See other All is Vanity Articles
Title: I’m beginning to think McCain will be less dangerous to my freedom than Obama
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: May 8, 2008
Author: Me
Post Date: 2008-05-08 07:57:19 by Jethro Tull
Keywords: None
Views: 7415
Comments: 195
As a realist I know either McCain or Obama will be the next president, and although I won’t be voting, I’m coming to the conclusion that McCain will be less of a train wreck to my personal freedom than Obama. Obama, like McCain, offers endless war, so their foreign policy is a draw. In fact I give points to McCain for his honest 100 year comment. Obama’s nutty obsession to hunt down al Qaeda, a creation of the US government, was all I needed to know about his foreign policy. His speech to AIPAC was the cap stone. On the domestic front, both are awful, but Obama is much worse on guns. His dalliance with Black Theology is equally bad news. One look at the over animated Jeremiah Wright should be enough to convince white America that an influence like him will bring us additional layers of affirmative action, political correctness and slavery reparations. And did I mention Michelle Obama? She reeks of nasty and racism. The only plus Obama would bring is a potential white backlash, which is long over due. There's lots more, but this is a starting point. Let the discussion begin.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-10) not displayed.
.
.
.
#11. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#6)
(Edited)
Nice edit job. It used to say: I shall not vote for evil, lesser or otherwise.
No surprise that somebody who uses the Bushite "war on terror" language would take this position.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Oh, sure. I bet that, if you find the courage to submit yourself to a thorough checkup, Bushbotulism will be detected.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Hilarious! I remember them ignoring the fact that the current Court has 7 Rs on it and they're still driving us to the Left. Like the Os here, reality and fact doesn't get in the way of emotion.
or intention.
I shall not vote for evil, lesser or otherwise.
Hilarious! Didn't you really mean to write... Hillaryous? Sorry... she's on her way out for the moment. Something is telling me that she's going to dedicate the rest of her life to grooming Chelsea - the 30 year-old teenager - for political life. How would a Chelsea C vs. Barbie Bush (with Jena as the VP) for what's left of the US prez in... 2020?
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
OELWEIN (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., argued Saturday that the U.S. is fighting on the wrong battlefield and that President Bush's failed policies had left the nation facing a greater threat from terrorism. Obama said Bush has talked tough on terrorism but made choices that let Osama bin Laden and his top deputies remain free. Obama said the military should begin reducing the number of troops in Iraq and turn its attention to al-Qaida strongholds. "We cannot win a war against the terrorists if we're on the wrong battlefield," said Obama. "America must urgently begin deploying from Iraq and take the fight more effectively to the enemy's home by destroying al-Qaida's leadership along the Afghan-Pakistan border, eliminating their command and control networks and disrupting their funding." Obama continued to talk tough on terrorism later in the day, as he packed about 300 people into a school gymnasium in Manchester, even with a popular county fair running just across the street. "When I am president of the United States I will make this pledge: Nobody will work harder to go after those terrorists who will do the American people harm," Obama said. "But that requires a commander in chief who understands our troops need to be on the right battlefield, not the wrong battlefield."
Yes, this was my argument to Arator and those who think Obama will kill of the Clintons. Look for this Bush ----> and Chelsea to sometime soon dedicate their lives to "public service."
And? Are you saying that our troops should be sent to the wrong battlefield and Obama, if elected, would upset that brilliant Bush strategy?
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Obama, Bush and the rest of the war party should extend thier "do unto them before they do unto you" attack philosophy down to the American street level. Therefore, say a street gang or, even, on the average school yard playground if someone percieves or thinks that someone else is out to "get" them be it based on real or imagined fears (or based on outright lies and fabrications), the first person should not hesitate to do great bodily harm to the second. It's the new American way to conflict resolution--the War Party way.
I shall not vote for evil, lesser or otherwise.
Our troops should be brought home and sent to our Southern border.
It's not a starting point for me. This thread is beyond disgusting.
I like this. We can start by preempting the Crips, Bloods and MS-13. Then, we can move on to the Illegal Invaders and welfare mooches. It's all about MY wallet and I can't AFFORD more SOCIALISM.
Sorry....
Tell me what's your point. This is entertainment for you? Are you then a McCain supporter? Why post a thread of this nature? Is this productive? Talk about driving the wedge in deeper...this furthers a rift that will never be healed. Just for my edification without rhetoric or bluster please tell me, what's your intent?
My intent is to use my 1st Amendment right to express my thoughts. Nothing more.
But, admit it, you ARE upset to see Hillary defeated by a darkie. Did you know that she's wearing blue contacts, to make her eyes look blue? It's almost as bad as Loudobbs bleaching the remains of his hairs. No wonder Loudobbs turned into a Hillarist.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
I'm not disputing your rights. I'm questioning your intentions. So then, you are affirming your support for McCain?
No. If he weren't a a socialist I'd be less troubled. If he were a libertarian, who put forward a RP-like platform, I'd support him.
Support? I'm not voting. What I said is that the selection is out of my hands and IMO, McCain will be less destructive to my personal freedom than Obama would be.
Now, you're again circling around the Ping's dilemma of personal comfort vs. the price others may be paying for it. Remember Mad Albright's (allegedly the daughter of Hollowcast survivors or at least related to some), completely untroubled by the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi kids, stating that it was 'worth it'? Then, the Bots' bragging that the benefits of sending 150,000 Americans to kill 1,000,000 Iraqis and have 4,000 of them die in the process and maybe 50,000 crippled was that there were no significant terroristic disturbances on the homeland? That and the one trillion borrowed from commies and Arabs were found to be a worthy 'sacrifice'? So, McCain is likely to continue the good works of Clinton/Reno/Clark/Mad Albbright/Olmert/Bush/Netanyahu. Does this trouble you at all? Or maybe it troubles you but it troubless you less?
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
So, you're not just a purist non-voter? You're actually an active promoter of rapacious corporate criminality, freedom-extinguishing police-state thuggery and mass murder for fun and profit? JT, you've gone over the bend, my friend. Have you had too many years of beating darkies down for the man in NYC to overcome your apparent auto-gag- reflex towards the prospect of a black president? I can't figure out any other reason why you could possibly support the continuation of the current criminal/fascist regime. As for your "analysis", it's fantastical. 1) Obama has promised to get our troops out of Iraq within his first 16 months in office. This sets him apart from the McCain/Hillary Bush/Clinton duopoly. He has taken heat from the warmongering media over this, but he has not backed away. Score 1 for Obama. 2) Under Obama, the war is less likely to expand. Unlike the McCain/Hillary Bush/Clinton duopoly, Obama has emphasized talking with rather than obliterating Iran. Score 1 for Obama (and humanity). 3) Obama has decried the police state fascism of the McCain/Hillary Bush/Clinton duopoly. Under Obama, Gitmo (and the black site torture centers) are more likely to be closed, and fundamental rights restored. Score 1 for Obama. These three reasons alone are enough to make Obama far superior to the fascist freakshow that is the McCain/Hillary Bush/Clinton duopoly. But you want more of the same? I guess fascist tyranny is OK for you just so long as the darkies are kept down (along with everyone else) in the process.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
You're actually an active promoter of rapacious corporate criminality, freedom-extinguishing police-state thuggery, and mass murder for fun and profit? Looks that way.
I think he only wants to have an interesting debate on the merits of the 'lesser evil' theory. 1 - Some say that 'the three' are 'equally evil' and don't bother to go any further. Those who belong to #2 should find this discussion interesting. It is also worth noting that the #1 crowd refuse to admit even the existence of #3, claiming that #3 are in fact #2, which is consistent with their inability to see any difference between 'the three'. To conclude: this is a good debate for the #2's but, I suspect, this is also an attempt to reinforce the false dogma that #2 = #3.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Your analysis is spot on.
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
2) Under Obama, the war is less likely to expand. Unlike the McCain/Hillary Bush/Clinton duopoly, Obama has emphasized talking with rather than obliterating Iran. Score 1 for Obama (and humanity). 3) Obama has decried the police state fascism of the McCain/Hillary Bush/Clinton duopoly. Under Obama, Gitmo (and the black site torture centers) are more likely to be closed, and fundamental rights restored. Score 1 for Obama. Arator, personal attack aside, your points above are based on promises and hope offered by a politician. You know better, but his race alone is the reason, IMO, that you have looked past his 9-11 beliefs, his promise of an expanded WOT against al CIAda, and his love of large central government (read socialism) Shelby Steele might assuage your guilt, but then again, some of us are lost to the System.
I think 3 does equal 2 inasmuch as the choice is made for us and this is merely a dog and pony show to distract the people from the reality that their "choice" is long over. The promotion of McCain and the discussion is illuminating in that actions are revealing. JT's decision to post this thread reveals his mind. I was unaware of his true position up until now. Frankly, I feel somewhat taken aback and foolish.
I would take it more like one of those 'Rush' challenges. I remember that, in the 20th century when I was tuning into his show from time to time, Rush would say something like: "I decided to become a Clinton supporter and join the Demo party" and then take listeners phone calls.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
The guy said that he WOULD use force to advance OUR national interest. He also stated that he would hunt down and strike at those who were responsible for the killing of Americans on 9/11. Is this surprising? As for Obama promising to 'invade' Pakistan... of course he never said that. He was discussing the kind of strikes are currently launched against targets in Paki and Somalia. I always suggested that the 'war on terror' would have been a lot more effective if 'we' sent out 1000 or 10,000 armed drones in the air rather than 200,000 GI's on the ground. Those things flying at 50,000 ft. would not recruit Al Queda new members like GI's patrolling the streets of Fallujah do.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Ploy, challenge or otherwise...it's revealing in a disappointing way because this forum has been under seige for a while now and threads of this nature are like poking a resting dog for no good reason.
NEW YORK CITY, April 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Congressman and Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich is challenging his fellow candidates' votes to authorize and fund the war in Iraq, and their positions on Iran. "Clinton, Edwards, and Obama share responsibility for wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in an unnecessary war. And the American tax payers on this day need to remember that," Kucinich charged. Hillary Clinton and John Edwards voted to authorize the war. Clinton and Barack Obama continue to vote to fund it. At a New Hampshire town meeting yesterday, someone asked Clinton about her vote to authorize the war, and asked if she had read the intelligence reports prior to her vote. Senator Clinton is reported to have said that if she had known then what she knows now, she never would have voted to give the President the authority to go to war. "If Senator Clinton and the others had done their job they would have known, and they would have voted correctly as I did,"declared Kucinich, who campaigned yesterday in New Hampshire and Connecticut and appeared live on CNN's night show from New York City. "I didn't just vote against the war, I shared an in depth analysis with Members of Congress that I wrote in October 2002, after reviewing intelligence reports," Kucinich said.
thats a very good point. I understand Obama recently sponsored legislation that would bring some positive changes in Guantanamo. But hasn't Obama voted for other police-state legislation? Patriot Act? Military Commissions Act? I mean if he voted agaisnt Military Commissions Act, then that would speak positively of him. But as the others say Obama speaks very enthusiastically about tracking down terrorists and expanding the Afghan war. he's not on our side. Here's another angle to look at Obama. He doesn't really have strong blood ties to our country. His mother was American. But his father was not. I know that Hilary & McCain are both disloyal to our country. But with Obama being weak on his blood ties to our country, that speaks negatively of him. When electing a president, we should not elect someone without the blood ties.
Revelation 6:6 And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and [see] thou hurt not the oil and the wine.
The more that
comes out about Obama, I have already decided he will be the worst of 3
evils and that he will usher in every totalitarian nightmare conceivable,
making Bush look like a school kid in perspective. I will vote, as I did
last time, for CP. But I will continue to say all possible to pursuade others
never to vote the marxist gun-hating, war on drugs continuing, world- taxing,
affirmative action loving, amnesty giving, reparation-loving, Farrakhan
hugging, give your money to the rest of the world, white-hating, black panther
forgiving, he'll close Gitmo but leave in place and expand other police state
legislation so people love him on one issue, married a racist bitch, amoral
Obama anywhere near the presidency. The man will be the worst thing that ever
happened to the USA and will only hasten our already under way demise. He
has not gotten to where he is for any reason other than his blackness. He used
the very system he claims to despise to rise to power. He is a lawyer. He is
the newer version of the Socialist jackboot. An Alan Keyes or a Dr. Walter
Williams (had they chosen to run as R's) would have received votes because of
their character, their leadership and their supreme intelligence. Obama can
not even shine their shoes. He is in every way..an empty suit. He is void of
character, leadership, honesty and IMO even intelligence. He's a smooth
talking "pretty boy"..the Tiger Woods of politics to most socialist whites
(Sorry Tiger).. He is eloquent to those with a high school degree or a
journalism degree. He doesn't impress the educated...at all. Just another
schmuk smooth-talking RICH lawyer seeking power for power's sake. When the
Socialist jackboot gets in power, people will be praying for Bush to come
back. And that says a lot. This man is a threat to the USA as much or more
than Bush is, and the possibility of his election should stoke fear in every
one who recognizes the freedoms we've lost under Bush and the ones we have yet
to lose, for which Obama has his sights set. Those on 4UM who defend him
either could care less about freedom and their presence on Freedom4um is
completely disingenuos, or they're simply ignorant and have fallen in love
with a photograph which is contorted to fit their own imaginations and hopes,
not reality. Actually, I thought people here had more intellectual "stuff." To
see them slobber over this socialist jackboot makes me as angry as seeing
Mexican flags being marched through LA. ("I will NOT abandon 20 million
illegal aliens!!"--Obama I will make my feelings known on this 4um, but I
will no longer respond to these people individually (so don't waste your time;
you'll be filtered or ignored). The New South Africa...coming soon to AmeriKa.
Let the reprisals begin.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition "Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." © IndieTx Walter Williams is great but Keyes is just another Jackson only on the right. I don't trust his finacial dealings.
FUCK PEDRO BUSH!!!
When has McCain called for restoring habeas corpus? I don't believe Obama will restore jack. He's a politician, therefore he lies. It's what they do. Nevertheless you seem to believe what McCain says. Even though he has a long history of reversing his positions.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
I take it that you support restoring the old Bozo filter system, then.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Looks that way. I don't see his position that way at all.. You really can't place anymore onus on his opinion that you can an Obama or Hillary voter. All 3 are the same, Obama much worse on the domestic side. If you are voting in self interest, you choose the one you think will do less damage. That is, IF you are voting. He says he is not... That's they way this is coming across to me. I have said before, if it were that McCain were somehow selected, would the 'democrats' get mad enough to put the pressure on their Congresspeople to stop the war? Dems have had a chance for two years to make it happen, and anytime they can shove more debt, laws and middleclass destruction down our throats. They have wasted their time on steroids in baseball, establishing special recognition for a wrestler, frittered over the lunch menu.... Little or no attention to the huge iceberg coming our way with entitlement spending, and returning war vets, and their care. They have done nothing to stop the outsourcing of jobs, or the flow of illegals.. All want to create as much damage as fast as possible. So, if McCain gets in, what would dems do? As I have read before, if you want an indication of what a person will behave in the future, look at how they have behaved in the past. Obama has a crappy record. Hillary spends her days thinking of being queen. I imagine how much hell she could raise if Obama became president. Anyway, do not take this an endorsement of McCain, but rather a repudiation of the whole rotten game. All we really have to go on, is dems raise taxes and have promised to end the tax cuts... while adding more taxes upon us all. All the rest.. the wars, the rights, the foreign nuttery will continue unabated. So, give me less taxes. Anyone that thinks there hasn't been enough sacrifice for this farce can certainly send the government a little more each month to help them get by. I know they'd appreciate it.
That's the part no one wants anyone else to see. It's the promotion of the Black liberation theology. And there is an expectation that Obama will make things 'right'. I've heard many of his voters say exactly that on the tube. That', is going back to the 60's. That is the domestic game plan -- to wipe out an entire segment of society. Here's where it's going to get interesting in the race between Obama and McCain.
Comments (51 - 195) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Hmmm, see?
Bushbotism re-raises its ugly head.
(Critter, this is addressed to Christine, you and JT are only cc'd)
#12. To: Jethro Tull, a vast rightwing conspirator (#0)
#13. To: Critter (#7)
#14. To: Critter (#5)
How did you like my best freeper imitation?
#15. To: Jethro Tull (#14)
Like the Os here, reality and fact doesn't get in the way of emotion.
#16. To: Jethro Tull (#14)
How did you like my best freeper imitation?
#17. To: aristeides (#12)
Obama loves the war on terror. He just wants to move it to a different battlefield.
Obama: War on terror being fought 'on the wrong battlefield"
#18. To: a vast rightwing conspirator, Arator (#16)
Didn't you really mean to write... Hillaryous? Sorry... she's on her way out for the moment. Something is telling me that she's going to dedicate the rest of her life to grooming Chelsea - the 30 year-old teenager - for political life. How would a Chelsea C vs. Barbie Bush (with Jena as the VP) for what's left of the US prez in... 2020?
#19. To: Jethro Tull (#17)
that requires a commander in chief who understands our troops need to be on the right battlefield, not the wrong battlefield."
#20. To: Jethro Tull (#17)
#21. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#19)
#22. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
There's lots more, but this is a starting point.
#23. To: wbales (#20)
It's the new American way to conflict resolution--the War Party way.
#24. To: angle (#22)
#25. To: Jethro Tull (#24)
#26. To: angle (#25)
#27. To: Jethro Tull (#26)
#28. To: Jethro Tull (#26)
#29. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#27)
#30. To: angle (#28)
#31. To: Jethro Tull (#30)
(Edited)
#32. To: Jethro Tull (#0)
(Edited)
I’m coming to the conclusion that McCain will be less of a train wreck to my personal freedom than Obama.
#33. To: Arator, Jethro Tull, peppa, cynicom, christine (#32)
...you're not just a purist non-voter?
#34. To: angle (#33)
(Edited)
2 - Some would support one (usually Obama) because he is 'the lesser evil'.
3 - Others - and Ron Paul and me are some of the 'others' - state that Obama is marginally or significantly better than the other 2 and that he is not 'less evil' but 'better' than the other 2.
#35. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#34)
To conclude: this is a good debate for the #2's but, I suspect, this is also an attempt to reinforce the false dogma that #2 = #3.
#36. To: Arator (#32)
1) Obama has promised to get our troops out of Iraq within his first 16 months in office. This sets him apart from the McCain/Hillary Bush/Clinton duopoly. He has taken heat from the warmongering media over this, but he has not backed away. Score 1 for Obama.
#37. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#34)
#38. To: angle (#37)
#39. To: a vast rightwing conspirator, Arator, All (#31)
Sure McCain bothers me. But Obama is no different. As I've shown in this thread, all he offers is a new battlefield. How many men, and at what cost will Obama's foreign policy folly cost us?
#40. To: Jethro Tull (#39)
#41. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#38)
#42. To: a vast rightwing conspirator, arator, ari (#40)
When the rubber hit the road, Obama continued to fund war, war, war......
Kucinich Says Clinton and Obama Continue to Vote for War Funding, They and Edwards Refuse to Oppose a Bush-Cheney Attack on Iran.
#43. To: Arator (#32)
3) Obama has decried the police state fascism of the McCain/Hillary Bush/Clinton duopoly. Under Obama, Gitmo (and the black site torture centers) are more likely to be closed, and fundamental rights restored. Score 1 for Obama.
#44. To: Jethro Tull, rickyj, foh, christine, nobody222, robnoel (#0)
(Edited)
Let the discussion begin.
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#45. To: IndieTX (#44)
An Alan Keyes or a Dr. Walter Williams (had they chosen to run as R's) would have received votes because of their character
Thought for the day:
Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a drug dealer an 'unlicensed pharmacist'
#46. To: Jethro Tull (#18)
#47. To: Jethro Tull (#10)
#48. To: IndieTX, Christine (#44)
I will make my feelings known on this 4um, but I will no longer respond to these people individually (so don't waste your time; you'll be filtered or ignored).
#49. To: angle (#33)
...you're not just a purist non-voter? You're actually an active promoter of rapacious corporate criminality, freedom-extinguishing police-state thuggery, and mass murder for fun and profit?
#50. To: IndieTX (#44)
But I will continue to say all possible to pursuade others never to vote the marxist gun-hating, war on drugs continuing, world- taxing, affirmative action loving, amnesty giving, reparation-loving, Farrakhan hugging, give your money to the rest of the world, white-hating, black panther forgiving,
.
.
.