[johnwk]

.
Is Obama a racist? Listen to HIS OWN WORDS!


Maybe the above is why Nation of Islam Leader Louis farrakhan calls Obama the messiah!


Also see Obama's Minister Honored Farrakhan


Monday, January 14, 2008 7:49 PM
By: Ronald Kessler

Barack Obama’s longtime minister, mentor, and sounding board has been a key supporter of Louis Farrakhan and last month honored the Nation of Islam leader for lifetime achievement.

Why has our big socialist media not reported on this?


JWK


Do we really want to place the world’s most powerful military force in the hands of someone that was virtually unknown to the America People until two years ago when our socialist big media gave Barack Obama its full propaganda support?

[itistoday]

Oooo... I'm shivering in my boots!

Obama Truth.

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by johnwk 

Do we really want to place the world’s most powerful military force in the hands of someone that was virtually unknown to the America People until two years ago when our socialist big media gave Barack Obama its full propaganda support?

Not sure how you can possibly substantiate the "virtually unknown" claim, but to answer your question: I sure do!

Barack Obama has clearly demonstrated to America, through his speeches, his books, his actions, and his record, that he is the best choice we have right now. Can we trust a man who refuses to talk to other countries to be in charge of the most powerful military in the world? That's a rhetorical question, of course not!

[ebuddy]

The fact of the matter is that Obama has glommed onto a fashionable world view in which the white man bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature.

You're welcome to watch the video detailing the words of Obama or you can just say; "I can't hear you!" It's not like Obama was trying to hide anything. At least, not in the written word. How damnable would it have been for him to actually have spoken his authored ignorance. He must've known he'd be running for office.

JWK; our media has not published these views because they stand in the way of giving their Preferred Ideology™ thrust.

[stumblinmike]

Fascinating! And why would America pick this dangerous Obama man as their leader? They must be as dank as gnats!

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

The fact of the matter is that Obama has glommed onto a fashionable world view in which the white man bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature.

Where has Obama said this?

You're welcome to watch the video detailing the words of Obama or you can just say; "I can't hear you!"

It's more along the lines of: people listen to what both candidates have to say, and based on that they make up their mind. I've listened to the words of both Obama and McCain, and Barack is right, "McCain is out of touch".

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by itistoday 

Where has Obama said this?

I watched the video of him reading from his book. Well... most of the words. Some of them he didn't repeat for his audio book.

It's more along the lines of: people listen to what both candidates have to say, and based on that they make up their mind. I've listened to the words of both Obama and McCain, and Barack is right, "McCain is out of touch".

I don't think the "out of touch" mantra is a good one. I think this reflects poorly on Obama as it was a label that stuck to him for some time. On what issues specifically, is McCain out of touch? There seems to be an assumption that the people have spoken and that Obama will be our next President. I'm not so sure.

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I watched the video of him reading from his book. Well... most of the words. Some of them he didn't repeat for his audio book.

I've listened to part of his book (via audiobook, but feel free to paste in quotes that you feel were left out and are relevant), The Audacity of Hope, and found it to be very well written, and very intelligent. I don't remember anything along the lines of "the white man bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature."

On what issues specifically, is McCain out of touch?

He was a strong supporter for the war in Iraq on the outset (and still is). He thinks that the US government shouldn't attempt to talk to leaders of "evil" countries (and even believes there is such a thing as an "evil" country!) He's very weak on healthcare, and on education (find me a clip of McCain making nearly as much sense as Obama does here). He doesn't know how to use a computer (so can we trust him to make the right decision on issues like net neutrality?) Perhaps the greatest evidence is his choice for VP, Sarah Palin, a complete embarrassment. It's pretty clear to me, at least, that McCain is "out of touch" on a myriad of issues.

[itistoday]

Regarding McCain's support for the Iraq war, I thought the wiki entry on him did a good job of summarizing just how "out of touch" he was (and still is) on that issue:

Meanwhile, in discussions over proposed U.S. action against Iraq, McCain was a strong supporter of the Bush administration's position.[144] He stated that Iraq was "a clear and present danger to the United States of America", and voted accordingly for the Iraq War Resolution in October 2002.[144] He predicted that U.S. forces would be treated as liberators by a large number of the Iraqi people.[155]

Obama was one of the few people to vote against the war.

