“Hope.” “Change.” “A new kind of politics.” Barack Obama’s promise to implement these ideals has led him top of the Democratic pack, as millions of Americans have contributed to his highly successful campaign. And who can blame Americans for jumping on board? On the surface, a platform that promises the invoke hope and change is surely enticing — especially after eight years of political and social turbulence. But, what do “hope” and “change” actually mean? If actions count for anything, Obama’s promise to ignite a “new kind of politics” is laughable at best. So, why are the American people missing all of the cues?
From race relations to the federal tax system, Obama continues to prove that his policies and allegiances possess the characteristics of nothing more than typical, run-of-the-mill political fodder. He’s no different from a traditional politician, yet for some reason his charismatic nature has inebriated my generation, in particular, severely impairing rational exploration of his actions, inactions and incessant flip-flops. Judicial Watch reports the following:
“While Barack Obama campaigns as an anomaly not corrupted by Washington politics or special interests, he has repeatedly contradicted this illusion by accepting big bucks from convicted entrepreneurs as well as oil company executives, steering millions of federal earmark dollars to his wife’s employer and a top donor and hiring powerful corporate insiders to run his campaign.”
When we talk about proposed tax systems, Obama fares not much better than McCain. According to the Brooking Institution and the Urban Instutite, McCain’s plans would cut receipts by $3.72 trillion from over a 10 year period, while Obama’s plans would cut revenues by $2.73 trillion during the same time frame.
And what about a more general sense of fiscal discipline? The sad reality is that neither of the candidates’ proposals would balance the U.S. budget:
“The left-leaning Tax Policy Center concludes: “Obama’s generosity comes at a price. … He’d raise the national debt by a staggering $3.3 trillion over the next decade, and that includes more than $900 billion in promised revenue raisers that TPC could not verify.”
Obama’s spending plans for health care, infrastructure, education and energy aren’t even included in TPC’s estimate. With Social Security and Medicare in grave danger, allowing our officials to manage a health care system in the current political climate is frightening at best.
But his hypocrisy transcends these issues and extends into nearly every facet of his campaign. Last week, he went back on his word and announced that he would be forgoing more the $85 million in public financing — a move that has McCain and many others (even Obama supporters) frustrated and disheartened. So much for bi-partisan negotiations. According to OpenSecrets:
“Last March, before Obama became the candidate to beat in the money race, his campaign said he would “aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election” if he were to win his party’s nomination.”
And while I’m at it, allow me to mention his insane endorsement of ethanol as a viable fuel alternative. I can’t imagine that he has missed the media’s coverage of the destruction that has been caused by the utilization of ethanol. Damaging the world’s fuel supply and potentially worsening the alleged global warming phenomenon apparently doesn’t matter to Obama. Judicial Watch reports the following:
“It turns out that Obama’s national campaign co-chairman, former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle, serves on the boards of three ethanol companies and his top advisor on environmental issues, Jason Grumet, used to work for a bipartisan initiative (National Commission on Energy Policy) that strongly supports ethanol…Obama is also very tight with Illinois agriculture giant Archer Daniels Midland, the nation’s largest ethanol producer…”
I suppose forgetting to mention Rev. Wright would be irresponsible of me. See, Obama attended the same church for years. He listened to anti-American and anti-white statements and seemed completely content with his pastor’s rants — that is, until his church membership hurt his campaign. It was not until pressures mounted that Obama formerly removed his allegiances to Wright and company.
Are we supposed to believe that Obama was never happy at his church — that he always differed ideologically from Rev. Wright? Believing such an idea would be nonsensical. No one stays at a church if they disagree with the leading pastor. And if by some chance Obama did stay despite some difference in opinion he surely wouldn’t have allowed his pastor to marry he and his wife or baptize his children. And wasn’t Wright an inspiration for one of his books? Obama agrees with Rev. Wright entirely — he just can’t admit that to the American people.
Perhaps Judicial Watch said it best: “Somehow, the charismatic young lawmaker that the mainstream media loves to portray as a sort of rock star doesn’t seem any different than most Washington heavy hitters.”
- The Democrat Party: The racist party of tolerance might hurt Obama’s chances
- Mindless Fans: The Obama Camp Unleashes Weak Counter Strategy
- Yay, Nay or Present: Barack Obama’s Insanely Maniacal Method of Jumping Hurdles to Avoid the Truth, Whilst Flip-Flopping Under the Rafters
- 2008 Unleashed: The Dem’s, McCain and Our Nation’s Future
- Obama’s “57 states” remark not a big deal
Wednesday, June 25th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
So what's the point? Let's concede every one of your points as true for the sake of this discussion. Barack is STILL kicking your man's butt. He will have raised a half billion dollars from millions of donors by the time it's all said and done. He leads in all the polls. He attracts huge crowds wherever he goes. He has active, invested, enthusiastic supporters. He has already killed a giant in the primaries. All of his dirty laundry is out there for the world to see. He has more than enough resources to counter any 527. Speaking of resources, he can challenge in red and purple states, effectively forcing Old Man River to spend time and money defending instead breaking new ground himself. McCain as a stand alone candidate has no momentum. You would rather attempt your feeble attacks than extol the virtues of Father Time. If he were my candidate I would do the same.
The bottom line is that no one cares about McCain. All your petty snipes do is strengthen the resolve of the broadest political base since Reagan. After November I will take great pleasure in throwing all of your garbage back in your face.
Wednesday, June 25th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Typical response by the left as shown by simonesdad2008. Instead attempting to rationally rebut this article he resorts to that age old childish, "My dad is better than your dad" response by stating, "Barack is STILL kicking your man's butt." Yeah, that will convince me to vote for Obama in a heartbeat.
This seems typical of those who see Obama as a prophet that will save us from ourselves by loading us with government regulations that take away our personal responsibility for our lives. If you cannot disprove the evidence against "your man" you whine and cry and jump up and down like a child, throw a tantrum, hold your breath, and hope mommy and Uncle Sam give in to your wishes and treats you like the irresponsible child you are.
