You wouldn't vote for OBAMA if he walked on water.

• Reply to pub claim that O's accomplishments - were not achieved indepently. sm
  • What has Obama run by himself. What business? - what organization? answer=none. nm
    • This is the experience currently being discussed. - What more do you need? sm
    • Excuse me. We are examining levels of experience - to lead nation, not a 5 and dime. sm
      • You wouldn't vote for OBAMA if he walked on water. - Obama for President
        • You mean O can't walk on water?! Oh no - Go McCain and Palin!
          • I am independent and considered Obama, but - cannot trust him and his associates. nm
            • Who supports Obama? Everybody in the democratic party - I felt the same until Germany
      • O is "just words, just speeches", little substance. - All he ever "runs" is a campaign. nm
        • You must have EXECUTIVE experience - to be President -list that of Obama!. nm
          • people are starting to pay attention. Obama's lead - is currently almost gone. nm
            • This was expected right after the convention, will change shortly I'll bet. nm - obamamama

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

This is a very reputable place to go for news (cousin to wnd.com). 

What kind of msg are those younger than us learning from this?  Easy:  that socialism is the answer.  That should scare the krud outta everyone.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=307667278225125

nm

There goes one of those extremist Republican tempers again, quoting so called facts and figures set forth by a "fat cat" named Senator McCain and his rich rich rich wife.  As I said before.. You vote for McCain and I will vote for Senator Obama. 

Why I can't vote for Obama:  Worth the read! 
I wanted to send this article from Huntley Brown - a fabulous concert pianist, a man of God and a black man. I appreciate so much his reasoning for not voting for Obama. I would like to see his article published or spread out via Email to as many as possible. It's good stuff!

Why I Can't Vote For Obama
By Huntley Brown
Dear Friends, A few months ago I was asked for my perspective on Obama, I sent out an email with a few points. With the election just around the corner I decided to complete my perspective. Those of you on my e-list have seen some of this before but it's worth repeating...
First I must say whoever wins the election will have my prayer support Obama needs to be commended for his accomplishments but I need to explain why I will not be voting for him.
Many of my friends process their identity through their blackness I process my identity through Christ. Being a Christian (a Christ follower) means He leads I follow. I can't dictate the terms He does because He is the leader.
I can't vote black because I am black; I have to vote Christian because that's who I am. Christian first, black second.  Neither should anyone from the other ethnic groups vote because of ethnicity. 200 years from now I won't be asked if I was black or white. I will be asked if I knew Jesus and accepted Him as Lord and Savior.
In an election there are many issues to consider but when a society gets abortion, same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning to name a few, wrong economic concerns will soon not matter.
We need to follow Martin Luther King's words, don't judge someone by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I don't know Obama so all I can go off is his voting record. His voting record earned him the title of the most liberal senator in the US Senate in 2007.
NATIONAL JOURNAL: Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007 (01/31/2008)
To beat Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton as the most liberal senator, takes some doing. Obama accomplished this feat in 2 short years. I wonder what would happen to America if he had four years to work with.
There is a reason Planned Parenthood gives him a 100 % rating. There is a reason the homosexual community supports him. There is a reason Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, Hamas etc. love him. There is a reason he said he would nominate liberal judges to the Supreme Court. There is a reason he voted against the infanticide bill. There is a reason he voted No on the constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. There is a reason he voted No on banning partial birth abortion. There is a reason he voted No on confirming Justices Roberts and Alito. These two judges are conservatives and they have since overturned partial birth abortion. The same practice Obama wanted to continue.
God help him. There is a reason Obama opposed the parental notification law.
Think about this:  You can't give a kid an aspirin without parental notification but that same kid can have an abortion without parental notification. This is insane.
There is a reason he went to Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years.
Obama tells us he has good judgment but he sat under Jeremiah Wright teaching for 20 years. Now he is condemning Wright's sermons. I wonder why now?
Obama said Jeremiah Wright led him to the Lord and discipled him. A disciple is one in training. Jesus told us in Matthew 28:19 - 20 'Go and make disciples of all nations.' This means reproduce yourself. Teach people to think like you, walk like you; talk like you believe what you believe etc. The question I have is what did Jeremiah Wright teach him?
Would you support a White President who went to a church which has tenets that said they have a ...
1. Commitment to the White Community
2. Commitment to the White Family
3. Adherence to the White Work Ethic
4. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the White Community.
5. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions
6. Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace the White Value System
7. Personal commitment to embracement of the White Value System.
Would you support a President who went to a church like that?
Just change the word from white to black and you have the tenets of Obama's former church.   If President Bush was a member of a church like this, he would be called a racist. Jessie Jackson and AL Sharpton would have been marching outside.
This kind of church is a racist church. Obama did not wake up after 20 years and just discovered he went to a racist church.  The church can't be about race.  Jesus did not come for any particular race. He came for the whole world.
A church can't have a value system based on race. The churches value system has to be based on biblical mandate. It does not matter if it's a white church or a black church it's still wrong.  Anyone from either race that attends a church like this would never get my vote.
Obama's former Pastor Jeremiah Wright is a disciple of liberal theologian James Cone, author of the 1970 book A Black Theology of Liberation. Cone once wrote: 'Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.
Cone is the man Obama's mentor looks up to. Does Obama believe this?
So what does all this mean for the nation?
In the past when the Lord brought someone with the beliefs of Obama to lead a nation it meant one thing - judgment.
Read 1 Samuel 8 when Israel asked for a king. First God says in 1 Samuel 1:9 'Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do.'
Then God says
1 Samuel 1:18 ' When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.' 19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. 'No!' they said. 'We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.'  21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, 'Listen to them and give them a king.'
Here is what we know for sure.
God is not schizophrenic
He would not tell one person to vote for Obama and one to vote for McCain. As the scripture says, a city divided against itself cannot stand, so obviously many people are not hearing from God.
Maybe I am the one not hearing but I know God does not change and Obama contradicts many things I read in scripture so I doubt it.
For all my friends who are voting for Obama can you really look God in the face and say; Father based on your word, I am voting for Obama even though I know he will continue the genocidal practice of partial birth abortion. He might have to nominate three or four Supreme Court justices, and I am sure he will be nominating liberal judges who will be making laws that are against you.  I also know he will continue to push for homosexual rights, even though you destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for this.  I know I can look the other way because of the economy.
I could not see Jesus agreeing with many of Obama's positions. Finally I have two questions for all my liberal friends.
Since we know someone's value system has to be placed on the nation,
1 Whose value system should be placed on the nation.
2.  Who should determine that this is the right value system for the nation?
Blessings, Huntley Brown
 

Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel issued the following statement following the U.S. Department of Justice’s denial of preclearance of Georgia’s voter verification process

Atlanta - “The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny preclearance of Georgia’s already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJ’s decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the preclearance submission.

“DOJ has thrown open the door for activist organizations such as ACORN to register non-citizens to vote in Georgia’s elections, and the state has no ability to verify an applicant’s citizenship status or whether the individual even exists. DOJ completely disregarded Georgia’s obvious and direct interest in preventing non-citizens from voting, instead siding with the ACLU and MALDEF. Clearly, politics took priority over common sense and good public policy.
 
“This process is critical to protecting the integrity of our elections. We have evidence that non-citizens have voted in past Georgia elections and that more than 2,100 individuals have attempted to register, yet still have questions regarding their citizenship. Further, the Inspector General’s office is investigating more than 30 cases of non-citizens casting ballots in Georgia elections, including the case of a Henry County non-citizen who registered to vote and cast ballots in 2004 and 2006.

“It is important to underscore that not a single person has come forward to say he or she could not vote because of the verification process. Further, while DOJ argues that the process is somehow discriminatory, the historic voter turnout among Hispanic and African-American voters in the 2008 general elections clearly says otherwise.

“This decision provides a specific example of the inherently illogical and unfair nature of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. It is a sad day for the rights of our state and for the integrity of our elections. I remain committed to continuing the fight for citizenship verification. In the coming days, I will consider every option available to the state, including the possibility of legal action.”

Background:

As required by law and ordered by federal courts in October 2008, the eligibility of new applicants to register and vote is checked against the Georgia Department of Driver Services (DDS) and Social Security Administration databases to ensure that individuals registering to vote report similar information. If information in these databases does not match information reported on the voter registration form, the applicant is asked to clarify the information. Additionally, if the applicant previously reported to DDS that he or she is not a U.S. citizen, that person is asked by a registrar to provide proof of citizenship.

Prior to the November 2008 General Election, Secretary Handel sent letters to 4,771 voter registration applicants whose records at DDS indicated they were not U.S. citizens, asking them to provide documentation of their citizenship. As of March 2009, 2,148 of these applicants still have chosen not to resolve the question about their U.S. citizenship.

In the November 2008 General Election, county election officials reported that 599 individuals cast a challenged ballot because the voter had previously indicated to DDS that he or she was not a United States citizen and had not resolved their status with county officials at the time of the election. Of those, 369 ballots were accepted because the voter provided documentation of their citizenship after the election; and 230 were rejected because the individual chose not to confirm his or her citizenship status.

On October 10, 2008, activist organizations including the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit to attempt to prevent Georgia from verifying the eligibility of applicants to register and vote in the November General Election, including whether those individuals were citizens of the United States.

On October 16, 2008, U.S. District Court Judge Jack Camp denied the motion by MALDEF and ACLU; directed the State to continue the verification process; and acknowledged the State’s requirements to verify information under the Help America Vote Act. In his order, Judge Camp stated:

HAVA requires that Defendant Handel match information in the statewide voter registration database with information from the Georgia DDS and the SSA databases “to the extent necessary to enable each such official to verify the accuracy of the information provided on the applications for voter registration.”

Judge Camp also stated: ...

Over the last few years, I think I know what it feels like to be a frog that's dropped into a pot of cold water, with the temperature rise of the water being so slow that the next thing he knows, he's DEAD.

I know I'm "there," but this "evolution" has been so subtle that I don't know exactly when it began and probably won't realize when it ends (if it ends).

For starters, this bill was apparently introduced on June 26, 2007, while Bush was still President.

The way it was being hyped, it seemed to be something that was designed to encourage public service in young people in exchange for financial assistance with college tuition, etc.  I thought it sounded like a good idea, something that might help to build character in young people and encourage and foster the kind of behavior we saw after 9/11, when Americans helped each other and showed the world what we're made of when it comes to helping each other.  To offer a young person financial help for college in exchange for some volunteer hours, I thought, was great.  Equally great, I thought, was the notion that this was voluntary and NOT mandatory.

Now, it's apparently for everyone, including seniors, which is still okay, I guess, if this is something that some seniors want to do.

However, one little sentence (shown below) is sending up a BIG RED FLAG into my little pea brain, copied below and bolded:

From:  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

OpenCongress Summary:
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, including those for seniors and veterans. It also establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer service program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.

In its current form, the legislation does not include a mandate requiring service.

Quite frankly, I have jumped (like a frog) from link to link to link trying to research this, so I'm not sure what its "current form" is today.  It apparently was passed by the House and now by the Senate just a few days ago (see http://loungedaddy.us/?p=725).

Yesterday, at first, when I heard of Rick Wagoner, GM's "sacrificial lamb," basically being fired by Obama, I felt very uncomfortable with that.  After I thought about it more, though, I do agree that ANY company that accepts financial aid from Americans should be scrutinized, including, if necessary in this manner (even if Wagoner's firing, in my opinion, was merely symbolic and not substantive).  What sticks in my crawl is the fact that Wall Street crooks have been treated like kings while auto industry workers are being kicked more and more every day while they're down.

I was never comfortable with any of the bailouts, and that was the one thing that Obama voted for that earned him a spot on the "negative" column of my pros and cons list.

I freely admit that my thought processes have been severely hampered recently (especially after two hospitalizations in less than a month).  It's much more difficult for me to concentrate and to word-find at times.  I had hoped that Obama would be the "people's" President (as opposed to Bush being the "corporation's" President.

I used to think (and frequently wrote) that the Clintons and the Bushes were merely opposite sides of the same coin.  I still believe that; however, I'm starting to think that Obama's face is on that coin now.

To sum it up, on this day and at this time, all I can truly say with certainty is:

RIBBIT!!!!

Over the last few years, I think I know what it feels like to be a frog that's dropped into a pot of cold water, with the temperature rise of the water being so slow that the next thing he knows, he's DEAD.

I know I'm "there," but this "evolution" has been so subtle that I don't know exactly when it began and probably won't realize when it ends (if it ends).

For starters, this bill was apparently introduced on June 26, 2007, while Bush was still President.

The way it was being hyped, it seemed to be something that was designed to encourage public service in young people in exchange for financial assistance with college tuition, etc.  I thought it sounded like a good idea, something that might help to build character in young people and encourage and foster the kind of behavior we saw after 9/11, when Americans helped each other and showed the world what we're made of when it comes to helping each other.  To offer a young person financial help for college in exchange for some volunteer hours, I thought, was great.  Equally great, I thought, was the notion that this was voluntary and NOT mandatory.

Now, it's apparently for everyone, including seniors, which is still okay, I guess, if this is something that some seniors want to do.

However, one little sentence (shown below) is sending up a BIG RED FLAG into my little pea brain, copied below and bolded:

From:  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

OpenCongress Summary:
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, including those for seniors and veterans. It also establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer service program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.

In its current form, the legislation does not include a mandate requiring service.

Quite frankly, I have jumped (like a frog) from link to link to link trying to research this, so I'm not sure what its "current form" is today.  It apparently was passed by the House and now by the Senate just a few days ago (see http://loungedaddy.us/?p=725).

Yesterday, at first, when I heard of Rick Wagoner, GM's "sacrificial lamb," basically being fired by Obama, I felt very uncomfortable with that.  After I thought about it more, though, I do agree that ANY company that accepts financial aid from Americans should be scrutinized, including, if necessary in this manner (even if Wagoner's firing, in my opinion, was merely symbolic and not substantive).  What sticks in my crawl is the fact that Wall Street crooks have been treated like kings while auto industry workers are being kicked more and more every day while they're down.

I was never comfortable with any of the bailouts, and that was the one thing that Obama voted for that earned him a spot on the "negative" column of my pros and cons list.

I freely admit that my thought processes have been severely hampered recently (especially after two hospitalizations in less than a month).  It's much more difficult for me to concentrate and to word-find at times.  I had hoped that Obama would be the "people's" President (as opposed to Bush being the "corporation's" President.

I used to think (and frequently wrote) that the Clintons and the Bushes were merely opposite sides of the same coin.  I still believe that; however, I'm starting to think that Obama's face has replaced Hillary's face on that coin now.

To sum it up, on this day and at this time, all I can truly say with certainty is:

RIBBIT!!!!

Over the last few years, I think I know what it feels like to be a frog that's dropped into a pot of cold water, with the temperature rise of the water being so slow that the next thing he knows, he's DEAD.

I know I'm "there," but this "evolution" has been so subtle that I don't know exactly when it began and probably won't realize when it ends (if it ends).

For starters, this bill was apparently introduced on June 26, 2007, while Bush was still President.

The way it was being hyped, it seemed to be something that was designed to encourage public service in young people in exchange for financial assistance with college tuition, etc.  I thought it sounded like a good idea, something that might help to build character in young people and encourage and foster the kind of behavior we saw after 9/11, when Americans helped each other and showed the world what we're made of when it comes to helping each other.  To offer a young person financial help for college in exchange for some volunteer hours, I thought, was great.  Equally great, I thought, was the notion that this was voluntary and NOT mandatory.

Now, it's apparently for everyone, including seniors, which is still okay, I guess, if this is something that some seniors want to do.

However, one little sentence (shown below) is sending up a BIG RED FLAG into my little pea brain, copied below and bolded:

From:  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

OpenCongress Summary:
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, including those for seniors and veterans. It also establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer service program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.

In its current form, the legislation does not include a mandate requiring service.

Quite frankly, I have jumped (like a frog) from link to link to link trying to research this, so I'm not sure what its "current form" is today.  It apparently was passed by the House and now by the Senate just a few days ago (see http://loungedaddy.us/?p=725).

Yesterday, at first, when I heard of Rick Wagoner, GM's "sacrificial lamb," basically being fired by Obama, I felt very uncomfortable with that.  After I thought about it more, though, I do agree that ANY company that accepts financial aid from Americans should be scrutinized, including, if necessary in this manner (even if Wagoner's firing, in my opinion, was merely symbolic and not substantive).  What sticks in my crawl is the fact that Wall Street crooks have been treated like kings while auto industry workers are being kicked more and more every day while they're down.

I was never comfortable with any of the bailouts, and that was the one thing that Obama voted for that earned him a spot on the "negative" column of my pros and cons list.

I freely admit that my thought processes have been severely hampered recently (especially after two hospitalizations in less than a month).  It's much more difficult for me to concentrate and to word-find at times.  I had hoped that Obama would be the "people's" President (as opposed to Bush being the "corporation's" President.

I used to think (and frequently wrote) that the Clintons and the Bushes were merely opposite sides of the same coin.  I still believe that; however, I'm starting to think that Obama's face has replaced Hillary's face on that coin now.

If I'm misinformed or otherwise wrong in anything I've written in this post regarding the links I included or statements, please tell me.  Seriously.  I don't want to argue or fight or name-call.  I just want to discuss because I'm beginning to feel almost as vulnerable and distrustful of Obama's presidency as I eventually became under Bush's.

I know discussions get heated on this board sometimes, but I'm not trying to be argumentative.  I'm much, much too tired for that. 

To sum it up, on this day and at this time, all I can truly say with certainty is:

RIBBIT!!!!

Over the last few years, I think I know what it feels like to be a frog that's dropped into a pot of cold water, with the temperature rise of the water being so slow that the next thing he knows, he's DEAD.

I know I'm "there," but this "evolution" has been so subtle that I don't know exactly when it began and probably won't realize when it ends (if it ends).

For starters, this bill was apparently introduced on June 26, 2007, while Bush was still President.

The way it was being hyped, it seemed to be something that was designed to encourage public service in young people in exchange for financial assistance with college tuition, etc.  I thought it sounded like a good idea, something that might help to build character in young people and encourage and foster the kind of behavior we saw after 9/11, when Americans helped each other and showed the world what we're made of when it comes to helping each other.  To offer a young person financial help for college in exchange for some volunteer hours, I thought, was great.  Equally great, I thought, was the notion that this was voluntary and NOT mandatory.

Now, it's apparently for everyone, including seniors, which is still okay, I guess, if this is something that some seniors want to do.

However, one little sentence (shown below) is sending up a BIG RED FLAG into my little pea brain, copied below and bolded:

From:  http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1388/show

OpenCongress Summary:
The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act would dramatically increase funding for AmeriCorps and other volunteer programs, including those for seniors and veterans. It also establishes a goal of expanding from 75,000 government-supported volunteers to 250,000, and would increase education funding and establish a summer service program for students, paying $500 (which would be applied to college costs) to high-school and middle-school student who participate.

In its current form, the legislation does not include a mandate requiring service.

Quite frankly, I have jumped (like a frog) from link to link to link trying to research this, so I'm not sure what its "current form" is today.  It apparently was passed by the House and now by the Senate just a few days ago (see http://loungedaddy.us/?p=725).

Yesterday, at first, when I heard of Rick Wagoner, GM's "sacrificial lamb," basically being fired by Obama, I felt very uncomfortable with that.  After I thought about it more, though, I do agree that ANY company that accepts financial aid from Americans should be scrutinized, including, if necessary in this manner (even if Wagoner's firing, in my opinion, was merely symbolic and not substantive).  What sticks in my crawl is the fact that Wall Street crooks have been treated like kings while auto industry workers are being kicked more and more every day while they're down.

I was never comfortable with any of the bailouts, and that was the one thing that Obama voted for that earned him a spot on the "negative" column of my pros and cons list.

I freely admit that my thought processes have been severely hampered recently (especially after two hospitalizations in less than a month).  It's much more difficult for me to concentrate and to word-find at times.  I had hoped that Obama would be the "people's" President (as opposed to Bush being the "corporation's" President.

I used to think (and frequently wrote) that the Clintons and the Bushes were merely opposite sides of the same coin.  I still believe that; however, I'm starting to think that Obama's face has replaced Hillary's face on that coin now.

If I'm misinformed or otherwise wrong in anything I've written in this post regarding the links I included or statements, please tell me.  Seriously.  I don't want to argue or fight or name-call.  I just want to discuss because I'm beginning to feel almost as vulnerable and distrustful of Obama's presidency as I eventually became under Bush's.  I know discussions get heated on this board sometimes, but I'm not trying to be argumentative.  I'm much, much too tired for that. 

To sum it up, on this day and at this time, all I can truly say with certainty is:

RIBBIT!!!!