Comparing JFK & OBAMA voters

[Bringthetruth]

When John F. Kennedy was elected as the country's first Catholic president nearly a half-century ago, the sons and daughters of immigrants from Ireland, Italy and Poland swelled with pride. Even today, it is not uncommon to see a framed photograph of our 35th president usually arranged near a similarly framed picture of Pope John Paul II adorning a wall in the homes of those whose forebears came from one of Europe's Catholic countries.



In a sense, they had made it. If a Catholic whose grandparents had arrived on one of the famine-fleeing coffin ships could become the president of the United States, all things were indeed possible.

So now the the son of a Kenyan native and American mother has accomplished the exact thing.

African Americans, whose ancestors were dragged here in chains from their homeland and sold into slavery, can now point to one of their own as having achieved the pinnacle of the American Dream.



Should people who voted for him have less pride in Obama's heritage and in a sense feel like they made it too ?

If so, why the outrage of minorities who voted for Obama.

Even if all the black people in america voted for Obama, he couldn't have won the election with their votes alone.


The Obama presidency represents a unique opportunity for everyone,not just people of color.

Some day the color of the president won't matter, it will be as it should be ... IRRELEVANT !

[Dougles]

Some day the color of the president won't matter, it will be as it should be ... IRRELEVANT !

It will be relevant as long as the media and people like Al sharpton MAKE IT RELEVANT. Did you notice how Obama is the first "African American" president?? HE'S NOT, he's the first MIXED RACED president, the media and the racist likes of people like Al Sharpton refused to call Obama for what he truly is an AMERICAN.

If you noticed, the right wing media did very little to even mention his race, it was the main stream left media that did at every step! The made his inaugaration (sp) into a historic day for blacks, when it was historic for this nation as we now have our first MIXED RACE president!

[Anotherview]

Some day the color of the president won't matter, it will be as it should be ... IRRELEVANT !

In my opinion, that day has come. I really believe that Americans looked beyond color and to the most qualified candidate for presidency. I think the message is loud and clear, racism is a thing of the past, for the most part.

[Surfing USA]

Watch the video Troofy.

This is what many people have a problem with. ;)

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/NyvqhdllXgU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NyvqhdllXgU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Anotherview]

I've heard similar tapes before. My presumptions are that these people are a little anxious (about talking to the media) and clearly not paying attention.

As far as blacks voting for blacks, I wonder how many Irishmen voted for McCain.

[Bringthetruth]

It will be relevant as long as the media and people like Al sharpton MAKE IT RELEVANT. Did you notice how Obama is the first "African American" president?? HE'S NOT, he's the first MIXED RACED president, the media and the racist likes of people like Al Sharpton refused to call Obama for what he truly is an AMERICAN.

If you noticed, the right wing media did very little to even mention his race, it was the main stream left media that did at every step! The made his inaugaration (sp) into a historic day for blacks, when it was historic for this nation as we now have our first MIXED RACE president!

Why did Al sharpton have to be brought into this discussion ?


This is the comparison of pride in ones heritage AS THE PRESIDENT.

Mixed race individuals are considered black IN AMERICA if your skin is light skinned dark.

Is halle berry considered mixed or black by american standards ?

[Surfing USA]

Is halle berry considered mixed or black by american standards ?Halle Berry is considered "SMOKING HOT" by my "American standards." :)

[therising]

Catholics voted for JFK in the 60's simply because there had never been a Catholic President before. And, I doubt there was any outrage over that.

Fast forward 45 years later, and blacks vote for Obama simply because he's black. And, suddenly people are aghast.

[Dougles]

Catholics voted for JFK in the 60's simply because there had never been a Catholic President before. And, I doubt there was any outrage over that.

Fast forward 45 years later, and blacks vote for Obama simply because he's black. And, suddenly people are aghast.

Race and religion are two different things one, one you can change every day of the week the other unless your micheal jackson your stuck with for your whole life!

[therising]

Race and religion are two different things one, one you can change every day of the week the other unless your micheal jackson your stuck with for your whole life!

How does that factor into what I was saying?

Answer - it doesn't.

[Jazz]

How does that factor into what I was saying?

Answer - it doesn't.

Actually it could. With religion you are supposed to be like minded with the people you share your belief system with. With ethnicity, you're belief systems can be totally opposite. So Catholics voting for JFK makes sense because they should have the similar belief systems. If people voted strictly based on race/color/ethnic background, then they may have voted for someone whose policies they do not agree with.

[FisherRd]

Damn Jazz, well done.

[therising]

Actually it could. With religion you are supposed to be like minded with the people you share your belief system with. With ethnicity, you're belief systems can be totally opposite. So Catholics voting for JFK makes sense because they should have the similar belief systems. If people voted strictly based on race/color/ethnic background, then they may have voted for someone whose policies they do not agree with.

Your typical Catholic (including my mother) did not vote for JFK because of his belief systems. They voted for him because he was "one of them."

To make him even better, in my mother's eyes - he was Irish.
In 1960, you would have probably been hard pressed to find an Irish American family, that were not ardent supporters of JFK. Again, it was because he was "one of them, " and their kind had never been President before.

Twist and turn it all you want. The fact of the matter is that it's no different than blacks supporting a black candidate.

[Dougles]

How does that factor into what I was saying?

Answer - it doesn't.

Well the last time i checked blacks can be catholics! Blacks can be musilms! however blacks can't be whites!

The point was religion is somthing you can change and that everyone no matter where you were born, what your status is in life and what COLOR you are you can be catholic!

However, you have to be born black to be black!

It's about opportunity; you have a 100% opportunity in life to be WHATEVER religion you want, you only have 14% chance of being black in the US!

[Jazz]

Your typical Catholic (including my mother) did not vote for JFK because of his belief systems. They voted for him because he was "one of them."

To make him even better, in my mother's eyes - he was Irish.
In 1960, you would have probably been hard pressed to find an Irish American family, that were not ardent supporters of JFK. Again, it was because he was "one of them, " and their kind had never been President before.

Twist and turn it all you want. The fact of the matter is that it's no different than blacks supporting a black candidate.


"One of them" ...meaning he had the same "belief" system. I grew up Catholic and I remember the whole Catholic vs. Protestant thing ... which isn't the same as it is now. Now everyone just considers themselves Christians. This time you had Evangelical Christians who are black vote for President Obama not because of his beliefs and/or policies but solely because of his skin color.

[Bringthetruth]

"One of them" ...meaning he had the same "belief" system. I grew up Catholic and I remember the whole Catholic vs. Protestant thing ... which isn't the same as it is now. Now everyone just considers themselves Christians. This time you had Evangelical Christians who are black vote for President Obama not because of his beliefs and/or policies but solely because of his skin color.

Sorry jazz people in my family(born again believers) didn't just vote for Obama because he was black, white people didn't vote for Obama because he was black.

We voted for Obama because of his policies ! George Bush in 8 yrs destrpyed the way of life in this country, John McCAIN agreed with 90% of GB policies.

People wanted change and they got it. Every Born Again Believer who voted wasn't persuaded by abortion. Legislation hasn't slowed abortion down one bit.

[Bannister]

It will be relevant as long as the media and people like Al sharpton MAKE IT RELEVANT. Did you notice how Obama is the first "African American" president?? HE'S NOT, he's the first MIXED RACED president, the media and the racist likes of people like Al Sharpton refused to call Obama for what he truly is an AMERICAN.


Eh, call him mixed all you want. If he tried to ride a bus in the south 50 years ago, he still would have been sent to the back.

[steven]

Actually it could. With religion you are supposed to be like minded with the people you share your belief system with. With ethnicity, you're belief systems can be totally opposite. So Catholics voting for JFK makes sense because they should have the similar belief systems. If people voted strictly based on race/color/ethnic background, then they may have voted for someone whose policies they do not agree with.

