# Obama knows he is in trouble



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I suppose this is to protect the illegal aliens voting. :wink: I think he remembers Florida a few years ago. I remember Al Gore trying to block the votes of our soldiers, but allowed the felons in prison to vote. Were going to see a new precedent in dirty politics from the liberals this fall. I think this goes hand in hand with his opening the doors to Mexico.



> Obama prepping thousands of lawyers for election
> 
> By MIKE BAKER
> Associated Press
> ...


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Yeah,,George,,,Al,,,and Barrack,,,
Georgie dragged us into Iraq cuz Saddam tried to knock off his old man. Al is a scum bag. Barrack is an anti-American scrum bag.
3 pieces of crap! 
Congressional term limits will free us all of the corruption that is Washington.

The difference between you and BIllThomas Plains is pretty small,,, except I like you.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

spentwings said:


> Yeah,,George,,,Al,,,and Barrack,,,
> Georgie dragged us into Iraq cuz Saddam tried to knock off his old man. Al is a scum bag. Barrack is an anti-American scrum bag.
> 3 pieces of crap!
> Congressional term limits will free us all of the corruption that is Washington.
> ...


Ouch and thanks, but let me explain my position on all of these things.

We should have CIA dealing with scumbags for intelligence on the ground. Not only was George wrong, but so was England, France, and Germany. Now some may think there could have been a conspiracy. I still had reservations until Russia chimed in with the same intelligence. My line of thought was if our enemies agree then there is a good chance this isn't all just bs.

However, since the liberals have blinded our intelligence (remember they didn't want to have us associate with bad boys like Noriega), I would have taken a little more time. But then Hillary and the liberals all wanted to head to Iraq too. I was impressed with republicans and democrats agreeing and I think that's when I suckered. I would not have put boots on the ground. I would have pounded them to dust from the air.

I agree with Bill on one thing. We give up integrity when we abandoned the Kurds. I don't get Bill wanting to abandon Israel though. We have a signed agreement to be allies. I think that would require giving up all integrity. Based on that Obama may want to do it.

Our politicians have lost sight of their true purpose. Their purpose is to serve us, but they have an attitude that they rule over us. I once made that statement to one of our senators just a few years ago. I could count the blood vessels in his face from ten feet. :rollin: Your right about the term limits. I think each state will need a measure because these suckers are not going to vote themselves out of office, power, and money.

You know one of the things that has always bothered me about the Bush presidents? They keep talking new world order. Sounds to much like one world government. Remember secretary of state Madeleine Albright saying Bill Clinton would make a good world president? That could give a guy nightmares for a while.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Plains,,,,Georgie believed what he wanted to believe and the rest followed.
Georgie is evil incarnate! Sending our boys over there as fodder for his born again holier then thou BS.
I hate Georgie. Barrack in some respects is an *Islamic* saint in comparison. :lol:
As for Billy boy,,, uke:

Nation building other than shortly post WW2 is a lost cause....Barrack at least knows that...screw with us and suffer death and destruction,,,Jesus Christ,,, that ain't hindsight let alone rocket science.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Obama is also about nation building, but not ours. What was that congressman's name again Anthony Weiner or something like that? His wife is Hillaries Chief of Staff. Her brother started Muslim Brotherhood. Hillary just gave two billion to them and it only made FOX news. Remember how Obama was so excited about the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Today I learned Hillaries Chief of Staff knows the new Egyptian first lady. Hmmmm kind of close all these Muslims. :rollin:



> Saddam tried to knock off his old man


 I don't remember that.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

Plainsman said:


> > Saddam tried to knock off his old man
> 
> 
> I don't remember that.


Of course you don't.
Like I said,,,you and Billy ain't to far apart.
Hillary gave 2 B to the MBH? :rollin:
Cynicism is an old man's disease for some of us ...insanity and extremism is for the rest of you,,,


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I thought if I told you I don't remember you would tell me about it.

Today on the news I had heard it was two billion that Obama transferred to the Muslim Brotherhood through Hillary and the State Department. When I googled it just now I get 1.5 billion. I understand why it was hard for you to believe. Crazy things are always hard to believe.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012 ... rotherhood

The headline reads:


> Obama Bypasses Congress, Gives $1.5 Billion to Muslim Brotherhood





> Who knows; perhaps the Obama administration can also circumvent Congress and give the Iranians some nuclear materials or give Hamas some advanced weaponry? I know both ideas sound crazy, but they're no crazier than giving $1.5 billion in military aid to the Muslim Brotherhood.


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

:lame: 
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012 
:rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin:

I may be a cynic and a drunk but I've never been one of you ,,,, somehow that makes me feel better.




 :rollin:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I never could understand Neville when he sang. Even when I was young and my ears worked. 

