RIP John Edwards Campaign

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by Senior

good point. but more what I'm getting at is that the kind of whole sale changes that need to made to the US are not going to be realized by Obama, Clinton or whoever else is running.

Yeah, probably not

(Is it wrong that I hold out hope Obama will be different? :P )

[galaxie]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

I think he's saying that you're paying too much attention to the media hype and not enough to what the candidates are actually endorsing.

Obama is religious? Where'd you get that from? A picture of him going to Church? His campaign has been anything but religion-based, but that's not what the media wants you to believe.

I know a few people who have worked with Obama recently in different areas. While his campaign hasn't been religion-based, he is apparently quite religious and has said that his "faith" will help him make decisions if he is President. I think that the President should be looking to the people and his advisors to make important decisions rather than placing such a high importance on "faith". Sure, I'm all for people having whatever beliefs they want, but I don't think they should necessarily influence every decision the President makes. Morals are one thing, religious beliefs that do not necessarily reflect the voice of the people are another.

I'm well aware of both Clinton and Obama's platforms, but like I said, I can't necessarily decide which I like better. Also, Obama's comment about the "President of Canada" totally disappointed me. If you want to be President of the United States you should probably know that your neighbours to the North have Prime Minister, not a President. While this may seem trivial and unimportant to some, it just adds to the question of his experience in my mind.

[rawb]

HILARY WANTS TO BE PRESIDENT, OBAMA WANTS TO LEAD A COUNTRY IMO
o

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by galaxie

I know a few people who have worked with Obama recently in different areas. While his campaign hasn't been religion-based, he is apparently quite religious and has said that his "faith" will help him make decisions if he is President. I think that the President should be looking to the people and his advisors to make important decisions rather than placing such a high importance on "faith". Sure, I'm all for people having whatever beliefs they want, but I don't think they should necessarily influence every decision the President makes. Morals are one thing, religious beliefs that do not necessarily reflect the voice of the people are another.

I'm well aware of both Clinton and Obama's platforms, but like I said, I can't necessarily decide which I like better. Also, Obama's comment about the "President of Canada" totally disappointed me. If you want to be President of the United States you should probably know that your neighbours to the North have Prime Minister, not a President. While this may seem trivial and unimportant to some, it just adds to the question of his experience in my mind.

Hi, this is you grasping at straws.

WTF? So now a candidate is not allowed to have faith?

I'm a pretty spiritual person too. I talk about having faith all the time. I don't consider myself Christian, but I'm not about to look down on someone for being so. What bugs me is if their personal beliefs interfere with their work. So far Obama hasn't given anybody any reason to think that it would, so why are you jumping on that as a fallacy? Because someone has genuine faith, and doesn't just go to church every week for their get-out-of-hell-free card? All the candidates are self-proclaimed Christians.

WTF is wrong with faith? Sometimes it's all people have.

[ebbomega]

I know Eli Stone agrees with me!

[galaxie]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

Hi, this is you grasping at straws.

WTF? So now a candidate is not allowed to have faith?

I'm a pretty spiritual person too. I talk about having faith all the time. I don't consider myself Christian, but I'm not about to look down on someone for being so. What bugs me is if their personal beliefs interfere with their work. So far Obama hasn't given anybody any reason to think that it would, so why are you jumping on that as a fallacy? Because someone has genuine faith, and doesn't just go to church every week for their get-out-of-hell-free card? All the candidates are self-proclaimed Christians.

WTF is wrong with faith? Sometimes it's all people have.

Originally Posted by galaxie

I'm all for people having whatever beliefs they want, but I don't think they should necessarily influence every decision the President makes. Morals are one thing, religious beliefs that do not necessarily reflect the voice of the people are another.

I'm not grasping - I feel uncomfortable with the idea of the President potentially making decisions based on his faith rather than what the people want/need.

[Senior]

Originally Posted by galaxie

I'm not grasping - I feel uncomfortable with the idea of the President potentially making decisions based on his faith rather than what the people want/need.

considering that god told bush to invade Iraq I think religion or faith could be considered a liability.

[Sykonee]

Originally Posted by Senior

considering that god told bush to invade Iraq I think religion or faith could be considered a liability.

Maybe so, but Obama's God told him not to vote on going to Iraq even when everyone else was for it.



Wait, don't they follow the same God...?

