Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I found exerpts of this speech delivered before the 2008 Election. It's pretty right on with what's actually happened.

"...when the cloud of rhetoric has passed...when the roar of the crowd fades away...when the stadium lights go out and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot--what exactly is [Obama's] plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?

"The answer is to make government bigger...take more of your money...give you more orders from Washington...and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy...[Obama] is against producing it.

"And let me be specific, the Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes...raise payroll taxes...raise investment income taxes...raise the death tax...raise business taxes...and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

And this is EXACTLY what has happened.

We'll see who can figure it out. If I don't hear the right answer by noon, I'll spill. I guarantee you, though, most people here aren't going to like it.

Chief wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:I found exerpts of this speech delivered before the 2008 Election. It's pretty right on with what's actually happened.

"...when the cloud of rhetoric has passed...when the roar of the crowd fades away...when the stadium lights go out and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot--what exactly is [Obama's] plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?

"The answer is to make government bigger...take more of your money...give you more orders from Washington...and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy...[Obama] is against producing it.

"And let me be specific, the Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes...raise payroll taxes...raise investment income taxes...raise the death tax...raise business taxes...and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

And this is EXACTLY what has happened.

Who's speech?

"...when the cloud of rhetoric has passed...when the roar of the crowd fades away...when the stadium lights go out and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot--what exactly is [Obama's] plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet?

"The answer is to make government bigger...take more of your money...give you more orders from Washington...and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy...[Obama] is against producing it.

"And let me be specific, the Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes...raise payroll taxes...raise investment income taxes...raise the death tax...raise business taxes...and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."



Sarah Palin

ODU gets the prize.

I can't believe how true this has turned out to be. They blast her for being a simpleton, yet she knew this way back then.

SuperHornet wrote:ODU gets the prize.

I can't believe how true this has turned out to be. They blast her for being a simpleton, yet she knew this way back then.

Uh.....I'm FAIRLY certain SHE didn't write that speech.

AZGrizFan wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:ODU gets the prize.

I can't believe how true this has turned out to be. They blast her for being a simpleton, yet she knew this way back then.

Uh.....I'm FAIRLY certain SHE didn't write that speech.

Perhaps. Palin definitely has her limitations, but the kind of things quoted here are the same things she has been saying extemporaneously for a couple of years. No big deal.

Palin is still not my favorite candidate but she is correct on many issues.

Bronco wrote:

Hmmm...maybe if she swallows enough cock she can convince him not to run again?

SuperHornet wrote:ODU gets the prize.

I can't believe how true this has turned out to be. They blast her for being a simpleton, yet she knew this way back then.

To be fair 18,046,007 democrats knew this as well. But in the end we voted for the lesser evil in November.

UNHWildCats wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:ODU gets the prize.

I can't believe how true this has turned out to be. They blast her for being a simpleton, yet she knew this way back then.

To be fair 18,046,007 democrats knew this as well. But in the end we voted for the lesser evil in November.

Now that you've had almost two years to think about it, are you sure he was the less evil?

CitadelGrad wrote:

UNHWildCats wrote: To be fair 18,046,007 democrats knew this as well. But in the end we voted for the lesser evil in November.

Now that you've had almost two years to think about it, are you sure he was the less evil?

I was about to ask the same thing.

In two more years will those same 18 million people still know the same and yet vote for him again?

clenz wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:
Now that you've had almost two years to think about it, are you sure he was the less evil?

I was about to ask the same thing.

In two more years will those same 18 million people still know the same and yet vote for him again?

I'm still trying to find a single person that will admit to voting for him when I ask them face to face.

GrizFanStuckInUtah wrote:

clenz wrote: I was about to ask the same thing.

In two more years will those same 18 million people still know the same and yet vote for him again?

I'm still trying to find a single person that will admit to voting for him when I ask them face to face.

Have you asked Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Fred Flinstone, or some dead people?

CitadelGrad wrote:

UNHWildCats wrote: To be fair 18,046,007 democrats knew this as well. But in the end we voted for the lesser evil in November.

