Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Okay, here's a conspiracy theory for youFollow

#27 Oct 08 2008 at 11:44 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,158 posts
I wrote a week or so ago in another thread....

Quote:
While i generally find Christopher Hitchens an execrable human being, I think he touches on something that I began to think about a while ago, and am becoming more and more convinced about as days go by in this comedic farce that is the US presidential election.

As he points out, there is no way on Bobs
green earth that Obama should be where he is at the moment.

Everything in the world of current events is turning out great for him.

From the National economy turning belly up, the incompetant way in wich its being handled now and the fact that in eight years of Republican oversight, no-one saw it coming and no-one did anything to mitigate it. The dollar cost of this alone is in the trillions of (taxpayer)dollars. Credit crisis, mortgage foreclosures, unemployment (McJobs don't count) industrial wasteland etc etc.

The war in Iraq is a failure. A bloody expensive one too. In terms of dollars?..trillions when you take into account future benefits to disabled servicemen. Expensive too in terms of civilian and military deaths, global reputation and credibility. Afghanistan? is circling the plug-hole. Why did the US and others think they could 'win' in Afghanistan when the Russians, most recently, and numerous others have failed throughout history.

A majority of the people in the US think that Bush is a ******* moron. Even half of Republicans think Bush is a ******* moron. Bush is a Republican. ergo McCain is just more of the same ****.

McCain is a septugenarian who has cancer and probably wont live for very long, and tho' he seems to be a pretty personable sort of chap, isn't exactly the most dynamic candidate to run for office in the history of the US.

When he dies, that would leave Palin. Tho some people seem to get their fantasies serviced by imagining her with a shaved **** and a shotgun over her knee, these ar'n't qualifications for being the President. Add to that her lack of experience of anything outside of Alaska, let alone mainland USA, and her complete inability to form opinions based on evidence (creationism anyone?) then it should be obvious to anyone that if the Obama camp wanted to destroy her, then they could without breaking a sweat. Hell! My dog could outwit her in a debate.

So that brings me back to my theory.

And that is, OBAMA HAS NO INTENTION OF WINNING THE ELECTION THIS TIME.

Yup. There you have it.

Obama knows that the good folk of the USA have the attention span of a nematode, and when all the sh*t inevitably comes crashing down over the next couple of years ie. recession as deep as the Marianas trench, civil unrest and homelessness and yes! even hunger, on the streets of the US. Slaughter on a grand scale in Iraq when the US leaves, Maliki gets strung from the nearest (made in Detroit) lampost and all those guns start getting used again. Afghanistan descends into a full scale rout of the international forces who, like the Russians and numerous others before them, will leave with bloodied noses and a personal vow to never try and **** with the pashtuns again.

Pakistan....Well who knows about that place, but I'm sure it wont be good.

Iran? See Pakistan.

China?? They are in charge now. You'd better get used to that idea sooner or later...

The list is endless.

So...when all that stuff happens, some of it the fault of the current moron in chief, some of it not... the person who is left holding his package when the music stops, is the poor sad **** who is going to get blamed for it. ALL of it.

Obama knows this. He's young. He can wait a bit (4 more years?)

He wants McCain to be in charge when it happens. Or Palin. Doesn't matter either way.

Because when it does, teh Dems are gonna stand up as one and shout 'YOU ******* IDIOTS!! LOOK WHAT YOU'VE DONE!!ITS ALL THE FAULT OF THE REPUBLICANS!!!".

And then the very next chance they get, they will landslide into the Whitehouse and then they will be there for ******* decades!



Glad I'm not the only one who finds the present situation a bit surreal, but, for slightly differing reasons.

____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#28REDACTED, Posted: Oct 08 2008 at 11:44 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) i disagree on the palin issue. i think mccain KNEW he had to drag the hard liners to the polls and that is what palin is there for. she is also there to get the democrat boggots. a hot looking red neck girl to them is a far better choice than a black man party be damned.
#29 Oct 08 2008 at 11:55 AM Rating: Default
*****
16,160 posts
Palin is all McCain, beginning to end, front to back. She wasn't foisted upon him, he specifically chose her. We can agree to disagree on her worthiness, but in terms of what McCain wanted her to do at the time, she delivered in spades. And short of the interviews with Gibson and Comrade Katie, her public persona would be intact based on everything else she has said or done.

But to put her being on the ticket on ther RNC or some other Republican entity is incorrect. That was a McCain decision, pure and simple.

Totem
#30 Oct 08 2008 at 12:18 PM Rating: Decent
bubspeed wrote:
Samira wrote:
I've been thinking about this for a month now. Well, longer, really; but since the first debate, certainly.

Do you think McCain has been set up to lose by his own party? That their position was just so weak after eight years of BushCo that they decided to throw a loser under the bus and regroup for 2012?




I approve this conspiracy theory. Why waste a good candidate right now? Let the republicans get it back in 2012. Afterall, there has got to be someone better then this cadaver.

Edited, Oct 8th 2008 11:59am by bubspeed


To add to this, if the Dems don't clean things up before the 2012 election, things will likely tip into the Republican's favour again, in the eyes of the public. I'd like to hope not, but hey, it's likely.the Republicans will play it off as the Dem's fault in an attempt to garner support. I don't think the public is stupid enough to outright think that the Republicans are going to be able to pull off what the Dem's couldn't, after getting us into the mess in the first place.

Edited, Oct 8th 2008 6:20pm by Paradox
#31 Oct 08 2008 at 12:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Totem wrote:
That was a McCain decision, pure and simple.
I'd feel better about McCain's brain if I thought he had been railroaded into it against his will.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#32 Oct 08 2008 at 12:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Baron von tarv wrote:
Varus would have us believe it was a brilliant campain statergy designed to unbalance the Dem's and ensure that "Queen" palin would win because all Democrats are evil Commies and Marxists..
... and probably toss in that he has a degree in Economics from Juillard's
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#33 Oct 08 2008 at 2:04 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,755 posts
I'd believe more of a Hail Mary apporach than an internal conspiracy. Kind of like, well, let's just throw it out there and hope we win.
#34 Oct 08 2008 at 2:17 PM Rating: Decent
Singdall believes this theory wthout even reading it.
#35 Oct 08 2008 at 3:41 PM Rating: Decent
Baron von tarv wrote:
And then picked an inexperianced Vp who would be forced to seek "Advice from her peers" before most critial decisions should the old man fall over mid term.


Hey, she's read all the magazines.

#36 Oct 08 2008 at 3:50 PM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
We were talking about this the other day and maybe I'm unrealistic but if McCain wanted to pick an independent minded woman, why didn't he pick one of the Senators from Maine? Both of them could more than hold their own. They are probably seen as way too moderate.

I've heard that some republicans think that Sarah Palin is the future of the party. Srsly, guys, I don't like republican politics but you guys can do much better.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#37 Oct 08 2008 at 4:45 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Quote:
... and probably toss in that he has a degree in Economics from Juillard's


I thought his economics degree was from the back of a McDonald's menu.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#38 Oct 09 2008 at 12:00 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,293 posts
US has the consistent trend to vote Republic when the economy goes well and citizens go worry about non-sensical stuff, like pooping in their panties for south americans or commies or terrorists or whatnot, and after a reality check vote Democrat when its time to clean up the mess.

Still the republicans put their most suitable candidate for this time in front and seriously campaign, they could save a lot of money, McCain hasnt got any chance to be president. Just like Bush sr didnt had any vs Clinton.

I personally dont believe in any conspiracy theory only in the consistent stupidity of mankind, not just US citizens btw.

Edited, Oct 9th 2008 10:05am by Sjans
#39 Oct 09 2008 at 4:22 AM Rating: Decent
@#%^ing DRK
*****
13,143 posts
If we are truly getting into conspiracy theories, your point is null Sam. The true overlords of our country have the means to cow the 44th President as soon--if not before--he takes the oath of office. It is obvious that the current financial crisis was orchestrated for the sole purpose of consolidating the power and money in the government further thus allowing them to complete one more step of their never ending, ultimate plan of global domination.
#41REDACTED, Posted: Oct 09 2008 at 7:13 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) To add to this, if the Dems don't clean things up before the 2012 election, things will likely tip into the Republican's favour again, in the eyes of the public. I'd like to hope not, but hey, it's likely.the Republicans will play it off as the Dem's fault in an attempt to garner support. I don't think the public is stupid enough to outright think that the Republicans are going to be able to pull off what the Dem's couldn't, after getting us into the mess in the first place.
#42 Oct 09 2008 at 7:27 AM Rating: Good
shadowrelm wrote:
it is true.

