http://www.activistpost.com/2012/08/40-points-that-prove-that-barack-obama.html?m=1

From my Boss, Randy Stufflebeam...

The parties not only kick each other when they are down, but they also pick each other back up, because each needs its opponent in order to continue the farcical show of difference in order to contain real opposition within their bifurcated fraudulence. The object is to contain all differences within the party system in order to keep real opposition from mounting from without.

I cant argue with that. Keep the staus quo. A real strong 3rd party would scare the pants off of them.

Indeed it would...

unfortunately for some here the only feasible 3rd party would have to be a moderate party. Since Teapulbicans are stretching the conservative vote to the extreme... wait we already have a moderate party its the Democratic party. They've long since given up on social programs and have become the stalwarts of the middle.

There is no middle with the one party system we have. The middle has to be and for all intent should be the rule of law. Without it we ARE lawless. If you cannot see that with wars neverending, one set of laws for the common man another for the elite [in some cases rich, others so called elected 'becouse of no choice offered in the voting booth'] then you are indeed blind to the truth.

In order to establish a third party in my state one must petition the voters. This is justified, I don't disagree. But the established party [dem&reps] only need 500 John Hancocks. I need 1500. I have tried twice now. I have reached the 500 with the help of three each time, given the time span allowed. It is designed to favor the established.

From my Boss, Randy Stufflebeam...

The parties not only kick each other when they are down, but they also pick each other back up, because each needs its opponent in order to continue the farcical show of difference in order to contain real opposition within their bifurcated fraudulence. The object is to contain all differences within the party system in order to keep real opposition from mounting from without.

I cant argue with that. Keep the staus quo. A real strong 3rd party would scare the pants off of them.

Indeed it would...

unfortunately for some here the only feasible 3rd party would have to be a moderate party. Since Teapulbicans are stretching the conservative vote to the extreme... wait we already have a moderate party its the Democratic party. They've long since given up on social programs and have become the stalwarts of the middle.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

From my Boss, Randy Stufflebeam...

The parties not only kick each other when they are down, but they also pick each other back up, because each needs its opponent in order to continue the farcical show of difference in order to contain real opposition within their bifurcated fraudulence. The object is to contain all differences within the party system in order to keep real opposition from mounting from without.

I cant argue with that. Keep the staus quo. A real strong 3rd party would scare the pants off of them.

Indeed it would...

From my Boss, Randy Stufflebeam...

The parties not only kick each other when they are down, but they also pick each other back up, because each needs its opponent in order to continue the farcical show of difference in order to contain real opposition within their bifurcated fraudulence. The object is to contain all differences within the party system in order to keep real opposition from mounting from without.

I cant argue with that. Keep the staus quo. A real strong 3rd party would scare the pants off of them.

---

[/quote]

Old James

From my Boss, Randy Stufflebeam...

The parties not only kick each other when they are down, but they also pick each other back up, because each needs its opponent in order to continue the farcical show of difference in order to contain real opposition within their bifurcated fraudulence. The object is to contain all differences within the party system in order to keep real opposition from mounting from without.

So not even a republican would vote for him

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Paul Ryan...

Voted for tarp, auto bailout, Medicare expansion, housing aubsidies, extension of unemployment, national I.D., patriot act permanent, survillance without warrent, no child left behind, keeping troops in Iraq, 2008 and 2009 stimulus. Ya, Mitt and Paul are two peas in the same pod...

Obamma has not passed a budget and he is the only one in the history of this nation to do so, this is treason.

He has not shown a long form birth record so how did he get a passport?

Sources please.

teaparty and associates(Donald Duc...Trump)

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Obamma has not passed a budget and he is the only one in the history of this nation to do so, this is treason.

He has not shown a long form birth record so how did he get a passport?

Sources please.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

I have already answered this question Bobby the fact that you have not reread what I have posted here has not gone unnoticed.

5 Ds or truthiness. You made an unsupported assertion about white slavery and did not address the Wikipedia source material.

I see no references to the Wikipedia source for Skildude's comments, namely "Negro President - Jefferson and the Slave Power" by Garry Wills other than my own. Does Wikipedia inaccurately portray the information from this source, if so how? If not, why the unwarranted attack on Wikipedia as a source for information in Skildude's post?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Obamma has not passed a budget and he is the only one in the history of this nation to do so, this is treason.

He has not shown a long form birth record so how did he get a passport?

Do get your facts right or SHUT UP

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate.pdf

Lets not forget that any budget he proposes is rejected out of hand and each segment(department) is funded separately. As I recall the budgets are a bit more transparent, eliminating the fake emergency spending for the Wars is the biggest part or transparency.

You'll recall that Bush intentionally left out the wars from his budgets. This made it look like a lean budget even though we spent an extra $trillion a year to pay for the wars through congressional emergency spending.
Had congress put his feet to the fire and not passed the emergency spending and insisted that any war appropriations be part of the budget we'd basically see that Obamas budgets are about what Bush was doing only with tranparency.

Let's not forget that it is not Obamas job to fund the Government it is Congress that does so. If Congress doesn't like his budget they pick it apart or create their own.

Lets not forget that the gov't hasn't shutdown much, except when the Rep. in Congress decided to obstruct passage of funding bills. So yes Obama has signed legislation to keep the gov't running. How else do you think they keep the lights on

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

Obamma has not passed a budget and he is the only one in the history of this nation to do so, this is treason.

He has not shown a long form birth record so how did he get a passport?

Do get your facts right or SHUT UP

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate.pdf

Obamma has not passed a budget and he is the only one in the history of this nation to do so, this is treason.

He has not shown a long form birth record so how did he get a passport?

Morally slavery was and still is wrong. Just because it was ok with the law makes no difference. The intent WAS to make the south give up this morally wrong slavery. So, yes the south was boxed in and done so for good reason.

The deal that was struck was done so by Jefferson as well as others and done so looking into the future, They didn't want a war becuse the nation was newly formed. Impoertation of slaves was stopped till Jefferson term at Prez was over. In the deal Jefferson got D.C. in the South.

So it seems that even back then money talks. There was a war anyways. The most costly in American history. All beacause our founding fathers waffled on human rights.

And I gave reason for the waffle. The nation was newly formed and if we went to war we would have fell back under the rule of England.

Credit had to be established for us to take the stage as a world player.

Im not a big fan of Lincoln but I think God form him. He did break our contract by placing in jail over 10,000 who was against him for many reasons.

Morally slavery was and still is wrong. Just because it was ok with the law makes no difference. The intent WAS to make the south give up this morally wrong slavery. So, yes the south was boxed in and done so for good reason.

The deal that was struck was done so by Jefferson as well as others and done so looking into the future, They didn't want a war becuse the nation was newly formed. Impoertation of slaves was stopped till Jefferson term at Prez was over. In the deal Jefferson got D.C. in the South.

So it seems that even back then money talks. There was a war anyways. The most costly in American history. All beacause our founding fathers waffled on human rights.

---

[/quote]

Old James

I have already answered this question Bobby the fact that you have not reread what I have posted here has not gone unnoticed.

Barry Obamma is the only Prez in the history of this country that has not passed a budget.

Morally slavery was and still is wrong. Just because it was ok with the law makes no difference. The intent WAS to make the south give up this morally wrong slavery. So, yes the south was boxed in and done so for good reason.

The deal that was struck was done so by Jefferson as well as others and done so looking into the future, They didn't want a war becuse the nation was newly formed. Impoertation of slaves was stopped till Jefferson term at Prez was over. In the deal Jefferson got D.C. in the South.

No peer review at Wackiepidiea....

Not a font of correct information.....

Did you change it for this thread?

If you'd followed the link provided in my previous post you'd have seen that it was to a book. The book is the source for the Wikipedia article. I take it that as you repeated your complaint about Wikipedia, rather than attempt to undermine the verifiable source material, you are unable to demolish the argument in the source. That you resort to the 5 D's does not go unnoticed.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...