Please tell me. Why are you so biased about this presidential election?

Here's some facts, not just some crud from "teh biased Fox News."

One of Barrack Obama's campaign employees said that the Senator is friendly with a former domestic terrorist from the 1970s.

Barrack Obama's pastor and mentor, Jeremiah Wright, is an elitist African-American that has said some controversial things about white people.

Louis Farrakhan, an Anti-semite and a racist, publicly endorsed Obama (even though it was denounced). Also, Obama's pastor gave an award to Farrakhan at his church and even traveled with him to Libya.

If John McCain or any other Republican had this baggage, you intellects would be all over it. You know it be so. It's a double standard and complete and utter hypocracy.

Let the apologists for "Change" come in!

i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothinglinkin_guy109

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much because she threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

[QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothingMayorJohnny

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much becauseshe threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

[QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothingMayorJohnny

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much becauseshe threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

nope i dont really care about that, its just from the impression that i get from seeing her campaign that makes me dislike her, it seems like shes power hungry and will try almost anything to try and get into the white house oh and this is just an outsider opinion because i live in canada :)

We need to move away from the politics of fear.

We need to move toward the politices of desire.

Desire for Change.

All of those are things that should be taken into account, but my main reasons for not supporting Obama revolve around his policies. I support almost none of them, therefore I will not vote for him.SmashBrosLegend

Yes, me too. I disagree with him on foreign policy, the economy, and health care. He just lacks experience, and the inspirational speeches have made up for it so far. Though, this "Change" rhetoric is starting to wear thin, and that's why things will only get tougher for him from here on out.

Two of those things have almost nothing to do with him.

But good job on nailing his pastor.

[QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

[QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothingTiefster

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much becauseshe threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

How do you know? Are you an expert? Are you in the military?

This kind of thought process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if everyone thought "the war against the Nazies can't be won!" back in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Ronald Regean didn't take a tough stance against the Soviet Union?

[QUOTE="Tiefster"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

[QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothingMayorJohnny

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much becauseshe threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

How do you know? Are you an expert? Have you in the military?

This kind of though process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if he though "the war against the Nazies can't be won!"

Iraq is the next Vietnam, it will eventually be known as the second great failure of the American military. Terrorists dont think like we do, they dont think in terms of battle, they will do anything to get their point across and you cant stop them. The Nazi's were an army, they could be defeated, terrorists cannot. When one dies, two more take his place. Theyre being brainwashed from a young age.

[QUOTE="MayorJohnny"][QUOTE="Tiefster"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

[QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothingTaegukki

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much becauseshe threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

How do you know? Are you an expert? Have you in the military?

This kind of though process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if he though "the war against the Nazies can't be won!"

Iraq is the next Vietnam, it will eventually be known as the second great failure of the American military. Terrorists dont think like we do, they dont think in terms of battle, they will do anything to get their point across and you cant stop them. The Nazi's were an army, they could be defeated, terrorists cannot. When one dies, two more take his place. Theyre being brainwashed from a young age.

So, what would propose the US government do about it? You can't reason with an evil that loves death. Should we only concentrate on homeland security and just ignore any crisis over seas which threatens our safety? Or should we commit to a long term plan to at least contain and quarantine terrorism?

The radical ideology isn't the only choice now. In Iraq, people have embraced democracy and peace with the United States and our allies.

Democratic countries don't fight one another. You can talk about the slow progress in Iraq, though why give up on it when the troop surge is working!? This war is not lost yet, and progress is being made.

Here's an analogy:

If you think that we broke the product, shouldn't we buy it? Instead of just running out of the store?

McCain is nothing more then the status-quo. Which means if he gets into the white house nothing will change. It will be the same crap. The only thing about McCain that is better then Bush is the fact that he served in combat, and in a war where as Bush got daddy to bail him out.

I am pretty sure plenty of white supremiscists (sp?) support McCain so it is only fair that black supremiscists (sp again?) support Obama. What do you think they would support McCain? he is white and vice versa.

Frankly I don't by this "Less experienced" bull. Because I far as I know none of the candidates have ever been president. You have to be president before you have presidential experience and no Hillary still does not count. Sleeping in a bed in the white house is different then actually working at the white house.

McCain is nothing more then the status-quo. Which means if he gets into the white house nothing will change. It will be the same crap. The only thing about McCain that is better then Bush is the fact that he served in combat, and in a war where as Bush got daddy to bail him out.

I am pretty sure plenty of white supremiscists (sp?) support McCain so it is only fair that black supremiscists (sp again?) support Obama. What do you think they would support McCain? he is white and vice versa.

Frankly I don't by this "Less experienced" bull. Because I far as I know none of the candidates have ever been president. You have to be president before you have presidential experience and no Hillary still does not count. Sleeping in a bed in the white house is different then actually working at the white house.

SunofVich

John McCain isn't the "status quo." He's actually tried to COMPROMISE and work with Democrats to get things accomplished, for better and for worse (such as McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy). He's also generally well liked by a lot of Independent voters, and is known as a "Maverick." So, just because he doesn't want to abandon the war, he's the status quo?

What the heck do you want to do about Iraq and Al Qaeda? Only fight in Afghanistan with the bare basic necessities? The "Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq until the war" crap is ridiculous. What's done is done, and an agenda shouldn't get in the way of maximizing our national security at home and over-seas just because you don't think that the war wasn't a smart idea in the first place.

How do you know? Are you an expert? Are you in the military?

This kind of thought process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if everyone thought "the war against the Nazies can't be won!" back in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Ronald Regean didn't take a tough stance against the Soviet Union?

MayorJohnny

[QUOTE="Taegukki"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"][QUOTE="Tiefster"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

[QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothingMayorJohnny

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much becauseshe threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

How do you know? Are you an expert? Have you in the military?

This kind of though process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if he though "the war against the Nazies can't be won!"

Iraq is the next Vietnam, it will eventually be known as the second great failure of the American military. Terrorists dont think like we do, they dont think in terms of battle, they will do anything to get their point across and you cant stop them. The Nazi's were an army, they could be defeated, terrorists cannot. When one dies, two more take his place. Theyre being brainwashed from a young age.

So, what would propose the US government do about it? You can't reason with an evil that loves death. Should we only concentrate on homeland security and just ignore any crisis over seas which threatens our safety? Or should we commit to a long term plan to at least contain and quarantine terrorism?

The radical ideology isn't the only choice now. In Iraq, people have embraced democracy and peace with the United States and our allies.

Democratic countries don't fight one another. You can talk about the slow progress in Iraq, though why give up on it when the troop surge is working!? This war is not lost yet, and progress is being made.

Here's an analogy:

If you think that we broke the product, shouldn't we buy it? Instead of just running out of the store?

For your analogy, in this case where you continously fumble your way to the checkout, subsequently toppling over and breaking merchandise at every step you take to the point where you need to take out bank loans to pay for all that stuff, it's probably in your best interest just to get the hell out of there.

[QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

How do you know? Are you an expert? Are you in the military?

This kind of thought process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if everyone thought "the war against the Nazies can't be won!" back in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Ronald Regean didn't take a tough stance against the Soviet Union?

Tiefster

Fear politics? I don't like fear politics. I strongly believe that I can be optimistic and realistic at the same time.

What should be done about Iraq and Al Qaeda now?

Also, the ideals of radical islamic extremism is being fought with the prospect of a free and soverign Iraq. Haven't you head President Bush talk about freedom and democracy in Iraq? It's an alternative choice of hope for people in that country, and it can be a good influence on the entire region.

1) That former domestic terrorist is now a professor at a major university and Obama has condemned his prior actions.

2) Which doesn't say anything about him.

3) He has been thoroughly condemned for this by Obama.

More or less all of the supposed "baggage" amounts to nothing. Anyone really looking at his record and his proposed policies should find something to like, even if they won't agree with everything about him.