[Krusty]

Originally Posted by johnwk 

<more from the MacNN branch of the McCain campaign>

Why has our big socialist media not reported on this?


JWK

Thank god we have you, JWK, to splice together prepackaged youtube scare-vids and stories from newsmax to make sure we're made aware of the threat against us. I'm shocked by all these things about Obama (for the 200th time). Next time, please take the word "scary" out of the title of your thread ... I like surprises.

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I watched the video of him reading from his book. Well... most of the words. Some of them he didn't repeat for his audio book.

Many audiobooks are abridged. Next

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I don't think the "out of touch" mantra is a good one. I think this reflects poorly on Obama as it was a label that stuck to him for some time. On what issues specifically, is McCain out of touch? There seems to be an assumption that the people have spoken and that Obama will be our next President. I'm not so sure.

The out of touch mantra is working as a criticism of McCain ... especially on the economy. You can see why in the debates and even in his interviews. After he gives his stump , he is literally speechless to respond to comments and questions posed to him. In the past, he's commented on his own weakness on understanding the economy and the plans he now proposes for taxes and healthcare make it abundantly clear that the same right-wing, "ownership" experts are penning the policies that he espouses. They are almost a complete 180 from what he said on the issues back in the "maverick" days prior to 2006. Find any of the (rare) times where he actually responds to a question or tries to explain why his policies will provide a better result for most people. He can't because they won't ... and he gets the appropriate deer-in-headlights look when pressed on it.
On many other issues including the Wars, bin Laden, Social Security, etc. he tells us that he knows what to do, knows how to win, find, or fix them. Wow! Those are some pretty bold promises from a guy who's had every opportunity to share this wisdom of the last 8 years but hasn't. I audibly chuckled when he said that he wasn't saying how he'd catch bin Laden because it would be "telegraphing" his plans and then chided Obama for his freshman mistake of cluing bin Laden to his plans to go into Pakistan if necessary.
His campaign has made an open statement that they are doing whatever they can to "turn the page" on "issues" and instead focus on "who is Barack Obama". I'm not saying people aren't interested, but the clearly are not interested in that as an issue to the exclusion of the other issues that they are quite concerned with . When people ask "How is this tax policy going to benefit me and the general economy ?" the McCain camp is left speechless on taxation and instead of answering say, "Hey, did you hear that that Obama is palling around with terrorists ?". This thread is a case in point.

However you slice it, "out of touch" is sticking and producing results for the Obama campaign and "Who is Barack Obama" is failing for McCain. Every week that these themes persist, McCain loses a little more ground.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by johnwk 

Do we really want to place the world’s most powerful military force in the hands of someone that was virtually unknown to the America People until two years ago when our socialist big media gave Barack Obama its full propaganda support?

In what ways was GW Bush better known to the American people before we elected him? Anything besides being his father's son?

[Ghoser777]

I'm convinced. Bright colors and larger, darker fonts always makes a winning argument.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by itistoday 

I've read part of his book (via audiobook during a long car ride), The Audacity of Hope, and found it to be very well written, and very intelligent. I don't remember anything along the lines of "the white man bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature."

I never claimed he said; "the white man bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature". I said he has glommed onto a fashionable world view in which the white man bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature. He chuckles when he utters the words of Malcolm X, claiming we've been "bamboozled" and "hoodwinked". He knows what he's doing and I know what he's doing.

He was a strong supporter for the war in Iraq on the outset (and still is).

There's nothing "out of touch" about this. Most of the American public and in fact most politicans from both sides of the aisle were strongly in support of this doctrine, uttered first by Clinton. McCain is a proponent of continued support in Iraq as is Obama.

He thinks that the US government shouldn't attempt to talk to leaders of "evil" countries (and even believes there is such a thing as an "evil" country!)

