What is Obama good for...

wispandex_bulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Posts
371
Media
1
Likes
15
Points
238
Location
Wisconsin
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
No--- a LIE is A LIE- A slander a slander.

The assholes putting out this story KNOWINGLY misrepresented the truth for the purposes of convincing the public of a lie.


Sorry- INTENT is the ONLY point.

IT doesn't matter if Obama were a muslim, because the constitution prohibits even taking that into consideration in selecting president.
Wrong, the constitution provides protection of right to assemble and practice religion. I dont particularly care about Obama's religion, but if someone were concerned that muslim ideological influence would lead Obama to make decisions which are unfavorable to America and or our allies, that is reason enough to consider not voting for Obama.
 

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
348
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Wrong, the constitution provides protection of right to assemble and practice religion. I dont particularly care about Obama's religion, but if someone were concerned that muslim ideological influence would lead Obama to make decisions which are unfavorable to America and or our allies, that is reason enough to consider not voting for Obama.


and THAT was a reason why so many feared a Catholic President!!!!

Would someone PLEASE be reminded that the Muslim world (which is predominantly Sunni) is having great trouble with it's fundamentalists, just as the Christian world is having a great deal of difficulty with IT'S fundamentalists???!!! Hmmmmmm!

And FINALLY --- also be reminded that it isn't just the "person" we vote for, but the "party"! In the next 4 years I would be MUCH more willing to trust the Democrats to pull the country back from the brink than I would trust the Republicans who led us TO it!
 

Phil Ayesho

Superior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Posts
6,189
Media
0
Likes
2,793
Points
333
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
Wrong, the constitution provides protection of right to assemble and practice religion. I dont particularly care about Obama's religion, but if someone were concerned that muslim ideological influence would lead Obama to make decisions which are unfavorable to America and or our allies, that is reason enough to consider not voting for Obama.

You can Say that, But the constitution says different. Try reading it all the way thru.

It says there shall be NO religious test for public office. NOT an amendment- An ARTICLE.

That means that a person's religion CAN NOT BE CONSIDERED in their qualifications for office.

It is JUST as unconstitutional for YOU to do it as it would be for the government to do it.


Of course it doesn't STOP people anymore than speed limits stop speeding.

You are free to act unethically in your selection of president.
But- for example- if a PASTOR were to stand in the pulpit and endorse a particlar candidate, or denouce a aprticular candidate for ANY reason... that church can LSOE its tax exemption.

Free people assembled in a church to practice their religion can NOT be collectively discussing candidates.
Not and still be a church.


BTW- Obama has no more Muslim ideological influence than you do.,
 

Phil Ayesho

Superior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Posts
6,189
Media
0
Likes
2,793
Points
333
Location
San Diego
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
I am gay, but gay rights are a minor issue for me right now. I have so many objections to Obama that I cannot vote for Obama even if he was going to make gays immune to HIV and give us the right to commit any "crime" with impudence...


You are not thinking clearly about your own interests.

Forget about Obama... You VOTE the platform.


You seriously look at the nation today- the train wreck of the economy, the train wreck of the War, the train wreck of constitutional rights, the train wreck of our global standing...
And you HONESTLY want to buy another ticket on that train?

You seriously look at 100,000 innocents killed in Iraq and more to come... at the failure to do ANYTHING about Bin Laden... the failure to address global warming...
and the ACTIVE denial of equal treatment of gay men and women...

And you REALLY want to vote for MORE of that?


If so- then I pity you for your lack of acumen... or I dismiss you for being a racist.


You have no valid ground form which to support the conservative ticket.
 

wispandex_bulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Posts
371
Media
1
Likes
15
Points
238
Location
Wisconsin
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
You are not thinking clearly about your own interests.

Forget about Obama... You VOTE the platform.

You seriously look at the nation today- the train wreck of the economy, the train wreck of the War, the train wreck of constitutional rights, the train wreck of our global standing...
And you HONESTLY want to buy another ticket on that train?

You seriously look at 100,000 innocents killed in Iraq and more to come... at the failure to do ANYTHING about Bin Laden... the failure to address global warming...
and the ACTIVE denial of equal treatment of gay men and women...

And you REALLY want to vote for MORE of that?

If so- then I pity you for your lack of acumen... or I dismiss you for being a racist.

