Why I'll be voting for Obama

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:Jeannie43

McCain doesn't have the slightest knowledge of economics.

Quote:jasd

...and Obama does!?...

So, tell us exactly how it is that you’ve established in your mind – that Obama is more qualified re economics vis-à-vis McCain...

>>Well, for starters, he has shown a substantially deeper grasp of the economic issues and certainly appears to have given them far more thought than McCain.<<

“Deeper grasp”!? Is that how 300 advisors and a travelin’ teleprompter is described? As for “given them far more thought...” – is that what the current Obama ‘pregnant pause’ is called? I thought it was because he was ‘outed’ as inexperienced and liteweight by all of the ubiquitous and unremitting “uh, uh, uh, uhs...” and now attempts to distill that perception with the ‘pregnant pause’. But I am probably wrong and that the ‘pregnant pause’ is simply calculated to enable the guys in the ‘war room’ time to

formulate his ‘views’ upon matters du jour.

But, to hear him tell, he ran a vast year and a half campaign and was thereby ‘vetted’ and received his ‘EXPERIENCE’ credentials. As I said, “Liteweight.”

Lastly, to paraphrase Obama’s words, his “deeper grasp re economic issues” is a “pig with lipstick” – an empty suit. (mind, it is the policy and not the man that I defined as an empty suit) :-o

>>If you will take the time to read this lengthy article specifically about it you will see what I mean:<<

Give me 300 ‘advisors’ to formulate my ‘positions’, a coupla days to commit them to memory – and I could do a fair imitation of the

last parrot on the Orinoco; however, I would be proffering nothing other a shallow recitation.

(yours was a good and measured post – deserving a like response; however, needless-to-say, I am immeasurably opinionated and have used your post as segue to express that which is honestly and strongly felt)

Peace

[Tom Wetmore]

...Bloomberg has a dog in the fight...

Pay attention, Shane. The author was Albert Hunt and the tag line said that these were his views. And Bloomberg Financial News Service is a well regarded source of financial news regardless of what you may think of Michael Bloomberg. Like you, he is a declared independent, so cut him some slack. :smilewink:

[Dr. Shane]

Obama supporters are basically making the argument that Obama is more qualified to handle the economic crisis because of the consultants he chose to speak with. I certainly do not take the position that McCain is in a better position to handle the crisis but to say Obama is because of who he choose to consult is not comforting to me. Whichever becomes President, I trust they will consult the leading economic experts. Whichever they choose to consult first is really not meaningful to me. What I feel sure about, is neither one of them has a deep enough grasp of economics to really know which of the experts to listen to.

I think we are lucky the crisis hit while Bush is still in office. Of the three (Obama, McCain, Bush) Bush is clearly the best equipped to handle the crisis. Not only does Bush have his MBA but has a record in business and banking in the private sector and, of course, now over seven years experience as President. That said, Bush is not the one heading the effort to get us out of this. He is just one of the few. Decisions are being made by Ben Bernanke, Henry Paulson, Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Barney Frank (D-MA), Spencer Bachus (R-AL) and President Bush. Take out Bush and Paulson and add two more. That is what we will get with a new President. How much of a difference is that going to make? Really? Bernanke is the one with the most influence and power on the team. It isn't going to make a whole lot of difference who is sitting in the Oval Office especially when our choices are Obama or McCain.

[Dr. Shane]

Pay attention, Shane. The author was Albert Hunt and the tag line said that these were his views.

I was referring to Bloomberg Financial News, not Michael Bloomberg. I was under the mistaken impression that Albert Hunt was writing the journal's endorsement of Obama. As that was not the case, his opinion is of even less value.

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

Pay attention, Shane. The author was Albert Hunt and the tag line said that these were his views.

I was referring to Bloomberg Financial News, not Michael Bloomberg. I was under the mistaken impression that Albert Hunt was writing the journal's endorsement of Obama. As that was not the case, his opinion is of even less value.

Oh my! I have dealt with a lot of strange people....But to not value the experts opinions, that is just foolishness.

That article was written by an economist who knows a little something about the economy. [Please note the gross understatement.]...I admit that they don't know everything, but this article had to go thru at least one economic editor, and I am sure that he does know something....

Obama went to THE experts, and McCain went to some experts...The analogy is like you need surgury and you are asking for a respiratory therapist to be the surgeon...and he's telling you to go TO A SURGEON...and you insist that the RT do the cutting...

Tell me that there isn't something wrong with the thinking of Americans when they are blinded by hate.....Hatred for Obama...

Wow....!

[Neil D]

Can you imagine how all this stuff sounds in Pirate talk and how rediculous it would sound?

Shameless plug for the Pirates political forum....

maybe that's the reason there is not much talk there...uses too many brain cells..

