|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 08:35 PM by dbates
|
Senator McCain was turning his sights to Iraq just days after 9/11. I stood up and opposed this war
He opposed it from where? His living room? Obama wasn't a Senator or Congressman, or anything before 9/11.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 08:45 PM by Uniceft17
|
Originally posted by dbates
Senator McCain was turning his sights to Iraq just days after 9/11. I stood up and opposed this war
He opposed it from where? His living room? Obama wasn't a Senator or Congressman, or anything before 9/11.
What exactly are you trying to say?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 09:09 PM by Hal9000
|
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
Originally posted by jamie83
OMG... here's a classic I overlooked...
"More of you have cars you can't afford to drive, credit card bills you can't afford to pay, and tuition that's beyond your reach. These
challenges are not all of government's making."
These challenges aren't ALL the government's making?
Seriously? Does anybody even listen to his pathetic drivel?
Which of these is ANY of the government's making?
He explained it in the next sentence. I'll post the relevant portion of his speech.
Tonight, more Americans are out of work and more are working harder for less. More of you have lost your homes and even more are watching your
home values plummet. More of you have cars you can't afford to drive, credit card bills you can't afford to pay, and tuition that's beyond your
reach.
These challenges are not all of government's making. But the failure to respond is a direct result of a broken politics in Washington and the
failed policies of George W. Bush.
Transcript: Barack Obama's Acceptance Speech
Bold emphasis added.
Just helping you out a bit. As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 09:38 PM by jamie83
|
Originally posted by Hal9000
"More of you have cars you can't afford to drive, credit card bills you can't afford to pay, and tuition that's beyond your reach. These
challenges are not all of government's making."
Still doesn't change his implication that having a car you can't afford, credit card bills, and tuition that's too high is somehow the
government's fault.
And exactly how is the Federal government and George Bush or ANY POTUS supposed to "respond" to an individual who can't make his car payment? The
problem with his statement is it presupposes the Federal government should intervene somehow to help you when you can't make your car payment, or
when you spent too much on your credit cards, or to pay your tuition.
He might as well just simplify it:
"I'll take other people's money at the point of a gun and with the threat of sending them to jail and give it to you."
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 09:42 PM by dbates
|
reply to post by Uniceft17
The U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003. Obama wasn't able to vote on any of this since he wasn't a senator at this time.
Obama is currently the junior United States Senator from Illinois. He was elected to the Senate in November 2004
en.wikipedia.org...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 09:44 PM by Uniceft17
|
Originally posted by dbates
reply to post by Uniceft17
The U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003. Obama wasn't able to vote on any of this since he wasn't a senator at this time.
Obama is currently the junior United States Senator from Illinois. He was elected to the Senate in November 2004
en.wikipedia.org...
So because he wasn't a Senator and wasn't able to vote his opinion wasn't revelant?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 10:51 PM by Hal9000
|
reply to post by jamie83
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
I think in general, he is referring to the inaction of government to manage the economy. It is debatable as to what role the government should play in
the market, but Bush did eventually come up with a bailout for the mortgage crisis, so evidently he thought the government does play a role. As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 10:55 PM by jamie83
|
Originally posted by Hal9000
reply to post by jamie83
I think in general, he is referring to the inaction of government to manage the economy. It is debatable as to what role the government should play in
the market, but Bush did eventually come up with a bailout for the mortgage crisis, so evidently he thought the government does play a role.
Ok. I see how that's what his point could be. That said, the way he worded it makes it sound like "not all these problems are the governments
fault,' implying that some are.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 11:06 PM by Hal9000
|
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
I think this was my favorite part of Obama's speech and exemplifies the whole republican ideology.
It's not because John McCain doesn't care. It's because John McCain doesn't get it.
For over two decades, he's subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy — give more and more to those with the most and hope that
prosperity trickles down to everyone else. In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society, but what it really means is — you're on your
own. Out of work? Tough luck. No health care? The market will fix it. Born into poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps — even if you
don't have boots. You're on your own.
Well, it's time for them to own their failure. It's time for us to change America.
Transcript: Barack Obama's Acceptance Speech
Bold emphasis added.
I think that says it all. America should be a place where people can get some help if they need it. If we don't, then opportunity will only apply to
those born to it, and is not possible for everyone. Anything else would be un-American.
As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 11:13 PM by Hal9000
|
reply to post by dbates
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
Obama was still an Illinois state senator, so he could not vote on whether to go to war in Iraq, but he did go out of his way to give this speech in
opposition to it.
Barack Obama's Stirring 2002 Speech Against the Iraq War
Even though he wasn't able to, he still showed how he would have voted on the war, if he could. As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 11:31 PM by Chucktah
|
reply to post by Hal9000
I agree with his statement to a point...the fact that Americans SHOULD be able to look towards our leaders for help if we absolutley NEED it, but
the fact is, that is exactly what most of our ancestors were told when they came here. "You're on your own." "Tough luck." "Born into
poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps — even if you don't have boots." Ever heard of Identured Servitude? Many of them gave up their
freedom so that we would have the chance to have ours. That is what this country is built on. Hard work, blood sweat, and tears. It's when we
start depending on our government for help EVERY time we need it, is when we've gave them too much power. 10% of the time a homless man actually has
a legit reason to be asking for help, the other 90% he's looking for a handout...there is a HUGE difference! It's time we get back to the basics.
You get out what you put in.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-9-2008 @ 11:49 PM by Hal9000
|
reply to post by Chucktah
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
But at the same time, we should not allow people to starve in the richest nation of the World. We should not deny someone who needs heath care in the
richest nation of the World. We should not let someone who has lost a job, loose everything they own. We should not keep a bright student out of
college because they cannot afford it. What we should do is encourage kids to not only finish High School, but continue their education. They will
need it in this global economy.
Not everyone is born into an environment that fosters education and health care and they should not be penalized, but be given the opportunity to do
so.
If we can spend 10 billion dollars a month in Iraq, why can't we use that to better our country? Then some of these people would not be the
ones that are despised, and would become productive citizens.
This problem is no different then becoming energy independent. It may be difficult, but we are Americans, and we can accomplish anything we put our
minds to. As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 6-9-2008 @ 12:10 AM by Chucktah
|
reply to post by Hal9000
I agree completley with everything you stated. I hope I didn't come off as anti-assistance. My philosophy is that until every single child in the
US is fed and has a doctor and a school, then there is NO excuse to for sending money elswhere! Not in the wealthiest country on earth. But, at the
same time, I see a lot of laziness, fraud, and misguided thinking that no matter how much we screw up, there will always be someone there to help you
out. Sadly, it all seems to get pulled under the same blanket.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 6-9-2008 @ 12:10 AM by centurion1211
|
Except for just one member and one mod, the lib/dems seem to be blowing their chance for equal time on this thread.
Which proves a point I've been making on many other political threads - that beyond a couple of sound bites they may have heard on TV, many (most?)
of Obama's supporters don't have a clue what Obama stands for (honestly, neither do I) or why they support him. The reason for no lib/dem posts
here?
It would be sad and pathetic if our future wasn't hanging in the balance over this election. 
[edit on 9/6/2008 by centurion1211]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 6-9-2008 @ 12:52 AM by feydrautha
|
was this in his speech?:
hmm... still, my fav obama lines... so far!
obama: the "no smack" candidate!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 6-9-2008 @ 01:00 AM by feydrautha
|
oh wait, i do have even better:
Obama Takes Aim at Palin, Hits His Own Foot
It's getting hard not to notice that the Obama candidacy is a farce. In his latest gaffe, the Obamessiah draws attention to his complete lack of
qualifications by declaring — conspicuously falsely — that he's more ready for the presidency than McCain's VP pick:
Barack Obama contends that he is more experienced in executive matters than Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin because he has managed his presidential campaign
for the past 18 months.
Speaking on a cable news channel Monday night, the Democratic presidential nominee said he is better prepared to handle a disaster like Hurricane
Gustav because of his pursuit of the White House.
"Well, my understanding is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We've got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget
is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. So I think that our ability to manage large
systems and to execute I think has been made clear over the last couple of years," Obama said.
A McCain spokesman observes:
For Barack Obama to argue that he's experienced enough to be president because he's running for president is desperate circular logic and it's
laughable. It is a testament to Barack Obama's inexperience and failing qualifications that he would stoop to passing off his candidacy as comparable
to Governor Sarah Palin's executive experience managing a budget of over $10 billion and more than 24,000 employees.
Someone had better program a couple of facts into Obama's teleprompter: 1) Palin is no longer a small town mayor, but Governor of Alaska; 2) He's
running against McCain, not Palin.
There will soon come a day when only the most pathetic of kooks will admit to having supported Obama.
Source
i am certain i'd vote for "spotted owl" gore before this guy...
is this an elaborate prank the dems are playing on the american people?
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 6-9-2008 @ 02:35 AM by wutone
|
Obama can be a spirit medium and contact the dead for us...
"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes — and I see many of them in the audience here today — our sense of
patriotism is particularly strong."
He sees dead people.
I guess that isn't above his pay grade.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 6-9-2008 @ 06:30 AM by Dronetek
|
reply to post by Uniceft17
So because he wasn't a Senator and wasn't able to vote his opinion wasn't revelant?
Its easy to run around claiming you didn't support the war, when you didn't have to vote for it. Who knows how he would have voted if he had
actually been a senator at the time.
[edit on 6-9-2008 by Dronetek]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 6-9-2008 @ 12:48 PM by drew1503
|
Mine was when he said he visited all 57 States. The man stumbles without a TelePrompter. Why is st so hard not to see both candidates are the same?
Obama and McCain have flip flopped on so many issues, how is that integrity? Obama voted YES to FISA, stripping our 4th Amendment, he wants universal
health care, how exactly are we going to pay for that with the dollar being devalued? How is he going to fix the economy and the Federal Reserve
system? His tax plan? His Iraq stance have changed with the wind as well as Iran. And we justify this by telling ourselves we have to pick the lesser
of two evils.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
