PDA

View Full Version : Tom Brokaw: Asking the Right Questions About Obama


Yar-El
11-03-2008, 06:44 PM
Tom Brokaw: Asking the Right Questions About Obama
How can you rationally vote for someone if this is the case. Did the media stop short of asking the right questions? It looks to be the case.

Video: Conversation With Tom Brokaw (http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2008/10/30/1/a-conversation-with-tom-brokaw)
Interview With Charlie Rose on PBS

ROSE: I don't know what Barack Obama's worldview is.

BROKAW: No, I don't, either.

ROSE: I don't know how he really sees where China is.

BROKAW: We don't know a lot about Barack Obama and the universe of his thinking about foreign policy.

ROSE: I don't really know. And do we know anything about the people who are advising him?

BROKAW: Yeah, it's an interesting question.

ROSE: He is principally known through his autobiography and through very aspirational speeches.

BROKAW: Two of them! I don't know what books he's read.

ROSE: What do we know about the heroes of Barack Obama?

BROKAW: There's a lot about him we don't know.

mimartin
11-03-2008, 06:53 PM
How can you rationally vote for someone if this is the case. Because you know the alternatives worldview views and they scares the hell out of you. :D I cannot rationally vote for McCain or his policies because I really do not know them. They were ones I respected 8 years ago, but they have unfortunately changed and now seem more in tuned with Bush’s views.

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 06:57 PM
Because you know the alternatives worldview views and they scares the hell out of you. :D I cannot rationally vote for McCain or his policies because I really do not know them. They were ones I respected 8 years ago, but they have unfortunately changed and now seem more in tuned with Bush’s views. You didn't answer the question. McCain is not George Bush.

My question is a very focused question.

jrrtoken
11-03-2008, 07:08 PM
Put it this way: I don't know jack about McCain's policies. From what I know about Obama, he wants to give 95% of America a tax cut, begin eventual withdrawal from Iraq, reinstate more troops into Afghanistan; Do I need to go on?

Now, what I know about McCain..... well, if he focused his advertising to actually talking about his policies as president, then maybe the American people would know what he would do. So far, he hasn't really said much about his actual plan, therefore, why should I even consider voting for him?

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 07:10 PM
Put it this way: I don't know jack about McCain's policies. From what I know about Obama, he wants to give 95% of America a tax cut, begin eventual withdrawal from Iraq, reinstate more troops into Afghanistan; Do I need to go on?

Now, what I know about McCain..... well, if he focused his advertising to actually talking about his policies as president, then maybe the American people would know what he would do. So far, he hasn't really said much about his actual plan, therefore, why should I even consider voting for him? Here is the problem. What do you know about Obama's past that allows him to have earned your respect? What did he do in the past that has earned the world's respect? What did he do in the past that makes you feel he can be trusted?

Were not talking about McCain, so please stay on topic.

Litofsky
11-03-2008, 07:11 PM
You didn't answer the question. McCain is not George Bush.

My question is a very focused question.

Actually, he did, albeit in an indirect form: he votes for Obama because the alternative is just as (if not more so) 'irrational.' McCain is not George Bush. However, from his voting record in the Senate, the two share similar views.

To put this out there, I'm not sure the point of this thread. In many thread, I believe that it has been established that the majority opinion is that Obama will do a better job than McCain, if elected.

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 07:12 PM
Actually, he did, albeit in an indirect form: he votes for Obama because the alternative is just as (if not more so) 'irrational.' McCain is not George Bush. However, from his voting record in the Senate, the two share similar views.

To put this out there, I'm not sure the point of this thread. In many thread, I believe that it has been established that the majority opinion is that Obama will do a better job than McCain, if elected. We are not talking about McCain, so please see the above posts for the questions. This is a Obama question. Please focus.

mimartin
11-03-2008, 07:14 PM
You didn't answer the question. McCain is not George Bush.But his worldview and view on issues have morphed into the same as Bush’s. He has voted with the President around 94% of the time, some Maverick. :xp:

So yes I answered the question, I’m voting for Obama first thing in the morning because it will be a change from the last 8 years. That and I made the mistake of voting republican in 2000 that cured my appetite for voting that way for a while. I always ask myself the same question when voting, am I better off today than I was 8 years ago. Then in a less selfish vain I ask myself, is the country better off than it was 8 years ago. If I honestly answer those questions, they would be so what and definitely no. That is another reason I will be voting for the Democrat.

At least Obama attempted to get people to vote for him, McCain only message was to try to scare the electronic into not voting for Obama.

Why does it matter if I do not know what books Obama reads? I know the couple Bush has read and it has done nothing to help the economy, improve education or get Bin-Laden.

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 07:15 PM
But his worldview and view on issues have morphed into the same as Bush’s. He has voted with the President around 94% of the time, some Maverick. :xp:

So yes I answered the question, I’m voting for Obama first thing in the morning because it will be a change from the last 8 years. That and I may the mistake of voting republican in 2000 that cured my appetite for voting that way for a while. I always ask myself the same question when voting, am I better off today than I was 8 years ago. Then in a less selfish vain I ask myself, is the country better off than it was 8 years ago. If I honestly answer those questions, they would be so what and definitely no. That is another reason I will be voting for the Democrat.

At least Obama attempted to get people to vote for him, McCain only message was to try to scare the electronic into not voting for Obama.

Why does it matter if I do not know what books Obama reads? I know the couple Bush has read and it has done nothing to help the economy, improve education or get Bin-Laden.

This is not a thread about McCain. Please read the above posts for the questions. Thank you. These questions are about Obama.

TriggerGod
11-03-2008, 07:15 PM
How can you rationally vote for someone

Is that a trick question?

Thats the problem. You can't. Everyone has a bias. Some people are able to hide their bias really well, and read everything possible (even smears. I'm looking at you, Garfield :p), but, tomorrow, the election will come down to preference, and what you hear. There is very little 'rational voting' that is going to happen. Its all personal preference. If someone doesn't like how Obama knew Ayers, they'll vote McCain, or if someone doesn't like McCain's choice of VP (or healthcare), they'll vote Obama.

mimartin
11-03-2008, 07:17 PM
We are not talking about McCain, so please see the above posts for the questions. This is a Obama question. Please focus. So this is another bash Obama thread and not a real discussion on why we are voting for Obama?

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 07:17 PM
Is that a trick question?

Thats the problem. You can't. Everyone has a bias. Some people are able to hide their bias really well, and read everything possible (even smears. I'm looking at you, Garfield :p), but, tomorrow, the election will come down to preference, and what you hear. There is very little 'rational voting' that is going to happen. Its all personal preference. If someone doesn't like how Obama knew Ayers, they'll vote McCain, or if someone doesn't like McCain's choice of VP (or healthcare), they'll vote Obama.
Avoiding the question by remarking about McCain is not facing the questions. Read post five please.