Wednesday, June 25th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
No Wade, what I'm saying is that the majority of Americans reject these sad arguments and this candidate of yours. There is no need to rebut anything. My candidate IS better than your candidate and that's why he will win. You are supposed to feel the same way about McCain but you don't so are reduced to whining or crying yourself. All you have is attack politics. You don't have a candidate you are excited about. You can read all of the posts by UC and all of the comments on this conservative site. No one is sticking up for Father Time. All there is is why you should or shouldn't vote for Barack. There are no this is why you should vote for McCain discussions. He's a non-issue as a candidate. That says it all. Elections are all about enthusiasm which equals turnout. John Kerry was not the ideal in 2004 and still almost won. Do you think Barack can improve upon those results? Even if Barack was not the ideal himself, W has all but handed to him anyway. I'm not trying to convince anyone to vote for Barack. That is his job and he is brilliant at it. I could care less if you or any cons miss the boat. It's sailing with or without you. Americans have seen what the republicans are capable of the last 7 years and are sick of it. So when you speak out against Barack as you do it is almost an endorsement of him given your own record. If you praise Father Time it has the opposite effect as well. Maybe that's why we don't hear a peep when it comes to McCain. It is a masterful political stroke by "my man."
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 4:14 am
When President Clinton ran for office, his message was that of change. Back then, Bill Clinton seemed like someone who would bring a fresh new "Charismatic" approach to the white house and liberals jumped on board--well sort of. With out Ross Perot, Bill Clinton may not have been elected, but this takes make off point.
The political machine in Washington forces everyone to get a long to go a long. President Bush said it best, to assume some brilliant argument is going to convince people they were wrong all along is naive.
The only change liberals seem to want is one from a Democracy to that of Socialism. In the end, Senator Obama's message of change is to take from the rich and give to the poor. I, for one, don't believe a Robinhood approach is any different than the way the Democrats party leadership have run things for the last 50 years.
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 4:21 am
What's missing between "simonesdad2008" and "Wade" is the hard fact that, just as in our current fuel fiasco, each of us needs to connect the dots. I remember the first lines at the pumps with griping, complaining, etc. yet each of us kept pumping and driving. Even now with unprecedented prices, we continue to raise the 'break-even point' when we will get serious, buy a bike, take the bus, trade in our SUV for a 4 cylinder, turn off the lights, etc. (An aside, how about Al Gore spending enough for 230 homes AFTER an energy re-do) Politics is no different. Ask yourself some basic questions, who besides the presidential presumptive nominees, are running for office not just federally but in your state and local elections? What issues are you passionate about, can articulate, and are willing to do something about besides just blogging, etc? Do you know where each candidate stands, (their record and not just what they say!!), do they align with your values, care about your country? Check out such web sites as http://www.votesmart.com, the roundtable or whatever in your state - know that you are responsible to vote intelligently across the board from dog catcher to president. Do the letters ENDA, LOST, and other such acronyms mean anything? Will your candidate put responsible judges in at the local, state and federal level (they and their actions last longer than the president/official who nominated them)? We, the people, are the government! If party holders don't represent you, petition or whatever to get them out of office. End such killing of our current generation (white and black unborn citizens) by abortion (50 plus million since Roe v. Wade), etc. This 'rant' could go on but you get my drift. Failure to do so could bring a substantial change to the USA to such things as the American Union,(Canada, US and Mexico - http://www.TransTexasCorridor.com) the UN controlling the seas (Laws of the Sea Treaty), and rampant Christian criminalization (The Criminalization of Christianity by Janet Folger, http://www.f2a.org)
Dave.
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 5:37 am
My candidate IS BETTER THAN YOUR CANDIDATE BECAUSE HE IS BETTER. Backing up my point simonesdad2008, no valid argument, just may candidate is better than yours because he is. You have fallen for Obama's slick tongue. Is that all it takes to elect a president? Obama sounds good even though his speech has no substance, jut flowers, and that is what he is captivating everybody with, flowers.
Remember, the more a candidate promises something the less he/she understands the presidency. The president is not all powerful. Remember that group called Congress? They are the folks that control the President's power.
And before you assume anything, I never said I was voting for McCain or that I like the guy. Neither candidate is fit for president.
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 5:48 am
Do you Remember (Panama) Mireya was "loosing at the end of the 10 oposition candidates list on 1994... and... 1999?" (her statistics where taken out at the beginning of campaign, because "arnulfists where suposedly extincted before may 94 ")?...
They said "panama loves prd", "and castrocuba", "and hates USA, Bush"
Remember Bush was "loosing all the way" and john skerry was "winning?... all the way"?... Bush was re-elected by record voting, on another massive record voting...
Candidates supporters, on left have media machinerie$, politician$, citie$, countie$, "ordinary people", "what asimetric pre invasion civilian army mind-orinted, terror logistics, what's wrong about help castrocuba"s anti-war on Iraq propaganda?, anti-war on Iraq authoritie$?, anti-Bush authorities, anti-Mireya authorities?, fidelcastro's accusation against oppositors (of terrorists) using Panama&Miami's governments?, no God at schools, sexgangland, paralegafesting$?...
"What can do local attorney"?, why are the feds and cias doing the job "local authoritie$" never did?, like anabelenmontes or carlosalvarez jobs? network$?, Pentagon's clinton era made castro spy and, another, on miamidade police "psicologist&recluter, both, 1st big 911 arrests?...
"What about coyotechildren&family?...
And, at the end: terror legal curtain, self-censured, local authority $tabli$ment, mental programing, selective prosecution, always helping castro, chavez, manuel noriega, iran, hamas, anti war on Iraq...
the bottom: local attorney says (rules) "I can't do anything without proves, if you "have the (public) proves, trail them"... whit already mega$candal$, permanently, feds in, cia now comming in...
local attorney's denial covers and helps paralegaland, related to terror governments, farc laundrie$, coyoteland,
no Godschoolgangland, to continue marching&chanting inland, "rebuilding" their $anctuarie$, saying "you" accuse mayor, superintendent, well, "do my job: prove it", and spend bill$ on attorney$, against same city attorney$ machinery "$y$tem", terror logistic decades experienced...
Any city on the continent, and globaly, the remaining terror logistic, can be metter, marketed, branded, on specific time and space, on patrons: anti-war on Iraq 2000's oriented minds...
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 7:27 am
BUYING THE PRESIDENCY OF THE U.S. ...
How many of the 1.5 million people who sent $200 to Obama's campaign were black? After all, Obama got 90% of the black vote. Is it possible that a group which comprises about 15% of the population in America could rule the other 85% ... simply by buying the election via contributions from 1.5 million people, in a country of 300 million people?
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Even if every single donation to Barack was from a black person, what's the point? Groups don't "rule" other groups in America (anymore). I think the point you are trying to make is that you are white and you are scared. You are seeing America grow up in front of your very eyes. It's like your teenage son beating you in basketball for the first time and you know he's growing stronger and more confident in himself everyday. You don't want to accept it initially because its only ever been one way and now that's changing. Barack running and winning means more than just winning. This country can finally turn an ugly page. Remember the movie "Back To The Future" There was a scene where Michael J. Fox's character plays with the band. He goes off on this heavy metal riff (because he is from the future) and these kids from the 50's look at him in stunned shock. They have no idea what he is playing. It's just noise to them. He says, "you don't understand, but your kids will love it." I would say that President Obama (yes, get used to it) will have infinitely more compassion for the citizens of this country that are white than the majority of his predecessors had for black citizens. Boo!
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 9:17 am
David Fouser,
I do ride a bike, 20 miles a day weather permitting, I do more than just blog, all my elected officials in the Michigan and DC House and Senates are familiar with me. I was also took part in getting rid of MTBE (a fuel additive) from gasoline here in Michigan.
I do not ride a bus, there is no bus service or MTA available for me to get me from home to anywhere, and work is 30 miles away. Bikes and MTA services are great in big cities, but not all 300,000,000 Americans live in areas that have bus or MTA service.
There are many of us here in America that have been told (since Jimmy Carter was president) that we need to make sacrifices. Quite frankly, I am tired of being told that when our ineffective politicians don't make any sacrifices themselves (Al Gore, Barack Obama to name two).
Until 4 cylinder cars can safely haul a family, until hybrids are more affordable and actually get the mileage they are touted to get, I will continue to drive my current LEV (Limited Emissions Vehicle) with the AC turned off and the windows open, and I will ride my bike when and where it is feasible for me to do so.
That is all the sacrifice I will make, unless my freedom itself is threatened.
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 9:29 am
So what you are saying 'dad, is that blacks are only voting for Obama because he is black and that means America is growing up? I have been beating this drum since Obama and Clinton announced they were running and the main stream media kept asking is America ready for a black or female president, that drum being;
If we in America have to ask if we are ready for a black or female president, it is a sign that we are not ready and America is not growing up and needs to grow up. If that is the whole basis to vote for someone, we are just as screwed up as our politicians and the MSM.
Let me make this clear, I don't give a hoot if a president is black or white, male or female. I care about what that person is going to do to for my country. This black issue has to stop! By bringing it up all the time we keep ourselves from overcoming racism. I let my ears do my listening, not my eyes.
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Wade:
"So what you are saying 'dad, is that blacks are only voting for Obama because he is black and that means America is growing up?"
No, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm actually saying is that whites voting for Barack means America is growing up. Some people take an enlightened, measured, intelligent approach to casting a vote. Some people vote R or D because, "My dad was one and my grandfather was one and his father was one"... and so on and so forth. I'd say much more than 90% of McCain supporters are white. Nobody is saying that THEY are voting their race. That seems to only apply to blacks. You can alway ascribe motives or reasons for other people's vote. The only one you can control is your own. Plus no one remembers that more black people supported Hillary Clinton over Obama prior to Iowa (look it up). The crossover happened when people saw that he could win white votes in significant numbers. That was the basketball moment in the driveway for America. But it wasn't just black people (who vote democrat overwhelmingly anyway). It started a movement. In a movement people come out on their own. In a campaign you try to persuade people to come out. The goal of any election is to get more votes than your opponent. Barack Obama, for whatever reason you want to assign to it, has done a better job of attracting voters. In an election season that is the number one focus. People have used lies, fear, dirty tactics and oh by the way, issues to sway voters. People vote for someone who they would drink a beer with. People vote against their own best interests. People vote along ethnic and religious lines. The only reason anyone votes for anyone is completely up to them.
So what you are implying; blind support to neutralize white guilt or a feel good story for black people all at the peril and detriment of the country is fine. Some of it may even be true but don't tell me that every vote for Father Time is a "pure" vote either. There are people today, right now, in 2008, who would never vote for Barack for exactly one reason. That is their right and so is the opposite. Vote your heart and conscience and mind and country. Vote your issues. Vote to participate in the democracy. In the end all we can control is our own vote.
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 10:43 am
"So what you are implying; blind support to neutralize white guilt or a feel good story for black people all at the peril and detriment of the country is fine."
No, read my post again, it is obvious you missed what I am saying which is, people shouldn't vote based on race or gender, if America has to bring it up as an issue it means America is not grown up at all. It is not a matter of voting Republican or Democrat because that is all I vote or the way my family votes. It should be as you said it yourself, "Some people take an enlightened, measured, intelligent approach to casting a vote." Unfortunately, those people are in the minority.
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Wade:
I thought republicans wanted to deregulate everything. What is your obsession with controlling other people's vote or controlling the national conversation about the president? Simply asking the question doesn't mean we are or are not ready. What I read when I read your posts, Wade, is someone who is saying, "Listen to me. I have studied the issues and I know what's best for me and you. If you haven't done the same due diligence, stay out of it. Having a good president is more important than having a black or woman president." Did it ever occur to you that we could have both? It seems like everyday more and more of what dems warned America about regarding W has come to pass with more to come I'm sure. I'd bet good money that no one could have talked you out of that vote in 2000 or 2004. Assuming you did vote for the "compassionate conservative" twice (and correct me if I'm wrong) would you vote for him in this cycle if he were eligible? I'm sure you took the same intelligent approach you are taking now, right? You were wrong then and you are wrong now. It just so happens that the person best suited to run this country, to restore America's rightful place in the world just happens to be black. Him being black may actually facilitate and expedite us gaining some credibility back quicker. That's not saying he doesn't have work to do because he has a huge mess to clean up. Every little bit helps though. What I'm saying is that when Bush wanted to sell his war, HE didn't go up to the UN. Cheney didn't go. Rumsfeld didn't go. Rice didn't go. They sent the only person who had that level of stature and gravitas on the world stage, Colin Powell. They listened and they believed and the US got its wish. Barack has that stature. Sometimes a man's very existence is bigger than his actual deeds. Nelson Mandela comes to mind. To the world a black POTUS is a signal. It's a sign that things can be different. Meanwhile back here at home some people are chalking up Barack's candidacy to Affirmative Action. Is that your position, Wade?
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 11:57 am
What? Wow. Just like the left, twisting everything the right says. I never said anything about controlling anything! I said, if we need to talk about whether or not we are ready for a black or female president, it proves we are not ready. We have too many issues with racism and gender discrimination in this country yet. We need to get over race and gender and vote BASED ON WHO WILL DO THE BEST JOB FOR THIS COUNTRY.
To quote you, "To the world a black POTUS is a signal." Who cares what the WORLD thinks? This is not about the world, this is about the United States of America. I don't care who other countries think I should vote for, especially if it is based on race. I'm note gonna vote for Barack because it is the politically correct thing to do and it will send the world a "sign".
I, and others like me, will vote for whichever candidate based on how we feel which candidate best supports our issues. Who cares whether the president is black or female or both? It is about the right person for the job, PERIOD.
This politically correct bull about sending the world a sign and having to vote for Barack because he is black is what is destroying this country. You want to take away my freedom to vote for anyone that is white because you say it is time for a black president and to send the world a sign.
I will vote for whoever I want whatever race he maybe based on his ability to effectively run this country. Also, read one of my previous posts, I NEVER SAID I WAS GOING TO VOTE FOR MCCAIN. You assume that I am going to walk the party line just because I am Republican.
Have a nice day. Until you can quit twisting my words and ignoring other words, I will not waste another post on you.
Thursday, June 26th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I haven't done this in a long time but I'm going to break you down point by point. I actually agree with the essence of some of your points but I think you are slightly misguided my friend. Will you answer my questions?
1. Did it ever occur to you that the best candidate just happens to be black?
2. Did you vote for Bush twice?
3. Would you vote for him a third time if you could?
4. Is Barack's candidacy and success just Affirmative Action?
Ok to your points...."if we need to talk about whether or not we are ready for a black or female president, it proves we are not ready."
This country is 232 years old. There has been exactly one non protestant president (JFK). Do you think there was a discussion at the time about whether America was ready for a Catholic president? Did the presence of the question mean that we weren't? History says no. What about Romney? Because he is Mormon and we discuss his Mormonism "proves" we are not ready for him? It doesn't make sense. Are you saying the question itself proves something? Existence of these type of questions by themselves does not disqualify America from being ready.
"Who cares what the WORLD thinks? This is not about the world, this is about the United States of America. I don't care who other countries think I should vote for, especially if it is based on race."
First off I said it would help us in the world. Whether you care or not, having the world on our side makes us better off. It makes us stronger. It makes us safer. But you are right, this is about the US. I want a strong country. There is strength in numbers. There is strength in credibility. Barack can manage and organize and optimize and communicate. All you have to do is look at his campaign. Those are all qualities America needs and has been lacking in the last 7 years. I believe your beloved W has taken your, "Who cares what the WORLD thinks" mantra to heart with disastrous results. And if we need to take action anywhere around the world it is better to have the world with us versus what we have now. Barack is the answer for the US AND is a positive sign to the world by extension. They are not mutually exclusive entities.
"I, and others like me, will vote for whichever candidate based on how we feel which candidate best supports our issues. Who cares whether the president is black or female or both? It is about the right person for the job, PERIOD."
I can almost hear the Battle Hymn Republic playing in the background....
"This politically correct bull about sending the world a sign and having to vote for Barack because he is black is what is destroying this country. You want to take away my freedom to vote for anyone that is white because you say it is time for a black president and to send the world a sign."
I've already sort of addressed this but absolutely no one is taking away your freedom. No one is telling you who to vote for. You are perfectly free to be politically correct or politically incorrect or politically whatever. You can freely state that you would never vote for a black candidate or woman candidate or a white candidate or any candidate for whatever reasons are important to you. No one will arrest you. Your freedom is intact. Your right to vote is intact. Political correctness is an abstract concept. That's it. If you choose to be swayed by it, that's on you. There is no correctness police or jail. These are ghosts getting you all fired up and "destroying this country."
You have stated that you won't waste another post but at least answer the questions. THE QUESTIONS!!!! (to quote John McEnroe) Ha! Ha!
Friday, June 27th, 2008 at 2:52 am
@ Simonsdad
1. Did it ever occur to you that the best candidate just happens to be black?
No because he is not. He is going to take this Country in a direction that we will never recover from. Look at the issues all of these socialized Countries like Canada and France have. Do you really want to live in a country with sub-par health care, where you have to stand in long lines for any medical issue? Or where a 12 year old can sue her dad for grounding her for posting nude pictures of her self on the internet. Because pal that is the direction Barack is going to take us, and once we go down that path there is no going back. Once you become dependent just like welfare, as a nation there is no way to get away from it.
Also just because a majority of people fall for what Barack is saying does not make him the better candidate. Every one in Germany fell for Hitler, and I don't think that they where happy in the end. And no I'm not saying that Barack is anything like Hitler, just using it as an example that the masses are not always correct.
2. Did you vote for Bush twice?
Yes I did, and I don't regret it at all. Once you look past all of the lies, and half truths that the media has spewed you would see that Bush has done great things in the face of very hard times. After the being directly attacked Bush has made sure that it has not happened again. While you may disagree with with the war in Iraq, I have been over there and I know the truth that the media will never tell you. that the majority of the people want us there, and are very happy with the direction that there own country is going in. We are not there stealing oil, and we are not rapping and pillaging. We have brought freedom to a nation that has been ruled with an Iron fist, where at any time a citizen could be murdered by there own Government. Not everything went perfect, and there where plenty of mistakes just like there are in all wars, but at least we took a stand, and said we will not stand by and watch it continue.
3. Would you vote for him a third time if you could?
NO because no many should be in power for to long not matter how good they are. Every nation should have change in their leaders to help keep things fresh. This however does not mean that Barack is the right change, nor does it mean that McCain is the right change.
4. Is Barack's candidacy and success just Affirmative Action?
Not sure what you are trying to say here, but Affirmative Action, like public housing, and welfare has done nothing but make generation after generation of dependent people. People who are dependent on the Government and special rules to survive. Sometimes in life in order to figure out how to live a safe and secure life you have to stumble and fall, get up and try it again. But when the Government gets into balling everyone out, or holding there hands, the become dependent on that, and forget how to survive on their own.
We are never going to agree, you have your views and I have mine. I believe in the power of the people to self govern, and generally take care of themselves and each other with out the need for big government. I believe that people are more willing to give the charity when there money is not forced from them by the Government and redistributed. This past year again despite all that is going on American's gave more to charity then any other year.
This world is not always a nice place, and it is not always fair. The people will only take so much, and when the Government starts to try to rule the peoples every move, the people will revolt. There is nothing wrong with this Country if you are willing to work hard, and you make sound financial decisions they will do just fine.
Friday, June 27th, 2008 at 3:57 am
Sweet mercy, simon, that you can express such odd views as though they were the normalcy is very frightening. That Obama can unite the people as he has is a BAD THING. There are reams of substantial controversy surrounding his character and beliefs; that people overlook those controversies because of his color or his silver tongue is a BAD THING. It shows that people aren't examining the candidates.
Clinton would have been a better candidate for one reason: she has no ties to radical racism. All conservatives would have against her is her liberal ideology, which is the way it should be. As it is now, though, we fear that a freakin' segregationist is going to be elected president.
Friday, June 27th, 2008 at 5:13 am
Jarrod,
"Once you look past all of the lies, and half truths that the media has spewed you would see that Bush has done great things in the face of very hard times."
So I guess Father Time has bought into the lies and half truths of the media, right? He is running as fast and as far away from W as he can. There is not a republican out there that wants any part of the Bush legacy. Were they brainwashed by the media too? I'm going to let you own that one, my friend. I'll be sure to revisit it every time you I respond to you. I'll focus on your use of the word "great." But you are right, you have your views and I have mine. When you get here, I'll be the first to welcome you to the 21st century.
Reaper,
"That Obama can unite the people as he has is a BAD THING."
Really? The fact that you see my views as "odd" is a badge of honor. What's odd is your desire for a divided country. What's odd is the idea that conservatives are AGAINST a segregationist. I would think you cons would be flocking to him if that is what you really thought he was.
Friday, June 27th, 2008 at 9:08 am
See, you only took issue with my comment because you don't consider Obama's ties to black liberation, racism, and segregation bad traits. You must understand, though, that those of us who don't desire those traits in our president find it utterly astonishing that anybody would fly his banner. Hence my comment, though I guess since quoting without context is so prevalent, I should have encapsulated my entire thought process into the middle of the sentence. "That Obama can unite people with a decorated history of racism is a BAD THING." Thar, much better.
As for your implying that conservatives are segregationists, liberal ideology contains far more divisive desires. Can you name me some conservative legislation that even makes distinctions based on race?
Friday, June 27th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Jarrod,
I swell with pride as an American as I read your supportive words for our President:
"Yes I did [vote for President G. W. Bush], and I don't regret it at all. Once you look past all of the lies, and half truths that the media has spewed you would see that Bush has done great things in the face of very hard times."
Sir, without knowing your background, I trust that you are serving, or have served our great nation. While we cannot always believe in what our superiors ask of us, we should at the very least trust in their ability to lead. I do not have the luxury of hitching my wagon to the latest fad and trampling over the one that guided me through tumultuous times...those perhaps borne by the "great President of the 90s".
The youth may bring this man of many colors close to winning our most revered office, but our seasoned experience and guidance will pave the way for a future devoid of ignorance and socialist ideals. After all, we live in AMERICA. Please help me spread the word through our armed services that our sacrifices are not in vane; that the lives lost are with purpose; that TRUE AMERICANS have not forgotten.
GOD BLESS AMERICA, LAND THAT I LOVE. Stand beside her, and guide her, Thru the night with a light from above.
Friday, June 27th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Fear not the ignorant that attempt to derail our values and ethics! Stay true to the God-given rights that established our nation and embrace your values. Ours is the time of great things. When we win the day, our nation will show the Marxist and Socialist factions that our liberty is not for sale, nor bargain, nor trade. Peddle your wares elsewhere Mr Obama...America is not buying.
Saturday, June 28th, 2008 at 3:59 am
Double standards. This is what I have heard throughout. Barack gets a pass because of PC or the media or whatever half baked theory thrown out there, hoping, praying it will stick. He gets a a pass for being a liberal or Muslim (that's my favorite because everyone knows how liberal the Muslims are). With that in mind, here is the free ride Mr. Obama enjoys...
If Barack Obama received a government check every week of his adult professional life as McCain has, you would be reinforcing this as proof of his desire for big government. Add in that this is true of his father and grandfather and you cons would be having a field day. McCain gets a pass.
If Barack Obama left his first wife and three kids behind to marry a woman nearly 20 years younger one month after his divorce was final, you would say that Mr. Obama is reinforcing racial stereotypes about black fathers. Never mind, McCain's self admitted "indiscretions" outside of his first marriage. Never mind the now famous c-word comment directed at his current wife. Barack would be excoriated. McCain gets a pass.
