Do I have this straight?
 

Do I have this straight?
A friend sent me the following email: (Please excuse the "all caps." This is the way it came.)

HIS FATHER WAS A BLACK AFRICAN MUSLIM FROM KENYA. WE HAVE
SEEN PICTURES OF HIS AFRICAN FAMILY.

HIS MOTHER WAS A WHITE AMERICAN ATHEIST FROM KANSAS. WHERE
ARE THE PICTURES OF HIS AMERICAN FAMILY?

HIS FATHER DESERTED HIS MOTHER WHEN HE WAS ONLY TWO YEARS
OLD AND WENT BACK TO AFRICA BY WAY OF HARVARD UNIVERSITY.
HOW? WAS HIS FATHER WEALTHY?

HIS MOTHER MARRIED AN INDONESIAN MUSLIM AND THEN MOVED TO
JAKARTA WHERE HE WAS ENROLLED IN A MUSLIM SCHOOL.

WHEN HE REACHED HIGH SCHOOL AGE HIS MOTHER SENT HIM TO
HAWAII TO BE WITH HIS WHITE GRANDPARENTS AND HE WAS PUT
INTO AN EXPENSIVE PRIVATE SCHOOL. HE LATER WENT TO HARVARD
UNIVERSITY. HOW? WERE HIS GRANDPARENTS RICH?

HE LIVES IN A $1.4 MILLION HOUSE OBTAINED THROUGH A DEAL
WITH A WEALTHY FUNDRAISER. HOW?

HE ‘WORKED’ AS A CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST IN CHICAGO.
HE HAS NEVER HELD A PRODUCTIVE JOB OR RECEIVED A PAY CHECK
THAT WAS NOT GOVERNMENT-FUNDED AND/OR TAXPAYER SUPPORTED.

THE PRESIDENCY IS NOT A CIVIL RIGHTS POSITION, NOR IS IT
SUBJECT TO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION SET ASIDES; ON-THE-JOB
TRAINING WON’T CUT IT.

HE ENTERED POLITICS AT THE STATE LEVEL AND THEN THE
NATIONAL LEVEL WHERE HE HAS MINIMAL EXPERIENCE.

HE IS PROUD OF HIS ‘AFRICAN HERITAGE’ (A FATHER
WHO GOT A GIRL PREGNANT AND DESERTED HER).

WHERE IS THE PRIDE IN HIS ‘WHITE HERITAGE’? (A
MOTHER WHO FLAUNTED CONVENTION AND DID NOT BELIEVE IN GOD).

SOME MIGHT THINK THERE WAS NOT MUCH TO BE PROUD OF EITHER WAY.

HE BELONGS, AND HAS BELONGED FOR OVER 20 YEARS, TO AN
‘AFRO-CENTRIC’ CHURCH IN CHICAGO THAT HATES WHITES,
HATES JEWS, AND BLAMES AMERICA FOR ALL THE WORLD’S
PERCEIVED FAULTS. (INCLUDING CREATING THE AIDS VIRUS IN
ORDER TO INFLICT IT ON AFRICANS).

HE REPEATEDLY WHITEWASHES THE PASTOR, HIS CHURCH AND THE
MEMBERS WHO CHEERED AFTER HEARING VITRIOLIC TIRADES AGAINST
AMERICA.

HE COULD NOT CONFRONT HIS PASTOR BUT HE WANTS US TO BELIEVE
HE CAN CONFRONT NORTH KOREA AND IRAN? YEAH
RIGHT! !

DURING HIS VERY BRIEF TIME IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE HE
HAS MANAGED TO AMASS THE NUMBER ONE ULTRA LIBERAL VOTING
RECORD OUT OF THE ONE HUNDRED MEMBERS.

HE HAS VOTED CONSISTENTLY FOR BIGGER GOVERNMENT AND HIGHER
TAXES. HE HAS VOTED FOR BIG ENTITLEMENTS AND LEGISLATION
THAT WOULD SEVERELY CURTAIL AMERICA’S ABILITY TO FIGHT
TERRORISM AND TO PROTECT OUR BORDERS AND OUR NATIONAL
INTERESTS AROUND THE WORLD.

BUT, HE IS A GOOD ORATOR. ISN’T THAT A COMFORT?

YEAH, I THINK I SEE HOW WELL HE COULD UNITE THE COUNTRY.

I THINK THE TRUTH IS THAT HE HOPES NO ONE WILL PUT THE
PIECES TOGETHER.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN LET ME INTRODUCE YOU TO OUR NEW
CHIEF PILOT. HE HAS NEVER FLOWN AN AIRPLANE, IN FACT HE HAS
NEVER EVEN SAT IN THE COCKPIT, BUT HE SAYS HE HAS RIDDEN ON
PLANES BEFORE. WE ARE SURE HE WILL GUIDE US SAFELY THROUGH
THE STORMS WE MAY ENCOUNTER ON THIS FLIGHT.

PEOPLE WHAT ARE YOU THINKING? HAVE YOU NEVER HEARD THE
STORY ABOUT THE WOLF HIDING IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING SO HE
CAN DESTROY THEM FROM WITH-IN? THE HAND WRITING IS ON THE
WALL; DO YOU NOT HAVE EYES TO SEE IT?

THINK LONG AND HARD BEFORE YOU VOTE FOR THIS GUY OBAMA!

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

WELL SAID!!!!! Hopefully others will think about the qualifications this man has to become our President.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

STOP CRYING-----Get used to it

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

No, not well said.

