Tonight America should be proud!...

[jeffw2767602]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO

Originally posted by: loki8481
every gay rights issue on the ballots across this country went down in flames.

I'm not especially proud of America today.

At least one good thing in the nation happened last night.

The whole "gay rights" thing is stupid. It is more putting gays on a higher level than straight people. People are people. If some want to be gay, that's their problem, but they can do so. But forcing people to like it is the issue.

Wait a minute, giving gay people the same rights as straight people is now putting them on a higher level? What moon logic is this?

Nobody's forcing you to like anything, the Constitution requires that the government not become an arm of your bigotry.

They are at the same level as everyone else, right now. They are treated as people, just like everyone else. What has been happening is they are trying to shove our faces in it, and that is what I have a problem with.

Quoted for stupidity.

 

[jeffw2767602]

Originally posted by: Hulk

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Goodbye choice of my doctor, been nice knowing you
Goodbye freedom of speech, been nice knowing you
Goodbye 2nd Amendment, been nice knowing you
Goodbye paycheck, been nice knowing you
Goodbye cheap electricity, been nice knowing you

Hello 4 years of hell

:frown:

Yeah if that's all it was it wouldn't be so bad.


You can add...

Goodbye no terrorist attacks in 7 years, been nice knowing you
Goodbye courts that judge, now they'll legislate, been nice knowing you


The Socialists/Communists finally have a man on the inside and of course the rest of the world is cheering. When you can beat 'em you try to ruin their team.

Whatever, we'll survive and get another Reagan just like we did after Carter's disaster.

We can usually withstand 4 years of bad Democratic leadership after the Republicans have fixed things. Clinton floated through for 8 years on the strength that Reagan/Bush 41 left behind. Bush 43 has held this country together with no terrorist attacks in 7 years and a solid economy despite the Dems ruining the mortgage industry by forcing banks to make loans to unqualified people while screaming "everyone should have a house." They don't care about putting businesses out of business because most of them have never worked much less ran a business. But things will be worse in a year or two, then the last two years we'll have a "misery index" like we did with Carter. Barrack will practically be thrown out of office by those who voted him in! Mark my words on that. I'm worried that Barrack will set back the ability for another person of race to gain office for another 100 years and that someone of race who IS qualified will be unable to get elected because they'll remember that other unqualified guy that "fooled them all."

Scary how the forces behind Obama that pull his strings could manipulate the country so easily. But fear not as all will be revealed soon enough...

Bring the pain to the masses Obama!!! I can't wait

I would like it if you would explain to me how the Republicans "fixed" things that Clinton "messed up". Have fun with that one.

 

[jeffw2767602]

Originally posted by: Muse

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hulk

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Goodbye choice of my doctor, been nice knowing you
Goodbye freedom of speech, been nice knowing you
Goodbye 2nd Amendment, been nice knowing you
Goodbye paycheck, been nice knowing you
Goodbye cheap electricity, been nice knowing you

Hello 4 years of hell

:frown:

Yeah if that's all it was it wouldn't be so bad.


You can add...

Goodbye no terrorist attacks in 7 years, been nice knowing you
Goodbye courts that judge, now they'll legislate, been nice knowing you


The Socialists/Communists finally have a man on the inside and of course the rest of the world is cheering. When you can beat 'em you try to ruin their team.

Whatever, we'll survive and get another Reagan just like we did after Carter's disaster.

We can usually withstand 4 years of bad Democratic leadership after the Republicans have fixed things. Clinton floated through for 8 years on the strength that Reagan/Bush 41 left behind. Bush 43 has held this country together with no terrorist attacks in 7 years and a solid economy despite the Dems ruining the mortgage industry by forcing banks to make loans to unqualified people while screaming "everyone should have a house." They don't care about putting businesses out of business because most of them have never worked much less ran a business. But things will be worse in a year or two, then the last two years we'll have a "misery index" like we did with Carter. Barrack will practically be thrown out of office by those who voted him in! Mark my words on that. I'm worried that Barrack will set back the ability for another person of race to gain office for another 100 years and that someone of race who IS qualified will be unable to get elected because they'll remember that other unqualified guy that "fooled them all."

Scary how the forces behind Obama that pull his strings could manipulate the country so easily. But fear not as all will be revealed soon enough...

Bring the pain to the masses Obama!!! I can't wait.

You people are insane.

Seconded. Pretty damn pitiful stuff.

X3

 

[tealk]

Originally posted by: jeffw2767602

Originally posted by: Muse

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Hulk

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
Goodbye choice of my doctor, been nice knowing you
Goodbye freedom of speech, been nice knowing you
Goodbye 2nd Amendment, been nice knowing you
Goodbye paycheck, been nice knowing you
Goodbye cheap electricity, been nice knowing you

Hello 4 years of hell

:frown:

Yeah if that's all it was it wouldn't be so bad.


