| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/22/2008 01:19:03 PM · #176 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Obama doesn't have "executive" experience. Neither did Abraham Lincoln, and I'll take intelligence, foresight and grace under fire over impulsive managerial bravado any day.
Ayers hates America? While his old methods were deplorable, they were protests against the policies of those in power at the time, not America itself, and he's been nationally recognized for his civic work. I'm sure the Boston Tea Party would be viewed as a similar act of terrorism today, and quite a few people are equally upset with the current administration even if they love the country itself.
And what's with scare-tactic claims that Obama might be Muslim? So freakin' what? As Colin Powell hinted, if there's ANY country where religion, race, sex, etc. should be distant secondary considerations to your actual positions and policies, the United States should be it. Assuming you're pro-American, that is... |
Isn't that change right there. Breaking from the same old mindset of past administrations, strategies and bad policies is what exemplifies change in a way that many are looking for. As an outsider living in another country I have a very strange perception of the Republican Party vs the Democrats. I view the repubs as a group of good ol boys trying to cling to their power in the states that still view them as the conservatives they try to be. I'm sure we've all seen the Bush outtakes from interviews where he says that appealing to the religious is just a vote getting scheme, whatever works are his words I think he used. Why are they still as popular today is beyond me.
Ayers was used as a last ditch effort to dirty Obama's reputation. They failed with the Rev. Wright innuendos and are trying this tactic now and guess what, it backfired to the point where it shaved at least 6 or 7 points off McCain's backing. Dems should send them a thank you letter after the election.
Your last point I quoted is what I feel is being felt the world over; the one country that showed the world that freedom of religion, speech and all it encompasses, is worth fighting for to the death. The whole world witnessed the civil rights movement in the late 50's that grew into a fight for human rights everywhere. Everyone everywhere looked up to the US for those specific reasons. Let's look at what is happening in this election? Racial slurs, fear of another religion other than theirs, claims of terrorism, what a bunch of bull, and it's only because, I fear, of lower level representatives that this crap is being spread throughout the country. Where else can it be coming from? |
|
|
|
10/22/2008 02:37:00 PM · #177 |
| Ugh, and a bad registration card that wouldn't even result in an actual vote is election fraud?!?! |
|
|
|
10/22/2008 03:42:05 PM · #178 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
On a side note I never understood why many Republicans of the middle class support policies that never benefit them |
The book What's The Matter With Kansas? addresses this issue directly, in detail, and apparently is a good read as well. |
Thanks Paul, I'd seen that book when it came out but figured the answers to that puzzle were pretty obvious.
I think the strongest point was/is the coopting religion and to some extent patriotism into their platform. Religion is a force that trumps all.
They also seem to have this ruthless ability to whip less educated people (that vote) into a frenzy.
Many of the less educated folks on the Democratic side don't vote.
ETA: If you like political humor Matt Taibbi is a pisser. He reminds me a little of Hunter S Thompson but meaner, funnier and more on point.
The scariest thing about Sarah Palin isn't how unqualified she is - it's ... -from The Smirking Chimp
You may not agree with the dude but he's way funny.
"Sarah Palin is a symbol of everything that is wrong with the modern United States. As a representative of our political system, she's a new low in reptilian villainy, the ultimate cynical masterwork of puppeteers like Karl Rove. But more than that, she is a horrifying symbol of how little we ask for in return for the total surrender of our political power.
Not only is Sarah Palin a fraud, she's the tawdriest, most half-assed fraud imaginable, 20 floors below the lowest common denominator, a character too dumb even for daytime TV -and this country is going to eat her up, cheering her every step of the way. All because most Americans no longer have the energy to do anything but lie back and allow ourselves to be jacked off by the calculating thieves who run this grasping consumer paradise we call a nation.
The Palin speech was a political masterpiece, one of the most ingenious pieces of electoral theater this country has ever seen. Never before has a single televised image turned a party's fortunes around faster.
" -MT
"a character too dumb even for daytime TV -and this country is going to eat her up"
That line made me choke and I think it's safe to say that he doesn't think too highly of her.
Message edited by author 2008-10-22 16:20:20. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 06:17:35 AM · #179 |
Sorry for breaking in here - I am taking this thread off of ignore to see what people think of Joe Biden's comments last week and also what people think of the lack of press coverage about his ominous comments.
"Mark my words - It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy - Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."
He also offers four or five scenarios that, according to ABC news, include the middle east, Russia, a nuclear capable Pakistan, and of course Osama bin Laden. Biden wants to remind you that al Qaeda is everywhere, "and its real"! Still, all that fear mongering was not nearly as concerning as his warning of our civil unrest, here we are only offered a teaser - but what he is saying is chilling.
"we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."
"Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."
