Obama

People only like Obama because he's black.

No it's because he is Kennedy reincarnated. Too bad he enjoys exterminating human rights.

>>2 = humorless conservative

>>2

yrup here. life without your "human rights" is actually pretty okay and enjoyable.

The guy has no solutions to problems and his speeches are terrible.

As much as getting a bunch of "ZOMG BLACK PRESIDANT" rabble roused ghetto trash to vote for him would be beneficial (they'd vote for him anyway, even if he was a white male ex-clan member, they always vote democrat), the last thing Barak wants is to whip up a "OMG U R NOT VOTING FOR HIM CAUSE HE IS BLACK" vs "OMG U R ONLY VOTING FOR HIM CAUSE HE IS BLACK" because the majority of the population don't care about race bullshit and will see his presidency as a load of bullshit if race is the major issue of his campaign. The Democrats are aware of this and may choose Hillary over him if he doesn't give some sort of assurance that racism will be kept to a minimum.

i usually vote democrat but if either hilary or obama are chosen as the candidate im going republican.

>>5

Now imagine the opposite and you have Obama.

Obama had those qualities? He obviously didn't display them in his speech today.

>>8
Obama has good speeches, he is a demagogue in my opinion. He has no solutions.
I'm going to vote for that Libertarian Comedian, because he seems to have no ethics, huge political balls, and could become a great utilitarianism president.  

Obama probably doesn't care, he just want to become president, mill around for one term and then be all "lol i was teh first black prezidant". Unless Obama is willing to show a little more initiative with his policies instead of waiting for the liberal current to take him out to sea he won't get my vote.

>>7

Though I could see myself voting for Obama, if he convinces me he'll do more than "omg, 1st black president!"

Obama critics need to read The Audacity of Hope. He has answers in there, explained in detail. Try knowing something about a person before you criticize them with weak "lol only cuz hes black lol demagogue" arguments.

>>13

Seriously, I haven't heard a serious and objective criticism about the guy, yet. It's actually kind crazy that all the Obama-critics are talking all of this shit, when so far the best that they've come up with is: "He smokes". Until, I hear a specific critism then I'm going to assume people dislike Obama because he's black.

I don't like him because of his position on firearms. I realize he's there to represent the state of Illinois (population center - Chicago, a high crime area), which has strict firearms laws, but shooting is one of my hobbies, I've gotten quite good at it, and I treasure my right to bear arms.

When I word it that way, people usually understand why I vote either republican or libertarian (sometimes Democrat, if the candidate isn't anti-gun). I think it sounds a lot better than "that damn nigger wants my maw-sheen gunz and he cain't have um!"

>>14
Your entire argument rides on people having no valid points against Barak, yet I count 5 valid points you "missed".
>>2, >>5, >>6, >>10, >>11

1: Attacking the 2nd amendment.
2: Critics make good politicians, not presidents.
3: No assurance that he doesn't care about race.
4: Hasn't proven himself to be anything other than a populist.
5: Doesn't show any initiative beyond the standard democrat opinion. This of course is a major problem since the Democrats are horribly wrong on many issues and he would only perpetuate them if elected.

What will you assume now? Firstly since it is unlikely you missed these 5 points since pretty much every reply has been about one of them I for one will assume you are just another idiot on the "OMG U R NOT VOTING FOR HIM CAUSE HE IS BLACK" team. Sorry, political correctness is dead. Playing the racecard just doesn't work anymore.

>>16
I use the word "since" too much.

You clearly misunderstand what I saying, allow me to clarify.

1. I have seen nothing, not a sound bite, not a passage where he overtly attacks the 2nd amendment. Maybe if you could provide proof for your assertions, instead of playing "he said, she said". I'd be more inclined to believe you.

2. Is invalid and doesn't make much sense. Are you saying Obama is a critic? If so, what proof do you have to back up your statement? Without proof that "Critics make good politican, not presidents" - your statement in invalid. Sorry. That's not a fact, that's an opinion. Nice try though.

3. What assurance? How can he assure you that he doesn't care about race and when so far the only people who have made a big deal about it are people who aren't Obama. Where is your proof to back up this statement? Also, let's be realistic here...even if Obama comes out and says 'race is not an issue here'...that isn't going to change much. All you'll do is claim that he's lying. And people who don't want Obama because he's black will STILL feel that way.

4. Again, where is the proof? What facts do you have to support this other than your subjective opinion about the guy? It just sounds to me that you won't vote a democrat, no matter WHO it is. How can your statements even be trusted when you adhere so closely to partisanship?

5. Again, read "The Audacity of Hope".

>>18
First of all the accusation of racism is unfounded because even if you think they are wrong they still had a basis and enough to be concerned about. Therefore there is nothing to suggest anyone here has been racist and you must be accusing them of being racist irresponsibly.

Secondly, all 5 points are valid crushing arguments which prove conclusively Barack is not the best option for president. The facts of which can easily be found, I'm not going to be your nanny though and google this all for you. Do it yourself.

1: He wants to tighten restrictions.
2: All he does is criticise. Every president risked his reputation on several
3: Race isn't an issue, but racism is an issue. He needs to give an assurance that he is mature enough to distinguish between these two seperate issues.
4: Baraks has done nothing to conflict with his own party which is seriously flawed. Either he doesn't have the balls to stop being a pupper or he is an idiot. Here is a list of facts I spent 3 hours compiling for you on the issue.
www.google.com
5: This is a democracy not a technocracy. I'm not going to fork out $5 and spend 90 minutes reading some democrat garble and god knows how long maticulously criticising and looking for answers for each and every flaw I come across. Let's do this one issue at a time. Why is Barack supporting mercantilist policies? Doesn't he realise the loss in economic efficiency costs the country as a whole? If he cares about stealing from the rich and giving to the poor why is he wasting the economy of the country to support corrupt outdated cottage industries?

2: All he does is criticise. Every president risked his reputation on several issues before getting elected.

>>4
Go read Brave New World.

The Audacity of Hope is a propaganda piece put out to brainwash the general political populace into believing he's different from every other politician.

>>20
So he wants to do tighten restrictions to the second amendment while at the same time all he does is to criticize. And as a black person he has to assure the people that he will not let this cloud his judgment, i mean the populace are used to white presidents that has no concern at all a priori for race since they are white, and the populace wants reassurance that this black feller is exactly as the white presidents in this regard. Or what is your argument?  To put it plainly, if you put extra demands on obama just because he is black then you are a racist. And if your reason on not reading the guys book is that you already have decided to hate democrat policies then why don't  you just say that you hate democrats, or at least as the democrats are not as republicans (you can have lieberman). And dont you realize that the US health care system is the most  economically inefficient in the world? Swedens are like three  times more efficient and they are commies!?!

btw im not >>18, im not even an american, i just needed to  rinse my brain from the stupidity of >>19. sorry fer trollin       

Obama supported legislation to crack down on drug users and throw them in jail - fuck, not even treatment.  That asshole.  He also supports the banning of semi-automatic firearms.  The legislation gave the government broad and sweeping regulatory power over all kinds of other private or personal activities such as control over the sale of cold medicines and infringed upon our civil liberties even more in an effort to fight the War on Drugs.

Obama voted NAY on a troop withdrawl timetable for Iraq. 

Obama is opposed to gay marriage (does support bullshit 'civil unions though').  In a 2004 interview, Obama has said he does not think that the freedom to get married is a human right.

Obama has said he supports affirmative action in state contracting, public employment, as well as college and university applications.

Obama voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses *who survive.*

Obama joined other democrats in his state during his tenure as state senator, pushing for the raising of over 300 various fees and taxes on businesses in 2004.

Obama sponsored some legislation in Illinois to study the ways Socialized Health Care could be implimented statewide in Illinois.

Voted against legislation that would stop the government from funding abortions.

Voted against legislation permitting people to argue self-defense when in violation of local gun bans in situations in which they use a firearm in their homes, even to save their lives from criminals.

Created and supported legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual could purchase within a given time period.

Voted against tax credits for parents who send their children to private school, essentially meaning those who do so must pay twice - once in taxes, and once in school dues.

Voted NO on Central American Free Trade.

Voted NO on preventing gun manufacturers from being sued when someone else* uses a gun purchased from a manufacturer to commit a crime. 

Expressed support for measures to ban ALL FORMS of semi-automatic weapons, including their sale and transfer.

Supports legislation to make gun locks MANDATORY.

Supports legislation to increase restrictions on ownership as well as possession of firearms. 

Claimed Health Care is a *right*, not a privilege in 2006.  (What about the rights of those who have to *provide* this 'right' to others?)

Voted YES on re-authorizing the USA PATRIOT Act.

Voted YES on giving social security to illegal aliens. 

Voted YES on giving welfare to illegal aliens. 

Voted YES on giving medicaid benefits to illegal aliens. 

Voted YES on establishing a guest worker program.

Voted YES on providing guest workers a pathway to citizenship. 

Voted NO on repealing the Death Tax. 

Voted YES on repealing the Capital Gains Tax cut, and redirecting the money to the military. 

Voted NO on extending the Capital Gains Tax cut.

>>23
"US health care system is the most  economically inefficient in the world?"

Health care would not be nearly as expensive as it is if it was not as highly regulated as it is.  If we just did some of the more basic de-regulating, we could lower health care costs for your average person by around 5000$. 

There are lots of government regulations of the industry that contribute to artificially inflating the price of health care beyond that of what would be normal in a free enterprise system.

fuck commie style health care.  My taxes shouldn't be paying to save the life of some fat who ate fast food all his life, or some crackhead nigger who got into a gunfight because someone stepped on his new pumas.

>>25
Why then has countries with more regulated health care systems (you know Sweden?) have a both cheaper and higher quality system? I mean, in believe even cuba has higher quality (if one counts the fairness as a quality, ie the difference in care between social groups) than the US, but they prolly pay through their nose for that. Sweden doesnt, and their system is like almost DDR:ish!

>>26

Right, because you'd rather have to clean out your life savings when your mommy needs bypass surgery, then sacrifice 50% of your paycheck for free heathcare.

>>27

Because they sacrifice 60$ of their paychecks every month for free healthcare.

Fuck, it's supposed to be a % sign, not a $ sign.

I really think this is really stupid
if anything people need to die faster.
I still think the least we could do is let generic drugs a chance and not let Brand name buy them and have high prices, they seems like a monopoly to me. And healthcare is something you can't fight against, because its a staple.

>>29
Less hyperbole, kthx.

Sweden spends considerably less per capita on its health-care system than the US does, with better outcomes.

>>31
Sweden is cold and doesn't have 30 million illegals who don't get included in the statistics.

>>23
"So he wants to do tighten restrictions to the second amendment while at the same time all he does is to criticize."
Yes. If he was the first democrat to stand up and oppose gun control then it would mean he he wasn't just going along with the flow and criticising the republicans like every other democrat. It would mean he actually cared about the issues and was trying to make a difference instead of doing the same thing the Democrats have been doing since the Reagan era.

As for race, look at what I said. A racial issue would be water fountains for blacks and whites. The only reason an issue should matter to Obama is because supporting segregated water fountains would be racist. It matters because racism matters, not because it is a racial issue and Obama needs to make this clear.

You assume that because he is black he cannot possibly be racist and should be exempt from criticism, this is racist. I intend to criticise him as brutally as I would any other person who might one day have his/her finger on the button as I am not racist. That should be clear.

>>32
Excuses, excuses. France is lower too. Pretty nice weather there. Actually, all OECD members are lower, and only some are colder than the US.

Why don't you put any pet ideology aside and look at empirical evidence? Do you prefer ignorance over reality? Why? It makes you feel good?

I hate humanity.

The government wouldn't be spending so much money on health care and things would be far more efficient if we didn't have socialist shitheads wanting americans to pay the medical bills of illegals who run across the border and squeeze out babies so they can stay here legally, then saddle the american taxpayer with their hospital bills and welfare payments.

Obama nation

>>28
I don't work hard to receive only 50% of what I've earned.  No one has the right to rape me of my money when they've done nothing to earn it.  When some nicotine junkie gets cancer he can have half of my money when he does half of my work.  Otherwise he can die for his poor life choices.

>>37 doesn't use public roads, didn't have a public education, doesn't need police or military protecting him, and the FDA is evil incarnate. Also, he's completely immune to contagious diseases.

Otherwise he can die for his poor life choices.
Truly lovable. You'll never make bad choices either, nope.

While I may make a mistake or two, I'm not out there smoking 3 packs a day, or fucking random people with no protection, or running with gangs, or stuffing my face with cheeseburgers, or driving drunk, or wasting all my money on worthless rims and making the minimum payment on seven maxed out credit cards.  If other people wanna live shitty lives, fine, but I shouldn't have to pay for them when they get sick.

>>38
He was clearly talking about the healthcare system, not all tax in general.

So you're putting words in people's mouths now instead of repeating already refuted arguments, looks like you're losing the debate.

Well, i thought the most important thing is to get as good service for as little money as possible, you know, efficiency. What does it matter that you pay almost no taxes if you medical bills are the highest possible on this earth while the service is not as grand? What moral reasons is there against saving money? Are you being opressed because you pay less?

>>41
Because then we don't have to pay for your 200 lb weed smoking ass when you have cardiac arrest on the highway.

>>42

Which rarely (see: never) ever happens. You're fagging out about stoners because of ignorance or you having a personal experience with being a fucked up stoner. But don't give you the right opt out of the government.

>>42
But its cheaper! You mean that you are prepared to pay more money so that the stoner doesnt get treatment? Its worse to pay less and he gets treatment than that you pay more and he doesnt get treatment? You are being selfish out of spite?

I can't speak for 42, because he obviously doesn't know how weed affects the body, but I think it's justifiable to deprive lazy, self-destructive people from medical care, even if I do end up paying more for my own health needs.  Society as a whole would benefit if the notion that "it's okay to be fat/lazy/promiscuous/etc" was erased.  Being a fat, lazy, unsafe, asshole should have no benefits to it whatsoever.  But a socialist style medicare system pretty much says "hey even if you don't take care of yourself you'll be treated anyway, so there's no reason for you to work hard, eat healthy, and stay away from drugs."

>>44
Do the maths. The difference in cost is just a few percentiles and it's not all doom and gloom for the US has one of the best track records for ambulance response times.

If I live a healthy lifestyle I pay less and if I get an unavoidable serious illness my insurance will cover it. I would be paying for private healthcare in other countries anyway because most of them are just minor ailment factories.

>>45
Okey, that is your opinion. But then never ever again say that your system is the most economical sound. Because you have just stated that you are prepared to waste money just so that people who is not as morally upright or whatnot as you want them to be wont get health care. You are prepared to waste money for no gain, just based on some abstract absolute moral code. Is that really capitalism?

>>46
Best response times is worthless if the rest of your system is a bloated pile of shit. But maybe you think that dying in a hospital instead of in your home is the greatest since the vaccine for polio?

>>47
The socialist system isn't better. Haven't you watched house?

>>48
Maybe socialist systems are cheaper because ambulances simply don't get there quickly enough and they can say "oh he was dead before we got here lol, nothing to do with us!".

>>47
I'm 45
I wasn't the one saying our health care system is economically sound.  I think you may have mistaken me for one of the other posters.  My whole opinion is that I don't want slackers leeching off of me and other people who live responsibly.  Whether or not it's the most efficient system makes no difference to me.

>>51
>I'm 45
Get off 4chan, you pedo!

>>49

That's not what he asked you. He asked you if that's really capitalism. Why didn't you answer him? Is that because you know the answer is "HELL NO."?

>>51

"Slacker" is a subjective term. In my opinion, you wasting your time on the internet and not being out there helping the poor or defending the world from terrorists-- makes you a slacker. If I have to pay for YOUR freedom to do whatever you want, then you have to pay for mine.

That's the beauty of America, no one has the right to say: "So and so isn't doing their part"...because this isn't a socialist or fascist system. There's no such thing as leeching because everybody pays into the system in one way or another.

>>53

Except for the very rich. Stoners pay into the system more than they do, but apparently they aren't a factor to >>51.

Back to the actual topic...

Obama may speak well, he *may* even be a good Senator, but he's too fucking inexperienced to have the highest office in the land.  If the Democrats care about getting some power back they'll realize that McCain will castrate Obama in a debate on the experience question alone.  They will also realize that Clinton is too divisive a character to be elected.  The Democrats need to start looking at people like Chris Dodd, who with the proper funding might actually have a shot.

>>55
Yeah. I think that's probably it. I think secretly his run for president is jus a confidence building exercise to say "I'd make a president, just not the best choice yet.". Of course if he gets overhwelming support compared to Hillary he will become the democrat candidate, but this is unlikely. I don't think the majority of the democrat party is a politically correct twit who vote for people just because they are non-white or female, not to say that there aren't people like that.

>>55
The less time playing the dirty political gain the better, quite frankly. Look at your example, McCain has completely lost all dignity and self respect and become another Neocon cronie. 6 years ago he was a good senator and a decent man.

The president doesn't need experience, really. They have so many advisers and cabinet members and everything that all they need is good judgment. Bush has bad judgment, Obama has good judgment and stands up for what he believes in, which for the most part is what I believe in, which is why I think he is the best candidate for president. And it looks like its going to be Giuliani for the Republicans, who has less experience than Obama, so they won't be able to get him on that one.

>>53
It has nothing to do with "doing their part".  The issue I have is that my money shouldn't pay for someone else's problems, especially if it happens that they've been reckless or failed to prepare themselves for hard times.

I had a strange dream last night. It was Obama taking Hillary doggy style and Hillary was all "FUCK ME NIGGER". What does this mean?

>>59
Hillary likes the hard nigga cock?

>>60
Who doesn't?

>>39
Probably does heroin.