Is Obama worthy?

[bolverk]

Jun 4, 2008 14:50:39 GMT -5 jgaffney said:

Here's a question I would like the moderator to pose to Sen. Obama in the upcoming presidential debates:

"Senator Obama, given that you were a member of Trinity Church for 20 years, and given that you undoubtedly sat through more than one sermon by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a strong proponent of black liberation theology, which has been described as a cross between black racism and Marxism, please tell us how Rev. Wright's black liberation theology has shaped your views and what role it will play in your government."

If Obama does not find a way to weasel out of the challenge by McCain to have Ten Town Hall Meetings as opposed to sound bite debates, then someone may well ask him that question. But, he is attempting to hide behind the Linclon-Douglas style of debates that do not serve the American Citizens interest.

McCain is correct, we are tired of the old sound bite style of debates, and want a transparent debate in the town hall format. If Obama is truly about transparency, then he should have no problems with this. If he is not, he will find a way to weasel out and truly disenfranchise the voters.

[bolverk]

Jun 4, 2008 14:33:37 GMT -5 saunterelle said:

The fact is that our invasion of Iraq was a mistake. We went in under false pretenses, misled by a deceitful leader (see Bush's lies thread). Before we get too much further into this quagmire we need to leave before it's too late, just like Vietnam.

Even a superpower like the U.S. doesn't have the resources to police the world alone. I didn't meant to call you nuts, but the idea that we should go into bankruptcy to liberate all oppressed nations is ludicrous.

And, by the way, I did not say we should liberate all oppressed nations. I said we should support all emerging democracies. That is a huge difference. And exactly why Burma is suffering today, because we did not support Democracy abroad.

[jgaffney]

Saunterelle sez...

The fact is that our invasion of Iraq was a mistake. We went in under false pretenses, misled by a deceitful leader (see Bush's lies thread). Before we get too much further into this quagmire we need to leave before it's too late, just like Vietnam.

I have responded to this progressive trope before, in the old PeeDee forums, but let me repeat it here for your edification, Saunterelle.

• The demonization of Saddam did not start in 2001. In fact, the Senate passed a resolution in 1998 making regime change in Iraq our national policy.
  
  
• It was widely thought in the late 1990's, by many of the Western powers, that Saddam possessed WMDs, the means to make more, and the will to use them. How else would you explain the string of resolutions from the UN Security Council, calling for Saddam to come clean on his WMD programs or face "dire consequences." Please give us your understanding of "dire consequences."
  
  
• When Bush led us to war in Iraq, he didn't create lies about WMDs or terrorist threats, he merely convinced us that the talk that had been common for the last 6 years regarding the threat Saddam posed was worth going to war over.
  
  
• If, as you claim, Bush is such a liar, then, when it was discovered that there were no stockpiles of yellow-painted warheads in Iraq, marked "WMD - Do Not Touch," why didn't Bush just plant some, declare victory and come home?
  
  
• How much do you really care about the Iraqi people who want to establish a free state?
  
  
• The "quagmire" analogy with Vietnam is appropriate. History has shown that we could have won that war handily, and, were in fact, defeating the North Vietnamese, but for the meddling by a progressive Left that was convinced that America was "evil" for trying to help a country, in this case, South Vietnam, remain free of Communism. Have you read any of the accounts of what happened in South Vietnam after we pulled out in 1975? do you think it will be different in 2009 or 2010? Can America stand another blow to its prestige like that?
  

Too many people on the Left allow their rabid hatred of the Bush administration cloud their vision of history and, hence, their ability to see forward. Those same people would be sorely disappointed should Sen. Obama be elected and - shazam! - discover that he really can't pull troops out in 16 months without creating a calamity in Iraq. But, who really cares about a bunch of dead Iraqis, right?

[bolverk]

Jun 4, 2008 15:12:58 GMT -5 jgaffney said:

The "quagmire" analogy with Vietnam is appropriate. History has shown that we could have won that war handily, and, were in fact, defeating the North Vietnamese, but for the meddling by a progressive Left that was convinced that America was "evil" for trying to help a country, in this case, South Vietnam, remain free of Communism. Have you read any of the accounts of what happened in South Vietnam after we pulled out in 1975? do you think it will be different in 2009 or 2010? Can America stand another blow to its prestige like that?