Inflammatory and inaccurate. If you watched the televised presentation last night on CNN with both Senators McCain and Obama you would realize that both men love this country dearly.
Who their parents were, or what they did, is irrelevant to the candidates' obvious desire to do good for our beloved nation, whether you agree with their positions or not.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

No, not well said.

Inflammatory and inaccurate. If you watched the televised presentation last night on CNN with both Senators McCain and Obama you would realize that both men love this country dearly.
Who their parents were, or what they did, is irrelevant to the candidates' obvious desire to do good for our beloved nation, whether you agree with their positions or not.
__________________________________________________ ________________---

Curious...what part is inaccurate ??

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

If you watched the CNN show from Rick Warren's Saddleback Church last night, both Senators have admitted to moral mistakes in their lives - youthful involvement in drugs, a failed marriage, etc. I admire their honesty.
What I find inaccurate about the earlier email is that Senator Obama has confronted his pastor and criticized the very issues that were raised in the email. Yes, his pastor has made hateful speeches - this does not make the entire church racist or bigoted. What more would one expect Senator Obama to do than sever his relationship with his former pastor and church and denounce the divisive speech?
Should this have occured sooner, perhaps. Does he regret this, does Senator McCain regret the situation leading up to his divorce, I believe so.
Have they both been employed in positions paid for by the taxpayers - yes. I have no problem with that, as I find both of them sincere and their differences good for our nation.
However, I do not hold them responsible for the deeds of their parents or pastors. I do respect their owning up to errors in judgment and their desire to work to make this country a better place for all of us.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Have they both been employed in positions paid for by the taxpayers - yes. I have no problem with that
__________________________________________________ _____

I would ask you to read read and read about those folks who influenced Sen Obama in his first years in Chicago as an organizer...and in fact read read about all the folks who he considers his mentors and teachers. This is what scares me about Sen Obama. He is steeped in marxism and socialism. Could he become mainstream instead of far left...maybe.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Yes, I have read extensively about the lives and backgrounds of both candidates. In fact, I had read about all of the potential Democratic and Republican candidates even before it was narrowed down to McCain and Obama - after all, one of them could be our next VP. I am registered as an Independent, so am not party-affiliated with either Democrats or Republicans.
As your suggest, I encourage everyone to read as much as possible, and please do not rely on emails without checking out the facts.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

As your suggest, I encourage everyone to read as much as possible, and please do not rely on emails without checking out the facts.
__________________________________________________ _________________-

THIS I COULD NOT AGREE MORE WITH.

I have been "lectured" on here about my concern on Obama's background as if it does not count....IT DOES......VERY MUCH !

I would also encourage everyone to vote based on the two candidates that are running...no body else

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I hope Obama wins for the simple reason that McCain scares me to no end. I don't want war after war in the Middle East and I do believe that within one year of McCain being in office will put our young men and women fighting in Iran. Afghanistan and Iraq is enough for me. Personally, I wanted Hillary and would have happily voted for her. I won't be happily voting for either of these men -- it hasn't even become a choice of the lesser of two evils, just a very sorry choice.

Regardless of who wins, it would be so nice to if we could vote on the issues of TODAY. I am so tired of the inferences that Obama is a Muslim or a racist or a socialist or a communist or a Marxist. He's denied these things categorically. His actions have shown he is not yet the internet constantly sends the same provocative smear campaign garbage around and around.

Obama has repeatedly denied he is a Muslim and has publicly affirmed his belief and love of God. Enough of the bigoted and racist attacks (and I'm not talking about him being black in any sense).

Obama's "white" family has asked to stay out of the limelight. Obama has actually respected those wishes. It's a shame more politicians can't leave their families in the background -- they're not the ones running for office.

Yes, he's a liberal. So am I. Big deal. Being liberal doesn't mean believing in socialism (I don't, many of my friends don't). Being liberal doesn't mean being anti-military and unpatriotic. I still get chills seeing the U.S. flag raised. I was raised to believe in the good of the military and I still do. I will support our troops anywhere in the world in any fashion I can but I most certainly will not support a government that puts those troops in harm's way for no good reason (and Iraq with its false and specious WMD claims certainly was not a good reason). Being a liberal doesn't make you deaf, dumb nor blind. Nor does it mean you want to see this country forced into bankruptcy to help everyone. It does mean you want to see people get the chance to pull themselves out of poverty. It does mean you want government spending to make sense; to stop some of the pork going to feed little pockets of the country rather than spreadng that pork around to all of the country; to give every child in this country a chance to have the tools to become President; to respect individual rights.

There is no question Obama is inexperienced, which, to me, is the biggest problem with electing him. The fact that his employment has only been at taxpayers' expense is completely and totally irrelevant. Most politicians have never had a job outside of the government.

So, any chance you could try smearing Obama with honest facts and not just innuendo and hearsay about his family (not our business), his former pastor (resolved at this time), his beliefs (if you know of a true fact that makes him anti-American or Muslim, do let us know), etc.?

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

[/quote]

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

After watching Saddleback Civil Forum last night, it became more than apparent that Mr. Obama has no business even running for President let alone winning. Without the teleprompter, he studders and stumbles and doesn't look his interviewer in the eye. The contrast between McCain and Obama in that format was stunningly telling. While I don't agree with some of McCain's thinking on issues that were not explored last night, he definitely is now more choice to lead this country. The operative word is lead.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

IGNORANCE IS BLISS.... :chillout:

bE SURE TO BELEIVE EVERYTHING YOU READ OR HEAR WITH OUT CHECKING OUT THE FACTS...................... SEE WHAT McCIAN IS UP TO AFTER 9/11 .. A WAR MONGER

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Great post by REDWITCH in my opinion !!

