For me, I liked Hillary - but am growing weary of some of the falsehoods (although, some may not be of her fault). But am having trust issues.

Barack - was weaking on him as time was going, and then came the comments the other day about folks turing towards guns and religion. I don't know, sounded a little elitest to me. Got turned off straight away, but as I said was weaking.

John McCain - I'm still very excited about this canadate. I had heard that Condoleezza Rice, was a possible running mate, but then I heard she turned it down. I would LOVE that ticket.

So, now after months and months of all this campaign stuff, where do you stand now?

I ask, as I still remain open minded, and truly want the best of the 3.

Barack - was weaking on him as time was going, and then came the comments the other day about folks turing towards guns and religion. I don't know, sounded a little elitest to me. Got turned off straight away, but as I said was weaking.Please don't be dissuaded by the neocons here (tom and steve) - they are full of hate and have as their mission to discredit people. It's pathetic and shameful.

Hi NK

No, I actually heard that on the news. Perhaps you are right, ( not about Tom and Steve)
But maybe his words, or the meaning being applied, I am putting too much weight on.

But I will admit they did sting and I really don't like guns. And it must be hard to be on the campaign trail and be perfect with every word. But for some reason it just rubbed with the wrong way. But I get over things quickly.

I still like Hillary but am afriad, if that makes sense.

But I understand what your saying.

But I will admit they did sting and I really don't like guns. If you don't like guns then you should appreciate Obama's message not be "stung" by them. Where did you read the story about his talk?

I didn't read it, it was on the news and I saw him actually say the words. But I don't know what he meant, that people turn to crime? The relegion portion, believe it or not really didn't sting at all. I think my concern was the blanket thrown over... painting with the same brush. That's what concerned me.

Here's an article that kind of gives a better picture as to what took place.

Obama's Remarks Give Clinton an Opening (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D900LRNG0&show_article=1)

I'm not one to hold someone's feet to the fire, but on first hearing, it does take you a bit back.

Here's a more direct report:
Obama Says Some Voters Are Angry, Bitter (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9006MDG0&show_article=1)
He's right, people are bitter, people voted on gun control and gay marriage previously. Where's the elitist part??

Hello All:

No, it wasn't politically correct. But, it was correct.

"..... they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

How come rednecks like it when they're told they have too many cars in the yard? Is it cause it's a white man saying it? It sure could be. They think it's funny.

But, Barak can't say the above?? Why not? Cause he's not being funny? I didn't know rednecks were so sensitive.

Nahh. If a white supremacist said what Obama said (using less sophisticated words), they'd be lined up to follow him.

excon

Here's a more direct report:
Obama Says Some Voters Are Angry, Bitter (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9006MDG0&show_article=1)
He's right, people are bitter, people voted on gun control and gay marriage previously. Where's the elitist part????

Thanks NK, I will give it a good read as well.

The elitist part comes in, when you shine a large group of people in a negative light, as though you are standing taller then they are.

If he would have said, "On the campaign trail, I have visited with many people from small towns, and they just don't feel as though they are being heard. They've become upset, frustrated and feel they are being left behind".

That would be a much more acceptable statement, because I don't understand where he came up with that sort of description, of a large group of people, even though in small towns.

But I will take a good read on what you provided.

Hello All:

No, it wasn't politically correct. But, it was correct.

"..... they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

How come rednecks like it when they're told they have too many cars in the yard? Is it cause it's a white man saying it? It sure could be. They think it's funny.

But, Barak can't say the above???? Why not? Cause he's not being funny? I didn't know rednecks were so sensitive. What? We gotta be politically correct about rednecks????

Nahh. If a white supremacist said what Obama said (using less sophisticated words), they'd be lined up to follow him.

excon


Excon I honestly would feel the same if any of the canadates would have said those comments.

The article NK provided is in a much better light then most I have either heard or read.

I'm from the working class, but that's not why it took me back, I'd feel the same if a generalization were made for the rich, or those in poverty.

There are some truth to his words, and to me it's not a matter of being PC, it's a matter of being accurate. And I don't think the descriptions capture all small town America, not even close.

I do not trust Hillary she is out for her ego and her secret service and secretaries hate her because she treats them like dirt.
I think Obama is shaky because he refuses to say what he believes about anything and only gives sketchy ideas (not details) of what he believes and what he will do.
I am not at all impressed with McCain but since people will not get together and come up with another candidate that the majority agrees on (too unrealistic to hope for)
I think McCain is the only one that we can vote for to keep from taking a gamble of what we will get with the other two. But in a way I hope that Hillary or Obama win so the Democrats can see what they actually thought was great. Yet the really liberal ones will never see it for what it is.

You can read my "hate filled " comments about the latest Obama flap here

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/obama-uncensored-205139.html

I am not at all impressed with McCain but since people will not get together and come up with another candidate that the majority agrees on (too unrealistic to hope for)
I think McCain is the only one that we can vote for to keep from taking a gamble of what we will get with the other two. I worry about his age, his anger management issues and his lack of understanding of economics.

