Why a Democrat is needed in office.

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 



Now electing Obama would Constitute 4 of the same. Because then the President and Congress control everything and it is a no hold bar. They can pass anything regardless whether republicans or taxpayers agree.

More like 4 of the opposite Jam. True....they can pass ANYTHING, but I am more interested in rescinding most of the crap pushed through by the neo-con's who have been using panic and fear as a political tool. True, the left had to vote to approve some of these things......but with the constant pressure of being called "un-American....and friends of terrorists" they have been played.

-The patriot act! (talk about a back-asswards name)
-2002 war authorization
-failed economic policies....many of them.
-suspension of habeas corpus.

And possibly going after a few of the criminals that have broken quite a few laws....


* Deception of Congress and the American Public
o Committing a Fraud Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371)
o Making False Statements Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 1001)
o War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)
o Misuse of Government Funds (31 U.S.C. § 1301) * Improper Detention, Torture, and Other Inhumane Treatment
o Anti-Torture Statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340-40A)
o The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 2441)
o The Geneva Conventions and Hague Convention: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
o United Nations Convention Against Torture, and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
o Command Responsibility (for known illegal acts of subordinates in the military)
o Detainment of Material Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 3144) * Retaliating against Witnesses and Other Individuals
o Obstruction Congress (18 U.S.C. § 1505)
o Whistleblower Protection (5 U.S.C. § 2302)
o The Lloyd-LaFollette Act, or "anti-gag rule" (5 U.S.C. § 7211)
o Retaliating against Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 1513) * Leaking and other Misuse of Intelligence and other Government Information
o Revealing Classified Information in Contravention of Federal Regulations (Executive Order 12958/Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement)
o Statutory Prohibitions on Leaking Information (18 U.S.C. § 641, etc.) * Laws Governing Electronic Surveillance
o Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq.)
o National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. chapter 15)
o Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. § 222)
o Stored Communications Act of 1986 (18 U.S.C. § 2702)
o Pen Registers or Trap and Trace Devices (18 U.S.C. § 3121) * Laws and Guidelines Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest (28 U.S.C. § 528, etc.)


I'm sure there are a few more....
Source....




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Grafilthy
 


With all those crimes you have against the Bush administration, I think every member in Congress should be impeached and removed for dereliction of duty.

You and I both know that even if Bush and Co. committed a crime, which is very debatable and time consuming, nothing will come of it besides some kind of report or talk. The dems would be opening up a can of worms if they did. Once reps took over Congress again they would be like wolves looking for any little thing to charge the sitting democrat President with.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by Douggie
 



Why would you expect them to have an opinion?


cause the GAO is the one who audits the government. It is called accountability.

The only way it would be posted on the GAO website is to respond to a request from the hill, unless it was put in a report. The information wouldnt just be posted. The office of management and budget could possibly have redily printed information, but then again it would have to have been a bipartisan effort requesting the information.


Nope, Im talking about the BIG tax break Bush gave at the begining of his term. If you dont know about it....you should

I know it, do you? Why don't you tell me exacty which tax break Bush and Congress passed that has caused people to earn billions in interest?

The tax break that was given to his elitist friends at the begining of his term. Offshoring of money from the US went up 66% during his term. Which led to Billions in untaxable interest. The trickle down effect never happend because they didnt stick the money back into the economy.


True, But its was drawn up with good intent and used in good practice until Bush got in office....then it was rape and pillage


How is it written up with good intent when your basically telling fannie mae and banks that they have to lend money to people who can't pay no matter what?

Uh, our current situation shows it. I think low income people should be able to buy a house. But there should be more regulation then what their was. Allowing anyone to purchase a house with almost no criteria is foolish. To have it happen with the frequency it did over the last 6 years is disastourous.


No doubt it was needed to be done...but not while the countries facing financial disaster


The country wasn't in a financial disaster when Senator MBNA helped pass the new bankruptcy law. It was a give me to credit card companies. A disaster to Americans filing for bankruptcy.

Yes it was, maybe you just didnt know it. Personally, I think weve been in a recession since 2006.


