White need not apply for jobs..poor minorities need them more then poor whites.
Smell that air boys? It's nice knowing the days of turning a man away from a job because of the color of his skin are long gone.
wait wut?
White need not apply for jobs..poor minorities need them more then poor whites.
Smell that air boys? It's nice knowing the days of turning a man away from a job because of the color of his skin are long gone.
wait wut?
My Predictions for the New Obama "Presidency"
Now that America has shown us all that affirmative action even works in politics, I've compiled a list of things that you can probably expect to happen. These predictions are 80% gleaned from information all of us have access to, and 15% gut instinct based on many years of research, historical study, and being glued to current affairs. The other 5% is just anger at my countrymen's stupidity--I admit it.
- Websites and mass emails offering "free grants," courtesy of the government and "Obama's wealth redistribution." Actually, this one's a freebie, because I have an email with a date and timestamp of literally minutes after Obama was declared the winner, offering exactly that.
- Israel will understand this election was the end of any type of assistance, military or otherwise, from the U.S., and will stop holding back their defense at the request of the American administration. Look for a first strike on Iran soon, as well as increased activity by the Israeli military in general. Israel is on her own now, and God help us all because of it.
- Look for Iranian retaliation--against American targets. That goes doubly for other terrorist organizations. We just elected a man with the full endorsement of every major terrorist group in the world as leader of the free world. It's the political equivalent of hiring a child molester to babysit your kids while you leave for the weekend. Not only is HE going to have fun with your child, but he'll probably sit and watch while his friends come over and do it too.
- Look for far-left justices appointed to the Supreme Court, effectively tying up the entire government in a trifecta of liberal humanism, the buzzwords of which remain empty platitudes like "hope and change," and the ultimate goal of which is socialism--and soon, sharia law.
- Military cases of troops being tried and convicted for killing the enemy in combat will continue to rise--and the conviction/plea-bargain rate will stay at nearly 100%, as the government seeks to use the best men and women this country has to offer as sacrificial lambs on the altar of global appeasement. Those brave and honorable men who currently reside in prison cells across the country, stripped of their rank, their careers, families, and their good name, will not taste free air again for many years. Their sacrifices and their stories will be forgotten by the general public, remembered only by those of us who continue to fight for them.
- Look for the slow but steady erosion of rights you have enjoyed for your entire lives--all the while being told it's "for your own good.." Restrictions on gun ownership, home schooling, encouraged dependence on the ever-growing federal government. More nanny-state provisions will be put into place to protect the "disadvantaged" and the "poor," (read: lazy, uneducated, unwilling to better themselves) even while groups like the unborn, the mentally handicapped, elderly, and terminally ill are slowly pushed toward euthanasia. Of course, this will be done with feel-good phrases like "death with dignity," "not wanting to be a burden," and "merciful release from suffering," all of which ignore the basic fact that we are killing people without their consent for the "good of the people." Before you tell me I'm crazy, let's just remember that Barack Obama was the ONLY senator in the Illinois state senate to vote against providing medical care for babies who were inconsiderate enough to survive an abortion. Also, look for taxes to go up. Yes, they'll go up.
- You think the economy is bad now? Just wait. You'll have the most expensive "free" health care ever. Bread lines aren't just for Russians anymore.
We have traded experience for color, freedom for slavery--and the irony is that the average American sheeple thinks their vote somehow righted an ancient wrong, somehow ENDED the spectre of slavery and ushered in some beautiful era of liberty. In reality, we are about to be less free than you ever thought possible.
I watched the faces of those crowded into the mob (excuse the pun) in Chicago. They stared at Obama like he was a god, an idol, a panacea to their every want and need. We have truly failed as a nation if we are at the point where we feel we must look to one man to take care of us all, to be our father figure and our sugar daddy. We have lost not only the "can-do" attitude of past generations, but the "MUST-do" attitude of our forefathers. We have allowed ourselves to become reduced from Patrick Henry's proud cry of "liberty or death" to the sniveling, whining idea that we are owed something. We have gone from being the honorable defenders of freedom, to being told we are the problem.