The elitist part comes in, when you shine a large group of people in a negative light, as though you are standing taller then they are. Isn't that exactly what those political guys do on this board every single day?

I worry too but most presidents were older.
I really wish we could get another candidate that is truly by the people and for the people!

John McCain - I'm still very excited about this canadate. I had heard that Condoleezza Rice, was a possible running mate, but then I heard she turned it down. I would LOVE that ticket.

So, now after months and months of all this campaign stuff, where do you stand now?

I ask, as I still remain open minded, and truly want the best of the 3.

Greatest right we have as US citizens is to vote; Civics 101. Here we can share various angles on why we vote for one candidate or the other and I respect your open mindedness.

I suppose there's room for anyone to vote on any issues important to the individual regardless of the rational. In fact I've known quite a few people that bet horses by their favorite color or number, rather than the jockey, record, surface, and length of race. In the casino it's said, "better to be lucky than good." Practically speaking though, the number one issue in most presidential elections is more often the economy. The war will also be weighing on American minds as we vote this coming November. On those two major issues alone, no way could I describe "John McCain" as "exciting." The most proper word I can think of is "antiquated." The fact Condoleeza Rice could possibly be chosen should scare the bejeepers-Bush crazies out of most people facing indecision. :eek:

Given the choice of the three, I would choose Barack Obama.


PS. Barack spoke at in-depth length about religion and politics in the Compassion Forum that was aired on CNN earlier today.

Allheart,
To see what a chord he hit check this out:
You're Darn Right I'm Bitter - Bitter Voters For Obama (http://www.bittervoters.org/2008/04/youre-darn-right-im-bitter.html)

Thank you I was looking for that article. I heard Hillary has turned it to her advantage saying he doesn't relate to the common folk like she does and is passing out I am not bitter bumper stickers.
Hillary took the bitter statement as a big put down to the people and says it shows exactly how out of touch he is with reality.

For me, it's not at all about "the economy". Presidents have far less ability to influence that than most people think. My biggest concerns are fidelity to the founding ideals of this nation: Respect for the rule of law, protection of individual rights against the power of the state, the separation of church and state, separation of powers among the three branches of government, and a commitment to the common good. I think Republican administrations since 1980 have done grievous harm to these ideals, and so could not vote for any Republican. I have more faith in Obama's understanding of and commitment to these ideals than Clinton's, so if he wins the nomination I will vote for him enthusiastically. If Hillary wins it, I will vote for her reluctantly.

I don't care. I like all three.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7745&stc=1&d=1208148286

Allheart,
To see what a chord he hit check this out:
You're Darn Right I'm Bitter - Bitter Voters For Obama (http://www.bittervoters.org/2008/04/youre-darn-right-im-bitter.html)


Thanks NK. Incredible article. And as I suspected the words, to me, no longer seem as terrible, as perhaps the situtations that most Americans are in, as well as how we are viewed by most of the world.

When I initiate threads, such as these, it's because something is on my mind and I welcome everyone's input with an open mind.

To me, I do like the fact that he didn't completely back down from what he said, and stood by what he believed, have to admit that is a leader.

I did see more coverage on this from the Barack camp as well as Hillary speaking.

Perhaps Barack brought something to the surface that we are all so used to living with, dealing with, it became the norm, and for those of us not bitter, ( I still always have hope things will get better) fell into a place of acceptance. That's not good.

NK and all THANK YOU.

I will say that "cat fighting" between Hillary and Barack, did make me weaken on both canadates, because it get's so discouraging. I don't want to hear from each of them, why the other isn't good, I want to hear, and believe what each of them are going to do.

I think this little "shake-up" is brining out the really issues, that perhaps so needed to be surfaced.

Thank you everyone.

I did also see on CNN that McCain (who I don't think is McBush at all), may be having Colin Powel, as his running mate. I find that very exciting.

But after reading all your comments and watching this topic a little more closely, my interest has once again peeked for Barack.

I will also say, in the circles I travel, it is Barack who is, so far, everyone's pick.

Again, thank you everyone for your input.

Of course Hillary is going to blow any advantage she might have gotten from this by concocting another questionable memory .

“You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught me how to shoot when I was a little girl,”

She could've used that shooting ability of hers to take on those Serbian snipers in Bosnia.

“You know, some people now continue to teach their children and their grandchildren. It's part of culture. It's part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it's an important part of who they are. Not because they are bitter.” ...
"As I told you, my dad taught me how to shoot behind our cottage,” she said. “I have gone hunting. I am not a hunter. But I have gone hunting."

She could've said that gun ownership was important to the Founders ;not because of some bitterness over an economic downturn or because the government wasn't involved enough in their lives .The Founders thought gun ownership was important for self defense from among other things too much government intrusion.

But she will never say something like that because the truth is that her record on gun control is spotty at best .

But she will never say something like that because the truth is that her record on gun control is spotty at best .

The US's record on gun control is spotty at best!

NK and all THANK YOU.

I will say that "cat fighting" between Hillary and Barack, did make me weaken on both canadates, because it get's so discouraging. I don't want to hear from each of them, why the other isn't good, I want to hear, and beleive what each of them are going to do.

Again, thank you everyone for your input.

Just a note. Hillary started attacking Obama when she saw that debating didn't fair well for her. She's been throwing the kitchen sink at him ever since. If Obama manages the nomination I suspect McCain likewise will start soft campaigning, but then will go increasingly negative after being exposed in a few debates.

Well Ron Paul must still be in the running he has been advertising as Republican on the radio the past week soooooo..?

People may vote for Ron Paul when they finally realize that the Federal Reserve really is crashing the economy on purpose. BTW, Ron Paul is a genuine Republican, unlike these elitist that are pretending to be.

Barack Obama on the Issues (http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm)


Obama
---------
Rated 100% by NARAL on pro-choice votes in 2005, 2006 & 2007.

I agree with most of his common sense positions on guns, however, as well intentioned as he may be, how does banning legal gun ownership in DC, stop illegal gun use?

Again - he is schizophrenic on energy. You can sponsor all the renewable energy, less oil dependence, increase Café to 40 mpg all you want - but allow the country to use ITS own oil.[anwr, offshore use]Who is going to pay the price for Café increases - domestic auto manufacturers. Is there not enough market pressure to increase MPG without politicians telling us what to do? That is ELITIST.


Taxes - everything to increase taxes on income, on capital gains in death - he has been for.

He, and so is Hillary is a hard core liberal - which I am not.







McCain has my vote, by default.

Just addresssed Obama's 2nd Amendment position here

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/obama-uncensored-205139-2.html

as well intentioned as he may be, how does banning legal gun ownership in DC, stop illegal gun use? He, and Hillary are hard core liberals - which i am not.Hello again, in:

How does banning crack cocaine stop its illegal use?? You don't seem to think THAT law is liberal... But, it is, and if you're for it, you are too.

excon

Ex:

The right to bear arms is a second amendment right.

There is no amendment to make, use, distribute, sell crack cocaine.

Can crack cocaine have a useful purpose in home defense? In protection of self from harm? Quite the opposite.

Can crack cocaine have a useful purpose in home defense? in protection of self from harm? Quite the opposite.

There can be quite a strong argument made that guns don't aid in self protection in the home but rather cause more deaths than lives saved, including self harm. To amny guns don't serve any useful purpose at all!

Boyd said Assam's actions saved the lives of 50 to 100 people

Security Guard: 'God Guided Me And Protected Me' - Denver News Story - KMGH Denver (http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/14817480/detail.html)

If a gun serves no purpose for a particular individual, no one is forcing them to get one.

But # 1 - Second Amendment
#2 - people do use them for hunting, target shooting, protection.


ABC News: Myths, Lies and Straight Talk (http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123606)

The Centers for Disease Control recently completed a review of studies of various types of gun control: background checks, waiting periods, bans on certain guns and ammunition. It could not document that these rules have reduced violent crime


Freakonomics by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (http://www.freakonomicsbook.com/thebook/ch5.html)

The likelihood of death by pool (1 in 11,000) versus death by gun (1 in 1 million-plus) isn't even close:

How to Make Your Pool Safe for Kids (http://www.securityworldnews.com/articles/1472/1/How-to-Make-Your-Pool-Safe-for-Kids/Page1.html)


Drowning is the SECOND leading cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 14 and LEADING cause of accidental injury-related death among children ages 1 to 4 according Safe Kids Worldwide.

Maybe we should ban pools instead?

No, not ban pools altogether. But yes, make it harder for kids to drown in them. Don't you do that? Like put fences around pools? Have life guards on duty at public pools? Teach kids about water safety? Don't you try and do something to prevent the problem rather than just continually let kids drown? I know we do down under here. We also banned guns after more than 30 people were shot dead many years ago now. Guess what, since then we haven't had another mass shooting. That argument is weak!

McCain :)

Obama :)

Obama :)

Hey, you don't count! :p :p

I invite all Canadians to support Obama :D

We do. We're sick of seeing what's going on so close to home.

For those of you talking about the Barack bitter comment...

If you aren't from rural Pennsylvania... which I am... then he wasn't referring to you.
Obama comments divide Rust Belt voters in Pa., many say it was no big deal | The Express (http://www.lockhaven.com/page/content.detail/id/45307.html?isap=1&nav=5051)

The locals here... Bitter? Nah. Pissed. Probably. Clings to guns and religion? Nah.

It doesn't matter, I think Hilary has the state regardless.