Obama Our Leader

[rbell]

I never said 40% doesn't matter, what I said is if the 40% want to meet the 60% at the table of discussion and come to a compromise then the 60% is more than willing to listen. However, when the 40% come to the table with an attitude of it's my way or you won't get my support, then I think they need to be reminded of who won and who has the 60%.

I would think you should be more upset with your representation for coming to the table with that attitude than to be upset with the 60% for giving the same response you would have gave. Bipartisanship doesn't mean I will do it your way, it only implies I will listen and consider to your views. Now when I listen to your views, considered them with an open mind and decided no then that is the answer and bipartisanship has been achieved. It is not the reaction of the GOP who grabbed the mic's, yelled louder saying they wouldn't listen. Oh they listened and heard, they just didn't agree (big difference).

Your post is hypocritical.

You didn't even attempt to do what you suggest others do:

Remember, your plan was on the ballot and went down in flames last Nov 4th...

 

[Pastor Larry]

Yet he repeated used the word WORKING. 95% of WORKING...

There are many working families who make too little to pay federal income tax. Ask me how I know ...

The truth is that you are defending the indefensible. Stop it. Everyone but you appears to get it, so much so, that even Obama stopped talking about it.

 

[Pastor Larry]

I never said 40% doesn't matter, what I said is if the 40% want to meet the 60% at the table of discussion and come to a compromise then the 60% is more than willing to listen. However, when the 40% come to the table with an attitude of it's my way or you won't get my support, then I think they need to be reminded of who won and who has the 60%.

HEre again you are simply incorrect. The 40% were rejected out of hand. They weren't even allowed in teh conference. Can you explain that?

Now when I listen to your views, considered them with an open mind and decided no then that is the answer and bipartisanship has been achieved.

No, that's not what bipartisanship it. Bipartisanship is working together.

I wish for your sake we were back in the Bush administration because at least then your posts had some legitimacy. Here you have gone towards stretching even the most gullible.

 

[DHK]

I did not vote for the man because of his antichrist pro-death values, which he proved out in his signing of the executive order to increase abortions world-wide, however I had some hope that the man was serious when he said he was going to change business as usual between the parties. How sad to see him as just more of the same.

How true is this extremist view?

United States President Barack Obama has named a young Pentecostal pastor to lead the White Office on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships as part of attempts to improve relations with faith-based groups, Worthy News learned Monday, February 16.

Joshua DuBois, 26, previously headed religious affairs for Obama's Senate office and his presidential campaign.

“In President Obama, you have somebody who is not only religiously knowledgeable, thoughtful, open and sensitive himself,” said Saperstein in a statement monitored by Worthy News. “You also have somebody who understands constitutional law, who understands the strength of our system is no establishment of religion. He's going to work hard to get this balance right," he added.

The advisory council says it will focus on four priorities: enlisting community groups to assist in economic recovery, reducing the number of abortions while encouraging responsible fatherhood, and improving interfaith relations, especially with Muslims.

http://www.worthynews.com/4755-faith-based-programs-retooled-under-obama-administration

It sounds optimistic to me.

 

[Revmitchell]

Supporting wholesale abortions shows any rhetoric of reducing the number of abortions as nothing more than talk. It means nothing.

 

[DHK]

Supporting wholesale abortions shows any rhetoric of reducing the number of abortions as nothing more than talk. It means nothing.

Since the one statement contradicts the other, you would have to document that Obama supports "wholesale abortions." The other position is already stated and documented.

 

[targus]

Supporting wholesale abortions shows any rhetoric of reducing the number of abortions as nothing more than talk. It means nothing.

I think that our tax dollars are actually paying for abortions at retail - not wholesale.

 

[JamieinNH]

I think that our tax dollars are actually paying for abortions at retail - not wholesale.

Since you're talking about abortion, you need to clarify that statement in the beginning with something along the lines of... In my opinion, ..... If not, you want be within the new rules of this board.

 

[targus]

Since you're talking about abortion, you need to clarify that statement in the beginning with something along the lines of... In my opinion, ..... If not, you want be within the new rules of this board.

"I think" is not a qualifier similar to "in my opinion"?

BTW it was a JOKE.

 

[JamieinNH]

"I think" is not a qualifier similar to "in my opinion"?

BTW it was a JOKE.

Hey I was only saying what the new rules where... I didn't and don't agree with the new rules, but if they are going to start to silence some, then they should be 'man' enough to enforce them... my opinion only of course.