So this is another bash Obama thread and not a real discussion on why we are voting for Obama?

Nope. They are straight-forward questions.

jrrtoken
11-03-2008, 07:20 PM
Here is the problem. What do you know about Obama's past that allows him to have earned your respect? What did he do in the past that has earned the world's respect? What did he do in the past that makes you feel he can be trusted?Lots of things, actually. The fact that Obama was a community organizer, is always respectable in my opinion, and the fact that he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago for twelve years, he passed a law in the Illinois legislature that banned state senators to accept gifts from lobbyists, the fact that he worked with Dick Lugar in preventing weapons from getting into the hands of terrorist organizations..... the point is, there's a lot of thing that Obama has done which I believe sets and example fro what he might do as president. Those who say that they don't know much about Obama's past, they just haven't look hard enough.

Litofsky
11-03-2008, 07:23 PM
First, please, Yar, with all due respect, ignoring counter-responses inevitable in any two-sided debates is just plan irresponsible.

Second, why do I trust Obama (over McCain)? He's a seemingly intelligent member of the United States Senate (not an easy place to get into, considering that there are only one hundred of them and the character test that is every election), who can vociferate his opinion without stumbling over his opinion (a significant improvement over our current President). Those are just two reasons. If you want more, I'm positive that I can procure more sources (however, I can already see that Pastrami beat me to naming a few).

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 07:23 PM
Lots of thing, actually. The fact that Obama was a community organizer, is always respectable in my opinion, and the fact that he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago for twelve years, he passed a law in the Illinois legislature that banned state senators to accept gifts from lobbyists, the fact that he worked with Dick Lugar in preventing weapons from getting into the hands of terrorist organizations..... the point is, there's a lot of thing that Obama has done which I believe sets and example fro what he might do as president. Those who say that they don't know much about Obama's past, they just haven't look hard enough. What is his views on foreign policy? What has he done to become respected by people from a foreign country?

First, please, Yar, with all due respect, ignoring counter-responses inevitable in any two-sided debates is just plan irresponsible.

Second, why do I trust Obama (over McCain)? He's a seemingly intelligent member of the United States Senate (not an easy place to get into, considering that there are only one hundred of them and the character test that is every election), who can vociferate his opinion without stumbling over his opinion (a significant improvement over our current President). Those are just two reasons. If you want more, I'm positive that I can procure more sources (however, I can already see that Pastrami beat me to naming a few). See questions above. You are still not answering the questions. What has he done for him to be trusted? How did he deserve the respect of foreign nations? ex- 200,000 people in Germany.

TriggerGod
11-03-2008, 07:25 PM
Avoiding the question by remarking about McCain is not facing the questions. Read post five please.

I'd also like for you to notice I remarked about Obama.

Anyways, if you looked at my entire post, I responded to your question "How can you rationally vote for somebody". Although that might not have been your exact question, it was a question in your statement.

Litofsky
11-03-2008, 07:28 PM
See questions above. You are still not answering the questions. What has he done for him to be trusted? How did he deserve the respect of foreign nations? ex- 200,000 people in Germany.

I believe that I've reasonably answered questions as to why I should trust him. Why does he deserve the respect of foreign nations? Perhaps he doesn't. I'd wager that, because Obama is such an improvement over Bush, people are ready for his change (in Washington).

jrrtoken
11-03-2008, 07:30 PM
What is his views on foreign policy? What has he done to become respected by people from a foreign country?Uh... Obama has done a lot to improve international relations with the U.S. Other than traveling to former Soviet territories to dismantle missile silos, he's also traveled to Palestine to state, and I quote, "the U.S. will never recognize winning Hamas candidates unless the group renounces its fundamental mission to eliminate Israel."

The point: Obama has shown to be a diplomat to the international community, and I expect that he will try to discuss peace with several of our more unsavory nations rather than stay the course with the Bush administration and issue veiled threats.

In case you'd like to be enlightened, then here's some more reading material:
Political positions of Barack Obama (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Barack_Obama)

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 07:31 PM
I'd also like for you to notice I remarked about Obama.

Anyways, if you looked at my entire post, I responded to your question "How can you rationally vote for somebody". Although that might not have been your exact question, it was a question in your statement. You made an accusation; thus, you avoided the questions dead on. Only one person came close to a rational one.

My questions are pretty simple. I respect you guys; thus, I'm trying to bring something to light. Try answering the questions without using Bush or McCain in the answer. You will find out something very illuminating. Use something about him personally.

Litofsky
11-03-2008, 07:33 PM
Further support of Obama on Foreign Policy (http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm). (closer to the source. Scroll down to the "Foreign Policy" box (http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm))

mimartin
11-03-2008, 07:34 PM
Nope. They are straight-forward questions.
:rolleyes:

All right since this is a bash, I will set the record straight on Obama’s heroes. We know them: Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi and Cesar Chavez. Replace Cesar Chavez with Earl Campbell and Barbara Jordan and you have mine too.

Obama favorite book is Toni Morrison’s 1977 novel “Song of the Solomon.” Asked and answered in a interview with Katie Couric.

I guess Rose and Brokaw did not pick up their copy of Newsweek (http://www.newsweek.com/id/139894) from June 3 2008, if they had they would have know Obama’s advisors.

As to his worldview, there is no way to know anyones worldview or how they will react as President. History has taught us that.

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 07:35 PM
Further support of Obama on Foreign Policy (http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm). (closer to the source. Scroll down to the "Foreign Policy" box (http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm)) Those are not Obama's foreign policies.

Litofsky
11-03-2008, 07:36 PM
Those are not Obama's foreign policies.

May I ask why you say that?

jrrtoken
11-03-2008, 07:36 PM
All right since this is a bash, I will set the record straight on Obama’s heroes. We know them: Martin Luther King Jr., Mahatma Gandhi and Cesar Chavez. Replace Cesar Chavez with Earl Campbell and Barbara Jordan and you have mine too.

Obama favorite book is Toni Morrison’s 1977 novel “Song of the Solomon.” Asked and answered in a interview with Katie Couric.Pretty good, but you forgot to say what is Obama's favorite color. :xp:

Det. Bart Lasiter
11-03-2008, 07:37 PM
May I ask why you say that?preemptive source has a liberal bias and cant be trusted hth

Web Rider
11-03-2008, 07:48 PM
Nope. They are straight-forward questions.
No, they are loaded questions and you know it.

How can you rationally vote for someone if this is the case.
It is not the case. The ignorance of these two people to Obama are irrelevant to reality.

Did the media stop short of asking the right questions? It looks to be the case.
If the "right questions" are loaded questions, then I am glad they did. Loaded questions never did anyone any good. And it only looks to be the case, in your opinion.

Here is the problem. What do you know about Obama's past that allows him to have earned your respect?
Given that my respect is tied neither to my vote nor anything I may or may not know about Obama, my level of respect for a person has no bearing here.

What did he do in the past that has earned the world's respect?
Can't I just like him 'cause he's sexy?

What did he do in the past that makes you feel he can be trusted?
I don't trust any politician. So my trust in Obama is irrelevant.

What is his views on foreign policy? What has he done to become respected by people from a foreign country?
Can't they just LIKE him? I mean, we are still allowed to hold our own opinions right? Surely some Germans can just like his funny ears or his short hair.

See questions above. You are still not answering the questions.
No, we're not giving you the answers you want to hear.

What has he done for him to be trusted?
He's not a republican. How's that?

How did he deserve the respect of foreign nations? ex- 200,000 people in Germany.
He doesn't support the policies of our current president?

I respect you guys; thus, I'm trying to bring something to light. Try answering the questions without using Bush or McCain in the answer. You will find out something very illuminating. Use something about him personally.
So, because we answered you honestly, and you didn't get the answers you want to hear, you're limiting the ways in which we can answer?

Okay, I respect him 'cause he's *mumble*.

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 07:59 PM
May I ask why you say that? Where I was going with this thread is simple. No one started off focusing on Obama himself. People ended up using McCain is Bush for an answer. We really don't know enough about Obama's past stance on foreign policy. We know more about his contraversial relationships; however, we stop short from actually asking him tough questions during interviews. Most of Obama's current policies were adapted from political polls; thus, they are actually your own policies just restated. Any politician can do that. Its pretty easy. Obama is an intellegent individual who took advantage of some opportunities; however, we don't have all the details about him or his past. Sometimes we get pieces of information; thus, we are allowed a small glimps of his real life. I didn't open this thread to bash Obama, therefore, I won't go on a rant about the things I do and do not agree with him upon.

This thread was focused on you. How you preceive the world around you, and how some people vote without stopping to ask questions. Can Obama be trusted? Why? What in his past gives us an indication? United States citizens have a responsibility to themselves and others.

Some of the most horrific individuals in world history started off poor. They got their power from relating to others with similar philosophies. Obama comes from a similar past; however, we don't know enough about him to become judges. Thats the problem. We don't have a big enough resume to know for certain. Many people will vote blindly for someone because they believe McCain is Bush. They never once ask - Can Obama be trusted? What has Obama done to be our hero? There are many other questions; however, time is too short for answers now.

Thank you,
Yar.

jrrtoken
11-03-2008, 08:09 PM
We really don't know enough about Obama's past stance on foreign policy.Actually, we do. The sources that I've presented have shown the contrary to your statement.

We know more about his "controversial" relationships;Why do you think we know more about his controversial relationships? The McCain campaign has been spewing them out one after the other. They've called him a terrorist, a socialist, an elitist, a liberal; all with questionable evidence and outright slander. Now, Obama has loads of dirt to work with on McCain and his acquaintances, however, you haven't seen as much as that being broadcast by the Obama campaign, which I believe is very respectable.

Some of the most horrific individuals in world history started off poor. They got their power from relating to others with similar philosophies. Obama comes from a similar past; however, we don't know enough about him to become judges. Thats the problem. We don't have a big enough resume to know for certain.Some of the more wicked people in history have also came from a line of privilege, but I see your point. However, to say that we don't know much about Obama's early life is ignorant and nonfactual; Look on Wikipedia and you'll find a whole summary, complete with sources, detailing Obama's life.

Rogue Nine
11-03-2008, 08:24 PM
People ended up using McCain is Bush for an answer.
Maybe because there is a lot of merit to that argument, given McCain's record in the Senate?

We really don't know enough about Obama's past stance on foreign policy.
I defer to PastramiX for his excellent linkage.

We know more about his contraversial relationships;
Yeah, thanks to the non-stop McCain smear train. McCain has focused more on pointing out irrelevant people in Obama's past and trying to paint him as an awful person rather than the issues that really matter to the American people.

however, we stop short from actually asking him tough questions during interviews.
Maybe because we already know Obama's positions about the things that matter? Interviewers go after McCain and his personal attacks on Obama; those are the tough questions asked of McCain. They can't ask these of Obama because he doesn't focus on the negative aspects of McCain's character.

Most of Obama's current policies were adapted from political polls; thus, they are actually your own policies just restated.
What. I have no 'policies', so how can they be restated? Please translate this sentence into plain English for me.

Obama is an intellegent individual who took advantage of some opportunities; however, we don't have all the details about him or his past.
Again, we know a lot about his past now, thanks to McCain's smear tactics. Why is Obama still leading in the polls? Because the American people care more about current issues than irrelevant past details that McCain insists on dredging up.

I didn't open this thread to bash Obama,
Hahahahahahahahahahaahaha, you could have fooled me. Anyone can see past this thinly-disguised ruse.

therefore, I won't go on a rant about the things I do and do not agree with him upon.
No, you'll just try to focus on Obama's character and ignore the salient issues that the nation is facing as a whole. How very...McCain-y of you.

This thread was focused on you. How you preceive the world around you, and how some people vote without stopping to ask questions.
Maybe because all the relevant questions have already been answered?

Can Obama be trusted? Why? What in his past gives us an indication?
Given his past history of charitable works and his current positions on relevant national and international issues, I think he can be trusted a lot more than John McCain.

What has Obama done to be our hero?
He's not a Republican. :xp:

Jae Onasi
11-03-2008, 08:25 PM
There is just no way to talk about Obama and this election without mentioning McCain somewhere--in fact, mentioning the differences between the two men (e.g. their stances on the Iraqi War) can help explain why someone prefers Obama over McCain.

Also--Litofsky did answer questions about why he prefers Obama in post 14--it was on topic.

That being said, this is a 'why do you support Obama' rather than 'why do I hate McCain and/or Bush', and the focus should follow accordingly.


Some of the most horrific individuals in world history started off poor. They got their power from relating to others with similar philosophies.Yes, well, Martin Luther King, Jr. started off poor. Mother Theresa wasn't a rich person. Christ was the son of a carpenter--hardly a rich start for him there. It doesn't follow that childhood poverty will turn someone into the next Hitler.

Det. Bart Lasiter
11-03-2008, 08:26 PM
on topic: see niner's sig for my reason

Litofsky
11-03-2008, 08:32 PM
We stop short from actually asking him tough questions during interviews.
That depends on what you consider "touch questions."

Most of Obama's current policies were adapted from political polls; thus, they are actually your own policies just restated.
I'm curious as to where you got this information.

Can Obama be trusted? Why? What in his past gives us an indication? United States citizens have a responsibility to themselves and others.
That they do. However, as much as you don't want to turn this conversation into one about McCain, the very same question can be turned around and is, therefore, useless in this matter.

Some of the most horrific individuals in world history started off poor.
And many of the world's greatest individuals were once poor: wealth generally doesn't impede intelligence.

Many people will vote blindly for someone because they believe McCain is Bush. They never once ask - Can Obama be trusted? What has Obama done to be our hero? There are many other questions; however, time is too short for answers now.
Many vote for McCain for the same reasons (not the exact same ones, but the point is the same). I find you accusations useless in this manner, as they are double-sided.

Thank you,
Yar.

No problem. I look forward to hearing your responses.

Nedak
11-03-2008, 08:47 PM
This is not a thread about McCain.

You can't bring up Obama and not expect a response about McCain. This is also about McCain, if it wasn't you wouldn't have brought it up.

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 09:00 PM
There is just no way to talk about Obama and this election without mentioning McCain somewhere--in fact, mentioning the differences between the two men (e.g. their stances on the Iraqi War) can help explain why someone prefers Obama over McCain.

Also--Litofsky did answer questions about why he prefers Obama in post 14--it was on topic.

That being said, this is a 'why do you support Obama' rather than 'why do I hate McCain and/or Bush', and the focus should follow accordingly.

Yes, well, Martin Luther King, Jr. started off poor. Mother Theresa wasn't a rich person. Christ was the son of a carpenter--hardly a rich start for him there. It doesn't follow that childhood poverty will turn someone into the next Hitler. I know enough about Jesus Christ to accept him as the massiah. We are talking about a person that we know very little about. They are not the same. Jesus and Martin Luther King have an extensive history to look back upon; thus, we are able to draw rational conclusions about them. Obama doesn't.

Your wrong on your original assessment. You can have this conversation without bringing up McCain or Bush. People are trying to push me up against a wall; however, I'm not going to let everyone. F. Y. I. - McCain and his group were not responsible for your knowledge of Rev. Wright. Many of Obama's contraversial relations came from the media. Lets get back on subject.

What specifically did Obama (alone) do in the past to draw 200,000 people together in Germany? What did he do in the past that makes you trust him? How can you vote for someone without any knowledge of his past?

You people feel the weight of these question for a reason. Lets see if you know why.

Det. Bart Lasiter
11-03-2008, 09:02 PM
We are talking about a person that we know very little about.you not knowing that much about obama != everyone not knowing that much about obama

Web Rider
11-03-2008, 09:02 PM
there is clearly no discussion to be had here. We've given you answers, you don't like them, and restate the question.

I move that this thread be closed. Do I have a second?

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 09:07 PM
Could it be that only one of you has answered the question; however, everyone else jumped onto the Bash McCain train? I can have this conversation about McCain without bringing up Obama. Why can't the majority of you do the same but in inverse?

Det. Bart Lasiter
11-03-2008, 09:09 PM
Could it be that only one of you has answered the question; however, everyone else jumped onto the Bash McCain train?

no.

Web Rider
11-03-2008, 09:09 PM
Could it be that only one of you has answered the question; however, everyone else jumped onto the Bash McCain train?

No "one of us" has answered your questions, according to you. for each response given before my first post, you replied with a "do not discuss McCain" post. There's no mythical person hiding in the corner who has given you the answer you want to hear besides yourself.

jrrtoken
11-03-2008, 09:10 PM
I know enough about Jesus Christ to accept him as the massiah. We are talking about a person that we know very little about. They are not the same. Jesus and Martin Luther King have an extensive history to look back upon; thus, we are able to draw rational conclusions about them. Obama doesn't.I wouldn't really list Jesus as a great example as a well-known figure. Sure, he existed, and there are several documents that prove his existence, I'm just saying that he was alive over 2,000 years ago, and therefore, there are still many documents pertaining to his early life that might have been lost since his death.

Your wrong on your original assessment. You can have this conversation without bringing up McCain or Bush. People are trying to push me up against a wall; however, I'm not going to let everyone. F. Y. I. - McCain and his group was not responsible for your knowlegde of Rev, Wright. Many of Obama's contraversial relations came from the media. Lets get back on subject.It's impossible to bring up Obama without bringing up McCain. Pure psychology; If someone mentions a topic connected to the presidential campaign, triggers in someone's mind will fire, bringing up topics such as "Obama", which is associated with "Election", which includes "McCain".

What did he do in the past that makes you trust him? How can you vote for someone without any knowledge of his past?As I've already stated, we have many details about Obama's past. Don't think so? Well, I'll bring up his Wikipedia article and fast-forward to his early life: Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Early_life_and_career)

I move that this thread be closed. Do I have a second?I second that motion.

Litofsky
11-03-2008, 09:10 PM
We are talking about a person that we know very little about. They are not the same. Jesus and Martin Luther King have an extensive history to look back upon; thus, we are able to draw rational conclusions about them. Obama doesn't.
Perhaps not at first, however? Hindsight is 20/20, if I may so remind you.

Your wrong on your original assessment. You can have this conversation without bringing up McCain or Bush. People are trying to push me up against a wall; however, I'm not going to let everyone. F. Y. I. - McCain and his group were not responsible for your knowledge of Rev. Wright. Many of Obama's contraversial relations came from the media. Lets get back on subject.
Not without it being a one-sided conversation. I suggest that one cannot ask a double-edged question without examining both ends of the 'sword.' As for Reverend Wright, does not everyone have the right to practice whatever religion they so choose in America?

What specifically did Obama (alone) do in the past to draw 200,000 people together in Germany? What did he do in the past that makes you trust him? How can you vote for someone without any knowledge of his past?
Do we need knowledge of his past to trust him? I can vote very simply for him by click the touchscreen pad that says "Obama/Biden." If you're asking for a reason, then perhaps it's simply because he's a breath of fresh air compared to the Bush Administration?

I move that this thread be closed. Do I have a second?
I'll second that- unless we can discuss both sides of this conversation, we'll go nowhere fast.

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 09:14 PM
Not without it being a one-sided conversation. I suggest that one cannot ask a double-edged question without examining both ends of the 'sword.' As for Reverend Wright, does not everyone have the right to practice whatever religion they so choose in America? Its not a double-sided question. The question(s) being asked can be answered from one perspective. Only one person was able to. Everyone else couldn't answer the question(s).

Rogue Nine
11-03-2008, 09:17 PM
I know enough about Jesus Christ to accept him as the massiah.
Oh, you don't want to be opening that can of worms. :rolleyes:

Jesus and Martin Luther King have an extensive history to look back upon; thus, we are able to draw rational conclusions about them. Obama doesn't.
Obama's history is well-documented. You just choose not to acknowledge it and that's your problem, not ours.

Your wrong on your original assessment. You can have this conversation without bringing up McCain or Bush.
Uh, no you can't. Barack Obama and John McCain are closely intertwined. You can't have a discussion on one without the other. That's how elections work.

~snipped~

What specifically did Obama (alone) do in the past to draw 200,000 people together in Germany?
I dunno, ask the German people. Personally, if an American politician can get that many foreigners excited about an election in a different country, I count that as a good thing.

What did he do in the past that makes you trust him? How can you vote for someone without any knowledge of his past?
Again, we know Barack Obama's past. No matter how many times you ask this question, it isn't going to change the answer.

You people feel the weight of these question for a reason.
I feel no weight of any questions, because they already have answers. Thanks.

Lets see if you know why.
See, you're trying to lead us somewhere with all this ridiculous run-around. This isn't a debate topic, it's a smear thread. It's pathetic.

Web Rider
11-03-2008, 09:17 PM
Only one person was able to.

Okay, who, in you opinion, answered the question? I keep seeing you refer to them. Please link to their post or give the post number.

Litofsky
11-03-2008, 09:17 PM
Its not a double-sided question. The question(s) being asked can be answered from one perspective. Only one person was able to. Everyone else couldn't answer the question(s).

While you may have a point, I do not believe that the entire question can be answered from only one perspective. So long as we're only 'allowed' to do so, we lose the ability to judge fairly.

mimartin
11-03-2008, 09:24 PM
Its not a double-sided question. The question(s) being asked can be answered from one perspective. Only one person was able to. Everyone else couldn't answer the question(s).

:rolleyes: There is no way to answer the question of anyones worldview. I never would have thought Bush was a complete idiot before he was elected. I never would have thought his worldview was kill everyone and let God sort them out. There is no way anyone can know Obama worldview for certain and the samething can be said about McCain.

I did answer the question on why it is rational for me to vote for Obama. :xp:

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 09:28 PM
This man was the closest -
Lots of things, actually. The fact that Obama was a community organizer, is always respectable in my opinion, and the fact that he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago for twelve years, he passed a law in the Illinois legislature that banned state senators to accept gifts from lobbyists, the fact that he worked with Dick Lugar in preventing weapons from getting into the hands of terrorist organizations..... the point is, there's a lot of thing that Obama has done which I believe sets and example fro what he might do as president. Those who say that they don't know much about Obama's past, they just haven't look hard enough. This was as close I could get to the answer; however, he couldn't go into details about Obama's personal perspective. He didn't answer the original question in post #1. How can people vote for someone if you don't know about their stance on foreign policy? -and, How can you vote for someone who doesn't have any foreign policy experience? ;)

You can answer these questions about McCain without bringing up Obama; thus, you should be able to without bringing up McCain or Bush. A question was presented to me; thus, I will take the time to answer it.

Where did I get the idea that Obama's foreign policy is based upon public opinion? His answers were from reading previously taken polls. Its easy to read the polls, and then just spit them back out. New politicians without experiences do this all the time. Its nothing new.

mimartin
11-03-2008, 09:29 PM
So what is McCain's worldview?

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 09:31 PM
So what is McCain's worldview? Why don't you answer the thread's question? We are not talking about McCain's foreign policy. We are talking about Obama's.

Web Rider
11-03-2008, 09:33 PM
How can people vote for someone if you don't know about their stance on foreign policy? -and, How can you vote for someone who doesn't have any foreign policy experience?
Because they find other experince more important and our DOMESTIC economy, education, and social well being are more important to them right now?

jrrtoken
11-03-2008, 09:36 PM
How can people vote for someone if you don't know about their stance on foreign policy? -and, How can you vote for someone who doesn't have any foreign policy experience? ;)Here's your answer: You can't. However, Obama DOES have experience in foreign policy, the articles that I've provided prove it. You simply can't deny the truth.

Jae Onasi
11-03-2008, 09:40 PM
Is there some reason why this thread should stay open, Yar-El, if you're asking for people's thoughts on why they want to vote for Obama and then saying 'people aren't answering the questions' when in fact they are?

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 09:53 PM
Because they find other experince more important and our DOMESTIC economy, education, and social well being are more important to them right now? Question? Uncertain? Living in a world where terrorism and communism exists requires someone that has straight-forward answers. He or she needs to draw upon first hand experience with foreign nations to know how to play the world game. Tackling our current wars on terrorism is only the surface. Yes, I admit that we do need to sit down with key players; however, tact must be used to negotiate any peaceful resolution. Obama was a community organizer, correct? Working with the community is a noble task; however, the size of a community is extremely smaller than the world. What has Obama done within his community to get 200,000 people to gather in Germany? What has Obama done to gain such trust escapes me. We don't have enough of Obama's history to know that he is affective. We also don't know enough of him to believe he is trustworthy.

His current stance on foreign policy is reflective of him seizing an opportunity. Frontline on PBS has shown me how much little we know about him. It turns out that his backstory is a summary of two years here and two years there; thus, he has not stayed in one location to build up experience.

Example - You and I can work for one company for two years; however, that doesn't give us enough knowledge or exposure on how to do a job. We are also lacking a foundation to build upon that clearly defines us as individuals. No one really knows who Obama is; thus, they are only looking at what he is promising. Anyone can sell you utopia; however, what says that they will actually give it to you? Obama hasn't proven that he could be trusted with the most powerful job in the United States.

Is there some reason why this thread should stay open, Yar-El, if you're asking for people's thoughts on why they want to vote for Obama and then saying 'people aren't answering the questions' when in fact they are? I have already answered that in a previous post. I know you are a supporter of Obama's, so I'm asking for a little more room to breath. What I'm asking for questions is not easily answerable; thus, people are having a hardtime personalizing and defining Obama. I think some people are finally seeing. Not all of them, but a few of them are. Keep in mind that Obama supporters want this thread closed. I wouldn't ask them to close a McCain thread, and I haven't asked them to close one yet.

Q
11-03-2008, 09:57 PM
I'm afraid that people just aren't providing the answers that Yar-El wants to hear, which should have been expected on a forum that's completely dominated by Democrats. ;)

Being that the election's tomorrow (THANK GOD!), There's little chance of changing anyone's mind, especially here at Obama&socialismFTW.com. :xp:

Web Rider
11-03-2008, 09:58 PM
Question? Uncertain?
Recitation: rhetorical.

Answer:words.

Jae, please close this tread.

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 10:01 PM
I'm afraid that people just aren't providing the answers that Yar-El wants to hear, which should have been expected on a forum that's completely dominated by Democrats. ;)

Being that the election's tomorrow (THANK GOD!), There's little chance of changing anyone's mind, especially here at Obama&socialismFTW.com. :xp: Thats could be very true. :) I'm trying to get people to see that nothing is clear cut. Its all about asking loaded and unloaded questions. We are talking about the most powerful office in the United States. That might not be true; however, it is one of the most powerful offices in the United States.

