U.S. election contrasts two types of patriotism

[LongShot]

U.S. election contrasts two types of patriotism
Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:37am EDT
By Matthew Bigg

ATLANTA (*******) (http://www.*******.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1027927820080819?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=10112)- The U.S. presidential election presents a sharp contrast between two types of patriotism: John McCain stands as a war hero. His rival Barack Obama calls Americans back to the can-do spirit of the nation's founders.

In November the candidates will find out which style appealed more to voters in this time of war and economic uncertainty.

Democratic candidate Obama has made patriotism a core theme of his campaign, seeking to inspire voters to overcome divisions of race and party and using his own story as a child of a Kenyan father and Kansas mother as an example of opportunities available only in America.

But on the campaign trail, audiences also applaud Republican McCain's tales of his experience as a prisoner of war in Vietnam which embody qualities he seeks to project as a candidate.

As a Navy pilot, McCain was shot down over Hanoi in 1967. He was stabbed, beaten, tortured and imprisoned for more than five years, including two years in solitary confinement.

The appeal of that biography was apparent last Saturday in televised interviews with each candidate by a leading pastor, Rick Warren, at his megachurch in California.

Asked to describe the hardest decision he had ever made, Obama talked about his decision to oppose the Iraq war.

McCain recounted how he had decided to refuse early repatriation from a Hanoi prison even though he was injured, because he did not want to jump the line -- a story that visibly resonated with the audience.

Nothing in Obama's life story can match those experiences and they reinforce McCain's slogan of "Country First," said Richard Kohn, professor of history at the University of North Carolina.

"For McCain, not only does it (patriotism) arise from his very being, his identity, but it plays a dual role of emphasizing a national security part of the campaign and the contrast between him and Obama," he said.

McCain retired from the Navy in 1981 and entered politics. He stresses his war years in questioning Obama's foreign policy credentials and readiness to be commander-in-chief.

For his part, Obama praises McCain's patriotic service but has made unswerving opposition to the Iraq war a pillar of his campaign and vows to pull U.S. combat troops out of Iraq.

"SUSPICION"

Obama grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, an island far from the U.S. mainland. As a result, he could be vulnerable to the charge that his background and values are unfamiliar.

One possible method of exploiting this emerged last week in a memo by campaign strategist Mark Penn for one-time Democratic hopeful Hillary Clinton, which suggested she could defeat Obama by running an explicitly patriotic campaign.

Obama should be presented as someone not "fundamentally American," said the memo in advice Clinton did not adopt.

In an apparent bid to overcome any skepticism about his background and values, the Democratic party will showcase Obama's life story at its convention in Denver next week, starting with a speech by his wife Michelle on opening night.

"He's going to demonstrate love of country by word and deed at the convention," said Democratic strategist Mark Mellman.

"It's not something that you repeat: 'I am patriot'. There are no specific patriotic activities. It's got to come across at an authentic and sincere way," Mellman said.

Obama would be the country's first black president and as such faces an extra hurdle as he attempts to persuade voters.

"There is a historic suspicion that African Americans are less patriotic," Kohn said.

Black Americans have fought in all the country's wars but their loyalty has been questioned because many black leaders have criticized U.S. policies on race and some whites assume historic discrimination against them, which includes slavery, would have undermined their commitment to U.S. ideals.

"Conservative whites look at them (blacks) as unpatriotic and yet if you look at the constitution and the history, the black community has been trying to make that constitution work for everybody," said Ronald Walters, professor of politics and government at the University of Maryland.

Walters contrasted what he called "bumper sticker patriotism" with what he said was a struggle many African Americans had engaged in to make the country a real democracy.

Nowhere is McCain's war hero status shown more clearly than in his bond with veterans, a group held in higher public esteem in the United States than in most other Western countries.

But Peter Melendez, a combat instructor recently retired from the U.S. army after 22 years, said that even for veterans McCain's status should not necessarily be a decisive factor.

"He has been in combat and I have been in combat but just because he is a military man running for office doesn't mean he has the right to run the country," Melendez said.

(Editing by Michael Christie and Jackie Frank)



Im not voting for either of these jokers.

[BonesBrigade]

Why would veterans even support McCain his record regarding veteran issues is abysmal.

[Lambert58]

It all boils down to which one you think will fk up the country the least, then hope for someone decent to run in 4 years.

[Winger]

Its tough to offer up community organizing as your accomplishment when the other guy has service and more time on this earth.

Me, I'm voting for whomever is the most transparent & forthcoming candidate.

[Ordie]

Country First?
One only needs to look at the Republican administration abismal response to Hurricane Katrina.

[Gunge]

obamas patriotism?
he dosent even like this country, he says it all the time
all you have to do is a little research

[BonesBrigade]

obamas patriotism?
he dosent even like this country, he says it all the time
all you have to do is a little research

Could you show us a source please if its so common?

[Zoomie]

Country First?
One only needs to look at the Republican administration abismal response to Hurricane Katrina.
What about the Democrat's abysmal response as well? It's up to the state and local governments to be the first responders, not FEMA.

I've never seen Obama's can do attitude. It's "What can we take from you?"

[Kak]

obamas patriotism?
he dosent even like this country, he says it all the time
all you have to do is a little research
All the time huh? So you should easily be able to provide 10 instances of him saying this.


I've never seen Obama's can do attitude.
You must not follow politics then, whether or not it's BS is a different story, you're saying you aren't aware of it at all, haven't you ever heard him speak? The biggest stereotype about Obama is all of his hope and change talk and "pie in the sky" attitude.

[Createdeemcee]

obamas patriotism?
he dosent even like this country, he says it all the time
all you have to do is a little research


He just hates to see it in its current state, just like everyone else.