You have no valid ground form which to support the conservative ticket.
You are wrong. You can vote the person or the platform. I vote the person becasue Obama has PROVEN that he cannot be trsuted to do what is right. McCain may not alwasy be right, but I can TRUST him to cooperate with Democrats to better the country.

And for the record, Obama has had a couple of very anti-gay religious surrogates, including reverend Meeks. So, If what you say about relgiious endorsements is true, Why haven't Wright's Holy Trinity Church and Meeks's church lost their tax exemption?

Lastly, Obama has recently proved he is just as willing as Bush is to step on constitutionally guaranteed freedoms by setting up his "truth squad". Thankfully the governor got wind of it quickly and challenged it for its lack of constitutionality.
 
Last edited:

wispandex_bulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Posts
371
Media
1
Likes
15
Points
238
Location
Wisconsin
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
You can Say that, But the constitution says different. Try reading it all the way thru.

It says there shall be NO religious test for public office. NOT an amendment- An ARTICLE.

That means that a person's religion CAN NOT BE CONSIDERED in their qualifications for office.

It is JUST as unconstitutional for YOU to do it as it would be for the government to do it.

BTW- Obama has no more Muslim ideological influence than you do.,
You dont understand the constitution very well. Religion was never considered in his qualifications...the most basic of which make him eligible to RUN FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT. Therefor, no unconstitutional judgement was made. Once the candidate is being voted for, all is fair to consider. You are even fair to consider somethign insidious but unproven. Most of Obamas supporters refuse to look at Obamas negatives, and I see a lot of them. I see a lot of negatives in McCain, but I see a much better leader and honnorable person in McCain. So, I vote for McCain because I cannot trust Obama.
 

Notaguru2

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
1,519
Media
0
Likes
10
Points
123
Location
Charleston, SC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
You are wrong. You can vote the person or the platform. I vote the person becasue Obama has PROVEN that he cannot be trsuted to do what is right. McCain may not alwasy be right, but I can TRUST him to cooperate with Democrats to better the country.

His voting record, not being ideologically aligned with you, does not make him untrustworthy. You might try to consider some open mindedness. You may sleep better at night.

And for the record, Obama has had a couple of very anti-gay religious surrogates, including reverend Meeks. So, If what you say about relgiious endorsements is true, Why haven't Wright's Holy Trinity Church and Meeks's church lost their tax exemption?

There's plenty of this to go around. None of the Evangelical churches have lost their tax exempt status. Quit whining please. Which surrogates of Obama are "anti-gay"? I bet you don't answer that...

Lastly, Obama has recently proved he is just as willing as Bush is to step on constitutionally guaranteed freedoms by setting up his "truth squad". Thankfully the governor got wind of it quickly and shut it down for its lack of constitutionality.

Obama didn't set up the truth squad - supporters did. Obama wouldn't and didn't sanction that. You wouldn't know the truth if it hit you in the face. Looks like we've stumbled onto the new Trinity, boys.
 

B_Morning_Glory

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Posts
1,855
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
183
Location
lucasville, ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
You really need to stop with the personal attacks. For one thing it shows the weakness of your own position.


i tell you what is weak your BRAIN how you can say McCain is good for this country is beond me, you go on an vote for the sob. go on show your true ignorance you love these republicans so much that you have in office now put them back in again then we will really be down hill as far as jobs, price of gas, you name it they screw it up as they already have, it will take more than 2 terms now to fix the mess this time they left. but it can be done but only if we have a DEMOCRATIC white house senate and congress magority, it will never be fixed with this thing you call a presindental canidate McCAIN and his same ole shit and his pussy licking running mate.
 

Notaguru2

Experimental Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
1,519
Media
0
Likes
10
Points
123
Location
Charleston, SC
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Most of Obamas supporters refuse to look at Obamas negatives, and I see a lot of them.

I don't view my differences with Obama as negatives. However, I am not going to reward McCain with my vote when his party has run the executive branch for the last 8 years and the congress for 10 of the last 12 years.

McCain was wrong on Iraq.
McCain was wrong on Afghanistan.
McCain is wrong on Iran.
McCain is wrong on the economy.
McCain is wrong in the direction we need to go.
McCain is wrong on education.
McCain is wrong on health care reform.
McCain is right on earmarks.
McCain is right on the military budget.
McCain was wrong with his VP pick.

