View Full Version: Obama Aipac Stooge

Loose Change Forum > The Lounge > Obama Aipac Stooge


Title: Obama Aipac Stooge


Reggie_perrin - January 5, 2008 12:14 AM (GMT)
Heres the speech he gave to AIPAC -

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/03/02/aipac_policy_forum.php

"Last week, this event was described to me as a small gathering of friends. Looking at all of you here today; seeing so many of you who care about peace in this world; who care about a strong and lasting friendship between Israel and the United States, and who care about what's on the next page of our shared futures, I think "a small gathering of friends" fits this crowd just right."



kissing blarney - January 5, 2008 12:40 AM (GMT)
At the top of the page:
"I'M ASKING YOU TO BELIEVE. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington...I'm asking you to belive in yours."

And then halfway through the speech says..."And we can, then, more effectively deal with one of the greatest threats to the United States, Israel and world peace: Iran.

Iran's President Ahmadinejad's regime is a threat to all of us."


How's that a real change in Washington?

OOO...and then there's the all seeing eye in the upper right hand corner...not that that means anything. :unsure:

Flipster3013 - January 5, 2008 08:03 AM (GMT)
Go John Edwards!

Sorry to derail, and I've seen some other LC board participators opinions on him. I also know this is a Ron Paul haven.

Do you remember Ralph Nader totally screwing Gore and 2000 elections?
I believe that Ron Paul does not have enough backing from the media nor his own party, to become the electorate. I believe 99.99% of Ron Paul backers will agree with me to this statement.

This is similar to the Ralph Nader 2000 ticket in my mind. I still to this day am angry at my hippy friends that HAD to vote for Nader. I told them then - "You're wasting your vote. Be careful what you wish for!" Look at where we are now.

I agree with what you're thinking. This is because the system is totally corrupt. Everything about it.

My belief is that holding onto pipe dreams of Ron Paul becoming President only hurts the candidates that can actually WIN the Presidency. Simply due to the fact that the caucus and primary election functions of our voting process are also corrupt. I'm not even going to mention the corruptness of our two most recent Presidential elections, or the electoral college.

I don't want to be a pessimist. I'm just want to be real.

Do you remember W.A.S.P. in your American History classes?

One letter of the acronym should be changed from (P)rotestant to ©atholic. This historical fact helps form my opinion that most registered voters will not vote for either Hillary, or Obama. Not because they're sexist. Not because they're racist. W.A.S.P. will however, play a part. This cannot be denied, as it is represented in our history, since President George Washington was in office.

People don't like Hillary. Plain and simple.

People don't believe Obama has the experience to lead the country.

I've seen this election play out before, in the form of 2000 Gore Lieberman ticket (maybe we actually dodged a bullet there) and the 2000 Bush Cheney ticket.

John Edwards is my candidate. John Edwards is the person that I believe best represents my interests:

Health Care
Fairness for the Middle Class
Anti Big Corporation
Anti War
Anti Big Government
Anti Drug Company
Anti Corporate Health Insurance
Pro Choice
Pro Diplomacy
Pro Gun Control (Not to take away our guns. But in the form of backround checks to hopefully prevent another Virginia Tech, or Columbine, or ............... yep, truly sad.)

PRO AMERICA!

PRO AMERICA!

PRO AMERICA!

PRO AMERICA!

He will pull our troops out of Iraq faster than any Democratic candidate. He has offered a plan to do such, in a timely fashion, UNLIKE ANY OTHER Democratic candidate.

Ok, so he's not investigating 9/11. WHO THE FUCK IS? Yep, nobody. That is up to US!

We have to start somewhere. I hope to convince some that the only choice we Democrats have is Edwards for President. Otherwise this whole thing is for nothing. We will have another republican.

Might I also add:

My dream ticket in the end is Edwards, Obama!

Let's get Obama some of the experience pundits say he lacks. Let's put him in office after President Edwards finishes his first two terms!

kissing blarney - January 5, 2008 08:14 AM (GMT)
Yep...John Edwards is Israel friedly and CFR owned...the perfect candidate! Nice hair too. :lol:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/...7_02/010678.php

Flipster3013 - January 5, 2008 08:38 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (kissing blarney @ Jan 5 2008, 03:14 AM)
Yep...John Edwards is Israel friedly and CFR owned...the perfect candidate!  Nice hair too. :lol:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/...7_02/010678.php

Sorry KB - Who isn't Israel friendly of the candidates we have to choose from?

