OBAMA 08′

In the future, try to make your point by critically assessing the issue, and then try to advance your argument without resorting to inflammatory language (ultra-liberal, unrepentant terrorist, elitist, e.g.)

……………………………………………….

You protest too much Sean…

You said…”I will concede to the issue about the AIDS virus being a production of the U.S. Government, but if you acknowledge this, you also have to acknowledge the FACT that the U.S. government did conducted studies on black men in which they were unknowingly infected with the Syphilis virus. So you have to allow some latitude in accepting the fact that some people have a reasonable fear that the government could be capable of creating a deadly virus. However, everything else that Reverend Wright has stated is true-and no, he does not hate America.”

The argument you just presented there Sean is firmly rooted in the emotional and inflammatory. Case in point..any rational thinking individual will not spout AIDS invented to kill black people, The USofKKA, rich white people. South Africa and Israel inventing bombs to kill arabs and black people..ad nauseum…and wouldn’t come to the conclusions you offered. Except Wright who uses the pulpit to, as I stated, spout his delusions and dissent. You can tip toe with that all you want Sean, Wright’s own words condemn him. Please…tell me how USofKKA is true, I’m all ears..and no this is not an invitation to divert with an argument on race as Obama is want to do. Wright said USofKKA, bombs to kill black people and Arabs (among other delusions)..etc..tell me how these are true. Cant’ wait for your proof…

You said…”It seems like every time a person of color expresses a negative truth about this country, they are being anti-American. But when a Caucasian person expresses the same, they are being critical.
Tel, this is the problem you have. You want to make assertions about Senator Obama and you want to SELECTIVELY choose what issues to accept in your assessment OF HIM. You refuse to think critically and examine these issues from a broader context. Why is that?”

You are guilty of the usual criticism one gets when someone criticses Obama..the “when people of colour say something” deflection. Appealing to sentimentality isn’t making your argument look credible Sean. My argument, if you’d understood what I said, was not addressing race and racial dynamics at all, it was addressing judgement, please don’t delfect with appeals to the emotional. Why can’t you ackowledge Obama’s lack in judgment Sean? Not voting for the war is only one point and quite frankly, that’s not the point that needs attention today..the issue is to address the situation as it stands today. There are many others Obama isn’t addressing. I can just as easily begin picking Obama apart on economy, foreign relations, spending, bigger government…I kept my argument within the context of the blog, that being, Obama’s less than complimentary assessment of working class Americans.

Sean, my argument was presented in a logical and acceptable manner, far from inflamatory. If your sensibilities can’t get around acceptable terms for the ultra-liberals in San Francisco and indeed an unrepentent terrorist in Bill Ayers..you have my sympathies.

I outlined the pattern of association and now Obama’s own words, to illustrate that Obama’s own views of elements of American society placed alongside his poor decisions in allying himself with questionable individuals to gain the office of Senator in Chicago and Illinois, should be questioned, and that he’s not fit to be a president.

In that you failed to grasp the fact Sean, that a man posturing as a “uniter” to attain the presidency, shouldn’t be associating with the likes Ayers and Wright (should also counsel his wife in acceptable speech when campaigning for the party nomination) and demeaning the unemployed, the religious, the second ammendment and the working class, has damaged his candidacy irreparably. I spoke to at least two democrat voters over the weekend, both were appalled at Obama’s words and will either not vote at all or vote McCain/Indpendent should Hillary not get the nomination.

_____________________________________________________

Why thank-you, thank-you very much. I will not, however, be asking the mormon hatin’ Ed Feeney to be my running mate. My first political promise will be that I promise you absolutely nothing. This way, you will not be disappointed!!!

Obama’s Oil Spill
Obama says he doesn’t take money from oil companies. We say that’s a little too slick.

Barack Hussien Obama
Wright
Rezko
Farrakhan
William Ayers
Black Phanther
Malcolm X

They are the same kind or type of people.
It is up to you now to decide what is best for our country.

“Birds of the same feathers flock together.”
“Tell me your friends are, and I tell you who you are.”

What a scary thought ahead for our country…
Think people… think…

And as far as Washington not being a source of help, although often it frustrates and confuses, presently it provides most seniors and others some help via Social Security. I don’t think the majority of Americans want that to end. If Mr. Obama, Hillary Clinton or John McCain want to truly help “small-town” America, focus on a plan to save Social Security.

Today, I believe that it is only in extemporaneous moments do we see the true position of those running for office. That seems to be what happened here.

Mr. Obama claims that he could of stated this better, but remember Shakespeare wrote “a rose by any other name …”. I find it hard that even the full staff of speechwriters couldn’t have changed this condescending aroma of his assessment of the wonderful people of Pennsylvania.

You are not thinking and I would encourage you to do so, critically!

Listen to what you’re saying. I appears that you are making the argument that Senator Obama lacks judgment based on his long affiliation with his church; or as you stated in your own words,……..“ It’s Obama’s judgment in remaining in an environment that preaches delusions and dissent from the pulpit.”

If you going to use inflammatory language to argue your point, then make certain that your words reflect some degree of fact. Please explain to me what type delusions and dissents are being preached from the pulpit.

I will concede to the issue about the AIDS virus being a production of the U.S. Government, but if you acknowledge this, you also have to acknowledge the FACT that the U.S. government did conducted studies on black men in which they were unknowingly infected with the Syphilis virus. So you have to allow some latitude in accepting the fact that some people have a reasonable fear that the government could be capable of creating a deadly virus. However, everything else that Reverend Wright has stated is true-and no, he does not hate America.

It seems like every time a person of color expresses a negative truth about this country, they are being anti-American. But when a Caucasian person expresses the same, they are being critical.
Tel, this is the problem you have. You want to make assertions about Senator Obama and you want to SELECTIVELY choose what issues to accept in your assessment OF HIM. You refuse to think critically and examine these issues from a broader context. Why is that?

Yes! faith is an issue that will be addressed during the general election. Hmmmm, I wonder why McCain avoids this issue.

The past and current military service of McCain, and that of his sons, is noble. No one is denying that. But his military service is not a characterization of his faith or his true beliefs on important issues (health care, immigration, tax reform e.g.). He will have to define that during the general election. If you would think critically, you would realize this.

In the future, try to make your point by critically assessing the issue, and then try to advance your argument without resorting to inflammatory language (ultra-liberal, unrepentant terrorist, elitist, e.g.)

When you use to this type of emotional language to argue your point, it prevents the reader from critically analyzing your argument for merit or substance, or lack thereof.

Obama will win the presidency in 2008 because common sense and critical thinking will prevail.