Barrack Husein Obama

The really HOT topics of the day... be careful to not get burned! Please try to remain open minded...

Moderator: The Moderating Team

User avatar
Hostrauser
All Star
All Star
Posts: 3791
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 11:19 pm
Location: Poway, CA
Contact:

Post by Hostrauser » Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:42 pm

Malibu wrote:He claims he is not a Muslim but he was sworn into Congress on the Koran, not the Bible.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he were being backed by Osama himself. What better way to infiltrate our country than through our leader.

Say what you all want to say, but mark my words, if he gets elected we are in for some huge changes and not in the best interest of Americans either.

No religious texts are used for swearing-in Senators or Representatives in Congress. The Constitution expressly forbids it (Article VI, clause 3). Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN), the first Muslim in Congress, announced he would be sworn-in while holding the Quran, but he was not sworn-in on the Quran (he and Nancy Pelosi posed for pictures with both of their hands resting on the Quran, one of Thomas Jefferson's, but this was AFTER the swearing-in ceremony and was purely a photo-op). Senator Obama is not and has never been a Muslim. Get your facts straight.

His Kenyan father was no longer a practicing Muslim by the time he married Barack's mother, and his parents divorced when Barack was two (and his father moved from Hawaii, where Barack was raised until age six, to Connecticut), so Barack did not receive any Muslim influence from his father. Barack Obama Sr. had virtually no influence on his son's life: they met once, when Senator Obama was eleven, and Obama Sr. died when Senator Obama was 21.


Bandmaster wrote:
Hostrauser wrote:And, I'll go ahead and assume right now that your opinion is largely based on b.s. smear tactics by right-wing talking heads, since what little rationale you've listed in this thread is pretty specious.

Funny... I heard that it was folks from the Clinton campaign that released the photo? But hey, why not blame the right-wing talking heads for everything?

Of course, I wasn't referring to the photo but to TX's comments (and implied views) on Obama's church and their social activities. But hey, why read and comprehend the whole thread?
"I hate mankind, for I think myself one of the best of them, and I know how bad I am."
-- Joseph Baretti

User avatar
LAMystreaux
All Star
All Star
Posts: 4374
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:00 pm
Location: Leesville, LA

Post by LAMystreaux » Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:36 am

Hostrauser wrote:Of course, I wasn't referring to the photo but to TX's comments (and implied views) on Obama's church and their social activities. But hey, why read and comprehend the whole thread?


So, you admit assuming on my part, yet want to accuse Dave of not reading the entire thread? Sounds pretty stupid to me.
Just because your hate is masked by "free thinking" or being "open-minded" does not make it right.

User avatar
chadwick
All Star
All Star
Posts: 1701
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Post by chadwick » Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:41 am

Malibu wrote:I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he were being backed by Osama himself. What better way to infiltrate our country than through our leader.


Are you serious with this statement? I would love to know what you are basing this on. Is it because his name resembles Osama's? His middle name is Husein? He is not the typical old, white, Christian male? :roll:

User avatar
LAMystreaux
All Star
All Star
Posts: 4374
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:00 pm
Location: Leesville, LA

Post by LAMystreaux » Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:55 am

chadwick wrote:
Malibu wrote:I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he were being backed by Osama himself. What better way to infiltrate our country than through our leader.


Are you serious with this statement? I would love to know what you are basing this on. Is it because his name resembles Osama's? His middle name is Husein? He is not the typical old, white, Christian male? :roll:



I agree with Chadwick here. I do think there are a few big reasons to not want Obama to be President, but his name and his race are not the reasons. His very short-lived record is one biggie for me. His idea of change for change's sake without much substance beyond that is another, coupled with the fact that if he truly wants all the change he keeps bringing up he also needs to address how it will be paid for. Putting us further into debt in the name of change is not the kind of change I want.

