Posted on 11/07/2008 10:40:35 AM PST by Traviswf
Hi there. I voted for Obama, but have been reading a lot of Freerepublic lately to see how the other side is reacting. I'm not trying to troll here - honestly - but if you feel I am, that's understandable. I just wanted to offer a perspective on this that I think may be interesting to some of you. Oh, and this is much longer than I intended. And I'm fairly certain I'm not posting this the right way...for which I apologize.
When Bush was elected in 2000, I was upset. And yes, I whined about him "stealing" the election. I don't really think that's true anymore - it was just a painful way to lose. Sure, we can whine about the popular vote vs. the electoral vote, but you can't change the rules in the middle of the game. Then I watched the movie Recount and realized just how awful the democrats were at trying to win the damn thing. Gore seemed like he didn't really want it.
When Bush won in 2004, I was absolutely devastated. I thought the world was going to end. I didn't think we should be in Iraq, I agreed with Kerry that we had to finish the fight in Afganistan. I was worried about the courts. And frankly - I just didn't like Bush. I didn't like the way he governed, the way he spoke, and the way he talked as if we on the left were less American.
On 9/11 I happened to be in Toronto on business. When the towers fell, I knew I had to get home. A colleague and I wanted to go to New York, to help in some way. But we were told nobody was getting anywhere close. Our next instinct was to get home - to California. We didn't just want to be with our families, we desperately wanted to be in our country. That day was rough because my colleague thought his wife might have been on one of the planes - her travel plans were very similar. It took hours of agony before we, thank God, found out she was safe.
So we rented a car in Toronto and drove across the country. It took a couple hours to get across the border in the middle of the night. We stopped in Omaha, and then Colorado. I can't even tell you how much I loved my country driving across its beauty in those days after the attacks. And there were no jokes about "we're in enemy territory" because we were in "red states." We were in America. Everywhere we went people said "How are you? Is everyone safe?"
I know everyone has similar stories of those days. And certainly many, many people have stories of real loss - not just "we thought we lost someone, but it was a happy ending." Then, fairly quickly, I felt my patriotism coming under attack because I had a difference of opinion about how to fight back. I didn't think Iraq was the right choice - it made no sense to me, and I certainly wasn't alone. But people questioned my love of my country. And that was very, very hard to forgive.
When 2008 came up, more than anything, I wanted to win the White House back. I wanted to punish the Bush administration for what I felt was not just a failure to be competent, but a failure to keep the country united. I inititally supported Hilary, but I had this feeling in my gut that she was just going to be Bush - but for our side. She'd be a partisan warrior, a polarizing figure (which Bush wasn't when he started, but Hilary already was...). It made me sick to my stomach.
I wanted to go back to feeling like an American in those days after the attack - where our disagreements were things we laughed about over a beer and the real threat was far, far more serious.
I'd written Obama's candidacy off as a dry run for 2016 or later. Or maybe he was running for VP. I thought - hey, dude, at least finish a term in the Senate. Then when he said "we're not a collection of red states and blue states, we're the United States of America" it hit me like lightning. It had nothing to do with him - it had to do with the country, and my love for it and this feeling deep down in my gut that we were fighting over the placement of the deck chairs while the ship was sinking.
Wow, this got really rambly. Sorry about that. Here's why I posted initially. I saw this thing on here about Obama's "national defense force" and some posters commenting about the coming civil war or some such. I'm pretty sure Obama was just talking about funding for police. I mean - are you guys really worried he's going to do this? There was a rumor on the left that Bush was bringing a military brigade trained in "riot control" home from Iraq before the elections. People were convinced Bush was going to take over the country in a military coup. I'm sure you think that's laughable - as do I. Obama is not going to raise a civilian force of brown coats. First of all there's no money for it, nobody would go for it, and he'd be laughed out of the White House.
He's also not a socialist. And he's not coming for your guns. If he did either of this things, he can basically just go home now. Those are not realistic positions for any president to have. He will likely appoint liberals - at least too liberal for you guys - to the courts.
But here's the thing. He's going to try and be a good president. I think they all do. And Obama ran on uniting the country, on being bipartisan. That's sort of ALL he ran on. It's how he won 60% of independent and brought home so many of the Clinton voters. So if he doesn't deliver on this - I imagine he'll be fairly easy to beat in 2012.
So that's my two cents. Obama was always going to get my vote as the nominee because I'm a lifelong democrat and a liberal. But I'm not a socialist or a pacifist. I believe in the 2nd amendment and favor the idea of most issues being decided by the states. I'm not a religious man, but I respect those who are and I think the Dems over reach in pushing religion out of the public square. I believe global warming is a serious problem, but I also think Al Gore enjoys it WAY too much.
