Democratic National Convention Discussion

reply to post by Grimpachi


Yes! And when he got finished with his speech, I didn't see many dry eyes in the place.

And that stadium looked at least full if not packed...some people standing on the upper levels but that might have been simply to gain a clear view...I doubt they would have intentionally overfilled that big place due to safety concerns...hopefully they intentionally did not let it fill to 100% capacity.

The people did not look like politician types or special interest groups as it seems to me it has always been in the past...I saw people of all varieties and many seemed to be wearing national costumes but holding signs that said things like "Arab-American Democrat" and "Brazilian American" and there were white haired ladies and obviously gay males and veterans and pretty much just average people...and they were all enthused and paying attention and cheering and a standing ovation but I forget what he said now that made everyone stand up.

And I KNOW without a doubt that the claims will be that all these diverse people were paid to go there and blah blah blah...but you know...you might be able to bus 20 to 30 thousand people into a place like that to make it appear to be filled with people who wanted to be there on their own...but you cannot make that many people feign the emotion and enthusiasm that I saw tonight. At the end, they were cheering so loud I could hardly hear the last words of his speech.

reply to post by queenannie38


The fact that Romney keeps touching on the issue of war with IRAN is not very good either.

Originally posted by neo96

Is Bush the current Potus?

No the guy who shoveled crap at the DNC convention is and what does that make him?

The guy who is currently bombing the hell out of brown people all over the globe.

So are you telling me that you were AGAINST the measures taken to find and capture the supposed enemy of the US...that you cried out against the warlike cry of shock and grief and anger that rose from this country on September 11, 2001?

Did you AGREE with most all Americans that day?
Or did you feel the same way as you do now...that we shouldn't be 'bombing the hell out of brown people all over the globe?'

Please, be honest.

reply to post by queenannie38


First off only their word has been given of his death, second off the dude no matter how much of a %$#$ deserves a trial.

Didn't get one did he?

Since they can't prove the guy is dead or even when he was killed the point is moot.

Obama was the guy and the democrats were the party calling the last administration warmongers and murders and guess what?

Lot of death and destruction at the hands of the supposed anti war crowd and I am suppose to cheer with glee at the murder of another human being?

I think not makes us no better than some middle eastern protest and party dragging a bloody Gadaffi through the streets of tripoli.

reply to post by neo96

The expansion of the epa powers

Republicans created the EPA under Nixon

the expansion of the healthcare control via the care act.

Obamacare is a conservative plan, Romney was the first to enact it, a Republican

The expansion of the clean,air and water act.

This requires the EPA, which was created by republicans

The expansion of government power via fanny and freddy

Republicans, multiple times

"In 2003, the Bush Administration sought to create a new agency, replacing the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, to oversee Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac"

"In 2005, the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act, sponsored by Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and co-sponsored by Senators Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), John McCain (R-AZ) and John Sununu (R-NH)[1], would have increased government oversight of loans given by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. "

"The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008—passed by the United States Congress on July 24, 2008 with bipartisan support and signed into law by President George W. Bush on July 30, 2008 — enabled expanded regulatory authority over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by the newly established FHFA, and gave the U.S. Treasury the authority to advance funds for the purpose of stabilizing Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac"

en.wikipedia.org...

The expansion of the patriot act.

Bi-partisan, once again it wouldn't have been there without the creation by Republicans

"91 Democrats voted against the one-year reauthorization of the Patriot Act in 2010. Only 6 Republicans voted against the Patriot Act reauthorization:"

irregulartimes.com...

The expansion of government powers via the ndaa,sopa,.acta etc

Bi-partisan, but once again the NDAA was a republican bill

The creation and expansion of the Federal Reserve and Frank Dodd act increasing government powers.

Democrat

The expansion of government powers to deny Americans the right to own a gun.

Republicans and Democrats

Number of Democrats voting for the AWB: 50/53 (94.3%)
Number of Republicans voting for the AWB: 45/47 (95.7%)

"Reagan's administration passed more restrictive gun laws than any other administration (including the dubiously-named "Firearm Protection Act of 1986 which banned citizens owning automatic weapons without special permission). And the "Clinton ban" was actually named after Ronald Reagan's press secretary after James Brady was shot by a nutjob."

