GOP failure
Douglas B. McGaw, Emporia
Monday, October 6, 2008
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, personified by Bush and Cheney, is the impetus behind a number of disasters:
• They implemented the No Child Left Behind debacle and then failed to provide funding to support even its good features.
• They pushed through tax cuts that benefit mainly the wealthy and do not help those who need it most.
• Their overspending has nearly doubled our national debt in only seven years to nearly $10 trillion.
• They have reversed gains made in environmental progress and they have, until recently, denied the reality of global warming.
• They have supported big oil while providing little support for alternative fuels, at the expense of the consumer.
• Their laissez-faire approach to the economy has enabled the collapse of major mortgage and investment houses and precipitated the current recession.
• They have supported the insurance industry and medical establishment over patients. (We are currently 45th in life expectancy.)
• They have opposed stem cell research.
• They have supported or ignored more corruption than even the Nixon administration.
• They have valued political “orthodoxy” over constitutional duty (eg: Alberto Gonzalez and others.)
• They have displayed the highest levels of incompetence and ineptitude, as in the Katrina disaster and the prosecution of the war in Iraq.
• Despite promises to unite, they have divided the parties and the country more than at any time since the Civil War.
• They have claimed — without merit — the moral high ground on “family values” while fomenting war, destroying the environment, and ignoring the needy.
• They have allowed religious wedge issues like biblical literalism, abortion and gay rights to hold precedence over urgent national priorities like education, environmental stability and fiscal sanity.
• They have undermined our freedom by unwarranted and unconstitutional invasion of privacy.
• They have used a bogus definition of patriotism in the attempt to define critics of the war as somehow “un-American.”
• They have used fear and lies rather than appeals to reason in the attempt to unite our people behind the war.
• Most importantly, they started the Iraq war under false pretenses for faulty — and constantly changing — reasons.
• Once starting the war, they have been criminally culpable for undersupplying and undersupporting the troops.
• They have caused the international good will of post-9/11 to turn into resentment with their heavy-handed and unresponsive treatment of our allies.
• They have allowed the focus on Iraq to undermine the righteous war in Afghanistan; bin Laden is still at large and the Taliban is on the rebound.
• They have showed an inability to listen to reason and to tolerate loyal opposition from top generals (Shinseki, Fallon, etc.) by removing them from positions of authority.
• They have betrayed the essence of American values by encouraging, tolerating and even ordering the use of torture on presumed enemies.
Time was when the Republican Party was the party of fiscal restraint and fiscal sanity; when it stood for individual freedom against the juggernaut of big government; when it could make a credible claim to being the “moral” party; when going to war was entered into only as a last resort; when party members gave serious attention to environmental and ecological issues; when serious national and international issues took priority over parochial and wedge issues.
No longer.
The difference between the parties is now crystal clear. Democrats versus Republicans have come to represent — respectively — progress versus obstructionism, change versus stagnation, optimism versus pessimism, tolerance versus intolerance, focus on people versus property, national unity versus party loyalty, focus on the well-being of the middle/working class versus the upper class, science versus distrust of scientific solutions, environment versus exploitation, core American values versus jingoistic patriotism, fiscal sanity versus irresponsibility and unrestrained wartime spending, international dialogue versus warmongering invective, an attitude of work-with-the-world versus us-against-the-world, solutions versus pandering, universal health care versus no health care for too many, human rights versus torture, hope versus fear, dreams versus doubts, peace versus war, future versus past.
Republicans ask us to trust them to be better at running the economy and providing national security, but their record of the past eight years gives us every reason to distrust them. If ever they were better at these things, it is certainly no longer the case.
Republicans have an inability to run on the issues or their record, and consequently need to sling mud and outright lies about their opponents in order to make political gains.
With this record of failure and for the sake of our future, it is not only necessary to vote against the Republican Party, it is the patriotic thing to do.
Comments
We allow registered users to post comments on this Web site. To learn more about our posting policies please read our User Poster Agreement Policy.
Posted by tillie (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 3:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, well put Doug!!!
Posted by admireed (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Doug, I hope BHO is the savior you are looking for so we might live happily ever after
Posted by wirewatt (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 3:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What planet did this person just come from? I thought the Dem's have been in control for the last two years. The guys whom have caused and helped create this mess need voted out of office. BHO is one of the problems, voting present isn't going to lead anyone to the promised land.
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 4:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Can't get much worse than it is presently, anything would be an improvement at this point, John Mc(keating)Cain or BHO. I'll wager though that die hard republicans here will turn this into a it's Clinton's fault or Obama is the Antichrist. There is a great deal of truth in the points you mentioned above, and this why I loathe Bush, not because of his affiliation.
The discussion is Bush and HIS tenure folks, I challenge you all to keep it focused on his time and actions in office, everything else is really semantics for the sake of this man's editorial.
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 4:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Last I looked the Dem's controlled the Senate, hmm, think I am on planet earth here. Please expound upon this logic, McCain and Obama have BOTH contributed to this, their hands are dirty like everyone else's. Get your facts straight sir. Perhaps someone we dredge up from Mars could perhaps lead to your promised land?
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 4:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So sneaky you are Wirewatt, you got me off track, you have been brainwashed well by W! Not one mention on the issues gotta shift the blame, so typical and representative of what is wrong.
Posted by Macular (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 6:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I can't believe these yazoos that think the Democrats are responsible for all these really bad things simply because they had an even split in the Senate (you can't count Lieberman as a Democrat) and control of the House for the last two years. The bad things were all perpetrated by the Executive Branch (controlled by the Republicans) which controls the agenda as well as the "bully pulpit." Additionally, there were not enough Democrats to overcome a filibuster, much less override a veto!
Posted by USNretired (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 6:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I can hear the theme from "Blazing Saddles".
Posted by USNretired (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 6:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This guy is too laughable to take seriously. I think I will go check KO on MSNBC to see if that is where he got this stuff.
Posted by alfalfa (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 6:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Whoa folks. I am a lifetime member of the GOP, and I will say readily the leadership we have seen has been awful from my own party. However, there is plenty of blame for Democrats as well, I don't care to start listing everything I think can be attributed to one party or the other, I will however point out that if you ask any Democrat right now, GW Bush is the dumbest man in the world, corrupt as all get out, etc. etc,, YET, it was the Dems who just pushed this ridiculous bailout package through with good old George and his henchmen. It had to be done quickly or we would have a financial meltdown, well from where I sit this evening looks to me like we are having one anyway. Not just in the Dow, but also in the grain and livestock markets, and those will affect this area just as much as the stock market will.
The last week all I heard from either side is how this is not the time to assign blame or point fingers. I sure wish I would have thought of that when I was 8 years old and through a chair through our front door, if only I would have told dad, "now is not the time for blame dad, lets join together and fix the problem". Dad whipped me, fixed the door, then threatened to whip me again. Now is exactly the time to assign blame, and all of us are kidding ourselves if we think whatever party we are affiliated with is blameless, both have shown tremendous dereliction of duty.
Supposedly, we have just been through a period of great economic growth for the last 10-20 years, if this is so, why are we now 11 trillion in debt? Until we quit fighting amongst ourselves and tell our own parties we expect better, we are going to head down the path to becoming a third world country.
Posted by eatasheep69 (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 6:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
*I love that movie! It's one of my all-time favorites.
Posted by wirewatt (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 9:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The point is we need to look at everyone of the folks in Washington and replace all of the good ole boys in both parties with new blood. I am sick of all the excuses and blame. Step up and admit your mistakes and get the ship righted and turn the mess around without taking any more of our money.
Posted by Observation (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 9:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Doug: Read what you wrote, out loud! Sounds a little like a stool flushing, doesn't it?
Posted by YaHooSis48 (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I must agree that both parties are to blame. Too many been in for too long. We need a good housecleaning from the bottom up! However; I AM NOT READY to see a BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA running the country that my dad fought for, nor am I am prepared to have a man at the helm who refuses to honor the flag that so many have gave their life's blood for. Nor by the GRACE OF GOD am I prepared to have a muslim who instead of the BIBLE would be sworn in with his hand on the quoran! A man who will hate Israel, a man that will look down upon other faiths as unacceptable. It is almost unbelievable that any sane person would consider voting for this person with such radical views. Believe me, I attend my Church because I believe in what is being taught there, so when Obama and his sweetie are telling you they just hung out in their church for 20 yrs and it didn't mean a thing, then you have got to be not only deaf but dumb!
