I just read a very compelling article about Obama...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hawk

Genius
Gold
Aug 2, 2007
6,682
241
83
49
ATL
#1
...and I thought I would share it with all of you. Being that this is an election year, it is very important to take all available information about candidates and make an educated decision that is best for the people of this great nation of ours.

I am not going to divulge who I will be voting for, but I can say that so far ALL candidates are disappointing. The big question is: "What are 'we' really looking at when we pick a candidate?"

Beyond Obama's Beauty

By KENNETH BLACKWELL | February 14, 2008

"[C]ivilizational war is real, even if political leaders and polite punditry must call it by another name."
— Robert D. Kaplan in the December 2001 issue of the Atlantic Monthly
It's an amazing time to be alive in America. We're in a year of firsts in this presidential election: the first viable woman candidate; the first viable African-American candidate; and, a candidate who is the first frontrunning freedom fighter over 70. The next president of America will be a first.
RELATED: Cowardly Abuse of Freedom.
We won't truly be in an election of firsts, however, until we judge every candidate by where they stand. We won't arrive where we should be until we no longer talk about skin color or gender.
Now that Barack Obama steps to the front of the Democratic field, we need to stop talking about his race, and start talking about his policies and his politics.
The reality is this: Though the Democrats will not have a nominee until August, unless Hillary Clinton drops out, Mr. Obama is now the frontrunner, and its time America takes a closer and deeper look at him.
Some pundits are calling him the next John F. Kennedy. He's not. He's the next George McGovern. And it's time people learned the facts.
Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in the entire U.S. Senate. He is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders, or Mrs. Clinton.
Never in my life have I seen a presidential frontrunner whose rhetoric is so far removed from his record. Walter Mondale promised to raise our taxes, and he lost. George McGovern promised military weakness, and he lost. Michael Dukakis promised a liberal domestic agenda, and he lost.
Yet Mr. Obama is promising all those things, and he's not behind in the polls. Why? Because the press has dealt with him as if he were in a beauty pageant.
Mr. Obama talks about getting past party, getting past red and blue, to lead the United States of America. But let's look at the more defined strokes of who he is underneath this superficial "beauty."
Start with national security, since the president's most important duties are as commander-in-chief. Over the summer, Mr. Obama talked about invading Pakistan, a nation armed with nuclear weapons; meeting without preconditions with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who vows to destroy Israel and create another Holocaust; and Kim Jong Il, who is murdering and starving his people, but emphasized that the nuclear option was off the table against terrorists — something no president has ever taken off the table since we created nuclear weapons in the 1940s. Even Democrats who have worked in national security condemned all of those remarks. Mr. Obama is a foreign-policy novice who would put our national security at risk.
Next, consider economic policy. For all its faults, our health care system is the strongest in the world. And free trade agreements, created by Bill Clinton as well as President Bush, have made more goods more affordable so that even people of modest means can live a life that no one imagined a generation ago. Yet Mr. Obama promises to raise taxes on "the rich."
How to fix Social Security? Raise taxes. How to fix Medicare? Raise taxes. Prescription drugs? Raise taxes. Free college? Raise taxes. Socialize medicine? Raise taxes. His solution to everything is to have government take it over. Big Brother on steroids, funded by your paycheck.
Finally, look at the social issues. Mr. Obama had the audacity to open a stadium rally by saying, "All praise and glory to God!" but says that Christian leaders speaking for life and marriage have "hijacked" — hijacked — Christianity. He is pro-partial birth abortion, and promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who will rule any restriction on it unconstitutional. He espouses the abortion views of Margaret Sanger, one of the early advocates of racial cleansing. His spiritual leaders endorse homosexual marriage, and he is moving in that direction. In Illinois, he refused to vote against a statewide ban — ban — on all handguns in the state. These are radical left, Hollywood, and San Francisco values, not Middle America values.
The real Mr. Obama is an easy target for the general election. Mrs. Clinton is a far tougher opponent. But Mr. Obama could win if people don't start looking behind his veneer and flowery speeches. His vision of "bringing America together" means saying that those who disagree with his agenda for America are hijackers or warmongers. Uniting the country means adopting his liberal agenda and abandoning any conflicting beliefs.
But right now everyone is talking about how eloquent of a speaker he is and — yes — they're talking about his race. Those should never be the factors on which we base our choice for president. Mr. Obama's radical agenda sets him far outside the American mainstream, to the left of Mrs. Clinton.
It's time to talk about the real Barack Obama. In an election of firsts, let's first make sure we elect the person who is qualified to be our president in a nuclear age during a global civilizational war.
Mr. Blackwell, a fellow at the American Civil Rights Union and the Family Research Council, is a columnist for The New York Sun, and a contributing editor for Townhall.com.
 

iCafe

New Member
Dec 11, 2007
1,877
0
0
www.wwtdd.com
#2
Thanks, for the article
im still not sure who i am voting for
but i am sure i want the war in Iraq to be finished
and i don't think John is going to help put it to an end asap
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Velodog2

Member
Silver
Jul 19, 2007
562
0
16
#3
Lol, with a name like "Hawk" it would seem your political disposition might have been predetermined. The tone of this article would support that.

