Science Forums 2

[Buffy]

Originally Posted by jackson33

I was hoping some other replies were added to counter Buffy, but since none will offer my opinion...

It's certainly just evidence of the silent majority: most folks disagree with me but they refuse to say so, right?

Originally Posted by jackson33

1- If you don't feel our markets have already been replying to the possibly, to probable and now pending Obama Administration, at least in part, then the negative power is just beginning.

That's absolutely right. The market is crashing solely because Obama won and the markets are certain that that means doom for the economy. If McCain had won, we'd be in a complete recovery, both due to the optimism it would engender as well as the fact that Bush's policies have been fundamentally sound.

Originally Posted by jackson33

Lower taxes for people not paying taxes, jobs for those that have never worked, probably wouldn't take a job, those in college expecting to graduate and receive pay levels other than an entry level into the workforce or those already receiving assistance and wanting more. These folks and those that picked out one promise or another are going to be sadly disappointed, becoming his worst critic's.

Yep, everyone who voted for Obama is expecting a free lunch. If he doesn't completely turn it around in the first 100 days, he's doomed and the SouthRepublicans will rise again!

Originally Posted by jackson33

2- We have been developing alternative energy or forms of energy for 30-40 years in most cases and government has been right square in the middle with grants through it all. Innovation, already under attack, has dwindled to and any resurgent will come from investors not from the small Federal Discretionary funds available.

Yah, see, if the government ever spends any money investing in R&D, it dramatically reduces private investment, and thus causes the target technologies to slow down.

The money is totally different, and even though the government actually doesn't ask for any return, and the actual investors benefit from the increased funding, it's tainted money, which means that people will refuse this benefit, and it will destroy the market.

The *only* solution is to ensure that investment comes solely from private investors without the taint of free money from the government.

Originally Posted by jackson33

I am sure many leaders will be looking for additional aid, some concerned about our trade agreements and others feel they can gain some advantage through diplomacy...

Yah, most of the other countries are simply reacting to this by assuming that Obama will be giving out much more money than under Bush, with the possible exception of Israel, because as you know, Obama is a Muslim and is seeking to destroy the Zionists.

Originally Posted by jackson33

... or have some unpleasant scheme in mind to gain test his, then assumed our resolve and other probably couldn't care less.

Yah, well al Qaeda is already calling him a "House Negroe" and supporting his desire to beef up our forces in Afghanistan because as we know Gen. Petraeus says we should keep all of our troops in Iraq instead because that's where the "real" terrorist threat is, and Zawahiri knows that if he backs Obama's initiative to beef up Afghanistan that the Defense department will want to do the opposite, thus guaranteeing that the troops don't go to Afghanistan, which is good because if we sent more troops to Afghanistan then it would make Bush and the Neo-cons look foolish and that would be bad for morale, and make the troops think that we don't support them, which we want to blame Obama for because he's a Muslim, but of course Zawahiri's tape shows pictures of Obama wearing a yarmulke to make him look like a Zionist so that he doesn't look foolish to the Jihadi's, and also gives the neo-cons lots of evidence that al Qaeda is preparing to attack Israel so that they can talk the Likud in Israel into attacking Syria, thus justifying the US's recent attack on the Iraq-Syria border which caused the Syrians to remove all of their troops from the border thus letting al Qaeda in Iraq more easily move arms into Iraq which will make it harder for Obama to remove troops from Iraq which we don't have to do because as we all know Dana Perino and Gen. Mullen say the recently approved SOFA agreement with it's end of 2010 "deadline" "only aspirational" and we can just renegotiate them later, and that will cause people to think Obama hates the troops, and since he's such a typical pandering Democrat he'll have to back down and carry out Bush's brilliant and consistent long-term plans for Iraq, along with stonewalling North Korea until they all starve to death, and insisting on placement of a well-tested and battle proven missile shield against Iran which cannot be placed anywhere except on Russia's border, and which is absurd to compare to say, Russia putting a missile defense in Canada to protect it against long range attack from Columbian reactionaries.

Originally Posted by jackson33

4- The far right, wasn't in this election in the first place. Indications are they sat this election out...

Absolutely! Especially in places like California where depression about Obama so resoundingly kept the conservatives at home: and that of course is perfect proof that it was actually the liberals that voted to ban Gay Marriage!

What's very clear is that Obama really only has the support of the far left. As these figures from Pew Research show, compared to the 2004 election, among White voters who are traditionally more conservative that immigrants, only a very few segments really moved toward Obama:

Source: Pew Research

So you're right:

Originally Posted by jackson33

... and frankly demographics have change so much in the past 20/30 years, I don't know if 'far right' has a meaning. I do feel the country remains right of center...

Absolutely the increase in minorities has fundamentally altered America, but of course it's still a Center-Right nation: it's just that the liberals have so tortured the term "center" to encompass the radical positions taken by for example Bill Clinton and his ilk, that it just has no meaning anymore.

