The Greatest Danger from Obama

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
accesscrimea said:
guys - I must be missing something. The US goverment is suggesting a more eglitarian health care system yet big business is fighting this to keep their profits in 100's of billions at the expense of the access to health care of ordinary americans - and you are against it?

I guess i really dont understand what the government is trying to do - i have the impression that theyre trying to make it more like the NHS in britain (which is fantastic by the way - ive lived in many countries including the US and i recieved better quality to expense health care in the UK than anywhere else) - but forgive me - i must be missing something cause so many people, like you guys, are against it.

Here's some rationale against BHO's socialized medicine plan...

Ron Paul on "ObamaCare"

Under "ObamaCare", Govt to Indoctrinate Children (Further)

"ObamaCare" - A Health Care Rationing Scheme

"ObamaCare" Means More Power for IRS


Edited by: DixieDestroyer
 

chris371

Mentor
Joined
Dec 1, 2006
Messages
711
My father thinks that the problem with healthcare in the US is significantly due to the high payments that a patient is awarded in a malpractice suit, (like most personal injury claims eg the woman who burnt herself with a Mcdonalds coffee and sued them because it didnt day "hot" on it). These payments are much higher in the US than in europe.

Anyway the doctors and hospitals insure themselves against the costs of malpractice claims, and these insurance fees are proportionally relative to the height of the average damages awarded when a patient sues. The doctor has to charge a higher price because he has these high insurance fees to pay.
My dad says this is unlikely to change because too many people in the judicial system profit from these high damages awarded in court cases.
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
1,016
accesscrimea said:
guys - I must be missing something. The US goverment is suggesting a more eglitarian health care system yet big business is fighting this to keep their profits in 100's of billions at the expense of the access to health care of ordinary americans - and you are against it?

I guess i really dont understand what the government is trying to do - i have the impression that theyre trying to make it more like the NHS in britain (which is fantastic by the way - ive lived in many countries including the US and i recieved better quality to expense health care in the UK than anywhere else) - but forgive me - i must be missing something cause so many people, like you guys, are against it.

Access, there are numerous reasons to oppose the healthcare "reforms" that are being proposed. Many on this forum lean to the idea of more personal liberty with less government control. Many here believe in personal responsibility, and that your own health is your issue, and not the governments. When the government takes care of your every need, you essentially become a ward of the state and they are in control of your lives. I don't believe the government should run health care, education, or businesses like GM, Chrystler, Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, Amtrak and the U.S. postal service. We are grown ups, and we don't need the government to take care of ourselves.
 

Europe

Mentor
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
1,642
Electric Slide said:
accesscrimea said:
guys - I must be missing something. The US goverment is suggesting a more eglitarian health care system yet big business is fighting this to keep their profits in 100's of billions at the expense of the access to health care of ordinary americans - and you are against it?

I guess i really dont understand what the government is trying to do - i have the impression that theyre trying to make it more like the NHS in britain (which is fantastic by the way - ive lived in many countries including the US and i recieved better quality to expense health care in the UK than anywhere else) - but forgive me - i must be missing something cause so many people, like you guys, are against it.

Access, there are numerous reasons to oppose the healthcare "reforms" that are being proposed. Many on this forum lean to the idea of more personal liberty with less government control. Many here believe in personal responsibility, and that your own health is your issue, and not the governments. When the government takes care of your every need, you essentially become a ward of the state and they are in control of your lives. I don't believe the government should run health care, education, or businesses like GM, Chrystler, Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, Amtrak and the U.S. postal service. We are grown ups, and we don't need the government to take care of ourselves.

I know many people on this site don't like things like the NHS, but I know people who live the the UK and they like it.I know someone from Spain and they like their systm also.In an ideal world you would be free of all taxes and gov't, but we are going to be paying taxes in our lifetime, so I look at it like we might as well get something out of it instead of just wars. The health insurance companies deny care and don't pay for bills that are incurred. They are also a massive beaurocracy themselves that waste a ton of money. We spend much more on administrative costs than other countries. What companies do is externalize costs by bringing in illegals and not giving them health insurance and when they get sick they show up at the hospital and we have to pay for it by hospitals raising their prices to cover the uninsured.Soceity is paying for all the uninsured people anyway because if they have a heart attack they will get care even if they can't pay and many people aren't getting preventative care because they are not insured so that increases costs in the long run.
There are other arguments, but suffice to say I wouldn't mind some sort of Euro system. We aren't even going to come close to that here though. WE need a complete change and start from scratch, but that is not going to happen.
 

guest301

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
4,246
Location
Ohio
Electric Slide said:
accesscrimea said:
guys - I must be missing something. The US goverment is suggesting a more eglitarian health care system yet big business is fighting this to keep their profits in 100's of billions at the expense of the access to health care of ordinary americans - and you are against it?