Wow
You get 5 stars for that reply.
Very good point IMHO.

Sorry jazz people in my family(born again believers) didn't just vote for Obama because he was black, white people didn't vote for Obama because he was black.

If you honestly believe some blacks didnt vote for Obama just because he was black and some whites voted for him because of white guilt then your political thought process is child like.

I cant believe anyone could say that with a straight face.

[Anotherview]

People wanted change and they got it. Every Born Again Believer who voted wasn't persuaded by abortion.

You are absolutely right. And, I am one of those born-again believers that voted for Obama

As far as I am concerned, George Bush was a mock to God. He led the people to believe he was such a strong Christian man and his actions showed just the opposite.

[mesue]

Obama is a poor choice no matter what color he is. I would have voted for Alan Keyes.
(Quick BTT, go Google him)

[therising]

"One of them" ...meaning he had the same "belief" system. I grew up Catholic and I remember the whole Catholic vs. Protestant thing ... which isn't the same as it is now. Now everyone just considers themselves Christians. This time you had Evangelical Christians who are black vote for President Obama not because of his beliefs and/or policies but solely because of his skin color.

Since you're old enough to remember the "whole Catholic vs. Protestant thing," can you tell me what the basic difference in belief systems was/is between Catholics and Protestants?

[therising]

Obama is a poor choice no matter what color he is. I would have voted for Alan Keyes.
(Quick BTT, go Google him)

What is it about Alan Keyes that you like so much?

[Surfing USA]

http://fliiby.com/images/_original/a76er066cv.gif

[mesue]

What is it about Alan Keyes that you like so much?
He's conservative libertarian. I heard him a few times in during different interviews over the last couple of years. I agreed with a lot of what he said.

[Bringthetruth]

Wow
You get 5 stars for that reply.
Very good point IMHO.



If you honestly believe some blacks didnt vote for Obama just because he was black and some whites voted for him because of white guilt then your political thought process is child like.

I cant believe anyone could say that with a straight face.

Why would you try and pin that statement on me, you never heard me say that. Aren't you a mod ?

We all know some minorities voted for him because he was black.

Whites voted for him because of guilt ?

Where did you hear me make those statements?

You guys are getting desperate :rolleyes:making up stuff!

[Bringthetruth]

You are absolutely right. And, I am one of those born-again believers that voted for Obama

As far as I am concerned, George Bush was a mock to God. He led the people to believe he was such a strong Christian man and his actions showed just the opposite.

Like someone else told me, republicans so called christians would have voted for the anti-christ if he was pro-life. Bush fooled so many evangelicals from James Dobson to John Haggee that it's almost impossible to follow their advice when it comes to politics.

[Anotherview]

Since you're old enough to remember the "whole Catholic vs. Protestant thing," can you tell me what the basic difference in belief systems was/is between Catholics and Protestants?

therising: This began hundreds of years ago. The differences are minusucle but it had to do with different interpretations of scriptures. The distinct difference between non-denominational - pentecostal churches and the Catholic Church is the gift of tongues. The non-denominational/pentecostal still believe in speaking in tongues where as the Catholic Church believes that speaking in tongues was done away with.

[Anotherview]

Like someone else told me, republicans so called christians would have voted for the anti-christ if he was pro-life. Bush fooled so many evangelicals from James Dobson to John Haggee that it's almost impossible to follow their advice when it comes to politics.


George Bush is the reason why I overlooked Obama's view on abortion and voted for the best man for the job. I don't know if I will ever consider the man's Christian walk again after Bush. He really misled the Country in this respect.

And, so far from what I can see, Barack Obama talks the talk and walks the walk in terms of Christianity. In addition to attending Church, he's a faithful and good husband, outstanding father and seems to be honest and ethical.

[Bringthetruth]

George Bush is the reason why I overlooked Obama's view on abortion and voted for the best man for the job. I don't know if I will ever consider the man's Christian walk again after Bush. He really misled the Country in this respect.

And, so far from what I can see, Barack Obama talks the talk and walks the walk in terms of Christianity. In addition to attending Church, he's a faithful and good husband, outstanding father and seems to be honest and ethical.

So tell me how was it so easy for the republican christians to overlook Obama's character and being faithful to his wife and family, even in the debates he showed christ's like character ?

[mesue]

Like someone else told me, republicans so called christians would have voted for the anti-christ if he was pro-life. Bush fooled so many evangelicals from James Dobson to John Haggee that it's almost impossible to follow their advice when it comes to politics.
Not all Republicans are Christian. Neither are all Democrats. Just like all black people are Christian. Neither are all whites.

Compare, if you must, this abortion issue:
Bush said he was a Christian and signed laws protecting the unborn and notifying parents of minor children.
Obama said he was a Christian and signed a law allowing for the killing of live babies that can be killed without the notification of the parents of minor children.
Jesus said we are known by our fruit. Which is what I have been trying to convey in another thread about church leaders. It has nothing to do with color and everything to do with the heart.
For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.
A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. Luke 6:44-45

[Anotherview]

So tell me how was it so easy for the republican christians to overlook Obama's character and being faithful to his wife and family, even in the debates he showed christ's like character ?


Bringthetruth:

People who hear the word pro-abortion simply run the other way. It's that plain and simple.

I am pro-life but I've also lived long enough to remember the nightmares back in the day when abortions were illegal. Woman, who had illegal abortions, would be hemorrhaging in emergency rooms and medical personnel would refuse treatment until such time the patient divulged who performed the abortion.

I think the only answer to the abortion issue is to mandate patients to attend classes that outline all the help available if they choose to keep the child. I think we can eliminate the amount of abortions performed but we will never live to see abortions outlawed.

[therising]

mesue - I asked you in another thread why you thought Alan Keyes would be a good President. I was surprised to see you say "because he's a conservative libertarian," because, I think the Libertarian view is largely pro-baby kill.

So, you chose to align yourself with baby-killing party. And, that's fine - because abortion doesn't have to be the be-all, end-all platform.

Maybe it just goes to show that it's not all that important to you?

EDIT: I thought this was the abortion thread; I just noticed it's the JFK-Obama thread?:confused:

[therising]

therising: This began hundreds of years ago. The differences are minusucle but it had to do with different interpretations of scriptures. The distinct difference between non-denominational - pentecostal churches and the Catholic Church is the gift of tongues. The non-denominational/pentecostal still believe in speaking in tongues where as the Catholic Church believes that speaking in tongues was done away with.

I was hoping Jazz would answer, but, thank you, because you have helped to prove my point.

Jazz said (and many here agreed), that it's understandable, and acceptable for a Catholic to vote for a Catholic over a Protestant, because of their "shared values" and that it's nothing like a black person choosing a black candidate simply because of their races.

I still maintain that the difference in values between Catholics and Protestants is so minuscule, Catholics voted for JFK simply because he was "one of them" and that it had very little to do with "shared values."

[Anotherview]

that it's understandable, and acceptable for a Catholic to vote for a Catholic over a Protestant, because of their "shared values" and that it's nothing like a black person choosing a black candidate simply because of their races.

Therising: I taught religious instructions (to confirmation students - 10 and 11th graders) for 14 years. Here's my experience with these students. Catholics know very little about their religion, shared values and even less about biblical scriptures. Beyond the 10 commandments, they do not know much more. The majority of students were making their confirmation because their parents made them or they wanted to eventually marry in a Catholic Church. Most were pro-choice, knew very little or next to nothing about having a relationship with Jesus Christ and did not want to be an abiding Catholic because they felt they would be living the life of a saint or that it wasn't any fun.