This is exactly the point I'm making. It's completely corrupt and unfortunate that we have to pick from the lesser of all evils. In my opinion Edwards, Huckabee, and Obama aren't evil. From the front runners we seemingly have to choose from.

You link a story from February of 2007.

Dude, that's almost a year ago. Not only is it a year ago, it's prior to the NIE.

Is his stance still the same?

Is Ron Paul a viable candidate?

Seriously ask yourself that question.

If, perhaps my theory is correct, who will win? Better yet, what part of my theories specifically do you disagree with? Don't smear me, tell me why I could be wrong.

kissing blarney - January 5, 2008 09:17 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Flipster3013 @ Jan 5 2008, 03:38 AM)
QUOTE (kissing blarney @ Jan 5 2008, 03:14 AM)
Yep...John Edwards is Israel friedly and CFR owned...the perfect candidate!  Nice hair too. :lol:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/...7_02/010678.php

Sorry KB - Who isn't Israel friendly of the candidates we have to choose from?

This is exactly the point I'm making. It's completely corrupt and unfortunate that we have to pick from the lesser of all evils. In my opinion Edwards, Huckabee, and Obama aren't evil. From the front runners we seemingly have to choose from.

You link a story from February of 2007.

Dude, that's almost a year ago. Not only is it a year ago, it's prior to the NIE.

Is his stance still the same?

Is Ron Paul a viable candidate?

Seriously ask yourself that question.

If, perhaps my theory is correct, who will win? Better yet, what part of my theories specifically do you disagree with? Don't smear me, tell me why I could be wrong.

You make good points, but all we have to base any opinion of anybody on is their
history, and I don't know if the NIE has affected his position or not. I didn't intend to smear you...guess I'm catching internet dickhead disease.
I am totally disillusioned with the election process as well. There is no blemish free candidate, and unfortunately we're going to get the pimples that the media/system decides to pop on us.
Is RP viable? No, not in the current system. He seems to have principles, though there are some members among us who feel he is a part of the system as well. Unfortunately, I think it will be Clinton/Obama in the White House in 2009, (covers about every demographic you can come up with) and it will be business as usual.

Flipster3013 - January 6, 2008 10:49 AM (GMT)
You're not an internet dickhead!

I consider you one of the good guys around here. :)

Any ways.. I agree that history is a good judge of character. There are people out there that still support Hillary even though she's never apologized for approving the deaths of over 3000 Americans over in Iraq. Edwards has. I support him for that.

Going back to my first point. Here is a bit of reference.

http://politicalmaps.org/if-clicks-were-votes-november-2007/

Neither Hillary or Obama will be able to beat a Republican.

Roxdog - January 15, 2008 04:54 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Flipster3013 @ Jan 5 2008, 02:03 AM)
Go John Edwards!

Sorry to derail, and I've seen some other LC board participators opinions on him. I also know this is a Ron Paul haven.

Do you remember Ralph Nader totally screwing Gore and 2000 elections?
I believe that Ron Paul does not have enough backing from the media nor his own party, to become the electorate. I believe 99.99% of Ron Paul backers will agree with me to this statement.

This is similar to the Ralph Nader 2000 ticket in my mind. I still to this day am angry at my hippy friends that HAD to vote for Nader. I told them then - "You're wasting your vote. Be careful what you wish for!" Look at where we are now.

I agree with what you're thinking. This is because the system is totally corrupt. Everything about it.

My belief is that holding onto pipe dreams of Ron Paul becoming President only hurts the candidates that can actually WIN the Presidency. Simply due to the fact that the caucus and primary election functions of our voting process are also corrupt. I'm not even going to mention the corruptness of our two most recent Presidential elections, or the electoral college.

I don't want to be a pessimist. I'm just want to be real.

Do you remember W.A.S.P. in your American History classes?

One letter of the acronym should be changed from (P)rotestant to ©atholic. This historical fact helps form my opinion that most registered voters will not vote for either Hillary, or Obama. Not because they're sexist. Not because they're racist. W.A.S.P. will however, play a part. This cannot be denied, as it is represented in our history, since President George Washington was in office.

People don't like Hillary. Plain and simple.

People don't believe Obama has the experience to lead the country.

I've seen this election play out before, in the form of 2000 Gore Lieberman ticket (maybe we actually dodged a bullet there) and the 2000 Bush Cheney ticket.