I guess i really dont understand what the government is trying to do - i have the impression that theyre trying to make it more like the NHS in britain (which is fantastic by the way - ive lived in many countries including the US and i recieved better quality to expense health care in the UK than anywhere else) - but forgive me - i must be missing something cause so many people, like you guys, are against it.

Access, there are numerous reasons to oppose the healthcare "reforms" that are being proposed. Many on this forum lean to the idea of more personal liberty with less government control. Many here believe in personal responsibility, and that your own health is your issue, and not the governments. When the government takes care of your every need, you essentially become a ward of the state and they are in control of your lives. I don't believe the government should run health care, education, or businesses like GM, Chrystler, Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, Amtrak and the U.S. postal service. We are grown ups, and we don't need the government to take care of ourselves.


Ditto, 100% spot on to that post, Electric Slide.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
201
Electric slide: I am also strongly for more personal liberty with less government control...but i dont think this is a 'right-left' issue - for instance, the government in the UK does not 'control' access to health care, but 'provides' it, and in a way which means that big business is not making billions of dollars off our health. And anyway, anyone can still get private health care in the UK if they so desire..and dont mind paying for it.

How far do you take the non-governmental control stance? should business run our primary schools? It runs pretty much everything else - and as first and foremost it is legally obliged to its shareholders; profit is the number one motive, often at the expense of humanistic values.

I live in Ukraine, where health care is now run by business and the profit motive, and its a nightmare - the system is designed to make money for insurance companies, drugs companies and the end providers of care, so if need be i go back to the UK where i get empathetic care in a system which is designed purely for the benefit of my health; where noone is trying to gain from my illness.


Dixie Destroyer: i can see how some of these arguments can be persuasive, but the sources seem very sensationalist. The article, 'government plan to indoctrinate children', for instance, makes reference to the system in the UK as if the government just walks into anyones house and takes control of their kids - whilst in actual fact this applies only to families with kids who are serial violent offenders (but too young to be criminalized). In many communities in the UK there are a small number of families that terrorize the rest of the community. It is exclusively into these families that the government can send people to help adapt the children to society in a mutually beneficial way.

Anyway, i understand how anything that is viewed as government control is seen as negative by you guys, but, as i have said, i dont consider this issue to be one of control, and in my opinion, a govermental based health system, although far from perfect,is better system than one based on profit.
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
1,016
Access, nearly all of the advancements in medicine have come from the United States, where there is a profit motive. In the US, individual states have proposed importing drugs from Canada because it's cheaper. The only reason the drugs are cheaper in Canada is because they are developed in the U.S. (it's very expensive to research drugs), and due to all the investment the U.S. allows patents on drugs for a certain period of time (8 to 15 years or so). Canada doesn't respect the U.S. patents, and allows companies to make copies of the U.S. developed drugs. So in essence, some U.S. states have desired to counteract our own system which allows live-saving medicines to be developed in the first place.

I think profit is a good thing. Profit allows us to live. You could argue all day about profit, how the homebuilder should not be profiting simply because I need a house; thus the government should provide it. The grocery stores and restaurants should not be profiting off of my need for food. Again, you can say the government should provide it. You can say the same thing about clothes, air-conditioning, heat, water, electricity, beds, shoes, and on and on. The only reason they make these things is because there is a profit. The only reason the make MRI and CAT Scan machines is because they make money doing it. Otherwise you don't have it.

So I believe everyone's health is their own responsibility. If people want to be charitable they can, but nobody has a right to demand other people's money to treat their own illnesses.
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
Access, I cannot speak for the UK or Ukraine, but the U.S. was founded as a Constitutional Republic, and our Founding Fathers never intended the government to have the (massive) levels of control they currently do. Most of the (American) CF posters seem to want strict Constitutional adherence, and this includes protection over our Bill of Rights and limited government empowerment. Americans are passionate about retaining their (fleeting) liberties & freedoms! When the government (state or Federal) gains any degree of power, it tends to become a "slippery slope" in which they eventually press for even further empowerment.FYI, here's some further insight on the fallacious "Obamacare" socialized medicine scheme...

