More Of The Same
Jan 28th, 2010 by Frank Knotts
Last night’s “State of the Union Address” by Pres. Obama was just more of the same.
The president called for more bank bail outs if needed, more of a push for government health care, and more so called “GREEN” economy.
But mostly what the president was calling for, was more and more government. I lost track of the times that the president explained what the government was going to do to solve the problems of the nation. How government would put people back to work, how the government would create innovation.
Pres. Obama even tried to sell the American people on the fact that his administration and the current Democrat run congress hadn’t raised taxes. Well in my opinion , since they allowed the Bush tax cuts to sunset they did raise taxes.
Of course we got more of the usual, “when I took office”, you know the blame it all on the former administration. Will this president ever grow up and understand that he now owns this nation’s faltering economy and un-employment ?
President Obama could have just come out and told the American people that in his view everything was right on track according to his agenda. More people were being forced to turn to government hand outs due to the fact that the president’s agenda was ruining the economy. Of course that wouldn’t have taken seventy minutes and he wouldn’t have been able to stand up there with his chin stuck out and accepted all of the Democrat applauds.
No real mention about the war on terror, no mention about detainees being tried in criminal courts in the U.S.. No mention of the Fort Hood shootings and no mention of the underwear bomber.
But he did take the opputunity of the State of the Union to call the Supreme Court out on its recent decision concerning campaign financing. This was a dangerous attack on a separate branch of government and ment as intimidation. It was also not the time nor the place to do so. It showed his total lack of respect for the court and its role in governing.
So according to Pres. Obama, the state of the union is basically , status quo and full steam ahead with his socialization of the United States of America.
Obama is the most incapable person to be President in the last 100 years. The world knows it and we see it every day.
He has a Presidency built on speeches and high brow political tomes along with blaming everyone else but no substance or accomplishment.
In the meantime, the self imposed Jan 1 Iran deadline has come and gone, the Russians have boxed us out of central Europe and there is no positive movement on any national security issue-none. When the French think you are weak, you are hopeless.
Domestically, everything Democrats blasted George Bush on Obama has made worse, much worse and his only answer has is to spend more money and drive up the debt.
Obama is a liar and opportunist incapable of holding the office he occupies.
Mike Protack
He spent a lot of time defending the tarp bailouts for banks ,and he pretty much claimed he staved off another great depression. The thing i don,t understand or buy is that the banks were in that bad of shape to begin with. How can you go from being in danger of failing one minute to the extent that you need a bailout to earning record profits the next minute. I suggest that they could have survived without tax payers money. It smells
He can’t concentrate on policy…he’s spending too much time ‘reading letters from children’ whose parents can’t find work or pay the mortgage.
He is pathetic.
Thought you could save some time with this software-
http://download.cnet.com/Childish-Insults/3000-2381_4-75013395.html
Youre a silly dork face! Well, you’re a dirty turtle head!
Ahhh, insults. Said on the playground all across the country, kids never seem to get tired of silly insults. That’s why we created Childish Insults.
Kids will love the randomly created three word insults that are created at the push of a button! There are over 125,000 possible combinations of silly, child-like insults that your kids can playfully banter about.
“Thought you could save some time with this software-
http://download.cnet.com/Childish-Insults/3000-2381_4-75013395.html
Youre a silly dork face! Well, you’re a dirty turtle head!
Ahhh, insults. Said on the playground all across the country, kids never seem to get tired of silly insults. That’s why we created Childish Insults.
Kids will love the randomly created three word insults that are created at the push of a button! There are over 125,000 possible combinations of silly, child-like insults that your kids can playfully banter about.”
Finally revealed, the site that generates think 123′s comments!!!
Rick what is pathetic is you and the same old shit that comes out of your mouth. Why don’t you just have another drink and leave us alone.
think123, as always you show up to distract. Instead of defending Pres. Obama by attacking someone else, why don’t you spend a minute here and defend his policies on their merit, if they have any . What is it that he has done or that he proposed in the SOTU address that moves you to defend him and his policies ? Please enlighten the rest of us with your indepth analysis of the minute details that have excaped the rest of us.
Letters from 7 yr old kids who understand the fundamentals of our economy and the political landscape no less….I say we elect the 7 yr old President and cut out the middle man in the cheap suit…ok in the expensive taxpayer funded suit
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by DelawarePolitics.net, delawareBNN. delawareBNN said: DelawarePolitics.net: More Of The Same: Last night’s “State of the Union Address” by Pres. Obama was just more of… http://bit.ly/ccEjGI [...]