It's going to take more than vetoing earmarks, having the best military and a MILF as VP to get my vote. It's just that simple.
 

wispandex_bulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Posts
371
Media
1
Likes
15
Points
238
Location
Wisconsin
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
His voting record, not being ideologically aligned with you, does not make him untrustworthy. You might try to consider some open mindedness. You may sleep better at night.
It is not his voting record, it is his lack of consistency between what he says and what he does. He talks about unity and change. I agree with that being a good step in the right direction, but Obama and his campaign is part of the problem. Obama has pushed this propaganda that all republians are all cookie cutter clones, that McCain is another Bush. That is nothign but a propagation of anti-Republican prejudice and hate. That isn't unifying or a change to current political currents. So you can continue to be part of the problem or we can try to find common ground.

There's plenty of this to go around. None of the Evangelical churches have lost their tax exempt status. Quit whining please. Which surrogates of Obama are "anti-gay"? I bet you don't answer that...
Meeks is, for one.

Obama didn't set up the truth squad - supporters did. Obama wouldn't and didn't sanction that. You wouldn't know the truth if it hit you in the face. Looks like we've stumbled onto the new Trinity, boys.
The truth squad is a branch of the Obama campaign. In fact, Sen Claire McCaskill was part of the squad. Obama should not allow elected officials who are part of his campaign to operate in an unsanctioned organizationed. It WAS sanctioned by the campaign, because he never acted to stop these organizations or admonish the participants. If Obama were truly concerned with Constitutionally protected rights such as free speech and open debate, he should have not allowed these organizations to operate. Further more, there are many references in the news to truth squads set up during the primary.
 
Last edited:

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,256
Media
213
Likes
32,279
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
It is not his voting record, it is his lack of consistency between what he says and what he does. He talks about unity and change. I agree with that being a good step in the right direction, but Obama and his campaign is part of the problem. Obama has pushed this propaganda that all republians are all cookie cutter clones, that McCain is another Bush. That is nothign but a propagation of anti-Republican prejudice and hate. That isn't unifying or a change to current political currents. So you can continue to be part of the problem or we can try to find common ground.


Meeks is, for one.


The truth squad is a branch of the Obama campaign. In fact, Sen Claire McCaskill was part of the squad. Obama should not allow elected officials who are part of his campaign to operate in an unsanctioned organizationed. It WAS sanctioned by the campaign. If Obama were truly concerned with Constitutionally protected rights such as free speech and open debate, he should have not allowed these organizations to operate.
A gay person voting for Mccain..........boggles the mind........kind of like a black person voting for George Wallace or the younger Strom Turmond
 

wispandex_bulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Posts
371
Media
1
Likes
15
Points
238
Location
Wisconsin
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
A gay person voting for Mccain..........boggles the mind........kind of like a black person voting for George Wallace or the younger Strom Turmond
Shame on your for reducing people to one issue and suggesting that all party members are identical and partisan. There are racist and bigoted democrats, just as there are pro-choice and gay republicans. This prejudice is part of the problem that is stifling development. I cannot work with someone who denigrates me out of reducing me to my sex or sexuality. Must women vote with their uteruses? Must men vote with penises? Must gay men vote with a swish? Please think more deeply about how you attack people. Stop the propagation or racism, sexism, stereotyping, and partisanship.

As for gay-marriage. It will come. Someday. With a social leaning congress and an open mind, It will happen. I don't need gay marriage if I'm going to lose freedom of speech or other freedoms. I support marriage equality, but is not necessary for me to lead a fulfilling life in America.
 
Last edited:

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,256
Media
213
Likes
32,279
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Shame on your for reducing people to one issue and suggesting that all party members are identical and partisan. There are racist and bigoted democrats, just as there are pro-choice and gay republicans. This prejudice is part of the problem that is stifling development. I cannot work with someone who denigrates me out of reducing me to my sex or sexuality. Must women vote with their uteruses? Must men vote with penises? Must gay men vote with a swish? Please think more deeply about how you attack people. Stop the propagation or racism, sexism, stereotyping, and partisanship.
I stand by my metaphor and this gay man votes with a pencil, not a swish....now who is stereotyping? I'm a legally married gay man in massachusetts. Obama and the Dems will work for the federal government to recognize that fact. McCain and the repubs will do everything to stop the federal governement from recognizing that fact........simple
 

wispandex_bulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Posts
371
Media
1
Likes
15
Points
238
Location
Wisconsin
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I stand by my metaphor and this gay man votes with a pencil, not a swish....now who is stereotyping? I'm a legally married gay man in massachusetts. Obama and the Dems will work for the federal government to recognize that fact. McCain and the repubs will do everything to stop the federal governement from recognizing that fact........simple
McCain was AGAINST Bush's push to enshrine sexual orientation descrimination against gays through marriage protection amendment to the constitution. McCain wont stop it because he opposes constitutional amdendments about this.