Q
11-03-2008, 10:06 PM
Of course it's true.

Not that I'm complaining or anything. ;)

I believe that you started this thread because you have come to the realization that McCain will most likely lose and you felt the need to rant about it. And I will again put forth the theory that it doesn't really matter who wins tomorrow. The country's going to Hell in a handbasket regardless. :p

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 10:08 PM
Of course it's true.

Not that I'm complaining or anything. ;) Very funny. :) Oky, the moderators can close this thread if they see fit. It may not be fair to only ask these questions about McCain; however, use your personal perspective to close or keep open the thread. I concede.

mimartin
11-03-2008, 10:14 PM
Every question Brokaw put forth has been asked by the media and answered by Obama's except Obama Worldview, which is impossible to answer for either candidate..

Yar-El
11-03-2008, 10:18 PM
I believe that you started this thread because you have come to the realization that McCain will most likely lose and you felt the need to rant about it. And I will again put forth the theory that it doesn't really matter who wins tomorrow. The country's going to Hell in a handbasket regardless. :p :) To be all honest. Who would want to inherit all this chaos. You wake up in the morning and someone is holding up the bathroom. You finally get in there and then Russia is calling about missing nuclear weapons. You walk over to the famous red phone only to find out you need to call collect. Man. What such a tough job. ;)

EnderWiggin
11-04-2008, 08:41 AM
This is not a thread about McCain. Please read the above posts for the questions. Thank you. These questions are about Obama.

Yet, since the answers are so closely linked, the thread is really about both of them.

You made an accusation; thus, you avoided the questions dead on. Only one person came close to a rational one.

My questions are pretty simple. I respect you guys; thus, I'm trying to bring something to light. Try answering the questions without using Bush or McCain in the answer. You will find out something very illuminating. Use something about him personally.

Unfortunately, the best answers to your question include both the words "McCain" and "Bush." Sorry, but it's the truth.

Where I was going with this thread is simple. No one started off focusing on Obama himself. People ended up using McCain is Bush for an answer.

That's because it's the answer that is going to get Obama 270 electoral votes today.

We really don't know enough about Obama's past stance on foreign policy. We know more about his contraversial relationships; however, we stop short from actually asking him tough questions during interviews. Most of Obama's current policies were adapted from political polls; thus, they are actually your own policies just restated. Any politician can do that. Its pretty easy. Obama is an intellegent individual who took advantage of some opportunities; however, we don't have all the details about him or his past. Sometimes we get pieces of information; thus, we are allowed a small glimps of his real life. I didn't open this thread to bash Obama, therefore, I won't go on a rant about the things I do and do not agree with him upon.

Can Obama be trusted? Why? What in his past gives us an indication? United States citizens have a responsibility to themselves and others.


Because he's not McCain.

Maybe because there is a lot of merit to that argument, given McCain's record in the Senate?

Yeah, thanks to the non-stop McCain smear train. McCain has focused more on pointing out irrelevant people in Obama's past and trying to paint him as an awful person rather than the issues that really matter to the American people.

Maybe because we already know Obama's positions about the things that matter? Interviewers go after McCain and his personal attacks on Obama; those are the tough questions asked of McCain. They can't ask these of Obama because he doesn't focus on the negative aspects of McCain's character.

What. I have no 'policies', so how can they be restated? Please translate this sentence into plain English for me.

Hahahahahahahahahahaahaha, you could have fooled me. Anyone can see past this thinly-disguised ruse.

No, you'll just try to focus on Obama's character and ignore the salient issues that the nation is facing as a whole. How very...McCain-y of you.

Maybe because all the relevant questions have already been answered?

Given his past history of charitable works and his current positions on relevant national and international issues, I think he can be trusted a lot more than John McCain.


He's not a Republican. :xp:

QFE... all of it.



Your wrong on your original assessment. You can have this conversation without bringing up McCain or Bush.

I disagree.

What specifically did Obama (alone) do in the past to draw 200,000 people together in Germany? What did he do in the past that makes you trust him? How can you vote for someone without any knowledge of his past?


Quite easily. However, the fact is I do know a lot about it, thanks to FoxNews and the "Straight-talk Express." And I still agree with his policies more than McCain's.
you not knowing that much about obama != everyone not knowing that much about obama

QFE.

there is clearly no discussion to be had here. We've given you answers, you don't like them, and restate the question.

I move that this thread be closed. Do I have a second?

I'll agree with that.


This was as close I could get to the answer; however, he couldn't go into details about Obama's personal perspective. He didn't answer the original question in post #1. How can people vote for someone if you don't know about their stance on foreign policy?

All a candidate has to do to win is convince me (and 50% of America) that his policies are better than all the other candidates'. He doesn't need to convince me that his are good, just that his are the best. Not that this fact is even relevant - I think Obama's policies are good.

I have already answered that in a previous post. I know you are a supporter of Obama's, so I'm asking for a little more room to breath. What I'm asking for questions is not easily answerable; thus, people are having a hardtime personalizing and defining Obama. I think some people are finally seeing. Not all of them, but a few of them are. Keep in mind that Obama supporters want this thread closed. I wouldn't ask them to close a McCain thread, and I haven't asked them to close one yet.

Oh my god. I hope you're not insinuating that Jae is partisan moderating. She's just responding to what's occurred in this thread. And she's not really even liberal, so your libel here is just offensive.

Very funny. :) Oky, the moderators can close this thread if they see fit. {snip} I concede.

Oh good.

_EW_

GarfieldJL
11-04-2008, 09:15 AM
Oh, you don't want to be opening that can of worms. :rolleyes:


Actually, I think he does because Jesus wasn't running around with a lunatics that killed people and weren't even remotely sorry about it.


Obama's history is well-documented. You just choose not to acknowledge it and that's your problem, not ours.


Oh really, from what I've seen his history is full of contradictions and the media trying to bury stuff to keep it from surfacing.


Uh, no you can't. Barack Obama and John McCain are closely intertwined. You can't have a discussion on one without the other. That's how elections work.


There are things about Obama that don't have anything to do with McCain such as Rev. Wright, Saul Allinski, Khalidi, Farrakan, etc.


I dunno, ask the German people. Personally, if an American politician can get that many foreigners excited about an election in a different country, I count that as a good thing.


To me that's another reason NOT to vote for that individual.


Again, we know Barack Obama's past. No matter how many times you ask this question, it isn't going to change the answer.


In all honesty, you may find no problem with him palling around with terrorists but I quite honestly do.