Plus, and I know this is a silly one in a way, but his wife really irks me. She, as I felt with Elizabeth Edwards, should just be quiet. She sounds stupid and hurts his campaign quite a bit. . .that is, if the media would actually cover some of the stuff she says.
Just because your hate is masked by "free thinking" or being "open-minded" does not make it right.

Jim Anello
All Star
All Star
Posts: 2281
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 5:47 am

Post by Jim Anello » Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:56 am

TXMystreaux wrote:
Jim Anello wrote:
TXMystreaux wrote:
Old Mike wrote:What a pile of crap!!!!!

A little checking shows the picture is from a visit to Africa.
It is customary for almost ALL political visitors to wear traditional garb.
Even the sainted/hated Hilary has said she has worn traditional outfits when visiting foreign countries.

Deciding to vote/NOT to vote for a person based on a picture - WOW.

I'm not sure who I'm voting for yet - McCain, Obama, Clinton (most likely NOT), Nader. I need to study a bit more. Clinton's camp was behind posting this - she is DONE - grasping at straws.......



Regardless of the origins of the picture, he was recently endorsed by Farrakhan, and his church has a history of being in the "black power" movement. Electing him as President would be akin to years ago had the state of LA elected David Duke as governor.

Most of what Obama says is nothing but fluff, and there is no way he intends on following through with much of it (we could never afford it). I am hoping Americans wise up to him soon.


A person can't control who endorses him or her. If you check, you might find some pretty unsavory characters who endorsed President Bush. So that means we shouldn't have voted for him?

If you examine the candidate's issues and decide not to vote for him, I can understand that. But to say you're against a person because of who endorsed him is pretty weak. TX, you're smarter than that!



My opposition to his possible presidency is based on much more than one person's endorsement. I thought that was pretty clear just from the first statement I made in this thread. My opinion that Obama is a "black racist" (if there is such a thing) is based on more than this endorsement. I have held this opinion of him for months, and this endorsement only helped further that point.


OK, TX, I'll bite. Just what exactly is so wrong about the church he attends? You use a phrase to describe it - "black power." That's a loaded phrase that means a lot of things to different people. What is it about his church's teachings that is so objectionable? And, even if I accept your arguement that it's teachings contain objectionable things, does it follow that Senator Obama buys into all of them, lock, stock and barrell? Is that really how you thought process works? You won't vote for a person because of the church he attends? Oh yeah, a lot of Republican voters didn't vote for Mr. Romney because he was a Mormon...
Jim Anello

User avatar
chadwick
All Star
All Star
Posts: 1701
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 9:37 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Post by chadwick » Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:31 am

TXMystreaux wrote:Plus, and I know this is a silly one in a way, but his wife really irks me. She, as I felt with Elizabeth Edwards, should just be quiet. She sounds stupid and hurts his campaign quite a bit. . .that is, if the media would actually cover some of the stuff she says.


Speaking of wives....McCain's is just scary!!

User avatar
LAMystreaux
All Star
All Star
Posts: 4374
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:00 pm
Location: Leesville, LA

Post by LAMystreaux » Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:37 am

Jim Anello wrote:
TXMystreaux wrote:
Jim Anello wrote:
TXMystreaux wrote:
Old Mike wrote:What a pile of crap!!!!!

A little checking shows the picture is from a visit to Africa.
It is customary for almost ALL political visitors to wear traditional garb.
Even the sainted/hated Hilary has said she has worn traditional outfits when visiting foreign countries.

Deciding to vote/NOT to vote for a person based on a picture - WOW.

I'm not sure who I'm voting for yet - McCain, Obama, Clinton (most likely NOT), Nader. I need to study a bit more. Clinton's camp was behind posting this - she is DONE - grasping at straws.......



Regardless of the origins of the picture, he was recently endorsed by Farrakhan, and his church has a history of being in the "black power" movement. Electing him as President would be akin to years ago had the state of LA elected David Duke as governor.

Most of what Obama says is nothing but fluff, and there is no way he intends on following through with much of it (we could never afford it). I am hoping Americans wise up to him soon.