[Ordie]

It's up to the state and local governments to be the first responders, not FEMA.

If the US were able to send entire fleets aof ships, planes and aid within 48 hours to Indonesia and Thailand after the Tsunami, why we did the Republican Administration failed to do the same at home?

'Brownie, you're doing a helluva job'!
-George W. Bush

[LongShot]

if the us were able to send entire fleets aof ships, planes and aid within 48 hours to indonesia and thailand after the tsunami, why we did the republican administration failed to do the same at home?

'brownie, you're doing a helluva job'!
-george w. Bush


x2.................

[Hilbert]

Just another choice between two piss poor candidates... as usual, sadly enough.

[Hilbert]

Country First?
One only needs to look at the Republican administration abismal response to Hurricane Katrina.

Meh, as someone living in the New Orleans area, I'll freely tell you that the response from both sides of government, democrat--republican, whatever, was abysmal. Personally, I'd say the politicians who did come down and tour the places, despite all of their "promises" we're far more interested in making a name and getting the right to say "I've been there" than actually doing anything to help; and honestly, I think it would've turned out exactly the same with any other administration regardless of their Political Affiliation. Even now, the so-called "Road To Recovery" is still moving at a snail's pace.

[-Church-]

obamas patriotism?
he dosent even like this country, he says it all the time
all you have to do is a little research

Ditto that, that bastard doesnt even wear a flagpin. He totally hates america.

[Ordie]

Ditto that, that bastard doesnt even wear a flagpin. He totally hates america.

What's the point of wearing a flag pin made in China?

[Ordie]

Meh, as someone living in the New Orleans area, I'll freely tell you that the response from both sides of government, democrat--republican, whatever, was abysmal. Personally, I'd say the politicians who did come down and tour the places, despite all of their "promises" we're far more interested in making a name and getting the right to say "I've been there" than actually doing anything to help; and honestly, I think it would've turned out exactly the same with any other administration regardless of their Political Affiliation. Even now, the so-called "Road To Recovery" is still moving at a snail's pace.

We expect and deserve better from our government.
Not to fleece it.

Hurricane Katrina is a watershed event for many Americans, especially the youth. It may set the agenda for the next 10 years.

[Umbro2914]

haven't you ever heard him speak? The biggest stereotype about Obama is all of his hope and change talk and "pie in the sky" attitude.

Yeah i heard him speak, and in every speech he points out everything thats wrong with this nation, everything that should be fixed... but rarly does he provide a blueprint on how to fix it, or on wheres hes gonna get the money to do so and so. someone should tell him that this nation is 9 trillion $ in dept.

[wildcat]

Obama does not even like the 2nd amendment, look at his voting record, he is not for what the founding fathers America stood for, he wants a larger more powerful central government. I think both Obama and McCain both blow chunks, the choice, is which one will do the less damage to the constituion and the USA in gerneral, there is not much difference, there is not much choice.

[wildcat]

Yeah i heard him speak, and in every speech he points out everything thats wrong with this nation, everything that should be fixed... but rarly does he provide a blueprint on how to fix it, or on wheres hes gonna get the money to do so and so. someone should tell him that this nation is 9 trillion $ in dept.
do take this as an attack on your words, because it is not, who do we owe this dept too? I had always wondered that, and what do we pay them with?

[Chulo]

If the US were able to send entire fleets aof ships, planes and aid within 48 hours to Indonesia and Thailand after the Tsunami, why we did the Republican Administration failed to do the same at home?

'Brownie, you're doing a helluva job'!
-George W. Bush
because, unless im mistaken, Indonesia and Thailand are not a part of America.
The nature of the Constitution ensures that the president / federal government can not take actions against/in a state unless given permission. Everyone knows that La. took a long time to go through the channels untill they found out they were over their heads and asked the federal government for help

[Umbro2914]

who do we owe this dept too? I had always wondered that, and what do we pay them with?
That is a fine question, and i am no economist so i dont really have an answer. However I can tell you that we have debt, according to this clock: http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
lol and when you have debt, you need to save money to pay it off... makes sense. and to save money, you need to cut back on spending. Which none of these candidates are proposing, so its all one big pile of crap. Both these candidates are a joke in mho.

The last time there was a balanced budget, ie no national debt was when Andrew Jackson left the white house.

[Unixnut]

who do we owe this dept too? I had always wondered that, and what do we pay them with?

From what I know the debt is issued as U.S. government backed bonds, which can be bought up by other governments/financial institutions. It's a bit like an I.O.U. Somebody buys $x amount of bonds, buying off the US debt, which they can hold and/or trade with others. Usually at some point you want your money back, so you go to the U.S government and request they return the money you gave them, which they have to do there and then.

From what I have heard from many sources, the majority of the US debt is currently held by China, followed by Russia and other European countries.

I hear China is really keen on buying the debt, as by doing that they relieve financial pressure on U.S consumers, who can then go out and spend that money on goods made in China, which keeps the Chinese economy running and their people employed (and therefore less likely to revolt). It's an interesting circle.

[wildcat]

From what I know the debt is issued as U.S. government backed bonds, which can be bought up by other governments/financial institutions. It's a bit like an I.O.U. Somebody buys $x amount of bonds, buying off the US debt, which they can hold and/or trade with others. Usually at some point you want your money back, so you go to the U.S government and request they return the money you gave them, which they have to do there and then.

From what I have heard from many sources, the majority of the US debt is currently held by China, followed by Russia and other European countries.

