Wheres all the self-righteous ANTI war Hypocrates these days??

Delusional

Well-Known Member
First of all, its HYPOCRITES, NOT HYPOCRATES.

If you're going to use a word, learn how to spell it at least.

Furthermore, if you're going to use a word you should really learn what it means.

Hypocrisy (alternately spelled hypocricy in American English), is acting in a manner contradictory to one's professed beliefs and feelings, or conversely, expressing false beliefs and opinions in order to conceal one's real feelings or motives.[1][2] For example, a smoker would be hypocritical if he or she were to criticize someone else for smoking tobacco. The term hypocrisy is often used in a religious context to refer to someone who gives a false appearance of virtue or religion, or does not "practice what he or she preaches". Psychologically, hypocrisy can be an unconscious act of self-deception.

Please, by all means, tell me how I'm a hypocrite. I have not proclaimed one thing, and done another as the definition of this word you have failed to use properly describes. I simply said its quite stupid to be bitching about such things two months into a new presidency, and it is. Even I do not agree with many actions made, but you wont see me acting like a retard going off about it. It's way too soon to pass any judgment. And you ask who is the retard? You are my friend. You are. Obama never said he was pulling troops out and ending the war immediately. If I remember correctly he was more about ending the war in IRAQ or at least dialing it down, closing Guatanamo bay, and then focusing on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Basically shifting the war effort, and yes, bringing some troops home. More specifically those on multiple deployments. Guess what..... that's exactly what he's doing.

Your parents have any children that actually LIVED aside you? I pity them. Now move along, let someone more intelligent get up on a soapbox. You have failed. Congratulations on stupid. :clap:
 

max420thc

Well-Known Member
you shouldnt attack a guys spelling when you lose a small debate..counter point with a fact please. not internet spelling corrections.
i dont think natrone read the first post. else he would have some facts to contend with .
obama has broken almost all of his original campaign promises already natrone.
no need to try and deny it.
id like to know what happened to getting rid of NAFTA AND GATT. a couple of things i might agree with obama on.
id like to also know what happened to the bull shit he was spouting about READY ON DAY ONE.
hell he still doesnt have a fully staffed treasury department.
and all the tax cheats in his admin and the democrat party are disgusting. truly corrupt .his whole admin.
now you can attack me and my spelling. i will be waiting to your response
 

Drgreenz

Well-Known Member
Any way you believe is pointless now. Now that the socialists are all in office(yes even many republicans fall under this) we are in for one hell of a ride over the next decade. Here is a little excerpt from a small left wing newspaper I like to call the Washington Post.

Posted March 24th, 2009 at 10.20am in Ongoing Priorities.

President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious. The Washington Post has a great graphic which helps put President Obama’s budget deficits in context of President Bush’s.
What’s driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending. Riedl details:

UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has been now been added.
CLARIFICATION: Of course, this Washington Post graphic does not perfectly delineate budget surpluses and deficits by administration. President Bush took office in January 2001, and therefore played a lead role in crafting the FY 2002-2008 budgets. Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for the FY 2009 budget deficit that overlaps their administrations, before President Obama assumes full budgetary responsibility beginning in FY 2010. Overall, President Obama’s budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years.


Welcome to the Socialist States of America...
 

max420thc

Well-Known Member
whos the retard? he told you he would pull out troops but instead hes adding them? and u say give him more time? for what? him to change his mind?

im glad hes adding them anyway, im just outing all the hypocrats who cry bloody murder and then r no where to be found when thier horse is doin the same shitty things, just shows exactly the kind of personalities we have in here, complete lieing hypocrates who are mostly ill informed and mildy slow


like you :bigjoint:






this guy has already sepnt more money in his 2 or 3 months than bush did during 8 years, while fighting 2 wars with half his brain tied behind his back


its clear to me you have no idea what is goin on in the world and are just a party wagon person who doesnt even know whats goin on
you are making fun of this mans spelling because he speaks a truth you do not like to hear. so instead of addressing the issues of being a HYPOCRITE . and obama doing the exact same shit bush did . you attacked his spelling. you lost the exchange without a doubt . counter with the facts please . unless of course you dont have any. then by all means correct spelling
 

Delusional

Well-Known Member
you are making fun of this mans spelling because he speaks a truth you do not like to hear. so instead of addressing the issues of being a HYPOCRITE . and obama doing the exact same shit bush did . you attacked his spelling. you lost the exchange without a doubt . counter with the facts please . unless of course you dont have any. then by all means correct spelling
Hardly. I already proved him wrong, as did another poster. You should really consider reading. :)
 

TeaTreeOil

Well-Known Member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WYTKj8pU5M

"But we have to send a clear message to the Iragi government as well as to the surrounding neighbors that there is no military solution to the problems we face in Iraq." - Barack Obama

"Have our combat troops out by March 31st of next year." - Barack Obama

"I have said I will begin immediately and do it as rapidly as we can." Barack Obama

"So the notion that some how because we've gone from horrific violence to just intolerable levels of violence and that somehow that justifies G. Bushes strategy is absolutely wrong and I'm going to bring it to a halt when I'm president of the US." - Barack Obama

I suppose he has two days, before he has clearly proven to be a liar on this matter.

He also talks about using diplomatic strategies to solve problems in that region. Yet claims we need to invade Afghanistan, and then sent more troops there.

Now there's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG9ednEa92w&feature=PlayList&p=BC91F72958394D42&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=2

Which claims nearly complete Iraq withdrawal by August of 2010. And they "have to leave" by August 2011, as per agreement with Baghdad.

Sorry if I expect integrity from a president.
 

jeffchr

Well-Known Member
what im wondering is why did G.W. drop the ball on this one


i think if obama says we need to hit the ungoverned parts of pakistan possibly to get the people who we were supposed to get in the first place, I think he is for real and there must be active enemies in this area


so im sitting here wondering wtf was wrong with bush all this time just pussyfootin around and lettin them live and plot?


would u sit by while you knew somone was plotting against you and the people you are responsible for?

somthin screwy
George W dropped the ball because he didn't care about Afghanistan, the Taliban, or Al Queda or OBL either.

George W and his cronies wanted to fight in Iraq. Not just for oil (for example, Shell) but for capitalism. We have just as many private contractors in Iraq and Afganistan as troops. A tremendous amount of construction in Iraq was all privately contracted. A great deal of troop support was privately contracted. It was a huge profit center - and still is.
 

jeffchr

Well-Known Member
Any way you believe is pointless now. Now that the socialists are all in office(yes even many republicans fall under this) we are in for one hell of a ride over the next decade. Here is a little excerpt from a small left wing newspaper I like to call the Washington Post.

Posted March 24th, 2009 at 10.20am in Ongoing Priorities.

President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious. The Washington Post has a great graphic which helps put President Obama’s budget deficits in context of President Bush’s.
What’s driving Obama’s unprecedented massive deficits? Spending. Riedl details:

UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has been now been added.
CLARIFICATION: Of course, this Washington Post graphic does not perfectly delineate budget surpluses and deficits by administration. President Bush took office in January 2001, and therefore played a lead role in crafting the FY 2002-2008 budgets. Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for the FY 2009 budget deficit that overlaps their administrations, before President Obama assumes full budgetary responsibility beginning in FY 2010. Overall, President Obama’s budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years.


Welcome to the Socialist States of America...
so americans want obama to
fix healthcare
keep the financial sector of the economy from tanking
reduce unemployment
conclude 2 pre-existing wars

while tax revenues decline

without increasing the deficit

your expectations are very complimentary to President Obama, but delusional

and don't tell me "I don't want him to do those things", cause the rest of the world does
 

ilkhan

Well-Known Member
What was one of the largest, if not the largest, factors in ending the great depression???
Kappainf

IMO, and I can find economists who will back me up on this.
Is that the greatist factor in ending the great depression was,
The END of world war two and the massive tax cuts
and even more massive cut in government spending.
A realocation of resources to true productive enterprises
and away from government command and control.
 

ViRedd

New Member
What was one of the largest, if not the largest, factors in ending the great depression???
The largest factor was our entry into WWII. This put millions of Americans to work either in the military or working for defense contractors. What were we making? ... things that were either blown up, sunk, crashed or otherwise destroyed, causing the necessity to manufacture more of them. WWII was a giant government make-work program.

After WWII, hundreds of thousands of GIs bought homes and went to college using their VA benefits. That got the construction industry busy building homes, schools and buildings.

Food for thought: Now that we are trillions in debt, a debt that will be impossible to pay off, is the time ripe for another world war? Going back in history, long before WWI and WWII, nations have often resorted to war as a debt payment method.
 

ilkhan

Well-Known Member
Nay Nay
However you can be forgiven for believing that.
It is the Governments and the Keynesians party line.
 

RickWhite

Well-Known Member
Too bad mankind did not have the benefit of the infinite wisdom of today's Leftists youth. If they did, clearly none of the thousands of wars that have been an unfortunate part of humanity since its inception, would ever have occurred.

See, stuff like this just proves that those on the Left really are omniscient beings and ought to be worshiped as gods. Oh all knowing Liberal gods, please use your infinite wisdom to tell us where else man kind is going wrong - only you can show us the error of our ways.
 

Big P

Well-Known Member
Too bad mankind did not have the benefit of the infinite wisdom of today's Leftists youth. If they did, clearly none of the thousands of wars that have been an unfortunate part of humanity since its inception, would ever have occurred.

See, stuff like this just proves that those on the Left really are omniscient beings and ought to be worshiped as gods. Oh all knowing Liberal gods, please use your infinite wisdom to tell us where else man kind is going wrong - only you can show us the error of our ways.

right and then you see the becon of thier ideals the liberal capitol of america the great state of california turned into a 3rd world country soon with thier great wisdom
 
Top