Unofficial results on primary night shows Obama received no votes in Harlem (voters, racist)

[paperhouse]

Originally Posted by BVH

Sometimes, as is the case with Obama , you have to really search to find answers to substantive questions.

I searched. I found only vague descriptions and no real substance on the one thing your nemesis claims Hillary and Obama differ on, their health care plan. I found fair and stable thresholds make up a reasonable part of his plan. I'm still not getting any answers from the Obama people about what he means by that.

[ndfmnlf]

If the answer is so important to you, go do some research. It's there, in plain English, in hundreds of posts. We all can't stand at pulpits and preach to you and serve you Kool-Aid. Sometimes, as is the case with Obama , you have to really search to find answers to substantive questions.

I have read your posts and I have not found any valid reason for you to be abandoning Obama if Hillary loses the nomination. The reasons you've stated are weak. You have not proved that Obama is more "far left" than Hillary is. You have not proved that Obama is less experienced than Hillary is. None of the things you've stated are severe enough to warrant a self-proclaimed Democrat crossing over to McCain. I suspect you have other hidden agendas and grudges against Obama that you do not want to be scrutinized.

[BVH]

Originally Posted by ndfmnlf

I have read your posts and I have not found any valid reason for you to be abandoning Obama if Hillary loses the nomination. The reasons you've stated are weak. You have not proved that Obama is more "far left" than Hillary is. You have not proved that Obama is less experienced than Hillary is. None of the things you've stated are severe enough to warrant a self-proclaimed Democrat crossing over to McCain. I suspect you have other hidden agendas and grudges against Obama that you do not want to be scrutinized.

Perhaps now would be a good time to let you know that I couldn't care less WHAT you think, in case you haven't noticed. There is simply no reasoning with you. See, when people get caught up in chasing an "ideal" they tend to stop scrutinizing the standard-bearer of that ideal thus rendering any rational debate pointless.

[ndfmnlf]

Perhaps now would be a good time to let you know that I couldn't care less WHAT you think.

Well, duh, since you are posting on a public forum where you are pushing your opinions for discussion, then it is fair game to question your reasons for your position. Unless you simply post here because you like reading your own posts.

[paperhouse]

Originally Posted by BVH

See, when people get caught up in chasing an "ideal" they tend to stop scrutinizing the standard-bearer of that ideal thus rendering any rational debate pointless.

Maybe you can post what I said up there and see if it will be addressed. I'm getting nowhere.

[ndfmnlf]

There is simply no reasoning with you. See, when people get caught up in chasing an "ideal" they tend to stop scrutinizing the standard-bearer of that ideal thus rendering any rational debate pointless.

Actually, you've just diagnosed your own condition. You have not provided any rational basis for your statement that you'd rather vote for McCain if Obama is the Dem nominee.

I'm all ears. I'm willing to listen to your defense. You have every right to vote for whomever you please, but since you asserted that Obama is worse than McCain, and since you posted that assertion on a public forum (presumably for discussion), then it is only logical for me to dissect your assertion. And I have. And I'm telling you, there is no substantial difference between Obama and Hillary on the major issues, so it makes no sense to me as a reader of your posts why you would reject Obama if Hillary loses.

[BVH]

Originally Posted by ndfmnlf

....since you posted that assertion on a public forum (presumably for discussion), then it is only logical for me to dissect your assertion. And I have. And I'm telling you, there is no substantial difference between Obama and Hillary on the major issues, so it makes no sense to me as a reader of your posts why you would reject Obama if Hillary loses.

Fair enough. Although, I have stated my positions on the matter REPEATEDLY and have not wavered. This is your last mulligan, so pay close attention.

Simply put: It is my opinion that: Obama lacks any credible experience; he's prone to socialist proselytizing up to and including quoting Louis Farrakhan "Baamboozled, Hoodwinked, and duped"; He associates himself with border-line racist organizations (Trinity United Church of Christ); He refuses to accept scrutiny of his positions without playing the "race" card (through his surrogates and supporters though, of course); I am uncertain of how he has risen so far so fast(Who are his REAL handlers?); His mortgage proposals are deplorable(A $500 tax credit????); His health care plan is neither universal nor is it better than or even equal to Hillary's plan yet he claims all 3; He plagiarizes and virtually copies ALL of Hillary's bills, yet he claims his ideas are "original".

Hillary has been fighting to make REAL changes practically since she was born. She has been a steadfast and proven advocate of healthcare reform and continues to be so. My top 3 qualifications in a Candidate are these:

1. National Security - She and McCain are strong; Obama is Weak.
2. Economy - Hillary is strong. McCain and Obama are weak.
3. Health Care- Hillary is hands down, the best advocate for healthcare reform that America has ever seen; Obama is Weaker-he lacks the conviction to make the tough proposals; McCain is non-existant on the issue.

It is also my opinion that Obama is untested and we have already suffered through 8 years of on-the-job-training. I don't think we can survive another. I lived VERY well under Bill Clinton, and I am confident that although Hillary will be her own President, the peace and prosperity that we saw in the 1990's will continue into Hillary's Administration.

In addition, I have found the vast majority, but not all, of Obama supporters to be pompous, arrogant and condescending, both online and in person. They are too quick to play the race card, and, contrary to how they like to portray themselves, in my opinion, have little knowledge of the political process nor do they understand what the stakes are in this election. I will not vote against him because he's black. But, unlike a large percentage of his Supporters, I won't vote for him simply because he's black, either.

I think there definately IS a racial component to this race, however. It's the 800 pound Gorilla in the room. If anybody has the audacity to disagree with him or his supporters, they are labeled racists, as you yourself have labeled me on multiple occassions, either directly or through insinuation. It's funny, I have yet to be called a "Feminist" for my support if Hillary...

Any potential support for McCain, in the unlikely event that it becomes nescessary, will hinge upon his VP choice. Regardless, Obama wouldn't get my vote if he paid me too.

[ndfmnlf]

Simply put: It is my opinion that: Obama lacks any credible experience; he's prone to socialist proselytizing up to and including quoting Louis Farrakhan "Baamboozled, Hoodwinked, and duped"; He associates himself with border-line racist organizations (Trinity United Church of Christ); He refuses to accept scrutiny of his positions without playing the "race" card (through his surrogates and supporters though, of course); I am uncertain of how he has risen so far so fast(Who are his REAL handlers?); His mortgage proposals are deplorable(A $500 tax credit????); His health care plan is neither universal nor is it better than or even equal to Hillary's plan yet he claims all 3; He plagiarizes and virtually copies ALL of Hillary's bills, yet he claims his ideas are "original".

You sound like some other posters here who are fond of connecting Obama to Farrakhan through the age old tactic of guilt by association. Are you sure you're not the same poster going by different monikers?

This alleged Obama connection to this Chicago church (which, by the way, is a Christian church) has been analyzed and re-analyzed to death on this forum. There's even a member of this forum who attends the church who attests that there are white members of the congregation. The worst that can be said of this church is that it is proud of its black Christian heritage. But then again, who cares?

All religious groups are proud of their heritage, and there is usually an element of ethnic pride mixed in there as well. That's what religions are, by definition. Don't the Jews call themselves the chosen people? Don't Catholics take pride of their Roman heritage? Doesn't the Anglican church proudly trumpet its Anglican roots by its mere name? Why should you single out Obama's church?

Besides, Obama did not found this church. He did not invent its doctirnes. We don't even know if he attends it on a regular basis. He may even just be a nominal believer, just like hundreds of millions of other Americans. To attack Obama on the basis of his church affiliation is no different than attacking Romney for being a Mormon (you know, those former polygamists), or attacking JFK for being Catholic (the inferred association with child-molesting priests). It's nothing more than guilt by association.

I am uncertain of how he has risen so far so fast(Who are his REAL handlers?

This is nothing more than your paranoia showing through. Look, Obama didn't appear on the scene overnight. He has been involved in Chicago politics for more than 10 years. He even lost to Bobby Rush in an election for Congress many years ago. He has built up a network of supporters through the years. People like him, he is articulate and intelligent, and contrary to your insinuation, he doesn't play the race card. That's why Illinois whites are among his strongest supporters. Even the former Illinois Republican governor Jim Edgar admired Obama's skills as a legislator in the state Senate.

His health care plan is neither universal nor is it better than or even equal to Hillary's plan yet he claims all 3; He plagiarizes and virtually copies ALL of Hillary's bills, yet he claims his ideas are "original".

What the hell are you talking about??? Obama's plan is based on the Democratic party's platform. That's why his plan is very similar to Hillary's. They both base their programs on the Democratic platform. There are some variations in the health plan, but the general idea is pure Democrat. There is no plagiarism here. Are you going to lambaste Obama for pushing the Democratic program of action? Isn't that what he's supposed to be doing? He is a Democrat, after all.

[ndfmnlf]

I think there definately IS a racial component to this race, however. It's the 800 pound Gorilla in the room. If anybody has the audacity to disagree with him or his supporters, they are labeled racists, as you yourself have labeled me on multiple occassions, either directly or through insinuation. It's funny, I have yet to be called a "Feminist" for my support if Hillary

I think you are getting paranoid beyond repair. I have never called you a racist. I was merely asking you a question. It is you who brought up this thing about race. Show me where in my posts I labeled you a racist.

[BVH]

Originally Posted by ndfmnlf

You sound like some other posters here who are fond of connecting Obama to Farrakhan through the age old tactic of guilt by association. Are you sure you're not the same poster going by different monikers?

This alleged Obama connection to this Chicago church (which, by the way, is a Christian church) has been analyzed and re-analyzed to death on this forum. There's even a member of this forum who attends the church who attests that there are white members of the congregation. The worst that can be said of this church is that it is proud of its black Christian heritage. But then again, who cares?

All religious groups are proud of their heritage, and there is usually an element of ethnic pride mixed in there as well. That's what religions are, by definition. Don't the Jews call themselves the chosen people? Don't Catholics take pride of their Roman heritage? Doesn't the Anglican church proudly trumpet its Anglican roots by its mere name? Why should you single out Obama's church?

Besides, Obama did not found this church. He did not invent its doctirnes. We don't even know if he attends it on a regular basis. He may even just be a nominal believer, just like hundreds of millions of other Americans. To attack Obama on the basis of his church affiliation is no different than attacking Romney for being a Mormon (you know, those former polygamists), or attacking JFK for being Catholic (the inferred association with child-molesting priests). It's nothing more than guilt by association.



This is nothing more than your paranoia showing through. Look, Obama didn't appear on the scene overnight. He has been involved in Chicago politics for more than 10 years. He even lost to Bobby Rush in an election for Congress many years ago. He has built up a network of supporters through the years. People like him, he is articulate and intelligent, and contrary to your insinuation, he doesn't play the race card. That's why Illinois whites are among his strongest supporters. Even the former Illinois Republican governor Jim Edgar admired Obama's skills as a legislator in the state Senate.



What the hell are you talking about??? Obama's plan is based on the Democratic party's platform. That's why his plan is very similar to Hillary's. They both base their programs on the Democratic platform. There are some variations in the health plan, but the general idea is pure Democrat. There is no plagiarism here. Are you going to lambaste Obama for pushing the Democratic program of action? Isn't that what he's supposed to be doing? He is a Democrat, after all.

So, what you are saying is that both you and Obama are absolutely infallible and that I simply HAVE to agree with you?

Let me let you in on a little secret: Just because you are an anonomous poster on a public discussion forum does not make you an expert on anything. You have an opinion like myself and everyone else. Of course, we all have anuses too.

Let me let you in on another little secret: We are electing the next President of the United States, not voting with Paula and Simon to determine the next "American Idol". ALL candidates should be thoroughly scrutinized.

Until you realize, understand and accept that fact, perhaps you should keep your voting limited to FOX on Tuesday nights. You are demanding, as per the Obama supporter usual,that we just annoint your candidate with no questions asked. That is both an unwise and irrational decision. But, by all means, carry on with the insanity. This conversation is over.