I hear China is really keen on buying the debt, as by doing that they relieve financial pressure on U.S consumers, who can then go out and spend that money on goods made in China, which keeps the Chinese economy running and their people employed (and therefore less likely to revolt). It's an interesting circle.
I guess that probably a good why of putting it. I laugh, because this whole credit system is not backed by anything tangible (like gold, corn, beach balls) it just backed by really nothing, very confusing.

[Umbro2914]

this whole credit system is not backed by anything tangible (like gold, corn, beach balls) it just backed by really nothing, very confusing.
x2 -- although beach balls is a good idea..

[wildcat]

x2 -- although beach balls is a good idea..
so when the dollar falls, we can use beach balls, I will have to get a bigger truck and air compressor to carry the new currency, also the supper markets will need bigger cash registers ?

[Umbro2914]

no need to worry, they do make mini ones http://image.orientaltrading.com/otcimg/49_95.jpg
but back on topic -- notice no one talks about the currency, neither candidate. nothing about inflation, nothing about federal reserve, nothing

[sidman69]

Ditto that, that bastard doesnt even wear a flagpin. He totally hates america.

yeah, exactly! He might as well slap the troops in teh face by not wearing a flag pin. I'll take cheap subsitutes for patriotism over substance any day.

[Unixnut]

I guess that probably a good why of putting it. I laugh, because this whole credit system is not backed by anything tangible (like gold, corn, beach balls) it just backed by really nothing, very confusing.

It really isn't based on anything tangible at all. It's based on promises the government makes that it will honour the debt (hence why these are called government-backed bonds, basically a promise that they will pay the debt on demand).

What it is backed by is trust. Yes, the U.S could in theory give China, Russia and the other debt holders the finger, and proclaim that they won't honour the agreements. As the debt isn't backed by anything tangible doing this would essentially wipe all the debt away from the U.S. The reason this isn't done is because it would break the trust relationship, and trust is important when money is involved.

If people see that the U.S government will not honour their financial commitments, then:

a) People will be less likely to invest in the U.S economy, if the government cannot guarantee that the money will not be "written off" on a whim then the investment will be too risky for most.

b) Governments/Financial institutions will never want to buy U.S debt again. What would the point be of buying U.S debt if the U.S just takes your money and you get the finger in return?

These two things would pretty much guarantee the collapse of the U.S economy (no new investment into the economy, and nobody wants to bail you out of your debt) so there is good reason no (sane) politician would do this.

That is why the system works, because breaking the trust link would be disasterous for any country in the world. Hence nobody does it (unless they default due to economic collapse anyway).

Unfortunately this road is not good for the U.S. As the Chinese buy your debt they are essentially putting you in their pocket. There will come a time (if it's not here already) where if China wants the U.S to do something the Chinese want, they can just threaten to bankrupt your economy by forcing the U.S government to buy back their debt. Then you will have two choices:

1) just give them the finger: medium to long-term economic problems (see above for explenation)

2) honour your agreements, buy back all the debt, and bankrupt the entire country in the process.

Neither is good, and you are lucky that the U.S is China's largest market, so they need you to buy their stuff at the moment as much as you need them to buy your debt. This means they can't use the U.S debt they hold against you without causing problems for themselves. Think of it as economic M.A.D :)

[budgie]

It all boils down to which one you think will fk up the country the least, then hope for someone decent to run in 4 years.


I think that given the way American elections always devolve into character assassination anyway, neither side will ever view the other as 'decent' again.

[Lambert58]

We expect and deserve better from our government.
Not to fleece it.

Hurricane Katrina is a watershed event for many Americans, especially the youth. It may set the agenda for the next 10 years.

For the south, maybe. Not to sound like the rest of the country doesn't care, but... in 2008 we (even the nutjob campus marxists have moved on to the issue du jour) really don't care. It may not be right, it may not be fair, but we don't. Sorry. Not going to set the agenda for the next 10 days, let alone years, except in those counties that were affected.

And... to tell the truth, those idiots kept/keep reelecting the corrupt democrats as governor/mayor/about to be indicted representative year after year so.... good luck. The rest of the country has other **** to worry about.

[Winger]

no need to worry, they do make mini ones http://image.orientaltrading.com/otcimg/49_95.jpg
but back on topic -- notice no one talks about the currency, neither candidate. nothing about inflation, nothing about federal reserve, nothing

Also, weak talk on immigration from both sides! In forty years we will have some serious issues because of all the tax money needed to support the illegal immigrants. Infrastructure, health care, education. These immigrants will not be picking up the tab for this. And certainly not the 50% bottom of income earners who pay 3% of all the income tax. The top 50% as always will have to pay the tab. And, what happens when they have less money to spend?

Although neither candidate has addressed this issue fully, I know that Obama's policies will only exacerbate this situation. Social medicine and higher taxes. Canadian provinces spend 42% of their tax on medical expenses. How f$cked will we be then? That, is not very patriotic.

[Hollis]

Country First?
One only needs to look at the Republican administration abismal response to Hurricane Katrina.


Maybe ask Governor Blanco who needed to OK the federal involvement before it could happen. Then NO is another issue.

[noname]

Yeah i heard him speak, and in every speech he points out everything thats wrong with this nation, everything that should be fixed... but rarly does he provide a blueprint on how to fix it, or on wheres hes gonna get the money to do so and so. someone should tell him that this nation is 9 trillion $ in dept.


That is where hope and change come into play.

[noname]

I think that given the way American elections always devolve into character assassination anyway, neither side will ever view the other as 'decent' again.


Seeing how the lunatic fringe on the left has lambasted Bush since the 2000 election, are you surprised? I mean they actually believe the election was stolen. Oh wait, do you believe that too?p-)

[ramallamamama]

In the USA the voting process has worked out pretty well wouldn't you say?

