Obama? Really?

First off, I am killing the quote tree. These things grow so damn huge so fast it is CRAZY!

1) Do you know Wright personally? No. Despite some of the insane stuff that has spewed out of his mouth doesn't mean he is incapable of running a comitte well. I never complained about the civility of the arguement, lol. I have trouble staying civil in these arguements now because you are far from the first person I have argued about this with and I have little impatience for stupidity.

Of course Obama wouldn't admit to agreeing, but how does that mean he agrees? He has stated that he disagreed with those views from day one, and I happen to believe this. If he actually believed such crazy things and had so much pent up hatred it easily would have slipped by now.

lol and don't even try and bring up intelligence. I am a highly intelligent person who has remained on honor roll pretty much all my life and through little effort at times. I would bring up my IQ score I got, but it was a random online one I took for fun and I really don't trust the result as I have heard other people taking online tests and getting 126 which isn't that far away from genius level.....

Oh and FYI I consider myself intelligent but NOT a genius.

2) ok those are obviously his views but that says nothing about his other sermons. You seem to automatically play "connect the dots to make Obama look bad" without taking 5 seconds to stop and actually use logic to bring up doubt. The bias is amazing.

About that looking for a new church, I once again ask do you know what Wrights other sermons are like? How do you even know for sure that these beliefs are long-withstanding? For all we know Obama had been friends with the man for YEARS before these views surfaced. Would you throw away a friend you had had for years for making a few extreme comments?

I am not the fanboy here. I am sitting here using reason. You on the other hand are playing connnect the dots all-over with no knowlege on what you speak of.

3) Once again it is hillarious how egotistical you are because you sit here acting as if you know Obamas life story. I direct you to re-read my point #2 to see exactly what is so incredibly wrong with your thinking.

4) As I mentioned Obama is cutting ties now that Wright is going off and trying to speak for Obama. If there is anything I hate personally, one of them is definitely someone trying to speak for me and act as if they know what I want and think.

No I am not naive. I don't jump to conclusions off such little information. You might want to try playing devils advocate sometime because you might find that we know way too little to sit here and try to judge Obama the way you are.

LostProphetFLCL

You didn't kill the quote tree. maybe someone can teach you basic HTML.

1. About the uncivility, it was a response to someone else. You both get confused too easily. Are you not reading the names in the quote boxes? If you claim to dislike stupidity, stop being a generator of it. To the subject, why would you put someone on a comitte if you didn't agree with their core values? Once again, you are a naive fanboy.

That hatred would not have slipped out if he knew the importance of hiding it. This is an example of what you tell yourself in order to accept him because you're a fanboy. It's no surprise that you claim high intelligence. It's apparent that you think a lot of yourself from your refusal to accept any faults. You're apparently egotistical and pompous. The fact that you use the honor roll as validation is kind of funny. Academic success does not equal common sense. That's a fact. Maybe as you mature, you'll learn some humility. It's a life lesson that you apparently haven't learned yet.

2. His views have nothing to do with his sermons? They were exposed most blatantly in that forum. Bias? I used to say I'd rather have Obama President than Hilary. Then all of these warning signs came up and I used my common sense. You've been a fanboy of his and you'll make any excuse you have to in order to accept him, no matter how much of your brain you have to shut down. You are a naive fanboy.

Finding a new church does not mean you throw them away. You don't go to church to appease a friend. Obama could have gone to a new church, but kept him as a friend at a distance. I would not go to a church operated by such a hateful biggot and I definately would not have named him my spiritual mentor and put him on a comitte unless I believe in his values. You are blind.

3. You calling me egotistical is like a PS3 fan saying the 360 has no good games. It is not his life story that matters, but the present product. He has written in his books about his anger towards the white race. He lies blatantly about his past. See the last sentence in point #2.

4. Obama has to cut ties now because his campaign is weakening significantly and rightfully so. Finally, people are using common sense.

The naive can't see that they're naive. This is one of the key requirements to being naive. As I said, I was open to Obama until all these warning signs started popping up. The flag uissue, the lying about his past issue, the words of his wife, the contents of his books, and finally his pastor. His flip flopping is a smaller part. I do what reasonable people should do. I let factors weigh in on a candidate and use rational judgement. You're a fanboy of his and there's almost nothing that would change your mind from voting for him. Go ahead, let's have another post saying the same things.

Ever since Obama stated that anyone who is against illegal immigration is a hypocrite, I have hated him.

Now he's been revealed to have extremely questionable peers, and then this whole attack on people living in rural states.

It baffels me how people can still believe his lies of "hope and change", when it's obvious that this "hope and change", if it comes about at all, will be intended for rich people with Obama's policies, while everyone else is left to suffer.

Dracargen

Wow, people are so ignorant nowadays. Your country is falling apart and you care about, of all things, illegal immigrants? They HELP the economy, providing necessary services for almost no money.

Obama = CFR

Hilary = CFR and Bilderberg

McCain = CFR

If you don't know what the council on foreign relations is and what their work is designed towards then you only know the public side of politics. There are no good candidates this year, they're all puppets this time around. Look into it. CFR Wants a one world government. I think Hilary will win this election either way because she was at their last meeting, same as Dubya was.

Nwordjohn

I hope people actually pay attention to the facts in this guys posts. ALL 3 OF THESE CANDIDATES ARE CFR MEMEBERS! ALL 3 ARE GOING TO APPOINT ZEBIGNEW BRZINSKI as one of their foreign policy advisors. If you know who Z'BIG is then you should know that NONE of these 3 should be trusted with this country in their hands. These people are all working for corporations, NOT THE PEOPLE they pander for. We need a real choice for president in this country. What we have now are puppets who are two wings of the same bird (McCain/Barack, Hitlery).

I could only get through half this thread before I had enough. It seems like the so many of the people on this thread (and probably OT) are completly lacking in civility and really seem to argue things they dont know much about. It tends to just be some name calling match in which the liberals say that consrvatives are evil and the conservatives say the liberals morons and brainwashed by the liberal media. This discussion of Obama has turned into the perfect microcosim of our political prosses; filled with pointless bickering and name calling. People playing the role of cheerleader for their favorite political party and seeing everything in black and white. If your not liberal well and like McCain then you must be some evil neo-con, gun toting hick who runs over the poor in your hummerss. While If your conservative and are arguing a liberal well then he must be some weed smoking hippie, bleeding heart liberal who hates America and eats aborted fetuses.

Is anyone capable of making a well thought out argument for either side? Are there any liberals or conservatives who can respect the others point of view and maybe attempt to learn something? I know there are many who do, but its seems like there are more who dont. Sorry if im actually wrong about this whole thing as I only got through about half the thread but its something that seems somewhat common place around here.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

First off, I am killing the quote tree. These things grow so damn huge so fast it is CRAZY!

1) Do you know Wright personally? No. Despite some of the insane stuff that has spewed out of his mouth doesn't mean he is incapable of running a comitte well. I never complained about the civility of the arguement, lol. I have trouble staying civil in these arguements now because you are far from the first person I have argued about this with and I have little impatience for stupidity.

Of course Obama wouldn't admit to agreeing, but how does that mean he agrees? He has stated that he disagreed with those views from day one, and I happen to believe this. If he actually believed such crazy things and had so much pent up hatred it easily would have slipped by now.

lol and don't even try and bring up intelligence. I am a highly intelligent person who has remained on honor roll pretty much all my life and through little effort at times. I would bring up my IQ score I got, but it was a random online one I took for fun and I really don't trust the result as I have heard other people taking online tests and getting 126 which isn't that far away from genius level.....

Oh and FYI I consider myself intelligent but NOT a genius.

2) ok those are obviously his views but that says nothing about his other sermons. You seem to automatically play "connect the dots to make Obama look bad" without taking 5 seconds to stop and actually use logic to bring up doubt. The bias is amazing.

About that looking for a new church, I once again ask do you know what Wrights other sermons are like? How do you even know for sure that these beliefs are long-withstanding? For all we know Obama had been friends with the man for YEARS before these views surfaced. Would you throw away a friend you had had for years for making a few extreme comments?

I am not the fanboy here. I am sitting here using reason. You on the other hand are playing connnect the dots all-over with no knowlege on what you speak of.

3) Once again it is hillarious how egotistical you are because you sit here acting as if you know Obamas life story. I direct you to re-read my point #2 to see exactly what is so incredibly wrong with your thinking.

4) As I mentioned Obama is cutting ties now that Wright is going off and trying to speak for Obama. If there is anything I hate personally, one of them is definitely someone trying to speak for me and act as if they know what I want and think.

No I am not naive. I don't jump to conclusions off such little information. You might want to try playing devils advocate sometime because you might find that we know way too little to sit here and try to judge Obama the way you are.

Trashface

You didn't kill the quote tree. maybe someone can teach you basic HTML.

1. About the uncivility, it was a response to someone else. You both get confused too easily. Are you not reading the names in the quote boxes? If you claim to dislike stupidity, stop being a generator of it. To the subject, why would you put someone on a comitte if you didn't agree with their core values? Once again, you are a naive fanboy.

That hatred would not have slipped out if he knew the importance of hiding it. This is an example of what you tell yourself in order to accept him because you're a fanboy. It's no surprise that you claim high intelligence. It's apparent that you think a lot of yourself from your refusal to accept any faults. You're apparently egotistical and pompous. The fact that you use the honor roll as validation is kind of funny. Academic success does not equal common sense. That's a fact. Maybe as you mature, you'll learn some humility. It's a life lesson that you apparently haven't learned yet.

2. His views have nothing to do with his sermons? They were exposed most blatantly in that forum. Bias? I used to say I'd rather have Obama President than Hilary. Then all of these warning signs came up and I used my common sense. You've been a fanboy of his and you'll make any excuse you have to in order to accept him, no matter how much of your brain you have to shut down. You are a naive fanboy.

Finding a new church does not mean you throw them away. You don't go to church to appease a friend. Obama could have gone to a new church, but kept him as a friend at a distance. I would not go to a church operated by such a hateful biggot and I definately would not have named him my spiritual mentor and put him on a comitte unless I believe in his values. You are blind.

3. You calling me egotistical is like a PS3 fan saying the 360 has no good games. It is not his life story that matters, but the present product. He has written in his books about his anger towards the white race. He lies blatantly about his past. See the last sentence in point #2.

4. Obama has to cut ties now because his campaign is weakening significantly and rightfully so. Finally, people are using common sense.

The naive can't see that they're naive. This is one of the key requirements to being naive. As I said, I was open to Obama until all these warning signs started popping up. The flag uissue, the lying about his past issue, the words of his wife, the contents of his books, and finally his pastor. His flip flopping is a smaller part. I do what reasonable people should do. I let factors weigh in on a candidate and use rational judgement. You're a fanboy of his and there's almost nothing that would change your mind from voting for him. Go ahead, let's have another post saying the same things.

lol damn I had to keep up your quote till I was done responding and I managed to forget to kill the quote tree.

1) You mentioned civility in the post I was responding to.

As for the comitte thing, people can still do certain things well in face of flawed values. I don't see what is so difficult to understand about that.

Wow, you made a complete ass of yourself right there. You do not know me so don't even begin to try and talk about me. Of course this seems to be a hobby of yours have you have been doing it constantly in this thread. I guess I can take comfort in knowing I am not so ridiculous arrogant to constantly sit there and judge peoples character without actually knowing them. I recommend getting your head out of your ass ASAP.

The hatred wouldn't have slipped out if he knew the importance of hiding? what? You aren't even getting at anything there. If Obama really was so hateful as you like to believe then it would have shown either in his past or during this election. The fact that no one can come up with any real example of Obama himself showing through hatred says alot especially in the face of Hillary being caught in lie after lie and Mccain having very public, childish temper tantrums.

Actually academic success says alot about ones ability to learn information and work their brain. I have much more common sense than you have shown yourself to have in this thread seeing as you cannot understand the very simple concept that one persons beliefs do not reflect anothers.

Funny you call me a fanboy when Obama wasn't even my original choice. I am no fanboy but rather someone with enough common sense to realize Obama is the only trustworthy candidate left who isn't going to ruin this country with terrible economics and war.

And it is absolutely ironic you try and tell me to learn some humility seeing as you are the one standing here trying to judge not only myself but Obama without ever meeting either of us. You seriously have some issues to work out and I would be incredibly surprised if you were even old enough to vote after these last remarks. You serously have shown in this last post an incredible amount of immaturity and arrogance I have yet to see on this forum. I think this sudden hostility is a good sign of your arguement breaking down.

2) One sermon is enough to judge a mans 20 YEARS of preaching? Absolutely ridiculous.

I am done repeating this point to you as you seem mentally incapable of understanding it.

Yes your BIAS is amazing. I have a hard time believing that comment for a minute seeing as you haven't even used any common sense (which I may bring you up actually had the nerve to accuse me of lacking) to think through exactly why all this controversy over Wright is BS. I am guessing you're a fan of attack ads? This focus on attacking Obamas character rather than his stances is amazing and not only shows how weak the opponents of Obama are but it also shows the sad state of American politics.

Excuses? SInce when is common sense? My brain has not shut down at all. You are the one actually telling me that I should see Obama as hateful and possibly racist when he himself has NEVER BEEN HEAR SAYING SUCH THINGS!!! You act as if I never thought anything of the Wright controversy. Believe me, I did think MUCH about it (Apparently more than you have) and untill I hear Obama himself showing through some of Wrights beliefs I do not care how crazy Wright is.

Yes Obama could have gone to a new church. He could have also joined the circus. Without knowing enough about the mans life I am not going to sit there and try and say he should have done things differently.

I do not care what you would have done. You know nothing of Obamas experience (as I do) so you can stop trying to talk about what you would do. It simply makes you look even more arrogant.

3) We are talking about his personal life and character here so HIS LIFE STORY MEANS EVERYTHING! How in Gods name can you sit there and try judging someones character and try to infer that they have certain beliefs without knowing much of ANYTHING about their life? That is absolute STUPIDITY to do such a thing.

