The world has turned upside down!!! (Re: McCain vs. Obama for President)

Look, you can take whatever opinion you want on Obama's stance on race relations. I feel like I am fighting against only everything that will fit into the confines of an anecdote.I would suggest to anyone else concerned about this to pick up either of Obama's books either Audacity of Hope or Dreams of my Father. If you want a good free insight into where Obama stands on race in America I would recommend reading this which is also much shorter than the books.Transcript of Obama's speech - CNN.comThis all started when you replied to me claiming that Obama is short on policies. At least in the arena of his foreign policy, and I mean no offense by this, you don't seem to be current.I don't know what news you watch but it just seems to be ironic how many times Obama has stated a position, have conservatives and/or Hillary criticize him, only later to be vindicated.1. During the primary Obama took the position that he will order attacks against terrorists in Pakistan without the consent of their government if we had actionable intelligence. He was criticized and called "inexperienced" for taking that position. A few weeks later the military launched an air strike in Pakistan against AQ leadership without the consent of Pakistan and were widely lauded for their success in taking out some of the more dangerous leaders.2. During the primary Obama took the position that we need to initiate diplomatic relationships with Iran and North Korea. He was criticized and called "inexperienced" for taking that position. Bush even called him out on the floor of the Israeli Kenesset and the only thing you heard about in the news for the next week was talks about "appeasement". The next week it came to light that even as Bush had been standing their in Israel railing against diplomacy, Israel had been in quiet peace negotiations with Syria. In different timing we were part of multi-lateral talks with North Korea on disarmament. And just recently, as of a few days ago, the State Department was setting up and engaging in talks with Iran about economic incentives in exchange for the cessation of uranium enrichment.3. Obama's position on Iraq is to have an organized 16 month withdraw from Iraq which would have most of our troops out by 2010 and has consistently said that we need to beef up troops in Afghanistan. He was criticized and called "inexperienced" for taking that position. People were saying that Afghanistan was fine and that we needed to stay the course in Iraq. They even said that we should respect Iraqi sovereignty and that if we were asked to leave that we would. Now we have multiple Iraqi officials who agree that the US should be out by 2010. They are rejecting US demands for permanent bases and open ended presence. The situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating to the point that US forces are actually retreating from positions near the border. Now almost everyone agrees that we need more troops in Afghanistan. The only place they could come from is Iraq because the surge brigades are still out of rotation. The administration is proposing time commitments calling them "time horizons". Even McCain advisers are now saying that McCain could get troops out of Iraq even faster that Obama.Vindicated on every point. This is just regarding middle east foreign policy mostly. Only because it gets more news. Are you still of the opinion that Obama has no positions only lofty speeches?

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

and The neo-cons have and probably will continue to dominate the Republican party. As such, I view the Republican party to be near terminally corrupt, and to be restricted in any way possible. My position has changed from "anyone but Bush" to pretty much "anyone but a Republican". I would have loved to have had McCain as president, rather than GWB. But now I do think Obama is in the best position to best counter the damage of the Bush 8 years.Moose

I must agree. Back when McCain was against the religious fanatics, the incompetent military strategy, oil and nuclear only energy strategy, and the economics of fiscal irresponsibility to give more tax cuts to the rich, I would have considered him a viable candidate. Now all I see is the continuation of corruption, failed foreign policy, failed domestic policy, the extermination of civil liberties, and most surprisingly the support of torture to pander to the pervert vote.Murdoch's Fox News and the Drudge Report be damned, I want a human for President, not a chunk of silly putty with a mean streak.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

What makes you think he has changed his mind.He had that mindset for over 40 years. But he is involved in a political race to win.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Alas, he is a prisoner of a corrupt Republican party. What might well be the "true McCain" could not get the Republican nomination.I must wonder where he would be running, if we had a system (instant run-off?) where a third party candidate was a practical option?MooseEdited by Minnemooseus, : Add link.