If you took Mrs. McCain's bio and switched it with Mrs. Obama's, Barack couldn't even consider running for dog catcher let alone president. I can just see the headlines now, "Black woman steals drugs from charity, enters rehab." Add in a convicted felon for a dad and it's case closed. McCain and his wife get a pass.
The truth is Father Time gets lots of passes mainly because he was a POW. One could argue Barack gets passes because of skin color. Let's call it a draw for the sake of this discussion. Does anyone think Barack Obama even considers running for president with McCain's history? And if you say Barack doesn't have any experience let me tell you a little story about an alcoholic lost child of privilege who was the Governor of Texas once upon a time. Well, once upon a time you voted for him TWICE. McCain gets passes like old white people get passes for calling anyone who isn't white "colored" or worse because back in their day it was socially acceptable. To hell with PC! Infringement on my right to call someone the n-word is destroying this country. McCain gets a pass for being technologically illiterate in 2008. This is a man who doesn't know how to use a computer. A computer! OK, but what about a Blackberry? No! If Barack Obama attempted to run for president and said he did not know how to use a computer, how far do you think he would get? I can hear the cons now saying he was unqualified and the racists reinforcing stereotypes about blacks and learning capacity. Old Man River gets a pass.
Yeah those darn double standards......
Saturday, June 28th, 2008 at 8:02 am
@Rick
"Fear not the ignorant that attempt to derail our values and ethics! Stay true to the God-given rights that established our nation and embrace your values. "
What are these "values and ethics" that you apparently have in your fragile grip? What "ignorant" person(s) are trying to remove them from you? (Actually, they must be pretty clever, these unknown persons- to wrestle away from your mind what you claim to be firm convictions of some sort).
"God-given rights"??? - just what are these? ...and while you are at it, explain please how you figure this god of yours decided to establish this nation? Just how did this come about?
... "our liberty is not for sale" ...no sir-ee...you fear freaks just give it away and this does not even seem to bother you in the slightest.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."~ Ben Franklin
"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology." ~Thomas Jefferson
“You can protect your liberties in this world only by protecting the other man's freedom. You can be free only if I am free.�~Clarence Darrow
Saturday, June 28th, 2008 at 6:16 pm
@Toe
Atheist or agnostic, doesn't really matter young man. You have miles to go before you understand the gift of liberty that you perch atop of in these forums. If you must ask me why God blessed our great nation, or why we were granted unalienable rights, you have obviously not spent enough time in civics class. Then again, what with the judicial push to eliminate values in schools, you might have spent more time learning about lesbian lifestyles...might I suggest a semester of political science? Get back with me when you grow up and actually understand the principles on which our great nation was formed, k?
Saturday, June 28th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
your failure to answer any of my questions is not at all surprising.
i am neither young nor a man. why don't you enroll in a civics course to discover a few basic principles - you are quite obviously ignorant of many facts regarding the founding of this country, the three branches of government and the thought behind this...then, you might attend a PFLAG meeting to have some sensitivity training and understanding ...perhaps, someday, if you are man enough, you will be able to address your fears and phobias- in the meantime, the rest of the sane and rational thinkers will be moving along without you. not to worry, little man, there's hope for you- it's called: education. give it a go.
Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 2:47 am
simones, nowhere has anyone indicated that McCain is an ideal candidate, or that he is without blemish; in fact, quite the contrary has been stated. He is merely enjoying the "lesser of two evils" status.
However, marital infidelity is obviously not that big an issue to either side. Remember Mr. Clinton? He didn't exactly get lynched for that one, so why you think McCain's version of infidelity (no civil wrong done, mind you. He did it the right way...as right as you can be with something like that, at least) should be considered an issue is rather confusing.
How you also compare that to questions of Obama's allegiance to his country and his open ties to racism is also confusing.
...and you're finally saying that Obama would be raked through the coals if he couldn't use a computer? Are you daft, man?
toe, you may be one of those who was raised by persons trying to de-emphasize Christianity's role in the formation of our government, but it an immutable fact: we were established as one nation UNDER GOD with a system of morality and ethical structure virtually mirroring Judeo-Christian values. Like it or not, those are our roots under which this nation has THRIVED, and those are what many would like this nation to go back to.
Our liberties are in danger; the very sovereignty of the Constitution is coming under attack; entities such as the ACLU seek to undermine it every day by injecting foreign systems of judgement into its evaluation; eventually they seek for international law to supersede the Constitution. Others seek to simply rewrite it; these such attacks come from both "sides," but they amount to the same thing: they want the government to assume control of everything. Some want a nanny state, others want a police state. Different though they may seem, they're the same, and we must fight them both.
Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 4:30 am
reaper, i should have known that rick needed a spokesperson-
as for the constitution coming under attack, yes it is- and for this sad fact and the guilty party, you no need look any further than yourself for the blame as you turn a blind eye in your support for this current administration and it's constant and continuing impeachable offenses and erosion of the constitution.
The ACLU has maintained the position that civil liberties must be respected, even in times of national emergency.
As much as i disagree with your political leanings and the phony "patriots" here- (those of you who think nationalism and patriotism are the same thing- those who say "america, love it or leave it", those of you who spout hate for those with a mind-set, or color, or sexual preferance, or religion other than yours... as repugnant as you are, the ACLU will even stand up for you and your right to stand on your flimsy soapbox and spew rubbish.
carry on.
Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 5:34 am
If I hadn't read it with my own two eyes, no one would have been able to convince me that Mr. Reaper, conservative republican, is explaining away marital infidelity. I thought you guys were the family values party. I only used it as an example of a double standard, not as an issue. Had this been Barack's story and his explanation was, "I did it the right way...well as right as I could with something like that" all of you cons would be up on your sanctimonious soap boxes. Given the fake smears that are already out there, what do you think you guys would be doing with this one if it were true like it is with Good Time Johnny?
