Do you like US President Barack Obama more or less since he took office?

My wife hates him. And Michelle. Says every time she sees Michelle she can't help but picture her with a spear and shield.

All I can say is that he can speak better than Bush, but so far nothing is getting better, and I wonder where all the money is coming from for bailing out all the big business enterprises and giving the average American squat.

It's nothing personal, I don't know the man to like him or not. I didn't like what I saw of his proposed policies before he took office and those opinions have only been reinforced since.

I love Obama even more he is the best President

Feelings haven't changed. I like him but am just not interested in politics. I say give the guy a chance - he has a lot on his mind.

Depends on the issue. Por ejemplo, I'm NOT a fan of his deciding to continue on with Bush's "Faith Based Initiatives" program.

My feelings haven't changed. I still like him.

About the same. (Which is to say, I like him quite a bit.)

i like him just the same

I would still very much like to have half-half-black children with him.

My feelings haven't changed, I still don't like the guy. I just don't trust him.

I really wish that BO would clamp down on the banks to get them lending to ordinary people again. I am fully in favor of a Partial or Full Nationalization of the banking system if they continue to sit atop all the money they have got. Same goes for AIG they are a disgrace and just as greedy and self-serving a company as the banks are.

My feelings haven't changed. I am also not American so it means less to me.

Ooooohhhh! I love your avatar!

No different. Maybe a touch more, since I now know he operates at least as well I hoped for, keeping the public informed, and hosting a decent concert with Stevie Wonder.

My feelings have not changed.

OOOOOOOooohhhh, a little Smurf baby!!! I want to coo at your baby!

I like him a little more.

I haven't been following everything real closely... but a few of the things I have noticed he's done are agreeable.

This thing, for instance: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/03/endangered....

Plus, some of them get hotter when they become president..... like Bill.

My feelings haven't changed.

Isn't he so cute?? He is 4 weeks old in the pic, taken 2 weeks ago. I'm so proud of him

I haven't decided, yet.

I am the last person in line to ever want to look at the baby pictures, I've actually said "no" to people that say "do you want to see my baby pictures?" (but soon realized that is the wrong thing to do). So I grimace, growl, and fake the whole smile thing,... but your little smurf baby !!
I want to reach through and coo at hime!!

much more, he has become far more centrist and thus, reasonable.

Yes. I remember in the first week when he signed the order to suspend all the ongoing proceedings at Gitmo and ordering that it be shut down within the year and then topped it off by signing the order requiring the Army Field Manual be used as a guide for terror interrogations, effectively banning torture and other illegal coercive techniques, such as waterboarding.and putting an end to extraordinary rendition and secret CIA prisons.

I thought, "Crap! What's he going to do next week?". And lo and behold, the next he signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

My feelings haven't changed; I still don't like Obama or anything about him.

I like him the same as I always did.

Didn't like him before the election and I still don't...

I WANT HIM TO FORK OVER HIS REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE. HIS GRANDMOTHER SAYS HE WAS BORN IN KENYA. AND HE HASN'T BROUGHT FORTH ANYTHING SAYING HE'S A NATURAL BORN AMERICAN. SO HE'S LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. ONCE A LIAR ALWAYS A LIAR.JUST LIKE A CHEATING SPOUSE. I DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM, AS YOU MIGHT GUESS, HE HAS NO MILITARY BACKGROUND. THERE'S ALREADY BEEN A COUPLE ATTEMPTS ON HIS LIFE, AND I HOPE HE'S WEARING A BULLET PROOF JACKET.AND THE STIMULUS PACKAGE IS RIDICULOUS AS ARE ALL THE BAILOUTS. THOSE COMPANIES SHOULD DEAL WITH THEIR PROBLEMS AND SHUT THE "F" UP. OH AND THE WAY HE TALKS TO THE PEOPLE, IS LIKE HE'S TALKING TO IDIOTS., SOOO CONDESCENDING. . HE SHOULD OF JUST BEEN A TEACHER. YOU HAVE TO TALK SLOW , TO TEACH AND BE UNDERSTOOD. I JUST HATE BEING TALKED TO LIKE I'M AN IDIOT. I AM NOT AN IDIOT.

He was an arsehole, only a bigger one now... He still is a liar, crook and very corrupt.

> He was an arsehole, only a bigger one now... He
> still is a liar, crook and very corrupt.

Based on what exactly?

> I WANT HIM TO FORK OVER HIS REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
> HIS GRANDMOTHER SAYS HE WAS BORN IN KENYA. AND
> HE HASN'T BROUGHT FORTH ANYTHING SAYING HE'S A
> NATURAL BORN AMERICAN. SO HE'S LYING TO THE AMERICAN
> PEOPLE. ONCE A LIAR ALWAYS A LIAR.JUST LIKE A
> CHEATING SPOUSE. I DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM, AS YOU
> MIGHT GUESS, HE HAS NO MILITARY BACKGROUND. THERE'S
> ALREADY BEEN A COUPLE ATTEMPTS ON HIS LIFE, AND
> I HOPE HE'S WEARING A BULLET PROOF JACKET.AND
> THE STIMULUS PACKAGE IS RIDICULOUS AS ARE ALL
> THE BAILOUTS. THOSE COMPANIES SHOULD DEAL WITH
> THEIR PROBLEMS AND SHUT THE "F" UP. OH AND THE
> WAY HE TALKS TO THE PEOPLE, IS LIKE HE'S TALKING
> TO IDIOTS., SOOO CONDESCENDING. . HE SHOULD OF
> JUST BEEN A TEACHER. YOU HAVE TO TALK SLOW , TO
> TEACH AND BE UNDERSTOOD. I JUST HATE BEING TALKED
> TO LIKE I'M AN IDIOT. I AM NOT AN IDIOT.

Yes, you are an idiot. The whole "he wasn't born in the U.S. thing has been debunked many MANY times. And you don't have to have a military background to be President. This isn't a military dictatorship, it's a Representative Democracy. Also, turn off the Cap Lock already moron. Left or Right we here at SC do not like being yelled at here. You are lying, inciting treason, and being exceptionally rude. So clearly, you do need to be talked to like, which Barack Obama does not do. Unlike you you lying idiot, I've seen his speeches. He talks to us like grown ups. of course, to the Right Wing that is being condescending. You anti-intellectual bastards feel about anyone whose IQ is higher than their shoe size the same way that Osama Bin Laden feels about Jews.

He is working to grab more power and make the USA a socialist nation.

LISTEN UP YOU IGNORANT BASTARD. I LIKE CAPS. SO I'M NOT CHANGING. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH YELLING. GROW UP YOURSELF , MORON. AND OBAMA DOES TO TALK TO AMERICANS LIKE THIER IDIOTS, JUST LIKE YOU. I AM NOT INCITING TREASON. WHAT'S YOUR PROBLEM? DO YOU LIKE BEING LIED TO? I'M NOT RUDE, JUST STATING THE TRUTH. AND AS FOR OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE. I HAVEN'T SEEN IT AND ALOT , I MEAN ALOT OF PEOPLE WANT TO SEE IT. SO WHY IS OBAMA HIDING THE TRUTH ALONG WITH HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE?HUH??? I AM NOT A LYING IDIOT. I WANT THE TRUTH. AND IT SEEMS LIKE "YOU, CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH"

> |> He was an arsehole, only a bigger one now... He
> |> still is a liar, crook and very corrupt.
>
> Based on what exactly?

Hmm could it be his lies, questionable background, questionable associates, inept ability to find cabinet members that are not as crooked as he is (and that pay thier taxes).... How is that for a start of a list....

Obama-bot's followers appear to be a bunch of brainwashed twits. To them he is the messiah...to anyone with a brain, he is just another crooked politician.

> LISTEN UP YOU IGNORANT BASTARD. I LIKE CAPS.
> SO I'M NOT CHANGING. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH
> YELLING. GROW UP YOURSELF , MORON. AND OBAMA DOES
> TO TALK TO AMERICANS LIKE THIER IDIOTS, JUST LIKE
> YOU. I AM NOT INCITING TREASON. WHAT'S YOUR PROBLEM?
> DO YOU LIKE BEING LIED TO? I'M NOT RUDE, JUST
> STATING THE TRUTH. AND AS FOR OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
> I HAVEN'T SEEN IT AND ALOT , I MEAN ALOT OF PEOPLE
> WANT TO SEE IT. SO WHY IS OBAMA HIDING THE TRUTH
> ALONG WITH HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE?HUH??? I AM NOT
> A LYING IDIOT. I WANT THE TRUTH. AND IT SEEMS
> LIKE "YOU, CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH"

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.shared/image.html...

You, are a liar. And all caps means yelling in Internettiquette.

> |> |> He was an arsehole, only a bigger
> one now... He
> |> |> still is a liar, crook and very corrupt.
> |>
> |> Based on what exactly?
>
> Hmm could it be his lies, questionable background,
> questionable associates, inept ability to find
> cabinet members that are not as crooked as he
> is (and that pay thier taxes).... How is that
> for a start of a list....
>
> Obama-bot's followers appear to be a bunch of
> brainwashed twits. To them he is the messiah...to
> anyone with a brain, he is just another crooked
> politician.

Questionable background? Oh, so you're yet another crazy idiot who likes to spread lies about him not releasing the birth certificate that he in fact did release.

As for the taxes thing, that is an exageration at best. But since you are a Right Wing douche, you're probably just lying. You see, with Mr. Geithner, his issue was a common error. IRS says THOUSANDS of people make that error every year. The Tom Daschle thing was a boneheaded move, and he dropped out to try and prvent docuhbag liars like you from gripping on. he underestimated just how moronic and evil you Righties are.

As for lies, I need some actual examples, not just more of your "everyone is politics is evil and I'm awesome" bullcrap. You NEVER have anything to offer but meanspirited rhetoric and dishonesty. In other words, everything you accuse politicians of being you are, in spades.

LOL SPADES? YA THAT'S CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK. OH YOUR SOOO FUNNY. AS GOMEZY3K SAID>"BAMA BOTS". IN A NUT SHELL. THAT'S YOU FROSTY.YOU DIFFENTLY HAVE YOUR BLINDERS ON. AS FOR CAPS> MY EYESIGHT ISN'T GOOD AND I LIKE BIG LETTERS. I'M NOT YELLING. AT ALL. SO GROW UP. AS FOR AS, MEAN SPIRITED RHETORIC>YOU STARTED IT BY CALLING ME NAMES.MY OPINION OF OBAMASS IS MY OPINION. I DIDN'T START CALLING YOU RUDE NAMES. , WHAT'S DOCUBBING ? DECUBBING LIAR? IF YOU MEAN GEORGE W BUSH. HE'S AN IDIOT. YES THAT'S MY OPINION AGAIN. I HAVE THE RIGHT.YOU SAY "AS FOR LIES.YOU WANT ACTUAL EXAMPLES, ( HOW ABOUT FACTUAL EVIDENCE?) HAVE YOU SEEN THE ACTUAL REAL PROOF OF WHERE ABAMA WAS BOR? I THINK NOT. EVEN WIKIPEDIA HAS SCRUBBED ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT AREA OF QUESTIONABLE ELIGIBILITY. . YOU NEED TO OPEN YOUR EYES AND YOUR BRAIN AND WAKE UP AND SEE THE PROOF. I HAVEN'T YET.

>HAVE YOU SEEN THE ACTUAL
> REAL PROOF OF WHERE ABAMA WAS BOR? I THINK NOT.
> EVEN WIKIPEDIA HAS SCRUBBED ANYTHING TO DO WITH
> THAT AREA OF QUESTIONABLE ELIGIBILITY. . YOU NEED
> TO OPEN YOUR EYES AND YOUR BRAIN AND WAKE UP AND
> SEE THE PROOF. I HAVEN'T YET.

