Disliking Obama: Politics or Pigmentation?

#1
All Vol!

All Vol!

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
3,703
Likes
2,160
#1
As I meet and speak with people who have a strong opinion about Obama, I am frequently left with a nagging question in my noggin:

Does Obama's prominent place in the pre-election race stir a majority of individuals to strong feelings because of his stance on the issues/style of campaigning, etc. OR, in an age of "political correctness", is there unspoken prejudice still brimming beneath the surface in far more Americans than would admit it...or perhaps even realize it?

Any takers?
 
#2
#2
I think the race stuff goes both ways - there are whites who don't like him because he's black and there are whites that do like him because he's black.

I like what I've seen of him as a person, just disagree with his politics.
 
#3
#3
Prejudice in America can in no way be described as brimming below the surface. Prejudice is a world wide phenomenon and is not going away any time soon.

That said, Obama's politics are atrocious. He's the most liberal of the lot and has recently begun sprinkling polling data into his thoughts and responses.
 
#4
#4
I can see why Obama is appealing to some voters. But in the end, he's just a guy who gives a good speech but isn't remotely experienced enough to be President. I'm not even sure that he intended to run for President this soon, but the groundswell of support was too much to ignore.
 
#6
#6
I read that last night. I guess it was just your everyday slip of the tongue, but man . . . he really missed the number on that one.
 
#7
#7
10,000 and 12, really not much of a difference there. I bet he tried to sound all anti-tornado and stuff.
 
#9
#9
allvol123 said:
10,000 and 12, really not much of a difference there. I bet he tried to sound all anti-tornado and stuff.
Click to expand...

Of course, he tried to tie it to the war

Obama mentioned the disaster in Greensburg, Kan., in saying he had been told by the office of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius that the state's National Guard had been depleted by its commitment to the Iraq War.
"Turns out that the National Guard in Kansas only had 40 percent of its equipment and they are having to slow down the recovery process in Kansas," Obama said, his shirt sleeves rolled up and his head glistening with sweat.
Click to expand...
 
#10
#10
GAVol said:
I can see why Obama is appealing to some voters. But in the end, he's just a guy who gives a good speech but isn't remotely experienced enough to be President. I'm not even sure that he intended to run for President this soon, but the groundswell of support was too much to ignore.
Click to expand...

Bush wasn't remotely experienced or qualified but was electable. Results indicate such
 
#11
#11
People don't like Obama for the same reason they didn't like Kerry. Too socially liberal. Its not going to play well in the heartland.

I do think the next president is going to be a democrat. Bush's poll numbers are as low as Carter's or anyone's for that matter. I think the democrats pick up more congressional seats.

The Iraq war is more unpopular then ever and the Republicans are not firm about ending it, which is what the majority of Americans want. The last election was a referendum on the war, and the next one will be too. But the Republicans don't want to publicly admit it was a mistake and Iraq is in civil war and the best course is to pull out. They will lose again.
 
#12
#12
oklavol said:
People don't like Obama for the same reason they didn't like Kerry. Too socially liberal. Its not going to play well in the heartland.

I do think the next president is going to be a democrat. Bush's poll numbers are as low as Carter's or anyone's for that matter. I think the democrats pick up more congressional seats.

The Iraq war is more unpopular then ever and the Republicans are not firm about ending it, which is what the majority of Americans want. The last election was a referendum on the war, and the next one will be too. But the Republicans don't want to publicly admit it was a mistake and Iraq is in civil war and the best course is to pull out. They will lose again.
Click to expand...

Plus, more and more republican congressman are jumping ship on him. He has shown a stubborness like no other as president. He has ignored everyone from military leaders to some of his closest advisors. In the last year and a half, over 20 of his cabinet/staff have either resigned or retired.

I don't think Obama will win though;however, I could see him on the ticket with Hilary.

I wish Evan Bayh would run
 
#13
#13
truefan said:
Plus, more and more republican congressman are jumping ship on him. He has shown a stubborness like no other as president. He has ignored everyone from military leaders to some of his closest advisors. In the last year and a half, over 20 of his cabinet/staff have either resigned or retired.

I don't think Obama will win though;however, I could see him on the ticket with Hilary.

I wish Evan Bayh would run
Click to expand...
This is hardly a situation in which he should waffle. As for the democrats, is there someone electable in the group?
 
#16
#16
OrangeEmpire said:
The same thing that is wrong with the ultra right, limitations of freedoms and the growth of government.
Click to expand...

Okay - even though when I hear "liberal" it makes me think "more freedoms," like, the freedom to get married regardless of sexuality or to terminate a pregnancy or to own a gun or to pray or to curse the president or burn the flag or send your children to private school...

But back to the subject - how is Obama ultra liberal?
 
#17
#17
wbarron said:
Okay - even though when I hear "liberal" it makes me think "more freedoms," like, the freedom to get married regardless of sexuality or to terminate a pregnancy or to own a gun or to pray or to curse the president or burn the flag or send your children to private school...

But back to the subject - how is Obama ultra liberal?
Click to expand...

Ok, either way, either side wants more control of your daily life through government. Just a different path to get there.

Read his book, he is a socialist. :yes:
 
#18
#18
As a hardline Libertarian/Conservative, I would like nothing better than to see Obama get the Communist Party nod....He's a borderline Stalinist, so those who are to the right and lean to that side of moderate will vote against him, and he's Black, so all the Elites who foo-foo about Don Imus will be afraid of him and vote Republican as well, since, as we all know, the only Minority the Liberal Elite hates is the one that moves in next door.
 
#19
#19
wbarron said:
Okay - even though when I hear "liberal" it makes me think "more freedoms," like, the freedom to get married regardless of sexuality or to terminate a pregnancy or to own a gun or to pray or to curse the president or burn the flag or send your children to private school...

But back to the subject - how is Obama ultra liberal?
Click to expand...

I don't think gun ownership is generally connected with the idea of liberal as we see it now.

I agree with OE. Both ultra-conservative and ultra-liberal betray their own core values. Liberalism (in the democrat rather than libertarian form) is generally connected with government regulation or even control of business, commerce etc. It uses such regulation to enforce equality.

Conservatism (the small government kind) technically has liberalistic tendencies in its disdain for government interference in the market. Yet social conservatism utilizes laws to regulate personal social behavior.

Fortunately, I'm a fiscal and economic conservative (capitalist) but a social liberal. Best of both worlds! :)
 
#21
#21
volinbham said:
I don't think gun ownership is generally connected with the idea of liberal as we see it now.
...

Fortunately, I'm a fiscal and economic conservative (capitalist) but a social liberal. Best of both worlds! :)
Click to expand...

I was just making a point that we've throw out terms like "liberal" b/c it's easier to put people in boxes than to realize that we're all very complex and have very different views on a variety of subjects. The people who say everyone should be free to own a gun but at the same time don't want to allow abortions or gays to join the military or get married really confuse me. Get over your discomfort with someone's lifestyle and let them live their lives.

For the record, I would categorize myself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Everyone should be accountable, and the, "Live and Let Live" works for me.
 
#22
#22
wbarron said:
I was just making a point that we've throw out terms like "liberal" b/c it's easier to put people in boxes than to realize that we're all very complex and have very different views on a variety of subjects. The people who say everyone should be free to own a gun but at the same time don't want to allow abortions or gays to join the military or get married really confuse me. Get over your discomfort with someone's lifestyle and let them live their lives.

For the record, I would categorize myself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Everyone should be accountable, and the, "Live and Let Live" works for me.
Click to expand...

I could live with that........

One another note about abortion, who speaks for the child?

:dunno:
 
#23
#23
OrangeEmpire said:
I could live with that........

One another note about abortion, who speaks for the child?

:dunno:
Click to expand...

Child: a person between birth and full growth. You can't abort a child by definition.

Did you mean, "Who speaks for the embryo?" Or "...the fetus?" If so, I'd say the mother first, then the father, then the next of kin, then close friends, then the government.
 
#24
#24
wbarron said:
Child: a person between birth and full growth. You can't abort a child by definition.

Did you mean, "Who speaks for the embryo?" Or "...the fetus?" If so, I'd say the mother first, then the father, then the next of kin, then close friends, then the government.
Click to expand...

Naw, just seeing where you stand.

:)
 
#25
#25
OrangeEmpire said:
Naw, just seeing where you stand.

:)
Click to expand...

Yeah - I hope I never have to make that decision, or advise someone else who has to. And I don't know what it's like. But on principle (and to me, this seems like the "less government" argument), the government shouldn't make that decision.

And I always wonder - would the number of abortions actually change if Roe were overturned? Or would it just make it unsafe for those who felt that was their only option? And would we have more unwanted babies in this world?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top