This says just as much about their parents' religious beliefs as it does about theirs. There has to be very little talk about Christianity in the home.

So, if a Catholic is voting for a Catholic President, it is likely that they are voting for the Name Catholic and not the shared values in my opinion.

[Jazz]

I was hoping Jazz would answer, but, thank you, because you have helped to prove my point.

Jazz said (and many here agreed), that it's understandable, and acceptable for a Catholic to vote for a Catholic over a Protestant, because of their "shared values" and that it's nothing like a black person choosing a black candidate simply because of their races.

I still maintain that the difference in values between Catholics and Protestants is so minuscule, Catholics voted for JFK simply because he was "one of them" and that it had very little to do with "shared values."

In the early 60's it wasn't so minuscule. If you voted for President Obama because you agree with his policies then fine. But to vote for him because of skin color when you disagree with his polices is not. That would be like voting for Hillary Clinton because and only because she's a woman. We have a true gift in this country ... we can vote for whomever we feel will do the best job and it shouldn't matter what color or gender they are. If color and/or gender is ONLY thing considered when voting, then the gift is wasted.

[Jazz]

Sorry jazz people in my family(born again believers) didn't just vote for Obama because he was black, white people didn't vote for Obama because he was black.

We voted for Obama because of his policies ! George Bush in 8 yrs destrpyed the way of life in this country, John McCAIN agreed with 90% of GB policies.

People wanted change and they got it. Every Born Again Believer who voted wasn't persuaded by abortion. Legislation hasn't slowed abortion down one bit.

I didn't say ALL black people voted for him because of his color. If you voted for him because you agree with his stand on the issues that is your right.

[Anotherview]

In the early 60's it wasn't so minuscule. If you voted for President Obama because you agree with his policies then fine. But to vote for him because of skin color when you disagree with his polices is not. That would be like voting for Hillary Clinton because and only because she's a woman. We have a true gift in this country ... we can vote for whomever we feel will do the best job and it shouldn't matter what color or gender they are. If color and/or gender is ONLY thing considered when voting, then the gift is wasted.


Jazz: If you were around in the early 60's then you probably remember voters saying I just pulled all the levers for Democrats or Republicans. It's pretty much the same thing.

[steven]

. Aren't you a mod ?!

Arent you a man?

Both are probably true, neither has anything to do with the discussion. :rolleyes:

Voting for someone because of the color of his skin is wrong.

If you cant comprehend what I am writing then I will move along to another thread.

[therising]

In the early 60's it wasn't so minuscule. If you voted for President Obama because you agree with his policies then fine. But to vote for him because of skin color when you disagree with his polices is not. That would be like voting for Hillary Clinton because and only because she's a woman. We have a true gift in this country ... we can vote for whomever we feel will do the best job and it shouldn't matter what color or gender they are. If color and/or gender is ONLY thing considered when voting, then the gift is wasted.

OK, let's say I agree with everything you say.

But if an Irish Catholic runs for President now, I guarantee you that my mother and millions of other Irish Americans will vote for him simply because he's Irish American, and that it has zero to do with the "shared values" of Catholics.

People vote for candidates that look like them - that's just the way of the world.
That's just the way of the world.

[Bringthetruth]

Arent you a man?

Both are probably true, neither has anything to do with the discussion. :rolleyes:

Voting for someone because of the color of his skin is wrong.

If you cant comprehend what I am writing then I will move along to another thread.


Share that argument with therising:cool:

[mesue]

mesue - I asked you in another thread why you thought Alan Keyes would be a good President. I was surprised to see you say "because he's a conservative libertarian," because, I think the Libertarian view is largely pro-baby kill.

A Libertarian is not a Liberal, they are juxtaposed.

[Dougles]

Eh, call him mixed all you want. If he tried to ride a bus in the south 50 years ago, he still would have been sent to the back.

Yeah and 50 years ago you wouldn't be wearing short shirts and we wouldn't all have cell phones, times change!

[Dougles]

OK, let's say I agree with everything you say.

But if an Irish Catholic runs for President now, I guarantee you that my mother and millions of other Irish Americans will vote for him simply because he's Irish American, and that it has zero to do with the "shared values" of Catholics.

People vote for candidates that look like them - that's just the way of the world.
That's just the way of the world.

100% agree!

[Bannister]

Yeah and 50 years ago you wouldn't be wearing short shirts and we wouldn't all have cell phones, times change!

Yup, they did on Jan. 20.

[therising]

A Libertarian is not a Liberal, they are juxtaposed.

Yes, I know that a Libertarian and a Liberal are not the same thing. My point was, that you seem to be supporting a Libertarian, and, that the Libertarian Party takes a pro baby-kill stance.

And, needless to say, that's your prerogative. I just find it surprising.

[mesue]

Yes, I know that a Libertarian and a Liberal are not the same thing. My point was, that you seem to be supporting a Libertarian, and, that the Libertarian Party takes a pro baby-kill stance.

And, needless to say, that's your prerogative. I just find it surprising.
He's Libertarian in that he's for less government. He's a Christian conservative otherwise.

[Surfing USA]

Eh, call him mixed all you want. If he tried to ride a bus in the south 50 years ago, he still would have been sent to the back.The times I've taken a Metro Bus, I've noticed that the majority of blacks ride on the back of the bus?

This observation has always baffled me.

In a way, I consider it a "slap in the face" to Rosa Parks.

If I were black, (in the name of Rosa Parks,) I'd make it a point to sit anywhere but the back of the bus.

[Bringthetruth]

Surfin, what Bannister was saying is anybody with at least 50% black in them is still considered black in america...not white in 2009.

Get a clue!

[Surfing USA]

Surfin, what Bannister was saying is anybody with at least 50% black in them is still considered black in america...not white in 2009.

Get a clue!
I understood what Bannister was saying. :rolleyes:

What she said just happened to make me think of the observation that I spoke of. ;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v515/BicFlame96/SpecialEDSPECIAL.jpg

[therising]

The times I've taken a Metro Bus, I've noticed that the majority of blacks ride on the back of the bus?

This observation has always baffled me.

In a way, I consider it a "slap in the face" to Rosa Parks.

If I were black, (in the name of Rosa Parks,) I'd make it a point to sit anywhere but the back of the bus.

Hey Surfin - you know the way, when you get on the bus, you can sit wherever you want, and no one thinks twice about it?

[mesue]

Surfin, what Bannister was saying is anybody with at least 50% black in them is still considered black in america...not white in 2009.

Get a clue!
But the fact remains, as you pointed out in a thread about Black Presidents about a year ago, they are still white. You can't have it both ways. Are the 5 white presidents black or not?

[therising]

If you saw Obama's mug shot in the paper, would you still go out of your way to call him a white guy?

You all have an African American President; deal with it.

[raoul duke]

But the fact remains, as you pointed out in a thread about Black Presidents about a year ago, they are still white. You can't have it both ways. Are the 5 white presidents black or not?
What therising said.

Yes you could have it both ways, if the "both ways" as you frame it existed in reality. They don't. President Obama is a black man. Yes, he's a product of interracial marriage and he may be a light skinned black man. But he's a black man, none-the-less, as we define it today.

Ask a cab driver or a Kenmore cop what color someone who looks similar to Obama is.

[Bringthetruth]

If you saw Obama's mug shot in the paper, would you still go out of your way to call him a white guy?

You all have an African American President; deal with it.

Mesue seems to have a problem ?

[mesue]

Mesue seems to have a problem ?
Nope, not at all. Did you Google Alan Keyes yet? Because if you did, you would stop your foolishness.

[mesue]

If you saw Obama's mug shot in the paper, would you still go out of your way to call him a white guy?