I showed it to you. Your lie has been debunked over and over again. Even Right Wing "news" sites like World Net Daily have gotten off the bandwagon.

And I just love the irony of being called a "Bot" by a member of the Dittohead Community.

Also, spell check is your friend.

Now stop screaming. That's what all caps means when used in an entire post. Instead, do something that smart people (i.e. non-Republicans) do. You can go into your internet browser and set the font size. Mine, por ejemplo, is set at Times New Roman Size 16.

You could just use CTRL+ to increase the size of all text, otherwise it's only your own text you can see anyhow (or is that all you care about anyhow?). Whatever your typing preference, it doesn't change that you are perceived as yelling by the conventions here.

Even if Obama were born in Kenya, with an american parent he could still legally be a natural citizen and president. Who cares where a person was born anyhow? The best person for the job may have spent the first 7 years of their life in Sweden. In fact I'd think such worldly experience would increase a candidates qualifications.

Personally I'd rather presidents had no military experience. People with military experience are more likely to choose military solutions even though better solutions exist.

What's with 'Obama-bots'? Is this some implication that people follow whatever he says? If anythings it's rather the reverse. Left-wing progressives have been waiting many years to have someone in office say many of the things Obama says. I for one have long been awaiting someone with the sense to create a public-works program to create green energy infra-structure. Besides our past energy strategy bordering on immoral, it's also a security and economy risk while other nations, including even oil producers have invested heavily in wind and solar. When the oil runs out we'd be like the team racing with flat tires.

So what's your problem, you don't like what he says, or don't believe he can achieve it? As I see it, whethar or not he can achieve it remains to be seen, but it's still way better than other candidates who didn't even offer sensible solutions in the first place.

Reasons for the bailout extend into macro-economics of the Federal Reserve beyond most peoples comprehension. The dollar needs devalued to reflect the recession reality, otherwise it means nothing at all and would collapse. Giving it to the banks and wealthy devalues it without directly affecting the common public. Also it serves as a checks-&-balance. The banks after all are in turn indirectly bailing out the people who are now going into bankruptcy. We are simply pulling up the bottom by allowing these bankruptcies to occur. If anything, Obama's fault is not his socialist solution, but using such a socialist solution to attempt to keep capitalism alive, when the evidence of what such a pyramid scheme causes is cleary in hand.

This last century has inevitably played out in Reaganomics style the only way it could, like a Monopoly game in which the top corporations eventually own Board Walk and parkplace and bleed every one else dry. It's further complicated by the fact that the FR issues debt, not money. Every dollar printed is owed with as much interest that can never be paid back. The system counts on ever increasing debt, and ever increasing production, something which wasn't possible to maintain indefinitely. It's amazing we invented as many economic/job systems to perpetate it as long as we did. The banks each average 1.2 trillion in asets, and 40 trillion in debt securities, their true asset. Debt securities only have value as long as the public believes things will get better, which is of course impossible. Only the debt can increase. This is why the USSR collapsed. People stopped believing their fictitious money had meaning.

If you don't undertand these concepts you have no business criticising presidential economic strategies.

Socialism is the only possible long-term stable economic system. Obama looks like the president who will be stuck trying to explain that to the american public. Without regulation (which is a form of socialism) ultimately we would all be slaves to the one VM-TW-WT-EB-TG-MA corporation {Visa/Mastercard, Time-Warner, Walmart/Target, Exxon/BP, Toyota/GM, Microsoft/ABC corporation}. Every decade this circumstance has been doubly so. Corporations got so big they became cabinet members and overturned anti-monopoly laws. Now, the only fair sensible thing left is for public democracy to own the VM-TW-WT-EB-TG-MA corporation, otherwise we are merely the consumer/employee subjects of an unelected CEO king, who, like the company towns of a century ago, have the power to write all the laws. It's pretty much like that already. The media won't even tell you about their power or inform you of choices. Presidentiar candidates like Dennis Kucinich weren't allowed into debates to tell the public the truth about corporate control, the FR, and such.

I suspect the only reason Obama was allowed in office at all is that Bush, Clinton, and the CEOS realize the monopoly game of the last century is essentially over, and are polite to allow Obama to clean up the aftermath, sustain the public anyhow.

YOU MAKE ME LAUGH. I'VE READ WND AND ALSO SIGNED A PETITION FOR OBAMA TO FORK OVER HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. AND I AM A REPUBLICAN. THE ONLY LIE I SEE IS OBAMA. HE'S HIDING WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT TO SEE. HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. IT HAS NOT BEEN DEBUNKED. THAT'S A LIE, RIGHT THERE. OH AND I'M NOT GONNA UNDO MY CAPS... YOU JUST DON'T LISTEN VERY WELL.. I'M GETTING TIRED OF ARGUING WITH STUPID PEOPLE LIKE YOU. GROW UP AND SEE THE TRUTH.

> YOU MAKE ME LAUGH. I'VE READ WND AND ALSO SIGNED
> A PETITION FOR OBAMA TO FORK OVER HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE.

Which he's done.

> AND I AM A REPUBLICAN. THE ONLY LIE I SEE IS OBAMA.
> HE'S HIDING WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT TO SEE. HIS BIRTH
> CERTIFICATE. IT HAS NOT BEEN DEBUNKED.

Yes, it had. I showed it to you.

> THAT'S
> A LIE, RIGHT THERE. OH AND I'M NOT GONNA UNDO
> MY CAPS... YOU JUST DON'T LISTEN VERY WELL.. I'M
> GETTING TIRED OF ARGUING WITH STUPID PEOPLE LIKE
> YOU. GROW UP AND SEE THE TRUTH.

You call me stupid, yet I am the only one here who has used evidence, and has typed in a non-aggravating manner. When people show you what they are, believe them. You have shown yourself to be rude, dishonest, and blinded by ideology to the point that even a notarized letter from whatever God you believe in would not convince you.

NON AGRAVATING MANNER? YOUR MAKING ME LAUGH AGAIN. I'M TELLING YOU WHAT I BELIEVE IN. HAVEN'T YOU BEEN LISTENING? ME RUDE? HA HA. YOUR THE ONE WHO STARTED IT. DON'T TELL ME I'M RUDE WHEN YOUR THE ONE THAT STARTED NAME CALLING. I WROTE WHAT I BELIEVE IN. THE CONSTITION. I HAVE NOT, MAY I REPEAT MYSELF A HUNDRED TIMES OVER . I WANT TO SEE PROOF IN OBAMA'S ELIGIBILITY FOR PRESIDENT. I'M STILL WAITING.AND SO ARE ALOT OF PEOPLE.YOU HAVE SHOWED ME NOTHING OF EVIDIDENCE EITHER. RUDE AND DISHONEST? YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING. I SEE NO NOTARIZED LETTER ANYWHERE. AND WHERE DO YOU GET OFF BRINGING GOD INTO THIS? HOW DARE YOU.

GROW UP OR SHUT UP

Apparently you are one of the LWL (Left Wing Loon) lackies. No I am not a Republican or a "Right Wing Douche" and, do not like either party. I have not voted for a Democrat OR Republican in the last 4 or 5 elections or longer (don't really care to keep track). I do know the last Republican I voted for was Reagan and that was only because he was the lesser of two evils.

Unfortunately you are so blinded or perhaps brainwashed by Obama-bot worship and the drivel the Democrats spew, you cannot see the truth even if it were presented to you. I have run into your kind on several boards... Instead of "The Democrats right or wrong" your Creed is "The Democrats right and never wrong." As for examples one has only to watch the news, read newspapers, visit blogs, and listen with an open mind to find questionable things in Obama-bot's background and current actions.

> NON AGRAVATING MANNER? YOUR MAKING ME LAUGH AGAIN.

Your is a possesive. I think you mean "you're" which is the proper contraction of you are.

> I'M TELLING YOU WHAT I BELIEVE IN.

"Faith is believin' what you know ain't so." - Mark Twain.

> HAVEN'T YOU
> BEEN LISTENING?

No, I've been reading.

> ME RUDE? HA HA. YOUR THE ONE
> WHO STARTED IT.

OK, again, it's "you're", and by started it, do you mean I'm the one who started spewing conspiracy theories (in all caps) that are so easy to disprove it took me less time to prove you wrong than it took to write the sentence that followed me proving you wrong?

> DON'T TELL ME I'M RUDE WHEN YOUR
> THE ONE THAT STARTED NAME CALLING.

OK, say it with me now. The contraction of you are is spelled Y, O, U, apostrophe, R, E.

> I WROTE WHAT
> I BELIEVE IN. THE CONSTITION.

Did you mean, constitution? Don't feel too bad. Rush Limbaugh doesn't know what's in it either (he misquoted the Declaration of Independence at CPAC, and proceeded to attribute that misquote to the Preamble to the Constitution. I'm going to be nice and not point out that I knew the difference by the time I was 6. Oops, did I type that?).

> I HAVE NOT, MAY
> I REPEAT MYSELF A HUNDRED TIMES OVER . I WANT
> TO SEE PROOF IN OBAMA'S ELIGIBILITY FOR PRESIDENT.

US Constitution, Article II, Section 1

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

And now, Barack Obama's birth certificate, released by the STATE of Hawaii. http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth... That's from the urban legend debunking site Snopes. And lest you think they're just a bunch of crazy Libs, here are a couple of debunkings of myths about George W. Bush, like his "refusing to sell his home to Blacks (never happened)", or that he was caught holding a book upside in a classroom (the pic was photoshopped).

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/presiq.asp
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/bush.htm
http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/bushbook.asp
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/fetal.asp

All the above links are internet rumors about the previous that, while sadly believable considering what he DID do, ar etotal bullcrap, and were exposed as such by Snopes.

> I'M STILL WAITING.AND SO ARE ALOT OF PEOPLE.YOU
> HAVE SHOWED ME NOTHING OF EVIDIDENCE EITHER.

Yeah I did. Twice.

> RUDE AND DISHONEST? YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING. I
> SEE NO NOTARIZED LETTER ANYWHERE. AND WHERE DO
> YOU GET OFF BRINGING GOD INTO THIS? HOW DARE YOU.

Well, there is no God so I can dare pretty much anytime I want. That and this being a free country with a right to free expression and thought.

> Apparently you are one of the LWL (Left Wing Loon)
> lackies.

No, that's just a buzz phrase Right Wing reactionaries use when they don't have facts to support them.

> No I am not a Republican or a "Right
> Wing Douche" and, do not like either party.

You may not be registered as a Republican, but like I've said, when people show you what they are, believe them. Your Right Wing docuhebaggery is self-evident.

> I
> have not voted for a Democrat OR Republican in
> the last 4 or 5 elections or longer (don't really
> care to keep track).

Which is fine, but doesn't change the wya you act on these forums, which is why I call you a Right Winger; i.e. because you act like one, and often repeat as rote their talking points and debunked theories about the Left in general and President Obama in particular.

> I do know the last Republican
> I voted for was Reagan and that was only because
> he was the lesser of two evils.
>

Sidenote: There's a great book about the Reagen era out now called "Tear Down This Myth." I am unsarcastically recommending it to you. http://www.amazon.com/Tear-Down-This-Myth-Distorte...

> Unfortunately you are so blinded or perhaps brainwashed
> by Obama-bot worship and the drivel the Democrats
> spew, you cannot see the truth even if it were
> presented to you.

Replace Obama with Rush, and Democrats with Republcians, and "you" with "me and the all caps lady," you'd be spot on.

> I have run into your kind on
> several boards...

And I into yours. And they are all meanspirited, dishonest, and sometimes flat out racist.

> Instead of "The Democrats right
> or wrong" your Creed is "The Democrats right and
> never wrong."

Which of course is a flat out lie, and you know it. I've never been shy about calling out my party when they fudgeed up. I've been here 10 years, so you've had plenty of opportunities to see me do so. You just ignore it because it gets in the way of your argument.

> As for examples one has only to
> watch the news, read newspapers, visit blogs,
> and listen with an open mind to find questionable
> things in Obama-bot's background and current actions.
>

Current actions? Oh, you mean trying to clean up the giant mess you fudgeers left us in?

Questionable things in his background eh? OK, show me one. Oh wait, you won't. You'll just call me a blind bot again. it's what your kind does.

Now, I on the other hand will lay some fact on you, which of course will slide off because your brain is made of Teflon, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

How about Senator McCain's questionable background? He had some ties to some pretty shady characters. Of course, you would've voted for him anyway because he's not a "Rape and plunder" Capitalist, and because he's White, but here's a REAL list of questionable ties for you.

Jim Hensley, Convicted Felon
G. Gordon Liddy, Convicted Felon
Charles Keating, Convicted Felon
Raffaello Follieri, Convicted Felon
Rick Renzi, Under Indictment
Rick Davis, Freddie Mac Lobbyist
Charles Black, Lobbyist for Dictators
Richard Quinn, White Supremacist
Pastor John Hagee, Bigot
Pastor Rod Parsley, Bigot
Todd Palin, Member of Secessionist Group
Andrew McCain, Resigned Manager Failed Savings and Loan
Christopher J. Ward, Alledged embezzler of hundreds of thousands of dollars from the chief fund-raising arm of House Republicans

"YOUR" MAKING ME LAUGH AGHIN. YES I SPELL IT "YOUR". WHICH MEANS THE SAME DANG THING.I WILL GO THROUGH THE SITES YOU GAVE AND CHECK THEM OUT. WHETHER I WILL BELIEVE THEM, WE'LL SEE. AND SINCE YOUR AN ATHEIST. OH DID I SPELL YOUR (AGAIN?LOL YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD, OR ANYTHING. THAT MAKES YOU A FOOL. AND APRIL FOOLS DAY IS ALL YOURS. OOPS THERE'S THAT WORD AGAIN. I'M TIRED OF FIGHTING WITH YOU. I KNOW WE AMERICANS HAVE THE RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH AND EXPRESSION. BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE BEING BITTER AND NAME CALLING. I WILL CHECK OUT THOSE SITES. OH AND GOMEZY3K IS MY BOYFRIEND SO STOP CALLING HIM NASTY NAMES. OK

> "YOUR" MAKING ME LAUGH AGHIN. YES I SPELL IT "YOUR".
> WHICH MEANS THE SAME DANG THING.

What? How old are you exactly? You really don't understand the proper usage of the word you're do you. It is a contraction, or a combination of the words you and are. Other examples of contractions include doesn't, they're, and can't. Ex: "You're a good friend." ("YOU ARE a good friend.") Ex: "I don't know what you're talking about." ("I don't know what YOU ARE talking about.")

The proper usage of the word your is different. The word your is the possessive form of you, referring to something that a person has, or something that belongs to the person in discussion [or, the person you are talking to].
* "Is your stomach growling?"
* "Your book is on the table."

See? Not the same. I had to learn that when I wrote my novel. http://stores.lulu.com/arkle

>I WILL GO THROUGH
> THE SITES YOU GAVE AND CHECK THEM OUT. WHETHER
> I WILL BELIEVE THEM, WE'LL SEE.

It's not really a matter of belief. They research their stuff, they don't just take it on faith.

> AND SINCE YOUR
> AN ATHEIST. OH DID I SPELL YOUR (AGAIN?LOL YOU
> DON'T BELIEVE IN GOD, OR ANYTHING. THAT MAKES
> YOU A FOOL. AND APRIL FOOLS DAY IS ALL YOURS.



> OOPS THERE'S THAT WORD AGAIN. I'M TIRED OF FIGHTING
> WITH YOU. I KNOW WE AMERICANS HAVE THE RIGHT TO
> FREE SPEECH AND EXPRESSION. BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE
> BEING BITTER AND NAME CALLING. I WILL CHECK OUT
> THOSE SITES. OH AND GOMEZY3K IS MY BOYFRIEND
> SO STOP CALLING HIM NASTY NAMES. OK

Really? That explains SO much.

Well, you are right about your and you're. .Are you a teacher? Since I'm leagaly blind, I do misspell words.I do go back and spell check as best I can. double vision doesn't help much. Since we have different opinions on different areas, I'd like see and hear the truth on many things, just like you. You keep doing what you do, and I'll keep protesting things I feel is wrong. Now that's my opinion, ok. That's what I was doing in the first place, writing down my opinion.

> Well, you are right about your and you're. .Are
> you a teacher?

No, not a teacher, though my Mom worked as a substitute for a few years. I'm a writer.

I applaud your mom. and I did noticed you like to write. "And here's to you" sounds like a very interesting book to read..
oh and by the way, I'm 53. I graduated in 75'

The distinction between contractions (you're, they're) and posessives (your, their) is typically taught around the fourth grade, and not indicative of being a writer or teacher.

FB backed up my point you never replied to; One of Obamas parents is an American citizen, he didn't renounce american citizenship for some other non-dual-citizenship nation, he's lived here 14 years - that qualifies him to be president. I'm sure he has an American birth certificate, but even if he didn't, it wouldn't have mattered. That's where the citizenship conspiracists particulary come out looking like fools, ignorant of the constitution they claim to be enforcing. It doesn't lend your cause much respect.

If you just came flat out and said "Laws be damned, we don't like Obama" I could have more respect for the integrity of your kind. {'your kind': righteous feeling republicans who intuitively believe the constitution supports their particular ideology without knowing the facts, history, or actual biographies of the founding fathers and what they actually believed in, particularly in the social context of the time}. For instance they tended to be atheists or on on the outlawed fringe of religions permissable in mainstream European society. To believe they intended the U.S. to be a nation of religious law is quite contrary to who we know the founding fathers to have actually been. They were set on creating the very opposite, to any extent the public could accept such a notion.

It's one thing to desire that our nation have a certain nature, and work democratically to shift the staus quo to reflect popular current sentiments, and quite another to claim as their justification (as Republican fundamentalists tend to do) that this has always been the ideological basis of our nation, when a study of the founding fathers indicates quite otherwise.

The birth certificate gig would make a difference for someone like Schwarzenegger though, since neither of his parents were American citizens at the time of his foreign birth. Because of this some people would like the law changed, but that would require a constitutional amendment, no easy matter. It's been decades since one passed.

To your credit, I notice you do admit to protesting with opinions.

Thank you for you information. I was constantly reminded by frostbrand and realized ther was a difference, that's all I needed. ok no more.
And what do you mean, "your kind"?? what does that mean? are you a democrat. It didn't sound very nice. what about>>Your kind?
Are founding fathers wrote the constitution. and it says you have to be a born native of the United States to be eligible to be president. . I understand about Gov. Arnold swarznegger. I'm not the only one wanting to see obama's birth certificate. wikipedia as even scrubbed anything to do with that subject. What does that tell you? nothing has been debunked. There are people wanting the truth, and the politicians and the president himself are hiding the truth. I want to see that certificate .like many others do. I'm not the only one.And living in the U.S. for 14 years has nothing to do, to where he was born. living here in the states, still doesn't make you a born citizen.unless you were born here.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Go ahead, Read the last sentence out loud . excluded dual citizens from qualifing as natural born.

I just love how rustygirl continues to flog this, even though the birth certificate was released and has been made part of the public record for MONTHS! Being legally blind is not an excuse for flat out lying. Those court challenges the fringe types at WND talk about are Right Wing lunatics who frankly should be drummed out of our armed service, cause they're clearly putting partisan hackery ahead of national security, which is supposed to be a soldier's top priority.

Oh by the way, I wanted to thank you for finding this bit about Obama's birth certificate. I hadn't heard. Admittedly, I hadn't looked either but I did wonder a little bit. Did this story come along with an explanation of why his birth certificate was kept secret in the first place? That seems to have served no purpose other than as a distraction, but maybe that's sufficient reason.

While I'm here, I also would commend you for how you've kept your side of the discussion here fairly civil. Well done.

Ah yes, the standard ploy of the LWL... Call the person you disagee with a Racist or a bigot and hope that shuts them up. Being a minority, I find it funny being called a racist.

As for Obama... you want specifics... Ok how about the names he is associated with:
1. Franklin Raines
2. Antoin Tony Rezko
3. Jeremiah Wright
4. Bill Ayers
5. Frank Marshall Davis
6. Mike Kruglik

Or perhaps the fact that many of those he picked for office are tax cheats, lobbyists (which he said he would NOT have in his administration) and instead of "change" he has the same bunch political hacks in the various offices that have been running Washington D.C.

Here is something for you to to read....

http://www.newsweek.com/id/188565/output/print

A Turning Tide?

Obama still has the approval of the people, but the establishment is beginning to mumble that the president may not have what it takes.


Howard Fineman
Newsweek Web Exclusive
Mar 10, 2009 | Updated: 8:37 a.m. ET Mar 10, 2009
Surfer that he is, President Obama should know a riptide when he's in one. The center usually is the safest, most productive place in politics, but perhaps not now, not in a once-in-a-century economic crisis.

Swimming in the middle, he's denounced as a socialist by conservatives, criticized as a polite accommodationist by government-is-the-answer liberals, and increasingly, dismissed as being in over his head by technocrats.

Luckily for Obama, the public still likes and trusts him, at least judging by the latest polls, including NEWSWEEK's. But, in ways both large and small, what's left of the American establishment is taking his measure and, with surprising swiftness, they are finding him lacking.

> Oh by the way, I wanted to thank you for finding
> this bit about Obama's birth certificate. I hadn't
> heard. Admittedly, I hadn't looked either but
> I did wonder a little bit. Did this story come
> along with an explanation of why his birth certificate
> was kept secret in the first place?

It wasn't. That was just made up by the Right Wing echo chamber.

> That seems
> to have served no purpose other than as a distraction,
> but maybe that's sufficient reason.
>
> While I'm here, I also would commend you for how
> you've kept your side of the discussion here fairly
> civil. Well done.

Thanks.

> Ah yes, the standard ploy of the LWL... Call
> the person you disagee with a Racist or a bigot
> and hope that shuts them up. Being a minority,
> I find it funny being called a racist.
>
> As for Obama... you want specifics... Ok how
> about the names he is associated with:
> 1. Franklin Raines
> 2. Antoin Tony Rezko

A tenuous connection at best, exaggerated for dramatic effect by the Right Wing.

> 3. Jeremiah Wright

A preaher with fiery rhetoric? Gee, that makes him so unique doesn't it?

> 4. Bill Ayers

A guy who did some bad things when Obama was 6. This is a stretch to put it mildly.

> 5. Frank Marshall Davis
> 6. Mike Kruglik
>

I don't even know who these two are, and seeing as the Conspriacy Theorists wing of the American Right Wing is hardly a quiet bunch, then they probably aren't that big a deal.

> Or perhaps the fact that many of those he picked
> for office are tax cheats,

Two are alleged tax cheats, and the third was a guy whose error was according to the IRS itself, fairly common.

> lobbyists (which he
> said he would NOT have in his administration)
> and instead of "change" he has the same bunch
> political hacks in the various offices that have
> been running Washington D.C.

You say that, yet so far his team is actually working on making things better, i.e the things that Right Wing docuhebags broke in the first place. Yeah, how dare he.

Just admit you're an ideological fudge and you'd rather see our country fall then see someone you don't like succeed.

> Here is something for you to to read....
>
> http://www.newsweek.com/id/188565/output/print
>
> A Turning Tide?
>
> Obama still has the approval of the people, but
> the establishment is beginning to mumble that
> the president may not have what it takes.
>
>
> Howard Fineman
> Newsweek Web Exclusive
> Mar 10, 2009 | Updated: 8:37 a.m. ET Mar 10,
> 2009
> Surfer that he is, President Obama should know
> a riptide when he's in one. The center usually
> is the safest, most productive place in politics,
> but perhaps not now, not in a once-in-a-century
> economic crisis.
>
> Swimming in the middle, he's denounced as a socialist
> by conservatives, criticized as a polite accommodationist
> by government-is-the-answer liberals, and increasingly,
> dismissed as being in over his head by technocrats.
>
> Luckily for Obama, the public still likes and
> trusts him, at least judging by the latest polls,
> including NEWSWEEK's. But, in ways both large
> and small, what's left of the American establishment
> is taking his measure and, with surprising swiftness,
> they are finding him lacking.
>
>

The center is the safest? Since when? Bill Clinton tried to go to the center and he got burned big time for the effort.

What I had heard of Obama's proposed tax policies before he took office made me uneasy because it sounded like exactly what Carter had done, and the Carter years were not good ones economically. Since he has taken office, so far as tax policy is concerned, he is on target for a repetition of the Carter years, so my feelings have not changed one bit. I am a little disappointed though, I thought Obama was a lot smarter than Carter.

Have you read the "worldnetdaily" today

There are still lawsuits all over the country challenging Obama to prove he is a "natural born citizen" as required by the Constitution. The most high-profile of these cases has been prepared and argued by the United States Justice Foundation, a public interest law firm with high principles, and which has worked closely with WorldNetDaily in the past.

People are always asking me what they can do on this issue. The answer is supporting the groundbreaking and relentless work of the USJF. Below, please find an important update from their Executive Director, Gary Kreep.

Joseph Farah
Editor and Chief Executive Officer
WorldNetDaily

URGENT CONFIDENTIAL LEGAL BRIEFING
Obama Hides Truth - Not A Natural-Born Citizen?

A Pattern of Lies Is Revealed In Just 2 Short Months in Office!


Dear Fellow American,

Barack Obama is coming after the United States Justice Foundation (USJF) with a vengeance because we dare to seek the truth.

In fact if Mr. Obama and his attorneys have their way, they will succeed in continuing to hide the truth by putting USJF out of business.

USJF Fights in Court Tomorrow Friday the 13th

That's right, not only does Mr. Obama continue to categorically refuse to produce the decisive evidence proving his "natural-born" citizenship, his high-priced LA-based "dream team" of attorneys has USJF squarely in its crosshairs! And they're loading both barrels!

Mr. Obama's attorneys have publically state he intends to first spend and then "sanction" USJF out of existence!

Click to Help USJF Demand Mr. Obama Show Us the Truth!

So unless you help, his hired guns could blow a fatal financial hole in USJF's operations. Listen to the ominous warning issued by Frederic D. Woocher, head of the Strumwasser and Woocher team:
"Please be advised, in particular, that in the event we are forced to file a motion to quash and we prevail in that motion, we will seek the full measure of monetary sanctions provided for in the Code of Civil Procedures."
That, in legal terms, is more than merely an answer to our citizenship challenge - it's a declaration of war! You don't need to don an attorney's glasses to read between the lines of this ultimatum:

MR. OBAMA WILL DESTROY USJF UNLESS WE DROP THE CASE.

That we cannot do!

As Barack Obama, sitting as President of the United States, has signed into law the so-called "Stimulus Bill," and the question remains whether his signature on that bill, or on any document, has any legal validity!

Reasonable doubt exists, causing the outcry for verification to grow louder by the day. Some claim that Mr. Obama was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in what now is Kenya. They say that Mr. Obama's American mother was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law in effect at the time.

Others say his "Kenyan" father makes Mr. Obama a dual citizen, thus disqualified to be President. There are conflicting reports from Mr. Obama's own family about his place of birth.

Rather than produce the evidence and immediately end the controversy, Mr. Obama instead chooses to threaten USJF's existence.

Please, sign a "Demand to Barack Obama" Now and be sure you read this important legal briefing in its entirety.

Click to Help USJF Demand Mr. Obama Show Us the Truth!

We do know that Mr. Obama's legal team is doing everything that it can, in every case filed over this issue to make sure that no one has access to his birth certificate!

We do know that Mr. Obama's legal team is doing everything that it can, in our California case, to make sure that no one has access to his college records!

We do know that Dr. Jerome Corsi traveled to Kenya to see if he could find a birth certificate for Mr. Obama, but was detained by Kenyan officials!

The voters of the United States have the right to know whether Barack Hussein Obama is a "natural born citizen," as REQUIRED by the U. S. Constitution! It's a question that MUST be answered!

and this is our so called predient? What's he hiding from? What's the secret he's hiding from the american people. As you see the issue has not been debunked. Americans still want to know the truth. ....

Oh come the fudge on! You have been SHOWN the birth certificate! TWICE! Knock this paranoid, borderline racist, conspiracy theory bullcrap spewed by a Right Wing hate site like WND that gets debunked more frequently then a small guy in a prison cell!

LOL I have not been shown at all. I want to see it on all news channels In the newspaper every night at 5pm.
I heard nothing on the news. NOTHING. And I'll shut up when I do see it, on the news or in the newspaper and frosty dear>if you don't like what I write, then don't even reply. find another topic. I know, I can probaly do that to. but I like being feisty...And if it's been debunked. why is the issue being brought up over and over? But, oh no, not on the news or in the newspaper. I'm still waiting!!!

Granted I'm more of a progressive, which overlaps somewhat wih liberal democrats, and do not favor most Republican ideology. That's not what I refer to however; I can respect a Republican even I do not share there views, as long as their views are founded in logic, sentiment, law, or history, and they can discriminate with integrity just where their position comes from.

There tend to be two types of groups concerned with the Constititution, apart from the oblivious mainstream.

One group knows the history and actual laws and concepts set forth in the Constitution, and strives to maintain them. People of this group can be from any political party.

The other group, which tends to be comprised of Republican fundamentalists, adamantly defends the Constitution and values of our founding fathers, but defends a long-standing fictional conception of both, and have not done their research to find these sources hardly back the values their own group has held for a century or two. They confuse their own political history values with those of the origin of our nation. They have some justification in this, in that they have been a contributing part of the political dialogue since this nations inception. They were however a minority then as they are now, and it is wrong of them to claim we have strayed from values which the founding fathers and political majority of the time never adopted in the first place.

Here are our citizenship laws. Even if Obama's father had no ties to US citizenship at all, Obama would qualify under the 7th rule here:

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
* Anyone born inside the United States *
* Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
* Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
* Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
* Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
* A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
* There is an exception in the law - the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.

- Presidents do not need to have been born on US soil, and never have. Having a US citizen parent is enough, otherwise the constitution would not have had to further add that they must have lived here 14 years.

You may complain all you want about his citizenship based on your sentiments, but it does not change the law.

Any presidents are wise to ignore attacks rather than defending against them.
If you accused me of stealing library books, I would just ignore you, otherwise a year from now I'd likewise be defending your accusations that I steal animals from the zoo. It could be endless, and would be quite waste of time to even pretend your accusations might have merit.

Every president has to deal with this phenomenon. Those who cater to it, even if innocent, don't go far. Unfortunately sometimes some accusations are true. Even then though, I think a president (or anyone else for that matter) should be evaluated by his current performance, not his past history. What matters, what people should be debating, is whethar or not his/her policies are good for the country, even if this president had three tails and was born on Saturn. People who judge a president on anything other than policies and performance aren't worth paying attention to, since nothing else affects our future anyhow.

To do otherwise just makes it appear that you are biased without any actual rational argument against how he/she is running the country. ..Especially when your claim was neither founded, nor even legally relevant if it were founded. You just make his detractors look like fools. ..it doesn't do whatever sincere cause you might have had (if any) much good.

> LOL I have not been shown at all. I want to see
> it on all news channels In the newspaper every
> night at 5pm.

So basically, you have to see what I've already shown you 100 more times than you'll believe it?

> I heard nothing on the news. NOTHING.

That's cause you don't want to.

> And I'll
> shut up when I do see it,

Which you have.

> on the news or in the
> newspaper

Which was where I linked you to.

> and frosty dear>if you don't like
> what I write, then don't even reply.

Sorry, but my family raised me not to suffer liars lightly.

> find another
> topic. I know, I can probaly do that to. but I
> like being feisty...

By feisty you mean pathologically dishonest and proudly ignorant.

> And if it's been debunked.
> why is the issue being brought up over and over?

Because you are a dishonest pain in the ass who prefers her own little world as opposed to reality. You bring it up despite the birth certificate that you claim ahs never been shown being available to the public for months. You are either the stupidest person on Earth, or the most pathologically dishonest.

> But, oh no, not on the news or in the newspaper.
> I'm still waiting!!!

It HAS been in the news, and the newspaper. Many newspapers in fact. You are a liar. A useless, gosh darn, good for nothing, pathetic, liar.

Here's a Florida newspaper. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/20...
A California newspaper. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/06...
An urban legend debunking site. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertific...
FactCheck.org. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_th...
An ABC news affiliate. That would be TV. http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html?...

And there is your beloved WorldNetDaily.com, for which Jerome Corsi, author of the debunked and discredited book The Obama Nation, works as a staff reporter. WND, the favored website of paranoid, dishonest, racist, scumfudges who put their own failed ideology ahead of their country making you and them the biggest traitorous bastards around, reported that a "WND investigation into Obama's birth certificate utilizing forgery experts ... found the document to be authentic." http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.vie...

These detractor groups you mention could 'change' how the law is interpreted. That's how law works. It would however be unfortunate if they did so because this would then exclude many children of our military, whom I would think should be all the more qualified because of their parents sacrifice.

Obama is the SEVENTH president with a foreign born parent.

Six other U.S. presidents had a foreign-born parent. Mr. Obama will be the first in nearly ninety years, since President Herbert Hoover was inaugurated in 1929.

Andrew Jackson (1829-1837) is the only president born of two immigrants, both Irish. Presidents with one immigrant parent are Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809), whose mother was born in England, James Buchanan (1857-1861) and Chester Arthur (1881-1885), both of whom had Irish fathers, and Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) and Herbert Hoover (1929-1933), whose mothers were born respectively in England and Canada.

Unless you also contest these other presidents, it seems you have more of an issue with Hawaii or Kenya than Ireland, England, or Canada.

Oops, didn't mean to target you in that last post.

Periodically we have to have clean-up presidents. Carter was one such example, Obama is another. If you have a step-father who gets your mother into $200,000 of debt then divorces her, life is going to bleak for the next decade with a new step-father no matter how good he is.

I won't deny there are separate opposite clean-up strategies. Sometimes it's years of unregulated corporations we need to recover from, and other times it's substantial government subsidies, employment, and such.

It's a teeter-totter. The Bush years have left the American mainstream close to bankrupt. Government assistance, not more unregulated commerce is what it will take to give average people a chance again. Once they are on their feet again, they will complain about taxes and vote for privatization again.

Like during Carter's term we are back to needing to spend our limited oil resources on agriculture, commodity production, water delivery, power, and everything else in our lives besides driving. Like back in '72, we need to go back to driving under 55 mph. This may feel bleak, but is not Carter's or Obama's fault that they need to clean up the mess big-business has left us in.

lol sticks and stones...
Because you are a dishonest pain in the ass who prefers her own little world as opposed to reality. You bring it up despite the birth certificate that you claim ahs never been shown being available to the public for months. You are either the stupidest person on Earth, or the most pathologically dishonest.

look who's got his panties in a twist. Is the best thing you can do is name calling all that really wasn't called for.
I seen that birth certificate even made it big so to read it
. are you happy now? of course it's just a picture on my computer screen., but so is my comments, You don't believe anything I say. you showed that by calling me a liar and dishonest. I'm neither. I hate liars. Especially when thier politicians and lying to me.

I read all 5 sites . top to bottom. . doesn't mean I believe that or not. They'll do anything to keep him in office, because the outcome would start alot of riots. and discord. ....