[QUOTE="SunofVich"]

McCain is nothing more then the status-quo. Which means if he gets into the white house nothing will change. It will be the same crap. The only thing about McCain that is better then Bush is the fact that he served in combat, and in a war where as Bush got daddy to bail him out.

I am pretty sure plenty of white supremiscists (sp?) support McCain so it is only fair that black supremiscists (sp again?) support Obama. What do you think they would support McCain? he is white and vice versa.

Frankly I don't by this "Less experienced" bull. Because I far as I know none of the candidates have ever been president. You have to be president before you have presidential experience and no Hillary still does not count. Sleeping in a bed in the white house is different then actually working at the white house.

MayorJohnny

John McCain isn't the "status quo." He's actually tried to COMPROMISE and work with Democrats to get things accomplished, for better and for worse (such as McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy). He's also generally well liked by a lot of Independent voters, and is known as a "Maverick." So, just because he doesn't want to abandon the war, he's the status quo?

What the heck do you want to do about Iraq and Al Qaeda? Only fight in Afghanistan with the bare basic necessities? The "Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq until the war" crap is ridiculous. What's done is done, and an agenda shouldn't get in the way of maximizing our nation security at home and over-seas just because you don't think that the war wasn't a smart idea in the first place.

John McCain is a politician with no integrity. His vote on waterboarding proves it.

[QUOTE="MayorJohnny"][QUOTE="Taegukki"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"][QUOTE="Tiefster"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

[QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothing_BlueDuck_

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much becauseshe threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

How do you know? Are you an expert? Have you in the military?

This kind of though process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if he though "the war against the Nazies can't be won!"

Iraq is the next Vietnam, it will eventually be known as the second great failure of the American military. Terrorists dont think like we do, they dont think in terms of battle, they will do anything to get their point across and you cant stop them. The Nazi's were an army, they could be defeated, terrorists cannot. When one dies, two more take his place. Theyre being brainwashed from a young age.

So, what would propose the US government do about it? You can't reason with an evil that loves death. Should we only concentrate on homeland security and just ignore any crisis over seas which threatens our safety? Or should we commit to a long term plan to at least contain and quarantine terrorism?

The radical ideology isn't the only choice now. In Iraq, people have embraced democracy and peace with the United States and our allies.

Democratic countries don't fight one another. You can talk about the slow progress in Iraq, though why give up on it when the troop surge is working!? This war is not lost yet, and progress is being made.

Here's an analogy:

If you think that we broke the product, shouldn't we buy it? Instead of just running out of the store?

For your analogy, in this case where you continously fumble your way to the checkout, subsequently toppling over and breaking merchandise at every step you take to the point where you need to take out bank loans to pay for all that stuff, it's probably in your best interest just to get the hell out of there.

Nice, don't pay your debts like a coward. It's too difficult to pay up and set things right.

The war hasn't gone that badly, though. The biased media makes it seem a little worse than what it actually is.

[QUOTE="Tiefster"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

How do you know? Are you an expert? Are you in the military?

This kind of thought process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if everyone thought "the war against the Nazies can't be won!" back in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Ronald Regean didn't take a tough stance against the Soviet Union?

MayorJohnny

Fear politics? I don't like fear politics. I strongly believe that I can be optimistic and realistic at the same time.

What should be done about Iraq and Al Qaeda now?

Also, the ideals of radical islamic extremism is being fought with the prospect of a free and soverign Iraq. Haven't you head President Bush talk about freedom and democracy in Iraq? It's an alternative choice of hope for people in that country, and it can be a good influence on the entire region.

How do you know? Are you an expert? Are you in the military?

Imagine if everyone thought "the war against the Nazies can't be won!" back in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Ronald Regean didn't take a tough stance against the Soviet Union?

MayorJohnny

Simple the war on terror is a war on an emotion, you can't beat an emotion. The only thing that the "war on terror" does is give us a poorly-defined and perpetually existing foe to demonize and use to revoke the constitutional rights and liberties of the populous.

Furthermore you display a pretty astounding ignorance in the last part of your post in at least two respects. On the first point guerilla warfare isn't the same as field warfare and we have a far worse record in winning it than we do in field warfare. With respect to the second point Reagan had very little at all to do with the Soviet Union's collapse, it is however a popular Republican myth that he did. By the time Reagan came around the Soviet Union's fundamental weaknesses were already becoming terminal.

[QUOTE="MayorJohnny"][QUOTE="Tiefster"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

How do you know? Are you an expert? Are you in the military?

This kind of thought process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if everyone thought "the war against the Nazies can't be won!" back in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Ronald Regean didn't take a tough stance against the Soviet Union?

Dreams-Visions

Fear politics? I don't like fear politics. I strongly believe that I can be optimistic and realistic at the same time.

What should be done about Iraq and Al Qaeda now?

Also, the ideals of radical islamic extremism is being fought with the prospect of a free and soverign Iraq. Haven't you head President Bush talk about freedom and democracy in Iraq? It's an alternative choice of hope for people in that country, and it can be a good influence on the entire region.

Can you be specific?

Do you mean leave Iraq and then return if Al Qaeda resurges?

[QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

How do you know? Are you an expert? Are you in the military?

Imagine if everyone thought "the war against the Nazies can't be won!" back in the 1930s and 1940s. What if Ronald Regean didn't take a tough stance against the Soviet Union?

Aidenfury19

Simple the war on terror is a war on an emotion, you can't beat an emotion. The only thing that the "war on terror" does is give us a poorly-defined and perpetually existing foe to demonize and use to revoke the constitutional rights and liberties of the populous.

Furthermore you display a pretty astounding ignorance in the last part of your post in at least two respects. On the first point guerilla warfare isn't the same as field warfare and we have a far worse record in winning it than we do in field warfare. With respect to the second point Reagan had very little at all to do with the Soviet Union's collapse, it is however a popular Republican myth that he did. By the time Reagan came around the Soviet Union's fundamental weaknesses were already becoming terminal.

I'm not an expert obviously, though I'm not dumb.

Guerilla warfare or not, it's still a war and the USA can't back down from such a dangerous enemy.

Nice, don't pay your debts like a coward. It's too difficult to pay up and set things right.

The war hasn't gone that badly, though. The biased media makes it seem a little worse than what it actually is.

All I'm saying its in the nation's best sovereign interest (and most american policies and actions seem to be sovereignty-based) to get out.

Regardless of how the media portrays everything, the fact still remains that huge amounts of money are being poured into this campaign with little reward. And national debt is climbing far too high.

_BlueDuck_

Nice, don't pay your debts like a coward. It's too difficult to pay up and set things right.

The war hasn't gone that badly, though. The biased media makes it seem a little worse than what it actually is.

All I'm saying its in the nation's best sovereign interest (and most american policies and actions seem to be sovereignty-based) to get out.

Regardless of how the media portrays everything, the fact still remains that huge amounts of money are being poured into this campaign with little reward. And national debt is climbing far too high.

Little reward? We've not had a single terrorist attack since 9/11.

Can you be specific?

Do you mean leave Iraq and then return if Al Qaeda resurges?

MayorJohnny

Al Qaeda is a miniscule portion of the insurgency, although considering how frequently our "liberal media" calls all insurgents Al Qaeda its not surprising you would be mistaken there.

As for what we do I think stopping a lot of the foreign intervention is a good first step. Thats how we made Osama, Saddam, and Khomeini amongst others.

You display a certain kind of idealism pretty much throughout this thread that is far less realistic than the sort Obama is regularly criticized for. Look behind the curtain sometime, you'll find not all is flowers and rainbows in the Bush Whitehouse and the "War on Terror".

[QUOTE="Taegukki"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"][QUOTE="Tiefster"][QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

[QUOTE="linkin_guy109"]i support him because hillary is the spawn of satan and mcain is no better then bush when it comes to fighting the war on nothingMayorJohnny

Ridiculous. You just dislike Clinton that much becauseshe threatens your precious video games, right? At least she would be more competent on foreign policy and has experience.

John McCain will end this war by WINNING it, using even more aggressive mesaures in combat and in talks with the Iraqi government to move the country into stability. Not by leaving too early like a coward for the sake of a short term boost in poll ratings.

