[surveyor]

ah

ah, Allan, how can you (or the rest of the United States, for that matter) possibly understand the nature of our enemy, Islam and its history and relationship towards Israel and the Western World when you:

Generally speaking I think the religious element becomes a bit of a smokescreen as it gets cherry picked for emotional effect/propaganda and derails a more responsible dialougue about ethics, power and economics.

That statement there is exactly why many Americans do not understand the complexity of the threat that Islam presents and why the United States has been unable to deal with it with any wisdom.

(I’m not a rabid Christian btw. I’m actually more agnostic/atheist. I do admit to having an extreme dislike of Islam, but that’s because I know what it’s about. I like silly, little things like the equality of men/women, the ability to live with other societies, the idea of not marrying 9 year olds girls, and the ability to eat Spam.).

[surveyor]

ah

ah, Allan, how can you (or the rest of the United States, for that matter) possibly understand the nature of our enemy, Islam and its history and relationship towards Israel and the Western World when you:

Generally speaking I think the religious element becomes a bit of a smokescreen as it gets cherry picked for emotional effect/propaganda and derails a more responsible dialougue about ethics, power and economics.

That statement there is exactly why many Americans do not understand the complexity of the threat that Islam presents and why the United States has been unable to deal with it with any wisdom.

(I’m not a rabid Christian btw. I’m actually more agnostic/atheist. I do admit to having an extreme dislike of Islam, but that’s because I know what it’s about. I like silly, little things like the equality of men/women, the ability to live with other societies, the idea of not marrying 9 year olds girls, and the ability to eat Spam.).

[surveyor]

ah

ah, Allan, how can you (or the rest of the United States, for that matter) possibly understand the nature of our enemy, Islam and its history and relationship towards Israel and the Western World when you:

Generally speaking I think the religious element becomes a bit of a smokescreen as it gets cherry picked for emotional effect/propaganda and derails a more responsible dialougue about ethics, power and economics.

That statement there is exactly why many Americans do not understand the complexity of the threat that Islam presents and why the United States has been unable to deal with it with any wisdom.

(I’m not a rabid Christian btw. I’m actually more agnostic/atheist. I do admit to having an extreme dislike of Islam, but that’s because I know what it’s about. I like silly, little things like the equality of men/women, the ability to live with other societies, the idea of not marrying 9 year olds girls, and the ability to eat Spam.).

[surveyor]

ah

ah, Allan, how can you (or the rest of the United States, for that matter) possibly understand the nature of our enemy, Islam and its history and relationship towards Israel and the Western World when you:

Generally speaking I think the religious element becomes a bit of a smokescreen as it gets cherry picked for emotional effect/propaganda and derails a more responsible dialougue about ethics, power and economics.

That statement there is exactly why many Americans do not understand the complexity of the threat that Islam presents and why the United States has been unable to deal with it with any wisdom.

(I’m not a rabid Christian btw. I’m actually more agnostic/atheist. I do admit to having an extreme dislike of Islam, but that’s because I know what it’s about. I like silly, little things like the equality of men/women, the ability to live with other societies, the idea of not marrying 9 year olds girls, and the ability to eat Spam.).

[surveyor]

[quote=Rustico]What if we did not occupy Palestine with the invention and aid of Israel?

What if the Islamic Fundamentalists had not been afraid of our attempt to threaten their way of life or our Dogma that freedom to follow our individual impulses should trump religious ethics?
[/quote]

Here’s the thing – the Islamic “fundamentalists” as you call them have been at war with the so-called Western world and the rest of the world for the past 2000 years. The Islamic religion divides the world into two parts – the House of Islam and the House of Infidels and it is MANDATED by Islamic law, tradition, and Koran to wage war against the infidels.

Anyone who tells you otherwise either has not read the Koran thoroughly or is deluding themselves.

So in regards to the conflict with Islam, believe me, we would be at war with them even if Israel never existed.

Here are a list of nations that are not “occupying” the middle east and yet are still at war with islam.

India, Sudan and Algeria, Indonesia and Nigeria and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and Uzbekistan and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and Argentina and Kuwait and Ethiopia and East Timor and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and Nepal
and the Maldives.

By the way, many religions, peoples, and cultures have had problems and issues with our values and ways of life, but they have not been threatened by it. You don’t see the war with buddhists, do you?

(waiting for those who say christianity is just as violent as islam – you would be extremely wrong.)

By the way, the United States never created Israel. The British started it. They were the ones who partitioned a part of Israel and a part for the Palestinians. As soon as Israel existed, the Arab nations declared war on it. All the grievances that the Arab world has concocted against Israel has been self-inflicted. The Arab world has created and continues to perpetuate a victim mentality for the Palestinians.

[surveyor]

[quote=Rustico]What if we did not occupy Palestine with the invention and aid of Israel?

What if the Islamic Fundamentalists had not been afraid of our attempt to threaten their way of life or our Dogma that freedom to follow our individual impulses should trump religious ethics?
[/quote]

Here’s the thing – the Islamic “fundamentalists” as you call them have been at war with the so-called Western world and the rest of the world for the past 2000 years. The Islamic religion divides the world into two parts – the House of Islam and the House of Infidels and it is MANDATED by Islamic law, tradition, and Koran to wage war against the infidels.

Anyone who tells you otherwise either has not read the Koran thoroughly or is deluding themselves.

So in regards to the conflict with Islam, believe me, we would be at war with them even if Israel never existed.

Here are a list of nations that are not “occupying” the middle east and yet are still at war with islam.

India, Sudan and Algeria, Indonesia and Nigeria and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and Uzbekistan and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and Argentina and Kuwait and Ethiopia and East Timor and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and Nepal
and the Maldives.

By the way, many religions, peoples, and cultures have had problems and issues with our values and ways of life, but they have not been threatened by it. You don’t see the war with buddhists, do you?

(waiting for those who say christianity is just as violent as islam – you would be extremely wrong.)

By the way, the United States never created Israel. The British started it. They were the ones who partitioned a part of Israel and a part for the Palestinians. As soon as Israel existed, the Arab nations declared war on it. All the grievances that the Arab world has concocted against Israel has been self-inflicted. The Arab world has created and continues to perpetuate a victim mentality for the Palestinians.

[surveyor]

[quote=Rustico]What if we did not occupy Palestine with the invention and aid of Israel?

What if the Islamic Fundamentalists had not been afraid of our attempt to threaten their way of life or our Dogma that freedom to follow our individual impulses should trump religious ethics?
[/quote]

Here’s the thing – the Islamic “fundamentalists” as you call them have been at war with the so-called Western world and the rest of the world for the past 2000 years. The Islamic religion divides the world into two parts – the House of Islam and the House of Infidels and it is MANDATED by Islamic law, tradition, and Koran to wage war against the infidels.

Anyone who tells you otherwise either has not read the Koran thoroughly or is deluding themselves.

So in regards to the conflict with Islam, believe me, we would be at war with them even if Israel never existed.

Here are a list of nations that are not “occupying” the middle east and yet are still at war with islam.

India, Sudan and Algeria, Indonesia and Nigeria and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and Uzbekistan and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and Argentina and Kuwait and Ethiopia and East Timor and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and Nepal
and the Maldives.

By the way, many religions, peoples, and cultures have had problems and issues with our values and ways of life, but they have not been threatened by it. You don’t see the war with buddhists, do you?

(waiting for those who say christianity is just as violent as islam – you would be extremely wrong.)

By the way, the United States never created Israel. The British started it. They were the ones who partitioned a part of Israel and a part for the Palestinians. As soon as Israel existed, the Arab nations declared war on it. All the grievances that the Arab world has concocted against Israel has been self-inflicted. The Arab world has created and continues to perpetuate a victim mentality for the Palestinians.

[surveyor]

[quote=Rustico]What if we did not occupy Palestine with the invention and aid of Israel?

