Log in

View Full Version : War will not end with Obama in office


SUBMAN1
07-24-08, 10:12 AM
Seems he is just telling you what you want to hear so that he can be nominated. Looks like he is losing his base from this article:

http://donedems.com/2008/07/06/puma-call-to-dnc-delegates/

-S

OBAMA SIGNALS ENDLESS WAR IN IRAQ, SELLOUTS ON FISA, NAFTA, AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

WANTED: 175 HONEST DEMOCRATIC DELEGATES TO LEAVE FRAUDULENT OBAMA IN DENVER!

On July 3, Barack Obama revealed once and for all that has run a fraudulent campaign in his attempt to secure the Democratic nomination for President. The foundation of Obama’s campaign had been his claim that he was the anti-war alternative in his opposition to Bush’s war in Iraq. Now, in a North Dakota campaign event, Obama has declared that he will consult with the generals and “refine his position” on the Iraq war. The Washington Post headlined: “Obama May Consider Slowing Iraq Withdrawal.” But the real message is clear: Obama is moving rapidly away from his earlier 11-month or 16-month timetables for withdrawal and towards full support for endless war, conflict, violence, and bankruptcy in Iraq. Samantha Power had confessed Obama’s doubletalk on Iraq months ago. The handwriting is now on the wall: Obama will soon go to Iraq, meet with General Petraeus, and then announce his Baghdad road conversion to a policy of open-ended military occupation, oblivious to the immense human costs. Soon there will be no difference at all between Obama and McCain on the Iraq war, and the Democratic Party will have missed yet another historic opportunity to help the American people end Bush’s and Cheney’s failed Neo-Conservative policies. McCain is exploiting Obama’s radical shifts in position as examples that Obama has no principles, but only opportunism and expediency, and that his much-touted soaring words mean absolutely nothing. We Democrats now have our last chance to reflect: do we really want to give our nomination to this little-known newcomer who solicited support as a peace advocate, but has now unmasked himself as being a candidate with positions closer to McCain on Iraq?

OBAMA BETRAYS DEMOCRATS ON FISA, NAFTA, CAMPAIGN FINANCE, THE DEATH PENALTY, AND MUCH MORE

From the instant that he felt that the Democratic nomination was in his hands, Obama has moved relentlessly to the right in a breathtaking, stunning exhibition of cynicism, duplicity, and fraudulent campaigning. Everything he stood for has been thrown overboard, and Obama has broken his verbal contract with his own core voters and donors. Obama promised to stop Bush’s assault on the Constitution and civil liberties, and end illegal wiretapping. Now, Obama will vote for the Republican leaning compromise on the FISA bill, including immunity for the telecoms – something only yesterday he promised the Democrats who supported him he would filibuster. Obama raised money from grassroots Democrats on the premise that their small donations would allow him to be free of the corrupting influence of big money, big business, and special interests, but he has now broken his promise by opting out of public financing for his fall campaign, junking the cause of political reform he claimed to champion. In Ohio and Pennsylvania, Obama posed as a critic of free trade sellouts like NAFTA, CAFTA, and WTO, specificly telling voters that voting for Hillary Clinton would be voting to support NAFTA. Now Obama has now told Fortune magazine that he is a great friend of free trade and the “market.” Obama now openly supports the death penalty, more of Bush’s faith-based theocratic subsidies, and the “merit pay” assault on teachers. He wants to cut the corporate income tax, and he now opposes attempts to curb hand gun violence. In a most glaring betrayal to his contract with the Democratic base, Obama’s current team of economic advisers suggests that he will soon come out for the partial privatization of Social Security, camouflaged as “entitlement reform.” In short, Obama intends to betray not just his own basic commitments, but the historical foundations of the Democratic Party going back to Franklin D. Roosevelt. The modern Democratic Party was built on the New Deal Democrats, a party of shared responsibility, and a contract to be the voice and champion of working class Americans. Obama’s “new coalition” dismantles the REAL Democratic party and replaces it with an elite party of Neo-Liberals, stealing the mantle of FDR.