I've given up on the political process and believe it's just a circus that takes our eyes off the ball, the important stuff, like caring for your family and others at the local level. Our votes, 'conservative' or 'liberal' have not kept us out of crushing wars that have bankrupted our economies and killed our children.

The left/right paradigm is one that divides the masses, we should be working together against a common threat. Here in the USA, this is the one that would infringe and make it difficult or impossible to obtain weapons we the people would use to defend ourselves and loved ones with. In the UK it would be the one that puts a million cameras up to watch it's citizen's every move.

I believe now is the time to focus on bullets, beans and band-aids, teaching friends and family safe weapon handling skills, and working with your friendly neighbors to develop disaster/security plans and ways to produce a lot of food.

[Dominique]

Seeing how the lunatic fringe on the left has lambasted Bush since the 2000 election, are you surprised? I mean they actually believe the election was stolen. Oh wait, do you believe that too?p-)

Both the left and right have a lunatic fringe, and lately it appears that both parties are playing to their interests. One side wants to swath themselves in the flag, and spout the either your for us, or against us line to justify their actions, no matter what they might be. The other side is more than happy to wallow in self pity, decrying anything that even remotely smacks of American pride (because we all know that anything the government does must have some sinister ulterior purpose behind it, or our actions might offend someone, somewhere).

Both of them sicken me. Both want to point the finger at the other, blaming them for the various problems our nation has, when in reality it's both of them that are bringing us down, yet neither of them is willing to admit it. They balk at the slightest mention that there's a possibility that the other side may have a valid point or two. We as a people spend far to much time looking for someone to blame for our woes, instead of concentrating on a valid solution.

We has a serious lack of leadership in this country. Our elected "leaders" are far to concerned with staying in office, and keeping tax dollars flowing into their respective states and/or districts than they are with actually working on issues that affect us. To do that, they do what's going to get them the most votes, not what's necessarily the right thing to do. A true patriot is one that does what's right for the county, not what's going to ensure his victory in the next election. Sometimes that means making hard unpopular decisions that will benefit us in the long run, and not just raise his or her standing in the polls.

As far as the two current candidates go, neither one really impresses me, I just feel that McCain is the better choice of the two, so he'll get my vote. That doesn't mean I endorse his policies or views, but I tend to disagree with far more of Obama's statements than I do his. As for their individual patriotism goes, I don't for a minute buy the "Obama hates America" statements, they're a crock. Just because he doesn't walk around with a flag pin on, doesn't mean he's un-American or hates the US, anymore than someone who doesn't join the military hates the military. My advice is to get over it, and move on as their are far more important issues in this election.

[Gunge]

Could you show us a source please if its so common?

you have the internet use it
how about his pastors sermons he sat in for 16 + years
how about his buddy wiliam ayers weather underground bomber of the pentagon

ignorance is costly

[LongShot]

Both the left and right have a lunatic fringe, and lately it appears that both parties are playing to their interests. One side wants to swath themselves in the flag, and spout the either your for us, or against us line to justify their actions, no matter what they might be. The other side is more than happy to wallow in self pity, decrying anything that even remotely smacks of American pride (because we all know that anything the government does must have some sinister ulterior purpose behind it, or our actions might offend someone, somewhere).

Both of them sicken me. Both want to point the finger at the other, blaming them for the various problems our nation has, when in reality it's both of them that are bringing us down, yet neither of them is willing to admit it. They balk at the slightest mention that there's a possibility that the other side may have a valid point or two. We as a people spend far to much time looking for someone to blame for our woes, instead of concentrating on a valid solution.

We has a serious lack of leadership in this country. Our elected "leaders" are far to concerned with staying in office, and keeping tax dollars flowing into their respective states and/or districts than they are with actually working on issues that affect us. To do that, they do what's going to get them the most votes, not what's necessarily the right thing to do. A true patriot is one that does what's right for the county, not what's going to ensure his victory in the next election. Sometimes that means making hard unpopular decisions that will benefit us in the long run, and not just raise his or her standing in the polls.

As far as the two current candidates go, neither one really impresses me, I just feel that McCain is the better choice of the two, so he'll get my vote. That doesn't mean I endorse his policies or views, but I tend to disagree with far more of Obama's statements than I do his. As for their individual patriotism goes, I don't for a minute buy the "Obama hates America" statements, they're a crock. Just because he doesn't walk around with a flag pin on, doesn't mean he's un-American or hates the US, anymore than someone who doesn't join the military hates the military. My advice is to get over it, and move on as their are far more important issues in this election.

I think that having only "two" choices in the election is both disturbing and rudimentary considering the amount of time and thought many people put into choosing something they want....given the choice between only two places to live, or two cars to drive, or two schools to attend, most Americans would lose it. We have a few viable and respectable third parties, yet the system in which the election is framed seems to be designed to keep them off the radar of America.

Third parties have little to no ability to attend debates (aside from taking the issue to court), are not given the same opportunities when it comes to government assistance.

Perhaps what America really needs is for the mainstream media to take interest in covering a few of the "other" candidates instead of depicting them as extremists/quacks/nobodies............

I suppose the Democrats and Republicans are perfectly happy to run against each other, but dont really like the idea of anyone else joining the club.

I dont know, maybe its just me that wants a viable third party slot with the same access and coverage as the other two...

