Who would you vote for if the election was today?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

If you know enough about the man to proclaim him as your choice for our next president, please explain what he meant when he wrote that....I am not even saying that people shouldnt vote for him, but he does have radical connections and those seem like radical statements to me....If Im missing his meaning, please enlighten me, if Im not missing his meaning, then defend his thoughts....If this was a tennis match, I just lobbed a volley into your court, if you have actually studied the man to which you are planning to vote for, you should be able to slam this right back into my court....this is a thread accompaning a poll about who you would vote for if the election started today, im telling you that I wouldnt vote for Obama because of his radical connections and because of what I interpereted as racist writings in his book, if those interpretations are wrong, convince me, my vote is up for grabs!!!
 
You can't take just a one line quote from that book. You are completely misrepresenting the work. Obama often used 7-9 pages to describe and discuss his incidents. This is just absolutely ****ing ridiculous to just pull quotes like that. He would often make statements such as these, and then go on to discuss it, or mention an alternative, etc.

For example:

Now lets play the chop up a quote game: "These are A-1, USDA-certified racists. All of 'em. White. Asian--shot, these Asians worse than the whites."

Now read it in context.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>"I mean it this time," he was saying to me now. "These girls are A-1, USDA-certified racists. All of 'em. White girls. Asian girls---shoot, these Asians worse than the whites. Think we got a disease or something."

"maybe they're looking at that big butt of yours. Man, I thought you were in training."

"Get your hands out of my fries. You ain't my bitch, ******...buy your own damn fries. Now what was I talking about?"

"Just cause a girl don't go out with you doesn't make her racist."

Don't be thick, all right? I'm not just talking about one time. Look, I ask Monica out, she says no. I say okay...your shit's not so hot anyway." RRay stopped to check my reaction, then smiled. "All right, maybe I don't actually say all that. I just tell her okay, Monica, you know we still tight. Next thing I know, she's hooked up with Steve 'No Neck' Yamaguchi, the two of 'em all holding hands and shit, like a couple of lovebirds. So fine---I figure there's more fish in the sea. I go ask Pamela out. She tells me she ain't going to the dance. I say cool. Get to the dance, guess who's standing there, got her arms around Rick Cook. 'Hi, Ray,' she says, like she don't know what's going down. Rick Cook! Now you know that guy ain't shit. Sorry-assed motherfucker got nothing on me, right? Nothing."

He stuffed a handful of fries into his mouth. "It ain't just me, by the way. I don't see you doing any better in the booty department."
Because I'm shy, I thought to myself; but I would never admit that to him. Ray pressed the advantage.

"So what happens when we go out to a party with some sisters, huh? What happens? I tell you what happens. Blam! They on us like there's no tomorrow. High school chicks, university chicks--it don't matter. They acting sweet, all smiles. 'Sure you can have my number baby.' Bet."

"Well..."

"Well what? Listen, why don't you get more playing time on the basketball team, hugh? At least two guys ahead of you ain't nothing and you know it, and they know it. I seen you ter 'em up on the playground, no contest. Why wasn't I starting on the football squad this season, no matter howm any passes the other guy dropped? Tell me we wouldn't be treated different if we was white. Or Japanese. Or Hawaiian. Or ****ing Eskimo."

"That's not what I'm saying."

"So what are you saying?"
"All right, here's what I'm saying. I'm saying, yeah, it's harder to get dates because there aren't any black girls around here. But that don't make the girls that are here all racist. Maybe they just want somebody that looks like their daddy, or their brother, or whatever, and we ain't it. I'm saying yeah, I might not get the breaks on the team that some guys get, but they play like white boys do, and that's the style the coach likes to play, and they're winning the way they play. I don't play that way.

"As for your greasy-mouthed self," I added, reaching for the last of his fries, "I'm saying the coaches may not like you 'cause you're a smart-assed black man, but it might help if you stopped eating all them fries you eat, making you look six months pregnant. That's what I'm saying."

"Man, I don't know why you making excuses for these folks." Ray got up and crumpled his trash into a tight ball. "Let's get out of here. Your shit's getting way too complicating for me."</div>


But then again, there is no need to play such games...lets just look at the facts. There is a reason those quotes didn't seem familiar to me.

From Factcheck.org
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_...ould_stand.html

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Q:
Did Obama write that he would "stand with the Muslims" and that he nurses a "pervasive sense of grievance and animosity" toward whites?
Can you guys provide some context to this e-mail. Not sure if you have already but thought I would pass it along. Thanks.

