z1uaqp0UIm
OMG, I agree with a serial rapist.
Meet me onstage, amateur. Or in a dark alley. Either way, you're crawling home. I'm ot exactly sure why a big, lurpy doofus like you would think he's tough.undercoverjoe wrote:I will literally tie one hand behind by back. Do you have that cashiers check or have you conveniently forgot that bet you made with me?
Pussy and a liar. What a way to go thru life.
If you were, you wouldn't be all gun-nut. Whatever the case, I'm sure nobody here is afraid of you.Well, if you were a bit more perceptive, you'd notice that I don't praise Obama. I defend him against the Braintrust, you just see what you want to see. For instance, I did not say Obama lowered gas prices did I? Nope. I defend him, and you're sooooo full of Obama-derangement, you're sooooo amazed and offended that anyone disagrees with you, that you hear it the way your handlers want you to.f.sciarrillo wrote: My point was that when prices rise you blame Bush, and when they drop you praise Obama. It can't be one or the other. The one lowering them has to be the one raising them as well. You can't be saying that Obama is making them drop, say that there is no way a President can affect the prices, and then turn around and say that it is Bush's fault that are rising. Do you see where that makes you a hypocrite?
What I said was, if according to you, Obama was the CAUSE of high gas prices, then he must also be the reason they're declining. The rest is Frank misunderstandifying.
If you're going to accuse me of hypocrisy, get your ducks in a row, because I'll call you on it.
You're quite the overlooker, or you're pretending that Ryan and the rest of the GOP didn't cut the balls off Dodd-Frank, AND super-opposed EVERY SINGLE White House attempt to do ANYTHING.lonewolf wrote: [[font=sarcasm]
Why are banks that are "too big to fail" still over-trading derivatives?
I thought that President Obama fixed this with his new policies?
I thought that the democrats fixed this with Dodd-Frank?
[/font]
Now let's see... some of us actually want to re-regulate banking... some of you are opposed to any business regulation or oversight whatsoever. I'm no fifnancial gurur like you, but I think this underscores the need for seperating customer service banking from the units that risk OUR money.
Let's see if Jamie Dimon takes a pay cut this year... I bet not.
-
lonewolf
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6249
- Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
- Location: Anywhere, Earth
- Contact:
Hah...you are pretending that you can make something up and I will just over look it. First of all, Dodd-Frank was done when the dems had a supermajority in congress. They had a stronghold on the financial services committee and there were very few amendments to the legislation. The only real point of contention was the Volcker rule and that actually was strengthened on the final passage.songsmith wrote:You're quite the overlooker, or you're pretending that Ryan and the rest of the GOP didn't cut the balls off Dodd-Frank, AND super-opposed EVERY SINGLE White House attempt to do ANYTHING.lonewolf wrote: [[font=sarcasm]
Why are banks that are "too big to fail" still over-trading derivatives?
I thought that President Obama fixed this with his new policies?
I thought that the democrats fixed this with Dodd-Frank?
[/font]
Now let's see... some of us actually want to re-regulate banking... some of you are opposed to any business regulation or oversight whatsoever. I'm no fifnancial gurur like you, but I think this underscores the need for seperating customer service banking from the units that risk OUR money.
Let's see if Jamie Dimon takes a pay cut this year... I bet not.
Ryan is not and has never been on the financial services committee and had very little to do with Dodd-Frank. Despite very little involvement, he recently made a statement that seems to support the Volcker rule:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... ul-volcker
You continually make shit up and I continually call you on it.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
Thats retired. Since I contribute to this country, not take like you, I know a lot more than you.songsmith wrote:"Murdoch-Controlled Media"undercoverjoe wrote:"Soros-Controlled Energy Council"
What would a racist leader from La Raza know about energy policy?????
What would an unemployed drug rep know about energy policy?????
Are you defending a racist friend of the Kenyan's?
Name the alley missy.songsmith wrote:Meet me onstage, amateur. Or in a dark alley. Either way, you're crawling home. I'm ot exactly sure why a big, lurpy doofus like you would think he's tough.undercoverjoe wrote:I will literally tie one hand behind by back. Do you have that cashiers check or have you conveniently forgot that bet you made with me?
Pussy and a liar. What a way to go thru life.
-
eightpointish
- Active Member
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Friday May 04, 2012
-
eightpointish
- Active Member
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Friday May 04, 2012
"The only person I know who is better off today than he was four years ago is President Obama.
He's making more money, living in a bigger house and playing more golf. And when his wife goes on a shopping spree with her girlfriends, it's to Spain on the taxpayer's dime.
If you asked President Obama if he's better off today, he'd say, "Hell, yeah! And we don't want it to stop!"