McCain has openly claimed that talks with leader(s) will always occur, but there's a difference between photo-ops of heads of state sitting at a table lending credibility to the ridiculous among us.

He's very weak on healthcare, and on education (find me a clip of McCain making nearly as much sense as Obama does here). He doesn't know how to use a computer (so can we trust him to make the right decision on issues like net neutrality?)

Interestingly, you posted three links here. First, Obama's education policy from a page of his campaign website; ObamaTV. Where did you get McCain's policy on education, The Daily Kos?

What about the primary uses of the internet? email (somehow I don't think email is that important a function for the commander in chief)
>
>
>
lol

Do you really think the President will require a search utility for products, travel, hobbies, and general information? Somehow, I doubt it.
How about online gambling, chess, Lord of the Rings? Nope.
Pron? Hopefully not.

Whether or not you support "net neutrality" (a complete misnomer if there ever was one. An extensive thread has been offered on this already) his principles on this issue are solid. Besides, if you think the President will be authoring any meaningful legislation regarding net neutrality, you don't understand the role of the President or the FCC nor could you define any one net neutrality plan. I think at last check there's about 8 of 'em and they're all over the place.

Perhaps the greatest evidence is his choice for VP, Sarah Palin, a complete embarrassment. It's pretty clear to me, at least, that McCain is "out of touch" on a myriad of issues.

I disagree that Palin is a complete embarrassment. I think this squarely falls down party lines. With all due respect, your post doesn't strike me as unbiased. I've been plenty hard on both Palin and McCain, but I certainly don't think McCain is an embarrassment on the issues you raise, nor is Palin an embarrassment to the ticket or the country.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Krusty 

Many audiobooks are abridged. Next

Of course they are. I would expect a moron to verbally espouse positions that would destroy their political aspirations, but not Obama. I never claimed he was stupid.

The out of touch mantra is working as a criticism of McCain ... especially on the economy.

This is unfortunate. I've been very hard on the McCain campaign for not giving adequate details on the history of this fiasco. Let's see if three's a charm shall we?

You can see why in the debates and even in his interviews. After he gives his stump , he is literally speechless to respond to comments and questions posed to him. In the past, he's commented on his own weakness on understanding the economy and the plans he now proposes for taxes and healthcare make it abundantly clear that the same right-wing, "ownership" experts are penning the policies that he espouses. They are almost a complete 180 from what he said on the issues back in the "maverick" days prior to 2006. Find any of the (rare) times where he actually responds to a question or tries to explain why his policies will provide a better result for most people. He can't because they won't ... and he gets the appropriate deer-in-headlights look when pressed on it.

The same look Obama used to get in the debates with his Democratic opponents when they challenged him on his tax plan. I will say this, Obama's learned how to package his BS more effectively than McCain, but make no mistake about it. It's BS. IMO he's having more trouble defending it than you think. I'd like to know how he supposes giving tax breaks to people who aren't paying them for one thing, but then I don't have to wait for him to tell me.

On many other issues including the Wars...

Which reminds me. Palin has been questioned on how she can reconcile the differences between her and McCain on ANWR, but curiously no one is asking how Obama and Biden manage to reconcile their differences on the smaller things like; when to go to war, where to engage it, how to execute it, and when to pull out.

Social Security, etc. he tells us that he knows what to do, knows how to win, find, or fix them. Wow! Those are some pretty bold promises from a guy who's had every opportunity to share this wisdom of the last 8 years but hasn't.

Even bolder from the man who's spent less than 2 years in the Senate and managed to procure more political contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than Kerry through decades of service in the Senate and Chris Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Seen Jim Johnson lately? Boldness indeed.

I audibly chuckled when he said that he wasn't saying how he'd catch bin Laden because it would be "telegraphing" his plans and then chided Obama for his freshman mistake of cluing bin Laden to his plans to go into Pakistan if necessary.

You should've chuckled at the mention of Bin Laden at all. Bin Laden is a convenient boogey man for Obama. The fact of the matter is that OBL is absolutely worthless if not already dead. It's quite possible everyone knows this except Obama.