What if the Islamic Fundamentalists had not been afraid of our attempt to threaten their way of life or our Dogma that freedom to follow our individual impulses should trump religious ethics?
[/quote]

Here’s the thing – the Islamic “fundamentalists” as you call them have been at war with the so-called Western world and the rest of the world for the past 2000 years. The Islamic religion divides the world into two parts – the House of Islam and the House of Infidels and it is MANDATED by Islamic law, tradition, and Koran to wage war against the infidels.

Anyone who tells you otherwise either has not read the Koran thoroughly or is deluding themselves.

So in regards to the conflict with Islam, believe me, we would be at war with them even if Israel never existed.

Here are a list of nations that are not “occupying” the middle east and yet are still at war with islam.

India, Sudan and Algeria, Indonesia and Nigeria and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and Uzbekistan and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and Argentina and Kuwait and Ethiopia and East Timor and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and Nepal
and the Maldives.

By the way, many religions, peoples, and cultures have had problems and issues with our values and ways of life, but they have not been threatened by it. You don’t see the war with buddhists, do you?

(waiting for those who say christianity is just as violent as islam – you would be extremely wrong.)

By the way, the United States never created Israel. The British started it. They were the ones who partitioned a part of Israel and a part for the Palestinians. As soon as Israel existed, the Arab nations declared war on it. All the grievances that the Arab world has concocted against Israel has been self-inflicted. The Arab world has created and continues to perpetuate a victim mentality for the Palestinians.

[surveyor]

[quote=Rustico]What if we did not occupy Palestine with the invention and aid of Israel?

What if the Islamic Fundamentalists had not been afraid of our attempt to threaten their way of life or our Dogma that freedom to follow our individual impulses should trump religious ethics?
[/quote]

Here’s the thing – the Islamic “fundamentalists” as you call them have been at war with the so-called Western world and the rest of the world for the past 2000 years. The Islamic religion divides the world into two parts – the House of Islam and the House of Infidels and it is MANDATED by Islamic law, tradition, and Koran to wage war against the infidels.

Anyone who tells you otherwise either has not read the Koran thoroughly or is deluding themselves.

So in regards to the conflict with Islam, believe me, we would be at war with them even if Israel never existed.

Here are a list of nations that are not “occupying” the middle east and yet are still at war with islam.

India, Sudan and Algeria, Indonesia and Nigeria and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and Uzbekistan and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and Argentina and Kuwait and Ethiopia and East Timor and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and Nepal
and the Maldives.

By the way, many religions, peoples, and cultures have had problems and issues with our values and ways of life, but they have not been threatened by it. You don’t see the war with buddhists, do you?

(waiting for those who say christianity is just as violent as islam – you would be extremely wrong.)

By the way, the United States never created Israel. The British started it. They were the ones who partitioned a part of Israel and a part for the Palestinians. As soon as Israel existed, the Arab nations declared war on it. All the grievances that the Arab world has concocted against Israel has been self-inflicted. The Arab world has created and continues to perpetuate a victim mentality for the Palestinians.

[surveyor]

figures….

Dukehorn: the question asked was: what is the issue with Obama. I answered. I also didn’t want to put down a 15 page memo on why, but those are my issues with him.

Also, the issues I listed were not specifically meant to show how Obama goes against the grain of American greatness, just the issues that I disagreed with him.

Some of these issues, we could spend all day. And certainly I’m not a fan of Bush either, but these are substantial issues to me.