I guess Sarah Palin's clothes are more important to discuss. Frankly, I can't stomach the vitriolic rhetoric and personal hatred that goes on in this thread any more than I can stomach the whole political process or the media. Would be much more interesting and productive to me if people dropped their biases and tried to be more objective and less hateful of opposing views.
Regarding Biden's statements, I would like to hear how Obama supporters interpret them. Try to respond without mentioning McCain, Palin or Bush.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2008 07:34:20 AM · #180 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Sorry for breaking in here - I am taking this thread off of ignore to see what people think of Joe Biden's comments last week and also what people think of the lack of press coverage about his ominous comments.
"Mark my words - It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy - Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."
He also offers four or five scenarios that, according to ABC news, include the middle east, Russia, a nuclear capable Pakistan, and of course Osama bin Laden. Biden wants to remind you that al Qaeda is everywhere, "and its real"! Still, all that fear mongering was not nearly as concerning as his warning of our civil unrest, here we are only offered a teaser - but what he is saying is chilling.
"we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right."
"Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."
I guess Sarah Palin's clothes are more important to discuss. Frankly, I can't stomach the vitriolic rhetoric and personal hatred that goes on in this thread any more than I can stomach the whole political process or the media. Would be much more interesting and productive to me if people dropped their biases and tried to be more objective and less hateful of opposing views.
Regarding Biden's statements, I would like to hear how Obama supporters interpret them. Try to respond without mentioning McCain, Palin or Bush. |
I'm not an Obama supporter but I would interpret them to mean exactly what he says. It just makes sense that the world knows what all americans ought to know and that is the fact that Barrack Obama IS untested. There will be a new chief in charge and those who wish to impose their will on the US and the world will be looking to see just how much they can get away with and wether it will be cost effective for them. They are hoping that Obama will not make them pay but will be willing to take that chance. I am marking his words. It's the best argument in the world why not to vote for Obama. There will be change for the worse. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 07:59:46 AM · #181 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I'm not an Obama supporter but I would interpret them to mean exactly what he says. It just makes sense that the world knows what all americans ought to know and that is the fact that Barrack Obama IS untested. There will be a new chief in charge and those who wish to impose their will on the US and the world will be looking to see just how much they can get away with and wether it will be cost effective for them. They are hoping that Obama will not make them pay but will be willing to take that chance. I am marking his words. It's the best argument in the world why not to vote for Obama. There will be change for the worse. |
If we had to rely only on those individuals vying for office that has as you say "Been tested", then I fear the USA would truly be stuck. You may not have faith in Obama, but from what I have seen to date, I would much rather place my faith in someone like him than the alternative.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 08:48:31 AM · #182 |
I think that whoever gets elected is going to be low in the polls, because this country and this world is in for some tough times. I think Obama's perception in the rest of the world is going to be more positive than negative. Potential allies think of him as world class and intelligent. Intelligence is valued more in Europe than it is here. (Notice that presidential campaigns never take any time to talk about the intelligence of their candidates. It boggles my mind.) Potential enemies will be testing us (already are testing us) because of our weakened position, regardless of who wins. The "experience factor" will be negligible, hardly motivation enough for a country or organization to make a major decision based on.
So, Biden is wrong. There's your answer from an Obama supporter. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 09:36:04 AM · #183 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
I think that whoever gets elected is going to be low in the polls, because this country and this world is in for some tough times. I think Obama's perception in the rest of the world is going to be more positive than negative. Potential allies think of him as world class and intelligent. Intelligence is valued more in Europe than it is here. (Notice that presidential campaigns never take any time to talk about the intelligence of their candidates. It boggles my mind.) Potential enemies will be testing us (already are testing us) because of our weakened position, regardless of who wins. The "experience factor" will be negligible, hardly motivation enough for a country or organization to make a major decision based on.
So, Biden is wrong. There's your answer from an Obama supporter. |
I'm sure all those wall street guys that got us into this economic mess are pretty intelligent to. Intelligence is a requirement to be president but in my opinion and while I'm sure Obama may be more intelligent than McCain I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. Experience should be a key factor. Can Obama learn... well of course but I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 09:43:41 AM · #184 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I'm sure all those wall street guys that got us into this economic mess are pretty intelligent to. Intelligence is a requirement to be president but in my opinion and while I'm sure Obama may be more intelligent than McCain I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. Experience should be a key factor. Can Obama learn... well of course but I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
Intelligence shouldn't matter that much.
Intelligence
shouldn't
matter
that
much.
WOW.
I am a stranger in a strange land. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 10:12:17 AM · #185 |
Biden is correct only in that any new leader will be tested, just as a pitcher in baseball might challenge any new batter. However, I think it's actually less likely our "enemies" will test us because there's less incentive to do so and it's harder to predict the response of an intelligent leader vs. the knee-jerk reaction of a less savvy leader who could be led to attack a country that actually posed little threat (not that THAT would ever happen). Suggesting that our enemies "wouldn't dare attack me" seems more like the nationalist rhetoric of Iran or North Korea, and I'd rather live in a world where people don't have a reason or incentive to threaten us in the first place. Given the choice as an enemy, which are you more likely attack: the bellicose leader with a missile pointed at your home or someone who has the backing of many friends and and a holstered missile, but is actually willing to work out the differences?
The answer probably depends on which enemy you're talking about. Al Qaeda leaders aren't really interested in working out differences- they just want to get more people to hate us regardless of who's running the country. Thus some predictions that bin Laden might strike before the elections in an effort to get a "warrior candidate" elected to keep us embroiled in Middle East wars and increase anti-American sentiment among Arab Muslims, in turn reinforcing bin Laden's power and ability to recruit terrorists. If Obama were elected, bin Laden would be shooting himself in the foot if he were to attack a leader who isn't fostering hatred in the area.
"Rogue" states like North Korea, Iran and Venezuela have two things in common with us: first, they don't want to be threatened (so they turn to nuclear and other WMD programs as a deterrent) and second, they don't want to be told how to run their affairs. At the core of each threat is someone whose power and influence rests entirely on galvanizing the locals to hate a common enemy (in this case, the U.S.). It's just as true for Al Qaeda and Iran now and it was for 1939 Germany or even Colonial America vs. Britain. If you really want to increase national security, the most effective weapon is one that sabotages an enemy's ability to rally his followers against us. Target the hatred and you dissolve the glue that binds an enemy against you. IMO, of course.
Message edited by author 2008-10-23 10:23:11. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 10:15:51 AM · #186 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
Originally posted by posthumous:
I think that whoever gets elected is going to be low in the polls, because this country and this world is in for some tough times. I think Obama's perception in the rest of the world is going to be more positive than negative. Potential allies think of him as world class and intelligent. Intelligence is valued more in Europe than it is here. (Notice that presidential campaigns never take any time to talk about the intelligence of their candidates. It boggles my mind.) Potential enemies will be testing us (already are testing us) because of our weakened position, regardless of who wins. The "experience factor" will be negligible, hardly motivation enough for a country or organization to make a major decision based on.
So, Biden is wrong. There's your answer from an Obama supporter. |
I'm sure all those wall street guys that got us into this economic mess are pretty intelligent to. Intelligence is a requirement to be president but in my opinion and while I'm sure Obama may be more intelligent than McCain I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. Experience should be a key factor. Can Obama learn... well of course but I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
We currently have a president lacking that "intelligence factor", in more ways than one, and look where that's gotten us: Recession, War, Big Brother, Huge National Debt, Brain Drain, Outsourcing Jobs Overseas...
Maybe it's time we had a president who really is smarter than a 5th grader. Much smarter. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 10:17:38 AM · #187 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
Then your greatest fear should be a Republican win followed by a sudden health problem... |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 10:21:43 AM · #188 |
| An interesting little film about the ACORN hubbub. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 10:43:20 AM · #189 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. Experience should be a key factor. |
Out of curiosity... I know McCain has been touting his experience, but what exactly does that mean? The experience of being captured? He's never actually led a military campaign (much less won), and being around a long time is no substitute for intelligence or sound strategy. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:03:13 AM · #190 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I'm sure all those wall street guys that got us into this economic mess are pretty intelligent to. Intelligence is a requirement to be president but in my opinion and while I'm sure Obama may be more intelligent than McCain I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. Experience should be a key factor. Can Obama learn... well of course but I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
Intelligence shouldn't matter that much.
Intelligence
shouldn't
matter
that
much.
WOW.
I am a stranger in a strange land. |
Who needs stickin intelligence! LOL
"I'm sure Obama may be more intelligent than McCain I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much."
Were you drunk or stoned when you wrote this dponlyme?
If that's your stance, then it must be the stance that most Republicans take as well so all this discussion is all for nothing because you and your party cannot understand basic principals of policy. If you yourself admit that intelligence is not important for a presidential candidate then why debate how Obama is not qualified for the job? Where do you get your information about your candidate? Experience for McCain is getting caught in a war in a strange land and being a POW for 4 years(?). How is four years in a prison experience?
I would rather have an intelligent one term senator in office than a 10(?) term puppet who can't even formulate an answer to easy questions like; How many homes do you own?
Let's talk about experience, intelligence and Bush now. If GW did it for 8 years, ANYONE can run your country, ANYONE. So all this talk about lack of experience is mute to me. It's hot air from a losing party. Can't wait to see what other crap will be released coming up to the big day.
