It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Once and for all: Why you should vote for Obama

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 03:39 AM
link   
You have Andrew, several posts with just the external text but no source.

So, back to that question about how Obama answered that questionnaire.



Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, "No, my writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns."
Actually, Obama's writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

35. Do you support state legislation to:
a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.
b. ban assault weapons? Yes.
c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

Obama's campaign said, "Sen. Obama didn't fill out these state Senate questionnaires--a staffer did--and there are several answers that didn't reflect his views then or now. He may have jotted some notes on the front page of the questionnaire, but some answers didn't reflect his views."


www.ontheissues.org...

Do you believe Obama and his staff when they later said a "staffer" filled out Obama's questionnaire for him, and that it didn't reflect Obama's views on gun control (see above post) when confronted with this issue?



[edit on 6-7-2008 by jetxnet]




posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 03:44 AM
link   
jetxnet just became the first person on my ignore list because of his nonstop racism, fearmongering, and lying. Thank God ATS has that function.

Andrew, great topic - It's good for people to actually get educated on the issues that matter, not whether Obama wore a flag pin or not.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by jetxnet
 


1.) No, when i post "external information" i always give my sources. I dont believe in plagiarism as "Some people" i could name, but wont'

2.)


Do you believe Obama and his staff when they later said a "staffer" filled out Obama's questionnaire for him, and that it didn't reflect Obama's views on gun control (see above post) when confronted with this issue?


Yep. I believe them. Why? Because im not ignorant. I also believe that when McCains advisor said "a terrorist attack would help mccain" that it didnt come from McCain

Political zealots are just liek religious zealots

their hearts are in the right place (sticking up for Obama)
but their minds are off in another dimension.

Obama is for pro-choice gun-laws. If you'd take the time required to read the instructions i posted for you so you can setup yoru XP text-to-voice translator

then you'd be able to visit all of my links and have a digitized voice read to you how Obama has voted on such instances in the past


Atleast you're finally quoting credible sources


you still avoid the new questions however

1.) how do i flipflop?

2.) you cant provide a single example of me not providing my sources with external information

3.)
explain to me, in what way, a 50-cal long range sniper rifle is explicit to protect your freedoms?

4.) Tell me. What is the purpose of an M4A1 in civilian life, other than killing another human being

5.) why do you continue to post other peoples' information wtihout giving them proper credit with a LINK (like the T&C says you must :shk: )


[edit on 7/6/2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by evanmontegarde
 


Thank you, evan


Im happy to see im not the only person up at 4 am.

On topic


my opponent cannot answer simple, fundamental questions of this argument and instead chooses to allude to vague articles written from biased entities

(assuming, of course, he chose to provide his sources at all)

So im curious

Are there any other people out there, who could be considered atleast credible, that could come hither and challenge the issues that i support Obama for?

Because so far, its just been a game of tennis

back and forth

back and forth

back and forth




i provide unbiased information for my sources
my opponents provide nothing for theirs

Im really yearning for someone to come and challenge this


......assuming that its possible to be challeneged?



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 03:54 AM
link   


Yep. I believe them. Why? Because im not ignorant. I also believe that when McCains advisor said "a terrorist attack would help mccain" that it didnt come from McCain


I rest my case.



Political zealots are just liek religious zealots

their hearts are in the right place (sticking up for Obama)
but their minds are off in another dimension.


Of course Andrew, that must be it. These staffers just don't know how to answer important questions on state Senate forms for Obama. Forms that were originally intended for Obama.

I guess Obama can scratch chicken notes on the form and then have someone else fill it out from his staff that are unaligned with his views.



Obama is for pro-choice gun-laws. If you'd take the time required to read the instructions i posted for you so you can setup yoru XP text-to-voice translator


Is that how the Obama camp instructed you to get your info? What a shame. The XP text-to-voice is very annoying. This technology for screen readers like Jaws and Dragon Naturally Speaking have been around for over 10 years and many blind people don't even like them!

I'll pass on that one Andrew, thank you.





[edit on 6-7-2008 by jetxnet]



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetxnet


Of course Andrew, that must be it.
[edit on 6-7-2008 by jetxnet]



I'm glad we finally agree.

im curious, since you are the main opponent challenging me here,
are you going to challanenge all of the issues that i say are important to me?
are you going to use unbiased sources, and at (the very least) provide your sources of information?

Are you going to answer MY questions? Because i answered yours. I mean, if you wanna play ball - great - but play fair. Going off on a little tirade isnt exactly going about it by the books.

You can refer to my numerous previous posts for my questions aimed at you.


(disclaimer) i am not attacking you, Jetx. You are challenging my likings of Obama's policies, and i am merely proving to people that you are, once again, lying and plagiarizing other people's thoughts.

If you wish to prove otherwise, then the burden of proof is on you.


+7 more 
posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

Sure you can.

Pro 1st amendment, until it infringes on the rights of another.


You ended your own argument right here. Owning a gun does not infringe on anybody else's rights.






he supports that each local government is allowed to decide their own laws

its called pro choice


Seriously, this may be the most convoluted logic I've seen on ATS since Obama declared his campaign was being publicly funded because the public was donating money to him.

Having a government mandate that I have no choice in a matter is NOT pro choice.

That would be like saying that if Tennessee outlawed abortion, Tennessee is a pro choice state. Idiotic reasoning in my opinion.



you dont educate yourself well enough to understand that the 2nd amendment is

its a poorly written amendment by our founding fathers that leaves loopholes and speculations



This is even more ridiculous than your last comment. Maybe you should go to bed earlier tomorrow.


The history of the 2nd Amendment includes rulings in the 1800's in which it was determined that laws preventing blacks from individually owning guns were unconstitutional. I think it's safe to say that James Madison et al. were a bit better writers than you. I doubt that 200 years from now anybody is going to be quoting inane posts on ATS written by Andrew E. Wiggin.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by evanmontegarde
jetxnet just became the first person on my ignore list because of his nonstop racism, fearmongering, and lying. Thank God ATS has that function.


You know what? That's a great idea. In the 3 years I've been an ATS member, I have never used that function. But I am going to join you and ignore 2 members. For the reasons you mentioned, plus the repeated plagiarism that the staff doesn't seem to notice or care about. At least what I see will be a lot "cleaner". Thanks for the idea.


Andrew, as far as telling people why THEY should vote for Obama, I can't do that. That's for them to decide. I can only say why I'm voting for him. And I think I've made that pretty clear already. Probably my top ten (in no order):

1. His goal is to bring troops home and end the war. (Even if it takes 4 years. That's better than 100.)
2. He's experienced in working across the aisle in the State Senate.
3. He's pro-choice.
4. He will strengthen civil rights enforcement (minorities, women and gay people - Equal rights for all)).
5. Healthcare coverage for everyone.
6. He supports stem-cell research.
7. He's "Green" (goal of oil independence)
8. He's courageous enough to TALK instead of BOMB, but willing to do what's necessary.
9. He is thoughtful, intelligent, honorable and principled.
10. He's NOT McCain

Oh, and these are really MY reasons, not some bogus reasons from a non-credible blog.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
3.)explain to me, in what way, a 50-cal long range sniper rifle is explicit to protect your freedoms?

4.) Tell me. What is the purpose of an M4A1 in civilian life, other than killing another human being


First, to answer these... Andrew, I'm afraid I must disagree with you on these two points.

1 - It is not necessary to justify the right of individuals in the US to own firearms. The right to own and carry the necessary weaponry to defend one's self is a human right, even without the 2nd Amendment.

2 - Regarding the .50-cal sniper rifle... there are a couple (at least) of shooting sports that make use of single shot, high power, long range accurate rifles. There is long range target shooting, and silhouette shooting. So there are 'valid', if you will, recreational 'reasons' to own such rifles.

3 - Regarding the M4A1, there is also a sport called practical rifle, or maybe something else by now, that involves scenarios in which such a rifle might be used.

So, there are in fact popular sports that use each of these weapons. But that is really beside the point. The reason behind the 2nd Amendment is to provide US citizens with the ability to defend themselves and the country against attempted tyranny, from within or from without. That is why the 2nd Amendment exists.

On to why I am going to vote for Obama: It really boils down to, as I've said before, he is different than what we've had for the last 8 years at least. The Bush 'Administration' is, in my opinion, the worst disaster to befall the US in my lifetime. Worse than Nixon. Worse than Johnson. Way worse than Carter. And McCain has made it painfully clear that he will be more of the same. I'm willing to give McCain the benefit of the doubt that he is not quite as totally corrupt as Bush, but he may be.

Obama is going to do something different. And that's enough for me. I fully recognize he may not be a great president, but I believe he has the potential to be.

Plus, I like Michelle better than I like Cindy...



I see that the NRA (of which I am a life member) is going to start an ad campaign soon trying to work up fear that Obama is going to take guns away.

It's a non-issue. For one thing, there is no support for that in the country, either in Congress or the real US. For another, if by chance some such legislation were to be passed, it would be massively defied.

I recall a story from when Clinton first signed the semi-automatic 'assault' rifle ban... a So. Cal. group of enthusiasts of those rifles published an ad saying that they would be gathered at a particular range on a particular date, and if any law enforcement folks wanted to come confiscate rifles, they (LE) would be most welcome to try.

Nobody showed up.

Any attempted ban on firearm ownership will meet similar defiance. It won't work, it's a non-issue, is not even necessary and I believe and hope that Obama, whatever his personal feelings on the matter, is smart enough to realize that.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 10:30 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.




[edit on 7/6/2008 by Gools]



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 


Oh!!! Thank you for those links! Now I can help beyond ATS! I wonder if the letter I sent his campaign about internet board rumors a while ago had any input into this decision...

Woo-Hoo!




[edit on 6-7-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


While i agree, partly with you BH, think of it this way (atleast this is how i think of it)

I posted reasons in this thread of why i'm voting for Obama. The reasons i choose are the same reasons i believe others should vote for Obama, because? They are my reasons, so of course i believe in them.

Once and for all: Why you should vote for Obama


election time is all about persuasion in my opinion. Find things your candidate has done well, excelled at, and can do again, and boast them in hopes others will jump aboard




again - just my opinion.


About the gun issue:
As i said. I own 2 guns. But i do not believe anyone should own such a high powered rifle in the private sector.

You dont see people driving our with sherman tanks that are capable of firing.
No one shooting off mortar rounds


Though one could make the argument of target practice and recreation.

I admit that i got to shoot a high powered rifle once, when i was young. I dont know what the gun was, but i know it left a huge hole in a 2 inch piece of metal


It was amazing, exhilarating, and fun
but imagine what that could do to human flesh

I support the notion of "common sense gun laws" by "leaving it in the hands of local governments"

Obama has never said he'd impose a federal regulation...he's merely trying to persuade people that this is the way to go (atleast thats how i view it)

Im not a member of the NRA....i just never signed up. Though i am not against them. I love my 2 guns, and i go hunting every year (more of a bow-hunter myself)



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 01:12 PM
link   
no jet, people have it rigth about Obama on gun control. He is the worst EVER.

Read the second amendment, it mentions nothig of hunting. And inner cities are the place you need protection the most. Who are you to tell me what I should or should'nt own? A UZI? Non of your business. Trust me if you do not pose a threat to me MY Uzi will not be pointed at you.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Okay I'm torn on the abortion issue, because in a way, it is murder. This country has laws against murder, but lots of people think that it's okay if the baby is still in the womb, that doesn't make sense to me. It is still a living lifeform that you are KILLING, simple and plain. And on another note, why is it JUST the woman's choice, because lots of women go and do it and don't even ask the father. That baby is that father's creation also, so why shouldn't he have a say?


On the Iraq issue I think that we shouldn't have even went there in the first place, same with Vietnam and Korea. And all 3 of those a UNDECLARED wars. It is against the law of the Constitution to go to war with a nation and not declare war. But the thing is, is that if Obama becomes president, will he REALLY bring the troops home, this is just my opinion, but I do not think so. I actually think the war is going to get bigger, no matter if it's McCain or Obama. Obama has already said that he wants troops in northern Pakistan, which is a MAJOR mistake. That country has an unstable regime with NUCLEAR WARHEADS, that would be a deadly mistake if we put troops there.


