BHO is a Muslim?

[Trouvere]

Socialist pure and simple and extremely sympathetic to whom ever or what ever
will back the agenda. It is no different than if we would have had Hilary. He was
better marketed. Its not Obama. He is just a speaker the real force is behind the
man. He is simply a voice for it. He was more marketable.

[Aquila]

I don't doubt that many Democrats are Marxist... most are indeed socialist leaning. Most Republicans are fascist leaning. Neither party is better than the other. Both are very out of step with the Constitution.

[Aquila]

Should Obama be the terrible President most think his policies will prove him to be we should ask - who's to blame for him being elected?

The American people elected Obama because of their rejection of the Bush Administration's policies and the Republican agenda at the time. The only ones to blame for his election are the Republicans. Had they governed rightly and righteously McCain would have been elected by the people.

[Trouvere]

Aquila do you agree with the stance of the constitutional party?
Just some thoughts.

[Light]

Originally Posted by RevDWW

So is President Obama a trying to bring down Capitalism? Forget about him be a Muslim, he's a Marxist. Go research his cabinet and staff to see what they espouse and you'll get a good idea of what the President believes.

So you are saying our Canadian neighbors are Marxist?

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Should Obama be the terrible President most think his policies will prove him to be we should ask - who's to blame for him being elected?

The American people elected Obama because of their rejection of the Bush Administration's policies and the Republican agenda at the time. The only ones to blame for his election are the Republicans. Had they governed rightly and righteously McCain would have been elected by the people.

No. If you go back and read the numbers of people who voted "historically" instead of by ideals/agendas ... BHO benefited of being the first black presidential candidate on the November ballot.

The majority of people voted for "history," not for agenda.

I had to shut off the news to keep from puking from the number of idiots who were voting BHO just so they could tell their kids they voted for the first black president.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Trouvere

Aquila do you agree with the stance of the constitutional party?
Just some thoughts.

Not really. I believe it's agenda is far to sectarian and "Christian" to be Constitutional. The party that appears to have the most consistant Constitutional principles and consistant approach to American liberty in my opinion is the Libertarian Party.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

No. If you go back and read the numbers of people who voted "historically" instead of by ideals/agendas ... BHO benefited of being the first black presidential candidate on the November ballot.

The majority of people voted for "history," not for agenda.

I had to shut off the news to keep from puking from the number of idiots who were voting BHO just so they could tell their kids they voted for the first black president.

I think the American people may have voted for history, however, had Bush governed our country righteously and justly I doubt the color of a man's skin would have dazzled the American people. We've had minority and female candidates before and they crashed and burned. The overwelming sense of the Bush Administration being a failure and highly questionable regarding the war, economics, and civil liberties left the American people ready for a change... whatever it might be. They saw history... and gladly voted for it.

[Trouvere]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Not really. I believe it's agenda is far to sectarian and "Christian" to be Constitutional. The party that appears to have the most consistant Constitutional principles and consistant approach to American liberty in my opinion is the Libertarian Party.

aren't they the don't pay your taxes group?????

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I think the American people may have voted for history, however, had Bush governed our country righteously and justly I doubt the color of a man's skin would have dazzled the American people. We've had minority and female candidates before and they crashed and burned. The overwelming sense of the Bush Administration being a failure and highly questionable regarding the war, economics, and civil liberties left the American people ready for a change... whatever it might be. They saw history... and gladly voted for it.

We'd disagree there... W could have been the best president ever, but it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the election.

It was between McCain (the angry, old guy who ran on nothing but attack ads) and BHO (the young, eloquent speaker, who it turns out is all teleprompter and no action.)

Even if W had been a strong, popular president, there's no way McCain beats BHO.