Obama meets privately with Michigan Muslim leader, page 4
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:28 PM by wytworm
reply to post by runetang



So as soon as they leave? The veil will be totally lifted, and yes, our country is going to be probably worse than it is now, the standard of living will probably be even a little worse for a while, before it gets better, possibly.


I would tweak this to say we will see for the first time how really bad it is right now.



reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:56 PM by wytworm

1 - Obama HAS TO raise taxes to cover his 287 billion $$ a year in new spending.


All those same economists are also saying that ANY POTUS will have to raise taxes. There is simply no choice left. Its that canard: When you are stuck in a hole the first thing to do is stop digging.

2 - His 'change' platform is rhetoric.


What platform isn't rhetoric? Rhetoric = oratory. Its what public figures do so we don;t have to read their minds. I think you mean to say empty rhetoric. I am not sure how you would know this at this point however...


He is corrupt. He lies. He misleads. He has NO clue about economics. He's racist. and He has (as the topic of this thread states) SECRET meetings with certain groups (could be any group - muslim doesn't mean anything) in order to facilitate their support. NO CHANGE.


Footnotes for these? No? Is it empty rhetoric? That must cause some internal conflict...



Did you know that we are not in a recession? That's right. People keep saying that we are. But we are not. The housing market is going through a NECESSARY CORRECTION.


This is inaccurate. It is accurate to say that we do not know whether we are in a recession or not. The National Bureau of Economic Research's (NBER) Business Cycle Dating Committee ultimately decides whether the economy has fallen into a recession. The NBER does not use any specific methodology for determining the start and end dates of a recession - instead it looks at a variety of economic indicators over various time periods and determines whether to declare that the economy is in a recession based on that data.

When they do decide, they will back date it to Jan 2008 or December 2007 most likely.
Also, it has nothing to do with fuel costs but everything to do with the defaults on mortgages, which is a wave that is still breaking. What is worse is that there are no apparent levers to resolve that issue.

Recession?



[edit on 18-5-2008 by wytworm]


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 05:29 PM by wytworm
reply to post by FlyersFan


Click through on the link. The REPLY button links you to what I was replying to.



reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 06:07 PM by Threadfall
Originally posted by Macrotus
You pro-Obama can't even see the forest for the trees. Don't you see? He's just pretending to be a Christian but in actuality he is a Muslim inside.

You people have been deceived. Haven't you heard the plans to turn America into an Islamic state? Don't vote him. His middle name is Hussein for Christ's sake!

He wants to negotiate with the Hamas and the muslims! If you vote him he's going to destroy the American way of life and put in place the Islamic laws!

He has got you all fooled with his ambiguous promise for 'change' in actuality he wants to change the American way into an Islamic way!

Don't vote him he's a wolf in sheep's clothing. He really is a Muslim and all Muslims have a tendencey to put their false god and prophet in front of everything everything!

You'll lose the American way of living, alcohol will be outlawed, no more football, baseball and hudud laws will be put into place and all women will have to wear burkhas! All the men will have to wear terrorist beards!

Think about it! Think about your children! Will you want their hands to be cut off? Will you want your children be stoned to death? Think people, he's a muslim. A muslim will turn on you when the time is right and that's the time when he's elected!

Think about America!









[edit on 18-5-2008 by Macrotus]


Go back to school you idiot. The President just doesn't snap his finger and make laws. Bills are proposed and affirmed by the CONGRESS, not the PRESIDENT. The President simply signs passed bills into laws (or vetoes them). You say Obama shouldn't be allowed to be President. I say people like you shouldn't be allowed to vote, damn. Voters with your knowledge of our 'American Way' are more a threat than Obama ever will be.


reply posted on 19-5-2008 @ 03:07 AM by PistolPete
Which is right:

Huffington Post

He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers has high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.


Or:

University of Chicago Law School
The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.


Well, they say the same damn thing. So apparently either by the Huffington Post's standards, or the University of Chicago's standards, Obama was in fact a Law Professor. Unless both of them made something up.

Just to throw salt on the wound: Penguins 6, Flyers 0.

P.S.: Go Ron Paul. I am so ****ing sick of inconsequential semantics being a factor in who becomes our President!!!!


reply posted on 19-5-2008 @ 04:50 AM by wytworm
reply to post by PistolPete


What about this part?

University of Chicago Law School
The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.


[edit on 19-5-2008 by wytworm]


reply posted on 19-5-2008 @ 05:50 PM by CharlesMartel
reply to post by Quarantine


Obama's socialist philosophies are far more dangerous to American than whether or not he is or was a Muslim.

I think these Muslim stories are just canards to distract from the fact the he is the most leftist member of the Senate.


reply posted on 20-5-2008 @ 08:23 AM by wytworm
reply to post by grover


Which by your logic means the status quo is permanent as anyone having gotten there is by definition status quo.



reply posted on 20-5-2008 @ 08:28 AM by grover
reply to post by wytworm


What I mean is that the business interests that control the country, which are btw, essentially conservative in outlook, will never allow anyone to be elected who will actually threaten their interests. So, in that regard all the rants about Democrats being communists (a really funny joke) or Obama being a socialist are nothing more than bullhooey.

As proof of my assertion about the status quo... Warren Buffet has just endorsed Barack Obama.

news.yahoo.com...;_ylt=AoMZ0By0QIhdx_88YO8En7Fh24cA




[edit on 20-5-2008 by grover]


reply posted on 20-5-2008 @ 08:44 AM by wytworm
reply to post by grover


So this is more of a 'fight within the system' vs 'system is fatally flawed, externally imposed change is required' point, yes?


reply posted on 20-5-2008 @ 08:50 AM by grover
reply to post by wytworm


Essentially yes.

There is one party in America that has two branches... one, the Democrats slightly left of center and the other, the Republicans slightly right of center.

And despite rhetoric to the contrary socialism and/or communism never had a chance in this country and starting in 1918 and continuing into the 70's was hounded out of existance. there are a few powerless groups but none within spitting distance of the halls of power.

The big debate between the "parties" really has nothing to do with the social issues that get voters fired up... gay marriage, gun rights, abortion etc... but it is in essence about what type and how many crumbs will be tossed to the rubes to keep them quiet and in line.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^




Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Stop Bashing Us Military Folks.
  Rant, Posted 14 hours ago, 184 replies
Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 10 hours ago, 99 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 6 hours ago, 66 replies