How do you know? Are you an expert? Have you in the military?

This kind of though process can be dangerous. Yeah, let's not even try because it's too hard!

Imagine if he though "the war against the Nazies can't be won!"

Iraq is the next Vietnam, it will eventually be known as the second great failure of the American military. Terrorists dont think like we do, they dont think in terms of battle, they will do anything to get their point across and you cant stop them. The Nazi's were an army, they could be defeated, terrorists cannot. When one dies, two more take his place. Theyre being brainwashed from a young age.

So, what would propose the US government do about it? You can't reason with an evil that loves death. Should we only concentrate on homeland security and just ignore any crisis over seas which threatens our safety? Or should we commit to a long term plan to at least contain and quarantine terrorism?

The radical ideology isn't the only choice now. In Iraq, people have embraced democracy and peace with the United States and our allies.

Democratic countries don't fight one another. You can talk about the slow progress in Iraq, though why give up on it when the troop surge is working!? This war is not lost yet, and progress is being made.

Here's an analogy:

If you think that we broke the product, shouldn't we buy it? Instead of just running out of the store?

Newsflash, terrorism doesnt only exist in Iraq. Bush's reasons for going there were BS, Iraq posed no threat to America, terrorists did. Do you expect the US to invade every middle eastern country that is harbouring terrorists and eradicate them? People in Iraq arent embracing democracy, theyre rejecting it. That's why its chaos over there. They want America out. As for your analogy, its more like youve already broken the product, how about you get out of the damn store before you break more.

I'm not an expert obviously, though I'm not dumb.

Guerilla warfare or not, it's still a war and the USA can't back down from such a dangerous enemy.

MayorJohnny

Well look into things more before you start to talk politics with me.

Reasons to blast GOP:

1.) John McCain (sell-out, sleazy politician)

2.) Patriot Act (errosion of US civil liberties)

3.) Nothing getting done in 8 years

4.) Iraq (should not have begun)

5.) Afganistan (not finished)

6.) Refusing to ban torture

-----------------------------------------------------

Reasons to defend Obama:

1.) The attacks most people are making are either ignorant, bigoted or complete mischaracterizations of who he is, what he believes in or what he'd like to get done.

2.) Stump speeches - No, that's not all he has to say...but there are objectives for rallys...and those objectives are not to talk in detail. It's not that there isn't detail....it's that those aren't the environments to talk in detail. That's what town hall meetings and debates are for. Some people's only source of Obama policy is in excerpts of stump speeches.

3.) Muslim roots - They are made more of than necessay. He is not and was never Muslim. He was athiest, then converted to Christiantiy.

4.) Middle name - People are attacking him because of his middle name. How juvenile.

5.) Endorsements - It's not his fault Louis Frarrakhan endorsed him. Nor is it his fault the Ku Klux Klan endorsed him (yes, they did). He did not solicit support from either of those groups...and obviously he rejects their support for multiple reasons. The fact that he has to answer for people who decide that they like him is lame.

6.) There's nothing wronng with encouraging the black community to become stronger. If that's a goal of his home church, what's the problem? It's not like anyone would suggest that the black community couldn't use more unity and encouragement.

7.) His pastor--like your pastor--is his own man. Obama has said many times that he disagrees with his Pastor sometimes...and the Farrakahn issue is one of those times. Worrying about his pastor is a waste of time.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lastly..."If John McCain had this much baggage..."

John doesn't? Have YOU checked his resume lately?

Torture flip-flop?

The shady deal that cost tax payers $1.5 billion?

The cheating?

The lack of trust from his own party?

The relationships with lobbyists?

Did you think John McCain is somehow *without* baggage?

All that being said, people will defend Obama because the attacks against him are mostly ignorant. Attacks on his name. Attacks on who his family. If attacks were limited to his inexperience, that's one thing. But most attacks just make people want to defend him.

[QUOTE="_BlueDuck_"]

MayorJohnny

Nice, don't pay your debts like a coward. It's too difficult to pay up and set things right.

