Obama, not Christ, not the Anti-Christ

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   
As we go forward in this general election campaign we are going to get
hit from every angle and from every group.

I am making this thread in hopes that thinking people focus not only on issues but that they do it with reality in mind.

In this day and age we are able to find out what the ph balance of a candidates stool was within hours of its occurance. These people are human (don't mean to offend some of you)

Some are going to be so disgusted with these human qualities and experiences that they will just do nothing and vote for no one.
There is no such thing as voting for no one. Bush thanks you all non voters for his 8 years.

All ready people have tied them to criminals, underground NWO groups, baby killer McCain crap, Bilderberg, Freemasons, .....oh, the list is simply endless. (How could I forget the Anti-Christ garbage)

I honestly don't know how these candidates are going to be able to walk that tightrope that they absolutely must walk in order to become elected.
Ron Paul did what he could but if you don't play the game you don't get elected.

The tricky part is going to be balancing the cynisism of reality with some optomism for change.

People, someone is going to be our next President. If you want to view it as it will just be more of the same, or that it doesn't make a difference who is President, then you are almost too far gone to be helped. But even if you are. Everyone can figure out on their own that one President CAN be worse than another. It is your Right and your civic duty to do your part so that the "worst" candidate does not take office. Are there some non voters that have learned nothing from the Bush disaster?

The point and purpose of this thread is to have people explain why their candidate is the best choice and to do so without obfuscation or twilight zone type stuff. Just relevant and factual issues. Who is going to "help" America? Why are they going to help America?
......Not "Obama is the anti Christ so I'm not voting for him" or "McCain wants to kill babies by giving them hot bottled water" or "I like Obama because he is Black" We have plenty of threads that you can take those things to. We don't have plenty of threads that deal with the reality of the politics and the issues.

I am in fact leaning towards Obama but mostly because the lynch pin for me in believing in an economic turn around is getting out of Iraq.

I'm no mod, so I just have to ask as nicely as I can that anyone that posts does so with keeping in the spirit of "honest" "rational" "issue" related debate.
I don't cast my vote until November, so I am open to be more educated about the issues and more hopefully, some of the readers will also get educated and to the non voters, hopefully give them a reason to pick the "least worst" candidate.




posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Ok, I say McCains policy on Iraq is much better than Obama's, and far more realistic, and in the long run will be far more cost effective.

The surge worked, violence declined considerably. In addition, from my understanding, Most Iraqi's want U.S. troop in Iraq. An honest effort to create democracy in Iraq might just work, as the surge looks to have been incredibly successful. A strong functioning democracy in Iraq with freedoms for all could save our country from WW III, and that would be worth the investment.



posted on Jun, 9 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Obama's plan for national health care is not perfect, but in a time when fewer and fewer employers are providing health insurance for their workers and more and more of the burden of medical expenses is being laid on individuals, it is at least a beginning. I personally would favor a single-payer plan similar to medicaid rather than government-subsidized health insurance because it would be more cost effective and efficient, but it's unlikely the American people would tolerate anything that seems so socialistic. Big pharma and big medicine will have to have big pieces of the pie. In the U.S. we basically have not a left and a right but rather a right and a further right. We are the only developed, first-world nation without some sort of national health care and our phobia about "creeping socialism" is the main cause, never mind that Japan, Germany, Great Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, etc. are not socialist countries.



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Poet, I really disagree about the Iraq assessment. Think about the money we have spent there. What would that money have done for us here, if spent on us here? How is that $4 gallon gas working for you? We were lied to. We are going to pay for this for a long long time. How was your life going before this dumb ass war? Were you afraid of Sadam? He was better than Hugo Chavez to us.

Sestias, I couldn't put it better.
I have heard people say that. " yeah, they might have great health care but they pay high taxes for it" hmmm. I wonder if they would rather pay higher taxes for it or file bankruptcy because they can't pay their $100,000 medical bills? AND, if you pay over $100,000 in taxes than you shouldn't complain about anything at all about your life!

Socialize medical. Communize medical. Nazi(ise) medical. I don't care what you call it. Just make it so we can afford to keep our family and ourselves healthy..........you greedy SOB's!



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Res Ipsa
 


Great thread!


I'm voting for Obama because I don't want to continue on the path we're on. We need out of Iraq. I think this way lies madness. I don't think Bush has/had the people's best interests at heart. I don't think he cares about us at all.

I think Obama cares about the people. About equality, health care, troop equipment, scholarships, veterans benefits, individual rights. Whatever he can do for this country is going to be better than what Bush/McCain is doing or will do.

Obama is the "least worst"
We have a chance with him. McCain has changed so much. He used to be a man I admired and could even see myself voting for. There was a time, I hoped for a Dem/Repub ticket and he was the Repub. But as I heard on TV tonight, the McCain of 2000 would not support or even vote for the McCain of 2008. He's a totally different person. And I do not trust that.


[edit on 20-6-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Res Ipsa
Poet, I really disagree about the Iraq assessment. Think about the money we have spent there. What would that money have done for us here, if spent on us here? How is that $4 gallon gas working for you? We were lied to. We are going to pay for this for a long long time. How was your life going before this dumb ass war? Were you afraid of Sadam? He was better than Hugo Chavez to us.


Looking back is one thing. But you need to objectively look forward as well. If we leave Iraq there is a very real possibility that the vacuum we leave will be filled primarily by Iranian influence. If that happens, gas is going to be $10 a gallon, not $4.

If we can continue to move towards stabilizing Iraq it would be far better than "change" just for the sake of change.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


I almost half-hazardly agree with you Jaime.

But i ask, how do you purpose we stabalize Iraq?
They've made it very clear that tehy're not in full need of our support anymore.

Give a man a fish. Feed him for a day
Teach a man to fish. Feed him for the rest of his life --- or something liek that


At what point do we say we've done enough for another countries problems, so we can start concentrating on our own.

Stabilize Iraq?

how about Stabilize Home first (just my opinion)



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:46 AM
link   
i also really like the title of this thread

i think it points out the over-lying problem in this very election

all thigns considered equal:

Think of Obama supports as "far right" and Obama opponents as "far left"

The far left fear obama blindly and hence call him anti-christ. There is no merit behind such claim, they are merely bandwagon greenhorns setting out on a 3 month political adventure so they can feel like they were a part of the solution


Far right support obama and call him a savior out of sheer spite for the far left. They have no actual opinion, other than they disagree with the 'far left". Everyone knows someone like this

when they're around cardinals fans - they're for the cubs
around cubs fans - for the cardinals.

etc


I really like this post

You know how you foot feels asleep after setting on it for a while?

My brain starts to feel the same way after reading someof the posts in the 2008 forum.

This type of thread is a refreshign delight.

i wonder if i might be so bold as to ask the OP to contribute to my thread, which talks about the voting records of the canddiates.

you can find the link here if you wish

Voting Records speak for themselves



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 05:15 AM
link   
I never have thought that we should have invaded Iraq, I thought it was foolish from the beginning, but being that the surge does seem to work, and there is reason to be hopeful that Iraq can develop a representative government and become a moderate Muslim country, and that is worth the additional investment. It would be foolish to pull out now, after all we have invested when it looks like we might succeed.

Are you aware the Obama wants to give huge amounts of charity money to the UN? Obama plans on send far more of our money overseas than McCain ever will. Obama's world charity plan is a very bad idea. Most of the money that is supposed to go to help people winds up buying weapons and supporting third world dictators. This charity plan will do more to create wars than to help people.

Look to Obama to get the U.S. caught up in the wars in Africa.

As far as Health care is concerned, McCain has a health care plan that is more universal and more fair to everyone than Obama's plan. Obama only wants to help the poor, not the U.S. working class with their shrinking standards of living. Obama has no intention of treating everyone equally.

While McCain has moved to the right, he will most likely govern from the middle. McCain will not run our country in any way like GW. McCain will not allow the corporate con artists to get by with their crooked schemes like GW has. A republican to balance a democratic party can work very well. I think McCain will govern much more like Ike.

Obama will govern from the far left. Obama will resurrect the welfare state, and embroil the U.S. deeply into African affairs. Obama will make a terrible president, the guy is very arrogant and far too idealistic.

Good to see this thread getting some attention.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Obama is pure "marxist" evil and will take this country down to the depths of insanity if he is elected.

If you want all of america to look like New Orleans, then vote for this moron...................



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   
the country cannot go any lower
if we went any lower, we'd pop out the other side.

why not give Obama a chance? We got nothing to loose.

I trust in the guy.

Another 4 yeras of McBush?

We've seen what 8 can do. Why ask for more.

I'm not into political S&M

i want something different

OBAMA for POTUS
OBAMA for POTUS

Because to vote for anyone else
is to vote for the wrong person......



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by heliosprime
 


So, your pick is 'anti-Christ' then?


On topic, I've been thinking about this since I was SO disappointed yesterday at Obama's decision to support the FISA Legislation. This (among other things) proves his humanity and that he's not perfect or even a "really great candidate". He's not going to provide what I want for this country.

But as I see it, I have a choice:

1. Four more years of Bush (vote for McCain)
2. Throw my vote to someone who has no chance of winning (write in a person who's not even running)
3. Something different than the last 8 years (vote for Obama)

It's a suck choice and I hate that those are my only choices (to me, not voting is not an option) but that seems to be the reality of it.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 09:24 AM
link   
So what makes you so sure that McCain will be a repeat of GW. McCain has a history of putting the rights of the people ahead of special interests, and chances are that he will change the executive branch a great deal, and return that branch to doing the job it is supposed to do, enforcing the laws.

With a democratic congress, McCain provides a balance to keep the government from jumping from one extreme to another. With Obama in the white house with a democratic congress, who knows how extreme our government will be able to go. I'm not exactly enamored with our democratic congress. They don't seem to care much about the rights of the individual these days, and more about the rights of illegals and people in other countries.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

So what makes you so sure that McCain will be a repeat of GW. McCain has a history of putting the rights of the people ahead of special interests, and chances are that he will change the executive branch a great deal, and return that branch to doing the job it is supposed to do, enforcing the laws.


Actually, McCain has quite the opposite of that history.
He tends to always put special interests ahead of people.

My all-time favorite McCain contradiction is

Bailing out Bear Stearns necessary to protect economy. (Apr 2008)

followed up by

Key is to not to bail out homeowners who speculated. (Apr 2008)


I could go on all day but Here is a great source of unbiased information.

For the record, very few people ever put obama on a cloud and said Praise be unto him.

After i changed my mind about the man, it still made no difference to me his flaws.
Why?
All politicians have them.

We vote for politicians to run for office because they know how to get things done in a world of lies, manipulation, 600-page bills, etc etc etc.

I wouldnt know where to begin.

You can't go to a car dealership and buy a collectors edition corvette
then get mad at your car because you cant cram a mattress in the trunk.

A politician is the same way.

It doesnt matter which side of the election you're on.
Both candidates lie to get ahead.

But what you have to do (IMO) is figure out which candidates' lies are in your best interest.

Obama or McCain?

For me, and apparently a lot of other people the choice is clear - Obama.

Until something drastic happens (if ever) to change my opinion, it shall stay here




[edit on 21-6-2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Res Ipsa
 


Excellent thread Res Ipsa, someone had to say it and I could not have said it better myself.

These threads that allege this and that do not add value to one of the most important decisions affecting America's future for generations. It also affects the rest the World whatever the outcome.

However, I believe that the problem with American politics currently is the complete lack of accountability for actions / inactions of the current (and previous) administration.

Whatever happens come voting time will not change anything unless the people demand more of their President - what he / she can do for the betterment of the country and less on what the President is made of, the colour of his skin and where he was born.

However, some people will never learn.

Brei.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Personally, I have to agree with bailing out Bears and Stearns because letting these corporate entities go bankrupt would hurt a whole lot of innocent people who have their retirements invested in these companies. That is the problem with the corporate entity, the people at the top get away with their stolen money, and the little people pay for the fall. Ideally, any bailout would also go after the people who profited from the most from the badly financed loans, and take all the money they made out of these deals that created so much trouble, and then some more.

As far as property speculators, I have no desire to reward their foolish and greedy investments with a government bailout. I feel very sorry for the people who bought homes they couldn't afford, but I have greater sympathy for the people who have waited for the market correction on the price of homes so that they could buy a house they can afford.

