h.uriahr Posted January 22, 2009 I could careless if he's black, red, yellow, polka dotted, rainbow or negative imaging color, he's a shitty president I bet. Time will tell but personally I think he was "elected" because he can push and sell bullshit to the public, like the REAL ID and the American Union, etc. He's a good salesman, Bush would never have been able to pull that off so they put in Obama. It goes to show you how ignorant most of the voters are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lino Posted January 22, 2009 I could careless if he's black, red, yellow, polka dotted, rainbow or negative imaging color, he's a shitty president I bet. Time will tell but personally I think he was "elected" because he can push and sell bullshit to the public, like the REAL ID and the American Union, etc. He's a good salesman, Bush would never have been able to pull that off so they put in Obama. It goes to show you how ignorant most of the voters are. Â The American Union, if there is one, is going to be modelled after the European Union. The EU is partly responsible for dragging down the standard of living in the European countries that are members. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hyok Posted January 22, 2009 The American Union, if there is one, is going to be modelled after the European Union. The EU is partly responsible for dragging down the standard of living in the European countries that are members. Â There's a big difference between the proposed NAU and EU. The NAU will be the combining of three nations whereas the EU was a union of 27 nations. Â Interestingly though, the EU passed with the specter of 9/11 lighting a fire under its ass. The NAU has no such event, yet. I would gather that it will take a helluva lot more than an event in NYC to convince the patriot/nationalist types in the US. If anything, it will definitely be interesting to see how the West gets the public to accept it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
h.uriahr Posted January 22, 2009 (edited) There's a big difference between the proposed NAU and EU. The NAU will be the combining of three nations whereas the EU was a union of 27 nations. Â Interestingly though, the EU passed with the specter of 9/11 lighting a fire under its ass. The NAU has no such event, yet. I would gather that it will take a helluva lot more than an event in NYC to convince the patriot/nationalist types in the US. If anything, it will definitely be interesting to see how the West gets the public to accept it. Â A smooth talking, charismatic man can sell the people on anything. That man is Obama. Once the economy gets even worse than it is now he will discuss merging Canada, Mexico and the U.S. People voted for him because he's black, plain and simple. People want change and they got it. BIG change. Â I'm sure that some people actually voted for him because they are hardcore Democrats or they liked some of his politics or they eeny meeny miny moed it. Â I'm sure that he's just a puppet on strings because it's not a one man ran country. Edited January 22, 2009 by MPWay Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idquest Posted January 22, 2009 Once the economy gets even worse than it is now he will discuss merging Canada, Mexico and the U.S. Why do you think Canadians and Mexicans would like to merge with the insolvent USA? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hyok Posted January 22, 2009 (edited) A smooth talking, charismatic man can sell the people on anything. That man is Obama. Once the economy gets even worse than it is now he will discuss merging Canada, Mexico and the U.S. Â Â I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if legislation and public approval passed it with flying colors. Either way, what the people want in the realm of rule and law is as important as what slaves want. This has been made insultingly obvious over the past two terms. However, the finalization of an official union must require a new constitution as well as a new constitutional convention, and realistically speaking, a few states are going to resist this. Namely Vermont, Montana, New Hampshire, heck even Texas. Perhaps even Ohio and Wisconsin. This could present a problem in terms of getting legislation through. Edited January 22, 2009 by hyok Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
h.uriahr Posted January 22, 2009 I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if legislation and public approval passed it with flying colors. Either way, what the people want in the realm of rule and law is as important as what slaves want. This has been made insultingly obvious over the past two terms. However, the finalization of an official union must require a new constitution as well as a new constitutional convention, and realistically speaking, a few states are going to resist this. Namely Vermont, Montana, New Hampshire, heck even Texas. Perhaps even Ohio and Wisconsin. This could present a problem in terms of getting legislation through. Â Of course. I could be completely wrong in my predictions. I'm not Sylvia Brown I just think that Obama has so much charisma that he can ( quoting Tommy Boy) sell a ketchup popsicle to a lady in a red dress, or sell ice to eskimos. It's all about how it's presented and Obama is quite the salesman. Â Why do you think Canadians and Mexicans would like to merge with the insolvent USA? Â With an ever failing global economy why wouldnt they want to merge? A unification would bring about a money value that would at the very least make our market stronger. Mexico has already said they would like to merge with the U.S. and open all borders for free flow of products, merchandises, and capital as well as peoples. All it would take is convincing Canada and that wouldnt be difficult. Obama has a gift. I'm sure this has been spoken of already , behind the scenes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idquest Posted January 22, 2009 With an ever failing global economy why wouldnt they want to merge? Because the USA economy is in worse shape than of those two contries. The USA is in fact a bancrupt (see Roubini recent report; and that guy, former USA Treasury Comptroller). The USA is a major and critical customer for Canada, but apart from that there is little in common including lifestyle values. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted January 22, 2009 Mexico is better off than the US??? hahahaa Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lino Posted January 22, 2009 Why do you think Canadians and Mexicans would like to merge with the insolvent USA? Â Keep in mind that Governments have no interest in serving their constituents. More and more Canadians are angry at their officials. We, along with Mexico, have already had "elections" that were questionable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lino Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) Mexico is better off than the US??? hahahaa  Don't laugh.  Mexico  Public debt: 22.8% of GDP (2007 est.) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...k/print/mx.html  USA  Public debt: 60.8% of GDP (2007 est.) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...ok/geos/us.html  Go to 2008 figures for the US  14.3 trillion USD (maybe fraudulent inflated, or at least optimistic) 10.6 trillion USD  Almost 75% of the GDP Edited January 23, 2009 by lino Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
h.uriahr Posted January 23, 2009 Because the USA economy is in worse shape than of those two contries. The USA is in fact a bancrupt (see Roubini recent report; and that guy, former USA Treasury Comptroller). The USA is a major and critical customer for Canada, but apart from that there is little in common including lifestyle values. Â Canada wont have a problem joining the US, Mexico already said they wanted to merge with us. Canada wont be left out of a union. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smile Posted March 14, 2009 New movie by Alex Jones: The Obama Deception Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheWhiteRabbit Posted March 16, 2009 hahahaha  What can I say but:  HA HA HA HA TELL ME YOU LIKE IT Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted March 26, 2009 I just saw a speech someone is going to be giving to Obama before long, should have been given to bush and clinton, and hell, just about every single serving member of the house and senate...devalued says it all. Â 94lW6Y4tBXs Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Owledge Posted March 26, 2009 Dunno whether it has been mentioned already, but Obama knows about so many things and just acts like they didn't exist. Let's forget about the Iran travesty, but for example he has been urged to support official R&D in the field of new energy technologies and nothing happens. Oh well... unnecessary to mention actually. Those who look, already see. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smile Posted March 27, 2009 Some people in congress keep speaking up but it doesn't really matter at this point. It will be a never ending blame game... very soon. Who ruined the economy first- the chicken or the egg? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joeblast Posted March 29, 2009 If any good comes of it, I hope its a 3 party system that will provide a much better balance instead of two chained to each other and pulling in opposite directions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smile Posted March 30, 2009 ... pulling in opposite directions. It looks more like they are fighting between each other who will be first to kick the average Joe in the balls. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Owledge Posted March 31, 2009 I'd prefer the intuitively more democratic model that is - to my knowledge - practiced in Switzerland: All parties are part of the government, with the respective fraction of their votes. With the usual system it applies what someone once said: Democracy is nothing but the suppression of the minority by the majority. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites