The Obama alternative

[jokersarewild]

Repost. Delete pls.

[atlantic]

Did he file chapter 11 or 13 though. Lots of companies file for bankruptcy. I seem to remember Bank of America needed the country's help, and that bank was bailed out. Bankruptcy is a normal condition of our financial system lately - sadly. What scares me are there are now towns who are eliminating their police, fire and other important services. We need someone who not only understands international threats, international banking, the importance of a solid economy, and the elimination of free handouts. We need someone who cares about this country first. Not every other country period. Donald Trump does care. Although, I'm sure he wouldn't be elected because people don't pay enough attention to who they are voting for. I do believe he has some really good ideas.

[jokersarewild]

Did he file chapter 11 or 13 though. Lots of companies file for bankruptcy. I seem to remember Bank of America needed the country's help, and that bank was bailed out. Bankruptcy is a normal condition of our financial system lately - sadly. What scares me are there are now towns who are eliminating their police, fire and other important services. We need someone who not only understands international threats, international banking, the importance of a solid economy, and the elimination of free handouts. We need someone who cares about this country first. Not every other country period. Donald Trump does care. Although, I'm sure he wouldn't be elected because people don't pay enough attention to who they are voting for. I do believe he has some really good ideas.

 

11, I believe. My point is, he overextends himself financially, then files bankruptcy when it comes back to bite him in the ass.

[jokersarewild]

Did he file chapter 11 or 13 though. Lots of companies file for bankruptcy. I seem to remember Bank of America needed the country's help, and that bank was bailed out. Bankruptcy is a normal condition of our financial system lately - sadly. What scares me are there are now towns who are eliminating their police, fire and other important services. We need someone who not only understands international threats, international banking, the importance of a solid economy, and the elimination of free handouts. We need someone who cares about this country first. Not every other country period. Donald Trump does care. Although, I'm sure he wouldn't be elected because people don't pay enough attention to who they are voting for. I do believe he has some really good ideas.

 

11, I believe. My point is, he overextends himself financially, then files bankruptcy when it comes back to bite him in the ass.

[timesjoke]

The first problem to anyone running for office is they have to be willing to be ripped apart by the other side and maybe even their own side of the political spectrum.

 

 

 

Let's take Phreak for one great example, Obama was his choice for President, he came here blindly defending Obama and his policies for a very long time and suddenly turns on Obama and starts calling Obama a Republican. Not one person who knows anything about politics would claim government power grabs over healthcare, the auto industry, or the takeover of the banking industry and even the recent expansions in other areas like the EPA who is taking away permits for things like coal mining under the order of Obama, any of these things would never be done by a conservative, most moderates in America are screaming against these actions as well and that is why the Democrats took the biggest beating in a mid term election ever recorded.

 

 

People in general are tired of two faced politicians who say whatever they have to say to get elected then they do whatever they want and forget all their promises after taking office.

 

 

So who can win in my opinion?

 

 

 

Anyone with a true conservative record and who wants to scale back the Government. Sarah Palin "could" be that person but you have radicals like Hugo who cover their ears and say over and over that Palin following State law was socialist and many of the stupid believe that mess but I once proved that even Hugo's state of texas takes massive taxes from oil companies and even has a "per quart" tax imposed so they are taking just as much from oil companies but they spend it themselves so the average Texas resident like Hugo pays less in taxes directly. The money turns out to be about the same, it is just shifted around in different ways. Hugo and his ilk actually help the radical left like Obama because he leads the bickering within instead of attacking the real enemy who is people like Obama.

 

 

 

I would agree with atlantic that someone like Donald Trump could be a good President. We have to remember that most of the business Trump has is here in america and things like casinos don't do very well in a depressed economy so his main priority would not be to smother business the way Obama has. The more people working, the more people with money to spend in places like a casino.......logic. Trump also saw massive losses during the mess that followed 9/11 so he will be strong against terrorist attacks where Obama has been almost understanding of terrorist actions like he wants to say they are justified but knows politically that would end him. I gurantee Trump would call a terrorist a terrorist without consulting the left wing political correcect handbook.

 

 

I know it will never happen soon but we will eventually need to end welfare as we know it. Welfare is a ponzi scheme, it requires way more people paying in them is taking out to stay viable, this is no longer the case. With the number of illegals now on welfare programs there is no way we can keep the system working. These illegals being able to get on the system is the very example of why a big government should not be running welfare because they give "free money" to people who don't deserve or need it. We need to go back to families and communities taking care of each other and give back the tax money being taken. If you are lazy and just don't want to work you can sit on your behind and get "free money" from the Government, it really is that easy, sure the amount you get will not buy you a fancy home or a nice car but you get the money for doing nothing so some people are willing to live that way. The illegals who get on the system have actually increased their standard of living ten times over compared to what they could have in Mexico so why not live on welfare?

 

 

 

 

 

Joker--------

 

Why not run America like a business?

 

Yes, Trump has had some of his business dealings go bad, but most have done well and nobody learns lessons better then to deal with failures. America is in financial trouble, we are following right behind California in spending money we don't have and just like California, it will never improve without some harsh business decisions being made. You speak of other people comming into office in California "saying" they wanted to treat it like a business but the problem was after they took office, they caved to political pressures and backed down. Someone like Trump would not back down. Nobody else being talked about has ever had to make these kinds of hard decisions, Trump has.

 

 

Let me put it to you this way:

 

If you have cancer do you want a doctor who is going to feel sorry for the tumor instead of you? If the doctor is making promises to cure you but every actions he does looks like he is actually helping the cancer spread what do you do?

 

If you ask me that question I tell you I get the doctor who will cut out the cancer and save the patient without feeling bad about the dead cancer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All that said I don't know who I would vote for, we need to get closer and see how things settle into place for the election run. Someone may come out of nowhere to step up and Phreak is right about one thing, the smartest thing the Democrats can do is let someone else run under the Democrat ticket and have Obama claim his has no desire for a second term. Right now there are too many promises he turned his back on and can be made into nice election videos against him for him to get re-elected. All a decent conservative canidate has to do is remind Americans how Obama and the Democrats cheated their way into passing Obamacare excluding all Republicans from the process and most Americans will refuse to support Obama because he plays dirty politics and Americans are tired of dirty politics. Remind them about the private meeting between Obama and Unions to give them their sweet exceptions to higher healthcare taxes all normal Americans have to pay, remind Americans that insurance companies gave millions to Obama to help him get elected and as a reward he gave the insurance companies 40 million new forced customers.

 

 

Believe it or not, while many Americans don't practice it themselves, they still believe in "fair play" and they will hold the Democrats accountable for their dirty back room deals and tricks as long as they are reminded just becfore election day.

[jokersarewild]

I would agree with atlantic that someone like Donald Trump could be a good President. We have to remember that most of the business Trump has is here in america and things like casinos don't do very well in a depressed economy so his main priority would not be to smother business the way Obama has. The more people working, the more people with money to spend in places like a casino.......logic. Trump also saw massive losses during the mess that followed 9/11 so he will be strong against terrorist attacks where Obama has been almost understanding of terrorist actions like he wants to say they are justified but knows politically that would end him. I gurantee Trump would call a terrorist a terrorist without consulting the left wing political correcect handbook.

 

I believe that Trump wouldn't smother businesses, you're right. He would probably be the most business-minded President we've had in quite awhile, though I've only been alive for 3 (technically 4, but seeing Bush Sr.'s last two years as an infant doesn't count in my book), so I suppose I couldn't rightfully claim that. shrug

 

I know it will never happen soon but we will eventually need to end welfare as we know it. Welfare is a ponzi scheme, it requires way more people paying in them is taking out to stay viable, this is no longer the case. With the number of illegals now on welfare programs there is no way we can keep the system working. These illegals being able to get on the system is the very example of why a big government should not be running welfare because they give "free money" to people who don't deserve or need it. We need to go back to families and communities taking care of each other and give back the tax money being taken. If you are lazy and just don't want to work you can sit on your behind and get "free money" from the Government, it really is that easy, sure the amount you get will not buy you a fancy home or a nice car but you get the money for doing nothing so some people are willing to live that way. The illegals who get on the system have actually increased their standard of living ten times over compared to what they could have in Mexico so why not live on welfare?