My statement towards you were not 'against' us, it's against the un-needed rule.. You just happen to give me an example of where some rules are silly.

I know you were 100% serious when you stated it.

 

[LeBuick]

The news source is irrelevant especially since it was video of Obama himself. But nice ad hominem..

I was only pointing to how they assembled this nice set of clips to include cutting him off mid sentence.

I explained what he's been saying all along but apparently you don't care for the facts. Somehow I thought we should want to know the truth and give credit where it's due...

 

[Revmitchell]

I was only pointing to how they assembled this nice set of clips to include cutting him off mid sentence.

I explained what he's been saying all along but apparently you don't care for the facts. Somehow I thought we should want to know the truth and give credit where it's due...

The fact is he said tax cuts for 95 % of Americans. It was incorrect and impossible. You cannot cut taxes on people who pay none. But he sure can give them welfare under a guise of a refund.

 

[LeBuick]

The fact is he said tax cuts for 95 % of Americans. It was incorrect and impossible. You cannot cut taxes on people who pay none. But he sure can give them welfare under a guise of a refund.

You're still leaving out the word WORKING... Listen to your own clips. He said 95% of WORKING American's..

 

[targus]

You're still leaving out the word WORKING... Listen to your own clips. He said 95% of WORKING American's..

You keep focusing on the word "working".

Obama didn't. He used the word in some of the various versions he was selling.

His promise of a tax cut continually morphed throughout the campaign.

This is most likely because he didn't really have any particular tax cut in mind. He was just trying to throw the words out there to cast as wide of a net as possible.

At the presidential debate in Oxford, Miss., Barack Obama described his tax plan and said, "Here's what I can tell the American people: 95 percent of you will get a tax cut."

 

[Revmitchell]

You're still leaving out the word WORKING... Listen to your own clips. He said 95% of WORKING American's..

Word wrangling again.

 

[LeBuick]

You keep focusing on the word "working".

Obama didn't. He used the word in some of the various versions he was selling."

Obama did... Did you even listen to the links you provided?

Listen at 34 seconds on the first clip...

Listen to 1:15 of the second clip...

He clearly says "working". Working people are not on welfare.

 

[Revmitchell]

Obama did... Did you even listen to the links you provided?

Listen at 34 seconds on the first clip...

Listen to 1:15 of the second clip...

He clearly says "working". Working people are not on welfare.

It is welfare if they do not pay taxes. Just because someone works does not mean they earn enough to pay out taxes. Many get a full refund on their return. Pretty simple really

 

[targus]

Obama did... Did you even listen to the links you provided?

Listen at 34 seconds on the first clip...

Listen to 1:15 of the second clip...

He clearly says "working". Working people are not on welfare.

You really need to read more carefully.

I said, "He used the word in some of the various versions he was selling."

But he did not use the word "working" in all of the versions of a tax cut that he was selling. For example, at the presidential debate in Oxford, Miss., Barack Obama described his tax plan and said, "Here's what I can tell the American people: 95 percent of you will get a tax cut."

As I said, you are focusing on the word "working" but Obama did not.

 

[Dragoon68]

The so called "tax cuts" are an absolute joke for most tax payers in America. It's like taking $10,000 and giving back $100 and calling it a good deal. Let's get real folks! The "tax cuts" are another name for wealth redistribution. None of it in the Oink Oink Oink Law has anything to do with a general tax cut. The "rebate" amounts to nothing and is a gimmick just like rebates for stuff you buy in the store. All of it is greatly offset by the expanded spending and the tab for all that will continue to grow. The other grossly misleading term is "working people"! Many of us are actually working but darn few of us are going to see any tax relief. Most of us are going to pay a lot more to fund the "non-working people" who'll get the grants, credits, etc. It's nothing but pure socialist pork! Oink, oink, oink!

 

[LadyEagle]

Most all of us are actually working but darn few of us are going to see any tax relief and most of us are going to pay more to fund the "non-working people" who'll get the grants, credits, etc. It's nothing but pure socialist pork! Oink, oink, oink!

Redistribution of wealth just like Joe the Plumber said. All the money will go to people who know how to work the system because they have milked it dry in the past and now the cash cow borrowed money to throw it at them again. Maybe they will bring back the government cheese for old folks. Or maybe not. Maybe they'll just euthanize us after they decide we cost their centralized health plan too much.