And here's another caveat. I know it's easier to be bipartisan and talk about "togetherness" when my guy won. I was where you guys are now in 2000 and 2004. I mean, my party ALMOST ran Howard Dean and then said "No wait! John Kerry is a much better idea!" Or in this election to have a friend say "You've GOT to read Alec Baldwin's latest piece on HuffPo." I mean...really? He doesn't count as an "Obamacon" you know, he only plays a republican on TV...(you guys ever notice that our most annoying Hollywood liberals end up playing republicans? what's with that?)
So yeah - we've all spent some time in the woods. I just hope we can all agree that we're just as American as the other, and we're passionate about what we believe to be the right path to take. There are real problems with the economy, and Islamic Terrorists aren't going to take a vacation for four years.
That's about it I guess. Sorry you guys lost.
My aunt, who is 81, told me the other night that Obama reminded her of Hitler when he first came to power in Germany. He promised the German people the moon and the stars, but what he gave them was in the end bombed out cities, devastation, ruin, starvation, desolation, humiliation and guilt for allowing such a charming “creature” to rule over them for a mess of pottage. She stated that what she saw in the faces of his “followers” on newsreels back at that time was the same worshipful adoration she had seen on the Obama worshippers of this era. - She is a lifelong Democrat and still does not see the truth of the debauched, greedy Clintons. Honey, the Clintons were “socialists”. What you have voted for here is a cynical, Daley Machine Chicago street thug, and a full-fledged Marxist. - You’re welcome to join the FR prayer forums when you wake up one day soon and realize that you should have asked two simple questions of Obama, “Change - what kind of change?” “Hope - Hope for what exactly?” and “Yes. We can. - Can what?”
I think you may have been so full of hatred of Bush, a decent man who has KEPT US SAFE for seven years from any more terrorist attacks against all odds, that you like all liberals, could only see how much you hated “Bush” and how wonderful it would be when you got the slick, well-dressed, “uh-uh-uh-uh-uhrticulate” Barack Husein Obama in and “Bush” out. Now you have your wish.
“Bush” was accused of “initiating a draft” rumored on Democratic Underground (the obscene, poor vocabularied DU) and they went ballistic with that. Guess you all should have LISTENED to Barry on the rare occasion that he mentioned this little ditty in passing.
BED MADE - lie in it and welcome to it.
You don't know how to post a link to back up
From what I’ve read, Rahm Emanuel had a big hand in recruiting pro-RKBA Democrat candidates
never said he “stands for the 2nd”. But it’s been widely reported that he pissed off a lot of gun-grabbers when he was running the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2006
What I’ve read is that it was in the 2006 election season that he pushed pro-RKBA candidates
when people are questioning you
OK. I’m not going to repeat this again.
The “Salman Pak” terrorist training center was a fiction created by a source named “Curveball.” His handlers reported that he was a drunk and shouldn’t trusted. It turns out that he wasn’t even involved in Saddam’s government.
Look, believe whatever fairy tales that you want. In the last five years, all of the prewar intelligence has proven to be false. There were no terrorist training camps. I’m not really interested in debating you on the basis of debunked propaganda. Read something recent.
Lets see where to start...
This week after the election:
1) Hamas shells 35 rockets into Isreal
2) Russia moves missles right across the Poland border
3) China says don’t even think of protecting Taiwan
4) Syria moves tanks on Northern Border of Isreal
5) Iran says get out of airspace & Iraq
6) Al Queda says leave Iraq & Afganistan
7) Markets tank by about 10%
Hope I’m not leaving anything out.
I would be more tolerant of this “unity” you guys talk about when some filmaker makes a documentary called “Hussein 451”, get feted at Cannes & gets an Oscar.
How about opposing the socialist at every turn? It's really not that difficult.Details?
I’m not sure I’m posting this reply in the right place. And yeah, I signed up in 2005 I guess? I had no recollection of that, but when I tried to sign up to post my thing today - it said that username was in use. Surprised me too. But I’m not drive by trolling - by daughter insisted on going to the park, and I do have a job.
I had NO idea that there would be so many replies, and I wasn’t able to read all of them before posting my own response. And please, someone let me know if I’m not replying in the right place. And now I gather that I should have included “(vanity)” next to my title, right?
To everyone being kind and open to my post, thanks. To those not being so kind - I would have done the same thing after 2004.
As for the New Party, I’ve read a little bit about their being some website archive that claims Obama as a candidate. That seems scant evidence and nothing I’m worried about. If it’s real - dig, dig, dig. Make him answer for it. But I don’t believe the man is a socialist. His comment about “spreading the wealth” I felt was an unfortunate way to say “spreading the prosperity.” What he was saying to Joe the plumber was that if the middle class can’t afford to pay the bills, his plumbing business won’t do so well. It’s a bit like “trickle up” economics, so we’ll see how that goes. But all Obama was talking about was a graduated income tax - which we’ve had under several presidents. Supporting what we’ve had for decades doesn’t make him socialist.