Why don’t you just have another drink and leave us alone.
Who is ‘us?’ You ‘real Americans’ who can’t utter a sentence without using meaningless profanity? Pathetic dork.
Instead of defending Pres. Obama by attacking someone else, why don’t you spend a minute here and defend his policies..
They can’t. They don’t know what BO’s ‘policies’ are, and they aren’t smart enough to defend them even if they did.
Rick..
Oh I think they know his policies…and they support them…but i agree, they can’t clearly articulate them…maybe they need to explain it better…
Frank,
Sorry I distracted you. You have to admit the first few comments here were sort of kiddie potty mouth stuff. Pathetic. Liar.
What’s to explain about the SOTU? The President says when he came into office he inherited two wars and an economy on the brink of collapse. From there he said he is trying to do everything he can to get us on the right track. He said our combat role in Iraq is ending, but the war goes on, the danger is no less great.
President Obama said things have not gone smooth on health insurance reform, but says reform is an important part of restoring our long range economic prospects. That we have to find a way to come together on this. He said he’s not quitting on that.
If you read the transcript, you will find a lot of serious talk about serious issues. National Security, the economy, fiscal situation, the Supreme Court decision expanding the role of Union and Corporate money in the election process. The need to heal our divided political process so we can do the Nation’s business.
In President Reagan’s first SOTU, he said in order to understand where he wants to go, we need to look at where we have been. Reagan went on to explain the stagflation he inherited from the Carter administration. When President G.W.Bush did his first SOTU address he made the point about how Federal Spending increased 8% in the last year of the Clinton administration, that was not acceptable, the Clinton budget surplus meant the Government was collecting too much money and that he, the new President Bush was going to give that money back to the People in tax cuts.
Last night and today President Obama reminded us what he got when he was sworn in. Two wars that were never funded that cost over $1 trillion in borrowed money, a huge new entitlement Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit never funded costing $200 billion a year in borrowed money with not even mechanism in place to permit the Government to bargain for drug price cuts, he inherited the $700 billion in borrowed money “Trouble Assets Relief Program” made necessary by the collapse of banks and brokerages. On top of that the hand he was dealt included a projected deficit over $1 trillion, $5 trillion already added to the national debt by his successor, and an economy that was losing 700,000 jobs in January when he took office. FDR inherited an economic disaster from Hoover, but even FDR did not get an economic disaster and two wars to go along with it.
Why would we not cut this guy some slack?
Now any true patriot – 912 Patriots – as well as those – like me – who are just run of the mill ordinary American patriots – Patriots of all stripe need weep for their Nation at this dangerous time.
Cut our new President some slack. He is a good man. There is nothing to be gained by undermining our national leadership, but much to risk.
I just encourage people to respect the President. Wish him well. Wish this Nation well.
Look back at the Civil War. The Depression. World War II. Present events are approaching that same magnitude. We need strong unified leadership.
The Founders established our national motto as E Pluribus Unum. From many, one. Unity is Strength. Words very deliberately forged into the National Consciousness by the Founders. On the currency. On the Seal of The United States. On the Seal of the President Of The United States. E Pluribus Unum.
Is it wise to so brazenly disregard such ancestral wisdom?
Our President is only as strong as we permit him to be. So it’s up to each of us to decide what American Patriots do in times like this.
wow think123………
I wish I could say I was shocked at how little you get it…but no…I’m not…like all progressives your faith is all placed in government and in this case all in ONE man.
Read some of the writings of the founders and please…get a clue before you comment on something like “E Pluribus Unum”… “E Pluribus Unum” is Latin for “One from many” or “One from many parts.” It refers to the welding of a single federal state from a group of individual political units — originally colonies and now states. Over the years, “E Pluribus Unum” has also served as a reminder of America’s bold attempt to make one unified nation of people from many different backgrounds and beliefs.
That’s what it means think123…it has nothing to do with all being progressive sheep that fall in line under a single dictator. It doesn’t mean we can’t criticize, question or disagree with the policies of someone just because he won an election. It also doesn’t mean that because he won the election we do what he wants. That’s not how America works son.
Now listen here Evan Q son, as usual you are jumping the gun. You need to think before you get insulted. Nobody is attacking you. Nobody wants to put you in a herd of sheep. Your inner demons may tell you “progressives” are out to get you – but that’s just in your imagination. In the real world we have wars and deficits, a host of national issues to be address, a future that needs to be constructed.
