Could it possibly be that they feel he's the best choice to be President? Yes, I think that's the answer.

 

You are just too smart.

 

Maybe it could be that he is different, he would be the first African American elected president. Maybe its because people believe everything he says and people that have never voted before will go to the polls just because he is runing. I would say that is a better assumption compared to the media thinking he is the right choice.

They are not lies. Like you admitted, there are some things you had to get past and then make the choice you feel is right. Others can't begin to get past certain things and in my honest opinion, most of it, is his skin color and name. Will people admit to that? No, but I expect nothing less. Why am I voting for Obama? This Country is in shambles right now and McCain can't fix it. Do I believe Obama can fix it? I believe he will try alot harder, he has to be good for so many reasons. He is young, he is brave and he honestly feels he can't fail. I believe he will do all he can to reach across the isle and eventually this Country may try and work together. He has ran a better race than McCain in my opinion. Had McCain stayed the same as he was eight years ago things may be different. Personally I believe he's a little loony at this stage and I don't think for one second he will do anything positive for the middle class.

 

We Obama supporters are few and far between on here, but the rest of the Country seems to agree that he is the best choice. I personally am not going to say I was wrong again, like I was the last time I voted in 2000.

 

See you folks tomorrow evening.:thumb:

 

The only thing that I got out of your post is that you think that those oppose to Obama are racist.

 

That alone makes anything else you have to say irrelevant.

Could it possibly be that they feel he's the best choice to be President? Yes, I think that's the answer.

 

We can debate the merits of each candidate all day long... however, if I am reading your post correctly and if it is indeed true, then the media needs to close up shop.

The problem Hoot is that so much of what you say has such an anti Obama spin on it that even if there is an ounce of truth in something you post I'm not going to pay attention to it because of the source. I'll give you four examples. First is associations. Obama has given the extent of his associations. You don't believe him so you call it a lie. If he doesn't list every meeting in every mention, you say he lied. It just isn't true. Second, tax policy. Obama's tax plans are well documented. For most Americans taxes will be lower under the Obama plan than under the McCain plan. You don't believe him so you argue against your made up version of his plans. Third, health care. Obama's health care plan is not single payer, yet all of the arguments accuse him of single payer. Fourth, your latest on coal. Both Obama and McCain have advocated cap and trade. One result of cap and trade is that a new coal fired plant would need to use either clean coal technology or buy prohibitively expensive carbon credits. That is what he said. And both candidates have backed cap and trade.

I am not going to respond point by point becasue by your own admission you dismiss my posts because I have been such a vocal critic of Obama. Therefore, pointing out the amount of documentation from mainstream (i.e., not sources such as Huffington Post, Media Matters, or Daily Kos) that I have provided to support my posiitons would be wasted upon you. I encourage you to review the threads that I have started and ask yourself if your characterization is accurate.

 

I will respond to your last point directly and I will make the assumption that you actually watched or listened to the information that I posted from the San Francisco Chronicle (not exactly a right wing blog). Listen again and you will hear Obama boasting that his cap and trade plan is as tough or tougher than any other candidate's plan. You will here Obama claim that the cost of electiricity will skyrocket under his plan and you will also hear him bost that the plan will lead to the bankruptcy of any company that decides to build a new coal-fired power plant under his system.

 

Unfortunately, it is true that McCain has also proposed a cap and trade program but it is a faulty, if convenient assumption for liberals to make, that McCain's program would be equally as onerous and devastating to the coal and power generation industries as Obama claims that his plan will be.

 

One more thing. Aside from occasionally voicing my opposition to nationalized health care proposals in very broad terms, I have participated very little in those threads. Had you bothered to read more of my posts, then you would realize that I do not play the game of comparing campaign promises point by point. History has proven time and again that the best predictor of a politician's performance is his or her record.

 

The details of somebody's tax plan or health care plan are not really important to me. All I need to know is has the candidate voted for tax increases in the past and does the candidate advocate growing the federal government's size power, and cost.

 

Obama's statements on his proposed cap and trade program exude an arrogance that I find even more troubling than the substance of his plan and it is unlikely that a liberal Congress will apply many constraints on the overall objectives of his plan to force strict conservation through "price signals." There is no way that Obama is going to allow expansion of domestic oil or coal production.

I find it interesting that there are no conservative journalist to dig up all these facts that hoot and all the other conservatives on this board are able to find.

Do you ever bother to follow any of the links that I provide. Did you read any of the information provided in the thread on Obama's plan to drastically increase energy prices? All of it was taken straight from the San Francisco Chronicle's web site. FYI, the Chronicle may be the most liberal newspaper in the United States. I link to other liberal newspapers such as the New York Times and Washington Post whenever I can simply to avoid having my sources attacked. In fact, I have even been known to link to articles appearing in Huffington Post from time to time.

 

If you are looking for some shaky sources, review the links cited by liberal posters in the Palin smear threads.

It must be fabulous to never be wrong.

Why must the anti-Obama crowd start a new thread every time they read an article or have a thought against the man?

 

:lol::lol:

 

That sentence absolutely cracked me up. Especially the bolded.

 

It just gets so tiresome to weed through all the daily accusations, links, videos, and general shenanigans that are brought to this forum.

 

100% is too small of a number to represent how much I agree with this statement...and I probably wouldn't vote for Obama unless Satan himself was running on the Republican ticket. (Oh wait...I forgot. Obama is Satan. I read it on BGP.)

 

Serioulsy, it's like the boy who cried wolf in some way. If you're trying to present information to sway people to not vote for Obama, I don't think oversaturating them with tons of accusations and speculation is the correct strategy. Exercise some discretion, find the ones that are credible and worth bringing attention to...if you don't, then people tune out. They'll eventually just group all Obama threads in the same pile, which means the legitimate points get lost in the pile of "Antichrist" and "Muslim Terrorist" threads...:sssh:

 

A perfect example is from post #10 in this thread by Trinity alum...

 

The problem Hoot is that so much of what you say has such an anti Obama spin on it that even if there is an ounce of truth in something you post I'm not going to pay attention to it because of the source.

No offense, but the constant complaining about the number of negative Obama threads by many Obama supporters on this site is what really gets old. When most of the anti-Obama threads concerned Obama's many questionable associations with terrorists, communists, and socialists, we saw complaints that the threads are nothing but attempts at establishing guilt by association.

 

Never mind that Obama has, in every instance, lied about the extent of these associations, and that similar associations have always been campaign issues in the past for other candidates. The refrain from the Obama supporters is that we should be discussing "real issues."

 

So, what happens when posts are made about widespread voter registration fraud on Obama's behalf? We see a few responses such as, "I am pretty sure that Mickey Mouse won't be voting, " as if every bogus registration of the hundreds of thousands of such registrations is nothing more than somebody's lame attempt at humor.

 

What about threads detailing the systematic acceptance by the Obama campaign of hundreds of millions of dollars of campaign donations without so much as validating the addresses and names claimed by the donors using credit cards to donate on line? Surely such actions constitute a "real issue." Apparently not, because Obama supporters have almost entirely ignored those threads.

 

I naively thought that Obama's voting record in the Illinois Senate on Illinois version of the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act would be an issue worthy of debate. Instead, the topic has been largely ignored by most Obama supporters. In the few responses posted by Obama supporters in these threads, it has been obvious that most of those posters have not even bothered to read the documentation that has been posted.

 

Last night, I posted audio and video of Obama threatening to destroy one of Kentucky's major industries and what has the response to that issue been by Obama supporters? Mostly silence but otherwise the response has been a couple of "Too little, too late!" taunts as if this campaign is some inconsequential sports contest where the only issues that matter are the score and time left on the clock.

 

The bottom line is that when it comes to Obama, it seems that almost all criticism has been met with dismissive comments by his supporters along with criticism of fellow posters for even starting the threads.

 

It may seem that everything has been thrown at Obama including the kitchen sink, but it should concern every voter that the media has virtually ignored so many issues that millions of Americans, including independent voters in coal producing states, would have found important in both Democratic primary elections and in the general election tomorrow.

 

 

Excellant post.:ylsuper:

There are threads, that while I read and participate, I know are futile. Others, I don't even bother to respond to, because no matter what evidence to the contrary, a browbeating will take place, the goal of which is to convice me that I am the biggest idiot on the face of the earth if I support Obama. Yet....no one can give me any good reason to support McCain, other than he is not Obama.

 

In addition, as soon as I read "socialist", "messiah", "sheep", "liberal", "communist", "Obomunist", I dismiss the entire subject of the post. It's irrelevant what you may be trying to convey. You (whomever the poster may be) have lost all credibility with me, because you can't leave your (obviously) personal feelings out of it.

 

You (collective term to encompass anti-Obama posters) want a worthy discussion? Then quit peppering the posts with demeaning adjectives. Quit berating all people who support Obama. Quit exaggerating hypothetical situations, and presenting them as facts.

We can debate the merits of each candidate all day long... however, if I am reading your post correctly and if it is indeed true, then the media needs to close up shop.

 

 

Guess your right. And I guess most of America's just like the media. Amazing is the only word I can think of when it comes to this election.

I just don't understand why yet another thread had to be started. This topic (in some form or another) already has about a dozen different threads going. Why must the anti-Obama crowd start a new thread every time they read an article or have a thought against the man? It just gets so tiresome to weed through all the daily accusations, links, videos, and general shenanigans that are brought to this forum.

 

You don't like him, I get it. You think I'm a lemming, I get it. You think I'm the dumbest creature on Earth for believing the "lies spewed" by Obama. I get it. But how many times a day do I have to hear it?

 

I have my reasons for supporting Obama. Do I have to get past some things to vote for him? Yes. Do I think he's the perfect candidate? No. But what I would really love is for all the folks on here who continue to start a new negative thread every 5 minutes about some aspect of Obama's life and campaign to just respect me and my opinions without the condescending attitude. It's really a turnoff.

 

Nobody twisted your arm to open it up and read it. If it bothers you that much, why not just ignore it?

Nobody twisted your arm to open it up and read it. If it bothers you that much, why not just ignore it?

 

 

Speaking for myself, I'm a mod. I have no choice.

There are threads, that while I read and participate, I know are futile. Others, I don't even bother to respond to, because no matter what evidence to the contrary, a browbeating will take place, the goal of which is to convice me that I am the biggest idiot on the face of the earth if I support Obama. Yet....no one can give me any good reason to support McCain, other than he is not Obama.

 

In addition, as soon as I read "socialist", "messiah", "sheep", "liberal", "communist", "Obomunist", I dismiss the entire subject of the post. It's irrelevant what you may be trying to convey. You (whomever the poster may be) have lost all credibility with me, because you can't leave your (obviously) personal feelings out of it.

 

You (collective term to encompass anti-Obama posters) want a worthy discussion? Then quit peppering the posts with demeaning adjectives. Quit berating all people who support Obama. Quit exaggerating hypothetical situations, and presenting them as facts.

 

 

Excellent post, RM.

 

I might add that Leatherneck is one of the more conservative posters that I enjoy listening to, as he does not participate in the activies that you list above. He brings substance without all of the name calling toward Obama (and the pro-Obama posters.) When LN speaks, I listen....(even if it is a REEEEEAAAAAALLLLLLYYYYYY long post )

Excellent post, RM.

 

I might add that Leatherneck is one of the more conservative posters that I enjoy listening to, as he does not participate in the activies that you list above. He brings substance without all of the name calling toward Obama (and the pro-Obama posters.) When LN speaks, I listen....(even if it is a REEEEEAAAAAALLLLLLYYYYYY long post )

 

I think Hoot is giving LN a run for his money on the looooooonnnnnnggggggg post catagory.

There are threads, that while I read and participate, I know are futile. Others, I don't even bother to respond to, because no matter what evidence to the contrary, a browbeating will take place, the goal of which is to convice me that I am the biggest idiot on the face of the earth if I support Obama. Yet....no one can give me any good reason to support McCain, other than he is not Obama.

 

In addition, as soon as I read "socialist", "messiah", "sheep", "liberal", "communist", "Obomunist", I dismiss the entire subject of the post. It's irrelevant what you may be trying to convey. You (whomever the poster may be) have lost all credibility with me, because you can't leave your (obviously) personal feelings out of it.

 

You (collective term to encompass anti-Obama posters) want a worthy discussion? Then quit peppering the posts with demeaning adjectives. Quit berating all people who support Obama. Quit exaggerating hypothetical situations, and presenting them as facts.

 

I was just thinking about the flip side of this. How about some reasons to vote for Obama, besides "Change". (Not you RM, people in general)

 

I can run for POTUS and promise change, doesn't mean I know what I'm doing.