On energy and oil, the whole ethanol thing is just outright stupid. It takes more energy to refine corn into ethanol than it is worth, and plus, ethanol is not good on your car, it erodes the engine and the gas tank. I do agree about nuclear energy, France runs most of their country of nuclear energy, why not us? I totally agree about the U.S. sending over billions of dollars to middle eastern dictators. But what really needs to happen is the government needs to stop playing politics, and really sit down and try to come up with an energy solution. If they TRULY wanted to, they could, look at water, water can be used a fuel souce. Yes, it is expensive, but if they really wanted to they would do some research and find a cheaper way to convert water into an energy source. The thing is, I can't remember his name, but a man came up with the design to run a car on water, and a couple months later he was dead, coincidence? I think not. The truth is, the government will never let out an energy source unless it will make them TONS of money. They don't want water as an energy source because water is so easily available, and cheap.

Okay, on gun control, this is what makes me mad. You bring up the Constitution when it supports one of Obama's views, but ignore it on an issue like this. The 2nd Amendment does not have a stipulation in it saying 'but we have the right to implement local gun bans', so show me where it says that and I'll be fine with it. You can not have a gun control measure and support the 2nd Amendment at the same time, it's impossible. Same thing with the assault rifle ban, show me where the Constitution says in the 2nd Amendment that the right to bear arms is okay, but not assault rifles. Have you ever though how much safer this country would be if lets say 75% of the people owned handguns. I think a person about to rob a store would think twice if he knew a majority of the people around him also had a gun. And you say that the Constitution guarantee's an individuals right to bear arms, but doesn't mean that the state or local government can't constrain that right? Isn't that is what the Constitution is about? A United States that excercises INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, and freedom of those rights. I'm sorry but your argument on this makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER.

On immigration, I mostly agree. We HAVE to get control of our borders, I understand that this country is a nation of immigrants. The thing is is that ILLEGAL immigrants drive up healthcare costs subsantially, so I'm getting tired of paying a 500 dollar hospital bill for just having strep throat. But the MAIN reason healthcare is so high though, is because are governnment is TOO invovled in healthcare, when the government got involved, the quality of healthcare went DOWN, and the price went UP, same thing with Education, the government got involved, and now our kids are dumber than ever, and if you want to send your kid to a private school, it is ridiculously expensive, but that's getting off the subject. When it comes down to it, enforcing the borders is on thing the government has full power to do, and they're not doing it right now, period.

All the stuff about Obama's name, religion and him not wearing an american flag pin is irrelevant, that should not matter at all when choosing someone for President of the United States, and anyone who bashes anyone for that kind of stuff is ignorant.

When it comes down to it, I personally do not think Obama OR McCain are fit to be President of these United States. They both have violated the Constituyion along with 90% of the Congress and the Senate, and President Bush. We need to have a President that will stand up to Congress and the Senate on the unconstitutional bills that are put up all the time. We need to have a President that has the balls to say, "i'm vetoing this bill, and all of you should reconsider your jobs by even TRYING to get this type of # passed."

These are my opinions, I am not trying to offend anybody. But that is one thing that is great about one of the only true freedoms we have left today, is that I may disagree and even despise somebody's opinions and thoughts, but I will fight to the death for their right to say it and think it.
I LOVE MY COUNTRY, I JUST CAN'T STAND OUR GOVERNMENT



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


Nice reply, anonymous poster.

But as your grievances pertain to the gun control, i offered an explanation that the 2nd amendment is vaguely written. It speaks of "right to bare arms" to a militia - yet never defines what KIND of militia. Its a militia of the people, and since a militia is an organized group of people.....i do see the conundrum.

My point is:

Obama does not want to take YOUR guns away.
People who are law abiding and use guns to protect themselves and their families have nothing to worry.

I dont support taking away guns for protection and things like hunting. But you don't need a fully automatic machine gun for either. You dont need a high powered sniper rifle that can pick off a human being from a mile away. You dont need mortar launchers and Big bad tanks.

I know a lot of people will "hate me" for that

To them : fine, i really am not going to loose sleep over it.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 04:05 PM
link   
^ i am the anonymous poster, I just registered. Anyways, here's the thing, where does our government get the authority to tell you or me that we can't own a high caliber rifle? I thought this was a free country? I am for gun control for people that commit aggravated assault, aggravated roberry, and homicide. But I am totally against any type of gun control imposed on the people of this country as a whole.

And with the 2nd Amendment militia thing, the Supreme Court has ruled on that time and time again.

Oh, and like a poster in here said, the 2nd Amendment is there to protect us from tyranny type government, so I would say we need the 2nd Amendment now more than EVER!!!

Good debate goin' here though.



[edit on 6-7-2008 by Slazer]



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin
 
Andrew....if I were looking to vote for obama after reading your post what with the ridacule and insults to anyone who is not strictly Pro obama I would shy away from him.There are alot of obama people out there like you that can't defend or support obama without being down right RUDE.Ya I know,the otherside is just as bad but what happen to "Change",how are you going to instill change when you are just like everyone else.YOU and people like you are Obama's and McCains worst enameies(No I am not a Ron Paul person).The idea that this is all this country has to offer as prez is worrysome.



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Obama is an empty-suit moron. The man has zero accomplishments. His supporters can't even come up with an accomplishment.

His energy policies are atrocious. Guess what? It will take 50-100 years for any alternative energy to be discovered and implemented. We CAN drill our way out of the mess we're in, very easily. There is enough oil in Alaska alone to power the USA for the next 100 years if we'd only stake our claim to it, and if we start drilling TODAY, oil prices will fall TOMORROW because speculators will bid the price down just as fast as they ran it up with the threat of an energy independent America on the horizon. We need to drill NOW while alternative energies are being researched, that way our economy doesn't die for the next 50 years until a new energy can be implemented. It'll be too late by then. Anyone that doesn't understand this has no grasp on economics.

Obama for change? He's never ONCE voted against his own party lines. He's the biggest conformist in Congress. Pathetic, low-life, racist, Marxist, lying, flip-flopping, anti-Constitution, empty-suited scumbag. That's all he is.

Obama doesn't have a single good idea. That is, unless you like the idea of letting an already born baby die on a table while no one feeds it. If you're for killing babies, high energy prices, a stagnant economy, more activist SCOTUS Justices and a collective, please, vote for Obama. If you care at all about the Constitution or individual rights, please, send your vote elsewhere.

And the Second Amendment isn't "vaguely written." It is perfectly clear that gun ownership is an individual right. It was granted to individuals in order to keep the government out of your home. People are attempting to redefine the words in the Second Amendment to try and deny our individual rights. In order to understand the Second Amendment, you have to use the definition of the word as it was 200 years ago, not as it has been attempted to be skewed today. That's why Scalia and Thomas are great Justices - they actually understand the Constitution. The best thing that could happen to America is for the four Justices that voted for an unconstitutional ruling to be impeached and jailed for the rest of their miserable lives for treason.

[edit on 6-7-2008 by ChocoTaco369]



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   
^^ Well, whether 50, 100, or even 200 years from now, we're going to HAVE to find some other energy source, why not start NOW?!?! This subject is not really political at all, it's common sense.

[edit on 6-7-2008 by Slazer]



posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
4.) Tell me. What is the purpose of an M4A1 in civilian life, other than killing another human being

Your elitist remarks are disgusting. Get off your high horse. Why do people own little glass nick nacks over their fireplace? Why do people own 1000hp cars that can't be driven on the street? It's a HOBBY. Some people like to collect guns. Some people like to go to shooting ranges. Some people like to drive race cars at the track. And some people like to collect little glass unicorns. Show me ONE REPORT of someone being killed on the street by a freaking M4A1. If someone's going to rob a bank, they're not going to do it with a M4A1, they're going to do it with a concealed weapon so they can sneak in. And if they don't have a gun to do it, they'll use a knife. That's why the UK has incredibly high stabbing rates. If you want to kill someone, you're going to kill someone.

Show me ONE REPORT of a GUN ever killing someone. Criminals kill people. Guns don't. If criminals don't have guns, they will kill you with something else. I could kill someone with a pen if I wanted to. Should we ban pens because they're sharp and deadly? Larry the Cable Guy said it best when he said "If guns kill people, I can blame my pencil for spelling words wrong."

So again, I'll wait on a report of a gun killing someone. Please, dig one up for me. I'm sure the first gun with a mind of its own would be worth something. You could sell that for a lot on Ebay.

I'm so sick and tired of elitist Fascists trying to take away my Constitutional rights by attempting to redefine words and brainwash people with the new definitions via the MSM.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join