Opinion Republic

From a fellow ranter

Archive for the tag “Barack Obama”

Indefinite Detention and Torture Act – The American Dictatorship

I’m going to keep this simple because I want you to be able  to formulate your own opinions and give you time to take this all in. It’s no use if I just ramble along as usual. There is something floating around called National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 or for short NDAA FY2012, sounds innocent, yeah? Well think again, in reality this is the Indefinite Detention and Torture Act about to be signed and passed by Barack Obama NOW. This thing flew by the House and Senate without even a double take and is now being signed by our “president”.

The bill is updated annually to outline spending for the Department of Defense. Any American that is a “suspected terrorist” can be detained in prison indefinitely and subjected to torture tactics previously outlawed.

“What this legislation does,” lectured Senator Karl Levin earlier this month, “says from the Congress’ point-of-view, that we expressly authorize the indefinite detention” of someone deemed a threat. “We recognize the authority of this president and every other president to hold an enemy combatant indefinitely, whether they are captured home or abroad, because that only makes sense.”

The problem is that there is a difference between an enemy combatant and a United States Citizen, unless you are trying to say that US citizens are the enemy? An enemy combatant, during a time of war, can be held indefinitely but a citizen of this country must go through the process of the Justice system which isn’t very good mind you. When asked, “How long can you hold them?” Senator Lindsey Graham responded “As long as it takes to make us safe.”

The senator added that, “when you join the enemy…we aren’t worried about how we’re going to prosecute you right away.”

Therefore, under this Act the Miranda rights will not be read to you and you will not be able to get an attorney…..good luck. Make sure you get Barack Obama what he wanted for Christmas because under this act he also has the right to send American-born citizens to other countries to be detained and tortured….don’t get him mad.

A Revolution Too Late?

I never got a chance to publish this but I think its just as relevent today as it was on January 27th.  enjoy!

 

The protest videos eerily resemble the protests in Tunisia which toppled their 23 year dictatorship headed by the exiled Zine Al-Abedine Ben Ali. Since the start of this revolutionary wave by Tunisia, one thing has stuck in the back of my mind. Could this be true? First Tunisia, then Algeria, then Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, Libya, Mauritania, what exactly is going on? Why after 23 years with Ben Ali, 30 years with Mubarak, why after 42 years of rule by Muammar Gaddafi are the people just starting to begin to rise up?

The reason this all started is not because of unemployment or high prices. Yes, the Arab countries have a very, very high unemployment rate with Libya nearly 30% and the rest of the Arab countries in the 10% range. Yes, people can’t afford to buy food or have decent home. If this was the case, these countries would have revolted long ago. Why wait 30 years? How could anyone possibly live under those conditions for 42 years, half a lifetime, and not lift a finger or raise a voice?

This all started because someone lit himself on fire. Then, someone else lit himself on fire. After that, 7 people lit themselves on fire. At first I thought, “the poor man couldn’t handle it any longer, he had nothing left.” but when everyone started copying…….that’s what got me worried. These are Arab countries with Islam being practiced by the majority. It is a horrible sin to commit suicide in Islam, as it is the same for Christianity. It was better for these people to fight and die for their people, their country, and their freedom that to light themselves on fire.

Was it better that they kill themselves than kill other people? Yes. Was it better that they kill themselves and leave their brothers and sisters to fight for their freedom and their rights as human beings? Absolutely not! Ladies and gentlemen, I am worried. I always thought and knew with confidence that the Arab people would never run a successful revolution. The day the Tunisians revolted, I thought I was wrong. Now, I’m starting to think I was right.

Tunisia and Egypt are American backed countries and yet America has silently stood buy. If they are American backed countries that means America has some sort of involvement. What kind of involvement, military, espionage, economic, political? Who knows, but we can assume that America has some sort of presence. The basics of a revolution are as follows:
1.Ruler treats people bad, unemployment, no food/water, no housing, etc.
2. people demand change
3. change does not come so people protest
4. Ruler tries to quill protest by shooting people and asserting his power
5. people get even more angry and kick ruler out
6. new ruler takes charge

Now, the people can either bring in this new ruler or the army can stage a coup. We know obviously that all of the dictators in the Middle eastern/ Arab countries are puppets. In other words, people control them, tell them what to do, they tell them when to leave and they tell them when to come. What would happen if the old ruler did all of the above on purpose. When the people revolted he left and the “new” leader was ready to take charge after the smoke cleared but all along this “new” leader was put in by the same people who put the old leader in his place.
What I’m trying to say is that this could be the “Arab Union.” We have the European Union, African Union, and the Arab League. Remember how the United nations started? It was first the League of Nations after WWII and then formed into what is now today the United Nations. The Arab League could very easily follow that path. Which would then only leave is with the Asian Union, North American Union, South American Union and a clever solution for Russia and central Asia.

Honestly speaking I don’t how this will turn out but it seems that this could be a step towards an Arab Union or some sort of fake khilafa. This of course can’t happen overnight, this is but a small step in a direction of which I have no idea but can only speculate the possibilities using the process of elimination.
Do your own research, monitor this situation yourselves and let me know what you find.

Barack Obama Just Ruined Sports!

You know how sports used to be the one thing to sit back a watch. The one thing that would take your mind off the wild and deceiving world of politics. Well Barack Obama has some how managed to change that. When I nearly threw my television out of the window because the Pittsburgh Steelers won the super bowl due to Barack Obama’s “uncalled-for” support, I thought despite all the flat out cheating of the officials on Pittsburghs side, it’s just a coincidence.

But when the North Carolina Tarheels win the NCAA championship, which happened to be the team Mr. Obama was rooting for,  you have to say something’s up.  Now I know what you’ll say, “Barack Obama is a miracle worker and he is the smartest person on the planet and he is the best and he is this and he is that and he knows what team to choose because he somehow manages to save the world and the economy and for some remarkable reason he also manages to watch and stay up-to-date on every dang sport!”

You know what I say, “NO……NO ………Okay?….. Just NO.” First of all, that is humanly impossible and second every time he says I root for this team they happen to win the championship in a NOT fair manor. I was so angry at the officiating in the Pittsburgh and Carolina Super Bowl that I nearly threw my TV out the window. I was so angry and frustrated at the stupid blind officiating of the NCAA championship game I had to quietly get up and walk away from the television during the last 5 mins in the game or else I would have burned something.

So just to make the president, or shall I say celebrity, look good they have to do this. Come on don’t stoop that low! Mr.Obama you preach change and never give it, you can preach tax cuts and never do it, you can preach better health care and never offer it, you can preach victory and never prevail, but please don’t ruin our game!!!!!

Just don’t say anything! when the stupid reporters ask, “Who do you think is gonna win?” can’t you just act like a normal responsible president and say, “I think we have more important issues to deal with beside who’s gonna win the NCAA championship.” I’m sure we all know that the winner of the NCAA championship is not gonna stop Taliban are they?

OUT!

Barack Obama’s New World Order

I was in the process of checking my email at Yahoo.com and something stopped me. I don’t know what it was, but a sudden chill went down my back. One of the headlines read “Barack Obama’s New World Order” and I was frozen. I didn’t know what to think anymore. I distinctly remember Henry Kissenger saying that its a perfect opportunity for Barack Obama to establish a New World Order.

So, why did that chill go down my back and why was I so shocked to see that headline? Just Search New World Order in google and you’ll have chills going down your back all week. The phrase New World Order is no longer a mere phrase, but a symbol. A symbol of peace to some and a symbol of oppression for others. Here’s the catch, which one is it “peace” or “oppression”.

We may go along and say the new World Order is for the good of all mankind and peace will surly ensue. However, if it turns out to be a sinister scheme masterminded by elite members of secret societies such as the Masons or the Bilderberg group, it may be too late to take action and stop it. If it’s for peace than why is it so quite? Why is it shrouded in secrecy? Is it already too late?

I found the article rather uninteresting. To be honest I think the government…..I mean media was just trying to throw the term “New World Order” around so when it actually happens (which according to henry kissinger is in the beginning of our next presidents term) the people won’t be surprised and possibly revolt. They’ll just say, “oh, yea New World Order, eh? I heard something about that back in April 2009.”

If you want to read the article (and also for proof that Yahoo really wrote this) here is the link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599188951200

History of The New World Order, How it started and what will become of it

According to the World Net Daily,

The phrase ‘new world order’ traces back at least as far as 1940, when author H.G. Wells used it as the title of a book about a socialist, unified, one-world government. The phrase has also been linked to American presidents, including Woodrow Wilson, whose work on establishing the League of Nations pioneered the concept of international government bodies, and to the first President Bush, who used it in a 1989 speech.

“A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment,” said Bush before a joint session of Congress. “Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective – a new world order – can emerge: A new era … in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony.”

The phrase “New World Order” causes alarm for many Americans, particularly those concerned about an international governing body trumping U.S. sovereignty or those that interpret biblical prophecy to foretell the establishment of a one-world government as key to the rise of the Antichrist. Conspiracy theorists, too, have latched on to the phrase, concerned that powerful financial or government figures are secretly plotting to rule the world.

Kissinger’s ties to government and international powers – as well as his use of the phrase – have made him suspect in the eyes of many who are wary of what “new world order” might actually mean.

“There is a need for a new world order,” Kissinger told PBS interviewer Charlie Rose last year, “I think that at the end of this administration, with all its turmoil, and at the beginning of the next, we might actually witness the creation of a new order – because people looking in the abyss, even in the Islamic world, have to conclude that at some point, ordered expectations must return under a different system.”

As WND reported, Kissinger was also part of last year’s super-secret Bilderberg Group, an organization of powerful international elites, including government, business, academic and journalistic representatives, that has convened annually since 1954.

According to sources that have penetrated the high-security meetings, the Bilderberg meetings emphasize a globalist agenda and promote the idea that the notion of national sovereignty is antiquated and regressive.

Source: http://www.worldnetdaily.com

According to Wikipedia their are a number of ways the New World Order could come about.

Postulated implementations

Just as there are several overlapping and even conflicting theories among conspiracy theorists about the nature of the New World Order, so are there several beliefs about how its architects and planners will implement it:

Gradualism

Some conspiracy theorists speculate that the New World Order is being implemented gradually, citing the formation of the Federal Reserve bank; the United Nations; the World Health Organization; the World Bank; the World Trade Organization; the European Union and the Euro currency; the Middle East Free Trade Area and various Middle East peace processes; and the African Union as major milestones.[citation needed]

In particular, paleoconservative documentary maker Alex Jones claims in his film Endgame that the theorized North American Union and the Amero currency will be an implementation of the New World Order, orchestrated by the Bilderberg Group.[31]

Coup d’état and martial law

Some conspiracy theorists, especially those associated with the United States militia movement, speculate that the New World Order will be implemented by martial law after a dramatic coup d’état, using UN peacekeepers and black helicopters, against all nation-states to bring about a world government. Before year 2000 some conspiracists believed this process would be set in motion by the predicted Y2K problem causing societal collapse.[32] After the September 11 attacks, some have become convinced that a more catastrophic terrorist incident will be responsible for triggering this process.

Surveillance-industrial complex

Some religious and secular conspiracy theorists believe that the New World Order will be created by the surveillance-industrial complex through the use of Social Security numbers, and the bar-coding of retail goods with Universal Product Code markings. Current theorists have implicated RFID tagging as well. Consumer privacy advocates Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre, authors of Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID, wrote another book on the subject from a Christian perspective, which associates spychips with the Number of the Beast mentioned in the Book of Revelation.[33] Christian conservative political activist Mark Dice, leader of an organization called “The Resistance of Christ,” also believes there is a strong connection.[34][35][36]

“Externalization of the Hierarchy”

In Alice Bailey’s conspiracy theories, a group of ascended masters called the Great White Brotherhood works on the “inner planes” to oversee humanity’s transition to the New World Order. At present, the members of this Spiritual Hierarchy are only know­n to a few people, with whom they communicate telepathically, but as the need for their personal involvement in the plan increases, there will be an “Externalization of the Hierarchy” and all people will know of their presence on Earth.[37]

Wikipedia has also a time line of the milestones of the New World Order

Timeline

There are several events that are considered pivotal in and related to the establishment of the New World Order:[38]

Kissinger says, “…new world order can be created” with Obama!

First off, I didn’t even know Henry Kissinger was even alive. How old is he like 120 or something. He was like the foreign policy guy for 10 presidents. He was probably their to witness the infamous Abraham Lincoln speech, while planning the New World Order apperntly.

He claims that Barack Obama, or “the perfect president” if you wanna call him that, can creat a New World Order. For those of you that are unfamiliar wth teh New World Order just search “New World Order” in Google and you’ll find out soon enough and then you’ll b back here to comment and release your rage.

Since no on believes me, here is an piece of an articale from World Net Daily.

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


Henry Kissinger

Conflicts across the globe and an international respect for Barack Obama have created the perfect setting for establishment of “a New World

Order,” according to Henry Kissinger, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former secretary of state under President Nixon.

Kissinger has long been an integral figure in U.S. foreign policy, holding positions in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations. Author of over a dozen books on foreign policy, Kissinger was also named by President Bush as the chairman of the Sept. 11 investigatory commission.

Kissinger made the remark in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” hosts Mark Haines and Erin Burnett at the New York Stock Exchange, after Burnett asked him what international conflict would define the Obama administration’s foreign policy.


“The president-elect is coming into office at a moment when there is upheaval in many parts of the world simultaneously,” Kissinger responded. “You have India, Pakistan; you have the jihadist movement. So he can’t really say there is one problem, that it’s the most important one. But he can give new impetus to American foreign policy partly because the reception of him is so extraordinary around the world. His task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created. It’s a great opportunity, it isn’t just a crisis.”

Kissinger’s comments are captured at roughly the two-minute mark of the following video

:

Are you shocked yet? Yeah, I thought so. Why not vote while you enraged!

[Breaking News] Say “goodbye” to Mr.Bush!

So, yesterday Mr.Bush bade his farewell to the country. Blabbing about our journey together and talking about our founders. I think all of it is bubkis. There is no we in I. Mr. Bush made all the decisions. We didn’t make mistakes. He did. We didn’t choose war. He did. We didn’t crash two planes into the twin towers and kill 3000 Americans. He did. We didn’t elect the worst president in United States history. He did.

This is a farewell from him to us. It’s not a farewell from us to him. Nor should we acknowledge his farewell.

Yet, new questions arise. We have a new president or is it a new problem? Did we elect our new president or did our new president elect us. Are we making the right decisions or is he making the right decisions. Are there hidden motives? We must look beyond the cameras, beyond the press, we must look into the president and interpret his real intentions.  We must look at the people around him and their intentions.

We may be the victims of starvation, and a savior comes along like the president-elect, we jump on the food and submit. We do as he says with no objections, we follow his lead with no caution, we place our trust in a leader that makes promises, but its one thing to make promises and it’s a whole other thing to keep them. Placing your trust in a leader that makes promises is like placing your trust in a lion that says, “I won’t eat you.” Placing your trust in a leader that keeps promises is like placing your trust in a butterfly that says, “I won’t hurt you.”

The saying goes, “If the people lead, the leaders will follow.” A perfect example of that has happened, and been happening, all over the world. It’s time we show our president-elect that we can lead him, that we elect him, that he doesn’t lead us and he doesn’t elect us as his followers because we are weak and media driven. It’s about time we show the media that they don’t pick our leader, that they don’t control us, we do. If we all just suddenly stopped watching TV, they would be grovelling at our feet begging that we do; Then we would be the leaders, right? We would be controlling them.

See, leadership happens when one person wants something that another person can give or make happen, or promise to happen. In this case we have a trash economy, we want it better. We have the worst president in history, we want a better one. Mr.president-elect (Obama) promises he will give us a better economy, and he promises a better president in him. That’s were leadership happens, he leads us because he can do something that we can’t and we want that something.

The media makes money off of our desire to watch TV. Our desire to listen to what ever they say, drives them to elect our president. When we stop watching TV, the leadership role changes. They want us and they will do anything to make us watch TV. Now we control them because we have something that they want-Television ratings…. and money.

So, Mr.Bush I appreciate your farewell, but that’s all it will be….an appreciation. I don’t accept it, I don’t give my farewell to you, I just appreciate it.

I thought I’d show you guys some pics, that I photoshopped

Using some kind of art tool which I can no longer remember.

Using some kind of art tool which I can no longer remember.

Using the burn tool, I'm not that good I know!

Using the burn tool, I'm not that good I know!

Iraqi Journalist Throws Shoes at George W.Bush?

To much of my surprise I saw, on Yahoo, the above title (minus the questions mark). The story goes, George W.Bush makes a surprise visit to Iraq. During a press conference with Iraqi president (I don’t know his name) a Journalist throws both of his shoes at the President. The President ducked and was NOT hit by either shoe. No one was injured during this fiasco. 

 

As all of you probably know my anti-New World Order attitude, it only seems natural for me to debunk this. I am, and I think you will be pleased with the results. 

 

Before we start I want everyone to see the real thing so here is a video.  The captions in the video are what the journalist is saying during his rampant shoe throwing.

 

Now let me show you the flaws with this whole scenario and why this was all an act…..a rehearsed act. Just like the Bin Laden Videos. 

 

Mr.Bush, Just seconds before a Journalist throws two shoes at him.

Mr.Bush, Just seconds before a Journalist throws the first of two shoes at him.

Mr.Bush, Just milliseconds before a Journalist throws two shoes at him.

Mr.Bush, Just milliseconds before a Journalist throws the second of two shoes at him.

 

Now lets skip to the more exciting part. While the shoe is actually making its way over Mr.Bush’s head.

 

 

Mr. Bush, while the first of two shoes comes over his head.

Mr. Bush, while the first of two shoes comes over his head.

 

 

 

Let us analyze the first flaw in this act. 

 

 

"How is Bush able to duck, yet the Iraqi president can't react?"

"How is Bush able to duck, yet the Iraqi president can't react?"

 

 

How is Bush able to swiftly duck, yet the Iraqi president can barely react? That “shoe” is a sandal, which carries significantly less mass which means significantly less velocity. 

 

 

The second shoe is flying over Bush's head.

The second shoe is flying over Bush's head.

 

Now the flaws.

 

 

"The Iraqi President has yet to offer a believable reaction."

"The Iraqi President has yet to offer a believable reaction."

 The Iraqi President has yet to offer a believable reaction. Unwillingly, extending your arm is in no way protecting the president nor changing the trajectory of the sandal. 

 

 

 

Seconds after Bush nearly get hit in the head by two shoes thrown by a journalist.

Seconds after Bush nearly get hit in the head by two shoes thrown by a journalist.

 

 

Now the flaws of this image.

 

 

Bush shoos a security guard after the guard comes to his aid.

Bush shoos a security guard after the guard comes to his aid.

You may need to watch the video again to spot this one. Mr.Bush actually shoos the guard away as the guard comes to his aid. 

 

Now I want to talk about the key area in this video. It is the whole back half of the room. Here is an untouched picture with no visual aid from me. Pay attention to the back half of the room. Just think, what is missing?

 

 

Pay attention to the back half.

Pay attention to the back half.

Do you know what’s wrong?  well, here are the answers. 

 

 

 

 

 

The chandelier is in the way of the sandal throw.

The chandelier is in the way of the sandal throw.

First off, their are no security guards behind the president or on either side. There isn’t even anyone sitting at the desk to the left. Here’s why, Judging by the  reflections of the chandelier  off the wall and desk, the chandelier is directly or approximately under the desk and in line with Bush and the Iraqi president. To be honest I’ve never seen the president, or any president, talk at a podium at the FAR right of a room and skip the middle. If Mr.Bush and the Iraqi president were in the middle of the room, like they were suppose to be, and the guards were near the president, like they were suppose to be, The sandal would have hit the chandelier and all havoc would wreak. Pieces of chandelier would be everywhere and the president could have been injured. 

If you look at the chandeliers height, based on reflection, it is right in-line with the door which is at a safe guess of 7ft. Assuming that the president is an  average height of 6ft that makes the chandelier only 1 foot higher than the presidents head. 

Instead of catastrophe, the sandals quietly slam into the wall behind and guards suspiciously run out from the door on the side of the wall behind the president. It took a whopping 7 seconds for the guards to reach the president from that back room as well as the guard that had to stagger over people. According to my calculations if the journalist had a standard hand gun, he could have got off 9 to 11 shots in that same period of 7 seconds. The last time the secret service was not around the president was during John F.Kennedy’s deadly drive through Dallas. 

 

All comments and opinions welcome.