 

Welfare does need reform. Lots of it. There are many people who can't actually work, and those people need the money to survive. But the lazy assholes who don't work, or better yet, don't get a real job, then go sell drugs and have nicer cars than most of us working stiffs, shouldn't get a damned penny out of us. Quite simply, SSI and the like shouldn't be given to people who can still work. If you can stand in one place for 8 hours, door greet at Wal-Mart. It's minimum wage, but it has to be the easiest job I can think of. And it's a JOB. That's the important part.

 

Foodstamps, however, are a different matter entirely. Most of the time that I've seen (as a Wal-Mart cashier), the people who have foodstamps have at least 1 kid. As much as I would love to do away with the program for the most part, it seems as if the children would suffer, and that's not right.

 

Joker--------

 

Why not run America like a business?

 

Yes, Trump has had some of his business dealings go bad, but most have done well and nobody learns lessons better then to deal with failures. America is in financial trouble, we are following right behind California in spending money we don't have and just like California, it will never improve without some harsh business decisions being made. You speak of other people comming into office in California "saying" they wanted to treat it like a business but the problem was after they took office, they caved to political pressures and backed down. Someone like Trump would not back down. Nobody else being talked about has ever had to make these kinds of hard decisions, Trump has.

 

 

Let me put it to you this way:

 

If you have cancer do you want a doctor who is going to feel sorry for the tumor instead of you? If the doctor is making promises to cure you but every actions he does looks like he is actually helping the cancer spread what do you do?

 

If you ask me that question I tell you I get the doctor who will cut out the cancer and save the patient without feeling bad about the dead cancer.

 

The problem is that Trump has no damn business sense. It's why he keeps having to file bankruptcy. He's been careful to not have to file bankruptcy personally, but he's had to file twice, and is currently being sued by one of the banks who loaned to him (Deutsche Bank), because he's asking for an extension on a loan he can't pay. Guess who will probably file a third time? I would be scared if he somehow got into office. If he can't run his business properly (and seriously, even in hard times, people seem compelled to give money to casinos hand over fist. We have a local casino where the parking lot is always, always 3/4s of the way full at least), why the hell do I want him to run our country "as a business"? "Oh man, looks like I screwed up again. Can the US file bankruptcy? Not without completely crashing the world economy and taking the planet into a global clusterfuck of epic proportions? Damnit, that's always my goto!"

[atlantic]

Who would you like to see run JAW?

[timesjoke]

 

I believe that Trump wouldn't smother businesses, you're right. He would probably be the most business-minded President we've had in quite awhile, though I've only been alive for 3 (technically 4, but seeing Bush Sr.'s last two years as an infant doesn't count in my book), so I suppose I couldn't rightfully claim that. shrug

 

The real question is, who makes jobs? People like Trump, he knows they don't need handouts as much as they need a solid set of rules as a foundation to move foward. The biggest fear Progressives like Obama delivers to the business community is that there are no set rules, they change the rules all the time and that makes it very hard to do business.

 

 

 

Welfare does need reform. Lots of it. There are many people who can't actually work, and those people need the money to survive. But the lazy assholes who don't work, or better yet, don't get a real job, then go sell drugs and have nicer cars than most of us working stiffs, shouldn't get a damned penny out of us. Quite simply, SSI and the like shouldn't be given to people who can still work. If you can stand in one place for 8 hours, door greet at Wal-Mart. It's minimum wage, but it has to be the easiest job I can think of. And it's a JOB. That's the important part.