Now that you've had almost two years to think about it, are you sure he was the less evil?

yes

GrizFanStuckInUtah wrote:

clenz wrote: I was about to ask the same thing.

In two more years will those same 18 million people still know the same and yet vote for him again?

I'm still trying to find a single person that will admit to voting for him when I ask them face to face.

I voted for him and if I could go back to 2008 I'd still vote for him again. Nothing McCain has done before then or since then would lead me to believe he'd be a better President.

Of course, I'd also go back in time and see if I could rig some elections to make sure the Dems didn't get the super majority. That was probably their biggest downfall - they got all that power and got all giddy that they forgot to do the immediate things (i.e. fix the economy) and instead went on a wish list spending spree while ignoring the impacts on the economy.

But I still think Obama, for all his flaws (and he certainly has many now) was a better pick than McCain, with all of his flaws as well. Come to think of it, we haven't had a decent pair of candidates run for President in some time - almost have to go back to Bush I and Clinton for a decent Presedential race. The last few have had some real dud candidates, especially the losers (McCain, Kerry, Gore, Dole - not impressive in the least).

clenz wrote:

CitadelGrad wrote:
Now that you've had almost two years to think about it, are you sure he was the less evil?

I was about to ask the same thing.

In two more years will those same 18 million people still know the same and yet vote for him again?

I would atleast consider voting for the republican but more likely a third party candidate.... unless Hillary challenges him and wins the nomination, than I would obviously vote for her.

GannonFan wrote:

GrizFanStuckInUtah wrote:
I'm still trying to find a single person that will admit to voting for him when I ask them face to face.

I voted for him and if I could go back to 2008 I'd still vote for him again. Nothing McCain has done before then or since then would lead me to believe he'd be a better President.

Of course, I'd also go back in time and see if I could rig some elections to make sure the Dems didn't get the super majority. That was probably their biggest downfall - they got all that power and got all giddy that they forgot to do the immediate things (i.e. fix the economy) and instead went on a wish list spending spree while ignoring the impacts on the economy.

But I still think Obama, for all his flaws (and he certainly has many now) was a better pick than McCain, with all of his flaws as well. Come to think of it, we haven't had a decent pair of candidates run for President in some time - almost have to go back to Bush I and Clinton for a decent Presedential race. The last few have had some real dud candidates, especially the losers (McCain, Kerry, Gore, Dole - not impressive in the least).

Gore woulda been a great president... the problem is he is just a very boring guy lol I still remember when I was working for him and Bill in 1996, on a visit to New Hampshire (And he may have done it other places too) he was on stage and made fun of his dullness by saying he was going to do his version of the marcarana and then just stood there still as can be for like 10 seconds lol

I guess UNH is running away to Canada when Sarah's elected to the White House in 2012.

GannonFan wrote:

GrizFanStuckInUtah wrote:
I'm still trying to find a single person that will admit to voting for him when I ask them face to face.

I voted for him and if I could go back to 2008 I'd still vote for him again. Nothing McCain has done before then or since then would lead me to believe he'd be a better President.

Of course, I'd also go back in time and see if I could rig some elections to make sure the Dems didn't get the super majority. That was probably their biggest downfall - they got all that power and got all giddy that they forgot to do the immediate things (i.e. fix the economy) and instead went on a wish list spending spree while ignoring the impacts on the economy.

But I still think Obama, for all his flaws (and he certainly has many now) was a better pick than McCain, with all of his flaws as well. Come to think of it, we haven't had a decent pair of candidates run for President in some time - almost have to go back to Bush I and Clinton for a decent Presedential race. The last few have had some real dud candidates, especially the losers (McCain, Kerry, Gore, Dole - not impressive in the least).

If McCain had been elected we'd be $1.5 trillion LESS in debt.

Hey SH is your dream presidential race Hillary vs Sarah?

AZGrizFan wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
I voted for him and if I could go back to 2008 I'd still vote for him again. Nothing McCain has done before then or since then would lead me to believe he'd be a better President.