John Edwards is my candidate. John Edwards is the person that I believe best represents my interests:

Health Care
Fairness for the Middle Class
Anti Big Corporation
Anti War
Anti Big Government
Anti Drug Company
Anti Corporate Health Insurance
Pro Choice
Pro Diplomacy
Pro Gun Control (Not to take away our guns. But in the form of backround checks to hopefully prevent another Virginia Tech, or Columbine, or ............... yep, truly sad.)

PRO AMERICA!

PRO AMERICA!

PRO AMERICA!

PRO AMERICA!

He will pull our troops out of Iraq faster than any Democratic candidate. He has offered a plan to do such, in a timely fashion, UNLIKE ANY OTHER Democratic candidate.

Ok, so he's not investigating 9/11. WHO THE FUCK IS? Yep, nobody. That is up to US!

We have to start somewhere. I hope to convince some that the only choice we Democrats have is Edwards for President. Otherwise this whole thing is for nothing. We will have another republican.

Might I also add:

My dream ticket in the end is Edwards, Obama!

Let's get Obama some of the experience pundits say he lacks. Let's put him in office after President Edwards finishes his first two terms!

Edwards is a CFR, Bilderberg, POS. Anti war???? HE VOTED FOR IT AND ESSENTIALLY CONTINUES TO VOTE FOR IT!

He voted for the patriot act.

He DOES INDEED want to BAN GUNS that I and MANY people I know currently OWN. To assert he just wants to prevent columbines is ludicrous. In his world, I f I want to sell my rifle to my brother I have to ask permission from the FBI. Gimme a break, dude...Pro America my arse.

He wants to further empower the UN and NATO for freaks sake. He wants to EXPAND NATO in Eastern Europe.

Voted YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe. (May 2002)
He wants to plug the federal government into EVERYTHING. He is PRO GIANT, BLOATED GOVERNMENT. His record shows that quite clearly. He's made himself FILTHY RICH from suing corporations into the ground. HE HIMSELF and his ilk have done so much to raise the cost of health care its unreal. For him to pretend he can or would know how to make communist health care work in America is a joke.

Voted YES on Bush Administration Energy Policy. (Jul 2003)
Strengthen the sanctions on Iran. (Oct 2004)
Target Castro's regime but help people of Cuba. (Mar 2004) Voted NO on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on permanent normal trade relations with China. (Sep 2000) Voted YES on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)


:blink:

http://www.ontheissues.org/John_Edwards.htm

alive and still talking - January 15, 2008 05:18 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
Neither Hillary or Obama will be able to beat a Republican. 
 
bill and hillary can beat a republican hands down

Flipster3013 - January 15, 2008 05:28 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (alive and still talking @ Jan 15 2008, 12:18 PM)
QUOTE
Neither Hillary or Obama will be able to beat a Republican. 
  
bill and hillary can beat a republican hands down

I really am not looking forward to having to say I told you so.

Roxdog - January 15, 2008 05:33 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Flipster3013 @ Jan 15 2008, 11:28 AM)
QUOTE (alive and still talking @ Jan 15 2008, 12:18 PM)
QUOTE
Neither Hillary or Obama will be able to beat a Republican. 
  
bill and hillary can beat a republican hands down

I really am not looking forward to having to say I told you so.

If you do it will ring hollow because your rationale is just as much a part of the problem as the neocons.

Flipster3013 - January 15, 2008 05:35 PM (GMT)
I'm just as much a problem as the neocons for having an opinion?

Isn't that a bit of a reach?

Roxdog - January 15, 2008 05:46 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Flipster3013 @ Jan 15 2008, 11:35 AM)
I'm just as much a problem as the neocons for having an opinion?

Isn't that a bit of a reach?

Let me clarify....your rationale is just as dangerous as the rationale employed by the cheerleaders of the Neocons. All the people with Bush signs in their yard and W stickers on their SUVs "have an opinion" as well. Your opinion is equally misguided.

Flipster3013 - January 15, 2008 06:30 PM (GMT)
So you believe that Ron Paul has a chance to win within the Republican party (he's said he will not run as independant)?

That Hillary or Obama can win the election on the Democratic side?

Enlighten me as to what YOU think will happen, please.

mynameis - January 15, 2008 06:39 PM (GMT)
You have to look at this from perspectives too. If you vote for one candidate that would normally vote republican and they switch to democrat, it decreases a republican vote. If you take votes from a republican and they vote democrat then the republican loses votes. Add an independent who will take more votes from one side than the other and you can control the projected outcome of the election. I myself think that if any of the candidates can't stand up to the corporations and lobbyists then they don't need my vote.

Roxdog - January 15, 2008 06:40 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
So you believe that Ron Paul has a chance to win within the Republican party (he's said he will not run as independant)?

Whether I personally believe their is a chance is irrlevent. What's right is right. He said he doesn't plan to but I believe "the revolution" plans otherwise.

QUOTE
That Hillary or Obama can win the election on the Democratic side?

I don't care but I hope not.

QUOTE
Enlighten me as to what YOU think will happen, please.

I think unless people like you wake up and stop making excuses we don't stand a chance...

Flipster3013 - January 15, 2008 07:10 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
QUOTE 
So you believe that Ron Paul has a chance to win within the Republican party (he's said he will not run as independant)? 


Whether I personally believe their is a chance is irrlevent. What's right is right. He said he doesn't plan to but I believe "the revolution" plans otherwise.


The revolution is going to force the man to do something he himself has said that he doesn't want to do? RIGHT!

QUOTE
QUOTE 
That Hillary or Obama can win the election on the Democratic side?


I don't care but I hope not.


Surely you care or you wouldn't attack my stance on this. Stop lying.

QUOTE
QUOTE 
Enlighten me as to what YOU think will happen, please.


I think unless people like you wake up and stop making excuses we don't stand a chance...


Roxdog, you sure are aggressive and rude.

People like me do not make up the Republican party. I am a registered Democrat. I CANNOT vote for Ron Paul in a caucus. Surely you know how the system works.

People like me, who in 2000 saw Ralph Nader take 34% of the vote from both Democrats and Republicans. Gideon pointed out that even without these votes Gore would not have one. That however does not change my opinion that Ralph Nader HURT the Gore campaign.

If you'd like to have a civil conversation about this I'm game. If you're going to continue with rude deragatory comments offering zero substance then let's agree to disagree. I'd get further talking to a wall then somebody with that type of attitude.

Roxdog - January 15, 2008 07:51 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
The revolution is going to force the man to do something he himself has said that he doesn't want to do? RIGHT!

Um, where have you been? The man didn't want to run for president and thought the idea was absurd just over a year ago. And he didn't say he didn't want to do it. He said he didn't have plans to. Not the same thing. And it wouldn't be "forced".

QUOTE
Surely you care or you wouldn't attack my stance on this. Stop lying.

Stop lying? Stop cheerleading pieces of sh^t that do nothing but help destroy America. I do care about truth and not being a slave.

QUOTE
Roxdog, you sure are aggressive and rude.

Aggressive? You bet. Rude? Nope. Edwards is a POS.

QUOTE
People like me do not make up the Republican party. I am a registered Democrat. I CANNOT vote for Ron Paul in a caucus. Surely you know how the system works.

You could if you didn't swear your allegiance to a bunch of UnAmerican clowns. Democrats are just as useless as Republitards.

QUOTE
People like me, who in 2000 saw Ralph Nader take 34% of the vote from both Democrats and Republicans. Gideon pointed out that even without these votes Gore would not have one. That however does not change my opinion that Ralph Nader HURT the Gore campaign.

Nader talked about real issues and is an honest man. Gore talked about fluff and is an American-destroying turd.

QUOTE
If you'd like to have a civil conversation about this I'm game.

I will not have a "civil" discussion about how to best dismantle the country.

QUOTE
If you're going to continue with rude deragatory comments offering zero substance then let's agree to disagree. I'd get further talking to a wall then somebody with that type of attitude.

So, calling murderers and tyrannts murderers and tyrannts is making "rude derogatory comments"? Wow...the doublethink is amazing. You want to talk to people who are going to tell you how smart you are and how your opinion is so informed. You want to talk to yourself..you dont give a crap about the truth. When you hear it, you just write it off...

Flipster3013 - January 15, 2008 08:24 PM (GMT)
are you 12? I'm sure Ron Paul is glad that you're on his side. WOW!

mynameis - January 15, 2008 08:27 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Flipster3013 @ Jan 15 2008, 08:24 PM)
are you 12? I'm sure Ron Paul is glad that you're on his side. WOW!

? :ph43r:

Gideon524 - January 15, 2008 08:29 PM (GMT)
Please keep the emotionalism to a minimum.

Relax.

And for the record, Nader did NOT COST GORE ELECTION 2000!

That drives me nuts hearing that.

Flipster3013 - January 15, 2008 08:32 PM (GMT)
I'll summarize my stance and why Roxdog is freaking out like a banshee in the amazon.

The Presidential election is mostly a two party election. To be on the ticket from either party you need to be elected by said party to represent that party.

I don't believe Ron Paul can win the Republican nomination. I've stated why ^ up there.

I do believe that Hillary or Obama will not be able to beat any Republican.

If - per say - the election was between Ron Paul against anybody I'd vote for him hands down.

Since I believe that Ron Paul will not win the nomination I am taking my next best corse of action. Supporting somebody I believe can beat the Republicans.

Gideon, I know that Nader did not cost Gore the election. I added that in my post. I still believe he hurt the campaign. That is personal belief. I do not have facts to support my personal beliefs. They are mine, all mine! :)

Roxdog - January 15, 2008 08:37 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (mynameis @ Jan 15 2008, 02:27 PM)
QUOTE (Flipster3013 @ Jan 15 2008, 08:24 PM)
are you 12? I'm sure Ron Paul is glad that you're on his side. WOW!

? :ph43r:

My point exactly.

No, I am not 12, hence why I'm not making excuses like a 12 year old. :)

Roxdog - January 15, 2008 08:43 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
I'll summarize my stance and why Roxdog is freaking out like a banshee in the amazon.

You are all buzzwords and zero substance. I'm not freaking out. I am merely pointing out absurdities.

QUOTE
The Presidential election is mostly a two party election. To be on the ticket from either party you need to be elected by said party to represent that party.

Thanks for the civics lesson...lol

QUOTE
I do believe that Hillary or Obama will not be able to beat any Republican.

Good.

QUOTE
Since I believe that Ron Paul will not win the nomination I am taking my next best corse of action. Supporting somebody I believe can beat the Republicans.

So then you care little about truth or justice and care more about getting "your guy" into office. Voting for and supporting Edwards is voting for and supporting tyranny and the destruction of America. Perhaps if you had actually done something besides cheerleading murderers via your keyboard, Ron Paul would have a chance. Thanks for nothing...

QUOTE
Gideon, I know that Nader did not cost Gore the election. I added that in my post. I still believe he hurt the campaign. That is personal belief.

Your personal belief is not based on any sort of facts.

QUOTE
I do not have facts to support my personal beliefs.

Finally some truth....

alive and still talking - January 15, 2008 08:48 PM (GMT)
Ralph Nader did hurt the dems, because he stole votes that would normally go to the dems.

Anyone who runs on the independent ticket this year will do the same thing

Flipster3013 - January 15, 2008 08:54 PM (GMT)
Enlighten me oh great wise one Roxdog. What did you do for his campaign?

Attacking people because they support somebody different than you is certianly not a way to win them over.

Ever hear of 'can't catch flies with vinegar'?

Frankly, after this thread, I am glad I didn't support Ron Paul. I do not want to be associated with people like you.

Good luck in the upcoming elections.

zyko148 - January 15, 2008 09:06 PM (GMT)
I believe one should always vote for the one who's HONEST, no matter what chances he has, rather than always voting for the lesser of two evils simply because he/she "has a better chance".

That's like selling out to the "tyrrany of the majority".

Roxdog - January 16, 2008 04:40 PM (GMT)
QUOTE
Enlighten me oh great wise one Roxdog. What did you do for his campaign?

Hum, probably spent over an entire paycheck on it, among other things. I've made signs and put them up all over town. Handed out hundreds of flyers. I went to Bonnaroo this year and passed out info and bumper stickers. I gave out hundreds of copies of America: Freedom to Fascism. I lobbied people with homes in high traffic areas of Nashville to put up yard signs. I've been promoting Ron Paul for years. Your point?

QUOTE
Attacking people because they support somebody different than you is certianly not a way to win them over.

That might be true if that were the case. But I attack people that have opinions that deserve to be attacked. At the end of the day, these scumbags are in power because of people like you. You OPENLY support and promote horrible, horrible people to run the country and continue to do horrible horrible things. How else should I act?

QUOTE
Ever hear of 'can't catch flies with vinegar'?

Sure you can. Just put it in a spray bottle and give em a squirt when they land.

QUOTE
Frankly, after this thread, I am glad I didn't support Ron Paul. I do not want to be associated with people like you.

As I don't want to be associated with people that promote and support tyranny as you do.

QUOTE
Good luck in the upcoming elections.

You too. If only Ron Paul had Bilderberg backing him like Edwards does. People worth trillions of dollars have a lot of pull in the world it seems.... :lol:

zyko148 - January 16, 2008 08:21 PM (GMT)
I AM *LMFAO* :lol:




Hosted for free by zIFBoards