PDA

View Full Version : Who's the stronger GENERAL election candidate? Barak, or Hillary?


Mr. Kotter
02-26-2008, 03:21 PM
I know Hillary isn't popular here. It seems as though Duhnise and Frankie are her two vocal supporters.

It also seems Barak's candidacy is about to be clinched, because Hillary would need a real Hail Mary Pass at this point--and I only see desperation.

Personally, I think Barak is the better candidate, on merit. In brief, he speaks a centrist rhetoric, and and been sufficiently vague about specifics of implementing some of his potentially controversial/more radical measures....that he hasn't scared me off. Coupled with his message of change (and hope,) he truly does inspire many people as much as any candidate to come along is awhile---obviously.

OTOH, is there a (thus far) unseen downside to Obama that will actually make him a weaker GENERAL election opponent? I think there is...but want to hear the thoughts of others before I elaborate.

That said, who will he be a stronger candidate in November? And why do you think that? :shrug:

BucEyedPea
02-26-2008, 04:00 PM
Well, I'd have to say Obama but mainly because he has the advantage of running against a candidate that will be identified with a continuation of Bush's policies. ( last I saw, which was today is that the Bush admin is polling in the 20 percentile). If he wasn't running against such a disastrous 8 years under the GOP I wouldn't give him a chance to win. Only a centrist Dem could. JMO.

Baby Lee
02-26-2008, 04:07 PM
I know Hillary isn't popular here. It seems as though Duhnise and Frankie are her two vocal supporters.

It also seems Barak's candidacy is about to be clinched, because Hillary would need a real Hail Mary Pass at this point--and I only see desperation.

Personally, I think Barak is the better candidate, on merit. In brief, he speaks a centrist rhetoric, and and been sufficiently vague about specifics of implementing some of his potentially controversial/more radical measures....that he hasn't scared me off. Coupled with his message of change (and hope,) he truly does inspire many people as much as any candidate to come along is awhile---obviously.

OTOH, is there a (thus far) unseen downside to Obama that will actually make him a weaker GENERAL election opponent? I think there is...but want to hear the thoughts of others before I elaborate.

That said, who will he be a stronger candidate in November? And why do you think that? :shrug:
If there's a weakness to Obama, it's gonna be the suggestion that his conservative demeanor belies a overly liberal agenda. The opposition will have to make the case that, no matter how well he talks about listening to alternatives, when the rubber hits the road, the road is gonna veer wildly left. Even then, there's gonna be a sizable contingent that gonna respond 'well, we need to try something new, and the conciliatory demeanor is refreshing nevertheless.' The key is to find a few hot button issues that it's pretty clear that Obama will probably reliably veer hard left [with proof to back up the assertion] and hit those positions [and the effects thereof] hard. And it can't just be taxing and spending [those issues have already been exhausted by Bush], maybe abortion, maybe appeasement of rogue leaders, something more visceral and clearly left/right between the parties.

That, or unprecedented success in the WoT, say the unlikely event of the Iraqi street fawning over McCain.

memyselfI
02-26-2008, 04:09 PM
I'm not a supporter. I lean towards her simply because she's a known quantity. I don't think there are too many skeletons to uncover with her. Other than that, she's not who I'd choose to run this country.

I think she will have the experience and time to actually run the country vs. a learning curve, reiterating what was meant vs. what was heard, and putting out fires.

penchief
02-26-2008, 05:56 PM
Clearly Obama.

People are waking up and it is the establishment candidates who are paying the price. I agree that Obama had better deliver the goods because it will be over for this country if he doesn't. The corporate right will reseize power touting a repackaged message and one gigantic, "I TOLD YOU SO," just in time to bury the people's government.

a1na2
02-26-2008, 06:33 PM
Neither of them have the experience to do what they want to do. Both are junior senators with no other public service to their name.

Maybe sometime in the future there will be a requirement that you actually have valuable and validated experience to be the president.

Mr. Kotter
02-26-2008, 06:35 PM
Neither of them have the experience to do what they want to do. Both are junior senators with no other public service to their name.

Maybe sometime in the future there will be a requirement that you actually have valuable and validated experience to be the president.

