I hate to bring up politics but, as a former-Obama supporter, I can't help but look at what's been happening around the country with his message of "hope" and "change" and see a too-inexperienced, and certainly big-headed and egotistical (at this point), youngster bullting his way to the top of this historical presidential race. I was sucked in by his speeches and his message so much I ignored the facts: that he has virtually no record, and the record of votes while in the Senate, he actually has behind him, 130 of them of are not "ayes", nor are they "nays", he has voted 130 times as "present", an easy cop-out from taking a stand on issues, be it the wrong or right one (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/u...cs/20obama.html)
Several weeks before the Jersey primary, I paid more attention, I looked at their records and compared them. I took the whole "two Clintons in the White House?" spin and thought to myself, "Hmmm.... Is it really THAT bad to have two extremely intelligent people with thousands of contacts around the world that love them dearly, who can get done?" Hate the Clintons all you want, but the answer to anyone with a brain is "no", that's not a bad thing.
Ask any of his supporters why they like him, and they'll say things like "change" and "hope" and he's a visionary and doing new things to this country. Ask them what his record is and I doubt they'll be able to answer. It's really sad that this country is falling for a "personality" again. This country fell for "the kinda guy I'd wanna have a beer with" in 2000, and then "the kinda guy who stays the course and gets us out of trouble" in 2004. Now, as if we haven't learned our lesson, people are going for the kinda guy they've wanted to see as president. Tear yourself away from one of his amazing speeches (which, we've found out, also aren't genuine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8M6x1H08aFc), and you'll see that there's no substance, "just words." We all WANT to believe that we have an inspirational and groundbreaking potential president, but we don't question when a fake-wannabe comes along...
Now, go back to the first video up top, I find it incredible and just another in a complete series of bull coming from this guy's campaign. It's kinda sad that this country's falling for another liar, we've had 8 years of one really bad one so far.
My five cents haha... Please discuss, and keep mature and intelligent, no racist or sexist remarks, I wanna see what other Democrats' views are...
PS: Before you make fun of Canada or call it an unreliable source, you should know that they actually outed the letter between the two guys, not just the heresay. It's out there, and the Obama campaign's silent now: http://hotair.com/archives/2008/02/...-confirmed-ctv/...
ownymcown
Who says too little experience is a bad thing? In my opinion, spending more years in Washington doesn't make a better leader or executive. Being in a legislature is NOT executive experience, they don't have to make real time decisions and they don't have to make tough choices. All they do is vote and get reelected. For all intents and purposes, both Hillary and Barack have very little executive experience.
As far as ideology, both have very similar thoughts on the issues. However, I think Obama has a more progressive and enlightened agenda and character.
And about making stands on certain issues, yes he hasn't had time to make much of a stand on anything but at least he didn't make the dramatically wrong decision of voting to support the war in Iraq from the start, like Hillary did. She dropped the ball on the most important foreign policy decision so far in the entire decade.
Burak14
I rather vote for him. You never know what Hillary you're going to get from day to day. One day she is pissed, one day she is condescending, one day she is happy, one day she says this, a few days later she says something completely different, etc. etc. But with Obama, you know what you're getting, someone that is willing to work hard at fixing our current messes, as he has with everything in his life, he is willing to apologize for mistakes that he has made, and he's a politician that is stubborn when it comes to certain issues, unlike Clinton. p.s Obama is young, idealistic, and interesting.
Fibonacci
Clinton couldn't control her panty-raiding husband to keep it in his pants, and couldn't leave him when he embarrassed her worldwide. Did she stay as a political tool, to keep harness of the Clinton name? She is of poor character.
Obama is inexperienced and I as much as I myself was against the iraq war from day 1, I'm not sure that Obama or his supporters are well-informed enough to consider the consequences of premature withdrawal in iraq. He does tend to be rather progressive. But mind you, he didn't vote for the iraq war because he wasn't in office then. He couldn't vote. But it's pretty easy to say you wouldn't have voted for it when you weren't even there. I wonder what he would have done?
McCain has a terrible track record and he wound up cheating on the wife that waited for him while he was a POW. Wow, what a hero. He's got alot of scandals tied to his name. Take a look...
They are all worthless candidates. I might vote for nader considering ron paul is a in joke.
DJ Eco
quote:
Originally posted by Burak14
p.s Obama is young, idealistic, and interesting.
Idealistic isn't a good thing nowadays, we need someone who's realistic. We're in a ty situation right now, we shouldn't give the amateur a turn at bat to fix it, but someone who has the right people and contacts to get us out. Give the amateur a run in 4 years from now, when, MAYBE, he's ready.
quote:
Originally posted by Burak14
But with Obama, you know what you're getting
That doesn't even make sense in light of everything I've just said. He has no record to run on, and the promises he IS making, as seen in the first video, they're just campaign rhetoric, or so says his own high-ranking member of his campaign... ownmycown's reply is justified and I respect it, but saying that with Obama we know what we're getting, that's the exact opposite view than I think anyone has ever said about him.
MeLLyMeL
IN B4 Inconspicuous comes in with his Barack Obama 101 - stats!
lol
Goodness I sure do hope he doesn't see this thread.
