I seriously don’t understand why some people are so vitriolic towards Obama. Yes, I agree he doesn’t have as much experience as would be ideal. But I still think he has the leadership ability and vision to take our country in a positive direction.
Anyway, here’s my question. If you were to choose ONE single reason that you believe Obama will destroy our country, what would that reason be? What is the one biggest beef you have with him?
[quote]forlife wrote:
I seriously don’t understand why some people are so vitriolic towards Obama. Yes, I agree he doesn’t have as much experience as would be ideal. But I still think he has the leadership ability and vision to take our country in a positive direction.
Anyway, here’s my question. If you were to choose ONE single reason that you believe Obama will destroy our country, what would that reason be? What is the one biggest beef you have with him?[/quote]
LOL.
I don’t like Obama because I am a toothless, white trash, sister-porkin’, PBR drinking, ignorant, bible banging, gun toting, turkey pot pie eating, racist, NASCAR watching, roadkill eating, trailer park hick.
I also believe that Obama is a muslim terrorist and a homosexual, and you know us hicks! We hate terrorists and homosexuals!
[quote]forlife wrote:
I seriously don’t understand why some people are so vitriolic towards Obama. Yes, I agree he doesn’t have as much experience as would be ideal. But I still think he has the leadership ability and vision to take our country in a positive direction.
Anyway, here’s my question. If you were to choose ONE single reason that you believe Obama will destroy our country, what would that reason be? What is the one biggest beef you have with him?[/quote]
The biggest beef we have with him is that he’s black. I mean, what other reasons could we knuckle-dragging, homophobic, troglodytic mouthbreathers have?
[quote]forlife wrote:
I seriously don’t understand why some people are so vitriolic towards Obama. Yes, I agree he doesn’t have as much experience as would be ideal. But I still think he has the leadership ability and vision to take our country in a positive direction.
Anyway, here’s my question. If you were to choose ONE single reason that you believe Obama will destroy our country, what would that reason be? What is the one biggest beef you have with him?[/quote]
I’m not a socialist.
He is a Smoke and Mirrors guy, which means he masks the truth, and has an obvious radical and SOCIALIST agenda.
I don’t claim to hate him, nor do I call him names, hang him by a noose in my yard, like many of the left with what I believe to be; their own self hate- projected on McCain and Palin.
I take issue with your hate stance as you are the ones with the most demonstrated hate here at T-Nation and in the media.
I don’t hate Obama. I disagree with his philosophy – what little of it I can discern beyond his obvious socialist bent.
For what it’s worth, I view McCain in the same exact light but I would add that I am more afraid of his militaristic approach to problem solving.
[quote]forlife wrote:
I seriously don’t understand why some people are so vitriolic towards Obama. Yes, I agree he doesn’t have as much experience as would be ideal. But I still think he has the leadership ability and vision to take our country in a positive direction.
Anyway, here’s my question. If you were to choose ONE single reason that you believe Obama will destroy our country, what would that reason be? What is the one biggest beef you have with him?[/quote]
“Economic Justice.”
Cause I am racist. Why else. If you don’t like Obama you are a racist.
Actually I haven’t heard any reason what so ever to like him…Hope and change don’t do it for me, I am not that pliable.
It could be his far left radical redistribution of wealth theory. It could also be his refusal to admit his association with Bill Ayers.
Nah, I think its how far to the left he leans regarding all of his policies. The government has its hands in way to much stuff as it is. I can’t imagine the government further extending it’s already ridiculous reach.
It is not my(i.e. hard working americans) job to ensure that lazy pieces of shit who won’t work can make a living off government entitlements. I don’t think there is anything wrong with helping people who need it and were or are contributing members of society.
I work in a jail so I see the bottom of the barrell. Nothing makes me shake my head harder in disbelief than what these people are entitled to. The same people that drive Cadillac Escalades when they are “out on the street”, also collect welfare, food stamps and section 8 housing.
Do we really need a President that is going to give these people more?
[quote]snipeout wrote:
Do we really need a President that is going to give these people more?[/quote]
that’s racist!
From the responses to far, it seems most of you dislike Obama because you disagree with the “Robin Hood doctrine”.
I can see letting people keep their own money, instead of forcing them to give it to others. It’s really a question of how much you take though, since I’m sure most of you agree that a government requires a certain amount of wealth redistribution in order to function.
Anyway, it’s interesting that most of you oppose Obama primarily on economic grounds rather than on other issues like his approach to international policy, social issues, etc.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
It could be his far left radical redistribution of wealth theory. It could also be his refusal to admit his association with Bill Ayers.
Nah, I think its how far to the left he leans regarding all of his policies. The government has its hands in way to much stuff as it is. I can’t imagine the government further extending it’s already ridiculous reach.
It is not my(i.e. hard working americans) job to ensure that lazy pieces of shit who won’t work can make a living off government entitlements. I don’t think there is anything wrong with helping people who need it and were or are contributing members of society.
I work in a jail so I see the bottom of the barrell. Nothing makes me shake my head harder in disbelief than what these people are entitled to. The same people that drive Cadillac Escalades when they are “out on the street”, also collect welfare, food stamps and section 8 housing.
Do we really need a President that is going to give these people more?[/quote]
They are only that way because white, heterosexual males made them that way…Kill whitey and the world will be saved.
[quote]forlife wrote:
From the responses to far, it seems most of you dislike Obama because you disagree with the “Robin Hood doctrine”.
I can see letting people keep their own money, instead of forcing them to give it to others. It’s really a question of how much you take though, since I’m sure most of you agree that a government requires a certain amount of wealth redistribution in order to function.
Anyway, it’s interesting that most of you oppose Obama primarily on economic grounds rather than on other issues like his approach to international policy, social issues, etc.[/quote]
Actually, the government doesn’t need to redistribute any of my wealth. They require a certain amount of taxation to defend this country, pay the people that defend this country, keep the infastructure running as well as make sure there are emergency response services on the road(local level). The federal government should not govern everything.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
forlife wrote:
From the responses to far, it seems most of you dislike Obama because you disagree with the “Robin Hood doctrine”.
I can see letting people keep their own money, instead of forcing them to give it to others. It’s really a question of how much you take though, since I’m sure most of you agree that a government requires a certain amount of wealth redistribution in order to function.
Anyway, it’s interesting that most of you oppose Obama primarily on economic grounds rather than on other issues like his approach to international policy, social issues, etc.
Actually, the government doesn’t need to redistribute any of my wealth. They require a certain amount of taxation to defend this country, pay the people that defend this country, keep the infastructure running as well as make sure there are emergency response services on the road(local level). The federal government should not govern everything.[/quote]
What you describe however already re-distributes wealth, because the police, as well as the military, protect non-taxpayers too.
:-).
So, how are schools, hospitals, streets and bridges different?
PS: I am tired that all the re-distributors cannot even come up with decent arguments for it.
[quote]forlife wrote:
From the responses to far, it seems most of you dislike Obama because you disagree with the “Robin Hood doctrine”.
I can see letting people keep their own money, instead of forcing them to give it to others. It’s really a question of how much you take though, since I’m sure most of you agree that a government requires a certain amount of wealth redistribution in order to function.
Anyway, it’s interesting that most of you oppose Obama primarily on economic grounds rather than on other issues like his approach to international policy, social issues, etc.[/quote]
If I had to choose one thing, I’d go with his faux humility - hiding (barely) an overweening arrogance, an oily insincerity, and a huge dose of narcissism. IMO, all else flows from that.
[quote]orion wrote:
snipeout wrote:
forlife wrote:
From the responses to far, it seems most of you dislike Obama because you disagree with the “Robin Hood doctrine”.
I can see letting people keep their own money, instead of forcing them to give it to others. It’s really a question of how much you take though, since I’m sure most of you agree that a government requires a certain amount of wealth redistribution in order to function.
Anyway, it’s interesting that most of you oppose Obama primarily on economic grounds rather than on other issues like his approach to international policy, social issues, etc.
Actually, the government doesn’t need to redistribute any of my wealth. They require a certain amount of taxation to defend this country, pay the people that defend this country, keep the infastructure running as well as make sure there are emergency response services on the road(local level). The federal government should not govern everything.
What you describe however already re-distributes wealth, because the police, as well as the military, protect non-taxpayers too.
:-).
So, how are schools, hospitals, streets and bridges different?
PS: I am tired that all the re-distributors cannot even come up with decent arguments for it.[/quote]
Because stealing my money to pay for necessities is different than stealing it to specifically give to someone else. I guess my point is that roads benefit the people paying for them at least, welfare doesn’t.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
forlife wrote:
From the responses to far, it seems most of you dislike Obama because you disagree with the “Robin Hood doctrine”.
I can see letting people keep their own money, instead of forcing them to give it to others. It’s really a question of how much you take though, since I’m sure most of you agree that a government requires a certain amount of wealth redistribution in order to function.
Anyway, it’s interesting that most of you oppose Obama primarily on economic grounds rather than on other issues like his approach to international policy, social issues, etc.
If I had to choose one thing, I’d go with his faux humility - hiding (barely) an overweening arrogance, an oily insincerity, and a huge dose of narcissism. IMO, all else flows from that. [/quote]
Hah! You just described the job description for a politician.
It seems most of the arguments against him are “Spread MY wealth around? I don’t think so”
a literal translation of his figurative speech
Obama meant spread everyone else’s wealth around. Not his own wealth, and not voluntarily at least, you see.
Just ask his Aunt here in Boston, who lives in slummy tenement housing.
The most generous people I know - who give to charity, who help out neighbors and family members - are usually the same ones who are opposed to government intervention/welfare.