"It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners."

"The ominous Assault Weapons Ban that passed in 1994 was a key part of H.R. 3355, The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The author was Rep. Jack Brooks from Texas. "


bsalert.com...

Drones over American skies.

Republicans voted yes for the drone bill than democrats

www.govtrack.us...

And that is the best someone can come up with is "the gop wants to control the government" take a damn good look at the past 4 years and come up with something better than dogma.

I just destroyed all of your talking points with facts and reality... How many times am I gonna have to prove you wrong?

Originally posted by thepresident
reply to post by queenannie38

 

The fact that Romney keeps touching on the issue of war with IRAN is not very good either.

Not at all. In fact, it is downright SCARY...and I'm not easily scared...if I thought he had a chance...I don't know what I'd do.

I was thinking today that maybe Bill Clinton could sit down with President A of Iran...after all...he got those two hikers released! We need someone who is charming and not fake...Bill has turned out to be quite the diplomat, from what I understand...and like Obama said tonight....Romney and Ryan are....'new' at foreign relations. I don't think they've gotten to the 'relations' aspect of that term, even...I don't know if they can.

If we (the US) are unpopular now...a GOP victory in November would seal our fate with a quick and final total trashing of our international reputation....and Romney and his pal Ryan would probably be the only ones standing as the dust settles around their feet...and Romney will be looking at Ryan with that partially veiled but very bewildered look on his face that I'm getting more and more used to seeing....he'll ask..."What it something I said?"...and then Ryan will say, in lieu of an actual answer..."I guess we're on our own now, Mitt...let's get this done!"

reply to post by RealSpoke

Ouch

Neo's butt is really gonna hurt after that post, Spoke

Prepare for an onslaught of crazy like the world has never seen

PS

The GOP kept NDDA in Place, the DEMS voted in mass to get rid of it

Originally posted by queenannie38
"I guess we're on our own now, Mitt...let's get this done!"

Then the would launch Nuclear War Heads off at Bolivia because they
turned the map upsides down.

I know the deal Annie,

They have ZERO foreign policy experience.

The actually hired (actually PAID MONEY) Bush's advisors, that is the
real scary thing.

reply to post by thepresident


OMG.

Yes. Very scary. But I absolutely believe it...the similarities are more than just party-related, imo...kind of like 'we now resume our regularly scheduled programming.

I was looking back at 2001 recently, thinking about a thread I will probably be starting soon...fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

reply to post by queenannie38

Obama quoted Romney as saying it was “tragic” to “end the war in Iraq.” What Romney was criticizing was the pace of Obama’s troop withdrawal, not ending a war.

Vice President Biden quoted GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney as saying “it’s not worth moving heaven and earth” to catch Osama bin Laden. Actually, Romney said he’d target more than just “one person.”

And more found here with details...

factcheck.org...

You can't reason with these people. Even FACTS, deter them. SORRY TO SAY.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by queenannie38

 

Obama quoted Romney as saying it was “tragic” to “end the war in Iraq.” What Romney was criticizing was the pace of Obama’s troop withdrawal, not ending a war.

Vice President Biden quoted GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney as saying “it’s not worth moving heaven and earth” to catch Osama bin Laden. Actually, Romney said he’d target more than just “one person.”

And more found here with details...

factcheck.org...

reply to post by RealSpoke

Obamacare is a conservative plan, Romney was the first to enact it, a Republican

This is what people really need to think about.

Romney may have been the first person to enact it, but he's also been the first one to see how it made his state bankrupt before he was able to push the majority of those costs off onto the federal government. The first few years, Massachusetts health care plan but Massachusetts in the top 5 of bankrupt states in the country. Now we pick most of the tab for their costs.

reply to post by RealSpoke


Actually, your site 'BSAlert' needs to check its own BS about the assault weapons ban. The final bill that passed was HR3355. That bill passed 61-38, with only 6 Republican votes in the Senate.