LMAO, it was part of Bushes campaign platform. Im running out of space.


go look up Pelosi campaign promise for the democrats in 2006 and you will see she promised a common sense plan to lower gas prices and it never materialized. Unless she meant the crisis was the common sense plan. Cause evr since this crisis took off gas prices have dropped quite a bit. I would have never known that a crisis was a common sense plan.

Gas prices have been rising at meteoric rates since the GOP took the reins under Bush. Odd how they're now looking to the Dems for a solution to a crisis their leader bragged he could fix with a phone call.


Well better now then having a dead president to deal with and have *Apaulin take over...eeek.


Discrimination comes in all forms, shapes, and sizes and it is wrong all the way around. Talking about McCain age has no merit. He may even outlive you. Life is short.

Theirs nothing discriminatory about it....its fact.



No, I never heard Obama say he was cutting anyones taxes.


He says it all the time.

I did hear him say if you make over 250,00 a year he will br raising taxes


You need to explain this better, All they did is contribute to his campaign. McCain is a totally different scenario, costing billions, admittingly so.


Do you really think Fannie Mae contributed to Obama out of the kindness of their heart? They expected things in return.

Like what?










posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by Grafilthy
 


With all those crimes you have against the Bush administration, I think every member in Congress should be impeached and removed for dereliction of duty.

You and I both know that even if Bush and Co. committed a crime, which is very debatable and time consuming, nothing will come of it besides some kind of report or talk. The dems would be opening up a can of worms if they did. Once reps took over Congress again they would be like wolves looking for any little thing to charge the sitting democrat President with.


I think too they were just scared to do anything.....If Bush was out of office ...Cheney would be President. From bad to worse.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grafilthy
reply to post by jam321
 



Now electing Obama would Constitute 4 of the same. Because then the President and Congress control everything and it is a no hold bar. They can pass anything regardless whether republicans or taxpayers agree.

More like 4 of the opposite Jam. True....they can pass ANYTHING, but I am more interested in rescinding most of the crap pushed through by the neo-con's who have been using panic and fear as a political tool. True, the left had to vote to approve some of these things......but with the constant pressure of being called "un-American....and friends of terrorists" they have been played.

-The patriot act! (talk about a back-asswards name)
-2002 war authorization
-failed economic policies....many of them.
-suspension of habeas corpus.

And possibly going after a few of the criminals that have broken quite a few laws....


* Deception of Congress and the American Public
o Committing a Fraud Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371)
o Making False Statements Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 1001)
o War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)
o Misuse of Government Funds (31 U.S.C. § 1301) * Improper Detention, Torture, and Other Inhumane Treatment
o Anti-Torture Statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340-40A)
o The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 2441)
o The Geneva Conventions and Hague Convention: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
o United Nations Convention Against Torture, and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
o Command Responsibility (for known illegal acts of subordinates in the military)
o Detainment of Material Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 3144) * Retaliating against Witnesses and Other Individuals
o Obstruction Congress (18 U.S.C. § 1505)
o Whistleblower Protection (5 U.S.C. § 2302)
o The Lloyd-LaFollette Act, or "anti-gag rule" (5 U.S.C. § 7211)
o Retaliating against Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 1513) * Leaking and other Misuse of Intelligence and other Government Information
o Revealing Classified Information in Contravention of Federal Regulations (Executive Order 12958/Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement)
o Statutory Prohibitions on Leaking Information (18 U.S.C. § 641, etc.) * Laws Governing Electronic Surveillance
o Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq.)
o National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. chapter 15)
o Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. § 222)
o Stored Communications Act of 1986 (18 U.S.C. § 2702)
o Pen Registers or Trap and Trace Devices (18 U.S.C. § 3121) * Laws and Guidelines Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest (28 U.S.C. § 528, etc.)


I'm sure there are a few more....
Source....


Good post. Im right there with ya!
Alright forgive me I suck with names and usually end up waisting a lot of space explaining...hehe like now.
But the head attorney defending the constitution and bill of rights in washington DC was interviewed recently. He was very angry, his ending comments were these:
"The changes made to the Constitution and Bill of Rights during the Bush administration were so dramatic that our grandchildren are going to be asking us what we did to stop it."