 

Foodstamps, however, are a different matter entirely. Most of the time that I've seen (as a Wal-Mart cashier), the people who have foodstamps have at least 1 kid. As much as I would love to do away with the program for the most part, it seems as if the children would suffer, and that's not right.

 

But you miss why it can never work, the system must be run by Government employees who don't care if the money is wasted. Each person who "really needs help" has a family, friends, neighbors, all sorts of people know them and can help them if they really do need help, we don't need, and can no longer afford, to blindly give money away.

 

I feel bad for the kids too, but again if they truly need help, their own family will help. You have other family I am sure Joker, if someone in your family truly needed help, would you help? Your parents? This is my point and when you make people turn to their own family for help, they most likely will not get away with just being lazy. Being 30 years old and going to your father asking for a handout is a lot more difficult than asking the Government to give you a handout. Suddenly you eliminate 90% of the lazy and at the same time you eliminate 90% of the illegals too because they don't have the "free money" anymore.

 

 

The problem is that Trump has no damn business sense. It's why he keeps having to file bankruptcy. He's been careful to not have to file bankruptcy personally, but he's had to file twice, and is currently being sued by one of the banks who loaned to him (Deutsche Bank), because he's asking for an extension on a loan he can't pay. Guess who will probably file a third time? I would be scared if he somehow got into office. If he can't run his business properly (and seriously, even in hard times, people seem compelled to give money to casinos hand over fist. We have a local casino where the parking lot is always, always 3/4s of the way full at least), why the hell do I want him to run our country "as a business"? "Oh man, looks like I screwed up again. Can the US file bankruptcy? Not without completely crashing the world economy and taking the planet into a global clusterfuck of epic proportions? Damnit, that's always my goto!"

 

Well you just sounded very foolish right there. How much business sense does Obama have? Before he was President he never even managed a fast food restaurant. Obama as well as the majority of the Democrats in power have "zero" experience in the private sector.

 

Yes, Trump has had to deal with the same economic problems most business people have had to deal with, my own business income has declined about 20% over the last 3 years mostly because people don't have the same money to spend they had before. The best manager in the world can't fix these things on their own. Trump has had more success than defeat and his motivation is to get the economy moving again so he makes more money.

 

 

 

The Progressive gains nothing if the economy improves. Only with this downfall was it possible for the Progressives to bully more entitlements. Depressions offer the Progressives the chance to give the Government more power over the people and less power to the every day man. This latest depression gave Obama and company the excuse to take over a massive chunk of the American auto industry and force them to build "eco friendly" (and other) cars the Progressives want people to drive, they took over the banking industry and have new sweeping powers to manipulate it, and they have created a massive new buracracy with open ended powers to manipulate and control a large part of the healthcare industry.

 

 

So what do you truly want Joker?

 

A progressive who has everything to gain by keeping the economy broken?

 

Or a businessman who has everything to gain by fixing the economy?

[hugo]

Anyone with a true conservative record and who wants to scale back the Government. Sarah Palin "could" be that person but you have radicals like Hugo who cover their ears and say over and over that Palin following State law was socialist and many of the stupid believe that mess but I once proved that even Hugo's state of texas takes massive taxes from oil companies and even has a "per quart" tax imposed so they are taking just as much from oil companies but they spend it themselves so the average Texas resident like Hugo pays less in taxes directly. The money turns out to be about the same, it is just shifted around in different ways. Hugo and his ilk actually help the radical left like Obama because he leads the bickering within instead of attacking the real enemy who is people like Obama.

 

 

 

 

Palin's Approval Ratings Slipping

By Eugene Robinson

 

WASHINGTON -- The headlines scream as if Godzilla were rising from the icy depths of the Potomac: "Sarah Palin: Threat or Menace?"

 

OK, I haven't actually seen that one, at least not verbatim. But the commentariat is in full run-for-the-hills mode over the prospect that Palin could still have a political future. A lot of Democrats -- and quite a few Republicans, too -- seem worried that she intends to stomp the capital to smithereens, perhaps along with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Her appearance at the Tea Party convention in Nashville was imbued with portent that might have been appropriate for, say, Napoleon's escape from Elba.

 

Sarah Palin

 

As is too often the case, Washington seems to be out of step with objective reality.

 

While the political insiders who are supposed to have their finger on America's pulse worry about Palin's burgeoning "popularity," the fact is that her approval ratings have been sinking. According to a new Washington Post poll, only 37 percent of Americans have a favorable impression of Palin -- an all-time low. Meanwhile, 55 percent have an unfavorable impression of the erstwhile Alaska governor, which is an all-time high.More to the point, Palin's refusal to rule out a run for the White House seems, at present, completely ludicrous. An astounding 71 percent of Americans do not believe that Palin is qualified to serve as president, the Post poll found. This number includes not only virtually all Democrats and two-thirds of independents but also a majority of Republicans -- 52 percent -- who believe that Palin should not be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office.The evidence suggests that the longer Palin struts and frets upon the national stage, the less seriously she is taken as a political figure. Even among those who describe themselves as conservatives -- a necessary constituency if a Palin candidacy were ever to gain traction -- fewer than half think she is qualified to be president, according to the Post poll. That's a sharp decline from the 66 percent of conservatives who believed her to be qualified last fall.Indeed, why wouldn't her numbers fall? The one concrete political step that Palin has taken since the 2008 election was to resign as governor with 17 months left in her term, explaining -- and I'm paraphrasing here, but I think I'm being fair -- that all those official duties were way too much of a hassle.

 

She also wrote an entertaining and lucrative book, established herself on the speaking circuit at a reported $100,000 per lecture, and signed on as a commentator for Fox News. Those are all great moves for a political celebrity. For a potential presidential candidate, apparently, not so much.

 

She's a great performer, though. And I'm not mad at her for writing notes for the Tea Party speech on her palm; it was almost charming, in a regular-gal kind of way. Palin knows how to whip up a crowd, and her nickname from her days as a high-school basketball star, Sarah Barracuda, aptly describes a finely tuned killer instinct. Her putdown of the Obama administration -- "How's that hopey-changey stuff working out for you?" -- might have been unfair, but it did have teeth.

 

Where does any of this really take her, though? It's certainly true that Palin has a knack for expressing the restlessness and anger of many Americans who are buffeted by economic crisis, fed up with a dysfunctional political culture in Washington and tired of feeling as if their voices are being ignored. So far, however, all that Palin's talent has accomplished is to make her the Tea Party Queen. That could be a valuable platform for a national campaign, but even a politician with Palin's undeniable charisma is eventually going to have to, you know, say something. Beyond nostrums about "common-sense solutions," I mean.

 

What does Palin actually propose? I realize she might consider this a trick question, like the time that mean Katie Couric asked about what she reads. But isn't it awfully patronizing to act as if her followers are so dazzled by her very presence that they will never seek to pin her down on a single issue? The polls certainly suggest this is a serious miscalculation.

 

There's a word for those who, like Palin, act as if the voters are mere sheep who don't need to be troubled by discussion of what their government should actually do. The word -- and Palin might want to cover her ears -- is elitist.

 

It ain't just the radicals opposing Palin. 71 percent of the American people and 52% of Republicans do not think she is Presidential material and less than half of the self described conservatives. Not because she increased socialism in a state that was already the most socialist state in the union, but because time after time she has shown little knowledge of the issues and no willingness to learn. I oppose her because she is a GW clone with no solid economic conservative principles. Most people oppose her because she has shown an inability to answer simple questions in an interview. She comes across as another Snooki type reality star. A huckster who is making the most of her 15 minutes of fame.