[Dominique]

you have the internet use it
how about his pastors sermons he sat in for 16 + years
how about his buddy wiliam ayers weather underground bomber of the pentagon

You are helping me prove my point about the right and the left with statements like this.


obamas patriotism?
he dosent even like this country, he says it all the time
all you have to do is a little research

When asked for proof of your comments, instead of citing the sources that helped you form your opinion (and that's all it is) you tell him to go search the internet (as we all KNOW everything posted to the net MUST be true). You cite him being a member of the laod load mouth Chicago preacher's church (and yes I do think the "pastor" is an @$$hole who has MAJOR issues with whites, and America in general), or that he knew and associated with William Ayers (who should IMHO still be locked up), but neither of the items you cited show Obama stating that he "doesn't even like this country".

All it shows is that he has made some very questionable choices in who he chooses to associate with (and is just one of many reasons he won't be getting my vote in November.


ignorance is costly

It certainly is, so don't help perpetrate it by spewing the party line. You should be able to back up your statements, and defend your position based on facts, and not propaganda kicked out by the opposing party's PR department to make the other guy look bad. And when I say facts, I'm not talking about information of dubious origin that you find on the internet, or a blog associated with the a party that has something to gain by smearing the person in question.

The same goes for everyone I see trying to question the character of John McCain's military service. With a few rare exceptions, the majority of the ones planting these stories, have never served so much as a single day in uniform, much less in combat, or had to endure years of captivity and torture. Yet they see fit to downplay exactly what it is he went through.

[Dominique]

I think that having only "two" choices in the election is both disturbing and rudimentary considering the amount of time and thought many people put into choosing something they want....given the choice between only two places to live, or two cars to drive, or two schools to attend, most Americans would lose it. We have a few viable and respectable third parties, yet the system in which the election is framed seems to be designed to keep them off the radar of America.

Third parties have little to no ability to attend debates (aside from taking the issue to court), are not given the same opportunities when it comes to government assistance.

Perhaps what America really needs is for the mainstream media to take interest in covering a few of the "other" candidates instead of depicting them as extremists/quacks/nobodies............

I suppose the Democrats and Republicans are perfectly happy to run against each other, but dont really like the idea of anyone else joining the club.

I dont know, maybe its just me that wants a viable third party slot with the same access and coverage as the other two...

The two parties have rigged the system to ensure that they, and only they, have any chance what-so-ever of actually getting a candidate into the oval office. And after what I've seen the last few years, you are far from the only one who wishes a third option was available.

[LongShot]

The two parties have rigged the system to ensure that they, and only they, have any chance what-so-ever of actually getting a candidate into the oval office. And after what I've seen the last few years, you are far from the only one who wishes a third option was available.


I tend to stay out of the conversation when it comes to the third party line...though I always vote third party even down to local elections....we need more choices, though there seems to be a majorty (whether vast or only slight) that are comfortable with only having two choices.

[Gunge]

You are helping me prove my point about the right and the left with statements like this.



When asked for proof of your comments, instead of citing the sources that helped you form your opinion (and that's all it is) you tell him to go search the internet (as we all KNOW everything posted to the net MUST be true). You cite him being a member of the laod load mouth Chicago preacher's church (and yes I do think the "pastor" is an @$$hole who has MAJOR issues with whites, and America in general), or that he knew and associated with William Ayers (who should IMHO still be locked up), but neither of the items you cited show Obama stating that he "doesn't even like this country".

All it shows is that he has made some very questionable choices in who he chooses to associate with (and is just one of many reasons he won't be getting my vote in November.



It certainly is, so don't help perpetrate it by spewing the party line. You should be able to back up your statements, and defend your position based on facts, and not propaganda kicked out by the opposing party's PR department to make the other guy look bad. And when I say facts, I'm not talking about information of dubious origin that you find on the internet, or a blog associated with the a party that has something to gain by smearing the person in question.

The same goes for everyone I see trying to question the character of John McCain's military service. With a few rare exceptions, the majority of the ones planting these stories, have never served so much as a single day in uniform, much less in combat, or had to endure years of captivity and torture. Yet they see fit to downplay exactly what it is he went through.


what the heck are you rambling on about you just said you agreed with me and dont agree in the same long ass response

if his pastor was yours would you sit there 16 years?
if you found out your bud was an enemy of America would you still be buds?

u r talkin out your elbow
im out of this one i can tell you drank the cool-aid
have a great one

[Dominique]

what the heck are you rambling on about you just said you agreed with me and dont agree in the same long ass response

I said I agreed that his pastor was an idiot, not that Obama "say he hates America", and you still have yet to show where he "says it all the time".


if his pastor was yours would you sit there 16 years?
if you found out your bud was an enemy of America would you still be buds?

I would have done a little more research on the church to begin with, and been long gone years ago, but still doesn't show where he says "he doesn't like the country"


u r talkin out your elbow
im out of this one i can tell you drank the cool-aid
have a great one

I've been quite clear in my statements, I asked you to show proof of your comments, nothing more, if you want to dip, so be it, that's your choice.

[Chulo]

When asked for proof of your comments, instead of citing the sources that helped you form your opinion (and that's all it is) you tell him to go search the internet (as we all KNOW everything posted to the net MUST be true). You cite him being a member of the laod load mouth Chicago preacher's church (and yes I do think the "pastor" is an @$$hole who has MAJOR issues with whites, and America in general), or that he knew and associated with William Ayers (who should IMHO still be locked up), but neither of the items you cited show Obama stating that he "doesn't even like this country".