His campaign has made an open statement that they are doing whatever they can to "turn the page" on "issues" and instead focus on "who is Barack Obama". I'm not saying people aren't interested, but the clearly are not interested in that as an issue to the exclusion of the other issues that they are quite concerned with . When people ask "How is this tax policy going to benefit me and the general economy ?" the McCain camp is left speechless on taxation and instead of answering say, "Hey, did you hear that that Obama is palling around with terrorists ?". This thread is a case in point.

You'll get no disagreement from me on the blunders of the McCain campaign, but it doesn't mean he has less integrity on the issues that matter. Funny, it wasn't until McCain was running for the Presidency that he became so "out of touch", "pro-Bush", etc... Those aren't really tags that have ever stuck to him the other 20+ years in government. I think he needs to buck all advisors for now. I question their judgement more than McCain's in this.

However you slice it, "out of touch" is sticking and producing results for the Obama campaign and "Who is Barack Obama" is failing for McCain. Every week that these themes persist, McCain loses a little more ground.

I believe Obama is an extremely charismatic figure. Charismatic figures often enjoy the love of our ideals over reality.

In many if not most respects, Obama represents the ideal. I love the ideal of a minority, leading us all toward accountability, acceptance, tolerance, and rekindling love for this country abroad. The ideal of working hand in hand with others to solve the most complex of social and economic issues. I love the ideal of being proud of your leader and in wanting to serve a worthy vision. The problem is, the only true evidence I have of this ideal in reality is what he espouses in his trumps. I don't think people really know who Obama is and you're likely right about them focusing on other seemingly more pressing issues. The McCain campaign's inability to bridge Obama's ideals with failed ideology is unfortunate. These ideals can be found at the very core of one of those "crises" we're supposedly more concerned about. He needs to give one of those; "in just a few days you'll be making one of the most important decisions you can as Americans." speeches.

[stumblinmike]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Of course they are. I would expect a moron to verbally espouse positions that would destroy their political aspirations, but not Obama. I never claimed he was stupid.


This is unfortunate. I've been very hard on the McCain campaign for not giving adequate details on the history of this fiasco. Let's see if three's a charm shall we?


The same look Obama used to get in the debates with his Democratic opponents when they challenged him on his tax plan. I will say this, Obama's learned how to package his BS more effectively than McCain, but make no mistake about it. It's BS. IMO he's having more trouble defending it than you think. I'd like to know how he supposes giving tax breaks to people who aren't paying them for one thing, but then I don't have to wait for him to tell me.


Which reminds me. Palin has been questioned on how she can reconcile the differences between her and McCain on ANWR, but curiously no one is asking how Obama and Biden manage to reconcile their differences on the smaller things like; when to go to war, where to engage it, how to execute it, and when to pull out.


Even bolder from the man who's spent less than 2 years in the Senate and managed to procure more political contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac than Kerry through decades of service in the Senate and Chris Dodd, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Seen Jim Johnson lately? Boldness indeed.


You should've chuckled at the mention of Bin Laden at all. Bin Laden is a convenient boogey man for Obama. The fact of the matter is that OBL is absolutely worthless if not already dead. It's quite possible everyone knows this except Obama.


You'll get no disagreement from me on the blunders of the McCain campaign, but it doesn't mean he has less integrity on the issues that matter. Funny, it wasn't until McCain was running for the Presidency that he became so "out of touch", "pro-Bush", etc... Those aren't really tags that have ever stuck to him the other 20+ years in government. I think he needs to buck all advisors for now. I question their judgement more than McCain's in this.


I believe Obama is an extremely charismatic figure. Charismatic figures often enjoy the love of our ideals over reality.

