OT: Obama reportedly chooses Biden as VP candidate

[Rick]

McCain and Romney, with their billions of dollars and million-dollar contributions from Big Oil, know far more about the suffering of the average middle-class American and high gas prices than self-indulgent elitist dirtbags like Obama and Biden.

I guess this administration wanted to punish us for the 8 great years we had with Clinton.

[Don]

I don't think Biden sounds arrogant. That's how people talk in SE PA. and N DE. Once you're used to it, you realise it's more a sign of confidence and not showing weakness. All my relatives talk like that and most of them are good, blue collar type people.

[Barb]

I don't think Biden sounds arrogant. That's how people talk in SE PA. and N DE. Once you're used to it, you realise it's more a sign of confidence and not showing weakness. All my relatives talk like that and most of them are good, blue collar type people.

Oh. I figure saying "I have a much higher IQ than you do" to anyone would classify a person as arrogant. Guess not. I think being in love with your own voice is a sign of arrogance too, but I'm probably wrong on that as well.

[Barb]

McCain and Romney, with their billions of dollars and million-dollar contributions from Big Oil, know far more about the suffering of the average middle-class American and high gas prices than self-indulgent elitist dirtbags like Obama and Biden.

I thought you had such a big problem with partisan comments. I guess only when it's me or someone who agrees with me, right?

[Barb]

Obama grew up in poverty, and his mother had to hold down multiple jobs (and still needed food stamps) to feed her son, who put himself through law school based entirely (unlike Clarence Thomas) on his brilliance and academic performance. He turned down a $250,000 a year job on Wall Street to go into public service.

Biden has a net worth of $150,000.

McCain and his wife are worth billions. Romney came from a family with money and has been living an exotic lifestyle his entire life. He and McCain have rubbed elbows with the rich and powerful for decades.

Yet some assholes insist on labeling Obama an "elitist". I love it. You're so ignorant it hurts.

I like rich people. Rich people provide jobs and are people to learn from on how to make it in this country. I'm tired of my tax dollars supporting lazy ass people who don't want to work for a living like I do. And, really, why should they work? They don't have to. All they have to do is show up on election day and pull the lever for the Democrat who promises them more and more tax dollars to maintain their pathetic lifestyles.

[7 Wishes]

I thought you had such a big problem with partisan comments. I guess only when it's me or someone who agrees with me, right?

I have proven myself to be FAR MORE open minded than you, Barb. Again, you attempt to divert the subject with a diversion.

Vote for someone based on your assessment of whether or not their beliefs best represent yours, instead of resorting to the hate faux politics of the far right and Hannity and Limbaugh. It's nothing but scare tactics. Just as many Americans are terrified at the prospect of McCain ushering in another decade of the completely failed policies of Bush as the possibility of an inexperienced leader in Obama.

[Don]

I don't think Biden sounds arrogant. That's how people talk in SE PA. and N DE. Once you're used to it, you realise it's more a sign of confidence and not showing weakness. All my relatives talk like that and most of them are good, blue collar type people.

Oh. I figure saying "I have a much higher IQ than you do" to anyone would classify a person as arrogant. Guess not. I think being in love with your own voice is a sign of arrogance too, but I'm probably wrong on that as well.

I've heard Biden sound bites 100's of times over the last 30 years. Every one has a faux pas sometimes when speaking. Overall, besides one or two instances, I don't see the conceit you people are railing on about. Don't be bitter, I wasn't singleing anybody out with my post.

[Barb]

I thought you had such a big problem with partisan comments. I guess only when it's me or someone who agrees with me, right?

I have proven myself to be FAR MORE open minded than you, Barb. Again, you attempt to divert the subject with a diversion.

Vote for someone based on your assessment of whether or not their beliefs best represent yours, instead of resorting to the hate faux politics of the far right and Hannity and Limbaugh. It's nothing but scare tactics. Just as many Americans are terrified at the prospect of McCain ushering in another decade of the completely failed policies of Bush as the possibility of an inexperienced leader in Obama.

You don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about when it comes to me, dude. At the beginning of this election cycle, I actually liked Obama and thought he was a good guy. Diagreed with him on EVERYTHING, but thought he was a good guy. I no longer feel that way. I've hated Joe Biden pretty much since the first time I laid eyes on him. I have even stated in this thread that Hillary would have been the right and winning choice. I sincerely do not believe Obama can win with Biden. It has nothing to do with partisan hate. It is my assessment of the situation.

[7 Wishes]

I like rich people. Rich people provide jobs and are people to learn from on how to make it in this country. I'm tired of my tax dollars supporting lazy ass people who don't want to work for a living like I do. And, really, why should they work? They don't have to. All they have to do is show up on election day and pull the lever for the Democrat who promises them more and more tax dollars to maintain their pathetic lifestyles.

Whatever. Pure hogwash and more hatemongering on your part. You're right - even though Democrats are more likely to be college-educated than Republicans, they're all lazy and selfish.

The rich don't provide jobs. A healthy, well-balanced economy does...such as the one the brilliant (although morally bankrupt) Bil Clinton crafted. TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS DOES NOT WORK. Period, end of story. Any economist will tell you that. When the rich get richer and keep all their money, they don't spend it or put it back into the economy, unless you include $75 million dollar yachts or $2,000 truffle dinners to be a stimulus package.

Are you even aware that true conservatism DOES NOT believe in supreme and limitless executive power? Romney supports line-item vetoes and unconstitutional Presidential powers (practiced by your idiot hero George Bush Jr. despite its Constitutional lawlessness. You're a walking contradiction, Barb.

[Barb]

I like rich people. Rich people provide jobs and are people to learn from on how to make it in this country. I'm tired of my tax dollars supporting lazy ass people who don't want to work for a living like I do. And, really, why should they work? They don't have to. All they have to do is show up on election day and pull the lever for the Democrat who promises them more and more tax dollars to maintain their pathetic lifestyles.

Whatever. Pure hogwash and more hatemongering on your part. You're right - even though Democrats are more likely to be college-educated than Republicans, they're all lazy and selfish.

The rich don't provide jobs. A healthy, well-balanced economy does...such as the one the brilliant (although morally bankrupt) Bil Clinton crafted. TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS DOES NOT WORK. Period, end of story. Any economist will tell you that. When the rich get richer and keep all their money, they don't spend it or put it back into the economy, unless you include $75 million dollar yachts or $2,000 truffle dinners to be a stimulus package.

Are you even aware that true conservatism DOES NOT believe in supreme and limitless executive power? Romney supports line-item vetoes and unconstitutional Presidential powers (practiced by your idiot hero George Bush Jr. despite its Constitutional lawlessness. You're a walking contradiction, Barb.

That's your opinion. I disagree. I have a huge tax bill every year to motivate that opinon too. I also live in California and see first hand lazy ass scumbag people living on welfare, having more and more babies to get more welfare, section 8 housing, then spending their money on $500 hair appointments and getting their nails done.

You hold your opinion based on your own life experience and knowledge and so do I. Only I won't call you names because of what you believe in -- unlike you do to me.

Have a good evening.

[7 Wishes]

You don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about when it comes to me, dude. At the beginning of this election cycle, I actually liked Obama and thought he was a good guy. Diagreed with him on EVERYTHING, but thought he was a good guy. I no longer feel that way. I've hated Joe Biden pretty much since the first time I laid eyes on him. I have even stated in this thread that Hillary would have been the right and winning choice. I sincerely do not believe Obama can win with Biden. It has nothing to do with partisan hate. It is my assessment of the situation.

What cracks me up is that Republicans were salivating at the prospect of Hillary being Obama's VP. That's all you heard. Then once it became apparent she wasn't the choice, every one of your right-wing talk disinfotaining talk show hosts began to target everyone on the short list. It was pretty obvious Biden was going to be the guy as of Wednesday. Suddenly that lying fatass Limbaugh starts blathering (between stuffing his face with Oreos and Xanax) about how he was "praying" that Biden would be the guy.

Well, there wasn't a lot to choose from for the Obama campaign, but they have the best guy in the field. If he had chosen someone with less foreign policy experience, people like you would have started running for the hills, screaming about how we were all doomed. Now that he has chosen Biden, you're all claiming it was because he is scared and has no foreign policy experience and that Biden is a "Washington insider".

Now, how much foreign policy experience did Reagan have? Depending on your perspective (America's or the rest of the world's) he was either brilliant or horrendous. Presidents are surrounded by minions of advisers - well, at least Clinton was (he actually knew about every issue he was briefed on, unlike your dufous hero Bush, who only listened to Wolfie, Cunnilingus Rice, and Ashcroft).

[7 Wishes]

[Only I won't call you names because of what you believe in -- unlike you do to me.

Have a good evening.

Bullshit. I didn't call you names. Besides, you have ripped into me on dozens of occasions on this board.

Would it surprise you to know that I have changed my mind on several key issues over the past two years, and that I scored 36 for Obama and 31 for McCain on that quiz? You've been toeing the party line since day one.

[conversationpc]

Now, how much foreign policy experience did Reagan have? Depending on your perspective (America's or the rest of the world's) he was either brilliant or horrendous. Presidents are surrounded by minions of advisers - well, at least Clinton was (he actually knew about every issue he was briefed on, unlike your dufous hero Bush, who only listened to Wolfie, Cunnilingus Rice, and Ashcroft).

Neither Barb nor I are huge fans of Bush. However, that being said and according to even some in the media who are not big fans of his, he is a lot smarter and more well informed that most give him credit for. I believe Wolf Blitzer, who is a known media lib, has stated on a few occasions how impressed he was with Bush when he met him. I'll have to see if I can find the comments but I remember seeing something on a news show not more than a few months ago about this.

[Barb]

[Only I won't call you names because of what you believe in -- unlike you do to me.

Have a good evening.

Bullshit. I didn't call you names. Besides, you have ripped into me on dozens of occasions on this board.

Would it surprise you to know that I have changed my mind on several key issues over the past two years, and that I scored 36 for Obama and 31 for McCain on that quiz? You've been toeing the party line since day one.

Go back and read what you've written here. Perhaps you've missed all the places I've posted how I will not be voting for John McCain. I'm a conservative, not a Republican. I am probably not even going to vote in this election. There's your party line.

You call me full of hate? Go back and read your own words.

[conversationpc]

You've been toeing the party line since day one.

Ummm...No. I've known Barb for probably about 7 or 8 years now and I can vouch for her that she's definitely not in lock-step with the Republican party. Let's at least be honest, here.

[7 Wishes]

Neither Barb nor I are huge fans of Bush. However, that being said and according to even some in the media who are not big fans of his, he is a lot smarter and more well informed that most give him credit for. I believe Wolf Blitzer, who is a known media lib, has stated on a few occasions how impressed he was with Bush when he met him. I'll have to see if I can find the comments but I remember seeing something on a news show not more than a few months ago about this.

That's fine. Pretty much every world leader who has met with him considers him an idiot.

[classicstyxfan]

I noticed one of the criticisms of Biden was that he is arrogant...........and he may well be just that.

Can anyone honestly say McCain, Romney, and Obama aren't also a bit arrogant themselves ? I think it is a prerequisite ( sic ) to even want to be considered for the position of leader of the free world. I also think they are all a bit off their collective rockers to even want the job.

I think the election could very well be decided by the 18 million who backed Hillary........will they choose the candidate that espouses the views closest to the ones she believed in ? or will they abstain from voting or vote for McCain out of spite or out of a desire to see her run in 2012 ? I think the latter may be what swings the election McCains way.

It would be ironic if the election is decided by a personality.......one that doesnt belong to either of the candidates ?

Just sayin....

[conversationpc]

Neither Barb nor I are huge fans of Bush. However, that being said and according to even some in the media who are not big fans of his, he is a lot smarter and more well informed that most give him credit for. I believe Wolf Blitzer, who is a known media lib, has stated on a few occasions how impressed he was with Bush when he met him. I'll have to see if I can find the comments but I remember seeing something on a news show not more than a few months ago about this.

That's fine. Pretty much every world leader who has met with him considers him an idiot.

Boy, there's a good standard to judge a person by.

Pretty much every country, leader, etc., out there hates us simply for who we are anyway. What the heck do you think they would think of our President unless he's a liberal?

[7 Wishes]

True enough. LBJ had all the charm of a snake oil salesman.

[inaweofschon]

7 Wishes said....

The rich don't provide jobs. A healthy, well-balanced economy does...such as the one the brilliant (although morally bankrupt) Bil Clinton crafted. TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS DOES NOT WORK. Period, end of story. Any economist will tell you that. When the rich get richer and keep all their money, they don't spend it or put it back into the economy, unless you include $75 million dollar yachts or $2,000 truffle dinners to be a stimulus package.

I usually don't get involved in these discussions but this has to be the single most ignorant comment I've ever seen.

Perhaps you need to go back to school and study high school economics. Unless you bury your money in a coffee can in the back yard it is ALWAYS working. I guarantee you that those rich people who supposedly don't spend their money do not use the coffee can method. Their money is constantly being invested. The companies that they invest in are the ones that provide jobs for everyone else. Exactly who do you think builds those $75 million dollar yachts or serves those $2k truffles? Could it be folks working for decent wages? Everyone benefits from wealthy people and yes trickle down does work!!

Barb is right!!!

[7 Wishes]

I usually don't get involved in these discussions but this has to be the single most ignorant comment I've ever seen.

Right, the borrow-and-spend system that was at the heart of Reaganomics worked.

Wealth redistribution (the opposite of Reaganomics) is NOT a socialist economic method. It is the pretext under which our economy has thrived the most. Labor pays but capital gets tax breaks, no matter what kind of national debt is needed to ensure the rich get richer. Indisputable fact: onopolization of wealth is NOT an effective way to improve the financial standing of those not among the privileged top 10% income earners. There is a REASON Keynesian economics is still esteemed as the best economic system.

So, you develop a monopoly market (i.e. big oil) - this forestalls competition and certainly does NOT spurn innovation and (contextually) the financing or exploration of alternative methods (fuel sources, for example). Yet that is EXACTLY what was proscribed under Reaganomics.

Reagan's massive budget deficits led DIRECTLY to the S & L Crisis, a $2.3 billion dollar increase in the national debt (up from $700 million in 1980), and the emergence of the U.S. as the world's biggest borrower (1984 to 1995, 2001 to present). In real dollars, the increase in the average wage DID NOT keep pace with inflation and a shift in the tax burden to the lower and middle classes.

These are all facts, you hick town butterball. You can keep leading yourself down the primrose path and metaphorically beat yourself off to your affection for Reaganomics and the economic failures it spawned. But you're wrong in the end. Vote for whomever you wish, for whatever reason you wish, but do not deign to designate my post as "ignorant" when it is in fact entirely factual and indisputable.

[conversationpc]

Wealth redistribution (the opposite of Reaganomics) is NOT a socialist economic method. It is the pretext under which our economy has thrived the most. Labor pays but capital gets tax breaks, no matter what kind of national debt is needed to ensure the rich get richer. Indisputable fact: onopolization of wealth is NOT an effective way to improve the financial standing of those not among the privileged top 10% income earners. There is a REASON Keynesian economics is still esteemed as the best economic system.

Privileged? Riiiiiigggghhhhhhhtttttttt. Most of the rich in this country, contrary to popular opinion, did not inherit, win their money in a lottery, or just fall face first into their money. They worked for it and invested their money wisely. Their being wealthy is no reason to justify a higher tax rate on their income. I'm not rich by any stretch of the imagination but I also do not suffer from wealth envy.

[7 Wishes]

Privileged? Riiiiiigggghhhhhhhtttttttt. Most of the rich in this country, contrary to popular opinion, did not inherit, win their money in a lottery, or just fall face first into their money. They worked for it and invested their money wisely. Their being wealthy is no reason to justify a higher tax rate on their income. I'm not rich by any stretch of the imagination but I also do not suffer from wealth envy.

Dave, I love ya, man, but don't try the duck and cover tactics. Whether or not one acquired wealth on his own means or inherited it is not the point. This is merely an illustration proving system does not work.

[Voyager]

if obama would've went with clinton that could've helped a lot.he is alienating tons of voters by snubbing hillary and it will cost him the election in my opinion.

You could be right... but at least the man is honorable to spare us from eight more years of the Clintons in the White House. As good as it may have been in the 90's, it's old school. The country desperately needs someone to restore the dignity of the USA after Bush has trashed it. Obama and Biden are the duo that will do it.

Drop the bigotry and use your intelligence. Obama is the anti-Bush. That's what the USA needs right now.

[conversationpc]

Privileged? Riiiiiigggghhhhhhhtttttttt. Most of the rich in this country, contrary to popular opinion, did not inherit, win their money in a lottery, or just fall face first into their money. They worked for it and invested their money wisely. Their being wealthy is no reason to justify a higher tax rate on their income. I'm not rich by any stretch of the imagination but I also do not suffer from wealth envy.

Dave, I love ya, man, but don't try the duck and cover tactics. Whether or not one acquired wealth on his own means or inherited it is not the point. This is merely an illustration proving system does not work.

The system does indeed work and would work much better if the government would get the heck out of the way and DRASTICALLY reduce spending. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. EVERY President AND Congress in the last 50-60 years has simply added to the problem.

[Voyager]

Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. EVERY President AND Congress in the last 50-60 years has simply added to the problem.

Uhhhh.... especially the current one....



I'm betting that Obama will reverse the Bush deficit.

The Republican trend sure doesn't fare well for McCain.

I used to have respect for McCain... until about 18 months ago when he did a complete 180 and started parroting the Bush agenda. If he would have stayed true to his moderate track record, I would have been ready to vote for him.

[7 Wishes]

I used to have respect for McCain... until about 18 months ago when he did a complete 180 and started parroting the Bush agenda. If he would have stayed true to his moderate track record, I would have been ready to vote for him.

Damned straight. He used to be a hero of mine. Hiring Rove was the spearhead of the phalanx of his turning to the dark side.

[7 Wishes]

That is information gleaned from the almighty government itself. No skewing there. You just cannot argue with facts. Where's that knucklehead from Idaho? I want him to read this before he goes out to milk the goats at 4:00 am.

[Rick]

I used to have respect for McCain... until about 18 months ago when he did a complete 180 and started parroting the Bush agenda. If he would have stayed true to his moderate track record, I would have been ready to vote for him.

Damned straight. He used to be a hero of mine. Hiring Rove was the spearhead of the phalanx of his turning to the dark side.

Okie here.

pha·lanx /ˈfeɪlæŋks, ˈfælæŋks/ Pronunciation Key [fey-langks, fal-angks]

–noun
1. (in ancient Greece) a group of heavily armed infantry formed in ranks and files close and deep, with shields joined and long spears overlapping.
2. any body of troops in close array.
3. a number of individuals, esp. persons united for a common purpose.
4. a compact or closely massed body of persons, animals, or things.
5. Military. (initial capital letter) a radar-controlled U.S. Navy 20mm Gatling-type gun deployed on ships as a last line of defense against antiship cruise missiles.
6. (in Fourierism) a group of about 1800 persons, living together and holding their property in common.
7. Anatomy, Zoology. any of the bones of the fingers or toes.
–verb (used without object)
8. Printing. to arrange the distribution of work in a shop as evenly as possible.

[7 Wishes]

#2 or #4 would have been those definitions towards which I was intimating. English majors are full of liberal banter and euphemisms.