All it shows is that he has made some very questionable choices in who he chooses to associate with (and is just one of many reasons he won't be getting my vote in November.




from a personal point of view, i dont know why people dont understand why is associations are not important.
1. He chose to go and be a member of a church for nearly 20 years.
You have a choice on where you go and on the basis of what you believe and your support for the pastor.
His association with the pastor was just not social but very personal
For nearly 20 years he sat there and took in the teachings and then is suddenly surprised by what is taught there?
When you go join a church you go there to learn, share the same ideas and expound. There is no way he went there for 20 years and NOT know what was happening there, and if he did, then he went there just for show and not true faith.
2. associating with a known terrorist and asking for his support is another lack of judgment

the fact is everyone is known by the people they keep, the people they chose as a role model and those they choose to look up to.
The sentiments of those Barrack has picked in the past (and now quickly dismissed) is just an indication of what he has chosen to hear and listen to for a long while.

[Hollis]

from a personal point of view, i dont know why people dont understand why is associations are not important.
1. He chose to go and be a member of a church for nearly 20 years.
You have a choice on where you go and on the basis of what you believe and your support for the pastor.
His association with the pastor was just not social but very personal
For nearly 20 years he sat there and took in the teachings and then is suddenly surprised by what is taught there?
When you go join a church you go there to learn, share the same ideas and expound. There is no way he went there for 20 years and NOT know what was happening there, and if he did, then he went there just for show and not true faith.
2. associating with a known terrorist and asking for his support is another lack of judgment

the fact is everyone is known by the people they keep, the people they chose as a role model and those they choose to look up to.
The sentiments of those Barrack has picked in the past (and now quickly dismissed) is just an indication of what he has chosen to hear and listen to for a long while.


Exactly, Also Obama's Wife paper that she wrote in college opens up some insight in this issue. The Campaign to Elect Obama is trying to re-create the candidate from a Radical Black Agenda to Mainstream all-American.

It seems to be working.


It was tried with Kerry, with his Anti-American approach of the 70's to Hunter, Patriot, and All-American. It almost worked.

[Umbro2914]

Third parties have little to no ability to attend debates (aside from taking the issue to court), are not given the same opportunities when it comes to government assistance....

Even if they take it to court they get ruled against, just as an example recent debate held at Saddleback, the Bob Barr [Liberitarian Party] campaign sued for not being allowed to participate, and the judge ruled agaist them stating "Plaintiffs will lose out on a fair amount of exposure and the opportunity to express their views in a popular forum,” Carter conceded. “On the other hand, halting this event would deny the other candidates the opportunity to be heard and would deprive the public of an opportunity to see the candidates and hear their views."

http://blog.bobbarr2008.com/



Perhaps what America really needs is for the mainstream media to take interest in covering a few of the "other" candidates instead of depicting them as extremists/quacks/nobodies...............
Good idea, too bad its not in the interest of ANY major media channel to raise awarness of 3rd party, for they benefit quit well financially from a 2 party system.


I suppose the Democrats and Republicans are perfectly happy to run against each other, but dont really like the idea of anyone else joining the club.
Last time a 3rd party candidate took part in debates was Perot in '92. After that election, the main parties realised these debates help 3rd party candidates gain votes!! they didnt want that. So even when Perot ran again in '96 he was denied any debates.



I dont know, maybe its just me that wants a viable third party slot with the same access and coverage as the other two...
Seems like a utopian idea at this point.

** Just a side note, the McCain campaign is no challenging Barr's right to the ballot in key state of Pennsylvania [for fears he will 'steal' votes from McCain] after Barr Campaign gain access with to the ballot with appropriate number of signatures.

[LongShot]

...


You pretty much nailed it.....I remember what happened to Badnarik in '04 when he tired to get debate time...........

[brainplay]

I've looked at alot of countries with multiple parties end up having 2 major parties with a load of minor parties that end up supporting the main parties. I know one of the biggest worries with third parties is that people worry if they vote for a 3rd party candidate that they'll cause a candidate they really really don't want to win gain a major advantage. Here in Texas we had a 3rd party guy running for Govenor who seemed to have a shot named Kinky Friedman who ran as a independent moderate conservative. Lots of hype surrounded him (sorta like Obama) and I knew some guys that voted for him since he was new and different. Turned out it was all hype after all. He might run again in 2010 but as a democrat, LOL.

Just out of curiosity, can I get some examples of 3 or more candidates running for president/leader that were neck and neck, etc.


The nature of the Constitution ensures that the president / federal government can not take actions against/in a state unless given permission. Everyone knows that La. took a long time to go through the channels untill they found out they were over their heads and asked the federal government for help

Thats exactly why Katrina went so bad in the first place. Its the same corrupt local government that screwed up stuff then and is still screwing stuff up now. Its the left leaners and media that consistently ignore this and other screwups that happened during that event (hey lets not forget who decided to violate the 2nd amendment).

[Ordie]

Thats exactly why Katrina went so bad in the first place. Its the same corrupt local government that screwed up stuff then and is still screwing stuff up now. Its the left leaners and media that consistently ignore this and other screwups that happened during that event (hey lets not forget who decided to violate the 2nd amendment).

History will show that it happened on George W. Bush's watch.

The reason why Katrina was watershed moment because it was a deathknell in whatever confidence people had in government. The first blow was Watergate and ever since then public confidence in our government has eroded.

The youth, already conditioned by thier parents and grandparents have zero trust in government. Katrina confirmed thier beliefs.

Without trust, then our system of governance is in danger.

[brainplay]

History will show that it happened on George W. Bush's watch.

The reason why Katrina was watershed moment because it was a deathknell in whatever confidence people had in government. The first blow was Watergate and ever since then public confidence in our government has eroded.

The youth, already conditioned by thier parents and grandparents have zero trust in government. Katrina confirmed thier beliefs.

Without trust, then our system of governance is in danger.

That was a media's making right there. The failure should have been firmly placed on the feet of others. The current failure in its reconstruction should definitely be placed on the feet of those re-elected (god knows why) corrupt officials.

