Jump to content

Just An Observation(Of Interest To Americans)


Recommended Posts

Paul

Yes, I was tired when I originally posted my first response. But, concerning Obama, I probably stated it correctly. :D

 

But, if you wish to make this a :hijack: and go :offtopic: , we can do that.

 

If a criminal wants a gun, he will get one - no matter what the laws state. So, don't say that giving American's the right to bear arms causes them to go out and shoot people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 200
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mr. Mike

    19

  • Brucewayne

    17

  • tom_shor

    16

  • broden

    15

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Doesn't anyone think that maybe, just maybe, that he actually wanted to visit to bring comfort and not for some cynical political advantage? The timing would not have been in his hands would it? That

you'd think he was a piss poor, totally incompetent incumbent President if he DIDN'T visit a swing state in election year. There are numerous foreign countries in the world that the President has not

Breath of fresh air??? Not quite sure what's fresh about taking the out of control spending habits from the previous admin and increasing them expodentially. Yes, the rich need to pay their fair share

  • Admin (Retired)
broden

Yes, I was tired when I originally posted my first response. But, concerning Obama, I probably stated it correctly. :D

 

But, if you wish to make this a :hijack: and go :offtopic: , we can do that.

 

If a criminal wants a gun, he will get one - no matter what the laws state. So, don't say that giving American's the right to bear arms causes them to go out and shoot people.

 

and here i assumed you meant that the second amendment protected the first amendment

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul
It's about time our representatives start listening to the people.

 

AND stop voting themselves pay raises. We, the citizens of the United States of America, should be the ones who determine if they are doing a job good enough to merit a pay increase.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Romney/rice??

 

That should split the racial voters a little ??

 

Americans are just tired of the war spending and life lost for no real goal/reward-- thats why Obama got elected to begin with.

 

Until the republicans produce a candidate that has a different mind set--- expect the Dem's to dominate !!

 

Oh wait-- they did, RON PAUL .........................................................................

 

Obamas biggest support LOSS-- will because of his immigration policy--- But it may very well be his biggest support GAIN as well due to the Hispanic voters wanting their CRIMINAL relatives to be able to stay in this country and milk it dry !!!

Edited by KID
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr. Mike

from my point of observation, it will be very difficult for Obama to lose this election. He's got most of the good cards that will win it for him, his best card is that he's been campaigning for it, from the first day of the presidency back in 2009. Obama has been campaigning for years. Romney, only months.

Only months? ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,check your history.............Obama is going to lose big time, he has disappointed/failed (for whatever reason),,Israel,,,, Catholics,,,,, black Americans,,,,, college grads,,,,,,, and the middle class. He has attacked/diminished the small business owner,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and that will kick his ass! Edited by Mr. Mike
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Justin Kredible
If a criminal wants a gun, he will get one - no matter what the laws state.

 

The more felony convictions you have, the easier it is to get one.

 

Like anything else, it's all about networking and who you know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
cebubird

Well, I guess I am not surprised that an observation for AMERICANS turned into a mudslinging contest that was completely offtrack, and of course it was mainly led off track by NON-Americans.

Why is "tho" that seemingly no matter what the subject, there ALWAYS has to be those who engage in personal attacks against other members comments? That is the reason the moderators quickly shut down anything political 'cause some get so nast towards others.

As far as my post went, interested Americans could have simply made one word responses, such as:

Maybe

Probably

No

Doubtful

Anyway--I say again, I posted it with no judgement as I can't see in the man's heart. Based on his history, I have an opinion, but I reserve judgement.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
If it were possible to curb the outrageous runaway spending of the liberal left, there would be no need for our excessive taxation. Both sides share responsibility for our tax burden, but the Democrats are by far the greatest offenders. BTW, I am happy to learn that you are not American. We have more than enough of your ilk on our voting rolls. I observe in the news on a regular basis the results of your philosophy in Europe. How's that working out for you?

 

The outpouring of right wing rhetoric to be read in this thread points up just how big a divide there is between American and European politics and, in my view, just how big a problem now exists in the USA. As I have said I am an observer and not a participant in this, but I have visited the USA enough times to have seen it all first hand and be able to make the comparisons. I think the system which has evolved there stinks and is in desperate need of reform. Reform which will not arrive because the system won't allow it to. When two sides look at a situation and see entirely different problems then you know that something is very wrong.

 

The "liberal left", an expression so beloved of the right, is a myth as is their "outrageous" spending. Most countries have been guilty of allowing too much debt, both public and personal, to be built up in recent decades. We were as guilty of this in the UK as anyone else. I always saw the danger myself,and for the past 20 years have been entirely debt free. I don't even possess a credit card now. If I don't have the funds I don't buy things. I live within my means. In the UK we followed the lead of successive US governments. This was NOT a policy to be laid at the door exclusively occupied by Democrat Presidents.

 

Your taxation is far from excessive. If you want to witness some excessive taxation come and live in a few places in Europe! No-one likes taxes but the plain fact is that some things are more efficiently done together than done alone and to do that you need to raise taxes. Ultimately it is in all our interests that is the case. Determining where to draw the line is the problem but I would agrue that efficiency ought to be the key. No-one but the most stupid gun toting reneck would argue that defence spending should be entirely a personal matter but I would also argue that other key areas, like healthcare, would be more efficiently managed through taxation than paid for privately. Thus taxation would rise, but because of increased efficiency, your spending power actually improves.

 

Other changes I would want to see, but almost certainly never will, would be a total ban on interest groups providing any funds to support campaigns. I would insist that all campaign funds be raised from the people themselves and that there be limits both to the amount any individual can contribute and to the total size of any fund, any excess having to be given to charity. I would ban TV advertising and ensure equality of opportunity to each candidate in terms of TV exposure.

 

One thing I detest in the USA is the way so many issues are put directly to the people for decisions and cannot understand why some posts argue for more of that. Rule by plebiscite puts us at the mercy of the influence of people like Murdoch, the radio "shock jocks" and the like, over the great unwashed. I prefer that our professional legislators decide things in a careful considered way, with no outside influences working on them. We control them, because we can replace them periodically if they fail us.

 

Bob answered the last question and I agree with his analysis.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
razorbackhog2
I did not ask if you had the right to do so. I asked who the hell you think you are to say that about him?
I say the same exact thing.............what gives me the right is I was born in the USA. Who am I? A free American citizen.
Link to post
Share on other sites
razorbackhog2

The outpouring of right wing rhetoric to be read in this thread points up just how big a divide there is between American and European politics and, in my view, just how big a problem now exists in the USA. As I have said I am an observer and not a participant in this, but I have visited the USA enough times to have seen it all first hand and be able to make the comparisons. I think the system which has evolved there stinks and is in desperate need of reform. Reform which will not arrive because the system won't allow it to. When two sides look at a situation and see entirely different problems then you know that something is very wrong.

 

The "liberal left", an expression so beloved of the right, is a myth as is their "outrageous" spending. Most countries have been guilty of allowing too much debt, both public and personal, to be built up in recent decades. We were as guilty of this in the UK as anyone else. I always saw the danger myself,and for the past 20 years have been entirely debt free. I don't even possess a credit card now. If I don't have the funds I don't buy things. I live within my means. In the UK we followed the lead of successive US governments. This was NOT a policy to be laid at the door exclusively occupied by Democrat Presidents.

 

Your taxation is far from excessive. If you want to witness some excessive taxation come and live in a few places in Europe! No-one likes taxes but the plain fact is that some things are more efficiently done together than done alone and to do that you need to raise taxes. Ultimately it is in all our interests that is the case. Determining where to draw the line is the problem but I would agrue that efficiency ought to be the key. No-one but the most stupid gun toting reneck would argue that defence spending should be entirely a personal matter but I would also argue that other key areas, like healthcare, would be more efficiently managed through taxation than paid for privately. Thus taxation would rise, but because of increased efficiency, your spending power actually improves.

 

Other changes I would want to see, but almost certainly never will, would be a total ban on interest groups providing any funds to support campaigns. I would insist that all campaign funds be raised from the people themselves and that there be limits both to the amount any individual can contribute and to the total size of any fund, any excess having to be given to charity. I would ban TV advertising and ensure equality of opportunity to each candidate in terms of TV exposure.

 

One thing I detest in the USA is the way so many issues are put directly to the people for decisions and cannot understand why some posts argue for more of that. Rule by plebiscite puts us at the mercy of the influence of people like Murdoch, the radio "shock jocks" and the like, over the great unwashed. I prefer that our professional legislators decide things in a careful considered way, with no outside influences working on them. We control them, because we can replace them periodically if they fail us.

 

Bob answered the last question and I agree with his analysis.

Your not American so who cares what you would like to see changed? Not I.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul
As far as my post went, interested Americans could have simply made one word responses, such as:

Maybe

Probably

No

Doubtful

 

A definite yes.

 

There, now the liberals are happy. I lied of course. Nothing is a coincidence when it comes to Obama.

Edited by Paul
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wombat No More

 

 

The stupid bastard is coming to Cambodia, sometime in October, I believe. I will be surprised if the Secret Service doesn't come to have a talk with me, prior to his arrival.

 

Ah, you're safe mate... They'd never find you in a crowd, blend in like a local...
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Admin (Retired)
broden

Ah, you're safe mate... They'd never find you in a crowd, blend in like a local...

 

well like a large family of locals anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul

They can come talk with me. I will be happy to do so. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyMan
The stupid bastard is coming to Cambodia, sometime in October, I believe. I will be surprised if the Secret Service doesn't come to have a talk with me, prior to his arrival.
Are you pimping now too?
Are they willing to give up their social security, medicare, military health care, etc.?
You mean all the programs that were paid for in advance by those receiving them as opposed to those donated to people so they don't have to work or pay for them?
at least he can pronounce nuclear.
I would quite prefer if my president didn't know that word at all.

I believe it's the First Amendment that protects speech. The Second Amendment is about the right to bear arms.

Without 2, 1 doesn't last very long.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..

Capture.JPG

I Understand...