i never said he didnt flip flop
but JetXnet has a tendency to just post something and leave zero source information, move on, rake in the ATS points, and be happy with it.
Regardless of the poster, yes, you could find flipflopping from both candidates, i've pointed this out in numerous other threads.
But i've also pointed out that you have to decide which flipologist you have to agree with.
Do you side with the guy who voted against MLK day, then, after the heat got onto him, he flipped? (McCain)
- under civil rights.
Or do you side with the candidate who allegedy
flipped on NAFTA. A few comments about your first video.
1.) A senior campaign spokesperson. I've recently started talking about the issues of internal/external struggles when running for candidacy. Your
idiot campaign staff can ruin you faster than your opponent. Just because this guy 'may' have said it, doesnt make it part of Obama's campaign.
Does it make it true for McCain that a terrorist attack would benefit him greatly? Because his 'senior spokesperson' said it would....
2.)That 'private' phone conversation, that 'allegedly' exists holds just as much water as someone saying bush is responsible for Katrina. We know
bush obviously didnt cause the hurricane, so it doesnt hold water, but was he responsible for the outcome? That's up for debate. If i posted on
here, semper, that i called you on the phone and you told me you liked were a McCain campaign lackey and you get paid 2000 dollars a month to post as
much garbage against obama as you could, does it make it true? (i know its not true, im just using it as an example)
Your second video
Yep - he's an idiot on this one. He did say one thing the first time, something the second time, and something else the third time. He
flip-flop-flipped. However; its the mans religion, its the mans church. Tell me what significance
his condemnation bares on his candidacy?
If we're going to make this election about Religion and skin color - then sure, lets use Obama's church against him. Just like the media used
Romney's beliefs against him. Pretty petty, just my opinion.
Your third video i can't argue with.
Your fourth video
Oh COME ON Semper, you've posted better stuff than this. This video has 0.001% truth, and the rest lies.
The truthful part is that Obama did vote against capping credit card interest rates. If he had voted to get the bill passed, and the bill had passed,
it would have put a new cap on the credit card interest rates that would be forced into lock mode. Meaning it can't be changed again for a long
time. Obama, and many others, thought that the new 'cap' % was STILL
too high. So to vote for a bill that you don't agree with -- IE:
The credit card companies say "hey !!! we're lowering interest rate caps, cmon now" by lowering it to 30%. Big deal, 30% is STILL way too high.
Obama did vote against--and Clinton voted for--an amendment that would have placed a 30% cap on the interest rate that could be charged on any
extension of credit. The amendment failed by a vote of 74 to 24 in 2005. When the amendment came up for a vote, Obama was standing next to Sen. Paul
Sarbanes, D-MD, the senior Democrat on the banking committee and the leader of those opposing the landmark bill, which would make it harder for
Americans to get rid of debt.
As for whether the 30% cap was too high, that's certainly a matter of opinion. Sen. Mark Dayton of Minnesota, sponsor of the amendment, said on the
Senate floor that such a cap "is still consumer abuse" but is much better than rates of more than 300%, which he said were being charged by some
loan operations in the country
So we can dispell the notion that its obama' fault. Clearly to vote YES would screw americans worse by forcing this bill to stay in play for a long
long time. You can work for a new
bill that lowers it much lower than 30%
But if we're going to put blame on credit card industry problems, lets talk about how the current administration signed a bill
I urge you, especially if you have show time, to keep an eye out for a documentary called Maxed Out: Hard Times
overview available here
where it talks about big banking interests supporting the Bush administration - writing this bill - pushing for its passing - and getting bush to sign
for it. For-ev-er screwing americans who need a second chance.
and, by far, my favorite: the last video.
I live in Illinois. I've followed Obama as a senator. Allow me to tell you that Barack Obama has done more for my state than my govenor could ever
dream of, on any issue, on any topic.
Barack Obama did issue a task force. When the bill came to the govenors desk for Illinois state-wide health care, guess what happened?
The only way Blagojevich would allow to pay for such bill was through a RIDICULOUS bill called Gross
Receipt sales tax
which NOBODY supported. So if you cant get all parties on board to pay for what makes a crap state (illinois SUCKS) a little
bit better, then you work with what you're given. Misleading statements like what this last video shows, only make obama look better to those who
know what really happened.
Next point: at 2:33 in the video
It is speculated
that Obama got this deal for future favors. That seems to be a recurring theme these days from anti-obama people. ALLEGEDLY.
Nothing proven - just more conjectures. No different than slurring the man for his religion or skin color, IMO. But, ill give it a little slack,
and move onto my next point:
Typical white person - hey - if the shoe fits, wear it. To be noble and say when you see a 'gangsta' walking down the street at night, you dont
cross the road to avoid them. If you don't - then you are not a 'typical white person'
I am a white person - and i see this VERY thing from white people all the time. Its not that their racist - he never called 'white people'
DAMN im outa characters, next post.
[edit on 25-6-2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]