HR3355 Votes

The one that passed the Senate overwhelmingly was S.1607, which did not include an AWB. If I'm reading it right, that particular vote was actually one to incorporate S.1607 into HR3355, not a vote for final passage of anything to send to the president.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
Obamacare is a conservative plan, Romney was the first to enact it, a Republican

Romney isn't a conservative. Romney and Obama = same/same.
40 points where Obama and Romney are exactly the same

Originally posted by Deetermined
Romney may have been the first person to enact it, but he's also been the first one to see how it made his state bankrupt before he was able to push the majority of those costs off onto the federal government.

Exactly. It simply doesn't work. It's unsustainable.

Obama Exaggerates, His little supporters EXAGGERATE. At the end, the Economy is still SLOW!

Originally posted by vor78
reply to post by RealSpoke

 

Actually, your site 'BSAlert' needs to check its own BS about the assault weapons ban. The final bill that passed was HR3355. That bill passed 61-38, with only 6 Republican votes in the Senate.

HR3355 Votes

The one that passed the Senate overwhelmingly was S.1607, which did not include an AWB. If I'm reading it right, that particular vote was actually one to incorporate S.1607 into HR3355, not a vote for final passage of anything to send to the president.

edit on 7-9-2012 by vor78 because: (no reason given)

I know ROMNEY IS NOT A CONSERVATIVE. RON PAUL DESTROYED them ALL in the PRIMARIES.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by RealSpoke
Obamacare is a conservative plan, Romney was the first to enact it, a Republican

Romney isn't a conservative. Romney and Obama = same/same.
40 points where Obama and Romney are exactly the same

Originally posted by Deetermined
Romney may have been the first person to enact it, but he's also been the first one to see how it made his state bankrupt before he was able to push the majority of those costs off onto the federal government.

Exactly. It simply doesn't work. It's unsustainable.

Originally posted by Q2IN2Y
Obama is doing a lot of talking, but he's isn't saying anything. He's selling hope like the preachers sell salvation in the church every Sunday. You get a little high. A little dopamine rush from the magnetic oratory, but when it is over, and the dopamine expires, you're back to square one.

That's all I have to say.

Ignore Obamas words. Just watch what he does.

- He played over 100 rounds of golf

- He blew $800 Billion in stimulus that failed. - Solyndra -

- The National Debt skyrocketed to $16 Trillion

- We 23 Million Americans unemployed - that's a disgrace

- According to Paul Krugman, an Obama future has Death Panels & a Value Added Tax

Originally posted by thepresident
P.S

AMERICA and the PRIVATE SECTOR added 200,000 jobs this month

GO AMERICA!

Wow! How did ADP get this so wrong?

BLS just came out with the August 2012 employment situation report showing only +96,000 jobs.

Then they downgraded July's numbers from +163,000 to +141,000.

Even worse, they revised June's numbers down AGAIN. Originally they said June had +80,000, then they revised it to +64,000 last month before revising it down again to a disappointing +45,000 in this report.

I'm pretty sure we're going to see July's numbers get revised down again too.

It doesn't look good for Obama.

www.bls.gov...

I think a comment on ADP's website is very telling regarding it's employment reports versus the BLS employment reports:

Publication of the Employment Situation by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (the BLS) is the first - and generally the most important - release of government-sponsored economic data every month. Employment is an intrinsically important statistic. Furthermore, financial markets react, sometimes strongly, to "surprises" in the BLS' estimates of establishment employment that might signal future changes in monetary policy.

adpemploymentreport.com...

Does this Reuters article outline what's getting ready to happen?

(Reuters) - Jobs growth slowed sharply in August, setting the stage for the Federal Reserve to pump additional money into the sluggish economy next week and dealing a blow to President Obama as he seeks reelection in November.

www.reuters.com...

Edit to add: Is it just me? Now that the European Central Bank has agreed to help bail out Spain and Italy in the last day or so, is the Federal Reserve really going to print more money again and say they are going to pump it into our economy while they really turn around and give it to the ECB? It's happened before.