Obama in the SC debate

[ClydeR]

Last night in South Carolina, Obama said (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/us/politics/21demdebate-transcript.html?pagewanted=print), "You've got the European markets dropped 5 percent. The expectation is that the Dow Jones tomorrow may do the same."

That was a really dumb thing to say. People in national positions of power, or who want to be in positions of power, should know that their comments can have unintended consequences for the financial markets. Someone more experienced would have either refrained from commenting or noted positive things about the economy.

Another thing from the debate that was interesting is when Obama said to Hillary, "Because while I was working on those streets watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart." Wow. I didn't know Hillary had been on the board of directors of Wal-Mart. If I were interested in voting for a Democrat, then that would make me more interested in Hillary. I love Wal-Mart, and if Hillary helped start that company, then that's a good mark on her otherwise ugly record.

Hillary then shot back, "I'm just reacting to the fact, yes, they did have ideas, and they were bad ideas. Bad for America, and I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Resco, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago." If that's true, Obama needs to explain what he was doing working for a slum lord and why he is accepting contributions from one.

[Tsa`ah]

Last night in South Carolina, Obama said (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/us/politics/21demdebate-transcript.html?pagewanted=print), "You've got the European markets dropped 5 percent. The expectation is that the Dow Jones tomorrow may do the same."

That was a really dumb thing to say. People in national positions of power, or who want to be in positions of power, should know that their comments can have unintended consequences for the financial markets. Someone more experienced would have either refrained from commenting or noted positive things about the economy.

Another thing from the debate that was interesting is when Obama said to Hillary, "Because while I was working on those streets watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart." Wow. I didn't know Hillary had been on the board of directors of Wal-Mart. If I were interested in voting for a Democrat, then that would make me more interested in Hillary. I love Wal-Mart, and if Hillary helped start that company, then that's a good mark on her otherwise ugly record.

Hillary then shot back, "I'm just reacting to the fact, yes, they did have ideas, and they were bad ideas. Bad for America, and I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Resco, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago." If that's true, Obama needs to explain what he was doing working for a slum lord and why he is accepting contributions from one.

Did you even watch the debate? Or is your viewing as selective as your reading?

Obama was able to explain anything and everything used out of context as an attack on him. Hillary, as always, had no explanations.

[Lord Nelek]

Barack Hussein Obama was a joke last night.

Do you want a muslim who was raised in Indonesia leading this country?

[Tsa`ah]

I really hope you're joking.

[ClydeR]

Obama was able to explain anything and everything used out of context as an attack on him. Hillary, as always, had no explanations.

What is Obama's explanation for representing and taking contributions from a slum lord?

It looks like Obama is the one who started the attacks. Why would he think it is a bad thing for Hillary to have been on the board of directors of Wal-Mart?

[Parkbandit]

Did you even watch the debate? Or is your viewing as selective as your reading?

Obama was able to explain anything and everything used out of context as an attack on him. Hillary, as always, had no explanations.

I didn't hear his explanation during the debate for working for the so called slum lord.

[RichardCranium]

I don't have any problem with him being a muslim or being raised in Indonesia. I do have a problem with him refusing to place his hand on the bible to take the oath of office and turning his back on the American flag during the Pledge of Allegiance and/or singing of the National Anthem.

[Warriorbird]

Nelek and ClydeR ...the combination of the "unbiased" opinion of the two of you on Obama is hilarious.

If Obama were actually Muslim (as opposed to corny megachurch...like most of the hyper-religious Republicans in the country)...

...aren't you obssessive rightwing Christian wackos supposed to be about freedom of religion? Oh wait...it's just YOUR religion. Nevermind.

::

The turning the back thing was explained, Richard. There's a lot of horrible photos out there of most of the candidates (and the President).

Why should you place your hand on a Bible to take the Oath of Office? Some people are against oathtaking on Bibles...some people don't believe in it.

[RichardCranium]

More for tradition than religion.

[Warriorbird]

Reasonable enough. I don't agree but I can appreciate the logic.

[Blud]

Who said it?

1. "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above

2. "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."
A. Lenin
B. Mousolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the above

3. "(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."
A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above

4. "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."
A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chaves
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above

5. "I certainly think the free market has failed."
A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above.

6. "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."
A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above

Answers:

1. None of the above. Statement made by Hillary Clinton on 6/29/2004.
2. None of the above. Statement made by Hillary Clinton on 5/29/2007.
3. None of the above. Statement made by Hillary Clinton on 6/4/2007.
4. None of the above. Statement made by Hillary Clinton on 6/4/2007.
5. None of the above. Statement made by Hillary Clinton on 6/4/2007.
6. None of the above. Statement made by Hillary Clinton on 9/2/2005.

[Warriorbird]

Out of context or no...Hillary's far more scary than Obama.

[Xaerve]

I don't have any problem with him being a muslim or being raised in Indonesia. I do have a problem with him refusing to place his hand on the bible to take the oath of office and turning his back on the American flag during the Pledge of Allegiance and/or singing of the National Anthem.

you're aware this is bullshit right? And was a chain-email letter that was sent out? He addresses these issues yesterday. Give me a break.

He's not a muslim...

[Parkbandit]

I don't have any problem with him being a muslim or being raised in Indonesia. I do have a problem with him refusing to place his hand on the bible to take the oath of office and turning his back on the American flag during the Pledge of Allegiance and/or singing of the National Anthem.

I think these things are nothing more than internet tales being exagerated and blown out of proportion.

[Parkbandit]

Out of context or no...Hillary's far more scary than Obama.

God.. it's like picking which one is more scary.. Dracula or Frankenstein. They are both fucking scary.