[Grapes]

God is double crossin n*ggaz

[Senior]

Originally Posted by Sykonee

Maybe so, but Obama's God told him not to vote on going to Iraq even when everyone else was for it.



Wait, don't they follow the same God...?

if it's some higher power talking to me how would I Know if it's god or satan?

[djmarkpaul]

Originally Posted by Senior

if it's some higher power talking to me how would I Know if it's god or satan?

Don't let the left hand know what the right hand is doing.

[djmarkpaul]

Originally Posted by Senior

Just watch and see the US will stay in Iraq and the Patriot act will not be repealed whether the Democrats or the Republicans win. the US will try to sell it as a withdraw and hand over of power to the Iraqi security forces but will still maintain bases there and continue to offer military support to prop up their puppet regime. but this will be called a withdraw. Americans will still live in a nation where their rights have been stripped. health care and education will still be for the rich.

It's likely to be this grim, seeing how there's only one constitutionalist in the race who's been so marginalized it's beyond obvious/laughable, it shouldn't come as a big surprise.

[djmarkpaul]

Originally Posted by Grapes

If you're saying 8 more years of Bush would be more likely to get people upset and angry than 4-8 years of a more moderate candidate then you're derailing your initial argument that the person elected "doesn't really matter". Societial institutions crumbling under incompetent government directly affect American lives, and that's the sort've shit they've seen down there (the Katrina fallout being a standout case of an overall malaise).

I agree, it matters, but incompetent government? If it was only that simple.

Originally Posted by Grapes

I guess it's pretty easy to sit on this side of the border and preach the big picture (which admittedly is as important if not more important than anything else) and say that a more competent, benevolent American government doesn't matter. Pretty sure it does to those south of the border.

Border? Oh right, it's still 2008.

[djmarkpaul]

Originally Posted by SEAN!

are you kidding? if it wasn't for bill clinton's support she'd be another mediocre senator that no one would care about.

The lady is more connected than you think, she's going to win, David Icke said so so it must be true.

Originally Posted by SEAN!

beyond the fact that much like Bush Jr she is standing on her last name for support its even more troubling that she sold her self respect out for a shot at the presidency. It is an indication of the type of person she is, Id never want her as a leader. If you're willing to stay with someone who has consistently cheated on you inorder to further your career, imagine what she'd do to improve her popularity the next time there's a terrorist attack.

You're right.

Next time huh?

Originally Posted by SEAN!

Also consider the fact that she has minimal support from independants and none from moderate republicans and its clear that she is the only person who is a gauranteed loser against the republican nomination, its hard to beleive that anyone in the democratic party is dumb enough to support her.

The Cliton's and Bush's are in bed like peanut butter and jelly...it doesn't matter who you vote for when the machines doing the tabulating are as easy as they are to hack.

[djmarkpaul]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

Hi, this is you grasping at straws.

WTF? So now a candidate is not allowed to have faith?

I'm a pretty spiritual person too. I talk about having faith all the time. I don't consider myself Christian, but I'm not about to look down on someone for being so. What bugs me is if their personal beliefs interfere with their work. So far Obama hasn't given anybody any reason to think that it would, so why are you jumping on that as a fallacy? Because someone has genuine faith, and doesn't just go to church every week for their get-out-of-hell-free card? All the candidates are self-proclaimed Christians.

WTF is wrong with faith? Sometimes it's all people have.

Seeing how church and state were meant to be seperate from the united states inception (look at the beliefs of the forefathers of the constitution), I would say it's easy to see yourself on either side of the fence, for different reasons naturally. It's odd how so many of them were christians too though don't you think?

So what's wrong with faith? Yeah sometimes it's all people have...that's a very dangerous precedent when you're supposedly supposed to make decisions where the fate of the world hangs in the balance.

But okay, what's really wrong with faith? It can be faked...that's what.
It doesn't just stop there...hell it can be even more scary if it's real.

It really depends on the quality of life though. Now I'm just gonna take a blind shot at this, but I'm guessing that Obama leads a life that's a tad more priviledged than your average american, but I could be wrong.

Faith can be a great asset to the individual, but as for a nation, I'm going to have to divert to some comic relief (there's some Bill Hicks in there too just for you dawg):

[miss.myra]

Originally Posted by galaxie

I'm not grasping - I feel uncomfortable with the idea of the President potentially making decisions based on his faith rather than what the people want/need.

