What is Wrong With These People!? - The U.S. Politics Discussion Thread

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

rev0lver wins.

The Bush years fucked this country into the ground long before Obama was even put on a ticket.

IMO, when Katrina happened the way it did, that was the day I really thought, "Man, they don't give a shit anymore."
And they didn't. Name one good thing that came out of the 2'nd Bush term other than the hype building up to the Obama Campaign.

Here's some food for thought.

Spoiler

Have any of you ever seen "The Core?" It was a ridiculous sci-fi flick with Harvey Dent, Stanley Tucci, whole bunch of awesome people where they had to go to the center of the earth because some dumb fuck decided it'd be a good idea to fire GIANT FUCKING LASERS into the earth's mantle and core in the hopes of creating some sort of subterrainean weaponry advantage over their enemies. GUESS WHAT? THE FUCKING LASERS STOPPED THE EARTH'S CORE FROM SPINNING AND THE FUCKING PLANET STARTED TO MELT. The Bush years were the equivalent of 8 years of big fucking lasers, and now Obama Eckhart and the gang have to figure out a way to get the core to spin again, or we're all doomed to a gooey, melty fate.

Also:

Spoiler

Just sayin'.

 

[Abra Kapocus]

I noticed abortion mentioned in the topic, so here's my two cents on this.

The majority of the time, abortion is seen as a viable option for economic reasons. The prime directive of "pro-lifers" (that term makes me sick, because it's loaded with smug, moral pretense) is to keep the poor where they are in life. By taking away from women the ability to control their reproductive rights, you are also stealing their financial independence. You are forcing them to have a kid that they don't have the capacity to care for, and you are allowing more kids to be brought up in a life of poverty and most likely crime (depending on the area). That's all this is. The middle class just happen to get caught in the crossfire. And then, to add fuel to the fire, you restrict women's access to contraception so that they can prevent the pregnancies in the first place. Holy double jeopardy, Batman! But wait! That's not all! The "big government" who just forced you to have a kid that you neither wanted nor had the ability to take care of, then sends you on your merry way, without even so much as a cent from their coffers to help you raise the kid. How does anyone even justify this?

Abortion is a clear-cut issue to anyone with an ounce of humanity. It needs to be kept legal for those who need it, otherwise they'll find other more dangerous ways to go about it, which very often turn deadly. Adoption is not a be-all, end-all solution to the problem, either. The agencies are already overflowing with kids. So why not let a gay couple adopt some?

I also noticed that people are still arguing with this clown. Do your sanity a favor and just stop. Seriously.

 

[rev0lver]

So why not let a gay couple adopt some?

My favorite part of the post. Lol

 

[M2Dave]

Abra Kapocus, you make good points, but if you live in poverty and cannot afford to have children, that begs the question, why have children? I am not against restricting contraception, though. I am against restricting partial-birth abortions in which the baby's brain gets sucked off. I think that is murder.

 

[Abra Kapocus]

m2dave: You assume that pregnancies are planned whenever casual sex is on the table. Also, don't forget instances of rape.

Regardless of the nuances, abortion absolutely needs to remain legal. And it's cases like you brought up that Planned Parenthood is the most essential organization for women's reproductive health. Not only are a mere 3% of their services are abortion, they do everything they can to make sure it's the last option, and to nip each case in the bud before it even reaches the point where partial-birth abortions even come into play. Women shouldn't be ashamed of having to enter these clinics, that just exacerbates the problem.

 

[rev0lver]

You also have to consider the fact that many abusive boyfriends force girls to have unprotected sex, it's not just with rape. This is a widespread and global problem, especially prominent in Africa, that leads to both unwanted pregnancies and STD's. The man feels like it doesn't matter for him, it's the girl who has the responsibility if something happens. People need to stop acting like if it's not rape, it's still the girl's fault that they have unprotected sex.