A person can't control who endorses him or her. If you check, you might find some pretty unsavory characters who endorsed President Bush. So that means we shouldn't have voted for him?

If you examine the candidate's issues and decide not to vote for him, I can understand that. But to say you're against a person because of who endorsed him is pretty weak. TX, you're smarter than that!



My opposition to his possible presidency is based on much more than one person's endorsement. I thought that was pretty clear just from the first statement I made in this thread. My opinion that Obama is a "black racist" (if there is such a thing) is based on more than this endorsement. I have held this opinion of him for months, and this endorsement only helped further that point.


OK, TX, I'll bite. Just what exactly is so wrong about the church he attends? You use a phrase to describe it - "black power." That's a loaded phrase that means a lot of things to different people. What is it about his church's teachings that is so objectionable? And, even if I accept your arguement that it's teachings contain objectionable things, does it follow that Senator Obama buys into all of them, lock, stock and barrell? Is that really how you thought process works? You won't vote for a person because of the church he attends? Oh yeah, a lot of Republican voters didn't vote for Mr. Romney because he was a Mormon...


Good for them, Jim. I don't answer for the Republican party and its voters. Romney was my candidate, easily.

My issue is that Americans and our media do not seem to examine Obama with the same scrutiny as Bush or other Republican leaders which is the status quo, but at the same time, the guy is running for President. He rarely gets asked any tough questions. The media made Romney's mormonism as much of an issue as some voters did. Where is that same scrutiny with Obama? If a church has teachings I feel are questionable, I stop attending and find a new place to worship. . .simple. It has happened a few times in my lifetime.

No, a person cannot choose who endorses them. But, an endorsement always says something about someone. Ted Kennedy endorsing the guy causes me to not want to vote for him. Farrakhan's endorsement certainly makes not want him to win the election. The question I am asking is, "why is Farrakhan endorsing the guy?".
Just because your hate is masked by "free thinking" or being "open-minded" does not make it right.

Blurae1
All Star
All Star
Posts: 951
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: North Louisiana

Post by Blurae1 » Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:08 am

The issue as to whether or not the media watches Dems or Reps more closely is simple. It has nothing to do with philosophy or politics it has to do with money. They do whatever they get the most money for doing.

The solution is simple. Don't watch them. No viewers = no sponsors = no money. Simple.

My first choice was also Romney. He's gone. I'm voting for Nader. It's all real simple for me.................Bill

P.S. A&E; Travel channel; TNT etc. avoid the political ads, at least until after the primarys

User avatar
LAMystreaux
All Star
All Star
Posts: 4374
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:00 pm
Location: Leesville, LA

Post by LAMystreaux » Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:56 am

Blurae1 wrote:The issue as to whether or not the media watches Dems or Reps more closely is simple. It has nothing to do with philosophy or politics it has to do with money. They do whatever they get the most money for doing.

The solution is simple. Don't watch them. No viewers = no sponsors = no money. Simple.

My first choice was also Romney. He's gone. I'm voting for Nader. It's all real simple for me.................Bill

P.S. A&E; Travel channel; TNT etc. avoid the political ads, at least until after the primarys



I don't watch mainstream news anymore. . .haven't for months.

And, I agree about tv channels. Our tv watching has shifted a lot from watching the 4 majors to watching more of the cable channels.
Just because your hate is masked by "free thinking" or being "open-minded" does not make it right.

User avatar
The Aceman
Soloist
Soloist
Posts: 345
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: Murrieta, Ca
Contact:

Post by The Aceman » Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:02 am

Malibu wrote:
chadwick wrote:To 'not' vote for someone because of this picture or because their middle name is not traditional American is shameful. The fact that Obama wore the African garb on his visit to this country is respectable not disrespectable. Debate the issues folks...not this ridculous fluff.


See I think you guys are being blinded by the truth. He comes across as a gentle and fair man but what is he really thinking?