weather mccain wins or obama, the next president is likely going to be a one term president. we WILL leave iraq reguardles of who gets in. but there will be no good way to get out just like there was no good way with vietnam.

the market WILL resolve itself but not before some more pain. pain the loosing party will plaster all over the headlines screaming we would have done it better. meanwhile, the money lost in the first couple years of the new president will STILL be affecting people 4 years from now. and those people will be angry with who ever is currently in charge.

this bail out making a profit. a crack pipe dream. not gona happen. and the opposing party will be screaming "mismanagement" the whole time.

people will still be hurting and angry about the mess we are in right now four years from now too. the chances that the next president will be a one term president is very very high no matter who wins this year. barring a miracle financial boom, or some genious government policies poping up with the next president, it is probably going to be a one hit wonder for the winner.


Oh, *********

We can speculate all day long, but if Obama manages to get us out of Iraq, stabilise Afghanistan, sort out the economy a bit, and reform your health system, chances are he'll be re-elected.

Speculation looking at 4 years in the future, in such an unstable climate, is a futile excercise at best. It's far too long a time-span. One terrorist attack, another Katrina, Israeli strikes on Iran, there a million things which could happen which will radically change the way we see things today. If you look back to 2000, no one would've predicted that 4 years later we'd be stuck in two wars and have a ginormous deficit and a crumbling economy.

Also, read The Black Swan, it's pretty good.
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#43 Oct 09 2008 at 7:37 AM Rating: Decent
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Oh, *********

We can speculate all day long, but if Obama manages to get us out of Iraq, stabilise Afghanistan, sort out the economy a bit, and reform your health system, chances are he'll be re-elected.

Speculation looking at 4 years in the future, in such an unstable climate, is a futile excercise at best. It's far too long a time-span. One terrorist attack, another Katrina, Israeli strikes on Iran, there a million things which could happen which will radically change the way we see things today. If you look back to 2000, no one would've predicted that 4 years later we'd be stuck in two wars and have a ginormous deficit and a crumbling economy.

Also, read The Black Swan, it's pretty good.


Right, but what I'm saying is: if we aren't out of debt in the next four years (which won't happen), the Republicans will bust their asses to try and make the Democrats out to look like failures. I'm not saying that they'll actually get support with that ploy, but it will happen.
#44 Oct 09 2008 at 7:41 AM Rating: Good
Paradox wrote:
Right, but what I'm saying is: if we aren't out of debt in the next four years (which won't happen), the Republicans will bust their asses to try and make the Democrats out to look like failures. I'm not saying that they'll actually get support with that ploy, but it will happen.


Well, I was responding to shadow, but yes, they will try to blame the Dems if things don't improve.

Having said that, even today, Republicans are trying to blame the economic crisis on Demorats. Or the failures in Iraq. Or the fact that some pople are poor. Just look at this forum, there isn't a single problem that gbaji and Knox can't attribute to the liberals.
____________________________
My politics blog and stuff - Refractory
#45 Oct 09 2008 at 8:07 AM Rating: Decent
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Paradox wrote:
Right, but what I'm saying is: if we aren't out of debt in the next four years (which won't happen), the Republicans will bust their asses to try and make the Democrats out to look like failures. I'm not saying that they'll actually get support with that ploy, but it will happen.


Well, I was responding to shadow, but yes, they will try to blame the Dems if things don't improve.

Having said that, even today, Republicans are trying to blame the economic crisis on Demorats. Or the failures in Iraq. Or the fact that some pople are poor. Just look at this forum, there isn't a single problem that gbaji and Knox can't attribute to the liberals.


But Gbaji and Knox aren't representative of the entire Republican mindset.


Are they?


...please, for the love of god, tell me they aren't
#46 Oct 09 2008 at 8:09 AM Rating: Good
Paradox wrote:
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Paradox wrote:
Right, but what I'm saying is: if we aren't out of debt in the next four years (which won't happen), the Republicans will bust their asses to try and make the Democrats out to look like failures. I'm not saying that they'll actually get support with that ploy, but it will happen.


