Democrats, explain this to me, I'm a bit confused

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
Wasn't Clinton the fucker that signed the free trade agreement that shipped our jobs over to China who is now trying to poison us all?

Bet they didn't see that shit coming. I wonder why nobody looks farther down the road than a year or two?
Yeah, that's the same fucker, though we must not neglect the role Bush played in NAFTA as well.

But, if we are going to withdraw from NAFTA, then shouldn't we also be withdrawing from WTO, GATT, SHAT (sorry, made that one up), and the UN?

Obama talks about NAFTA, like its the end all of everything, and neglects to mention the WTO, GATT and the UN.
 

Bongulator

Well-Known Member
He wasn't exonerated. He was reprimanded for bad judgment by his peers, and as best as could be determined, he was required to return the various bribes he received, monetary and otherwise. That was a slap on the wrist. He took bribes! He shoulda been tossed out on his ass for blatantly taking bribes.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
He wasn't exonerated. He was reprimanded for bad judgment by his peers, and as best as could be determined, he was required to return the various bribes he received, monetary and otherwise. That was a slap on the wrist. He took bribes! He shoulda been tossed out on his ass for blatantly taking bribes.
Read your own links Bongulator

Glenn and McCain: cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment

The Senate Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of Glenn in the scheme was minimal, and the charges against him were dropped.[49] He was only criticized by the Committee for "poor judgment."[52]
The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.[50][49] McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf.[7] The report also said that McCain's "actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him....Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate."[53] On his Keating Five experience, McCain has said: "The appearance of it was wrong. It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do."[7]
Regardless of the level of their involvement, both senators were greatly affected by it. McCain would write in 2002 that attending the two April 1987 meetings was "the worst mistake of my life".[54] Glenn has described the Senate Ethics Committee investigation as the low point of his life.[8]
The Senate Ethics Committee did not pursue, for lack of jurisdiction, any possible ethics breaches in McCain's delayed reimbursements to Keating for trips at the latter's expense, because they occurred while McCain was in the House.[51] The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct said that it too lacked jurisdiction, because McCain was no longer in the House.[55] It said it did not require that McCain amend his existing financial disclosure forms for his House years, on the grounds that McCain had now fully reimbursed Keating's company.[55]
 

Doctor Pot

Well-Known Member
Yes, we may have problems, but they are our problems to solve, and not some one else's.

Surrendering our sovereignty means that we might as well not vote, because at that point it doesn't matter who we elect, they'll be forced to dance on puppet strings to foreign masters who are more likely to want to see the United States of America humbled and reduced to the ash heap of history than anything else.

Screw that!
I think you may be starting to understand how the other 95% of the world feels about us. Right now, we're trying to run the world, and other countries don't want to be our puppets.

Nobody is suggesting that we surrender our sovereignty, only that we treat other nations as equals instead of underlings. What makes you think Obama wants to surrender our sovereignty?
 

ccodiane

New Member
I think you may be starting to understand how the other 95% of the world feels about us. Right now, we're trying to run the world, and other countries don't want to be our puppets.

Nobody is suggesting that we surrender our sovereignty, only that we treat other nations as equals instead of underlings. What makes you think Obama wants to surrender our sovereignty?
He sounds just like you.
 

ccodiane

New Member
Me neither.

I don't get it.
I think you may be starting to understand how the other 95% of the world feels about us. Right now, we're trying to run the world, and other countries don't want to be our puppets.

Nobody is suggesting that we surrender our sovereignty, only that we treat other nations as equals instead of underlings.
 

TheBrutalTruth

Well-Known Member
I think you may be starting to understand how the other 95% of the world feels about us. Right now, we're trying to run the world, and other countries don't want to be our puppets.

Nobody is suggesting that we surrender our sovereignty, only that we treat other nations as equals instead of underlings. What makes you think Obama wants to surrender our sovereignty?
Treat other nations as equals. Are you saying that we should treat countries like Cuba as equals, or what about North Korea, and Iran?

What's next after you have those four being treated as equals, treating Al Qaeda as an equal, and all the other terrorist organizations as equals.

Though, a bigger point at stake here is the fact that you are saying that we should treat other nations as equals.

I agree, we should butt out of their business, and they should butt out of ours. We should not be dictating to Africa that they do not exploit their resources for fear of that incredible myth called Anthropogenic Global Warming. They are sovereign nations, and as sovereign nations, what they do on their own soil is their business, and not ours.

Trade with all, alliances with none.

That also means we shouldn't be deploying our soldiers half way across the world to Korea, Japan, or Germany watching out for their defense.

If they desire to be treated like equals they should stop sucking on our tit, and spend enough so they don't need our soldiers there to defend themselves.
 

Doctor Pot

Well-Known Member
I'm not saying we should treat all other nations as equals. And I'm not saying that other nations even are our equals. Despite the actions of the Bush administration, we're still up at the top. But we do need to cooperate on global problems, scientific research, technology, etc.

I guess the question is, what's the big picture? What should we be striving towards now? During the Cold War, our objective was clear, be better than the USSR. Now, not so much. Have the best military? We already do, but there's not as much need for it anymore. Have the best technology? We've got that too, but for what purpose?
 

machetekills

Active Member
this is bad my friends... i dont really know whats going on anymore. I well was supporting Mccain now im not.... still not supporting obama either cause he's going to ruin our country... wait so is Mccain. in the debate Mccain sounded like he wanted to go to war with russia... he kept attacking obama... obama being sadly like ten steps ahead refrained damn well to attacking mccain which in turn partially led to him winning the debate. now why the fuck is mccain talking about putting russia in their place when we already fucked up in iraq. we cant pull out now like obama wants to do but going to war with russia or hinting at it isnt my idea of making things better either
 

machetekills

Active Member
i know you will call me on it so before you say anything the obama is going to ruin our country is complete opinion from put together sources of my own judgement so dont quote me too harshly on that please just lookin for some opinions here
 
Top