Meanwhile, as the president skates through the Great Recession, his failure to get the economy back on track has turned a country known for its optimism and belief in a better future into a nation of pessimists.
According to a recent opinion poll by Scott Rasmussen's company, 63 percent of voters -- liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans -- do not think today's children will be better off than their parents."
http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelr ... better_off
He's making more money, living in a bigger house and playing more golf. And when his wife goes on a shopping spree with her girlfriends, it's to Spain on the taxpayer's dime.
If you asked President Obama if he's better off today, he'd say, "Hell, yeah! And we don't want it to stop!"
Meanwhile, as the president skates through the Great Recession, his failure to get the economy back on track has turned a country known for its optimism and belief in a better future into a nation of pessimists.
According to a recent opinion poll by Scott Rasmussen's company, 63 percent of voters -- liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans -- do not think today's children will be better off than their parents."
http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelr ... better_off
"Obama's jaw-dropping moment occurred Tuesday in the West Virginia Democratic Presidential primary. Obama squeaked out a 58% to 42% victory. You might ask, “Who got the 42%? I didn’t know Obama had an opponent for President on the Democrat side?” Good question. Obama didn’t know he had an opponent either. Neither did the media.
The man who got 42%? Inmate #11593-051. Yes, you heard correctly. A Texas prison inmate named Keith Judd, incarcerated for 17 years for extortion, won 42% of Democrat primary voters in West Virginia’s Presidential primary against Barack Obama, the incumbent President. Keep in mind these were Democrats, Obama’s most loyal voters.
But wait. It gets worse for Obama. Inmate #11593-051 won 10 West Virginia counties outright! Against a sitting Democratic President.
There are several conclusions to be drawn. First, Obama is in deep, deep, deep trouble. President Lyndon Johnson circa 1968 trouble.
Second, Obama's popularity in some areas of the country is as low as a politician can get without hitting zero. Obama would lose to Donald Duck in West Virginia nowadays. And it wouldn't be close."
http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneall ... son_inmate
The man who got 42%? Inmate #11593-051. Yes, you heard correctly. A Texas prison inmate named Keith Judd, incarcerated for 17 years for extortion, won 42% of Democrat primary voters in West Virginia’s Presidential primary against Barack Obama, the incumbent President. Keep in mind these were Democrats, Obama’s most loyal voters.
But wait. It gets worse for Obama. Inmate #11593-051 won 10 West Virginia counties outright! Against a sitting Democratic President.
There are several conclusions to be drawn. First, Obama is in deep, deep, deep trouble. President Lyndon Johnson circa 1968 trouble.
Second, Obama's popularity in some areas of the country is as low as a politician can get without hitting zero. Obama would lose to Donald Duck in West Virginia nowadays. And it wouldn't be close."
http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneall ... son_inmate
I know LOTS of people who are better off. At least 1% of the population is far better off, their income is up double-digits.undercoverjoe wrote:"The only person I know who is better off today than he was four years ago is President Obama.
He's making more money, living in a bigger house and playing more golf. And when his wife goes on a shopping spree with her girlfriends, it's to Spain on the taxpayer's dime.
If you asked President Obama if he's better off today, he'd say, "Hell, yeah! And we don't want it to stop!"
Meanwhile, as the president skates through the Great Recession, his failure to get the economy back on track has turned a country known for its optimism and belief in a better future into a nation of pessimists.
According to a recent opinion poll by Scott Rasmussen's company, 63 percent of voters -- liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans -- do not think today's children will be better off than their parents."
http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelr ... better_off
Obama is the only rich guy you seem to hate being rich... is that because he looks like Trayvon? Maybe you only support white rich guys...
Fox-employed Scott Rasmussen... did he ask whther those people thought it was government's fault children will not be better off, or Wall St. and other Big Business? I bet more people think it's the 1%, instead of Big Bad O.
Funny how you hate and envy the rich, except for your Kenyan master. Oh, thats right, he gives you gummint goodies. sit up and beg for your morsels slave.songsmith wrote:I know LOTS of people who are better off. At least 1% of the population is far better off, their income is up double-digits.undercoverjoe wrote:"The only person I know who is better off today than he was four years ago is President Obama.
He's making more money, living in a bigger house and playing more golf. And when his wife goes on a shopping spree with her girlfriends, it's to Spain on the taxpayer's dime.
If you asked President Obama if he's better off today, he'd say, "Hell, yeah! And we don't want it to stop!"
Meanwhile, as the president skates through the Great Recession, his failure to get the economy back on track has turned a country known for its optimism and belief in a better future into a nation of pessimists.