The eyes of Obama and McCain were also telling. McCain acted with class and grace in his concession speech, offering the most honorable response I've seen yet. I don't agree with all of McCain's positions, but it cannot be denied that the man has served his nation--at permanent and severe detriment to himself--for half a century. His eyes were clear and sincere, honest. His speech underlined the very reasons why, of the two men offered, he was hands down the best choice.
On the other hand, Obama's eyes were cold, calculating. His manner was smug and still carried the arrogance he has always had. His facial expression was one of barely disguised disdain for everything people like me believe in. His body language was smooth, polished--too much so. He talked of patriotism as though it is a value he is familiar with--and yet, his horrifying attitude toward the country he now leads is as well-documented as his friendships with those who seek its demise. He is charismatic to those who don't know what to look for, and he is inspiring to those who cannot or will not think for themselves. However, too many who voted for him are guilty of the most dangerous kind of hypocrisy. You see, we are told daily that we must not see color, just mankind. (We are all family, you know--or so we're told.) And yet Barack Obama was handed the White House on a silver platter by a fawning media, a bevy of foreign donors (who, to this day and in violation of U.S. election laws, remain nameless and unaccounted for), and a populace who voted based on color instead of right and wrong--even in the face of the most damning evidence against a Presidential candidate in many years , perhaps ever.
It is said that the people receive the government they deserve. Sadly, I fear that's correct. We have become complacent, unwilling to see the writing on the wall, content to frolic in the warm water without bothering to notice that it's been getting hotter by the minute. We are two seconds from a rolling boil--and perhaps it is already too late.
So, liberals, enjoy your victory. Jump around. Have a party, file for your free grants. Scream "Gimme my handout!" and make fun of those of us who fought to make sure your "messiah" didn't get access to the most powerful position in the world. Just remember when it all comes crashing down: You own the White House, the Congress, and soon the Supreme Court. You have no one to blame but yourselves for the mess you just created.
As for me, I'm buying my weapons so I have an answer for those who will come try to take them.
Originally posted by KidRock
YouTube videoWhite need not apply for jobs..poor minorities need them more then poor whites.
Smell that air boys? It's nice knowing the days of turning a man away from a job because of the color of his skin are long gone.
wait wut?
You know, if you weren't an idiot you'd be much more concerned when he says that your skill level doesn't matter.
Originally posted by Lycanthrope
- Israel will understand this election was the end of any type of assistance, military or otherwise, from the U.S., and will stop holding back their defense at the request of the American administration. Look for a first strike on Iran soon, as well as increased activity by the Israeli military in general. Israel is on her own now, and God help us all because of it.- Look for Iranian retaliation--against American targets. That goes doubly for other terrorist organizations. We just elected a man with the full endorsement of every major terrorist group in the world as leader of the free world. It's the political equivalent of hiring a child molester to babysit your kids while you leave for the weekend. Not only is HE going to have fun with your child, but he'll probably sit and watch while his friends come over and do it too.
I read these 2 and stopped
man... so to begin - Obama has an EXTREMELY pro-Israel stance, as does JOE-****ING-BIDEN!
Israel has been planning an independent strike on Iran for at least 6months to a year, and over the summer declared that they were capable without American support. Obama is not related to that at all.
Actions of the Israeli military have created more danger for Americans than not, so them being "on their own" is essential for American foreign policy interests.
Iran will not directly target Americans. They build strength from the war of words between the two nations, but know they ultimately stand no chance against Israeli, let alone American, military forces. Iran is posturing in order to look stronger than Saudi Arabia in terms of regional politics.
Most Jihadi groups, in statements found in internal memos from the groups, supported McCain, as militant foreign policy is favorable to Jihadi organizations.
I didn't read the rest assuming the quality was at least the same (though, I normally lead with my best points...)
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Response will be: That's based on your quaint liberal belief that neither of them is a Muslim.
😆
ya, unfortunately I'm so enamored with the radical left. And I totally missed the part of the inauguration where Obama yelled "Allahu Akbar" and called the masses into prayer from the minaret he is having installed in the white house.
so, further proof of how pro-Islam and such Obama is going to be:
Robert Fisk: So far, Obama's missed the point on Gaza...