He claims he is not a Muslim but he was sworn into Congress on the Koran, not the Bible.
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he were being backed by Osama himself. What better way to infiltrate our country than through our leader.

Say what you all want to say, but mark my words, if he gets elected we are in for some huge changes and not in the best interest of Americans either.


I'm really sorry, but this kind of thinking is exactly the problem with American voters. Uniformed, and completely directed by the media. The media doesn't care if they endorse the best candidate, the media has one goal in mind, and that is to grab ratings...not exactly the best source for information. Esp. on a topic as opinionated and important as politics and our country's president. If Obama is elected, the changes in our country will be for the better, one because he's a good candidate and two because Bush has left him nowhere to go but up. We've already had huge changes in America with Bush and they have all been for the worst.

NCLB = Bad
War on Terrorism = Bad
PATRIOT Act = Bad
Economy = Horrible
Big Business Such as the Oil Companies = Richer than ever

The sad part is that war actually stimulates the economy in most cases, somehow Bush messed it up so bad that he didn't even accomplish that. Anyhow, I kinda strayed off-topic, but my point is that Obama would make a good President, and I think he actually has the best chance of becoming president. I think he will win the Democratic Nomination, and I just can't see our country putting another Republican in office after the debacle known as Bush. I think people are realizing this as well and that's why there are smear tactics coming at him now.
Go read "Ishmael" a novel by Daniel Quinn. It will literally change your life.
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Image

User avatar
Hostrauser
All Star
All Star
Posts: 3791
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 11:19 pm
Location: Poway, CA
Contact:

Post by Hostrauser » Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:49 am

TXMystreaux wrote:
Hostrauser wrote:
TXMystreaux wrote:Regardless of the origins of the picture, he was recently endorsed by Farrakhan, and his church has a history of being in the "black power" movement.

Of course, I wasn't referring to the photo but to TX's comments (and implied views) on Obama's church and their social activities. But hey, why read and comprehend the whole thread?

So, you admit assuming on my part, yet want to accuse Dave of not reading the entire thread? Sounds pretty stupid to me.

I didn't say I "assumed" anything, I said that I felt you "implied" certain things. Don't strain your brain, just read the bolded text. The first quoted section is YOUR words, after all, if you can't remember what you wrote.

How dare I try to interpret what you actually wrote! That does sound pretty stupid! You're right, I should go back to just ignoring everything you write and making stuff up in my head to put words in your mouth. :roll:

TXMystreaux wrote:No, a person cannot choose who endorses them. But, an endorsement always says something about someone. Ted Kennedy endorsing the guy causes me to not want to vote for him. Farrakhan's endorsement certainly makes not want him to win the election. The question I am asking is, "why is Farrakhan endorsing the guy?".

Well, now that you mention it, the KKK endorsed Ronald Reagan and the American Nazi Party endorsed George W. Bush. :hum: You might be on to something.

But seriously, see how terrible your logic is? (Probably not, I'm guessing.)

An endorsement says nothing about anyone but the person/organization giving the endorsement.

Oh, and I realize the right-wing reacts to actual fact much in the same way a vampire reacts to sunlight, but here's another fact: Farrakhan has not "endorsed" Obama. He simply said this:
Louis Farrakhan wrote:This young man is the hope of the entire world that America will change and be made better. This young man is capturing audiences of black and brown and red and yellow. If you look at Barack Obama's audiences and look at the effect of his words, those people are being transformed.

Louis Farrakhan on 'Nightline' wrote:I like him very much. I like him, he has a fresh approach. And I'm fearful, because there's a structure in our government that no matter who sits in the seat of power, there are forces that one has to contend with if one is able to attract the masses of their votes. Barack Obama is doing quite well.
"I hate mankind, for I think myself one of the best of them, and I know how bad I am."
-- Joseph Baretti

User avatar
LAMystreaux
All Star
All Star
Posts: 4374
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:00 pm
Location: Leesville, LA

Post by LAMystreaux » Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:19 am

I didn't say I "assumed" anything, I said that I felt you "implied" certain things. Don't strain your brain, just read the bolded text. The first quoted section is YOUR words, after all, if you can't remember what you wrote.

