I completely understand that you can get emotional over the historical significance of having the first black man be president--without supporting him as a candidate, for any reason. I completely enjoyed the inauguration and the emotional reactions by many in the country to the 2008 election. I 100% empathize with any black person who watched that take place and were moved to tears. Who wouldn't? I think you have to be pretty callous to not appreciate those feelings. I made my kids sit down and watch tv during the election and the inauguration and we discussed the monumental nature of that moment, based on our history as a nation.
That said, CP is a very smart man, and I don't believe he would vote for anyone based on race alone--I don't believe he would have voted for Condi Rice, for instance, if she had ran(and I wish she would ). CP wasn't happy with how Bush handled things, to put it mildly, and he wasn't having more of the same. I'm surprised that he would object to Romney, though, because Romney is nothing like Bush. Frankly, I wasn't happy with Bush either, particularly in the last two years of his presidency. His first term was his best one.
For some people, I do think that the romanticism of having our first black president DID prompt them to vote for Obama, and their objectivity was missing. Objectivity is what allows us to set aside emotions and be logical.
I do understand why many, many people voted for Obama in 2008. Some because of race; that's a fact. Some because he made a lot of great-sounding promises. Some because they just liked the guy. I don't understand why so many would want to go back and vote for him again this time around. He has failed to deliver on so many campaign promises, it is staggering. I don't think he has a clue what he's doing, especially in regard to the economy. The main reason I'm going to vote for Romney is simple: He's a businessman, and a good one. If one of these men can fix the economy, it will be Romney; not Obama.
Thats just it though, Obama followed through on GWB policy. I just saw an article a week or so back that spelled out almost point by point where Obama's foreign policy has followed the same plans GWB did. Yet Obama and co say Romney is the one who would be just like GWB because some of GWB's advisors are on Romney's team? Willfull blindness to Obama's clear adhearance to GWB's policies himself.
Yeah that's what it is. I oppose all things Obama. LOL.
I liked many of his positions in the foreign policy debate. I agree with many of those decisions. I like the sanctions he has used against Iran. There are plenty of things he was wrong on though, and if CP was so disguisted with GWB over any of those things...there is no rational for supporting Obama.
My primary gripes with Obama are domestic and social issues, not foreign policy.
You have to understand that that is where you and Powell are opposites. He has always been more liberal on domestic and social issues. I think it was his only his previous alignment on global issues that had him hanging onto the left fringes of the GOP. When you subtract that due to his strong disagreement with GOP policy in foreign affairs, there really is nothing left to hold him there.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
Here's the deal... Saddam was a Sunni Socialist dictator, largely secular. Women even served in government positions and as court justices in Saddam's Iraq. As of right now, women are increasingly not permitted to hold any of the positions they did previously. There is even a growing movement within Iraqi politics to deny women education because of the number of religious extremists that want an "Islamic Iraq". In a part of the world where the population is largely moved by religious extremism... do you want Democracy??? Democracy is the WORST thing you could give them.
Iraq will be a failed Islamic fundamentalist state in 15 years or less.
Aquila, anyone who disagrees with you certainly has to be drinking cyanide laced kool aid. There's no other explanation. The superiority of your intelligence is apparent to anyone with half a brain.
What part of the history that I shared is inaccurate?
Are you willing to go on record to say that Iraq was better off with Hussein in power?
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
Thats just it though, Obama followed through on GWB policy. I just saw an article a week or so back that spelled out almost point by point where Obama's foreign policy has followed the same plans GWB did. Yet Obama and co say Romney is the one who would be just like GWB because some of GWB's advisors are on Romney's team? Willfull blindness to Obama's clear adhearance to GWB's policies himself.
No way. THE foreign policy issue in the Bush Presidency was the Iraq War. It cannot be buried among a bunch of other generic, traditional, relatively inconsequential foreign policy issues that a majority of American leaders would agree on.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
And just for the record, he was not the one that I respected the most just because he is black
whatever
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
Aquila, anyone who disagrees with you certainly has to be drinking cyanide laced kool aid. There's no other explanation. The superiority of your intelligence is apparent to anyone with half a brain.
What part of the history that I shared is inaccurate?
Are you willing to go on record to say that Iraq was better off with Hussein in power?
What I'm trying to tell you is that Iraq will be a failed Islamic fundamentalist state in 15 years or less. We can't go around invading countries to spread OUR political values. Don't you fascist statists understand this??? The Saddam's government was failing. It would have fallen. We'd probably see some form of dictator rise to replace him... perhaps secular... perhaps Islamic... BUT we can work with a dictator in that region. The teaming masses of violence, riots, and Islamic radicalism will prove impossible to work with.
