<p>
[quote]
I have a friend who works in the business, its an act 99% of the time. the only pundit I can respect is stephen colbert
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And Stephen Colbert isn't an act?</p>
<p>Please tell me I just missed the sarcasm here...</p>
<p>Everyone who thinks that Obama will really bring a huge improvement in America, just look at his campaign. This also applies to McCain's campaign.</p>
<p>They're still smearing and one upping each other. It's politics as usual. Don't look forward to hope, change, and "yes we can!" no matter who lands in the Oval Office.</p>
<p>I'm not thrilled with either candidate at the moment, but of the two, I would still vote for Obama.</p>
<p>It is not that stephen colbert isnt an act, it is just that he does not pretend to be real, so its fine, he is not trying to fool us.</p>
<p>Johnson181 do you have a personal vendetta against me or something, I realize that post wasnt like trying to insult me, but a few times now you have tried the "gotcha" approach to defeating me.</p>
<p>The sad truth is that Stephen Colbert actually reports the real news may more than another pundit. Its pretty sad to say that the best news we Americans can get is from "fake" news.</p>
<p>I can't believe you guys support Obama because he will 'help the underrepresented nations and minorities and gays and poor people.' I'm not quoting anyone in particular, but rather the entire mass of responses. I don't buy into this whole Obama craze. This is ridiculous.</p>
<p>The whole idea of supporting non-allies is ridiculous. Someone actually posted that 'the age of unilateralism is over', or something like that. In this age of global terror, the last thing we need is to lose control. We have crazy terrorist dictators leading nations in several countries around the world (Cuba, Venezuela, Palestine, Syria, Iran, and N. Korea to name a few). Obama wants to support the United Nations and talk to the crazy dictators and be everyone's friend. He is completely clueless on this issue of national and global security. We cannot afford a person like him as Commander in Chief.</p>
<p>Even more than defense, our economy is going down the drain with this globalism. We are being taxed like crazy, and billions of dollars are being spent outside of the US for "Foreign Aid." What are we? The Red Cross? We cannot let tiny little impoverished nations in Africa milk off the US and boss us around in the United Nations. Sure, it is great when a charity raises money to buy rice for the starving people across the world, but the United States is not a charity. Nowhere in the US Constitution does it say to buy rice for the starving people in other nations. At least not in my view of government. However, Barack Hussein Obama believes that the US Treasury is a charity that can take money from US citizens and spend it in Africa and South America and Asia and anywhere outside of the US economy. Obama will just let this un-American, liberal, politically correct globalization continue until America becomes a minuscule dot on the global picture. He will let China reign supreme as the next world power with nukes and rockets and factories and scientists and whatnot. This isn't about Islam, this is about the world stage.</p>
<p>About minorities: I love you. I truly do. It's just that we don't make progress in achieving a color-blind America by voting as a racial voter bloc. It just further divides us. Obama is biracial, but he is afraid to admit it. He gets more mileage out of claiming to be black. Frankly, I don't care what color he is. If Condoleezza Rice was running for president, I would vote for her. It's the issues, not the skin color of a president that counts.</p>
<p>Furthermore, it is not your skin color that holds you back from success. It is your attitude and lifestyle that holds you back. Any black or Hispanic or any other minority can be successful in business, media, sports, or science. It is just that when a person, usually but not always an inner city minority, chooses to live the lifestyle of crime, violence, government welfare, and child bearing out of wedlock, that person ends up unsuccessful. This has nothing to do with whether you are white or black or brown or blue. It is just a fact that when you choose to drop out and to do drugs and to drink and womanize and all that bad stuff, you end up unsuccessful. It happens to both whites and blacks. Unfortunately, Obama will do nothing to stop this phenomena that McCain can’t do.</p>
<p>As president, Obama will do more to hurt minorities than anything else. His plans include government programs to help specific minorities. What will this do? It will foster resentment by whites and any other excluded minorities. If we hope to achieve a truly color-blind society (regarding race) then we cannot have government programs that target specific races. It is not fair and it breeds resentment. Affirmative Action is another example. Obama supports it. If Obama was some positive and true change, then he needs to change his own policies regarding race.</p>
<p>Regarding Gay Marriage: It is not illegal for two persons of the same gender to live together. This has never been illegal. So what’s the big deal? Now these people want a license that forces the rest of the population to accept them into normal social activities like weddings, adoptions, and marriage tax.</p>
<p>I cannot believe that someone posted that they support Obama solely because of the issue of gay marriage. That person will look past all the misgivings of a candidate just because the candidate wants to give licenses to a very small percentage of Americans, something that has never been done in 200 + years of American democracy.</p>
<p>In treating civil unions and gay marriage as what it really is, I realized that people are arguing solely over the issue of a government granted license. Let’s look at the facts: This license [civil union] has never before been granted to these [gay] people at any time in America’s history. This license forces the vast majority of heterosexual Americans to accept a controversial minority of homosexual Americans into programs like adoptions. This will lead to orphans and abandoned children being forced to live in an unnatural family situation, growing up with unusual family values and morals. Now do you really want a candidate that will force this view upon all Americans?</p>
<p>And now the spin: Through all of American history, homosexuality has been discouraged and discriminated against. The leading religious beliefs of Americans view homosexuality as immoral. Why should a new movement allow this discouraged practice to take root with a government supported license? What’s next, a license for polygamy and a license for sodomy? I think not. For Obama to grant marriage licenses to homosexuals is like someone giving driver’s licenses to 8 year olds; These people are not mature enough for these licenses and will endanger other Americans. Of course a gay marriage license will not cause car crashes, but it will allow for the teaching of traditionally immoral practices to America’s orphans and foster children. Basically, homosexuals are not prohibited from life, liberty, or happiness in the current laws. Obama’s granting of marriage licenses to gays will only force this belief on heterosexual Americans.</p>
<p>And now the poor people: Everyone thinks Obama stands for the poor family in South Chicago. This is not the case. He is a rich Chicago politician who grew up with middle class grandparents. Of course Obama wants to throw money at the poor people, but is this the right solution. Barack “Robin Hood” Obama believes he can use the government to take from the rich and give to the poor. What does this do? It discourages people from earning their money and tells people that everything will be okay if you just stay poor and live off of the government. Robin Hood economics is socialism. It is a government sponsored poor working class. 1984 anyone? Supply side economics works (although Obama has never heard of it). It worked for Reagan, and Bush. It will work for McCain. Interestingly enough supply side economics also works in reverse. If Robin Hood Obama takes from the rich, he is eliminating industries like boat building, limousines, valets, home building, and retail. This will lead to job loss among the poor. But it’s okay, the poor will have the money that Obama took from the rich, so they can live without a job. The answer is to tax everyone equally. We all vote equally, so why shouldn’t we be taxed equally?</p>
<p>Now there you have it: Obama is a disaster in the making. He is an average liberal claiming to help the poor and underrepresented. All he will accomplish is to make China the next world power, make whites resentful, make adopted kids gay, and make more Americans poor.</p>
<p>Notice I hardly said anything about McCain. That is because there is not much to say. He is a moderate to the max. The reason he is so good a reaching across the aisle is because he is 50% liberal. The Republicans could have made a much better choice in the primary. Romney, Huckabee, Paul, or Hunter would be much better than McCain. Anyways, we are stuck with McCain, so we must support him, lest we be faced with the New Yorker Cover in January.</p>
<p>The news media has trained American voters to become Bush filters. Whenever someone says Bush, they say boo. It is ridiculous that the media can be so negative about a sitting president. Bush hasn’t really done that bad. He got back at Al Qaeda and removed a ruthless dictator. There is nothing wrong with being a republican. McCain’s plans are much better for the economy than any of Obama’s plans.