>
> I read all 5 sites . top to bottom. . doesn't
> mean I believe that or not. They'll do anything
> to keep him in office, because the outcome would
> start alot of riots. and discord. ....
>

So, basically, it doesn't matter what the truth is, what you "think" trumps it all?

Useless, utterly useless. You are a drain on our country, our species, our planet.

You have been shown the evidence and you have stated that it doesn't matter to you, that no matter what proof is shown to you you will continue to beelive that which is not true. You are as much wroth to the human race as pond scum. The world would be a quieter, nicer, more hoenst place if you were to just off yourself.

The problem is none of them ever really clean up anything. They throw a band-aid on a sucking chest wound and act like the problem is fixed. I suppose it's easy to blame our current situation on the most recent and most known politicos, but I am convinced the real source of our economic woes lies in the year 1913. There was some really bad legislation written and ratified then, some of which actually became constitutional amendments. The worst of these were the 16th Amendment (creating the income tax) and the 17th Amendment (changing the way Senators are elected). Of those two, I think the 17th Amendment was really the absolute worst. Prior to 1914, US Senators were appointed by each state's Legislatures. Congressmen were elected by the state's citizenry. This gave us a genuine two house legislature at the federal level. However, since 1914, Senators and Congressmen are both elected by the state's citizenry, which makes the Federal legislature a de facto one house body. This has had a terrible effect on our economy. You can check out a graph of federal debt here: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_debt_c... . Notice how federal spending takes that HUGE upward jump after 1914 and just keeps going up from there...

Now your saying I should "off" myself? what's wrong with you? Get your thumb out of your butt-hole. Like I said before, it's my opinion and I'll keep it.If you don't mind. oh, you spelled believe wrong. You should look it up in the dictionary. Hey it's possible it's a fake., anythings possible, And I wouldn't put it passed the government. Wroth to the human race. ummm, as pond scum? lol. it doesn't matter what I think. and you can say that til your blue in the face, But I'm not the only one out there. You remind me of a "sheeple" just another left wing NUT, that's not screwed in very tight. You follow the crowd, just like a "sheeple". Grow up.

> Now your saying I should "off" myself? what's
> wrong with you?

Just saying it wouldn't be a bad idea. Not going to force you though, that would be uncool.

> Get your thumb out of your butt-hole.

It's not in my butt-hole. It's on my hand, thanks to evolution.

> Like I said before, it's my opinion and I'll
> keep it.

People are entitled to their own opinions yes, but not their own facts.

> If you don't mind. oh, you spelled believe
> wrong.

I missed one typo. So? It's not like I deliberately misspelled "you're" then got defensive about it for a day and a half.

> You should look it up in the dictionary.
> Hey it's possible it's a fake., anythings possible,

It's been authenticated dumbass. Including by people at the Right Wing loon site WND.

> And I wouldn't put it passed the government.

You mean past. And your people were still in charge during the campaign season when all this crap you're spewing started. So not only do you Right Wingers have no concept of reality, or decency, you also have no concept of time.

> Wroth to the human race. ummm, as pond scum? lol.
> it doesn't matter what I think. and you can say
> that til your blue in the face, But I'm not the
> only one out there.

That's not something to be proud of.

> You remind me of a "sheeple"
> just another left wing NUT, that's not screwed
> in very tight. You follow the crowd, just like
> a "sheeple". Grow up.

So, basically you close your argument by accusing me of being what you are? Smooth.

frosty, your such a cry baby, nit picking over and over. you are unless. Just because someone doesn't see your eye on things, they are the scum of the earth and should die. That is soooooo one sided.
GROW UP DUDE!!!

Oh, you're familiar with Skull Island. Maybe. The creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 is what pretty much forced forced us to run a rat race of perpetual debt ever since. (income tax was devised in tandem with that. You can't print money from nothing and have it mean anything if you don't also take it back out of commission as possible).
You're missing on some of the benefits of the system, I think, and not grokking the core of it's mechanism. Maybe. It created a monstrous economy. Whethar or not that is bad is a matter of opinion.

State legislatures are elected too. I'm failing to see the difference except that the Senator decisions are now more directly democratic instead of chosen people (corrupt or otherwise) who at least know what they are doing. More democracy these days means more control by those who own or buy the media.

The debt is fictitious. What is not fictitious is that people were employed building hydro-electric dams, moon rockets, and such. The debt climbs roughly at the compounded prime rate. There is no other choice unless we go back to fixed gold standard currency and allow the top rich to accumulate all wealth. The Federal Reserve issues debt. The more debt we have on the books, the more prosperous our economy has been (up until these bailouts). These bailouts are a new mechanism that instead of taking money back out of comission through taxes when it didn't create anything to add value, instead devalues the dollar by flooding the economy in places where dollars won't hit street level barter.

52 days, 52 mistakes

Let me count them up, in no particular order. Some are big. Some are small. We all make mistakes. Here’s his:
1. A do-over on the oath of office.
2. Tim Geithner.
3. Bill Richardson.
4. Tom Daschle.
5. Eric “Nation of Cowards” Holder.
6. Leon Panetta.
7. Arne “Cappuccino” Duncan.
8. Hilda Solis (OK, her husband has the tax liens).
9. Nancy Killefer.
10. Charles Freeman Jr.
11. Ron Kirk.
12. Adolfo Carrion.
13. Banning offshore oil again.
14. Letting Nancy Pelosi write the $787 billion “stimulus’ plan.
15. Relying on Tim Geithner to explain it.
16. It is a $13-a-week stimulus, or as his wife said of Bush’s plan: “You’re getting $600. What can you do with that? Not to be ungrateful or anything. But maybe it pays down a bill, but it doesn’t pay down every bill every month.”
17. Going to a press conference without a TelePrompTer. I… Uhh… Umm… Could you repeat the question?
18. Using a TelePrompTer at a press conference. Big boys don’t need training wheels.
19. “Good evening, everybody. Please be seated. Before I take your questions tonight, I’d like to speak briefly.” 1,228 words later he took his first question.
20. Going after Rush Limbaugh.
21. Going after Rick Santelli.
22. Going after Jim Cramer.
23. “Never waste a good crisis.”
24. Obama supporter Warren Buffett: “I don’t think anybody on December 7th would have said a ‘war is a terrible thing to waste, and therefore we’re going to try and ram through a whole bunch of things and — but we expect to — expect the other party to unite behind us on the — on the big problem.’ It’s just a mistake, I think.”
25. Writing a love letter to Vlad and Dmitry.
26. Putting Poland under the bus.
27. Putting Tibet under the bus.
28. Putting Israel under the bus.
29. Taking Cuba out from under the bus.
30. Having his tax cheat go after the tax cheats in Switzerland. Cognitive dissonance.
31. “Karzai has a bunker mentality.”
32. Iran has plans to Marine One helicopters.
33. “I won.”
34. BlackBerry singing in the middle of the night/ Take these golden secrets and learn to fly…
35. Obama: “If Congress passes our plan, this company will be able to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off.” CEO: No. There will be more layoffs.
36. DVDs to Gordon Brown.
37. “You can’t take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers’ dime.” Vegas convention bookings nosedive.
38. Wagyu.
39. Reset/overcharge button given to Russia.
40. Taking a 4-day holiday weekend before signing “emergency” legislation.
41. “I did think it might be useful to point out that it wasn’t under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks. It wasn’t on my watch. And it wasn’t on my watch that we passed a massive new entitlement — the prescription drug plan — without a source of funding. And so I think it’s important just to note when you start hearing folks throw these words around that we’ve actually been operating in a way that has been entirely consistent with free-market principles and that some of the same folks who are throwing the word ’socialist’ around can’t say the same.”
42. Stiffing Chicago for nearly $2 million for that Election Night par-tay.
43. Caroline Kennedy.
44. Bombing Pakistan.
45. Sending the bust of Sir Winston Churchill back to the British.
46. Saying: “President Obama has accomplished more in 30 days than any president in modern history.”
47. A window is not a door.
48. Doctors must perform abortions.
49. Signing earmarks while denouncing them.
50. Adding signing statements while denouncing them.
51. Quadrupling the deficits, while denouncing them.
52. Missing the Gridiron Club dinner.

And here i go again.

USJF IS IN A BATTLE THAT COULD CHANGE THE HISTORY OF OUR REPUBLIC! USJF subpoenaed the records of Barack Hussein Obama from Occidental College in California, but, at the hearing on March 13, 2009, the Judge, in Sacramento County Superior Court in California, blocked USJF from obtaining those critical records.

What is in those records? We do not know. But the Obama legal team pulled out all of the stops to block the subpoena, so we believe that there is something in those records that bears on the critical issue of whether Barack Obama is eligible to serve as President of the United States.

JUST LIKE WE BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A REASON WHY THE OBAMA LEGAL TEAM, ACCORDING TO A PUBLISHED REPORT, HAS BEEN PAID OVER $800,000.00 TO KEEP THE PUBLIC FROM SEEING HIS REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE-NOT THE PHONY ONE THAT HE PUT UP ON HIS WEBSITE.

> Oh, you're familiar with Skull Island. Maybe. The creation of the
> Federal Reserve in 1913 is what pretty much forced forced us to run
> a rat race of perpetual debt ever since. (income tax was devised in
> tandem with that. You can't print money from nothing and have it mean
> anything if you don't also take it back out of commission as possible).
> You're missing on some of the benefits of the system, I think, and
> not grokking the core of it's mechanism. Maybe. It created a monstrous
> economy. Whethar or not that is bad is a matter of opinion.
>

Do you mean Jekyll Island? That is an island off the coast of Georgia where the people who created the Federal Reserve system went to do the dark deed. There is a book called "The Creature from Jekyll Island" that goes into great detail about the whole affair. The creation of the Federal Reserve Bank was the result of a Senate investigation which concluded in 1910. They were investigating whether or not too much money was being controlled by an entity called the Money Trust. The committee conducting the investigation concluded that there was such an entity and that it was operating against the public interest. So something had to be done. The whole problem here was that the folks who went to Jekyll Island and drafted the Federal Reserve Act were people like Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, The CEO of Lehman Bros., etc. In short, the legislation that was drafted to save us from the evil machinations of the Money Trust were, in fact, drafted by the Money Trust. In essence, what the Federal Reserve Bank is, is a cartel comprising all the banks in the country. Now a cartel, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad thing. But the main thing to be aware of is that a cartel does not operate in the public interest. It operates in the interest of its members. Okay, now Lehman Bros. was allowed to go down, but you can rest assured that the head honchos from there are not standing in an unemployment line or wondering whether or not they will have the money to eat in a week. It's only their former employees who have those concerns. I don't feel that I am ignorant of the benefits of the system. It's just that I feel that the potential harm (part of which we are experiencing now) outweighs those benefits.

> State legislatures are elected too. I'm failing to see the difference
> except that the Senator decisions are now more directly democratic
> instead of chosen people (corrupt or otherwise) who at least know
> what they are doing. More democracy these days means more control
> by those who own or buy the media.
>

Yes, state legislatures are also elected by the citizenry. But the whole point in the constitution of having those elected legislators appoint the Senators to the Federal legislature was to have representatives in that legislature from two distinct interest groups. The public was to be represented by their congressmen and the States were to be represented by the Senate. This was intended to be an impediment to too much legislation, too quickly. One of the great fears of some of the Founding Fathers was that a democracy could be too easily panicked by an emergency into making laws that seem like a good idea in an emergency situation, but eventually would cause great harm to the liberty of the people. We've seen that these days in the form of the Patriot Act.

> These bailouts are a new
> mechanism that instead of taking money back out of comission through
> taxes when it didn't create anything to add value, instead devalues
> the dollar by flooding the economy in places where dollars won't hit
> street level barter.
>

Oh, they are nothing new. The Fed was handing out dollars hand over fist in the recession of the late 70's and early 80's, and again in the early 90's and probably several times before that. Those bailouts are the real reason the Federal Reserve system was created.