In many if not most respects, Obama represents the ideal. I love the ideal of a minority, leading us all toward accountability, acceptance, tolerance, and rekindling love for this country abroad. The ideal of working hand in hand with others to solve the most complex of social and economic issues. I love the ideal of being proud of your leader and in wanting to serve a worthy vision. The problem is, the only true evidence I have of this ideal in reality is what he espouses in his trumps. I don't think people really know who Obama is and you're likely right about them focusing on other seemingly more pressing issues. The McCain campaign's inability to bridge Obama's ideals with failed ideology is unfortunate. These ideals can be found at the very core of one of those "crises" we're supposedly more concerned about. He needs to give one of those; "in just a few days you'll be making one of the most important decisions you can as Americans." speeches.

Mr ebuddy,
Seriously, I want to thank you for the time you put into your rebuttals. You obviously are very passionate about these matters. But you MUST see that you are on the wrong side of these arguments. The ENTIRE country is all done with this current administration and anything that reminds them of it (McCain). They (Bush & friends) had eight years, and they just about ran the country into the ground. I am puzzled why you refuse to see/accept this. It's so painfully obvious to most folks. That is why change is the new mantra. We must change to survive! It's that simple. I offer this as an olive branch of sorts, we must work together to piece our country back together. Let's make our country great again. Deal?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

The fact of the matter is that OBL is absolutely worthless if not already dead. It's quite possible everyone knows this except Obama.

McCain also said he would catch Bin Laden. I know you can just attribute this to another mistake among many by McCain during his campaign, but don't you think it's also possible that both candidates talked about catching Bin Laden because most Americans still want to catch him, because most people don't think like you that he's worthless or dead?

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I never claimed he said; "the white man bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature".

And I don't think I said you did... I just wanted you to quote (in context please) the example that would indicate that he has "glommed onto [that] fashionable world view".

There's nothing "out of touch" about this. Most of the American public and in fact most politicans from both sides of the aisle were strongly in support of this doctrine, uttered first by Clinton.

In that case, it seems to me that you and I are interpreting Obama's words differently. According to that quote above, it seems that you think that to be "in touch" with an issue is to side with the popular opinion on it.

I don't think that's what Obama meant, because that wouldn't make very much sense considering the context in which he said it. I took it to mean that McCain is "out of touch" with reality, in the sense that he doesn't know what's best for the country. For example, I don't think that going to war with Iraq was in our best interest.

However, I'm willing to admit that my interpretation is an interpretation. And I very well could have incorrectly interpreted what Obama meant by "out of touch", so debating this, and trying to prove that I have the correct interpretation is not something that I'm going to pursue.

McCain has openly claimed that talks with leader(s) will always occur, but there's a difference between photo-ops of heads of state sitting at a table lending credibility to the ridiculous among us.

I don't think that when Obama says he wants to talk with other countries, that he means he wants to have photo-ops with them, if that's your meaning there.

I've been having difficulty finding a clear stance on this issue from McCain (whether he's willing to have talks with any country). What is clear to me is that he is less open to the idea of having diplomatic discussions with other countries than Obama is. What I have been able to find, all seems to indicate this.

Interestingly, you posted three links here. First, Obama's education policy from a page of his campaign website; ObamaTV. Where did you get McCain's policy on education, The Daily Kos?

Huh? Of course I went to Obama's site to find his policy on education. Why would I go anywhere else? I want to hear directly from Obama how he plans to fix the education system, so a video where he does just that is most appropriate.

I challenged you to find me a clip where McCain makes as much sense as Obama does on education. I searched for you just now, and no, I don't know why you think I would go to the Daily Kos, I went to John McCain's campaign site. After some searching, I finally found a video of McCain talking about education. To me it is clear, after watching Obama speak, and then McCain speak, that Obama's the better man on the issue.

What about the primary uses of the internet? email (somehow I don't think email is that important a function for the commander in chief)
Do you really think the President will require a search utility for products, travel, hobbies, and general information? Somehow, I doubt it.
How about online gambling, chess, Lord of the Rings? Nope.
Pron? Hopefully not.

Where did I say any of that? McCain doesn't know how to use a computer, he probably rarely uses the internet himself, so my argument is simply that he doesn't have much personal exposure to the issue.

if you think the President will be authoring any meaningful legislation regarding net neutrality, you don't understand the role of the President or the FCC nor could you define any one net neutrality plan.

