# Interesting voter perspectives



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

I saw a discussion of Howard Stern somewhere on here awhile back, and it sparked some passionate dialogue. :lol: I don't intend to start that here, but this was just sent to me, and I found it very entertaining.

In all fairness, Stern should do the same of McCain to see to what extent the reverse is true. If it's already out there, please post it here.

http://odeo.com/episodes/23498122-hs_sa ... peg-Object

Goes to show what I've worried about for a long time. We need some way to prove competence prior to voting. :wink: I mean, for cryin outloud, my ex-wife voted for Clinton because he was better looking!

I'm SERIOUS! 

She couldn't tell you one thing about what he stood for or believed in.....but she liked him. :wink:


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

And I FIRMLY believe most young people who are voting Obama are doing just on the age standpoint. McCain looks and is old.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

We have witnessed that prejudice right here on this form. Openly as a matter of fact. Age was presented as a good reason not to vote for McCain, and for goodness sake be careful of Palin because she is Christian. What do you call these guys, age bigots?


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> We have witnessed that prejudice right here on this form. Openly as a matter of fact. Age was presented as a good reason not to vote for McCain, and for goodness sake be careful of Palin because she is Christian. What do you call these guys, age bigots?


Excuse me? Prejudice? Give it a rest.

Age is a HUGE factor if someone dies in office, and their VP needs to assume the role of the office.

When McCain would be the oldest person to assume the office in history, and combined with the fact that he has multiple medical issues, I think anyone that doesn't take his health into consideration, and then subsequently scrutinize thier VP pick more closely than normal is not doing due diligence vetting the VP on a personal level. It is completely relevent and fair game.

As everyone has seen, Palin has clearly been shown to be inept and incompetent to hold that office.

Heck if you need me to, I'll show you 2-3 articles written in the last week where hard core Republicans have come out saying either she is not competent to hold office, or maybe recently you saw the news from the Chicago Tribune? You know that stauchly Republican newspaper that has NEVER IN HISTORY endorsed a Democratic Party candidate going back to Abraham f'in Lincoln? Guess what? *THEY endorsed Obama*!! Think about that!  They are a fiercely supportive Republican publication folks. They didn't endorse McCain due to his VP plain and simple.

Or better yet.. how about Colin Powell? Ever heard of that guy? Wonder who he is endorsing? Wanna go look it up? Guess who doesn't think that Palin has what it takes to run the country or the military? I thought he was Republican? Wasn't he going to be a Republican VP candidate himself in a prior election cycle?

I could go on and on, but you refuse to see the light, or even slightly admit that she is weak in so many areas. You notice she still hasn't given any more unscripted, no pre-conditions interviews? She doesn't take press conferences? Gee why is that? Still hasn't gotten a grasp of the "tough" issues without falling back on talking points?

So when folks are trying to learn more about her by listening to her in an unscripted fashion, you know.. "off the cuff", we have nothing. zip. notta. She and her handlers won't allow her to speak. Makes a person start to wonder her competency on even basic things. That combined with her shaky debate where she refused to answer questions, makes her a weak Presidential nominee. Yes it does matter Plainsman.

But I digress.. I've gotten off topic a bit on a rant...

So let me get this straight. It is ok to *stir up hatred* and perpetuate lies and myths, and stoke the fires of race, the Islamic religion, terrorism, and birthright, BUT age is wayyyy off limits? Do I hear you correctly?

Pure hogwash. I'm am completely disgusted by the faux moral outrage.

Furthermore.. if we want insist on talking bigotry and prejudice, I've got 5 or 6 YouTube videos to post of recent Republican rallies for you to review. We can then get into some great conversations on why folks are voting for McCain due to their prejudices against Obama.

Here's a neat little sample:






Some of the Republican party's finest there. That's your party folks. You should be proud.

And just think... the McCain campaign is fueling those fires.. If not directly, then instead blame those holding the rallies representing the Republican party, however the McCain campaign has representatives there giving it their approval. They could squash the nonsense but they believe it will get swing voters to their side right? :roll:

What's the saying? Those who live in glass houses....