[Woody]

Quote:

Bush is clearly the best equipped to handle the crisis.

Good Point Shane.

[Liz]

Tell me that there isn't something wrong with the thinking of Americans when they are blinded by hate.....Hatred for Obama...

Wow....!

This is kind of a broad statement too. Not all Americans are blinded by hate for Obama. It is just that he stands for a particular issue that I just can't get behind. I really don't care about the empty promises about the economy, because the economy is going to go the way the economy is going to go, due to the fact that we are living in end times, and things are just naturally going to go from bad to worse. It doesn't matter who is president in that regard. Which leaves us with some of the seemingly minor issues that we really aught to pay attention too.

Wait.......

O.k. now I am ready, I had to put on my flame proof underwear, and my Xena Warriour Princess armour.

[Neil D]

Before I throw my flame thrower into the mix, I would like to know what " a particular issue that I just can't get behind" you are refering to that you can not get behind on....

[Liz]

Even though I don't agree with abortion, I know that it will always go on. Having said that. I believe that should a baby be born alive and need medical attention to keep them that way, that it should be administered. Obama doesn't see it that way, he says that if the baby is born alive and then receives medical attention that that undermines the decision of the mother to abort it in the first place.

This is what I have a problem with.

[Jeannieb43]

I believe that should a baby be born alive and need medical attention to keep them that way, that it should be administered. Obama doesn't see it that way, he says that if the baby is born alive and then receives medical attention that that undermines the decision of the mother to abort it in the first place.

I challenge you on that statement.

Have you seen that in Obama's own words, or was it in somebody else's misquoting Obama?

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Neil D

Tell me that there isn't something wrong with the thinking of Americans when they are blinded by hate.....Hatred for Obama...

Wow....!

This is kind of a broad statement too. Not all Americans are blinded by hate for Obama. It is just that he stands for a particular issue that I just can't get behind. I really don't care about the empty promises about the economy, because the economy is going to go the way the economy is going to go, due to the fact that we are living in end times, and things are just naturally going to go from bad to worse. It doesn't matter who is president in that regard. Which leaves us with some of the seemingly minor issues that we really aught to pay attention too.

Wait.......

O.k. now I am ready, I had to put on my flame proof underwear, and my Xena Warriour Princess armour.

I have to agree with you on this Liz. It should not be personal. It is the policies. But the policies can become emotional. For example .... Obama would kill babies in addition to our young people that he would send to Afghanistan. This seems like a double shot of trouble to me. Yes, McCain would send soldiers like Obama ... but at least he would protect our babies.

[Liz]

Originally Posted By: Liz

I believe that should a baby be born alive and need medical attention to keep them that way, that it should be administered. Obama doesn't see it that way, he says that if the baby is born alive and then receives medical attention that that undermines the decision of the mother to abort it in the first place.

I challenge you on that statement.

Have you seen that in Obama's own words, or was it in somebody else's misquoting Obama?

Here are a couple of places about it. I am not real good at this so if the links don't work, let me know.

Illinois Law that Obama was a part of....

A nurse talking about this......

Obama can't say when a baby gets human rights....

[there buster]

Fully 95% of Americans would love to be able to vote for a black candidate for President. I know I would. Not that it would ever stop the cries of racism from the left--who are its major practitioners--but because it would ratify the American Dream.

But that has been prevented so far by Democrats. They keep offering us candidates from their far left. Obama advocates the same basic policies as McGovern, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry. They were all caucasion, and they all lost.

And the Dems oppose Ken Blackwell, Michael Steele, Herman Cain, J.C. Watts, and other blacks who are closer to the American mainstream.

IF the Dems put up the black equivalent of a Bill Clinton-- Harold Ford, for example, he (or she) would have won this election going away. But no, they give us Obama, with his Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, Fr. Pleger, and Tony Rezko far out buddies. And if he isn't elected, they'll blame racism.

They keep selling the same wares, and can't decide whether to blame the customers, who won't buy, or the salesmen, who can't close the sale.

This time around, it's either buy or be labeled racist. It might have worked, but they've devalued the currency by overuse. No sale.

[Woody]

Good Post Ichabod. Well said.

And to Liz ... you are so right. Those links are frightening. I certainly would think twice before voting for Obama.

[carolaa]

I've never been able to figure out why abortion is a litmus test for so many.

[Jeannieb43]

Originally Posted By: Jeannieb43

Here are a couple of places about it. I am not real good at this so if the links don't work, let me know.

Illinois Law that Obama was a part of....

A nurse talking about this......

Obama can't say when a baby gets human rights....