As for requiring service, I don’t think it’s a terrible thing. All Israelis have to serve in the military, because it’s necessary for their defense. We have plenty of problems here - and this might be a way towards fixing some of them. We’ll see what the details are, but I don’t think requiring people to help their country is wrong on principle - especially when we’re facing a number of major problems, the main one being the economy. But this does surprise me. It’s a bold initiative that will (as is obvious on FP) rub some people the wrong way.
Someone asked what I felt government can do for me that I can’t do myself. Beyond the obvious infrastructure and national defense aspects, I think there are levers the government can apply at times like these to encourage growth. I don’t like wildly unrestricted big government, but I do believe some government can be applied well. And the thing is - I’ve never bought the idea that the government can’t do anything right. They run the military, and they do a pretty good job. I think people just EXPECT the government to do a bad job, and then don’t demand that it does better.
As for being using my brain - I’ve only got what I’ve got. I read all of Obama’s position papers, lots of articles on him. I read his second book, but not his first. I watched all of the debates he had with Hillary and Edwards, and then with McCain. I feel I know what Obama wants to do.
As for his record - I agree there are some far left elements here and there, and that was a good point for McCain to make. However - and this is another fair criticism - I don’t think anyone can call him “the most liberal senator” because he simply doesn’t have the record. Ted Kennedy makes Obama look like Ted Stevens.
And yes, that is a troubling thing about Obama - his shallow record. That’s why the Economist essentially endorsed him by saying “Take a chance on him.” Because that’s exactly what it is. We know what he’s said he wants to do, his positions are quite thorough. His speeches have, at times, been thorough and identified major policy shifts and directions he would like to take the country. Almost all of these appealed to me.
Is it risky? Yeah, a bit. Is it as big a risk as a lot of you guys think? My God, I hope not. Just as I was glad to be wrong about many things the left thought Bush would bring about.
As for falling in love with a politician. I don’t have to be in love with him to love what he’s trying to do. I disagreed with a lot of what Reagan stood for - but he was a positive President who tried (and mostly succeeded) at bringing the country back from some bad times. And I guess you guys think this a sign of a weak intelligence, but I believe a good speech is important. I believe some of Reagan’s finest speeches, when he would talk in broad terms of the general goodness of America - are landmarks in the American identity. It’s not ALL I look for, but I believe the ability to stir the heart AND the mind with a speech is the sign of a leader. It’s one of the essential skills of leadership at that level.
Now, I’m really not going to do justice to this next bit - but I’ve seen a few people criticize me about Iraq. I never thought Saddam Hussein was a good man, or a good regime. But launching a nearly unilateral war and occupation of Iraq has proven to be disastrous for us. It does seem to be starting to turn around - but in my mind, this was NEVER the front of the war. Al Qaeda might be there now - but any Muslim can grab an AK and say “I’m Al Qaeda!” It’s not like there’s an entrance exam.
To me, there is circular logic employed here. It’s like if we invaded France and the French started fighting back and we said “See! They’re trying to kill us! They’re obviously terrorists, so this war was justified.” Doesn’t that seem insane?
And it’s a simple fact that we’re facing force readiness problems. There has been a lot of public testimony about this. Occupying and stabilizing Iraq should not be our job. We got rid of Saddam - a mission I did not agree with - but we did it. And just to reiterate, I didn’t agree with the mission because it seemed the wrong front at the wrong time. I understand what the neocons were trying to do - essentially throw a democracy grenade into that f-ed up swamp and hope to establish an island of stability. I think it was massively wrong-headed and done on a wing and a prayer.
Here’s the thing about Afghanistan. I feel we have to get Bin Laden. There’s no capital city we can invade, no commanders we can put on trail in Nuremberg. I feel we need to get the symbolic head of this movement to prove we can - to make a point. To say - we’ll get you to. And then I think we should put him on trial and throw him in jail. Not just because I believe in the rule of law, but Bin Laden will be so much more powerful as a martyr, so I say we lock him up. Run video of his parole hearing every so often. At the same time, if we can get him, then just get him. Pull the trigger and be done with it. We’ll worry about the martyrdom thing later.
Now I have a few questions. A lot of you are saying “You’ll reap what you sow” and “Just wait and see how bad this will get.” What, specifically, are you afraid of?
For instance - when you say he’s socialist - beyond the graduated income tax going back to the Clinton-era numbers - what do you think he would do? Bush has already nationalized parts of the economy - do you think Obama would do anything of that magnitude?
Oh, and one final note - I don’t think “guilt by association with advisors” is a fair game to play. I say this after stomping up and down whenever Bush would pick someone I hated. But honestly, I think the reason Obama picked Rahm Emmanuel is to deal with the DEMOCRATS - not Republicans. He knows he’s going to have trouble with the left wing wanting all their goodies delivered and I don’t believe that’s what he intends to do.
I might be wrong, but remember - we’re DEMOCRATS. It’s like herding cats. Who are blind, and deaf and possibly oding on vicodin. I think Rahm is there to keep the dems in line with what Obama wants. After all - what hardline tactic can a guy like Emmanuel take on the minority party?
And that’s my final point. It’s not like there aren’t ANY republicans left in office. We won’t get 60 votes in the senate. The republicans still have a 170+ seats in the house. If Obama really was a Marxist who wanted to get Jay-Z to write a new national anthem - you think they’d let him get away with it? That’s the beauty of our system.
Not to mention John Roberts is the Chief Justice and the court is 5-4 (for the most part) conservative. And Roberts is like, what, 50? He’s going to be there FOREVER.
Finally - if they’re really going to try to make pump action shotguns illegal - that sucks. It will also NEVER pass. Not ever in a million years. A lot of the democrats who won in 2006, and maybe some of them in 2008 - are from more conservative parts of the country. If they vote to ban firearms, they might as well buy their ticket home that day. You think Jim Webb would allow such a thing? He just staked his political future by telling Virginia that Obama would protect gun rights.
But the shotgun thing...I mean - it’s just wrong. They’re just so...satisfying. Imagine that scene at the end of Terminator 2 where Sarah Connor is pumping the shotgun with one hand because her other arm is wounded. Now...imagine that scene with a bolt action carbine.
I don’t think that’s an America any of us want to live in.
I’m sorry if it seems like I’m dodging some of the questions here - there were 300+ posts when I started writing this reply...
And thanks for not deleting me!
You’re more of a lib troll than the guy who started this thread.
Never said this specific war granted them independence. But when the '91 no-fly zone was set up, we were responsible for it (along with the Brits). Does that compute? Anything positive since the 90s in the region is because of OUR intervention one form or another... and here you are, lamenting the entire decision in the first place.
I also am so damn sick of these socialists saying that they are “pro-choice” instead of saying they’re “pro killing of babies at any time anyplace”. I’m “pro-choice”, too, in that I certainly cannot and do not wish to have the power to stop ANY WOMAN or ANY DOCTOR from aborting a baby anytime, or anywhere they wish in their ungodly, filthy, unrighteous CLOAK OF FREEDOM. They always have and they always will anyway. I just do not CHOOSE to finance it, because it is supposed to be a FREE country. FREE FOR THEE, BUT NOT FOR ME. Abortion is not and has NEVER been illegal in reality; and the state should have stayed out of it. - Homosexuals - just shut up and do it. I’m not trying to run your lives, don’t try to run mine either.
“Let him who is filthy be filthy still.”
Lmao! I totally agree with you.
Glad I’m not the only one to notice that. They are crawling out of the woodwork. There are people who have been here far less time and are far more supportive of the resistance.
” and many known and notable terrorists deemed just as dangerous as Bin Laden were being granted asylum and continued to plot our downfall, as well as that of our allies
Name one.”
Abu Nidal
This isn't just a casual label. It is based on objective analysis by the National Journal: http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/
I was just commenting today, I didn't hear the media nor those on the left talking about being gracious, congratulatory, or supportive of President Bush either in 2000 or 2004 as they have now that Obama has won. I didn't hear Republicans saying such things to democrats either, probably because we know you darn well and knew you wouldn't be. You don't respect graciousness, character, or good sportsmanship, though you know we do, so you hold it over our heads. But no longer.
The same goes for togetherness. I only hear these things from your side when you win.
I appreciate your civil post and the courage it took to write it on a conservative forum. But you'll get no support or "togetherness" coming from me. I'll treat the Obama presidency the same way the left treated the 8 years of President Bush's two terms (while we were at war no less, particularly disgraceful) when they undermined everything he did. Count on it!!!!! : )
With all due respect, you either:
1. Know nothing about Hussein and are therefore duped and stupid
Or
2. Know how evil Hussein is and like him anyway and are therefore evil
Which is it? (Haven’t read the thread yet, maybe you’ve already revealed which).
This twinkie lefty voted for the One...who supports every leftist idea the house and senated offeres form it’s most radical element fringe and in the same breath speaks down about President Bush.
Has anyone yet reminded newbie that the leftists in Congress have a lower approal rating than the POTUS?
Ofama supports EVERY ONE of the loser leftist’s in congresses failing policies!
...yet nooB picked the biggest losers to get behnd!
...now comes here to what...give us a hard time?
Let me know when nooB has been zotted and FR has returned to a conservative forum, not a DU soapbox.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.