You all have an African American President; deal with it.
If his mugshot were in the paper would they mention his lineage? I mean, really therising, can you get more asinine than that? Stop with the red herrings.
However, for the sake of argument, yes, he would be a white guy.

[Surfing USA]

If you saw Obama's mug shot in the paper, would you still go out of your way to call him a white guy?

You all have an African American President; deal with it.I'm hoping to see his picture as a "mugshot" someday. :)

[Bringthetruth]

Mesue seems to have a problem ?

I knew about the high pitched voice of alan keyesin the 90's probably before you did, I didn't need to google him.

I think he's a blow hard who sits along side the rush limbaugh types LOL

Didn't want to waste my time talking about him. HE'S A CLOWN:D:D:p

[mesue]

I knew about the high pitched voice of alan keyesin the 90's probably before you did, I didn't need to google him.

I think he's a blow hard who sits along side the rush limbaugh types LOL

Didn't want to waste my time talking about him. HE'S A CLOWN:D:D:pI don't see him as such. I see him as a conservative Christian who loves the LORD Jesus Christ. Maybe I'm too racist to see him as anything else.

[Surfing USA]

I don't see him as such. I see him as a conservative Christian who loves the LORD Jesus Christ. Maybe I'm too racist to see him as anything else.White Jesus or Black Jesus? :D :p :D

[therising]

If his mugshot were in the paper would they mention his lineage? I mean, really therising, can you get more asinine than that? Stop with the red herrings.
However, for the sake of argument, yes, he would be a white guy.

I didn't say anything about them mentioning his lineage. If you, or anyone else, saw his picture, or met him, the mind would automatically associate the person as being black. (Please don't even bother saying "I don't see people that way."

So, the point is, that this man has been gone through his whole life with the perception of being a black man. And, he's overcome a lot of obstacles, and gotten pretty far in life.

Because, like it or not, there are some people (of course you're not one of them) who cause obstacles for black people.

So, now that this man has overcome all these obstacles, and become the leader of the free ****ing world, YOU want to claim him as a white guy!! :D:D

Do you see how ****ed up that is?

Face the music, the President of the United States is a black man.

PS Raoul's cop/taxi driver analogy was better than mine. Cause I'm willing to bet that, if you put him in a hoody, he would not have an easy time getting a cab in some neighborhoods, buy he would have no problem getting a cop car to stop. :)

[therising]

Nope, not at all. Did you Google Alan Keyes yet? Because if you did, you would stop your foolishness.

We get it, you would vote for a black guy. :rolleyes:

[mesue]

I didn't say anything about them mentioning his lineage. If you, or anyone else, saw his picture, or met him, the mind would automatically associate the person as being black. (Please don't even bother saying "I don't see people that way."...
stop placing your standards on me.

[Anotherview]

I think we elected the best man for the job. Personally, his color makes no difference to me. That's if you want my 2 cents :D:D:D

[therising]

stop placing your standards on me.

No reason to get so defensive.

[mesue]

No reason to get so defensive.
I'm not, I'm merely repeating myself to you.

[therising]

I'm having a deja vu of a Seinfeld episode.

There was one where George had a black guy at work. And someone mentioned the fact that the guy was black. And, George was so eager to show that he's not prejudiced, that he said "Oh, is Bill black? I hadn't noticed.

[mesue]

I'm having a deja vu of a Seinfeld episode.

There was one where George had a black guy at work. And someone mentioned the fact that the guy was black. And, George was so eager to show that he's not prejudiced, that he said "Oh, is Bill black? I hadn't noticed.
You must have been contemplating your life when your deja vu occurred :rolleyes:

[Surfing USA]

I didn't say anything about them mentioning his lineage. If you, or anyone else, saw his picture, or met him, the mind would automatically associate the person as being black.I don't see people that way.

[FisherRd]

George Bush is the reason why I overlooked Obama's view on abortion and voted for the best man for the job. I don't know if I will ever consider the man's Christian walk again after Bush. He really misled the Country in this respect.

And, so far from what I can see, Barack Obama talks the talk and walks the walk in terms of Christianity. In addition to attending Church, he's a faithful and good husband, outstanding father and seems to be honest and ethical.

Here we have the depth of the Obama voter. Oh, by the way, George Bush wasn't running against Obama.

How many times since he won the election has he attended church?
I doubt you can google the exact amount, but I'm equally sure there are articles that mention him skipping chirch and working out instead.

So he attended church and for you that was a plus. Were you one of the people that had no problem with what was being preached in his church by the Rev Wright?

[Anotherview]

Here we have the depth of the Obama voter. Oh, by the way, George Bush wasn't running against Obama.

You are right but the damage he had done to this country still sat in my craw and I saw Mc Cain as nothing more than more of the same old Bush policies.



I know he went to church on Election Day and the day following. However, I don't judge people on how many times they go to church because many church goers also go through the motions on Sunday and live their life as they so please the rest of the week.

[QUOTE So he attended church and for you that was a plus. Were you one of the people that had no problem with what was being preached in his church by the Rev Wright?

Yes, I was. I thought the Republicans were digging the bottom of the barrel when they tried to used someone else's actions (Rev Wright's) against Obama. All this told me is that they had no dirt on Obama so they tried the next best thing. Someone close to him. I attended a church for 15 years (before I moved). I didn't always agree with what the pastor preached but I didn't leave the church for that reason. Yeah, the republicans really made a big deal out of this. Too bad (for them) it didn't work. That's because God is greater than he that is in the World.

[Bringthetruth]

Amen brother

[FisherRd]

Another,
I'm having a hard time understanding your rationalization.

Obama sat in a church that preached hate. The man doing the preaching was extremely close to Obama (an "uncle", a mentor, the man that gave him the title of his book, a man that was in Obama's inner circle as he ran for the Dem nod, married him, baprtized the kids, etc). Then when this all came to light (poor obama, he had no idea even though he sat in church), Obama discarded the man (after initially refusing to do so). Did he cut this spiritual advisor off for Political Expediency? Talk about convictions and faith...

The fact is Obama has blown off church in favor of workouts. I thought seeing as though your reasoning for liking Obama included "attending church". Also that he was a good husband and father (because Time, People, and CNN said so I guess...).

As for being honest and ethical, I guess I'll remain skeptical that somebody could rise to his level through the chicago political machine and remain honest and ethical while everyone around him have been falling like dominos.

How did Obama run unopposed in Chicago I wonder? How did his opponents divorce records surface?


The only person that has bamboozled more people than Obama so succesfully is Billy Mays.

[Surfing USA]

Obama sat in a church that preached hate. The man doing the preaching was extremely close to Obama (an "uncle", a mentor, the man that gave him the title of his book, a man that was in Obama's inner circle as he ran for the Dem nod, married him, baprtized the kids, etc). Then when this all came to light (poor obama, he had no idea even though he sat in church), Obama discarded the man (after initially refusing to do so). Did he cut this spiritual advisor off for Political Expediency? Talk about convictions and faith...Which brings up another question.

If it were true that Obama "had no idea" his mentor was preaching hate, then it would also be true that he wasn't listening to him; right?

If he didn't listen to Reverend Wright, what makes Obama's followers believe he'll listen to them? :confused:

[Dumbfounded]

WHO CARES what color or gender the President is?!

Does it make a difference what doctors you people see, as long as he/she is competent and listens to your worries?

Electing a BLACK President basically brought MOST American racists "out of the closet" and boy are they P'd. GOOD.

Obama could be as black as Wesley Snipes and I wouldn't give a damn.

Hell, after Bush you'd think most people would be happy with a talking dog who could sign bills.

And "DUH"-If Obama was white with his ideaologies and incredible oratory skills, he would have been the Mummy and the Mommy by a LANDSLIDE;
I could not BELIEVE how close the election results were-Mainly because of the guy's color?

