what might we expect under an obama administration? - Page 2

Madtown HD Junkie · #21 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenl

i think an obama administration will be the complete opposite of the bush one.

1. The return of the bill of rights.
2. Low deficiet, the end of debt spending (at least at this extreme level we are doing so now)
3. No unnecessary wars.
4. Someone who is not a bumbling idiot when speaking representing us.

stevenl · #22 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 05:45 PM

I forgot your one who supports the Bush Policy of setting the US constitution on fire, and wiping his ass with the charred leftovers.

virtualFallout · #23 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenl

I forgot your one who supports the Bush Policy of setting the US constitution on fire, and wiping his ass with the charred leftovers.

Hey man, don't forget that Congress votes for all the shit that gets passed into law...if you're gonna blame Bush, don't forget to blame every Congressman and Senator that also voted YES.

stevenl · #24 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 05:57 PM

I do, It was a republican controlled congress at the time. And America voted against them. If the Dems dont change it I will vote against them as well.

virtualFallout · #25 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenl

I do, It was a republican controlled congress at the time. And America voted against them. If the Dems dont change it I will vote against them as well.

Hardly my friend, their were 208 Democrats in Congress at the time of the vote to give Bush right to declare war. And there were 221 Republicans. That's far from a Republican controlled Congress. The Dems could have blocked it if they wanted to back in 2002. Kind of funny how in 2006, they get more Democrats in Congress and they still can't stop the war!!!!! :ROFLMFAO:

stevenl · #26 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 06:13 PM

Whos talking about the war?

PS: In 2002 Republicans had a "voting" majority of Congress.. Currently the Democrats do not. The republicans could of passed just about anything (aside from a constitutional amendment) without democrat support. Currently the dems can not pass anything without Republican support. The Democrats majority is only in name, not real "voting power" Although being in the majority does give them power over comities etc.

virtualFallout · #27 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 06:20 PM

I was using the war vote as an example.
Doesn't it takes a 2/3rds vote to pass something in Congress?
208 nay votes could have blocked any Republican bill if they wanted to in 2002-2006.

stevenl · #28 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 08:18 PM

2/3 is required only to override a veto.

You only need to have a majority for a simple bill or resolution to pass. In the Senate currently the democrats do not have that, its a relative tie. And in the House Of Reps they do have it, however they do not have a veto proof majority.

In the house if every democrat voted Yes, and every republican No it would still pass. However they could not get passed a Veto. In the Senate the independents need to vote with the dems and I think 1 republican. I think its 49 - 49 in the senate with 2 independents ?

stevenl · #29 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 10:07 PM

NpT · #30 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenl

I think an Obama Administration will be the complete Opposite of the Bush one.

1. The return of the bill of rights.
2. Low Deficiet, the end of debt spending (at least at this extreme level we are doing so now)
3. No unnecessary wars.
4. Someone who is not a bumbling idiot when speaking representing us.

you mean like this stumbling bumbling idot , who also wants to fuk t Boone pickens on a wind farm:ROFLMFAO::ROFLMFAO:

NpT · #31 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 10:12 PM

and this why there gonna be over 60 in the senate com jan 09 , then there gonna ram some left wing bills down your throat

pjmrt · #32 (**permalink**) 08-13-2008, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenl

I think an Obama Administration will be the complete Opposite of the Bush one.

1. The return of the bill of rights.
2. Low Deficiet, the end of debt spending (at least at this extreme level we are doing so now)
3. No unnecessary wars.
4. Someone who is not a bumbling idiot when speaking representing us.

1. --> the return of the bill of rights for a free ride on the backs of working americans.
2. --> low deficiet, more like lowly deceit.
3. --> no unnecessary wars as he emulates his european heros, surrender, play dead, and hope the boggyman leaves you alone (which he never does)
4. --> someone who's not genuine enough to have views of his own to represent, only whichever have the political wind at that moment. (i.e. not a leader of the free world, an ordinary political hack in a job way over his head)

Fortunately, my original post posed a question which is really a worst-case scenario. Obama will lose and the dems will have wished the national thumb-suckers had listened to the good people of PA, OH, FL, .... and put Hillary forth as the candidate.

