Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Bucs90...is Obama trying to become a law enforcement officer?
That's news to me.
I wonder if any other Presidents would have failed your background check.
Lets take a look at this.
Bucs90...is Obama trying to become a law enforcement officer?
That's news to me.
I wonder if any other Presidents would have failed your background check.
Lets take a look at this.
Well, "W" would've likely failed. His cocaine use would've DQ'ed him also, which is a shame. Thats part of my issue, our president should NOT be someone who couldn't even qualify to be a cop. But Obama is our current president, and as much as you lefties wanna keep harping on the past, we must look to your current president.
But the cocaine use of either is not as big a deal as Obama's past associations.
So in other words, you don't know why it's wrong, it's just not what they tell you in the liberal media? Actually the right wing radio is wrong about a lot. The liberal media is wrong about everything. So he's still ahead of where you are...
I don't listen to any talk radio.
I just find this discussion..."My candidate could be a police officer and yours could not"...is both humorous and pathetic.
Isn't it, tho?
Bucs90...is Obama trying to become a law enforcement officer?
That's news to me.
I wonder if any other Presidents would have failed your background check.
Lets take a look at this.
Well, "W" would've likely failed. His cocaine use would've DQ'ed him also, which is a shame. Thats part of my issue, our president should NOT be someone who couldn't even qualify to be a cop. But Obama is our current president, and as much as you lefties wanna keep harping on the past, we must look to your current president.
But the cocaine use of either is not as big a deal as Obama's past associations.
"Palling around" with radical Wahibists wouldn't be considered a disqualifying past association?
Herman Cain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Personal lifeIn 2006, Cain was diagnosed with Stage IV cancer in both his colon and his liver. Cain underwent surgery and chemotherapy following the diagnosis, and has since reported that he is cancer free
Im glad he survived but this medical history alone will make people less likely to vote for him.
Plus he is a right wing radio personality.
Cain will never be able to get elected to such a high office
Herman Cain has run a very successful huge corporation.
Palin has governed a city and state.
Just those two things alone make them both more qualified than Obama.
Obama had never done anything in his life but lecture. He lectured spoiled Harvard liberal future-lawyers. He befriended terrorists. And voted "present" for 2 years in Chicago. Thats it. Thats ALL he had done in life. NEVER had to make hard business choices. NEVER had to make government decisions in which HE alone would draw praise or criticism.
And I'll say, Cain/Palin would be a very underexperienced ticket. Maybe good, seeing that we new fresh faces in DC. But even their severely limited experience are massively more than Obama had.
But the more I think of it, the more I like Donald Trump. Trump would absolutely crush Obama in a debate.
Sorry, but people don't vote for quitters and Palin is a quitter. She didn't even make it half way through as a first term governor.. Trump would be another joke as well.
oooooooooooooooooooooo, all we heard was the same bullshit line that the left slings around.
Palin is a QUITTER. I guess we were TOLD.
As usual our conservative "friends" make a spurious claim, and then proceed to "gloss" over the relevent facts!Herman Cain has run a very successful huge corporation.
Palin has governed a city and state.
Just those two things alone make them both more qualified than Obama.
Obama had never done anything in his life but lecture. He lectured spoiled Harvard liberal future-lawyers. He befriended terrorists. And voted "present" for 2 years in Chicago. Thats it. Thats ALL he had done in life. NEVER had to make hard business choices. NEVER had to make government decisions in which HE alone would draw praise or criticism.
And I'll say, Cain/Palin would be a very underexperienced ticket. Maybe good, seeing that we new fresh faces in DC. But even their severely limited experience are massively more than Obama had.
But the more I think of it, the more I like Donald Trump. Trump would absolutely crush Obama in a debate.
Herman Cain has run a very successful huge corporation.
Palin has governed a city and state.
Just those two things alone make them both more qualified than Obama.
Obama had never done anything in his life but lecture. He lectured spoiled Harvard liberal future-lawyers. He befriended terrorists. And voted "present" for 2 years in Chicago. Thats it. Thats ALL he had done in life. NEVER had to make hard business choices. NEVER had to make government decisions in which HE alone would draw praise or criticism.
And I'll say, Cain/Palin would be a very underexperienced ticket. Maybe good, seeing that we new fresh faces in DC. But even their severely limited experience are massively more than Obama had.
But the more I think of it, the more I like Donald Trump. Trump would absolutely crush Obama in a debate.
Sorry, but people don't vote for quitters and Palin is a quitter. She didn't even make it half way through as a first term governor.. Trump would be another joke as well.
so, the leftist elitism shows it's head again.
Now, they're throwing out the populations of alaska and wasilla as "proof" that although palin was the executive head of both, that doesn't account for anything since it's not a big metro area.
Lefty elitism is sickening. Unless you governed a major metro area (which btw obama never did, he only voted present, and had no executive decisions), and unless you have an uber expensive degree from a select elite (liberal only) university, then you and your opinions are to be discarded along with the wal-mart overstock nascar t-shirts. She wasn't the governor of a real state, like illinois (which dems have run into the ground) or cali, or ny, or nj (all 3 of which libs ran into the ground over the past 30 years).
Libs, your vice savior bill clinton governed a little state, arkansas, but you don't seem to hold that against him, do you?
And they discard cain because he "only" led godfathers pizza. He wasnt the head of a real company, like ge (which liberals have run into the ground) or gm (which liberals ran into the ground).
No, successfully governing or running a small state or small company is not admirable. They need to have run a massive state, well or poorly, and run a massive company, failed or not, to be considered legitimate. Right libs?
Me? If i were searching for a football coach, i'd take the guy who was successful at a small school, not the guy who was an assistant at a big school that was a clusterf**k all over. But libs would argue "he only won at a small school, not a big one" and then elect the coach who assisted on the staff at a failed big school. Perfect liberal logic.
oooooooooooooooooooooo, all we heard was the same bullshit line that the left slings around.
Palin is a QUITTER. I guess we were TOLD.
So, the leftist elitism shows it's head again.
Now, they're throwing out the populations of Alaska and Wasilla as "proof" that although Palin was the executive head of both, that doesn't account for anything since it's not a big metro area.
Lefty elitism is sickening. Unless you governed a major metro area (which BTW Obama never did, he only voted present, and had no executive decisions), and unless you have an uber expensive degree from a select elite (liberal only) university, then you and your opinions are to be discarded along with the Wal-Mart overstock NASCAR t-shirts. She wasn't the governor of a REAL state, like Illinois (which Dems have run into the ground) or Cali, or NY, or NJ (All 3 of which libs ran into the ground over the past 30 years).
Libs, your Vice Savior Bill Clinton governed a little state, Arkansas, but you don't seem to hold that against him, do you?
And they discard Cain because he "only" led Godfathers Pizza. He wasnt the head of a REAL company, like GE (which liberals have run into the ground) or GM (which liberals ran into the ground).
No, successfully governing or running a small state or small company is NOT admirable. They need to have run a massive state, well or poorly, and run a massive company, failed or not, to be considered legitimate. Right libs?
Me? If I were searching for a football coach, I'd take the guy who was successful at a small school, NOT the guy who was an assistant at a big school that was a clusterf**k all over. But libs would argue "He ONLY won at a small school, not a big one" and then elect the coach who assisted on the staff at a failed big school. Perfect liberal logic.
oooooooooooooooooooooo, all we heard was the same bullshit line that the left slings around.
Palin is a QUITTER. I guess we were TOLD.
Stephanie, do you think Palin's Republican opponents for the Nomination will ignore that little fact? That it is only Lefties? That it is bullshit? (She really didn't quit?)
oooooooooooooooooooooo, all we heard was the same bullshit line that the left slings around.
Palin is a QUITTER. I guess we were TOLD.
Stephanie, do you think Palin's Republican opponents for the Nomination will ignore that little fact? That it is only Lefties? That it is bullshit? (She really didn't quit?)
LOL, she RESIGNED dear.
something Clinton, Rangel, Frank, etc etc SHOULD of done for the good of the people they Represent, but they believe they be way MORE Important. And we sure as hell don't EVER see you lefties calling for them to. Hell you LEFTIES still stick up for Clinton, and he was IMPEACHED.
Stephanie, do you think Palin's Republican opponents for the Nomination will ignore that little fact? That it is only Lefties? That it is bullshit? (She really didn't quit?)
LOL, she RESIGNED dear.
something Clinton, Rangel, Frank, etc etc SHOULD of done for the good of the people they Represent, but they believe they be way MORE Important. And we sure as hell don't EVER see you lefties calling for them to. Hell you LEFTIES still stick up for Clinton, and he was IMPEACHED.
She resigned in the middle of her term...but I notice you did not answer my question about her Republican opponents if she chooses to run. Do you think they will ignore her....ahem...resignation? Do you think it will only be Lefties who bring up her...er...resignation?