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 10:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Doug, I'll help you out a little, you forgot a couple of the biggies:
1) 9/11 was an inside job, the towers were blown up from within, by bombs personally planted by Republicans.
2) We faked the moon landings (also Republicans)
Who needs SNL when we can read it right here?
Posted by neighbor (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 11:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Now I see why so many believed the broadcast of War of the Worlds years ago. Too many people believe or want to believe whatever they hear and read. The mess we are in comes from all sides and angles Doug, it cannot be blamed on one or two individuals. We've met and broke bread together, I was under the impression you are a intelligent man. Your letter makes me question that judgement.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 11:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Neighbor, War Of The Worlds must have been on MSNBC, and the only news outlet exposing it to be fiction was probably Fox News - LOL
Most of these points are opinion, some skewed more th anothers, some are true, some are plain lies, but - what is on the other side of the fence from it? Just the first statement alone is enough to bring up some points on. I'm not going to argue whether or not No Child Left Behind has or hasn't been an underfunded failure, but lets look at how Obama feels about education. Sorry to whoever it was that said Obama just sat on a board with him and didn't check him out on another thread (I think it was momus) - but Obama basically launched his political career in Ayers living room. Anyway, back to the point. Ayers views on education are extremely radical - the guy possibly hates the US more than even Rev Wright. Do some research on the views he espouses in his book - you know, the one that Obama has read and heartily endorses. Now we're finding out that Ayers got large grants for education, and named Obama to be the one to distribute them - but they didn't go to schools, they went to radical groups like ACORN and fringe groups that promote teaching radical, anti-US views in schools.
I'd take No Child Left Behind, with all it's imperfections, any day over what Obama has supported in field of education in his career so far.
Posted by goodoleboy (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 6:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I love it when people have to call Obama by his middle name, makes me giggle. I am also glad our state has so few electoral votes, people here cannot seem to understand that this man is talking about the Bush administration, not the election. Amazes me how the conversation always turns to Obama and how evil he is, McCain is just as bad, he was part of the Keating scandal, involved in the Iran-Contra affair, both have skeletons. But unless something crazy happens Obama will be our next president, McCain is dropping further and further, even Karl Rove said yesterday that it was likely over and the smear tactics are the acts of a desperate man.
Posted by alfalfa (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 7:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Goodoleboy, everything right now is about the election. Obama is not evil, just very misguided. The moderator in the Palin/Biden debate tried to get them to answer a question Obama and McCain dodged in their debate, what promises they would not be able to deliver on because of the cost of the bailout, a question that to me makes perfect sense, and is very appropriate given a $700b expenditure. She didn't get any better results, other than Biden said one promise Obama might have to slow down on was the promise he would double foreign aid. Double foreign aid?? We are $11 trillion in debt and in the what could be the worst financial crisis since the depression, and we have a candidate who can still suggest we double foreign aid?
I won't stand up for either party, and I won't claim that McCain is the best the GOP could find. Obama clearly still does not get the idea we are going to have to cut spending. Having said that, I agree with you that Obama will be our next President, people are mad and their anger is directed at Bush and the party he belongs to. It would take a miracle for McCain to win now.
Posted by create (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 7:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
No Child Left Behind was a good, viable program designed not only to help all students understand the concepts, but to make teachers accountable for teaching them as well. The problem is not with the program itself, originally the idea of Senator Ted Kennedy, Dem of Massachussetts.
The problem began when Bush chose for his first Secretary of Education a Houston Superintendent of Schools who boasted about his district's test scores. Then we learned the truth about how he skewed those test scores -- by telling those kids who were poor performers to stay home on the day of the tests. The district rule was that only those who were present on testing day got scores recorded. It was yet another "good job, Brownie" moment.