 

[M2Dave]

You also have to consider the fact that many abusive boyfriends force girls to have unprotected sex, it's not just with rape. This is a widespread and global problem, especially prominent in Africa, that leads to both unwanted pregnancies and STD's. The man feels like it doesn't matter for him, it's the girl who has the responsibility if something happens. People need to stop acting like if it's not rape, it's still the girl's fault that they have unprotected sex.

According to this web site, "1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest...and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e, the child is unwanted or inconvenient)" in the US. The other 6% is related to health problems either for the mother or the child. So most pregnancies seem to occur in casual sex.

 

[Espio]

My thoughts on abortion have always been so neutral, I'm not for or against abortion. I feel that I have no business passing judgment on an expecting mother or family, when I don't know their situation and such. Rape, incest, risk of death to the mother, quality of life for the fetus etc. could all be factors.

 

[Superi0rMagik]

I thought they had threads for this kind of stuff why bring it to test your might?

 

[Zoidberg747]

I thought they had threads for this kind of stuff why bring it to test your might?

They do, and you are now in it. Forumception.

 

[aj1701]

I thought they had threads for this kind of stuff why bring it to test your might?

You can make that argument about any thread in the off topic area. Some of us here a mature enough to discuss this topic civilly.

Also, nothing forces you to read this thread.

 

[rev0lver]

According to this web site, "1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest...and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e, the child is unwanted or inconvenient)" in the US. The other 6% is related to health problems either for the mother or the child. So most pregnancies seem to occur in casual sex.

What I mean is that "casual sex" isn't always what it implies... what I discussed wouldn't be included in rape statistics. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/health/research/15pregnant.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss

 

[DanCock]

MKF30

1 ~ are you ok with Oil companies getting 4 billion dollars in subsidies? even though they "say" they dont want them, and they have profits in the high billions. does this make any sense?? wouldnt you be down with taking away those since they clearly dont need them.

2 ~ people making over a million dollars a year, wouldnt it makes sense that they pay a higher % income tax then say some one like me who earns barely 30,000 a year? as a matter of fact many of them pay a lesser % then myself because they are able to pay lawyers to find all kinds of loopholes to avoid paying higher taxes. they make their money through the american dream and yet they dont want to invest back into the country that has helped make them rich. this countries infrastructure is slowly crumbling.


now on to Obama ~ you do realize that a ton of liberals dislike him right? half the stuff stuff that he has helped pass or signed off on have been squarely centered polictics and or older republican policies. he has thrown a few bones to the "libs" but most of his stuff is centered policies. obama care isnt a liberals idea it was a republican idea, the mandate isnt what liberals wanted, because it still privatizes health insurance so insurance companies still can collect tons of $$$$$$$ single payer should have been the way to go, but obama had to compromise LIKE HE ALWAYS DOES O_O
he threw a bone to "libs" by saying no to the key stone pipe line, then 2 months later allows them to build the bottom half portion of the pipe line..

the republicans have gone so far right because of the high jacking from the SUPER conservatives. you have tons of actual republicans in office quitting this year because of what has happened to the party that they can no longer be associated to it.
the problem with this high jacking is that it has now caused the Democrats to be pulled closer and closer to the conservative side to the point where they are slowly becoming the old republican party.


consistently calling obama a liberal just shows you that you are being misinformed big time..

 

[Abra Kapocus]

Why does Obama suck? Let me count the ways. With an itemized list this time.

**********************************************
Economics
------------------
-Bailing out Wall Street with taxpayer money without the necessary preconditions to make sure that those same bankers can't crash the economy again. No regulations of derivatives trading, no capital requirements, etc. Rampant protectionism and kicking the can down the road.

-Capitulated on Bush tax cuts for the rich in the stimulus bill

-Cut a backroom deal with the hospital lobby to kill the public option while campaigning on its behalf

General Policy
---------------------
-Stacked his cabinet full of corporate shills and lobbyists, including Michael Taylor of Monsanto, Bill Daley of Citigroup who bet on the housing market collapse, Larry Summers, who not only served under Bush but was guilty of the exact same thing, and Tim Geithner, who oversaw the unconditional Wall Street bailouts.