SENATOR CLINTON MUST BE OUR NOMINEE
DEMOCRATS DID NOT VOTE FOR THE OBAMA WHO HAS BEEN RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT AFTER JUNE 3RD

If Obama imitates McCain on so many issues, the November election will come down to a choice between two individuals, and a fraudulent Obama will not fare well against war hero McCain, who is seen by voters as a straight shooter. McCain will point out that voters cannot trust the disingenuous Obama, and on that, McCain will be correct. Fortunately, Obama has tipped his hand by dropping his mask too soon: there is no Democratic nominee until the Roll Call of the States on August 27, 2008 in Denver. We are not calling for some futile and self-defeating gesture – we are pointing to the path that leads to victory. With Senator Clinton, we have a superior, battle-tested, and winning candidate who is waiting in the wings, ready, and willing to take over. Clinton would be a reliable leader on the issues that have built the Democratic Party. She has stood firm on her positions — past and present — even when it is not politically expedient. The lesson is clear: the Democratic Party cannot win back the White House without the support of the New Deal Democratic base and their ideals. The Democratic Convention in Denver must put forth a candidate that represents the values of the Party of FDR and that will win the hearts, minds, and votes of Democrats in November. The Barack Obama running after June 3rd is not that candidate. We must have an open convention in Denver — not a thoughtless coronation — so that we can seriously deliberate the far-reaching choices the party must make in this time of war and economic depression.

175 PATRIOTS CAN SAVE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BY NOMINATING THE TRUER DEMOCRAT

The fate of the United States — and the future of the Democratic Party – now rests with a minimum of 175 Democratic delegates who must now exercise their mature political judgment in the service of their country, and turn away from Obama to support Senator Clinton. As of now, Obama has about 2229.5 delegate votes, with 1766.5 pledged delegates and 463 superdelegates. Clinton has 1896.5 delegate votes, with 1639.5 pledged and 257 super delegates. Shift just 175 delegates from Obama to Clinton, and Obama’s power grab comes to a halt. There must be no nomination of Obama on the first ballot. Once Obama has failed to secure the nomination on the first ballot, the party will be able to reflect on who the nominee ought to be, based on the experiences of June, July, and August. Senator Clinton is pledged to an orderly, sane, and secure pullout. Clinton wants mandatory universal health care and a freeze on foreclosures. She wants to shift the federal gasoline tax away from motorists, truckers, and farmers and towards the Oil Industry. Obama is on the wrong side of all of these issues. Hillary Clinton is and has always been on the side of traditional Democratic Party values. We want a president from the Democratic Party, not from a small group of elite, libertarian Neo-Liberals. Lexington and Concord were started by a few dozen farmers. Does the Democratic Party still have 175 patriots with the courage to take a stand?

PUMAS URGE YOU TO BRING TO AND END WHAT HAS HAS BEEN A MOST FRAUDULENT CAMPAIGN

We are PUMAs — Democrats who reject an automatic proxy vote. Instead, we are fighting for real Democratic Party values and the future of the party we love and still claim as our own. We call on the delegates to the Denver convention to search their consciences, their experiences in past elections, and their own common sense. Our party has had enough of defeat and retreat. We must not allow the DNC to impose on us yet another losing General Election candidate. Obama’s anemic poll numbers already foreshadow defeat in November, and his continuing sellout on the issues is only making matters worse. We urge you to reconsider your vote for Obama, and to instead vote for Senator Clinton — the strongest candidate, the people’s choice in the popular vote, and the candidate who has and will continue to steadfastly represent the core pillars of the Democratic Party. Vote to seat Michigan and Florida at full strength as elected in the January primary. Organize your fellow delegates to block Obama. Vote for Clinton, for victory in November, and for an end to the long nightmare of the Iraq war.


Will Bower (in cooperation with other PUMAs)
PUMA / Just Say NO DEAL
PUMA08.com

SUBMAN1
07-24-08, 10:14 AM
Wow! He is losing his base big time! Check this site - over one million demo's are saying Just Say No Deal to Obama!

http://www.justsaynodeal.com/

-S

Frame57
07-24-08, 11:21 AM
Nothing new under the sun when it comes to politicians. When will the American people wake up and realize they are being played by both parties? Business as usual in Washington D.C. must change.

SUBMAN1
07-24-08, 11:22 AM
Nothing new under the sun when it comes to politicians. When will the American people wake up and realize they are being played by both parties? Business as usual in Washington D.C. must change.

I agree. We need a new party to come on the scene. One to shake up the balance of same old same old regardless of who is in office.

-S

FIREWALL
07-24-08, 11:32 AM
People , especially Americans need a little lying to.

Most peeps wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the ass.

When you have someone come along and say " I'll only tell you the TRUTH and fix everything that's Wrong " it's second nature to be suspicious and shy away.

Stealth Hunter
07-24-08, 07:50 PM
Not that McCain is any different than Obama. Hillary was no exception, either. They're all just wanting to get elected...:roll:

UnderseaLcpl
07-24-08, 08:02 PM
If only there were some sort of liberty-embracing party that could keep us out of international struggles and focus on domestic prosperity. Liberty-tarians or something. Oh, well.

Stealth Hunter
07-24-08, 08:03 PM
I lol'd.

Frame57
07-24-08, 10:05 PM
If only there were some sort of liberty-embracing party that could keep us out of international struggles and focus on domestic prosperity. Liberty-tarians or something. Oh, well.I have registered as an Independant for the first time in my life and I am now a member of the Constitutional Party. I only hope they will do what they say. But they are worth looking into.:up:

SUBMAN1
07-24-08, 10:39 PM
I have registered as an Independant for the first time in my life and I am now a member of the Constitutional Party. I only hope they will do what they say. But they are worth looking into.:up:Just the name of that party wants to make me join, but I am highly skepticle!

-S

Frame57
07-24-08, 10:46 PM
Ditto, but unless one starts and gains credible momentum it will never happen. The Congress has the lowest rating I think in history, so people are getting fed up. I will give them a shot and if all else fails I will build a boat like Nemo's and live in the sea.:up:

Monica Lewinsky
07-24-08, 10:53 PM
Just the name of that party wants to make me join, but I am highly skepticle!

-S

Pardon me for being rude, I live in Illinios where he is from and holds a Senate seat. He has done NOTHING for us in two years. His job at the moment is to do the "people business" for Illinois - which is NOTHING - he has done NOTHING. We find him as a WORTHLESS piece of crap in Illinois - the state of Illinois along with our jack ass governor and Senator o' bama. - Are both are useless pieces of crap in Illinois.

But go ahead and and elect the jerk. See what you get. We got NOTHING DONE in Illinois thanks to that JERK o bama and the other USELESS Illinois Senetor called Dick Durban.

You can get get 4 years of NOTHING! We got two years of NOTHING in Illinois.

Elect the a-hole.

Lurchi
07-24-08, 11:02 PM
They're all just wanting to get elected...:roll:
Whenever i hear this sentence - i must think of this song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXvACE5Pe9Q
Vote Bean! :rock:

SUBMAN1
07-24-08, 11:05 PM
Pardon me for being rude, I live in Illinios where he is from and holds a Senate seat. He has done NOTHING for us in two years. His job at the moment is to do the "people business" for Illinois - which is NOTHING - he has done NOTHING. We find him as a WORTHLESS piece of crap in Illinois - the state of along with our governor and Senator o' bama. - Are both are useless pieces of crap in Illinois.

But go ahead and and elect the jerk. See what you get. We got NOTHING DONE in Illinois thanks to that JERK o bama and the other USELESS Illinois Senetor called Dick Durban.

Whatever happened to giving up your Senate seat if you are trying to run for Pres? That should still be mandatory!!! For both McCain and Obama!

-S

FIREWALL
07-24-08, 11:10 PM
Joining one of these small Political partys sounds good.

But it's like buying an EDSEL. Drives the same but never caught on or was popular. It, like the small partys will never sell.

It's like throwing a vote away and influence an election.

Ross Perot for example.

Platapus
07-25-08, 05:40 AM
Trivia question.

Since World War II (just to have a starting date) Has the Electoral College cast a vote for a candidate not belonging to either the Republican Party or the Democratic party?

August
07-25-08, 08:11 AM
Trivia question.

Since World War II (just to have a starting date) Has the Electoral College cast a vote for a candidate not belonging to either the Republican Party or the Democratic party?

I believe the answer is yes.

Frame57
07-25-08, 09:42 AM
Just the name of that party wants to make me join, but I am highly skepticle!