I had the good fortune of working with a gentleman from Vietnam from 1980 to 1985. He was a gracious gentleman, but despised communism and what it did to his country. Suffice to say, he was happy to be here, but disappointed that his country was lost to despots. I blame the tune in, turn on and drop out crowd for that. They truly hate America, and all people who seek freedom and democracy.

[jgaffney]

Today's Wall Street Journal has this:

A 2004 Chicago Sun-Times interview with Mr. Obama mentioned three men as his religious guides. One was Rev. Wright. Another was Father Michael Pfleger, the Louis Farrakhan ally whose recent remarks caused Mr. Obama to resign from Trinity, but for whose Chicago church Mr. Obama channeled at least $225,000 in grants as a state senator. Until recently, the priest was connected to the campaign, which flew him to Iowa to host an interfaith forum. Father Pfleger's testimony for the candidate has since been scrubbed from Mr. Obama's campaign Web site. A third mentor was Illinois state Senator James Meeks, another Chicago pastor who has generated controversy for mixing pulpit and politics.

The point is not that Mr. Obama now shares the radical views of these men. The concern is that by the Senator's own admission they have been major moral influences, and their views are starkly at odds with the candidate's vision as a transracial peacemaker. Their patronage was also useful as Mr. Obama was making his way in Chicago politics. But only now, in the glare of a national campaign, is he distancing himself from them. The question is what in fact Mr. Obama does believe.

The young Senator has been a supernova exploding into our politics, more phenomenon than conventional candidate. His achievement in winning the Democratic nomination has been impressive. Now comes a harder audience. The presidency has to be earned, and Americans have a right to know much more about the gifted man who is the least tested and experienced major party nominee in modern times.

The "least tested and experienced major party nominee" indeed!

[bolverk]

And Rezko has now been found guilty and convicted of corruption.

[The New Guy]

mamma always said, be careful who you hang around with. people might get the wrong idea about you.

[mrroqout]

Yeah Tony Rezko, care to speak about this Saunterelle?

www.suntimes.com/news/politics/425305,CST-NWS-obama13.article

Yeah no way is B. Hussein a Business as usual LIAR.
Oh wait nope he is.

When B.Hussein was originally called to the carpet on his shady dealings with Rezko the liar replied “I’ve never done any favors for him.” --- LIAR Often?


Also as B. Hussein is calling out American auto makers for not producing enough environmentally friendly vehicles, and wants US all to cut waaay back. Yet when he's at home he drives a HEMI V8 Chrysler 300..... LIAR Typical do as I say NOT as I do...

www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/05/more_obama_hypocrisy.html

It's cool though..He's superhuman...

[saunterelle]

I don't understand how you can call him a liar. The question is whether Obama wrote letters as a favor to Rezko. This is what the article you linked to says about it:

"On Tuesday, Bill Burton, press secretary for Obama's presidential campaign, said the letters Obama wrote in support of the development weren't intended as a favor to Rezko or Davis.

"This wasn't done as a favor for anyone," Burton said in a written statement. "It was done in the interests of the people in the community who have benefited from the project.

"I don't know that anyone specifically asked him to write this letter nine years ago," the statement said. "There was a consensus in the community about the positive impact the project would make and Obama supported it because it was going to help people in his district. . . . They had a wellness clinic and adult day-care services, as well as a series of social services for residents. It's a successful project. It's meant a lot to the community, and he's proud to have supported it.''

Asked about the Obama letters, Rezko's attorney, Joseph Duffy, said Tuesday, "Mr. Rezko never spoke with, nor sought a letter from, Senator Obama in connection with that project."


Can you please explain where Obama is LYING? Seems to me he is simply looking out for the best interests of his district.

[mrroqout]

Right because B.Husseins PRESS SECRETARY says "oh hey they weren't favors" of course they weren't.

Wow..again do you HONESTLY BELIEVE THIS Drivel you write?

OF COURSE HIS PRESS SECRETARY is going to SPIN it in his favor.

The EVIDENCE is there IN THE LETTERS.

Funny you dismiss his GAS GUZZLER huh? After crying about EVERYONE elses? It's cool for him though?

[saunterelle]

You've got a point about the gas guzzler. Not cool. But he still gets my vote.

[mrroqout]

Did hell freeze over today?

We agree on something?

I'm off to buy a lotto ticket!!!!!!!!!