Two bullshit non-issues and falsely claiming that Obama has done nothing since entering public life. Yeah, you're right, Desert. You won this debate on the merits by posting of a photo of Obama with his hands at his side.

Game, set, match.

Ok so what has Obama done while in Washington. What Bills or Laws did he draft. Reforms of some kind. How about a change at the national level that he has even spearheaded while in office. I am sure your list will be very long so I wait in anticipation.

Oh my naval is pucking and unpucking I am so excited

I just posted the link to the old thread where we discussed this. Try and keep up.

quote:

Originally posted by heckofajobBrownie:
Two bullshit non-issues and falsely claiming that Obama has done nothing since entering public life. Yeah, you're right, Desert. You won this debate on the merits by posting of a photo of Obama with his hands at his side.

Game, set, match.

Hey moron, I am not debating you.

I told you stop campaiging to me for Obama, and yet you still think I am debating over whether to vote for him. Your situational awareness sucks, pretty much always has.

I do not care for his policies on the 2nd Amendment, Healthcare, Spending, Taxes, and Iraq, to name a few. Furthermore, I do not like his lack of experience v. McCain.

You may live in the fantasy world that Obama will defeat McCain, but the rest of us will reside in reality, thank you very much.

quote:

Originally posted by heckofajobBrownie:
I just posted the link to the old thread where we discussed this. Try and keep up.

It's okay. You can say it. He hasn't done much to write home about. You're trying very hard to poish his turd of a record, and it is embarassing to watch you squirm and evade. You're a grown man for crying out loud - stop dodging the issue.

quote:

Originally posted by heckofajobBrownie:
I just posted the link to the old thread where we discussed this. Try and keep up.

Then it should not take long to list them. This is not a problem is it. Oh wait this is the one of them can't back it up things.

I am done with this turd - the embarassing way Heck handles himself on Obama's shortcomings is only surpassed by his rabid denial of Obama's association with a race baiting church.

Heck has lost all credibility. He knows with Hillary out of the race Obama does not stand a chance, so he is making up as many positives as he can.

Read the USA Today Poll from three days ago and you'll find that 60% of the people agree with McCain's position on Iraq. That's not the way Heck would write it, though, because he has no integrity.

If you guys would simply click on the link you can see where I acknowledge Obama's obvious lack of Washington experience, then list his legislative accomplishments.

I don't have anything substantive to say, like where he puts his hand when the anthem is playing or to suggest how much he hates the military, but it's something.

Here it is again:

http://thebrownsboard.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3656077115/m/3511014425/p/1

He's had a Republican co-sponsor on three of his main bills: Demint, Coburn, and Lugar.

Go ahead and read it. You might see why I enjoy having these conversations with people like Tupa and Dennis instead of you guys.

Because they know stuff, and it's about facts.

No they probibly agree with you. The easyest way to win a debate is to talk to people with the same opinion.

Uh, sure.

I posted an article in the Fararro thread, but what parts of "blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America." is neither "racist" nor "Anti-American?"

Heck, for a moment forget that we are bashing "your boy" (we arent), how can the above statements even be argued as "not that big of a deal?"

And yes Obamas statement was efficient, but he credited this pastor for coming up with the title of his book: "The Audacity of Hope" Can the assumption not be made that these two share similar thoughts on the state of minorities (particularly blacks) in the US?

Heck, I think you're a little to quick to minimize this. This is not the same as McCain/Falwell or most of your other examples. Obama didnt hold a press conference one time with this guy to win a couple votes, he was close with him personally for 20 years. Maybe I was wrong, but before this story broke, I was under the impression that Rev. Wright was one of Obama's most significant influences over the past 20 years, and that he still played an important role in advising him. The idea that you could be an active an proud member of a church that cheered Rev. Wright's words and also bring in an era of post-racial post-partisan politics with "hope" is not one that I find easily reconcilable.

I personally dont believe that the Rev started feeling the way he did all of a sudden on a Sunday in '06. I also dont believe that he couldve felt that strongly and decided to do a great job of hiding it from his most famous and influential parishoner for 20 years. In short, I dont believe Obama and, therefore, dont think he has fully addressed the issue.

In a broader context, none of Obama's past in "Chicago politics" has really been brought up yet. I expect that it will. I expect that there will be quite a few questionable things, and I wont be very surprised if we find out that a black politician campaigning for black votes knew full well the power of Rev Wright's words.

