2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

[Digit]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

But what about the big people in high places that make important comments with lots of big complicated words covered in all their secrecy?

Is it all a well covered game of secrecy and hidden means and evil motives?

 

[pauli]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

Phoenix stated:

\"John was light in the criticism here. I believe Alexander did refer to the president of 2009 as a monster.\"

Of course that is possible, however, if the jury is still out on Titor and his predictions, it is doubly - or triply - out on both Alexander and Maxwell. I reserve my judgement for seeing if Titor's words start panning out. And then, I will revisit Alexander and Maxwell's words in turn.

Not trying to be difficult here, but, well... you know... :dry:

 

[sosuemetoo]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

Pauli's quote from John Titor

Your enemy was in the cities. Was the President in 2005 also on the enemy side? How did you feel personally about the President then?

The President or \"leader\" in 2005 I believe tried desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together but many of their policies drove a larger wedge into the Bill of Rights. The President in 2009 was interested only in keeping his/her power base.

This quote is exactly why I am a believer in John Titor. In 1999-2000, we could never have imagined anything like what we see today.

"The larger wedge into the Bill of Rights," I believe pertains to Patriot Act I and II. People all over the US are screaming that their rights have been taken away through these acts. But how do we, as a country" protect ourselves from those who wish to kill us? Continue giving out visas, leaving our borders porous, and giving those here illegally the same rights as those that citizens enjoy? We just can't, IMO. So we have to have a way to question all people that are here. If you've done nothing wrong...like fund the enemies, etc, what is the fear? I guess some of the fear is what John Titor has stated.

"I believe desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together" , I believe Titor is speaking of Bush. I know many will disagree with me. However, listen to the campaign speaches. Who talks about "two different Americas.?" Kerry does. Whether it is about being in Vietnam, or not serving in Vietnam. Whether it is having healthcare or not having healthcare. Whether it is paying too much tax or not enough tax. The list goes on and on. Bush unites the country saying that we are all Americans, equal in opportunity and priveleges. Bush is your Lincoln.

"The President in 2009 was interested only in keeping his/her power base." I believe this is Hillary. She is a powerful woman, and remains powerful as long as she remains married to Bill. In some ways I believe her to be the reason he got to the Whitehouse, and why he was able to remain in the Whitehouse after he was impeached. She remained with him for power. She would want to keep her powerbase. Also note that Titor used the word his/her.

"Mom"

 

[TTO34]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

2008 is a women!!

EDIT:

TTO34 Please confine your story to this thread.

http://www.timetravelforum.net/forums/inde...p?showtopic=887

Posting your story in other threads, in whole or in part, will lead to having your posts in other threads deleted.

 

[Judge Bean]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

Originally posted by pauli@Sep 6 2004, 09:59 AM
Cornelia writes:

The 2008 President will be a gangster.

My understanding of Titor's words was different. Here they are:

Your enemy was in the cities. Was the President in 2005 also on the enemy side? How did you feel personally about the President then?

The President or \"leader\" in 2005 I believe tried desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together but many of their policies drove a larger wedge into the Bill of Rights. The President in 2009 was interested only in keeping his/her power base.

I am not sure he stated the President of 2009 to be a gangster - though I could be wrong in my interpretation of these words. It seemed more to me that the President of 2009 will be more interested in keeping his/her power. That does not, necessarily, mean he/she will resort to gangster types of activities. It could simply be the case of anxiously trying to maintain the status quo and ignoring the complaints and/or concerns of the American people. He/she could just be selfishly trying all that would be possible to stay in power. This could be done by being another poll watching sort of president.

​

Notice that Titor says that the president in 2005 will try to hold the country together despite having driven a wedge into the Bill of Rights. He does not say that this will be a new president, and the description actually fits Bush better than Kerry, and the description of the 2009 president sounds more like a Democrat than a Republican.

 

[Mudpuppy]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

Originally posted by Paul J. Lyon+Oct 20 2004, 12:25 PM--><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-pauli@Sep 6 2004, 09:59 AM
Cornelia writes:

The 2008 President will be a gangster.

My understanding of Titor's words was different. Here they are:

Your enemy was in the cities. Was the President in 2005 also on the enemy side? How did you feel personally about the President then?

The President or "leader" in 2005 I believe tried desperately to be the next Lincoln and hold the country together but many of their policies drove a larger wedge into the Bill of Rights. The President in 2009 was interested only in keeping his/her power base.

I am not sure he stated the President of 2009 to be a gangster - though I could be wrong in my interpretation of these words. It seemed more to me that the President of 2009 will be more interested in keeping his/her power. That does not, necessarily, mean he/she will resort to gangster types of activities. It could simply be the case of anxiously trying to maintain the status quo and ignoring the complaints and/or concerns of the American people. He/she could just be selfishly trying all that would be possible to stay in power. This could be done by being another poll watching sort of president.

​

Notice that Titor says that the president in 2005 will try to hold the country together despite having driven a wedge into the Bill of Rights. He does not say that this will be a new president, and the description actually fits Bush better than Kerry, and the description of the 2009 president sounds more like a Democrat than a Republican.

[snapback]12655[/snapback]​

[/b][/quote]

I agree with Sos and Paul. Also, I think with Cheney's failing health that he may not be able to be on the ticket for the next election which would open it wide up for the Democrats again (male or female). One wouldn't think to even put in "his/her" if there weren't a good reason for it.

 

[StarLord]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

What enemy would live in the cities? Rich people? Most of the real powerful rich folks live out in the suburbs not in the cities IMHO. So what "ENEMY" were they refering to?

 

[Mudpuppy]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

Originally posted by StarLord@Oct 20 2004, 02:16 PM
What enemy would live in the cities? Rich people? Most of the real powerful rich folks live out in the suburbs not in the cities IMHO. So what \"ENEMY\" were they refering to?

​

Didn't JT once say that the "enemy" would be the ones with the most to lose? It could be financially or politically or both. Those types of people are in the city (in a working capacity....not living).

 

[StarLord]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

Yes, but that still makes no sense because of the high percentage of poor people that live in cities. In one sense, it's the poor that have the most to lose.

 

[CaryP]

2015 in Retrospect: Where Will You Be Politically?

Those in power (govt. and corporations - all types of industries) have the most to lose. It's always a matter of follow the money. The "poor" people on govt. entitlement rolls have nothing to fear. The current govt. structure will always have something to "give out" as it's a big vote getter, and a great way to enslave a people. Remember to "follow the money and power". That's who has the most to lose.

Cary