It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If William Jefferson Clinton was America's first "black" president, could it be that Barack Obama is positioning himself to be the nation's first "gay" president?
Bush Waged Nasty Smear Campaign Against McCain in 2000
Bush Supporters Called McCain “The Fag Candidate.” In South Carolina, Bush supporters circulated church fliers that labeled McCain “the fag candidate.” Columnist Frank Rich noted that the fliers were distributed “even as Bush subtly reinforced that message by indicating he wouldn’t hire openly gay people for his administration.”
Rove Suggests Former POW McCain Committed Treason and Fathered Child With Black Prostitute.
In 2000, McCain operatives in SC accused Rove of spreading rumors against McCain, such as “suggestions that McCain had committed treason while a prisoner of war, and had fathered a child by a black prostitute,” according to the New Yorker.
A group funded by the biggest Republican campaign donor in Texas began running an attack ad Aug. 5 in which former Swift Boat veterans claim Kerry lied to get one of his two decorations for bravery and two of his three purple hearts.
Originally posted by seagull
I would encourage you, and others, to start ignoring the ads, and slanted, in which ever direction, commentary, and start listening for yourself. The speeches are, for the most part, available on the internet, without any commentary. Don't let the news media, bloggers, whomever, decide for you.
Listen with both ears, then use your brain and decide for yourself. You support Obama, good for you...if others support McCain, good for them. Just make sure your decision was made by YOU, not FOR you...that is after all what these sites are designed to do, keep you from thinking, and just react...
Originally posted by jetxnet
I am very good at research Mental, have a very strong background in research and problem-solving.
When you do as much trouble-shooting as I have, whether programmatically or otherwise, you learn to quickly discern facts from hype.
You also learn to make connections quicker and on multiple levels.
The average American (or anywhere) are not like this, they depend on what they read from someone else to get them the facts, and then make decsion based on evidence they identify with the most.
It's funny, because alot of my like-minded friends share the same views and we're all in the Computer Science field - national security etc.
Sift through it, put logic before emotion to arrive at the facts.
Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by mental modulator
I apologize if I gave the impression that I thought that...looking back at it, that's indeed what I implied. Sorry.
Those comments were aimed at those who because they read it on a pro McCain site, or a pro Obama site, it must be the gospel truth. Because the supporters of a certain candidate wouldn't lie to us, would they.
I suppose what I'm saying is: Don't believe everything you read, especially during this silliest of seasons.
Originally posted by jam321
What makes you so sure that Obama won't keep us in a war for 25 years+?
He has already went on record that he would go into Pakistan to get Osama, says military force is not off the tables on Iran, and is hinting heavily about getting involved in Darfur, on top of continuing( expanding) the war in Afghanistan.
Sounds to me that he is just as likely to take us to war just like any other president would. He is not a pacifist by any means. he just doesn't like dumb wars. I'm sure he wouldn't classify any of his wars as dumb.
Originally posted by mental modulator
TERROR ( they gonna git you )
HE's A MUSLIM
HE has a black baby
HE's a communist
HE's black and must be a racist
He's an Elitists ( Mr Mccains wife who is richer then god )
ON and ON and ON
Often I hear righties on here who seem completely oblivious or secretly in cahoots
with this reoccurring theme. I feel certain that this "device" is as intentional as any act can get.
First, while Obama is playing armchair general, second-guessing why there is an Taliban offensive in Afghanistan, the reality is that this is a result of the U.S. success in Iraq. Al-Qaida forces fleeing Iraq have been redeployed inside Afghanistan staging a last desperate stand in its own back yard.
Secondly, the offense in Afghanistan is a failure for al-Qaida because it was a trap that they have fallen into. The Taliban and al-Qaida forces have not been successful in anything but short spurts and withdrawals. They have been forced from all the gains that they made with the extra forces, taking great numbers of casualties. In fact the terrorists have lost several top members of the leadership.
Third, redeploying the forces from Iraq is not only a logistic nightmare but also the wrong kind of tactics for the Afghan theater. The heavy armor and tank forces deployed in Iraq are not only useless in the mountainous Afghanistan; they would be easy targets for insurgent attacks. The Army ground mobile units in Iraq are designed to fight in the open desert and in crowded cities, neither of which are the main battlegrounds of Afghanistan.
Finally, there is the political factor at home. What Obama does not say about his supporters is the fact that they not only oppose the war in Iraq but they also oppose the war in Afghanistan.
Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by southern_Guardian
withdrawing from Iraq to send to Afghanistan. They are not coming home. There will be a residual force in Iraq and troops stationed close by. This isn't an attempt to do what you say. It is just to show that Obama is just as likely as anyone to take us into a war.
I have yet to see a guarantee where he promises not to get involved in a war. No President could make that kind of promise. All are capable of getting us involved in a war.
Obama used to say I will bring the troops home. He doesn't say it anymore.