| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/20/2008 01:05:24 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by frisca:
i have to disagree with you, Spaz, to some extent. Plans and ideas without hope and vision are just meandering busywork designed to distract. I don't know enough about the campaign to say that Mr. Obama has NO plan, but I can't imagine that he has nothing since he appears to have a decent grasp on some of the most basic problems and issues. Sometimes all a leader has is vision and that's more than enough to carry the burden. There is nothing wrong with hope; there is a lot wrong with lack of it. |
There's a need for both a vision and a plan.
I can envision whatever perfect world I want, (usually involves a large estate with servants on my own tropical island and a great amount of leisure time, but I digress.) but without a plan to achieve that vision, it's just a fantasy.
I'm not saying Obama doesn't have a plan, but I have yet to see it.
It's one thing to understand the world's problems and to envision a new world where those problems have been solved and another entirely to understand how to wisely navigate the path between the two. How one gets from A to B is a thousand times more complex than envisioning the before and after.
Message edited by author 2008-03-20 13:08:52. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:08:08 PM · #52 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by karmat:
that he doesn't agree with everything his preacher says <--- gross oversimplification :) |
I think that's probably the least of what it says.
The whole sound bite thing is where political discourse ends up as a point scoring farce on cable TV, polarized into a silly team sport of 'us vs. them' |
Yes, thus the phrase "GROSS oversimplification" and the :)
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:10:25 PM · #53 |
At the end of the day, the man is a politician. A politician who is willing to say whatever it takes to get the job he wants.
If he truly believed the words that he said in that speech (I watched it live) then he would not have been sitting in that church in the first place. He would have distanced himself from a man who is willing to damn the very country that he wants to lead. He would have ensured that everyone knew (and by this I mean before the tape surfaced) that he did not agree with a man who blamed the very country that he wants to lead for the 9-11 attacks.
Remember, his campaign knew about thee tyrants before last week, yet this pastor was on Obama's staff (as a spiritual advisor) until Friday when the pressure got to high for him to remain.
At the end of the day, the man is a politician. A politician who is willing to say whatever it takes to get the job he wants.
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:12:13 PM · #54 |
| Let me know when you find a church where you believe and support everything the pastor/rabi/priest says. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:15:55 PM · #55 |
That is easy. I don't go to church to begin with.
This is poor excuse levied by the man that is trying to cover up why he didn't get rid of Wright. Keep in mind that Wright was not just a pastor in a church that Obama was a member. Wright was a member of his campaign. Wright was Obama's spiritual advisor. If I am going to pick a spiritual advisor while running for office, the very last thing I would do is pick one that damns the very country I am trying to lead. This isn't a matter of me disagreeing over whether or not I should not drink from the wine glass, this is a man who said God Damn the United States. Wright said this and Obama didn't think this man was not the right one to spiritually lead him while he is running for President.
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Let me know when you find a church where you believe and support everything the pastor/rabi/priest says. |
Message edited by author 2008-03-20 13:16:47.
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:18:14 PM · #56 |
Wow, that was a hell of a speech... I'm uber-impressed.
R.
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:19:31 PM · #57 |
| So what. He was just his spiritual advisor. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:21:59 PM · #58 |
I guess my problem lies in the fact that a church/temple/synagogue's leader is not to use the pulpit for "political messages."
Locally, one pastor made the statement (in a past election year) that if you were a member of that congregation, you should vote against candidates that were for abortion, otherwise, you could possibly face discipline from the church (that was the crux of it; I've forgotten the exact words). (personally, yes, I think he crossed the line, but that is not my point). The local media picked up on it, then the national media. In the end, he could either resign, or his church would risk losing non-profit status.
My understanding is that a religious pulpit/podium is not to be used to denigrate or endorse ANY candidate at ANY time.
Obviously, Obama can't control what his preacher preaches, but I can' help but wondering if it were any other pastor (on any side of the political spectrum), what would have happened to the church, and why it has not been questioned. (maybe it has and I've not seen it).
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:22:18 PM · #59 |
And as that advisor, wouldn't he turn to Wright for advice? do we really want our president turning to a man that damns his very own country for advice? You may want that in Canada, but I definately do not want that in my country, the very country that I sacrifice everyday to defend. I refuse to support anyone who gets advice from a man that would damn the country that I have sworn to give my life for.