The failure of parents to teach their youth about their power over the government is the biggest loss in US. You attribute too much confidence loss to Katrina when it should be used as a prime example of propoganda. The stonewalling and failures of Congress should have been more significant.

Continually trying to blame Bush for your problems is a sad state of affairs for the left (especially when alot is their fault) although its the thing to do these days.

[Ordie]

The checks and balances are gone, the political patronage (Brownie) replaced merit, and leaders are absent (playin golf in Vegas).

The only entity that attempts to keep policymakers honest today is the media.

If it wasn't for the media, more would've died.

[Dominique]

History will show that it happened on George W. Bush's watch.

The reason why Katrina was watershed moment because it was a deathknell in whatever confidence people had in government. The first blow was Watergate and ever since then public confidence in our government has eroded.

The youth, already conditioned by thier parents and grandparents have zero trust in government. Katrina confirmed thier beliefs.

Without trust, then our system of governance is in danger.

While I whole heartedly agree that the government response to Katrina was piss poor (from the locals, to the feds), the simple fact is, until the local government requests help, the feds can't do anything. The Mayor (why they reelected this idiot), the Governor (and her advisers), a large chunk of FEMA, and several people at DHS, and many of the Presidents advisers should have been sh*t canned.

While it's not the President's job to get mixed up in the details, it is his job to provide leadership in times of crisis. In other words, he needs to look like he's got the situation in hand, and is working on a solution (even if he doesn't). The image he portrays has a lot to do with how people will perceive him. When your advisers are giving you bad advice (they should have had him on a plane headed down there with in the first 48 hours, and announcing what the Feds would be able to provide in the way of help), you get rid of your advisers. You don't keep them around out of a since of loyalty.

As far as people loosing faith in their government goes, that's been happening for years. Every time government fails to make do on a promise, every time a politician gets busted for corruption, Congress deadlocks, or allows themselves a raise, etc., etc. it drops a little more.

[hsh2]

Exactly, Also Obama's Wife paper that she wrote in college opens up some insight in this issue. The Campaign to Elect Obama is trying to re-create the candidate from a Radical Black Agenda to Mainstream all-American.

It seems to be working.


It was tried with Kerry, with his Anti-American approach of the 70's to Hunter, Patriot, and All-American. It almost worked.

Agreed

I'm not sure it's working though. Kerry lead in a good number of polls and some political sites even predicted a Kerry victory...we all know the end-result.
Nowadays the Senate is D dominated, the Republican name is unpopular, the Iraq War is unpopular and gas is at almost 4dollars and with all that in his favor Obama manages to lead with 2-3 percent(within the margin of error) over an old and ugly guy like McCain. Sounds like a good candidate choice if you ask me:lol:

Furthermore:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/16/us/politics/16web-elder.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1219331843-4oKiLTPQ6ICWmjt4x7GK0g

[Umbro2914]

Just out of curiosity, can I get some examples of 3 or more candidates running for president/leader that were neck and neck, etc..
Impossible in the US system, because to win the presidency you need X electoral points, which would be impossible to attain if the votes were divided up into 3 candidates instead of the usual 2.

[Ordie]

Impossible in the US system, because to win the presidency you need X electoral points, which would be impossible to attain if the votes were divided up into 3 candidates instead of the usual 2.

Usually the third canidate is the spoiler.

For example:

Ralph Nader took away democratic progressive votes away from Al Gore. Thus George Bush got elected by a slim margin.
Ross Perot took away votes from Bush Sr. giving Clinton the lead.

[LongShot]

Usually the third canidate is the spoiler.


For example:

Ralph Nader took away democratic progressive votes away from Al Gore. Thus George Bush got elected by a slim margin.
Ross Perot took away votes from Bush Sr. giving Clinton the lead.



Too Correct...................im all for throwing out the electoral system myself....

[Umbro2914]

Usually the third canidate is the spoiler.


For example:

Ralph Nader took away democratic progressive votes away from Al Gore. Thus George Bush got elected by a slim margin.
Ross Perot took away votes from Bush Sr. giving Clinton the lead.

Yeah but none of these candidates actually got any electoral votes..... maybe this year a state will go to a 3rd party candidate ....

[Doublethinker]

Were these US humvees or US-made humvees used by the Georgian side?

[LongShot]

Were these US humvees or US-made humvees used by the Georgian side?


wrong thread man

[Will938]

If the US were able to send entire fleets aof ships, planes and aid within 48 hours to Indonesia and Thailand after the Tsunami, why we did the Republican Administration failed to do the same at home?

'Brownie, you're doing a helluva job'!
-George W. Bush

We have this thing called a federal system of government. The state is responsible for their own disasters until they request the help of the feds. You do agree that the feds shouldn't be able to impose on the sovereignty of states don't you? As I recall that permission came pretty late in the game, and then it took 5 or so days for **** to start filtering in. If we're gonna have FEMA around they should have had their **** together better than that, but it was hardly the federal government's fault; why don't you blame the people responsible for relief - the individual state. The reason we can send a fleet to thailand in a couple days is because the president has free reign to do as he pleases in the rest of the world, here he is much more restrained in his actions. But hey, facts be damned when it comes to badmouthing republicans.

[Chulo]

History will show that it happened on George W. Bush's watch.

The reason why Katrina was watershed moment because it was a deathknell in whatever confidence people had in government. The first blow was Watergate and ever since then public confidence in our government has eroded.

The youth, already conditioned by thier parents and grandparents have zero trust in government. Katrina confirmed thier beliefs.

