Obama tells Israel to f#ck off.....
-
whitedevilone
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 1072
- Joined: Saturday Mar 24, 2007
- Location: Watching and making lists.
Obama tells Israel to f#ck off.....
...and move back to the stone age.Nice.Is there ANYTHING that this fool has done that doesn't fly in the face of common sense and dignity?You fish can't still be proud.....can you?
NailDriver
Only fools stand up and lay down their arms.
Only fools stand up and lay down their arms.
-
RobTheDrummer
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 5227
- Joined: Tuesday Dec 10, 2002
- Location: Tiptonia, Pa
-
whitedevilone
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 1072
- Joined: Saturday Mar 24, 2007
- Location: Watching and making lists.
Come one,come all and witness the Non-Muslim president who bends over backwards to praise Muslims worldwide...even though he's not one himself mind you.The President who takes every chance to belittle Christianity...unless it's witnessed in an anti-American,anti-Semitic church fueled by hate.Yes yes yes step right up and place your bet on this freak and his ever revolving actions and reactions.So tell me fish,what has the man done for America?Gas is still 4.00.The dollar is worth shit.Manufacturing is gone never to return,and he says we are not defined by OUR BORDERS!!??The man lives in a dreamworld.Nice work fish.America is hanging by a thread....and this fuck is fashioning a noose out of it.
NailDriver
Only fools stand up and lay down their arms.
Only fools stand up and lay down their arms.
Re: Obama tells Israel to f#ck off.....
whitedevilone wrote:...and move back to the stone age.Nice.Is there ANYTHING that this fool has done that doesn't fly in the face of common sense and dignity?You fish can't still be proud.....can you?
What about Osama Bin Laden?.............Doesn't that count?
-
onegunguitar
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 2080
- Joined: Wednesday Aug 10, 2005
- Contact:
Don't forget this:
Barack Obama's deal with the president of Mexico to allow Mexican trucks to carry their loads onto U.S. highways and roads is new evidence of his high-handed solo behavior that has become Standard Operating Procedure in the administration. Here are 10 reasons why Obama's plan is dangerous and must be stopped by Congress and public protest.
1. Obama's deal with President Felipe Calderon, announced on March 3, bypasses Congress, defies the wishes of the American people, and looks like the action of a Third World dictator who thinks representative government is a nuisance and can be ignored. Congress made its wishes emphatically clear in 2007 when it voted to continue our ban on Mexican trucks. The House roll-call vote was 411 to 3, and the Senate's was 75 to 23.
2. Obama's deal is a direct attack on the jobs available to U.S. truck drivers because it helps big-business interests cut their costs by hiring cheaper Mexican drivers. Obama's deal is also an attack on small business (i.e., the owner-operated and independent truck drivers) who constitute the big majority of U.S. trucks.
3. The claim that Obama's deal is reciprocal (i.e., U.S. trucks will be allowed to drive into Mexico) is so cynical that we can hardly believe anyone says it with a straight face. "South of the border down Mexico way" (in the words of the old popular song) is the most dangerous war zone in the world (more dangerous than Afghanistan or Libya), where U.S. truck drivers would become the targets of hijackings, theft, murder, kidnappings and even beheadings committed by the drug cartels.
4. Built into the Obama deal is the sneaky imposition of costs on both U.S. truck drivers and U.S. taxpayers. Each truck will be required to install an EOBR (electronic on-board recorder) costing $3,000 plus maintenance fees: U.S. drivers at their own expense and Mexican trucks as a gift from U.S. taxpayers paid out of the Highway Trust Fund. U.S. taxpayers are already paying $1,600 each for many Mexican trucks to replace their old mufflers with catalytic converters.
5. Obama's deal will make it easy for Mexican trucks to bring in loads of illegal aliens and illegal drugs. Border inspection will be a farce, maybe only one in 10 trucks inspected, perhaps merely one in 20.
Barack Obama's deal with the president of Mexico to allow Mexican trucks to carry their loads onto U.S. highways and roads is new evidence of his high-handed solo behavior that has become Standard Operating Procedure in the administration. Here are 10 reasons why Obama's plan is dangerous and must be stopped by Congress and public protest.
