Why shouldn't I vote for Obama?? - Page 3

Michael The Disciple · #21 02-09-2008, 10:58 PM

His Church does same sex marriages? Show us the proof.

StMark · #22 02-09-2008, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

His Church does same sex marriages? Show us the proof.

check out the beliefs of the united church of christ

StMark · #23 02-09-2008, 11:04 PM

CP,

Look what happend to their choir director last month

Was murdered gay choir director a “saint”?

http://gcmwatch.wordpress.com/2008/0...ector-a-saint/

MissBrattified · #24 02-09-2008, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChicagoPastor

good point

so which 'honest liberal' do we vote for?

To be quite frank, I consider Hillary to be the more "honest liberal" of the two. She openly espouses liberal views and policies, even though overall she is a dishonest person. At least we KNOW what she stands for, most of the time--we know what to look out for.

Obama is WAY too vague and mysterious. Yeah, he can "preach", but who cares? I know lots of great orators who would make awful presidents. I don't trust him.

ChristopherHall · #25 02-09-2008, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChicagoPastor

good point

so which 'honest liberal' do we vote for?

LOL

No politician is completely honest. LOL

However, both Obama and Hillary are liberal and honest about it. McCain is pretending to be a conservative. Therefore I'd trust either Obama or Hillary over McCain. At least with each of them you know what you're going to get. You know what you will disagree with and you know where they stand on issues and policies that may warrant a closer look and serious consideration. With McCain, his obviously trying to trick us into supporting him. I don't trust him one bit. Now Huckabee, he's the only Republican running worth his salt. He's not a fiscal conservative....but he is a social conservative. He's the only Republican I'd consider voting for.

Now, on a side note. What is this "fiscal conservative" garbage? Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II have each left massive deficits. Bush I and Bush II grew the government and national spending far more than any Democrat, even though these Republicans were running deficits! Clinton had to raise taxes to pay for Bush I's deficits before he could initiate his Democratic reforms. In spite of this Clinton balanced the budget and ran a surplus he advised be used to strengthen Social Security. Bush II gave the Surplus away in rebates and gave the most massive tax cuts in history causing the government to nearly begin running in the red immediately. Then 9/11 hit us and we launched into war. Did Bush push war bonds, call on Americans to reach into their pockets to support the war effort as he raised taxes as necessary to pay for the war? No. Now we're running even worse deficits than before, the value of the dollar is tanking, deregulation of the banking industry has allowed predatory lending and the collapse of the housing market, and oil prices are through the roof and the White House isn't even trying to negotiate lower costs. Guys....these aren't fiscal conservatives. The Democrats are far more conservative fiscally than the Republicans. At least Democrats hold to PayGo meaning they only pay for programs as they go, not running deficits. Each party spends the tax payer dollars on their pet projects. Even this current White House is spending our dollars like their's no tomorrow. At least the Democrats will make sure we at least have a health insurance program covering all Americans.

Oh well, those are my thoughts right now. I may change my mind if convinced otherwise, but that's my line of thought right now.

Fiyahstarter · #26 02-09-2008, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Obama is WAY too vague and mysterious. Yeah, he can "preach", but who cares? I know lots of great orators who would make awful presidents. I don't trust him.

(Nods head in agreement)

Run for the hills if Obama gets in!

Ogatt, you got room for me in them there hills?

ChristopherHall · #27 02-09-2008, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StMark

CP our friendship depends on you NOT voting for him and I am a "D" ya know but I aint voting for no terrorist!!!!!!!! and don't you either. If you do don't ever contact me again

PS tune Christopher out- he's being an advocate of the enemy

Wow...rings of McCarthyism. lol Look out...everyone who disagrees might...might be...a Communist! AAAAAHHHH.

lol

Praxeas · #28 02-09-2008, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRINGE_NUTTER

Yes, it could be a deal. If your father and step father were Muslims, it could be a big deal on how you view the world. Also, the quotes were in the book out of context or not out of context. I think we should study his books, his record and how the man thinks before jumping in to vote for him. What has he done for America? Making an inspiring speech and rallying people to his cause does not make a good leader or a good president. It makes him a good speaker and a good campaigner. That's all.

It could, It could, It could. It could NOT too. That's the point. Both men were NOT in his life very long.

Look at the quotes...he quotes part of paragraph then adds.....then another quote from somewhere else. In other words that person left OUT a lot and put two unconnected statements together.

Study his record. I agree. Study his words and books incontext. I agree. No disagreement there. What has anyone really done for America? What did Dubya do for America before he was elected?

ChristopherHall · #29 02-09-2008, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

To be quite frank, I consider Hillary to be the more "honest liberal" of the two. She openly espouses liberal views and policies, even though overall she is a dishonest person. At least we KNOW what she stands for, most of the time--we know what to look out for.

Obama is WAY too vague and mysterious. Yeah, he can "preach", but who cares? I know lots of great orators who would make awful presidents. I don't trust him.

Well, at least you're not touting email rumors and slander about the man. LOL

Either way, Obama would be far better than McCain. McCain's a joke and a phony conservative. If you're right sis, Hillary sounds better than either Obama or McCain. However, I think your sense of Obama being a vague is rooted in the fact that Obama is rather new to politcs and he isn't as well known as either Hillary or McCain. I see that as a good thing. With either Hillary or McCain, we'd be electing more of the same. McCain would give us more Bushonomics and failed policies. Hillary would essentially be a resurrection of the 90's. Obama is the only one who will obviously bring a change to American politics.

While I might disagree with Obama on a couple issues, I sense he really believes in what he's trying to do. He's not just after power. That's somewhat inspiring even though I disagree with him on a couple things.

Praxeas · #30 02-09-2008, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StMark

CP,

Look what happend to their choir director last month

Was murdered gay choir director a “saint”?

http://gcmwatch.wordpress.com/2008/0...ector-a-saint/

Think about this for a second.....if a covert Terrorist Muslim was wanting to make Americans think he was a Christian...would he go there then? He he was wanting to sway all Americans especially christians, would he go to a church that praises Louis Farrakhan?

Say what you want about that church and his brand of Christianity....this should really show the man is NOT a closet Muslim terrorist...

Personally I don't think a Democrat HAD to be a closet Muslim terrorist to put us in danger of islamic extremism growing in America. Muslims never had to go covert in the past to do that. They always used the more liberal branch of nations OPENLY to take over when they were doing a bloodless Jihad.