On this issue, I think McCain's approach is far superior, and far better for the average person than Obama's.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
So what makes you so sure that McCain will be a repeat of GW. McCain has a history of putting the rights of the people ahead of special interests...


McCain does have an encouraging history, but as I observe his choices and voting record over the past 8 years, I see him moving closer and closer to Bush, to the point where he is actually beginning to merge with Bush.

The McCain of 8 years ago would not vote for or support the McCain of today (Howard Dean). So, IMO, if you're looking at his history to evaluate him, thinking he will be that man again, I think you'll be disappointed.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

Personally, I have to agree with bailing out Bears and Stearns
Maybe you have yet to read about This

A company is no different from an individual in this sense:
A company makes bad choices - goes out of buisiness. That is the companies fault. Do not bail them out.

An individual makes bad choices - looses their home. That is their fault. Do not bail them out.

Bear Stearns investors made a bad investment decisions. Its the stock market. It happens. It'll fix its self. Don't bail them out.

Bailing out Bear Stearns for their courrupt and deceptive practices would be no more noble than giving Enron a free-pass with a slap on the wrist.




As far as property speculators, I have no desire to reward their foolish and greedy investments with a government bailout. I feel very sorry for the people who bought homes they couldn't afford, but I have greater sympathy for the people who have waited for the market correction on the price of homes so that they could buy a house they can afford.
Again - they made bad decisions just like Bear Stearns did. Bear Stearns made the decision to loan money to these people.



On this issue, I think McCain's approach is far superior, and far better for the average person than Obama's.


I respect your opinion, because you explain yourself
thank you


I just see it as dont bail anyone out.
The economy wont be 'hurt' over bear stearns. Why?
Because another company will aquire bear stearns for a cheap investment, move in, fix the problems, expand, fire stagnant employees and execs, and become twice as profitable.

Thats how the economy works.
"survival of the fitest" if you will.

atleast - in my humble opinion



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

I never have thought that we should have invaded Iraq, I thought it was foolish from the beginning, but being that the surge does seem to work, and there is reason to be hopeful that Iraq can develop a representative government and become a moderate Muslim country, and that is worth the additional investment. It would be foolish to pull out now, after all we have invested when it looks like we might succeed.


You never thought we should have invaded Iraq? You must be one of the rare few.
You see, I bought into what people like Powell told us. I wanted someone to get crushed after 9/11 and I was sick and tired of Sadamm giving us the finger by ignoring all those resolutions.
...hindsight of course makes me sick to know how fooled we were. I am guessing that you too will come to see that the "surge" is not going to achieve the goal, also, Iraq leadership is more loyal to Iran than they are to us. But they will take our money for as long as we keep pouring it in there.
Iraq is a huge dam ready to burst and the only thing keeping it from bursting is our fat finger jammed in the hole. Nobody is going to repair that dam. It will stand for as long as we keep our finger there. But how long are we willing to do this if we know in the end we have to remove our finger or starve.
There is no win/win solution. But, if I were POTUS, I would go over to Malaki and say..."yeah, we are leaving. How do you want this to go down?...(just to be polite and diplomatic like)...then I would "tell" him how it is going to happen. You, Malaki, declare Iraq stable enough to self govern and owe the wonderful United States for this "Victory" and "Freedom" ( find all the platitudes that are going to make great media sound bytes) America then claims victory and to show that we are not empire builders but liberators, we will honor Mr. Malaki's request to return home to America knowing that we have yet another friend in the middle east. (just political rhetoric the hell out of this to make everyone happy) Thats my end game.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Res Ipsa
You see, I bought into what people like Powell told us. I wanted someone to get crushed after 9/11 and I was sick and tired of Sadamm giving us the finger by ignoring all those resolutions.


Me, too! I agree with your whole post!



But, if I were POTUS, I would go over to Malaki and say..."yeah, we are leaving. How do you want this to go down?...


Res Ipsa in '08!
That's what needs to happen.
We're leaving.
What's your input?
Here's ours.
Here's how it's going to happen.
Buh-bye.





 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join