Boy, are we "englightened" and "advanced" as a people.


America is DROWNING and people are STLL bickering and crying and complaining about the President's RACE?

[Surfing USA]

I could not BELIEVE how close the election results were-Mainly because of the guy's color?Agreed. :)

If Obama's skin color was white, McCain probably would have won.

[Anotherview]

Another,
I'm having a hard time understanding your rationalization.

Obama sat in a church that preached hate. The man doing the preaching was extremely close to Obama (an "uncle", a mentor, the man that gave him the title of his book, a man that was in Obama's inner circle as he ran for the Dem nod, married him, baprtized the kids, etc). Then when this all came to light (poor obama, he had no idea even though he sat in church), Obama discarded the man (after initially refusing to do so). Did he cut this spiritual advisor off for Political Expediency? Talk about convictions and faith...

The fact is Obama has blown off church in favor of workouts. I thought seeing as though your reasoning for liking Obama included "attending church". Also that he was a good husband and father (because Time, People, and CNN said so I guess...).

As for being honest and ethical, I guess I'll remain skeptical that somebody could rise to his level through the chicago political machine and remain honest and ethical while everyone around him have been falling like dominos.

How did Obama run unopposed in Chicago I wonder? How did his opponents divorce records surface?


The only person that has bamboozled more people than Obama so succesfully is Billy Mays.

Fisher: I believe Reverend Wright built his church up to 8,000 members. Nobody builds a church of this size if they are preaching hatred "all the time" or not walking with God. I think something went wrong somewhere with Rev. Wright but he didn't run for president, Barack Obama did.

You said it is a fact that Barack blew off church for workouts. I've followed his campaign closely for one year, read the newspaper and CNN on a daily basis and also watch talk shows. I've never heard this. Also, you claim that I know Barack to be a good husband, father, etc. because I read Time, CNN.
I have to presume that this is how you found out that he skips church for workouts.

There are many reasons why I think Obama is a good husband and father. One is called personal interaction analysis. In addition there are other little things that added up over the year. Like, flying in from Missouri to Chicago to spend one hour trick or treating with Malia and Sasha.

As far as you questioning Obama's honesty and ethics because everyone (in Chicago) around him is falling off like dominoes. Again, it's others and not Obama.

I can give you a laundry list about his honesty and ethics but I'll wait till my next post as I think you and I will be talking here for a while.

I enjoy the debate and mean this sincerely

[Anotherview]

Agreed. :)

If Obama's skin color was white, McCain probably would have won.

Close? The results were Obama 67 Million and Mc Cain 58 Million.

[Anotherview]

WHO CARES what color or gender the President is?!

Thank you dumbfounded. I also looked beyond color and voted for the most qualified canidate.

[FisherRd]

You said it is a fact that Barack blew off church for workouts. I've followed his campaign closely for one year, read the newspaper and CNN on a daily basis and also watch talk shows. I've never heard this. Also, you claim that I know Barack to be a good husband, father, etc. because I read Time, CNN.
I have to presume that this is how you found out that he skips church for workouts.
If you literally google "Obama skips church" you'll get a bunch of links to choose from. The reason the Obamas give is that they didn't want to turn the church visit in to a 3 ring circus (which they weren't concerned with when he was running for office, and which didn't happen to Clinton or Bush, but I digress).
There are many reasons why I think Obama is a good husband and father. One is called personal interaction analysis. In addition there are other little things that added up over the year. Like, flying in from Missouri to Chicago to spend one hour trick or treating with Malia and Sasha.
I'm by no means claiming he's a bad parent, I'm just curious as to how people can say he's a good dad and hubby. Hell, I don't know if my neighbors are good parents and spouses and I live next door to them.
As far as you questioning Obama's honesty and ethics because everyone (in Chicago) around him is falling off like dominoes. Again, it's others and not Obama.
[COLOR="red"]Doesn't it strike you odd that Barack, from Chicago, known for being the bar with which political corruption is set, seems to have escaped it all and risen to the level he has? All of his political allies, fundraisers, etc all seem to be involved, but not him?
Did you know he ran unopposed for Ill State Senate? Do you know how he did that?
can give you a laundry list about his honesty and ethics but I'll wait till my next post as I think you and I will be talking here for a while.

I enjoy the debate and mean this sincerely


I don't think any politician is honest or ethical, if they were they wouldn't make the National Stage.
I too appreciate the discussion. I really do want to know why Obama seems to have captured so many people. Even his obvious screw-ups (Sec of Treas and Sec of Ed) don't seem to have even drawn much criticism. The Blago thing (where Obama claimed his people haven't had any contact) seemed to get some minor traction but that too was blown off.

His talking to an arab tv network for his first tv interview seems odd at first glance, but nothing I would consider criticizing.

[therising]

Agreed. :)

If Obama's skin color was white, McCain probably would have won.

You may right.

And, if Presidents 1 through 43 were black, they wouldn't have been elected either.

[Dougles]

You may right.

And, if Presidents 1 through 43 were black, they wouldn't have been elected either.

I bet you had Mr. powel run in 2000 he would have won! I would have voted for him!

[Surfing USA]

I bet you had Mr. powel run in 2000 he would have won! I would have voted for him!Me too.

[therising]

You must have been contemplating your life when your deja vu occurred :rolleyes:

No, that's not it at all. :rolleyes:

[Anotherview]

[QUOTE]If you literally google "Obama skips church" you'll get a bunch of links to choose from. The reason the Obamas give is that they didn't want to turn the church visit in to a 3 ring circus (which they weren't concerned with when he was running for office, and which didn't happen to Clinton or Bush, but I digress).

I did google Obama skips church, there were quite a few links but they all seemed to be around the same time frame (a few weeks after the election). It seems like it was one story that hit various newspapers. I know that the Obama’s have been attending church in the more recent weeks. I really don’t believe that George Bush ever gain excitement amongst the American People so it doesn’t surprise me that he wouldn’t have a problem with people crowding churches to see him. Clinton attracted a much different crowd than Obama (college students, men women; a group that would be less likely to follow them to church

. I'm by no means claiming he's a bad parent, I'm just curious as to how people can say he's a good dad and hubby. Hell, I don't know if my neighbors are good parents and spouses and I live next door to them).


I believe it’s through personal interaction analysis. If you ever watched Bush, he would very often walk ahead of his wife and then stop and look back as if he knew he was being televised and it didn’t look right not to walk with Laura. How many times did you hear Bush say he loved his wife in public? He rarely talked about his children.

With the Obama’s, they have shown their love and respect for each other. Just by conversations Obama relays between he and his daughters, you can tell they have a very open relationship. He has consistently mentioned how much he loves his girls and wife



Doesn't it strike you odd that Barack, from Chicago, known for being the bar with which political corruption is set, seems to have escaped it all and risen to the level he has? All of his political allies, fundraisers, etc all seem to be involved, but not him?Did you know he ran unopposed for Ill State Senate? Do you know how he did that?).

Getting along with political figures and have political allies are two different issues. If you give me specifics on individuals, I can probably respond. It doesn’t surprise me that Obama ran unopposed in Chicago. Look at how the people view him? Who would want to run against such a strong candidate?

I don't think any politician is honest or ethical, if they were they wouldn't make the National Stage.?)

I do agree with you to an extent about politicians. However, I think Obama is pretty clean. We haven't gotten any dirt on him. If there was any negativity, it was about the people around him not Barack. One factor that really attracted me is the fact that he didn’t accept any campaign money from lobbyists. And, in his first week of office, he signed an executive order/policy. His administration cannot work or accept gifts from any lobbyists. Another, is his open policy with the public. Once the Stimulus Package (825 billion dollars) is passed, he is going to open a site so that the American People can see where the money is being spent. When was any other president so open with the American people?