-Opposed marriage equality by appealing challenges to DOMA, the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act"

-Massive expansion of offshore drilling right before the BP disaster, and granting 27 waivers to oil companies in the weeks following

-Sided with utility companies in lawsuit to stop greenhouse gas emissions

-Used a signing statement to ignore labor and environmental standards for the IMF and World Bank in a war spending bill


Civil Liberties/War Crimes
----------------------
-No investigation of torture, false evidence leading into Iraq, or warrantless wiretapping. Fought for government immunity in prosecutions for domestic spying, and eventually won the privilege to delare "state secrets" on all of the above.

-Continuation and expansion of most Bush policies including the Patriot Act, indefinite detentions of alleged terrorists without trial or charge in Gitmo, renditions of alleged terrorists to countries where they could be tortured, warrantless wiretapping and surveillance, and suspension of Habeas Corpus for detainees.

-Operated a Black Site at Bagram Air Base where the Red Cross had reported detainee abuse

-Authorized the assassination of US citizens abroad, an unprecedented declaration of executive power

-Awarded $250 million in government contracts to Blackwater, who were responsible for some of the most heinous crimes in Iraq

-Mindlessly ramping up an undeclared drone war, mainly in Pakistan, targeting not only "alleged" terrorists, but rescue workers and funerals. Calls this practice "self defense" [update] Now the CIA wants to bomb the shit out of people without even knowing who they are

-Took up Rumsfeld-era Prompt Global Strike weapons deemed controversial even for the Bush administration, weapons that look and fly like nuclear missiles, thus risking nuclear war.

-Eased the restrictions on the use of child soldiers in Africa while openly providing military aid to the countries that used them

Transparency
----------------------
-Dramatically increased government secrecy, blocking more FOIA requests in 2009 than Bush did in 2008

-Fought to block dozens of public-interest lawsuits challenging privacy violations and presidential abuses.

-Cracked down on government whistleblowers more than every President in history combined

-Indefinite detainment of PFC Bradley Manning without trial or charge for over a year under inhumane conditions for exposing the corruption and malfeasance in our military

**********************************************

If that's "liberal," then I'm ultra-mega-hyper-king-kamehameha liberal!

The best part is that's not even the full list.

 

[rev0lver]

^^^^total proof that Obama is a socialist. Look at all that redistribution of wealth and control of the private sector.

 

[DanCock]

Omg but Obama wants to take our guns!!! Noooooooooooooooooo


Sent from my iPad 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Verstande]

I just want a leader that will cut the deficit, I don't care what party =(

 

[DanCock]

start by ending all these fucking wars over oil.. use the money to invest in other ways to create energy.

 

[Abra Kapocus]

^ Truth to power. Even if we slashed our defense budget in half we could still dominate the world. But we're spending trillions on weapon and vehicle programs that not even the pentagon wants, and when something goes wrong with one of their prototypes, guess who has to cough up more money to help them out? That's right, us.


[edit] \/ Did it just get dumber in here?

 

[MKF30]

Yeah, whatever you say Purple feel free.

I don't see anything wrong with the Saudi king.

I actually never said what PH said, as you noticed I merely referred to him as Saudi King but for some reason he thinks I said he said that lol. When I never said that.

But yeah, I agree.



@Revolve ok..

1. Yes, I read it but my point was you don't seem to acknowledge the fact that MOST democrats were against the civil rights act...


Again, it's not just about marriage. The majority of the republican party rallied against the repeal of DADT and many want it reinstated. And about the states, that's a horrible argument. I've heard it many times in arguments about states' rights. If your home is in a state that doesn't support gay marriage, why should you move from a place you otherwise love and call your home? It's the laws that should change, not you.

