Yes Skybird but you didn't not indicate it was anything official.

When I first read it I thought you were mentioning some government initiative. TBH I think it is inconsequential as few will know about it and even fewer will care.

Um, no. Clearly superior off the top of my head:

Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, and (yes indeed) Obama.

I won't argue w/you on this, sort of like I won't be arguing about the sun rising tomorrow or the earth being spherical.

Hmmm?? I'm mostly lib, and I have no problem setting up minefields, sniper teams, etc., to close off the southern border. It's our border, we can do w/it as we wish, and if Mexico whines about it, too bad.

LOL isent that the same list O read as his beaming face proclaimed a victory?

Tell me whom is the defeated?

Lincoln I will say was good but not as great as he is made out to be, Booth took him out so Abe gets points to his legacy from everyone.

I used to think TR was awseome but I grew up and realized he was pretty dangerous.A few good things , but not a great President.FDR did a great job as a wartime President but New Deal was really a failure(which is a whole other dicussion)

LBJ? Seriously, terrible.The Great Society and all that crap.Civil Rights Act, sure a good thing to make Jim Crow laws illegal and all.Of course as the Feds tend to do they went too far and put in things like Affirmative Action in , which is just reverse racism, no longer needed and violates other's civil rights, those contradicting the whole point of the bill.Ah the crazy things bleeding heart Liberalism will make you do.Terrible bill and a stain on America.Between his bungling in Vietnam, BS of the Great Society and the BS in the Civil Rights Act, Johnson was not a good President.

I actually agree that Nixon was a good President.Clinton, well he was an OK President but he failed in important areas and had no integrity(I do not care he got a blow job, but he got on national tv and lied.The guy could have said, I made a mistake, it's between Hillzilla and I, I did nothing illegal, the end. No No, Billy had to lie and cause the huge episode he did.Clinton also shoulders some of the blame for 9/11 throughout the 90's we were attacked multiple times...WTC 93, Embassy in Africa, USS Cole and all he did was lob a few cruise missles here and there and arrest a few people.Never did any sweeping actions to go after their base as Bush did in Afghanistan, which even most Libs I talk to have admitted the initial decision to go into Afghan was correct. Clinton also played around with Iraq and Sadam Hussein in the 90's, which is why Sadam did not really believe Bush would invade, he had years of jerking America around with NO consequences other than a few cruise missles and plane strikes now and then.The housing bubble began under Clinton although the Clinton years were mostly prosperous times for America.Also handled the situation in Bosnia well, believe he did some welfare reform.For the good things and bad together, Clinton was OKAY.Would take him back over Obama in a heart beat, least Clinton was no such an idealogue than he moved to the center a bit and cared what the American people wanted.

I have to say how dare you rate obama as one of the best.That hooligan has done nothing but divide this country after he was elected under false pretences(ran as a centrist who cared, who was above politics as usual.Many of us were smart enough to see the most Liberal Senator in the US Senate was not going to be a centrist President, but America was drunk.Kind of like if you would normally never sleep with a fat woman but got a little too drunk and made that mistake, then vowed to never do it again, pretty much the same thing:haha:

Again, how dare you rate him as a great President when he lies constantly, has taken the muslims side and shunned Israel.How dare you rate him as great when he defies the American people when all polls show most did not want the healthcare bill to pass, esp after all the corrupt deals.How dare you say a President who had people like Van Jones, Anita Dunne(admirer of Mao) How about the racism he exhibited in the whole white cop black professor incident? How about the arrogant comment he made at the healtcare summit that if the American people do not like us passing this bill "Then that is what elections are for" Obama is dangerous.Is he the antichrist? No, is he Hitler or Stalin? I do not believe so. This jerk has an agenda that is not in line with America and hopefully one day will be looked at in history books as the terrible "one night stand with a fat girl" that he is so far.

Finally, Reagan is the greatest President we have had in a long long time, far exceeds the ones you listed.Reagan defeated the Soviet Union after decades of proxy wars and letting them jerk us around.Helped defeat them in Afghanistan and won the Cold War. The economic policies were great cut in personal income tax, moderate deregulation and tax reform.After a recession, long period of high economic growth occured with little to no inflation.On the negative side you had the Iran-Contra thing, which I believe because Reagan was an honest man, he had no knowledge of but was a stain on his admin.Handled Grenada and Libya very well etc etc etc Finally, the man legitimately loved this country and had great sense of humor and outlook on life,.No bitterness like obama and his ilk.No association with nutjobs like Wright, Jones, Ayers, Dunne etc No wonder he left office with 64% approval rating.

I reserect this thread with a hearty... "Told you so".


http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi...0.html?showall

So this "told you so" is an address urging people who voted last time to vote this time, but since this topic was you "telling us so" that Obama was going to grant an amnesty to get all the illegals to become citizens so he would as if by magic get all their votes this time.
So it isn't a told you so at all is it:rotfl2:

Tell me this.. whom are the 'new voters' referred to in that clip? ;)

Brace yourself its comming.

Errrrrr...thats a hard question .
Lets see, it may take quite a bit of thought.
So by "new voters" you mean the bit in the clip where he talks about the new voters right.
And by "referred" you must mean what he said.
I assume that by "in that clip" you mean in that clip you posted which I assume you didn't watch because if you did you would know the answer.

So . blimey this is really hard....really really hard....how long can I drag it out....a little longer maybe...
Here we go, after much thought, brain storming and deliberation I think I have deduced that when someone talks about the new voters that turned out and voted for the first time in the last election they are referring to the new voters who turned out and voted for the first time in the last election:yeah:

I think Obama is best served if he attempts to reach all instead of selecting groups based on gender, race, color, creed for votes.....after all, is he not supposed to be the president for all?

To build on this a little, if Obama was white and said this:

instead of mixed race and said this:

What would peoples response be then? Just sayin'.

Lest we forget he was to cross the isle and work together. Bipartisanship! More like bullsh!tsanship to me. He is dividing and not unifying. Not a good road to take. He fuels the fires of these 'radical, crackhead' tea party folks.

But doesent he already have that vote? Hrm... must need more for some reason.

Not if they don't vote again this time.
In case you missed it the last election was it the highest turnout for decades.

Are you running short of tin foil?

It wouldn't make sense, since the old white male voter turnout is fairly consistant.

You are correct that the old white male turnout is fairly consistent, but that's not the point here.:03: