Sen. Barak Obama considering a run for President ..

bush_cheney2004 · January 18, 2007

Sen. Obama faces an uphill battle to become US president, and it has nothing to do with qualifications. Courting the moderate middle ground will alienate some of the left wing base he needs to prevail in several states, not unlike disgruntled Nader voters who punished the Democrats for selling out in 2004.

A rising star too young to even assume office dazzled Democrats at the violent 1968 convention and was nominated for Vice President on the ticket, only to fade into national political oblivion while staying true to his civil rights convictions. That man was Julian Bond.

Like Bond, I suspect Obama will be locked in as second banana on the ticket (at best), if only because of the competing egos of yesterday's also-rans.

Guthrie · January 18, 2007

You two fellas are pretty funny. You go on and on and on about how Bush has single handedly decimated America, even called it the end of the American empire or some such thing. He's lied and schemed and taken tribute from the world. Good will and friendship towards the U.S. has been poisoned beyond all repair.
And then you comment on this topic like all will be forgiven of the U.S. and the empire will miraculously rise from her death bed if only Obama can be the next American leader, by which I assume you mean president.

Perhaps things aren't as bad as you two nay sayers are letting on.

I did some name calling, I'll admit --- but I was responding to the above, which I consider much more insulting than calling someone a clown

insulting and dishonest and I've seen way too much of this insulting and dishonest nonsense in the past to just let it slide

like I said, give me an honest argument and you'll get one back

Canadian Blue · January 18, 2007

Guthrie, all you're argument's consist of is ranting about the Buschistas, making false claim's without backing them up, accusing everybody else of being a clown and engaging in buffoonery, and saying everybody that disagrees with you is a government apologist.

I asked you a series of question's before about the arguments you made in a seperate thread, and you have not yet been able to answer them.

BubberMiley · January 18, 2007

As far as Obama is concerned - his name sounds too much like OSAMA to run for president. He'll get crucified on the dirty attack ad circuit.
Pray tell, can someone please articulate for me this man stands for and what qualifies him for being President, other than being black, hanging with Oprah and having a nice smile?

Obama graduated from Harvard Law School, was the president of Harvard Law Review, received a Ph.D. from Harvard, and was a law professor before he was elected to the Senate.

In other words, he's more than qualified and quite intelligent, and I think the American people, more than anything, want an intelligent president this time around.

And I'm surprised you are so contemptuous of the American voting public to imply that they are so stupid that they wouldn't vote for someone just because of the similarity of a candidate's name to bin Laden. I think they are aware of the issues and aren't stupid at all. Bush's current approval rating is testament to that.

bush_cheney2004 · January 18, 2007

Yet, the US Congress' approval rating is not much better than President Bush's:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/ne...t_id=1003532033

Senator McCain, who favors a troop surge in Iraq, polls better for president in 2008 than opponents to the surge.

Guthrie · January 18, 2007

Guthrie, all you're argument's consist of is ranting about the Buschistas, making false claim's without backing them up, accusing everybody else of being a clown and engaging in buffoonery, and saying everybody that disagrees with you is a government apologist.
I asked you a series of question's before about the arguments you made in a seperate thread, and you have not yet been able to answer them.

once again, these accusations are false

BubberMiley · January 18, 2007

Senator McCain, who favors a troop surge in Iraq, polls better for president in 2008 than opponents to the surge.

Don't you think it's misleading to call it a surge? They are only increasing the number of U.S. troops by 15%. Given the chaos there, I doubt that change will even be noticeable.

bush_cheney2004 · January 18, 2007

Don't you think it's misleading to call it a surge? They are only increasing the number of U.S. troops by 15%. Given the chaos there, I doubt that change will even be noticeable.

Agreed, it has happened before without such a label. Such is politics and media.

Canadian Blue · January 18, 2007

once again, these accusations are false

Hold on...

No, we're talking about KKKarl Rove, vote fraud and the failure of Al Gore to press the issue at a very important juncture.

Somehow Karl Rove is a member of the Ku Klux Klan.

I have not been presented any debate or logical questions. Only pantloads hurled by right wing natural jesters.

Except when your asked question's, you usually can't come up with an answer, so your answer usually is:

buffoonery - I've never seen such incredulous buck passing as you clowns offer to defend the indefensible Buschista Junta
'they did it first,' is what I expect from a child caught in a playground scuffle - grow up!

Somehow, I missed the newsreport that Bush was instated through the use of a military coup, and not the electoral college.

How so?, please explain.
btw - China was never helping Viet Nam -- in fact, after America left, the Vietnamese had to fend off border attacks by the Chinese --- please get your history straight

Yet that's not true since during the Vietnam war, China was supplying the NVA.

The People's Republic of China's involvement in the Vietnam War began in the summer of 1962, when Mao Zedong agreed to supply Hanoi with 90,000 rifles and guns free of charge. After the launch of Operation Rolling Thunder, China sent engineering battalions and supporting anti-aircraft units to North Vietnam to repair the damage caused by American bombing, build roads, railroads and to perform other engineering works. This freed North Vietnamese army units to go to the South. Between 1965 and 1970 over 320,000 Chinese soldiers served in North Vietnam; the peak year was 1967 when 170,000 were serving there. In April 2006, an event was held in Vietnam to honor the almost 1100 Chinese soldiers who were killed in the Vietnam War; a further 4200 were injured.

So the accusation's aren't false.

Canadian Blue · January 18, 2007

I think Barak Obama would be a great president, a liberal is what's needed in the Whitehouse at this time, and he should be able to fix some of the problem's caused by the Bush administration. But so far the race for president in 2008 look's very good, with quality candidates coming from each party. The Democrats have Obama, Clinton, Edwards, and possibly Gore. The Republican's have McCain, and Guiliani, both who have shown that they possess good leadership qualities.

Hopefully we'll see the religious right start to die off, as they haven't been able to contribute much to the country, and have really failed to be legitimate especially after Ted Haggard, and other scandal's involving members. It's never good for religion and politics to be mixed, and it's a dangerous combination in a liberal democracy.

Guthrie · January 18, 2007

Link

...
The Geneva Conference

As the time for the Geneva conference approached, a CIA propaganda team in Singapore began to disseminate fabricated news items to advance the idea that "the Chinese were giving full-armed support to the Vietminh" and to "identify" the Vietminh "with the world Communist movement." The CIA believed that such stories would strengthen the non-Communist side at the Geneva talks.(34)

...

Karl Rove killed John McCain's bid for the nomination in 2000. Using racism, an ugly lie and push polling. (no, I never said he was a member of the Ku Klux Klan)

Link

After getting beat in New Hampshire by McCain, Bush’s first event was at Bob Jones University in South Carolina. ... A whisper campaign told voters that McCain had a black child. ...

As for the failure of Al Gore to press the issue, what was he supposed to do, as the supreme court voted in favor of Bush, call for a revolution?

-- your original quote

"On January 6, 2001, a joint-session of Congress met to certify the electoral vote. Twenty members of the House of Representatives, most of them Democratic members of the Congressional Black Caucus, rose one-by-one to file objections to the electoral votes of Florida. However, according to an 1877 law, any such objection had to be sponsored by both a representative and a senator, and no senator would co-sponsor these objections. Therefore, Gore, who was presiding in his capacity as President of the Senate, ruled each of these objections out of order."

Al Gore could have co-sponsored this objection. The election would then be sent to the Senate to make the final choice for the next president. Had he done so, his own vote would have made him president.

excuse me if I get bored when handed, over and over, these kind of nonsensical propositions with a demand for some kind of notarized government press release proving my point

Dick Cheney wasn't Vice President in 1999.

- was this supposed to mean something?

Obviously, American's do not want Bush impeached. If the American's were to call for impeachment, I wouldn't be surprised to see it go through.

this, of course, is exactly wrong but I didn't comment on it - I just noted it as another pile of dung

this list of boring nonsensical claims can go on for a long time - but at some point, I just don't care to reapond anymore

--- boycott gasoline - I'll bet you still consider that a legitimate idea -

As well it's not Rawanada, it's Rwanda.

on this one you wanted to tag me for a spelling error --- and even then you didn't repeat the spelling I had used - I mean, this is just pathetic

Next, I submit that clown and buffoon are not the kind of nasty epithets that, "sphincterboy," is.

so, if you want my info to be carved in granite, you'd better clean up your own act first - if you want to be treated more reasonably, well, you should know what to do

blackascoal · January 18, 2007

I haven't called you any names. I simply asked you to post what you claim I said .. which you could not do .. just as you cannot post any names that I supposedly called you.

You continue to go on and on about shit that was never said.

Seems that you're incapable of debating with honesty. I've challenged what you've said several times in this forum .. never once misrepresenting what you actually said. And you've not ONCE posted what you claim I said.

No point in dragging on about this.

Feel free to continue to create your own questions so you can answer them "intelligently".

No duh you haven't called me names. Let me direct your attention to the post immediately previous to the post of mine where I state the name calling ensues. It is a post by Guthrie where he calls me a clown and a few after it where he calls me a backward looking loudmouth, whatever that is.

If you don't have the cajones to admit you think Bush has ruined the U.S., fine by me. The weight of all your rants in all of the threads begs to differ.

It's just hypocritical to assert this, and then talk about how wonderful things would be if Obama becomes president. Since this is lost on you, as well as the name calling(even though the namecalling was in the post IMMEDIATELY preceding mine), I'll leave you to your wild accusations.

Whatever Guthrie called you doesn't have shit to do with me. I have not called you anything at all period.

"Blacky" is a racist slur, which I'm sure you are well aware of.

Is there a problem with you debating with civility?

It seems that you have a serious problem with reading comprehesion and/or an inability to counter intellectually. I stand by everything I've said, including Bush is the worst president in American history who led America into the worst military blunder in our history, but he did not do it by himself.

Given that you appear incapable of honest civil debate, you "leaving me to my wild accusations" is a very good idea.

blackascoal · January 18, 2007

As far as Obama is concerned - his name sounds too much like OSAMA to run for president. He'll get crucified on the dirty attack ad circuit.

Pray tell, can someone please articulate for me this man stands for and what qualifies him for being President, other than being black, hanging with Oprah and having a nice smile?

Obama graduated from Harvard Law School, was the president of Harvard Law Review, received a Ph.D. from Harvard, and was a law professor before he was elected to the Senate.

In other words, he's more than qualified and quite intelligent, and I think the American people, more than anything, want an intelligent president this time around.

And I'm surprised you are so contemptuous of the American voting public to imply that they are so stupid that they wouldn't vote for someone just because of the similarity of a candidate's name to bin Laden. I think they are aware of the issues and aren't stupid at all. Bush's current approval rating is testament to that.

Excellent post.

bush_cheney2004 · January 18, 2007

...Hopefully we'll see the religious right start to die off, as they haven't been able to contribute much to the country, and have really failed to be legitimate especially after Ted Haggard, and other scandal's involving members. It's never good for religion and politics to be mixed, and it's a dangerous combination in a liberal democracy.

But such has not always been the total American experience....from the abolitionist movement (birth of the Republican Party) all the way through struggles for civil rights in the 60's/70's. If religion is never good to mix, then America would not have tolerated Dr. King or the Islamic objections of M. Ali. Like guns, it is part of what makes America what it is...good or bad.

"Liberal" Norway has an official state Protestant religion based on Evangelical-Lutherans.

sharkman · January 19, 2007

No duh you haven't called me names. Let me direct your attention to the post immediately previous to the post of mine where I state the name calling ensues. It is a post by Guthrie where he calls me a clown and a few after it where he calls me a backward looking loudmouth, whatever that is.

If you don't have the cajones to admit you think Bush has ruined the U.S., fine by me. The weight of all your rants in all of the threads begs to differ.

It's just hypocritical to assert this, and then talk about how wonderful things would be if Obama becomes president. Since this is lost on you, as well as the name calling(even though the namecalling was in the post IMMEDIATELY preceding mine), I'll leave you to your wild accusations.

Whatever Guthrie called you doesn't have shit to do with me. I have not called you anything at all period.

"Blacky" is a racist slur, which I'm sure you are well aware of.

Is there a problem with you debating with civility?

It seems that you have a serious problem with reading comprehesion and/or an inability to counter intellectually. I stand by everything I've said, including Bush is the worst president in American history who led America into the worst military blunder in our history, but he did not do it by himself.

Given that you appear incapable of honest civil debate, you "leaving me to my wild accusations" is a very good idea.

About the name calling: I know you never called me any names. That is why I said,"No Duh you haven't called me names". The ONLY reason I mentioned that the name calling had ensued was because as I mentioned, Guthie had called me names. You are innocent of the charge, except you were never accused of it.

As to Blacky, I am often shortening up long names when I communicate on these threads, others do it as well, but I will call you coal instead since you have a point about Blacky having racist overtones.

My original post poked fun at you and Guthrie for bemoaning how the Bush administration had ruined the U.S., and then talk about Obama like it could be quickly reversed. My orginal point, which August1991 immediately understood and agreed with, still stands.

You are condescending, insulting, and rude. Any time someone disagrees with you, out comes the sarcasm. If you want respect from other posters, give respect.

Guthrie · January 19, 2007

and about those lies (poking fun???--- balls!!!) about my post

are you still defending them?

Canadian Blue · January 19, 2007

--- boycott gasoline - I'll bet you still consider that a legitimate idea -

Yeah, but then again you're probably more into the talk, than taking any action.

- was this supposed to mean something?

Yes, to show you're inability to grasp current event's and recent history.

excuse me if I get bored when handed, over and over, these kind of nonsensical propositions with a demand for some kind of notarized government press release proving my point

Excuse me for asking you to back up you're rediculous claim's, like the one about China attacking Vietnam during the Vietnam War.

this, of course, is exactly wrong but I didn't comment on it - I just noted it as another pile of dung
this list of boring nonsensical claims can go on for a long time - but at some point, I just don't care to reapond anymore

Sorry tuts, it's called losing at a debate, and failing to respond since you can't back up any of you're arguments, which in a way are "a pile of dung".

on this one you wanted to tag me for a spelling error --- and even then you didn't repeat the spelling I had used - I mean, this is just pathetic

No, it was to show how little you know about the world. Rwanada doesn't exist, and that's not a typo.

Next, I submit that clown and buffoon are not the kind of nasty epithets that, "sphincterboy," is.

Well it's because all that really is represented on you're posts are BS, so that's were I got sphincterboy from.

PolyNewbie · January 19, 2007

Don't be fooled by this guy because mainstream is giving him lots of publicity which means he has been approved by the CFR. The gloabalists always pick a nobody and put him on the ticket. Who ever heard of Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter before they met with the CFR and the CFR put them on the presidential ticket.

Vote Ron Paul (Republican) because he speaks against the Federal Reserve and the New World Order. Him running is the result of a grass roots movement.

Guthrie · January 19, 2007

It's getting just severely boring and I don't know how much time I'll waste on your stuff.

that boycott gasoline idea is lame in the extreme - it simply is not possible - more to the point, if it were possible, it would be a fait accompli - anyone who presently can avoid buying gasoline, is avoiding such purchases and likely will continue on in that direction from now on - that said, if enough people were following your boycotting gasoline scheme, to make a difference to oil companies, those oil companies would be getting ready to close their doors

"Yes, to show you're inability to grasp current event's and recent history."

sorry, that kind of quote attribute has nothing wrong with it --- in 1999 Cheney said that, currently he is VP -- no, it doesn't matter what he was in 1999 - your corrective action is misplaced -

"Excuse me for asking you to back up you're rediculous claim's, like the one about China attacking Vietnam during the Vietnam War."

except I never said that - and as I remarked earlier, I will not let your misrepresentations of my posts go unchallenged

here's what I really said:

in fact, after America left, the Vietnamese had to fend off border attacks by the Chinese -

note, after America left, means after the war and NOT as you suggest, during

finally, I don't believe, not for a second your claim about the name calling --- I'd like to suggest rather, the word comes to your mind every time you look in the mirror .... "sphincterboy" .... well, that's my best guess

sharkman · January 19, 2007

It's getting just severely boring and I don't know how much time I'll waste on your stuff.
that boycott gasoline idea is lame in the extreme - it simply is not possible - more to the point, if it were possible, it would be a fait accompli - anyone who presently can avoid buying gasoline, will continue on in that direction from now on - that said, if enough people were following your boycotting gasoline scheme, to make a difference to oil companies, those oil companies would be getting ready to close their doors

"Yes, to show you're inability to grasp current event's and recent history."

sorry, that kind of quote attribute has nothing wrong with it --- in 1999 Cheney said that, currently he is VP -- no, it doesn't matter what he was in 1999 - your corrective action is misplaced -

"Excuse me for asking you to back up you're rediculous claim's, like the one about China attacking Vietnam during the Vietnam War."

except I never said that - and as I remarked earlier, I will not let your misrepresentations of my posts go unchallenged

here's what I really said:

in fact, after America left, the Vietnamese had to fend off border attacks by the Chinese -

note, after America left, means after the war and NOT as you suggest, during

finally, I don't believe, not for a second your claim about the name calling --- I'd like to suggest rather, the word comes to your mind every time you look in the mirror .... "sphincterboy" .... well, that's my best guess

I think I understand now. English is your second or third language. Good for you!(Smiling and nodding, as if what Guthrie just said makes perfect sense, Sharkman carefully steps backward and away.)

Guthrie · January 19, 2007

nice reponse from a guy who cried and whined and bitched about being called a clown

I notice, you quoted my post but never actually referred to it. What do they call that again???

sharkman · January 19, 2007

Don't be fooled by this guy because mainstream is giving him lots of publicity which means he has been approved by the CFR. The gloabalists always pick a nobody and put him on the ticket. Who ever heard of Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter before they met with the CFR and the CFR put them on the presidential ticket.
Vote Ron Paul (Republican) because he speaks against the Federal Reserve and the New World Order. Him running is the result of a grass roots movement.

I, several 100,000 others, and all of Arkansas had heard of Clinton before he got put on a ticket. I will agree that there seems to be an establishment that anoints political leaders, however.

BTW, I've never mentioned it, but sometimes I've given you a hard time over your conspiracy theory stuff. It speaks to your character that you don't tell me to #@* off or something.

Guthrie · January 19, 2007

yes, as I thought

blackascoal · January 19, 2007

No duh you haven't called me names. Let me direct your attention to the post immediately previous to the post of mine where I state the name calling ensues. It is a post by Guthrie where he calls me a clown and a few after it where he calls me a backward looking loudmouth, whatever that is.

If you don't have the cajones to admit you think Bush has ruined the U.S., fine by me. The weight of all your rants in all of the threads begs to differ.

It's just hypocritical to assert this, and then talk about how wonderful things would be if Obama becomes president. Since this is lost on you, as well as the name calling(even though the namecalling was in the post IMMEDIATELY preceding mine), I'll leave you to your wild accusations.

Whatever Guthrie called you doesn't have shit to do with me. I have not called you anything at all period.

"Blacky" is a racist slur, which I'm sure you are well aware of.

Is there a problem with you debating with civility?

It seems that you have a serious problem with reading comprehesion and/or an inability to counter intellectually. I stand by everything I've said, including Bush is the worst president in American history who led America into the worst military blunder in our history, but he did not do it by himself.

Given that you appear incapable of honest civil debate, you "leaving me to my wild accusations" is a very good idea.

About the name calling: I know you never called me any names. That is why I said,"No Duh you haven't called me names". The ONLY reason I mentioned that the name calling had ensued was because as I mentioned, Guthie had called me names. You are innocent of the charge, except you were never accused of it.

As to Blacky, I am often shortening up long names when I communicate on these threads, others do it as well, but I will call you coal instead since you have a point about Blacky having racist overtones.

My original post poked fun at you and Guthrie for bemoaning how the Bush administration had ruined the U.S., and then talk about Obama like it could be quickly reversed. My orginal point, which August1991 immediately understood and agreed with, still stands.

You are condescending, insulting, and rude. Any time someone disagrees with you, out comes the sarcasm. If you want respect from other posters, give respect.

I appreciate the thoughtfulness, but you're still putting words in my mouth, and Guthrie's too for that matter. You never read the word "quickly" in either of our posts. I even restated what I said in case you simply misunderstood my meaning. I never suggested that Obama is a magic bullet or saint, but he'd make a good president, in my opinion, and would be a light years improvement over the idiot we currently have. America is in a crisis and only intelligence will get us out of it. Obama is undeniably intelligent and that would be a good beginning to a long ass haul to recovery for an America that has been drunk with power.

Nothing in that is in conflict with anything else I've said on this board, including Bush is A problem, but not THE problem, which I clearly define in the thread about the world reacting to American imperialism .. not just Bush. I also blame the Democratic Party .. and have said so.

As for my being insulting, you have a right to your opinion. But, I've had good civil respectful conversations here with people who don't agree with me. If I mischaracterize something someone else has said, I apologize. If someone points out something they think I'm doing wrong, I may change the way I do it. Such as making sure that when I use "we" or "us", I clarify it, even though I don't think it was a problem. When posted to with respect, I reply with respect. Just as we're doing now.

The point is, I don't sound like the person you think I am .. but you're entitled to your opinion. I can't think of a more futile or wasteful excersise than slinging insults over the internet. I'd rather drop out of a conversation or thread rather than do 8th grade shit like sling insults .. which is exactly what I did in the 9/11 thread. I come here for the dialouge, not to convince anyone of anything they don't want to believe.

Again, I appreciate the thoughtfulness .. and look forward to ripping your logic to pieces :rolleyes:

Just kidding.

blackascoal · January 19, 2007

...Hopefully we'll see the religious right start to die off, as they haven't been able to contribute much to the country, and have really failed to be legitimate especially after Ted Haggard, and other scandal's involving members. It's never good for religion and politics to be mixed, and it's a dangerous combination in a liberal democracy.

But such has not always been the total American experience....from the abolitionist movement (birth of the Republican Party) all the way through struggles for civil rights in the 60's/70's. If religion is never good to mix, then America would not have tolerated Dr. King or the Islamic objections of M. Ali. Like guns, it is part of what makes America what it is...good or bad.

"Liberal" Norway has an official state Protestant religion based on Evangelical-Lutherans.

Much of what you've said here is true, however what King and Ali preached most was common to all people regardless of faith or lack of faith. It was social justice. It was the commonality of all people.

Religion by its very nature is divisive. It's one deity, one God versus another. What we see in the world today are the wars of religions.

I don't deny that religion has its place, but that place is not in government, in my opinion.