Obama: Stop, take a deep breath and explain to me......

Great Debates
81

[QUOTE=Paladud]
Honestly, his background (law school -> community organizer -> elected office, with a conversion to Christianity tacked on) seems purely power-seeking. People have made comments to that effect about Bobby Jindal on this very forum, but Obama seems to get a pass.
[/QUOTE]

Power seeking? Why not shoot for the moon when you get out of college and take the 1.2 million a year job in downtown? No, Obama took the no money job and worked for a living. I identify with that side of him quite a lot.

82

[QUOTE=Paladud]
Honestly, his background (law school -> community organizer -> elected office, with a conversion to Christianity tacked on) seems purely power-seeking. People have made comments to that effect about Bobby Jindal on this very forum, but Obama seems to get a pass.
[/QUOTE]

So what? Any really liberal or left-progressive POTUS we ever get – and Og knows we need one! (though I’m not entirely satisfied Obama qualifies) – almost certainly will have followed either something like the above career path (religious conversion optional) or that of FDR (born to privilege). Well, there’s also the John Edwards option (self-made wealth), but how far did he get?

83

His background seems not “power seeking”, but rather that of a guy who wanted to help people.

It does happen that his path brought him to national prominence very quickly. But if you were truly looking to be president, I could think of better grooming grounds than Trinity United and the south side of Chicago. A nice corporate job or a prosecutor’s gig and a vanilla white church would be excellent choices both. He had the world by the balls and he chose to direct himself to organizing poor black folks.

He’s really been lucky beyond belief, and that is why he’s basically untainted- he did not have to get too dirty to get where he got, he was able to maintain his idealism. It’s really lucky for him and I submit, for the rest of us.

84

[QUOTE=holmes]
I’ll add this, I’m city guy; grew up in NYC and have a real problem with concealed weapons; as in my neighbourhood when someone was hiding was weapon, they were looking to kill someone…so chances are you and I will have issues on concealed weapons.
[/QUOTE]

See, all those people hiding weapons in New York City did not have carry permits. They had those guns illegally. And the fact that they were “looking to kill someone” (or rob someone, or rape someone) means that they’re already a criminal, gun or no gun. The fact that handgun permits were and are impossible for an average person to obtain in NYC means that the only people with the monopoly on the guns are criminals, and law-abiding people who wish to defend themselves from said criminals are unable to do so without becoming criminals themselves.

Someone who’s a criminal doesn’t give two shits whether guns are legal or illegal. He is going to get a gun if he wants one, and he’s going to conceal it whether or not he has a permit.

Vermont has the most liberal gun laws in the United States (no permit needed for concealed carry) and an insanely low crime rate. D.C., NYC, L.A., - not so much.

The fact that in New York, in the 80s at the height of the crack wars and the crime wave, some little old lady who had to ride the subway and put herself at risk every night was not legally allowed to have a source of protection against thugs who would be packing heat, makes me sick. That’s the government saying, “the life of a thug is more important than the life of an innocent person.”

As it stands now, Obama is against ALL concealed carry and against ALL handguns in general in his state of Illinois and presumably the whole country. To me, this means that he believes that average, innocent, law abiding people should be forced to be prey for law-breaking predators who will carry a handgun and the laws be damned. It means that some woman who’s in danger of being raped by a 250-pound brute has no way of fighting back. It means that someone in a wheelchair, who can’t even walk, shouldn’t be able to protect themselves from thugs who would rob him for twenty dollars.

And meanwhile, President Obama will have armed bodyguards and security details with fucking Uzis under their jackets.

To me, Obama’s position on guns is a big, huge, gigantic, “FUCK YOU” to the average American, and I will not vote for someone with that attitude.

85

[QUOTE=Marley23]
:rolleyes:
He was working as a community organizer and the churches were an important part of the community. Without their support he couldn’t get anything done, as holmes describes. So he started going to Trinity and according to his own words - which I’m taking at face value because I don’t have any reason not to - he later had a genuine religious experience there.
[/QUOTE]

As I said, I like Obama, there’s no need for the rolleyes. I was asking an honest question, not a loaded one.

I didn’t know much about the Trinity Church other than that Rev Wright and Obama belonged to it, so…ignorance fought.

86

[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
See, all those people hiding weapons in New York City did not have carry permits. They had those guns illegally. And the fact that they were “looking to kill someone” (or rob someone, or rape someone) means that they’re already a criminal, gun or no gun. The fact that handgun permits were and are impossible for an average person to obtain in NYC means that the only people with the monopoly on the guns are criminals, and law-abiding people who wish to defend themselves from said criminals are unable to do so without becoming criminals themselves.

Someone who’s a criminal doesn’t give two shits whether guns are legal or illegal. He is going to get a gun if he wants one, and he’s going to conceal it whether or not he has a permit.

Vermont has the most liberal gun laws in the United States (no permit needed for concealed carry) and an insanely low crime rate. D.C., NYC, L.A., - not so much.

The fact that in New York, in the 80s at the height of the crack wars and the crime wave, some little old lady who had to ride the subway and put herself at risk every night was not legally allowed to have a source of protection against thugs who would be packing heat, makes me sick. That’s the government saying, “the life of a thug is more important than the life of an innocent person.”

As it stands now, Obama is against ALL concealed carry and against ALL handguns in general in his state of Illinois and presumably the whole country. To me, this means that he believes that average, innocent, law abiding people should be forced to be prey for law-breaking predators who will carry a handgun and the laws be damned. It means that some woman who’s in danger of being raped by a 250-pound brute has no way of fighting back. It means that someone in a wheelchair, who can’t even walk, shouldn’t be able to protect themselves from thugs who would rob him for twenty dollars.

And meanwhile, President Obama will have armed bodyguards and security details with fucking Uzis under their jackets.

To me, Obama’s position on guns is a big, huge, gigantic, “FUCK YOU” to the average American, and I will not vote for someone with that attitude.
[/QUOTE]

Vermont’s not exactly overrun with black and hispanic gangs toting guns like LA, NYC and DC, but…all the more reason to be packing a firearm.

87

[QUOTE=stolichnaya]
He says his Christianity was influenced by his wife and the community work done by Trinity. He even says in his book that he benfited from Trinity because as a community organizer on the south side of Chicago, Trinity represents authenticity, resources, and political connections in the black community and beyond. Without an alliance to a strong church community you’re not going to get far in organizing the south side.

To your curiously insistent question, have no proof that Obama is not a Christian. I have only piles of insinuation. I can see that he behaves as a Christian. I’d like to see some proof that he’s not an honest Christian before I go asking oily questions about him designed to sow doubt. Even better, I’d like to see some proof that he has ever been a practicing Musilm past the age of reason.

For whatever it’s worth, if his Christianity is a matter of political expediency it might actually raise him in my estimation.
[/QUOTE]

Thank you.

88

[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil]
As I said, I like Obama, there’s no need for the rolleyes. I was asking an honest question, not a loaded one.

I didn’t know much about the Trinity Church other than that Rev Wright and Obama belonged to it, so…ignorance fought.
[/QUOTE]

I therefore retract my more touchy remarks above. I certainly need to grow a thicker skin on the Wright stuff, as do others. Sorry.

89

[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
To me, Obama’s position on guns is a big, huge, gigantic, “FUCK YOU” to the average American, and I will not vote for someone with that attitude.
[/QUOTE]

I think you’re taking a leap to assume that your views on gun control are typical. They may not be uncommon but I would not assume that they are typical. People who base their entire political view on the Second Half of the Second Amendment are not likely Democratic voters in the first place. I’m sure Obama will not get your vote, but I rather doubt any Democrat would. He’ll just have to get by without the NRA endorsement.

90

[QUOTE=stolichnaya]
I therefore retract my more touchy remarks above. I certainly need to grow a thicker skin on the Wright stuff, as do others. Sorry.
[/QUOTE]

Well, the soundbites on Wright are pretty alarming, and Obama himself made some remarks about Wright being a mentor to him (prior to the meltdown), Wrigh did marry the Obamas…so I thought it was fair to inquire. Certainly there is no guilt by association on Obama’s part, unless in fact Wright is truly as evil as portrayed (I don’t think he is) and Obama worships his every word as some may believe (I don’t).

I think this whole mess is just politics as usual.

91

[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
The fact that in New York, in the 80s at the height of the crack wars and the crime wave, some little old lady who had to ride the subway and put herself at risk every night was not legally allowed to have a source of protection against thugs who would be packing heat, makes me sick. That’s the government saying, “the life of a thug is more important than the life of an innocent person.”
[/QUOTE]

Dude, bring it down a notch. The thing about crime in New York and I haven’t lived there in over a decade, so take it for what it’s worth…were criminals attacking other criminals. Very rarely did innocent people have to fear for their lives…did it happen sure, but I assure you that the majority of us, rode the train, read our papers and minded our business without fear of thugs packing heat, looking to kill us.

However, due to our experiences, we understood that someone hiding a gun was looking to do harm to someone; because we don’t have a gun culture. The only people who had guns were cops, criminals or people that needed them for their business. That’s the way that I grew up. My grandfather being a Southerner had rifles in the house; it’s a different culture, not bad or good; just different.

Understanding that, and agreeing with that type of restriction if the state wants it; doesn’t mean I’m saying “fuck you” the rest of the country; that has a different relationship with guns than NY does and I imagine neither is Obama.

Even if he thinks allowing concealed weapons is a bad idea; he believes in the Constitution…but like I said, we all have to draw our lines in the sand.

92

[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
I think you’re taking a leap to assume that your views on gun control are typical. They may not be uncommon but I would not assume that they are typical. People who base their entire political view on the Second Half of the Second Amendment are not likely Democratic voters in the first place. I’m sure Obama will not get your vote, but I rather doubt any Democrat would. He’ll just have to get by without the NRA endorsement.
[/QUOTE]

Maybe they don’t share my views - fine - but the thing about freedom, the kind of freedom that the Constitution gives us, is that we need to be free to choose whether or not to carry a gun. Plenty of people don’t want to have a gun, and that’s their choice, fine, but real freedom is having the option to make that choice instead of it being compulsory.

The Second Amendment says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The draconian CC laws that Obama supports are a very severe infringement upon that right, which as far as I’m concerned means he’s pissing on the Bill of Rights. For the record, I’m just as upset with conservatives’ pissing on the first amendment as I am with “liberals” pissing on the second. I believe all the rights are equally important.

With that said, if you’re faced with a life and death situation but don’t have a handgun because you’re not allowed to by law, you’re not going to be thinking about freedom of artistic expression or the right to not incriminate yourself or the right to not have troops quartered in your house - you’re going to be thinking, fuck, I wish I had a gun right now.

93

The Supremes will rule on the Second Amendment soon enough so what you or I think doesn’t mean squat. Not to hijack this thread, but what is it about the US that requires guns to maintain freedom when other western countries do just fine without their citizens packing heat?

94

[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
To me, Obama’s position on guns is a big, huge, gigantic, “FUCK YOU” to the average American, and I will not vote for someone with that attitude.
[/QUOTE]

I live in CT, a mere 70 miles from the Vermont border, I have a lot of family that live up there. Do you know what we have that they don’t up in VT???
A high crime rate.

I have my CT permit, but I don’t carry a gun, it’s for recreational/security purposes only. However, I support your right to get pissed at someone who doesn’t excactly support concealed carry, or your views on gun ownership - but for Ogs sake don’t not vote for him because of that - Heh, do you think Obama will actually ever want to seriously touch peoples right to bear arms? I doubt it.

95

What about the recent NRA meeting where John McCain required everyone who came in to hear him speak to surrender their firearms? Isn’t it hypocritical of him to say that armed people are safe around other people but nobody can carry a gun in his presense? If armed people make the world a safer place then McCain should be encouraging people to carry guns around him. And if armed people make a place more dangerous, then why should only John McCain have the power to ensure his safety by being able to disarm people?

96

[QUOTE=BobLibDem]
The Supremes will rule on the Second Amendment soon enough so what you or I think doesn’t mean squat. Not to hijack this thread, but what is it about the US that requires guns to maintain freedom when other western countries do just fine without their citizens packing heat?
[/QUOTE]

Switzerland has the highest gun ownership rate in the WORLD and, I think, the lowest crime rate.

Lots of Western countries had loads of people murdered by their own government in the past 70 years. Germany comes to mind. They didn’t do “just fine.”

97

[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
Switzerland has the highest gun ownership rate in the WORLD and, I think, the lowest crime rate.
[/QUOTE]
I imagine the compulsory military service has something to do with both of these.

98

I have, having been robbed at gunpoint. I didn’t want a gun, I wanted him not to have a gun.

Two things, one simply anecdotal: I was born and raised in Texas (quiet little town called Waco, you never heard of it, nothing ever happens there…) Guns were so normal, never much thought about it. It wasn’t till I left Texas that I did. And I remembered that there was a spot in the local paper, right by the comics, where they would report who got shot at the Dew Drop Inn, or the It’ll Do Lounge, or in an argument over the proper stinkbait for catfish.

Never occurred to me that wasn’t normal, thought everybody lived like that. But they don’t, do they? Are the Amish plundered daily by home invasions?

Civilization is an act of risk, and a certain degree of faith. If you carry a lethal weapon, you are already afraid, you have already given up. And I suggest that the price you pay in fear and dread is far more than the actual liklihood that you will save your life, or someone dear, with that weapon. Like a crucifix may testify to your faith in Jesus, your weapon testifies to your lack of faith in your fellow man. And an extraordinary statement of your faith in your own unshakeable rationality, that you will never lose your temper, or think yourself threatened by a stranger when you are not. As you may have surmised, my faith in myself is pretty high, self-regard issues I have not. But not that much.

Secondly, given the circumstances our country faces, and the potential for disaster embodied in Sen McCain - are you really sure that this one issue is sufficient? If, by some magic, GeeDubya were allowed to run against Obama, would you vote for him?

Allow me to express my faith in your rationality by assuming that you would not.

99

[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
Lots of Western countries had loads of people murdered by their own government in the past 70 years. Germany comes to mind. They didn’t do “just fine.”
[/QUOTE]

:rolleyes: In the U.S., you will never use your gun to resist what you consider oppressive behavior by the police, and if you do, you will deserve whatever you get.

100

[QUOTE=Argent Towers]
Switzerland has the highest gun ownership rate in the WORLD and, I think, the lowest crime rate.
[/QUOTE]

The correllation between gun ownership and crime rates was discussed pretty thoroughly (but no consensus reached) here.