[Blud]

Published on Tuesday, February 7, 2006 by the Huffington Post

Hillary Clinton and Wal-Mart: A Love Story
by Jonathan Tasini

Even Wal-Mart, the largest and arguably most powerful corporation in the country, is no match for the triangulation, pandering and obfuscation of Hillary Clinton. With Wal-Mart rating as public enemy number one among many liberals, progressives and just regular voters, Clinton is finding her past ties to Wal-Mart too hot to handle so, presto, over the side the Beast of Bentonville must go.

For those not in the know, Clinton served on Wal-Mart’s board for six years prior to her husband’s run for the presidency. She recently received $5,000 from Wal-Mart. I’ve raised the Wal-Mart relationship repeatedly in my current race against Clinton and it causes deep unease among voters. I believe it speaks to the incumbent’s close ties to abusive corporate power: her large corporate financial contributions, her support for so-called “free trade” (which is simply trade to benefit corporations) and her unwillingness to confront corporate power that denies every American, among other things, universal health insurance.

So, I had to chuckle when I read that Clinton, having never said a bad word about the company in the past, recently said that Wal-Mart should pay more for its workers’ health benefits. And, to boot, she returned the $5,000 she had received from the company. But, when asked what she did about the company’s benefits for workers when she served on the board, she replied, “Well, you know, I, that was a long time ago ... have to remember…”

You can’t have it both ways. You can’t promote an image of being an intelligent woman who has a pile of facts at her fingertips but, at the same time, you suffer a sudden bout of amnesia when asked to answer for your record. And it would be an inconvenient record to defend.

In 1992, Wal-Mart was simply smaller than it is today. But it was still huge, with $43.9 billion in net sales, 1,714 stores and 371,000 employees. Even in 1992, Wal-Mart was already the world’s largest retailer.

And the board Hillary Clinton sat on was rabidly anti-union, was exploiting sweatshop labor around the world, discriminating against women workers, forcing workers to labor off the clock and destroying communities that did not want them. This should not be a shock: Clinton was a partner in the Rose law firm, one of the most active anti-union law firms in the country.

So, the question still remains: what did Hillary Clinton do—or, not do—when she served on the board of Wal-Mart? Maybe, if her memory was refreshed, she could tell us how she protested the company’s relentless union-busting, expressed feminist outrage at the widespread discrimination against women and was horrified that the mushrooming wealth of the Wal-Mart family was made possible on the backs of slave labor around the world.

Her behavior then, when the spotlight was not on and her record did not matter to voters, should tell voters a lot more about her principles and values than the carefully orchestrated image New Yorkers try to figure out now. The voters deserve to know.

...

In case you have a hard time seeing it, the last two paragraphs are sarchasm about how Hillary *should* have been outraged at the time she served on the board, but since her record didn't matter then, and the spot light was not on her at the time, she didn't. This calls into question her "morals and standards".

[Lord Nelek]

Nelek and ClydeR ...the combination of the "unbiased" opinion of the two of you on Obama is hilarious.

If Obama were actually Muslim (as opposed to corny megachurch...like most of the hyper-religious Republicans in the country)...

...aren't you obssessive rightwing Christian wackos supposed to be about freedom of religion? Oh wait...it's just YOUR religion. Nevermind.

::

The turning the back thing was explained, Richard. There's a lot of horrible photos out there of most of the candidates (and the President).

Why should you place your hand on a Bible to take the Oath of Office? Some people are against oathtaking on Bibles...some people don't believe in it.

I'm voting for Hilary and I don't claim to belong to any religion. I try to live my life treating others how I would like to be treated. I don't need a book to tell me how to live my life.

The whole raised in Indonesia and being raised by two different Muslim fathers and being Muslim is just new news to me that I thought I would share.

Barack Hussein Obama is only popular because he's the first black man with a shot at being president.

[ClydeR]

To clear up any misunderstandings,....I never said Obama is a Muslim. Obama claims (http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=10775) to be a Christian.

[Blud]

Barack Hussein Obama is only popular because he's the first black man with a shot at being president.

Hmm...Same as Hillary being the first woman with a shot at being president is the only reason she's popular?

Understand, I don't have a problem with a black or a woman being president. I'm pretty sure I would give serious consideration to Condy Rice if she ran for president one day.

EDIT:

This would be, of course, based upon her complete record at the time of her running.

[Parkbandit]

I have no issue with bringing out flaws with both candidates... but just because someone is raised by a Muslim father doesn't automatically make you question him as a man. You say you try to live your life by treating others how I would like to be treated.. but this is just words.. something you obviously don't do or you wouldn't have this opinion.

Obama is a very charismatic guy who captures his audience with his eloquent speaking. There's much more to his popularity than him just being the first black man with a shot at being President.

I may not agree with him politically, but even I am drawn to him when he speaks.

[BigWorm]

Two dads? Guess that's why he's gay. Do you people just believe everything you get forwarded in chain letters?

Yes, Obama has a Muslim-sounding name. Big fucking deal. Even if he was Muslim, which he isn't, what does that have to do with his politics? His father was born into Islam, but was a "confirmed atheist" by the time his parents were together. Also, raised in Indonesia? He lived there from age 6-10. That's like criticizing a military kid for living in Germany for 4 years.

As far as "claiming" to be a Christian, he started his political career as a community organizer working with local churches. That's not a position you take on to pad your resume before you fun for office; that's how people start when they really want to make a difference. I don't follow him to church on Sunday, but Wikipedia says "He has been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ for over twenty years."

Whatever. I'm not going to convince you. The fact that you think Obama is a serious contender for President based solely on his race shows how blatantly bigoted you are. Just because race is a major issue to you, doesn't mean that it is to everyone else. Thank god that some people care about the actual stances of politicians, not just their race and religion.

[Kembal]

I'm voting for Hilary and I don't claim to belong to any religion. I try to live my life treating others how I would like to be treated. I don't need a book to tell me how to live my life.

The whole raised in Indonesia and being raised by two different Muslim fathers and being Muslim is just new news to me that I thought I would share.

Barack Hussein Obama is only popular because he's the first black man with a shot at being president.

Wow, there's a whole rash of stupidity in this thread. (and it's not all from ClydeR!)

Obama isn't Muslim. And what does it matter that he lived in Indonesia for 5 years? (ages 6 to 10) Was he supposed to choose to not live there?

[Blud]

I don't follow him to church on Sunday, but Wikipedia says "He has been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ for over twenty years."

Let me start by saying that what I am about to say is unconfirmed, but it was my understanding that one cannot belong to the Trinity United Church of Christ unless he/she is black. If it turns out that this is true, I'm not entirely certain I want a candidate in the oval office that belongs to any organization that only accepts membership based upon race, and if it turns out to be true, then that seems to be at odds with your post about racism.

Furthermore, as I'm sure you know (I hope you know), Wikipedia is editable by the general public meaning I could go there right now and put whatever I want to add to this "source", so the information contained in there should be viewed with a dash of criticism. Granted, there are editors in place that more or less "check" the edits, but still they can't possibly "know it all".

[Warriorbird]

I don't believe they expressly forbid white members or they wouldn't count as UCC. It is clearly black centered however.

[Clove]

FFS. He's not a muslim. He never knew his dad. He lived in Indonesia for 4 years. Is it really so difficult to read a basic bio before people start parroting all sorts of crap?

http://www.biography.com/search/article.do?id=12782369

[Daniel]

That's not true at all. First and foremost, the UCC is probably one of the most liberal, whilst sane protestant denominations in the country. They would never let a member church do something that asinine.

Also, My mother went to divinity at the University of Chicago with the Pastor of Trinity. It was a hole in the wall on the south side of Chicago and he managed to turn it into a pretty big presence in the neighborhood.

I'd wager that the vast vast majority of the people in the church are black, but that has mroe to do with the fact that it's in the middle of the HOOD, than anything else.

[BigWorm]

More lies about Obama debunked:

Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp)
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrack_Obama)

[Warriorbird]

Most folks don't care too much about the truth when bashing Presidential candidates.

[BigWorm]

Oh, and to get back to the topic that started this thread, HE WAS RIGHT. Did you people not notice everyone on the news shitting themselves because the Dow was down ~ 400 points at one point this morning. And before you blame the downturn on Obama, I would have to say it had much more to do with Bernake slashing interest rates or that maybe more accurately, both of those have the same root cause.

So, ClydeR, your criticizing Obama for being honest? Isn't that exactly what we want from our leaders? I guess not, since you consider Bush to be a good president, and he lied and denied his way through the Oval Office.

[Ilvane]

That goes for Hillary bashers too, WB.

I'm not really going to comment much, while I agree Obama is a great speaker, he's still not talking about how he's going to do things.

Edwards aced that debate last night, if you ask me.

Angela

[Warriorbird]

What have I said about Hillary that's untrue? You've said you'd rather elect a Republican than Obama...

...leaving me to wonder about the fluidity of your values.

Which is funny...given the fluidity of Hillary's.

Stunts like crying for votes are crass political showmanship. Obama seems above that. He's a great public speaker. He's got a willingness to actually work with the other party rather than making a lot of unpassable and inane statements (Hillary's foreclosure relief ideas) to appeal to the base. I value that much more than stuff that's never going to happen.

[Ilvane]

I was speaking in general, not specifically to you.

[Blud]

More lies about Obama debunked:

Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp)
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrack_Obama)

The snopes source was a good source (I always check out politically pointed e-mails with Snopes.com), but I still view wikipedia with criticism, and will not use it to base any political decision on.

As far as the UCC thing goes, I was referring specifically to the TRINITY United Church of Christ.

I am a member of the Church of Christ, but not the UNITED Church of Christ. They are vastly different in their positions on controversial topics. I am saying this to say that just because a church claims to be a "Church of Christ", does not automatically associate them with all "Churches of Christ". It is entirely possible that the TRINITY United Church of Christ holds different views from the United Church of Christ, just as the Church of Christ I attend is very different from the United Church of Christ and Trinity United Church of Christ.

[Blud]

As I suspected. Check out this link:

http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

The first sentence on the home page says it all.

[Warriorbird]

Nah. They're associated with the UCC as a whole. I doubt that'd continue if they entirely barred white members.

[BigWorm]

Let me start by saying that what I am about to say is unconfirmed, but it was my understanding that one cannot belong to the Trinity United Church of Christ unless he/she is black.

Meaning, you made that up. It's not true, if you take the time to learn anything about UCC. If any of the candidates has a religion that is clouded heavily by racism, I'd say it is Mike DALE Huckabee, a Southern Baptist. The main reason the Southern Baptists split from the rest of the Baptists was because they felt the Bible supported racism and slavery and they wanted to protect their pastors' right to own slaves. I know they also differed on organization matters and some other minor things, but this was the main issue that drive them to split. But do I think this automatically makes Huckabee a racist? No, because that doesn't make any logical sense.


Furthermore, as I'm sure you know (I hope you know), Wikipedia is editable by the general public meaning I could go there right now and put whatever I want to add to this "source", so the information contained in there should be viewed with a dash of criticism. Granted, there are editors in place that more or less "check" the edits, but still they can't possibly "know it all".

Yeah, because the editors don't watch the pages of Presidential canidates like a hawk, here some other sources, which they were so nice as to link to it right next to where they are making such a claim. It's almost like they were citing sources for their information. Weird.

Obama (2006), pp. 202–208. Portions excerpted in: Obama, Barack. "My Spiritual Journey", TIME, October 23, 2006. Retrieved on 2008-01-14.
See also: Guess, J. Bennett. "Barack Obama, Candidate for President, is 'UCC'", United Church News, February 9, 2007. Retrieved on 2008-01-14.