You can add...

Goodbye no terrorist attacks in 7 years, been nice knowing you
Goodbye courts that judge, now they'll legislate, been nice knowing you


The Socialists/Communists finally have a man on the inside and of course the rest of the world is cheering. When you can beat 'em you try to ruin their team.

Whatever, we'll survive and get another Reagan just like we did after Carter's disaster.

We can usually withstand 4 years of bad Democratic leadership after the Republicans have fixed things. Clinton floated through for 8 years on the strength that Reagan/Bush 41 left behind. Bush 43 has held this country together with no terrorist attacks in 7 years and a solid economy despite the Dems ruining the mortgage industry by forcing banks to make loans to unqualified people while screaming "everyone should have a house." They don't care about putting businesses out of business because most of them have never worked much less ran a business. But things will be worse in a year or two, then the last two years we'll have a "misery index" like we did with Carter. Barrack will practically be thrown out of office by those who voted him in! Mark my words on that. I'm worried that Barrack will set back the ability for another person of race to gain office for another 100 years and that someone of race who IS qualified will be unable to get elected because they'll remember that other unqualified guy that "fooled them all."

Scary how the forces behind Obama that pull his strings could manipulate the country so easily. But fear not as all will be revealed soon enough...

Bring the pain to the masses Obama!!! I can't wait.

Sadly but there are things that are 100% correct about his statement that WILL happen! If not all.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Locut0s
I'm saying this as a Canadian.

Whatever else the future may hold tonight America has finally stood up to 8 years of hellish governance that has greatly damaged the world. Tonight America has made an historic choice, the first African American president in the history of the country and in fact one of the few in the history of western civilization. This is a moment for us all to be proud. Whatever else may come America has now crossed a line it can not back track over. No more will we wonder if a "black man could ever win the presidency". Once this precedent has been set it's there for good in the history books for all to see. There is undoubtedly much work to do and the important question of how good a leader Obama will ultimately really be has yet to be answered (no mater the calibre of the contender few presidents have been faced with as dire a situation). But whatever the answer to these questions turn out to be history has been made tonight and we should all be very proud.

Presidency is no place for making political correct statement. This is a serious position that needs serious leadership.

Obama should be a step up from GWB, no doubt about it. But to say we should be proud just because someone is elected is dumb. Obama has done nothing yet, this country has done nothing yet under his leadership. We will know if we should be proud in 4 years and 8 years. But until then, to say we should be proud just because we make some PC statement with one of the most important position in the world, during one of the most difficult time in history, is just senseless.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Locut0s
I'm saying this as a Canadian.

Whatever else the future may hold tonight America has finally stood up to 8 years of hellish governance that has greatly damaged the world. Tonight America has made an historic choice, the first African American president in the history of the country and in fact one of the few in the history of western civilization. This is a moment for us all to be proud. Whatever else may come America has now crossed a line it can not back track over. No more will we wonder if a "black man could ever win the presidency". Once this precedent has been set it's there for good in the history books for all to see. There is undoubtedly much work to do and the important question of how good a leader Obama will ultimately really be has yet to be answered (no mater the calibre of the contender few presidents have been faced with as dire a situation). But whatever the answer to these questions turn out to be history has been made tonight and we should all be very proud.

Presidency is no place for making political correct statement. This is a serious position that needs serious leadership.

Obama should be a step up from GWB, no doubt about it. But to say we should be proud just because someone is elected is dumb. Obama has done nothing yet, this country has done nothing yet under his leadership. We will know if we should be proud in 4 years and 8 years. But until then, to say we should be proud just because we make some PC statement with one of the most important position in the world, during one of the most difficult time in history, is just senseless.

So, basically you're saying that the Democrats decided to run Obama simply because he's black and not because of his beliefs, his principles, or his abilities. High praise indeed...:roll: What must that say about Hilary Clinton's abilities since he won a very close and hard fought race with her. How about the other Democratic nominees?

 

[BUTCH1]

We can usually withstand 4 years of bad Democratic leadership after the Republicans have fixed things. Clinton floated through for 8 years on the strength that Reagan/Bush 41 left behind.

Huh? Clinton won mainly because of a very crappy economy in the early '90's. Morally bankrupt for sure but at least we were not in a deficit situation when he was in charge. Correct however, is the comment about Barney Frank pushing for unqualified loans, but since there was so much $$$ being made by the entire industry no one tried to stop this, like it was a swap, "we won't push for more fannie/freddie regulation if you let unqualified folks get a peice of the action too". In the end we all lost, and even today the market bottom has not been reached.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Guess which party blacks have overwhelmingly supported over the last 50 years? The Democratic party.