I will just put this simply: NO HE HASN'T! Seeing as you know nothing of his life experience I guess it makes sense that you would not understand the points he was getting at with his book. One of the few things I know about his life is that he experienced alot of confusion and such because of his being torn between different cultures and such.

He never lied blatanly about his past we went over this before.

4) I believe it is definitely more than just the campaign. Did you see him talking about cutting ties in that speech. I could tell there was a bit of hurt in his eyes because he has basically been betrayed by Wright.

Yes, and the naive are also the first to claim others as naive which you did to me.

If you really let those things effect your decision then that is incredibly immature. You would let his refusing of a flag-pin and words of OTHER PEOPLE effect the way you think of the man (I am not bringing up the past thing or the books because I have been over that many times to apparently blind eyes) then I seriously hope you are not old enough to vote in this election.

Hillary has been caught lying many times and got caught flip-flopping WAY more than any other candidate this election. Mccain happens to have terrible views on foreign policy and also knows nothing when it comes to economics. You would choose one of those over Obama based on such trivial things? Wow, just wow....

What would change my mind is if Obama himself actually came through showing this supposed "hatred" that people claim he has because of others hateful remarks. That hasn't happened yet however so I see no real issue with Obama and I am quite sick of hearing all the stupid arguements brought up against the man. Obama haters all say the same tired things that mean absolutely nothing and I am waiting for someone to actually come forward with a new and meaningful arguement against the man.

You're sick of hearing the same tired things? Well so am I! Try reading my arguements and taking to seconds to try and understand them the next time you go and post the same things over after I have already shown you exactly why those arguements fail.

I will make it easier for you. From now on if you go and bring up some arguement I have already gone over with you, I will just direct you to my previous posts. That way this won't take up NEARLY as much time as it does to respond.

I could only get through half this thread before I had enough. It seems like the so many of the people on this thread (and probably OT) are completly lacking in civility and really seem to argue things they dont know much about. It tends to just be some name calling match in which the liberals say that consrvatives are evil and the conservatives say the liberals morons and brainwashed by the liberal media. This discussion of Obama has turned into the perfect microcosim of our political prosses; filled with pointless bickering and name calling. People playing the role of cheerleader for their favorite political party and seeing everything in black and white. If your not liberal well and like McCain then you must be some evil neo-con, gun toting hick who runs over the poor in your hummerss. While If your conservative and are arguing a liberal well then he must be some weed smoking hippie, bleeding heart liberal who hates America and eats aborted fetuses.

Is anyone capable of making a well thought out argument for either side? Are there any liberals or conservatives who can respect the others point of view and maybe attempt to learn something? I know there are many who do, but its seems like there are more who dont. Sorry if im actually wrong about this whole thing as I only got through about half the thread but its something that seems somewhat common place around here.

JackMcSexbeard

If you can get over my uncivility (sorry I just don't care to pull punches and that sort) then I direct you to my posts and trashfaces for that matter as he does a good job of representing every single Obama hater out there.

[QUOTE="JackMcSexbeard"]

I could only get through half this thread before I had enough. It seems like the so many of the people on this thread (and probably OT) are completly lacking in civility and really seem to argue things they dont know much about. It tends to just be some name calling match in which the liberals say that consrvatives are evil and the conservatives say the liberals morons and brainwashed by the liberal media. This discussion of Obama has turned into the perfect microcosim of our political prosses; filled with pointless bickering and name calling. People playing the role of cheerleader for their favorite political party and seeing everything in black and white. If your not liberal well and like McCain then you must be some evil neo-con, gun toting hick who runs over the poor in your hummerss. While If your conservative and are arguing a liberal well then he must be some weed smoking hippie, bleeding heart liberal who hates America and eats aborted fetuses.

Is anyone capable of making a well thought out argument for either side? Are there any liberals or conservatives who can respect the others point of view and maybe attempt to learn something? I know there are many who do, but its seems like there are more who dont. Sorry if im actually wrong about this whole thing as I only got through about half the thread but its something that seems somewhat common place around here.

LostProphetFLCL

If you can get over my uncivility (sorry I just don't care to pull punches and that sort) then I direct you to my posts and trashfaces for that matter as he does a good job of representing every single Obama hater out there.

Sorry I wasnt trying to direct my post towards you, or anyone in particular it was juat a sort of frustration I had reading throught the earlier parts of the thread and other threads in the past. I know a arguments can get pretty heated and thats fine, I was more or less attacking the broad generalizations people tend to make and how people can only see things in these arguments as either right or wrong and no in between. Sorry if I was unclear or if it seemed to be directed to you as im still trying to read through the whole thing and what everyone said.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="JackMcSexbeard"]

I could only get through half this thread before I had enough. It seems like the so many of the people on this thread (and probably OT) are completly lacking in civility and really seem to argue things they dont know much about. It tends to just be some name calling match in which the liberals say that consrvatives are evil and the conservatives say the liberals morons and brainwashed by the liberal media. This discussion of Obama has turned into the perfect microcosim of our political prosses; filled with pointless bickering and name calling. People playing the role of cheerleader for their favorite political party and seeing everything in black and white. If your not liberal well and like McCain then you must be some evil neo-con, gun toting hick who runs over the poor in your hummerss. While If your conservative and are arguing a liberal well then he must be some weed smoking hippie, bleeding heart liberal who hates America and eats aborted fetuses.

Is anyone capable of making a well thought out argument for either side? Are there any liberals or conservatives who can respect the others point of view and maybe attempt to learn something? I know there are many who do, but its seems like there are more who dont. Sorry if im actually wrong about this whole thing as I only got through about half the thread but its something that seems somewhat common place around here.

JackMcSexbeard

If you can get over my uncivility (sorry I just don't care to pull punches and that sort) then I direct you to my posts and trashfaces for that matter as he does a good job of representing every single Obama hater out there.

Sorry I wasnt trying to direct my post towards you, or anyone in particular it was juat a sort of frustration I had reading throught the earlier parts of the thread and other threads in the past. I know a arguments can get pretty heated and thats fine, I was more or less attacking the broad generalizations people tend to make and how people can only see things in these arguments as either right or wrong and no in between. Sorry if I was unclear or if it seemed to be directed to you as im still trying to read through the whole thing and what everyone said.

I took no offense man.

Even if you had been scolding me I understand. It is just my personality that when not in a serious debate (as in one where there will actually be a winner) I tend to get uncivil and I know people don't like it.

Who is Obama? He is an Illinois Civil Lawyer and Senator for one or two years.. Who is Hilary Clinton? A former first lady and a Senator of New York I believe. Who is John McCain? A former war prisoner, milatary soldier, and has been in the Congress for about 20 years. You tell me who has the most experience. Plus basically what the President is responsible for is the armed forces. All the taxes and healthcare issues are generally addressed by Congress.... which usually doesn't see eye to eye with the President.Moroes

Who CARES if Mccain was in the military? He was a war prisoner which is a negative in my mind because who knows how that effected him mentally.....

You have a point when it comes to the congress stuff, but please don't bother bringing up military experience because it means absolutely nothing....

[QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

First off, I am killing the quote tree. These things grow so damn huge so fast it is CRAZY!

1) Do you know Wright personally? No. Despite some of the insane stuff that has spewed out of his mouth doesn't mean he is incapable of running a comitte well. I never complained about the civility of the arguement, lol. I have trouble staying civil in these arguements now because you are far from the first person I have argued about this with and I have little impatience for stupidity.

Of course Obama wouldn't admit to agreeing, but how does that mean he agrees? He has stated that he disagreed with those views from day one, and I happen to believe this. If he actually believed such crazy things and had so much pent up hatred it easily would have slipped by now.

lol and don't even try and bring up intelligence. I am a highly intelligent person who has remained on honor roll pretty much all my life and through little effort at times. I would bring up my IQ score I got, but it was a random online one I took for fun and I really don't trust the result as I have heard other people taking online tests and getting 126 which isn't that far away from genius level.....

Oh and FYI I consider myself intelligent but NOT a genius.

2) ok those are obviously his views but that says nothing about his other sermons. You seem to automatically play "connect the dots to make Obama look bad" without taking 5 seconds to stop and actually use logic to bring up doubt. The bias is amazing.

About that looking for a new church, I once again ask do you know what Wrights other sermons are like? How do you even know for sure that these beliefs are long-withstanding? For all we know Obama had been friends with the man for YEARS before these views surfaced. Would you throw away a friend you had had for years for making a few extreme comments?

I am not the fanboy here. I am sitting here using reason. You on the other hand are playing connnect the dots all-over with no knowlege on what you speak of.

3) Once again it is hillarious how egotistical you are because you sit here acting as if you know Obamas life story. I direct you to re-read my point #2 to see exactly what is so incredibly wrong with your thinking.

4) As I mentioned Obama is cutting ties now that Wright is going off and trying to speak for Obama. If there is anything I hate personally, one of them is definitely someone trying to speak for me and act as if they know what I want and think.

No I am not naive. I don't jump to conclusions off such little information. You might want to try playing devils advocate sometime because you might find that we know way too little to sit here and try to judge Obama the way you are.

LostProphetFLCL

You didn't kill the quote tree. maybe someone can teach you basic HTML.

1. About the uncivility, it was a response to someone else. You both get confused too easily. Are you not reading the names in the quote boxes? If you claim to dislike stupidity, stop being a generator of it. To the subject, why would you put someone on a comitte if you didn't agree with their core values? Once again, you are a naive fanboy.

That hatred would not have slipped out if he knew the importance of hiding it. This is an example of what you tell yourself in order to accept him because you're a fanboy. It's no surprise that you claim high intelligence. It's apparent that you think a lot of yourself from your refusal to accept any faults. You're apparently egotistical and pompous. The fact that you use the honor roll as validation is kind of funny. Academic success does not equal common sense. That's a fact. Maybe as you mature, you'll learn some humility. It's a life lesson that you apparently haven't learned yet.

2. His views have nothing to do with his sermons? They were exposed most blatantly in that forum. Bias? I used to say I'd rather have Obama President than Hilary. Then all of these warning signs came up and I used my common sense. You've been a fanboy of his and you'll make any excuse you have to in order to accept him, no matter how much of your brain you have to shut down. You are a naive fanboy.

Finding a new church does not mean you throw them away. You don't go to church to appease a friend. Obama could have gone to a new church, but kept him as a friend at a distance. I would not go to a church operated by such a hateful biggot and I definately would not have named him my spiritual mentor and put him on a comitte unless I believe in his values. You are blind.

3. You calling me egotistical is like a PS3 fan saying the 360 has no good games. It is not his life story that matters, but the present product. He has written in his books about his anger towards the white race. He lies blatantly about his past. See the last sentence in point #2.

4. Obama has to cut ties now because his campaign is weakening significantly and rightfully so. Finally, people are using common sense.

The naive can't see that they're naive. This is one of the key requirements to being naive. As I said, I was open to Obama until all these warning signs started popping up. The flag uissue, the lying about his past issue, the words of his wife, the contents of his books, and finally his pastor. His flip flopping is a smaller part. I do what reasonable people should do. I let factors weigh in on a candidate and use rational judgement. You're a fanboy of his and there's almost nothing that would change your mind from voting for him. Go ahead, let's have another post saying the same things.

lol damn I had to keep up your quote till I was done responding and I managed to forget to kill the quote tree.

1) You mentioned civility in the post I was responding to.

As for the comitte thing, people can still do certain things well in face of flawed values. I don't see what is so difficult to understand about that.

Wow, you made a complete ass of yourself right there. You do not know me so don't even begin to try and talk about me. Of course this seems to be a hobby of yours have you have been doing it constantly in this thread. I guess I can take comfort in knowing I am not so ridiculous arrogant to constantly sit there and judge peoples character without actually knowing them. I recommend getting your head out of your ass ASAP.

The hatred wouldn't have slipped out if he knew the importance of hiding? what? You aren't even getting at anything there. If Obama really was so hateful as you like to believe then it would have shown either in his past or during this election. The fact that no one can come up with any real example of Obama himself showing through hatred says alot especially in the face of Hillary being caught in lie after lie and Mccain having very public, childish temper tantrums.

Actually academic success says alot about ones ability to learn information and work their brain. I have much more common sense than you have shown yourself to have in this thread seeing as you cannot understand the very simple concept that one persons beliefs do not reflect anothers.

Funny you call me a fanboy when Obama wasn't even my original choice. I am no fanboy but rather someone with enough common sense to realize Obama is the only trustworthy candidate left who isn't going to ruin this country with terrible economics and war.

And it is absolutely ironic you try and tell me to learn some humility seeing as you are the one standing here trying to judge not only myself but Obama without ever meeting either of us. You seriously have some issues to work out and I would be incredibly surprised if you were even old enough to vote after these last remarks. You serously have shown in this last post an incredible amount of immaturity and arrogance I have yet to see on this forum. I think this sudden hostility is a good sign of your arguement breaking down.

2) One sermon is enough to judge a mans 20 YEARS of preaching? Absolutely ridiculous.

I am done repeating this point to you as you seem mentally incapable of understanding it.

Yes your BIAS is amazing. I have a hard time believing that comment for a minute seeing as you haven't even used any common sense (which I may bring you up actually had the nerve to accuse me of lacking) to think through exactly why all this controversy over Wright is BS. I am guessing you're a fan of attack ads? This focus on attacking Obamas character rather than his stances is amazing and not only shows how weak the opponents of Obama are but it also shows the sad state of American politics.

Excuses? SInce when is common sense? My brain has not shut down at all. You are the one actually telling me that I should see Obama as hateful and possibly racist when he himself has NEVER BEEN HEAR SAYING SUCH THINGS!!! You act as if I never thought anything of the Wright controversy. Believe me, I did think MUCH about it (Apparently more than you have) and untill I hear Obama himself showing through some of Wrights beliefs I do not care how crazy Wright is.

Yes Obama could have gone to a new church. He could have also joined the circus. Without knowing enough about the mans life I am not going to sit there and try and say he should have done things differently.