> 52 days, 52 mistakes
>

52 exaggerations, lies, or spins.

> Let me count them up, in no particular order.
> Some are big. Some are small. We all make mistakes.
> Here’s his:
> 1. A do-over on the oath of office.

The msitake was made by Justice Roberts, who apologized.

> 2. Tim Geithner.

Common error according to the IRS. Thousands of people make it every year.

> 3. Bill Richardson.

Innocent until proven guilty, and beisdes, he withdrew his own name.

> 4. Tom Daschle.

See above.

> 5. Eric “Nation of Cowards” Holder.

Was he wrong? He was talking about your people after all.

> 6. Leon Panetta.

Nothing wrong here unless you believe Right Wing spinmesiters.

> 7. Arne “Cappuccino” Duncan.

Ooh, must be a huge deal, seeing as I never heard anything about it, not even from the Right Wing media that you and your retarded girlfriend take at face value. Also, what's wrong with cappuccinos? I don't like them personally, but I still fail to see the point of Right Wing fudgetards like you turning them and other types of caffeinated drinks into a barometer of someone's patriotism.

> 8. Hilda Solis (OK, her husband has the tax liens).

She's a good person whose husband made a goof. So? Your President, Mr. Bush, drove drunk with his sister in the car. I'd say that's worse. I'm not going to defend what her husband did, but to blame Obama for it is patently ridiculous.

> 9. Nancy Killefer.

Nothing wrong here either. Now you're just making crap up aren't you?

> 10. Charles Freeman Jr.
> 11. Ron Kirk.
> 12. Adolfo Carrion.

I don't even know who these people are, and I'm a politics junkie.

> 13. Banning offshore oil again.

Which is good thing, because it won't lower prices at the pump, and probably wouldn't even stay in the country since the oil companies can sell to whoever, and if China offers more money, we just fudgeed up the ocean for no benefit whatsoever. SO this is not a mistake unless you are a fudging moron. Period.

> 14. Letting Nancy Pelosi write the $787 billion
> “stimulus’ plan.

That we need to get out of the mess that your ilk got us into. So, not a mistake, but rather an admittedly underfunded attempt to fix one of yours.

> 15. Relying on Tim Geithner to explain it.

OK, I'll give you that the Treasury Secretary is not a dynamic speaker. So? Need I remind you that your side of the political spectrum (you may not be a registered Republican, but you are ideologically in lock step with them) started an illegal war that has killed thousands of innocent people on both sides? Compared to picking a Treasury Secretary who "ums" and "ahs" a lot, well, fudge to a douchebag like you it's probably worse. You cockstains are fmaous for your jacked up priorities.

> 16. It is a $13-a-week stimulus, or as his wife
> said of Bush’s plan: “You’re getting $600. What
> can you do with that? Not to be ungrateful or
> anything. But maybe it pays down a bill, but it
> doesn’t pay down every bill every month.”

Because Obama made a real mistake; believing that people like you can be worked with. If he had the stones I hoped he did, he'd tell you and the rest of the Anarcho-Capitalists who brought this nation the closest it's ever been to Thunderdome to go fudge themselves.

> 17. Going to a press conference without a TelePrompTer.
> I… Uhh… Umm… Could you repeat the question?

That's because he wasn't repeating practiced Right Wing talking points. He was speaking of the cuff. And you know what? Human beings do that sometimes. You wouldn't know that.

> 18. Using a TelePrompTer at a press conference.
> Big boys don’t need training wheels.

Proving that you don't get how the world works. Every President we've had since the thing was invented has used the damn thing, Right and LEft alike. Now you're just being a dick.

> 19. “Good evening, everybody. Please be seated.
> Before I take your questions tonight, I’d like
> to speak briefly.” 1,228 words later he took his
> first question.

That's barely longer than a piece of flash fiction! My god you're one pathetic excuse for a human being aren't you?

> 20. Going after Rush Limbaugh.

Brought it on himself by trying to act like he's the de facto leader of the Republican party, and for being a hate filled liar. Good call on the Dems part, and of course they are the ones mostly doing this as opposed to Obama himself, but you don't care about that do you? Right Wingers don't like facts. They just get in the way.

> 21. Going after Rick Santelli.
> 22. Going after Jim Cramer.

That's Jon Stewart doping that you lying fudge, and you know it. Just 'cause you're functionally retarded doesn't mean the rest of us. Plus, they deserve it. So fudge off, again.

> 23. “Never waste a good crisis.”

When exactly did he say that? Probably never, considering the source. And of course, coming from the side of the ideological spectrum that used 9/11 as a justification for everything short of restoring Jim Crow, your statement is deliciously ironic.

> 24. Obama supporter Warren Buffett: “I don’t think
> anybody on December 7th would have said a ‘war
> is a terrible thing to waste, and therefore we’re
> going to try and ram through a whole bunch of
> things and — but we expect to — expect the other
> party to unite behind us on the — on the big problem.’
> It’s just a mistake, I think.”

See above.

> 25. Writing a love letter to Vlad and Dmitry.

When, exactly? Oh wait, I'm talking to a liar. Either there was no letter, or there was a letter, but it contains nothing that you suggest it does,

> 26. Putting Poland under the bus.

When?

> 27. Putting Tibet under the bus.

When?

> 28. Putting Israel under the bus.

When?

> 29. Taking Cuba out from under the bus.

When? gosh darn, you're not even trying to make your lies credible anymore. This is just sad.

> 30. Having his tax cheat go after the tax cheats
> in Switzerland. Cognitive dissonance.

And of course by tax cheats, you mean the one guy who didn't withdraw who made the common error. Fudge you, liar.

> 31. “Karzai has a bunker mentality.”

Um, he does. There's a reason he's known as "the mayor of Kabul." No you've shown just how litle you know about, well, anything, let alone Afghanistan.

> 32. Iran has plans to Marine One helicopters.

Oh, you mean that security breach at a company that got sweetheart deals with no oversight form the previous Administration? Dude, you are relaly stretching now. I bet you were in pain by this point.

> 33. “I won.”

He did. He did win. And big. Seriously, fudgetard, since when did stating the obvious become a mistake? You claim not to be a Republican, but you sure seem to enjoy having your head up their asses.

> 34. BlackBerry singing in the middle of the night/
> Take these golden secrets and learn to fly…

Yeah, the NSA fixed that issue. It's public knowledge. You are a liar, and a baldfaced one at that.

> 35. Obama: “If Congress passes our plan, this
> company will be able to rehire some of the folks
> who were just laid off.” CEO: No. There will be
> more layoffs.

You left out the first part, where the CEO had told Obama that he would.

> 36. DVDs to Gordon Brown.

You are a Republican. just admit. Because only a member of the Greedy Old Perverts party would be so stupid as to think being nice to one of our allies is a "mistake."


You know what? I'm not even going to bother with the other ones. Because I'm sure if there any real mistakes in here, you moved them all to the bottom because you'd rather people read the bullcrap first. It's lukcy for you Bill doesn't a policy on banning pathological liars.

Forget what Keith Olbermann may say, YOU sir are the Worst Person in the World!

> frosty, your such a cry baby, nit picking over
> and over.

Facts are not nit.

> you are unless.

There is no "n" in useless.

> Just because someone
> doesn't see your eye on things, they are the scum
> of the earth and should die.

No, I didn't say that and you know it. I said that people who are alleged full grown adult that can't see what's right in front of them because they like what they made up (read: LIED ABOUT) better are scum of the Earth and should die.

> That is soooooo
> one sided.
> GROW UP DUDE!!!

Here's a thought; tell the pathologically dishonest people I was responding to to grow up. They need it more.

> JUST LIKE WE BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A REASON WHY
> THE OBAMA LEGAL TEAM, ACCORDING TO A PUBLISHED
> REPORT, HAS BEEN PAID OVER $800,000.00 TO KEEP
> THE PUBLIC FROM SEEING HIS REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE-NOT
> THE PHONY ONE THAT HE PUT UP ON HIS WEBSITE.
>

Oh shut up you fudging lying chicken! We have seen the birth certificate! Crazy Right Wing conspiracy theorists with no probable cause getting justly shut down in a court of law is not proof of anything, other than how fudging useless you are to this country! I am sick to death of people like you! Why don't you just end your life if you think things are so awful? We had people like back in the 1930s too. They were people who would ruthlessly trash FDR, even as they ate food they wouldn't otherwise have had if it weren't for the New Deal. You are irrational, dangerous, dishonest, and so blinded by ideological indoctrination, that if someone from WND told you that all cats are fat, a skinny cat would go unnoticed by your otherwise functioning eyes.

NONE of what you say has ever been true. The birth certificate is out there you just don't want to see it, because you would rather die than be wrong. So, please, do so. Because I for one, am sick of it. Just fudging sick. Be glad I am not President, because unlike Obama, I don't think it would be necessarily bad to just round up all the pathologically dishonest people out there, the kind of people who will insist they only fell down the stairs when we can see the imprint of your husband's school ring in the bruise, the kind of people who insist that the Holocaust never happened, the kind of people that swear that lynchings in the South never happened, just round up the whole lot of you and drop you off in Antarctica with nothing but your Ann Coulter books, Confederate flags, and tin foil hats.

Yeah yeah, Jekyll Island. I thought that didn't sound quite right, otherwise I would have already had asossiations between it and Skull & Crossbones.

I actually see the FR as a good conspiracy posing as a bad conspiracy. 'Supposedly' this bank cartel is 'loaning' money. I think that's all just original hype to comfort the public that the money comes from somewhere. If this were actually true however, that handful of FR owners would theoretically own (your choice of perspective) A) All money ever issued since 1913 plus quadruple that in interest. B) The value of all products and services produced in America since 1913.
- Gates, Turner, and Walden are public enough. I think we would eventually figure out if there were also a few multi-trillionaires roaming the planet.

There was more to the Patriot Act though. Reps were pushed into a totalitarian 'You are either for or against us' paradigm reminiscent of Hitler, USSR, and McCarthyism tactics.

It's a doubled sword, a quickly responsive govornment. Sweeping reforms can be good or bad.
Sometimes, as with FDR, a slow, pandering to the middle of the road, process interferes with something that can only work as a complete visionary package. I think the public should be voting on such packages, and oust a president when they don't follow through with what they offered.

Besides simply preferring the Obama platform, it matters to me that he's rather transparent about his intentions. Bush was not. The really perceptive, like myself, knew his agenda was war when his campaign 2000 commercials were full of jet fighters. I could intuitively see Iraq, Korea, Pakistan, and a few countries which narrowly escaped on the horizon after we hit Afghanistan. The public shouldn't have to be intuitive.

On the other hand, they should also be much better informed.
- I propose far more direct democracy, but I also propose that a bipartisan (or bi-issue) committee create polling place tets which screen voters for knowledge of both sides of any issue. If you want to vote on nuclear waste in duck ponds, you have to be informed on both costs of nuclear storage options and on biological nuclear waste hazards. In such a sytem you could defer any votes to your choice of reps. You could have Greenpeace do your environmental voting for you, side with your favorite congressman on economy bills, and let Dr. without Borders do your foreign policy voting. Such reps could of course pass voting the tests.

For all the wildfire email induction sweeps we have now, sponsors would be passing out real facts on both sides of issues, because they want all their voters to pass the qualified voter tests.

Things 'like' these bailouts may have been the FR plan (stabilising money and entities important to gov't), but I doubt even they quite anticipated the type of activity occurring now.

It's also always useful to play one's own devils advocate. The official reason to create the FR was that any old banks, willy nilly, were issuing their own loans from thin air, and this was in fact partially controlled. Not so well of course, since it was put together by the money trust, and crazy thin-air policies still existed, but at least it was a system which would succeed or fail on a nationally regulated level.