Robert Fisk, Thursday, 22 January 2009, The Independent
It would have helped if Obama had the courage to talk about what everyone in the Middle East was talking about. No, it wasn't the US withdrawal from Iraq. They knew about that. They expected the beginning of the end of Guantanamo and the probable appointment of George Mitchell as a Middle East envoy was the least that was expected. Of course, Obama did refer to "slaughtered innocents", but these were not quite the "slaughtered innocents" the Arabs had in mind.There was the phone call yesterday to Mahmoud Abbas. Maybe Obama thinks he's the leader of the Palestinians, but as every Arab knows, except perhaps Mr Abbas, he is the leader of a ghost government, a near-corpse only kept alive with the blood transfusion of international support and the "full partnership" Obama has apparently offered him, whatever "full" means. And it was no surprise to anyone that Obama also made the obligatory call to the Israelis.
But for the people of the Middle East, the absence of the word "Gaza" – indeed, the word "Israel" as well – was the dark shadow over Obama's inaugural address. Didn't he care? Was he frightened? Did Obama's young speech-writer not realise that talking about black rights – why a black man's father might not have been served in a restaurant 60 years ago – would concentrate Arab minds on the fate of a people who gained the vote only three years ago but were then punished because they voted for the wrong people? It wasn't a question of the elephant in the china shop. It was the sheer amount of corpses heaped up on the floor of the china shop.
Sure, it's easy to be cynical. Arab rhetoric has something in common with Obama's clichés: "hard work and honesty, courage and fair play ... loyalty and patriotism". But however much distance the new President put between himself and the vicious regime he was replacing, 9/11 still hung like a cloud over New York. We had to remember "the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke". Indeed, for Arabs, the "our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred" was pure Bush; the one reference to "terror", the old Bush and Israeli fear word, was a worrying sign that the new White House still hasn't got the message. Hence we had Obama, apparently talking about Islamist groups such as the Taliban who were "slaughtering innocents" but who "cannot outlast us". As for those in the speech who are corrupt and who "silence dissent", presumably intended to be the Iranian government, most Arabs would associate this habit with President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt (who also, of course, received a phone call from Obama yesterday), King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and a host of other autocrats and head-choppers who are supposed to be America's friends in the Middle East.
Hanan Ashrawi got it right. The changes in the Middle East – justice for the Palestinians, security for the Palestinians as well as for the Israelis, an end to the illegal building of settlements for Jews and Jews only on Arab land, an end to all violence, not just the Arab variety – had to be "immediate" she said, at once. But if the gentle George Mitchell's appointment was meant to answer this demand, the inaugural speech, a real "B-minus" in the Middle East, did not.
The friendly message to Muslims, "a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect", simply did not address the pictures of the Gaza bloodbath at which the world has been staring in outrage. Yes, the Arabs and many other Muslim nations, and, of course, most of the world, can rejoice that the awful Bush has gone. So, too, Guantanamo. But will Bush's torturers and Rumsfeld's torturers be punished? Or quietly promoted to a job where they don't have to use water and cloths, and listen to men screaming?
Sure, give the man a chance. Maybe George Mitchell will talk to Hamas – he's just the man to try – but what will the old failures such as Denis Ross have to say, and Rahm Emanuel and, indeed, Robert Gates and Hillary Clinton? More a sermon than an Obama inaugural, even the Palestinians in Damascus spotted the absence of those two words: Palestine and Israel. So hot to touch they were, and on a freezing Washington day, Obama wasn't even wearing gloves.
not to mention Al Jazeera frequently reports on skepticism in the middle east about Obama, iirc.
I have noticed a very dangerous mentality emerging in the mainstream political discourse and from average Americans. This idea is while amidst economic turmoil, with the transition of Barack Obama as the President, we should stand aside and let him do what he needs to in order to resurrect the economy before its too late. We cannot allow ourselves to fall under such complacency and ignorance. That very mind sight manifested itself after the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and it allowed President Bush full reign to do as he pleased. Fear plus uninterrupted governmental power equates to disastrous and detrimental policies for America.