Anyways, here:

e) I didn’t say all of Obama supporters hate America (or you, for that matter). (that in debate rules is called a “slippery slope” and shows a distinct lack of logic). Unfortunately, there are many who have professed hate towards America and think America is the cause of every single problem that has existed in the world. I don’t subscribe to that view, but I do question why those who have that view are so attracted to him. The policies of these people have been very unattractive to me, so I can only surmise that I will not agree with Obama’s policies when these supporters start lobbying for them (or when these supporters begin to be tapped for official government service).

d) Please show me the white collar criminals who are running for office and then you can find this point relevant. (straw man argument, another fallacy of logic).

c) I am different from a lot of people here. I believe that the Iraq War was justified. Certainly it has been mismanaged, but that the threat was real. Still, just because Bush is seen as wrong on foreign policy or that he has made mistakes does not in fact make Obama correct in his foreign policy analysis. Another fallacy of logic.

b) Tax cuts. Simple self interest. I have been one of the fiercest proponents of tax cuts here on this board, for the simple reason that the government does not spend money well and it is stupidity to believe that giving them more money would improve it. That is simple logic in itself.

a) firearms. another slippery slope. Just because semi-automatics are available for sale does not mean that Obama is right to want to restrict ownership of said item.

So anyways, this is a blog post, so I HAVE to simplify. I’ve got lots and lots of reasons why I am not voting for him. If it were my job to convince you to vote for McCain, maybe I would take out more time to explain it. I’m only stating my basic reasons for not voting for him and why I disagree with him. Many people here will disagree with my reasons. =shrug= Don’t care. I also don’t care about the things Bush did. We’re not voting for Bush this time. Bringing up his shortcomings does no good towards Obama’s qualifications and inexperience. People who bring up Bush in order to make Obama votable are not necessarily helping make the case for his election.

(I realize many people will read my post and find it directed at them, that is not my intention. Just because I say that “one of the criticisms of Bush by others”, it does not mean to say that I am purporting that you, Dukehorn, specifically said that. Please separate yourself from your candidate and look at the issues objectively.).

Anyways, the inexperience thing is important to me. Maybe Bush got some of his experience because of his father’s help, but he at least got that experience. My father’s success helped me attain a certain amount of experience, but I still had to do the job he gave me. That experience helped me out. For me, Obama needs that experience before he gets my vote.

(Dukehorn: by the way, the use of your flawed logic actually means YOU are stereotyping).

and lastly: (you haven’t made a single substantive comment on this thread)

In your opinion…

You know the surprising thing? I actually think Obama is going to win.

[surveyor]

figures….

Dukehorn: the question asked was: what is the issue with Obama. I answered. I also didn’t want to put down a 15 page memo on why, but those are my issues with him.

Also, the issues I listed were not specifically meant to show how Obama goes against the grain of American greatness, just the issues that I disagreed with him.

Some of these issues, we could spend all day. And certainly I’m not a fan of Bush either, but these are substantial issues to me.

Anyways, here:

e) I didn’t say all of Obama supporters hate America (or you, for that matter). (that in debate rules is called a “slippery slope” and shows a distinct lack of logic). Unfortunately, there are many who have professed hate towards America and think America is the cause of every single problem that has existed in the world. I don’t subscribe to that view, but I do question why those who have that view are so attracted to him. The policies of these people have been very unattractive to me, so I can only surmise that I will not agree with Obama’s policies when these supporters start lobbying for them (or when these supporters begin to be tapped for official government service).

d) Please show me the white collar criminals who are running for office and then you can find this point relevant. (straw man argument, another fallacy of logic).

c) I am different from a lot of people here. I believe that the Iraq War was justified. Certainly it has been mismanaged, but that the threat was real. Still, just because Bush is seen as wrong on foreign policy or that he has made mistakes does not in fact make Obama correct in his foreign policy analysis. Another fallacy of logic.

b) Tax cuts. Simple self interest. I have been one of the fiercest proponents of tax cuts here on this board, for the simple reason that the government does not spend money well and it is stupidity to believe that giving them more money would improve it. That is simple logic in itself.

a) firearms. another slippery slope. Just because semi-automatics are available for sale does not mean that Obama is right to want to restrict ownership of said item.

So anyways, this is a blog post, so I HAVE to simplify. I’ve got lots and lots of reasons why I am not voting for him. If it were my job to convince you to vote for McCain, maybe I would take out more time to explain it. I’m only stating my basic reasons for not voting for him and why I disagree with him. Many people here will disagree with my reasons. =shrug= Don’t care. I also don’t care about the things Bush did. We’re not voting for Bush this time. Bringing up his shortcomings does no good towards Obama’s qualifications and inexperience. People who bring up Bush in order to make Obama votable are not necessarily helping make the case for his election.

(I realize many people will read my post and find it directed at them, that is not my intention. Just because I say that “one of the criticisms of Bush by others”, it does not mean to say that I am purporting that you, Dukehorn, specifically said that. Please separate yourself from your candidate and look at the issues objectively.).

Anyways, the inexperience thing is important to me. Maybe Bush got some of his experience because of his father’s help, but he at least got that experience. My father’s success helped me attain a certain amount of experience, but I still had to do the job he gave me. That experience helped me out. For me, Obama needs that experience before he gets my vote.

(Dukehorn: by the way, the use of your flawed logic actually means YOU are stereotyping).

and lastly: (you haven’t made a single substantive comment on this thread)

In your opinion…

You know the surprising thing? I actually think Obama is going to win.

[surveyor]

figures….

Dukehorn: the question asked was: what is the issue with Obama. I answered. I also didn’t want to put down a 15 page memo on why, but those are my issues with him.

Also, the issues I listed were not specifically meant to show how Obama goes against the grain of American greatness, just the issues that I disagreed with him.

Some of these issues, we could spend all day. And certainly I’m not a fan of Bush either, but these are substantial issues to me.

Anyways, here:

e) I didn’t say all of Obama supporters hate America (or you, for that matter). (that in debate rules is called a “slippery slope” and shows a distinct lack of logic). Unfortunately, there are many who have professed hate towards America and think America is the cause of every single problem that has existed in the world. I don’t subscribe to that view, but I do question why those who have that view are so attracted to him. The policies of these people have been very unattractive to me, so I can only surmise that I will not agree with Obama’s policies when these supporters start lobbying for them (or when these supporters begin to be tapped for official government service).

d) Please show me the white collar criminals who are running for office and then you can find this point relevant. (straw man argument, another fallacy of logic).

c) I am different from a lot of people here. I believe that the Iraq War was justified. Certainly it has been mismanaged, but that the threat was real. Still, just because Bush is seen as wrong on foreign policy or that he has made mistakes does not in fact make Obama correct in his foreign policy analysis. Another fallacy of logic.

b) Tax cuts. Simple self interest. I have been one of the fiercest proponents of tax cuts here on this board, for the simple reason that the government does not spend money well and it is stupidity to believe that giving them more money would improve it. That is simple logic in itself.

a) firearms. another slippery slope. Just because semi-automatics are available for sale does not mean that Obama is right to want to restrict ownership of said item.

So anyways, this is a blog post, so I HAVE to simplify. I’ve got lots and lots of reasons why I am not voting for him. If it were my job to convince you to vote for McCain, maybe I would take out more time to explain it. I’m only stating my basic reasons for not voting for him and why I disagree with him. Many people here will disagree with my reasons. =shrug= Don’t care. I also don’t care about the things Bush did. We’re not voting for Bush this time. Bringing up his shortcomings does no good towards Obama’s qualifications and inexperience. People who bring up Bush in order to make Obama votable are not necessarily helping make the case for his election.

(I realize many people will read my post and find it directed at them, that is not my intention. Just because I say that “one of the criticisms of Bush by others”, it does not mean to say that I am purporting that you, Dukehorn, specifically said that. Please separate yourself from your candidate and look at the issues objectively.).

Anyways, the inexperience thing is important to me. Maybe Bush got some of his experience because of his father’s help, but he at least got that experience. My father’s success helped me attain a certain amount of experience, but I still had to do the job he gave me. That experience helped me out. For me, Obama needs that experience before he gets my vote.

