Barak Obama

ditto

Really?, cuz I see a lot of ppl in my workplace, a public mall, and I talk to a lot of ppl, and I ask them (when i can) about what they know about Obama and about only 20% of them know his full name, and on some occasions some of the ppl who voted for him, when I ask them would knowing his name prior to voting, change ur vote, they did say yes, and that shocked me. How easily they are swayed. Again I got really nothing against him, others thou i can't speak for, you know there's tons(maybe an exaggerated number okay) of ppl who don't want a guy with Hussien in his name running the country. I actually knew a very nice girl in high school whose last name was Hussien, I thought she was so nice, and I bet she still is, to me its just a name.

*edit* sweet! 500 I elite now, cool

Maybe they didn't realize where Kenya was?

MY PRESIDENT IS BLACK

MY LAMBOS BLUE

& ILL B GODAMNED IF MY [color=blue]RIMS[/color] AINT 2

MY MONEY LIKE GREEN

& MY JORDANS LIKE GRAY (DAMN NO GRAY)

DELUXE TEE WHITE(DAMN NO WHIT EITHER) NOW HOW MUCH U TRYING 2 PAY!!!!!!!1

My piss is yellow.

And I mean, really yellow. I've heard it's because my diet is full of unhealthy stuff, but I don't care.

thats really intresting but if u didnt know this is the chorus 2 a Young Jeezy`s my president(hip-hop) featuring Nas


also i didnt realize i was n SD (i swear i thot i was n random) but im not deleting it

I thought yellow piss meant your lacking water in your daily consumption. If you only drink sodas and or alcohol, your piss will be yellow.

Unless you take multivitamins. They can put color in your piss too.

this is derailing rather quickly. id help but i gotta go

The fact that he started his political career in Bill Ayers home. Is a stupid reason? So a man detonates bombs in America and suddenly its "Forgive and forget" (because it's Obama). The man never said he was sorry or that he regretted his actions. No, he said he wished he had planted MORE bombs. If Ayers was involved with any other candidate everybody would be screaming bloody murder and trying to do even more against them than the flak Obama is taking.

On Rev. Wright. You're right it's not Obama's fault that Wright was insane BUT, he remained a member of his church for 20 years. At ANY POINT he could have walked out when Wright went on his anti-american anti-white rants. He choose to stay. It's not like Wright went "insane" overnight. He's been like this for a very long time. Obama shows his dedication to this "insane" guy. He even called him his mentor. If you wanted to protect your golden boy you shouldn't be insulting his mentor.

Anyways, Sorry MY BAD, My bad everybody. Sorry. I apologize for "thinking" and using "logic". I'll try to refrain from using those.

If we want go the way of guilt by association, McCain had his share of people I didn't think highly of either. Jerry Falwell, who said that God sent Hurricane Katrina to smite the gays, Rod Parsons, who said that Hitler was an agent of God, Hagee, the list goes anyone. Anyone, especially politicians who are forced to deal with a wide range of people if they want to be able to forge connections, is going to have associations that are less than pristine.

Perhaps it is better to put things in perspective. William Ayers and Rev. Wright are not the one dimension comic book style evildoers that the likes of Limbaugh and O'Reilly like to portray them now. Certainly Ayers engaged in actions that I would consider morally reprehensible, but he also became a respected scholar in the field of education. It was in this respect that Obama interacted with him: to discuss school policy, not to build bombs. Of course, the right wing pundits and radio personalities prefer the phrase "Obama launched his career in Ayers's living room" because it is intentionally vague and encourages false assumptions. Did Ayers try to justify his actions to Obama personally? We don't know, but I think it is quite clear from Obama's writing and speaking, even before he was in politics, that he did not pick up whatever anarchistic ideas Ayers supports.

Likewise with Wright, he certainly holds some destructive ideas, but he has also contributed to society through ministry to the poor and his commitment to social justice. Perhaps it is these qualities which Obama admires in Wright, and not Wright's espousal of "white man's greed puts the world in need."

McCain's pastors probably have their redeeming features too, despite the idiotic things they have said in public. The point is, if a person's associations are important, then a thorough understanding of the people and events in question should also be important.

Attacking associations with one liners is profitable in attack politics and punditry, but in intelligent debate it falls woefully short.

I don't think that bringing McCain into the argument is much good, if I recall correctly, before the election, F_PoD said he was going 3rd party.
Could be misremembering, though.

As I see things:

If he was 13 when Ayers was doing his thing, Obama gets off clean there. He didn't do anything.

Or Wright, you can love someone for the good, hate them for the bad, and balance things out to see where you stand. Since I never went to his church, I'll assume there was enough good to explain his actions. Either way, Obama didn't do anything wrong that I can see. It's kinda like, "If you don't like the president, get out of the country." It's never a simple yes/no decision to leave something.



I voted Obama for two reasons. In all I saw, McCain ran a dirty campaign. For a while there, all the adds seemed to be just bashing Obama and not saying a damn thing about himself. I wanted hope and change, and Obama offered it, while McCain just tried to tear Obama down while offering none of his own.

Secondly, Palin scared the shit out of me. She is batshit insane and I want her nowhere near the White House, especially since McCain has a higher possibility of dying before four years is up than Obama does.

It didn't strike me until now, but this election was just like Macs vs. PCs:

- Macs (McCain) ran dirty ads and did nothing but attack PCs (Obama)
- The rivalry between the two was intense, with fans of Macs (McCain supporters) saying that PCs were lame and fans of PCs (Obama supporters) saying that Macs were lame
- There were people who liked a third party OS (third-party candidate) who said that both Macs (McCain) and PCs (Obama) were crazy

The lesson - life imitates art? Something like that. I dunno.

Possibly correct, only I think McCain would be PC, and Obama would be Mac.

Maybe. I didn't really think too much about it, just used the dirty ads that McCain's camp and Mac were guilty of as a springboard.

Those Mac ads really piss me off. Not only do they focus on bashing PCs, but when Microsoft makes a legitimate commercial that isn't full of mudslinging, what does Mac do? Make a commercial about how stupid Microsoft was for taking the high ground.

But this thread isn't about computers. It's about the president! And him being a filthy immigrant and a terrorist. Well, that's what I got from this thread.

Yeah, and colors are cool.

So you see nothing wrong with associating with a unrepentant terrorist? So..Lets take Timothy McVeigh for example. So you would find nothing wrong with a presidential candidate associating with him?

You also see nothing wrong with attending a church for twenty years with a radical pastor who has gone on seriously anti-american rants. There is not logic in staying in a church like that to ONLY disown Wright AFTER a political shitstorm. Obama can say he didn't drink the Kool-aid but, I know thats a load of bullshit.

Damn! I feel like Charlton Heston on a planet full of Apes.

McVeigh didn't go on to become a respected education scholar, and Wright, as I wrote before, isn't simply the boogey man that right wing pundits try to make him out to be. Yes, he has some destructive beliefs, but he also did a lot of work to help the poor and promote social justice.

I actually admired the fact that Obama didn't immediately disown Wright. He tried to explain that he didn't agree with some of Wright's racist views, but that the man also had a good side that wasn't being shown in the YouTube clips. Unfortunately, Wright then decided to go before the press and say a bunch more idiotic things and dismiss Obama, and then Obama caved to the conventional wisdom of politics and disowned him.

If we look at the things Obama wrote and said even before he was in politics, I think that it becomes clear that Obama admired Wright becuase of Wright's work for social justice and poverty outreach. Pay attention to the kinds of things he says or hints at: moving affirmative action to being based on class, more gently echoing the famous speech of Bill Cosby when he famously declared that the fate of African Americans would not get better until they learned to value education over shoes.

It's clear that Obama never agreed with Wright's "God damn America", but that he did feel strongly about Wright's social ministry.

When I hear Obama "hint" at anything I hear him "hint" that the ideals America was founded on are going out the window and we will become just like Europe, especially France. I hear "I'm going to tax success" "Spread the wealth". I could go on.

Another point I want to make is the biased coverage of him in the news. Through various news mediums I noticed that the Liberal media treats Obama like he's the damn Messiah. For the longest time you couldn't open a newspaper or turn on the tv without Obama being right in your fucking face. While McCain was pushed deep into the newspaper or was given a fraction of the air time to the all the sucking up that Obama got.

I hate the fact that people follow him so blindly (Obamamania) as if he can do no wrong. He could eat a baby while stomping on a bag full of kittens on live television and everybody would be in times square cheering.

This whole election was really depressing. On one hand America is decided between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. The other depressing part is that lemmings came out in droves. Spurred on by this vague talk of "change". Nobody questions what kind of change he's talking about but, as long as it's something different they're on board!

I hate the fact that he nominated Hilary into a higher office. The last thing America needed was another jackass Clinton to fuck things up worse than they already are. Between Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Reid, etc we basically have a dictatorship, one political party basically rules everything. Obama can dictate just about anything and the only opposition he has to face are the few republicans that managed to hold their seats. Before you say "You don't like it because their Democrat", you would be wrong. I don't like any party having such a majority. They could be Libertarian and I still wouldn't like it. Equal representation is the key to a fair government. If it's 75/25 it's not "equal" especially when you don't need the whole 75% to pass a bill.

I do agree with you about Hillary. He couldn't have found someone better for secretary of state?

As for the usual whining about the "liberal media"(if indeed the media is indeed as liberal as its accusers claim), let me ask you this: does the media have a responsibility to the public to try and treat both sides equally? Should we advance state enforcement of equal media coverage, as is already done on network television? Ultimately, media companies need to make money(in fact, Friedman might argue that their highest responsibility is to make money without engaging in illegal market practices). If liberality was significantly hurting the constituency of the mainstream media, they would do things differently. But as it is, people read the Washington Post, and not the Washington Times. If America is fed up with liberal media, then people should start buying conservative newspapers. I think in the case of this election people were legitimately more interested in stories about Obama. He was new, he was a novelty in some ways. McCain was the old veteran.

As for equal representation, I have no idea what you are thinking. The system of government we have is set up to be a representative democracy. We have more safeguards against excessive majority rule than most states(the senate, federalism), but how does forcing "equal" representation further the ideals of the US? It's not democracy if the vote doesn't count, and it's not liberty if the voters aren't free to choose whatever candidates they wish. You can think that they are foolish certainly, but to say that it is "unfair" is nonsense.

The rest of the post seems to be either insulting Obama supporters, or selective ranting about the horror of Obama's policies. I tried to discuss the totality of Obama's associations and their implications as well as the importance of trying to approach these subjects from a rational standpoint. If you'd like to debate the ethical and economic merits of Obama's economic policy by examining in detail the possibilities and their relation to economic and moral theory, I'd be glad to participate. However, if you plan to shout down the opposition with insults and specious talking points, I don't really think there is anything else to be said.