I find it funny that these wanna be Republicans can find any justification to defend the neocons. They all must be for total destruction of the US and its policies. As I siad, The Republicans your mommy and daddy were so fond of havent been in office in decades. The Neocons are for totally different things....



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 





Once reps took over Congress again they would be like wolves looking for any little thing to charge the sitting democrat President with.


True.....but it's up to the American people if that ever happens again.

Yes, most of congress is guilty of SOMETHING, but remember....these "panic" bills they were voting on.....were based on lies. They also never get to read most of the bills they pass. (Don't know who to blame on this).

As far as looking for things to charge a president with.....they can be my guest. Look at all the time and money the "fiscal conservatives" spent looking for a little dirt on Bill Clinton......only, all they found was that Monica Lewinsky likes cigars, and needs to do her laundry?!?! Now, if they were really looking for wrongdoing they would be elbow deep on Cheney and his man-sized safe (I don't give Bush the credit...he's an idiot).

Seriously.....for every dollar we spent on Clinton's "impeachment" if we had spent a nickle looking at the alleged crimes of this administration......

....a few people would be looking at some time.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fromabove
In the 1930's Hovver, who was an American President at the time, decided to raise taxes on the nation. We had a depression. In the 60's, we had the "Great society" under LBJ where the government set about to create the welfare state and spend unheard of somes of money. In the 1970's we had Jimmy Carter who, began to push for "affordable housing" mush as we have seen under Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac. Under Clinton, this program blossomed and with the help of cummunity organisers and groups such as ACORN, the Woods Foundation, etc, law suit after lawsuit forced banks to give mortgages to millions of people who could not afford them. Apert from this, and in spite of two wars, a national terrist attack, and a struggling economy left over from Clinton, Bush cut taxes and the economy boomed and boomed. But Under democratic control, the congress refused regulation of the economic lenders, in spite of Republicans calling for them under McCain. Barny Frank, Chris Dodd, etc. said no. Then the bottom finally dropped out and here we are.

If you put another democrat in the whitehouse, we will go immediately into an economic nightmare depression worse than the 1930's. The way to defeat economic troubles is to not speand money you don't have, and cut taxes for all, not some, but all Americans. Therefore, put a Republican in the Whitehous, and in the congress, and eveything will be fine.

Here's my plan that would work...

1. Suspend the 2008 income tax for all wage earners.

2. Suspend the capital gains tax for 2009

3. Encourage banks to re-negotiate mortgage loans to this present economy.

This is simple and this will work, no socialism needed.


Like I said in my original post....you can draw your summations all the way back to George Washington if you want. The fact is everything worked fine. Everything you posted about Carter and Clinton was working and would have continued to work. But the GLB act totally screwed everything up. i wouldnt be surprised if 10 years down the road for it to be determined as the most damaging thing that ever happend to the US economy.
Then you demand for ever US citizen to own there own house. It created a free for all. I wish I had more space.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Douggie
 



I think too they were just scared to do anything.....If Bush was out of office ...Cheney would be President. From bad to worse.


Congress= 535 people

Bush=1

scared how. Point blank Congress has tried to do nothing with the exception of a few like Ron Paul.

I'm sure if they found enough evidence on Bush Cheney wouldn't be too far behind. That would have made Pelosi the President.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by Douggie
 



I think too they were just scared to do anything.....If Bush was out of office ...Cheney would be President. From bad to worse.


Congress= 535 people

Bush=1

scared how. Point blank Congress has tried to do nothing with the exception of a few like Ron Paul.

I'm sure if they found enough evidence on Bush Cheney wouldn't be too far behind. That would have made Pelosi the President.




Well scared 2 years ago. Now its wouldnt matter either way. I wonder why Bush bought that ranch in south America?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Douggie
 



Same reason rich people buy property in other countries.

This thing about Bush moving to Argentina to avoid prosecution is hilarious.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:53 PM
link   
IMO

I think any political party that has complete control of our government is extremely bad for our country, DEM or REP. It's just dangerous. It didn't work with Republicans and it won't with Democrats. It's just wishful thinking. Congress has a lower approval rating than Bush. Yep, Democratic majority in both the Senate and House and they SUCK. Yet they are supposed to save the country?