(Dukehorn: by the way, the use of your flawed logic actually means YOU are stereotyping).

and lastly: (you haven’t made a single substantive comment on this thread)

In your opinion…

You know the surprising thing? I actually think Obama is going to win.

[surveyor]

figures….

Dukehorn: the question asked was: what is the issue with Obama. I answered. I also didn’t want to put down a 15 page memo on why, but those are my issues with him.

Also, the issues I listed were not specifically meant to show how Obama goes against the grain of American greatness, just the issues that I disagreed with him.

Some of these issues, we could spend all day. And certainly I’m not a fan of Bush either, but these are substantial issues to me.

Anyways, here:

e) I didn’t say all of Obama supporters hate America (or you, for that matter). (that in debate rules is called a “slippery slope” and shows a distinct lack of logic). Unfortunately, there are many who have professed hate towards America and think America is the cause of every single problem that has existed in the world. I don’t subscribe to that view, but I do question why those who have that view are so attracted to him. The policies of these people have been very unattractive to me, so I can only surmise that I will not agree with Obama’s policies when these supporters start lobbying for them (or when these supporters begin to be tapped for official government service).

d) Please show me the white collar criminals who are running for office and then you can find this point relevant. (straw man argument, another fallacy of logic).

c) I am different from a lot of people here. I believe that the Iraq War was justified. Certainly it has been mismanaged, but that the threat was real. Still, just because Bush is seen as wrong on foreign policy or that he has made mistakes does not in fact make Obama correct in his foreign policy analysis. Another fallacy of logic.

b) Tax cuts. Simple self interest. I have been one of the fiercest proponents of tax cuts here on this board, for the simple reason that the government does not spend money well and it is stupidity to believe that giving them more money would improve it. That is simple logic in itself.

a) firearms. another slippery slope. Just because semi-automatics are available for sale does not mean that Obama is right to want to restrict ownership of said item.

So anyways, this is a blog post, so I HAVE to simplify. I’ve got lots and lots of reasons why I am not voting for him. If it were my job to convince you to vote for McCain, maybe I would take out more time to explain it. I’m only stating my basic reasons for not voting for him and why I disagree with him. Many people here will disagree with my reasons. =shrug= Don’t care. I also don’t care about the things Bush did. We’re not voting for Bush this time. Bringing up his shortcomings does no good towards Obama’s qualifications and inexperience. People who bring up Bush in order to make Obama votable are not necessarily helping make the case for his election.

(I realize many people will read my post and find it directed at them, that is not my intention. Just because I say that “one of the criticisms of Bush by others”, it does not mean to say that I am purporting that you, Dukehorn, specifically said that. Please separate yourself from your candidate and look at the issues objectively.).

Anyways, the inexperience thing is important to me. Maybe Bush got some of his experience because of his father’s help, but he at least got that experience. My father’s success helped me attain a certain amount of experience, but I still had to do the job he gave me. That experience helped me out. For me, Obama needs that experience before he gets my vote.

(Dukehorn: by the way, the use of your flawed logic actually means YOU are stereotyping).

and lastly: (you haven’t made a single substantive comment on this thread)

In your opinion…

You know the surprising thing? I actually think Obama is going to win.

[surveyor]

figures….

Dukehorn: the question asked was: what is the issue with Obama. I answered. I also didn’t want to put down a 15 page memo on why, but those are my issues with him.

Also, the issues I listed were not specifically meant to show how Obama goes against the grain of American greatness, just the issues that I disagreed with him.

Some of these issues, we could spend all day. And certainly I’m not a fan of Bush either, but these are substantial issues to me.