A lot of people have lambasted Rush Limbaugh and other Republicans that openly or secretively wish the failure of President Obama. I don’t align with the aforementioned in the least, but it isn’t about whether Barack Obama fails or succeeds, but rather is his policies right or wrong? Is government the answer to our current woes? And should we allow Obama to lead unimpeded?
Peter Schiff of EuroPacific Capital: "Obama is going to help destroy the country. We have a serious, serious problem and unfortunately the government is making it worse. We simply have borrowed and spent too much money: the federal and state governments to Wall Street and individual Americans. We need to reduce our spending and increase our savings. Obama is trying to do the opposite. He is trying to force feed more borrowing and spending in the economy. We need less government."
Peter Schiff and I, among others follow the Austrian business cycle theory. Essentially, that theory states that the expansion of credit causes the expansion of the supply of money. That creates a 'fake economy' of sorts (or a boom) and then it eventually leads to a burst. This is what the government did in the 1920's after the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 and that led to the Great Depression (and only became ‘Great’ because Hoover and FDR kept instituting government programs to stop it) and this is what we are doing now. George Bush was Herbert Hoover and Barack Obama is the moderan day FDR.
We need to recoil from this notion that government can fix the problem, should fix the problem and anyone that dissents from that should stay out of the way.
Part of his job as President is to do what it takes to bandage up the economy before it's too late, as we don't want another Great Depression or even the big slump we hit in 1982. Who exactly is giving Obama carte blanche to do everything and anything regardless of ethnics, logic or common sense be damned, though?
What exact steps would Schiff and yourself take?
Originally posted by Robtard
Part of his job as President is to do what it takes to bandage up the economy before it's too late, as we don't want another Great Depression or even the big slump we hit in 1982. Who exactly is giving Obama carte blanche to do everything and anything regardless of ethnics, logic or common sense be damned, though?What exact steps would Schiff and yourself take?
The problem is, his steps mirror those taken by government of yesteryear in causing the Great Depression. He's going to cause another Depression, but this time of possible hyperinflation.
I'm not saying it has happened yet, but I've certainly been seeing the idea circulate that we need to let Obama do what he wants to fix the economy.
What would Peter Schiff have done had he been in charge? Well first off, if libertarians were in control, the bubble wouldn't have been created in the first place, so no burst would have happened. But okay, let's say the burst does happen for the sake of debate. Libertarians would get out of the way and put trust in the free market. Capitalism works. It really does.
Instead though, government gets in the way and creates a larger mess.
Originally posted by BigRed
No it isn't. His job as President is to let the free market work and stay away from the economy, not to micromanage it.The problem is, his steps mirror those taken by government of yesteryear in causing the Great Depression. He's going to cause another Depression, but this time of possible hyperinflation.
I'm not saying it has happened yet, but I've certainly been seeing the idea circulate that we need to let Obama do what he wants to fix the economy.
What would Peter Schiff have done had he been in charge? Well first off, if libertarians were in control, the bubble wouldn't have been created in the first place, so no burst would have happened. But okay, let's say the burst does happen for the sake of debate. Libertarians would get out of the way and put trust in the free market. Capitalism works. It really does.
Instead though, government gets in the way and creates a larger mess.
A) America is a democracy the people get what vote for. They did not vote a libertarian or anarchist into office (thank god).
B) Letting people do whatever the hell they wanted to is pretty much what got us into this mess and what got us into the Great Depression.
Originally posted by Symmetric ChaosB) Letting people do whatever the hell they wanted to is pretty much what got us into this mess and what got us into the Great Depression.
Yeah, banks just wanted to give out mortgages to people they knew couldnt pay them back..such a good business plan.
The democrats didn't push this on them, nope.
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, his job is to be a libertarian even though he didn't run as one and the American people did not vote one in?
A President isn't supposed to micromanage the economy. We are supposed to be free market capitalists. I guess that's a dying idea.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
A) America is a democracy the people get what vote for. They did not vote a libertarian or anarchist into office (thank god).
Yeah and the people voted for George Bush twice. So I don't really put much stock in the intelligence of American people. And now they've voted for another big government proponent.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
[B]B) Letting people do whatever the hell they wanted to is pretty much what got us into this mess and what got us into the Great Depression.