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
So what. He was just his spiritual advisor. |
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:22:41 PM · #60 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Wow, that was a hell of a speech... I'm uber-impressed.
R. |
The bit that surprises me the most is the surprise you find in various commentators about the fact that he wrote it himself. It is surprising to find that people are surprised that a politician can be literate. Doesn't say much for the rest of them that being able to write marks you as better than average. Maybe if he is numerate as well the economy might see some hope too. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:25:11 PM · #61 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Wow, that was a hell of a speech... I'm uber-impressed.
R. |
The bit that surprises me the most is the surprise you find in various commentators about the fact that he wrote it himself. It is surprising to find that people are surprised that a politician can be literate. Doesn't say much for the rest of them that being able to write marks you as better than average. Maybe if he is numerate as well the economy might see some hope too. |
My first thought was "wow, he has a good speech writer." then found out he wrote it himself.
I just wish I could trust politicians. Any of them.
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:26:56 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by BHuseman:
And as that advisor, wouldn't he turn to Wright for advice? do we really want our president turning to a man that damns his very own country for advice? You may want that in Canada, but I definately do not want that in my country, the very country that I sacrifice everyday to defend. I refuse to support anyone who gets advice from a man that would damn the country that I have sworn to give my life for.
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
So what. He was just his spiritual advisor. |
|
Spiritual advisers always seem to be causing trouble. Bush's is endorsing Obama. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:27:09 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by BHuseman:
And as that advisor, wouldn't he turn to Wright for advice? do we really want our president turning to a man that damns his very own country for advice? You may want that in Canada, but I definately do not want that in my country, the very country that I sacrifice everyday to defend. I refuse to support anyone who gets advice from a man that would damn the country that I have sworn to give my life for.
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
So what. He was just his spiritual advisor. |
|
I don't care what his religious affiliations are. From what I've heard/read it sounds like he'd be pretty good at keeping his own spiritual beliefs out of the Whitehouse and do what's right for the country.
As far as spiritual advisor goes, I think maybe you stretch that to something more than just religion. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:35:11 PM · #64 |
I think it's a great speech with a wonderful message, although I find him to be hypocritical. Earlier last year he spoke on the subject of Don Imus, radio shock jock who, in jest, made some derogatory comments:
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
The whole "Do as I say and not as I do" sentiment is tiresome in politics. I had higher hopes for this man but now I question his integrity. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:39:04 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by trevytrev:
I think it's a great speech with a wonderful message, although I find him to be hypocritical. Earlier last year he spoke on the subject of Don Imus, radio shock jock who, in jest, made some derogatory comments:
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
The whole "Do as I say and not as I do" sentiment is tiresome in politics. I had higher hopes for this man but now I question his integrity. |
Very good point that you make here.
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:40:31 PM · #66 |
Originally posted by BHuseman:
And as that advisor, wouldn't he turn to Wright for advice? do we really want our president turning to a man that damns his very own country for advice? You may want that in Canada... |
What the hell does that mean? |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:43:22 PM · #67 |
Colette was defending the relationship that Obama has had with Wright, and i was simply saying that she may want a relationship between Wright and the PM of Canada, but I do not. No offense towards the Canadaians in any way intended.
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by BHuseman:
And as that advisor, wouldn't he turn to Wright for advice? do we really want our president turning to a man that damns his very own country for advice? You may want that in Canada... |
What the hell does that mean? |
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:49:13 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by trevytrev:
I think it's a great speech with a wonderful message, although I find him to be hypocritical. Earlier last year he spoke on the subject of Don Imus, radio shock jock who, in jest, made some derogatory comments:
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
The whole "Do as I say and not as I do" sentiment is tiresome in politics. I had higher hopes for this man but now I question his integrity. |
You question his integrity because he dismissed the guy from his staff and renounced his views in public ? I haven't been following all that closely, but what would you prefer him do ? |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 01:52:42 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by trevytrev:
I think it's a great speech with a wonderful message, although I find him to be hypocritical. Earlier last year he spoke on the subject of Don Imus, radio shock jock who, in jest, made some derogatory comments:
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
The whole "Do as I say and not as I do" sentiment is tiresome in politics. I had higher hopes for this man but now I question his integrity. |
You question his integrity because he dismissed the guy from his staff and renounced his views in public ? I haven't been following all that closely, but what would you prefer him do ? |
He only dismissed this guy after the videos surfaced and made the international news (the first time I saw the videos was while on vacation Hong Kong.) It shouldn't have taken the videos being aired on tv for Obama to dismiss Wright. He should have done it on his own. But as of Friday morning Wright was not dismissed. And Obama still clings on to Wright with his unwillingness to "disown" Wright.
|
|
|
|
03/20/2008 02:04:16 PM · #70 |
Originally posted by BHuseman:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by trevytrev:
I think it's a great speech with a wonderful message, although I find him to be hypocritical. Earlier last year he spoke on the subject of Don Imus, radio shock jock who, in jest, made some derogatory comments:
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
The whole "Do as I say and not as I do" sentiment is tiresome in politics. I had higher hopes for this man but now I question his integrity. |
You question his integrity because he dismissed the guy from his staff and renounced his views in public ? I haven't been following all that closely, but what would you prefer him do ? |
He only dismissed this guy after the videos surfaced and made the international news (the first time I saw the videos was while on vacation Hong Kong.) It shouldn't have taken the videos being aired on tv for Obama to dismiss Wright. He should have done it on his own. But as of Friday morning Wright was not dismissed. And Obama still clings on to Wright with his unwillingness to "disown" Wright. |
He shouldn't have to. But so be it. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 02:12:25 PM · #71 |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 02:19:03 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by BHuseman:
And Obama still clings on to Wright with his unwillingness to "disown" Wright. |
It's weird, I probably have more respect for him because of that. The easy thing would be to cast the guy out, disown him totally. Distance himself as far as he could from the man and the message. That'd be the smart political thing to do and the common path to take. Instead he stands by his friend and advisor, even while disagreeing with his words.
I've got a fair number of friends who I disagree with a lot of what they say or think. Even then I still value their opinions. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 02:30:22 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by BHuseman:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by trevytrev:
I think it's a great speech with a wonderful message, although I find him to be hypocritical. Earlier last year he spoke on the subject of Don Imus, radio shock jock who, in jest, made some derogatory comments:
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
The whole "Do as I say and not as I do" sentiment is tiresome in politics. I had higher hopes for this man but now I question his integrity. |
You question his integrity because he dismissed the guy from his staff and renounced his views in public ? I haven't been following all that closely, but what would you prefer him do ? |
He only dismissed this guy after the videos surfaced and made the international news (the first time I saw the videos was while on vacation Hong Kong.) It shouldn't have taken the videos being aired on tv for Obama to dismiss Wright. He should have done it on his own. But as of Friday morning Wright was not dismissed. And Obama still clings on to Wright with his unwillingness to "disown" Wright. |
He shouldn't have to. But so be it. |
I agree that he shouldn't have to disown the guy, most individuals have friends or family members that have radical or outright crazy views on varying subjects, I know I do. My issue isn't with him refusing to disown the Rev, but a matter of the hypocrisy of the situation. Mr.Obama came out approximately one week following the Don Imus statement and called for him to be fired by NBC. On the other side he became aware of some of the Rev's statements last year before he announced his candidacy and actually dis invited the Rev to give a speech at his announcement. He then turns around and puts the Rev on his staff. Only until the shit storm hits and his presidential nomination in jeopardy does he do what he told NBC he would do if someone on his staff expressed views against anybody of any ethnic group. All this after he first tried to dismiss this as comments likened to a crazy uncle. So what more I would have wanted him to do is to practice what he preached a year ago and to never put the Rev on his staff knowing full well his radical and sometimes racial, anti-American views. I also think it's crap that he has never heard the Rev say these comments to him him person, just my opinion on that. Everything he says now seems self serving. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 02:33:29 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by trevytrev:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by BHuseman:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by trevytrev:
I think it's a great speech with a wonderful message, although I find him to be hypocritical. Earlier last year he spoke on the subject of Don Imus, radio shock jock who, in jest, made some derogatory comments:
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
The whole "Do as I say and not as I do" sentiment is tiresome in politics. I had higher hopes for this man but now I question his integrity. |
You question his integrity because he dismissed the guy from his staff and renounced his views in public ? I haven't been following all that closely, but what would you prefer him do ? |
He only dismissed this guy after the videos surfaced and made the international news (the first time I saw the videos was while on vacation Hong Kong.) It shouldn't have taken the videos being aired on tv for Obama to dismiss Wright. He should have done it on his own. But as of Friday morning Wright was not dismissed. And Obama still clings on to Wright with his unwillingness to "disown" Wright. |
He shouldn't have to. But so be it. |
I agree that he shouldn't have to disown the guy, most individuals have friends or family members that have radical or outright crazy views on varying subjects, I know I do. My issue isn't with him refusing to disown the Rev, but a matter of the hypocrisy of the situation. Mr.Obama came out approximately one week following the Don Imus statement and called for him to be fired by NBC. On the other side he became aware of some of the Rev's statements last year before he announced his candidacy and actually dis invited the Rev to give a speech at his announcement. He then turns around and puts the Rev on his staff as his spiritual advisor. Only until the shit storm hits and his presidential nomination in jeopardy does he do what he told NBC he would do if someone on his staff expressed views against anybody of any ethnic group. All this after he first tried to dismiss this as comments likened to a crazy uncle. So what more I would have wanted him to do is to practice what he preached a year ago and to never put the Rev on his staff knowing full well his radical and sometimes racial, anti-American views. I also think it's crap that he has never heard the Rev say these comments to him him person, just my opinion on that. Everything he says now seems self serving. |
Emphasis and context added by me.
If he were added to his staff as some sort of political advisor then I agree 100% that he needed to be removed. But he was his spiritual advisor. So now he's just an unpaid spiritual advisor rather than a paid one.
Message edited by author 2008-03-20 14:34:16. |
|
|
|
03/20/2008 02:38:41 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by trevytrev:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by BHuseman:
Originally posted by Gordon:
Originally posted by trevytrev:
I think it's a great speech with a wonderful message, although I find him to be hypocritical. Earlier last year he spoke on the subject of Don Imus, radio shock jock who, in jest, made some derogatory comments:
"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."
The whole "Do as I say and not as I do" sentiment is tiresome in politics. I had higher hopes for this man but now I question his integrity. |
You question his integrity because he dismissed the guy from his staff and renounced his views in public ? I haven't been following all that closely, but what would you prefer him do ? |
He only dismissed this guy after the videos surfaced and made the international news (the first time I saw the videos was while on vacation Hong Kong.) It shouldn't have taken the videos being aired on tv for Obama to dismiss Wright. He should have done it on his own. But as of Friday morning Wright was not dismissed. And Obama still clings on to Wright with his unwillingness to "disown" Wright. |
He shouldn't have to. But so be it. |
I agree that he shouldn't have to disown the guy, most individuals have friends or family members that have radical or outright crazy views on varying subjects, I know I do. My issue isn't with him refusing to disown the Rev, but a matter of the hypocrisy of the situation. Mr.Obama came out approximately one week following the Don Imus statement and called for him to be fired by NBC. On the other side he became aware of some of the Rev's statements last year before he announced his candidacy and actually dis invited the Rev to give a speech at his announcement. He then turns around and puts the Rev on his staff as his spiritual advisor. Only until the shit storm hits and his presidential nomination in jeopardy does he do what he told NBC he would do if someone on his staff expressed views against anybody of any ethnic group. All this after he first tried to dismiss this as comments likened to a crazy uncle. So what more I would have wanted him to do is to practice what he preached a year ago and to never put the Rev on his staff knowing full well his radical and sometimes racial, anti-American views. I also think it's crap that he has never heard the Rev say these comments to him him person, just my opinion on that. Everything he says now seems self serving. |
Emphasis and context added by me.
If he were added to his staff as some sort of political advisor then I agree 100% that he needed to be removed. But he was his spiritual advisor. So now he's just an unpaid spiritual advisor rather than a paid one. |
added bold to show the hypocrisy |
|