1. Obama's deal with President Felipe Calderon, announced on March 3, bypasses Congress, defies the wishes of the American people, and looks like the action of a Third World dictator who thinks representative government is a nuisance and can be ignored. Congress made its wishes emphatically clear in 2007 when it voted to continue our ban on Mexican trucks. The House roll-call vote was 411 to 3, and the Senate's was 75 to 23.
2. Obama's deal is a direct attack on the jobs available to U.S. truck drivers because it helps big-business interests cut their costs by hiring cheaper Mexican drivers. Obama's deal is also an attack on small business (i.e., the owner-operated and independent truck drivers) who constitute the big majority of U.S. trucks.
3. The claim that Obama's deal is reciprocal (i.e., U.S. trucks will be allowed to drive into Mexico) is so cynical that we can hardly believe anyone says it with a straight face. "South of the border down Mexico way" (in the words of the old popular song) is the most dangerous war zone in the world (more dangerous than Afghanistan or Libya), where U.S. truck drivers would become the targets of hijackings, theft, murder, kidnappings and even beheadings committed by the drug cartels.
4. Built into the Obama deal is the sneaky imposition of costs on both U.S. truck drivers and U.S. taxpayers. Each truck will be required to install an EOBR (electronic on-board recorder) costing $3,000 plus maintenance fees: U.S. drivers at their own expense and Mexican trucks as a gift from U.S. taxpayers paid out of the Highway Trust Fund. U.S. taxpayers are already paying $1,600 each for many Mexican trucks to replace their old mufflers with catalytic converters.
5. Obama's deal will make it easy for Mexican trucks to bring in loads of illegal aliens and illegal drugs. Border inspection will be a farce, maybe only one in 10 trucks inspected, perhaps merely one in 20.
-
f.sciarrillo
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6990
- Joined: Thursday Oct 28, 2004
- Location: Not here ..
-
shredder138
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 561
- Joined: Monday Jun 02, 2008
- Location: Where you're not
Border Patrol Lauds 385-Pound Mexican Bologna Bustonegunguitar wrote: 5. Obama's deal will make it easy for Mexican trucks to bring in loads of illegal aliens and illegal drugs. Border inspection will be a farce, maybe only one in 10 trucks inspected, perhaps merely one in 20.
http://www.koat.com/r/27914039/detail.h ... 4bdfdd%2C0
It's interesting that the Israeli issue has mixed with our Mexican issue in this thread. One could argue that the Palestinians view the Jews in much the same way that we view the Mexican influx. This link may provide some historical context to the issue: http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/kabd_eng.html
As for Obama, he said this in 2008 on Meet the Press after his trip to the Middle East:
"We've got to have an overarching strategy recognizing that all of these issues are connected. If we can solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, then that will make it easier for Arab states and the Gulf states to support us when it comes to issues like Iraq and Afghanistan. It will also weaken Iran, which has been using Hamas and Hezbollah as a way to stir up mischief in the region. If we've got an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal, maybe at the same time peeling Syria out of the Iranian orbit, that makes it easier to isolate Iran so that they have a tougher time developing a nuclear weapon."
Let's hope that his comments yesterday are all part of a master plan and ultimately the right move. It's hard to judge when you aren't privy to the complete set of blueprints.
It seems many US citizens root for Obama to fail, but why? Aren't we all on the same team? I always hoped that Bush was right in his decisions, and, for now, I will do the same for Obama. If he turns out to be wrong, I'll be like this guy: http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/ind ... eoId=11901
As for Obama, he said this in 2008 on Meet the Press after his trip to the Middle East:
"We've got to have an overarching strategy recognizing that all of these issues are connected. If we can solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, then that will make it easier for Arab states and the Gulf states to support us when it comes to issues like Iraq and Afghanistan. It will also weaken Iran, which has been using Hamas and Hezbollah as a way to stir up mischief in the region. If we've got an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal, maybe at the same time peeling Syria out of the Iranian orbit, that makes it easier to isolate Iran so that they have a tougher time developing a nuclear weapon."
Let's hope that his comments yesterday are all part of a master plan and ultimately the right move. It's hard to judge when you aren't privy to the complete set of blueprints.
It seems many US citizens root for Obama to fail, but why? Aren't we all on the same team? I always hoped that Bush was right in his decisions, and, for now, I will do the same for Obama. If he turns out to be wrong, I'll be like this guy: http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/ind ... eoId=11901
"Music, the greatest good that mortals know, and all of heaven we have below." -Joseph Addison
Phew, what's that smell?
Oh, that's rightwing desperation!
Israel: No longer strategically necessary. There's something happening called The Arab Spring, my friends. Democracy and secularism are sweeping through the Mideast. The kids all want bluejeans and Ipods and voting rights. The main argument for vast military aid to Israel USED to be that it was the only democracy in the region, but that's no longer true. So why continue subsidizing Israel's military at American taxpayer expense? What about the deficit that "our children and our children's children" have to pay for? Jerusalem? Really? Really?
You fellers go ahead and be pouty that Big Bad O's still in office. Line up your candidates for 2012, and make big plans for them. Have the Chamber of Commerce pony up billions to buy the election, it won't matter. All the left has to do is point out who wants to cut SocSec and Medicare, then give tax cuts to corporations and fatcats. That's math so easy, even poor people can do it. And for God's sake, fix your mascara, it's all runny from the tears.
Oh, that's rightwing desperation!
Israel: No longer strategically necessary. There's something happening called The Arab Spring, my friends. Democracy and secularism are sweeping through the Mideast. The kids all want bluejeans and Ipods and voting rights. The main argument for vast military aid to Israel USED to be that it was the only democracy in the region, but that's no longer true. So why continue subsidizing Israel's military at American taxpayer expense? What about the deficit that "our children and our children's children" have to pay for? Jerusalem? Really? Really?
You fellers go ahead and be pouty that Big Bad O's still in office. Line up your candidates for 2012, and make big plans for them. Have the Chamber of Commerce pony up billions to buy the election, it won't matter. All the left has to do is point out who wants to cut SocSec and Medicare, then give tax cuts to corporations and fatcats. That's math so easy, even poor people can do it. And for God's sake, fix your mascara, it's all runny from the tears.
-
ToonaRockGuy
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 3091
- Joined: Tuesday Dec 17, 2002
- Location: Altoona, behind a drumset.
Are you suggesting that one of our great parties would spew rhetoric that impedes peace in the Middle East merely for their own political gain?songsmith wrote:Phew, what's that smell?
Oh, that's rightwing desperation!
Israel: No longer strategically necessary. There's something happening called The Arab Spring, my friends. Democracy and secularism are sweeping through the Mideast. The kids all want bluejeans and Ipods and voting rights. The main argument for vast military aid to Israel USED to be that it was the only democracy in the region, but that's no longer true. So why continue subsidizing Israel's military at American taxpayer expense? What about the deficit that "our children and our children's children" have to pay for? Jerusalem? Really? Really?
You fellers go ahead and be pouty that Big Bad O's still in office. Line up your candidates for 2012, and make big plans for them. Have the Chamber of Commerce pony up billions to buy the election, it won't matter. All the left has to do is point out who wants to cut SocSec and Medicare, then give tax cuts to corporations and fatcats. That's math so easy, even poor people can do it. And for God's sake, fix your mascara, it's all runny from the tears.
"Music, the greatest good that mortals know, and all of heaven we have below." -Joseph Addison
-
bassist_25
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6815
- Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
- Location: Indiana
Kevin, I think Jesus is the problem.ToonaRockGuy wrote:Yeah, Johnny, cause democracy is working out SO well in the Middle East. Jesus, dude.
In all seriousness, Israel is like the kid who constantly gets called into the principal's office, but his parents are in denial that their sweet little angel ever does anything bad. Israel and Palestine BOTH have blood on their hands, but we always seem to ignore the former. Israel could start WWIII and we'd just approvingly nod.
Hmm, prediction of the end of the world tomorrow and bad relations with Israel: coincidence? I think not.
"He's the electric horseman, you better back off!" - old sKool making a reference to the culturally relevant 1979 film.
-
lonewolf
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6249
- Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
- Location: Anywhere, Earth
- Contact:
EFFING DUHHHH!
10 years ago, we went to war with Usama Bin Laden and anyone following him. During that time, thousands of American lives were lost and we spent about a trillion dollars of the nation's treasure all in the name of hunting down UBL.
Finally, after all that was mentioned above, we corner the son of a bitch and need approval to go in. How could the President make any other decision but to go after him? It would almost seem treasonous to NOT go after him. Morally, all he had to do was specify that he wanted UBL alive if possible, but dead if necessary.
So in the final analysis, the order wasn't really all that courageous. It was so simple, even Biden could have done it.