2. Actually it is about marriage to some folks, you see if you want to go nuts marriage's history is really about man and woman, not man and man, or woman and woman otherwise why not suit for Civil Unions? It's like same sex couples emphasize on "Marriage>>>Civil Unions" ? But whatever...I'm all for laws being changed and I've even said I don't care about gay marriage or not, as long as nobody bothers me personally I'm fine with it. Now, my religious views I'm just for man and woman marriages but will I rebel against same sex marriages if it passes all over? Not at all. It doesn't effect me remotely.


3. If you support adoption then why don't democrats like ever consider it or mention it? It's like most of the time I hear "abortion abortion abortion, it's their body this and that" without even at least considering alternatives...you're assuming these kids are growing up in "bad envionments" again which is very presumpturous...and yes, we always have a choice. If you have an STD or aids something like that then you shouldn't have sex but sadly people still do....technically you're not supposed to have anal sex(regardless of sexual orientation) yet people still do it...which can also cause problems. In terms of having a baby or not, if you're an adult or old enough to realize the consequences then you should act like one and accept responsibility. If you can't handle it, then adoption is their best resort.


4. I've stated numerous times dude, I support medical weed. Just not "recreational by at any local store use" that's it. I'm not wrong about weed and their brain cells. I used to be friends and hang with pot heads, believe me if screws up your brain and it's statistically proven to kill brain cells over time. Anyone who denies this is either in denial or simply doesn't understand what weed does to your brain cells and brain tissue over time of extended use...and like anything else, O.D. on anything is bad for you, even water can kill you if you drink too much of it(believe it or not) as far as being being the wheel of something, well I'd prefer Sober>>>>anything else as in high, drunk or sleepy...they're all bad and you're taking a risk when you're not sober driving. Period. As for other drugs, well there will always be a black market for something...that's how I see it but drugs like coc, crack etc yeah...nobrainer that they should be banned all together.



5. Yes, I do and I just don't agree with them Taking money from from the rich(as in taxing them more) has been done already and hasn't changed anything...I'm talking about paychecks, that's something only the government can do by creating more jobs. But keep in mind one of my best friends is on welfare and he's not really that lazy, sometimes maybe but he's just unfortunate although his father could have taken him years ago he didn't...so don't know what that's about, anywho I'm not saying all those on welfare are lazy, some yes just not all. But keep in mind, welfare is something very unique to the us as we offer it more then anyone else. You can still work your way up, try to better your life too you know instead of just relying on others to bail you out or asking the gov "give me, give me, give me" that's all I'm saying. Everyone hits bad luck in life even rich people...as well as poor and middle class



6.Not trolling at all, did you not see my link proving that democrats have performed "hate crimes" yet just ignored it? lol. Whatever dude...



7. Yes, RR made a black holiday so that kills any theory of "the righties are all racists" as a copout argument most of the time. Lincoln fought for black rights yes, so what if it was in the 1800s? Racism hasn't changed and never will, thus time is really irrelevant there. Perhaps you never said that, but the mainstream left has and often...so that's why I've pointed out that hey, sure I'm sure there are righty racists...but racism is unfortunately a universal trait as I've listed democrats who are obviously racist such as Sharpton and Jackson. I don't see how it's overstated but whatever... Yes, I agree in fact with any politician dem or rep I don't care about their "personal issues" unless they're a killer or something crazy I never cared about that. I'm just pointing out that politics plays dirty especially with personal attacks against the right of late. I remember when anyone tried getting dirt on Chealsea Clinton, Bill threatened people and it stopped right away....yet the Bush daughters got SOO much heat for going out, clubbing, having fun etc because I guess that was ok... I merely brought up the Bill vs. Rush thing because of one reason. Hypocrisy. But you're right that's old news now.

8. % amount of income is also based on how good or bad your job is and how much you work. Honestly, out of all the middle class gets screwed the most because they're not the "rich" nor the "poor" NYC didn't have it's best economic time period because of that alone because that happened as far as Rudy was still mayor which Bush was already in by that time...in 2000/01. But my point was if you compare Rudy's record compared to previous or current mayors, it's no doubt a fact he did the best job over the past 20 years...crime? Jobs? security? taxes? There were other spots around the country(as in most) that didn't have tax free on clothes, now that's back again...NJ being one of the few consistent exceptions.



9.It's not just WND, I can find you other sites unbiased or political in general that have Obama seen with these guys....secondly, yes the mainstream media is very leftwing biased and I found this out on my own. CNN, neutral/left. MSNBC, totally left, ABC left, CBS, left. Fox news, right. Daily Show(not that I consider this a serious station for politics) but left. Out of all of those totals, Fox is the only one NOT mainstream left....what I find amusing is some people keep denying this...and act as if every network "except Fox" is unbiased or something...It's a fact that Bush knows the Saudi King, big whoop like I said Obama is friends and closer with FAR more dangerous people who literally hate our guts and wouldn't mind seeing us all die...




Dan, you're right I'm NOT for the oil companies getting billions...it's a rip, I've always felt that way sadly it's always fluctuated with prices regardless of who's in the white house, but sure I'm always for lowering it but I'm also for examining our possible alternatives too...like digging in Alaska for oil there on our own land, something the left is very against and I don't get why. Richer people do pay higher income taxes and more in taxes in general. It's sad that people with money have power and find loopholes, that's something that won't change much like someone running a site can really do whatever they want, ban whoever they want(hint hint JTF) my point is as long as you have "power" you don't even need money to do messed up things in life. Now with the oil and countries infrastructure, well first we have to get out of debt that both Bush and Obama put us in...


Obama is a liberal...why do you disagree with this? It's so obvious, you act as if the word "liberal" is an insulting word or something? lol and not all rep are so far right, there's moderates who are very liberal. Conservatives are usually the hardcore right much like liberals are far left.

Do I think tons of libs hate obama? Probably not, some don't agree with him such as Clinton on a few occassions. I don't see how his policies are equal to oldschool republican policies since they've never been for free healthcare, raising taxes and making the rich pay more so I don't know what you're reading but whatever. Both parties have been for healthcare reform for years but Obama's method is very socialist in his ideals surrounding it. It's not like I'm not for it, just has to be another way. I don't like having the government force me to have a provider I don't want, much less being able to choose who I want or don't want...as for the pipeline, ok few things. A. why did he refuse to ok to build it to begin with and B. If he's going to ok it, build the whole damn thing not one part...

 

[RagingNight]

Lets just lock this thread as well

 

[Purple Haze]

start by ending all these fucking wars over oil.. use the money to invest in other ways to create energy.

Canada has more oil than Saudi Arabia in its oil sands (in Alberta). Look for a regime change attempt there in about 20 years time.

Yeah, whatever you say Purple feel free.

It's what everyone is saying, where you are concerned. You say things then deny you said them like when you said I was talking about the Saudi king, when I never mentioned him.

 

[Purple Haze]

4. I've stated numerous times dude, I support medical weed. Just not "recreational by at any local store use" that's it. I'm not wrong about weed and their brain cells. I used to be friends and hang with pot heads, believe me if screws up your brain and it's statistically proven to kill brain cells over time.

Everything kills brain cells over time. Alcohol, additives in food, traffic fumes, cigarettes, your posts, everything.

 

[Abra Kapocus]

But why is it that, in order to extract that oil, we need to resort to such environmentally destructive means?

We have a ridiculous surplus of oil here that isn't being used, and the oil companies would rather sell it than put it to use in this country. Not to mention we're moving dangerously close to peak oil with our consumption rate (and criminally inefficient use thereof), so I say we sink in more $ to research and development for alternative fuels and make the switch before we absolutely have to!

 

[rev0lver]

lol....

1. Yes, I read it but my point was you don't seem to acknowledge the fact that MOST democrats were against the civil rights act...