-S

Pardon me for being rude, I live in Illinios where he is from and holds a Senate seat. He has done NOTHING for us in two years. His job at the moment is to do the "people business" for Illinois - which is NOTHING - he has done NOTHING. We find him as a WORTHLESS piece of crap in Illinois - the state of Illinois along with our jack ass governor and Senator o' bama. - Are both are useless pieces of crap in Illinois.

But go ahead and and elect the jerk. See what you get. We got NOTHING DONE in Illinois thanks to that JERK o bama and the other USELESS Illinois Senetor called Dick Durban.

You can get get 4 years of NOTHING! We got two years of NOTHING in Illinois.

Elect the a-hole.Nothing rude about it. You are just calling it like you see it. The man is running on charisma alone. It is sad that the choice boils down to either of these guys. This is the best we have?

SUBMAN1
07-25-08, 09:53 AM
Nothing rude about it. You are just calling it like you see it. The man is running on charisma alone. It is sad that the choice boils down to either of these guys. This is the best we have?With the way the media works lately, they have pushed away anyone that would be considered decent for the job. This decent people are decent enough to not want to put their families through the torture.

-S

Platapus
07-25-08, 01:29 PM
Trivia question.

Since World War II (just to have a starting date) Has the Electoral College cast a vote for a candidate not belonging to either the Republican Party or the Democratic party?

I believe the answer is yes.

Correct

in 1972 one of the Virginia Electors cast one vote for the Libertarian candidate. 1972 was the first election that the newly formed Libertarian party had a candidate for President.

But that is the only time. This is why I am not really a fan of the Electoral College. It practically limits us to a two party system.

UnderseaLcpl
07-26-08, 05:37 AM
I don't find the natural tendency towards a two-party system hard to believe at all. In fact, I think that it is logically what must occur, depspite my dilsike of it.
Mikhayl sums it up admirably; in the event that we can't win, we vote for the candidate that makes us lose the least. Given the 'mainstream' nature fo the Democratic and Republican parties, this is hardly surprising.
As much as I hate the Electoral college I doubt its elimination would affect much.

The United States is trapped by the fact that "the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world" and we are too far gone now to effect any real change before we endure catastrophic consequences at the level needed to trigger a revolution in public opinion and involvement.

Welcome to the beginning of the end, fellow Americans. Like so many before us, we have made the same mistakes as any great nation, just as whomever succeeds us as the world's leading nation will do the same.

Modern politics, public opinion, democracy (or representative democracy, supposedly, in our case), mean nothing in the face of history's unstoppable tide.
Why even bother?

Wow, that was dark was it not? I depressed myself:cry:

jpm1
07-26-08, 11:17 AM
I don't find the natural tendency towards a two-party system hard to believe at all. In fact, I think that it is logically what must occur, depspite my dilsike of it.
Mikhayl sums it up admirably; in the event that we can't win, we vote for the candidate that makes us lose the least. Given the 'mainstream' nature fo the Democratic and Republican parties, this is hardly surprising.
As much as I hate the Electoral college I doubt its elimination would affect much.

The United States is trapped by the fact that "the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world" and we are too far gone now to effect any real change before we endure catastrophic consequences at the level needed to trigger a revolution in public opinion and involvement.

Welcome to the beginning of the end, fellow Americans. Like so many before us, we have made the same mistakes as any great nation, just as whomever succeeds us as the world's leading nation will do the same.

Modern politics, public opinion, democracy (or representative democracy, supposedly, in our case), mean nothing in the face of history's unstoppable tide.
Why even bother?

Wow, that was dark was it not? I depressed myself:cry:
Obama's arrival match with the United states dusk yes it's a bit dark for me http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b264/jpm1/Emoticons/sourire4.gif . The way the political system's made in the US make me think the persons arrive the persons who want to be elected arrive , the persons who want to be elected arrive then they have to face lobbies that they canno't avoid even if they loose their soul there . It makes me think of the "beast" of Nixon movie when Nixon says "i canno't control the beast but i manage to tame it" . the french system isn't much far away from America's what is different it's when a smaller party has an anormally high numbers of voices during the first round the bigger party which goes to the second round has to deal with that for example if the "green" party has a high number of votes it'll be much probable that we'll have a "green" environnement minister if the bigger party with the same political tendance than the "green" is elected