[CrystalTears]

Where does it say that he was a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ? I've only read United Church of Christ.

[BigWorm]

As I suspected. Check out this link:

http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

The first sentence on the home page says it all.

I know! Can you believe that they are Unapologetically Christian? That's crazy talk!

[Blud]

Read this link, the Trinity United Chuch of Christ's home page:

http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

Read the first sentence that comes up...

We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian...

I did not make it up, I was told that this was the case, but did not actually take the time to look it up at the time I was told; therefore, I made NO CLAIM WHATSOEVER in my post that what I heard was true. After taking the time to look it up now, however, I find myself wondering why you would make the very first 8 words on your webpage geared toward being "Unashamedly black" if you were not a black only cogregation.

As I said already, I read the snopes report that you furnished and trust it to be true.

[Warriorbird]

If there's white folks who are loopy enough to want to join...I doubt the TUCC forbids them to. They've been referred to as having a few white members even by anti-Obama Republicans.

If you want to criticize his church... it is much easier to do on anti-semitic grounds. His pastor's had some problematic associations recently and in the past.

[ClydeR]

After taking the time to look it up now, however, I find myself wondering why you would make the very first 8 words on your webpage geared toward being "Unashamedly black" if you were not a black only cogregation.

Reach the church's value statement (http://www.tucc.org/scholarship_pdf/black%20value%20system.pdf), and it will make more sense. I don't understand the part quoted below, but it sounds controversial, which is good enough reason to quote it!


Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”

Classic methodology on control of captives teaches that captors must keep the captive ignorant educationally, but trained sufficiently well to serve the system. Also, the captors must be able to identify the “talented tenth” of those subjugated, especially those who show promise of providing the kind of leadership that might threaten the captor’s control.

Those so identified as separated from the rest of the people by:

Killing them off directly, and/or fostering a social system that encourages them to kill off one another.

Placing them in concentration camps, and/or structuring an economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons. Seducing them into a socioeconomic class system which while training them to earn more dollars, hypnotizes them into believing they are better than others and teaches them to think in terms of “we” and “they” instead of “us”.

[Clove]

If you want to criticize his church... it is much easier... than having a discussion on his political ideas.

..

[Warriorbird]

I don't understand the part quoted below, but it sounds controversial, which is good enough reason to quote it!
-ClydeR


I love the PC.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Trinity United Church of Christ
W.E.B. DuBois indicated that the problem in the 20th century was going to be the problem of the color line. He was absolutely correct. Our job as servants of God is to address that problem and eradicate it in the name of Him who came for the whole world by calling all men, women, boys and girls to Christ.

Damn they sound evil

http://www.tucc.org/mission.htm

[Blud]

Where does it say that he was a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ? I've only read United Church of Christ.

Well, BigWorm claims that Widipedia says he (Obama) belongs to the Trinity United Church of Christ.

I have already established my opinion of Wikipedia, but since that is the source he is claiming, and apparently holding as fact, I thought I would provide whatever information I could find about said church.

It is entirely possible that Wikipedia is wrong about Obama belonging to the Trinity United Church of Christ, but BigWorm is touting Wikipedia as the wisdom well of all knowledge, so...

[Warriorbird]

But but but W.E.B. Dubois was an evil commie, Sean!

;)

[Sean]

I really don't see what the make up of his church congregation has to do with anything. If you're really that curious to make a case against Trinity call them up tell them you're white/asian/hispanic/etc. but have an interest in a church which has its roots in African culture and see if they'll let you become a member.

[Warriorbird]

Obama just made a statement about the TUCC's acceptance of white members. There's one prominent British member that a lot of folks seem to know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU

[Blud]

Clove could be a budding political publicity agent! Way to take things out of context. My hats off to you, sir.

I don't believe anyone here is focusing on his religious beliefs for the sole purpose of trying to find a reason NOT to elect him, but let's face it...Politics and religion go hand in hand, and IF it is true that he belongs to a church that discriminates membership based upon race, what could be said about his political ideologies?

[Latrinsorm]

If it turns out that this is true, I'm not entirely certain I want a candidate in the oval office that belongs to any organization that only accepts membership based upon race, and if it turns out to be true, then that seems to be at odds with your post about racism.Barack Obama is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Warriorbird]

Except it...doesn't. The Church has white members.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU

[CrystalTears]

Just because an organization is predominantly black does not mean that they don't allow in members of another race. You have no proof that they've denied anyone but black people in.

I bet if Hillary were part of an exclusively female organization no one would say much about it. Seems like a double standard to me.

[Blud]

Obama just made a statement about the TUCC's acceptance of white members. There's one prominent British member that a lot of folks seem to know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU

Damn it! Youtube is blocked at work...

I would love to hope that there is an Obama watchdog in the PC forums!

Anyway, as I said, I never made any claim that what I was told was true about the TUCC, but after reading their web site, it did raise questions in my mind.

You may not believe me, BigWilly, but I certainly hope that it is not true. If for no other reason than to confirm the fact that I *think* Obama is not a bad person. However, I won't vote for him because I don't think he has much of a resume yet (political records are very important in my opinion), and I have yet to hear any of his plans to fix the problems he is ready to point out when (if?) he gets elected.

[Clove]

Politics and religion go hand in hand...

Interesting. Which country's politics are we discussing?

[Sean]

Clove's just waiting to see which candidate will put on a Red Sox hat before casting his vote.

[Warriorbird]

This one's, Clove. Think about our President.

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/08/john-kerry-sox.jpg

[Blud]

Just because an organization is predominantly black does not mean that they don't allow in members of another race. You have no proof that they've denied anyone but black people in.

I bet if Hillary were part of an exclusively female organization no one would say much about it. Seems like a double standard to me.

I never made any claims to that effect. In fact, I believe I was very reserved in any and all comments I made about this story in the event that it did turn out to be false.

And I'm not voting Democrat, so I have no double standard to worry about here. And for the record, if Hillary did belong to an all female organization, I would feel compelled to point that out as well.

RECORDS, RECORDS, RECORDS! That's what people should vote on, not popularity, but at the same time, people should also account for whatever they know about a candidates personal life as well, as no one can separate personal life from professional life all the time.

My humble opinion. :)

[Blud]

Interesting. Which country's politics are we discussing?

The United States of America, but before you begin the "Separation of Church and State" rhetoric, let me remind you that there is no law in the constitution to that effect.

This county was founded on Christian principles, like it or not, and I'm rather fond of that idea personally. I have absolutely no problem NOT voting for a candidate who is an agnostic or otherwise aetheist.

And yes, I do tolerate other religious beliefs.

So mote it be.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Blud
And I'm not voting Democrat, so I have no double standard to worry about here. And for the record, if Hillary did belong to an all female organization, I would feel compelled to point that out as well.

Do you know any 1 person who's ever changed their mind or even just made up their mind on how they will cast a vote based on internet chatter and speculation?

[Blud]

Do you know any 1 person who's ever changed their mind or even just made up their mind on how they will cast a vote based on internet chatter and speculation?

No. But it does make for good conversation! :)

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Blud
No. But it does make for good conversation!

I'm all for good conversation and intelligent debate. I just don't see how being COMPELLED to be a 2nd hand sensationalist fits the mold.

[Clove]

The United States of America, but before you begin the "Separation of Church and State" rhetoric, let me remind you that there is no law in the constitution to that effect.

This county was founded on Christian principles, like it or not, and I'm rather fond of that idea personally. I have absolutely no problem NOT voting for a candidate who is an agnostic or otherwise aetheist.

And yes, I do tolerate other religious beliefs.

So mote it be.

No shit sherlock because "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…"

Way to be tolerant.

[Blud]

No shit sherlock because "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…"

Way to be tolerant.

That is the Establishment clause, not a separation of church and state.

The government will not make Christianity or any other religion the official religion of this country. I support that clause. But I am free to vote how I want, including but not limited to a candidate's religious beliefs.

Being tolerant means I respect your right to worship how you want, but I DON'T have to vote for you (or any other candidate) if your (their) religious beliefs differ from mine. THAT is the intent of the establishment clause.

[Blud]

I'm all for good conversation and intelligent debate. I just don't see how being COMPELLED to be a 2nd hand sensationalist fits the mold.

Nah...I simply brought up an issue that I was told and read about later...People responded. I hardly consider that being a 2nd hand sensationalist, but if that's how you see it...:shrug:

That's no different than what anyone else does here.

[Ilvane]

Barack Obama is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So is Bill Clinton!!!!

(Yes, I know, he's white..it's a joke..hehe, pardon me)

Did you guys hear the question on the debate that they asked Obama if Bill Clinton was more black than he was? LOL

Silly.

[Clove]

That is the Establishment clause, not a separation of church and state.

The government will not make Christianity or any other religion the official religion of this country. I support that clause. But I am free to vote how I want, including but not limited to a candidate's religious beliefs.

Being tolerant means I respect your right to worship how you want, but I DON'T have to vote for you (or any other candidate) if your (their) religious beliefs differ from mine. THAT is the intent of the establishment clause.

Actually it's the beginning of the 1st Amendment. The separation of church and state is a quote from Thomas Jefferson's letter (ironically) to the Danbury Baptist Association (in my own fine state) where he explained the 1st Amendment (better than you).

"To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802."

Your rationale on tolerance is weak. I rather like this quote as well "that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions"

[Parkbandit]

That goes for Hillary bashers too, WB.

I'm not really going to comment much, while I agree Obama is a great speaker, he's still not talking about how he's going to do things.

Edwards aced that debate last night, if you ask me.

Angela

That's fantastic that Edwards 'aced' the debate last night. There's zero pressure on him.. he already knows he has zero chance of being the nominee.. so all he is doing is trying to convince one of the frontrunners to make him their VP.

[Blud]

Actually it's the beginning of the 1st Amendment. The separation of church and state idea comes from Thomas Jefferson's quote from a letter he wrote (ironically) to the Danbury Baptist Association (in my own fine state) where he explained the 1st Amendment (better than you).

"To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802."

Your rationale on tolerance is weak. I rather like this quote as well "that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions"

I don't know how you read me saying that I respect everyone's right to worship in their own way as weak, but I don't expect us to see eye-to-eye anyway.

In any case, I have a right to vote for a candidate that I feel matches my religious beliefs just as much as you do. And a political candidate is not required to suspend his religious beliefs in order to hold office.

Although I don't believe you are trying to say this, I somehow get the impression that you are using this letter from Thomas Jefferson as some sort of crutch to say that a politician can't (shouldn't) use his religion in political debate. I may have seriously missed your point, and if I did please know I mean absolutely no offence. However, just because Thomas Jefferson felt this way, doesn't mean that every other candidate in these United States MUST feel that way too.

Finally, when I said that "Politics and religion goes hand-in-hand", what I was trying to say (albeit, in a very poor way) is that candidates know that the majority of voters DO care about a candidate's spiritual belief and it is in most cases a major point to consider. Not that Government MUST and SHALL consider religion when making laws and running for offices.

[Lord Nelek]

I have no issue with bringing out flaws with both candidates... but just because someone is raised by a Muslim father doesn't automatically make you question him as a man. You say you try to live your life by treating others how I would like to be treated.. but this is just words.. something you obviously don't do or you wouldn't have this opinion.

Obama is a very charismatic guy who captures his audience with his eloquent speaking. There's much more to his popularity than him just being the first black man with a shot at being President.

I may not agree with him politically, but even I am drawn to him when he speaks.

Anyone can give a good speech when they read it off of a teleprompter and they've been taught how to say it correctly. Look at him during the debate when he actually has to speak his mind... He fumbles too much. He is not a President.

And he "Claims" to be a christian now, but I'm sure a lot of people would claim to be something they're not to get them votes.

[Blud]

Anyone can give a good speech when they read it off of a teleprompter and they've been taught how to say it correctly. Look at him during the debate when he actually has to speak his mind... He fumbles too much. He is not a President.

And he "Claims" to be a christian now, but I'm sure a lot of people would claim to be something they're not to get them votes.

Right. He is not a president. He lacks experience and still does not explain his plans for all of the flaws he finds.

[Clove]

Some voters care about a candidate's religious background, others do not (and I'm sure candidates are aware of this).

I was using Thomas Jefferson's letter to source where "separation of church and state" slogan comes from and I think it illuminates what his intentions might have been while he participated in the Constitution and Amendments.

I think this letter makes a good argument that Thomas Jefferson felt religion was a private matter that really didn't belong in government and by extension has little to do with whether or not to vote for a candidate.

Your definition of tolerance is weak in my opinion, because in effect you are discriminating based on religious background; which I suppose is your right to do (as far as your voting franchise is concerned). I suppose it's that penchant that has made religion (among others) a protected class. It seems incongruent to me to say "I respect your right to worship (or not as you choose)" and "I don't think your religion should exclude you from having a job with me... going to school with me... or running for office with me." but "I'm not voting for that Muslim."

Personally I think the framers would have a dim view of that mindset. You have Jefferson's thoughts on the 1st Amendment, you be the judge.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Blud
But I am free to vote how I want

While it's certainly true that no one can dictate to you why or for what you should vote for. The way you say it reminds me of:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=HH-zLsZmF3Q

[Latrinsorm]

Personally I think the framers would have a dim view of that mindset. You have Jefferson's thoughts on the 1st Amendment, you be the judge.I think Jefferson would be all for not voting for people of religion (in the crude, classical sense). I also think he would have something pompous to say about people voting "for" a particular religion, though.

[Daniel]

I am a member of the Church of Christ, but not the UNITED Church of Christ. They are vastly different in their positions on controversial topics. I am saying this to say that just because a church claims to be a "Church of Christ", does not automatically associate them with all "Churches of Christ". It is entirely possible that the TRINITY United Church of Christ holds different views from the United Church of Christ, just as the Church of Christ I attend is very different from the United Church of Christ and Trinity United Church of Christ.


Except not. Church of Christ is an entirely different entity than Untied Church of Christ. However, they are both networks of churches. Trinity UCC is a member of the UCC, and thus subject to their rules, regulations and beliefs.

[Warriorbird]

I guess going to a church for over 20 years now makes you not a Christian. Man. I feel more holy every day.

[ClydeR]

I am a member of the Church of Christ....

So is Fred Thompson. That may be why he never caught on with Baptists. They do not allow pianos or organs in their services.

The Church of Christ is popular in parts of Tennessee.

[Sean of the Thread]

I guess going to a church for over 20 years now makes you not a Christian. Man. I feel more holy every day.

once a week or once a year?

[Warriorbird]

He supposedly attends regularly. His presence is probably a profitable one for that pastor.

[Tsa`ah]

Obama's response to representing a slum lord was that the firm he worked for did. He was representing a church. He did admit to 5 billable hours of work, while under the employ of said firm, to said slum lord.

That was Hillary's best shot. She could have done better ... such as calling into question why Rezko (said slum lord) was doing some fund raising for Obama early in his political career. Of course by doing that she would have opened the door for questions about her own fund raising methods (Peter Paul for one).

I think a much safer line of questioning/attack would have been centered around Obama's support for Alexi Giannoulias as Illinois treasurer ... of course she ignored another potentially shady character in Obama's political past and went after his voting record as an Illinois Senator.

Hillary made "smart" attacks last night ... attacks that wouldn't call into attention shady associates in her past or shady campaign contributions ... let alone her "credentials".

Of course I really don't understand why neither Edwards or Obama have gone for Clinton's throat when she talks about healthcare ... because she had the opportunity to become the person who ushered in drastic healthcare reform ... and she sold out.

[Parkbandit]

Anyone can give a good speech when they read it off of a teleprompter and they've been taught how to say it correctly. Look at him during the debate when he actually has to speak his mind... He fumbles too much. He is not a President.

And he "Claims" to be a christian now, but I'm sure a lot of people would claim to be something they're not to get them votes.


Are you fucking kidding me? George W Bush is the President.. and NO ONE fucks up as many speeches as he has.

And he CLAIMS to be christian for the past what.. 20 years? My parents are and were Methodists and have gone to church EVERY SINGLE SUNDAY for the past 40 years... dragging me for my first 16... does that automatically now make me Methodist even though I have zero belief in some alien entity known as God?

Your meteoric rise to super stupidville surpasses so many stupid people who've taken far longer to reach this level. Grats.

[BigWorm]

Your meteoric rise to super stupidville surpasses so many stupid people who've taken far longer to reach this level. Grats.

What'd it take ClydeR, one post (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showpost.php?p=667411&postcount=5)?

[Parkbandit]

I can't even read your fucking post with that rainbow ass staring at me....

[TheEschaton]

I was gone all weekend for a Jesuit-centered retreat on vocation as a lawyer (which I'm sure will be used in later years as a sign I "regularly convened with socialists and other government agitators") and just read this thread. A few points:

1) Obama is not Muslim. He was not "raised" in Indonesia. That's like saying I'm Hindu cause I lived in India when I was a kid.

2) He is, far and away, the best speaker on either side of the debate.

3) Being "Unashamedly black" by no means you deny white people access to your Church. MLK was unashamedly black, but there were many liberated white folks who marched with him, you know, including a couple of my profs.