Again, I am confused, what gave you that idea? Of course I know that. But I also know that the President plays a huge role in bills that go through congress, and in whether or not they're eventually successful.

I disagree that Palin is a complete embarrassment. I think this squarely falls down party lines. With all due respect, your post doesn't strike me as unbiased.

I never claimed I was unbiased! I'm an Obama supporter, so of course I'm biased. I don't think you could be an unbiased supporter of something, at least by how I understand the word's meaning.

You're of course more than welcome to your opinion on Palin, but I think that most people, after watching her interviews, and after listening to her speeches, end up laughing at her. Do you need me to post video clips of her acting like a completely clueless soccer mom? YouTube has a bountiful collection of them.

[Chongo]

Hmmm, the Messiah huh?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

McCain also said he would catch Bin Laden. I know you can just attribute this to another mistake among many by McCain during his campaign, but don't you think it's also possible that both candidates talked about catching Bin Laden because most Americans still want to catch him, because most people don't think like you that he's worthless or dead?

My point was that it was laughable OBL even came up. It was more an indictment against his claim of going and finding the cave of OBL and killing him. If you watch them in the debate, McCain seems almost annoyed that he even has to address it. You can say the fact that we haven't caught OBL is a net plus for Obama, but I'm not so sure the people are that worried about him. If he comes out with another video and it seems like it could be credible then maybe, but as far as I know we've not heard from him in any way, shape, or form including from the American public or media.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by itistoday 

And I don't think I said you did...

Originally Posted by itistoday

Where has Obama said this?

I just wanted you to quote (in context please) the example that would indicate that he has "glommed onto [that] fashionable world view".

Dreams from my father
"That's just how white folks will do you. It wasn't merely the cruelty involved; I was learning that black people could be mean and then some. It was a particular brand of arrogance, and an obtuseness in otherwise sane people that brought forth our bitter laughter. It was as if whites didn't know they were being cruel in the first place. Or at least thought you deserving of their scorn. White folks."

I put statements like this in context of "hoodwinked", "bamboozled", and "clinging to guns and religion". You've accepted this as part of his shtick. There's nothing wrong with that. So long as you know there are those who might think you've been hoodwinked and bamboozled.

In that case, it seems to me that you and I are interpreting Obama's words differently. According to that quote above, it seems that you think that to be "in touch" with an issue is to side with the popular opinion on it.

Actually, that might only be one piece of evidence, but certainly not the end-all. Who was out of touch with the action in Iraq? Why? The only thing I can think of is the notion that we'd be greeted as liberators. Well... I've got pictures of several buddies of mine being treated as liberators. I suppose it'd be more efficient to simply wait for your definition of "out of touch" and we can go from there.

I don't think that's what Obama meant, because that wouldn't make very much sense considering the context in which he said it. I took it to mean that McCain is "out of touch" with reality, in the sense that he doesn't know what's best for the country. For example, I don't think that going to war with Iraq was in our best interest.

Excellent. Now we have our definition. McCain is out of touch because you don't think Iraq was in our best interest. Okay. I think Obama is out of touch because he hasn't one day of foreign policy experience, was wrong on the surge, and has picked a running mate to help him get in touch. I think he's displayed being out of touch whereas your definition seems to hinge on your own personal view. Which is fine of course. So long as we know where you're coming from. As far as being in touch with reality goes, whether or not you think we should be in Iraq doesn't matter. We're in Iraq.

However, I'm willing to admit that my interpretation is an interpretation. And I very well could have incorrectly interpreted what Obama meant by "out of touch", so debating this, and trying to prove that I have the correct interpretation is not something that I'm going to pursue.

You already pursued it?

I don't think that when Obama says he wants to talk with other countries, that he means he wants to have photo-ops with them, if that's your meaning there.

That's generally what happens when heads of state collect. The cameras flash. The news is published. People talk about it.

