Whose more insane, me or the rest of society? Read the following blog of bollocks and decide for yourself.
Subjective view on your countries presidential campaign.
Published on July 1, 2008 By Scotteh In Politics

The following article is my subjective view of the American presidential election. I'll get the disclaimer out of the way first. I’m not American, I’m not as informed as many of you regarding the current presidential race with regards to policies and so on however, as I have already said, this is my subjective view (opinion) and if anything will prove as a good way to perhaps educate myself on the subject further.

I think the likes of the e-mail floating around that contain out of context quotes that was recently used in a JU article as a reference for an example of Obama’s supposed lack of patriotism and racial mentality shows at what length people are willing to go to just to influence the opinions of the masses, with one of our very own JU users falling for it when they used it as a reference.

The article in question can be found HERE.

It is all to often that we get people reacting in way that is can only be described as hearing only what they want to hear. People read that Obama is racists and anti-American, get floated an out of context quote and before you know its common fact amongst certain communities.

That’s not to say there haven’t been some genuine criticisms of Obama that should be debated properly, such as his position on Iraq, oil drilling and I think perhaps the most controversial issue of all, his former pastor.

The first two, I’m not all that clued up on, other than reading other JU users articles and what I’ve seen on the http://www.bbc.co.uk (which is very little). The third issue however was something that intrigued me, as I had heard the name of his pastor previously. As someone who is passionate about secularism, I’m all too familiar with the Nation of Islam (of whom Obama’s former pastor used to be a member).

I’m all to familiar with what he’s said and what he and others like him have said, they themselves are not the problem, its those that listen to them. I think far less would take these people seriously had the opportunities such as racial segregation and poor American foreign policy not existed. The likes of Henry Kissinger playing a game of chess with the world are out right the cause of so many of today’s major issues. With regards to racial segregation, thankfully America as a state has removed this, but the aftermath of it still lingers like the unwanted odor of washed up drunk stood behind you in the queue at the paper store as your purchasing the morning gazette.

I think something like segregation of the races will be a thing of the past in years to come, but there are still to many people with deep rooted and inherited xenophobia that walk the earth. Someone said once that Science only progress with funerals, I fear the same is true for society and politics.

The question still remained for me, had I been an American citizen, would i still vote Obama in the next election, despite this issue having come of light? Let me first come to say that the polices I am aware of I fully support and think are what is needed from America, things like removing lobbying influence, promoting universal healthcare and his concerns over nuclear terror.

With this in mind I think I still would. The pastor issue isn’t enough, it was a mistake sure, but lets face it I think he can be forgiven of a mistake or two in comparison to your current president who has been nothing short of a disaster.

Thanks for reading and all comments are welcome.

 


Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Jul 06, 2008
Reply #32
textwing


If you are representative of Obamabots, then he has lost. Not everyone who may vote for him is a mindless automaton, and a little understanding of the real issues and differences they have with him will go a long way in gaining their vote. Idiotic childish name calling and school yard taunts will just make them stay home or vote for the more adult candidate.
on Jul 08, 2008
The fact remains bigots oppose Obama, AMERCANS support him.


I take exception to your statement. I am not for Senator Obama. He has not shown me that he can handle being president of these United States. He’s just too colored for me, and I need a president that will work for all the people not just the race baiters. He gets the votes because he is black and little else.

Senator Obama has a law degree, that if fine if I want laws written so no one can understand them. President Bush has an MBA, that is not a degree that is given lightly, since most of my peers have this degree including my son. The other half of my peers has law degrees so I understand what we are getting with a lawyer as president. This country is made up of people trying to live the American dream not some socialized nightmare. Business is what makes America work and if you hurt business you hurt people. The good Senator has not shown that he understands business in any way shape or form.

Actually you are not voting for Obama because you are an unintelligent low moraled buffoon who got your panties in a knot because he dared win while you were pretending to be a Democratic Hillary Clinton supporter.

Then when Hillary lost thinking for yourself became too difficult and you went back to sniveling about how you preferred the party who looks to keep you pregnant barefoot and in the kitchen.


I am sensing some unresolved anger here. I think you need a time out for a nap. What you wrote was rude and uncalled for. If you disagree with someone tell them why, launching into mean spirited attacks is not going to win you any friends.
on Jul 08, 2008

I made a similiar prediction back in January when Edwards dropped out of the race.  You can see it here.

It was also somewhat proven out in the Kentucky and West Virginia elections, when I believe soemthing like 20% of voters voted against Obama based on Race.  What does that mean, you might say, my state isn't 'racist' per se?  I would say that West Virginians and Kentuckians are more willing to speak out on their beliefs than some.

Hell, I know, since we are talking experience, then perhaps we should have a Bush or Clinton in the White House for, oh I don't know, the next 100 years or so, that will solve everything!  Sorry, no one is truely ready for the job of being the President of the United States, are they?  It is sort of like having kids, where you really are not ready for everything that it entails.  Just how it is.

on Jul 08, 2008
It was also somewhat proven out in the Kentucky and West Virginia elections, when I believe soemthing like 20% of voters voted against Obama based on Race. What does that mean, you might say, my state isn't 'racist' per se? I would say that West Virginians and Kentuckians are more willing to speak out on their beliefs than some.


I find it interesting that you say that your state is not racist but then you mention other states are more willing to speak their minds. This suggests to me that you believe race is a factor in your state but no one will admit it. That is a dishonest state in my view.