NCLB should never be partisan. When NCLB works, it is a thing of beauty in the classroom. Those of us who understand NCLB and have seen it work can vouch for its viability. At the state level, I've seen it work very well. Once teachers could buy in to the program and exercise its tenets, the sky was the limit. Many did not and retired early. Good riddance. Those who stayed have received the ongoing extra training they need to reach every student. The key is to stay abreast and embrace new technology and methods.
The real problem with NCLB is the expectation that all students will pass the test by 2014, and that there will be no stragglers. That needs to be tweaked, and the feds will have to do that. But the NCLB practiced now has more to do with the way the states and even individual districts have handled themselves. The Bush that hired that first crook to be Secretary of Education is so far out of touch with Education, he hasn't the slightest idea what NCLB is all about.
Whoever wins, I hope that beside tweaking the 2014 date, that he leaves NCLB alone. NCLB is no debacle. Teachers and administrators, fearful of change, who refused to study it, to accept it, and to apply it became the barriers.
Posted by OutsiderJ (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yahoosis
Educate yourself. I am a third party voter leaning toward Obama, but even if I was the chairman of the RNC (you'll probably have to look up what that stands for.) I would know that nearly everything in your post is a lie. Lies that have been thoroughly exposed and dismissed. You need to get with the times here. If you are going to ignorantly bash someone, stay up with the trends. Google 'William Ayers' and then come back and resume your misinformation.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
create, although I am not a teacher, I pretty much agree with what you said about NCLB. I would like to know what your thoughts are about William Ayers views on education, and Obama's endorsement of those views.
I ask because everyone seems to dismiss Ayers past, and say "well, he's working on education now, so that's proof he has reformed", etc, etc.... and just working on education is a good thing. But I've seen some of what his education views are about, and what the millions of $$ that he gave to Obama to distribute in Chicago went towards, and I don't believe that is the education that I would want children in America nowadays steered towards. Some of it may sound good in theory, but get down to some of the nuts and bolts of it....
Posted by OutsiderJ (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 10:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You talk as if that money was Ayers' to give. It came from the Annenberg foundation, who gives grants for educational improvement and youth programs. He qualified for the grant, so someone there must thought he had some good ideas.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 10:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Sure they did. I guess since Congress ok'd Bush going into Iraq, you now agree that somebody must have thought Bush had some good ideas?
Sure it has some good ideas. But it also has alot of bad ones that I do not agree with at all.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 10:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I guess, to sum it up, as to keep from a spiraling finger-pointing discussion, is this: (Respectfully)
Obama has had more than just casual contact with Ayers. Some people that does not bother, fine, that is your right. As for me, a President surrounds himself with people to help him formulate policy, hear opinions, etc - even though the final decision rests with him, I personally think it is still important to see who a candidate affiliates with.
Many claim Ayers has "mellowed" with age. He may not be planting bombs, but he's not sorry he ever did. And Obama has denounced this. Good for him. So Ayer's focus now is eduction. And that is the crux of my point(s). Although they are not all bad, I disagree strongly with many of his education views that I have been able to find - and, also question the views of a candidate that has worked with him on education, and been quite involved with distributing the funds. Just as there are some who wholeheartedly agree with his views on education and America.
And Ayers has always, and still does, pretty much consider America to be the worst country in the world. I respectfully disagree with that.
Posted by create (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 11:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
open_eyes, I'm going to look up Ayers and his views on Education. I'll have to get back to you on this. I believe it is important enough to get a good, solid look. One thing I can say on the surface is that Ayers is a college prof. As such, scholars often sit behind a firewall of tenure. That's all I can say for now. Let me look for some info. (I was hoping that by now, at least one of the news agencies would have scored an interview with him. I'll bet his phone is ringing).
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 12:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
create, to clarify as I said on the other thread, I missed the mark slightly on which book Obama endorsed - that was the book on our juvenile court system. Which you may or may not agree with. However, I have alot of problems with Ayers views on education. Good luck hunting. (Not to be confused with good will hunting, the movie.... LOL)
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just a couple for starters:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/16_3_ed...
and
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/b...
and here's a peek into his mindset, since some people on here like to point out he was never convicted - here's a quote from him during an interview:
“Guilty as hell, free as a bird—America is a great country,”
Of course, many people in this country believe in socialism and/or communism, and want to move America towards that - those will certainly agree wholeheartedly with Ayers views. I am one of those that does not agree.
Posted by create (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I found an interesting article here in American Thinker. It outlines much of Ayers' views.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/b...
Much of what Ayers thinks sounds like it can be taken right out of Richard Wright's "Native Son," a lengthy novel that, in short, blamed capitalism for society's woes.
I taught that novel to seniors in college prep, not because I myself am subversive, not at all. I taught that novel so my students could see the world as some see it, and the inherent dangers that can be unleashed by such views. See how it works both ways? BTW, I also used the song "Fortunate Son" to teach satire and to let them know that singing the lyrics "born in the USA" is not the patriotic song they think it is. I taught kids to be critical thinkers.
Unfortunately, Education students have to take x-amount of courses and at least one of his are probably required. In one of his courses, in fact, two of the required books are his own. I wonder if that's the only way he can make sales. I had a prof at ESU like that. We had to buy his book. I bought the book only because I had to have the course since it was the only game in town, but I never had any respect for anything the man said after that. Take my course and buy my book? Forget it. A waste of time and money, but I had to have the credit.
However, I really believe that Ayers views are so far out of proportion to what normal people believe, especially what normal teachers believe, that his views would never make it past his own classroom door. As I said in my earlier post, academics like Ayers often can hide behind the firewall of university tenure. Public school teachers, on the other hand, are largely special people. They have strong regard for their students, and for society as we know it. I honestly don't believe real teachers have an eye on changing an entire society to suit what they learned from some professor in college. Teachers have more sense than that.
I think I can easily cast Ayers as an aging academic whose only audience for his views is a classroom of college kids. Too bad we had to shine a light on him once again. Maybe 60 Minutes will get an interview.
Posted by momus (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As I've said before, character attacks are the last respite of the desperate. Character attacks through a third party of a person with no current or even recent contact with Obama show just how desperate and pathetic the GOP election bid has become. Obama continues to gain ground, and the McCain campaign continues to reach....
Posted by create (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 12:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I must have been typing while you were posting. LOL. Anyway, thanks.
Posted by cyberspace (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
YahooSis
You must be friends with a good ole boy I met in a local bar a few weeks back. He admitted he voted for Bush then went on to say he thinks he is the dumbest President this country ever had. He accused him of making millions of dollars for his political buddies. He related how there are people lined up to assasinate him. He then went on to say that the man he was going to for was also in cahoots with people profiting from the war and this man wanted it to continue so these people could continue plundering and profiting. He is voting for John McCain.
He didn't stop there. He said he wasn't voting for that "n****r" Obama. He doesn't trust him. He believes the "n******s" have an agenda to take control of this country.
I walked away after that statement, filled with a deep sadness. I wasn't surprised. Racism, bigotry, simplemindedness and closed minds still reign in the Midwest. Republicans are incapable of considering both sides of an issue, fear change and can't vote for anyone except in the own party. That's why they are called conservative.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You have some excellent observations, as usual, create. Although I do not completely agree with your last paragraph. I could go on about the particulars of why but I will leave it at that.
Momus, at this time in 2000, Gore had a... what.... 11 point lead over Bush? Yes, I feel at this time that Obama will probably win. But I don't count my chickens until they are hatched.
Cyberspace - that is a sad, sad story. And, I do not doubt for a second, absolutely true. But I think, respectfully, that you are a little narrow-minded to ascribe all of that to only the midwest and conservatives. Remember, we have "educated" people in California who think we still fight Indians here in the midwest. And I see no difference between some idiotic bigot using the n** word (like Jesse Jackson does) - and some liberal on the HuffingtonPost delighting in Tony Snow's cancer, and hoping that he suffers a great deal. If you think that only Republicans are incapable of considering both sides of an issue, fear change, and can't vote for anyone except their own party then you need to please open your window shades, take off the blinders, and step into the real world. Palin & McCain BOTH have more of a record of going against their own party than does Obama, who is pretty much a strict party-line voter. I seriously doubt that you are unaware of the types of things that are daily spouted by the DailyKos and like-minded organizations, so I am left with the only option available, that you somehow think that is ok, not close-minded, and fair. Nor have you examined the voting records of many Democrats. And you also believe Barney Frank when he said none of it was his fault. How sad.