MSM/ABC's John Stossel Exposes The Flaws of Govt Ran Health CareEdited by: DixieDestroyer
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
201
Dixie destoyer - i understand you completly, I just dont think this is an issue of liberty and freedom - people in west europe who have socilazed medicine are certainly no less free than those in the US. Some say that universal health care is a universal right - a freedom in itself. it depends on how you look at it...but i repeat, i do understand your point of view.

Electric slide - It is a slippery slope argument to suggest that if the government provides healthcare then by that rational it should also provide housing, clothes, food etc (and therefore the government clearly shouldnt provide healthcare). It also is flawed in the respect that we can choose our level of housing, our diet and wardrobe in relation to how much we earn, whilst health is quite different and in many aways unique - if you end up in a car accident and your need head stitched back on there is just one standard procedure that is the same for all - a person who earns less money does not have the chance to opt for a treatment that is less expensive - you either stich it back on or you dont.

I agree that the profit motive gets things done in respect to technological and pharmaceutical advances...and the US is responsible for many advances in the last few decades (but i wouldnt say the majority - for example, Scandinavia and Southeast Asia have massive medical research programs too), but this is very different to the provision of consumer healthcare. Medical research is carried out by private compaines all over the world, however, the US is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system. The extraordinary costs which private providers of healthcare in the US now demand is testament to how flawed I think the system is.

You wrote that no one should use other peoples money to treat their illness (which, i assume you mean, occurs in a socialised medical system) - but its not quite like that. I pay a certain amount of money into Britain's NHS every month, and I get the corresponding full access to healthcare, like everyone else... no matter what the problem is with my health, no questions asked. I go into a hospital or to a doctors and never have to show any ID, never have to justify myself...never have to worry about the financial side of it. This system cuts out the middle man; the insurance companies, who take a big wack of money for themselves and then do everything they can to limit their coverage and weasel out of making payments.

Yes, unemployed people have the same access as me even thought they are not contributing, but whether that bothers you depends on whether you agree with the welfare system as a whole. 2 arguments for it - 1) any one of us can lose our job at any time and get ran over the next day 2) The welfare system was originally set up to protect ourselves from the 'unemployed masses' - because if these people can feed themselves and get treatment if they are ill, then they are much less likely to turn to crimes to get what they need to survive (and since the welfare state was set up in England after WW2, crime has reduced significantly). This system, i would like to add, has gone too far the other way in england, (but that is a whole different topic of discussion).

Anyway, ive spent enough time writing this (and im not sure why i am - i thought i was here to support white sportsmen ;)), most people have already made up their mind on topics such as this (i think we have!) so lengthy forum conversations are usually quite fruitless, but its interesting to get your point of view anyway.
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
Globalist Elite shill "Bacrock YObuma's" ratings continue to tank. Even the MSM & their watered down polls can't hide America's growing frustration with Bacrock's Marxist shell & Globalist core...


Obama disapproval on health care up to 52 percent

By ALAN FRAM, AP

WASHINGTON â€" Public disapproval of President Barack Obama's handling of health care has jumped to 52 percent, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll released hours before he makes his case for overhaul in a prime-time address to Congress.

With his health revamp moving slowly and unemployment edging ever higher, Obama's overall approval rating has also suffered a blow. The survey showed that 49 percent now disapprove of how he is handling his job as president, up from 42 percent who disapproved in July.

The grade people give Obama on health care also has worsened since July, when just 43 percent disapproved of his work on the issue.

The poll underscores how the president has struggled to win public support to reshape the nation's $2.5 trillion health care system and to put the brakes on a deep recession.

Forty-nine percent say they oppose the health overhaul plans being considered by Congress, compared to just 34 percent who favor them.

People are about evenly split over what lawmakers should do now on health care: About four in 10 say they should keep trying to pass a bill this year while about the same number say they should start over again.

Significantly, though, only about two in 10 say the health care system should be left as is.

There is a clear public desire for a bipartisan approach on the issue. Eight in 10 say it's important that any plan that passes Congress should have the support of both parties, while two-thirds want Obama and Democrats to try winning support from Republicans, who with few exceptions have opposed the Democratic drive.

Obama's marks are also poor on the economy, with 52 percent saying they disapprove of how he's handled that issue.

A similar number disapprove of his handling of taxes, some of which may rise to help finance his health overhaul. And 56 percent dislike his handling of the budget deficit, which has skyrocketed under the costs of the financial bailouts and a recession that has caused sinking federal revenues.

The survey of 1,001 adults with cell and landline telephones was conducted from Sept. 3-8. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

***Reference article...Edited by: DixieDestroyer
 

guest301

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
4,246
Location
Ohio
I don't think Obama's speech tonight is going to work for him. A goverment takeover of the health care system is unpopular with the people and growing more so as each day passes by, that coupled with the growing mistrust and buyers remorse concerning the President means the best he can do tonight is to define a narrow victory of sorts where he compromises on tort reform, portabilty across statelines of health insurance and co-ops and gets that bill pushed through Congress and declares victory. I personally don't think he will compromise in any meaningful way other than to set up a trojan horse where the goverment takeover happens incrementally instead of overnight.Edited by: guest301
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
Good article from the American Thinker...

The Prince of Lies

By John Griffing

"A lie told often enough becomes truth." - Vladimir Lenin

President Obama's skill as a liar is critical to his success as a Socialist.

Considering the zeal with which President Obama has in a very short time remade America, we can conclude that he will not stop until America is completely socialist. But one building block remains: government-controlled healthcare. As Lenin once said, "Medicine is the keystone in the arch of socialism." To embark upon such an ambitious project that has yet failed at every attempt, President Obama must lie, since it is clear that a sizeable majority opposes his healthcare reform.

And President Obama is a most gifted liar. We're not talking about a new Clintonian era of likeable misinformation. This is not, "I didn't inhale." President Clinton's loveable way of twisting the truth pales in comparison to Obama's brazen boldness in lying even when Obama knows he will be caught.

President Obama is a special breed of liar, employing an array of varying techniques intended to marshal public emotion in his favor. For example, he uses his own grandmother to gain sympathy for a plan that will leave millions of grandmothers without care.

Unlike his predecessors, when caught in the midst of a deception, Obama is not deterred. He lies to cover his lies. Remember confessed terrorist Bill Ayers? First, then-Senator Obama denied knowing Ayers at all. Then, when the evidence was incontrovertible that Obama had indeed not only known Ayers, but also worked with him professionally, Obama changed his defense to one of ignorance, claiming that he was only a child when Ayers committed his crimes, and assumed that Ayers had been rehabilitated. Obama has continued and applied this pattern to a host of crucial national questions.

Obama is a Socialist. And the authentic Socialist is not driven by morality or truth, but by the end that justifies the means.

This philosophy reveals itself quite starkly in President Obama's patent fabrications regarding his healthcare reform plans. Observe the consistent mismatch between the facts and what Obama says:

Obama says that he does not support a "single-payer system" even though his comments in favor of single-payer healthcare are on tape, and his "public option" amounts to a piecemeal takeover of private-sector medical coverage.

Obama says, "You will not be waiting in any lines," but Section 1151 of HR 3200 penalizes hospitals for the costs incurred in readmitting patients, permitting the Health and Human Services Secretary to "reduce" payments to hospitals for readmission, a decision likely to force the sick out into the cold. If a cancer patient has a relapse, they might as well get drunk on morphine, because readmission will be exceedingly difficult.

Obama ridicules the idea of "death panels" as right-wing hysteria, saying that HR 3200 contains no such entity. He is right. The Independent Medicare Advisory Council, the source of the death panel concerns, is the topic of another bill introduced by the Obama Administration. Its job? To cut Medicare payments. And specific sections of his proposed legislation create mechanisms that will result in the loss of care for elderly persons. In addition, Medicare Advantage programs would be ended, a cut of $150 billion. This has not stopped the President from saying, "We are not talking about cutting Medicare benefits."

Obama makes the transparently false claim that private insurance will not be affected by HR 3200, and that those who like their current plans can keep them, despite the fact that individual Americans will only be allowed to obtain private plans for a 5 year grace period, and government plans will become the default should citizens switch employers.

