First, let me apologize for starting yet another thread on Mr. Obama. But, I didn't want to sift through the other 362 to figure out where what I want to say would be most appropriate.

 

First, as someone who voted for John McCain, I'd like to congratulate the new president elect (or "my/our opponent" as he was so lovingly referred to by McCain and Palin:D). OK, just a little attempt at humor there.

 

Second, I'd like to say, Barack Obama is my president and I'll support him as I can. Obviously, there are certain issues that I differ with him on and would never agree with, like his view on abortion. There are others, however, that I may have taken the opposite side on during this election, but am not totally convinced that his view is wrong, like the war on Iraq. I'm curious to see what affect a fast withdrawal from Iraq will have. I'm not completely convinced that this is a bad move. So, I will support the president's decision to withdraw (and will have no trouble doing so), just as I supported the Bush decision to go in.

 

Third, part of my support for him will be to pray for him (I appreciated the post lbbc made on this subject). As a Christian, I am commanded to submit to and pray for those in authority. So, I intend to do that.

 

Romans 13:1, 2 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed...

 

1 Timothy 2:1, 2 ...I urge that all supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high positions...

 

Finally, let me say that I wasn't surprised, but was disappointed by the immediate sniping directed at Obama by the right. I do not like the new company line: I'll give Obama the same chance and respect that the democrats gave Bush. While they may have a valid point and there is some truth to that, it accomplishes nothing. At some point, we have to move past this and I'm hoping we can start now.

 

Some other hopes for his presidency (realistic or not)...

 

-That he would change his position on abortion...or, at the least, pursue moderate policies on this issue.

 

-That he will stay true to his campaign and govern as a moderate, rather than continue down the path as president that earned him the title of "most liberal" senator.

 

-That he will work with both parties and advance the unity in Washington.

 

-That his decisions will be made based on what is best for America and its future, and not based on what can help in the short term and get him re-elected.

 

 

And, one questions (sort of)...

 

Does supporting someone exclude disagreement and criticism? An example is the issue of abortion. How do you "support" someone when you disagree with them 100% on an issue? When pro-lifers criticize and disagree with Obama on abortion, will they be accused of undermining the president? If so, how can you disagree with someone and still support them? Or, is it acceptable to disagree with the president on social issues inside the country, as long as you support him on global issues/foreign policy (i.e., war on terror, the middle east, Russia, etc.)?

 

 

I would appreciate some responses to this post as a whole and the questions at the end. But, if you have nothing more to offer than some childish quips about Obama, there are 362 other threads...er, wait...2 more have popped up since I started typing...so, if you have nothing more to offer than some childish quips about Obama, there are 364 other threads just for you. Please, post them there. :thumb:

Does supporting someone exclude disagreement and criticism? An example is the issue of abortion. How do you "support" someone when you disagree with them 100% on an issue? When pro-lifers criticize and disagree with Obama on abortion, will they be accused of undermining the president? If so, how can you disagree with someone and still support them? Or, is it acceptable to disagree with the president on social issues inside the country, as long as you support him on global issues/foreign policy (i.e., war on terror, the middle east, Russia, etc.)?

Great post and a fair way of thinking.

 

To the question how do you support someone you disagree with 100% on an issue? First I would say make sure that is the case, because like on abortion, Obama doesn't want more abortions and neither do you, so in that instance you have a common cause, where disagree about is the area to make it illegal. So if you want to support him you can focus your energies on preventing unwanted pregnancies as opposed to fighting the ramification of these pregnancies.

 

That does not mean you should "shut up" on the issues. He is everyones president and he has an obligation to hear his constituents. Speak your peace and do what you can do.

Great post and a fair way of thinking.

 

To the question how do you support someone you disagree with 100% on an issue? First I would say make sure that is the case, because like on abortion, Obama doesn't want more abortions and neither do you, so in that instance you have a common cause, where disagree about is the area to make it illegal. So if you want to support him you can focus your energies on preventing unwanted pregnancies as opposed to fighting the ramification of these pregnancies.

 

That does not mean you should "shut up" on the issues. He is everyones president and he has an obligation to hear his constituents. Speak your peace and do what you can do.

 

 

Then why does he support a proposed law which will make them legal at anytime during the pregnancy from conception thru the 9th month, eliminate any parental consent for children over the age of 13 and federally funding some abortions? I guess his promised support of this bill, the Freedom Of Choice Act is one way to prevent more unwanted pregnancies, but not one that I could EVER support.

Great post and a fair way of thinking.

 

To the question how do you support someone you disagree with 100% on an issue? First I would say make sure that is the case, because like on abortion, Obama doesn't want more abortions and neither do you, so in that instance you have a common cause, where disagree about is the area to make it illegal. So if you want to support him you can focus your energies on preventing unwanted pregnancies as opposed to fighting the ramification of these pregnancies.

 

That does not mean you should "shut up" on the issues. He is everyones president and he has an obligation to hear his constituents. Speak your peace and do what you can do.

 

:thumb:

 

I'm willing to see what he does now that he's president on an issue like abortion. (Of course, I have no choice in reality.)

 

Other issues, as I said earlier, I may have leaned opposite of him, but I'm hoping that he turns out to be right and think its possible that he will be.

:thumb:

 

I'm willing to see what he does now that he's president on an issue like abortion. (Of course, I have no choice in reality.)

 

Other issues, as I said earlier, I may have leaned opposite of him, but I'm hoping that he turns out to be right and think its possible that he will be.

 

 

5-wide, I don't know any single person who is for abortion. I know people who are for the choice, for many varying reasons.

 

What I do know, is that I cast my vote for president based on what I feel he can do for the ENTIRE country, not just one demographic. I also throw out issues on which I feel the solution isn't what the government can do, but what I can do myself. Like RRR said, it's up to each and every one of us to affect reducing abortions, whether they are legal or illegal, and that initiative is one that will need to continue, even if RvW were to be overturned.

 

I was against Bush 100% on the war. I never voted for him. And I didn't like his "attitude", as I felt it hurt us on the world stage. But, I did support him in certain areas, like his appointments to the Supreme Court, and what I feel is his commitment to education, although I don't feel his ideas worked. I do feel though, that at least he tried to effect change in education.

5-wide, I don't know any single person who is for abortion. I know people who are for the choice, for many varying reasons.

 

What I do know, is that I cast my vote for president based on what I feel he can do for the ENTIRE country, not just one demographic. I also throw out issues on which I feel the solution isn't what the government can do, but what I can do myself. Like RRR said, it's up to each and every one of us to affect reducing abortions, whether they are legal or illegal, and that initiative is one that will need to continue, even if RvW were to be overturned.

 

I was against Bush 100% on the war. I never voted for him. And I didn't like his "attitude", as I felt it hurt us on the world stage. But, I did support him in certain areas, like his appointments to the Supreme Court, and what I feel is his commitment to education, although I don't feel his ideas worked. I do feel though, that at least he tried to effect change in education.

 

Needless to say, we differ on abortion. But, I don't want to get into discussing it in depth because that's not what I intended this thread to be. Abortion is just the most obvious, and likely issue, that I'll never be able to "support" Obama on unless he goes in a different direction than he has prior to November 7, 2008. It could be any issue that you strongly disagree on...abortion just happens to be the most obvious for me, so I used it as an example.

 

I'm also not criticizing anyone who voted for Obama because of his stance on abortion.

 

My purpose was to state where I stand on Obama and then ask a serious question (or questions) about supporting him. Is it acceptable to criticize him on an issue like abortion when I disagree with him, or is that being "non-supportive"? So, the question is not so much about abortion specifically, but any issue that you strongly disagree with? Can you disagree/criticize and still be considered a supporter? I think so. I just want to hear some thoughts from other people.

No you should not blindly follow or support. Just because you disagree with someone over an issue doesn't mean you can't support them.

Needless to say, we differ on abortion. But, I don't want to get into discussing it in depth because that's not what I intended this thread to be. Abortion is just the most obvious, and likely issue, that I'll never be able to "support" Obama on unless he goes in a different direction than he has prior to November 7, 2008. It could be any issue that you strongly disagree on...abortion just happens to be the most obvious for me, so I used it as an example.

 

I'm also not criticizing anyone who voted for Obama because of his stance on abortion.

 

My purpose was to state where I stand on Obama and then ask a serious question (or questions) about supporting him. Is it acceptable to criticize him on an issue like abortion when I disagree with him, or is that being "non-supportive"? So, the question is not so much about abortion specifically, but any issue that you strongly disagree with? Can you disagree/criticize and still be considered a supporter? I think so. I just want to hear some thoughts from other people.

 

There is no perfect candidate for President. There's no way he can please all people. I would suspect that even if there were a president-elect that you supported becuase of his position on abortion, you would strongly disagree with another of his policy positions. I think you can support a president, yet be critical of some of the issues on which you think he errs.

There is no perfect candidate for President. There's no way he can please all people. I would suspect that even if there were a president-elect that you supported becuase of his position on abortion, you would strongly disagree with another of his policy positions. I think you can support a president, yet be critical of some of the issues on which you think he errs.

 

Obviously, John McCain wasn't my ideal candidate either.

 

So, here's what I'm wondering next...based on some talk radio listening and some of my own thinking (very dangerous).

 

Here is a call-in exchange typical of several I've heard on conservative talk radio since the election (and a few BGP exchanges)...

 

Caller: I think we need to support Obama and give him a chance.

 

Host: Oh. You mean like the democrats gave Bush a chance and supported him. I'll give Obama the same chance that Pelosi and the democrats gave Bush.

 

What they mean or imply is obvious.

 

So, here's the flipside of that argument...the Republicans, unfairly in some, perhaps many way, accused the democrats of being unpatriotic (among other things) any time they dared to disagree with Bush and criticize him.

 

Is it fair to expect the democrats to borrow that playbook for the next 4 years?

 

I think both sides have some valid points. I do think the democrats eventually became anti-Bush to the point that it didn't matter what he did. I also think the Republicans were wrong in labeling any disagreement or criticism as unpatriotic. My fear is that we're going to hear the same exact crap for the next four years, only the GOP will be saying what the dems have said for 8 years, and vice versa. I do know that a continuation of that is definitely not the answer.

 

Who will step up and be the "bigger man"? Which party is most likely to stop?

I knew nothing would change. Obama has been president-elect for 2 whole days and the economy still sucks....

Obviously, John McCain wasn't my ideal candidate either.

 

So, here's what I'm wondering next...based on some talk radio listening and some of my own thinking (very dangerous).

 

Here is a call-in exchange typical of several I've heard on conservative talk radio since the election (and a few BGP exchanges)...

 

Caller: I think we need to support Obama and give him a chance.

 

Host: Oh. You mean like the democrats gave Bush a chance and supported him. I'll give Obama the same chance that Pelosi and the democrats gave Bush.

 

What they mean or imply is obvious.

 

So, here's the flipside of that argument...the Republicans, unfairly in some, perhaps many way, accused the democrats of being unpatriotic (among other things) any time they dared to disagree with Bush and criticize him.

 

Is it fair to expect the democrats to borrow that playbook for the next 4 years?

 

I think both sides have some valid points. I do think the democrats eventually became anti-Bush to the point that it didn't matter what he did. I also think the Republicans were wrong in labeling any disagreement or criticism as unpatriotic. My fear is that we're going to hear the same exact crap for the next four years, only the GOP will be saying what the dems have said for 8 years, and vice versa. I do know that a continuation of that is definitely not the answer.

 

Who will step up and be the "bigger man"? Which party is most likely to stop?

 

 

I think you are right about the "he did, so we do" philosophy. But, I would hope, sincerely hope, that given the current state of the economy, the length of the Iraqi war, and the state of other issues such as health care, that everyone could find it within themselves to step up. I know some think Obama should be the first, then they might follow. If what I believe is true, he knows he'll have to be the first, and will be doing so. But, from what I know of some people, based on their comments, no matter what he does to try and extend the "hand" and create a unity, they won't support him. The feelings they have are, for lack of a better term, personal.

 

At the very least, we have a person who has spoken big about uniting the country. He's won the presidency based upon that promise. I think he has too much invested in that promise to back down from it. Will some individual pieces of his platform take more time than he'd anticipated at the outset? I think yes. But, I do think that if nothing else, if Obama is able to inspire this country and it's leadership to work together toward solutions, he'll have achieved much more than most of his detractors anticipated.

 

It shouldn't be about who extends the first olive branch. I would hope the citizens of this country would want to begin moving forward and working toward regaining our jobs, rebuiliding our economy, strengthining our world postion, that they would be eager to support, and urge their representation to support efforts to reach both ways across the divide.

I knew nothing would change. Obama has been president-elect for 2 whole days and the economy still sucks....

 

 

He hasn't moved in yet. Give it a couple more months. :lol:

I think you are right about the "he did, so we do" philosophy. But, I would hope, sincerely hope, that given the current state of the economy, the length of the Iraqi war, and the state of other issues such as health care, that everyone could find it within themselves to step up. I know some think Obama should be the first, then they might follow. If what I believe is true, he knows he'll have to be the first, and will be doing so. But, from what I know of some people, based on their comments, no matter what he does to try and extend the "hand" and create a unity, they won't support him. The feelings they have are, for lack of a better term, personal.

 

At the very least, we have a person who has spoken big about uniting the country. He's won the presidency based upon that promise. I think he has too much invested in that promise to back down from it. Will some individual pieces of his platform take more time than he'd anticipated at the outset? I think yes. But, I do think that if nothing else, if Obama is able to inspire this country and it's leadership to work together toward solutions, he'll have achieved much more than most of his detractors anticipated.

 

It shouldn't be about who extends the first olive branch. I would hope the citizens of this country would want to begin moving forward and working toward regaining our jobs, rebuiliding our economy, strengthining our world postion, that they would be eager to support, and urge their representation to support efforts to reach both ways across the divide.

 

I would expect Obama to avoid that blame game. I thought he did a good job of staying away from that during his campaign.

 

It doesn't matter what Obama does if it isn't reciprocated.

 

The problem with the citizens is many of the people who say they're tired of the same old politics talk from both sides of their mouth. After saying that, they'll say other things that feed the beast. And, I think you're right, many won't be satisfied unless Obama does everything the way they want.

 

I think the politicians need to actually step up and be leaders. Put the country first in action rather than in word. That means doing something unpopular if its for the better...even if it could hurt your re-election. It also means not engaging in the blame game...I truly believe that if one side, whether it be democrats or republicans, would just say, "Enough. We're not going down this road any more." and stick with it, the majority of the public would catch on. I think it would backfire on the other side if they were the only group than continually engaged in the "he said, she said" crap.

Deuteronomy 34:1-10

2 Chronicles 7:12-18

Matthew 5:13-16

Acts 19:21-41

Romans 8:18-25

1 Timothy 2:1-8

 

 

 

There are some verses to help you on your quest of answering your questions.

 

Godspeed!:thumb:

5wide, this is one of the best threads started in P/R in quite a while.

 

In answer to your question, no, I don't think that criticizing decisions that you disagree with would constitute not supporting the president. You're right...he absolutely will not be able to please anyone the whole time. If disagreeing with him equals non-support, then soon he wouldn't be supported at all.

 

I think the manner of criticism is important. There is a way to respectfully criticize. I think humans tend to understand that as we get older. One thing I would like to see people to lessen their addictions to are all of the Olberman/Hannity/Limbaugh-esque shows. They are designed to keep things stirred up and focus on every single negative aspect of "the other side".