So what DOES Obama stand for?
 

Obscene Bastard Ate My Artichoke

He's for change. What change means is, as yet, undefined. If this is an example of speaking his mind, it doesn't bode well, because he's said little.

BTW, Harrison went the route I was going to take. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/lol.gif

Winston may be an elder, but he's quick. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/nod.gif

As a matter of record, I wouldn't vote for Obama. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/smile.gif

Dauphin, would you rather abstain though or vote for the other guy?

Though if Obama makes it the whining of the conservatives will be quite amusing http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/nod.gif

Originally posted by Ecthy
Dauphin, would you rather abstain though or vote for the other guy? It's too late to vote for Hillary.

With McCain running, it's not a good idea for the GOP to play the flip-flop card this year.

Originally posted by Ramo
Yep. The idea that McCain could base a campaign on calling his opponent a flip flopper is pretty ridiculous. Well they could have a few laughs with his "I was for Welfare reform before I was against it" ad meant to position himself with the center.

Originally posted by Ramo
Yep. The idea that McCain could base a campaign on calling his opponent a flip flopper is pretty ridiculous. The article wasn't written by a McCain supporter

Looks like another election between terrible candidates, even though this one was supposed to be better. Why does American politics suck so much?

The article wasn't written by a McCain supporter I didn't assert that was the case. Just pointing out a simple fact.

As for the article, it's pretty ridiculous. It's a combination of paint-huffing fantasy ( The first is his tax policy. This would raise the top marginal rate of federal income tax in the US on those earning $250,000 a year to more than 56 per cent. , his primary campaign pledge to dismantle the North American Free Trade Agreement ), lack of an actual recent change in positions - what a "flip flop" constitutes ( opposition to another that outlawed the death penalty for rape of a child.
), failure to understand the First Amendment and how the left interprets it ( a programme that channels funds to religious groups so that they can deliver social welfare services, which the Left regards as a heinous blurring of Church-State separation. ), and general idiocy (
The other challenge is Iraq. Mr Obama continues to insist that Iraq is a failed war and says that he will withdraw all US combat troops within 16 months of taking office. But the closer the election gets, the less plausible it will be to refuse to acknowledge the success that US forces have had in Iraq in the past year. ).

There are a few points where there are real flip flops. He switched his mind about the constitutionality of handgun bans, but that's the "major issue" that a care the least about, and one that I'd argue is completely peripheral to personal liberty and crime policy. He promised the left that he'd filibuster a FISA compromise that included telecom amnesty, but now indicates that he probably would vote for one (and would fight to get it out of the bill before it comes to a vote), but that skirts the major issue regardless - on the NSA datamining program, where Obama was always weak from the perspective of civil libertarians. And on NAFTA, he has gone from saying that he'd unilaterally start a renegotiation of NAFTA to a more multilateral stance - which amounts to a hill of beans in either case.

But the point is, all this is nothing compared to what McCain has gone through over the past few years.

As humans, we flip flop, the problem is how much we flip flop.

I don't really see much of it with Obama, he seems like an alright candidate. Some say he is inexperienced, I say bullshit. A leader is someone who reminds people which path is the best to take, a leader is not someone who sits down at a table and does all the calculations. JFK anyone?

Obama winning means he only allow one religion for all Americans, which will be called judachrislam, where women wear headscarfs or not, men drink alcohol or not and militants fight for a global judeo-christian caliphate. Or so.

I think it's political strategy for Obama to make himself into a centrist. This election is going to be determined by with party gets out the vote. If either of the candidates appears too extremist it will fire up the other party's base more than it will fire up their own base. That said, Obama has the edge in a contest where a portion of each base will not vote because the right wing is more extremist than Democrats as a whole. And if McCain tries to appeal more to his base he's going to lose what moderates he does have as well as fire up the leftists like myself who wouldn't otherwise vote for a moderate and a liar.

In case anyone wants to know the answer to the question "So what DOES Obama stand for?" here's the link to the definitive answer: LINK

Originally posted by Zkribbler
He's the only candidate with enough guts to call the gas-tax proposed holiday what it is: a pandering ploy which will prove to be ineffective. But not enough guts to offer a solution of his own. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ons/icon13.gif

What else do you suggest? But not enough guts to offer a solution of his own. Obama is coming in at the end of 35 years of energy neglect and 7 years after the Bush administration permitted the oil companies to write our energy policy. This problem wasn't caused by him.

The only possible "quick fix" is an investigation into whether there's been manipulation and price fixing. Obama (and many others) have called for this.

If there's been no manipulation, then this is a solely supply-and-demand problem which will need long-term solutions, i.e. alternative energy sources. Obama has called for these.

Why? I think a lot of people would benefit from a war between the US and China.

Meh, we're all going to die anyway.