Hell, I know, since we are talking experience, then perhaps we should have a Bush or Clinton in the White House for, oh I don't know, the next 100 years or so, that will solve everything!


I would have been happy if neither was president at all and their families stayed out of politics.

You are right about the experience thing. it is a straw man argument, that I have started in the past without thinking. The only people experienced in being president of the United States are presidents. Everyone else is looking for the job and hopes they are up to the task. When President Bush was tested by China at the start of his presidency I was worried. But the way he handled it told me that there was a lot beneath the surface, and any jerk that messed with us was in deep trouble. I was right. This is why I have doubts about Senator Obama. He reminds me of a corporal I had once. This guy talked the talk all the time. As soon as he saw his first headless body that used to share his room he puked and could not handle the pressure for days. He bounced back but the time he needed to recover was way too long. I fear the same with the good Senator. We get an attack like what China did and he might fold, we get an attack like 9/11 and he looks as if he will curl up in the fetal position sucking his thumb for a day or two. His Vice and his staff had better be ready to pick up the slack because if an enemy sees any weakness we will have a long indecisive war on our hands. The next president will be tested by China and Russia while at the same time we will be dealing with the war. Not a situation you want someone to deal with when all they want is to be president but have no ideas as to how to lead the nation.
on Jul 09, 2008

why would I have voted for Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice


I don't care how much it hurts liberals to face this reality, but I too would gladly vote for Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice. They are both competent and resourceful politicians, as honest as can be, and their skin colour has nothing to do with that (except in the sense that they have to take a lot of crap from liberals because they are black Republicans and presumably grew as human beings because of it).

(A white anti-war Democrat afraid of black Republicans. It's the 1870s all over again.)
on Jul 09, 2008
1) If I'm such a bigot, why would I have voted for Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice if either of them had chosen to seek the Republican nomination?


LW, they are not black they are race traitors! If you sit with a liberal long enough face to face that will be what you will walk away with after the argument if you listen carefully enough. If you remember the term race traitor is a term used by white supremacists. As long as they vote liberal they are “good Negros” but when they get uppity and think outside the party line they are traitors to the party and their race. Since the Senator is still a liberal and will do their bidding he is a good Negro. I remember a liberal telling a joke to another liberal when he thought I could not hear them. What do you call a Negro doctor? Ni---r! That was the last time I went to a democratic function in New York. Some time later I left the democrat party. Since I have been with the racist, bigoted, homophobic, intolerants of the Republican Party I have not heard such talk. Never had I heard even mild racial jokes. Sure there are the jokes about terrorist, and liberals but none that attack a person or their religion, with the exception of the religion of global warming.

In their mindless minds they honestly believe that if you don’t vote for the Senator then you are a racist but there are many in their party that will not vote for the Senator because of his race. They are not racists they just wanted Hillary. A good excuse but not a truthful one.

They aren't 'black enough' for ya? If that's the case, B. Hussein Obama should suffer the same judgement because he's half white.


No, that’s different because he is their half white candidate. When General Powel had kept his political leanings private he was a wonderful person. As soon as he announced that he was a republican the knives came out, the attacks did not stop until he left the Bush Administration. As long as he criticized the administration he was a good Negro. Doctor Rice has been called all manner of things. They attacked her because she was a woman, so much for equal rights for women. She was attacked because she is black, so much for racial equality. The liberal democrats have a scorched earth strategy, nothing is left when they attack because all is fair in politics, even racism and sexism.
on Jul 09, 2008
As long as they vote liberal they are “good Negros” but when they get uppity and think outside the party line they are traitors to the party and their race.


Very true. A bigot is one who puts race above the person. That is classic liberals of today. They only see race, not the person. The KKK did not go away, they just changed tactics - and still have their own man in the senate.
on Jul 09, 2008
Very true. A bigot is one who puts race above the person. That is classic liberals of today. They only see race, not the person. The KKK did not go away, they just changed tactics - and still have their own man in the senate.


More than one and not just men.

on Jul 10, 2008
Precisely my point, just more eloquently put.


I highly respect you and reading this is an honor to me. Thank you very much.
on Jul 11, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copperheads_%28politics%29

"During the American Civil War, the Copperheads nominally favored the Union and strongly opposed the war, for which they blamed abolitionists, and they demanded immediate peace and resisted draft laws. They wanted Lincoln and the Republicans ousted from power, seeing the president as a tyrant who was destroying American republican values with his despotic and arbitrary actions."

"Some Copperheads tried to persuade Union soldiers to desert. They talked of helping Confederate prisoners of war seize their camps and escape. They sometimes met with Confederate agents and took money. The Confederacy encouraged their activities whenever possible."

"The Copperheads sometimes talked of violent resistance, and in some cases started to organize. They never actually made an organized attack, though. As war opponents, Copperheads were suspected of disloyalty, and Lincoln often had their leaders arrested and held for months in military prisons without trial"

on Jul 11, 2008
Obama's comparing himself to Lincoln is deeply flawed.

Lincoln was a pro-war Republican. Obama has more in common with the Copperhead-Democrats mentioned above.
on Jul 11, 2008
Obama has more in common with the Copperhead-Democrats mentioned above.


Seems democrats have not changed in 140 years.
3 Pages1 2 3