On another note...I just lost all respect for Dr. Ron Paul. All respect.
Printable View
On another note...I just lost all respect for Dr. Ron Paul. All respect.
Why?
Im not judging black people but i can't imagine them voting for mccain.
You are judging black people. There are fiscally conservative republican african americans. About 3% of black people did not infact support Obama.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamhope11
Edit: I just wasn't one of them :P And on another note, this is a ginormous monumental event for black people but it's also one for people of all color. Latinos were crying at Grant Park being interviewed saying how they are happy to see a man of color in the white house. An asian CNN reporter remarked how she is elated to see someone of color in the white house as well. But I don't think this is just "people of color are the only ones that should feel proud" kind of thing. It's a triumph for everyone because a candidate of change has just entered the white house.
On November 4th, "Yes we can!" became "Yes we did!".
Change is not always good. Some changes are disasters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff777
I think it is awesome that a black person got elected president. That factor in a vacuum kicks ass. It is an enormous milestone in American history. Hopefully it will reduce the perception that the United States is a mostly racist country. It obviously is not any more. I love that. However, I think it sucks that Barack Obama was elected president. He was the wrong person for breaking the barrier.
Why did you lose respect for Ron Paul?
Obama gave a pro-Ayers speech in Ayers' living room after Ayers bombed the Pentagon, Capitol building, and NYC Police Headquarters and admitted to it. Ayers got Obama's political career off the ground. Ayers and Obama were partners in public speaking and served on boards together after the attacks. Ayers is unrepentant for his terrorist attacks to this day.Quote:
Originally Posted by Serkat
Now read the same thing with some names changed.
McCain gave a pro-Osama speech in Osama's living room after Osama bombed the Pentagon and the World Trade Center and admitted to it. Osama got McCain's political career off the ground after those attacks. Osama and McCain were partners in public speaking and served on boards together after the attacks. Osama is unrepentant for his terrorist attacks to this day.
Get it?
I get it. You think Obama is a terrorist becausehe's blackI meanhe's not evangelicalI mean he was once acquaintances with a domestic terrorist.
UM is one of the most anti-religion people on this board...:?
Nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by drewmandan
Try again.Give it up. Your ass must really be hurting after pulling so much out of it.
By your reasoning, you were against McCain because he had a woman for a running mate. Do you really want to play this stupid game?
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grod
Drew just isn't intellectually honest enough to make legitimate points.
By your reasoning, should we think McCain would be terrible since he was more than likely kin to someone, or was friends with someone that does drugs, or has murdered someone in their past? Everyone makes mistakes, Obama being friends with Ayers was a mistake, what's it matter? I have friends that are hardcore druggies, does that mean I'm going to go shoot up heroin and stay blitzed out of my mind every day? No. I'm sure I'm kin to someone that's killed someone, does that mean I'm going to start killing people? No. Just because you're friends with someone that makes bad/horrible choices doesn't mean you're going to, and doesn't mean you're exactly like them either. It's like the question, "Will you jump off a bridge if your friend does?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
That does not even come close, except for the friends with a murderer part. And a mere murderer is not the same as somebody who committed terrorist attacks on the U.S. government. Anybody with a close personal and political bond like that makes a terrible president, especially during the war on terror. I can't believe I need to explain this to anybody. It is so mind boggling.Quote:
Originally Posted by nitsuJ
I want somebody to address my McCain/Osama paragraph and tell me in total seriousness you would not have a problem with that. Who wants to be first?
Would you jump off a bridge if your friend told you to, or jumped off himself, Universal Mind?
Of course I'd have a problem with McCain being with Osama, I had a problem with Obama being with Ayers, but just because I have a problem with someone doesn't mean I don't think they're able to do a job, I think Obama is more fit for the presidency than McCain.
The last time I checked, we're able to change. Just because Obama was friends with Ayers, and supported him at one time, doesn't mean he still has to, or will still support him. I was making a point in my last post, just because your friends do something doesn't mean you have to do the same thing, just because Ayers committed terrorist acts doesn't mean Obama will, and doesn't mean that he condones it now. Everyone makes mistakes, Obama isn't some perfect human.
I have never said Obama is therefore automatically a terrorist himself, and I keep clarifying that I never said it. I said he cannot be trusted with the presidency because he is not passionately enough against terrorism. Also, Obama has a significant likelihood of supporting terrorists STILL. That is a problem. I never said people automatically do what their friends do or tell them to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by nitsuJ
If a presidential candiate was as intimate with Bin Laden after 9/11 as Obama was with Ayers, you would be going off about how electing him is out of the question, so long as he's not a Democrat.
And we're all saying that you're a fucking moron for thinking that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
I would like to see you argue it instead of just asserting it like an intellectual cup cake. You are a fucking moron for not knowing my main point on it (which you have yet to even address) and for not knowing the difference between stating something and expressing significant possibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by drewmandan
Now give me a real argument. You can start by taking me up on the Osama/McCain paragraph challenge. Let's see what you can do.
Why would any American who is not a radical muslim support terrorism? The burden of proof is on you here, since when is it reasonable to expect anybody to be a terrorist until they can prove otherwise?
Anyway, doesn't Obama want to increase the push in Afghanistan? You know, that place where all the terrorists are?
William Ayers was never a radial Muslim, yet he is a terrorist who attacked the United States.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
I am not saying it proves Obama is definitely a terrorist.Do I really need to clarify it again?
How about analyzing my McCain/Osama paragraph and what the implications would be if it were real? It is getting dodged like a dodgeball.
I don't trust a word that comes out of his mouth. Why do you? There is no telling what he will and won't do as a politician who acts on the political stage, but I know where his heart is and is not. I think you do too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
http://thenitza.home.comcast.net/~th...all%5B1%5D.png
Let me know when you have an on-point response.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
America is considered as a terrorist nation to some parts of the world, so should Obama be against America since that'd help him be against terrorism?
Just because one of Obama's friends was a terrorist, doesn't mean he's going to be a bad president.
watQuote:
Originally Posted by nitsuJ
Yes very good, the political climate's changed a bit since then. Is that the only terrorist you know of? :\Quote:
William Ayers was never a radial Muslim, yet he is a terrorist who attacked the United States.
The very fact that you are contemplating it so seriously it is just hilarious. You're living in a dream world.Quote:
I am not saying it proves Obama is definitely a terrorist. Do I really need to clarify it again?
Why would he announce that he plans to increase force in Afghanistan if he's going to do the opposite? He does want to be elected again, I assume.Quote:
I don't trust a word that comes out of his mouth. Why do you? There is no telling what he will and won't do as a politician who acts on the political stage, but I know where his heart is and is not. I think you do too.
Well, at least you admitted it this time. ;)
Let me know when you're going to start acting like an adult.
You know how weak your responses are, right? You are just playing dodgeball. You make irrelevant comments, ask questions that I just answered, and repeatedly refuse to analyze my McCain/Osama paragraph in terms of its implications. You are doing a pathetic job of defending your side in this debate. Ad hominem attacks are not analyses, counterarguments, or answers. Analyze the McCain/Osama point in an on-point manner, or else stop spinning your wheels in the mud. I have you on that point, and that is why you keep dodging it. Either address it head on or give up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Be responsive. ;)
Ok, I'll bite. Bin Laden is the head (supposedly) of an active extremist terrorist organization with agents worldwide, and is supposedly planning more strikes (for the sake of argument, let's say this is true). Ayers is under extreme government scrutiny and couldn't plan going to the washroom without them knowing.
Bin Laden is responsible, either directly or indirectly, for thousands of deaths all over the world. Ayers is responsible for not one single injury, let alone death.
Bin Laden is in the habit of destroying buildings and naval vessels. Ayers detroyed some statues 40 years ago.
Bin Laden is wanted, dead or alive, by a dozen governments. Ayers is a college professor.
See, you're comparing apples and oranges. Instead of comparing Ayers to Bin Laden, which is one hell of a stretch, why not just say this:
"McCain gave a pro-Ayers speech in Ayers' living room after Ayers bombed the Pentagon and some statues and admitted to it. Ayers got McCain's political career off the ground after those attacks. Ayers and McCain were partners in public speaking and served on boards together after the attacks. Ayers is unrepentant for his terrorist attacks to this day.
Quote:
NitsuJ America is considered as a terrorist nation to some parts of the world, so should Obama be against America since that'd help him be against terrorism?
Yeah, I'm with Grod on this one. You've definitly brought up some good points thus far, nitsuJ. But that wasn't one of your better ones....Quote:
Grod
wat
Oh, it goes much deeper than her lack of knowledge of the Bush Doctrine:Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Not to say she's an idiot, but seriously...Vice President (and a "70 year old man's ailing heartbeat away" from being President) of the most powerful nation on the planet? Really. This woman was not ready for Prime Time.
I will tell you how I view his associations:Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Think about Barack's (supposed) demeanor. His entire philosophy. He is all about reaching across isles and trying to be both tolerant and understanding of all points of view, even when he doesn't agree with them. I can completely identify with that. Terrorism (as a method) is indefensible, on the surface. It's so easy to label something "terroristic" and say "DIS' IS BAD!!" without any context. Although, many of the motives behind various terrorist attacks are actually pretty legitimate. A moderate - such as Obama seems to be - would take all sides of the spectrum into consideration, and would find it possible to condemn such acts, even while being connecting with the offender on some other level.
I doubt very much that Obama has applauded Ayers for his acts (I haven't seen/heard the speech he supposedly gave - only reports that it happened, usually with the hint of spin. If you have a link to what was actually said at the speech, I would love to hear/see it).
I would like to know more about his association with Ayers than what they cherry-pick through to put up on FOX News. Simply the fact that he is associated with the man, while a brow-raiser, does not persuade me to immediately delegitimize him as a true American who loves his country. There has to be more to it. And, as of now, I haven't seen it.
The same goes for Reverend Wright. The truth is, many of the most harshest critics of anything or anyone (whether it be a nation, a person, a novel, a video game, etc...) are also the most passionate lovers of the same. It is because they do love said item that they are moved to so much emotion, when said person/place/thing is behaving in a despicable way. You and I have had the debate before about whether Wright was addressing America As A Whole, or "America" meaning the U.S. Government, in relation to the world stage (which is what he, himself, said). So I really don't want to go back into it. I simply want to make the point that, where you are really quick to say "ZOMG, Wright said Goddamn America!" I am looking at the context, and I don't quite feel the same way you do about it.
To address your "name change" paragraph: Drew actually beat me to it. How can you possibly compare someone who participated in some statue and building bombings (which, I agree, is a method of protest that I don't necessarily support), with someone who led an attack that took thousands upon thousands of lives?