Originally Posted by jackson33

...but were certainly not going back to Reagan or even the days of JFK, who by todays standards was right of Reagan.

Yes, it's sad. Long gone are the days when the acts of the United States were unquestioned and Presidents were empowered to focus on centrist, international policies that were the best thing for the entire world's population even if they weren't smart enough to realize it, like the Bay of Pigs, and Iran-Contra. How the liberals can think that there won't be horrible consequences from limiting our Presidents' ability to simply take action when they know they are right, and instead having to think through all the consequences of their actions and asking others for advice. I mean, just look at what happened with the Cuban Missile Crisis when meddlers like Bobby Kennedy from the *Justice* Department were brought into the analysis and disagree with the Joint Chiefs who wanted to do the only right thing and eliminate the threat directly. We might have lost Florida, but they voted for Obama anyway and nearly cost Bush the election in 2000, and we would have really shown the Commies that we meant business and that the next step was East Germany. Just think, we could have ended the Cold War right there!

Originally Posted by jackson33

Buffy; The Republican Party is far from doomed and your listing of factions horribly misrepresents them.

You're right, these three groups really don't exist. They're just figments of liberal imaginations. Whew!

Originally Posted by jackson33

Conservative in politics aligns itself with traditional, or what you'll call 'Status Quo'.

...and that bears absolutely no resemblance to the third group in the list.

The Neo-cons--who of course do not really exist--really are for the status quo, that's why they wanted to invade Iraq, overthrow Iran, attack Pakistan even though they're our allies, push for Israel to annex all most all of the West Bank and Gaza, support the development of multi-national firms who can operate without governmental oversight, and so on. That's very traditionally conservative.

And of course the Social Conservatives aren't for real change either, they just want it to be a consistent representation of the Nuclear family of two parents, two children living in a ranch house, going to church every Sunday, agreeing that the world is 5438 years old, and understanding that anything goes on that is disagreeable is due to a lack of faith in the creator. It's just wanting things to be like they've always been until the liberals and God-haters came along and caused all of these problems and conflicts. Never in our history have we had such things to deal with, except for maybe the westward expansion, and maybe the Industrial Revolution, and maybe Reconstruction, and maybe the massive immigration in the first half of the 20th Century, and maybe a few other times. If we all just live like June and Ward Cleaver as was true for almost all of American history until the liberals came along with their insistence on strict adherence to Marxism everything would be just fine.

Originally Posted by jackson33

Palin, apparently your new arch rival, represents only what most American are, with a little added admiration for her accomplishments.

On the contrary! As a Hillary supporter, of course I detest everything about Obama, and Sarah represents everything a Hillary supporter could want! And yes, just *look* at her accomplishments! She stopped that bridge to nowhere single-handedly went designer glasses to ugly mug with that saintly Ted Stevens (who was shockingly and unreasonably convicted based on completely trumped up charges over a minor accounting error)! And she single-handedly built that new natural gas pipeline that is going to drastically reduce our energy requirements (well, its not quite finished yet...just started, well, not actually funded yet...)! And her incredible leadership and detailed direction of the Alaska National Guard has kept the entire Russian Army at bay!

And don't get me started about all the work she did getting the oil companies in Alaska to support Revenue Enhancement for the state by reducing infrastructure investments so that the money could be redistributed to the states citizens no matter whether they worked or not so that it could enhance the state's economy and run real estate prices up in the Turnagain Heights section of Anchorage and other areas that have been targets of evil government regulators who want to slow the economy down by saying that areas subject to massive liquifaction are somehow dangerous and would cause increased government expenditures....

No, this woman has so much more experience than *anyone* that the Republicans could promote that it's silly to consider another candidate!

Originally Posted by jackson33

I happen to like Arnold, but wouldn't call him a republican and doubt he could get the nomination.

And he's an alien--actually a former *illegal* alien--and he's married to a Kennedy! He's no Republican!

And if the Republican party dares let *anyone* who thinks like Arnold even be a member, the party is doomed to keep losing! The party *must* go back to its roots!

Originally Posted by jackson33

You portrayal of a few people, upset with the outcome, would have taken on a far different picture, had Obama lost, and I not only think you believe this, I believe many sat out this election fearing even trying to vote.

Absolutely! If Obama had lost there would have been riots everywhere. People were scared to go out and vote!

What I don't understand is why the vote suppression efforts failed so miserably. I mean, what about those phone calls to Marxist students letting them know that its illegal to vote where they go to school? What about those fliers that were sent out informing folks that in order to ease the lines, that the Democrat party had agreed to have all their voters vote on November 5th? What about all those people who had moved and whose licenses didn't match their voting records that were purged from the voter rolls? Why were they allowed to vote?

Well, unless this country comes to its senses and starts promoting *mainstream* centrism as represented by our greatest leaders like Dick Cheney, Tom Delay, Michelle Bachmann and Donald Wildmon well, America will get exactly "the kind of government they deserve!"

I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them,
Buffy