Without trust, then our system of governance is in danger.
the only reason why history might show it that way would be because of the ignorance of people on exactly what happen, and the willingness of people to continue to pass on that misinformation - out of ignorance or misinformation

If the US were able to send entire fleets aof ships, planes and aid within 48 hours to Indonesia and Thailand after the Tsunami, why we did the Republican Administration failed to do the same at home?

'Brownie, you're doing a helluva job'!
-George W. Bush

[Bia]

The youth, already conditioned by thier parents and grandparents have zero trust in government. Katrina confirmed thier beliefs.

Not true.

...

[Umbro2914]

To sum up the Katrina Point it was state's responsability. so blame governor Blanco. Also incase you all didnt know, the police in NO forcefully disarmed all the citizens there, even those with licenses... so much for 2nd amendment.
http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/gun-seized-after-katrina-nra-wants-you/
but on a side note since Katrina was a bad example off the top of my head all the crappy things this administration has done:
- invaded a soverign nation without a declaration of war
- severly trampled our civil rights
- drove our economy into the sh*thole
- screwed the youth over with the NCLB act
- increased federal beuracracy.

[Chulo]

To sum up the Katrina Point it was state's responsability. so blame governor Blanco. Also incase you all didnt know, the police in NO forcefully disarmed all the citizens there, even those with licenses... so much for 2nd amendment.
http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2007/12/27/gun-seized-after-katrina-nra-wants-you/
but on a side note since Katrina was a bad example off the top of my head all the crappy things this administration has done:
- invaded a soverign nation without a declaration of war
- severly trampled our civil rights
- drove our economy into the sh*thole
- screwed the youth over with the NCLB act
- increased federal beuracracy.
humm... so the police is not a state agency but a federal agency?
there was one declaration of war, and it was done with approval
what aspects of the government has caused the lenders and borrowers to over stretch their own reach and cause the mortgage meltdown?
the NCLB has helped alot kids get an education

[Hollis]

If the US were able to send entire fleets aof ships, planes and aid within 48 hours to Indonesia and Thailand after the Tsunami, why we did the Republican Administration failed to do the same at home?

'Brownie, you're doing a helluva job'!
-George W. Bush


LOL, maybe do some research, The FEDS can not just go into a state and take over. Look at the California Emergency Management Response system, It was originally set up by the California State Fire Fighters to handle fires, and the system spread. It is now what is used by most emergency managements and FEMA.

There are Jurisdictional issues. FEMA had everything ready for Governor Blanco to signed, but she refused too. Until she signed the Governor had jurisdicition over how emergency management was to act in her state.


Also as I mention DO NOT BLAME the Feds over New Orleans city government incompitence.

Until recently I was a part of State SAR and FEMA.

[Dominique]

there was one declaration of war, and it was done with approval


While it was done with the approval of Congress, there was not formal declaration of war.

[California Joe]

I believe Teddy Roosevelt and the Bull Moose Party were a viable third party. Was it George Wallace and the Dixiecrats that ran as a third party or did they simply split the Democrats off in the South. I can't remember.

Yeah, Katrina may have been portrayed as a collosal f*ckup by the Bush Administration but the f*ckup started much closer to home with that Nagin imbecile and Governor Sh*tforbrains .

[Ordie]

Yeah, Katrina may have been portrayed as a collosal f*ckup by the Bush Administration but the f*ckup started much closer to home with that Nagin imbecile and Governor Sh*tforbrains .

Perhaps

But both the governor and the mayor are not household names and will be forgotten in the annals of history.

If anything.
The consequences of this past Republican Administration will do of either two things.

1) People divorcing themselves from government and not to trust it.
2) Spark a non-partisan progressive movement on issues of the environment, meritocracy, and the promotion of civil society.

[Umbro2914]

humm... so the police is not a state agency but a federal agency?
there was one declaration of war, and it was done with approval
what aspects of the government has caused the lenders and borrowers to over stretch their own reach and cause the mortgage meltdown?
the NCLB has helped alot kids get an education
Police is local thats why i said blame Blanco :roll:
1 Declaration, 2 Wars....
Mortgage meltdown is only one of many aspects of our failing economy
Would they have not gotten an education without NCLB?

[brainplay]

Perhaps
1) People divorcing themselves from government and not to trust it.
2) Spark a non-partisan progressive movement on issues of the environment, meritocracy, and the promotion of civil society.

1. Well thanks to the media the trust for the Bush administration is going to be lost. There has been alot of poor journalism that has sought to tarnish him and the result has been turning a blind eye to things like Katrina or the utter failure of a Democratic congress and various levels.

2. Non-partisan? I believe the total opposite is true. Non-partisan is a media word thats supposed to be attached to an action that makes us feel better. The fact is that the very items you listed are 100% partisan in themselves and their definitions. In fact we've seen a total polarisation on supposed "non or bi partisan" issues in recent years.

The fact is that "the people" have ALOT more power than they realize. People keep forgetting about the Immigration reform bill that congress and the president thought would pass without any incident. It tooks some help from conservative talk show hosts but the result scared the living daylights out of Congress and stunned "the people" about the power they hold. Amazingly thats already faded from memory and its business as usual. If "the people" actually got off their rear ends more often instead of watching the John Stewart show they might actually start to feel less like a nobody in a sea of nobodies.

[Zoomie]

Perhaps

But both the governor and the mayor are not household names and will be forgotten in the annals of history.
Only because of people like you who help to keep trying to say it's all Bush's fault. :roll:

[Chulo]

Only because of people like you who help to keep trying to say it's all Bush's fault. :roll:
seems like he agrees its not the all the Federal government's fault, but still uses it as an excuse, since people to "know"/ "recognize" the other names that were really a major part of it