 merrie says: Some pundits are calling him the next John F. Kennedy. He’s not. He’s the next George McGovern. And it’s time people learned the facts. Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in the entire U.S. Senate. He is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders, or Mrs. Clinton. Never in my life have I seen a presidential frontrunner whose rhetoric is so far removed from his record. Walter Mondale promised to raise our taxes, and he lost. George McGovern promised military weakness, and he lost. Michael Dukakis promised a liberal domestic agenda, and he lost. Yet Mr. Obama is promising all those things, and he’s not behind in the polls. Why? Because the press has dealt with him as if he were in a beauty pageant. Mr. Blackwell is Chairman of the Coalition for a Conservative Majority, a Fellow at the American Civil Rights Union, and the Buckeye Institute. He is a columnist for the New York Sun, a contributing editor for Townhall.com, and a member of the NRA Public Affairs Committee. Forgotten Prophets blogspot God, Politics & Cetera His Almanac of American Politics rating on Foreign Policy is 85% liberal -- not 100% liberal because of such odd positions as that he would invade Pakistan in order to attack al-Qaeda. "I will not hesitate," he orated, "to use military force to take out terrorists who pose a direct threat to America." I must be missing the nuance, that distinguishes this statement from Bush's so-hated policies of the past five years. But I'm being disingenuous. The hesitation wouldn't be in the attack, it would be in determining what a "direct threat" might possibly be. He imagines that Iran can be handled by "sustained and aggressive diplomacy" along with... merrie....perhaps it's a good thing that this campaign has gone on for a long time. He has talked about "change" and declared himself as wanting to "unite" America. I don't believe his ideas concerning these things have any relationship or affinity to what *regular* America knows anything about. Hillary is scary but this man is dangerous. Hillary is scary but this man is dangerous.In his speech yesterday, Obama catalogued all the charitable projects his church administered to their community, and that's as it should be. But, he cannot and will never justify the hysterical propaganda that Rev.Wright regurgitates from his pulpit and sells in the church's bookstore in DVD format! Also, the disturbing question as to if they're taking their young daughters to a service that calls on God to "Damn America" would be important to address. The head of George Bush's Church said that W's preparations for war against Iraq are "without any justification according to the teachings of Christ". But W. didn't follow his church's lead. Isn't it possible for Obama not to follow his church's lead? The head of George Bush's Church said that W's preparations for war against Iraq are "without any justification according to the teachings of Christ".Separation of church and state is the political and legal idea that government and religion should be separate, and not interfere in each other's affairs. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state Isn't it possible for Obama not to follow his church's lead?The following is the first sentence in this clip. Over the summer, Mr. Obama talked about invading Pakistan, a nation armed with nuclear weapons: Based on Mr. Obama's statement, I would take him at his word right on, merrie! Well I would like to know what you envision as an invasion of Pakistan. If you believe it is something like "shock and awe" that was launched by George Bush on a nation that never attacked us and did not have WMD's, or connections to Al-Qaeda, it wouldn't be anything like that. He was talking about, if there was a situation, where it was known that Bin Laden was meeting, and the U.S. knew where and Pakistan wouldn't do anything. It would be more like a surgical strike of dropping commando units not a 500,000 strong army. Or it could be using drones to launch a couple of Hellfire missiles at a safe house. And thank you for you answers on the churches because it is basically an admission... Well I would like to know what you envision as an invasion of Pakistan.Personally, I think it's a bit premature for any presidential candidate to publicly "map out" any military strategies. The word 'invasion', as I would define it, is completely inappropriate. Or it could be using drones to launch a couple of Hellfire missiles at a safe house.Exactly. Most recently,Abu Laith al-Libi was killed the end of January'08 by U.S. strike. So, intel is key to eliminating al-Qaeda commanders in Waziristan. |
View the Top Clips from March 19, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
||
|
|
|||