I just need to make my own personal views clear as I can since I am not the best at communicating on this medium.

I have no problems with liberals...I was once very very active in the Democratic party. I have never nor will I ever distribute the various emails that circulate, nor have I on purpose allowed one of the various circulating items on the net influence me. I like to make up my own mind.

When the primary campaign began, Sen Obama was a mystery to me...I knew he was great orator.....he can make songs with his words. I began to investigate things about him and what I found was very uncomfortable for me. Snopes is used a lot on this board and I would invite you to check that on what Sen Obama says he has accomplished. My point was I could find no record of accomplishments ON A NATIONAL LEVEL at all. So, in my feeble mind, I needed to know what drives the man, how he was trained, what and who did he associate with.

Again, I have no problem with liberals...I DO have problems with extremism on both sides of the aisle, and Sen Obama represents EXTREME liberalism. It is factual as you requested...it is not innuendo at all. This is factual and easily verified. I, personally, do not want anything close to socialized medicine....I, personally, do not want my taxes to pay for anyone else's failings (THAT DOES NOT MEAN I AM A CRUEL HEARTLESS PERSON) and that is where this is headed. I also do not want to be dismissed everytime I say something that is true by being told how I am being negative or using innuendo or being negative. That is becoming the norm this election. This has nothing to do with race either and I dont want to hear that. I am not FOR war either as folks seem to want to imply when discussing Sen Obama, and I dont believe either candidate is. When you oppose Sen Obama you subject yourself to more claims that you are trying to diffuse on the other end. You are a racist, you are using innuendo, you listen to anything, you are pro war, you are this or that. I, for one, have heard no claims that apply to me...yet.

EVERYTHING is not a lie....EVERYTHING is not innuendo...EVERYTHING is not prompted by racism or whatever the term this week is. Sen Obama's training, voting record, associates and everything else points not to liberallism but EXTREME liberalism.

It is fine to support this....I am just tired of every post saying how there are lies and innuendos, etc about Sen Obama. The implication to me is that you are superior (not referencing specifcally you REDWITCH) and all I do is listen to "stuff". NEWFLASH...I dont think I have said anything about Sen Obama that is not true and credible and nobody has yet to even dispute it

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Bucco, this one's for you!



;D

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Unfortunately, this election is becoming a sporting event rather than the hiring of a public employee.

I have heard more garbage about "electability" and "change" and "inexperience" and "which VP candidate could garner the more votes" than what substantive effort is to occur post-election. Where is there any concern about AMERICA? It's become "my side won" regardless of what constitutes that "side."

No matter what, the slate is clean for each candidate. Sen. Obama is his own person, as Sen. McCain is as well. Neither are Pres. Bush and that administration is down to its last few weeks. The constant trying to link Sen. McCain as a continuum of the Bush administration is as idiotic as claiming Sen. Obama will turn the nation into the first North American Islamic republic. Neither position has any merit and rates as "dirty pool."

The simple question is always the best - if you were hiring the person with your own money (which you are) to perform duties affecting your home (which one will) as your employee (which that person will be) and locking yourself into trusting the person's judgment to do a good job (which you are) and giving the person a four-year exclusive contract to do the job (which is what happens) AND trusting that the person will not be influenced by others with interests of their own (a la the "Party" leadership) despite what may be your best interests, then WHICH CANDIDATE GETS HIRED? This isn't the selection of a king or messiah, but the hiring of an employee by committee.

For a Floridian, this does get a little more complicated when the backers of one candidate have already told Floridians they don't count in the equation, and the candidate has not rebutted that rebuke other than to say "those are the party rules, (and the party does rule)" but you can be worth a half a vote as a toss-in. I prefer to be more than a half-a-vote, and if not equal to others, then to *$^^ with the party!

"Backbone" is probably the most important trait for my employee, and it always has been for anyone I've ever hired. No backbone means no ethics. Not having a backbone when it comes to "the Party" only means not having one to represent or defend my interests.

School is still out, and the party conventions may give the candidates an open forum to show if each is hisr own man or just another party puppet. The "Florida and Michigan" situation, and how it is handled by Sen. Obama will measure his backbone, as how Sen. McCain handles himself before a convention seeking stability and confidence.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

If one uses this forum, or the media as a resource, to determine a candidates qualifications the obvious conclusion would be neither is qualified, experienced, suited to, etc, etc for the job.

Regarding back grounds and how it may or may not influence decisions/directions/etc....not to worry....remember they are POLITICIANS so they will say what ever y'all want to hear to get elected. They will do what ever they want that is in the best interest of their personal/party/special interest groups needs....whether supported by the American majority or not (Just like Pelosi and Bush, eh?).
There is little they as an individual can deliver by them selves.....and it usually takes a couple of years for the winner to find they don't have the Omnipotent power, they dreamed about while campaigning. Therefore it really does not matter who wins.

As for affecting any outcomes in the MidEast......does anybody really believe any American President will influence what they do. The last few centuries there are testimony to that.

Lest we forget....and we all do....9/11...how it affected our leaders state and federal...as well as all the rest of us.....the most memorable visions of the immediate post 9/11 days was the fact there was unity in Washington, albeit brief (they forget faster than the rest of us because they have no power of recollection). When the next act of terrorism on and in America happens, it will most likely be worse than 9/11....the terrorist have promised that and they are not promises like politicians make, they are real as born out by history.

The US at war in another country to protect the US once upon a time was a unifying factor. That no longer exists. Are we destined to unify only when under attack?

As you weigh the candidate of your choice they will continue to remind you in the coming weeks why they are the one to vote for (Oh excuse me, I almost forgot...they will constantly remind you why the other guy is not good for the job).

For me it is not all the political fluff, nor the media, nor the price of gas, or the war in Iraq et al, rebate checks, black, white or other. It is who will be sitting in that seat when the next 9/11-like incident happens... and who the running mate is in case the President is included in the attack. That is what motivates my evaluation.

BTK

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Yes!

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I have no problems with liberals...I was once very very active in the Democratic party. I have never nor will I ever distribute the various emails that circulate, nor have I on purpose allowed one of the various circulating items on the net influence me. I like to make up my own mind.

A Democrat is not a liberal. A liberal can be a Democrat and is more likely to vote the Democratic ticket. A liberal can be a Republican. A true liberal is neither -- we choose who we think will stand for the individual more than for big business and government. I've voted Republican (Nixon and proud of it), Democratic (Carter and not so thrilled with that choice), Independent (Perot and still sorry he didn't win).

I, personally, do not want anything close to socialized medicine....I, personally, do not want my taxes to pay for anyone else's failings (THAT DOES NOT MEAN I AM A CRUEL HEARTLESS PERSON) and that is where this is headed.

Well, I'm one of those people who has been ruined financially because of lack of health insurance. Do I want socialized medicine? Not really. Do I want to see some of affordable, viable national health insurance? You better believe I do! The fact I have no health insurance is not due to a lack of tryng. It is due to the fact I had melanoma (Stage 3) 16 years ago and no company is willing to cover me. No, you're not cruel nor heartless but, unless you've been put into the situation of not being able to get medical coverage through no fault of your own, you have no idea of the difficulties nor of the need of the government to do something about this.

I also do not want to be dismissed everytime I say something that is true by being told how I am being negative or using innuendo or being negative. That is becoming the norm this election. This has nothing to do with race either and I dont want to hear that.

When you go on about the fact that Sen. Obama's father or stepfather was a Muslim and do not mention Obama has categorically denied being Muslim, you are in fact relying on innuendo. To be fearful of every Muslim (there are more moderate Muslims than extremists although it is the extremists that get the press -- what a surprise there, eh?) and to imply Obama will support the extremists is, in my mind, in fact bigoted -- not against the fact Obama is black but the fact that his family background is not quite the norm in America and does smack of racism as well. Sorry, that's how I see it and so long as you mention Obama and his Muslim background you're not going to convince me you're not racist in this matter.

I am not FOR war either as folks seem to want to imply when discussing Sen Obama, and I dont believe either candidate is.

McCain has stated more than once that he sees nothing wrong with the war in Iraq continuing for years. He has also stated more than once that he can foresee attacking Iran. Sounds pretty hawkish to me. I have yet to hear McCain say a word about trying diplomatic channels (not that they'd work in the Middle East -- this is not a recent war there, they've been battling snce before Jesus and will probably be battling long into the future). Even so, diplomatic channels and economic sanctions are still far better options than war.

gf and I have gone round and round about posts exactly like this one time and again. When you object to Obama because of his lack of experience, I have no issues with you and can only say you have a valid point and one that causes me concern. When you say Obama comes from one of the most corrupt political machines (the Chicago Democrats) in the country, again, I have no issue with that beng said other than some good politicians have come from incredibly corrupt political machines. When you say Obama is a liberal (first time I've heard the argument that he is an extremist but I'm sure many believe that), all I can say is, "So what, I'm a liberal and I happen to like me and my ethics and morals." When you comment about the people he has had as frends in the past and who his mentors were, I'm back to so what. One of my mentors in college was Angela Davis. A good friend was Lou Alcindor. I used to run track with Tommie Smith. More than a few of my professors that I truly admired and can say I learned a tremendous amount from were avowed communists. I am not nor have I ever been pro-Black Panther. I've seen communism in action and loathe what it does to individuals.

I wish we had better choices, I truly do. We don't. I do believe both of these men love this country. I'm thoroughly convinced neither man is the right man for the job. The American people are not being given good choices. The last truly great man we had as President was, in my opinion, Harry S. Truman -- he did what he thought was right, not what was politcally expedient. No way can a person today win by being honest, ethical and moral -- they'd be destroyed before they got off the local scene. So, we're stuck with politicians. When I vote, I no longer vote for the man or woman nor even what they say but rather I vote for their choices in advisors and staff. If they're strong, truly intelligent and have some ethics (can't ask for too many but one or two ethical and moral beliefs would be nice), then that is the person who will ultimately get my vote.

Okay, now I'm going to try to stay out of the political forum (again).

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

When you go on about the fact that Sen. Obama's father or stepfather was a Muslim and do not mention Obama has categorically denied being Muslim, you are in fact relying on innuendo. To be fearful of every Muslim (there are more moderate Muslims than extremists although it is the extremists that get the press -- what a surprise there, eh?) and to imply Obama will support the extremists is, in my mind, in fact bigoted -- not against the fact Obama is black but the fact that his family background is not quite the norm in America and does smack of racism as well. Sorry, that's how I see it and so long as you mention Obama and his Muslim background you're not going to convince me you're not racist in this matter.
__________________________________________________ ___________________

The only comment I have REDWITCH is that I NEVER EVER SAID WHAT YOU SAY I SAID...IN NO WAY...DIDNT EVEN IMPLY ANY OF WHAT YOU SAY. The above that you attribute to me is NOT TRUE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM.

If you respond to me...respond to ME...not in general.....

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I did respond to you, Bucco. You basically implied that you agreed with gf's original post. As usual, gf started with Obama's heritage and the , instead you couldn't quite see what was inflammatory about the original post. You yourself have stated that you believe Obama's background counts but did not state which part (if only a part rather than all counts). Sorry, but unless you categorically state that you think at least parts of the original email posted are tripe, garbage or whatever, then you tar yourself with the brush. So, I stand by my comments.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I have, on many occasions in this forum, with as clear as language as you can said this his training and associates were important.....the word background...yes, but NEVER EVER EVER EVER mentioned anything personal about him as far as how he was raised..NOT ONCE. I have spoken ONLY of those people he associated with and never even told you their skin color and doubt if you looked it up to see that they were white.

This is typical however of anyone who supports Sen Obama...if you are not supporting him you are a racist !

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I really don't want to see this turn into an argument. As I said, when you let statements stand about his heritage without stating that you believe they are irrelevant or wrong or whatever, you are basically implying you believe them correct. If you don't, then say so. If you do, then stand by your beliefs.

I do agree there are issues with his political background (so far as I know, the vast majority of the Chicago political machine are white; so are many of his college mentors -- I didn't have to look it up to know those facts). I have no issues with his personal background. Maybe if you prefaced that your issues are with his political friends and supporters, people like me wouldn't think you support the innuendo about his being a Muslim, communist, etc. Sorry, but I'm not going by your past statements (I really do try to stay out of the political forum but sometimes I just get sucked in, so have no idea what you said previously), I'm going by your statements in this one thread and here I got the impression that you agreed wholeheartedly with the original post.

I am not and probably will never be a big Obama supporter. I will vote for him for one reason only -- McCain scares me. At least Obama wants to try diplomatic routes rather than just saying 100 years in Iraq is okay with him or that invading Iran is a viable option (and Obama has not ruled out that these things could in fact happen).

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

No arguement...I will repost what I said about a week ago and IF you read it, and IF you verify what I am saying....and you are not afraid of this guy..well...

__________________________________________________ _____________________-
I am curious, could you please list the Marxists by name? Such a statement sounds very familiar, like a Senator from Wisconsin back in the 50s stating "I have a list of communists in the State Department." but never providing the list.
__________________________________________________ ______

Surely....not in any particular order...

SAUL ALINSKY....A fellow who lived and died in Chicago in 1972, the author of "Rules for Radicals"..one of his students was Cesar Chavez, and actually Hillary Clinton wrote her thesis on this guy but it was not allowed to see the light of day during the Clinton presidency. The following quote is from a writer who wrote on the connection between Sen Obama and Alinsky..."Finally, in 1983, he decided to follow in the footsteps of one of his heroes, radical leftist and communist fellow traveler, Saul Alinsky. He concluded, "That's what I'll do… I'll organize black folks at the grass roots… for change.". However this is from his memoirs "among his friends he included "the more politically active black students, foreign students, Chicanos, Marxist professors, feminists, and punk rock performance poets."
This is a quote from Sen Obama discussing some things about Alinsky....""Sometimes the tendency in community organizing of the sort done by Alinsky was to downplay the power of words and of ideas when in fact ideas and words are pretty powerful. 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, all men are created equal.' Those are just words. 'I have a dream.' Just words."

There is a lot more out there but I am trying to keep away from the facts twister.

FRANK MARSHALL DAVIS...A labor activist known for his communist connections. He died in 1987 but during the 70s Sen Obama had a very close relationship with him and this is the guy that when Sen Obama refers to Frank his advisor that folks say he is referring to.

Again, I am trying to stay away from some of the other things out there because to my knowledge no verification on some stuff but lots and lots of smoke.

WILIAM AYERS...one of the famous WEATHERMEN of the 60's who bombed and killed. I cannot comment on any relationship here because the only facts are that Ayers contributed to Obamas campaign which in itself means nothing...they did served together at the same time on a board or two in Chicago however.

Now, I could add that Sen Obama has received an enthusiatic endorsement from the American Communist party or mention Rev Wright, etc, but my point is and always has been on this...

My concern with Sen Obama is that there is NO list of accomplishments for him...if you look at the current legislation he proffered in Congress (Global Poverty Act)..that is pretty socialist, and he himself has said he wants to "reallocate the worlds resources".....Lacking any achievements to make a consideration on, TO ME...it would seem that his training and past associates and those he calls mentors would be most important. Now, I find the above plus more but much of that falls into a catagory of hearsay...but this is what I have to go on...nothing more.

This is my concern...I am NOT a supporter of Sen McCain....I agree with some and disagree with other things he has done or stood for. In the case of Sen Obama, my concern is simply that he seems to stand for a very far left, socialist program and that is something I oppose.

I am open minded if you can allay any of my fears !

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Remember this we haven't been to the conventions yet you could end up with different candidates still. A long shot but it could happen. What a way to confuse us all. If it happened who would you want.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Remember this we haven't been to the conventions yet you could end up with different candidates still. A long shot but it could happen. What a way to confuse us all. If it happened who would you want
__________________________________________________ ______--

What an interesting concept and thinking of any scenarios that would allow for that....but to play the game...

I like Mitt Romney on the Rep side and Joe Biden on the Dem side. Could live with either of those !

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Bucco, I've seen the list of communists and Marxists that were friends and mentors of Obama in his youth. So far as I know, they are not present-day mentors and that, to me, is much more important. If I'm wrong, let me know as this is something I would truly be interested in knowing.

As I said, I had many of the same ilk for mentors but West Coast style -- mine were more likely to turn to violence than his. The fact they were my mentors truly has little to nothing to do with my viewpoints then or now. They were anti-Vietnam and the military. I was anti-Vietnam war, pro military. They marched for peace, I wanted them out of my way so I could get to class. I did enjoy sitting and talking to them, getting their viewpoints; sometimes agreeing, sometimes disagreeing.

As to the "Global Poverty Act," to me it's more of a soundbite than much of anything else. America has always been generous in giving to the rest of world. Sometimes for truly altruistc reasons, more frequently for political purposes.

As to a re-distribution of wealth, again, I'd say it sounds good and in some instances truly should occur (I'm thinking of areas where things like the old coal companies' stores and housing basically made serfs of the miners still exist in this country) and maybe when a company's profits are truly obscene some of that money should be given back to the consumers who were forced to pay outrageous sums for necessities. A CEO whose company has lost money and is fired should not be entitled to a golden umbrella package -- those funds should be given back to the company and its shareholders. So, I can think of instances when I do believe wealth should be distributed. From what I've heard, Sen. Obama is talking more of those type of scenarios than across-the-board disbursals.

There are checks and balances in place that would pretty much prevent Sen. Obama from turning the U.S. into a socialist state. I do believe in some of things he is espousing but I truly doubt he will be successful in implementing them in any major way. To me, the economy, the war in the Middle East, affordable health insurance for all, Amerca regaining its place as an educational leader, the environment are the important issues. To accomplish any of this, it is going to take a decent President with some very good advisors and staff.

Until the conventions are over, we're not really going to know who these advisors and staff will be. That's when it will get interesting and, hopefully, give us all a better idea of who the better man is.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Oops, forgot to mention this. The American Communist Party has not endorsed Obama (at least not that I could find). As a matter of fact, they have endorsed no candidate. However, they are historically opposed to the Republican party and will automatically work for any candidates that are not Republican. Can't blame Obama for being a Democrat. Just luck of the draw on that one.

http://cpusa.org/article/articleview/907/1/4/

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

REDWITCH....thanks for a nice and thoughtful reply. I wont say anymore...you have convinced yourself that there is no threat thus there is no threat....

....Sen Obama's MUSLIM advisor (DID YOU KNOW HE HAD ONE) resigned just last week because of his ties to a fundamental Islam group.

....Sen Obama has an official blogger. His name is Sam Graham=Felsen who is a contributor to the SOCIALIST VIEWPOINT and publicy says he believes in class warfare. He helped found the SOCIALIST WORKERS ASSOCIATION

....Your link was rather old to the Communist Pary of America...the following is recent and is part of the endorsement...,,,"Barack Obama is not a left candidate. This fact has seemingly surprised a number of progressive people who are bemoaning Obama’s “shift to the center.” (Right-wingers are happy to join them, suggesting Obama is a “flip-flopper.”) It’s sad that some who seek progressive change are missing the forest for the trees. But they will not dampen the wide and deep enthusiasm for blocking a third Bush term represented by John McCain, or for bringing Obama by a landslide into the White House with a large Democratic congressional majority"

....One of his co campaign managers is Jessie Jackson Jr who during he SC primary said that Sen Obama was "acting too white" ! Not racist though,huh?

These are REAL AND CURRENT and you said you had some interest in knowing. This combines with what has been his training should give us a clue. None made up...none from some email circulating around just simple hard facts.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

So Bucco, I have a question. You seem to dig up the dirt (whether true or false) on Obama. Let's hear some on McCain. After all, you said you're not really a McCain supporter. Do you see any shortcomings there?

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Online

Posts: 157


Re: Do I have this straight?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So Bucco, I have a question. You seem to dig up the dirt (whether true or false) on Obama. Let's hear some on McCain. After all, you said you're not really a McCain supporter. Do you see any shortcomings there?
___________________________________________

yep sure do. Can start with age for sure; that is an issue even though we dont like to bring it up out loud but it is thus the VP choice for him becomes important.

Next, he has been a guy who will "cross the aisle" but he has a lot of "baggage" as a result of that and I think is a bit callous right now.

I wish he could present himself as well as Sen Obama for sure.

He has become, not only callous, over the years but despite not being one in his early years he is now a Politician.

A McCain presidency would need top flight advisors to tackle the economy.

On the issues, they both will tell you whatever will get your vote.

Just for the record...I was a Democrat for years and years and very active. I left that party in about 1973 or so and the reason would make an entire new thread :) I have never voted a straight party line in any election as I think that is lazy. In 2004, I looked to the Democrats for a viable alternative and they gave us John Kerry, who I just could not support. I was hoping for more from both parties this year and am very dissapointed.

I tell you all that not because you care but so you dont consider that I am some strong advocate for any and all Republicans. I am much more conservative than liberal for sure but put my country well ahead of any party affliations.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Oh and also for the record, EVERYTHING I have mentioned about Sen Obama is verifiable very easily. I just shared some of his aides and that is readily available, all true and credible. Most, if not all, of his background stuff is verifiable.

I did not include any of the stupid stuff you hear (I probably receive two to three emails a week on Sen Obama), but there is some really incredible stuff out there but most is not easily verified.


I added this because you seem to think that I am making up stuff or something..I am not and woud welcome anyone to show me the error of my ways !

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

you have convinced yourself that there is no threat thus there is no threat....

Nope, just no one has convinced me yet there is a threat.

....Sen Obama's MUSLIM advisor (DID YOU KNOW HE HAD ONE) resigned just last week because of his ties to a fundamental Islam group.

Personally, I hope every Christian politician in the world has a Muslim advisor in today's climate and the more fundamentalist, the better (just be sure and keep that person far away from security data). The more we can get into the head of our enemy, the better chance we have of battling that enemy.

....Sen Obama has an official blogger. His name is Sam Graham=Felsen who is a contributor to the SOCIALIST VIEWPOINT and publicy says he believes in class warfare. He helped found the SOCIALIST WORKERS ASSOCIATION

Do you have the link for this blog? Would love to read it but too lazy to look.

...Your link was rather old to the Communist Pary of America

March 2008 isn't that old, but it does show the CPUSA's feelings about Republicans and that's all I was really trying to point out.

....One of his co campaign managers is Jessie Jackson Jr who during he SC primary said that Sen Obama was "acting too white" ! Not racist though,huh?

Definitely racist, definitely inexcusable. But, then, Jesse Jr. has also said his father is too white. The child has no respect and needs a good mouthful of soap. (Really not making light of the comment, it is racist and wrong.)

Yeah, I know we discussed this in PMs but figured it only fair I go public since the post is now back (I do wonder how it disappeared for me before).

This Is GREAT!!
 

I'm really pleased that so many of us watched the "Saddleback Show" last night. It will be one of the few times between now and election day when each of us can see each of the candidates answering unscripted questions, not making stump speeches, and definitely not being defined by what their handlers say, the interpretations of the media, or some of the offensive and really dumb ads currently being broadcast.

I watched the whole 3-hour show in its entirety. I made it a point to not only listen to the candidates' answers, but look at their faces and expressions while being questioned. Oh, there were a few things said by both candidates that I don't necessarily agree with, but nothing that would cause me to be terribly unhappy if either one was elected President.

I respect John McCain and tend to believe that what he says can be believed. That's a big difference from many other candidates for political office. At times I wished Obama would have responded with the certainty of McCain. I say that even though I think all would agree that we would value thoughtfulness as an important personal trait of anyone sitting in the White House.

While McCain has been in the Congress for many years, I don't think his experience makes him significantly better qualified than Barack Obama. Both have spent their entire lives in the employ of one agency of government or another. Neither of them have ever held a job in the private economy. Neither of them have ever had to manage and motivate large groups of people with disparate interests. Neither of them have been in positions where their decision and their decision alone would affect the lives of millions of people. In that sense, both of them will have to do some OJT if they are elected.

McCain is older and more experienced in government. However, he has experienced difficulties managing his campaign staff and financing. Obama is almost certainly the smarter of the two and has done what is broadly viewed as a great job of running a 21st century political campaign without utilizing negative tactics. Neither have made it very clear who their key advisors will be if they are elected. Both have endured criticisms for a few people that they had relied on during their campaigns. Bottom line: the management skills of both candidates remain an open question, as is who "the administration" will actually be for both candidates. I surely hope that question gets some clarity before election day.

On the question of leadership, neither candidate has been in much of a position to lead and motivate people. Both have organizations which can "turn out" large groups for campaign events. Between the two, Obama seems to have distinguished himself in motivating large, even huge groups of people. He seems to have gotten an entire generation of Americans re-awakened and involved in the political process. How wonderful for all of us. The crowds of foreign residents who turned out to see and hear him speak during several stops on his recent European tour was amazing. Certainly his political handlers could not have arranged those crowds. Has Obama awakened a large segment Americans to the political process? Are the crowds that turned out in Europe an expression of their interest in a change in the role the U.S. wil play in the world? Could Obama extend that enthusiasm throughout America and the world if he were elected, ala John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan? I don't have the answer to that question, but that's surely something to consider when we enter the voting booth in November.

Politically, Obama will have a greater opportunity to create the change that is the basis of his campaign than will McCain. Obama wil work with a Congress controlled by his own party. McCain would have attempt to promote his platform with a Democratic Congress. It's possible that McCain would have to work with a Congress which could actually over-ride his veto of legislation. While McCain is widely respected, by his own description he is a bit of a political maverick and would never win the "congeniality award". So our choice seems to be one candidate that will actually be able to get things done politically, which carries the risk that he might get some wrong things done. The other candidate will have his difficulties accomplishing much politically, particularly if his VP represents the far right and if he were to populate his administration with those from the far right of the political spectrum. This contrast makes for an interesting choice on our part--a lot of risk that some things will get done that might not turn out so well, or not much of a chance that anything meaningful will be accomplished legislatively.

Maybe the most important comments made by both candidates had to do with the type of people they might consider for nomination to the Supreme Court. While I tend to agree with McCain's definition of the proper role of the Supreme Court, the justices he admires were for the most part the most strident opponents of many of the legal decisions that have been so important to our country in the past several decades. If McCain could unilaterally appoint 2-3 replacements, I'd be very concerned. But with what is certain to be a pretty heavily Democratic Senate, he'll have to nominate candidates that are somewhere more towards the middle of the jurisprudence spectrum, so what McCain says now regarding candidates he might nominate isn't very meaningful given the political process they would have to survive in order to be confirmed. I think we need to pay a lot of attention on who Obama might nominate because his choices stand a much better chance of approval in the judiciary committee and confirmation by the full Senate. I'll be watching that one. I wouldn't want a Supreme Court canted heavily to the liberal side any more than I want a far right wing majority on the Court.

Some of the questions regarding when life begins and stem cell research were a little irritating to me because those issues don't seem to compare in importance to many of the economic, social, health and foreign relations problems facing our country. I recognize that the questions were framed by the pastor of an evangelical megachurch and that those issues are important to many of his members and other evangelicals who lean to the far right. But in my opinion, those issues pale in importance in the grand scheme of how the U.S. should be governed and how important problems facing us are resolved.

These candidates both have positive and admirable qualities. I know who I will vote for--after reading all this, you probably know too. But as I said at the outset, and unlike some recent presidential elections, I wouldn't be unhappy with either candidate.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

:agree: :agree:
YOUR LONG SAGA IS INTERESTING BUT IS SO GRADE SCHOOL IN KNOWLEDGE OF POLITICS.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Obama is almost certainly the smarter of the two and has done what is broadly viewed as a great job of running a 21st century political campaign without utilizing negative tactics.
__________________________________________________ ______________

I am not sure what campaign you have been watching. No, Sen Obama engages in no negativism but his campaign sure does. Blaming Sen McCain's comments for the escalation in Georgia (NOT Sen Obama but his aide...Susan something or other on CNN)....calling various folks racists during the primary (NOT Sen Obama but his campaign)....saying using his name was unfair (NOT Sen Obama but his campaign), etc.
He is using old tactics to run his campaign...use the word CHANGE and keep your hands clean allowing your staff to do the dirty work. He is running at a time when we are in a unpopular war, struggling economy thus ANY Democrat should be winning and using that word. Sen Obama is not the genius you make him out to me but I am sure your measure of intelligence ("Obama is almost certainly the smarter of the two") is right on.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

The irony is that posts regarding Sen. Obama far outnumber posts regarding Sen. McCain. That seems to indicate a significant lack of information about Sen. Obama overall - both in him personally and professionally.

It really doesn't seem like there is an anti-Obama sentiment as much as there is an anti-"Trust Me" sentiment. In the land of the seasoned, Trust is earned, and Sen. Obama has had difficulty winning support from many due to this anti-"Trust Me" sentiment. It may be easy for many to follow a charismatic person wherever the charismatic person goes - definitely a trait of of the young and not-often-burned. Others want reliability to mesh with the charisma (me, for one) and truly want to see if we are missing something by not viewing the person with rose-colored glasses.

I spent a good deal of my life as a negotiator, and "No" really means "Yes, but..." to me. I'm looking for that reliability factor, combined with backbone, and the charisma means nothing other than slick salesmanship.

From the events over the last 8 months, it appears that the presidential race is really Sen. McCain versus the Democratic National Committee (with Sen. Obama being the designated "face" on the poster). I have witnessed many times Sen. McCain demonstrating "backbone" and being his own person, much to the dismay of the Republican National Committee and the current administration. So far, all I've seen of Sen. Obama is as an actor following the DNC-prescribed script, and never once taking a tack in the slightest from what the DNC dictates.

I'm hoping that Sen. Obama's supporters show me where I've missed Sen. Obama as being his own person, rather than as the Charlie McCarthy to the the DNC's Edgar Bergen. If there are going to be two males on the ballot, then I'd like the election to be won by a MAN rather than a parrotting spokesperson for a elitist committee concerned with its power ratio. If Sen. Obama is truly that kind of formidable MAN, please help provide the steak where there's only been sizzle. If we didn't want to know, we wouldn't challenge this much. We like to believe, but must be shown there is something adult to believe in.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I don't agree with this statement at all. The information is all out there. IMHO Republicans fear Senator Obama, and not for the reasons given. I think they fear him because they know he's going to win. Again, just my opinion. ;)

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I don't agree with this statement at all. The information is all out there. IMHO Republicans fear Senator Obama, and not for the reasons given. I think they fear him because they know he's going to win. Again, just my opinion.
__________________________________________________ _________________-

1. He should win going away ! With the conditions as they are and the other party in the White House for 8 years, this should be, even now, a runaway ! I think Sen Clinton said a number of times...he cant win.

2. Read TODAYS Washington Post...an article about the bias in reporting on her own newspaper...This substantiates STEVEZ' post.

3. There are so many reasons NOT to trust Sen Obama and I hope that either it all gets on the table and he goes down in flames, OR it gets on the table and he is able to credibly respond to it. He just seems to sweep anything off about him as if it should never be asked.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

And you are entitled to your opinion.... as I.

After all these months the only thing I know about Sen. Obama is that he is not his own person. He comes across as a "developed" candidate by the DNC in the same way that a professional baseball franchise "develops" a minor leaguer and presents him in prime-time. Just ONCE it would be refreshing to see him as an independent person instead of a DNC-created figure whose owes his entire being to the boardroom at 430 S. Capitol St. SE.

He may indeed win the presidential election, and all the folks who will be chanting "we won" will be in for a surprise to find the "we" is a select few who lunch at Old Ebbitt Grill. Even Sen. Obama wouldn't be in the "we won" bunch as he is the messenger, not the message.

Nobody fears Sen. Obama. There have been prior presidents in the hip pocket of someone or some group, and even the present officeholder is often accused of that. Having another one won't destroy the country should the DNC succeed, but the "change" will only be in who gets lobbied and who doesn't. That's why parties have national headquarters and where platforms undergo modification.

So, this is election is not about the two candidates, but instead one maverick versus a political machine.