[/quote']

Those are the most sensationalistic, truth-bending pieces I've ever seen. There is no hospital in the whole world which would allow a healthy baby such as in that second video to lie unattended on a slab to die. That picture bears absolutely no resemblance to a 22-week-gestation embryo as discussed by the "nurse". The baby in this picture is a full-term infant, kicking and fully alive. The video is a lie.

Also, in none of those videos is Barack Obama ever seen saying he would vote to let a living breathing infant die unattended. These are lies, total untruths, being spread around about Obama.

The radical right will stop at nothing to try to win. I am thoroughly disgusted by what used to be my party.

In order to be an informed voter, you really need to learn to be discriminating... Look behind what you hear people say. Look for original sources -- not hearsay!

[Jeannieb43]

I've never been able to figure out why abortion is a litmus test for so many.

It's the inherent Constitutional right over one's own body. That's what the radical right is trying to take away.

[This is the right which gives you the right to sign a Living Will, directing what is to be done when you are terminally ill, for instance.]

To carry this to its logical conclusion, the Supreme Court justices will be called upon the euthanize human beings [as in the Schiavo case a few years ago].

I do not promote abortion. But I promote CHOICE.

[Liz]

In order to be an informed voter, you really need to learn to be discriminating... Look behind what you hear people say. Look for original sources -- not hearsay!

So if I was an informed voter and learned to be discriminating I would then vote for Obama? So I guess I am stupid or naive or both? Just because I don't see it the way you do?

I wasn't trying to convince you one way or the other on who to vote for, I was just giving my reason on why I wasn't voting for Obama; and now I am uninformed and nondiscriminating? So be it.

You vote for who you wanna vote for, and I will do the same.

Peace

P.S. What does the "b43" stand for???????

[Bravus]

Liz, that's not a fair reading of Jeannie's post. Her comment was that those sources were simply lying about Obama's policies. I don't think she was saying that if you were informed and discriminating you'd necessarily agree with her, but that you would avoid making a decision based on falsehood, and seek out the truth. Is that not a reasonable comment to make?

[Liz]

I read it several times. And I keep coming to the same conclusion. We were presented with the same material, she perceives it to be lies, and I see some truth to it. She is saying that I need to be more informed and discriminating, because I see some truth to it. Plus, I am not trying to convince her one way or the other, I am just saying why I am not voting for him.

It probably would have been a reasonable statement to make, had she not preceeded to slam my few sources that I picked to back up why I wasn't voting for him. It was just three sources out of a whole google search, that I chose to post here.

I hope that makes sense now, as to why I posted what I did.

[carolaa]

Originally Posted By: carolaa

I've never been able to figure out why abortion is a litmus test for so many.

It's the inherent Constitutional right over one's own body. That's what the radical right is trying to take away.

[This is the right which gives you the right to sign a Living Will, directing what is to be done when you are terminally ill, for instance.]

To carry this to its logical conclusion, the Supreme Court justices will be called upon the euthanize human beings [as in the Schiavo case a few years ago].

I do not promote abortion. But I promote CHOICE.

It sounds like you're saying that liberals tend to see abortion as a bigger issue - something that, if taken away, puts other Constitutional rights at risk.

So, what is it that makes conservatives use abortion as a litmus test?

[Woody]

Let me see ...

God's Rights for us ..... vs ..... Our constitutional rights

[there buster]

Quote:

In order to be an informed voter, you really need to learn to be discriminating... Look behind what you hear people say. Look for original sources -- not hearsay!

Here's an original source, the testimony of Nurse Jill Stanek to a Congressional Committee.

Quote:

One night, a nursing co-worker was taking an aborted Down's syndrome baby who was born alive to our Soiled Utility Room because his parents did not want to hold him and she did not have time to hold him. I could not bear the thought of this suffering child dying alone in a Soiled Utility Room, so I cradled and rocked him for the 45 minutes that he lived. He was about 22 weeks old, weighed about a half a pound, and was about 10 inches long, about the size of my hand. He was too weak to move very much, expending any energy that he had trying to breathe. Toward the end of his life he was so quiet that I couldn't tell if he was still alive unless I held him up to the light to see if his little heart was still beating through his chest wall. After he was pronounced dead, we folded his little arms across his chest, tied his hands together with a string, wrapped him in a tiny shroud, and carried him to the hospital morgue where all of our other dead patients go.

This experience, in Illinois, was the impetus for introducing the Born Alive Bill that Obama three times voted against.

[carolaa]

Let me see ...

God's Rights for us ..... vs ..... Our constitutional rights

I'm not sure what that has to do with being a better President. I can see how you wouldn't want a President who undermines the Constitution (I'm holding my tongue right now), but how does being anti-abortion make a candidate better? Does that mean he/she will bring the country closer to God?