Bear Paws · #33 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008, 02:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NpT

you mean like this stumbling bumbling idot , who also wants to fuk t Boone pickens on a wind farm

I hear that great anti capitalist left wing charlatan of a working class Nancy Palosi got in on the IPO of Boone's while the "pickin" was still good.. For the good of the planet..:ROFLMFAO:
Nancy Pelosi Invests In Energy Scheme and Water Grab By T. Boone Pickens : #dontgo Movement

Pelosi #dontgo Bombshell: MONEY : #dontgo Movement

Follow the money :ROFLMFAO:

Here is the REAL story..

Texas Kaos:: Update : Pickens Does It - Votes himself a Water Bonanza!

You guys are sooo gullible... You still believe snake oil and a wind dance will fix the energy problem.

Bear Paws · #34 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008, 12:27 PM

"Speaking" of Palosi... This is not a simple portfolio, this is Mutual Fund proportions for Crize Sakes.
http://scottsmb.com/uploads/N00007360_2007.pdf

Oh yeah. She is your friend. She is just like you.. Comrades.

I have NO problem with making money. Matter of fact I highly encourage it. But the hypocrisy of this women and her buddies is just stunning. Whats even more disappointing is the people that so approvingly sniff her shorts.

Its like the weasel being the representative for the hen house. "Come little chicks , gather around Mother Palosi..":ROFLMFAO:

Madtown HD Junkie · #35 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenl

I forgot your one who supports the Bush Policy of setting the US constitution on fire, and wiping his ass with the charred leftovers.

yah....The dems are the ones who think we should give away everything to the laziest. They are the ones who think the terrorists deserve US citizens rights when not even on our soil. The dems think the answer to high oil prices is inflate your tires:ROFLMFAO: They are giving away our country like a deer slowly bleeding out after taking a rifle shot to the gut in November's deer hunting season in WI.

Spare me the minutia

Madtown HD Junkie · #36 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevenl

congratulations Steven....a new low for even you. You been hanging with npaultodd?

bruce · #37 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madtown HD Junkie

The dems think the answer to high oil prices is inflate your tires
Spare me the minutia

They said that was one of the answers, not the cure, someone else agrees with Obama-

“Obama said a couple of days ago says we all should inflate our tires. I don’t disagree with that. The American Automobile Association strongly recommends it,” McCain said.

That was from Aug. 5

Tales from the Trail » Blog Archive » McCain takes air out of tire pressure debate | Blogs | Reuters.com

Also Factcheck said Proper Tire Pressure could save more than a billion gallons of fuel per year and do it several years sooner than expanded drilling could produce a single drop. McCain has exaggerated by representing Obama's suggestion as a silly notion or implying that it constitutes his entire energy policy.

FactCheck.org: The Truth About Tire Pressure

BlackHitachi · #38 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008, 03:41 PM

EWW some of the descriptions of Black guys with white weman are just plain sick!! I guess i am very much different the a lot of Black GUYS!

TITS YES!! An ASS YES nice bubble but not some flat or fat ass! Bleach HELL NAW! If i do date a white one it has to be one of the better ones!

WalksInDarkness · #39 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackHitachi

EWW some of the descriptions of Black guys with white weman are just plain sick!! I guess i am very much different the a lot of Black GUYS!

TITS YES!! An ASS YES nice bubble but not some flat or fat ass! Bleach HELL NAW! If i do date a white one it has to be one of the better ones!

You don't count, you have a career. The guys I am talking about are the loafers, even if they do have a job it is usually a "McJob"; and they intentionally try to get fired, so they have an excuse to go home and play GTA. These brothers are really just living out an extended childhood.

vurbano · #40 (**permalink**) 08-14-2008, 06:31 PM