According to a recent opinion poll by Scott Rasmussen's company, 63 percent of voters -- liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans -- do not think today's children will be better off than their parents."
http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelr ... better_off
Obama is the only rich guy you seem to hate being rich... is that because he looks like Trayvon? Maybe you only support white rich guys...
Fox-employed Scott Rasmussen... did he ask whther those people thought it was government's fault children will not be better off, or Wall St. and other Big Business? I bet more people think it's the 1%, instead of Big Bad O.
I'm noticing NOT ONE of the Rockpage Illuminati have mentioned the landmark of Obama favoring gay marriage. Not one.
Apparently, either they begrudgingly agree, or they don't want to go on record as homophobic.
Either way, it was a brilliant political move, though a somewhat forced one. When Biden was asked on the Sunday show (taped Friday), it started people asking why Obama didn't do the same, forcing him to make a statement. The Fox dildoes were gobsmacked. There was nothing they could do, like here on Rockpage. They're acting like it never happened, or saying we have to concentrate on the economy (even though they dedicated WEEKS to Trayvon, which had zero to do with the economy; and were still running with the NC referendum the day before).
Why brilliant, you ask? Doesn't it move independents away from him?
Not alot. A few percentage points, maybe. On the other hand, the college-kids that were lackadaisical a few weeks ago, are now back in the mix. Gay marriage is a no-brainer to them, they don't have the institutional bigotry my generation had growing up. Add to that the budget fights this week (GOP wants to cut student aid to keep defense contractors on board), and I see a bunch of whistle-stops at campuses this fall. Mean while, it surfaced that (R)money gay-bashed a kid at prep-school, and I hear, was cited for disorderly conduct. So while one candidate showed support for gays, the other was outed as a homophobe. That's a big deal to a 20-yr-old.
My own view of gay marriage is evolving, just like Big Bad O. While I like the idea of something my culture alone would have, (marriage), I can also see that gay marriage would really have zero effect on my own marriage. I don't need to deny someone else's happiness to achieve my own. It would be weird for me to go to a gay wedding, but I really don't care for the hetero kind, either. I didn't need a party to affirm what I felt privately.
I look at the wide picture, and see that real freedom means I have to allow others to have their own freedom, not the rightwing version of "freedom," where liberty is defined as "the ability to do whatever I allow you to do."
Curious to see if any rightwingers are okay with gay marriage.
Apparently, either they begrudgingly agree, or they don't want to go on record as homophobic.
Either way, it was a brilliant political move, though a somewhat forced one. When Biden was asked on the Sunday show (taped Friday), it started people asking why Obama didn't do the same, forcing him to make a statement. The Fox dildoes were gobsmacked. There was nothing they could do, like here on Rockpage. They're acting like it never happened, or saying we have to concentrate on the economy (even though they dedicated WEEKS to Trayvon, which had zero to do with the economy; and were still running with the NC referendum the day before).
Why brilliant, you ask? Doesn't it move independents away from him?
Not alot. A few percentage points, maybe. On the other hand, the college-kids that were lackadaisical a few weeks ago, are now back in the mix. Gay marriage is a no-brainer to them, they don't have the institutional bigotry my generation had growing up. Add to that the budget fights this week (GOP wants to cut student aid to keep defense contractors on board), and I see a bunch of whistle-stops at campuses this fall. Mean while, it surfaced that (R)money gay-bashed a kid at prep-school, and I hear, was cited for disorderly conduct. So while one candidate showed support for gays, the other was outed as a homophobe. That's a big deal to a 20-yr-old.
My own view of gay marriage is evolving, just like Big Bad O. While I like the idea of something my culture alone would have, (marriage), I can also see that gay marriage would really have zero effect on my own marriage. I don't need to deny someone else's happiness to achieve my own. It would be weird for me to go to a gay wedding, but I really don't care for the hetero kind, either. I didn't need a party to affirm what I felt privately.
I look at the wide picture, and see that real freedom means I have to allow others to have their own freedom, not the rightwing version of "freedom," where liberty is defined as "the ability to do whatever I allow you to do."
Curious to see if any rightwingers are okay with gay marriage.
-
lonewolf
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6249
- Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
- Location: Anywhere, Earth
- Contact:
Except for his views on re-election, I really don't care what the President thinks...especially about issues that are the domain of the several states.songsmith wrote:I'm noticing NOT ONE of the Rockpage Illuminati have mentioned the landmark of Obama favoring gay marriage.
I really don't believe that marriage is something that government needs to concern itself with anyway.
Last edited by lonewolf on Saturday May 12, 2012, edited 1 time in total.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...