But along the lines of an expose by either party, the most important thing in this upcoming election is for people to be very very careful of what they are buying. Both sides will be trying everything they can to mislead the voters and misrepresent the other side, but I can comfortably say especially the Republicans will be doing this because of their record, because they are so good at it, and because they are starting off behind in the polls and have nothing to lose. Corroborate everything you hear. It's going to get dirty, mark my words.

Again, be careful we don't buy another W.
 

Hawk

Genius
Gold
Aug 2, 2007
6,682
241
83
49
ATL
#4
I don't like McCain OR Obama. I hate the fact that our system grinds down to choosing the lesser of 2 evils. In this case, I see both of them as a lose/lose situation.
I would prefer Ron Paul ( and not by a lot)- ONLY because that man wanted to get us back to the basics and strengthen economy and our Dollar ( by going back to a gold standard - amoung other things) He was also not a top choice, but a far cry from what we are looking at now. The best thing to happen at this point is to have both candidates at some debate and some lunitic blow up the joint and we have to pick new BETTER candidates.
 

Velodog2

Member
Silver
Jul 19, 2007
562
0
16
#5
Well, I'm not sure I'm quite as negative as you on our current, apparent choices. The good news I think about the need to be careful not to buy another George W. is that I don't think anyone is going to be selling anything that bad. While I am a devoted Democrat (was forced into that position by the embarrassing republican-lead charade of the Clinton impeachment trial) I will happily say that anyone will be a significant improvement over the current admin, and it's possible I could even be "ok" with McCain. I will of course be upset if it appeared he won dirty tho. And I realize all campaigns are somewhat dirty, but I'm referring to the slash and burn, divide and conquer, get power at any cost Rove-esque tactics we've seen nationally lately as well as in Texas previously.

And that's my point - if enough of us could be sold something that bad for W to get into the oval office, twice, as well other offices before, then we need to be just a lil bit smarter as an electorate this time around. I'm not holding my breath of course...
 

psylichon

Genius
Moderator
Oct 31, 2007
16,591
751
113
41
Philly
#6
Thanks for the article, Hawk. I've vowed to refrain from all political discussion here because I have way too many good friends here who I completely disagree with in those regards. But I'm still happy to read any and all info that people post. It is an extremely important election year, no doubt... and people need to be informed!
 

OJsakila

New Member
Jul 15, 2007
3,021
1
0
Jupiter's sulphur mines
#7
this thread needs to be closed asap because if I have to listen to much more rambling liberal retoric , I'm going to get involved.
 

iCafe

New Member
Dec 11, 2007
1,877
0
0
www.wwtdd.com
#8
Or you can just stay out of the thread, takes a little self control
but i think you can handle it
 

OJsakila

New Member
Jul 15, 2007
3,021
1
0
Jupiter's sulphur mines
#9
Or you can just stay out of the thread, takes a little self control
but i think you can handle it

Who the hell are you to tell me anything? All you are worried about is what everyone around here thinks of you. Acting like a whore for thanks and tooting your own horn like you're hot crap or something. Why don't you stay out of the political threads since you know nothing and stay within your lighthearted and shallow comic crap that you're famous for?
 

Hawk

Genius
Gold
Aug 2, 2007
6,682
241
83
49
ATL
#10
It doesn't matter if you are Republican or Democrat, All I am saying is get knowledgeable about your candidate.

Obama scares the crap out of me to the point where I would take Hillary in a heartbeat.
McCain... We can easily do better.

This is a forum, and it is where we discuss things. If you cannot do that without whipping your ego or attitude out, then it's not really discussing, it's arguing. And arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics. Win ot lose, you are still a retard.
 

psylichon

Genius
Moderator
Oct 31, 2007
16,591
751
113
41
Philly
#11
I applaud your efforts, Hawk. But I think we all know how these discussions end up on the internet. You can't avoid tempers getting all touchy and people going off as though they understand everything... and you don't. It's just human nature. Well... some humans.
 

Hawk

Genius
Gold
Aug 2, 2007
6,682
241
83
49
ATL
#12
I applaud your efforts, Hawk. But I think we all know how these discussions end up on the internet. You can't avoid tempers getting all touchy and people going off as though they understand everything... and you don't. It's just human nature. Well... some humans.
<sigh> Yeah, I know. I had to give it a shot. I hope that at least made a few people really scrutinize who they were considering voting for.
 

Velodog2

Member
Silver
Jul 19, 2007
562
0
16
#13
<sigh> Yeah, I know. I had to give it a shot. I hope that at least made a few people really scrutinize who they were considering voting for.
And I hope everyone realizes I was saying about the same thing. Read, get the back-story, double-check your sources, and corroborate anything that might make you make a decision one way or another. Democracy takes effort.
 

chris

Administrator
Administrator
Jun 10, 2006
11,813
1,779
113
Long Island, NY
#14
These topics usually end in hurt feelings, etc. I think it's the reason most forums do not allow political or religious discussion. I'm going to close this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.