You had a great and moving first paragraph, and first statement of the second paragraph. For the rest of your post, I finish this post filled with a deep sadness and sympathy for your extreme narrow-mindedness, and closed eyes. You pretty much have just exemplified the accusations you make at the end.
Posted by Observation (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 1:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yahoosis
Silly, I think goodoleboy is a liberal and you just made up all of that last post. I can't believe he could change his stripes so completely,so quickly.
Posted by USNretired (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 2:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am a constitutional conservative (look it up if you need to), and an Independent Voter. Here is what I believe based on historical precedence. If Obama is elected it will mean 2 things, Hillary can't run again for 8 years and Republicans will own the White House for 12 years after Obama's 1 failed term.
Posted by UsayULoveGod (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 2:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I also heard a older gentlemen say that he would vote for a Dog before he voted for a Ni-ger . Sad but true . And he classfied himself as a Christian !!!
Posted by UsayULoveGod (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 2:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How about McCain and his Cronnies, The Keating Scandal ??
McCain refused to allow Dr. King Birthday to be a Holiday in Arizona . he voted against it 3 times .
Posted by OutsiderJ (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 2:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bob Barr for president. He is more qualified, has experience, and truely believes in America and Americans. He was a GOP congressman which should sit well with republicans and is running on the libertarian ticket which should sit well with democrats. He is actually pretty moderate for a libertarian, but no one is perfect.
Posted by sadinemporia (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 3:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Okay everyone, can you just leave the "n" word and connotations out of this debate!! People who keep bringing it up are just as guilty! Don't mention it again. WE are ALL human beings!
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And Usay, I've repeatedly watched you scream "racist" at the drop of a hat in the most un-christian like way also.
There are plenty of idiots and bigots out there. Some Democrat, some Republican, some liberal, some conservative, some neither, some part of both. What's the point? Unless you think stupidity is the sole property of one group or the other, which puts you squarely in the very group you are stereotyping.
I'm all for finding some independent for President. Not overly impressed with our choices this year.
Posted by USNretired (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Calling someone a vile name tells everyone a lot about the person saying it, but nothing about the person being defamed.
Posted by YaHooSis48 (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 5:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dear Friends:Obama is not black. He has no relatives who came over on slave ships. Excuse me, his people owned slaves. I have nothing against this man's color or lack thereof, I would have voted for Colin Powell in a flash! Can a muslim be a good American??Politically no, because he must submit to the spiritual leaders (mullahs) who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan.
Philosophically - no- because Islam,Muhammad,and the Quran does not allow freedom of religion and expression. DEMOCRACY and Islam cannot coexist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.
And Barack Hussein Obama, a Muslim, wants to be our President? You've GOT to be kidding! Wake up America! Obama was sworn in on the Quran for his current office and he refuses to pledge alliegiance to the United States or put his hand over his heart when the National Anthem is played! The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within. Hello! Having a Muslim president would seem to fit the bill! Will you trust this man with our national secrets? At least we know where John McCain stands.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 5:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yahoo, although a few of the things you say are correct, much is not. Obama was NOT sworn in using the Quran - that was a Minnesota congressman, Keith Ellison.
And, among other inaccuracies you site, Turkey is a Muslim democratic government. And, recently now, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq all have democratically elected governments.
Posted by create (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 6:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yahoo: Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised as a Muslim, and is a committed Christian. Further, this myth perpetuates unfortunate falsehoods about the Muslim-American community that are offensive to people of all faiths. Shame on you for putting forth lies that you find in your e-mail and such rags as the National Enquirer. Why not dare to be a critical thinker and find out for yourself the real truth about the crap you are spouting instead of listening to others. You have world of information at your fingertips, kiddo; it's called a keyboard. Why not learn how to use it.
open_eyes, you are right in your corrections, but yahoosis has been on these forums before spouting the same old, same old e-mail false garbage that has been making the rounds for months and months now. People like this will not believe the truth because the fake information is so much more tasty to them. It takes less work to believe lies than to search for truth. Unfortunately, people who put forth all this kind of garbage also vote.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 6:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Create - I did not realize or recognize that yahoo is one that has been repeating the email junk. I didn't even bother with that point because I figured most people have figured that out by now - the ones that still claim he is a Muslim will never change their minds no matter what, just as the hard-core Bush haters who blame him for Everything will never be convinced otherwise. I was pointing out just a few corrections at random that came to mind - and my statement that a few of the things Yahoo said were correct were the fact that his ethnicity is mostly Arab, not African. And the radical Muslims have said that they will destroy us from within. Democracy and Islam DO seem to have a problem co-existing, but then again, America and Democracy seem to be having problems co-existing these day - LOL
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 6:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And, create, I'm sure you've also checke out the thread "All talk, no walk" for another person (from the other side of the aisle) who fits your last paragraph perfectly. Too bad people aren't required to take a basic common sense test before being allowed to cast a vote.... (sigh)..
Posted by methusla (anonymous) on October 8, 2008 at 9:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
People ! Please, the fault for the mess this country is in now and in the past ( now follow along closely), can be blamed on, in my opinion, is the fact that all politicians, political partys and yes even the american taxpayer, who voted for these greedy, self centered politicians have allowed so-called special interest groups and individuals to hire lobbyists to offer untold sums of money, gifts and favors to congressmen, presidents, vice presidents, etc. in order to influence their policy making and law making decisions to benefit noone except the special interest group, individual or campaign contributor who donated large sums of money to a politicians campaign.
Let's face it, whoever is elected the next president is going to inherit the fruits of decades of corruption and greed in our government that, in my opinion is going to take decades to straightn out, if it can be straightened out at all.
You can also be assured that the enemies of the U.S. are salivating at the thought of the self made mess the U.S. is in and the possible collapse of what is perceived as the most powerful country on earth.
Posted by methusla (anonymous) on October 8, 2008 at 9:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
P.S.- I know there are those who believe a collapse of the U.S. is impossible and I sincerely hope and pray you are right, however keep a very wary eye on the stock market and the ever decreasing value of the dollar. If either continues to fall the outcome will not be good.
Posted by hogan77 (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 3:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yahoo... your ignorance is blinding. It is people like you that make me ashamed to be part of the human race. Why don't you check this out, and educate yourself?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/mus...
That should cover all the allegations you are making. Obama is as much a Christian as you are claiming to be. Why don't you pull out your trusty Bible and read up in Acts 17:26?
Posted by create (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 8:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wonder if Yahoosis caught the news last night and watched as one woman at McCain's Minnesota rally said she couldn't trust Obama because he is "a muslim and an Arab." McCain immediately took back the microphone and told her she was wrong. Then he explained to the rest of the people that Obama was not a Muslim, not an Arab, that he was an American and a good, decent family man. Kudos to McCain for doing that. It was a courageous move because the nuts at the rally boo'd him for defending Obama, but he continued anyway. Obama took a moment to compliment him for doing that at his own rally later on.
I may not agree with McCain's policies, but I respect him for trying to put out that wildfire of racism amid a mob of extremists.
Posted by create (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 9:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
May I offer this op-ed article by Frank Schaeffer, a lifelong Republican. It appeared in the Baltimore Sun yesterday. In short, it takes McCain to task for "deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence."
I hope you will take the time to read this important piece.
www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/b...
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 10:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, I went to the DailyKos (shudder). "I hope everyone will take the time to read the important pieces there". (Shudder again).
From an article entitled "Why We Hate George Bush":
"Yes, I know hate is a strong word. But I do hate the man. I hate him." (Lot's of supposed "facts" listed in that article, too...)
I could have filled up 50 pages of these blogs with articles similar to create's link. But I don't think they deserve it.
And we have the movie "Death of a President", which portrays Bush assassinated which comes out WHILE he is still in office. Anyone here object if we come out with a movie entitled "Death of a Candidate" portraying the assassination of Obama? Anyone mind? Would that be stoking the fires of hatred, and planting ideas in the minds of idiotic zealots? Why or why not? Why or why not could the Bush movie be accused of the same thing?
Anyone think the left hate articles and stokers of hatred and racism are just as important as the right? Anyone think the extremists on the left deserve as much air and print time to voice their crap as the extremists on the right? Anyone?
Posted by USNretired (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 2:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
create Check out Obama's bio as his team promulgates it. He attended Muslim training as a child in Indonesia.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 5:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just FYI to be factual about Obama's ethnic lineage (not that it matters one whit).
6.25% Black
43.75% Arab
50.00% White
Every ancestor on his father's side has an Arabic name, because his father was officially classified as "Arab African" by the Kenyan government.
100% of African tribal members of western Kenya where his father was born have Christian names, not Arabic. His father's decision to name him with an Arabic name is a matter of his father establishing his ethnic identity in Africa - it is done deliberately to ethnically separate from the African tribes. Researching his roots reveal that on his father's side, he is descended from Arab slave traders. They operated under an extended grant from Queen Victoria, who gave them the right to continue the slave trade in exchange for helping the British defeat the Madhi Army in southern Sudan and the Upper Nile region.
Just a techincal FYI.
Posted by create (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks,USN. I know from several readings that Obama did indeed live in Indonesia as a child from ages 6 to 10. Fact checks at several sites reveal his "muslim training." Snopes has the most comprehensive information.
True, Obama attended Muslim training in Indonesia, ages 6-10. However, according to several sites, he attended BOTH Muslim and Catholic schools and took religious training in both.
His own writings say that his mother also took him to Buddhist temples and Shinto shrines. At ten, he was sent to live with his maternal grandparents in Hawaii where he attended Punahou School. (POONA hoe)
I am from Hawaii, born and raised so I'm familiar with Punahou, a prep school founded by fundamentalist Christian missionaries for their own children in the early Hawaiian Islands. In addition to college prep classes, Punahou teaches religious classes everyday -- Christian. He took those classes from age ten until graduation at 17.
Think about this. When he was in Indonesia, he was just a little kid. Taking religious instruction in two different religions plus going to Buddhist temples and Shinto shrines has to be confusing. I can only conclude that his religious training at Punahou for 8 years had to have been far more direct and certainly much more profound in the tenets of Christianity than he ever received in his early life in Indonesia.
In my own experience, my parents were at odds with my religious upbringing. My mother insisted that I attend Catholic parochial school. I was educated by Maryknoll nuns who used the ruler approach as they taught "religion" everyday. I remember very little because it was shoved down my throat with talk of black marks on my soul if I played marbles with the boys out in the school yard. Hopscotch with girls was okay. Geeesh.
What I really learned was that pious old Catholic women who, along with my mother and aunt, attended church every Sunday but gossipped viciously about everybody the rest of the week. They discussed who wore what, who was or wasn't standing in line for communion. Every Sunday!
When I became an adult I refused to have anything to do with the Catholic Church. I am what is called a lapsed Catholic, and my view of organized religion is dim.
My point is this. Obama's religious training at Punahou had to have been much stronger than mine at St. Ann's because he still is a Christian and he still attends church. Not me.
The whole accusation that Obama is a muslim is nothing more than just another way of saying, "he's Black." It's low class and intentionally racist!
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
create, I agree. Just because Obama had some Muslim training when he was little does not make him a Muslim.
I'm sad you had that experience with the church, and you allowed it to turn you against it. I, too tend at times to take a dim view of organized religion, regardless of my personal spiritual beliefs. Because I tend to fall into the trap of stereotyping people in certain groups as being supposed to behave a certain way. I have to remind myself that just because a person attends church does not make them perfect, or any better than anyone else. We're all just trying. I know some people who are absolute a**holes on the basketball court and softball diamond, but I have not let it sour me on organized sports. I prefer to focus on the people that are fun and enjoyable to play with, and realize that every segment of society, every group, every religion, every ethnic race, every political party has it's share of saints and sinners.
Posted by glarson (Gwen Larson) on October 11, 2008 at 7:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Time to move to a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/ope...