Anyways, here:

e) I didn’t say all of Obama supporters hate America (or you, for that matter). (that in debate rules is called a “slippery slope” and shows a distinct lack of logic). Unfortunately, there are many who have professed hate towards America and think America is the cause of every single problem that has existed in the world. I don’t subscribe to that view, but I do question why those who have that view are so attracted to him. The policies of these people have been very unattractive to me, so I can only surmise that I will not agree with Obama’s policies when these supporters start lobbying for them (or when these supporters begin to be tapped for official government service).

d) Please show me the white collar criminals who are running for office and then you can find this point relevant. (straw man argument, another fallacy of logic).

c) I am different from a lot of people here. I believe that the Iraq War was justified. Certainly it has been mismanaged, but that the threat was real. Still, just because Bush is seen as wrong on foreign policy or that he has made mistakes does not in fact make Obama correct in his foreign policy analysis. Another fallacy of logic.

b) Tax cuts. Simple self interest. I have been one of the fiercest proponents of tax cuts here on this board, for the simple reason that the government does not spend money well and it is stupidity to believe that giving them more money would improve it. That is simple logic in itself.

a) firearms. another slippery slope. Just because semi-automatics are available for sale does not mean that Obama is right to want to restrict ownership of said item.

So anyways, this is a blog post, so I HAVE to simplify. I’ve got lots and lots of reasons why I am not voting for him. If it were my job to convince you to vote for McCain, maybe I would take out more time to explain it. I’m only stating my basic reasons for not voting for him and why I disagree with him. Many people here will disagree with my reasons. =shrug= Don’t care. I also don’t care about the things Bush did. We’re not voting for Bush this time. Bringing up his shortcomings does no good towards Obama’s qualifications and inexperience. People who bring up Bush in order to make Obama votable are not necessarily helping make the case for his election.

(I realize many people will read my post and find it directed at them, that is not my intention. Just because I say that “one of the criticisms of Bush by others”, it does not mean to say that I am purporting that you, Dukehorn, specifically said that. Please separate yourself from your candidate and look at the issues objectively.).

Anyways, the inexperience thing is important to me. Maybe Bush got some of his experience because of his father’s help, but he at least got that experience. My father’s success helped me attain a certain amount of experience, but I still had to do the job he gave me. That experience helped me out. For me, Obama needs that experience before he gets my vote.

(Dukehorn: by the way, the use of your flawed logic actually means YOU are stereotyping).

and lastly: (you haven’t made a single substantive comment on this thread)

In your opinion…

You know the surprising thing? I actually think Obama is going to win.

[surveyor]

obama-mania!

If you set aside the partisan talking points, be reasonable here, help me understand what are the main issues with Obama? I’m genuinely curious.

My god, where to begin…

I’m sure someone can come up with a huge list but it comes down to this for me: this guy is just unqualified and too inexperienced to be president.

I’ve seen a lot of people who try to “BS” their way through a job. Like when an MBA tries to do an grunt surveying/engineering job but has never gone through the ranks (I think there was a fedex commercial about this once). Yeah, obviously the MBA is a bright guy, but when he starts doing this job, unless he has had the necessary experience to do it, he will screw it up. Hell, I was that guy for awhile.

That’s what Obama is. Bright guy, smart guy, but when you get down to the details, you find that he has nothing there and he has to start making stuff up. And then when people say to him, hey, that’s not the right way, he has to backtrack and or say oh I was misquoted or well I was “inartful”.

Do you really want a president who has to learn on the job?

One of the cricitisms of George W. Bush was that he didn’t have the experience to be president. Ok, that’s debatable. So what’s the response? His opponents choose a candidate that has even LESS experience than Bush?

Anyways, there are no shortcuts to success. I go through his policy statements and I keep disagreeing with every single one of them. Maybe I tilt right on these issues, but I think his positions go directly against the things that make America great.

Anyways, as to specific disagreements (and not to make a 15 page post), here they are:

1. Lack of understanding of foreign issues.
2. Lack of any fundamental understanding of business and economics.
3. Raising of taxes.
4. Questionable associations with people who HATE America.
5. Wants to restrict firearms.
6. Overly optimistic understanding of issues.

I just remember the last time the Republicans had a candidate like Obama, with similar qualifications (actually better qualifications) and yet did not fare so well with the public (admittedly not as good of a speaker, though).

His name was Dan Quayle.

[Author]

Posts