How many times do I have to restate this before it sinks in? It was a north vs south issue, not a democrat vs republican issue. The numbers speak for themselves. Northern democrats supported it, southern democrats didn't. This is because the southern democrats were not socially liberal. Southern Republicans didn't support it either (and, in fact, had less support in the north from their party). The only reason more democrats voted against it is because there were more far more democrats in congress in the south. There's no logical reason why someone can't accept this. The facts are plainly in front of you.

2. Actually it is about marriage to some folks, you see if you want to go nuts marriage's history is really about man and woman, not man and man, or woman and woman otherwise why not suit for Civil Unions? It's like same sex couples emphasize on "Marriage>>>Civil Unions" ? But whatever...I'm all for laws being changed and I've even said I don't care about gay marriage or not, as long as nobody bothers me personally I'm fine with it. Now, my religious views I'm just for man and woman marriages but will I rebel against same sex marriages if it passes all over? Not at all. It doesn't effect me remotely.

Again, you're dancing around issues like DADT. That's been one of the most significant LGBT issues over the past few years. Personally, I don't care if it's called a marriage or a partnership, but I want those who do want that title to be able to have it. The main issue is what comes with marriage, such as inheritance rights, hospital visitation rights, etc. Marriage or civil union, most republicans are against it. That's an obvious issue. And, as someone brought up earlier, gay adoption, which is a no-brainer.

3. If you support adoption then why don't democrats like ever consider it or mention it? It's like most of the time I hear "abortion abortion abortion, it's their body this and that" without even at least considering alternatives...you're assuming these kids are growing up in "bad envionments" again which is very presumpturous...and yes, we always have a choice. If you have an STD or aids something like that then you shouldn't have sex but sadly people still do....technically you're not supposed to have anal sex(regardless of sexual orientation) yet people still do it...which can also cause problems. In terms of having a baby or not, if you're an adult or old enough to realize the consequences then you should act like one and accept responsibility. If you can't handle it, then adoption is their best resort.

Once again, most women have a natural inclination to keep the baby, not give it away. Even if all these women who would have an abortion did give it away, it would drastically increase the already-high amount of children in that system. No, nothing is presumptuous... the majority of abortions are performed in low-income areas. And I again point to the issues with simply being pregnant. This can interfere with work, cause problems with boyfriends/spouses on what to do with the baby, etc.

4. I've stated numerous times dude, I support medical weed. Just not "recreational by at any local store use" that's it. I'm not wrong about weed and their brain cells. I used to be friends and hang with pot heads, believe me if screws up your brain and it's statistically proven to kill brain cells over time. Anyone who denies this is either in denial or simply doesn't understand what weed does to your brain cells and brain tissue over time of extended use...and like anything else, O.D. on anything is bad for you, even water can kill you if you drink too much of it(believe it or not) as far as being being the wheel of something, well I'd prefer Sober>>>>anything else as in high, drunk or sleepy...they're all bad and you're taking a risk when you're not sober driving. Period. As for other drugs, well there will always be a black market for something...that's how I see it but drugs like coc, crack etc yeah...nobrainer that they should be banned all together.

This has to be one of the most ignorant things posted in this thread. You don't actually know anything about the medical impacts of marijuana. Hanging around potheads has nothing to do with actual scientific research. Hell, the government has even finally admitted it doesn't kill brain cells. http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20030701/heavy-marijuana-use-doesnt-damage-brain . And you can't OD on marijuana, that's just silly lol. I mean, technically you can, but you would have to smoke the equivalent of about 20,000 joints within 15 minutes (otherwise known as "physically impossible"). Yeah, sober driving is the best obviously, but they have been coming up with ways to test drivers for marijuana intoxication if legalization happened. As it stands now, though, I would much rather get in a car with a stoned driver than a tired driver. And for other drugs, nobrainer? Did you not read what I wrote before? Decriminalization exceeded expectations of its success when they did it in Portugal. Treating drug abuse as a public health issue is, in every aspect, better than treating it as a criminal issue. Spending money to throw people in jail does no good for either party.