Looks like your arm is worn out throwing all these stones...

uke:


----------



## JustAnotherDog (Oct 16, 2005)

Obama even had pictures of the t-Shirts on his website. Nope, my arm ain't wearing out, it's clicking to these sites:


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

The left keeps saying how unqualified Palin is.

Never in the last 50 years has such an un-qualified person been a candidate for president, and that is Obama.

Exactly what has Obama ever done in his life that qualifies him to be the leader of the free world.

Exactly when has he ever show one iota of leadership ability.

You bring up youtube of idiots, which I can go find just as many videos of the same crap in the opposite direction, but which candidate sat in a church for 20 years listening and saying amen to such rhetoric.

Which candidate had the character to associate with a known former terrorist to further his own political carreer.

Also, did you really think the tribune wouldn't endorse the hometown boy, especially when they are in finacial dire straights?

How many press conferences has Biden done lately? Especially since JOBS is a three letter word now.

As far as Palin's competency, dude, she is responsible for a state, and doing very well at it. As far a troopergate, that has been drug around so much only because they don't have anything else to say about her. She took on big oil and won, she took on the old guard corrupt politicians in her state and won, which is a heck of a lot more than Obama has ever done besides vote present.

Then there is ACORN, it's bad enough what they are doing, but Obama refuses to admit that he is their main finacial supporter. Dude, just tell the truth and say hey, we wanted them to register voters, not commit voter fraud and it would be over.

As far as off the cuff, how is Obama's little "REDISTIBUTING THE WEALTH COMMENT GOING"? Marxism at it's finest, which is exactly what Obama is and wants.

And yes McCain would be the oldest first term president, but not the oldest president to be sworn in. Reagan was older when he was sworn in for his second term.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Face it, McCain could croak tomorrow, or go another decade. Hell, if you really want to get nitty gritty, Obama could croak tomorrow.

Age is my least concern.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

I'm glad you guys showed up. Reading some of Ryan's posts reminds me of the conversation I had awhile back with a one-eyed tile setter who was explaining to me why he didn't need to wear safety glasses while cutting tile.

I was so dumbfounded afterwards I was speechless! 

Absolutely despicable info you found, Dog. Thanks for posting.

I gotta say, all this cherry pickin' going on here again has got me hungry for some warm pie! Too bad it's not our side doin' the pickin' :lol:

Have fun guys......I gotta get to bed

:beer:


----------



## Gun Owner (Sep 9, 2005)

Ok Ryan. On one hand we have a group that supports Obama's right to life, pro Iraq war stance, and his choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate.

To respond you post a link of crude, childish, but 100% correct republicans...

Now if your video had shown support of John Hussein McCain, or maybe a voter who was happy that McCain was going to legalize partial birth abortion, or even better a voter who thought Obamas life in Hanoi didnt qualify him to be president, well then it may have been worth posting.


----------



## Gun Owner (Sep 9, 2005)

as long as we're posting irrelavant videos, heres one showing Obama explaining why he couldnt run for president in 2008


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

"There may be some people who are comfortable doing that, im not one of those people"....in reference to having experience and knowing what your doing when it comes to your job. Apparently he got ALOT of experience in the last four years.

Thaaaaats priceless GunOwner. Wonder why we havent been seeing that tasty tidbit on CNN?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> It is ok to stir up hatred and perpetuate lies and myths, and stoke the fires of race, the Islamic religion, terrorism, and birthright, BUT age is wayyyy off limits? Do I hear you correctly?


I have never seen race brought up in a demeaning manner. I have seen people mistake Islam for race. As far as hatred and false reporting Ryan people who do that loose credability and no one believes them anymore. I certainly don't. 
Remember how the liberals cried that Bush stole the election in Florida? What do you think of ACORN and all the fraud they are perpetuating?