My how the cons rigid discipline and standards have fallen. Lesser of two evils? You guys haven't eased up on any of your issues since you relaxed the bow tie rule. Now you want to put Good Time Johnny in the Oval Office because he is the lesser of two evils? Maybe not you, Reap, but your fake conservative (really just run of the mill republican) friends do. None of you have the stones to vote for Bob Barr. He is by far the MOST conservative candidate in the race. And don't give me that "he can't win" crap. Real conservatives stick by their principles even in the face of overwhelming unpopularity. Your boy Rick says Bush has done a "great" job. Now either he is off of his meds or he is sticking by his man through thick and thin. I'll say he is loyal, but McCain? You cons are going to sell out for John McCain? I don't blame you for trying to tear down Barack. That's your job (sort of) and you cons follow orders like nobody's business. What troubles me is that you tear down Barack in the name of a candidate you, yourself don't even believe in. That's not principle. In fact it's the opposite of principle. Live up to your conservative principles or stand aside. Make a case FOR someone, anyone instead of just attacking for attacks sake.
Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 6:16 am
FYI, toe, I'm on the fence about the current administration; I'd enumerate but that'd just dilute the dialog with other stuff you'd feel the need to respond to (a problem I'm all too guilty of myself). As I said, though, the attacks on the Constitution come from both ends, and Bush is obviously leaning to the police state end. The ACLU, however, only protects civil liberties when it serves their erosive ends. They have stated flatly that they want international law to have weight against the Constitution. Of course this will only give you pause if you oppose things such as the ICC and the UN.
simonesdad, I personally view marital infidelity as a disqualifier for the presidency, and I would vote for someone based on his or her views, but...the system simply doesn't work that way, sadly. It is hardly my choice who is nominated, so I am left with three choices: vote for a third party, which will only dilute the Republican voter base, not vote at all which will have the same effect, or vote Republican. Since my goal is to keep Obama out of the White House, voting for McCain is my only option, marital infidelity or no.
I like the sinking ship analogy, though, but you got it a little wrong. America is the ship; we will stay with her 'til the end. We simply want the best captain we can muster; and at the very least we want one we can be sure won't lead to her sinking.
My question to the liberal camp is why haven't you left yet? Europe is your utopia, isn't it? They have open borders! Go there! Live out your socialist, welfare state dreams! Let America be the bastion of conservatism like it has historically been. Some of you have even threatened to do that, but you haven't! We conservatives have no utopia. Are we not entitled to one?
Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 6:26 am
Ooo, I apparently fabricated the sinking ship analogy. Must've read it somewhere else...
Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 7:19 am
why should i leave.? .you are in the minority... your support for minority rights is even more important than ever. don't lose the ACLU's phone number.
Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Conservatives are in the minority? That is patently untrue; partiality sways cyclically between Democrats and Republicans because both parties completely screw everything up when they're in power, but liberalism and conservatism are only tentatively linked to the two parties; I'd say virtually everybody except those who live in heavily metropolitan areas and those who inherited wealth actually lean toward conservatism. We're only transitioning to Democratic control because...well, Republicans completely screwed everything up, at least in the eyes of popular opinion.
Sunday, June 29th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
@toe:
I owe you an apology. Unfortunately, I am not accustomed to a woman's prose oozing with such disdain and derision, which is why I confused you for a male. For that, I am indeed sorry.
Taking you to task on your recommendation that [I] "attend a PFLAG meeting to have some sensitivity training and understanding"; before you decide what another should do to meet you on some middle ground (that you've established), perhaps you should attend the same training that you recommend simply to learn the basic components of human relations and interpersonal communications. Your vicious attacks on anyone questioning your arguments certainly proves that you lack a fundamental understanding of both sides of an issue. The fact that your words are seething with contempt only supports this argument.
It is certainly understandable that in this genre, you feel free to attack at will, without regard for the competency and background of your assailant.
God forgives you for your transgressions, as I do I. Have a blessed Monday.
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 3:52 am
Wow I guess I should not have taken the weekend off from Blogging.
I love some of the points that have been brought up, but rather then talking about them one at a time let me just add some thought to it all. First it seems to me that Toe, has a warped sense of liberty and freedom. In America you can be what ever you want, the police are not going to come knocking at your door because your gay or lez, or transgender. The fact of the matter these groups that promote Gay and lez parades, and feel the need to stick it in everyone’s face I take issue with. I could care less who you sleep with or what you do in your bedroom as long as it does not involve children, and I DON"T HAVE TO FUCKING HEAR ABOUT IT. It is called decency. I won't tell you what I did last night, as long as I don't have to hear about what you did. Gay bars have been around a long time, your into that go to one. Marriage is a Religious think, since a person is gay, and 9 time out of 10 take exception to God, then why they would want to get married is beyond me.
I have no issue with a person being Gay, the Bible is my guide, and it says love all man, because we are all sinners. Being gay does not make one less of a person, it just makes them sinners like the rest of us.
Moving on. I agree with the lesser of two Evils analogy, in this particular case it is very true. I have said for years that they should put a non of the above category, and with enough not of above selections we do the thing over with two new candidates, but since we know that is not going to happen, I have to vote for the guy who is not going to take us down the path to socialism. If I wanted that I would just move to Canada. Yes for who ever said it before, YOU DON�T LIKE THIS COUNTRY, THEN GO FIND A NEW HOME. There are plenty of hard working Mexican’s that would die to have your place. Maybe we should start doing a one for one swap. You don’t like this country, or you don’t want to work then we trade you out for one hard working Mexican that would love to have a job, and be a citizen.
The fact of the matter is that it seems Republicans can at least admit that McCain is not a true conservative, and that he is nothing more then a RINO (Republican In Name Only). But we also know that at the end of the day we don’t have a lot of choice, and so it is a matter of picking the one that is not going to destroy this country before true leadership can be found.
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 4:33 am
rick,
find me one of my "vicious attacks". find a statement of mine here that represents this accusation of yours. if you believe that anyone who stands up to say "you're promogating lies, knock it off!" is vicious... you have more problems than i can list here.
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 4:40 am
jarrod, why is it that you bible-thumpers are so foul mouthed? and where is this "chrisitan" brotherly love that you claim to have? what part of you actually lives what you claim to believe? and do you spend all of your days and nights in your bedroom engaging in sexual activity? is this why you can only think of gays in these terms?
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 6:44 am
I ain't Jarrod, but I can say that if we have to quote you in order to point out vicious attacks, you obviously don't construe them as such in the first place so it is pointless. I have certainly seen what I have previously called "verbal diarrhea" in gross excess from most of the commentators on this blog, present company included. Heck, I may have slipped some in myself, though I have taken pains to avoid it. BUT, to assert that someone here is openly lying is downright duplicitous. We're all being honest to the best of our ability.
As for Christian decorum, I've always maintained that the best Christians are the people you'd never know were such; those who lead by example rather than pontificate on a pedestal. It is in that spirit that I can safely disregard those who preach hate as non-Christians, because it goes against the spirit of the religion.
As for "our" collective beef with gays, "they" always seem to deify themselves. As with Christians, the best gays are the ones you don't know are gay. However, there's a movement that declares on a mountaintop that they are gay, and that they DEMAND EQUAL RIGHTS as though they weren't allowed to shop in heterosexual stores and drink from heterosexual water fountains. It is endlessly irritating, and many maintain that a developing child doesn't need that discourse when he or she hasn't even matured sexually yet. Men are built to have sex with women, and that should be declared the norm until such time that mother nature decides to change the paradigm. If a child grows up with the men + women equation and still prefers same sex company, then so be it.
As for marriage, it is an institution of religion which the government has no right to define. That is one aspect of the separation of church and state that has merit; if the government wants to lawfully respect a religious institution, it must do so equally to all religions...which would allow a frighteningly wide array of horrible combinations. The solution? Use civil unions and strictly define them however you wish; allow them between a man and a woman or just between a pair of consenting adults -- I don't really care which -- and respect marriages from any religion as civil unions so long as they lawfully conform to the definition. For those who still fall outside of the lawful civil union, allow civil partnerships whereby shared property and visitation rights exist between all members therein, and perhaps remove all tax exemptions from them.
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 6:53 am
JarrodM,
Take the week off.
"Marriage is a Religious (thing), since a person is gay, and 9 time out of 10 take exception to God, then why they would want to get married is beyond me."
Marriage is a function of government. You can be married in City Hall, in your back yard, on the beach or anywhere you want including a church. A Justice Of The Peace can marry you or ship captain or judge or mayor or your religious leader. What you CAN'T do is get married without a marriage license. That comes from the government. That license entitles you to certain benefits and rights recognized by business and industry as well as the government. Yes, it has religious connotations. The Pope could preside over your wedding but without that piece of paper from your town or state, you are just living together.
I'm just cherry picking here. Your whole rant tells me you should have taken the whole week off as well. You don't stand for anything. You call yourself a conservative but you have sold out to John McCain? Maybe for the price of your vote he will come to your house and tell you to F*** Off or call your wife the c-word since you love profane language so much. I never dreamed the end of conservatives as a viable constituency would come at the hand of McCain.
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 7:06 am
I think I hear an echo, simonesdad. Have our lengthy explanations of our support for McCain not satisfied you or are you simply trying to bait conservatives to vote for a 3rd party, thus drawing votes away from McCain and giving Obama a leg up on him?
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 7:35 am
Reap,
I can't get anything past you...and I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for those crazy conservative kids.
Seriously, I'm going to hammer you guys on this. I am sick of you cons and your holier than thou, sanctimonious, self righteous garbage. You are sell outs just like the rest of us. Yes, I include myself. The difference is, I'm not going to tell you how to live your life or claim that I'm a super patriot and you are a traitor. You can sleep with and marry whomever you want. I can't say for sure if you are going to heaven or hell when you leave this earth. I do believe it is in your hands though. If I disagree with you or have a different point of view, I'm not going to assign some sinister motive to your beliefs. Live and let live, my friend. I respect(ed) conservatives discipline. You guys are a tenacious lot. When I see the one thing I actually admired about you guys go by the wayside, it's sad. When it's John McCain that got you to do it, it makes me think you are phonies. As I said, I agree with about 5% of what you guys stand for but I always believed YOU believed it. Now that's gone.
As an aside, people who self-identify as conservatives (or liberal for that matter) always rang false to me anyway. I believe people are a bit conservative and a bit liberal as well. It depends on the particular issue. You would call me liberal (among many other choice words, I'm sure) but I'm a dad too. That's how I identify myself first and foremost. Ask my daughter if she thinks I'm liberal. I'm always going against the grain with the other parents in her class and I know for a fact there are some "conservatives" among them. So I have been seeing your ranks beginning to break, first hand, for a while now.
Too much personal stuff, I know....back to the bashing!
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 8:25 am
See, you're doing what experts call "grossly overgeneralizing the population." But that is a common affliction, so it's not exactly a big deal. What I do find ironic is this, "holier than thou, self righteous garbage" you attribute to conservatism; you apparently fail to realize that the socialism that the left wishes to impose on America is holier than thou, self righteous garbage incarnate. They believe they know best, and they want to force everybody to conform by law. Affirmative action, welfare, open borders, and this anti religious undercurrent all seek to impose conditions on everybody because "they" know best. You know what? Conservatives, as you say, do the same thing. We don't want gay people groping each other in the streets (we don't particularly care for heterosexuals doing it either; we like to keep that stuff behind close doors); we don't like seeing dictatorial regimes lopping heads off like it was some kind of competition. The only semantic difference I see is that conservatives don't make a damned law in effort to correct every perceived wrong in society.
Just for kicks, though, what have I done that you consider a holier than thou attitude?
Monday, June 30th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Reap,
Holier than thou and anti religious? So now we are pretzels too. Yeah, it's a generalization. How gross it is depends on your perspective. Affirmative Action, welfare. We will never agree on it. Some segments of society need help. Most fairly middle class families are a missed paycheck or two from being homeless. We are rich enough as a country to help people when they fall. Do some abuse the system? Absolutely. Do we throw the whole thing out? Of course not.