What would that really say about his character, that he completely and utterly abandons his principles just to pander to the neo-con wing of the Republican party to win an election?I mean, here is a guy who voted FOR torture while at the same time highlights his time as a POW in almost every ad he has put out thus far.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

What part of my post did you not understand?I said he had these beliefs for 40 years and asked the question why anyone would think he had changed his mind.He is the same today and will have the same agenda he had 5 or 10 years ago come January.The same is the case with his opponent who said:

quote:

---

The constant, crippling fear that I didn't belong somehow that unless I dodged and hid and pretended to be something I wasn't I would forever remain an outsider with the rest of the world, black and white, always standing in judgment

---

DFMF 111Can a leopard change his spots?Can a waterfalls run in reverse?Can a man abandon his beliefs of the last 20/30 years? Do you know anyone better qualified to know if it works or not?
If he voted for it that means he did not feel it was inhumane.
He thought it could produce positive results.Or do you think you are better qualified to determine its use? If so what do you base your decision on?My personal views of a politician.He/she has his/her mind made up on what he/she is going to try to accomplish before he/she begins a run for office.He/she then has to convince the voters to give him/her the opportunity to accomplish his/her goal.Since he/she has convinced himself/herself that he/she is the prophet to lead the people to the promised land.The only truth that matters is the one that get the voters to the polls to pull the lever by his/her name.If that truth happens to be a lie so what it is only politics.What difference does it make how many times you flip-flop on an issue.Primary goal get the voter to pull the lever by his/her name NOTHING else matters.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Surprisingly, I have noticed that conservative Christians understand religion less than just about any other group I know of.

---

Speaking personally, I find few things more awesome than contemplating this vast and majestic process of evolution, the ebb and flow of successive biotas through geological time. Creationists and others who cannot for ideological or religious reasons accept the fact of evolution miss out a great deal, and are left with a claustrophobic little universe in which nothing happens and nothing changes.
-- M. Alan Kazlev

Apparently I understood it just fine because you essentially just reiterated your position below. He is not the same today. That is if you believe what he says and the positions he is displaying to the public.Are you saying that there is some kind of moderate dog whistle that he is blowing to signal that he is just pandering to the right but will actually govern as a moderate?

---

Moreover in this circumstance, on this issues he has changed on, they are not changes for the better.His positions are self-contradictory. He claims to be fiscally conservative while describing plans that would have him spending more than Obama would. He wants to give health care tax credits while at the same time taxing employer provided health care as income. There are plenty of people who are better qualified to know if it works or not. What are John McCain's credentials when it comes to criminology and intelligence? Because you see, there are plenty of people who have studied torture and it is well understood among those people that it in fact does not work.Saying that a POW is the most qualified to know if torture is effective is simply asinine.Of course all of that leave aside the moral question of torture and the risk it places on our soldiers when we as a nation support a policy of torture. John McCain being a hypocrit on torture is only the icing on the cake of reprehension that ANYBODY, especially Christians, should feel against someone who would support those kinds of heinous acts against another human being.Our nation was founded on the moral superiority of our values which from day one included very strict admonishment of torture policies. -- George Washington And you see nothing wrong with that?

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

So you are saying a person that has never been exposed to torture would know whether it works better than someone who has experienced it.To borrow your words that is 'asinine'. You did not answer the question about the leopard changing his spots. Well he can't.Nether can McCain change who he is.Nether can Obama change who he is. I did not say I agreed with any of what I said.Other than:I believe someone who has experienced something knows more about it than someone who has never experienced that something.A leopard can not change his spots. Neither can either one of these candidates change who they are. If elected the real person will show up. I don't care what they told you, or promised you.Is their behavior acceptable to me. No.What can I do?Forget the hype, and find out who the real person is and then make my decision who I think will benefit the country the most and then vote for that person.The problem I am now faced with is, who will do the least damage?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Are you saying he could sit and listen to Wrights messages for 20 years pour multiple of thousands of dollars supporting that message and then not believe a word of it?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Thats not what I said because you can't read.I said that if McCain thinks torture works, it is irrelevant if he was once a POW or not, he is standing AGAINST the experts who have studied it that shows that it in fact DOES NOT WORK!McCain is also standing against the inherant immorality of it regardless if it works or not. (it absolutly does not)McCain is also standing against our troops who are put in danger when we as a country condone torture policies.McCain is also standing against history as the very founding of our nation was amongst ideals which included seperating ourselves from the barbarism of the rest of the world.McCain is just plain wrong on torture on all accounts. It doesn't matter whatsoever if he was a POW or not.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

You could always go back and read what you said."DOES NOT WORK" Does that mean no information has ever been obtained by applying torture?You said: Message 144You did say people who have studied torture know more about it than those who have suffered it as to whether it works or not.I am not debating whether it is right or wrong.Only that McCain would be better qualified to know if it works under laboratory tests.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Yes you do get information. But as the studies have shown, you get bogus information. People will in fact say anything to get you to stop torturing them. This is a fact that has been verified numerous times at numerous points in history. You know what, you are right. You are exactly right. I should have noticed it earlier.John McCain should know more than anybody else that torture doesn't work. What I should have said is that it is asinine the thought that his time as a POW gives him a superior opinion to CONTRADICT the well known fact that torture does not work.John McCain should know more about the ineffectivness of torture than others because he himself gave false confessions. He should in fact know that it does not work becuase while he was a POW, under torture they got him to confess that he was a war criminal and to a variety of other things that he didn't commit. The got him to list the names of his commanding officers and he gave them the starting linup of the Green Bay Packers. He gave them nonsense.John McCain's stance on torture is WORSE precicely because he should know better!

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

When you are writing about past events, you have to use past tense. At this moment, as I type, it is the present. When you read it, it will be the past. The past tense is in relation to his college experience.Couple that with what we do know today, his wife, his pastor, and it starts to make sense. I am not saying he is out there rolling with the Black Panthers beating up non-blacks all day long. What I am saying is that he is sympathetic to such causes, which is just as unacceptable as a neo-nazi sympathizer. Trinity United Church of Christ, of which Obama is part of the congregation, is a black separatist church. They cater specifically to a black demographic, instead of whoever wants to know Jesus Christ. Only if I knew his cocaine habits. He doesn't say, "I am afrocentric," rather, what he writes about is afrocentric. No, that isn't clear at all. If you would like to provide quotes proving that I am quotemining, I am certainly open to it.In the meantime, here is a critique I found that expresses the exact same kind of understanding that I came to after reading Dreams:"Forget the content of our character; this is a work preoccupied with skin color. It’s drenched with the legacy of Malcolm X (whom Obama, at least in this book, openly idolizes). At times it’s as if there were no historical injustices in the world other than those visited upon blacks by whites. Obama routinely refers to other black men (but never white men) as “brothers”; he exhibits considerably more concern for the dignity of black men than for that of women or non-black men; and he’s acutely sensitive to perceived racial slights (yet even as he deplores the subordination of blacks in America, curiously enough, he appears to accept as his due his family’s lofty position in Kenya). While occasionally gesturing toward an ideal of colorblindness a la Dr. King, in his heart of hearts he’s anything but colorblind, fervently endorsing black solidarity while repeatedly expressing distrust of, and even contempt for, whites. When, lamenting Kenya’s intertribal rivalries, he tells a relative that “We’re part of one tribe. The black tribe. The human tribe,” the last three words feel like an afterthought - as does his attempt, in the book’s closing pages, to move beyond strict racial line-drawing and to articulate broader sympathies. As if all this weren’t enough, it seems clear by book’s end that his heart’s home is not America but Kenya.

​

What does it say about the young Obama that he was well-nigh obsessed with his vain braggart of an absentee father but trivialized his mother’s accomplishments? What does it mean that he himself plainly can’t see that his father comes off in these pages as a world-class jerk and his mother as a woman of admirable self-discipline and quiet achievement? What does it mean that throughout his account of his work as a community organizer in Chicago, Obama himself is in sharp focus while the underprivileged folks he’s supposedly trying to help are hazy figures in the distant background? What does it mean that some of the characters in this book - whom one would otherwise assume to be important people in his life - are, as he admits in the introduction, composites? What does it mean that despite his fixation on his father and his Kenyan kin, their religion (Islam) is barely mentioned, and that in the most substantial reference to it, he gives a genial thumbs-up to his brother’s newfound religious fervor?" - sourceThere is nothing in the book describing any kind of change of heart. I would encourage you to scour the book(s) for any such renunciation. There is a pattern being established here. His own words indict him. His pastor, of whom he spokes so fondly of in the books, his own wife who makes tacit assertions that "black America" should "wake up" and vote for Barrack on the basis of his blackness. Something isn't quite right here, and quite frankly, it is disconcerting to see this kind of rationale coming from someone who might just be the next president of the United States.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo