Prior to the election I asked as many Obama supporters as I could find why they were voting for him? I had one friend give me a reasonable argument for an Obama presidency.
I had asked about ten others, including one of my roomates why they were voting for him. The only three answers I received from these individuals were the following (paraphrased):
1) He is going bring the troops home and end this war.
2) He is going to bring back US respect in the world. (However not one could explain to me how?)
3) He is going to be the first black president.
When asked what Barack had done to prove he would be a great president, I asked each person to name one thing he did. Barack voters were 0 for 10 with answers.
The following youtube clip is of a British journalist who recently made it to the online news. Good example of Obama supporters.
Saturday, November 08, 2008
Thursday, November 06, 2008
It is a new time. A story has been made.
Read the text message I received at 11:08pm on November 4, 08 from my friend Brian. I replied back "I hope so." "Give him a chance for me," he said. And my last message said, "I plan to, for you as well."
Now Barack is our President elect. I will support him as our new commander in chief. He deserves all the respect the office demands and he will get the respect he deserves from me.
Not sure what to think of the media saying, "President Obama, president of the world." Maybe it is supposed to be poetry or symbolism? So far I do not get it. Perhaps it is in response from people like supposed entire countries wanting Obama to be our new president and individuals like Achmedinajad congradulating Barack?
Off come the McCain bumper stickers.
Now Barack is our President elect. I will support him as our new commander in chief. He deserves all the respect the office demands and he will get the respect he deserves from me.
Not sure what to think of the media saying, "President Obama, president of the world." Maybe it is supposed to be poetry or symbolism? So far I do not get it. Perhaps it is in response from people like supposed entire countries wanting Obama to be our new president and individuals like Achmedinajad congradulating Barack?
Off come the McCain bumper stickers.
Thursday, April 03, 2008
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Benedict Undermining Peace by Demanding Peace?
The Vatican has strongly opposed the Iraq War from the beginning and the article lists statements and subjects the Pontiff made to broadcast his disgust for the Iraq war. Or is he disgusted with the terrorist murderers?
The Associated Press article says, ...Benedict said Rahho's dedication to the Church and his death compelled him to "raise a strong and sorrowful cry" to denounce the violence in Iraq spawned by the war that he said had destroyed civilian life... The quotations surrounds just a small part of this sentence, so I call into question the end of the thought after the quotations, "to denounce the violence in Iraq spawned by the war..." Who said this? Because it is not in quotations, the Press seems to have taken the liberty to define what the Pontiff meant by his own words.
The Vatican strongly opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. In its aftermath, Benedict has frequently criticized attacks against Iraqi Christians by Islamic extremists. Last year, he urged U.S. President George W. Bush to keep the safety of Iraqi Christians in mind.. The previous may lead a reader to believe another untruth. The first sentence highlights the Vatican's opposition to the "U.S. led invasion. The next sentence he finds Islamic extremists attacks on Christians to be horrible, and then ask Pres Bush to protect Christians against extremists. This paragraph suggests the US invasion caused extremists to start attacking Christians and now the US must clean up it's own mess and protect Christians?
Finally the Popes homily was a speech about looking at everything including the war in Iraq through the eyes of a child or like a child. Perhaps the Press again took another quote of the Popes out of context because such idealism is hardly a strategy for peace.
I understand the Pope's position may not allow him to appear in anyway to promote or agree with the taking of lives of anyone, good or evil. Here in again lies the problem. Ideally there are no extremists Ideally all these murderers of Christians, Jews, other Muslims and American Troops could be reasoned with and negotiated. However those willing to blow themselves and 20 innocents are well beyond negotiating. Does he believe after this speech by him or any other, the terrorists will suddently realize they are wrong, the Pope is right and immediately stop killing?
I am glad the Pope is the leader of a church and not a general. Perhaps his position only allows him to speak from a vacuum which is the Vatican. But outside those walls there are people who want to kill even him. Thank you United States for fighting a war in which everyone would have been a target of terrorism and victims. Thank you President Bush for not deciding what is popular and staying with principal. The only ideal President Bush is guilty of, is the one he feels all people are created equal, and is willing to put his Presidency in historical jeopardy for winning a war and winning peace through strength.
The Associated Press article says, ...Benedict said Rahho's dedication to the Church and his death compelled him to "raise a strong and sorrowful cry" to denounce the violence in Iraq spawned by the war that he said had destroyed civilian life... The quotations surrounds just a small part of this sentence, so I call into question the end of the thought after the quotations, "to denounce the violence in Iraq spawned by the war..." Who said this? Because it is not in quotations, the Press seems to have taken the liberty to define what the Pontiff meant by his own words.
The Vatican strongly opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. In its aftermath, Benedict has frequently criticized attacks against Iraqi Christians by Islamic extremists. Last year, he urged U.S. President George W. Bush to keep the safety of Iraqi Christians in mind.. The previous may lead a reader to believe another untruth. The first sentence highlights the Vatican's opposition to the "U.S. led invasion. The next sentence he finds Islamic extremists attacks on Christians to be horrible, and then ask Pres Bush to protect Christians against extremists. This paragraph suggests the US invasion caused extremists to start attacking Christians and now the US must clean up it's own mess and protect Christians?
Finally the Popes homily was a speech about looking at everything including the war in Iraq through the eyes of a child or like a child. Perhaps the Press again took another quote of the Popes out of context because such idealism is hardly a strategy for peace.
I understand the Pope's position may not allow him to appear in anyway to promote or agree with the taking of lives of anyone, good or evil. Here in again lies the problem. Ideally there are no extremists Ideally all these murderers of Christians, Jews, other Muslims and American Troops could be reasoned with and negotiated. However those willing to blow themselves and 20 innocents are well beyond negotiating. Does he believe after this speech by him or any other, the terrorists will suddently realize they are wrong, the Pope is right and immediately stop killing?
I am glad the Pope is the leader of a church and not a general. Perhaps his position only allows him to speak from a vacuum which is the Vatican. But outside those walls there are people who want to kill even him. Thank you United States for fighting a war in which everyone would have been a target of terrorism and victims. Thank you President Bush for not deciding what is popular and staying with principal. The only ideal President Bush is guilty of, is the one he feels all people are created equal, and is willing to put his Presidency in historical jeopardy for winning a war and winning peace through strength.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