E pluribus unum, is all about unity. I am not a progressive or any of the labels you simplify people with. You group and label people like they were sheep. I am a simple patriot. Not loyal to a MAN, loyal to the institutions our Founders established. If you would stop worrying about sheep and progressives and get a clue that we are in trouble and we only have one President at a time, maybe you could contribute instead of tearing everybody who does not think like you down. Be a good loser. You can oppose all you want. Just don’t make the winners out to be anything other than good solid American patriots who are working to build a better future for us.
Now son, maybe you think the President has no business trying to manage the future of the Nation. That is an interesting view of things.
The Founders established our national motto as E Pluribus Unum. From many, one. Unity is Strength. Words very deliberately forged into the National Consciousness by the Founders. On the currency. On the Seal of The United States. On the Seal of the President Of The United States. E Pluribus Unum.
Is it wise to so brazenly disregard such ancestral wisdom?
The Socialist-Democrats may pay lip service to ‘unity,’ but their manta has been, for years, ‘diversity is our strength.’ This is why the S-Dems pander to the ‘gay and transgender community,’ the ‘union households,’ and ‘people of color,’ ad nauseum.
To hell with Pathetic Barry and his grotesque, anti-American agenda. There’s a reason his poll numbers are plummeting; if he keeps it up, maybe he can sink to Pelosi’s 20% approval rating. Keep up the delusion that Corzine, Deeds and Coakley lost because of the ‘economy.’ See how that works out this coming November.
————————————————————
By-the-way, think..how did you like the recent SCOTUS decision, deeming corporations to be individuals and declaring attack ads against specific candidates to be free speech? I’m sure you support the decision, because, to use your own words, ‘they are jurists and we are not.’
You lefties never seem to anticipate the reality of the axiom; ‘what goes around, comes around.’
Rick, can you tell us what part of the President’s agenda is “anti-American and what makes it anti-American?
You’ve got yourself in a dark box surrounded by imaginary enemies. I am not a Democrat, a Socialist, or a Lefty. I am a Republican. A businessman. A fiscal conservative. I even play golf. I like money. I am a big fan of American Capitalism. Not gay transgender or in a union. I voted Democrat once in 2008, and I am glad I did.
The main reason I did was because as a lifelong Republican fiscal conservative, I was really really upset with the way my Party trashed our fiscal situation – you know – going from a balanced budget with the debt clock stopped – to these incredible deficits and all the new debt, then the Big Collapse and TARP. I voted for Obama to get rid of the leadership that took over a good fiscal situation and ruined it.
The new President’s great victory in 2008 came with 66 million votes. That’s the most popular votes, the biggest turnout of the People ever – for any President in any election in American History. So I hope we can agree that getting more votes than any President in history took more than gays and union members. It took Republicans, conservatives like me, crossing over because the old ways were failing and we are willing to trying new ways. Mainly, kick the bums out.
Regarding the court decision, without seeing how it works out, I don’t like it. And you are correct, the court decides the law, not me, just like the Founders said it should be. All we who disagree can do it follow the Constitutional process, get Congress to pass some law that helps. If it turns out this Corporation/Union Money As Person decision plays out real real bad I guess somebody will have to launch some major amend the Constitution campaign and see how that goes.
I don’t think the Justices who voted for this are fascists KKK lefty righty progressive reactionary communist wingnut idiots. I just think they see things different than I do. Hate is never a good thing.
Maybe you think the President has no business trying to manage the future of the Nation. That is an interesting view of things.
Interestingly enough a view shared by pretty much every founder of this “N”ation.
How ignorant and twisted is a view that the constitution invests the Chief Executive with the right and authority to “manage the future of the Nation”.
Such a belief is truly a perversion of everything the United States was formed upon and everything the founders did to prevent such singular accumulation of control by the state in a nexus with the power and ambitions of any one person or group of people.
That statement goes so far beyond the point of managing the affairs of the national government in a federal republic, explicitly limited by its constitutional document, it is breathtakingly frightening.
Just “Think” about it….managing the very future of the entire Nation.
I can ponder the fates of numerous nations in recent history for which their “futures” were “managed” by a single charismatic leader of singular ambition, hubris, and arrogance. Even the lemmings who signed off on such a recipe for tyranny were not spared any more than those coralled into it.
It’s fine if some people want to prostrate themselves before some political big daddy “managing the future of the Nation” (as if the nation is so sacrosanct as to be capitalized). More accurately stated this means controlling the destinies of everyone in it…and the requisite power to do so.
Bow away, think123. Just don’t expect the rest of us to be dragged over the cliff with you.
This is why the S-Dems pander to the ‘gay and transgender community,’ the ‘union households,’ and ‘people of color,’ ad nauseum.
gay and transgender community = 8.8 million Americans
union households = 15.3 million Americans
people of color = 104.6 million Americans
ad nauseum = everybody else
Tyler, why jump to extremes here?
Did I say let’s all throw ourselves at the feet of some charismatic leader? No. You said that.
I said “maybe you don’t think the President has any business trying to manage the the future of the Nation”. Have things gotten so twisted out there that even Presidents are not supposed to lead? Or is it just President’s who are not of your Party?
Remember the Great Communicator? The maximum leader we all love? Tear down this wall. Government is the problem not the solution. He was managing our Future. From the first paragraphs of President Reagan’s first Inaugural Address:
“The business of our nation goes forward. These United States are confronted with an economic affliction of great proportions. We suffer from the longest and one of the worst sustained inflations in our national history. It distorts our economic decisions, penalizes thrift, and crushes the struggling young and the fixed-income elderly alike. It threatens to shatter the lives of millions of our people.
Idle industries have cast workers into unemployment, causing human misery and personal indignity. Those who do work are denied a fair return for their labor by a tax system which penalizes successful achievement and keeps us from maintaining full productivity.
But great as our tax burden is, it has not kept pace with public spending. For decades, we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children’s future for the temporary convenience of the present. To continue this long trend is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals.
You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we are not bound by that same limitation?
We must act today in order to preserve tomorrow. And let there be no misunderstanding—we are going to begin to act, beginning today.
The economic ills we suffer have come upon us over several decades. They will not go away in days, weeks, or months, but they will go away. They will go away because we, as Americans, have the capacity now, as we have had in the past, to do whatever needs to be done to preserve this last and greatest bastion of freedom.”
At the time, I was sure President Reagan had a vision for the Nation’s future. That’s why I voted for him twice.
Did Lincoln manage the future of the Nation? Did Eisenhower envision a nation connected by Interstate Highways? Did JFK say let’s explore the moon? Did Reagan lead us with visions of the “shining city”. Did George W. Bush say “no child left behind”.
The President is expected to set the priorities, formulates the Budget, he can veto Congress – the Executive Branch is one third of the deal – what the heck are you objecting to? Me saying we are in hard dangerous times, it’s not smart for us to undermine the President. We need a some unity.
I am not a Democrat, a Socialist, or a Lefty. I am a Republican. A businessman. A fiscal conservative…..think
You forgot comedian.
The new President’s great victory in 2008 came with 66 million votes. That’s the most popular votes, the biggest turnout of the People ever – for any President in any election in American History.…think
More PMSNBC Kook-Aid. Turnout (as a percentage of registered voters) was down from ’04. This is because the Republicans ran a hapless cnadidate; BO won’t be so lucky in ’12.
“Bye-Bye Nan-cy,
We Hate to See You Go…”
Hey Rick, what would you call the 66 million Americans who voted for President Obama? Got some great insult for us? Bad Americans maybe.
And if the Republicans ran a “hapless” candidate – why did you vote for Mr. Hapless? Are you stuck so deep in some ideological box you vote for anybody who says crap that sounds “conservative”?
You are a sucker for the conservative con. If a car dealer told you to buy his wonderful product, then delivered something totally inferior, would you do it over and over and over again? Fall for the same bull, the same promises, keep buy the same inferior product? At what point do you figure they might be taking advantage of you? Conning you? Giving you the old Bernie Madoff. I can do great things for you. Then they run away with your vote and steal your money. That’s what happened with this last gang of conservatives we just kicked out of Washington.
That is what we are still getting from this new group of politicians who prey on vulnerable Patriots take advantage of your yearning for small government, low taxes, balanced budgets. We elected them for the White House, to control Congress and they delivered none of what they promised – instead of small government and balanced budgets they gave us huge spending, no way to pay for it except their uncontrolled borrowing and huge debt. They collapsed the economy on us – the only – the only group that benefitted from these con artists were the huge financial institutions banks on Wall Street. The rest of us get debt, sorrow, lost jobs, shattered investments, even our homes are devalued.
Aren’t you angry about that? To have politicians promise they will make all your conservatives dreams come true, then they turn around and do the exact opposite after you give them your vote? Don’t be a patsy. We Republicans always say run government like business – do we now turn around and ignore this disaster like nothing happened? Because we are trained to think “liberals” are the enemy? Nancy Pelosi and Acorn are the problem? Not AIG, not the last Adminstration, not TARP. It’s liberals that are the problem. That total 1984 doublethinktalk. Your eyes see one thing, but you brain has been conditioned to process in the opposite direction. You can stay with program Rick, I am moving on. I am willing to see if a whole new group of leaders can wreck things – I know the old “conservative” group did wreck things. WTF would I want to keep them around. Believe their crap? Because that’s me team? Bull.
Notice the recent Supreme Court decision by the “conservative” court? You know the one that promised the court should not make the law, the court should just stick with the letter of the Constitution, not be activists, let the elected Lawmakers make the Law. Well they just overturned the will of the U.S. Senate McCain Feingold (59-41) and went way beyond being activists by creating a whole new identity for Union and Corporation money in elections.
Is that the non-activist, strict constructionist conservative Court you got conned into fighting for by phony conservatives? No, that is the Court that people get when they are conned by politicians who know how to fool you into voting for them, then they turn around a rob us blind.
They say a sucker is born every minute, this conservative con game proves the point.
Think, have you ever heard the axiom “brevity is the soul of wit?” Where does that put you?
Hey Rick, what would you call the 66 million Americans who voted for President Obama?
Suckers. Luckily, as polls show, most of them won’t make the same mistake twice.
And if the Republicans ran a “hapless” candidate – why did you vote for Mr. Hapless?
I didn’t. As I clearly stated on WGMD on numerous occasions, I wouldn’t support the ‘moderate’ take-over of the Republican Party. I felt that by repudiating the pathetic McCain (with appropriate deference to his military service), a re-invigorated party would emerge from the rubble. With the help of BO and Pelosi’s radical agenda, this is exactly what is happening; see VA, NJ and MA.
You are a sucker for the conservative con…
I suppose you’re right..assuming you mean conservatives like Washington, Jefferson, et. al.
Notice the recent Supreme Court decision by the “conservative” court? You know the one that promised the court should not make the law..
The Court is now completely politicized. Of course, we shouldn’t criticize the decision; to repeat your own fatuous words, “they are jurusts and we are not.”
They say a sucker is born every minute..
True. You are a perfect example. “Hope and Change.” Ha! My God, what a sucker.
Rick, I don’t like brevity. I am not trying to be witty. I like writing stuff that goes on and on. How am I doing?
I’m trying to get you to channel some of that passion against stuff energy of yours into something more constructive than calling people names.
Yes, they are the jurist we are not. The difference between us perhaps lies in the fact I understand that fact.
What is the reference to WGMD? They let you on the radio?
Rick, I don’t like brevity.
Obviously.
I am not trying to be witty.
The aforementioned quote doesn’t have anything to do with ‘wit’ in the contemporary sense.
What is the reference to WGMD?
In a previous post, you asked “why did you vote for Mr. Hapless?” My ‘reference’ to WGMD was simply to show that, as usual, you don’t have any idea what you are talking about. As Frank will attest, I clearly and frequently recommended against supporting McCain and his record of ‘moderate’ appeasement. This is because I anticipated what the results of a BO presidency would bring, long-term, for conservatism. So far, the script is being followed to the letter. You people are as predictable as the tides.
“Stop the Marxist Bastards!!!
I’m trying to get you to channel some of that passion against stuff energy of yours into something more constructive than calling people names.
No, you’re trying to pass yourself off as a ‘moderate’..you’re not. We both know that, now don’t we?
Rick, say hello to the boys down at KKK for me. Your backward looking pro-slavery anti-freedom mentality is hard to figure. I guess if it was up to you, blacks would not vote. The Government would not recall cars, banks could double our interest rates, health insurance could triple, and you people would say it smells like freedom.
Only thing nuttier than Marxists are you new anti-American KKK promoters.
Good luck trying to take America back to colonial times. How about if we make “liberals” 3/5 of a citizen? You sound like just the rightwing guy to administer the test. Polish your brown boots. Fire up the cross. Make sure your white hood is looking spiffy for the parade.
Rick, say hello to the boys down at KKK for me..
There you have it, folks. When confronted with reality (I didn’t vote for’ Mr. Hapless’..and can prove it), our enlightened Think-I-Know-it-All resorts to the old KKK slander.
KKK? I know you feel frustrated and dejected after being exposed as a mole, but is that the best you can come up with? KKK?
Pathetic.
Stop the KKK bastards!!!!
Rick, here’s a little quote to mull over before another wasted rebuttal. “I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”
George Bernard Shaw
“How about if we make “liberals” 3/5 of a citizen? ” – think123
Any idea why the founders settled on 3/5ths? Not a clue? Good think123…now please try to pay attention *logic alert*
The south had many larger states in size and the north held more of the population numbers…they also had the lions share of slaves. Since the census was to be used to determine apportionment within the House of Representatives (as well as taxes but the issue was mainly representation especially for smaller states), counting slaves (who could not vote but would be counted in the census) would allow the south to claim a HUGE majority annually in the House and would almost guarantee that pro-slavery sentiment would dominate the political landscape. By contrast, abolitionists (mostly based in Boston, NYC and Philadelphia) wanted no slave to count in the census for any amount. For example, in 1793 slave states would have been apportioned 33 seats in the House of Representatives had the seats been assigned based on the free population; instead they were apportioned 47. In 1812, slaveholding states had 76 instead of the 59 they would have had; in 1833, 98 instead of 73. This would have actually guaranteed the abolitionist movement sentiment a dominant role in politics. The south could never have that and in fact, Virginia, South Carolina and North Carolina threatened to secede from the union then! So the founders compromised. The abolinists knew they did not have the sweeping numbers they needed across the states to make the case to end slavery without a destruction of the fragile union. Likewise, southern slave holders knew they couldn’t continue to sustain their current economic prosperity without the ship builders of the north. So they agreed to disagree (at times FURIOUSLY and with more than one fist fight on the subject taking place) but the apportionment of representatives still remained at hand and so the 3/5ths compromise was proposed by James Wilson and Roger Sherman at the convention in 1787 (originally proposed by Madison). It presented the South with the opportunity to even the score in the House but it also refused either side a huge majority.
Turned out that the South actually retained more control than intended but the idea was “moderation”. In 1860, (actually sometime before that, around 1850 was when the wheels began turning toward abolition) it all came to a head with the election of Lincoln and secession of southern states. That’s the beauty of that Constitution we love. It allows rights to be wronged and yet, doesn’t require us to rebuild our government every time we need to make a change.
Rick, here’s a little quote to mull over before another wasted rebuttal. “I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”
George Bernard Shaw – anbupro
Wow…what a guy *rolls eyes*
Thanks Evan, I knew there was a good Godly Christian reason for counting slaves as 3/5 of a person. Personally, I would have counted non-slaves as 7/5. Since you are a scholar, can you tell us how they counted native Americans?
The political arena is filled with Marxists and Ku Klux Klan members fighting to the finish. The President is a Marxist, of course. David, Rick, and EvanQ are dedicted KKK. That seems to be the extremes you guys like to wallow in.
“Do you know what a pessimist is?” “A man who thinks everybody is as nasty as himself, and hates them for it.”
George Bernard Shaw
“Since you are a scholar, can you tell us how they counted native Americans?” – think123 They didn’t count them at all.
Hey..at least they weren’t persecuted as slaves right?!
“David, Rick, and EvanQ are dedicted KKK.” You know…for some strange reason, when think123 calls me, Rick and David (who may feel differently based on his racial background) KKK members…it kinda makes me feel like we’re doing something right. I’m ok with a Progressive like think123 thinking I am THAT far away from his/her ideology. That being said, I should point out that calling us KKK members is about as far from the TRUTH as possible. Wasn’t think123 the one telling us to live Christian values? Interesting
“Do you know what a pessimist is?” “A man who thinks everybody is as nasty as himself, and hates them for it.”
George Bernard Shaw
aww isn’t that cute…one progressive quoting another. I wonder if think123 knows that GBS called for eugenics, killing people who have no “societal value” and that he idolized Facist Italy?
Evan, the blacks made out better than the natives for sure. Just think if we put the slaves into Federal Reservation camps with the Natives. Or what if we let the natives keep their villages instead of killing as many of them as we could? Hard to say if that would have worked out for us.
The forefathers did what they had to do, what they thought was best. It’s all worked out pretty good. I’m not sure who the progressives were back in that time, but there must have been some folks thinking it ain’t good to kill people so you can build a railroad line. I hope this does not sound Socialist. I am sort of a history buff. Do not take any of this to be anti-American, progressive, Marxist or any of that. I am a good American. I just like to think about stuff.