So now it's racist that blacks supported a black Democratic candidate when they've been supporting white Democratic candidates with nearly the same level of support the last few decades? Yea that makes sense. Don't mention that Obama IS a better candidate for the job and that his policies will help the black community out far more than McCain's will. Don't mention that Obama has the rare qualities of calm leadership and moderation and the ability to inspire.

 

[hiromizu]

I say we go an peach Bush. He's very bad, stupid and dangerous and we really need Obama or democrat in office NOW.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: hiromizu
I say we go an peach Bush. He's very bad, stupid and dangerous and we really need Obama or democrat in office NOW.

impeach.

and if Bush were impeached now (assuming the unlikely scenario that it could/would even happen) that would simply result in President Cheney until the inauguration in January.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
What, then, makes this "historic"? What makes it a "great event"? Obama is educated, intelligent, and has an exceptional presence in public. He is the sort of candidate that is an obvious choice and an obvious winner. There is nothing new or unusual about Obama's policies; his platform is solidly Democratic. His voting record shows no more real attempts at bipartisanship than any other politician's does. In every way, Obama is a typical Democratic candidate. He is an extremely good typical Democratic candidate, but policy-wise he is little different from Clinton, Carter, or Johnson. So why is this historic?

A stunning lack of perception on your part. If Obama is a typical candidate, then how did he come from nowhere to defeat the established, much less than typical Democrat with firm policy credentials and another very popular claim to history-making, despite the enormous racial handicap? If just being a Democrat was enough, then Hillary was certainly enough. Being a woman, an experienced woman with a former popular president as a close personal advisor, is far less contentious than being a relatively inexperienced black man.

Tilting at windmills, voting for imaginary presidents, you don't see which way the winds are blowing.

Only after a successful administration will a large proportion of the US be able to think that race is not an issue, and while this alone is historic, the currents of history are far stronger. Obama represents a recognition of that, in himself, and in the American population that supported him despite the racial divide.

"Change you can believe in" is a hope, and a prayer. Because it's a hope, you can also disbelieve in it. After history has passed, one feels that of course it was the right choice which they themselves would have made. But it can be much harder to make the right choice when you're living the making of history and can't see the future as a certainty. That's why we need visionaries like Obama in front -- to articulate the greater hopes of the masses, who may able to perceive the forces and necessity of change, but be unable to conceptualize let alone articulate what they feel.

 

[Nemesis 1]

What makes you guys believe this is the First African American that ever been president.

Africa americans can be white as snow also.

I thought Obama was a breed. Half white Half black. If thats true than he is no differant than the millions of Americans that have Both bloods . Some are brown some white and some black. Collin Powell would have been my choice. I love the way he walked away from the Corruption . TRUE GRIT. A real AMERICAN.

 

[nageov3t]

Why Some Americans Don't Have Reason to Celebrate

Sorry to be the buzz-kill at the liberal victory-party, but this election has been a historic nightmare for millions of gay Americans. In Florida, Arizona, and California propositions have been passed to amend state constitutions, permanently enshrining second-class citizenship into law. America has taken a tremendous step backward -- actively revoking rights granted to citizens by state constitutions -- though you'd never know it from most of the punditry and pontificating.

Drunk on Obama victory, commentators are busy idealizing the American electorate, waxing rhapsodic about the inherent goodness of the American spirit, the progress it has made, and its tolerant essence. Skim the titles down yesterday's Huffpost for gems like: "How to come down from Euphoria," "The Other Side of Paradise," "Exhale," "Real Shock and Awe," "Why All Americans have a Reason to Celebrate," and "Hitting the Reset Button on the 21st Century." Apparently nobody in the MSM has the stomach to parse words like "bittersweet," "hypocrisy," and "pyrrhic victory." It just does not jibe well with the supposed revival of the American dream that began this past Tuesday. I get it: anger and suffering isn't cool. It makes Americans uncomfortable. The victors do not want to hear about it; certainly not while they congratulate themselves for being so enlightened...

To be sure, this is not the media's fault. But its reticence on the uneven nature of American progress is strikingly naive and delusional, especially given the overwhelming--though not singularly determinative--role that African-Americans played in supporting Prop 8 and denying other Americans their civil rights. While seventy percent of self-identified gays and lesbians supported the first African-American presidential candidate (according to the exit poll reported by CNN), seventy percent of African American voters approved Prop 8, compared to 53% of Latino voters, 49% of white voters, and 49% of Asian voters.

