"What makes your opinions the only ones worth listening too?" -jlc24
I am constantly amazed how some people can read an entire thread and then make up something in their own minds that someone else said.
Read this thread again. You obviously didn't get it the first time. I began by clearly stating my intentions with the original post. I quoted something pertinent to what was written in another thread by someone else and noted that I thought it was "amusing and interesting".
Then bobcat posted a comment that though slightly confusing, seemed to me to say that once again I was trying to force my candidate down someone's throat, i.e., pimping him out. Since that was not the intent of my original post, and knowing that bobcat's opinions are vastly different than mine, I suggested - half-jokingly - that perhaps if my posts consistently irritate him he should consider ignoring mine in the future.
From that point suddenly others jump in with how important it is to have open discourse and accept everyone's opinions, regardless of what they are, because nobody's right and nobody's wrong. My only comment past that was in regard to global terrorism.
So please tell me how you've leapt to the conclusion you have that would make you state "What makes your opinions the only ones worth listening to?"
Disliking someone shouldn't cause another to make up things about that person, put words in their mouth that they did not say, or accuse them of beliefs or opinions that they don't have and never said.
There are some people on this forum - and I'm not naming names because people who can read can figure it out on their own - who seldom post any comments of their own, any opinions or back-and-forth conversation, and who are in short not really what you'd call contributors to the forum...EXCEPT when they feel the need to criticize another poster.
A message board is sort of like real life. Some people get out there and play, sometimes making friends, sometimes coming to good-natured blows, but still out there playing...while others sit in the shadows and wait to throw insults at the players.
Can anyone give me a single reason I should vote for Barack Obama?
The guy is a junior senator that has spent most of his term campaigning for the presidency. His very brief voting record is abysmal and considered to be the most liberal on Capital Hill. Yet, he claims he is the person to bring both parties together over the next four years. Fat chance of that!
He pushes socialist programs that will redistribute hard working people's money and put it into programs for those that can't or won't work, but his charitable contributions are next to nil. The bulk of which went to a black liberation style church that preaches anti-American sentiments.
This whole election season is starting to look like a Spielberg movie gone bad!
Can anyone give me a single reason I should vote for Barack Obama?
bamabob, the short answer to your question is "no". The reason I say this is because you already know - in fact knew long before the Reverend Wright issue - that you would not vote for Obama. Yes, you had a certain degree of respect for the man (if I'm correctly recalling things you've earlier posted), but never would you have considered throwing your vote his way in the general election.
Now of course you, like many others who never would have voted for him in the first place have what you consider a good, valid reason not to. In fact, you've mentioned several reasons you would not vote for him.
Your question would be the same as my asking "Can anyone give me a single reason I should vote for John McCain?" and expecting someone to actually give me a reason that would change my mind. When each citizen reaches the point in an election year when they have made a choice, often that choice is made for them by the other candidates. The reasons are many. A particular candidate cannot win. Another is so vile on his war stance that one's conscience wouldn't allow a vote for him. Maybe it's something as indefinable as personality. Some folks may not think that's important in the grand scheme of things with so many other critical issues. But a person (for my example let's say a woman) who turns off people right and left and who most people honestly say can garner no respect would NOT be the best choice for America's highest post.
So in the end I think that far more people end up voting for a candidate by default than because of ebullient zeal.
Do I believe that Barack Obama has shortcomings? Of course he does. Do I believe that he has more shortcomings that the other viable candidates? I do not. The vote will come down to a choice between flawed, imperfect individuals, not between someone Christ-like or Satanic.
You will NOT vote for Obama, and that's fine. Don't look for reasons to do so. Just accept it won't happen and vote your conscience. But at the same time, don't think your candidate is worthy and flawless and will always make the right choices and the perfect decisions. To the best of my knowledge no president before has ever been that person and the likelihood is that no one from this day forward ever will be either.
Come November, each of us will have one vote. Of course with delegates and superdelegates, our vote may really NOT be worth what it should be, but it is what it is and nobody can make it more than that. I respect the vote that anyone makes, as long as they've thought it out and are voting for the best leader in their eyes, in their heart...or against the one they feel will let this country spiral even further than it's heading. The voter I'll never respect is the one who's voting against the black or against the woman or against the person who in their eyes is imperfect.
You are right on one point and that is that I never planned to vote for Obama or Clinton. Race and gender have nothing to do with my choice. The Wright issue is intriguing in that those that stand behind Obama no matter what make excuses for his involvement in such a fanatical organization with deep rooted anti-American sentiments.
Set the Wright issue aside and tell me just exactly about this man’s politics appeal to you! I can easily do the same for McCain. There is absolutely nothing mysterious about McCain and his very long record speaks loud and clear.
Strong Defense and National Security
Strategy for Victory in Iraq
Commitment to Our Service Members, Past & Present
2nd Amendment Rights
Pro-Life
Lower Taxes
Smaller, Less Intrusive Federal Government
Lobbying & Ethics Reform
Strict Constructionist Philosophy *
*Perhaps one of the most important and long-lasting impacts a President will have on this country are the people he selects to sit on the Supreme Court.
The list goes on and on….. Can you give me a reason that I should consider either Obama or Clinton? Or, do you want to continue your nebulous diatribe about nothing; much like your chosen candidate does in each of his speeches?
I'm going to put myself out here for a minute-has anyone read the Left Behind Series? I don't know how the internet rumor got started, and I have actually never seen the rumor-but I do find it interesting that people are questioning this as a possibility. If you have read the Left Behind Books (and yes, they are fiction, but based on interpretation of biblical prophesy) then you can see some possible correlation here. Have I wondered it-yes I have. I didn't say anything to anyone, and this was before I even knew someone else was thinking the same thing. The funny thing is, even my husband mentioned it, and he hasn't been to church in years! I almost fell out when he said something to that effect after hearing Obama speak. Perhaps I am totally wrong, but what if it is true? I liked Obama at the very beginning, but then I just felt like he couldn't be trusted. I still feel that he is untrustworthy. I don't know that I can explain it, but he has a sense of self-righteous "falseness" about him. Gut instinct.
There is nothing "mysterious" about Obama either. You apparently just haven't cared enough to investigate.
Commitment to Our Service Members, Past & Present - Check
Lower Taxes - Check
Smaller, Less Intrusive Federal Government - Check
Lobbying & Ethics Reform - Check
2nd Amendment Rights - For gun control but does not intend to take away people's guns.
Iraq - Withdraw troops beginning immediately; boost reconstruction efforts to restore basic services in Iraq; engage neighboring states and Arab nations to help secure Iraq's future.
Human Rights - Supports civil unions; pro-choice.
Health Care - Create a national health program; mandatory coverage of all children.
Immigration - Add personnel at borders and ports of entry; crack down on employers who use illegal immigrants.
Energy - Reduce carbon in transportation fuels; raise vehicle fuel economy standards; promote use of hybrid and ethanol vehicles; reduce greenhouse emissions; fund exploration for alternative fuels.
Stem Cell Research - Supports it.
Though you and I will likely never see eye-to-eye on politics, I happily give you ten points though for the colorful "nebulous diatribe".
Commitment to our service members – Both Barack and Hillary voted no on the $120 billion dollar package to fund our military, but it went on to pass in the Senate by an 80-14 vote on May 24, 2007.
Lower Taxes – Barack supports increasing capital gains taxes by 20 – 25%, which most economists agree would be a calamity.
Smaller, Less Intrusive Federal Government – The fundamental differences between Democrats and Republicans lie within this very concept. How you can say Obama is for a national this and a national that yet be for smaller federal government is a little hard for me to understand. He apparently wants to put everything into federal government’s hands.
Lobbying & Ethics Reform – McCain has a proven record on these issues. Obama has not been tested in this area and so far all we know is that he will take large donations from anyone handing them out.
Iraq – Obama has wavered on his intentions on this topic over the course of a very few months. How can anyone be certain what his plans really are?
Now see, I could return your comments by saying that McCain's commitment to our service members means keeping our soldiers over in Iraq for the next ten decades, dying by the thousands. Way to commit to our service members.
Obama's tax relief plan would mean $80 billion or more in tax cuts - for the middle class ALONE.
McCain's "proven record" on lobbying and ethics reform is a joke! The majority of McCain's donations are from large donors, whereas the majority of Obama's donations came from donors giving less than $200.
We could argue back and forth on the merits of our candidates from now until November, but what's the point? Your mind's made up and mine - barring something unforeseen happening - is too. I'm actually a little confused by why you continue your assault on Obama. I haven't heard you make a case against Hillary, though I'm sure you dislike her as well. In fact, I'm not sure I've heard you argue vehemently against any other candidate. Just for my own curiosity, why the fascination with Obama? Are you that afraid he's gonna win?
Phil Singer, Deputy Communications Director: "It's unfortunate that Senator Obama is using false advertising to explain why he can be trusted to do something about energy prices. Senator Obama says he doesn’t take campaign contributions from oil companies but the reality is that ExxonMobil, Shell and others are among his donors. I wonder if they’ll fix the ad."
A new ad by Sen. Obama running in Pennsylvania falsely claims that Sen. Obama does not accept money from the oil industry. In the ad, Sen. Obama says, "I'm Barack Obama and I don't take money from oil companies or lobbyists and I won’t let them block change anymore."
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Sen. Obama has received over $160,000 from the oil and gas companies. Two major bundlers for his campaign -- George Kaiser [Tulsa, Oklahoma] and Robert Cavnar �" are oil company CEOs. Sen. Obama has accepted money from Exxon, Shell, BP, Chevron and just about every other major oil company. Just last month, Sen. Obama accepted another $8,400 from ExxonMobil, $12,370 from Chevron and $6,500 from British Petroleum.
In 2005, Sen. Obama voted for the Dick Cheney energy bill, which was written in secret with the oil industry. Hillary Clinton opposed Cheney's energy bill, has a plan to eliminate oil industry tax breaks, and would require oil companies to contribute to a $50 billion strategic energy fund to jumpstart research and investment in clean energy technologies.
There are a few points to be made about your queries.
1) The topic you started is about Barack Obama, not Hillary Clinton.
2) Some of you are seeing this man through rose colored glasses and I find that to be both interesting and a curiosity.
3) Unless a person has been living in a cave for the past several decades, they know who Hillary Clinton is and what she is about. That can't be said about Barack Obama
1. The topic I started was a Snopes article on the silliness of an e-mail being forwarded that compares Obama to the AntiChrist. My mistake was thinking that even after saying up-front that I didn't want the thread to deteriorate into Obama-bashing it wouldn't happen. Big surprise there. I honestly don't know why I even keep talking politics on this board, as skewed as the numbers are with the preponderance of ultra-Conservatives.
2. And YOU aren't seeing McCain through rose-colored glasses? Pot/Kettle/Black.
3. Point taken about Hillary. I disagree that the same can't be said about Obama.
I no longer want to be the lone voice on this message board desiring change in America instead of another term of Bush. Y'all conservatives can praise the warmonger from now until election time, ignoring his age, his senile blips, and his stubborn refusal to stay a course that is not working. You did the same thing with Bush his last term, and look where it got us.
I don't think anyone has said they don't want change. Sure I would like world peace, to have a fat healthy paycheck that isn't consumed by grocery and gas bill, to have earth friendly choices and blah, blah, blah. But I don't think that Obama is the one to give us that change. I do not like the way he flips things he says, to placate people when he is called on something-ie...comments that were made about his church, that if Wright hadn't retired, he would have left the church. Hello? A little too late for that after listening to those hate filled messages for 20 years! That's a cover up.
Clinton and McCain may not be the perfect candidates for change either. Let's face it, no candidate is perfect. But at least these two have experience, they are not merely "junior senators" which is in my opinion like being a high school or college graduate-you think you know everything and have all the answers, but until you have lived a little and experienced life, you don't know squat! Clinton can't control her household-ie...the Monica, etc, etc, etc scandals-why would I think she can run a country. McCain has experience, he has the wisdom of time on his side-yes he may be a little older, but when it comes to matters of running our nation, I would rather have someone older, wiser and with experience, than someone who is wet behind the ears, and can't even give a straight answer. He is like a kid caught sneaking out of the house or skipping school, always trying to justify his actions even when they are WRONG! And the saddest part, he doesn't even recognize them as wrong, until they get picked up by the media.
Why is asking questions about Barack Obama's policies considered bashing? Why is pointing out the discrepancies between what he says versus what he has done considered bashing?
This man burst onto the national scene after giving the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention a very few years ago and went on to become a U.S. Senator from Illinois. The majority of his time since winning that seat has been spent campaigning for president and the very brief voting record he has established does not reflect the feelings of the majority of people in this country. That is an important point.
Questioning Obama's true intentions appears to be off-limits to some, while they feel perfectly justified in expressing discriminatory comments about people of a certain age that have served this country well in past wars. That is distasteful and ludicrous!
Obama has made it known that he would have face to face talks with rival nations such as Iran, North Korea and China. In an attempt to persuade them to take a stand against terrorist organizations to end global terrorism. Israel has had these same negotiations for decades with no resolve in thier dispute. Obama is about to create a diplomatic mess that will take away our ability to strike these terror organizations with force, effectively tieing our hands behind our back. We are going to have bombs blowing up all over america and will not be allowed to retalate against them. Obama is a soft president at best and if elected your children are going to pay the price.
Observation - We seem to dwell on the non-sense. I guess it's entertaining and it doesn't burden the higher processing/learning centers of our brains. It’s easy to just accept the prejudges passed down the family tree, why else would people stay members of the same church as their parents. I finally heard a new campaign issue that would help fix the mess we are in – The governments can spend money to keeps jobs from being outsourced overseas. People have no idea how much money is lost and how much it cost a communities each time a plant is closed. Bringing jobs back home and getting rid of the war mongers could save this country. If we continue down the path we are on, the United States will soon be bankrupt. Also, if we bring home the jobs, maybe we wouldn’t have to put so many people in prison. 1 in 9 black males between 20 and 33 is behind bars. 1 in 30 white male, 1 in 100 general population. 50 percent high school graduation rate? What are we doing? This is crazy!