As far as that 1.5 billion to the Muslim Brotherhood there are pages of conservative, liberal, and neutral sites with the same news. Of course the conservative sites don't like it and the liberals do. Go figure. These are just the first out of pages.

www.thegatewaypundit.com/.../screw-demo ... nistrati...

www.nationalreview.com/.../obama-funds- ... ment-and...

lonelyconservative.com/.../obama-gives-1-5-billion-to-egypt-and-the...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2S1mJAxMzA

www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1815478/pg1

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2862116/posts


----------



## spentwings (Apr 25, 2007)

I knew there was validity to your post Plains,,,but admitting it wud have interfered with my rant. :beer:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

spentwings said:


> I knew there was validity to your post Plains,,,but admitting it wud have interfered with my rant. :beer:


OK :rollin:


----------



## Anas Strepera (Nov 10, 2004)

Plainsman said:


> Obama is also about nation building, but not ours.


I wish he was more like Bush when it comes to nation building. Look how great Iraq turned out and the cost was only minimal. If we had Bush in now he'd be kicking the snot out of Mexico and then building America back like he did Iraq! I wish Bush would have been more like Putin and figured out a way to always stay in power.


----------



## BillThomas (Jun 19, 2012)

Anas Strepera said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > Obama is also about nation building, but not ours.
> ...


We will be paying for the folly in Iraq for decades, at Interest.
And we dont get the oil, Israel does. (The plan all along)

Iraq was a disaster, we are STILL there, Private firms like Blackwater, KBR etc bill the taxpayer Millions daily. 
We lost a tremendous amount of respect in the world for our invasion, not to mention the loss of life on both sides, and all based on lies.

Bush favored Illegal immigration from Mexicans. With his buddy John McSame.
I cant believe some of you are really this silly.


----------



## BillThomas (Jun 19, 2012)

Plainsman said:


> I never could understand Neville when he sang. Even when I was young and my ears worked.
> 
> As far as that 1.5 billion to the Muslim Brotherhood there are pages of conservative, liberal, and neutral sites with the same news. Of course the conservative sites don't like it and the liberals do. Go figure. These are just the first out of pages.


Muslim Brotherhood are Israeli Puppets.

Mubarrak was thrown out BY Israeli Mossad, CIA and MI6.

The revolution was staged by us.
The plan to overthrow 6 countries in the Middle East was outlined long ago.
General Wesley Clark said he was briefed on the USA invading these 6 nations shortly after 911, a pretext to invade these nations.
The video of his interview is on Youtube. I can load it if you cant find it.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Muslim Brotherhood are Israeli Puppets.


I think that like Iran the Muslim Brotherhood would like to wipe Israel off the planet.

If your not voting for Obama or Romney what are you going to do? Not voting is as good as voting for Obama. Voting for a third party is wasting you vote, and as good as a vote for Obama. I don't want to vote for Romney either, but I will. Once he is in hopefully we can start working towards something else. Right now the number one priority is Obama out.


----------



## Anas Strepera (Nov 10, 2004)

Plainsman said:


> If your not voting for Obama or Romney what are you going to do? Not voting is as good as voting for Obama. Voting for a third party is wasting you vote, and as good as a vote for Obama. I don't want to vote for Romney either, but I will. Once he is in hopefully we can start working towards something else. Right now the number one priority is Obama out.


Plainsman, do you understand how the electoral college works? In ND Romney is going to win by 10 points, easily. So what is your vote _really_ worth voting for him? Nothing. He will get ND's 3 electoral and that's a given.

With the way you lean politically, why not vote for a third party? Liberterian party would fit your ideals well I'd think.

When Nader ran all those years he wasn't trying to win. What he wanted was for the Green party to receive 5% of the popular vote in the federal election. Once that happens a party is eligible to receive federal funding. It was a crucial hurdle he couldn't surpass for the party. If more people in *non-battleground states* would vote third party we'd get more parties in the mix. The Dems and Repubs have it set up where no other party can get in. A candidate has to be polling at 15% of the vote to get into the debates; which is why Ross Perot will probably be the only third party presidential candidate I will ever see in the debates in my lifetime.

Our country didn't used to be that way, and it wasn't intended to be that way when it was founded. In my opinion, getting other parties in the mix is essential for moving this country forward. Think if you had 4 or 5 parties (covering the political spectrum from very conservative to very liberal) in congress instead of 2? There would be a tremendous amount of compromise and there wouldn't be a line drawn in the sand like there is now. Parties would have to work with one another. It'd take working with at least two other parties to pass anything. There is far too many votes today that go entirely up and down party lines.

The old adage that 'a vote for a third party is a wasted vote' is complete BS and put forth by guess who? The two major parties.

You don't live in a swing state. The most valuable way you could cast your vote is for someone other than Romney or Obama. If ND is ever close (polling shows them within the margin of error) then I'd tell you to vote for whoever you liked out of the big two. Romney already has your state's electoral votes...showing up to vote for him is a complete waste of your time. Show up and vote for your local elections and do us all a favor and vote third party in the federal elections.