Obama won't go after corruption in our government when it's full of democrats that helped him get elected in the first place.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grafilthy\


How can you explain the fact that Obama voted for George Bush's FISA bill and George Bush's energy bill??




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by mabus325
 


What.....as they say, does that have to do with the price of tea in China?!!??! If that was a response to a previous post....I'm gonna need a proper quote, cause you lost me.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 10:05 PM
link   
We don't need a Democrat or Republican. We need an honest person who cares. Partisanship is destroying us. Only when we identify ourselves as Americans and no longer as Democrat or Republican will there be hope.

More taxes will not fix anything. In fact most of them would not be needed at all if we had honest government. If you think more money is the answer, or class warfare is the answer; you are the problem.

I'm Blaine91555 and I approved this message to end Partisanship and the stupidity it breeds forever.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


It would be nice. But the big politicians have control over everythiing. From where we are now, I see it as we gave the republicans 8 years and theyve totally destroyed our country. The next person in office is going to be keeping it afloat day by day for the first 2 years.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 07:16 AM
link   
Douggie,

You sound like the democrat version of the republican wannabes you complain about. Democrat sheep. Both parties have made a mess of the government and the economy. Ignoring the democrats part in it, especially the recent financial issues, doesn't change the facts no matter how much you want to deny it. I've voted republican since I've been old enough to vote. I'll say I'm not happy with how things have gone recently but I will not vote democrat cause I haven't seen anything with any sense come from them. I'm pretty open minded but I don't buy into their (democrats) way of thinking.



posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Douggie
 



But the big politicians have control over everythiing.



I have to disagree with you.

Lobbyist have control over everything and that includes both parties.



posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTraveler
Douggie,

You sound like the democrat version of the republican wannabes you complain about. Democrat sheep. Both parties have made a mess of the government and the economy. Ignoring the democrats part in it, especially the recent financial issues, doesn't change the facts no matter how much you want to deny it. I've voted republican since I've been old enough to vote. I'll say I'm not happy with how things have gone recently but I will not vote democrat cause I haven't seen anything with any sense come from them. I'm pretty open minded but I don't buy into their (democrats) way of thinking.


Well, I dont think anyone in office is just stupid (sorry to say including Bush). I think the reason the democrats werent getting involved with anything is in part with the way the republicans won office the last 2 times.
Diebold hurt democracy in America and to add to it the 2nd leading manufacturer of voting machines was found to be doing the same....33% of the votes dropped.

I dont see it....you have one side totally destroying our way of life (republicans). But you would rather have them back in office because the other side (democrats) didnt do anything to stop there rapage? Sorry that just doesnt make sense to me.



posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   


I dont see it....you have one side totally destroying our way of life (republicans). But you would rather have them back in office because the other side (democrats) didnt do anything to stop there rapage? Sorry that just doesnt make sense to me.


One side? What world are you living on? Democrats have done far more to destroy our way of life than the republicans though they have done their part in recent years. I'm saying the republicans are by far the better option, especially if they wake up and get back to the core conservative values.



posted on Oct, 18 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTraveler



I dont see it....you have one side totally destroying our way of life (republicans). But you would rather have them back in office because the other side (democrats) didnt do anything to stop there rapage? Sorry that just doesnt make sense to me.


One side? What world are you living on? Democrats have done far more to destroy our way of life than the republicans though they have done their part in recent years. I'm saying the republicans are by far the better option, especially if they wake up and get back to the core conservative values.


Sorry, I think youre missing the point. The republicans are fine. But there hasnt been one in office for decades. The Neocons are for; segregation, rich/poor, theyre for control, patriot act 1 and 2.

The most destructive economical piece of legislation ever introduced was the GLB act. Im sure 10 years from now it will be looked at like that. All I can say is that Ive been warning about our economical meltdown way before it was even considered on mainstreet. I dont even have a degree in economics.
Bush set things up and yes I was one that was real worried he was going to declaire martial law and continue being president. Anyway, the ground work is set. I dont want to see things continue on this path. With McCains innuendos and hints, I really dont want him to be in office. I really think were heading for the worse thing that ever happend in US history.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join