I feel no weight of any questions, because they already have answers. Thanks.


Well Yar-El, myself, and quite a few others do whether they are members of this forum or not.


See, you're trying to lead us somewhere with all this ridiculous run-around. This isn't a debate topic, it's a smear thread. It's pathetic.

The truth isn't a smear, it's the truth Obama hasn't been honest with the American people, his past has relevence because it demonstrates his current value system.

EnderWiggin
11-04-2008, 09:27 AM
Actually, I think he does because Jesus wasn't running around with a lunatics that killed people and weren't even remotely sorry about it.

Oh really, from what I've seen his history is full of contradictions and the media trying to bury stuff to keep it from surfacing.

There are things about Obama that don't have anything to do with McCain such as Rev. Wright, Saul Allinski, Khalidi, Farrakan, etc.

To me that's another reason NOT to vote for that individual.

In all honesty, you may find no problem with him palling around with terrorists but I quite honestly do.

Well Yar-El, myself, and quite a few others do whether they are members of this forum or not.

The truth isn't a smear, it's the truth Obama hasn't been honest with the American people, his past has relevence because it demonstrates his current value system.

Unfortunately for you, none of that is not going to stop Obama from getting his 270 electoral votes today.

_EW_

Det. Bart Lasiter
11-04-2008, 10:55 AM
Oh really, from what I've seen his history is full of contradictions and the media trying to bury stuff to keep it from surfacing.senor mccain tambien mr garfield

To me that's another reason NOT to vote for that individual.heh jingoism i thought all you guys were dead

The truth isn't a smear, it's the truth Obama hasn't been honest with the American people, his past has relevence because it demonstrates his current value system.yawn go find out some stuff about obama before you start bitching about him being dishonest about his past and not knowing enough about him

Yar-El
11-04-2008, 10:58 AM
Yet, since the answers are so closely linked, the thread is really about both of them.

Unfortunately, the best answers to your question include both the words "McCain" and "Bush." Sorry, but it's the truth.

That's because it's the answer that is going to get Obama 270 electoral votes today.

Because he's not McCain.

I disagree.
Quite easily. However, the fact is I do know a lot about it, thanks to FoxNews and the "Straight-talk Express." And I still agree with his policies more than McCain's.


All a candidate has to do to win is convince me (and 50% of America) that his policies are better than all the other candidates'. He doesn't need to convince me that his are good, just that his are the best. Not that this fact is even relevant - I think Obama's policies are good.

Oh my god. I hope you're not insinuating that Jae is partisan moderating. She's just responding to what's occurred in this thread. And she's not really even liberal, so your libel here is just offensive.

Oh good.

_EW_
Basically I conceded in post #58, and you want to continue with beating people down. Its not okay for someone to concede a fight with dignity; thus, people have to continue until more blood is spilt. Thats nice of you. Thanks. I apprechiate that.

EnderWiggin
11-04-2008, 12:13 PM
Basically I conceded in post #58, and you want to continue with beating people down. Its not okay for someone to concede a fight with dignity; thus, people have to continue until more blood is spilt. Thats nice of you. Thanks. I apprechiate that.

And yet I assume you're not going to stop Obama-bashing :)

_EW_

mimartin
11-04-2008, 12:23 PM
And yet I assume you're not going to stop Obama-bashing :)I'm rooting for 8 years of Obama-bashing. Let's get Ken Starr out of retirement. :D

Yar-El
11-04-2008, 12:29 PM
And yet I assume you're not going to stop Obama-bashing :)
_EW_ I will never-ever support Obama even as President. I didn't open this thread as a way to bash the man. I stand on my original intent. See my previous posts for the reasoning.

EnderWiggin
11-04-2008, 12:33 PM
I will never-ever support Obama even as President.

I was only trying to explain that he doesn't need your vote. :)

_EW_

Astor
11-04-2008, 02:19 PM
To me that's another reason NOT to vote for that individual.

Whoever becomes the President of the USA is going to have a big impact on the rest of the world - I think it's refreshing that not only has Obama courted American voters, but they've also tried to improve relations with other countries and world leaders.

In a world that seems to be getting smaller all the time, a friendly face, open to reason and diplomacy is a welcoming sight.

GarfieldJL
11-04-2008, 02:41 PM
Whoever becomes the President of the USA is going to have a big impact on the rest of the world - I think it's refreshing that not only has Obama courted American voters, but they've also tried to improve relations with other countries and world leaders.


Uh huh, yeah leaders like Chavez supporting him... Yeah, this is yet another reason why I would vote for Donald Duck or Hillary Clinton over Obama.


In a world that seems to be getting smaller all the time, a friendly face, open to reason and diplomacy is a welcoming sight.

I don't really care what certain powers in the world want, honestly the fact the Iranians want Obama in office so they can develop nuclear weapons is a pretty good reason why I don't want him in office.

Astor
11-04-2008, 02:47 PM
Uh huh, yeah leaders like Chavez supporting him... Yeah, this is yet another reason why I would vote for Donald Duck or Hillary Clinton over Obama.

Because i'm sure Obama tells people if they can or can't support him. :dozey:

I don't really care what certain powers in the world want, honestly the fact the Iranians want Obama in office so they can develop nuclear weapons is a pretty good reason why I don't want him in office.

Can you prove that they want him in so they can make nukes? No?

I seem to remember Obama saying that he would be prepared to speak with the Iranian government, without any preconceptions. Maybe they want a US President who's actually willing to talk to them without having made up his mind beforehand.

I'd much prefer a President who's going to at least make a proper effort at peace before sending in troops - to anywhere.

mimartin
11-04-2008, 02:57 PM
Uh huh, yeah leaders like Chavez supporting him... Yeah, this is yet another reason why I would vote for Donald Duck or Hillary Clinton over Obama.So you allow foreign entities to affect your vote. Let us not forget some of McCain’s dubious endorsements. Just who did Al-Qaeda endorse again? :rolleyes: Their support of McCain will not influence my vote either way.
Can you prove that they want him in so they can make nukes?
It is call lets make stuff up.

EnderWiggin
11-04-2008, 03:08 PM
I'd much prefer a President who's going to at least make a proper effort at peace before sending in troops - to anywhere.

So would I. The fact that he seems to be at least trying to be nice to the rest of the world is a refreshing change to me.

_EW_

GarfieldJL
11-04-2008, 03:11 PM
Because i'm sure Obama tells people if they can or can't support him. :dozey:


I'm saying they support him because he believes as they do.


Can you prove that they want him in so they can make nukes? No?


I can prove that Hamas and Hezbolla endorsed him.
Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25NiwvPNanM&feature=related)

I'm trying to find some of the other stuff, the MSM has actually been removing articles.