Back on topic: I understand your frustration Scott. As I said in 2008, Obama was nothing more than a rubber stamp for the mass of socialist legislation that Pelosi & Reid had been saving up since they took control of 2/3 of active government in 2006. Now that they lost the House, Obama has been exposed for what he is: A clueless politician with a teleprompter.
10 years ago, we went to war with Usama Bin Laden and anyone following him. During that time, thousands of American lives were lost and we spent about a trillion dollars of the nation's treasure all in the name of hunting down UBL.
Finally, after all that was mentioned above, we corner the son of a bitch and need approval to go in. How could the President make any other decision but to go after him? It would almost seem treasonous to NOT go after him. Morally, all he had to do was specify that he wanted UBL alive if possible, but dead if necessary.
So in the final analysis, the order wasn't really all that courageous. It was so simple, even Biden could have done it.
Back on topic: I understand your frustration Scott. As I said in 2008, Obama was nothing more than a rubber stamp for the mass of socialist legislation that Pelosi & Reid had been saving up since they took control of 2/3 of active government in 2006. Now that they lost the House, Obama has been exposed for what he is: A clueless politician with a teleprompter.
Last edited by lonewolf on Friday May 20, 2011, edited 1 time in total.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
-
f.sciarrillo
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6990
- Joined: Thursday Oct 28, 2004
- Location: Not here ..
You constantly bring up President Carter. Please explain your distaste.f.sciarrillo wrote:We will have to see about the elections, Johnny. There are a lot of people who supported obama in 2008 that will not be supporting him in 2012. It will be interesting to see how it turns out. I'll bet you were saying the Jimmy Carter would beat Reagan as well.
Let's see, your a conservative right ? All this talk about debt and deficit right ?
How do your conservative presidents stand up to Carter.
Debt / GDP
Carter -3.3 %
Reagan 1st term + 11.3 %
Reagan 2nd term + 9.3 %
Clinton 1st term -.07 %
Clinton 2nd term -9.0 %
G H W Bush + 15 %
Granted Obama is spending more than they did, but they also had higher taxes to collect than Obama does.
Unfortunately, I voted for Reagan for his 1st term.
Bill, you are the hero of of all liberals to stand up for Jimmy Carter. Even the dems do not invite him to democrat party events. When he left office there was over 10% unemployment and over 10% inflation rate. There was a new term called the misery index created just to try to explain how fucked the country was under smilin Jimmy.
Like I said Joe, I voted for Reagan. However, in the long run, his voodoo economics that were greatly enhanced by GHWB and GWB fuled the debt.undercoverjoe wrote:Bill, you are the hero of of all liberals to stand up for Jimmy Carter. Even the dems do not invite him to democrat party events. When he left office there was over 10% unemployment and over 10% inflation rate. There was a new term called the misery index created just to try to explain how fucked the country was under smilin Jimmy.
If the trickle down theory of Reagan was so great, and Bush and GW Bush followed to a T, where the hell is the trickle ?
By Joe's definition, and you are hearing it here first: There is NO freedom in Israel !undercoverjoe wrote:Don't confuse liberals by asking them for facts.lonewolf wrote:Really? Where are all these bastions of freedom?songsmith wrote:The main argument for vast military aid to Israel USED to be that it was the only democracy in the region, but that's no longer true.
Oh, why not ?
Well, they pay taxes...
The tax system in Israel:
Israel's tax laws took a major change from 1.1.2003.
According to Israel's tax reform tax is levied on personal basis, instead of the previous territorlal basis, Israelis pay tax on all sources of income, in Israel and abroad.
In 2011 Israel's corporate income tax rate is 24% (previous rate-25%).
Individual income tax rates in 2011 are 10%-45%.
There are reduced tax rates for passive income, e.g. flat rental and interest.
Taxation of Current Income (Personal Income Tax)
Personal Income Tax (for both the employed and self-employed)is a progressive tax starting at 10% and increasing to a maximum of 45% (at present, on a gross monthly income of about USD 11,175).
Allowance points are granted on the tax due which reduces the tax payable (an allowance point is worth approximately $697 a year).
Really Joe, freedom has a cost...taxes for government protection. All sorts of protection.
-
f.sciarrillo
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6990
- Joined: Thursday Oct 28, 2004
- Location: Not here ..