How dare I try to interpret what you actually wrote! That does sound pretty stupid! You're right, I should go back to just ignoring everything you write and making stuff up in my head to put words in your mouth. :roll:


The following is a direct quote from one of your earlier posts in this thread:

And, I'll go ahead and assume right now that your opinion is largely based on b.s. smear tactics by right-wing talking heads, since what little rationale you've listed in this thread is pretty specious.

As far as ignoring me, that would be a good idea. I have no intentions of getting into political discussions with you because, frankly, you tend to be a jerk about things and have proven time and again your inability to discuss things in a civil manner.
Just because your hate is masked by "free thinking" or being "open-minded" does not make it right.

User avatar
Malibu
Support Staff
Support Staff
Posts: 4803
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 4:13 am
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Post by Malibu » Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:59 pm

The Aceman wrote:
Malibu wrote:
chadwick wrote:To 'not' vote for someone because of this picture or because their middle name is not traditional American is shameful. The fact that Obama wore the African garb on his visit to this country is respectable not disrespectable. Debate the issues folks...not this ridculous fluff.


See I think you guys are being blinded by the truth. He comes across as a gentle and fair man but what is he really thinking?

He claims he is not a Muslim but he was sworn into Congress on the Koran, not the Bible.
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he were being backed by Osama himself. What better way to infiltrate our country than through our leader.

Say what you all want to say, but mark my words, if he gets elected we are in for some huge changes and not in the best interest of Americans either.


I'm really sorry, but this kind of thinking is exactly the problem with American voters. Uniformed, and completely directed by the media. The media doesn't care if they endorse the best candidate, the media has one goal in mind, and that is to grab ratings...not exactly the best source for information. Esp. on a topic as opinionated and important as politics and our country's president. If Obama is elected, the changes in our country will be for the better, one because he's a good candidate and two because Bush has left him nowhere to go but up. We've already had huge changes in America with Bush and they have all been for the worst.

NCLB = Bad
War on Terrorism = Bad
PATRIOT Act = Bad
Economy = Horrible
Big Business Such as the Oil Companies = Richer than ever

The sad part is that war actually stimulates the economy in most cases, somehow Bush messed it up so bad that he didn't even accomplish that. Anyhow, I kinda strayed off-topic, but my point is that Obama would make a good President, and I think he actually has the best chance of becoming president. I think he will win the Democratic Nomination, and I just can't see our country putting another Republican in office after the debacle known as Bush. I think people are realizing this as well and that's why there are smear tactics coming at him now.


Actually I don't sit around and read or watch TV news especially politics. It's all BS if you ask me. They say one thing but they do another. All they really care about is getting YOUR vote.

Obama scares me. He is like a snake in the grass waiting to strike.
Malibu
Crossmen Alumni

"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."

Image

User avatar
The Aceman
Soloist
Soloist
Posts: 345
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: Murrieta, Ca
Contact:

Post by The Aceman » Thu Feb 28, 2008 6:15 pm

Malibu wrote:Obama scares me. He is like a snake in the grass waiting to strike.


I'm still waiting on a good reason WHY he scares you? I mean, you can't really tell me you don't like him just because of one picture, a picture that really doesn't show anything.
Go read "Ishmael" a novel by Daniel Quinn. It will literally change your life.
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
Image

WE ARE SPARTACI
All Star
All Star
Posts: 1859
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 1:54 pm
Contact:

Post by WE ARE SPARTACI » Fri Feb 29, 2008 12:50 am

The Aceman wrote:McCain is also an idiot, he is willing to wage a hundred year war...


Sorry, but this statement does not reflect his stated views. He indicated that a presence would be required for a long period of time, much like we see today in Japan, Korea, and Germany half a century after the fact. Agree or disagree, that is entirely different than suggesting an active century-long war.

Post Reply