Well, I was responding to shadow, but yes, they will try to blame the Dems if things don't improve.

Having said that, even today, Republicans are trying to blame the economic crisis on Demorats. Or the failures in Iraq. Or the fact that some pople are poor. Just look at this forum, there isn't a single problem that gbaji and Knox can't attribute to the liberals.


But Gbaji and Knox aren't representative of the entire Republican mindset.


Are they?


...please, for the love of god, tell me they aren't
Not the entire party, no.
#47 Oct 09 2008 at 8:15 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Totem wrote:
No, I don't think McCain has been set up to fail by the Republicans, but him being the choice to be nominee is in reaction to Bush, that is he is considerably more moderate than Bush ever was, despite the tar baby effect the Black Neo has given him.

However, this will be McCain's last trip on the merry-go-'round. He'll finish his career in the Senate never to run for president again, regardless his lifespan. And maybe that'll be a good thing for him, much as it has been for Teddy Kennedy. To achieve our nation's highest office would quite possibly diminish the legacy either of them will leave behind.

That said, whoever becomes president will likely be a one termer, because the economy will utterly crush whoever is in office. FDR Obama ain't. And neither is McCain. Nearly every piece of legislation they'd love to move through a vilified Congress will be severely hampered by extraordinarily tight purse strings, thus leaving either of them a lame duck in 2010.

Wait...are you suggesting that a series of social programs from a Democrat is what we need to get out of these rough times?!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#48 Oct 09 2008 at 10:53 AM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
"We can speculate all day long, but if Obama manages to get us out of Iraq, stabilise Afghanistan, sort out the economy a bit, and reform your health system, chances are he'll be re-elected." --Red

That's a lot of "ifs."

Yes, he can get us out of Iraq. That's within his power if and when he becomes President. What the end product looks like is absolutely our of his control.

Stabilize Afganistan? Hmm, tougher nut to crack. A surge isn't necessarily the answer, despite its' success in Iraq. These two countries have different circumstances and history working against each other.

Sort out the economy? This pretty much out of his control. As I have said in the past, beyond cheerleading and giving ever-so-slight nudges with interest rates and such, a president doesn't have that much influence on the economy for good or bad. This monster has a mind and life of its' own now and we are just along for the ride.

Reformation of the health care system will be largely dependent on $$$, something we are desperately short of right now. Beyond mere goldbricking, lipservice, or platitudes nothing will get done until the economy is solidly back on its' feet. Too costly. Instead we'll talk about it and let the present universal health care we have cover the uninsured. Yeah, that's right, I'm talking about the emergency room.

This is not to say Obama, assuming he is elected, won't be re-elected in 2012, but from where I sit it looks like whoever is in office is going to be a one termer. We are not the same nation that we were in the 1930's, nor do we have that same mentality required to sacrifice and scrimp and save like we did back then. We are soft, lazy, and used to having it easy, good, and cheap. Can you even imagine ordinary Americans joining the Conservation Corps, working with their hands, just to eat? Nope. Neither can I. For decades that's what Mexicans are for-- at least that's the thinking of Joe Six-pack. ****, I'm still getting at least 4 or 5 credit card offers in the mail each week and there's no credit to be had. And I have the means to pay my bills! For you average American buried under a load of credit card debt, living month to month, not saving, not investing, wondering what goodie they can afford to buy next, Depression-era cost saving measures are utterly foreign to them. The economy will crush whoever is the next president. Period.

Totem
#49 Oct 09 2008 at 11:02 AM Rating: Good
*****
16,160 posts
" Just look at this forum, there isn't a single problem that (fill in the blank with the name of your typical liberal Asylum poster) can't attribute to the neocons/Bush/Republican party."

FTFY

*********************************************************
Actually, Debalic, that is precisely what we will need, along the lines of the Conservation Corps, et al, to fix our infrastructure, facilitate a change in thinking that encourages selflessness rather than living large, and a willingness to actually work and get our hands dirty. Fewer lawsuits, more industry, larger savings, less dependence on credit, more self reliance.

All anathema to today's typical American.

Totem
#51 Oct 09 2008 at 11:08 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
knoxsouthy wrote:
Iraq is not a failure.
Take a vacation there then. Smiley: schooled
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 188 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (188)