----------



## sevendogs (Sep 19, 2003)

Plainsman said:


> We have witnessed that prejudice right here on this form. Openly as a matter of fact. Age was presented as a good reason not to vote for McCain, and for goodness sake be careful of Palin because she is Christian. What do you call these guys, age bigots?


People will vote for Obama, because of what he said and how he said it; because of his appearance and he is younger and has more energy to work and time to learn and because he choose a very capable and experienced VP. McCain is a less interesting personality; he does not bring anything new or creative; another man born with silver spoon in his mouth, out of touch man; his judgement may be questioned, because he choose Sarah Palin as his running mate. He is an old man, anything can happen and then, we would have Sarah Palin as our president. He already made this choice for us. We have to make our choice, when we go to vote.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

sevendogs said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > We have witnessed that prejudice right here on this form. Openly as a matter of fact. Age was presented as a good reason not to vote for McCain, and for goodness sake be careful of Palin because she is Christian. What do you call these guys, age bigots?
> ...


I think you have made a point for us. People will vote for him because of "how he says things"??? To me that's very shallow. People will vote for him because of "his appearance"? Again from a value standpoint that's very shallow. McCain is a "less interesting personality"? Again I think that's very shallow. We are electing someone to run this country, not have coffee with in the morning. 
Do you think McCain was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. His father was military and they don't make much money. Silver spoon or not he proved his values when he refused to be set free before his fellow soldiers in Viet Nam. That was a measure of a man. Don't whine to me about any silver spoon. 
I think Sarah Palin was a good choice. The only reason liberals are angry is because they are afraid everyone else is prejudice like they are and sexism might trump racism in the race.


----------



## sevendogs (Sep 19, 2003)

Appearance may be a shallow feature, but it works. Obama's black skin is not in his favor, because of prejudices in the society, but he has other merits and what he said and how he said it sounds believable. McCain is a hero, but it does not guarantee his quality as a president. He did not grow up without toys or without running water. Some of us did. McCain did not know how many houses he had; do not ask him how many cars... How many jobs he created? Do not ask him that. Many of us hated liberals and believed in "trickle down economy" idea, which have never been analysed scientifically. We had "god in the White house", at last, shouted evangelicals. This is why we had Republican administration. Eight years later we have our economy in trouble. May be this is the time to see, if the economy can "trickle up"? Vote for Obama. He is a quality man, very smart and he will become one of our greatest presidents.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Obama's black skin is not in his favor, because of prejudices in the society


I agree there is prejudice in society (darn it's cold out today I can hardly type after coming in), and that is why 90% of blacks are voting for Obama. I could see 60/40, even 70/30, but 90/10 just proves there is prejudice in the black community just like prejudice in any white community.



> McCain is a hero, but it does not guarantee his quality as a president.


I agree.



> He did not grow up without toys or without running water. Some of us did.


That would include me. We didn't have electricity until the 1960's. I don't need sympathy, and I don't need your tax dollars. I didn't have money for college, I borrowed it, and guess what, I paid it back.



> McCain did not know how many houses he had; do not ask him how many cars.


That also has no more bearing on how qualified he is than being a hero. It's very very shallow, and we have seen it on here before. Jealousy is all it is and not very well cloaked.



> Many of us hated liberals and believed in "trickle down economy" idea, which have never been analysed scientifically.


Scientifically? Your joking right. That would require about a 20 year period, you would need to test at least ten variables, and have a control. I don't think you mean scientifically. Sounds great, but not practical.



> We had "god in the White house", at last, shouted evangelicals. This is why we had Republican administration. Eight years later we have our economy in trouble.


What is all the christian prejudice all the time? It has nothing to do with it, anymore than the number of houses or McCain being a hero. Get over the Christian hate. As far as the economy the president can not do anything that congress does not send his way. Remember who has been top dog in congress lately. Yup, and things were not bad until the democrats took over.



> Vote for Obama. He is a quality man, very smart and he will become one of our greatest presidents.


A vote for McCain is ensured freedom. I and my fellow sportsmen keep our semi-autos for at least another four years. Children about to be born will not have their brains sucked out before birth. More than a third of my retirement income (which is far below even the $42,000 that Obama will tax) will go to support illegal aliens if Obama is elected. The defense budget will be cut if Obama is elected and our nation will be in danger. An Obama president will make terrorists dance with glee. Obama may be our last president.


----------



## JustAnotherDog (Oct 16, 2005)

I like McCain because he isn't a slick, snake-oil salesman kind of guy. He has limited mobility and seems sort of out of place in the limelight. He seems more like us than someone that always needs a teleprompter. He has a public record that anyone can access and isn't hiding his college days for some reason. His wife founded and ran a non-profit organization, the American Voluntary Medical Team, from 1988 to 1995 that organized trips by medical personnel to disaster-struck or war-torn third-world areas. He has principles he isn't afraid to vote on and hasn't lived his life like he was planning to be president. Vote for McCain. He is a quality man, very smart and isn't hiding his past.

(Maybe Obama will take time in Hawaii to pick up a copy of his birth certificate)


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> > We had "god in the White house", at last, shouted evangelicals. This is why we had Republican administration. Eight years later we have our economy in trouble.
> 
> 
> What is all the christian prejudice all the time? It has nothing to do with it, anymore than the number of houses or McCain being a hero. Get over the Christian hate. As far as the economy the president can not do anything that congress does not send his way.


The problem is Plainsman, that we have voters who use their Christian prejudice when deciding who to vote for. It isn't Christian hate. I support all religions. But that means I support ALL religions, and believe that this nation was founded on Freedom of Religion, AND Freedom FROM religion.

We truly need to seperate the church from the state.

Until our nation starts voting on issues of national importance like the economy, foreign relations, and protecting our national interests, and stops basing their decisions on religion, our country is fooling itself when it comes to religous dogma.

These are the types of voters I fear. They are truly foolish.






That sad irony is that McCain is practically an atheist, and never even really embraced religion, until he secured the nomination. Contrast that to Obama who is deeply spiritual and religious. Fortunately for all Americans (including those of us who are not at all religious), Obama's faith is more of the "helping the less fortunate" stripe than the "condemn the infidels" variety.

The racist and religiously intolerant subtext of her comments makes my blood boil. There is simply no reasoning with ignorance as potent as hers. She's become so corrupted by FauxNews and religiously-based hate-speech that she is no longer capable of thinking for herself, however the worst part about her is not simply the stupidity or close-mindedness but her infuriating _arrogance_.

I'd love to ask her "When has McCain proven himself in any way a fervent, fundamentalist Christian? Isn't Barack Christian? Isn't your unwillingness to accept your Christian brothers and sisters unChristian of you? You see... That's not the Christianity I know. That's not the Christianity that's in the Bible. Is it?"

:withstupid:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I didn't even bother with the clip Ryan. Without looking I know you searched the internet for the worst possible person to portray Christians.

Separation of church and state is not in the constitution. I'm not advocating a state endorsed church, I'm simply saying it's freedom of religion and I am sick of hearing the anti Christian prejudice. If you think your tolerant and non-prejudice I have bad news for you. I don't understand your constant or the need of others to constantly bring it up. Many others enjoy the protection of non-prejudice statements. Not so for Christians.

I see your cut little I'm with stupid sighn again. Ryan who is stupid someone who defends their religion, or someone who PM's and phone calls to tell me how brilliant they are? That they are so intelligent they can't find anyone smart enough to relate with? No kidding, I had someone do that.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> I didn't even bother with the clip Ryan. Without looking I know you searched the internet for the worst possible person to portray Christians.
> 
> Separation of church and state is not in the constitution. I'm not advocating a state endorsed church, I'm simply saying it's freedom of religion and I am sick of hearing the anti Christian prejudice. If you think your tolerant and non-prejudice I have bad news for you. I don't understand your constant or the need of others to constantly bring it up. Many others enjoy the protection of non-prejudice statements. Not so for Christians.