I've been having difficulty finding a clear stance on this issue from McCain (whether he's willing to have talks with any country). What is clear to me is that he is less open to the idea of having diplomatic discussions with other countries than Obama is. What I have been able to find, all seems to indicate this.

I think McCain wins on this issue, I really do. I'm not going to repeat McCain's stump, but suffice it to say it's a little ridiculous to assume you can have a serious talk with one who regards you as Satan?

Huh? Of course I went to Obama's site to find his policy on education. Why would I go anywhere else? I want to hear directly from Obama how he plans to fix the education system, so a video where he does just that is most appropriate.

If you're interested in comparing policies, why would you not also cite McCain's campaign website?

I challenged you to find me a clip where McCain makes as much sense as Obama does on education. I searched for you just now, and no, I don't know why you think I would go to the Daily Kos, I went to John McCain's campaign site. After some searching, I finally found a video of McCain talking about education. To me it is clear, after watching Obama speak, and then McCain speak, that Obama's the better man on the issue.

"After watching Obama speak" Case and point. Again, this is fine so long as we know where we stand. Obama talks that's for sure.

Where did I say any of that? McCain doesn't know how to use a computer, he probably rarely uses the internet himself, so my argument is simply that he doesn't have much personal exposure to the issue.

I clarified that his stance on this issue is solid. You might know there is considerable debate on this issue from those who are very much in touch. This issue (as do most) will follow down a particular path of government administration or private administration. There are pros and cons to both, but at the end of the day you have to make a call. I believe his call is disciplined and also enjoys majority support for now. Maybe when a more solid, comprehensive plan is proposed this could change. McCain does not strike me as so rigid that he will not hear dissenting opinion. In fact, I'd argue that he has a more established track record of listening to the opposing side and finding merits in their arguments. I think he wins on this issue as well.

Again, I am confused, what gave you that idea? Of course I know that. But I also know that the President plays a huge role in bills that go through congress, and in whether or not they're eventually successful.

I might clarify "a role in bills that get into Congress", where it goes from there is a different deal entirely.

I never claimed I was unbiased! I'm an Obama supporter, so of course I'm biased. I don't think you could be an unbiased supporter of something, at least by how I understand the word's meaning.

The more one accepts a premise, the less evidence they need to affirm it and the more evidence they'll need to disprove it. That's all.

You're of course more than welcome to your opinion on Palin, but I think that most people, after watching her interviews, and after listening to her speeches, end up laughing at her. Do you need me to post video clips of her acting like a completely clueless soccer mom? YouTube has a bountiful collection of them.

The more one accepts a premise, the less evidence they need to affirm it and the more evidence they'll need to disprove it. This is an uphill battle because of course you will not acknowledge the laughing stock that is Obama's running mate and the wealth of YouTube video to affirm it.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by stumblinmike 

Mr ebuddy,
Seriously, I want to thank you for the time you put into your rebuttals. You obviously are very passionate about these matters. But you MUST see that you are on the wrong side of these arguments. The ENTIRE country is all done with this current administration and anything that reminds them of it (McCain). They (Bush & friends) had eight years, and they just about ran the country into the ground. I am puzzled why you refuse to see/accept this. It's so painfully obvious to most folks. That is why change is the new mantra. We must change to survive! It's that simple. I offer this as an olive branch of sorts, we must work together to piece our country back together. Let's make our country great again. Deal?

There you go stumblinmike. Now I have to feel low for being such a prick to you. I hope you still feel this way when there's an (R) in office.

[Chongo]

OBL is defrosting on will be displayed on 10/29/08

[finboy]

Originally Posted by stumblinmike 

We must change to survive! It's that simple. I offer this as an olive branch of sorts, we must work together to piece our country back together. Let's make our country great again. Deal?

Alrighty then. Nuff said, I'm voting for Obama! Me and all the other sheep, evidently. I hope some folks have better reasons than "change." Good Lord.

[johnwk]

Originally Posted by Krusty 

Thank god we have you, JWK, to splice together prepackaged youtube scare-vids .

So sad that you just don't get it.

