Waterboarding

No offense, but one more good ole All American white guy in a line of 43 other good ole etc.

Ticomaya wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

As for hard choices. Yes, he has my confidence.

For one who disclaims "faith," you must have an awful lot to place any confidence whatsoever in this untried, untested, and inexperienced individual.

He is none of those things. But he is going to beat McCain this fall. And that worries you.

Cycloptichorn

He's every one of those things ... every last one of them.

And that's what worries you.

For someone who likes to insult my age, you certainly aren't very well versed on Obama's "experience."

During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included

1. Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law,
2. Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, - became law,
3. Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
4. 2007 Government Ethics Bill, became law,
5. Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.

In all, since entering the State/U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

Obama isn't just a talker, he works too, and he works fast and efficiently.

And must I remind the readers that there was nobody who had more "experience" than Cheney or Rumsfield. It didn't mean **** when it came down to it.

You're just precious Tico.

T
K
O

You're right. He has little foriegn policy experience.

A president should have lots of experience and networking with people who will later be attacking us. Bonus if you give them weapons.

I repeat: Nobody had more "experience" than Cheney or Rumsfield.

If you think that McCain's foriegn policy experience gives him the wisdom to be president, then why does he stand a on a platform to continue with the Iraq police action?

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

As for hard choices. Yes, he has my confidence.

For one who disclaims "faith," you must have an awful lot to place any confidence whatsoever in this untried, untested, and inexperienced individual.

He is none of those things. But he is going to beat McCain this fall. And that worries you.

Cycloptichorn

He's every one of those things ... every last one of them.

And that's what worries you.

snood wrote:

No offense, but one more good ole All American white guy in a line of 43 other good ole etc.

No offense, but why does one more white guy bother you, snood?

A black guy doesn't bother me, but them I'm not hung up on race and all, like some people.

Any anxiety felt by me with an Obama win will stem from apprehension that he is not at all the individual who ought to be Commander in Chief of the American Forces.

Diest TKO wrote:

You're right. He has little foriegn policy experience.

A president should have lots of experience and networking with people who will later be attacking us. Bonus if you give them weapons.

I repeat: Nobody had more "experience" than Cheney or Rumsfield.

I would certainly trust the security of the US more to either Cheney or Rumsfeld than Obama.

Quote:

If you think that McCain's foriegn policy experience gives him the wisdom to be president, then why does he stand a on a platform to continue with the Iraq police action?

Because he has wisdom. I understand you don't agree, and that's why you will vote for the man who wants to immediately tuck tail and run, and then downsize the US military, probably more so than Clinton did.

Ticomaya wrote:

snood wrote:

No offense, but one more good ole All American white guy in a line of 43 other good ole etc.

No offense, but why does one more white guy bother you, snood?

A black guy doesn't bother me, but them I'm not hung up on race and all, like some people.

Any anxiety felt by me with an Obama win will stem from apprehension that he is not at all the individual who ought to be Commander in Chief of the American Forces.

Oh fer the luva....

If you are going to feign confusion about why it would bother anyone that the presidents and most other seats of real power and influence have been held nearly exclusively by white men, I won't be clearing that up for you.

And IMO wishing for a little more diversity in high places doesn't mean one "has a problem with race". For instance, I'd consider a woman as POTUS a good sign that times are changing for the better, as well. (Hence "white guy")

Ticomaya wrote:

snood wrote:

No offense, but one more good ole All American white guy in a line of 43 other good ole etc.

No offense, but why does one more white guy bother you, snood?

A black guy doesn't bother me, but them I'm not hung up on race and all, like some people.

Any anxiety felt by me with an Obama win will stem from apprehension that he is not at all the individual who ought to be Commander in Chief of the American Forces.

Oh fer the luva....

If you are going to feign confusion about why it would bother anyone that the presidents and most other seats of real power and influence have been held nearly exclusively by white men, I won't be clearing that up for you.

Ticomaya wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

As for hard choices. Yes, he has my confidence.

For one who disclaims "faith," you must have an awful lot to place any confidence whatsoever in this untried, untested, and inexperienced individual.

He is none of those things. But he is going to beat McCain this fall. And that worries you.

Cycloptichorn

He's every one of those things ... every last one of them.

And that's what worries you.

For someone who likes to insult my age, you certainly aren't very well versed on Obama's "experience."

During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included

1. Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law,
2. Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, - became law,
3. Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
4. 2007 Government Ethics Bill, became law,
5. Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.

In all, since entering the State/U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

Obama isn't just a talker, he works too, and he works fast and efficiently.

And must I remind the readers that there was nobody who had more "experience" than Cheney or Rumsfield. It didn't mean **** when it came down to it.

You're just precious Tico.

T
K
O

snood wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:

snood wrote:

No offense, but one more good ole All American white guy in a line of 43 other good ole etc.

No offense, but why does one more white guy bother you, snood?

A black guy doesn't bother me, but them I'm not hung up on race and all, like some people.

Any anxiety felt by me with an Obama win will stem from apprehension that he is not at all the individual who ought to be Commander in Chief of the American Forces.

Oh fer the luva....

If you are going to feign confusion about why it would bother anyone that the presidents and most other seats of real power and influence have been held nearly exclusively by white men, I won't be clearing that up for you.

Ah, yes. You're a black man, and therefore you're pissed that a black man hasn't been President, and thus you want a black man to win the election because you're sick of whiteys being elected to the highest office.

Gotcha. You don't have to paint it any clearer for me.

Diest TKO wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

As for hard choices. Yes, he has my confidence.

For one who disclaims "faith," you must have an awful lot to place any confidence whatsoever in this untried, untested, and inexperienced individual.

He is none of those things. But he is going to beat McCain this fall. And that worries you.

Cycloptichorn

He's every one of those things ... every last one of them.

And that's what worries you.

For someone who likes to insult my age, you certainly aren't very well versed on Obama's "experience."

During the first - 8 - eight years of his elected service he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.

His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored another 427. These included

1. Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 - became law,
2. Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, - became law,
3. Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
4. 2007 Government Ethics Bill, became law,
5. Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, In committee, and many more.

In all, since entering the State/U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and co-sponsored another 1096.

Obama isn't just a talker, he works too, and he works fast and efficiently.

And must I remind the readers that there was nobody who had more "experience" than Cheney or Rumsfield. It didn't mean **** when it came down to it.

You're just precious Tico.

T
K
O

And how many of those have been passed into law,and signed by the respective chief executive?

Ah, yes. You're a black man, and therefore you're pissed that a black man hasn't been President, and thus you want a black man to win the election because you're sick of whiteys being elected to the highest office.

Gotcha. You don't have to paint it any clearer for me.

Relavance? Doesn't the answer to that question speak directly to the executive branch's decisions, and not Obama's?

The only answer can be that he fulfilled his duty and others may chose to or not.

Quote:

Relavance? Doesn't the answer to that question speak directly to the executive branch's decisions, and not Obama's?

The only answer can be that he fulfilled his duty and others may chose to or not.

Actually, it is relevant.
If Obama cant get enough support from others in the legislative branch to get his bills out of committee, or cant muster enough votes to get his bills passed, that says much about his ability to make deals and to work with the other side.
In other words, compromise.

Quote:

Relavance? Doesn't the answer to that question speak directly to the executive branch's decisions, and not Obama's?

The only answer can be that he fulfilled his duty and others may chose to or not.

Actually, it is relevant.
If Obama cant get enough support from others in the legislative branch to get his bills out of committee, or cant muster enough votes to get his bills passed, that says much about his ability to make deals and to work with the other side.
In other words, compromise.

Hot damn but he does that soooo well!

JTT wrote:

Hot damn but he does that soooo well!

blatham: Does such a sycophantic post please you? Gosh, I hope not.

sycophant

1537 (in L. form sycophanta), "informer, talebearer, slanderer," from L. sycophanta, from Gk. sykophantes, originally "one who shows the fig," from sykon "fig" + phanein "to show." "Showing the fig" was a vulgar gesture made by sticking the thumb between two fingers, a display which vaguely resembles a fig, itself symbolic of a c*nt (sykon also meant "vulva"). The story goes that prominent politicians in ancient Greece held aloof from such inflammatory gestures, but privately urged their followers to taunt their opponents. The sense of "mean, servile flatterer" is first recorded in Eng. 1575.