Anyone know what Obamas New vision of America is??

macgyver06

is there anyone out there who thinkks about things and what that means when he says it...


why wont he tell you what his plan is...


any ideas??

810wmb

mrs clinton in a dog collar?

macgyver06

810wmb wrote:

mrs clinton in a dog collar?

wait.... you think she looks good?

810wmb

macgyver06 wrote:

wait.... you think she looks good?

maybe with a dog collar and a rubber mask...maybe...

onelongsong

macgyver06 wrote:

is there anyone out there who thinkks about things and what that means when he says it...


why wont he tell you what his plan is...


any ideas??

because you wouldn't vote for him if he does.

onelongsong

810wmb wrote:

maybe with a dog collar and a rubber mask...maybe...

2 bloody bags over her head in case one fails.
cheers

macgyver06

onelongsong wrote:

because you wouldn't vote for him if he does.

it really seems like this right... hitler had great ideas for germany, but he didnt address them till after being ELECTED

onelongsong

macgyver06 wrote:

it really seems like this right... hitler had great ideas for germany, but he didnt address them till after being ELECTED

good analogy.

blackredyellow

macgyver06 wrote:

is there anyone out there who thinkks about things and what that means when he says it...


why wont he tell you what his plan is...


any ideas??

I'm not sure I understand your question. He talks about his plans and vision in the same vagueness as just about every other presidential candidate in recent history.

Like other candidates, you have to figure in his past votes, statements and actions and in your mind decided how he will lead or govern.

Even if a candidate tells you exactly what they will do, it won't happen that way anyway, with congress and everyone else involved. For future re-election, it's safer to be vague then to promise the world and come up really short.

RainDog

macgyver06 wrote:

it really seems like this right... hitler had great ideas for germany, but he didnt address them till after being ELECTED

If by "didn't address" you mean "shouted them out to anyone who would listen - including during his trial when charged with treason" and by "elected" you mean "appointed Chancellor by the German president - whose office was disolved after he died, making Hitler the German head of state" then, yeah. Just like that.

onelongsong

blackredyellow wrote:

I'm not sure I understand your question. He talks about his plans and vision in the same vagueness as just about every other presidential candidate in recent history.

Like other candidates, you have to figure in his past votes, statements and actions and in your mind decided how he will lead or govern.

Even if a candidate tells you exactly what they will do, it won't happen that way anyway, with congress and everyone else involved. For future re-election, it's safer to be vague then to promise the world and come up really short.

if it's safer to be vague; why are we questioning it so?

blackredyellow

onelongsong wrote:

if it's safer to be vague; why are we questioning it so?

I didn't say it was right, but I just didn't get why Obama got singled out in this thread for something that every major party candidate does.

deadmosquito

RainDog wrote:

If by "didn't address" you mean "shouted them out to anyone who would listen - including during his trial when charged with treason" and by "elected" you mean "appointed Chancellor by the German president - whose office was disolved after he died, making Hitler the German head of state" then, yeah. Just like that.

oh snap!!

onelongsong

blackredyellow wrote:

I didn't say it was right, but I just didn't get why Obama got singled out in this thread for something that every major party candidate does.

i can see where you're coming from; but i've heard the others plans. if i had the transcripts from the debates i could answer more knowledgably; but obama seems to have the same vauge answers as hilary; which makes me think he's a crook too. i can't stand before the american public and say elect me and i'll show you what i can do. i want to know what and how. if you're going to end the war; i want to know how. are you going to send in enough troops to finish the job or just pull out and cause the middle east to explode with violence? and if you do that; will we be paying $20.00/gallon for gas. people don't get elected when they can't answer questions.

RainDog

onelongsong wrote:

i want to know what and how. if you're going to end the war; i want to know how. are you going to send in enough troops to finish the job or just pull out and cause the middle east to explode with violence?

Bias much? At any rate, according to the Obama campaign site (also quite biased):

"In January 2007, Obama introduced legislation to responsibly end the war in Iraq, with a phased withdrawal of troops engaged in combat operations.

Obama has a plan to immediately begin withdrawing our troops engaged in combat operations at a pace of one or two brigades every month, to be completed by the end of next year. He would call for a new constitutional convention in Iraq, convened with the United Nations, which would not adjourn until Iraq's leaders reach a new accord on reconciliation. He would use presidential leadership to surge our diplomacy with all of the nations of the region on behalf of a new regional security compact. And he would take immediate steps to confront the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Iraq."


So I guess by your analysis, he wants the Middle East to explode in violence, driving our gas prices up to $20.00 a gallon. Of course, that's not my analysis - but I still consider it an acceptable risk.

inmytree

RainDog wrote:

If by "didn't address" you mean "shouted them out to anyone who would listen - including during his trial when charged with treason" and by "elected" you mean "appointed Chancellor by the German president - whose office was disolved after he died, making Hitler the German head of state" then, yeah. Just like that.

ShaZamm...!!!

onelongsong

RainDog wrote:

Bias much? At any rate, according to the Obama campaign site (also quite biased):

"In January 2007, Obama introduced legislation to responsibly end the war in Iraq, with a phased withdrawal of troops engaged in combat operations.

Obama has a plan to immediately begin withdrawing our troops engaged in combat operations at a pace of one or two brigades every month, to be completed by the end of next year. He would call for a new constitutional convention in Iraq, convened with the United Nations, which would not adjourn until Iraq's leaders reach a new accord on reconciliation. He would use presidential leadership to surge our diplomacy with all of the nations of the region on behalf of a new regional security compact. And he would take immediate steps to confront the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Iraq."


So I guess by your analysis, he wants the Middle East to explode in violence, driving our gas prices up to $20.00 a gallon. Of course, that's not my analysis - but I still consider it an acceptable risk.

i'm not biased; just educated. if you've got say 100 blokes in a fight and they're not winning; and you take away 25; the 75 are going to get their arses kicked.

onelongsong

inmytree wrote:

ShaZamm...!!!

if you read hitlers speaches; he didn't shout his "agenda" from the rooftops. he shouted what the people wanted to hear. once in control; he did what he wanted.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Bammers vision is a quaint little place called letspretendthefeddoesntrapeus USA.

t206

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Bammers vision is a quaint little place called letspretendthefeddoesntrapeus USA.

Did you see Ron Paul on Mad Money? They were just sharing their bad feelings about the fed together.

Cosmo

macgyver06 wrote:

it really seems like this right... hitler had great ideas for germany, but he didnt address them till after being ELECTED

onelongsong wrote:

if you read hitlers speaches; he didn't shout his "agenda" from the rooftops. he shouted what the people wanted to hear. once in control; he did what he wanted.

...
"This is the first demand we must raise and do [reversal of the Versailles Treaty provisions]: that our people be set free, that these chains be burst asunder, that Germany be once again captain of her soul and master of her destinies, together with all those who want to join Germany.
And the fulfillment of this first demand will then open up the way for all the other reforms. And here is one thing that perhaps distinguishes us from you [Austrians] as far as our programme is concerned, although it is very much in the spirit of things: our attitude to the Jewish problem.
For us, this is not a problem you can turn a blind eye to-one to be solved by small concessions. For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst."
Adolph Hitler - Salzburg, 7 or 8 August 1920
Source: D Irving, The War Path: Hitler's Germany 1933-1939. Papermac, 1978, p.xxi
...
Hitler's political rise to power were based on these principles and made them known. His campaign was run on these points. And even though he lost this presidential race against Hindenberg, he would later be appointed Chancellor as the Germany Republic deteriorated amid (false) fears of a military coup by Schleicher against Hindenberg.
Hitler's motives were well known prior to his taking power and thusly, documented.