I wasn't comparing this relationship to that of McCain and Falwell. I'm specifically addressing someone's lament that this meant Obama was either racist or a shameless panderer for black votes. I thought that was a silly either/or, and if you were going to accuse Obama of pandering for black votes you'd have to throw McCain in there, too, who surely pandered and pretended he was something he is not (religious, a Baptist) for Evangelical votes.

More later.

p.s. It's not like it was Sen. Harry Reid saying these things where he can just disassociate himself from in some form letter. "We may work together, but I don't agree with what he says."

That doesn't really fly here.

Gerald Posner writing at HuffingtonPost.com:

I'm still in the Barack camp. But, as a vocal supporter, I'd like just a couple of answers about the flap over Reverend Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr, the former pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ, the Chicago megachurch where the Obamas have been members for 20 years.

Guilt by association is totally unwarranted. Barack is not responsible for Wright's views. However, how he responds to those views -- and whether he is being straight with us, the voters -- is critical as to whether he should lead our country.

The key issue for me, as both a supporter and as a reporter, revolves around what I view as Wright's most incendiary comments, those implying that America -- because of its own actions -- deserved the 9/11 terror attacks.

Wright made his comments on September 16, only 5 days after the deadly strikes in New York and Washington. He said, in part, "We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye. . . ."

. . . .If the parishioners of Trinity United Church were not buzzing about Reverend Wright's post 9/11 comments, then it could only seem to be because those comments were not out of character with what he preached from the pulpit many times before. In that case, I have to wonder if it is really possible for the Obamas to have been parishioners there -- by 9/11 they were there more than a decade -- and not to have known very clearly how radical Wright's views were. If, on the other hand, parishioners were shocked by Wright's vitriol only days after more than 3,000 Americans had been killed by terrorists, they would have talked about it incessantly. Barack -- a sitting Illinois State Senator -- would have been one of the first to hear about it.

Can't you imagine the call or conversation? "Barack, you aren't going to believe what Revered Wright said yesterday at the church. You should be ready with a comment if someone from the press calls you up."

But Barack now claims he never heard about any of this until after he began his run for the presidency, in February, 2007.

As for the above statement, Legacy, I don't happen to be one of those people who gets their back up when someone says something negative about America, our president, or our way of life. I happen to think we're big enough to take it. It doesn't warrant a big dust-up and a week of news coverage every time some preacher or the Dixie Chicks say something that makes someone somewhere feel like America is being threatened somehow. It isn't.

I think the guy is sort of silly, like most preachers, but his point about the drug war and "three strikes" laws I happen to agree with. I don't think God blesses America or damns it anyway, so I really don't care about the rest. As we've talked about many times before, nothing makes me laugh harder than someone who thinks they know what parts of America God approves of, and which parts he doesn't.

As for his points about 9/11, they're ridiculous. Of course, there's some truth in there. We've targeted civilians before, which is the definition of terrorism. Not quite sure what Hiroshima had to do with 9/11, though.

What I guess I just don't share with you guys is that I read this story or hear this guy preach and I move on. It doesn't stun me. We've heard plenty of these types of people speak before. The guy didn't have any real role in the campaign even before he left - he was just on an religious advisory board.

It's kind of ironic because the reason Obama even has a religious advisory board is because in the last ten years or so it's become almost mandatory to talk about and prove your "faith" on the campaign trail.

I've also read some of Wright other more toned-down sermons about Biblical scripture and they sound like something Tupa would write.

I guess the plus side is that at least now you guys know that he's Christian!

quote:

It's kind of ironic because the reason Obama even has a religious advisory board is because in the last ten years or so it's become almost mandatory to talk about and prove your "faith" on the campaign trail.

I didnt realize JFK ran for President in the last 10 years.

Jefferson's opponents tried to trash him by referring to his Deism (it almost worked), and Lincoln only went to church because people noticed that he didnt.

It isnt a new phenomenon.

quote:

I've also read some of Wright other more toned-down sermons about Biblical scripture and they sound like something Tupa would write.

Pat Robertson has given some very unoffensive sermons in his day. But I would still take issue with McCain if he was claiming Pat Robertson as a primary influence on his worldview or whatever else you want to call the relationship Obama seemed to have with Wright up until he decided to run for Prez.

This guy isn't Pat Robertson. Pat Robertson is a true lunatic. I mean, that guy should be raving on the street with a sandwich board around his neck.

But come on, Tupa. There's a real difference between the religious politics of even the Mondale/Reagan race, or the Bush/Dukakis race, or Clinton/Dole, and the tenor of today's races. I can't imagine you can't tell the difference. Simply noting that religion has been raised as an issue before doesn't paper over the degree to which this has been injected into political life in the last ten years.