The Obama victory was undoubtedly historic and groundbreaking, but it has come at a price: the aggrandizement and intensification of hostility between Blacks and gays. The irony is as ugly as it is heartbreaking. The betrayal gays feel can be summed up pithily: how is the outlawing of same sex marriage any different from the anti-miscegenation laws of segregation? Some may point to religious values as the discriminating factor, but "Christian values" were used to justify anti-miscegenation just as they are now used to justify the revoking of same-sex marriage. Hiding behind the Church, then and now, does not absolve anyone of their complicity in discrimination.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...s-dont-h_b_141830.html

pretty much sums up my bittersweet feelings all week.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: loki8481
pretty much sums up my bittersweet feelings all week.

I think that the inclusion of gays in Obama's victory speech, which is not only historic but current and heard world-wide, is something to appreciate, though of course the issue is far from being settled satisfactorily.

 

[tk149]

"...they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. "

I wish that this were true of Obama's election. But let's face it, who really believes that a significant portion of the voters were NOT influenced by the color of his skin (either way)? I don't. In fact, I suspect that "but for" the voters who voted based solely on the color of Obama's skin, he may not have won.

He'll be remembered as the first non-all-white President, and maybe even as the first "black" President, but to me, we won't have a truly historic election until the phrase I first quoted is true. I fear that that day is a long way off.

 

[BUTCH1]

Originally posted by: tk149
"...they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. "

I wish that this were true of Obama's election. But let's face it, who really believes that a significant portion of the voters were NOT influenced by the color of his skin (either way)? I don't. In fact, I suspect that "but for" the voters who voted based solely on the color of Obama's skin, he may not have won.

He'll be remembered as the first non-all-white President, and maybe even as the first "black" President, but to me, we won't have a truly historic election until the phrase I first quoted is true. I fear that that day is a long way off.

I guess not as many as you think, obviously a lot of voters decided he was better qualified "regardless" of his color. The black turnout alone wouldn't have come close to carrying him to a landslide victory. I'm white and voted Obama not to see a political first but just thought he was more in touch with our current situation than McCain..

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: BUTCH1

Originally posted by: tk149
"...they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. "

I wish that this were true of Obama's election. But let's face it, who really believes that a significant portion of the voters were NOT influenced by the color of his skin (either way)? I don't. In fact, I suspect that "but for" the voters who voted based solely on the color of Obama's skin, he may not have won.

He'll be remembered as the first non-all-white President, and maybe even as the first "black" President, but to me, we won't have a truly historic election until the phrase I first quoted is true. I fear that that day is a long way off.

I guess not as many as you think, obviously a lot of voters decided he was better qualified "regardless" of his color. The black turnout alone wouldn't have come close to carrying him to a landslide victory. I'm white and voted Obama not to see a political first but just thought he was more in touch with our current situation than McCain..

Obviously many people voted for Obama without regard to his skin color, and that's the way it should be. But many also voted solely because of his skin color. There is no way to tell how many pro-McCain people decided not to vote because they believed that their vote wouldn't count because of all the election predictions, but some estimates have been as high as 30%.

I believe that if both candidates had been black or both white, the race (no pun intended) would have been much closer. Refute that if you can.

 

[BUTCH1]

Originally posted by: tk149

Originally posted by: BUTCH1

Originally posted by: tk149
"...they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. "

I wish that this were true of Obama's election. But let's face it, who really believes that a significant portion of the voters were NOT influenced by the color of his skin (either way)? I don't. In fact, I suspect that "but for" the voters who voted based solely on the color of Obama's skin, he may not have won.

He'll be remembered as the first non-all-white President, and maybe even as the first "black" President, but to me, we won't have a truly historic election until the phrase I first quoted is true. I fear that that day is a long way off.

I guess not as many as you think, obviously a lot of voters decided he was better qualified "regardless" of his color. The black turnout alone wouldn't have come close to carrying him to a landslide victory. I'm white and voted Obama not to see a political first but just thought he was more in touch with our current situation than McCain..

Obviously many people voted for Obama without regard to his skin color, and that's the way it should be. But many also voted solely because of his skin color. There is no way to tell how many pro-McCain people decided not to vote because they believed that their vote wouldn't count because of all the election predictions, but some estimates have been as high as 30%.

I believe that if both candidates had been black or both white, the race (no pun intended) would have been much closer. Refute that if you can.

Well it's had to refute, I do know a lot of people who were pro McCain and they voted, but I don't know what the % that sat it out. Supposedly it was a good turnout but I didn't see any demographic breakdown of non-voting registered voters (age/income, ect), we might never know. Had McCain not had the misfortune to follow GWB and maybe a more thoughtful choice of a running mate race might have been tighter..