I don't like to be any sort of conspiracy thinker, but the fact is that conspriracies actually do exist on occasion. Really one could look at any closed trial or boardroom meeting as a sort of conspiracy. I think the right to privacy has unfortunately become obsolete. For $30 priveleged people can probably have the contents of your computer and an analysis of every activity you've ever done in public. We the public on the other hand aren't so equally prepared to counter secret policies. We could be charged with conspiracy but they can't. I think it's time to put a 24-7 web cam on anyone who writes corporate or gov't policy, give democracy an actual chance.

>'Supposedly' this bank cartel is 'loaning' money. I think that's all just original hype
>to comfort the public that the money comes from somewhere.

In fact, US money was still backed by gold for a time even after the creation of the Fed. At least from 1914 to 1934 US currency was fully convertible to gold at the rate of $20.00 an ounce. Then in April, 1934 FDR seized private gold reserves in the US (gold owners were of course compensated at the rate of $35.00 an ounce, the point is their choice was to turn in their gold or be subject to legal penalties). The idea behind this was that gold was going to still be used to back US currency, just in a different manner. FDR switched us from an actual gold standard to something he chose to call the 'gold exchange standard'. What this amounted to was that every dollar's worth of gold was going to be used to back 10 US dollars. This worked out as might be expected. In 1971 or 2, when Nixon finally took us off the gold standard entirely, he announced the reason for doing this was that since 1934, the US dollar had lost 90% of it's buying power. I suppose it could be just a coincidence that the loss of buying power of US currency just happened to reflect the actual amount of gold supporting it.

Now here's the thing. I used to be a rabid gold bug, but if you are going to have a fiat currency, do it right. Our money today is built on debt. This is not good. What is needed is real debt-free currency. There are some thoughts about how this might be accomplished. If you get a chance, try reading Robert Heinlein's "For Us, the Living" (no, I am not confusing it with Ayn Rand's "We the Living") and "Beyond this Horizon". Both of those novels describe a system in which a central agency keeps track of production and consumption, compares the two and issues buying power in the form of checks to each citizen, such that the buying power in the population at large is always equal to the supply of goods and services produced. I realize the novels are science fiction, Utopian fantasies, but the purpose of such is to get people thinking about better ways of doing things. I assure you I can differentiate between fantasy and reality...I think. Well, I did come of age in the 70s after all.

I am sick to death of people like you! Why don't you just end your life if you think things are so awful?
Now that's NOT sounding like you have any brains in your head. remember you called me pond scum. well you can remove the pond scum but it always comes back. I never said the holocaust never happened. Now YOU are making things up. ohh lie lie liar..
you keep telling me I should "off myself" why is that? you seem afraid of me because I don't see things YOUR way.
LOL>just round up the whole lot of you and drop you off in Antarctica with nothing but your Ann Coulter books, Confederate flags, and tin foil hats.You are so afraid to stand and question anything , as long as it suits you punny pride. You think that anyone who disagrees with you should kill themselves, "How childish is that?" I think your the chicken . here, not me...

> I am sick to death of people like you! Why don't
> you just end your life if you think things are
> so awful?
> Now that's NOT sounding like you have any brains
> in your head. remember you called me pond scum.
> well you can remove the pond scum but it always
> comes back. I never said the holocaust never
> happened. Now YOU are making things up. ohh lie
> lie liar..

Learn to read. I said you were LIKE them, not that you are one of them, and you full well know that.

> you keep telling me I should "off myself" why
> is that? you seem afraid of me because I don't
> see things YOUR way.

Afraid that people like will take over my country again? Yes. You've already almost destroyed twice (the Hoover Depression and the Bush Depression). I'm deeply concerned that third time would be the charm and it's buh-bye America.

> LOL>just round up the whole lot of you and
> drop you off in Antarctica with nothing but your
> Ann Coulter books, Confederate flags, and tin
> foil hats.You are so afraid to stand and question
> anything , as long as it suits you punny pride.

I find it ironic that someone who swallows debunked conspiracy theories without question accuse me of being afraid to question.

> You think that anyone who disagrees with you should
> kill themselves, "How childish is that?" I think
> your the chicken . here, not me...

No, dumb dog, I think, and have said, over and over again, if you could learn to fudging read (of course being a Right Winger you probably think that literacy is for jerks and witches), that gullible, willfully ignorant, pathological liars should kill themselves.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

Now here are a bunch of interesting lies:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements...

> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
>
> Now here are a bunch of interesting lies:
>
> http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements...
>

Hmm. It shows a grand total of 2 promises broken, 18 kept, and 42 in progress. In other words, nowhere near your list of "52 mistkaes." So far, you have not helped your own case.

Also, he;s only been in for 2 months! Are you seriously so fudging insane as to think that the mess you and your kind have spent 30 years making can be fixed in less time than it took to film Mallrats?

I'VE BEEN REPETING WHAT YOU'VE BEEN SAYING AND COMMENTING. .(REMEMBER THAT'S MY OPINION) ONCE AGAIN.

Afraid that people like will take over my country again? Yes. You've already almost destroyed twice (the Hoover Depression and the Bush Depression). I'm deeply concerned that third time would be the charm and it's buh-bye America.

don't even know what that statement is all about.

No, dumb dog, I think, and have said, over and over again, if you could learn to fudging read (of course being a Right Winger you probably think that literacy is for jerks and witches), that gullible, willfully ignorant, pathological liars should kill themselves.

Now you have problems with jerks and witches? oh and pathological liars should kill themselves? You are deranged .
get over it and grow up. and you are afraid.

> I'VE BEEN REPETING WHAT YOU'VE BEEN SAYING AND
> COMMENTING. .(REMEMBER THAT'S MY OPINION) ONCE
> AGAIN.
>

No, you've been exaggerating, and misinterpreting what I've written. There's a difference.

> Afraid that people like will take over my country
> again? Yes. You've already almost destroyed twice
> (the Hoover Depression and the Bush Depression).
> I'm deeply concerned that third time would be
> the charm and it's buh-bye America.
>
> don't even know what that statement is all about.
>

Not in the least surprised.

> No, dumb dog, I think, and have said, over and
> over again, if you could learn to fudging read
> (of course being a Right Winger you probably think
> that literacy is for jerks and witches), that
> gullible, willfully ignorant, pathological liars
> should kill themselves.
>
> Now you have problems with jerks and witches?

You must have your "censor" turned on. And thanks for proving my point about how idiotic you are. If you read my comment, it is clear that I am mocking people who cry "witch."

> oh and pathological liars should kill themselves?

It would be nice, though I doubt it'll ever happen.

> You are deranged .
> get over it and grow up. and you are afraid.
>

The twinkie who keeps claiming that something that has been public for months is being kept secret is telling me to grow up. Rich.

As for afraid, yeah, I already explained why and WHAT I'm afraid of. Stop being a retarded chicken and actually read what I write, if you can.

Since you are a Rightie though, I'll have to re-post what I wrote, since you're too much of a sad lazy fat liar to bother to scroll up the short distance you'd have to go. You'd rather wait for Jesus to do it. But he's not real, so I'll have to step in. Here's what I wrote with regard to my fears.

> Afraid that people like you will take over my country
> again? Yes. You've already almost destroyed twice
> (the Hoover Depression and the Bush Depression).
> I'm deeply concerned that third time would be
> the charm and it's buh-bye America.

I've been copying and pasting what you wrote word for word. There you go again with the name calling.retarted chicken. . come on. that's so childish. And when did Jesus get into the this issue? I'm not sad or lazy fat or a liar. Why should I believe your rhetoric and you don't believe mind.?? isn't that what having different opinions mean? I'm not telling you to go kill yourself or jump in a lake. and name calling like you started in the first place, because you don't like "my opinions".

> I've been copying and pasting what you wrote word
> for word.

Actually, no you haven't. I've noticed quite a few rods changed. Now, some of them can be chalked up to the SC censoring program, but not all of them.

> There you go again with the name calling.retarted
> chicken. . come on. that's so childish.

Agreed, and yet it seems to be the only way to get you people's attention sometimes.

> And when
> did Jesus get into the this issue? I'm not sad
> or lazy fat or a liar. Why should I believe your
> rhetoric and you don't believe mind.??

Because I have photographic evidence, and you have paranoid websites.

> isn't that
> what having different opinions mean?

Yes, but again, you are not entitled to your own facts.

> I'm not telling
> you to go kill yourself or jump in a lake. and
> name calling like you started in the first place,
> because you don't like "my opinions".

No, because I don't like your predilection towards repeating loudly and as gospel oft debunked Right Wing conspiracy theory. Again, differences. learn them.

Yeah, 'seized'. that was a grim point in history. I liked much of FDR's policies, but not that one.

I don't think it's the (lack of) gold standard per se to be blamed, but simply all the printing, even with (or because of) interest due. Stabilizing money could have been far more simple. Four times the population = four times as much money which should be in print. Industrialisation will cut some costs while new commodities take their place. The value of the dollar would be based on labor with no expectation of accumulated wealth, just a relative ongoing thing. We wouldn't go for such a thing though because everyone from slum tenant to CEO has bought into the notion of accumulating wealth. The slum tenant is of couse a fool to buy in. Value of money is relative. No matter what he accumulates, the CEO will accumulate at even higher rates. Capitalism was never ultimately the friend of the masses.

The whole notion of accumulating wealth should be obsolete. Look around your house. How many things in it were built by your grandparents generation? Nothing! The only thing we produce now which could remotely justify inheritance of accumulated wealth is an ever increasing database of R&D knowledge which our current lives build from. To any extent this knowledge becomes obsolete, as it does, we are back to simply being an ongoing service economy. The gold standard belongs to the early days of imperial mercantile expansionism. We live in a closed self-perpetuating system now. The FR, while closer to the truth of modern reality, is based on escalating production/consumption via capitalism, and thus obsolete too. In a society so post-industrialised that people have to make up 4/5 of new jobs for personal paychecks, rather than for society to survive, a system of rotating welfare checks most closely approximates an economy which matches the needs of society aggregated top-down.

No visionary can forge such a new economy because the average person is unwilling to accept that the frontier world is over and that we are essentially a giant ant farm in a glass box. Sure, there will always be new scientific and entertainment frontiers, but that doesn't change that we are one big service-process clock and need a system that mostly keeps a ton of unnecessary gears turning. Our current Monopoly Game ideology is quite the opposite. It ends with one CEO owning all production, all employment, and all sales. Throw in robotics and the public is obsolete. Physically though, it's inevitable progress. The only absurd part is that one CEO rather than a global leisure class consisting of everyone equally on the planet owns that feeding/clothing/entertaining machine.

Our current economic models have nothing to do with the shape of life to come. People adverse to welfare (which isn't the ultimate equitable solution either) are coming from pure obsolete ideology and are not reckoning with what the total world picture has physically become today.

Theres nothing wrong per se with an economy built on debt. Any currency is going to be a non-physical abstraction anyhow, what does it matter if the ink is red or black?

Heinlein was quite the open-market libertarian. I don't find his frontier ideology practical, even if it sounds psychologically inspiring. I have given long deep thought into matters such as the intrinsic failure of capitalism in a post industrial society and have created a system which 'half' resembles Heinleins model of libertarian independent contractors, and have resembles it's very opposite, popular-democratized communism.

The foundation of my system is that we really do live in an age where 4/5 of the public could retire. In my system everyone is an independent contractor, and everyone is on unemployment. Everyone makes the same 'street-income', that which they buy bread and bicycles from. Every one is also obligated to earn some 'service-transaction-income'. Not much. They earn this through iPhone barter alphabetizing files at a project site, giving a guitar lesson, or repairing a bicycle for a neighbor. Everyone is both employer and employee. If they lack creativity or wish to work less, they can get their service credits doing something no one wants to do, like 8 hrs per week of driving a garbage dumpster. Everyone is issued expendable-service-money which needs to be spent hiring their neghbors, shops down the street, balloon-clowns at the beach, or whatever. Service money has no bearing on ntreet income. If you don't make enough service income, you'll be involuntarily employed as a job-counseling client. That's a bleak unlikelihood, as is employment as a prisoner or disabled mental patient, when even employment as a college/trade-school student is an option.