The war hasn't gone that badly, though. The biased media makes it seem a little worse than what it actually is.

All I'm saying its in the nation's best sovereign interest (and most american policies and actions seem to be sovereignty-based) to get out.

Regardless of how the media portrays everything, the fact still remains that huge amounts of money are being poured into this campaign with little reward. And national debt is climbing far too high.

Little reward? We've not had a single terrorist attack since 9/11.

There's no indication that there would have been another attack if the US didn't go to Iraq.

It's also worth nothing that the total of American casualties in Iraq have exceeded the fatalities from 9/11, Nevermind the casualties of other coalition forces and Iraqi civilians.

Nor is it his fault the Ku Klux Klan endorsed him (yes, they did).

Dreams-Visions

Actually they didn't the rest of your post is well done but this is plain wrong.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

Nor is it his fault the Ku Klux Klan endorsed him (yes, they did).

Aidenfury19

Actually they didn't the rest of your post is well done but this is plain wrong.

:lol:

[QUOTE="Aidenfury19"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

Nor is it his fault the Ku Klux Klan endorsed him (yes, they did).

Dreams-Visions

Actually they didn't the rest of your post is well done but this is plain wrong.

*pic*

:lol:

The KKK's site says otherwise broken and poorly done as it is.

Haha McCain has way more baggage that this crap you've exaggerated and blown out of porportion. If you republicans thought you could call Kerry a "flip-flopper" don't even get started about McCain's switches. Not to mention he's in the pockets of corporate lobbyists like the rest of your party.

Seriously even if you're conservative in the social sense you have got to see how badly the republican party and Reaganomics have just raped our country to benifit the rich. I mean I'm prettymuch a Nazi but I could never vote for someone who's entire purpose is to keep our broken economic system that only benifits the super rich.

All of those are things that should be taken into account, but my main reasons for not supporting Obama revolve around his policies. I support almost none of them, therefore I will not vote for him.SmashBrosLegend

Well then who are you going to vote for?

[QUOTE="SpaceMoose"]Yes, rather than provide Fox News as a source, you opted to provide no sources at all. That's much better.MayorJohnny

It's the truth. I don't need to post sources, though you can get them if you want. The liberal media won't discuss it very much because you know that they really want a liberal to become President.

Besides Talk Radio and a couple of shows on Fox News, the media is dominated by liberalism. That is not my opinion, that is just a fact.

So basically your sources are Fox News (which you stated it wasn't) and Rush Limbaugh and his clones. Yeah, Rush does some hard hitting investigative journalism sitting in his radio booth, doesn't he?

Oh, and it is your opinion.

[QUOTE="MayorJohnny"]

[QUOTE="SpaceMoose"]Yes, rather than provide Fox News as a source, you opted to provide no sources at all. That's much better.SpaceMoose

It's the truth. I don't need to post sources, though you can get them if you want. The liberal media won't discuss it very much because you know that they really want a liberal to become President.

Besides Talk Radio and a couple of shows on Fox News, the media is dominated by liberalism. That is not my opinion, that is just a fact.

So basically your sources are Fox News (which you stated it wasn't) and Rush Limbaugh and his clones. Yeah, Rush does some hard hitting investigative journalism sitting in his radio booth, doesn't he?

Oh, and it is your opinion.

How is Fox News the source? This isn't made up by Sean Hannity.

I don't want to find one ultimare source for you. I owe you nothing, and you can believe jargon if you want.

Yes, some of this is still my opinion. I can be a smart alec, as well.

1) That former domestic terrorist is now a professor at a major university and Obama has condemned his prior actions.

2) Which doesn't say anything about him.

3) He has been thoroughly condemned for this by Obama.

More or less all of the supposed "baggage" amounts to nothing. Anyone really looking at his record and his proposed policies should find something to like, even if they won't agree with everything about him.

Aidenfury19

The thread was fine right up until this part:

Let the apologists for "Change" come in!

MayorJohnny

If you're looking for discussion post away but if you're going to start labeling anyone who disagrees with your POV don't bother posting.