Obama promises to give everything to the poor and oppressed [non taxpayers], and then has ACORN registering them, sometimes 20 and 30 times to vote him into office.

And why do so many foreign socialist countries support Obama, especially people who are like the Castro Brothers? Because Obama also has a plan to improve the world as well.

Obama, the chosen one, has promised to hand over $845 BILLION to foreign nations which will be taxed away from American Taxpayers under a United Nation’s 0.7 percent tax upon America’s GNP!

For those who do not believe part of Obama's global economic plan is to allow the United Nations to impose a 0.7 percent tax upon the gross national product of the United States, here are the facts.

Under Obama’s Senate Bill 2433, the president is required to devise a "comprehensive strategy" to meet Millennium Development Goals


Obama’s bill is designed to legislatively require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to “achievement of the Millennium Development Goal ” which includes imposing a 0.7 percent tax upon America’s GNP


In return for Obama’s commitment as outlined in Obama’s bill, foreigners have been contributing quite heavily into Obama’s campaign!


Bottom line is, Obama is working to enslave the Productive American, which includes millions of hard working Black Business owners. The Obama plan is to spread their hard earned wealth across the globe, even to nations who hate America!




Why has our establishment big media [NBC, CBS, ABC CNN, MSNBC , The New York Times, The Washington Post, etc., ] not reported on Obama’s plan to commit the American People to a new tax --- a United Nation’s tax of 0.7 percent laid upon America’s GNP?


JWK



``Change`` we can believe in if Obama is elected ---- tax America’s wealth and leave us with change.

[itistoday]

johnwk, your posts are hilarious. Do you make up your own material? All someone has to do is click on the very links you provide to realize how ridiculous your post is.

Obama talks about his tax plan

Obama's tax plan will surely leave us all with change in our pockets.

[itistoday]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Dreams from my father
"That's just how white folks will do you. It wasn't merely the cruelty involved; I was learning that black people could be mean and then some. It was a particular brand of arrogance, and an obtuseness in otherwise sane people that brought forth our bitter laughter. It was as if whites didn't know they were being cruel in the first place. Or at least thought you deserving of their scorn. White folks."

I was hoping that I'd have the time to find the chapter from which this quote was taken, because I would be willing to bet a lot of money that Barack Obama did not say, and doesn't believe, that "the white man bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature". But I don't think that will be necessary. That charge is ridiculous, if you know anything about the man. He's too intelligent to hold such an ignorant view.

I don't think you honored my request to quote the passage in context. My evidence for this is the emboldened statement above: "I was learning that black people could be mean and then some." The existence of that statement in the above quote implies that we're missing something here. For example, it could be that Barack is quoting a memory from his early childhood when someone (a black man) was telling him that white people were cruel, and thus he was learning that some "black people could be mean" in their view towards whites.

Whatever the real context happens to be, it is plainly clear that said quote does not support your charge that Obama believes that the white man "bears the responsibility for everything shameful of human nature." That is simply absurd to anyone who knows anything about Obama.

Do you want to know what Obama really thinks about white people? Where he stands on the "race issue"? One of Barack Obama's greatest speeches is on this very topic:

Obama Speech: A More Perfect Union
Full Transcript

After watching that I don't think anyone could accuse Obama of holding any ignorant views about race and racism. I encourage you to watch the full speech if you haven't already.

The more one accepts a premise, the less evidence they need to affirm it and the more evidence they'll need to disprove it.

Right back atcha.

This is an uphill battle because of course you will not acknowledge the laughing stock that is Obama's running mate and the wealth of YouTube video to affirm it.

I will acknowledge it right here: Joe Biden is a poor choice for VP (in my opinion). But not nearly as bad as Sarah Palin.

[Chongo]

claims BO did not write Dreams of my Father

Posted: October 13, 2008
1:00 am Eastern

© 2008

The emergence of a previously unseen writing sample proves all but conclusively that Barack Obama did not in any meaningful way write "Dreams from My Father," the book Time Magazine has called "the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician."

The emergence of a second writing sample, this one by a legitimate author, provides convincing evidence as to who did.