BT, I hope you realize I was clearly trying to be silly with my last post.


----------



## BillThomas (Jun 19, 2012)

Plainsman said:


> > Muslim Brotherhood are Israeli Puppets.
> 
> 
> I think that like Iran the Muslim Brotherhood would like to wipe Israel off the planet.
> ...


In truth, Palestine has been wiped off the map,
Israel keeps expanding its ilegal settlements(UN 338, UN 242)

Voting for the lesser of 2 evils, is still voting for evil.

Ron Paul or Bust


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I think if you mess with someone and loose the old adage "to the victor go the spoils" should apply. After the 1967 war Israel should have kept what the conquered.

Gadwall in North Dakota voting third party isn't as bad as I was thinking. You do have an excellent point. I wish we run our elections like Russia does. Anyone who wants may run, then the top two vote getters face off. That would be even better than voting third party because no one would worry about putting the wrong man (Bill Clinton) into office.


----------



## Anas Strepera (Nov 10, 2004)

Plainsman said:


> That would be even better than voting third party because no one would worry about putting the wrong man (Bill Clinton) into office.


That is actually false. Here's a good breakdown of what actually happened in that election. I didn't write it but I also couldn't find an author, but I did look into the numbers and it looks to be very factual.

Again, the whole notion that Perot cost Bush that election is just another bit of propaganda pushed by the Republican party to ensure that conservatives stay within their ranks. It's the same thing the Democrats pushed with Nader because of their fear of him siphoning off liberal voters.

Heck, let's say you choose to vote Obama. If ND goes Romney (which it absolutely will) does your vote even really matter? It does nothing to get him elected. Obama picks up a vote counted in the popular vote, but since we don't elect presidents on the popular vote...who cares?

If the Liberterian party could poll 5% nationally in the election that'd be HUGE. If conservative voters were smart, or voters in general for that matter, they could easily get 10-15% of the popular vote and not cost Romney the election...as long as people understood the importance of being unified in swing states where it could cost Romney electoral votes.

Here's the read on Perot and the '92 election. A little lengthy but very interesting IMO.



> In 1992, Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton defeated incumbent President George Bush. Almost every analysis or reference to the 1992 presidential race claims that Perot's presence on the ballot cost Bush the election. No facts are cited, it is merely asserted.
> 
> Perot did a lot of damage, it is true. During the spring primaries in the big industrial states like New York and Pennsylvania, when attention might have been paid to Clinton and former California Governor Jerry Brown as they fought each other and debated a domestic agenda for the new administration, all the media covered was the "undeclared" candidacy of Ross Perot.
> 
> ...


----------



## BillThomas (Jun 19, 2012)

Plainsman said:


> I think if you mess with someone and loose the old adage "to the victor go the spoils" should apply. After the 1967 war Israel should have kept what the conquered.


They did keep it all, and more, in Violation of International Law.

Israel was losing it all in 1973, in danger of total annihilation, until the USA intervened with Billion, Arm shipments etc-hardly 'to the victors' with 3rd party intervention, something called blowback, unless you want Russia also fighting Proxy wars too.
Probably our worst decision ever. Oilw as $3 a barrel and went to $33 almost overnight. Thanks Israel.

In truth, Israel shouldnt exist. 
It was created BY the UN, stolen from Palestinian Christians and Muslims by Balfour, Hertzl, Rothschild and England.
Those living there are Turk Mongol Converts from the 8th century.

Does Woody Allen look Semitic or Arabic to you?
He doesnt because hes not. Nor are 90% of Israelis.


----------



## BillThomas (Jun 19, 2012)

Anas Strepera said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > That would be even better than voting third party because no one would worry about putting the wrong man (Bill Clinton) into office.


That is actually false. Here's a good breakdown of what actually happened in that election. I didn't write it but I also couldn't find an author, but I did look into the numbers and it looks to be very factual.

Again, the whole notion that Perot cost Bush that election is just another bit of propaganda pushed by the Republican party to ensure that conservatives stay within their ranks. It's the same thing the Democrats pushed with Nader because of their fear of him siphoning off liberal voters.

Heck, let's say you choose to vote Obama. If ND goes Romney (which it absolutely will) does your vote even really matter? It does nothing to get him elected. Obama picks up a vote counted in the popular vote, but since we don't elect presidents on the popular vote...who cares?

If the Liberterian party could poll 5% nationally in the election that'd be HUGE. If conservative voters were smart, or voters in general for that matter, they could easily get 10-15% of the popular vote and not cost Romney the election...as long as people understood the importance of being unified in swing states where it could cost Romney electoral votes.

Here's the read on Perot and the '92 election. A little lengthy but very interesting IMO.

quote]

We need a Viable 3rd Party Now.

The Tea party was taken over by Cronies, Neo Cons and Zionist war mongers, and most of these shills supported Bank Bailouts!

Hardly Constitutional Conservatives.


----------

