1. You're seeing this notice because your currently a guest. By taking the time to register you'll unlock access to features such as the creating threads, posting replies, sending private messages, and commenting to articles at Huntingne.com.

    Once you've registered you'll have to activate your account which your able to do by checking your e-mail to which you registered to (if you didn't receive your e-mail) try checking your spam folder.

    Once you've registered this notice will disappear.

Proctor & Gamble pulls ads from Glenn Beck

Discussion in 'Political Forum' started by Shorty, Aug 14, 2009.

  1. tmrschessie Moderator

    shorty you asked I gave you what you asked for, no cherry picking. Can't ask for apples and complain when yoiu get em....
  2. livnlrn Member

    We have no idea what's really going on in Obama's mind...he very well could be a racist. I don't believe he is. He's not afraid to play the race card when it's in his hand though.

    I also think Beck was wrong in calling Obama a racist.

    Shorty that was a campaign speech. Any politician , with the exception of Biden, would never admit being a racist in a campaign speech.

    Agreed!!!
  3. Shorty Active Member

    It wasn't the end of the world as we know it (TEOWAWKI) when Bush was in office, the same thing can be said about Obama. Neither one are bad people despite what the political pundits on both side have claimed. BTW - I am 43 and have learned that when it comes to politics things are never as bad as they say, nor are they ever as good as they claim. At this point in my life I prefer basic "facts" over partisan "spin".
  4. muddy river Active Member

    That's all Obama gives anymore is campaign speeches. He can't stop blaming Bush. He figures if it worked during his campaign, it'll work now. How many fundraisers has Obama attended now? 30? I heard after 20 he had raised only a few million dollars. Bush raised a lot more than that in only 6 appearances.
  5. choclab Member


    Was that before or after clearing brush at his ranch?
  6. Shorty Active Member

    Where exactly did Obama blame Bush for something in his speech on race?

    I must have missed it. :skeptical:
  7. muddy river Active Member

    Just a general comment. Didn't mean to say it was about race. My apologies. It was in his free time from clearing brush. By the way choclab, how many times has Obama golfed so far in his Presidency? 24. It took Bush 2 years and 10 months to play 24 times. POLITICO CLICK: President Obama ties George W. Bush on golf - Patrick Gavin Too much leisure time going on and not enough work in my opinion. October is the deadliest month for the war since it's start and Obama is still "dithering". BOOM! 8 soldiers dead. "Four!" Another hole in one. Congrats.
  8. Shorty Active Member

    I hear MR, I was quite pizzed when Bush & Co. "dithered" on what to do about the increasing violence in Iraq for THREE YEARS.

    :realmad:
  9. muddy river Active Member

    Me too. We can't leave Afghanistan so what's the point in not sending in reinforcements? To keep his leftist buddies happy and to try and push his domestic agendas through with there support. That's more important to him than the lives of the soldiers. He feels he can't pass anything without the left so he doesn't want to piss them off. Not until he ruins healthcare and taxes the f**k out of us with the climate change bill or whatever it's called now. They change the names of these bills so much it's hard to keep up with them anymore.
  10. Shorty Active Member

    I saw a report the other day that said US/NATO troops already outnumber the Taliban by a 12 to 1 ratio in Afghanistan. Do we really need to send in more troops? My thoughts are that the increased number of troops we sent in earlier this year may be what is fueling the current violence. I don't have the answers but giving Obama a little more time to get this right is not all that unreasonable.
  11. tmrschessie Moderator

    Hey shorty did those figures come from the taliban post? What is fueling the violence is the public opinon here and news stories showing how indecisive America is AGAIN.
  12. Shorty Active Member

    Tom, those figures were in the Lincoln newspaper and on the the Huffington post the other day, this was an AP story. However, I do not remember seeing this AP story covered on Fox.

    Analysis: Taliban outnumbered, but strategy still in trouble - KansasCity.com

    Posted on Tue, Oct. 27, 2009 10:38 PM

  13. Shorty Active Member

  14. muddy river Active Member

    I didn't thank you for the link Shorty. I thanked you because I always enjoy reading your posts. You're very good at counter-attacking.
  15. tmrschessie Moderator

    shorty by the link you gave ...2/3 of that 12 to 1 figure are afghan forces. Again statistics are used to make what ever point you want. The number of non afghan put the ratio at 4 to 1.....Also in the article they say that the military is leaving taliban forces alone that are not an "imminent threat" Sounds like defensive tactics.....i there are 25K taliban we need to kill 25K taliban to end this BS.
  16. Shorty Active Member

    Yeah, I crunched the numbers on the AP story too, even at a 4 to 1 ratio, do we really still need more troops?
  17. tmrschessie Moderator

    Shorty having been in combat in mountainous terrain I can attest to the effieceny of an enemy well hidden. Yes, I would have more troops. If we are going to have an effect over there we have to have some protecting the civilans and some fighting the bad guys. Tom
  18. Shorty Active Member

    I wouldn't object to more troops if they have a clear obtainable objective to achieve, right now I don't see what that objective is that requires more troops.

    :no:
  19. tmrschessie Moderator

    Too KILL the the bad guys. That is the only way to stop them.
  20. muddy river Active Member

    It doesn't matter if we see what the objective is or not. Obama's military guys know what they need and have told him. The election is over so time to make a "Presidential" decision. Shouldn't they have had a scenario for either outcome of the election? If this guy gets elected, we do this. If the other guy gets elected, we do this. Basically they have sat on their hands and done nothing. Now that it's time to act, they still have no plan. Obama has no idea what to do when it comes to military stuff so he's scared to death to make the wrong decision. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Sometimes you have to make a decision and deal with the consequences later. Not find out the consequences first and then plan accordingly.

Share This Page