Comments on: Barack Hussein Obama II, for President of USA

By: michael

michael — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 18:09:13 +0000

I never heard he intended on focusing on taxing the rich. Taxes are the means by which a government supports itself. Most taxes are paid by corporations. Republicans generally stick to a “supply side” tax theory and Democrats to a “consumer side” tax theory. The former means that you cut taxes to those that produce the goods, thereby increasing production and goods and jobs, by making them less expensive. Consumer side theory means you tax the consumers less so that they have more money to buy the goods that are produced by the more heavily taxed manufacturers. While I tend to favor Republican theory fiscally and militarily, I tend to favor Democrats on social issues. That’s why I am a registered Libertarian, which is at times a confusing thing to be because of the wide and sometimes conflicting ideals of professed libertarians.
While you did not express the question, I expect that Obama, once sworn into office will take the first opportunity that he has to flex his military muscle despite that fact that he has run his platform on the diplomacy first ideal. He’s going to blow some people up and then say, yeah, I favor diplomacy, but remember I have the biggest gun, and if diplomacy does not work, watch out. Obama says and is going to continue to say that he is different than what came before him, but the difference is mainly “spin”.

By: Melchizedek CastaÃ±ares

Melchizedek CastaÃ±ares — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 14:32:51 +0000

Obama said about increasing tax to rich people. What could this possibly mean?

By: michael

michael — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 14:10:12 +0000

If the incoming Grand Master congratulated Obama, then the incoming Grand Master is very likely a Mason, otherwise, he wouldn’t be incoming Grand Master.
If I kiss a lesbian does that make me a lesbian? If the Pope congratulates Obama, does that make him a Catholic?
As for Obama’s birth certificate, an image can be found here, http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn227/Polarik/BO_Birth_Certificate.jpg, and relevant discussion can be found here, http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp. The official stamps on the birth certificate on on the back, that’s why they do not show on the front.
Finally, I’m pretty sure that Bush, as commander-in-chief very likely ordered an investigation into Obama’s background a long time ago. I do not believe it would be easy for someone to become the President of the United States by faking a birth certificate.
Indeed, the unbelievable has happened and Obama is now the incoming President of the United
States. Obviously, America was ready for a change, and I would say that while change is coming, I do not believe that Obama has anything but America’s best interests at heart, and he will shock many Republicans by promptly demonstrating direct command of the U.S. Military. He is no more of a sissy than John F. Kennedy was a sissy. I was only 2 years old when Kennedy faced down Russia and the World stood on the brink of mutual assured destruction.
Congratulations, Barack!

By: RAY BELL

RAY BELL — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 10:11:08 +0000

Obama is probably not a US citizen. He refuses to show his birth certificate. Seems rather simple.

By: Melchizedek CastaÃ±ares

Melchizedek CastaÃ±ares — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:53:31 +0000

I’ve heard that the incoming grand master of the Philippines (mason) congratulate President elect Barak Obama. Does this means that he is really a mason?

By: michael

michael — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 13:53:36 +0000

That site has a mile-long disclaimer stating they cannot attest to the veracity of anything on it and wouldn’t correct inaccurate information even if they knew it existed. http://www.rense.com/disclaimer.htm
If Obama was a Mason, it would be much bigger news than it is. It was common knowledge that Gerald Ford was a Mason when he was nominated for VP under Nixon.
That’s not the case here, so don’t believe it.

By: Melchizedek CastaÃ±ares

Melchizedek CastaÃ±ares — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 13:57:39 +0000

Obama is also a 32nd degree Prince Hall Freemason loyal to the Craft and devoted to his principles (http://www.rense.com/general80/obmw.htm)

By: michael

michael — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:13:55 +0000

Apparently, you are right, Jungle Jil. Now why couldn’t I find your Yahoo Answer,Reference 1
, before posting that? I did not post that without searching for information first, but it looks like I did not search long enough. The oldest reference to this I can find is: http://www.sarajevo-x.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=36907

I honestly admire McCain. He’s been rode hard and put up wet, and he just keeps going and going like the Energizer bunny. I agree with his positions more than I do with Obama’s. However, Sarah Palin is a poor choice for Vice President, the poorest of choices. Vote for McCain and you vote for Sarah to be the president. I just couldn’t do it.

Condoleezza Rice would have been the ideal VP for either party. The problem is she is not a politician. Other than that, her credentials are better than anyone else in the field. She says she will never seek an elected position. I would say that right there makes her a professional at politics and the most qualified to do the job. Actually, come to think of it…her refusal to accept an elected position, like VP of the USA is a violation of her her civic duty. How can I say that? She’s been flying all over the World on behalf of the USA since 1986. I suppose one could easily say she has served her country already.

By: Jungle Jil

Jungle Jil — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 09:37:20 +0000

I had never heard Obama was a Freemason... so I went and looked. Turns out to be false. The only place I could find mention of the Obama/Mason thing was on far right conspiracy web sites, apparently trying to paint him as some illuminati satanist or something. Reference 1 Reference 2 Reference 3 If Obama were really a high level in the Masonic order, it certainly would be notable enough to rank up there with his community outreach work, and editing of the Harvard Law Review (not to mention his crazy church and social connections)... instead of being a totally new tidbit of information to me. (And I'm following this election closely, so that's saying something.)

By: hi

hi — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 04:53:49 +0000

Just goes to show you that what you think you know now might be just as absurd 20 years from now as what you thought you knew 20 years ago. That’s the problem with the human mind, it’s unreliable as a truth detector since it can only GIGO.