Who will be your next president? - Page 2

kgun · #51 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctabuk

LOL -now he would have made a great Prime Minister

I thought of the same, the flying Prime Minister of England.

<off topic>
Congratulation:

ManU (my favourite foreign soccer team won yesterday - intensive match). Hope they meet Liverpool in the finale in Moscow. The Russians hope for Chelsea of course. Should like to be there.
</off topic>

cw1865 · #52 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgun

I don't agree. You can say that about any profession. There are good and there are bad leaders. I think all three remaining candidates will do their best to be a good leader for your country.

Hmmm, high gas prices....Clinton and McCain are saying exactly what people want to hear....

Clinton-McCain gas tax holiday slammed as bad idea - Yahoo! News

Clicken · #53 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 02:40 PM

They will say one thing and do another.

Kgun, there are more than three candidates. The other ones, who are not bought and paid for, are being downplayed by the class of people in the orignizations mentioned below. Nader bowed to threats when he withdrew in a previous election as he revealed during a TV documentary. I do not have reference to that source available at this time.

Osama’s wife is a CFR member The heading on the page doesn’t say CFR but check the url, it does. Check the quotes below to see why there is concern about our leaders being part of the CFR.

McCain’s Bio on the CFR Website

Quote:

Originally Posted by ”McCain’s CFR Bio page”

If elected, McCain, 71, will be the oldest person to win the presidency. He now seems poised to win the Republican nomination, having earned far more of his party's delegates than any other candidate.

This is propaganda at it’s best! He has not EARNED the delegates. The party leaders are breaking rules. The nominations committees, being pressured from the party elite, are submitting list of delegates who were not voted on at the primary conventions, which is in violation of the rules.

Actual convention coverage of them doing just that...
YouTube - Nueces County Republican Convention

The Parker County Convention experienced significant controversy that began before the Convention started but came to a boil when the Chair railroaded over an attempt to challenge her under Rule 11 of the Republican Party of Texas. As you will see in the video she refused to allow the challenge to be debated from the floor and did not even maintain order on which vote was before the body. I am only going to include reference to two segments of the video from this Convention here, but there are twelve in all:
YouTube - Parker Co Republican Conv Mar 29 2008 Part 3
YouTube - Parker Co Republican Conv Mar 29 2008 Part 4

There are more conventions’ coverage videos at youtube.

Ron Paul Delegates Dominates Convention article, Las Vegas Sun

Quote:

Originally Posted by cw1865

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clicken

They called themselves Americans
Through the many years
Until they traded liberty
So leaders would ease their fears

'many years' - try nine....Alien and Sedition Acts....The United States has been balancing individual liberties vis-a-vis national security during virtually every conflict.

Yes, well it rhymes this way and is correct!
They have been chipping away at the liberties little at a time and we are now at the point that there isn’t much more to chip away.

Quote:

The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down... but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault. — Council on Foreign Relations member Richard Gardner, l974

This power was not given to them by consent of the people, it was taken by means of fraudulent tactics. The deceptive actions are an indication of how they will treat their property, tagged like cattle, their disposable property. Research Eugenics for insight into the mentality of some of the elite.

Quote:

We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries. — David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, address to The Trilateral Commission, June, 1991.

CONSPIR’ACY, noun [Latin conspiratio, from conspiro. See Conspire. 1.A combination of men for an evil purpose; an agreement between two or more persons, to commit some crime in concert; particularly, a combination to commit treason, or excite sedition or insurrection against the government of a state; a plot; as a conspiracy against the life of a king; a conspiracy against the government.

The act of taking control of the nation’s money through the Federal Reserve was a deliberate action to bring the nation down so that the people would not be able to resist. It was named federal to intentionally deceive the people into thinking it was a government entity. JFK tried to correct the matter with executive order#11110 but shortly after his assassination the following president rescinded that order to keep the FED in control.

Quote:

Permit me to issue and control the money of the nation and I care not who makes its laws. — Mayer Amsched Rothchild, a prominent European banker in the eighteenth century

The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. — Curtis Dall (Franklin D. Roosevelt’s son-in-law), My Exploited Father-in-Law

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it. — President Woodrow Wilson, 1913

We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. We are no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominate men. I have unwittingly betrayed my country. — President Woodrow Wilson, 1916

They were able to take the liberties through the use of our legislation by means of deception and political threats, and it is through the legislation that it has to be returned. The revolution of the past was in American’s favor because it was a level battle field, musket against musket, and the King was across the ocean. Today they have not only the laws they keep trying to pass like the patriot act and Bill 1959, but also the sophisticated weapons of the military-industrial complex.

Congress has refused to hear the Redress of Grievances presented to them by the lawyers of the ‘We the People Foundation’ Those who have tried to ‘Wake the People Up’ in the past were shunned as being ridiculous, or crazy ‘conspiracy theorist’.

Now is the time for more men and women like Ron Paul to get involved although yesterday would have been better!

**jawn_tech** · #54 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgun

Pure speculation. But may be a good tactic to split democrats.

I know, it was just pure speculation. Just a theory. I can't take credit for it though. I heard some commentator on TV say that, but can't remember who or what channel. I thought it was an interesting theory, based on Clinton politics.