4) I think Obama adequately answered the Rezco charge. I think he did not adequately respond to the "free pass" Edwards accused him of taking when merely voting "present" over 100 times in the IL legislature.

5) Edited to add: Some of you are fucking retarded.

-TheE-

[Tsa`ah]

I think Obama adequately answered the Rezco charge. I think he did not adequately respond to the "free pass" Edwards accused him of taking when merely voting "present" over 100 times in the IL legislature.

Edwards and Hillary are obviously ignorant of Illinois politics.

Over 4k votes, and the best they could do was point out how many votes he voted "present" on.

It's common practice in the Illinois Senate and Congress to vote present on bills you would vote "yes" for if the content or wording were changed a bit. It's not even uncommon to vote present on bills introduced by your own party that you don't agree with.

[TheEschaton]

Is Edwards quoting the Chicago Tribune (supposedly knowledgable on such IL political maneuvering) saying Obama's tactics were a "political pass" on controversial, potentially damaging votes somehow a misquote or wrong, then?

-TheE-

[Tsa`ah]

The Tribune can only guess why Obama voted "present". The Tribune does a good deal of guessing. It's not a rag, but they have plenty of "ragesque" articles.

As I said, it's not uncommon to vote present on legislation introduce by your own part that you are against. It is a "politically safe" method of voting. It would have been more interesting to see how many times he voted present in comparison to other senators and congressmen in the Illinois legislature.

[Blud]

It seems incongruent to me to say "I respect your right to worship (or not as you choose)" and "I don't think your religion should exclude you from having a job with me... going to school with me... or running for office with me." but "I'm not voting for that Muslim."

Uhmm...I don't recall saying that I would not vote for Obama because he's muslim (which he isn't muslim, but the way). I'm not voting for Obama because I don't think he's presidential material.

The only reason the statement, "We are a congregation that is unashamedly black" raises questions in my mind about whether or not white people are permitted to join their church is because I took out the word "unashamedly" and read the sentence again...

"We are a congregation that is black." Sure, that doesn't mean white people CAN'T join, but why is it even necessary to put that statement in there? To me, it kind of indicates that there is a discouragement of while people joining. Face it, if you were a white person and saw that statement, would you feel welcome?

[Clove]

Uhmm...I don't recall saying that I would not vote for Obama because he's muslim (which he isn't muslim, but the way). I'm not voting for Obama because I don't think he's presidential material.

You didn't say "I respect your right to worship (or not as you choose)" or "I don't think your religion should exclude you from having a job with me... going to school with me... or running for office with me." either. But you did say you didn't see a problem with voting (or not voting) for someone based on their religion and I was illustrating why I thought that sort of religious descrimination was ridiculous. I already stated Obama wasn't Muslim. Focus.


"We are a congregation that is black." Sure, that doesn't mean white people CAN'T join, but why is it even necessary to put that statement in there? To me, it kind of indicates that there is a discouragement of while people joining. Face it, if you were a white person and saw that statement, would you feel welcome?

I suppose it depends on your comfort level. I'd be considered white by most people. I've never felt uncomfortable amongst black congregations and I wouldn't expect blacks to feel uncomfortable in a white congregation. It may be an unnecessary statement (unless they are a black congregation), then again maybe they're trying to outreach specifically to the black community; though that statement certainly wouldn't fly in the reverse.

[Latrinsorm]

why is it even necessary to put that statement in there?Read Malcolm X's autobiography. The reason will become very, very clear.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Blud
Uhmm...I don't recall saying that I would not vote for Obama because he's muslim (which he isn't muslim, but the way). I'm not voting for Obama because I don't think he's presidential material.

Applying your belief that it's perfectly fine to NOT vote for someone based on their personal ideologies (you'd have absolutely no problem with not voting for an atheist) and that it's whoevers vote to do whatever they want with (You are free to vote how you want, including but not limited to a candidate's religious beliefs) would you have absolutely no problem if someone misinformed like Lord Nelek ran with that mistake and used it as a basis for their vote?

[ClydeR]

Even liberals are saying that Obama lied (http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/01/22/didnt-obama-watch-the-firm) in the debate about his connections to the slum lord. Democrats would be wise to investigate this before rushing to nominate Obama. There may be nothing there, or it may be something after all. But it's clear that Obama is not being completely open and honest.

[Parkbandit]

Should you now do a complete background check on anyone you talk with? Interview his parents, high school teachers, ex girlfriends?

I know plenty of scumbags.. and I'm sure I've had lunch with them. Doesn't automatically make me a scumbag though... in my case it was just a coincidence. :P

[ClydeR]

Should you now do a complete background check on anyone you talk with? Interview his parents, high school teachers, ex girlfriends?

No, that would be too burdensome, even for well organized campaigns like Obama's. But Obama actually went into business with the slum lord. His connections were not limited, as he implied in the debate, to a) accepting campaign contributions and b) working for a law firm that represented a church that did business with the slum lord.

There may be nothing to hide, but it looks like he is trying to hide something. He needs to explain it fully.

[Some Rogue]

Whitewater.

Oh wait, she billed what, 300 hours, and still couldn't remember anything.

Obama should have totally turned that bullshit line of questioning on her and asked her about whitewater again.

[Clove]

What have you got against affordable housing?

[TheEschaton]

Should you now do a complete background check on anyone you talk with? Interview his parents, high school teachers, ex girlfriends?

I know plenty of scumbags.. and I'm sure I've had lunch with them. Doesn't automatically make me a scumbag though... in my case it was just a coincidence. :P

DUDE. I thought we were gonna keep our business lunches private.