His talking to an arab tv network for his first tv interview seems odd at first glance, but nothing I would consider criticizing..

I have so much hope that Obama will bring peace in his years of administration. From what I understand, his TV interview has gained the interest of our foreign leaders in a positive way. It’s much too early to comment but like I mentioned, I have hope.

I really do want to know why Obama seems to have captured so many people ..

[COLOR="Red"]

1) His charisma. He is an eloquent speaker and also speaks with respect. This is a welcome change from our last leader, George Bush. I saw him as arrogant. He seemed to talked down to the American People.

2) His campaign promises met the needs of the American People. He seemed to be the answer to our problems. So far, he has fulfilled or addressed almost 20 of nearly 500 promises made during the campaign.

3) His ability to work his “own” way up the ranks in such a short time.

4) He captured so many people because he inspired so many different walks of life (young children, young adults, men, women of all ages). Bush didn’t attract such a diversified group of people and the Clinton administration sparked the interest of college students, men and women.

5) I am sure that the condition of our country was also a factor in attracting people. Bush had a poor rating. McCain seemed to project another 8 years of Bush and the people wanted change.[COLOR]

6) First American Black President

[Surfing USA]

Clinton attracted a much different crowd than ObamaYes. Interns. :D

[Anotherview]

Yes. Interns. :D

Surfing: You're the best :D:D:D:D:D

[FisherRd]

Another,
With regards to running unopposed, I don't mean people didn't want to run against him (hell, he had absolutely zero experience when he ran for ther Ill Senate). He had his competition thrown off of the ballot. One of his opponents divorce records came in to play.

You seem to lack even the most basic curiousity in regards to Obama. How can you be an avid supporter yet seem to be unaware of any controversy surounding him?

Lobbyists...It's pretty easy to not take money from lobbyists when you take it from their spouses. It's alos pretty to easy to claim when you make exceptions...http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhead/archive/2008/05/19/obama-s-lobbying-ties.aspx
It's smoke and mirrors, and so few people look beyond his talking points. It's as if he's able to brainwash people.
Remeber Obamas pledge that no lobbyists will have a spot in his Admin? Well, he lied. http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/01/obamas_lobbyist_rule_runs_up_a.asp

[Bringthetruth]

[QUOTE=FisherRd;440495]




I did google Obama skips church, there were quite a few links but they all seemed to be around the same time frame (a few weeks after the election). It seems like it was one story that hit various newspapers. I know that the Obama’s have been attending church in the more recent weeks. I really don’t believe that George Bush ever gain excitement amongst the American People so it doesn’t surprise me that he wouldn’t have a problem with people crowding churches to see him. Clinton attracted a much different crowd than Obama (college students, men women; a group that would be less likely to follow them to church




I believe it’s through personal interaction analysis. If you ever watched Bush, he would very often walk ahead of his wife and then stop and look back as if he knew he was being televised and it didn’t look right not to walk with Laura. How many times did you hear Bush say he loved his wife in public? He rarely talked about his children.

With the Obama’s, they have shown their love and respect for each other. Just by conversations Obama relays between he and his daughters, you can tell they have a very open relationship. He has consistently mentioned how much he loves his girls and wife





Getting along with political figures and have political allies are two different issues. If you give me specifics on individuals, I can probably respond. It doesn’t surprise me that Obama ran unopposed in Chicago. Look at how the people view him? Who would want to run against such a strong candidate?



I do agree with you to an extent about politicians. However, I think Obama is pretty clean. We haven't gotten any dirt on him. If there was any negativity, it was about the people around him not Barack. One factor that really attracted me is the fact that he didn’t accept any campaign money from lobbyists. And, in his first week of office, he signed an executive order/policy. His administration cannot work or accept gifts from any lobbyists. Another, is his open policy with the public. Once the Stimulus Package (825 billion dollars) is passed, he is going to open a site so that the American People can see where the money is being spent. When was any other president so open with the American people?




I have so much hope that Obama will bring peace in his years of administration. From what I understand, his TV interview has gained the interest of our foreign leaders in a positive way. It’s much too early to comment but like I mentioned, I have hope.



[COLOR="Red"]

1) His charisma. He is an eloquent speaker and also speaks with respect. This is a welcome change from our last leader, George Bush. I saw him as arrogant. He seemed to talked down to the American People.

2) His campaign promises met the needs of the American People. He seemed to be the answer to our problems. So far, he has fulfilled or addressed almost 20 of nearly 500 promises made during the campaign.

3) His ability to work his “own” way up the ranks in such a short time.

4) He captured so many people because he inspired so many different walks of life (young children, young adults, men, women of all ages). Bush didn’t attract such a diversified group of people and the Clinton administration sparked the interest of college students, men and women.

5) I am sure that the condition of our country was also a factor in attracting people. Bush had a poor rating. McCain seemed to project another 8 years of Bush and the people wanted change.[COLOR]

6) First American Black President

ANOTHERPOINTOFVIEW, you are a breath of fresh air on this forum, too many here haven't understood there are other points of view coming from minorities.

[Anotherview]

Another,
With regards to running unopposed, I don't mean people didn't want to run against him (hell, he had absolutely zero experience when he ran for ther Ill Senate). He had his competition thrown off of the ballot. One of his opponents divorce records came in to play.

This is just good politics.


You seem to lack even the most basic curiousity in regards to Obama. How can you be an avid supporter yet seem to be unaware of any controversy surounding him?

I've been around politics long enough to know the difference between dirty politics, mudslinging and the truth. What seems like controversy to others may be mudslinging to me. Also, we discussed some of the mudslinging/contraversy surrounding Obama (one was Rev Wright) so I am not totally sure what you refer to in your above comment.


Lobbyists...It's pretty easy to not take money from lobbyists when you take it from their spouses. It's alos pretty to easy to claim when you make exceptions...[url]

This is 2009, women make their own money, make contributions to whom they please, vote for who they please. My husband supported and voted for Mc Cain. I supported and voted for Obama. The bottom line is that he signed an Executive Order prohibiting his administration to work with or accept gifts from Lobbyists. Yes, the order was compromised but it's a far cry from what we've had. And, unlike the Bush administration, there won't be lobbyists lined up waiting for their favors that have devastated our economy in the past.

It's smoke and mirrors, and so few people look beyond his talking points. It's as if he's able to brainwash people.

I can only speak for myself. I call it trust.


Remeber Obamas pledge that no lobbyists will have a spot in his Admin? Well, he lied.

He lied??? How about he made mistake??? Have you ever gone back on your word? His administration can't work with lobbyists. So where's the damage here? Obama has made nearly 500 promises in his campaign. Let's not hang him on "one" flaw. Instead look at the entire picture

[Surfing USA]

[COLOR="Red"]This is 2009, women make their own money, make contributions to whom they please, vote for who they please. My husband supported and voted for Mc Cain. I supported and voted for Obama. The bottom line is that he signed an Executive Order prohibiting his administration to work with or accept gifts from Lobbyists. Yes, the order was compromised but it's a far cry from what we've had. And, unlike the Bush administration, there won't be lobbyists lined up waiting for their favors that have devastated our economy in the past.
Doesn't that kind of suck when you're voting for President, knowing that you're canceling each-others' votes out?

[Anotherview]

[QUOTE=Anotherview;440683]

ANOTHERPOINTOFVIEW, you are a breath of fresh air on this forum, too many here haven't understood there are other points of view coming from minorities.

Bringthetruth: I know that there are dirty politicians out there but not everyone is bad. I happen to believe in Obama.