Obama says that "46 million of our fellow citizens have no coverage. They are just vulnerable. If something happens, they go bankrupt, or they don't get the care they need." But everyone can currently obtain care, even if they cannot pay. That is why 60 hospitals in California have closed, because the law requires them to treat everyone. And that 46 million number is known to be bogus, since 9.7 million of this number are illegal aliens. By one estimate, 14 million Americans choose not to obtain coverage. 18 million are under 34 and are either dependents or simply opt not to seek insurance, according to one study. When these numbers are subtracted, only 5 million uninsured remain.

Obama says that "we will make sure that no insurance company or government bureaucrat gets between you and the care you need," but responding to a Medicare recipient that had been denied the only drug that would alleviate his condition, Obama had this to say, "Look, there may be -- in nine out of 10 cases, the generic might work as well or better than the brand name. And we don't want to just subsidize the drug companies if you've got one that works just as well as another."

Obama says that the healthcare reform measure will not be used to expand federal funding of abortions, knowing that the vaunted Hyde amendment applies only to Medicaid, not the public option, and that the Capps Amendment, as passed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, explicitly requires every enrollee of a government-subsidized health insurance plan to be charged an extra fee to cover abortions. Obama can hardly plead ignorance.

Obama makes outrageous claims that his healthcare reform will reduce the deficit and rein in healthcare spending, but the CBO says just the opposite. How can the present healthcare crisis, supposedly a crisis of spending, be solved with more spending, and by an institution known for its reckless disregard for fiscal realities?

At the heart of this barrage of deception and dishonesty is an uncommon genius, innate to only the most devious sort. While Obama's opponents spend their precious time addressing each new lie, Obama will keep the focus off the end-zone, and government healthcare will sail into place. This strategy has a name; it is called "the big lie," and it depends on a fundamental truth of human nature: fatigue.

At some point, citizens grow weary of hearing that their leaders are out for their ill, that political policies are nothing more than grand deceptions. Who wants to believe their President is a serial liar that seeks to impose full Socialism on the land of the free? Some truths are too big to contemplate, an observation that would lead one of the world's most successful propagandists to write:

It would never come into their [the people's] heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.

Obama is counting on this principle. Most Americans are growing tired and are ready for some sort of compromise, but we cannot give in to this impulse. Obama will not give up and neither can we. Be encouraged. Don't lose hope. We must push forward, and keep the heat on the enemies of freedom. Americans must stay alert or the lie of all lies will consume what is left of liberty in America.

***Reference article...Edited by: DixieDestroyer
 
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
1,016
Access, what it comes down to me is that in a free society you have the responsibility to take care of yourself. I don't believe in SS, Medicare/Medicaid either, unfortunately we all get taxed for that whether you make $1 or ten million dollars a year. If I get run over by a car, that is not the rest of societies' fault for me gettting run over. The people who did not get run over shouldn't have to pay for me just for getting run over, struck by lightning, whatever. I know it's very expensive to pay for, even with insurance, but that's the hand that is dealt and you deal with it. If I need life saving surgery, I want to be able to pay more so I can get the treatment the NEXT DAY, not have to schedule through a government agency for a date. Free market should be how we pay for everything. Single payer system means some get more, and some get less due to the government deciding it. Again, i reiterate my point that we are grownups and don't need the government to be our mommy and daddy to provide for our needs (medical and otherwise).
 

Jimmy Chitwood

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
8,975
Location
Arkansas
"The Great One" and his queen, along with the Oprah, produced an Epic Fail in their ridiculous stunt to bring the Olympic Games to Chicago.
smiley36.gif
i'm surprised no one here has mentioned this, but their abysmal failure today to bring the horribly corrupt IOC into the horribly corrupt Second City has made me have a great day and a smile on my face.
smiley4.gif
smiley32.gif


with all the important issues Obongo could be working on and screwing up, he instead managed to pick a stupid issue to line his corrupt cronies' pockets with loot ... and managed to screw that up, too.
smiley36.gif
Chicago came in dead last. ha!

along the way, he wasted millions of tax payers' dollars while flying two separate jumbo jets and "sacrificing for the children of Chicago and the world," as his wife put it. and what a sacrifice it was! being personally attended by over 40 servants, eating dinner with the Queen, and lolling about Copenhagen like royalty for nearly a week! how horrifying it must have been. i'm curious how they minimized their carbon footprints ... i mean, in order to "sacrifice" themselves and fly in two separate luxurious personal jumbo jets, they used thousands of gallons of jet fuel, which was expelled directly into the environment. i guess they'll urge the rest of us to "do more."

and to think they did all of this for "us."
smiley2.gif
 

Thrashen

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
5,706
Location
Pennsylvania
Jimmy, watching Rio De Janeiro celebrate the coming Olympics was quite amusing.