Message edited by author 2008-10-23 11:05:13. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:08:13 AM · #191 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. Experience should be a key factor. |
Out of curiosity... I know McCain has been touting his experience, but what exactly does that mean? The experience of being captured? He's never actually led a military campaign (much less won), and being around a long time is no substitute for intelligence or sound strategy. |
McCain has experience "bailing out", in fact, he'd already bailed out of and destroyed 2 multi-million dollar fighter planes when he was forced to bail out over VietNam. Maybe he thinks that experience will help him "bail out" the economy. Unfortunately, the Oval Office isn't equipped with an ejection seat. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:12:06 AM · #192 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
Then your greatest fear should be a Republican win followed by a sudden health problem... |
Sarah Palin reminds me of a prosecuting attorney I met in Breckinridge Co., KY. She was pretty much in charge of the redneck little town. Everybody loved her and was scared of her at the same time. If you got along with her she pulled her strings and got you a good paying government job. If you crossed her, you had the chief of police (her boyfriend) on your tail just waiting for a reason to arrest you so that she could put you in jail.
A little off topic, I know, but for me, President Palin is a horrible horrible thought.
Oh, and what's this crap about her wanting a public apology from Barack for the whole lipstick comment. Aren't you supposed to get over the whole sticks and stones thing in like 4th grade? Ohhhhhh, everything about that woman just grinds my gears (as homer would say).
|
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:16:44 AM · #193 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Intelligence shouldn't matter that much.
Intelligence
shouldn't
matter
that
much.
WOW.
I am a stranger in a strange land. |
Elitist. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:22:59 AM · #194 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I'm sure all those wall street guys that got us into this economic mess are pretty intelligent to. Intelligence is a requirement to be president but in my opinion and while I'm sure Obama may be more intelligent than McCain I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. |
Shoot me NOW! |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:30:00 AM · #195 |
Originally posted by cynthiann:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
Then your greatest fear should be a Republican win followed by a sudden health problem... |
A little off topic, I know, but for me, President Palin is a horrible horrible thought... |
Maybe we could increase her foreign policy experience by moving her to the space station so she can see every country from her home? We'll budget a return flight right after we pay off the country's $50 trillion debt. ;-) |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:37:49 AM · #196 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I'm sure all those wall street guys that got us into this economic mess are pretty intelligent to. Intelligence is a requirement to be president but in my opinion and while I'm sure Obama may be more intelligent than McCain I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. Experience should be a key factor. Can Obama learn... well of course but I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
Reminds me of a comment I heard a while back: " My mind is made up... don't confuse me with facts!!!"
"Intelligence should not matter that much"... yes Virginia, there are folks out there who earnestly believe that, and then they wonder why people look at them funny and ask if they rode the short bus to school.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:40:02 AM · #197 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
Then your greatest fear should be a Republican win followed by a sudden health problem... |
Here's a little comedy short that mentions "on the job training" a few times and bunch of juicy quotes regarding the economy, foreign policy and so on...
You can run but you can't hide.
Message edited by author 2008-10-23 11:42:56. |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:48:24 AM · #198 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I'm sure all those wall street guys that got us into this economic mess are pretty intelligent to. Intelligence is a requirement to be president but in my opinion and while I'm sure Obama may be more intelligent than McCain I don't think the "intelligence factor" should matter that much. |
Shoot me NOW! |
That's the joy of living in a democracy/ republic. Everyone gets to vote, no matter how smart or how stupid and they all get to have opinions. Lots of opinions.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:52:55 AM · #199 |
I lost the source-link, but here's a little info regarding Obama's potential IQ:
Is Obama's IQ The Highest Certified Of Any President Ever?
As was noted earlier hits morning on Sirius Left, the former
Guidance Counselor of Obama's private Hawaiian school
has supplied The Washington Post with a certified copy of
Obama's Stanford-Banai IQ Certification, one of which was taken in 1966 when
he was a kindergardener in Hawaii before moving to Indonesia, and one which
was taken as entrance protocol as a freshman in his private (extremely
exclusive) Honolulu private highschool.
His IQ was clocked at 172 and 166 respectively (IQ's normally have a
fluctuation of 6 or 7 points from test to test so that discrepency is
normal).
That puts Obama in the certifiable clinical genius category.
Obama's campaign is apparently NOT HAPPY about The Washington Post preparing
to disclose this, because they fear it adds to his reputation as no an
"everyman" and being too "professorial".
But that aside...if elected, does this make Obama, the retainer of the
highest certified IQ of any president in American history? |
|
|
|
10/23/2008 11:55:32 AM · #200 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by cynthiann:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't want someone just learning about the world and foreign policy to be in charge at this critical time in our history. |
Then your greatest fear should be a Republican win followed by a sudden health problem... |
A little off topic, I know, but for me, President Palin is a horrible horrible thought... |
Maybe we could increase her foreign policy experience by moving her to the space station so she can see every country from her home? We'll budget a return flight right after we pay off the country's $50 trillion debt. ;-) |
Better do it quick or she'll have to go to Russia to get there. |
|
