The Barnyard

Oddly enough, I deem you to be a reasonably intelligent person(I think most of the "political" posters are)..which is why I don't understand why you just pull stuff straight out of your arse.

I don't really see anything that's true or relevant...just demo talking points...which is a waste of time.

Your first point..."trust fund babies"...facts: Obama is wealthy, Clinton is wealthy, Kerry I believe is the wealthiest to ever run for office, JFK was wealthy...you really don't have a logical point here
Your 2nd point..'.Romney's and Ryan's platform is that Bush just didn't cut taxes for the wealthy enough...other than that it was great...' This is just a ludicrous statement that you don't even believe...just spouting talking points
3rd point...' They wanted the banks to do just whatever they wanted'...I'm sure that's exactly what the plan is...you're not even asking the right questions with regards to this
4th point...Basically, they wanted to get 3 wars going...hey, why not.

***this stuff is just silly and frankly insulting to the rest of us on the board...it's really not even worth addressing. You know it's possible to support your candidate or party without turning all who disagree with you into monsters...just a suggestion.

First of all, you don't speak for the rest of the board.

Secondly, a trust fund baby is someone who inherits their wealth. There are two in this years race, Willard and Ryan. I assert that is part of why they haven't the slightest idea what life is like for a typical middle class family. I never said a word good or bad about wealth. You republicans are so far up the wealthy's ass you can't bear to hear anyone not bow before them.

The Willard/Ryan economic plan is clear. They haven't tried to hide it, like they are their plans for Medicare. Keep all of the Bush tax cuts, including the extra ones for the rich and add more, for the rich. You can go on their website and see it.

Fourth, they whine constantly about "unchaining" the banks and financial industry. Not my term or Joe Biden's. Theirs.

Fifth, Willard and Ryan both criticize the Obama administration for getting our troops out of Iraq and having a timetable for leaving Afghanistan. At the same time, they threaten military action in Iran and cede US sovereignty over our own foreign policy. FACT, Willard went to Israel, stood on foreign soil and said when he was president, he would tell Israel we would unequivocally support whatever Israel decided to do. His words, not mine.

When you have no history of military service in your family, you don't appreciate how difficult these wars are on our troops. Look at Willard. His grandfather was in Mexico with his multiple wives during WW !. His father didn't volunteer for WW II. He spent Vietnam in France. None of his five sons volunteered after 9/11 to fight the wars he says Obama ends to early.

Compare that to Obama who grew up with his maternal grandparents who both served in WW II or Biden who's son served in Iraq.

Trying refuting something I post with a fact to the contrary.

here comes the refuting...
Romney-Ryan are not "hiding their plans for Medicare." Ryan's plan has been out in open for months & Obama even praised parts of it last year. Erskine Bowles called Ryan's plan "wonderful".

Quite frankly, most of the reasonable people that I know want to keep the Bush tax cuts, so I would say they are doing what their target constituents want. Just because you don't like it does not mean it shouldn't happen or is wrong.

Biden's twangy inflection "put ya'll back in chains" was a blatant racist statement meant to scare those who don't know any better.

Exactly when did we cede US sovereignty over our own foreign policy. The FACT is that Romney stated what every president since 1947, prior to NObama has stated: Israel is our friend and we will protect her. FACT: it is Nobama and Hillary who attempted to cede our gun rights via a UN treaty but public outcry caused them to drop it.

Nobama did not grow up with his grandparents until he was 10. He was indoctrinated in a madrasa and does/did not know what it was to grow up in the USA. He was not exposed to American exceptionalism. Believe it or not, in 1971 when he returned to Hawaii, the curriculum there was very dissimilar to the one taught on the mainland. There are many articles, easily found via Google, that indicate his grandparents had strong ties to extreme leftists/organizations, including Frank Marshall Davis. That removes all doubt, in my mind, that his parents were patriots during Nobama's time with them.

Why? Perhaps because of the United Nations resolution recognizing Israel as a country. Or maybe the Camp David peace accords would have something to do with our continued support. Not to mention after being attacked, Israel defeated it’s adversaries in two wars.

Both Clinton and Carter invested large amount of political and personal capital into the peace process.

Perhaps in tribute to the 1978 Noble peace prize awarded equally to:

MOHAMED ANWAR AL-SADAT, President of the Arab Republic of Egypt.

MENACHEM BEGIN, Prime Minister of Israel.

for jointly negotiating peace between Egypt and Israel.

Or the 1994 Noble peace prize shared by:

YASSER ARAFAT, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO, President of the Palestinian National Authority.

SHIMON PERES, Foreign Minister of Israel.

YITZHAK RABIN, Prime Minister of Israel.

for their efforts to create peace in the Middle East.

We could throw in the 2002 Noble prize awarded to:

JIMMY CARTER JR., former President of the United States of America,

for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development.

One of the tenants of the Progressive agenda has been tolerance – your suggested position seems to discount that posture and espouses one of marked intolerance. Perhaps you would agree with Ahmadinejad’s rhetoric of annihilation as a method of removing the sour impediment.

You think our relation with radical, fundamentalist "theocratic" Islamic regimes is sour because of our support of Israel - just my opinion - but I believe you are grossly mistaken.

We've had a policy since 1947-48 that an attack on Israel is an attack on the US. Israeli defense secretary Ehud Barak, said just after Willard's visit that in his decades in the Israel government he's never seen a better working relationship than they have with the Obama administration.

What Willard said, on foreign soil, is a whole 'nother thing. The policy he said, while US troops are in harm's way in the Middle East, his administration would follow was that the US would completely support any steps Israel chooses to take militarily. That is a big, big difference from "an attack on Israel is an attack on the US."

It is outsourcing US foreign policy in the Middle East to Netanyahu, putting our troops at greater risk, and it is wrong on every level. I know of no other example of an American presidential candidate of a major party taking such a step and doing it on foreign soil to beat. If he were elected and instituted such a policy it would be treason.

Outrage, anger and dismay are all more than deserved, however I'm sure there is more (much more) to the story than what we were told or led to believe.

On the surface it appears the hand of the administration, at the very least, has its fingers in the mix.
......
From a 2001 story by Eric S. Margolis a foreign correspondent for the Toronto Sun.

Less than an hour after the attack, Israel told Washington its forces had committed a 'tragic error.' Later, Israel claimed it had mistaken 'Liberty' for an ancient Egyptian horse transport...

In contrast to American outrage over North Korea's assault on the intelligence ship 'Pueblo,' Iraq's mistaken missile strike on the USS 'Stark,' ...bombing of the USS 'Cole' in Aden, and the recent US-China air incident, the savaging of 'Liberty' was quickly hushed up by President Lyndon Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara....
......
I will read up on the incident but I suspect I will gain very little insight into the details.

Read up on it all you want, Jack. Absolutely.

But you'll learn that the Israeli Defense Forces with the full knowledge of prime minister Golda Meir, a former American Citizen, bombed a US Navy vessel, and jammed SOS communications to the Sixth Fleet. LBJ, and his successor Nixon, who took office nine months later did nothing, and in fact hushed it up.

We have literally declared war on other nations for this very thing.

We do agree there is more to the story and there appears to be some underhanded, perhaps, nefarious "'coverup" or borderline government conspiracy between the two countries?

We've both been around the block. You and I both know damn well why this got covered up.