All I know.. is my vote isn't going to Barack. That's a fact. As much as I want "change"... I don't want him to be doing any of the "change"-ing.
edit- EVERY Politician has a scandal. Should we start naming them? I dunno what is worse.. cheating on your wife [something of a norm now a days] or being tied to a Church which has connections with someone as Anti-Semitic as Farrakhan.. sp?
DJ Eco
quote:
Originally posted by Fibonacci
Clinton couldn't control her panty-raiding husband to keep it in his pants, and couldn't leave him when he embarrassed her worldwide. Did she stay as a political tool, to keep harness of the Clinton name? She is of poor character.
Obama is inexperienced and I as much as I myself was against the iraq war from day 1, I'm not sure that Obama or his supporters are well-informed enough to consider the consequences of premature withdrawal in iraq. He does tend to be rather progressive. But mind you, he didn't vote for the iraq war because he wasn't in office then. He couldn't vote. But it's pretty easy to say you wouldn't have voted for it when you weren't even there. I wonder what he would have done?
McCain has a terrible track record and he wound up cheating on the wife that waited for him while he was a POW. Wow, what a hero. He's got alot of scandals tied to his name. Take a look...
They are all worthless candidates. I might vote for nader considering ron paul is a in joke.
See, but everything you just mentioned, with all three candidates, is stuff relating to their personal lives. If we were to base every politician on what happens in their personal life, , we'd be without a government to run the country!!! They've all got skeletons to hide; personal baggage should never ever be a reason you're for or against someone... , France's prime minister divorced his wife and married a younger broad within half a year, and the French people aren't batting an eye, all they worry about is whether or not he can do the job. That's what we should worry about, instead of treating our government like a Page Six or Perez Hilton article. I see it as all about issues, and it shouldn't be about anything but the issues.... Just my thoughts :)
ownymcown
quote:
Originally posted by Fibonacci
Clinton couldn't control her panty-raiding husband to keep it in his pants, and couldn't leave him when he embarrassed her worldwide. Did she stay as a political tool, to keep harness of the Clinton name? She is of poor character.
Obama is inexperienced and I as much as I myself was against the iraq war from day 1, I'm not sure that Obama or his supporters are well-informed enough to consider the consequences of premature withdrawal in iraq. He does tend to be rather progressive. But mind you, he didn't vote for the iraq war because he wasn't in office then. He couldn't vote. But it's pretty easy to say you wouldn't have voted for it when you weren't even there. I wonder what he would have done?
McCain has a terrible track record and he wound up cheating on the wife that waited for him while he was a POW. Wow, what a hero. He's got alot of scandals tied to his name. Take a look...
They are all worthless candidates. I might vote for nader considering ron paul is a in joke.
Ron Paul takes Nader any day of the week. At least Paul isn't considering running and essentially stealing votes away from one of the political party; Nader's presence only helps the Republicans.
He didn't vote for it, you're right, but at the time he made it known that he oppose the vote to go into Iraq.
Let's face it, experience isn't everything. George Bush Jr. had plenty of executive experience, he's governed a large state and managed large businesses/corporations. Coincidentally, he also happened to be one of the worst presidents in American history.
Obama isn't for premature withdrawal either. He won't withdraw against the advisement of military officials; he'll only orchestrate the leaving of Iraq when it is logistically sound to do so.
DJ Eco
quote:
Originally posted by Fibonacci
They are all worthless candidates. I might vote for nader considering ron paul is a in joke.
I agree with the first part of that sentence, not the second though... These aren't the candidates I wanted at all... The two guys I wanted were knocked out in the first round because of how bull this "primary" system is; apparently, Iowa dictates who can and can't run for the whole country's presidency. Not to mention, if you want to talk about ty character, you should be saying that about Nader. Activist????? Yeah, maybe thirty years ago... Nowadays, where is he the 3.5 years that there isn't election... Then, ding, the four-year mark pops up and there he is...
MeLLyMeL
My vote might go towards the VP I like the most. I don't like either of the possible candidates. The VP will make me 100% of my vote. (In hopes of having a smarter VP to help with some of the decision making)
So they better choose wisely!
DJ Eco
quote:
Originally posted by ownymcown
Let's face it, experience isn't everything. George Bush Jr. had plenty of executive experience, he's governed a large state and managed large businesses/corporations. Coincidentally, he also happened to be one of the worst presidents in American history.
Very true, althought he DID have a track record of running to the ground, and any non-idiot could have seen that by reading about him, or by not being captivated by his friendly persona.
This time around, not only are people completely captivated and obsessed by Obama's persona, but he doesn't even have a record!!
I'd like to see Clinton say she's going to change something, and then one of her high-ranking people contact another country to tell them she's "not serious, it's just campaign rhetoric." Everyone would be all over her, she would have had to leave the race. But Obama's too cute and the media has a double-standard for him. They flipped the speech-copying thing against Hillary as if she was the bad one in the situation...
ownymcown
Lol, because she's getting kind of ridiculous. When she was favored overwhelmingly in the beginning of the primary race, she really didn't have anything to complain about. Now that Obama is leading, she brings out her hat full of tricks. It's transparent.