 

Extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice--Barry Goldwater, the mentor to Ronald Reagan.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Last-Jeffersonian-Ronald-Radical-Democracy/dp/1930586175

 

I suggest you read that book and understand the radicalism of Ronald Reagan and why we cannot let Reagan be the last Jeffersonian.

[timesjoke]

People are stupid, they see the radical like you come out against Palin and believe that at least some of what you say might be true and if there is that much internal fighting it may be better not to support her.

 

 

Put simply, you cause the internal fighting because of an irrational view you have of her and other conservative minded people who don't measure up to your concept of perfection in a political canidate.

 

 

Sarah Palin did not write the laws making the oil the property of all Alaskan residents Hugo, all she did do is support those State laws to the best of her ability no matter if she agreed with them or not. I like that about her because right now we have people like Obama who do not like the constitution and are ignoring it as much as possible. Progressives hate our existing laws and try to work around them all the time. I donb't want Sarah Palin ignoring State law any more than I want Obama and company ignoring the Constitution. People like you dirty the water for conservaties who may want to get into public service but do not want to face attacks even from people who should be on their side.

 

 

Together we stand, divided we fall. You are one of the divided, sure take issue as we boil down the choices, but you take it to a level of hatred and lies that actually hurt conservative canidates.

[phreakwars]

People are stupid, they see the radical like you come out against Palin and believe that at least some of what you say might be true and if there is that much internal fighting it may be better not to support her.

 

 

Put simply, you cause the internal fighting because of an irrational view you have of her and other conservative minded people who don't measure up to your concept of perfection in a political canidate.

I disagree, I think hugo doesn't like Palin because he knows stupid when he sees it. Only ignorance is political, stupid is as stupid does.

 

I REALLY REALLY do hope Sarah runs. I really do wanna vote for her. I'll have my cell phone with me taking video of me filling in that oval ballot with a big smile and thumbs up and I'm gonna post it on YouTube for the world to see.

 

I REALLY REALLY do support Sarah Palin!!

.

.

[hugo]

I am in the majority when it comes to thinking Palin ain't Presidential material. That ain't real radical. If the Republicans wish to beat Obama they need to pick someone else. I prefer someone with Jeffersonian principles without a history of being a socialist and a quitter.

[eddo]

and a quitter.

 

That's what bugs me the most about her: When she stepped down from her post in Alaska before her term was over.

 

She lost a lot of my respect then.

[jokersarewild]

I say ol' Gov. Moonbeam steps up and runs. Why the hell not?

[timesjoke]

I am in the majority when it comes to thinking Palin ain't Presidential material. That ain't real radical. If the Republicans wish to beat Obama they need to pick someone else. I prefer someone with Jeffersonian principles without a history of being a socialist and a quitter.

Obama was the picture perfect Presidential material. he looked the part, spoke the part, said all the right things and had plenty of support and what did we get as a result of all that perfection hugo?

 

 

Yes, Palin made some mistakes, I agree with you guys on how it looked bad for her to step down but I understand "why" she stepped down, the level of attacks even from people like you who are sometimes conservative was more than she was prepared to handle. To be honest I put part of that blame on those who should have gotten her prepared for this before she was announced.

 

 

 

Guys, I am not so much saying she would be great as I am saying that I am sick and tired of professional politicians. Palin is a genuine person, someone who is not hiding a completely different agenda behind her back like Obama and all the Progressives. I would love to see some true humans run for office but we make it hard to entice real people to office because of the internal bickering that goes way, way off the page of decency. Hugo, you are a prime example, you atack Sarah for following State law, she had no choice but to follow those laws and do the best by those laws she could. I happen to like that about her.

 

 

Imagine she did what you say you want her to do, ignore State law and do what you would want her to do. Let's say she gives all the oil away to big oil companies as you say and simply ignores the State laws.........how is that any different from the Progressives ignoring the constitution to put into place more "social justice" programs? Either those in public office respect and follow the laws of their States and Country or they don't Hugo. If it is okay to ignore these laws in one way, then you are condoning them to be ignored in other ways.