Actually I didn't. It was posted just today, as a recent example of a husband and wife who are voting based on different logic.

Maybe you should take a moment to review the actual clip Plainsman. That clip explains a lot more than some trite example of religion bashing.

Rather it shows a great example of an American and how they base their voting choice. This example is from someone who bases their decision on several criteria, with religion being but one. However, the fact that they let their religion be the over arching factor in their decision is what is so disturbing.

They cherry pick their logic to fit their ulterior motives and agenda. She is hiding her prejudice(s) underneath the veil of her religous beliefs.

I used her as an example of the very reason we do need to have a larger seperation between church and state. A very large segment of our society is not very well educated, and they are very easily manipulated and coerced by their churches into doing the churches bidding. Everyone knows this to be true. Please don't insult me by claiming otherwise.

Sorry Plainsman but the sign in my former post was in reference to that woman and how she arrives at her decisions. I think many here reviewing this clip would agree with me...

If the shoe fits..


----------



## sevendogs (Sep 19, 2003)

By some reasons, being a senator or a president is considered the easiest job in the world, because age is not considered as a problem, or is it? McCain voted with Bush 90% of the times. Then, we hear from his TV ad:"Washington is broken and McCain knows it..." How to come? Where he was in Washington and what he was doing all those years? He is at a ripe retirement age. His energy, tempreament and judgement are not in the best condition.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

First I think it is most important what he is not what his parents are. Of course his parents may give us a hint at what he really is, and of course maybe not. The reason I disagree with the woman in the clip is I believe God gave us brains to use. However, she does have a few good points mixed with the bad ones at the end.
You see Ryan I will admit things. If I was you I would say that clip was manufactured by the left and these people didn't really exist.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

I would have to say that the very large segment of society that is uneducated is courted far more by the left, than by churches, with their ongoing class envy warfare. And in mainstream religions, it is far more common to see very well educated persons in attendance than the opposite. I could actually count the people on two fingers that I know attend my church whom are not college educated.

That being said, I don't like religeous zealots in office, but there is the undeniable fact that this country was founded on the basis of christian law, and the laws derived were based on the ten commandments.

And also, go dig up a consitution and find exactly where it states about the separation of church and state. It isn't there, it is a derivative of the first amendment, which states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." The phrase "separation of church and state", which does not appear in the Constitution itself, is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, where Jefferson spoke of the combined effect of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.

That being said, why would anyone voting based on their religeous beliefs bother you? Why are they less important than any other opinions formed by any other means of logic? This is a free country, which makes it everyone's right to vote based on whatever reason they believe to be most important to one's self. To deny those rights, is to deny democracy itself.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

R y a n said:


> Contrast that to Obama who is deeply spiritual and religious. Fortunately for all Americans (including those of us who are not at all religious), Obama's faith is more of the "helping the less fortunate" stripe than the "condemn the infidels" variety.


Really? What, are you two good friends? Or did CNN spoon feed you that tasty tidbit?

Yeah, he belongs for 20 some odd years to a church headed by a blatant psycho intolerant racist that calls to "kill the *******" or something to that effect, and hes NOT a "condemn the infidels" kind of guy?

Come on.....


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> That being said, why would anyone voting based on their religeous beliefs bother you? Why are they less important than any other opinions formed by any other means of logic? This is a free country, which makes it everyone's right to vote based on whatever reason they believe to be most important to one's self. To deny those rights, is to deny democracy itself.


 :thumb: Very respectful southdakbearfan. The idea should be emulated by everyone in a free society.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

Plainsman said:


> > That being said, why would anyone voting based on their religeous beliefs bother you? Why are they less important than any other opinions formed by any other means of logic? This is a free country, which makes it everyone's right to vote based on whatever reason they believe to be most important to one's self. To deny those rights, is to deny democracy itself.
> 
> 
> :thumb: Very respectful southdakbearfan. The idea should be emulated by everyone in a free society.


Thanks.


----------