I guess King Turd doesnt have as much sway on the world scene as the american media says? It seems like more and more stooges are finally sobering up and realizing that (B)ody (O)dor is actually an annoying little nobody and offers no change from the "conservative" zionist-christian Bush twins.

I guess they're getting bored with the "black" gimmick....we better elect a black handicapped woman next, they'll be truely untouchable.Edited by: Thrashen
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
Thrashen said:
I guess King Turd doesnt have as much sway on the world scene as the american media says? It seems like more and more stooges are finally sobering up and realizing that (B)ody (O)dor is actually an annoying little nobody and offers no change from the "conservative" zionist-christian Bush twins.

I guess they're getting bored with the "black" gimmick....we better elect a black handicapped woman next, they'll be truely untouchable.

smiley32.gif
Excellent synopsis Thrashen!
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
British Lord gives the scoop on the UN Climate Change based treaty...the surrender of U.S. sovereignty.

Obama to Cede U.S. SovereigntyEdited by: DixieDestroyer
 

Thrashen

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
5,706
Location
Pennsylvania
The loveable humanoid-mannequin, VP Joe Biden, confirms our suspicions of globe-straddling Zionism with yet another visit to Tel Aviv (the liberal / neocon Mecca).

B(ody) O(dor), W. Bush, Clinton, Daddy Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, blah, blah, blah"¦.all love-struck with Hebrew Nation. Probably just a "coincidence,"Â￾ I'm sure. From what I've seen, heard, and read, Israel as a whole is not too infatuated with the BHO administration (probably because he's a Muslim). Our government, as is customary when dealing with "God's Chosen People,"Â￾ is now is "kiss ass mode."Â￾

BIDEN QUOTE:
He opened the speech by stressing the importance of US-Israel friendship and Washington's commitment to the security of the Jewish state, saying that "US President Barack Obama and myself know that the US has no better friend in the community of nations than Israel."


With friends like Israel, who needs enemies?

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=170747
 

Jimmy Chitwood

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
8,975
Location
Arkansas
anyone remember those Black Panther thugs that were terrorizing votes in the last election? well, according to Obama's appointed Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez (not surprisingly, heisn't White), the Black Panther polling cases lack proof.
smiley5.gif
the link includes actual video of the black thugs doing some intimidating, but apparently that means nothing ...as the case was dismissed by Attorney General Eric Holder, Obama's appointed negro homeboy in charge.
an excerpt from the article bythehispanic affirmative-action appointment in the "Justice" Department:

Mr. Perez, the only Justice Department official to testify publicly before the commission about the case, said that without sufficient proof that party members or the organization's leader, Malik Zulu Shabazz, directed or controlled unlawful activities at the poll or made speeches to incite or produce lawless action, the complaint "would have likely failed" in court.


"Based on the totality of the evidence and the relevant legal precedent, the acting assistant attorney general made a judgment about how to proceed, choosing to seek an injunction against the only defendant who brought a weapon to the Philadelphia polling place on Election Day and to voluntarily dismiss the other three defendants," he said.
 

Jimmy Chitwood

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
8,975
Location
Arkansas
a funny song lampooning Obongo. the tune is set to the Kenny Rogers song, "You Picked a Fine Time to Leave Me, Lucille."

[tube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W57aBMYKvU[/tube]
 

Jimmy Chitwood

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
8,975
Location
Arkansas
more New World Order globalizing by "our" President.

Obongo to Mexican president: We're not defined by our borders.

[tube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K63xEbqO4FY[/tube]
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
JC, more spewing the Globalist rhetoric by Obongo & fellow NWO puppet Calderón.Ol' Felipe has some unmitigated gall draggin' his sorry mexcrement @$$ onto OUR sovereign soil & lecturing us about our laws. That sack of dung needs to haul his sorry @$$ back down to that cesspool he calls a country...and take all his invader "imports" back with him!
smiley87.gif
 
Top