We'll revisit this at the end of the text Presidential term. We'll see if Iraq is a shining city on a hill, a wonderful example of Western Democracy importated to the Middle East... or a failed Islamic state. Time WILL prove me right. And the sad thing is... you know it but you won't admit it.
If Obama came out in favor of Oxygen... Republicans would soffocate themselves. lol
We would choose a carbon footprint over oxygen because we want dirty water, dirty air and we only want to see the top 1% succeed...
What's funny is you act as if only GOP voters vote in lock step...
Were you asleep during the Bush years? If Bush farted, it was because he was trying to steal oil from the Iraqis. If Cheney sneezed it was because he was trying to get Halliburton another no bid contract. If Rumsfeld belched it was a conspiracy to take away our civil liberties.
Most of us oppose Obama for very logical ideological reasons. I happen to like him on a personal level. I admire his marriage and his parenting. I think his story of being the mixed race son of a single white woman and an absentee Kenyan father and rising to the level of POTUS is nothing short of intriguing. I just happen to disagree with just about every policy decision he's made. Only twice hacpve I agreed with him: I agreed with the content of his speech accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in which he basically said that Europe would not be free without the war waged by Americans against Nazism and his decision to take out Bin Laden.
Your dismissive insults of those of us who disagree with your take on history and those of us who are opposed to Obama's presidency on ideological grounds is evidence of a lack of substance on your part, not ours.
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
I completely understand that you can get emotional over the historical significance of having the first black man be president--without supporting him as a candidate, for any reason. I completely enjoyed the inauguration and the emotional reactions by many in the country to the 2008 election. I 100% empathize with any black person who watched that take place and were moved to tears. Who wouldn't? I think you have to be pretty callous to not appreciate those feelings. I made my kids sit down and watch tv during the election and the inauguration and we discussed the monumental nature of that moment, based on our history as a nation.
That said, CP is a very smart man, and I don't believe he would vote for anyone based on race alone--I don't believe he would have voted for Condi Rice, for instance, if she had ran(and I wish she would ). CP wasn't happy with how Bush handled things, to put it mildly, and he wasn't having more of the same. I'm surprised that he would object to Romney, though, because Romney is nothing like Bush. Frankly, I wasn't happy with Bush either, particularly in the last two years of his presidency. His first term was his best one.
For some people, I do think that the romanticism of having our first black president DID prompt them to vote for Obama, and their objectivity was missing. Objectivity is what allows us to set aside emotions and be logical.
I do understand why many, many people voted for Obama in 2008. Some because of race; that's a fact. Some because he made a lot of great-sounding promises. Some because they just liked the guy. I don't understand why so many would want to go back and vote for him again this time around. He has failed to deliver on so many campaign promises, it is staggering. I don't think he has a clue what he's doing, especially in regard to the economy. The main reason I'm going to vote for Romney is simple: He's a businessman, and a good one. If one of these men can fix the economy, it will be Romney; not Obama.
#1 reason most people voted for Obama in 2008: the economy tanked 6 weeks before election day and a Republican president was in the Oval Office. Presidents, right or wrong, always get the blame for a bad economy and the credit for a good one. McCain was ahead in the polls until Bear Stearns failed. He fell behind from that moment and never recovered. A big reason Obama became president was fortuitous timing.
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
Obama and Bush are the right and left hands of a fascist statist beast. The Republicans AND the DEMOCRATS have nearly wrecked this nation. A vote for either should be considered an act of treason against the Constitution of the United States.
Vote Libertarian!
A Libertarian can't win because Americans are stupid and follow politics like it's sports. They don't care about the Constitution. BUT... if you care about the Constitution... vote for Liberty... vote Libertarian even if a Libertarian can't win. Vote PRINCIPLES. Don't vote just to say you voted for a winner.
#1 reason most people voted for Obama in 2008: the economy tanked 6 weeks before election day and a Republican president was in the Oval Office. Presidents, right or wrong, always get the blame for a bad economy and the credit for a good one. McCain was ahead in the polls until Bear Stearns failed. He fell behind from that moment and never recovered. A big reason Obama became president was fortuitous timing.
I think Iraq and President Bush's overall approval rating affected it as well if I remember correctly. I know that Iraq was not popular with a lot of people I know.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
). CP wasn't happy with how Bush handled things, to put it mildly, and he wasn't having more of the same. I'm surprised that he would object to Romney, though, because Romney is nothing like Bush. Frankly, I wasn't happy with Bush either, particularly in the last two years of his presidency. His first term was his best one. 
Linear Mode