Misleading Obama E-mail:
"In His Own Words"

The last quote tells all we need to know! Be sure and read that one!

This guy wants to be our President and control our government. Pay close attention to the last comment!! Below are a few lines from Obama's books " his words:

From Dreams of My Father: "I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites."

From Dreams of My Father : "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race."

From Dreams of My Father : "There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white."

From Dreams of My Father : ; "It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names."

From Dreams of My Father : "I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, Dubois and Mandela."

From Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
A:
No. A widely circulated e-mail fabricates some quotes from Obama's books and twists others.
Anyone looking for Barack Obama's real sentiments about whites, blacks and Muslims won't find them in this scurrilous collection of falsified, doctored and context-free "quotations." The e-mail claims to feature words taken from Obama's books, "The Audacity of Hope" (2006) and "Dreams from My Father" (1995, republished in 2004). But we found that two of the quotes are false, and others have been manipulated or taken out of context.

We have received many inquiries about this from readers whose suspicions were aroused, with good reason. Aside from the fact that the e-mail incorrectly cites the title of Obama's book as "Dreams of My Father," rather than "Dreams from My Father," you may have noticed that none of the quotes in this e-mail contain page references. This should be a sign to any reader that the author is trying to pull a fast one, betting that you won't take the time to read through all 806 pages of Obama's books to get to the facts.

False Quotes

We'll take these supposed Obama quotes one at a time, starting with the ones that are simply false. The first has Obama confessing to a "sense of grievance" and "animosity" toward whites.
Misleading e-mail: From Dreams of My Father : "I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race."

Actual quote from "Dreams from My Father": Nothing like this quote appears in Obama's books.
The Obama campaign states that this quote does not appear in Obama's book "Dreams from My Father." We carefully looked through that book, as well as "The Audacity of Hope," and found nothing similar. The popular urban legends reference site Snopes.com comes to the same conclusion. Snopes also notes that a similar quote does appear in an unfavorable review of "Dreams from My Father" that was published in the March 2007 issue of The American Conservative. But the words are those of the reviewer, Steve Sailer, not Obama.
Steve Sailer: He inherited his father’s penetrating intelligence; was raised mostly by his loving liberal white grandparents in multiracial, laid-back Hawaii, where America’s normal race rules never applied; and received a superb private school education. And yet, at least through age 33 when he wrote Dreams from My Father, he found solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against his mother’s race.
We find that this e-mail takes the personal opinion of a conservative author and falsely presents it as a confession by Obama.

A second false quote has Obama saying he would "stand with the Muslims," words that don't appear in his book. What he actually said is that he would stand with American immigrants from Pakistan or Arab countries should they be faced with something like the forced detention of Japanese-American families in World War II:
Misleading e-mail: From Audacity of Hope: "I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."

Actual quote from "The Audacity of Hope" [pg. 261]: Of course, not all my conversations in immigrant communities follow this easy pattern. In the wake of 9/11, my meetings with Arab and Pakistani Americans, for example, have a more urgent quality, for the stories of detentions and FBI questioning and hard stares from neighbors have shaken their sense of security and belonging. They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.
Obama did not say he would side with "the Muslims," which could easily be read as meaning he would side with the world's Muslim population even if it meant working outside the best interests of the United States. He said he would side with "them," referring back to his mention of immigrant communities and specifically to "Arab and Pakistani Americans." Furthermore, he was speaking of an "ugly direction" like the mass internment of Japanese Americans.

This false quote goes hand in hand with the equally false rumor that Obama is a Muslim.
Doctored Quotes

We next turn to a quote that is manipulated to make it sound as though Obama is saying he would "never emulate" a white man, when he was actually describing a personal struggle to come to terms with his own mixed-race ancestry, and the failings of blacks and whites alike.

Misleading e-mail: From Dreams of My Father: "I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, Dubois and Mandela."

Actual quote from "Dreams from My Father" [pg. 220]: Yes, I'd seen weakness in other men - Gramps and his disappointments, Lolo and his compromise. But these men had become object lessons for me, men I might love but never emulate, white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela. And if later I saw that the black men I knew - Frank or Ray or Will or Rafiq - fell short of such lofty standards; if I had learned to respect these men for the struggles they went through, recognizing them as my own - my father's voice had nevertheless remained untainted, inspiring, rebuking, granting or withholding approval. You do not work hard enough, Barry. You must help in your people's struggle. Wake up, black man!

The e-mail cuts out important words, changing the quote's meaning. Gone is the notion that he "might love" white or brown men. Gone also is that Obama was speaking not of white or brown men generally, but specifically about "these men," his white, maternal grandfather Stanley Dunham and his Indonesian stepfather Lolo Soetoro. The doctored quote makes it appear as though Obama said he would never emulate any white or brown man, based on their race.

Gone as well is Obama's admission that his black friends sometimes "fell short of [the] lofty standards" of black role models like Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela.

Another doctored quote is trimmed to make Obama sound as though he is wary of working for a white man because of his race, when Obama actually wrote that the "problem" of race had been raised by the man himself.

Misleading e-mail: From Dreams of My Father: "There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white."

Actual quote from "Dreams from My Father" [pgs. 141-142]: Now he was trying to pull urban blacks and suburban whites together around a plan to save manufacturing jobs in metropolitan Chicago. He needed somebody to work with him, he said. Somebody black. ...

He offered to start me off at ten thousand dollars the first year, with a two-thousand-dollar travel allowance to buy a car; the salary would go up if things worked out. After he was gone, I took the long way home, along the East River promenade, and tried to figure out what to make of the man. He was smart, I decided. He seemed committed to his work. Still, there was something about him that made me wary. A little too sure of himself, maybe. And white - he'd said himself that that was a problem.

The e-mail's edited quote makes it appear as if Obama is left with an unfavorable opinion of someone based on race. The full quote shows that Obama's mention of Marty Kaufman's race is made only after Kaufman raises it as a potential problem in light of his consideration to hire Obama for a job on a community organizing drive.

Obama took the job. "Kaufman" is actually a pseudonym. Obama told Chicago Sun-Times reporter Lynn Sweet that the man's real name was Gerald Kellman, who was Obama's boss at his first job in Chicago as a community organizer at the Calumet Community Religious Conference. Obama worked for him for three years before going on to law school. Kellman has said of Obama: "One of the remarkable things is how well he listens to people who are opposed to him."

Context, Please

Other quotes in the e-mail are offered without their full context, which we offer here.
Misleading e-mail: From Dreams of My Father: "I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites."

Actual quote from "Dreams from My Father" [pg. xv]: When people who don't know me well, black or white, discover my background (and it is usually a discovery, for I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of twelve or thirteen, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites), I see the split-second adjustments they have to make, the searching of my eyes for some telltale sign. They no longer know who I am. Privately, they guess at my troubled heart, I suppose - the mixed blood, the divided soul, the ghostly image of the tragic mulatto trapped between two worlds. And if I were to explain that no, the tragedy is not mine, or at least not mine alone, it is yours, sons and daughters of Plymouth Rock and Ellis Island, it is yours, children of Africa, it is the tragedy of both my wife's six-year-old cousin and his white first grade classmates, so that you need not guess at what troubles me, it's on the nightly news for all to see, and that if we could acknowledge at least that much then the tragic cycle begins to break down...well, I suspect that I sound incurably naive, wedded to lost hopes, like those Communists who peddle their newspapers on the fringes of various college towns. Or worse, I sound like I'm trying to hide from myself.
On its own, the quote can be interpreted as Obama rejecting his white heritage and, by extension, the entire white population. But, in full context, the statement is part of Obama's assessment of "black or white" individuals' first impressions of him as a person of mixed race.

And finally ...
Misleading e-mail: From Dreams of My Father : ; "It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names."

Actual quote from "Dreams from My Father" [pg. 100-101]: To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets. We smoked cigarettes and wore leather jackets. At night, in the dorms, we discussed necolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy. When we ground out our cigarettes in the hallway carpet or set our stereos so loud that the walls began to shake, we were resisting bourgeois society's stifling constraints. We weren't indifferent or careless or insecure. We were alienated. But this strategy alone couldn't provide the distance I wanted, from Joyce or my past. After all, there were thousands of so-called campus radicals, most of them white and tenured and happily tolerated. No, it remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.
On its own, the quote makes Obama appear racially militant. Whereas, in full context, the quote illustrates Obama's confusion over his race and cultural heritage. This is emphasized in the preceding paragraph, where Obama describes himself as someone compensating for insecurity in his "racial credentials."</div>
 
Atleast you did some research and may have educated me on something I may be mistaken on....I will now go back to the book and see If I can find the section....consider my side of this debate on hold until I find more evidence or concede if I fail to do so
 
You don't have the book. Your just a <strike>bigoted Right winger</strike> grasping at straws. What your doing is taking right out of the Republican playbook. Throw out some complete bullshit, and then keep doing that until something sticks.

<span style="color:#FF0000">No personal attacks - gambitnut</span>
 
McCain for me, for two simple reasons, one, he knows the mistakes that Bush made and will not repeat them, two, will never negotiate with the enemy and will never give up. True fighter is what he is.


MCCAIN 4 PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Those were his feelings at the age of 12 and 13 you can't hold it against him. He was reflecting on his childhood at least he was honest about it.

I'm voting for Obama because I cannot stand John McCain.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Jun 8 2008, 11:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You don't have the book. Your just a <strike>bigoted Right winger</strike> grasping at straws. What your doing is taking right out of the Republican playbook. Throw out some complete bullshit, and then keep doing that until something sticks.

<span style="color:#FF0000">No personal attacks - gambitnut</span></div>


Ive found 2 websites that say one of those quotes are not in the book and Ive found 100s that say they all are....one of the sites that say the quote is not in there, is the site you have used....I find it hard to believe that all the other sites are incorrect....


On a related note, I dont appreciated you calling me what you called me when you know nothing about me except that I posted some quotes from the book of your candidate and then gave an interpertation of them....its that kind of hatred that damages the political process in this country and will eventually lead to this countries downfall....perhaps you should take a look in a mirror and consider your statement will reflecting on what the word bigot means....
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBeef @ Jun 9 2008, 12:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BG7 Lavigne @ Jun 8 2008, 11:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You don't have the book. Your just a <strike>bigoted Right winger</strike> grasping at straws. What your doing is taking right out of the Republican playbook. Throw out some complete bullshit, and then keep doing that until something sticks.

<span style="color:#FF0000">No personal attacks - gambitnut</span></div>


Ive found 2 websites that say one of those quotes are not in the book and Ive found 100s that say they all are....one of the sites that say the quote is not in there, is the site you have used....I find it hard to believe that all the other sites are incorrect....


On a related note, I dont appreciated you calling me what you called me when you know nothing about me except that I posted some quotes from the book of your candidate and then gave an interpertation of them....its that kind of hatred that damages the political process in this country and will eventually lead to this countries downfall....perhaps you should take a look in a mirror and consider your statement will reflecting on what the word bigot means....
</div>

IIRC, doesn't BG7 have the book in question?
 
Put that first quote in google. You'll get "American Conservative Magazine", "Republican Faith Blog".

Then looking at the forums/yahoo answers: "Yahoo Answers: What if a white man said this in a book", "Yahoo Answers: Where is this in My Father", "Google Groups: Obama is a racist piece of shit", "Newzapforums: Could Barack Hussein Obama Be Our Next President"

Then of course is at the bottom of the first page of google results a "Truth or Fiction" site, that debunks it saying, "All but two of the quotes seem to be accurate, but are taken out of context. One of the quotes does not exist and the one about Islam is fabricated."

So you are either playing the same old Republican games or are just plain dumb. I think it is the former, and this type of politics will not work this time.

There is a reason they didn't cite any page numbers.
 
Yahoo! answers and a Truth of Fiction site....true journalistic integrity....whats a matter, couldnt find it in wikopedia? By the way, you have gone with the standard from the Liberal Playbook, when you cant win a debate, try to attack and discredit all that oppose your view....well done
 
I find it rather sickening to think that these two are the best candidate each party can offer.

I vote None of the Above
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jun 9 2008, 02:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I find it rather sickening to think that these two are the best candidate each party can offer.

I vote None of the Above</div>

Welcome to every four years.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ghoti @ Jun 9 2008, 02:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jun 9 2008, 02:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I find it rather sickening to think that these two are the best candidate each party can offer.

I vote None of the Above</div>

Welcome to every four years.
</div>

I've been saying that since the first Presidential election you and I could vote in
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jun 9 2008, 12:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>IIRC, doesn't BG7 have the book in question?</div>

He claims that hes read the book....May I point out that he didnt remember any of the 3 quotes before he found his research that stated 2 of the 3 were in the book....so why should we assume that he would remember the third? the bottom line is that of the 1st 100 sites that came up when I googled the quote, 2% disputed it, 98% confirmed it....
 
I don't think he has the entire book embedded into his memory.

I would put my money on BG7 being correct in this case, he's been more specific on this point.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 8 2008, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Winston Churhill was a torrie, no?</div>

OK, I should have said modern Tories. They just seem to be too much about keeping the rich rich and the poor poor. Granted, the Labour Party (who I would support as left-wing by default) have not been much better, and they have moved to the right over recent years which has helped. But I'm just against a lot of things that the Tories stand for, such as always trying to maintain tradition, Euro-scepticism (isolationism). I suppose it was Thatcher who really made the mess, and I consiider myself lucky not to have lived a day of my life whilst she was PM (she resigned the day before I was born - obviously scared of me
) but I fear for British politics that the two major parties seem to be converging on the middle ground of politics rather than offering a true left/right wing stance. And that is why we need PR or a hybrid system in the UK, but I digress. I'm not too sure on the exact stances of Obama and McCain at the moment, but just based on the overall Party stereotype I would vote for Obama, though he does remind me a little too much of David Cameron - pledging "change" but not really stating what the changes will be.
 
I'd vote for Obama because it'd make me seem fashionable and would give me a handy defense against accusations of racism.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Jun 9 2008, 08:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 8 2008, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Winston Churhill was a torrie, no?</div>

OK, I should have said modern Tories. They just seem to be too much about keeping the rich rich and the poor poor. Granted, the Labour Party (who I would support as left-wing by default) have not been much better, and they have moved to the right over recent years which has helped. But I'm just against a lot of things that the Tories stand for, such as always trying to maintain tradition, Euro-scepticism (isolationism). I suppose it was Thatcher who really made the mess, and I consiider myself lucky not to have lived a day of my life whilst she was PM (she resigned the day before I was born - obviously scared of me
) but I fear for British politics that the two major parties seem to be converging on the middle ground of politics rather than offering a true left/right wing stance. And that is why we need PR or a hybrid system in the UK, but I digress. I'm not too sure on the exact stances of Obama and McCain at the moment, but just based on the overall Party stereotype I would vote for Obama, though he does remind me a little too much of David Cameron - pledging "change" but not really stating what the changes will be.
</div>
Word. I want the same in Canada too.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thrilla @ Jun 8 2008, 07:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 8 2008, 08:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Maybe he should have served one term in the senate then ran? Get some accomplishments under his belt...</div>
Why? So he could have voted on more issues and sponsored a few more bills? I'm having a hard time thinking of just one thing that a Senator has accomplished on their own thats of any significance.
</div>

McCain-Feingold. From that one piece of legislation alone, you get that McCain is willing to work across the aisle (with Feingold), that he's willing to take on the fat cat insiders who buy politics and politicians, and that he's willing to break ranks with his party (good of country over good of party).

It's not just about sponsoring bills and voting on issues, though it'd be nice to see how a candidate did those things when he had to actually govern. It's about building relationships that he can use to get his agenda passed. It's about building an organization of staff members who can basically take over the top jobs at the white house.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Governors and Mayors do get things done.</div>That has nothing to do with my experience point. I was only saying that veteran officials are less likely to be motivated in office. More going through the motions than anything else. Whether they are congressman, senators, mayors, governors, etc.. That's one of the reasons term limits exist.
</div>

Term limits don't exist in most of the places that count (like congress). You might look at NYC before and after Rudy. Before, it was a city on the verge of bankruptcy and was generally an open sewer (trash bags piled 15 feet high on the corners); after, it was one of the best cities in the USA.

Back to my previous point about relationships. Bush brought in his staff from government at Texas. Clinton brought in his staff from Arkansas. Reagan, his staff from California. Who is Obama's staff?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>As for his associates, how'd you feel if he made his pastor secretary of state? That's the kind of people he's hung with...</div>I don't know anything about the guy besides 3-4 minutes of his 30 year career as a Pastor that was taken out of context. I wouldn't want any Pastor as an elected official, but he couldn't be any worse than some of the cabinet members Bush has appointed.
</div>

It's likely to be just as bad as the cabinet members Bush has appointed, or worse - the ones that Clinton appointed. A lot of Clinton's guys and gals were indicted or investigated by special prosecutors for good reason.

The basis that he isn't Bush isn't enough of a reason to vote FOR him. Noam Chumpsky isn't Bush, either, and I wouldn't want any part of him; what I know about Wright is that he sounds a lot like Chumpsky.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Going to Iraq, he'd at least see first hand whether it's worth staying.</div>That's dumb. if he didn't think we should have gone do begin with, why would something he saw over there all of a sudden make him think its worth staying?
</div>

The anti-war movement has spent $billions putting down the war, the USA, and the progress that's been made there. It's one thing to ride that publicity to victory in presidential elections, and another to look at the facts on the ground in Iraq today. If you do look at the situation in Iraq today, you might get the sense that the war is almost won there, and that staying a couple more years seals the deal.

http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14690674

Al-Qaeda facing alienation from fellow jihadists: Expert
Monday, 09 June , 2008, 11:11


New York: Al-Qaeda is said to have lately started attracting alienation from fellow jihadists because of its brutal campaign in Iraq, as most of its victims around the world are Muslims, as also that the terror network has continued to target civilians for slaughter in the West, writes Cruickshank in the New York-based Daily News.

Cruickshank is a fellow at the New York University Centre on Law and Security and the co-author of the current cover story “The Jihadist Revolt against Bin Laden” published in the New Republic.

According to him, among the jihadi leaders who have openly attacked al-Qaeda in the recent past, include Salman al Oudah, a Saudi cleric with a large international youth following and whose fiery anti-American audiotapes in the 1990s were a huge inspiration for Bin Laden and his circle, Sayyid Imam al Sharif, the Egyptian spiritual godfather of al-Qaeda, and Noman Benotman, a former leader of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.

While mainstream Muslim leaders have long criticised al-Qaeda, these critics have the jihadist credentials to make their criticisms bite, wrote Cruickshank.

According to the writer, recent polls show that al-Qaeda has haemorrhaged support in places where its terrorist campaign has reached people's doorsteps. By one measure, pro-al-Qaeda sentiment is now down to 10 per cent in Saudi Arabia - and has dropped from 70 per cent to 4 per cent in the Northwest Frontier Province of Pakistan. The number of al-Qaeda sympathisers in Britain fell dramatically after the 2005 London bombings.

According to him, this “tectonic shift” beneath the headlines in the wider war on terrorism could within a few years significantly lower the likelihood of terror returning to New York’s streets.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Jun 9 2008, 06:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 8 2008, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Winston Churhill was a torrie, no?</div>

OK, I should have said modern Tories. They just seem to be too much about keeping the rich rich and the poor poor. Granted, the Labour Party (who I would support as left-wing by default) have not been much better, and they have moved to the right over recent years which has helped. But I'm just against a lot of things that the Tories stand for, such as always trying to maintain tradition, Euro-scepticism (isolationism). I suppose it was Thatcher who really made the mess, and I consiider myself lucky not to have lived a day of my life whilst she was PM (she resigned the day before I was born - obviously scared of me
) but I fear for British politics that the two major parties seem to be converging on the middle ground of politics rather than offering a true left/right wing stance. And that is why we need PR or a hybrid system in the UK, but I digress. I'm not too sure on the exact stances of Obama and McCain at the moment, but just based on the overall Party stereotype I would vote for Obama, though he does remind me a little too much of David Cameron - pledging "change" but not really stating what the changes will be.
</div>

I think you folks over there are just now starting to experience what the USA has been about all along. We have states like Virginia and Texas, who should be considered like countries in Europe (France, Germany, GB, etc.). The union of these states here was to make a common currency and to make it so your marriage in one state is recognized in another, so you don't need a passport to go from state to state, and to provide common defense and ambassadors. That kind of thing.

The "traditionalist" view here is to recognize the states as states and the powers they should have as if they were euro countries. The american version of social democratic movement would eliminate this distinction for the most part.

I can't say that I'm immersed in your politics - far from it. What I have read of Churchill's quotations, I'd consider myself that kind of torrie
 
On the subject of Iraq and Al-Qaeda, terrorism etc, has anyone ever seen the TV Show Sleeper Cell? I think it's really good, really insightful into the World of Islam. For example, you get the extreme view from the terrorists that is seen in the media anyway, but you also get the view of the vast majority of Islam. For example, they say the greatest jihad is the war you fight within yourself, to battle your own faith and to stay true to Islam. That there was once a warrior fighting in the name of Islam, and that he was about to kill a Crusader, when the Crusader spat in his face. Then the warrior felt hatred for the crusader so could not kill him, else it would be murder since he was no longer just fighting to protect the faith. Please don't think I'm preaching, I'm a solid atheist, but I think it's interesting to get a different perspective on Islam other than the negative view we see all to often in the media.

For anyone in the UK reading this, Sleeper Cell is on FX (Sky 15-something I think) on Tuesday nights around 11, watch it if you have the chance.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 9 2008, 03:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Jun 9 2008, 06:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 8 2008, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Winston Churhill was a torrie, no?</div>

OK, I should have said modern Tories. They just seem to be too much about keeping the rich rich and the poor poor. Granted, the Labour Party (who I would support as left-wing by default) have not been much better, and they have moved to the right over recent years which has helped. But I'm just against a lot of things that the Tories stand for, such as always trying to maintain tradition, Euro-scepticism (isolationism). I suppose it was Thatcher who really made the mess, and I consiider myself lucky not to have lived a day of my life whilst she was PM (she resigned the day before I was born - obviously scared of me
) but I fear for British politics that the two major parties seem to be converging on the middle ground of politics rather than offering a true left/right wing stance. And that is why we need PR or a hybrid system in the UK, but I digress. I'm not too sure on the exact stances of Obama and McCain at the moment, but just based on the overall Party stereotype I would vote for Obama, though he does remind me a little too much of David Cameron - pledging "change" but not really stating what the changes will be.
</div>

I think you folks over there are just now starting to experience what the USA has been about all along. We have states like Virginia and Texas, who should be considered like countries in Europe (France, Germany, GB, etc.). The union of these states here was to make a common currency and to make it so your marriage in one state is recognized in another, so you don't need a passport to go from state to state, and to provide common defense and ambassadors. That kind of thing.

The "traditionalist" view here is to recognize the states as states and the powers they should have as if they were euro countries. The american version of social democratic movement would eliminate this distinction for the most part.

I can't say that I'm immersed in your politics - far from it. What I have read of Churchill's quotations, I'd consider myself that kind of torrie

</div>

I'll be honest, I don't know much about the politics from Churchill's era, but what I do know is that he was an incredible leader who had charisma in abundance and could really pull people together, but I'm not 100% sure exactly what he stood for. When I was studying for my Politics exam a few weeks ago,m reading about traditional conservatism, I was a lot more sympathetic towards it than I am for modern Conservatism as displayed by the Conservative Party today. I just think that, in this day and age, principles such as collectivism should be placed a lot higher than individualism, but I know that that is unlikely to ever be true in the USA as it conflicts with the American Dream, that underlies a lot of things in the country.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TheBeef @ Jun 9 2008, 02:22 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Jun 9 2008, 12:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>IIRC, doesn't BG7 have the book in question?</div>

He claims that hes read the book....May I point out that he didnt remember any of the 3 quotes before he found his research that stated 2 of the 3 were in the book....so why should we assume that he would remember the third? the bottom line is that of the 1st 100 sites that came up when I googled the quote, 2% disputed it, 98% confirmed it....
</div>

So you remember every line from every piece of text you've ever read?

I am not going to remember quotes that are 1.) Not in the book and 2.) A brief snippet, taken out of context, that doesn't reflect the message he was writing on those pages.

As Mark Green would say, when you're in a hole, just stop digging.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=""></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

There is a reason they didn't cite page numbers.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Jun 9 2008, 07:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>On the subject of Iraq and Al-Qaeda, terrorism etc, has anyone ever seen the TV Show Sleeper Cell? I think it's really good, really insightful into the World of Islam. For example, you get the extreme view from the terrorists that is seen in the media anyway, but you also get the view of the vast majority of Islam. For example, they say the greatest jihad is the war you fight within yourself, to battle your own faith and to stay true to Islam. That there was once a warrior fighting in the name of Islam, and that he was about to kill a Crusader, when the Crusader spat in his face. Then the warrior felt hatred for the crusader so could not kill him, else it would be murder since he was no longer just fighting to protect the faith. Please don't think I'm preaching, I'm a solid atheist, but I think it's interesting to get a different perspective on Islam other than the negative view we see all to often in the media.

For anyone in the UK reading this, Sleeper Cell is on FX (Sky 15-something I think) on Tuesday nights around 11, watch it if you have the chance.</div>

My understanding is that Jihad doesn't mean "war" but rather to spread the word of Allah, or to do his work.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Jun 9 2008, 07:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 9 2008, 03:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Jun 9 2008, 06:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 8 2008, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Winston Churhill was a torrie, no?</div>

OK, I should have said modern Tories. They just seem to be too much about keeping the rich rich and the poor poor. Granted, the Labour Party (who I would support as left-wing by default) have not been much better, and they have moved to the right over recent years which has helped. But I'm just against a lot of things that the Tories stand for, such as always trying to maintain tradition, Euro-scepticism (isolationism). I suppose it was Thatcher who really made the mess, and I consiider myself lucky not to have lived a day of my life whilst she was PM (she resigned the day before I was born - obviously scared of me
) but I fear for British politics that the two major parties seem to be converging on the middle ground of politics rather than offering a true left/right wing stance. And that is why we need PR or a hybrid system in the UK, but I digress. I'm not too sure on the exact stances of Obama and McCain at the moment, but just based on the overall Party stereotype I would vote for Obama, though he does remind me a little too much of David Cameron - pledging "change" but not really stating what the changes will be.
</div>

I think you folks over there are just now starting to experience what the USA has been about all along. We have states like Virginia and Texas, who should be considered like countries in Europe (France, Germany, GB, etc.). The union of these states here was to make a common currency and to make it so your marriage in one state is recognized in another, so you don't need a passport to go from state to state, and to provide common defense and ambassadors. That kind of thing.

The "traditionalist" view here is to recognize the states as states and the powers they should have as if they were euro countries. The american version of social democratic movement would eliminate this distinction for the most part.

I can't say that I'm immersed in your politics - far from it. What I have read of Churchill's quotations, I'd consider myself that kind of torrie

</div>

I'll be honest, I don't know much about the politics from Churchill's era, but what I do know is that he was an incredible leader who had charisma in abundance and could really pull people together, but I'm not 100% sure exactly what he stood for. When I was studying for my Politics exam a few weeks ago,m reading about traditional conservatism, I was a lot more sympathetic towards it than I am for modern Conservatism as displayed by the Conservative Party today. I just think that, in this day and age, principles such as collectivism should be placed a lot higher than individualism, but I know that that is unlikely to ever be true in the USA as it conflicts with the American Dream, that underlies a lot of things in the country.
</div>

"We are Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile." -- Star Trek TNG

"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." -- Churchill

"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals. " -- Churchill

"If the human race wishes to have a prolonged and indefinite period of material prosperity, they have only got to behave in a peaceful and helpful way toward one another. " -- Churchill

Peace!
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 9 2008, 12:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Jun 9 2008, 07:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>On the subject of Iraq and Al-Qaeda, terrorism etc, has anyone ever seen the TV Show Sleeper Cell? I think it's really good, really insightful into the World of Islam. For example, you get the extreme view from the terrorists that is seen in the media anyway, but you also get the view of the vast majority of Islam. For example, they say the greatest jihad is the war you fight within yourself, to battle your own faith and to stay true to Islam. That there was once a warrior fighting in the name of Islam, and that he was about to kill a Crusader, when the Crusader spat in his face. Then the warrior felt hatred for the crusader so could not kill him, else it would be murder since he was no longer just fighting to protect the faith. Please don't think I'm preaching, I'm a solid atheist, but I think it's interesting to get a different perspective on Islam other than the negative view we see all to often in the media.

For anyone in the UK reading this, Sleeper Cell is on FX (Sky 15-something I think) on Tuesday nights around 11, watch it if you have the chance.</div>

My understanding is that Jihad doesn't mean "war" but rather to spread the word of Allah, or to do his work.
</div>

Struggle is implicit in any real definition of Jihad, whether one is speaking of 'traditional' Jihad in a warmaking context, or the 'Greater' Jihad that revolves around introspection and inner struggle.

An interesting article on the subject by Daniel Pipes may be found here: http://www.danielpipes.org/article/990

An excerpt: <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Jihad did have two variant meanings through the centuries, one more radical, one less so. The first holds that Muslims who interpret their faith differently are infidels and therefore legitimate targets of jihad. (This is why Algerians, Egyptians and Afghans have found themselves, like Americans and Israelis, so often the victims of jihadist aggression.) The second meaning, associated with mystics, rejects the legal definition of jihad as armed conflict and tells Muslims to withdraw from the worldly concerns to achieve spiritual depth.</div>
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AEM @ Jun 9 2008, 12:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Jun 9 2008, 12:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chingy0007 @ Jun 9 2008, 07:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>On the subject of Iraq and Al-Qaeda, terrorism etc, has anyone ever seen the TV Show Sleeper Cell? I think it's really good, really insightful into the World of Islam. For example, you get the extreme view from the terrorists that is seen in the media anyway, but you also get the view of the vast majority of Islam. For example, they say the greatest jihad is the war you fight within yourself, to battle your own faith and to stay true to Islam. That there was once a warrior fighting in the name of Islam, and that he was about to kill a Crusader, when the Crusader spat in his face. Then the warrior felt hatred for the crusader so could not kill him, else it would be murder since he was no longer just fighting to protect the faith. Please don't think I'm preaching, I'm a solid atheist, but I think it's interesting to get a different perspective on Islam other than the negative view we see all to often in the media.

For anyone in the UK reading this, Sleeper Cell is on FX (Sky 15-something I think) on Tuesday nights around 11, watch it if you have the chance.</div>

My understanding is that Jihad doesn't mean "war" but rather to spread the word of Allah, or to do his work.
</div>

Struggle is implicit in any real definition of Jihad, whether one is speaking of 'traditional' Jihad in a warmaking context, or the 'Greater' Jihad that revolves around introspection and inner struggle.

</div>

on point.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top