I do not care what you would have done. You know nothing of Obamas experience (as I do) so you can stop trying to talk about what you would do. It simply makes you look even more arrogant.

3) We are talking about his personal life and character here so HIS LIFE STORY MEANS EVERYTHING! How in Gods name can you sit there and try judging someones character and try to infer that they have certain beliefs without knowing much of ANYTHING about their life? That is absolute STUPIDITY to do such a thing.

I will just put this simply: NO HE HASN'T! Seeing as you know nothing of his life experience I guess it makes sense that you would not understand the points he was getting at with his book. One of the few things I know about his life is that he experienced alot of confusion and such because of his being torn between different cultures and such.

He never lied blatanly about his past we went over this before.

4) I believe it is definitely more than just the campaign. Did you see him talking about cutting ties in that speech. I could tell there was a bit of hurt in his eyes because he has basically been betrayed by Wright.

Yes, and the naive are also the first to claim others as naive which you did to me.

If you really let those things effect your decision then that is incredibly immature. You would let his refusing of a flag-pin and words of OTHER PEOPLE effect the way you think of the man (I am not bringing up the past thing or the books because I have been over that many times to apparently blind eyes) then I seriously hope you are not old enough to vote in this election.

Hillary has been caught lying many times and got caught flip-flopping WAY more than any other candidate this election. Mccain happens to have terrible views on foreign policy and also knows nothing when it comes to economics. You would choose one of those over Obama based on such trivial things? Wow, just wow....

What would change my mind is if Obama himself actually came through showing this supposed "hatred" that people claim he has because of others hateful remarks. That hasn't happened yet however so I see no real issue with Obama and I am quite sick of hearing all the stupid arguements brought up against the man. Obama haters all say the same tired things that mean absolutely nothing and I am waiting for someone to actually come forward with a new and meaningful arguement against the man.

You're sick of hearing the same tired things? Well so am I! Try reading my arguements and taking to seconds to try and understand them the next time you go and post the same things over after I have already shown you exactly why those arguements fail.

I will make it easier for you. From now on if you go and bring up some arguement I have already gone over with you, I will just direct you to my previous posts. That way this won't take up NEARLY as much time as it does to respond.

1. You presented enough about yourself that it was easy to see that you're inconsiderate and arrogant. You brought uncivility into it first which is a sign of immaturity and lack of consideration and control. You're naive because you deny the fact that these could be indicators of his core beliefs. It's not the fact that you don't agree, it's the fact that you're so naive as to even be open to it. This is also a sign of lacking intelligence. Yes academia can be an indicator, but it does not equate to common sense and intelligence. It's just an indicator.

If he had his eye on the office and was determined enough, he could hide that hatred until it was time to express it in action. Once again, you are naive.

Your approach, close mindedness and lack of consideration from your very first post shows you need some humility. Any uncivility I had towards you was just a reaction of your own. It was you who set the atmosphere of childishness.

2. It does not matter how many sermons were filled with this hate. He had shown his true colors and even Obama's own words from one of his book mirrored the anger towards the white race.

I am far from biased. You don't have to believe it. You obviously have a habit of being close minded anyway. Yes, originally Obama made a better impression on me. Then after all the warning signs, I used common sense and became suspicious. I'm open to the fact that he may not believe the same as his Pastor, but the fact that he may is far to important to dismiss when you're talking about the leader of our countryadded to all the other warning signs. He would be our protector and it's too much of a chance wth all of the warning signs. Yes, you are a fanboy and your brain has shut down on this issue.

Do you not understand that I was talking about what I would do in the situation because you were saying things such as "well you wouldnt disown a family member if they said those things" and I said that a Pastor was far different. You started that line of discussion. You're making yourself look slow.

3. I never said I knew his heart and life. I said there was enough warning signs to be suspicious. You're the one who is blindly accepting. That is true stupidity and foolishness.

I don't know how I can simplify this for you. He attended a catholic school as a Muslim. He recited from the Quran. His campaign lies blatantly about him being a Muslim and him reciting from the Quran. If you can't understand that, then I really don't know what to say to you. If he can't admit to those things, why should we believe him about his beliefs?

4. If he were forced to cut ties with his spiritual mentor, of course it would hurt. Of course his primary objective is more important than remaining loyal. Doesn't mean they don't hold the same core beliefs. He can't admit that, it would destroy his chance.

I call you naive because you have no suspicion. You tell yourself whatever you have to in order to accept him. I'm open to the idea of him not sharing those beliefs, but with all the warnings, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable, intelligent thinking. Better to be safe than sorry. Yes, you are naive.

It doesn't matter whether you approve of me voting or not. You stated that if Obama doesn't win, you'll leave the country because the voters aren't intelligent enough for you to be around. This statement shows how pompous and arrogant you are even if you can't see it yourself. You're approval is nothing to desire.

Of course of he won't show that hatred even if he possesses it. Are you so naive to think that an intelligent, motivated person would ruin an ultimate plan because of a slip? Notice I said IF he possesses it. I'm open minded about it, unlike the naive.

Your naive arguments are easy to understand. I type the same things to respond to your repeated words. You've shown no failure in my arguments. I've said it's possible he doesn't agree, but with so many warning signs, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable.

Go ahead and repeat yourself again.

1. You presented enough about yourself that it was easy to see that you're inconsiderate and arrogant. You brought uncivility into it first which is a sign of immaturity and lack of consideration and control. You're naive because you deny the fact that these could be indicators of his core beliefs. It's not the fact that you don't agree, it's the fact that you're so naive as to even be open to it. This is also a sign of lacking intelligence. Yes academia can be an indicator, but it does not equate to common sense and intelligence. It's just an indicator.

If he had his eye on the office and was determined enough, he could hide that hatred until it was time to express it in action. Once again, you are naive.

Your approach, close mindedness and lack of consideration from your very first post shows you need some humility. Any uncivility I had towards you was just a reaction of your own. It was you who set the atmosphere of childishness.

2. It does not matter how many sermons were filled with this hate. He had shown his true colors and even Obama's own words from one of his book mirrored the anger towards the white race.

I am far from biased. You don't have to believe it. You obviously have a habit of being close minded anyway. Yes, originally Obama made a better impression on me. Then after all the warning signs, I used common sense and became suspicious. I'm open to the fact that he may not believe the same as his Pastor, but the fact that he may is far to important to dismiss when you're talking about the leader of our countryadded to all the other warning signs. He would be our protector and it's too much of a chance wth all of the warning signs. Yes, you are a fanboy and your brain has shut down on this issue.

Do you not understand that I was talking about what I would do in the situation because you were saying things such as "well you wouldnt disown a family member if they said those things" and I said that a Pastor was far different. You started that line of discussion. You're making yourself look slow.

3. I never said I knew his heart and life. I said there was enough warning signs to be suspicious. You're the one who is blindly accepting. That is true stupidity and foolishness.

I don't know how I can simplify this for you. He attended a catholic school as a Muslim. He recited from the Quran. His campaign lies blatantly about him being a Muslim and him reciting from the Quran. If you can't understand that, then I really don't know what to say to you. If he can't admit to those things, why should we believe him about his beliefs?

4. If he were forced to cut ties with his spiritual mentor, of course it would hurt. Of course his primary objective is more important than remaining loyal. Doesn't mean they don't hold the same core beliefs. He can't admit that, it would destroy his chance.

I call you naive because you have no suspicion. You tell yourself whatever you have to in order to accept him. I'm open to the idea of him not sharing those beliefs, but with all the warnings, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable, intelligent thinking. Better to be safe than sorry. Yes, you are naive.

It doesn't matter whether you approve of me voting or not. You stated that if Obama doesn't win, you'll leave the country because the voters aren't intelligent enough for you to be around. This statement shows how pompous and arrogant you are even if you can't see it yourself. You're approval is nothing to desire.

Of course of he won't show that hatred even if he possesses it. Are you so naive to think that an intelligent, motivated person would ruin an ultimate plan because of a slip? Notice I said IF he possesses it. I'm open minded about it, unlike the naive.

Your naive arguments are easy to understand. I type the same things to respond to your repeated words. You've shown no failure in my arguments. I've said it's possible he doesn't agree, but with so many warning signs, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable.

Go ahead and repeat yourself again.

Trashface

1) If you really think that an online debate is enough to make a good judgement of someone then you really have more issues than I thought. Seriously man, that is absolutely absurd and if you actually knew me in real life you would have an idea of what I am like. There is a big difference between arrogance and confidence and if you have paid attention to even the posts on here you would realize I am NOT arrogant. Never did I claim to be better than someone and never did I claim to be more knowlegable on Obama than you are. In fact my whole point is your judgement of Obama is absurd seeing how little we know of the man and the fact that he himself hasn't made hateful comments.

As for the uncivility, I must apologize but it just happens to be the way I debate when in a non-serious environment such as this. Sorry if it annoys or offends you, but it is really just the way I am and I can't say I am exactly proud of it.

When did I say that they couldn't be indicators of his beliefs? I never denied that they need to be taken into consideration, but my point is they are most certainly not enough to make a fair assessment of his character.

Hiding such beliefs is very difficult albeit not impossible. Thing is though I think it would have showed up in some of his writings over the years. However I am willing to take his word for now in face of Mccains bad policy and Hillary being a very known liar and flip-flopper.

As for the tone, you definitely took the uncivility a step farther in your last post and I think you should recognize that. I threw out mere random insults that really that are nothing more than mere "accents" onto my arguements, but you went so far as to try and directly attack my character and personality without even knowing me which is wrong.

I am not close minded though. In fact my views on things have changed much over the years and continue to today. The main reason I debate so fiercely is to see if someone can present another valid view. I attack as much as possible to see how well it can hold up.

2) It does matter in this case because the concern isn't Wrights beliefs which I will not defend the man, but we need wonder how much of it Obama has heard. If you had talked to me a few years ago you would have known me as a church-going kid who liked Bush and would argue people that God exists. People change over time and I wonder how long Wright has been like this and if he kept these crazy views to himself for years. We can't be sure Wright was making these crazy sermons from the beginning and if Obama actually became friends with the man knowing him for his crazy side.

Like I said I just find it hard to believe you were backing Obama at one point from the way you are attacking him now. I never denied it could be true, but I am justly skeptical. If I hadn't told you I once supported Bush and you heard me talk about Bush now you probably would find it hard to believe I supported him at one point.

I to took some suspicion in Obama with the controversy but the difference is my common sense led me to dismiss it for now. I don't find it that big of a deal to worry about considering even if he is some hate filled person his power is limited enough by congress that we could keep it from seeping through into the way the country is run.

I am not a fanboy and it is funny you think so. In all honesty, my main stance is anti-Mccain more than anything. I would prefer Hillary over Obama because of how known of a liar and flip-flopper she is, and to me common sense says to go against the known liar even if you are voting for a possible liar.

Damn it was so long ago I didn't realize I brought those questions into play. I feel a bit stupid for that one now, lol.

3) No but you did try and say it didn't matter how much we knew of his life, and it means everything when discussing character. Quotes can be missunderstood when not knowing the context ala people thinking Obama is racist from remarks in his books. The man went through alot of conflict in terms of race issues and I think he is trying to explain himself and coming off the wrong way in a few quotes.

So if I was to go to a Catholic school and recite from the Bible I would be a Catholic? It doesn't work that way and his not attending service regularly suggest him not being dedicated in any way to the Muslim faith. Only the person themselves can truely say whether or not they are or were religious so him saying he wasn't Muslim in face of that school experience really isn't lying because for all we know it wasn't his choice and he had no dedication to it.

4) Of course it is a possiblity he does hold the beliefs but the key word is POSSIBLITY. He hasn't shown through himself to hold those beliefs which is why I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.

You didn't pay attention to my last post on the suspicion. Go back over it because I did mention I am not simply passing these things off.

Better safe than sorry need not apply here, seeing as the other choices are a man who will surely ruin this country and a woman who is actually a KNOWN liar. I will take a possible liar over a known liar anyday. Not to mention his beliefs aren't that big of an issue as if he does try to put them into decision making he will be shot down by congress. He is even against gay marriage in terms of beliefs but opposes the constitutional ban at the same time. No I still am not naive.

I probably should take back that statement now shouldn't I. Twas admittingly stupid of me to say when my statement should be "If Mccain wins the election I will do what I can to leave the country." Obviously my not approving of your being able to vote doesn't truely mean anything because it won't stop you from doing so, but I definitely feel the need to express my extreme distaste for people who vote based on character such as the people prancing around pointing out Mccain was a soldier and POW when it means absolutely NOTHING and in fact can be taken as a big negative seeing how it is likely that someone who was a POW would have suffered some bad mental trauma...

If his hatred is bad then yes it would slip somewhere along the line, especially pre-election. Intelligence means nothing with how powerful emotions can be. In fact he is showing himself to be the most honest candidate as he is the only one not walking out there sugar-coating everything. All the controversy over him not wearing that lapel pin and the bitter comments shows he really doesn't like pulling punches.

Yes I show failure because I show just how much doubt there is to bring in terms of your arguements and I have shows in so many way why it isn't reasonable to jump to any conclusions about Obama with the little that has happened. Remember, INNOCENT untill PROVEN guilty. If this was a trial your arguements would fail because there is so much connect the dots going on without any true evidence to support all the connections being made.

And I am saying there isn't enough to be so fearful of him winning the election.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]

The reasons people have to vote for this man seem to be that he speaks of hope and change, he's young, and he's a good speaker. To me, these are not good enough reasons to elect someone President. He's accomplished nothing in the Senate, he has no leadership experience, and he hasn't gone into detail about how he would bring this change that he keeps speaking of.

Aside from these things, there are other things that make me very uneasy about him being elected. I have no problem with a black President, although he has made his race an issue.

Here are some quotes from one of his books:

From 'Dreams of My Father',
"I CEASED TO ADVERTISE MY MOTHER'S RACE AT THE AGE OF12 OR 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites"

From Dreams of My Father, " I FOUND A SOLACE IN NURSING A PERVASIVE SENSE OF GRIEVANCE AND ANIMOSITY AGAINST MY MOTHER'S RACE".