I thought this was a great video too, since Lincoln was brought up in this thread:

6.Not trolling at all, did you not see my link proving that democrats have performed "hate crimes" yet just ignored it? lol. Whatever dude...

What are you talking about? The point is that Republicans have a history of shutting down initiatives like hate crime laws, which I specifically pointed to a recent case of. You keep dancing around that fact. All you show is that some republicans in the past have done good things for black people... that's not even relevant in this discussion. Republicans don't support hate crime laws for gays, right now, in current American politics, and you are completely ignoring this. Let me remind you what you said:

Conservatives never opposed discrimination and hate laws, that's more bullshit from the left trying to influence everyone of anyone opposing them believing that.

You have yet to justify this at all.

I merely brought up the Bill vs. Rush thing because of one reason. Hypocrisy. But you're right that's old news now.

I already went over this before. There's no hypocrisy here. Bill Maher, a comedian, made a general comedic comment about Sarah Palin. Rush Limbaugh, an influential conservative commentator, made a comment in direct reference to that woman. Maher basically called Palin "dumb", Rush called this girl a slut with direct connotation to being an actual slut. The only reason Bill was even ever brought up was so conservative commentators could try to justify it.

8. % amount of income is also based on how good or bad your job is and how much you work. Honestly, out of all the middle class gets screwed the most because they're not the "rich" nor the "poor" NYC didn't have it's best economic time period because of that alone because that happened as far as Rudy was still mayor which Bush was already in by that time...in 2000/01. But my point was if you compare Rudy's record compared to previous or current mayors, it's no doubt a fact he did the best job over the past 20 years...crime? Jobs? security? taxes? There were other spots around the country(as in most) that didn't have tax free on clothes, now that's back again...NJ being one of the few consistent exceptions.

First of all, I reiterate, Rudy's record was batter compared to the other mayors because the national statistics on those things were better during that period. When the national economy improves, you can't go around saying it's because of a city's mayor unless you have proof of a causal relationship between Rudy's policies and the effects it had on the city. What does that first part of this quote even mean? The simple issue is that the rich are paying proportionally less than others, which is a blatant problem. Please justify this and don't dance around it.

9.It's not just WND, I can find you other sites unbiased or political in general that have Obama seen with these guys....secondly, yes the mainstream media is very leftwing biased and I found this out on my own. CNN, neutral/left. MSNBC, totally left, ABC left, CBS, left. Fox news, right. Daily Show(not that I consider this a serious station for politics) but left. Out of all of those totals, Fox is the only one NOT mainstream left....what I find amusing is some people keep denying this...and act as if every network "except Fox" is unbiased or something...It's a fact that Bush knows the Saudi King, big whoop like I said Obama is friends and closer with FAR more dangerous people who literally hate our guts and wouldn't mind seeing us all die...

Do you wear some kind of weird reality-transforming glasses when you look at my posts? I don't know how you can completely miss the point of something when it is written in plain English. I'll bold it for you: The fact of the matter is that the people listed in your post aren't problems. You have people like an Obama supporter who has never met the man, an anti-zionist being called a terrorist-supporter, and a guy who has never done anything bad except, apparently, being a Muslim. While WND and other sites you have been citing are clearly extremely biased, that wasn't the main point I was making. The point is I can go down that list of people for you and tell you why all these people knowing or being friends with Obama is not shady or wrong. They don't hate our guts and don't want to see us die. Are you really trying to transform that Bush point again? Did that not sink in for you? There's a difference between doing a lot of business with someone, and simply knowing that person.
And about Obama being so liberal: When you have a president who doesn't even implement a full public option, something that numerous capitalist countries in the world has done, being called a radical lefty or a socialist makes absolutely zero sense. He spends far more time compromising and appeasing the right on things like the budget, tax cuts, gay rights, regulation, etc than he does trying to support the liberal base.