But based on how things are going now, I'd predict 2008 will be Obama vs. McCain in November. In 2012, Hillary will be back in the race, and we'll see Huckabee as a strong candidate. We'll see Obama again either as an incumbent for re-election, or another bid for the Democratic nomination.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgun

How many have tried twize? I only remember Nixon.

Huh? In this election alone we've had repeat bids. McCain, Edwards, and Nader have all ran for president before. That's just three examples.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgun

What about a civilized nation, that often claim to be the greatest nation on the earth, that kill their leaders? Too many guns there?

Apples and Oranges. Assassinations are indigenous to the US? World history and global current events would disagree. The human race has wackos all over the planet. I've never heard about an assassination caused by someone stumbling upon a gun, causing him to haphazardly decide to assassinate with it.

I have no comment though on guns and street crime. That's another can of worms.

cw1865 · #55 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawn_tech

Huh? In this election alone we've had repeat bids. McCain, Edwards, and Nader have all ran for president before. That's just three examples.

Reagan (1976, losing to Ford who of course lost to Carter) and HW Bush (lost to Reagan in 1980) did too.

kgun · #56 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clicken

BTW, it would be democratic to include Congressman Ron Paul in the poll because he is still running. There are delegates who will vote for Dr. Paul as the Republican nominee regardless of the suppression against him and regardless of the party elite dictating McCain as the party favorite and they will do it because,…

My coloring. Agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clicken

They will say one thing and do another.

Kgun, there are more than three candidates. The other ones, who are not bought and paid for, are being downplayed by the class of people in the orignizations mentioned below. Nader bowed to threats when he withdrew in a previous election as he revealed during a TV documentary. I do not have reference to that source available at this time.

.................................................. .................................................. .............................................

Now is the time for more men and women like Ron Paul to get involved although yesterday would have been better!

I know, but something fundamentally may happen if that should be a realistic alternative or am I wrong?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jawn_tech

Apples and Oranges. Assassinations are indigenous to the US? World history and global current events would disagree. The human race has wackos all over the planet. I've never heard about an assassination caused by someone stumbling upon a gun, causing him to haphazardly decide to assassinate with it.

I have no comment though on guns and street crime. That's another can of worms.

My bolding. But in a culture where you can go into a store and buy a gun, can there be a correlation between the numbers of guns per inhabitant and the tendency to solve problems with guns? Go to the extreme opposite. Only police / security officers / hunters that are thoroughly tested are allowed to have guns. Do you see any possibility of less killing in the streets and in your society generally?

Not that our history is any better than yours. Did you know that (one of) Americas worst female serial killers through history was from Norway?

My advice to your next president: Make it more difficult to buy guns.

Free consumer choice of every good has an alternative cost.

**jawn_tech** · #57 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgun

My advice to your next president: Make it more difficult to buy guns.

I'm with you there!

cw1865 · #58 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 06:49 PM

Watch the DC v Heller case. Montana has threatened to secede (literally) if the court rules that the right to keep and bear arms is ruled a 'collective' vs. an individual right.

Martinscholes · #59 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 06:52 PM

Hang on! We could always let you borrow Gordon Brown! He could not be president, as he is not born in the USA, but he could be some sort of Prince Regent or whatever!

Second thoughts... take him as a gift! Keep him for as long as you want!

Clicken · #60 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 08:57 PM

LOL,.. a gift, like one of those that you will re-wrap and pass on to someone else at the first opportunity!

Making it difficult to purchase guns will not keep guns out of the hands of criminals. They will get them from the underground or just steal one. Why should the criminals be the only ones who can get guns? Why not let people have a fair shot/chance to defend themselves? Criminals will generally target the least protected.

Here is an interesting story from ”Gun Town USA”

Quote:

Originally Posted by ”kgun – On Topic”

I know, but something fundamentally may happen if that should be a realistic alternative or am I wrong?

Some of us are hopeful!

**jawn_tech** · #61 (**permalink**) 04-30-2008, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clicken

Making it difficult to purchase guns will not keep guns out of the hands of criminals. They will get them from the underground or just steal one.

That I do agree with. I think people with squeaky-clean records should have the right to own hunting guns and handguns, per the 2nd amendment. My personal opinion though, is if someone ever even had so much as a restraining order on their record, been found guilty of assault, battery, stalking, or any other kind of charge where kookiness or violence was done, no gun for them.

Some will still get them underground, sure enough, but some won't.

Clicken · #62 (**permalink**) 05-01-2008, 12:13 AM

Something has come to my attention which beckons for an explanation.

It would be a considerate gesture for the person who gave me bad rep to expand on the two word comment “conspiracy theorist”. By using a complete sentence in those comment areas then there is a better chance of understanding the offense, which could possibly lead to avoidance of future offenses.

I listed quotes of people who have openly admitted to their conspiring acts and thus do not understand the offense represented by the two word comment. Please help me to understand how I have offended, or posted in error.

**jawn_tech** · #63 (**permalink**) 05-01-2008, 12:42 AM

lol... Yikes, wasn't me!

kgun · #64 (**permalink**) 05-01-2008, 10:05 AM

<may be off topic comment to a comment started by a Republican? moderator>
To repeat in other words:

Can there be a correlation between the exclusive right to own a gun and the inherent ability to use guns in street fights?

Remember Janis Joplin: "Freedom is just another word for nothing left to loose."

I see, now the dicussion starts (in another thread?).

O Lord wan't you buy me a ...
</may be off topic comment to a comment started by a Republican? moderator>