Obama, his church, and Farrakhan

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RipCity @ Mar 15 2008, 10:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Don't buy it hook line and sinker. Up until yesterday he said he wouldn't do any of this, now because he realized the political suicide he was about to commit, he changed his tune. He doesn't have the experience required. And if we were to judge him on his values and judgment, intelligent people would take into account the fact that he voted "Present" on 130+ issues to avoid aggrevating his base instead of doing his job as a United States Senator and voting for what he saw was the best course of action. I think that shows a lack of values at least, and maybe not a lack of judgement, but an unwillingness to tackle tough issues.</div>

Well that's misleading. I wouldn't generalize like that.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Mr. Obama?€™s aides and some allies dispute the characterization that a present vote is tantamount to ducking an issue. They said Mr. Obama cast 4,000 votes in the Illinois Senate and used the present vote to protest bills that he believed had been drafted unconstitutionally or as part of a broader legislative strategy.

?€œNo politically motivated attacks in the 11th hour of a closely contested campaign can erase a record of leadership and courage,?€? said Bill Burton, Mr. Obama?€™s spokesman.

An examination of Illinois records shows at least 36 times when Mr. Obama was either the only state senator to vote present or was part of a group of six or fewer to vote that way.

In more than 50 votes, he seemed to be acting in concert with other Democrats as part of a strategy.

For a juvenile-justice bill, lobbyists and fellow lawmakers say, a political calculus could have been behind Mr. Obama?€™s present vote. On other measures like the anti-abortion bills, which Republicans proposed, Mr. Obama voted present to help more vulnerable Democrats under pressure to cast ?€œno?€? votes.

In other cases, Mr. Obama?€™s present votes stood out among widespread support as he tried to use them to register legal and other objections to parts of the bills.</div>

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/polit...S4h9aQDn/9nB6Sw

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Mar 15 2008, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>LOL at quoting the Democratic Party mouthpiece NYT.

And Obama's spokesman.

What's he going to say? Something bad about him?

LOL some more.</div>

And? I was too lazy to find another newspaper that would wind up saying exactly the same thing.

It's generalizing either way, LOL yourself out of here.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 15 2008, 06:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Mar 15 2008, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>LOL at quoting the Democratic Party mouthpiece NYT.

And Obama's spokesman.

What's he going to say? Something bad about him?

LOL some more.</div>

And? I was too lazy to find another newspaper that would wind up saying exactly the same thing.

It's generalizing either way, LOL yourself out of here.
</div>

I was going to just stop replying to this thread, but in light of this response I will. I'm not generalizing anything. The issues that he voted present on are things that are vote-changing issues, abortion, gun control, things like that. Things that regardless of how you vote, will alienate certain groups of people. In order for anyone to pass judgment on something like abortion, your values, or lack thereof, come into play. So when I say that he's showing a lack of values, I'm not generalizing. If his personal values told him that he was against abortion, his vote would reflect that. The fact that he can vote present on an issue as important as partial birth abortion shows that his values going one way or the other, are not strong enough to overcome the political consequences of that vote.

I don't know, maybe your not a political person, and are not following this election as closely as some of us. But it is accepted fact that the New York Times is absolutely liberally biased. Denny is not making that up. If you were posting a link from the NYT on a political forum as a means of proving a point, even Democrats would laugh at you.

Back to the church and the racial issues with the pastor. Obama says that his sermons are "inflammatory and appaling" You may buy that, but anyone with half a brain does not. These are not cherry-picked sermons from Jeremiah Wright. This is the norm at this church, and for the millionth time one THAT HE HAS ATTENDED FOR 20 YEARS. Inflammatory now that the rest of the nation has taken notice, but apparently they weren't inflammatory when he sat in those pews for the past two decades. Obama denouncing this man has nothing to do with what he feels personally, it's the fact that he would be done in the election if he did not issue a statement saying that very thing. Obama himself has referred to Wright as "an uncle figure" and a "spiritual guide" So we're expected to believe that he knows where Wright stands on issues enough to call him a spiritual guide, but not well enough to know him as the racist bastard he is. If thats the case, I don't really want someone making decisions for this country who could call that man his spiritual guide, despite the fact that he spews hate at seemingly every sermon, and makes absolutely ridiculous statements like how HIV is a government conspiracy.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RipCity @ Mar 15 2008, 07:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I was going to just stop replying to this thread, but in light of this response I will. I'm not generalizing anything. The issues that he voted present on are things that are vote-changing issues, abortion, gun control, things like that. Things that regardless of how you vote, will alienate certain groups of people. In order for anyone to pass judgment on something like abortion, your values, or lack thereof, come into play. So when I say that he's showing a lack of values, I'm not generalizing. If his personal values told him that he was against abortion, his vote would reflect that. The fact that he can vote present on an issue as important as partial birth abortion shows that his values going one way or the other, are not strong enough to overcome the political consequences of that vote.

I don't know, maybe your not a political person, and are not following this election as closely as some of us. But it is accepted fact that the New York Times is absolutely liberally biased. Denny is not making that up. If you were posting a link from the NYT on a political forum as a means of proving a point, even Democrats would laugh at you.

Back to the church and the racial issues with the pastor. Obama says that his sermons are "inflammatory and appaling" You may buy that, but anyone with half a brain does not. These are not cherry-picked sermons from Jeremiah Wright. This is the norm at this church, and for the millionth time one THAT HE HAS ATTENDED FOR 20 YEARS. Inflammatory now that the rest of the nation has taken notice, but apparently they weren't inflammatory when he sat in those pews for the past two decades. Obama denouncing this man has nothing to do with what he feels personally, it's the fact that he would be done in the election if he did not issue a statement saying that very thing. Obama himself has referred to Wright as "an uncle figure" and a "spiritual guide" So we're expected to believe that he knows where Wright stands on issues enough to call him a spiritual guide, but not well enough to know him as the racist bastard he is. If thats the case, I don't really want someone making decisions for this country who could call that man his spiritual guide, despite the fact that he spews hate at seemingly every sermon, and makes absolutely ridiculous statements like how HIV is a government conspiracy.</div>

NYT times is biased, but Obama has said already that he votes present when he follows Democratic leader orders (50+ times this happened), or when he likes the bill and wants something changed.

McCain has dealt with his own wack spiritual guides that he doesn't even reject. Obama already stated his position on those Wright views as well. I hate fear mongering, what is he a terrorist? If he had any extreme views like that he'd get impeached immediately.