[Anotherview]

Doesn't that kind of suck when you're voting for President, knowing that you're canceling each-others' votes out?

Yes, it's the first time it ever happened in our marriage but I couldn't persuade him otherwise.:D The good thing is that he has since lined up behind Obama and we can have intelligent and positive conversations about our new president.

[Dougles]

[COLOR="Red"]He lied??? How about he made mistake??? Have you ever gone back on your word? His administration can't work with lobbyists. So where's the damage here? Obama has made nearly 500 promises in his campaign. Let's not hang him on "one" flaw. Instead look at the entire picture


To many people this is a very important point, we all know that Obama WON'T be the one who comes up with every idea, he relies on his staff. If his staff look like they have any sign of impropriaty, it make our form of democracy look bad. I mean look how bad it looks when they guy in charge of the IRS comitted tax fraud 4 years straight, then the same guy goes and hires a former lobiest to be number 2!!

I found it amazing that not much was made up that i high ranking person at the DOD worker for a weapons contractor within the last year! The media highlited these idea when bush was in office (chaney and haliburton) but not when Obama's in office!

Even if their is nothing going it still looks funny. Its like when you and your husband were dating and he hung out with other women, i'm sure nothing was going, but i'm sure you didn't trust him 100%!!

[FisherRd]

Another,
I find it impossible to believe you're being serious.
Every single issue I've brought up you have made an excuse. Every one.

Sliming an opponent is "good politics".
Lying is "making a mistake". Being a sycophant for Obama you must have realized he made the "lobbyist" issue one of the cornerstones of his campaigns, yet here we are...

I do find some relief in your odd replies though. You specifically mentioned it's 2009 and women make their own money. No kidding? My question to you would be "Who said anything about women?". You realize "spouse" doesn't mean only "wife"?

You'll make any excuse for Obama no matter how lame. I'm sure the spouses of lobbyists contributing heavily to Obama is pure coincidence. So is the fact that Wall St donated 2 to 1 for Obama.

What excuse do you have for Obama's Top Spy nominee not admitting Waterboarding is torture? How about the giant loopholes Obama has created for closing Gitmo, renditions, etc

(And please, you asking for examples is getting old. Anyone that pays attention to politics enough to cheerlead for Obama the way you do has to be aware of the things I'm bringing up.)

[Anotherview]

Another,

I find it impossible to believe you're being serious..

I simply do not see the world as black and white as you do. That’s what debates are all about. Differences of opinions and views. These are not excuses. Apparently, I am more willing than you are to look outside the box.



Sliming an opponent is "good politics".

Please. Mc Cain devoted nearly his whole campaign with bashing Obama. It happens all the time in politics.

I do find some relief in your odd replies though. You specifically mentioned it's 2009 and women make their own money. No kidding? My question to you would be "Who said anything about women?". You realize "spouse" doesn't mean only "wife"?".

Spousal relationships pertain to marriage. Since same sex marriages are lawful in only 4 out of 52 states in our country, it’s a pretty safe bet that a wife (or husband) contributed to the fund that you spoke about.

You'll make any excuse for Obama no matter how lame. I'm sure the spouses of lobbyists contributing heavily to Obama is pure coincidence..

Coincidental or not coincidental, there was no benefit in doing so because Obama made it clear in his campaign that he wouldn't work with lobbyists and also signed an order confirming his promise.


What excuse do you have for Obama's Top Spy nominee not admitting Waterboarding is torture? How about the giant loopholes Obama has created for closing Gitmo, renditions, etc..

I’d be willing to bet money that it was Obama’s idea for John Brennan to step down. The media doesn’t spell out everything in “black and white.” Sometimes we have to read between the lines.

With respect to Gitamo I think you’re jumping the gun here. The plan is to close Gitmo within a year. Thinking outside the box, I am sure that if the remaining terrors are not slotted in a place, safe for society, the objective of a year will not be met. However, I think one year is ample time for due process and placement.


(And please, you asking for examples is getting old. Anyone that pays attention to politics enough to cheerlead for Obama the way you do has to be aware of the things I'm bringing up.)

If you don't like my questions, don't answer them. In some instances, I am asking for clarification to be sure we are on the same page. In addition, I believe in a fair playing ground. You ask questions so I should be able to as well. I don't like double standards :(

[Anotherview]

To many people this is a very important point, we all know that Obama WON'T be the one who comes up with every idea, he relies on his staff. If his staff look like they have any sign of impropriaty, it make our form of democracy look bad. I mean look how bad it looks when they guy in charge of the IRS comitted tax fraud 4 years straight, then the same guy goes and hires a former lobiest to be number 2!!

I found it amazing that not much was made up that i high ranking person at the DOD worker for a weapons contractor within the last year! The media highlited these idea when bush was in office (chaney and haliburton) but not when Obama's in office!

Even if their is nothing going it still looks funny. Its like when you and your husband were dating and he hung out with other women, i'm sure nothing was going, but i'm sure you didn't trust him 100%!!


Dougles: I understand what you are saying here. It does look bad. However, if a promise is made and afterwards it becomes clear (like in the case of Lynn) that an individual would be good for the Country, I can understand the change of heart.

In my opinion, Obama has done away with lobbyists continuing to destroy our country. This is far more than any other administration has done and I am satisfied with his order.

[FisherRd]

Another,
Are you or are you not aware that Obama has lied about lobbyists? If you're aware of it, how do you reconcile this statement "Obama made it clear in his campaign that he wouldn't work with lobbyists and also signed an order confirming his promise."

If you're not, how come? I gave you a link.

Also, I'm sure you're aware that pointing to McCain's behavior to justify Baracks is a non-starter. McCain didn't bamboozle a bunch of Americans with "Hope and Change". Besides, your point was Obama was different, ethical, clean, etc Now you seem to be admitting he's no different than McCain.

[Anotherview]

Another,
Are you or are you not aware that Obama has lied about lobbyists? If you're aware of it, how do you reconcile this statement "Obama made it clear in his campaign that he wouldn't work with lobbyists and also signed an order confirming his promise."

If you're not, how come? I gave you a link.

Also, I'm sure you're aware that pointing to McCain's behavior to justify Baracks is a non-starter. McCain didn't bamboozle a bunch of Americans with "Hope and Change". Besides, your point was Obama was different, ethical, clean, etc Now you seem to be admitting he's no different than McCain.

Obama signed an order that restricts his administration from working with lobbyists, who helped destroy this country ecomonically. On many occasions during his campaign, he said he wouldn't work with lobbyists and followed through on his word. The rest is superfulous. And, I have to add that no other administration has EVER gone this far to eliminate lobbyists.

You missed my point completely on the Mc Cain example. Politicians mudsling their opponents all the time. And, you're right, McCain didn't bamboozle a bunch of Americans with "Hope and Change." That's because he had NOTHING to offer and pretty much all of his campaign was directed towards mudslinging and criticizing Obama.

[Dougles]

Dougles: I understand what you are saying here. It does look bad. However, if a promise is made and afterwards it becomes clear (like in the case of Lynn) that an individual would be good for the Country, I can understand the change of heart.

In my opinion, Obama has done away with lobbyists continuing to destroy our country. This is far more than any other administration has done and I am satisfied with his order.

So your first statement is saying "it may not be a bad ting he picked a lobiest, just give it some time". But your second says "he's gotten rid of lobiest effects after only 8 days".

So which one is it, it's okay that he picked a lobiest because he can still do a good job? Or that Obama got did a better job getting rid of the influence of lobiest in 8 day than all the POTUS in the last 200 years?

Your the one who tells every to give Obama a try, but you raise the Golden flag for him after 8 days, doesn't make sense!

[FisherRd]

Obama signed an order that restricts his administration from working with lobbyists, who helped destroy this country ecomonically. On many occasions during his campaign, he said he wouldn't work with lobbyists and followed through on his word. The rest is superfulous. And, I have to add that no other administration has EVER gone this far to eliminate lobbyists.



Seriously, you're kidding, right?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/01/obamas_lobbyist_rule_runs_up_a.asp

How does he supply you with the Kool-Aide?

Some how all Obama has to do is say something for it to become true. His actual actions never have to match the rhetoric because his supporters are so blinded by his words.

[Anotherview]

Your the one who tells every to give Obama a try, but you raise the Golden flag for him after 8 days, doesn't make sense!

It is only my opinion, you don't have to agree with me.

[Anotherview]

Some how all Obama has to do is say something for it to become true. His actual actions never have to match the rhetoric because his supporters are so blinded by his words.

His actions have met his rhetoric. He campaigned that he didn't accept donations from lobbyists (regardless of what your article says) and he followed through with an order. Was the order written "exactly" the way he campaigned? The answer is no. The bottom line is that we have an order that will eliminate the destruction that lobbying has caused. The problem was government owing lobbyists favors .... It's done and over with it. This is my point.

[FisherRd]

His actions have met his rhetoric. He campaigned that he didn't accept donations from lobbyists (regardless of what your article says) and he followed through with an order. Was the order written "exactly" the way he campaigned? The answer is no. The bottom line is that we have an order that will eliminate the destruction that lobbying has caused. The problem was government owing lobbyists favors .... It's done and over with it. This is my point.


You can lead a horse to water...

Are you purposely ignoring William Lynn and David Hayes? I guess their lobbying doesn't count.
Being Deputy Sec of Def while having recently lobbied for a defense contractor doesn't raise any flags...


You are the definition of a blind supporter.

[Anotherview]

You are the definition of a blind supporter.

You have a right to your opinion. Enjoy your day

[FisherRd]

Are you purposely ignoring William Lynn and David Hayes?

Yes.
Sincerely,
Anotherview

[Anotherview]

Yes.
Sincerely,
Anotherview

Fisher: If you can continue our debate without any namecalling or insulting remarks, I will be happy to discuss these issues with you. Until then, enjoy your day.

[FisherRd]

The discussion was over when you continued to play dumb.

[Anotherview]

The discussion was over when you continued to play dumb.


Playing dumb is your opinioin. I was just asking for clarification and we already discussed this matter. Please don't try and read my mind

[FisherRd]

http://www.baynews9.com/content/86/2009/1/28/431264.html?title=Ex-Goldman%20lobbyist%20now%20Geithner's%20right-hand%20man

But...but...but he signed a letter! He said no lobbyists!

[therising]

Fisher is taking out the frustration he has at home.

His wife is an Obama supporter, but she doesn't allow him to talk back to her.

[FisherRd]

Fisher is taking out the frustration he has at home.

His wife is an Obama supporter, but she doesn't allow him to talk back to her.


Nope. The wife is an NPR supporter, Sierra Club Member, Social Liberal, but even she is dismayed at the blind support that Obama commands.


3 instances in the Presidents first 9 days of hiring Lobbyists in key positions (with 12 more rumored to be in line) and Anotherview continues to repeat that "Obama wouldn't work with lobbyists" and has stayed "true to his word".

If somebody's not playing dumb, what's the alternative?

[Dougles]

Nope. The wife is an NPR supporter, Sierra Club Member, Social Liberal, but even she is dismayed at the blind support that Obama commands.


3 instances in the Presidents first 9 days of hiring Lobbyists in key positions (with 12 more rumored to be in line) and Anotherview continues to repeat that "Obama wouldn't work with lobbyists" and has stayed "true to his word".

If somebody's not playing dumb, what's the alternative?
Maybe she can't read?:D

[JustRetired]

Nope. The wife is an NPR supporter, Sierra Club Member, Social Liberal, but even she is dismayed at the blind support that Obama commands.


3 instances in the Presidents first 9 days of hiring Lobbyists in key positions (with 12 more rumored to be in line) and Anotherview continues to repeat that "Obama wouldn't work with lobbyists" and has stayed "true to his word".

If somebody's not playing dumb, what's the alternative?

Maybe she's not playing!:D

[Anotherview]

http://www.baynews9.com/content/86/2009/1/28/431264.html?title=Ex-Goldman%20lobbyist%20now%20Geithner's%20right-hand%20man

But...but...but he signed a letter! He said no lobbyists!


Fisher: The reality is that we are better off , since the signing of the policy, than we were prior to the policy being signed. I am not interested in the intricate details, just the bottom line.

[FisherRd]

Fisher: The reality is that we are better off , since the signing of the policy, than we were prior to the policy being signed. I am not interested in the intricate details, just the bottom line.

You're kidding right? He signed a policy that he has violated 3 times in 9 days.
As I mentioned, Obama sycophants are happy with platitudes and slogans. That's all they need are his words, deeds don't matter.

[Anotherview]

You're kidding right? He signed a policy that he has violated 3 times in 9 days.
As I mentioned, Obama sycophants are happy with platitudes and slogans. That's all they need are his words, deeds don't matter.


The order was revised and not violated. The revisions of the order do NOT allow the current administration to accept gifts or work with lobbyists; two activities that destroyed the country.

Before you come back about Lynn working with Raytheon, the government already has numerous contracts with the organization and presumably would continue to negotiate agreements with or without Lynnn.

Fisher, I am beginning to wonder if you think you are the "Messiah." It seems everyone of your posts include some insulting or condescending remark. Is it difficult for you to show respect when someone disagrees with your stance?

[Brandon]

You're kidding right? He signed a policy that he has violated 3 times in 9 days.
As I mentioned, Obama sycophants are happy with platitudes and slogans. That's all they need are his words, deeds don't matter.

I agree with you here, Fisher Rd.

You win this one. (However, Obama TECHNICALLY didn't violate the rule as Obama got waivers. :) :) :) )

However, I saw an article which is supporting Obama about the hiring of the lobbyists (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-runs-into-trouble-with-lobbying-rules-2009-01-28.html), and it states:

'Restricting lobbyists from some appointments could force the administration to rely on more inexperienced help, or appointees from academia.'

Does this mean that you are FOR hiring 'appointees from academia'? Take down your altar to Rush Limbaugh if you are!

[FisherRd]

I agree with you here, Fisher Rd.

You win this one. (However, Obama TECHNICALLY didn't violate the rule as Obama got waivers. :) :) :) )

However, I saw an article which is supporting Obama about the hiring of the lobbyists (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-runs-into-trouble-with-lobbying-rules-2009-01-28.html), and it states:

'Restricting lobbyists from some appointments could force the administration to rely on more inexperienced help, or appointees from academia.'

Does this mean that you are FOR hiring 'appointees from academia'? Take down your altar to Rush Limbaugh if you are!


Limbaugh is enetertainment for when Rome is in commercial break. Although he's funny, his spin is as blatant as any AA offering.
I'm all for having people with experience and from academia, as long as they're qualified. Obama had to know his no lobbyist claim was total BS, but knew people like "Anotherview" would buy it hook, line, and sinker.
He's a smart guy, and his advisors are some smart people too, so what other explanation could there be for making the waiver and making a show out of not hiring or working with lobbyists (like Joe Bidens son) when they damn well knew that some of the most qualified people were lobbyists?

He's banking on Americans being apathetic and uninformed and it's obviously working.

[therising]

He's banking on Americans being apathetic and uninformed and it's obviously working.

I really don't care, or know about him; I just know I like the guy.

[Anotherview]

I really don't care, or know about him; I just know I like the guy.

The Rising - He's referring to me. I have spelled it out 4 different times - he just doesn't get it.