Again, you use a fear tactic to try and convince voters. That sounds like a traditionally "republican" tactic. So, stop using your pure Republican prejudices.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,256
Media
213
Likes
32,279
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
McCain was AGAINST Bush's push to enshrine sexual orientation descrimination against gays through marriage protection amendment to the constitution. McCain wont stop it because he opposes constitutional amdendments about this.

Again, you use a fear tactic to try and convince voters. That sounds like a traditionally "republican" tactic. So, stop using your pure Republican prejudices.
NO scare tactics/ McCain is for DOMA....Obama wants it repealed in its entirety.....McCain wants DADT.....Obama favors its removal.........just facts(If you don't know what doma and dadt are...look them up)
 

wispandex_bulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Posts
371
Media
1
Likes
15
Points
238
Location
Wisconsin
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
NO scare tactics/ McCain is for DOMA....Obama wants it repealed in its entirety.....McCain wants DADT.....Obama favors its removal.........just facts(If you don't know what doma and dadt are...look them up)
You dont seem to get it. We have DOMA and DADT right now. I am not particularly affected by either. Change will come to descriminatory legislation, but only if American attitudes change. Again, you reduce all gay men to one issue: gay rights. I agree with you that those laws need to be changed, but I don't they that they are more important than other issues such as economy, constitutional freedom, and general social justice.
 

Industrialsize

Mythical Member
Gold
Platinum Gold
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Posts
22,256
Media
213
Likes
32,279
Points
618
Location
Kathmandu (Bagmati Province, Nepal)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
You dont seem to get it. We have DOMA and DADT right now. I am not particularly affected by either. Change will come to descriminatory legislation, but only if American attitudes change. Again, you reduce all gay men to one issue: gay rights. I agree with you that those laws need to be changed, but I don't they that they are more important than other issues such as economy, constitutional freedom, and general social justice.
well I believe that gay rights are JUST as important as the ones you mentioned. And you ARE affected by DADT and DOMA whether you think so or not. The "mindset" that thinks those 2 laws are acceptable is one that discriminates against gay people in many ways. I also believe that the Democrats are better on constitutional freedom, especially the economy, and very especially on social justice. All major civil rights legislation has come from the DEMS. 8 years of republican rule has left our economy in shatters. And I don't want any supreme court justices telling me what I can do in my bedroom or with my body.
I'm not sure how old you are, but i came of age in the 70's. Things were not very easy for gay people back then and we've worked too hard to see things regress.
 

B_VinylBoy

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,363
Media
0
Likes
70
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
You dont seem to get it. We have DOMA and DADT right now. I am not particularly affected by either. Change will come to descriminatory legislation, but only if American attitudes change. Again, you reduce all gay men to one issue: gay rights. I agree with you that those laws need to be changed, but I don't they that they are more important than other issues such as economy, constitutional freedom, and general social justice.

As regards to constitutional freedoms, remember how close we were to having an actual anti-gay passage added to the Constitution in the last election? Truth be told, if that actually happened then gay & lesbian people would have a lot more to worry about right now than just DOMA, especially with a current Republican ticket that features a VP who is strongly against any kind of progression for gays & lesbians being so close to the White House. Change to discriminatory legislation only happens if we continue to progress forward in its thinking. By supporting someone who supports the Defense Of Marriage Act and Don't Ask Don't Tell, we do not progress towards eliminating the problem at all. And deep down, even if it's not your chief concern, gay rights is something that every gay & lesbian person wants to see happen in their lifetime. I agree with Industrialsize on this one... if you're gay and you're voting for McCain & Palin, you're shooting yourself in the foot.

Oh, and BTW... if you want to focus on the economy Obama trumps McCain on this issue as well. :biggrin1: