The only change that would come from the democrats is either a black or a woman for president. I don't think that anything else would change, and that would be good, given their ideas. At least HC follows the polls, so America would have a chance, Obama worries me more than her. McCain wouldn't last for more than 4 years anyway...
He did? I wish that was so, but it is totally untrue. People want to be coddled, reassured, pandered to. They want guarantees, they want hope, they desire a strongman type leader. They aren't interested in hard truth at all. They want the fantasy of Pax Americana, either the Republican or Democrat versions. They want to believe that the US can continue to live a high standard off the backs of Asians an 3rd world export nations, and that it can go on indefinitely. They want to believe that foreign intervention isn't immoral, but on the contrary, the morally superior right of the brave and free. When they f**k up their investments, they want a bailout. When they are uncompetitive, they want a handout. When they make bad decisions, they want a fresh start via bankruptcy. But they certainly do not want to deal with the hard truth, and sadly the spirit of rugged independence and hard work has been replaced with a sense of entitlement and arrogance.
I actually agree, that's a great description of the present generations of Americans. They are giving up and away all that was done by the past ones, that built America. After the building, it's now time for demolition, it always happened in history. Goodbye America. Too bad I just moved here... Better be ready to move to to China or Australia?
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...ign-denies-canadian-report-on-nafta-comments/ It looks like it was actually Clinton's campaign who did what they accused Obama of doing (but he did not.) Hopefully this is the final nail in the Clinton's coffin. They desperately try to smear Obama and it ends up that they are the ones who are behind it and the ones who actually did what they accused the other of doing. Incredible.
You should read what you link to Obama denied a meeting ever took place and demanded names. Canada gave names and confirmed that his senior economic advisor talked to them. Obama is guilty. Are we really supposed to be so stupid that we believe that Obama had no idea what his SENIOR advisor was saying to a foreign country? There is no proof of guilt for Clinton yet. Obama is playing the "I didn't know card" which is transparent and lame. Your advisors are hired to speak for you. If he really doesn't believe what his advisor told Canada then Obama needs to condemn his advisor and fire him. He hasn't. What kind of president can't keep his advisors under control? Maybe both campaigns talked to Canada but so far the only proof is that Obama's campaign did. Clinton wants the name of the person who talked. And until Canada comes up with a name it's an allegation. Seriously, read. And even if a Clinton advisor talked then she's in the same boat as Obama. And since nobody cares about that then they shouldn't care about what Hillary did. So the only defense is the standard "I was misinterpreted" line. The meeting happened. Obama claimed it didn't. Now their only defense is to pretend Goolsbee didn't say what he said. At worst Obama tells Canada one thing and Americans another. At best he doesn't know who his advisors are talking to.
You don't have to move, just understand that the government is in cahoots with business, the elections are staged, and the majority of your fellow citizens are uninformed and ignorant. A smart man would be able to use that situation to his advantage. I'm still trying to figure that out.
NAFA is the beginning of the future "North American Union" It must be stopped if you love America. Get info at this site: http://www.stopnau.info Jeff