We had a bullish (good) economy for five years under Bush, until oil speculators and oil barons decided to raise the price. Bush had nothing to do with $4 gasoline. It is just that we have been used to cheap gasoline for so long, not to mention the media sensationalism. Notice that nobody in America is starving over $4 gasoline. However rice prices in Asia and Africa are leading to massive hunger. We could live with $10 gasoline and still not have starvation. Voters need to realize the real issue: the economy, not gas prices.</p>
<p>We don’t need a guy with the middle name Hussein in charge of the War in Iraq. That means don’t vote for Obama. Stay the course with a strong America, vote McCain.</p>
<p>While skimming through your long post, suddenly catching this: </p>
<p>
[quote]
What are we? The Red Cross?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>has made it worthwhile and induced me to read ALL of your post.</p>
<p>Wow, I actually read it full through, pretty amazing post dude..not necessarily that I agree with everything, but pretty damn hilarious.</p>
<p>ROFL at the middle name Hussein thing, I never knew. wow...so that's why my friends were jokingly saying yesterday a C(a)rack Hussein Osama..I never understood it until now.</p>
<p>If you actually look at the constitution, our federal govenrment is way too big. It is the fault of both parties. We probably should not be in Iraq, but likewise we should not send billions of $$ to other countries and take money away from workers to pay for nursing home bills (social security). Mondern day politics is just ridiculous compared to the founding principals. I'm afraid both Obama and McCain will add to our ridiculosity, but Obama moreso that McCain.</p>
<p>lol way too long to read that pist</p>
<p>
[quote]
The whole idea of supporting non-allies is ridiculous. Someone actually posted that 'the age of unilateralism is over', or something like that. In this age of global terror, the last thing we need is to lose control. We have crazy terrorist dictators leading nations in several countries around the world (Cuba, Venezuela, Palestine, Syria, Iran, and N. Korea to name a few). Obama wants to support the United Nations and talk to the crazy dictators and be everyone's friend. He is completely clueless on this issue of national and global security. We cannot afford a person like him as Commander in Chief.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And McCain's is to basically go to war with everyone who doesn't agree with us. Is that good for the country? Where are we going to get that money and military support? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Barack Hussein Obama
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Seriously, get off your high horse. Again, I am JEWISH and have an ADOLF in my family. Should I hate him? Obviously he has no control over what his parents named him. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Obama is biracial, but he is afraid to admit it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Are you serious? Not true in the least. He talks about his biracial background at every opportunity. </p>
<p>
[quote]
It is just that when a person, usually but not always an inner city minority, chooses to live the lifestyle of crime, violence, government welfare, and child bearing out of wedlock, that person ends up unsuccessful.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Right, but it all starts with education. You can't get out of poverty without schools who are willing to help. But, McCain voted against funding school construction and against a minimum wage increase. How is THAT going to help? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Regarding Gay Marriage: It is not illegal for two persons of the same gender to live together. This has never been illegal. So what’s the big deal? Now these people want a license that forces the rest of the population to accept them into normal social activities like weddings, adoptions, and marriage tax.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh dear... Oh dear... THESE PEOPLE are AMERICANS who are just like you! Get off of your high horse and come down to where everybody is created equal. I'm sorry, but if I'm in love with somebody and they are dying and I can't see them because we are the same gender and not married, IT'S A PROBLEM! And why can't they adopt? We have hundreds of thousands unloved, unwanted children in American who just need to have people care about them and love them. You'd rather have them in a shelter with hundreds of other children instead of with two women? That's twisted. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I cannot believe that someone posted that they support Obama solely because of the issue of gay marriage. That person will look past all the misgivings of a candidate just because the candidate wants to give licenses to a very small percentage of Americans, something that has never been done in 200 + years of American democracy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why not? Many people voted for JFK simply because he wanted equal rights. </p>
<p>
[quote]
In treating civil unions and gay marriage as what it really is, I realized that people are arguing solely over the issue of a government granted license. Let’s look at the facts: This license [civil union] has never before been granted to these [gay] people at any time in America’s history. This license forces the vast majority of heterosexual Americans to accept a controversial minority of homosexual Americans into programs like adoptions. This will lead to orphans and abandoned children being forced to live in an unnatural family situation, growing up with unusual family values and morals. Now do you really want a candidate that will force this view upon all Americans?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The same arguments were used against interracial marriage. Are you saying THAT was wrong?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think not. For Obama to grant marriage licenses to homosexuals is like someone giving driver’s licenses to 8 year olds; These people are not mature enough for these licenses and will endanger other Americans. Of course a gay marriage license will not cause car crashes, but it will allow for the teaching of traditionally immoral practices to America’s orphans and foster children. Basically, homosexuals are not prohibited from life, liberty, or happiness in the current laws. Obama’s granting of marriage licenses to gays will only force this belief on heterosexual Americans.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So you're going to force your Judeo-Christian beliefs on to me, a fellow American, who is not a Judeo-Christian. Huh... I didn't know America was a theocracy... OH WAIT! WE'RE NOT!</p>
<p>
[quote]
If Robin Hood Obama takes from the rich, he is eliminating industries like boat building, limousines, valets, home building, and retail.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I have no problem taking away another million for somebody who clears $10 million a year. Trust me, it's not going to phase them too badly. However, taking away another $2,000 for somebody who makes $20,000 a year is going to majorly cut their budget thus making them shop less and therefore eliminating jobs. </p>
<p>
[quote]
The news media has trained American voters to become Bush filters. Whenever someone says Bush, they say boo.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You've been watching Fox too much. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Notice that nobody in America is starving over $4 gasoline.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hello?!? Have you noticed our economy? I have 10 houses on my street, 8 are foreclosed on. Part of that is from soaring food prices from fuel prices. People are traveling less, people are contributing less to the economy, unemployment is growing, and people are becoming homeless. </p>
<p>Oh and before anybody says I don't like McCain, I'll be the first to tell you I don't. I loved the McCain of 2000, then the so called Straight Talk Express set his sights on the White House and moved radically toward the right. He lost his credibility with me by claiming to be different, but acting like every other politician. </p>
<p>Btw, why does nobody talk about him screwing around on his wife because she was in a horribly disfiguring accident? And then divorced her and married Cindy less than a month after their divorce? I think THAT shows his character. </p>
<p>Peace.</p>
<p>Rofllmfao@ Romanigypsyeyes. Talk about heated debate...