I seem to remember Obama saying that he would be prepared to speak with the Iranian government, without any preconceptions. Maybe they want a US President who's actually willing to talk to them without having made up his mind beforehand.

No he said that he would meet without preconditions.


I'd much prefer a President who's going to at least make a proper effort at peace before sending in troops - to anywhere.

There is a difference between diplomacy and sitting down face to face and legitimizing a lunatic.

EnderWiggin
11-04-2008, 03:13 PM
I can prove that Hamas and Hezbolla endorsed him.
Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25NiwvPNanM&feature=related)


Unfortunately, that has nothing at all to do with Barack Obama himself, or his future presidency.

_EW_

Astor
11-04-2008, 03:19 PM
No he said that he would meet without preconditions.

So I may have used the wrong word, but you've not addressed the point.

There is a difference between diplomacy and sitting down face to face and legitimizing a lunatic.

There's also a difference between opening a dialog and an Abrams blowing up a mosque, or Black Hawks screaming across the desert.

GarfieldJL
11-04-2008, 03:35 PM
So I may have used the wrong word, but you've not addressed the point.


Oh but I have, when Reagan met with Gorbachev, he did so after months of low-level diplomats having meetings and there were conditions attached. When President Kennedy tried to meet with a Soviet Leader prior to that he ended up looking weak which resulted in the Cuban Missile Crisis.



There's also a difference between opening a dialog and an Abrams blowing up a mosque, or Black Hawks screaming across the desert.

You're missing the point, I'm not saying low-level diplomatic talks won't help, but just flying in on Air Force One (which is what Obama suggested) to have tea only emboldens them.

mimartin
11-04-2008, 03:36 PM
I can prove that Hamas and Hezbolla endorsed him.You keep forgetting that McCain got the all important Al-Qaeda endorsement. :xp:
You're missing the point, I'm not saying low-level diplomatic talks won't help, but just flying in on Air Force One (which is what Obama suggested) to have tea only emboldens them. No true.

GarfieldJL
11-04-2008, 03:39 PM
You keep forgetting that McCain got the all important Al-Qaeda endorsement. :xp:

An endorsement I'm still wondering why the heck they were dumb enough to give, unless they think McCain is just going to be playing hide and seek. :loco:

That's assuming that they aren't really pulling for Obama but are trying to get it so McCain loses.

mimartin
11-04-2008, 03:46 PM
An endorsement I'm still wondering why the heck they were dumb enough to give, unless they think McCain is just going to be playing hide and seek. :loco:They want to kill Americans and get more recruits. McCain wants to stay in Iraq thus making it easier to kill Americans and get more recruits to defend their holy land from the evil invaders. They don’t care who the President is, they just want to bring us to our knees. It is just less travel under McCain.

Litofsky
11-04-2008, 03:51 PM
I'm saying they support him because he believes as they do.
Wait, did you just call Barack Obama a Muslim, despite the fact that you've used Reverend Wright and his Church against him?

I'm trying to find some of the other stuff, the MSM has actually been removing articles.
Do you have any proof of such accusations?

No he said that he would meet without preconditions.
I don't see what's wrong with that. Please, elaborate as to why you think this is a bad move on Obama's part.

mimartin
11-04-2008, 03:59 PM
I don't see what's wrong with that. Please, elaborate as to why you think this is a bad move on Obama's part.

It is not true. It is a story that was made up. Obama never said the President of the United States would set down with anyone.

Obama: Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who's one of his advisers, who, along with five recent secretaries of state, just said that we should meet with Iran – guess what – without precondition. This is one of your own advisers.

McCain: By the way, my friend, Dr. Kissinger, who's been my friend for 35 years, would be interested to hear this conversation and Senator Obama's depiction of his -- of his positions on the issue. I've known him for 35 years.

Obama: We will take a look.

McCain: And I guarantee you he would not -- he would not say that presidential top level.

Obama: Nobody's talking about that.

Kissinger Sept. 20: Well, I am in favor of negotiating with Iran. And one utility of negotiation is to put before Iran our vision of a Middle East, of a stable Middle East, and our notion on nuclear proliferation at a high enough level so that they have to study it. And, therefore, I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level so that we -- we know we're dealing with authentic...

CNN's Frank Sesno: Put at a very high level right out of the box?

Kissinger: Initially, yes.But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations.

GarfieldJL
11-04-2008, 04:05 PM
They want to kill Americans and get more recruits. McCain wants to stay in Iraq thus making it easier to kill Americans and get more recruits to defend their holy land from the evil invaders. They don’t care who the President is, they just want to bring us to our knees. It is just less travel under McCain.

Correction, McCain wants to stay in Iraq only as long as the Iraqis need the United States, now if the EU would be willing to supplement the police work (which the US isn't doing much of anymore), as well as serve as Iraq's airforce until Iraq can defend itself, I'm sure we'd be more than willing to leave at this juncture.

Iraq has become a humiliating defeat for Al Qaeda, the Iraqis that were fighting us, got so ticked off at Al Qaeda's terrorist tactics, that they actually decided to help us throw Al Qaeda out of Iraq.

McCain and every Republican honestly wants to leave Iraq, but we want to make sure that we've done the job right, so that we don't have to go back in 5 years from now, because everything has fallen apart and we just have to go back in again.

Obama quite frankly just doesn't care, and reports are that he actually tried to sabotage an agreement as far as turning over parts of Iraq back to the Iraqis. I can do some digging later to back this part up too.

Look at how Iraq deteriorated from 2003-2006, through this time McCain was demanding more troops in Iraq while President Bush was living in a fantasy world listening to Rumsfeld. Finally, McCain forced Rumsfeld's resignation and forced President Bush to support a troop surge and put General Petraeus in charge. Now look at Iraq today, it's nothing like the Iraq of 2006.

Look at President Bush's thinking Putin was a swell guy and McCain could see three letters K-G-B. Everyone was bashing McCain for being a warmonger, but it turned out he was right, see Russia's invasion of Georgia, where Obama said the Georgians needed to show restraint. McCain called it how it was, while Obama floundered everywhere.

mimartin
11-04-2008, 04:09 PM
Do you really believe the reason we are there makes any difference to terrorist attempting to kill American troops?

GarfieldJL
11-04-2008, 04:14 PM
Do you really believe the reason we are there makes any difference to terrorist attempting to kill American troops?

Not to them, but I sincerely believe they've actually lost their recruiting base bigtime, especially since their attacks have lately been on Iraqi civilians and not American troops.

mimartin
11-04-2008, 04:24 PM
Not to them, but I sincerely believe they've actually lost their recruiting base bigtime, especially since their attacks have lately been on Iraqi civilians and not American troops.

You think! Could it be that we have more American there due to the surge. I hope you are right, but I have my doubts. We will see as they pull troops back to pre-surge levels.