Why is everyone so scared of President Obama?

[Digital_Trucker]

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

Point taken.:p BO does have a quite a job ahead of him to knock o'l W off his throne though!! Something tells me we won't see 365day calenders with Obamaisms. Oh, well, all good things must end.

:rotfl:Good ol' W probably left us enough silly quotes to take care of the next millenium's worth of calendars, so any Obamaisms we get are just the icing on the cake, so to speak.

[Mikhayl]

Eh, nobody compares to hockey-six-pack-mom Palin, *winks*, I betcha, *winks*, doggone it, *winks*

[Kapt Z]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

Eh, nobody compares to hockey-six-pack-mom Palin, *winks*, I betcha, *winks*, doggone it, *winks*

But, no one is really listening to her anyway. They're too busy checking out her..... 'platform'.:p

[JHuschke]

No, you won't be the same under Obama. No one is scared of him..if they are, they shouldn't be. He is nothing less but a racist who has people he hates voting for him. Stupid people, wake up!

[Task Force]

Ok obama has some good and bad ideas.

[Rockin Robbins]

Goober, that's an irresponsible statement. Extraordinary statements require extraordinary proof. Where is your evidence that Obama is anything more than a guy willing to take all the money that government and lobbyists throw his way? And how does that make him a racist. Even his well known statement about residents of small towns being afraid, clinging to their guns and religion was only elitist, not racism. Some country club Republicans could well have said the same thing. All it makes him is an ordinary politician.

Obama is a member of American society at large, not part of the hip-hop black culture that refuses to adopt mainstream American culture. He talks like an educated American. He uses ideas like an educated American. He's way too left-leaning. But none of that can be stretched to calling him a racist. He deserves credit for keeping race out of the equation to be best of his ability. Why do you think Jesse Jackson and Louis Farrakhan among others aren't too fond of Barack Obama? It is because he has succeeded in transcending race and running as a human being. Yes, racists by the million will vote for and against him, but none of that reflects on Barack Obama.

This country is full of successful and great black lawyers, doctors, dentists, accountants and executives. Barack Obama is the first high profile black politician to walk through the open door of achievement as a representative not just of black America, but of all of America. It is the end of black politics as it shamefully existed since the death of Martin Luther King. It is the beginning of true black achievement. Jackson an Farrakhan can't stand it!

Mikhayl, there is more to Palin than meets the eye. She is not Dan Quayle. As hokey as she is, she is a real force to be reckoned with. Don't let prejudice related to use of language cloud your judgment. I know women like her and they can be reasoned and dealt with as equals. Let's not try to ridicule all people into talking the same, thinking the same, wearing the same clothes and reciting the same dogma. This is a woman who took her medicine for turning in a corrupt politician who happened to be her boss and was perfectly willing to go home for the duration if that was the cost of doing the right thing. That's strength, even if you don't agree that we should catch corrupt Republican politicians.

[Mikhayl]

I wasn't specifically mocking her language, rather her ever so poor attempt at looking like the average american or worse to gather votes for her running mate. Besides I look at her from a foreign eye, her so called political achievements in Wasilla & Alaska don't really interest me. But I see her calling the war in Iraq a "task of god", talking about Afghanistan as a neighbouring country, being so confused that she seems to be willing to protect Hamas from the anti-democracy crowds, etc.
In that sense, I wish her language was all there was to her.
Now you can say "yes but she's not running for president", that's true, but picking that woman for VP is still an insult to the intelligence of the voters IMO, all she does is appealing to the far right.

[Rockin Robbins]

But unfortunately, Obama is equally wet behind the years. He doesn't even have any Senate experience, having spent all of his 150 or so days in the Senate running for president and not learning the job. You can't attack Palin's VICE-presidential candidacy without acknowledging the much worse qualifications of Barack Obama.

Please read your first post and reflect that substituting Obama's name for Palin's results in a statement of equal veracity. OK, he wouldn't claim to be a six-pack guy. You threw out the bath water all right, but also threw out your own baby contained in it. That's child abuse, sir!:rotfl:

By the way, do you KNOW what Barack Obama's political achievements in Chicago were? Do you ever wonder why he has never claimed to have made any? Could it be that he knows that if you knew, you wouldn't vote for him? He hides his political past because it would destroy his future, as it should. Although Palin's political past is an open book, Obama can hide his secure in the knowledge that the American news media is dead.

It will not investigate because it wants him elected and will go to any length to cause that to happen. Those who refuse to look at this and past elections through that prism cannot understand American politics. What the Soviet Union had to force its media to do, American mainstream media does willingly. That's OK. It's a self correcting process as more people understand the process. It will mean the loss of influence of the formerly great journalism departments of major universities, the source of the problem. But it will happen as people seek the truth. They will look elsewhere to find it. The Dan Rather incident, broadcasting a knowingly false story regarding President Bush's military service, was typical of the functioning of American news media as unpaid Democratic press agents. The American public largely knows this. The foreign public does not.

Rest assured SOMEBODY in the mainstream media will eventually grow some fortitude and out the story, if only for selfish reasons. What I have said in another post in great detail will become common knowledge and all those who voted for him that have the national interest at heart will realize that they voted for a person up to his eyeballs in responsibility for actually causing the housing crisis at the root of the entire world's economic problems today. They will be ashamed that they supported him to fix the problem that Barack Obama was instrumental in causing. Then they will be angry that those with the responsibility of informing them chose not to.

The rest of the country, whose political life consists merely of voting themselves cash from the government budget, will most likely be proud of Mr. Obama, ignorant that they have done incalculable harm to themselves.

[Mikhayl]

You speak just like a politician, turning around the question without adressing it, and going on on something completely different that suits you better.
But yeah I know talking politics on the internet is merely asking for that kind of thing, nevermind

[AVGWarhawk]

I have stated this before and will do so again. It does not matter who makes it...either will be hung out to dry by Americans and the media. What was once great today and the future of America will be nothing more than a popularity poll showing great disgust with the President. Yet, in the background, are hundreds of men and women who are utter lunatics that are really running the country. Their captain is Pelosi and second mate is Barney Frank. Neither could run a popsicle stand. So, in reality, we could vote in Mickey Mouse and we end up with the same end result. More failures, pork barrel spending and general disregard for anything that might work. These are the people that we need to be looking at replacing. Term limits need to be instituted and quickly.

[Frame57]

Yep! Agreed term limits and all the &*%$ get is a 401K for retirement... Maybe then wew ould not get crooks running for Congress or Senate.

[August]

My biggest problem with "President Obama" is that Congress is unlikely to change hand this time around, and when we have a President and a Congress both from the same party it usually means trouble for the country.

[kurtz]

Agreed, what we, well I, always hope for in dear old Blighty is for a hung parliament then the fools who inhabit it can't do any damage.

[Rockin Robbins]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

You speak just like a politician, turning around the question without adressing it, and going on on something completely different that suits you better.
But yeah I know talking politics on the internet is merely asking for that kind of thing, nevermind

No I answer your concerns about non-consequential religious beliefs and inexperience with the much more consequential governmental beliefs and greater inexperience of the Democratic presidential candidate. I also, in contrast to your statement of conclusions, provide evidence and examples to illustrate my point that Palin, a state governor for the past two years, is more experienced than Barack Obama, senator in absentia for less than 200 days, and before that, community organizer with the task of blackmailing banks to make bad loans is many times more apt to do harm to the country.

Win or lose, you haven't heard the last of Sarah Palin. She is real. Her life is an open book and you see what you get. She's shown a willingness to call foul when the law breaker was the most powerful Republican in Alaska. She was content to take whatever consequences came her way as a result. That kind of strength of character will get my vote any day, even for a Democrat who would show similar morality. Abraham Lincoln was like that and ridiculed for the same reasons. Character trumps "experience" sometimes. I wish her success, no matter what the result of the election.

Then we will see if success makes or breaks her. More people are broken by success than master it, and she is not immune from the corruption that comes as part of the package.

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by August

My biggest problem with "President Obama" is that Congress is unlikely to change hand this time around, and when we have a President and a Congress both from the same party it usually means trouble for the country.

Did you hold that same view of President Bush when the Republicans held power in all three being the Whitehouse, Senate, and House of Reps?