From 'Dreams of my Father', "The emotion between the races could never be pure..... the THE OTHER RACE (WHITE) WOULD ALWAYS REMAIN JUST THAT: MENACING, ALIEN AND APART"

From Dreams Of My Father, "never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. IT WAS INTO MY FATHER'S IMAGE , THE BLACK MAN, THE SON OF AFRICA, THAT I'D PACKED ALL THE ATTRIBUTES I SOUGHT IN MYSELF.

From Dreams Of My Father:
"THAT HATE HADN'T GONE AWAY," he wrote, BLAMING WHITE PEOPLE,- SOME CRUEL, SOME IGNORANT, sometimes a single face, sometimes just a faceless image of a system claiming power over our lives."

If these quotes had been made by a white candidate, and the racial roles in the quotes were reversed, they would have been ripped to pieces and labeled a racist. This cannot be denied. The book seems to be about him denying the known maternal heritage (white) and embrace the heritage of his father (black) who had abandoned him.

Also, his Pastor repeatedly, literally cursed America spouting "G D America!! G D America!!" Obama responded by saying that he could no more disown his Pastor than his white Grandmother, which is just idiocy. You can select Pastors, you cannot select Grandmothers.

Also, his wife spoke recently saying that for the first time in her life, she's proud to be an American. She's 40 something. So she's never been proud in her entire life until now?

As for his recent statement that rural Americans cling to religion and guns because they're bitter towards people with more money, it's ignorance. I'm in the lower economic bracket and I understand that I could have finished college if I had put forth the effort. I'm responsible for my economic situation just like people with more money than I worked for their money. I will not be pandered to.

Lastly, Obama was indeed a practicing Muslim. He went to a Catholic school where non Catholic children were also accepted. this is fact. Everything I have typed is fact. Take the time and research.

Once more, are there any good reasons to vote for this person? I see plenty of reasons not to vote for him.

Responses such as "He's better than Bush" are irrelevant because we're talking about electing our NEXT leader.

Responses such as "Well he'll be better than Hilary and McCain won't be accepted because, 1. you don't have to vote at all, and 2. we're talking about reasons to vote for Obama and reasons not to.

H8sMikeMoore

usually, he youth vote is naive. The liberal media wanted either him or hillary to win it. Obama has better speeches

[QUOTE="Trashface"]

1. You presented enough about yourself that it was easy to see that you're inconsiderate and arrogant. You brought uncivility into it first which is a sign of immaturity and lack of consideration and control. You're naive because you deny the fact that these could be indicators of his core beliefs. It's not the fact that you don't agree, it's the fact that you're so naive as to even be open to it. This is also a sign of lacking intelligence. Yes academia can be an indicator, but it does not equate to common sense and intelligence. It's just an indicator.

If he had his eye on the office and was determined enough, he could hide that hatred until it was time to express it in action. Once again, you are naive.

Your approach, close mindedness and lack of consideration from your very first post shows you need some humility. Any uncivility I had towards you was just a reaction of your own. It was you who set the atmosphere of childishness.

2. It does not matter how many sermons were filled with this hate. He had shown his true colors and even Obama's own words from one of his book mirrored the anger towards the white race.

I am far from biased. You don't have to believe it. You obviously have a habit of being close minded anyway. Yes, originally Obama made a better impression on me. Then after all the warning signs, I used common sense and became suspicious. I'm open to the fact that he may not believe the same as his Pastor, but the fact that he may is far to important to dismiss when you're talking about the leader of our countryadded to all the other warning signs. He would be our protector and it's too much of a chance wth all of the warning signs. Yes, you are a fanboy and your brain has shut down on this issue.

Do you not understand that I was talking about what I would do in the situation because you were saying things such as "well you wouldnt disown a family member if they said those things" and I said that a Pastor was far different. You started that line of discussion. You're making yourself look slow.

3. I never said I knew his heart and life. I said there was enough warning signs to be suspicious. You're the one who is blindly accepting. That is true stupidity and foolishness.

I don't know how I can simplify this for you. He attended a catholic school as a Muslim. He recited from the Quran. His campaign lies blatantly about him being a Muslim and him reciting from the Quran. If you can't understand that, then I really don't know what to say to you. If he can't admit to those things, why should we believe him about his beliefs?

4. If he were forced to cut ties with his spiritual mentor, of course it would hurt. Of course his primary objective is more important than remaining loyal. Doesn't mean they don't hold the same core beliefs. He can't admit that, it would destroy his chance.

I call you naive because you have no suspicion. You tell yourself whatever you have to in order to accept him. I'm open to the idea of him not sharing those beliefs, but with all the warnings, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable, intelligent thinking. Better to be safe than sorry. Yes, you are naive.

It doesn't matter whether you approve of me voting or not. You stated that if Obama doesn't win, you'll leave the country because the voters aren't intelligent enough for you to be around. This statement shows how pompous and arrogant you are even if you can't see it yourself. You're approval is nothing to desire.

Of course of he won't show that hatred even if he possesses it. Are you so naive to think that an intelligent, motivated person would ruin an ultimate plan because of a slip? Notice I said IF he possesses it. I'm open minded about it, unlike the naive.

Your naive arguments are easy to understand. I type the same things to respond to your repeated words. You've shown no failure in my arguments. I've said it's possible he doesn't agree, but with so many warning signs, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable.

Go ahead and repeat yourself again.

LostProphetFLCL

1) If you really think that an online debate is enough to make a good judgement of someone then you really have more issues than I thought. Seriously man, that is absolutely absurd and if you actually knew me in real life you would have an idea of what I am like. There is a big difference between arrogance and confidence and if you have paid attention to even the posts on here you would realize I am NOT arrogant. Never did I claim to be better than someone and never did I claim to be more knowlegable on Obama than you are. In fact my whole point is your judgement of Obama is absurd seeing how little we know of the man and the fact that he himself hasn't made hateful comments.

As for the uncivility, I must apologize but it just happens to be the way I debate when in a non-serious environment such as this. Sorry if it annoys or offends you, but it is really just the way I am and I can't say I am exactly proud of it.

When did I say that they couldn't be indicators of his beliefs? I never denied that they need to be taken into consideration, but my point is they are most certainly not enough to make a fair assessment of his character.

Hiding such beliefs is very difficult albeit not impossible. Thing is though I think it would have showed up in some of his writings over the years. However I am willing to take his word for now in face of Mccains bad policy and Hillary being a very known liar and flip-flopper.

As for the tone, you definitely took the uncivility a step farther in your last post and I think you should recognize that. I threw out mere random insults that really that are nothing more than mere "accents" onto my arguements, but you went so far as to try and directly attack my character and personality without even knowing me which is wrong.

I am not close minded though. In fact my views on things have changed much over the years and continue to today. The main reason I debate so fiercely is to see if someone can present another valid view. I attack as much as possible to see how well it can hold up.

2) It does matter in this case because the concern isn't Wrights beliefs which I will not defend the man, but we need wonder how much of it Obama has heard. If you had talked to me a few years ago you would have known me as a church-going kid who liked Bush and would argue people that God exists. People change over time and I wonder how long Wright has been like this and if he kept these crazy views to himself for years. We can't be sure Wright was making these crazy sermons from the beginning and if Obama actually became friends with the man knowing him for his crazy side.

Like I said I just find it hard to believe you were backing Obama at one point from the way you are attacking him now. I never denied it could be true, but I am justly skeptical. If I hadn't told you I once supported Bush and you heard me talk about Bush now you probably would find it hard to believe I supported him at one point.

I to took some suspicion in Obama with the controversy but the difference is my common sense led me to dismiss it for now. I don't find it that big of a deal to worry about considering even if he is some hate filled person his power is limited enough by congress that we could keep it from seeping through into the way the country is run.

I am not a fanboy and it is funny you think so. In all honesty, my main stance is anti-Mccain more than anything. I would prefer Hillary over Obama because of how known of a liar and flip-flopper she is, and to me common sense says to go against the known liar even if you are voting for a possible liar.

Damn it was so long ago I didn't realize I brought those questions into play. I feel a bit stupid for that one now, lol.

3) No but you did try and say it didn't matter how much we knew of his life, and it means everything when discussing character. Quotes can be missunderstood when not knowing the context ala people thinking Obama is racist from remarks in his books. The man went through alot of conflict in terms of race issues and I think he is trying to explain himself and coming off the wrong way in a few quotes.

So if I was to go to a Catholic school and recite from the Bible I would be a Catholic? It doesn't work that way and his not attending service regularly suggest him not being dedicated in any way to the Muslim faith. Only the person themselves can truely say whether or not they are or were religious so him saying he wasn't Muslim in face of that school experience really isn't lying because for all we know it wasn't his choice and he had no dedication to it.

4) Of course it is a possiblity he does hold the beliefs but the key word is POSSIBLITY. He hasn't shown through himself to hold those beliefs which is why I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.

You didn't pay attention to my last post on the suspicion. Go back over it because I did mention I am not simply passing these things off.

Better safe than sorry need not apply here, seeing as the other choices are a man who will surely ruin this country and a woman who is actually a KNOWN liar. I will take a possible liar over a known liar anyday. Not to mention his beliefs aren't that big of an issue as if he does try to put them into decision making he will be shot down by congress. He is even against gay marriage in terms of beliefs but opposes the constitutional ban at the same time. No I still am not naive.

I probably should take back that statement now shouldn't I. Twas admittingly stupid of me to say when my statement should be "If Mccain wins the election I will do what I can to leave the country." Obviously my not approving of your being able to vote doesn't truely mean anything because it won't stop you from doing so, but I definitely feel the need to express my extreme distaste for people who vote based on character such as the people prancing around pointing out Mccain was a soldier and POW when it means absolutely NOTHING and in fact can be taken as a big negative seeing how it is likely that someone who was a POW would have suffered some bad mental trauma...

If his hatred is bad then yes it would slip somewhere along the line, especially pre-election. Intelligence means nothing with how powerful emotions can be. In fact he is showing himself to be the most honest candidate as he is the only one not walking out there sugar-coating everything. All the controversy over him not wearing that lapel pin and the bitter comments shows he really doesn't like pulling punches.

Yes I show failure because I show just how much doubt there is to bring in terms of your arguements and I have shows in so many way why it isn't reasonable to jump to any conclusions about Obama with the little that has happened. Remember, INNOCENT untill PROVEN guilty. If this was a trial your arguements would fail because there is so much connect the dots going on without any true evidence to support all the connections being made.

And I am saying there isn't enough to be so fearful of him winning the election.

My replies will be short because I've become bored with this.

If better safe than sorry applies antwhere, it's when selecting our leader.

He is a liar and flip flipper. His campaign says he didn't recite from the Quran when he factual did. This is a lie no matter how important the context. He also said pulling the troops would be a disaster. This was not long go at all. Now he says they need to be pulled. That's a plain flip flop. Even more plain than a hippy's foot wear.

If you were enrolled as a Catholic , then I suppose you would be attending as a Catholic. He was enrolled as a Muslim.

If he had an ultimate goal, he could hold back that hatred until it was the planned time to release it. This is what he would call means to an end.

When it comes down to it, I think there's reasonable suspicion and you don't.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

1. You presented enough about yourself that it was easy to see that you're inconsiderate and arrogant. You brought uncivility into it first which is a sign of immaturity and lack of consideration and control. You're naive because you deny the fact that these could be indicators of his core beliefs. It's not the fact that you don't agree, it's the fact that you're so naive as to even be open to it. This is also a sign of lacking intelligence. Yes academia can be an indicator, but it does not equate to common sense and intelligence. It's just an indicator.

If he had his eye on the office and was determined enough, he could hide that hatred until it was time to express it in action. Once again, you are naive.

Your approach, close mindedness and lack of consideration from your very first post shows you need some humility. Any uncivility I had towards you was just a reaction of your own. It was you who set the atmosphere of childishness.

2. It does not matter how many sermons were filled with this hate. He had shown his true colors and even Obama's own words from one of his book mirrored the anger towards the white race.

I am far from biased. You don't have to believe it. You obviously have a habit of being close minded anyway. Yes, originally Obama made a better impression on me. Then after all the warning signs, I used common sense and became suspicious. I'm open to the fact that he may not believe the same as his Pastor, but the fact that he may is far to important to dismiss when you're talking about the leader of our countryadded to all the other warning signs. He would be our protector and it's too much of a chance wth all of the warning signs. Yes, you are a fanboy and your brain has shut down on this issue.

Do you not understand that I was talking about what I would do in the situation because you were saying things such as "well you wouldnt disown a family member if they said those things" and I said that a Pastor was far different. You started that line of discussion. You're making yourself look slow.

3. I never said I knew his heart and life. I said there was enough warning signs to be suspicious. You're the one who is blindly accepting. That is true stupidity and foolishness.

I don't know how I can simplify this for you. He attended a catholic school as a Muslim. He recited from the Quran. His campaign lies blatantly about him being a Muslim and him reciting from the Quran. If you can't understand that, then I really don't know what to say to you. If he can't admit to those things, why should we believe him about his beliefs?

4. If he were forced to cut ties with his spiritual mentor, of course it would hurt. Of course his primary objective is more important than remaining loyal. Doesn't mean they don't hold the same core beliefs. He can't admit that, it would destroy his chance.

I call you naive because you have no suspicion. You tell yourself whatever you have to in order to accept him. I'm open to the idea of him not sharing those beliefs, but with all the warnings, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable, intelligent thinking. Better to be safe than sorry. Yes, you are naive.

It doesn't matter whether you approve of me voting or not. You stated that if Obama doesn't win, you'll leave the country because the voters aren't intelligent enough for you to be around. This statement shows how pompous and arrogant you are even if you can't see it yourself. You're approval is nothing to desire.