You do know John Edwards is a devout Christian too right? He has said in interviews that his own faith would affect his decisions too. In that sense, they are both very similar.

In 2004, John Kerry said that he wouldn't let his faith affect his decision making. Does it affect yours?

Yes, it does. I do believe in the separation of church and state. But I don't think separation of church and state means you have to be free from your faith. My faith informs everything I think and do. It's part of my value system. And to suggest that I can somehow separate and divorce that from the rest of me is not possible. I would not, under any circumstances, try to impose my personal faith and belief on the rest of the country. I don't think that's right. I don't think that's appropriate. But freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom from religion. And I think that anything we can do to promote the idea that people should express their faith is a good thing.

source here: John Edwards, Democrat, presidential candidate -- Beliefnet.com

[galaxie]

^ Actually:

On Faith and the Constitution
"...for any publicly elected official, you're responsibility is to abide by and enforce the Constitution, and meet your constitutional duties. My personal faith guides and affects my personal decisions in my personal life. But as President of the United States I have a constitutional responsibility to all of the American people, which means, to all people of all faiths. So I think you have to be very, very careful to not let your own personal faith beliefs, particularly where they may differ with other faith beliefs, to influence national policy."
--Interview with the Interfaith Alliance, December 3, 2003

[Grapes]

Sweet, it's a have your cake and eat it too mandate!

[wishbone]

so this whole faith based shit galaxie is arguing. Obviously a president cannot run the country according to strict bible rule/code. They could try to do so, but thanks to checks and balances, that won't get really far.

The only thing I can see a candidate using faith for is "guidance" in decision making. Asking God if he/she is making the right decision.

Now I ask.....

How is this any different than following a 'gut instinct'? Sometimes using logistics and looking at all the options take time - I would love a president who can use their gut instinct in time sensitive conditions. Whether it's truly a gut feeling or they claim it was guidance from the divine...you know what? WHO CARES! MEANS DON'T MATTER, ENDS DO for decision making!

let me repeat that once more

MEANS DONT MATTER FOR DECISION MAKING, ONLY ENDS.

[miss.myra]

Originally Posted by galaxie

^ Actually:

On Faith and the Constitution
"...for any publicly elected official, you're responsibility is to abide by and enforce the Constitution, and meet your constitutional duties. My personal faith guides and affects my personal decisions in my personal life. But as President of the United States I have a constitutional responsibility to all of the American people, which means, to all people of all faiths. So I think you have to be very, very careful to not let your own personal faith beliefs, particularly where they may differ with other faith beliefs, to influence national policy."
--Interview with the Interfaith Alliance, December 3, 2003

okay, but your whole issue with Obama was the fact that he would use his faith to help him make decisions, and despite the quote above, John Edwards said he would in a different interview? I have no doubts that although Obama too is religious that he would definitely agree with the statement above. Just because someone is openly Christian doesn't mean that they don't feel people of other faiths and beliefs deserve to benefit from their decisions. I don't see any difference whatsoever between Obama's and Edwards' own personal faith and value set. Both are deeply religious men who are very open about it.

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by galaxie

I'm not grasping - I feel uncomfortable with the idea of the President potentially making decisions based on his faith rather than what the people want/need.

I'd rather he base his religion in faith than moral outrage.

I still see nowhere that Obama seems to imply or suggest that he might make his personal religious beliefs interfere in his ability to make decisions. Faith is a good thing, regardless of whether or not you believe in God.

[robyn]

millions invested in subprime lenders. cheated on wife. $400 haircut. otherwise cool.

[wishbone]

subprime loans for some......

miniature american flags for others!

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by robyn

millions invested in subprime lenders. cheated on wife. $400 haircut. otherwise cool.

What's not cool about a $400 haircut?!

How much shellac do you have to use to run up that tab, I wonder??

[SEAN!]

this discussion about faith has me laughing, no one can be elected in the US unless they had 'faith' and faith in christianity is pretty much a prerequisite.

galaxie its funny that you say obama is too religious because the democrat ive heard spit that shit the most is edwards followed by clinton.

you also need to take into account what being a unitarian is compared to being a baptist.

if you thought sunni and shia were irreconsible, then you on to some tame shit.