What this system counts on is that people would prefer to do something meaningful if they have to do anything. They will get sick of school and start designing paragliders or scrubbing pools. Career prestige will still be a significant motivator. People who build gyms or split atoms will have the bragging rights. As further incentive, one can do the equivalent of writing off one's business expenses. Your street-income may be fixed, the same as everyone else, but as an entrepreneur or gov't project leader you may be able to land tons of perks like fancy computers, an employee swimming pool, jet flights - none of it yours, but yours to use as long as you have public or committee confidence. ...

In this system, popular democracy would vote on investment, for instance production of better video games or invention of new solar/wind systems. Entrepreneurs would petition for funding of projects, and then to be leaders of these projects. They would be given a state budget of service-transaction funds to hire secretaries, polymer scientists, or whatever they needed, all independent contractors (as they are themselves). Capitalism would still exist in the abstract. A project leader might pay for mediocre secretaries but buy the best scientists their project could afford. Sure every scientist has the same street-income as any student or dog shampooer, but they command more hourly in service transactions. Their next door neighbor can not afford their services to analyze polymerization of their doughnut fryer. Money for the gifted goes to what society votes on needing, and the gifted/industrious benefit from prestige and project-budget perks like a fast motorcycle to get to work. The public doesn't mind overfunding projects for two reasons: A) The proof is in the pudding. Who cares if a project leader buys his team fancy motorcycles if he gets the job done. B) It's understood that this is the mechanism by which society and individuals benefit. Of course selfish corruption factors in. Novelists will vote for funding of more novels. The system though is designed to make the coruption work for society, not against it.

I have a political platform posted for the Utopian Party. I even hand delivered it to Dennis Kucinich and was asked to work for him by his campaign manager.

Not that I was an adult myself in the 70's, but we had most everything worked out then. We knew what infrastructure we needed to create back then to avoid the mess we are in now. We knew we needed transcontinental magtrains and electric diamond freeway lanes powered by wind and solar. Forty years later we've done hardly anything. Unfortunately, if we wait till we are desperate, we won't even have the resources to rebuild infrastructure. The last of our oil and steel will be used just keeping obsolete food production practices going, not rebuilding boulevards with desalination farms and mass transit.

If I were president now the very first thing I would do is nationalize steel, defense, power, and the automotive industry, in conjunction with NASA, and put them all to work building jet-stream/gulf-stream turbines, electric shipping lanes, electric stratosphere mag-monorails, electric canopy-enclosure bicycles for shopping, and networks of rapid direct inter-community busses in conjunction with free taxis and furniture/shopping cart trucks for end-point service. We could be way way way more efficient if we built on government subsidized infrastructure. When new boulevards are built in a hot town, a grid beneath the asphalt should supply a separate resevoir-delayed direct-hot-water circuit, reduce load on water-heaters.

Our schools should have programs to teach salvage engineering. If our garbage was fed on conveyors with robotics reading product/container RFID chips, it could be easily sorted, and companies would benefit from comprehensive product life-cycle data.

Unfortunately we don't have enough big-picture engineers determining solutions. On one hand we have environmental movements to dry up cities, lose the lawns, and save water. On the other, we could do a Dune conversion and save on air conditioning and food distribution farming on our roof-tops.

In theory, going on the notion that the energy/mass in every bounce of sub-atomic particles is recyclable, with advancement in nanotechnology, this planet could sustain trillions of people stacked in palatial homes 2000 stories tall circling the globe with a good layer of insulation, for billions of years after our sun died. Seen from that perspective our real justified fears of botching up the planet now indicate how inept we can let ourselves become without a unifying vision.

There comes a time when the argument is over. Often that is when the other person stops listening. To go on beyond that is just a foolish pastime, although the same can be said of most entertainments as well, and you have indicated that this is your entertainment as well.

With Gomez on the other hand, you still have a valid debate going. He brings up new contentions that can be argued with reasonably.

Fair enough. To be honest, I'm starting to think that I argue with these increasingly irrelevant Righties more out of habit than anything else.

Yeah, I think I've been there myself.

As life gets shorter, it's probably wise to step-back and evaluate how we actually want to spend it rather than falling into the easiest habitual trance.

Old habits die hard of course. I know I'm not doing what I most want to do, but it's difficult to see ways out of existing patterns, or take them up even when I can see them.

They 'get your goat', but it's you, not them, you have the power to change. Otherwise you are just letting their existence keep your own hands tied.

thank you kristal

> Theres nothing wrong per se with an economy built on debt. Any currency
> is going to be a non-physical abstraction anyhow, what does it matter
> if the ink is red or black?
>

Well, you might ask that of someone who survived the inflation of the German Mark under the Weimar Republic. I'm sure there are some around who have seen that old newsreel footage of Germans trundling wheelbarrows full of money to the grocery store. One of the most telling types of incident during that time was the case of a typical German retiree who, having accumulated savings of half a million marks, had thought when he retired he would be in decent shape. During this inflationary period, he suddenly receives a letter from his bank. The bank is informing him that since the cost of servicing his account his out of all proportion to the amount involved, they have closed his account and are returning his money. However, they explain, they have no notes of small enough denomination to give him his exact balance, so please find enclosed one one million mark note. The stamp on the envelope? Six million marks.

A similar thing happened in Argentina during the 1970s. One of the stories coming from there tells of a merchant closing up shop at the end of the day and depositing the days receipts at his bank. He presents the teller with a full paper grocery sack. The teller weighs the sack and credits the merchants account based on the weight of the sack. The point of this story is, the teller never looks in the sack. The currency had become so worthless it literally did not matter what was in the sack, banknotes or shredded newspaper.

So far we have avoided that kind of thing for some time in the US. But it is always a very real possibility in an economy built on debt.


> Heinlein was quite the open-market libertarian. I don't find his frontier
> ideology practical, even if it sounds psychologically inspiring. I
> have given long deep thought into matters such as the intrinsic failure
> of capitalism in a post industrial society and have created a system
> which 'half' resembles Heinleins model of libertarian independent
> contractors, and have resembles it's very opposite, popular-democratized
> communism.
>

As he matured he became more and more libertarian in his ideas. But in his younger days he was very much given to social democracy, which most people wouldn't suspect on reading his later works, since those make it clear that he detested socialism. "For Us, the Living"
was never published in his lifetime. He had written it in the early 1930s, had it rejected, and didn't do anything with it at all for the rest of his career. His first published work was a short story called "Lifeline", published in 1939. That early novel was in some ways a kind of rough draft for "Beyond this Horizon". The latter one really is much better as a story, but the earlier one has more technical detail on the shape of the economic system he was proposing.

I want to read and think about the rest of your ideas for a bit. I may be back with more.

> Stabilizing money could have been far more simple. Four times the
> population = four times as much money which should be in print.

Ah, if only it were that simple.

Unfortunately, it is not. The key to a stable money supply is that buying power (money) should be sufficient to absorb the total supply of goods and services that are produced. When you have too much money and not enough goods and services for which there is real demand, you get inflation. When you have more goods and services than there is a demand for, or than there is money to absorb, you get a recession / depression.

Your examples don't necessarily discredit a debt based economy, the discredit ones that don't have some standard like gold, oil, or my preference, hourly wages of untrained labor. The problem wasn't a potage stamp costing 6M marks, but that a year earlier that would have bought you a palace. This also ties into what I was saying about accumulating wealth being obsolete. The move towards maximizing quarterly earnings, though rather unfortunate as far as stability and invetment is concerned, is based on some recognition of this. The source of fluctuating dollar values is due to specualtion. I feel most speculation should be illegal. Although I've invented a system of taxation based on cumulative accrual accounting of environmental footprint costs, ultimately correlated with cost to human survival as the system is refined, I do highly a favor an existing theoretical economic model in which profit/capital-gains is the sole basis of taxation.

My economic model can be summarised as well not by it's implementation model, but by it's operating premises which are as follows:
A) Advancement of society is mostly optional.
B) In a post-industrialised economy, 4/5 of labor is optional.
C) An economy based on capital leveraging can only result in the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
D) Profit as motive for businesses does not always lead to greatest public benefit.
E) People must be free to pursue to their gifts and interests.
F) Rigid company-employee structures are insufficient to utilize peoples wealth of skills.
G) People are more willing to contribute when their effort has personal meaning by being a unique effort or serving a friend.
H) A personal drive to create is sufficient motivation to advance society, and profit was seldom the source for truly inspired revelation.
I) A limited amount of required service is sufficient to fill societal task obligations by those who have nothing better to do, and more equitably fills these task than economic reward.
J) People will aspire to use their greatest strengths when all career paths pay equally.
K) People who are motivated by ego, currently fullfilled by achieving great wealth, would often be as happy having such relative ego status through fame or power in the absence of accumulated personal wealth.
L) People motivated by service will perform better in fieds like medicine than those motivated by profit.
M) In a system where indefinite free education opportunity exists, no career must pay for the investment, and everyone is free to pursue the career they have a gift for.
N) In a system where everyone is paid the same and can better choose their field, and in which gov't fully regulates exchange of service values, and remedies shortcomings, lawsuits become unneccessary.
O) People, given their aptitude, do not work several times harder than each other, and their is no cause that some people should have incomes 20 or 100 times higher than others.
P) Any task has an easily perceivable posible range of effort that can be associated with it and discerned by peers or clients of contractors.

In my early years of college (28 so far) I spent a few years as a fast-food chef, and wondered why persons in such employ didn't have just as much right to repair of a broken leg, a swimming pool, or a conertible Jag as a lawyer or engineer did. With each new career, automotive restoration, software development, I found the job was easier and paid three times as much as what I was doing earlier, and this only confirmed my earlier observations that, aside from any extra voluntary investment that went into study, or economic risks, that there was nothing to justify higher pay for specialist occupations. I would prefer to write software than cook hamburgers even if cooking burgers paid more.

In subsequent years I began examining the failures of society as whole, and concluded the same things in meta-theory that I had experienced in micro-practice.

A synopsis of my libertarian-communism model is as follows: Let people do whatever they want as an occupation, including study at school, so long as someone can vouch that they aren't slacking (the iPhone reporting system) (unless exempt by illness), pay everyone the same thing, give perks to people who do things the public desires or requires, and everyone will do just fine, benefitting from more leisure time and more productive interest in the activities they do choose to do.

Consider yourself in such a situation. I presume you have some college educated career. If you enjoy what you do, you'll probably continue to do it anyhow, even though you still only make as much hotel maids. If you don't, you might prefer to sell hot-dogs and maintain chlorine levels at the water-slide park. Someone who wants your career can do your work instead. If no one wants it, but it needs doing, that's where the perks come in. There are no perks for being a librarian. Too many people would naturally choose that in the first place. Nuclear scientist or dumpster driver, bigger perks.

It's all very fluid though. I don't particularly plan on things like property ownership either. Rather condo projects and such are created by democracy and publically owned. The corporate commune, like totally self-sufficient skyscrapers containing industry, offices, businesses, schools, shops, and residences would be the ideal. These centers would be like a cross between college and Disneyland, where anyone is free to use the welding center, sewing room, biology lab, candy kitchen, bike mechanic garage, or performance stages. If you want more than your street income will buy, like tons of guitars or jewelry, run the guitar shop or jewelry store.

I have many friends who basically do that already, instead of getting taxed for tons of purchases, they partially own tons of the stuff they like as shop proprietors, make money having what they want rather than paying it.