 

What I think will happen this election……

Here are my predictions for the turn out of this here election:

http://news.yahoo.com/election/2008/dashboard?mapid=12305

This will be updated

This will be updated

Obama Wins in Mississippi!!!!

JACKSON, Miss. – Barack Obama coasted to victory in Mississippi‘s Democratic primary Tuesday, latest in a string of racially polarized presidential contests across the Deep South and a final tune-up before next month’s high-stakes race with Hillary Rodham Clinton in Pennsylvania. – Yahoo News

Obama was winning roughly 90 percent of the black vote but only about one-quarter of the white vote, extending a pattern that carried him to victory in earlier primaries in South Carolina, Alabama, Georgia and Louisiana.

His triumph seemed unlikely to shorten a Democratic marathon expected to last at least six more weeks — and possibly far longer — while Republicans and their nominee-in-waiting, Sen. John McCain, turn their attention to the fall campaign. – Yahoo News

“Now we look forward to campaigning in Pennsylvania and around the country,” Maggie Williams, Clinton’s campaign manager, said in a written statement that congratulated Obama on his victory.

“I’m confident that once we get a nominee, the party is going to be unified,” Obama said as he collected his victory.

But in a race growing more contentious, he took a swipe at the way his rival’s campaign has conducted itself.

“We’ve been very measured in terms of how we talk about Senator Clinton,” he said. “I’ve been careful to say that I think Senator Clinton is a capable person and that should she win the nomination, obviously, I would support her. I’m not sure we’ve been getting that same approach from the Clinton campaign,” he said in on CNN. – Yahoo News

Wow, Obama is still going strong. Hillary is going to need something big to come back let alone even win this thing.

Returns from 25 percent of Mississippi’s precincts showed Obama gaining 54 percent, to 43 percent for Clinton.

Obama picked up at least six Mississippi delegates to the Democratic National Convention, with 27 more to be awarded. He hoped for a win sizable enough to erase most if not all of Clinton’s 11-delegate gain from last week, when she won three primaries. -Yahoo News

Yeah, that three primary win the Hillary got last week must have scared the Obama supporters. She just could keep the momentum.

The Illinois senator had 1,585 delegates to 1,473 for Clinton. It takes 2,025 to win the nomination.

Neither of the two rivals appears able to win enough delegates through primaries and caucuses to prevail in their historic race for the nomination, a development that has elevated the importance of nearly 800 elected officials and party leaders who will attend next summer’s national convention as unelected superdelegates.

Obama leads Clinton among pledged delegates, 1,374-1,226 in The Associated Press count, while the former first lady has an advantage among superdelegates, 247-211.

There was little suspense about the Mississippi outcome, and both Clinton and Obama spent part of their day campaigning in Pennsylvania, which has 158 delegates at stake in a primary on April 22.

The volatile issue of race has been a constant presence in the historic Democratic campaign, and it resurfaced during the day in the form of comments by Geraldine Ferraro, the 1984 Democratic vice presidential candidate and a Clinton supporter.

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept,” she said in an interview with the Daily Breeze of Torrance, Calif., that was published last Friday. – Yahoo News

Clinton expressed disagreement with Ferraro’s comments, and said, “It’s regrettable that any of our supporters — on both sides, because we both have this experience — say things that kind of veer off into the personal.”

Obama called Ferraro’s remarks “patently absurd.” – Yahoo News

Blacks, who have supported Obama in overwhelming numbers in earlier primaries, accounted for roughly half the ballots cast in Mississippi, according to interviews with voters leaving polling places.

About one in six Democratic primary voters were independents, and Clinton and Obama split their support. Another 10 percent of voters were Republican, and they preferred Clinton by a margin of 3-1.

Six in 10 Obama supporters said he should pick the former first lady as his vice presidential running mate if he wins the presidential nomination. A smaller share of Clinton’s voters, four in 10, said she should place him on the ticket. – Yahoo News

Every time I say Obama is going to win, Hillary pops out of now where and wins three primaries. So, I’m just going to say that every presidential hopeful has an equal chance to win and I wish good luck to Obama and Hillary. [But lets be honest for a second, it does look like Obama is takin this thing home Right?]

See Also: Hillary Clinton Wants Obama for Vice President!!

Post Navigation