Wow. ;)</p>
<p>"We don’t need a guy with the middle name Hussein in charge of the War in Iraq."</p>
<p>Wow, you have made my day...and it's only 45 minutes long so far! Logic good job!</p>
<p>Lol, Ivoyable, I'm sorry. But his post infuriated me. That is the first time I've ever systematically argued (almost) each point of the post. I kind of feel liberated. It had a calming affect on me. :)</p>
<p>well said mchrisp10</p>
<p>while some of your ideas and thoughts were a bit radical(Barack Hussein Obama) i agree with you on most of your ideas</p>
<p>McCain 08</p>
<p>
[quote]
About minorities: I love you. I truly do. It's just that we don't make progress in achieving a color-blind America by voting as a racial voter bloc. It just further divides us. Obama is biracial, but he is afraid to admit it. He gets more mileage out of claiming to be black. Frankly, I don't care what color he is. If Condoleezza Rice was running for president, I would vote for her. It's the issues, not the skin color of a president that counts.</p>
<p>Furthermore, it is not your skin color that holds you back from success. It is your attitude and lifestyle that holds you back. Any black or Hispanic or any other minority can be successful in business, media, sports, or science. It is just that when a person, usually but not always an inner city minority, chooses to live the lifestyle of crime, violence, government welfare, and child bearing out of wedlock, that person ends up unsuccessful. This has nothing to do with whether you are white or black or brown or blue. It is just a fact that when you choose to drop out and to do drugs and to drink and womanize and all that bad stuff, you end up unsuccessful. It happens to both whites and blacks. Unfortunately, Obama will do nothing to stop this phenomena that McCain cant do.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Nice stereotype.... Because it's never racism that holds us back, it's always lifestyle. Please. Do you realize how many minorities live in ghettoes and then how few of them are actually gangbangers, womanizers, drug dealers, etc.? That's why many minorities look up to a guy like Obama. And yeah, it must be the colored people attitude that keeps us from fair treatment in the work place. </p>
<p>McCain fans: I love you. I truly do. It's just that when you talk about minorities like they are all the same, it drives me crazy. </p>
<p>Obama > McCain. Obama is clearly going to win, he's already doing his victory lap around the world.</p>
<p>But unfortunately I think it's going to be Obama that takes us into the 'New World Order.' Yes, yes, I know it sounds crazy, but it's bound to happen.</p>
<p>"Obama is a disaster in the making. He is an average liberal claiming to help the poor and underrepresented. All he will accomplish is to make China the next world power, make whites resentful, make adopted kids gay, and make more Americans poor."</p>
<p>Dude, it's 2008. You should know by now that having gay parents does not make you gay.</p>
<p>I think that the fact that Obama is running proves mchrisps's point about lifestyle. Go look up Obama's history of his life up to this point. You could call him a self-made man. He was never part of a rich, privileged family, and, after going through multiple divorces and going all over the world with different fathers, he finally went to Occidental, then Columbia, and then finally Harvard. HE WAS A SELF-MADE MAN. </p>
<p>And he was a self-made man because of correct lifestyle choices. So I completely agree with Mchrisp on that one. </p>
<p>And BeKindRewind, I totally agree with you about the New World Order thing. It does not sound crazy. Barack Obama is a liberal Democrat, and I can easily see him taking away all power from the states and placing it in the frail little hands of our current federal government to shake up our political system. It's really scary. In 5 years, you may look me up and find me in Switzerland! </p>
<p>As an American, and nothing more, I give no ounce of support to Obama. This is one election where we already know beforehand how it is going to turn out, and it won't be pretty if Obama wins.</p>
<p>China is going to be the next world power no matter what. Obama isn't going to "make China the next world power." </p>
<p>Obama is certainly better than McCain. I wouldn't be surprised if McCain died in office.</p>
<p>mchrisp10:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The whole idea of supporting non-allies is ridiculous. Someone actually posted that 'the age of unilateralism is over', or something like that. In this age of global terror, the last thing we need is to lose control. We have crazy terrorist dictators leading nations in several countries around the world (Cuba, Venezuela, Palestine, Syria, Iran, and N. Korea to name a few). Obama wants to support the United Nations and talk to the crazy dictators and be everyone's friend. He is completely clueless on this issue of national and global security. We cannot afford a person like him as Commander in Chief.
[/quote]
</p>
<ol>
<li>Bush is right now engaging in negotiations with Iran after swearing not to talk to "our enemies." Clearly, even he who was once opposed to speaking with other countries, has now realized the benefits. Look at North Korea - we are improving our relations with them, and thereby also reducing their threat of nuclear weapons development. Talking to "enemy" nations WORKS.</li>
<li>Iran, Syria, and Palastine are not dictatorships, their leaders have been voted into office. Just because they oppose us, does not mean that those countries are not simply reflecting the attitude of a nation of people toward the USA. Alienating those nations will only perpetuate their negative sentiments toward the USA.</li>
</ol>
<p>
[quote]
Even more than defense, our economy is going down the drain with this globalism. We are being taxed like crazy, and billions of dollars are being spent outside of the US for "Foreign Aid." What are we? The Red Cross? We cannot let tiny little impoverished nations in Africa milk off the US and boss us around in the United Nations. Sure, it is great when a charity raises money to buy rice for the starving people across the world, but the United States is not a charity. Nowhere in the US Constitution does it say to buy rice for the starving people in other nations. At least not in my view of government.
[/quote]
</p>
<ol>
<li>Bush has launched perhaps the largest amount in aid offerings to help combat AIDS in Africa. I actually think it's one of the best policies that he has endorsed (I'm clearly a Democrat.)</li>
<li>Foreign aid is not the reason that the USA economy is suffering. I don't need to explain this one to you (hopefully)</li>
<li>I agree that we shouldn't become a charity, but there are significant benefits to helping other countries because it gives us more leverage on the international stage.</li>
</ol>
<p>Concerning minorites, I won't dispute you too much because I agree with the basic sentiment that one shouldn't support Obama because they believe he will do more for minorities than John McCain. I don't really support AA either.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Regarding Gay Marriage: It is not illegal for two persons of the same gender to live together. This has never been illegal. So what’s the big deal? Now these people want a license that forces the rest of the population to accept them into normal social activities like weddings, adoptions, and marriage tax.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You go on, but I'm not going to repost your entire post. It's a matter of equality. romanigypsyeyes basically said what I wanted to. By adopting a policy of discrimination against homosexuals, the government would be forcing a Judeo-Christian belief on me. </p>
<p>
[quote]
And now the poor people: Everyone thinks Obama stands for the poor family in South Chicago. This is not the case. He is a rich Chicago politician who grew up with middle class grandparents. Of course Obama wants to throw money at the poor people, but is this the right solution. Barack “Robin Hood” Obama believes he can use the government to take from the rich and give to the poor.
[/quote]
</p>
<ol>
<li>Barak Obama did not grow up with his grandparents. He was raised by his mother who was at one point in his childhood, on foodstamps. Not exactly what I consider "glamourous." He worked hard to get into college (like many of us here), and achieved his dreams. </li>
<li>Please, do me a favor. Before you throw out blind accusations, specify which exact policy position you are considering socialist. I am strongly capitalist (I intend on going into finance), and I would appericiate if you told me which policy throws "money at poor people"</li>
<li>If you mean the Bush Tax Cuts, even McCain was against them in the beginning. The truth is, they have done nothing to stimulate the economy. </li>
<li>No, we should not be taxed equally. We should be taxed proportionally to the amount that we make and therefore we will be making an equal sacrifice of our money for our country. Taxing Bill Gates the same amount as a laborer who makes $60,000 makes absolutely no sense because their proportional contribution is not equal. </li>
<li>WE CANNOT MAKE TAX BREAKS WHEN WE ARE IN A 9 TRILLION DOLLAR DEFIECT. We will only be burying ourselves in more debt and making future generations pay it off, with interest.</li>
</ol>
<p>I'm not even going to respond to your comments about the media because it's hard for me to take them seriously and I'm tired of typing. Sorry in advance for any typos.</p>