-TheE-

[Parkbandit]

I once was the Asst. General Manager for a guy who smoked crack and did coke... does that automatically make me a crackhead? What about when I was in high school and I did the lawn of a guy who we all thought was a mobster? He paid me very well and I made sure I always cut his lawn before anyone else's... does that somehow now give me mob connections?

If there is a pattern.. like Obama is always around scumbags like this guy.. then maybe you can make that reach. A couple business dealings with a guy who may or may not have been a slum lord does not an issue make.

Concentrate your efforts on Obama's extreme liberal voting record.. or his lack of national and international experience...

[Clove]

I once was the Asst. General Manager for a guy who smoked crack and did coke...

That was YOU?

[Ilvane]

That's interesting.

I read the article you posted, I wonder if he will address it at all.

Oh, and John Kerry saying Obama got swiftboated by this being brought up just cracks me up.

I was against the Swiftboat Veterans because they were obviously with issues(Like the guys going after McCain right now in a similar manner),

This is actually an interesting story. If he did business with him, it does make a difference, and it means he lied when he said he just was involved in the law firm that defended him. According to that he was actually friendly with him as well, and also did business with him..

Angela

[Ilvane]

Oh, and Whitewater the Clintons LOST MONEY.

OMG..they are so evil and corrupt.


David Hale, the source of criminal allegations against President Clinton in the Whitewater affair, claimed in November 1993 that Clinton, while governor of Arkansas, pressured him to provide an illegal $300,000 loan to Susan McDougal, the partner of the Clintons in the Whitewater land deal.[1] This allegation by Hale was questionable because it contradicted his own testimony in the original FBI investigation of the failure of Madison Guaranty in 1989 where Hale did not mention Clinton in reference to this same loan. Hale also had a history of creating dummy companies, then looting federal funds, such as SBA loans, from them, and allowing them to fail. Only after coming under indictment in 1993 for charges in just such a scheme did Hale make allegations against Clinton.

A New York Times article published during the 1992 U.S. presidential campaign reported that Clinton and his wife had invested in and lost money in the Whitewater development project. A U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigation resulted in criminal charges against the two principals in the Whitewater project, but the Clintons themselves were never charged. Three separate inquiries found that there was insufficient evidence to charge the Clintons with criminal conduct in the land deal.

Angela

[Tsa`ah]

That's interesting.

I read the article you posted, I wonder if he will address it at all.

Oh, and John Kerry saying Obama got swiftboated by this being brought up just cracks me up.

I was against the Swiftboat Veterans because they were obviously with issues(Like the guys going after McCain right now in a similar manner),

This is actually an interesting story. If he did business with him, it does make a difference, and it means he lied when he said he just was involved in the law firm that defended him. According to that he was actually friendly with him as well, and also did business with him..

Angela

Peter Paul

[Some Rogue]

Oh, and Whitewater the Clintons LOST MONEY.

OMG..they are so evil and corrupt.



Angela


Because they would totally report illegal income.

[CrystalTears]

Oh, and Whitewater the Clintons LOST MONEY.

OMG..they are so evil and corrupt.

Angela
Wow, here... wear these.

http://static.flickr.com/132/318263814_c459ade057_o.jpg

[Clove]

Oh, and Whitewater the Clintons LOST MONEY.

OMG..they are so evil and corrupt.



Angela

OMG along with everyone else involved with the investment!!!!! Yet Bill and Hill weren't among the 14 convictions.

[ClydeR]

Antoin "Tony" Rezko (http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-rezko-arrested_webjan29,0,6857272.story), who is Obama's largest contributor, business partner and client, has been arrested again by the feds. Clinton brought up Obama's involvement with the slum lord after Obama accused Clinton of being on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart at the Democrat debate.

[Latrinsorm]

Obama's largest contributors are freedom and love.

[Tsa`ah]

You have GOT to start investigating facts on your own.

Rezko's contributions were a drop in the bucket during Obama's early political runs ... and they weren't Rezco's, they were contributions collected by Rezco.

Current contributions (80 grand worth), connected to Rezco (meaning he collected them) have been donated to charity. He is far from Obama's largest contributor.

You also have to take into account that Chicago papers are still particularly pissed at Obama over the pressure he put on them and loss of face when he'd nail them to a cross over their "coverage" of events that took place in the neighborhoods he worked in.

[Parkbandit]

You have GOT to start investigating facts on your own.

Rezko's contributions were a drop in the bucket during Obama's early political runs ... and they weren't Rezco's, they were contributions collected by Rezco.

Current contributions (80 grand worth), connected to Rezco (meaning he collected them) have been donated to charity. He is far from Obama's largest contributor.

You also have to take into account that Chicago papers are still particularly pissed at Obama over the pressure he put on them and loss of face when he'd nail them to a cross over their "coverage" of events that took place in the neighborhoods he worked in.

Nailed them to a cross? Is that supposed to be a slight against Christianity? I imagine if I said "lynched them with a noose" there would be a public outcry for my banination.

Maybe next time, you could be a little more tolerant of our religious freedom.

Thank you.

[Parkbandit]

That's interesting.

I read the article you posted, I wonder if he will address it at all.

Oh, and John Kerry saying Obama got swiftboated by this being brought up just cracks me up.

I was against the Swiftboat Veterans because they were obviously with issues(Like the guys going after McCain right now in a similar manner),

This is actually an interesting story. If he did business with him, it does make a difference, and it means he lied when he said he just was involved in the law firm that defended him. According to that he was actually friendly with him as well, and also did business with him..

Angela

Oh oh.. tell us the story about how you would vote for McCain instead of Obama... man, that was classic political Ilvane.

[Gan]

Oh oh.. tell us the story about how you would vote for McCain instead of Obama... man, that was classic political Ilvane.

LOL

Thats a classic.

If the nominations turn out McCain v. Obama I fully expect Ilvane to live up to her words.

:yes:

[Warriorbird]

Y'all can have her. Her vote doesn't count.