Of course, I'd also go back in time and see if I could rig some elections to make sure the Dems didn't get the super majority. That was probably their biggest downfall - they got all that power and got all giddy that they forgot to do the immediate things (i.e. fix the economy) and instead went on a wish list spending spree while ignoring the impacts on the economy.

But I still think Obama, for all his flaws (and he certainly has many now) was a better pick than McCain, with all of his flaws as well. Come to think of it, we haven't had a decent pair of candidates run for President in some time - almost have to go back to Bush I and Clinton for a decent Presedential race. The last few have had some real dud candidates, especially the losers (McCain, Kerry, Gore, Dole - not impressive in the least).

If McCain had been elected we'd be $1.5 trillion LESS in debt.

Eh, hard to tell. McCain has changed direction a lot in his career - maybe he would've spent even more than that. Too wishy washy to be an effective executive. Again, for all of Obama's flaws, the GOP didn't put up a strong candidate to oppose him. And if they make that mistake again in 2012, the result will be the same.

GannonFan wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
If McCain had been elected we'd be $1.5 trillion LESS in debt.

Eh, hard to tell. McCain has changed direction a lot in his career - maybe he would've spent even more than that. Too wishy washy to be an effective executive. Again, for all of Obama's flaws, the GOP didn't put up a strong candidate to oppose him. And if they make that mistake again in 2012, the result will be the same.

Perhaps you are allowing your like/dislike of the person to cloud your judgement of the individual's effectiveness, GF. This is highly unusual for you.

McCain may be less likable than Obama for many, and wishy washy on some social issues, but he has been a consistent fiscal conservative.

Fortunately, more and more voters are able to separate their fondness for Obama from their outrage at his failed policies and distate for his incompetent exective style.

native wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Eh, hard to tell. McCain has changed direction a lot in his career - maybe he would've spent even more than that. Too wishy washy to be an effective executive. Again, for all of Obama's flaws, the GOP didn't put up a strong candidate to oppose him. And if they make that mistake again in 2012, the result will be the same.

Perhaps you are allowing your like/dislike of the person to cloud your judgement of the individual's effectiveness, GF. This is highly unusual for you.

McCain may be less likable than Obama for many, and wishy washy on some social issues, but he has been a consistent fiscal conservative.

Fortunately, more and more voters are able to separate their fondness for Obama from their outrage at his failed policies and distate for his incompetent exective style.

I certainly think he's been a consistent fiscal conservative, but I don't think he would've been able to stand up to a Democratic super majority that wasn't fiscally conservative. In that case, I think McCain's tendency to accomodate would've seen him going along with the crowd on many of the same things Obama did.

I have no problem with McCain as a person or a Senator. I just don't think, and still don't think, he'd make a good executive. I think he'd actually be a pretty poor one, and the way he conducted his campaign didn't make me think otherwise.

GannonFan wrote:

native wrote:
Perhaps you are allowing your like/dislike of the person to cloud your judgement of the individual's effectiveness, GF. This is highly unusual for you.

McCain may be less likable than Obama for many, and wishy washy on some social issues, but he has been a consistent fiscal conservative.

Fortunately, more and more voters are able to separate their fondness for Obama from their outrage at his failed policies and distate for his incompetent exective style.

I certainly think he's been a consistent fiscal conservative, but I don't think he would've been able to stand up to a Democratic super majority that wasn't fiscally conservative. In that case, I think McCain's tendency to accomodate would've seen him going along with the crowd on many of the same things Obama did.

I have no problem with McCain as a person or a Senator. I just don't think, and still don't think, he'd make a good executive. I think he'd actually be a pretty poor one, and the way he conducted his campaign didn't make me think otherwise.

I disagree (at least on the "accomodation" part). I think a Republican president (and certainly one of McCain's stature) would have allowed some of the more blue-dog Donks to break ranks when it was blatantly obvious that money pits like the Healthcare bill wasn't even remotely popular. All McCain would have needed was 1 or 2 to break ranks and suddenly the bill isn't veto-proof. I think he could have rather easily gotten off without passing either the healthcare bill OR the bloated stimulus package.