Of course of he won't show that hatred even if he possesses it. Are you so naive to think that an intelligent, motivated person would ruin an ultimate plan because of a slip? Notice I said IF he possesses it. I'm open minded about it, unlike the naive.

Your naive arguments are easy to understand. I type the same things to respond to your repeated words. You've shown no failure in my arguments. I've said it's possible he doesn't agree, but with so many warning signs, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable.

Go ahead and repeat yourself again.

Trashface

1) If you really think that an online debate is enough to make a good judgement of someone then you really have more issues than I thought. Seriously man, that is absolutely absurd and if you actually knew me in real life you would have an idea of what I am like. There is a big difference between arrogance and confidence and if you have paid attention to even the posts on here you would realize I am NOT arrogant. Never did I claim to be better than someone and never did I claim to be more knowlegable on Obama than you are. In fact my whole point is your judgement of Obama is absurd seeing how little we know of the man and the fact that he himself hasn't made hateful comments.

As for the uncivility, I must apologize but it just happens to be the way I debate when in a non-serious environment such as this. Sorry if it annoys or offends you, but it is really just the way I am and I can't say I am exactly proud of it.

When did I say that they couldn't be indicators of his beliefs? I never denied that they need to be taken into consideration, but my point is they are most certainly not enough to make a fair assessment of his character.

Hiding such beliefs is very difficult albeit not impossible. Thing is though I think it would have showed up in some of his writings over the years. However I am willing to take his word for now in face of Mccains bad policy and Hillary being a very known liar and flip-flopper.

As for the tone, you definitely took the uncivility a step farther in your last post and I think you should recognize that. I threw out mere random insults that really that are nothing more than mere "accents" onto my arguements, but you went so far as to try and directly attack my character and personality without even knowing me which is wrong.

I am not close minded though. In fact my views on things have changed much over the years and continue to today. The main reason I debate so fiercely is to see if someone can present another valid view. I attack as much as possible to see how well it can hold up.

2) It does matter in this case because the concern isn't Wrights beliefs which I will not defend the man, but we need wonder how much of it Obama has heard. If you had talked to me a few years ago you would have known me as a church-going kid who liked Bush and would argue people that God exists. People change over time and I wonder how long Wright has been like this and if he kept these crazy views to himself for years. We can't be sure Wright was making these crazy sermons from the beginning and if Obama actually became friends with the man knowing him for his crazy side.

Like I said I just find it hard to believe you were backing Obama at one point from the way you are attacking him now. I never denied it could be true, but I am justly skeptical. If I hadn't told you I once supported Bush and you heard me talk about Bush now you probably would find it hard to believe I supported him at one point.

I to took some suspicion in Obama with the controversy but the difference is my common sense led me to dismiss it for now. I don't find it that big of a deal to worry about considering even if he is some hate filled person his power is limited enough by congress that we could keep it from seeping through into the way the country is run.

I am not a fanboy and it is funny you think so. In all honesty, my main stance is anti-Mccain more than anything. I would prefer Hillary over Obama because of how known of a liar and flip-flopper she is, and to me common sense says to go against the known liar even if you are voting for a possible liar.

Damn it was so long ago I didn't realize I brought those questions into play. I feel a bit stupid for that one now, lol.

3) No but you did try and say it didn't matter how much we knew of his life, and it means everything when discussing character. Quotes can be missunderstood when not knowing the context ala people thinking Obama is racist from remarks in his books. The man went through alot of conflict in terms of race issues and I think he is trying to explain himself and coming off the wrong way in a few quotes.

So if I was to go to a Catholic school and recite from the Bible I would be a Catholic? It doesn't work that way and his not attending service regularly suggest him not being dedicated in any way to the Muslim faith. Only the person themselves can truely say whether or not they are or were religious so him saying he wasn't Muslim in face of that school experience really isn't lying because for all we know it wasn't his choice and he had no dedication to it.

4) Of course it is a possiblity he does hold the beliefs but the key word is POSSIBLITY. He hasn't shown through himself to hold those beliefs which is why I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.

You didn't pay attention to my last post on the suspicion. Go back over it because I did mention I am not simply passing these things off.

Better safe than sorry need not apply here, seeing as the other choices are a man who will surely ruin this country and a woman who is actually a KNOWN liar. I will take a possible liar over a known liar anyday. Not to mention his beliefs aren't that big of an issue as if he does try to put them into decision making he will be shot down by congress. He is even against gay marriage in terms of beliefs but opposes the constitutional ban at the same time. No I still am not naive.

I probably should take back that statement now shouldn't I. Twas admittingly stupid of me to say when my statement should be "If Mccain wins the election I will do what I can to leave the country." Obviously my not approving of your being able to vote doesn't truely mean anything because it won't stop you from doing so, but I definitely feel the need to express my extreme distaste for people who vote based on character such as the people prancing around pointing out Mccain was a soldier and POW when it means absolutely NOTHING and in fact can be taken as a big negative seeing how it is likely that someone who was a POW would have suffered some bad mental trauma...

If his hatred is bad then yes it would slip somewhere along the line, especially pre-election. Intelligence means nothing with how powerful emotions can be. In fact he is showing himself to be the most honest candidate as he is the only one not walking out there sugar-coating everything. All the controversy over him not wearing that lapel pin and the bitter comments shows he really doesn't like pulling punches.

Yes I show failure because I show just how much doubt there is to bring in terms of your arguements and I have shows in so many way why it isn't reasonable to jump to any conclusions about Obama with the little that has happened. Remember, INNOCENT untill PROVEN guilty. If this was a trial your arguements would fail because there is so much connect the dots going on without any true evidence to support all the connections being made.

And I am saying there isn't enough to be so fearful of him winning the election.

My replies will be short because I've become bored with this.

If better safe than sorry applies antwhere, it's when selecting our leader.

He is a liar and flip flipper. His campaign says he didn't recite from the Quran when he factual did. This is a lie no matter how important the context. He also said pulling the troops would be a disaster. This was not long go at all. Now he says they need to be pulled. That's a plain flip flop. Even more plain than a hippy's foot wear.

If you were enrolled as a Catholic , then I suppose you would be attending as a Catholic. He was enrolled as a Muslim.

If he had an ultimate goal, he could hold back that hatred until it was the planned time to release it. This is what he would call means to an end.

When it comes down to it, I think there's reasonable suspicion and you don't.

No playing it safe rather than sorry doesn't neccessarily apply everywhere. Sometimes there is enough to be gained that the risk is worth it.

No I do believe they were saying that he wasn't a Muslim and I do believe that is what you were saying before. If they were saying that he hadn't read out of the Quran then yes they would be lying.

I do believe he has been anti-war his whole campaign albeit all candidates have changed since the campaign started. I do know he has voted in favor of the war in the past but that isn't neccessarily flip-flopping. I was for the war untill we stayed there after ousting Saddam and now we are there for no good reason trying to claim we are preventing violence when really we are just adding extra violence onto the innevitable civil war we have caused through our actions.

Hillary on the other hand has managed to switch positions in a matter of 2 minutes which is downright ridiculous....

It isn't a good assumption. There are PLENTY of people who go to Catholic schools and abandon the chruch quite quickly after they graduate. Parents choose where to enroll their kids up till college so trying to claim the kids follow the religion without them saying they follow the religion themselves is not right.

Why did you even bring this up? I said it was a possiblity but incredibly unlikely.

And yes this does seem to be the big difference. Can we at least agree on a anti-Mccain stance here?

meh, I want him to win. And how could he possibly be racist when he is half white , half black?allnamestaken

Voldemort was a half-blood, and look what happened there!

[QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

1. You presented enough about yourself that it was easy to see that you're inconsiderate and arrogant. You brought uncivility into it first which is a sign of immaturity and lack of consideration and control. You're naive because you deny the fact that these could be indicators of his core beliefs. It's not the fact that you don't agree, it's the fact that you're so naive as to even be open to it. This is also a sign of lacking intelligence. Yes academia can be an indicator, but it does not equate to common sense and intelligence. It's just an indicator.

If he had his eye on the office and was determined enough, he could hide that hatred until it was time to express it in action. Once again, you are naive.

Your approach, close mindedness and lack of consideration from your very first post shows you need some humility. Any uncivility I had towards you was just a reaction of your own. It was you who set the atmosphere of childishness.

2. It does not matter how many sermons were filled with this hate. He had shown his true colors and even Obama's own words from one of his book mirrored the anger towards the white race.

I am far from biased. You don't have to believe it. You obviously have a habit of being close minded anyway. Yes, originally Obama made a better impression on me. Then after all the warning signs, I used common sense and became suspicious. I'm open to the fact that he may not believe the same as his Pastor, but the fact that he may is far to important to dismiss when you're talking about the leader of our countryadded to all the other warning signs. He would be our protector and it's too much of a chance wth all of the warning signs. Yes, you are a fanboy and your brain has shut down on this issue.

Do you not understand that I was talking about what I would do in the situation because you were saying things such as "well you wouldnt disown a family member if they said those things" and I said that a Pastor was far different. You started that line of discussion. You're making yourself look slow.

3. I never said I knew his heart and life. I said there was enough warning signs to be suspicious. You're the one who is blindly accepting. That is true stupidity and foolishness.

I don't know how I can simplify this for you. He attended a catholic school as a Muslim. He recited from the Quran. His campaign lies blatantly about him being a Muslim and him reciting from the Quran. If you can't understand that, then I really don't know what to say to you. If he can't admit to those things, why should we believe him about his beliefs?

4. If he were forced to cut ties with his spiritual mentor, of course it would hurt. Of course his primary objective is more important than remaining loyal. Doesn't mean they don't hold the same core beliefs. He can't admit that, it would destroy his chance.

I call you naive because you have no suspicion. You tell yourself whatever you have to in order to accept him. I'm open to the idea of him not sharing those beliefs, but with all the warnings, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable, intelligent thinking. Better to be safe than sorry. Yes, you are naive.

It doesn't matter whether you approve of me voting or not. You stated that if Obama doesn't win, you'll leave the country because the voters aren't intelligent enough for you to be around. This statement shows how pompous and arrogant you are even if you can't see it yourself. You're approval is nothing to desire.

Of course of he won't show that hatred even if he possesses it. Are you so naive to think that an intelligent, motivated person would ruin an ultimate plan because of a slip? Notice I said IF he possesses it. I'm open minded about it, unlike the naive.

Your naive arguments are easy to understand. I type the same things to respond to your repeated words. You've shown no failure in my arguments. I've said it's possible he doesn't agree, but with so many warning signs, it's too much of a risk. This is reasonable.

Go ahead and repeat yourself again.

LostProphetFLCL

1) If you really think that an online debate is enough to make a good judgement of someone then you really have more issues than I thought. Seriously man, that is absolutely absurd and if you actually knew me in real life you would have an idea of what I am like. There is a big difference between arrogance and confidence and if you have paid attention to even the posts on here you would realize I am NOT arrogant. Never did I claim to be better than someone and never did I claim to be more knowlegable on Obama than you are. In fact my whole point is your judgement of Obama is absurd seeing how little we know of the man and the fact that he himself hasn't made hateful comments.

As for the uncivility, I must apologize but it just happens to be the way I debate when in a non-serious environment such as this. Sorry if it annoys or offends you, but it is really just the way I am and I can't say I am exactly proud of it.

When did I say that they couldn't be indicators of his beliefs? I never denied that they need to be taken into consideration, but my point is they are most certainly not enough to make a fair assessment of his character.

Hiding such beliefs is very difficult albeit not impossible. Thing is though I think it would have showed up in some of his writings over the years. However I am willing to take his word for now in face of Mccains bad policy and Hillary being a very known liar and flip-flopper.

As for the tone, you definitely took the uncivility a step farther in your last post and I think you should recognize that. I threw out mere random insults that really that are nothing more than mere "accents" onto my arguements, but you went so far as to try and directly attack my character and personality without even knowing me which is wrong.

I am not close minded though. In fact my views on things have changed much over the years and continue to today. The main reason I debate so fiercely is to see if someone can present another valid view. I attack as much as possible to see how well it can hold up.

2) It does matter in this case because the concern isn't Wrights beliefs which I will not defend the man, but we need wonder how much of it Obama has heard. If you had talked to me a few years ago you would have known me as a church-going kid who liked Bush and would argue people that God exists. People change over time and I wonder how long Wright has been like this and if he kept these crazy views to himself for years. We can't be sure Wright was making these crazy sermons from the beginning and if Obama actually became friends with the man knowing him for his crazy side.

Like I said I just find it hard to believe you were backing Obama at one point from the way you are attacking him now. I never denied it could be true, but I am justly skeptical. If I hadn't told you I once supported Bush and you heard me talk about Bush now you probably would find it hard to believe I supported him at one point.

I to took some suspicion in Obama with the controversy but the difference is my common sense led me to dismiss it for now. I don't find it that big of a deal to worry about considering even if he is some hate filled person his power is limited enough by congress that we could keep it from seeping through into the way the country is run.

I am not a fanboy and it is funny you think so. In all honesty, my main stance is anti-Mccain more than anything. I would prefer Hillary over Obama because of how known of a liar and flip-flopper she is, and to me common sense says to go against the known liar even if you are voting for a possible liar.

Damn it was so long ago I didn't realize I brought those questions into play. I feel a bit stupid for that one now, lol.

3) No but you did try and say it didn't matter how much we knew of his life, and it means everything when discussing character. Quotes can be missunderstood when not knowing the context ala people thinking Obama is racist from remarks in his books. The man went through alot of conflict in terms of race issues and I think he is trying to explain himself and coming off the wrong way in a few quotes.

So if I was to go to a Catholic school and recite from the Bible I would be a Catholic? It doesn't work that way and his not attending service regularly suggest him not being dedicated in any way to the Muslim faith. Only the person themselves can truely say whether or not they are or were religious so him saying he wasn't Muslim in face of that school experience really isn't lying because for all we know it wasn't his choice and he had no dedication to it.

4) Of course it is a possiblity he does hold the beliefs but the key word is POSSIBLITY. He hasn't shown through himself to hold those beliefs which is why I am giving him the benefit of the doubt.

You didn't pay attention to my last post on the suspicion. Go back over it because I did mention I am not simply passing these things off.

Better safe than sorry need not apply here, seeing as the other choices are a man who will surely ruin this country and a woman who is actually a KNOWN liar. I will take a possible liar over a known liar anyday. Not to mention his beliefs aren't that big of an issue as if he does try to put them into decision making he will be shot down by congress. He is even against gay marriage in terms of beliefs but opposes the constitutional ban at the same time. No I still am not naive.

I probably should take back that statement now shouldn't I. Twas admittingly stupid of me to say when my statement should be "If Mccain wins the election I will do what I can to leave the country." Obviously my not approving of your being able to vote doesn't truely mean anything because it won't stop you from doing so, but I definitely feel the need to express my extreme distaste for people who vote based on character such as the people prancing around pointing out Mccain was a soldier and POW when it means absolutely NOTHING and in fact can be taken as a big negative seeing how it is likely that someone who was a POW would have suffered some bad mental trauma...

If his hatred is bad then yes it would slip somewhere along the line, especially pre-election. Intelligence means nothing with how powerful emotions can be. In fact he is showing himself to be the most honest candidate as he is the only one not walking out there sugar-coating everything. All the controversy over him not wearing that lapel pin and the bitter comments shows he really doesn't like pulling punches.

Yes I show failure because I show just how much doubt there is to bring in terms of your arguements and I have shows in so many way why it isn't reasonable to jump to any conclusions about Obama with the little that has happened. Remember, INNOCENT untill PROVEN guilty. If this was a trial your arguements would fail because there is so much connect the dots going on without any true evidence to support all the connections being made.

And I am saying there isn't enough to be so fearful of him winning the election.

My replies will be short because I've become bored with this.

If better safe than sorry applies antwhere, it's when selecting our leader.

He is a liar and flip flipper. His campaign says he didn't recite from the Quran when he factual did. This is a lie no matter how important the context. He also said pulling the troops would be a disaster. This was not long go at all. Now he says they need to be pulled. That's a plain flip flop. Even more plain than a hippy's foot wear.

If you were enrolled as a Catholic , then I suppose you would be attending as a Catholic. He was enrolled as a Muslim.

If he had an ultimate goal, he could hold back that hatred until it was the planned time to release it. This is what he would call means to an end.

When it comes down to it, I think there's reasonable suspicion and you don't.

No playing it safe rather than sorry doesn't neccessarily apply everywhere. Sometimes there is enough to be gained that the risk is worth it.

No I do believe they were saying that he wasn't a Muslim and I do believe that is what you were saying before. If they were saying that he hadn't read out of the Quran then yes they would be lying.

I do believe he has been anti-war his whole campaign albeit all candidates have changed since the campaign started. I do know he has voted in favor of the war in the past but that isn't neccessarily flip-flopping. I was for the war untill we stayed there after ousting Saddam and now we are there for no good reason trying to claim we are preventing violence when really we are just adding extra violence onto the innevitable civil war we have caused through our actions.

Hillary on the other hand has managed to switch positions in a matter of 2 minutes which is downright ridiculous....

It isn't a good assumption. There are PLENTY of people who go to Catholic schools and abandon the chruch quite quickly after they graduate. Parents choose where to enroll their kids up till college so trying to claim the kids follow the religion without them saying they follow the religion themselves is not right.

Why did you even bring this up? I said it was a possiblity but incredibly unlikely.

And yes this does seem to be the big difference. Can we at least agree on a anti-Mccain stance here?

I'm anti all 3 of the candidates, but Obama is my least favorite for one because of his want to negotiate with people who have called all out jihad upon us. He will enable people who have sworn us their enemies. The most dangerous enemy is one within our walls.

McCain's only real weakness is a lack of knowledge of the economy, but I am much more concerned with our safety and there is no doubt he would be the best protector of this country. The terrorists who want us to die want Obama to be our next president.

Also, Obama has NO executive experience. This would be like McDonalds corporate hiring a cash register operator as their new CEO. It would be completely idiotic.

McCain> Hillary> Obama

And why did I bring all this up? Because electing this man is potentially a very dangerous mistake. He has no experience. he wants to negotiate with people who have no other interest than western destruction. He has questionable beliefs (his reverend, his wife's words, the fact that a former comittee member is allied with Hamas, the fact that he was enrolled in school as a Muslim). His campaign lies blatantly about the fact that he has recited from the Quran. This was stated by a school mate. Most recently, he flip flopped horribly. 2 days ago, he said iran was no threat. Just yesterday, he stated that they were a serious threat. Voting for this man would be stupid.Trashface

Everything that you've typed is exactly why we MUST vote him into office. He embodies ideals and views that will the take the country in a direction different from where it's going now. If the current state of the United States is represented by the last 17 pages of filth in this thread, then I'm embarrassed to be an American citizen. Seriously, the majority of you seem to be idiots with only your own views and goals for the country having importance. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

This country is apparently built on a Christian belief system in which turning the other cheek, embracing your neighbor, and loving everyone (not just those people that seem important to you) are of the highest priority. Most of you have no idea what that means or why diplomacy is so important right now instead of leading this country into further conflict.

You know what, many Americans have recited from the Quran or at least read various passages during various religious and literature courses. Many Americans have questionable beliefs. Many Americans change their minds. Finally, many Americans simply want the West and the Middle East to stop with the bickering, because a few hundred years of hostility between the western ideal and the middle eastern sense of religious superiority is enough.

If you don't like it, then go live somewhere else.

I find it absolutely hilarious that people keep bring up Rev. Wright. Yes, he's a nutbag, but Obama has clearly stated that he disagrees with him. End of story.

If we want to bring up wacky endorsements look no further than McCain with Hagee, Folwell, and Pat Robertson. All three of these people are way more F***ed up than Wright could ever be.

I'm not claiming this post is a chain email; however, it certianly looks like something you'de find in a chain email.

Fact: The best US presidents in the history of the country have had little-to-no previous political experience. It's not required, and I don't think being in Washington for a long time is really a plus.

Fact: One of the best presidents in US history, Woodrow Wilson was educated in international relations, and used his IR education to the country's advantage during his presidency (See: Wilson's 14 points). Obama has a political science degree in International Relations, and if you are looking to see how an Obama presidency will be, I think you would only have to look as far as Woodrow Wilson.

The United States as a whole has been quickly going down the tubes since the Vietnam War. I think anything would be better than the same political hacks and ideas we have now. Our economic numbers, especially in recent years (from the early 80's - today) have primarily been fudged, and the country is drowning in it's own economic ideals. I'm willing to try something new. After all, it's a law of science that if you should try the same thing over and over and expect to get different results.

AmyMizuno

I agree. Whereas I don't see Woodrow Wilson as a particularly good prez, what with WW1, he did know how to deal with world politics, and most good Presidents HAVE been those w/ specialties apart from politics (Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Polk, Lincoln, TR, Wilson, FDR (to an extent), JFK, and soon to be Obama.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]And why did I bring all this up? Because electing this man is potentially a very dangerous mistake. He has no experience. he wants to negotiate with people who have no other interest than western destruction. He has questionable beliefs (his reverend, his wife's words, the fact that a former comittee member is allied with Hamas, the fact that he was enrolled in school as a Muslim). His campaign lies blatantly about the fact that he has recited from the Quran. This was stated by a school mate. Most recently, he flip flopped horribly. 2 days ago, he said iran was no threat. Just yesterday, he stated that they were a serious threat. Voting for this man would be stupid.drj077

Everything that you've typed is exactly why we MUST vote him into office. He embodies ideals and views that will the take the country in a direction different from where it's going now. If the current state of the United States is represented by the last 17 pages of filth in this thread, then I'm embarrassed to be an American citizen. Seriously, the majority of you seem to be idiots with only your own views and goals for the country having importance. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

This country is apparently built on a Christian belief system in which turning the other cheek, embracing your neighbor, and loving everyone (not just those people that seem important to you) are of the highest priority. Most of you have no idea what that means or why diplomacy is so important right now instead of leading this country into further conflict.

You know what, many Americans have recited from the Quran or at least read various passages during various religious and literature courses. Many Americans have questionable beliefs. Many Americans change their minds. Finally, many Americans simply want the West and the Middle East to stop with the bickering, because a few hundred years of hostility between the western ideal and the middle eastern sense of religious superiority is enough.

If you don't like it, then go live somewhere else.

I agree w/ you, but don;t tell him to live in a different country if he doesn't like it. We have free speech for a reason. And I don't get what people dislike about 'flip-flopping.' Flip-flopping is a SMART thing to do - it shows that you can be flexible and open-minded, and change your views if the situation goes sour.

meh, I want him to win. And how could he possibly be racist when he is half white , half black?allnamestaken

I'm anti all 3 of the candidates, but Obama is my least favorite for one because of his want to negotiate with people who have called all out jihad upon us. He will enable people who have sworn us their enemies. The most dangerous enemy is one within our walls.

McCain's only real weakness is a lack of knowledge of the economy, but I am much more concerned with our safety and there is no doubt he would be the best protector of this country. The terrorists who want us to die want Obama to be our next president.

Also, Obama has NO executive experience. This would be like McDonalds corporate hiring a cash register operator as their new CEO. It would be completely idiotic.

McCain> Hillary> Obama

Trashface

Diplomacy should ALWAYS come before force. Fighting helps no one in the long-run, and if we can avoid it we should.

Mccain's weakness is also his willingness to use our military.

I absolutely laugh at you being afraid. Congradulations, people like you are exactly the ones who are giving terrorists power. They are powerless on our own soil and the only way they are hurting us now is through killing our troops on their soil.

9/11 was a simple accident on our part as we not only didn't put intelligence reports together, but our security in airplanes was very lax. Not only that, but don't you think other people on the planes would have overcome the terrorists if they knew what could happen? If any terrorists were to try something they better account for over half the passengers because people will take them out easily. Things have changed and I would not be afraid of terrorists if I were to fly.

NONE OF THE CANDIDATES HAVE PRESIDENTIAL EXPERIENCE!:lol:

Mccain is a bad vote because he will do nothing but increase our national debt by an incredible amount through his tax cuts and likely military use. Older generations don't seem to care about this seeing as it us young folk who will be left to clean up their mess.

Neither of the candidates are perfect, but at this point I have resigned myself to signing the democrat ticket this election because Mccain is just a bad choice in my mind.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]

I'm anti all 3 of the candidates, but Obama is my least favorite for one because of his want to negotiate with people who have called all out jihad upon us. He will enable people who have sworn us their enemies. The most dangerous enemy is one within our walls.

McCain's only real weakness is a lack of knowledge of the economy, but I am much more concerned with our safety and there is no doubt he would be the best protector of this country. The terrorists who want us to die want Obama to be our next president.

Also, Obama has NO executive experience. This would be like McDonalds corporate hiring a cash register operator as their new CEO. It would be completely idiotic.

McCain> Hillary> Obama

LostProphetFLCL

Mccain is a bad vote because he will do nothing but increase our national debt by an incredible amount through his tax cuts and likely military use. Older generations don't seem to care about this seeing as it us young folk who will be left to clean up their mess.

And what is Obama going to do? He has advocated nothing but government spending this whole election.
Look at the 300 Billion dollar farm bill that Bush vetoed; Obama supports it.

The only reason I'll vote for Obama is b/c I think he's the least bad candidate. I think his plans are too idealistic and unrealistic. He wants to do everything good but there's not much answers about where the resources for those are going to come from. I'll vote for him, but I don't expect much if he becomes president.

It's a shame b/c I really want to like McCain after I heard about what he did when he was taken prisoner and was being tortured, but I just don't like his plans.

Yes, and Obama is right. Leading economists, and myself as an economist think that the best way to bring this economy back on it's feet is to reappropriate government spending away from the war in Iraq, and to government infastructure. I just heard on NPR's 'Marketplace' (Yes, economists listen to boring stuff on the radio), leading economists Robert Reich call for a stimulus to infastructure.

Here is the link, please educate yourself. http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/05/21/reich_commentary/ You can listen to it by clicking 'Listen to commentary.'

AmyMizuno

And this bill is not the answer you or Robert seek.

Have you even looked at it? Robert says " No more earmarks" but if you quickly glance through the bill some of the things seems questionable (ex. $170 million in subsidies for the salmon industry, tax breaks for racehorse breeders). Is this how you build infastructure? The bill is bloated and needs to be cut back, all it does is hand out subsidies to large farms that are already pulling in large profits.

Do farm owners pulling in over $750,000 (or more for married couples)a year need all this?

You say you are an economist; are you still studying to become one or are you employed someplace?

Also, I still would like to know how Obama plans on cutting the national debt without hurting the economy (ex. corporate tax).

[QUOTE="Trashface"]

I'm anti all 3 of the candidates, but Obama is my least favorite for one because of his want to negotiate with people who have called all out jihad upon us. He will enable people who have sworn us their enemies. The most dangerous enemy is one within our walls.

McCain's only real weakness is a lack of knowledge of the economy, but I am much more concerned with our safety and there is no doubt he would be the best protector of this country. The terrorists who want us to die want Obama to be our next president.

Also, Obama has NO executive experience. This would be like McDonalds corporate hiring a cash register operator as their new CEO. It would be completely idiotic.

McCain> Hillary> Obama

LostProphetFLCL

Diplomacy should ALWAYS come before force. Fighting helps no one in the long-run, and if we can avoid it we should.

Mccain's weakness is also his willingness to use our military.

I absolutely laugh at you being afraid. Congradulations, people like you are exactly the ones who are giving terrorists power. They are powerless on our own soil and the only way they are hurting us now is through killing our troops on their soil.

9/11 was a simple accident on our part as we not only didn't put intelligence reports together, but our security in airplanes was very lax. Not only that, but don't you think other people on the planes would have overcome the terrorists if they knew what could happen? If any terrorists were to try something they better account for over half the passengers because people will take them out easily. Things have changed and I would not be afraid of terrorists if I were to fly.

NONE OF THE CANDIDATES HAVE PRESIDENTIAL EXPERIENCE!:lol:

Mccain is a bad vote because he will do nothing but increase our national debt by an incredible amount through his tax cuts and likely military use. Older generations don't seem to care about this seeing as it us young folk who will be left to clean up their mess.

Neither of the candidates are perfect, but at this point I have resigned myself to signing the democrat ticket this election because Mccain is just a bad choice in my mind.

You can't negotiate with extremist Muslims. our existance is an abomination to them. It's silly and naive to think they can be reasoned with. One day he tries to justify the negiotation mindset by saying Iran is no threat, then the next day says they are to try and run from his first rediculous statement.

Both Clinton and Mccain have had tons more experience than him. Electing Obama is like McDonalds corporate putting a cashier in CEO position. It's foolish, especially when you're talkin about the most important office in the world. You laugh at at me being afraid? You think it's funny that I care enough about the future to worry about a dangerous candidate getting elected? of course, you were TRYING to be condescending because it's in your childish nature, but the fact that you stated that shows the kind of people voting for Obama. these are people driven by baseless and foolish passion, not be sense and responsibility.

I find it absolutely hilarious that people keep bring up Rev. Wright. Yes, he's a nutbag, but Obama has clearly stated that he disagrees with him. End of story.

If we want to bring up wacky endorsements look no further than McCain with Hagee, Folwell, and Pat Robertson. All three of these people are way more F***ed up than Wright could ever be.

Donkey_Puncher

You don't sit for 20 years in a church when you don't agree with the preachers views. Also, Obama has him on a commitee. Obama finally distanced himself because he had to. Don't be naive.

Obama possesses charisma, and people tend to be drawn to him because of his speaches, hence why people will vote for him. What makes me sad is when people say that they are going to vote for him because "America needs a black president" (or something to that accord).Setsa

You're right. People vote for him because of charisma and rhetoric of change and hope with no real words of how this change and hope are going to happen. Also, it's ironic how white people are accused of voting because of color, yet polling numbers indicate that the black minority is voting almost completely for Obama.

I have to wonder if he was a white candidate that had a racist preacher for 20 years that offered nothing more than empty rhetoric, would he still be in the running? I doubt it.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

I'm anti all 3 of the candidates, but Obama is my least favorite for one because of his want to negotiate with people who have called all out jihad upon us. He will enable people who have sworn us their enemies. The most dangerous enemy is one within our walls.

McCain's only real weakness is a lack of knowledge of the economy, but I am much more concerned with our safety and there is no doubt he would be the best protector of this country. The terrorists who want us to die want Obama to be our next president.

Also, Obama has NO executive experience. This would be like McDonalds corporate hiring a cash register operator as their new CEO. It would be completely idiotic.

McCain> Hillary> Obama

Trashface

Diplomacy should ALWAYS come before force. Fighting helps no one in the long-run, and if we can avoid it we should.

Mccain's weakness is also his willingness to use our military.

I absolutely laugh at you being afraid. Congradulations, people like you are exactly the ones who are giving terrorists power. They are powerless on our own soil and the only way they are hurting us now is through killing our troops on their soil.

9/11 was a simple accident on our part as we not only didn't put intelligence reports together, but our security in airplanes was very lax. Not only that, but don't you think other people on the planes would have overcome the terrorists if they knew what could happen? If any terrorists were to try something they better account for over half the passengers because people will take them out easily. Things have changed and I would not be afraid of terrorists if I were to fly.

NONE OF THE CANDIDATES HAVE PRESIDENTIAL EXPERIENCE!:lol:

Mccain is a bad vote because he will do nothing but increase our national debt by an incredible amount through his tax cuts and likely military use. Older generations don't seem to care about this seeing as it us young folk who will be left to clean up their mess.

Neither of the candidates are perfect, but at this point I have resigned myself to signing the democrat ticket this election because Mccain is just a bad choice in my mind.

You can't negotiate with extremist Muslims. our existance is an abomination to them. It's silly and naive to think they can be reasoned with. One day he tries to justify the negiotation mindset by saying Iran is no threat, then the next day says they are to try and run from his first rediculous statement.

Both Clinton and Mccain have had tons more experience than him. Electing Obama is like McDonalds corporate putting a cashier in CEO position. It's foolish, especially when you're talkin about the most important office in the world. You laugh at at me being afraid? You think it's funny that I care enough about the future to worry about a dangerous candidate getting elected? of course, you were TRYING to be condescending because it's in your childish nature, but the fact that you stated that shows the kind of people voting for Obama. these are people driven by baseless and foolish passion, not be sense and responsibility.

NO ONE HAS EVE TRIED NEGOTIATING SO HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT!!! Simple negotiating could be used to make a deal where they can have their power while we make sure they don't develope weapons. Despite this Mccain has already talked about possible scenarios where we attack Iran...

None of the candidates have been president, end of story. Clinton has had experience and her experienced shows she is only willing to go so far for her stances. She was heavily crusading for nationalized health care in the early 90's, then stopped by the mid 90's and now it is suddenly being brought back up as an issue now that she is running for office and Sicko came out.

Yes you are foolish for fearing people who hide in caves and such and are located halfway across the world. We have security here and now that it is up to par and people know just what can happen when we aren't careful there isn't going to be another major attack. You know how many terrorists attacks have occured here in the US since 9/11? NONE!!!:lol:

It saddens me to see idiots running around freaking out about terrorists. If we weren't invading their damn land they wouldn't be causing us casualties right now!!!! Terrorism is a problem in the Middle East, not here, yet stupid individuals insist on being scared. It is PATHETIC!!!

[QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

I'm anti all 3 of the candidates, but Obama is my least favorite for one because of his want to negotiate with people who have called all out jihad upon us. He will enable people who have sworn us their enemies. The most dangerous enemy is one within our walls.

McCain's only real weakness is a lack of knowledge of the economy, but I am much more concerned with our safety and there is no doubt he would be the best protector of this country. The terrorists who want us to die want Obama to be our next president.

Also, Obama has NO executive experience. This would be like McDonalds corporate hiring a cash register operator as their new CEO. It would be completely idiotic.

McCain> Hillary> Obama

LostProphetFLCL

Diplomacy should ALWAYS come before force. Fighting helps no one in the long-run, and if we can avoid it we should.

Mccain's weakness is also his willingness to use our military.

I absolutely laugh at you being afraid. Congradulations, people like you are exactly the ones who are giving terrorists power. They are powerless on our own soil and the only way they are hurting us now is through killing our troops on their soil.

9/11 was a simple accident on our part as we not only didn't put intelligence reports together, but our security in airplanes was very lax. Not only that, but don't you think other people on the planes would have overcome the terrorists if they knew what could happen? If any terrorists were to try something they better account for over half the passengers because people will take them out easily. Things have changed and I would not be afraid of terrorists if I were to fly.

NONE OF THE CANDIDATES HAVE PRESIDENTIAL EXPERIENCE!:lol:

Mccain is a bad vote because he will do nothing but increase our national debt by an incredible amount through his tax cuts and likely military use. Older generations don't seem to care about this seeing as it us young folk who will be left to clean up their mess.

Neither of the candidates are perfect, but at this point I have resigned myself to signing the democrat ticket this election because Mccain is just a bad choice in my mind.

You can't negotiate with extremist Muslims. our existance is an abomination to them. It's silly and naive to think they can be reasoned with. One day he tries to justify the negiotation mindset by saying Iran is no threat, then the next day says they are to try and run from his first rediculous statement.

Both Clinton and Mccain have had tons more experience than him. Electing Obama is like McDonalds corporate putting a cashier in CEO position. It's foolish, especially when you're talkin about the most important office in the world. You laugh at at me being afraid? You think it's funny that I care enough about the future to worry about a dangerous candidate getting elected? of course, you were TRYING to be condescending because it's in your childish nature, but the fact that you stated that shows the kind of people voting for Obama. these are people driven by baseless and foolish passion, not be sense and responsibility.

NO ONE HAS EVE TRIED NEGOTIATING SO HOW CAN YOU SAY THAT!!! Simple negotiating could be used to make a deal where they can have their power while we make sure they don't develope weapons. Despite this Mccain has already talked about possible scenarios where we attack Iran...

None of the candidates have been president, end of story. Clinton has had experience and her experienced shows she is only willing to go so far for her stances. She was heavily crusading for nationalized health care in the early 90's, then stopped by the mid 90's and now it is suddenly being brought back up as an issue now that she is running for office and Sicko came out.

Yes you are foolish for fearing people who hide in caves and such and are located halfway across the world. We have security here and now that it is up to par and people know just what can happen when we aren't careful there isn't going to be another major attack. You know how many terrorists attacks have occured here in the US since 9/11? NONE!!!:lol:

It saddens me to see idiots running around freaking out about terrorists. If we weren't invading their damn land they wouldn't be causing us casualties right now!!!! Terrorism is a problem in the Middle East, not here, yet stupid individuals insist on being scared. It is PATHETIC!!!

There hasn't been an attack since because the Bush administration has kept us safe. Candidates like Obama would weaken the Patriot act and make us much more vulnerable.

McCain and Clinton have much more political experience than Obama. This is fact. As I said, it's like McDonalds corporate hiring a cashier for CEO when there are more qualified applicants.

Healthy fear and caution is foolish? Our culture and very existance is hated by these people. These people would use our attempts to negotiate against us. Yes we are safe at the moment. I want it to stay that way and that's why Obama needs to stay out of office. I'm foolish for fearing people who hide in caves? That is one of the most idiotic things I've seen typed from someone who thinks their opinion is politically relevant. These people want to kill each and every one of us. That type of hatred knows no bounds of distance. Also, they would attack their neighbors (our allies) if enabled. This would cause true chaos in the Middle east.

The fact that you think healthy fear is "pathetic" shows you have no sense. People like you hear nice, empty words like "hope and change" from a charismatic, fresh face, and that's all it takes to make you a blind fanboy. Deny it if you want, but that's what you are. As many serious negatives as this candidate has, the fact that you don't acknowledge any as serious shows that you are a blind fanboy who does not use logic and sense. Obama's core audience are blind fanboys.

By you saying that it's hilarious and pathetic to fear extremist Muslims, you've proven that your opinion is irrelevant and shouldn't be taken seriously. You've also backed up the theory that Obama's supporters really don't care about logic and common sense. Sadly, there are quite a few of you. Your childish and insulting demeanor also make you easier to dismiss. It's easy to see you think a lot of yourself and it makes you feel good to be taken seriously. If you start talking like a big boy, your ego can be fed more often. It's certainly not sense that drives you, so it must be this false sense of self and the false idea that you're enlightened in this matter, when in reality you are naive and blind. You readily swallow empty words and propaganda without question.

On the up side, many sensible people have left Obama's side and his numbers have slipped a lot. I'm much more confident that Mccain will win.

[QUOTE="limpbizkit818"][QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

I'm anti all 3 of the candidates, but Obama is my least favorite for one because of his want to negotiate with people who have called all out jihad upon us. He will enable people who have sworn us their enemies. The most dangerous enemy is one within our walls.

McCain's only real weakness is a lack of knowledge of the economy, but I am much more concerned with our safety and there is no doubt he would be the best protector of this country. The terrorists who want us to die want Obama to be our next president.

Also, Obama has NO executive experience. This would be like McDonalds corporate hiring a cash register operator as their new CEO. It would be completely idiotic.

McCain> Hillary> Obama

AmyMizuno

Mccain is a bad vote because he will do nothing but increase our national debt by an incredible amount through his tax cuts and likely military use. Older generations don't seem to care about this seeing as it us young folk who will be left to clean up their mess.

And what is Obama going to do? He has advocated nothing but government spending this whole election.
Look at the 300 Billion dollar farm bill that Bush vetoed; Obama supports it.

Here is the link, please educate yourself. http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/05/21/reich_commentary/ You can listen to it by clicking 'Listen to commentary.'

There hasn't been an attack since because the Bush administration has kept us safe. Candidates like Obama would weaken the Patriot act and make us much more vulnerable.

McCain and Clinton have much more political experience than Obama. This is fact. As I said, it's like McDonalds corporate hiring a cashier for CEO when there are more qualified applicants.

Healthy fear and caution is foolish? Our culture and very existance is hated by these people. These people would use our attempts to negotiate against us. Yes we are safe at the moment. I want it to stay that way and that's why Obama needs to stay out of office. I'm foolish for fearing people who hide in caves? That is one of the most idiotic things I've seen typed from someone who thinks their opinion is politically relevant. These people want to kill each and every one of us. That type of hatred knows no bounds of distance. Also, they would attack their neighbors (our allies) if enabled. This would cause true chaos in the Middle east.

The fact that you think healthy fear is "pathetic" shows you have no sense. People like you hear nice, empty words like "hope and change" from a charismatic, fresh face, and that's all it takes to make you a blind fanboy. Deny it if you want, but that's what you are. As many serious negatives as this candidate has, the fact that you don't acknowledge any as serious shows that you are a blind fanboy who does not use logic and sense. Obama's core audience are blind fanboys.

By you saying that it's hilarious and pathetic to fear extremist Muslims, you've proven that your opinion is irrelevant and shouldn't be taken seriously. You've also backed up the theory that Obama's supporters really don't care about logic and common sense. Sadly, there are quite a few of you. Your childish and insulting demeanor also make you easier to dismiss. It's easy to see you think a lot of yourself and it makes you feel good to be taken seriously. If you start talking like a big boy, your ego can be fed more often. It's certainly not sense that drives you, so it must be this false sense of self and the false idea that you're enlightened in this matter, when in reality you are naive and blind. You readily swallow empty words and propaganda without question.

On the up side, many sensible people have left Obama's side and his numbers have slipped a lot. I'm much more confident that Mccain will win.

Trashface

The Patriot Act needs to be thrown out. It is unconstitutional and has been abused. Anyone who would sacrifice those freedoms to try and feel secure is a fool.

See previous post. You don't even realize what I am getting at genius. In the original post you tried saying they had more presidential experience:lol:

There is a HUGE difference between fear and caution. Caution is healthy, fearing terrorists isn't. Beefed up security and an alert public are all that is needed to prevent another attack, simple as that. They aren't even going after us much at all anymore and it is looking like it has become Britains problem more than ours.

Yes and the less we meddle in their business the less people will be able to be brainwashed. By going onto their soil and killing their own people we have given them real reason to hate us. We are the big bully here. If we wouldn't keep botherin them they would eventually lose their ability to brainwash masses of people to hate us, simple as that. Idiots such as Mccain want to fight fire with fire which is just STUPID. We aren't even going after the people who actually attacked us anymore!!! WE HAVE NO REASON TO BE IN IRAQ!!!

Yes, they attack our allies and they know we will bring hell on them. Don't you think there is a reason Israel hasn't been leveled by now? We happen to support a country that all its neighbors seem to hate, yet Israel is still standing. Says alot doesn't it.

The fact that you think fearing people such as terrorists is healthy shows you are a tool;)

You haven't been following my posts apparently. I am signing the democratic ticket end of story. Mccain is the most frightening candidate I have seen in a while. I would rather elect Bush in term 3 because at least he is more stable than the man talking of war with Iran....

Actually I am using common sense here. You should try it sometime next time you are fearing a group of people half-a-world away who manage to attack us ONCE on our own soil:lol:

You like to use the word blind, I am guessing because you yourself are blind to cold logic and sensible thinking.

Hey is this meaningless dribble at the end get you off or something?:lol:

The fact you spend almost half your post just trying to straw-man me shows how pathetic your arguement is.

[QUOTE="Trashface"]

There hasn't been an attack since because the Bush administration has kept us safe. Candidates like Obama would weaken the Patriot act and make us much more vulnerable.

McCain and Clinton have much more political experience than Obama. This is fact. As I said, it's like McDonalds corporate hiring a cashier for CEO when there are more qualified applicants.

Healthy fear and caution is foolish? Our culture and very existance is hated by these people. These people would use our attempts to negotiate against us. Yes we are safe at the moment. I want it to stay that way and that's why Obama needs to stay out of office. I'm foolish for fearing people who hide in caves? That is one of the most idiotic things I've seen typed from someone who thinks their opinion is politically relevant. These people want to kill each and every one of us. That type of hatred knows no bounds of distance. Also, they would attack their neighbors (our allies) if enabled. This would cause true chaos in the Middle east.

The fact that you think healthy fear is "pathetic" shows you have no sense. People like you hear nice, empty words like "hope and change" from a charismatic, fresh face, and that's all it takes to make you a blind fanboy. Deny it if you want, but that's what you are. As many serious negatives as this candidate has, the fact that you don't acknowledge any as serious shows that you are a blind fanboy who does not use logic and sense. Obama's core audience are blind fanboys.

By you saying that it's hilarious and pathetic to fear extremist Muslims, you've proven that your opinion is irrelevant and shouldn't be taken seriously. You've also backed up the theory that Obama's supporters really don't care about logic and common sense. Sadly, there are quite a few of you. Your childish and insulting demeanor also make you easier to dismiss. It's easy to see you think a lot of yourself and it makes you feel good to be taken seriously. If you start talking like a big boy, your ego can be fed more often. It's certainly not sense that drives you, so it must be this false sense of self and the false idea that you're enlightened in this matter, when in reality you are naive and blind. You readily swallow empty words and propaganda without question.

On the up side, many sensible people have left Obama's side and his numbers have slipped a lot. I'm much more confident that Mccain will win.

LostProphetFLCL

The Patriot Act needs to be thrown out. It is unconstitutional and has been abused. Anyone who would sacrifice those freedoms to try and feel secure is a fool.

See previous post. You don't even realize what I am getting at genius. In the original post you tried saying they had more presidential experience:lol:

There is a HUGE difference between fear and caution. Caution is healthy, fearing terrorists isn't. Beefed up security and an alert public are all that is needed to prevent another attack, simple as that. They aren't even going after us much at all anymore and it is looking like it has become Britains problem more than ours.

Yes and the less we meddle in their business the less people will be able to be brainwashed. By going onto their soil and killing their own people we have given them real reason to hate us. We are the big bully here. If we wouldn't keep botherin them they would eventually lose their ability to brainwash masses of people to hate us, simple as that. Idiots such as Mccain want to fight fire with fire which is just STUPID. We aren't even going after the people who actually attacked us anymore!!! WE HAVE NO REASON TO BE IN IRAQ!!!

Yes, they attack our allies and they know we will bring hell on them. Don't you think there is a reason Israel hasn't been leveled by now? We happen to support a country that all its neighbors seem to hate, yet Israel is still standing. Says alot doesn't it.

The fact that you think fearing people such as terrorists is healthy shows you are a tool;)

You haven't been following my posts apparently. I am signing the democratic ticket end of story. Mccain is the most frightening candidate I have seen in a while. I would rather elect Bush in term 3 because at least he is more stable than the man talking of war with Iran....

Actually I am using common sense here. You should try it sometime next time you are fearing a group of people half-a-world away who manage to attack us ONCE on our own soil:lol:

You like to use the word blind, I am guessing because you yourself are blind to cold logic and sensible thinking.

Hey is this meaningless dribble at the end get you off or something?:lol:

The fact you spend almost half your post just trying to straw-man me shows how pathetic your arguement is.

Wow, you're full of contradictions and two sided logic. You trying to insult my intelligence is like an ant calling a tree short.

You call to attention how we haven't been attacked since, yet support throwing away the patriot act, which is one of the main reasons we haven't been attacked since. You expose your own political ignorance.

You say that I don't know what you're getting at, when you're the one that apparently can't read. If you scroll up, you may see that I did not say he had no Presidential experience. I said executive experience. If you're going to try and insult someone, don't be so clueless. Your ignorance is also ironic humor.

You say we shouldn't meddle in the middle east, yet you say we should support allies? You really are a contradicting little fella. Supporting our ally Isreal is why many Muslims hate us. Also, as you stated, Britain is also a target, so tes we should be meddling in their affairs.

Then you say "they aren't even going after us anymore" as if they aren't waiting for the first chance they get. What complacent and naive non sense. They aboslutely want Obama elected. he will be their enabler and a danger to the country. There's a reason why Obama's strongest following is mainly 20 something year olds. Only kids would be so naive and blindly passionate. It's scary to think that we could all possibly suffer for such a lack of logic, sense, and clear sight.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"][QUOTE="Trashface"]

There hasn't been an attack since because the Bush administration has kept us safe. Candidates like Obama would weaken the Patriot act and make us much more vulnerable.

McCain and Clinton have much more political experience than Obama. This is fact. As I said, it's like McDonalds corporate hiring a cashier for CEO when there are more qualified applicants.

Healthy fear and caution is foolish? Our culture and very existance is hated by these people. These people would use our attempts to negotiate against us. Yes we are safe at the moment. I want it to stay that way and that's why Obama needs to stay out of office. I'm foolish for fearing people who hide in caves? That is one of the most idiotic things I've seen typed from someone who thinks their opinion is politically relevant. These people want to kill each and every one of us. That type of hatred knows no bounds of distance. Also, they would attack their neighbors (our allies) if enabled. This would cause true chaos in the Middle east.

The fact that you think healthy fear is "pathetic" shows you have no sense. People like you hear nice, empty words like "hope and change" from a charismatic, fresh face, and that's all it takes to make you a blind fanboy. Deny it if you want, but that's what you are. As many serious negatives as this candidate has, the fact that you don't acknowledge any as serious shows that you are a blind fanboy who does not use logic and sense. Obama's core audience are blind fanboys.

By you saying that it's hilarious and pathetic to fear extremist Muslims, you've proven that your opinion is irrelevant and shouldn't be taken seriously. You've also backed up the theory that Obama's supporters really don't care about logic and common sense. Sadly, there are quite a few of you. Your childish and insulting demeanor also make you easier to dismiss. It's easy to see you think a lot of yourself and it makes you feel good to be taken seriously. If you start talking like a big boy, your ego can be fed more often. It's certainly not sense that drives you, so it must be this false sense of self and the false idea that you're enlightened in this matter, when in reality you are naive and blind. You readily swallow empty words and propaganda without question.

On the up side, many sensible people have left Obama's side and his numbers have slipped a lot. I'm much more confident that Mccain will win.

Trashface

The Patriot Act needs to be thrown out. It is unconstitutional and has been abused. Anyone who would sacrifice those freedoms to try and feel secure is a fool.

See previous post. You don't even realize what I am getting at genius. In the original post you tried saying they had more presidential experience:lol:

There is a HUGE difference between fear and caution. Caution is healthy, fearing terrorists isn't. Beefed up security and an alert public are all that is needed to prevent another attack, simple as that. They aren't even going after us much at all anymore and it is looking like it has become Britains problem more than ours.

Yes and the less we meddle in their business the less people will be able to be brainwashed. By going onto their soil and killing their own people we have given them real reason to hate us. We are the big bully here. If we wouldn't keep botherin them they would eventually lose their ability to brainwash masses of people to hate us, simple as that. Idiots such as Mccain want to fight fire with fire which is just STUPID. We aren't even going after the people who actually attacked us anymore!!! WE HAVE NO REASON TO BE IN IRAQ!!!

Yes, they attack our allies and they know we will bring hell on them. Don't you think there is a reason Israel hasn't been leveled by now? We happen to support a country that all its neighbors seem to hate, yet Israel is still standing. Says alot doesn't it.

The fact that you think fearing people such as terrorists is healthy shows you are a tool;)

You haven't been following my posts apparently. I am signing the democratic ticket end of story. Mccain is the most frightening candidate I have seen in a while. I would rather elect Bush in term 3 because at least he is more stable than the man talking of war with Iran....

Actually I am using common sense here. You should try it sometime next time you are fearing a group of people half-a-world away who manage to attack us ONCE on our own soil:lol:

You like to use the word blind, I am guessing because you yourself are blind to cold logic and sensible thinking.

Hey is this meaningless dribble at the end get you off or something?:lol:

The fact you spend almost half your post just trying to straw-man me shows how pathetic your arguement is.

Wow, you're full of contradictions and two sided logic. You trying to insult my intelligence is like an ant calling a tree short.

You call to attention how we haven't been attacked since, yet support throwing away the patriot act, which is one of the main reasons we haven't been attacked since. You expose your own political ignorance.

You say that I don't know what you're getting at, when you're the one that apparently can't read. If you scroll up, you may see that I did not say he had no Presidential experience. I said executive experience. If you're going to try and insult someone, don't be so clueless. Your ignorance is also ironic humor.

You say we shouldn't meddle in the middle east, yet you say we should support allies? You really are a contradicting little fella. Supporting our ally Isreal is why many Muslims hate us. Also, as you stated, Britain is also a target, so tes we should be meddling in their affairs.

Then you say "they aren't even going after us anymore" as if they aren't waiting for the first chance they get. What complacent and naive non sense. They aboslutely want Obama elected. he will be their enabler and a danger to the country. There's a reason why Obama's strongest following is mainly 20 something year olds. Only kids would be so naive and blindly passionate. It's scary to think that we could all possibly suffer for such a lack of logic, sense, and clear sight.

The Patriot Act is unneccesary and unconstitutional and has been abused which was even admitted by the head of the FBI a while ago. It does need to be thrown out, it being unconstitutional is reason enough. You also do realize that we had information to know 9-11 was coming yet it wasn't stopped, right? Didn't need the Patriot Act to know it was going to happen.

BTW I have to add in here that supporting something as unconstituional as the Patriot Act is not only stupid but frightening that people would be willing to try and throw away our liberties like that. I don't care if you aren't intelligent enough to realize how little of a threat terrorists pose to s here in America, don't ******* throw away us sane peoples rights because of your own fear.

Yeah, nice edit:lol:

And how was Iraq a threat to our allies? Not only that, as far as I recall Israel isn't under attack right now so why do we have troops in the Middle East?

BTW you can support allies through statements and letting people know you will jump into help. Russia is supporting Iran (just one of the reasons a war with Iran would be moronic) yet as far as I know they haven't sent troops in their yet. Kinda stupid if you think that supporting someone means having troops there.

Yes I know thats one of the reason but believe me there are many more reasons. I never stated my view on our supporting Israel as I really don't have an opinion on it yet as I have no idea why we became allies in the first place.

Britain is handling itself right now. They have not requested our assitance.

We have a simple thing called security. It does wonders. Might want to look into it. Try going to an airport and seeing how much stuff people go through, ESPECIALLY those of Middle Eastern decent.

It is funny, you hate Obama yet cannot present a single good arguement against the man. You say terrorists support Obama yet have no evidence or reasoning for this. You try and call me naive yet you have not supported your arguement whatsoever. Not only that, you call me a fanboy when I clearly stated my stance is simply anti-Mccain and at this point I am just signing the democratic ticket, which looks to be Obama at this point.

I really think this Nevermore quote applies hear "The less you understand, the more your driven."

You are so hardcore Mccain it is hillarious yet you have no good reason for supporting the man and certainly no reason for hating Obama other than lame arguements spewed out by the ever so credible Fox news network.

I suggest next post you have some actual logic to your arguement. This is getting boring as your stance gets weaker and weaker.

no one can be worse than bush, he has gone to war without justification at his so called war on terrorimprezawrx500

He believed the same intelligence that everyone who gave him permission believed. How is it his fault. If you're going to site some government conspiracy, be prepared to back it up.

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"]no one can be worse than bush, he has gone to war without justification at his so called war on terrorTrashface

He believed the same intelligence that everyone who gave him permission believed. How is it his fault. If you're going to site some government conspiracy, be prepared to back it up.

Concerning the Patriot Act. Has there been a single lawsuite that has found that the P.A. crushed someones rights? Because I don't remember hearing about one.