Guess by that standard, Lincoln never shoulda been President...eh? :shrug:

:hmmm:

a1na2
02-26-2008, 06:45 PM
Guess by that standard, Lincoln never shoulda been President...eh? :shrug:

:hmmm:

I think I can honestly say that neither Hillary or Obama will ever be considered on the same plain as Lincoln.

Mr. Kotter
02-26-2008, 06:47 PM
I think I can honestly say that neither Hillary or Obama will ever be considered on the same plain as Lincoln.

Not that any of the other 41 Presidents can claim that either....

;)

Logical
02-26-2008, 06:57 PM
I believe Barack will be the better GE candidate because of his consistency when it comes to the Iraq mess. That and he is the messiah.:D

Logical
02-26-2008, 06:58 PM
I think I can honestly say that neither Hillary or Obama will ever be considered on the same plain as Lincoln.
Possibly the most ignorant post possible, hard to top that one VoldemorTOM.

a1na2
02-26-2008, 06:59 PM
Not that any of the other 41 Presidents can claim that either....

;)

My point is that none of the candidates are really presidential material.

a1na2
02-26-2008, 07:02 PM
Possibly the most ignorant post possible, hard to top that one VoldemorTOM.

Here is someone that has always claimed to be above the fray and his only response is to insult the person that makes an honest comment about the presidential race.

Very nice *******! Learn to be more human and maybe you will actually be able to claim that you have done something with your life.

What is needed here is that you get a grip on life and forget about the past.

a1na2
02-26-2008, 07:03 PM
I believe Barack will be the better GE candidate because of his consistency when it comes to the Iraq mess. That and he is the messiah.:D

You post this and then have the nerve to say what you have about my post!?

ROFLROFLROFLROFL

You have claimed the ignorant post crown!

BucEyedPea
02-26-2008, 07:04 PM
... That and he is the messiah.:D

:LOL:

a1na2
02-26-2008, 07:08 PM
:LOL:


You should be very hopeful that he does not see himself as that. The messiah that he just might be wanting to exhibit is the one that follows Allah and not God.

In either case it would not be true, but having someone in that position will fool many and destroy more.

Think about it.

Logical
02-26-2008, 07:38 PM
You should be very hopeful that he does not see himself as that. The messiah that he just might be wanting to exhibit is the one that follows Allah and not God.

In either case it would not be true, but having someone in that position will fool many and destroy more.

Think about it.
ROFLROFLROFL

a1na2
02-26-2008, 07:44 PM
ROFLROFLROFL

Ignorance bounds free again.

:rolleyes:

Sully
02-26-2008, 07:46 PM
Ignorance bounds free again.

:rolleyes:

He's a closet Muslim!!!!!!!!!!!

GAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL

a1na2
02-26-2008, 08:20 PM
He's a closet Muslim!!!!!!!!!!!

GAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL

Prove that he isn't.

I have no clue where his head or heart is and neither do you.

Something that everyone seems to be missing is that the country is more resilient that most posters on this board.

Regardless of who wins the election the country will survive as well as thrive. How many of the posters here will just go ballistic and have little or no control over their activities on boards like this one?

GAAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhhhh? Shit man!

Mr. Kotter
02-26-2008, 11:09 PM
My point is that none of the candidates are really presidential material.


And if you really think that, you are not only naive....you are FOS.

McCain vs. Obama.....would give us a real choice, between quality folks, IMHO. :clap:

a1na2
02-27-2008, 05:49 AM
And if you really think that, you are not only naive....you are FOS.

McCain vs. Obama.....would give us a real choice, between quality folks, IMHO. :clap:

Inexperience with Obama and advanced age with McCain.

Get real kotter. It might be an interesting election but neither of the guys that are most likely to be running do not represent the best of either party.

Jenson71
02-27-2008, 09:02 AM
You should be very hopeful that he does not see himself as that. The messiah that he just might be wanting to exhibit is the one that follows Allah and not God.

In either case it would not be true, but having someone in that position will fool many and destroy more.

Think about it.

This is just foolish. "Prove that he isn't" Do you know what Bush really feels or thinks in his heart? Does anyone know what anyone really feels or thinks?

and Allah = God. Just like hola = hello and uno = one.

The answer for the thread is Obama. Obama is definitely the strongest candidate in the general election.

BucEyedPea
02-27-2008, 09:29 AM
...and Allah = God. Just like hola = hello and uno = one.
I agree. I pretty much said this to some Protestant Christians on another board because this is what I was taught in Catholic school. But they totally reject this concept. They say it comes from paganism, moon godesses and such.

HolmeZz
02-27-2008, 10:43 AM
You should be very hopeful that he does not see himself as that. The messiah that he just might be wanting to exhibit is the one that follows Allah and not God.

In either case it would not be true, but having someone in that position will fool many and destroy more.

Think about it.

You are f*cking nuts.

Cochise
02-27-2008, 10:51 AM
I don't think it matters that much. Both are basically the same on all the issues with only stylistic differences between them. Both will draw the same distinctions between themselves and John McCain. The Clintons have never had trouble getting libs to fall in line before, even as they dove into the mud.

The platitudes and promises of utopia are beginning to ring hollow, and both will end up running something not far removed from the usual DNC/MoveOn FUD-based campaign. The result would probably be the same either way no matter which of them won, whichever way it goes.

Taco John
02-27-2008, 12:04 PM
I agree. I pretty much said this to some Protestant Christians on another board because this is what I was taught in Catholic school. But they totally reject this concept. They say it comes from paganism, moon godesses and such.



Did these same people celebrate Christmas with a Christmas Tree in their living rooms?

Cochise
02-27-2008, 12:08 PM
I agree. I pretty much said this to some Protestant Christians on another board because this is what I was taught in Catholic school. But they totally reject this concept. They say it comes from paganism, moon godesses and such.

That's because the God revealed in that holy text and the God revealed in the others are mutually exclusive.

Adept Havelock
02-27-2008, 12:20 PM
Probably Obama, as his negatives are nowhere near as high as Clintons.


I agree. I pretty much said this to some Protestant Christians on another board because this is what I was taught in Catholic school. But they totally reject this concept. They say it comes from paganism, moon godesses and such.

IIRC, Islam, Judiasm, and Christianity all recognize the god of Abraham (Elohim, Jehovah, Allah).

I think that's the main common ground for approaching those faiths from that view.

AustinChief
02-27-2008, 12:33 PM
Wow, simply wow.

Neither Clinton nor Obama are electable. BUT Clinton has the advantage that she can QUICKLY slide toward the middle in a general election... Barrack cannot.

Not that it is RIGHT, but the nation is not ready to elect a woman or an ethnically confused man with a Muslim name. I am amazed that the Democratic party threw away its best chance to win in a landslide...

Aain, this is not my opinion of either candidate, this is my opinion of where America is and isn't.

HolmeZz
02-27-2008, 12:44 PM
Wow, simply wow.

Neither Clinton nor Obama are electable. BUT Clinton has the advantage that she can QUICKLY slide toward the middle in a general election... Barrack cannot.

Not that it is RIGHT, but the nation is not ready to elect a woman or an ethnically confused man with a Muslim name. I am amazed that the Democratic party threw away its best chance to win in a landslide...

Aain, this is not my opinion of either candidate, this is my opinion of where America is and isn't.

LMAO So when is America going to be ready for a black guy or a woman to be President?

The longer you say America's not ready for either, the longer it remains an issue.

America's already starting to move beyond these things. I know it's soooo unfortunate, but it does seem to be the trend.

Mr. Laz
02-27-2008, 01:13 PM
i think Obama is clearly the better general election candidate if for no other reason than charisma.

NewChief
02-27-2008, 01:15 PM
Wow, simply wow.

Neither Clinton nor Obama are electable. BUT Clinton has the advantage that she can QUICKLY slide toward the middle in a general election... Barrack cannot.

Not that it is RIGHT, but the nation is not ready to elect a woman or an ethnically confused man with a Muslim name. I am amazed that the Democratic party threw away its best chance to win in a landslide...

Aain, this is not my opinion of either candidate, this is my opinion of where America is and isn't.


I guess we'll see. Polls show you're wrong, but I'm not big on polls.

BucEyedPea
02-27-2008, 01:24 PM
Did these same people celebrate Christmas with a Christmas Tree in their living rooms?

I can only assume they do. Good question though. I think I'll ask.


IIRC, Islam, Judiasm, and Christianity all recognize the god of Abraham (Elohim, Jehovah, Allah).

I think that's the main common ground for approaching those faiths from that view.
That's the way I see it.

Maybe, Cochise can explain why they are mutually exclusive?
I mean I can see that they worship God differently.

AustinChief
02-27-2008, 01:28 PM
LMAO So when is America going to be ready for a black guy or a woman to be President?

The longer you say America's not ready for either, the longer it remains an issue.

America's already starting to move beyond these things. I know it's soooo unfortunate, but it does seem to be the trend.

I think you misunderstand my take, this is simply an observation. I am PROUD that we are much much closer than ever before. I am just saying we shouldn't underestimate the pervasive nature of racism and sexism...

Ignoring their existence doesn't help the problem.

Me pointing out that it will have an effect on this election, does not in any way shape the outcome.

Jenson71
02-27-2008, 01:38 PM
America is not ready for schools to be desegragated.

Some people will never be ready. I think centuries of blacks being part of our lifestyle, whether we owned them as children/property or they were freedmen in our cities, over 150 years since slavery is banned in the 13th amendment, the civil rights laws of the early Reconstruction, 140 years since the first black senator and representative, over 100 years since equality was at least formally acknowledged as needed in Plessy, over 60 years since a civil rights movement in the south supported by the U.S. Supreme Court, politicians, and many in the nation, the emergence of the secular sainthood of Martin Luther King Jr., the emergence of national heroes in sports and music has made us ready now for a black president. Two black Supreme Court Justices, two black state governors, two black secretaries of state, a black U.S. representative to the United Nations, a black chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, black astronauts, a black president of Brown University, black noble prize winners in literature and peace, black billionaires and black Miss Americas are some indications that we can handle a black president.

So I think the "we're just not ready for a black president" is an excuse. I mean, I acknowledge that there are some out there that won't vote for him because he's black. But I think in general, we're ready.

Cochise
02-27-2008, 01:51 PM
Maybe, Cochise can explain why they are mutually exclusive?
I mean I can see that they worship God differently.

Mutually exclusive means that they cannot logically occupy the same space.

The Christian Bible says that the path to salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. The Koran says that only Muslims will be in paradise, depending on if their faith and works were strong enough.

Islam declares that there is only one person in the godhead, Christianity holds that there are three. The trinity is a foundational doctrine of Christianity because the whole of the religion rests on the divinity of Jesus Christ. Islam denies the divinity of Jesus Christ, in fact calling it shirk - assigning partners to god, polytheism - the punishment for which is damnation. All claim to similarity is muted by that.

The only similarities between the two are that a few of the same people appear in both works, one of which is about 600-700 years later than the latest part of the other.

There are a lot of differences that make the two mutually exclusive, such as God being knowable or unknowable, and his essence and character. But these two primary ones mean they logically cannot be the same.

BucEyedPea
02-27-2008, 01:56 PM
Mutually exclusive means that they cannot logically occupy the same space.

The Christian Bible says that the path to salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. The Koran says that some Muslims will go to paradise and some will not, but only Muslims will be in paradise, depending on if their faith and works were strong enough.

Islam declares that there is only one person in the godhead, Christianity holds that there are three. The trinity is a foundational doctrine of Christianity because the whole of the religion rests on the divinity of Jesus Christ. Islam denies the divinity of Jesus Christ, in fact calling it shirk - assigning partners to god, polytheism - the punishment for which is damnation. All claim to similarity is muted by that.

There are a lot of differences that make the two mutually exclusive, such as God being knowable or unknowable, and his essence and character. But these two primary ones mean they logically cannot be the same.

I see. Interesting. Seems to me the argument is the nature and description of "God" and "salvation" more. God as in a "Supreme Being" that exist is where I think Allah = God. Doesn't the word Allah just mean "God"? Seems anything beyond is denominational.

Cochise
02-27-2008, 01:58 PM
I see. Interesting. Seems to me the argument is the nature and description of "God" and "salvation" more. God as in a "Supreme Being" that exiss is where I think Allah = God. Doesn't the word Allah just mean "God"? Seems anything beyond is denominational.

How can they both worship a factual god who is one and the same, if they disagree on nearly every aspect of that being's nature? If you say God is not triune and I say God is triune, we cannot both be right. At most, one of us is right.

Another example would be that the Christian scriptures say that Jesus was the second person of the trinity, God robed in human flesh, who came to earth and lived without sin, was crucified, and raised bodily on the third day. Islam says that Jesus was not part of the trinity, he was only a human, and that he was not executed by crucifixion but God made Judas look like him to fool everyone, and Judas was executed by crucifixion while Jesus was secretly taken up into heaven and never was resurrected.

If Islam is right about that, then Christianity is dead because without a resurrection there is no faith. if Christianity is right about that, Islam is incorrect that Allah has guarded the scriptures against any corruption through all times, and if the scriptures can't be trusted then there is no authority for that faith either.

The claims that they are all the same are nonsense, because the same God cannot exist according to any of the natures attributed to him and be true simultaneously for all three.

AustinChief
02-27-2008, 02:00 PM
So I think the "we're just not ready for a black president" is an excuse. I mean, I acknowledge that there are some out there that won't vote for him because he's black. But I think in general, we're ready.

We will find out soon enough. I'm not a fan of any of the three candidates so I could care less.

I do think we are within 10-20 years of being at the point where it is a non-issue. I just don't see it yet.

BucEyedPea
02-27-2008, 02:01 PM
How can they both worship a factual god who is one and the same, if they disagree on nearly every aspect of that being's nature? If you say God is not triune and I say God is triune, we cannot both be right. At most, one of us is right.


Yeah I can see that. I was just acknowledging that the word "Allah" just means "God"....a supreme being....in the same sense as the God of Abraham. I mean I don't know. Just sayin'. I mean was the God of the orginal father, Abraham considered triune too?

Cochise
02-27-2008, 02:19 PM
Yeah I can see that. I was just acknowledging that the word "Allah" just means "God"....a supreme being

I guess, in the sense that they are both pronouns. The words are not descended from one another. "god" is descended from some Germanic word, the German form is "gott" though I forget the rest of the etymology. "allah" I think was the pronoun used to refer to god in pre-islamic arabic mysticism. Other languages have pronouns like this too, like Deus, Theos, Elohim, Bhakti.

Logical
02-27-2008, 03:24 PM
How can they both worship a factual god who is one and the same, if they disagree on nearly every aspect of that being's nature? If you say God is not triune and I say God is triune, we cannot both be right. At most, one of us is right.

Another example would be that the Christian scriptures say that Jesus was the second person of the trinity, God robed in human flesh, who came to earth and lived without sin, was crucified, and raised bodily on the third day. Islam says that Jesus was not part of the trinity, he was only a human, and that he was not executed by crucifixion but God made Judas look like him to fool everyone, and Judas was executed by crucifixion while Jesus was secretly taken up into heaven and never was resurrected.

If Islam is right about that, then Christianity is dead because without a resurrection there is no faith. if Christianity is right about that, Islam is incorrect that Allah has guarded the scriptures against any corruption through all times, and if the scriptures can't be trusted then there is no authority for that faith either.

The claims that they are all the same are nonsense, because the same God cannot exist according to any of the natures attributed to him and be true simultaneously for all three.


Well, too us simple minded folks God simply exemplifies the idea of a supreme being, or perhaps even the forces of nature which account for all existence.:shrug:

Taco John
02-27-2008, 04:34 PM
How can they both worship a factual god who is one and the same, if they disagree on nearly every aspect of that being's nature? If you say God is not triune and I say God is triune, we cannot both be right. At most, one of us is right.


Or both could be wrong. The point is, both religions are mono-theistic, and actually are branches off of the same source (if you believe what the Bible says, that is). They believe in the same God stemming back before the split. They just disagree about events that have happened since the split -- not to mention the demands of that God in how he should be served.

Taco John
02-27-2008, 04:42 PM
Let me put it like this...

If I believe in the sun, and think that it's made of molten lava and fire, and you believe in the sun, but believe that it's made of superheated gasses and enormous chemical reactions, do we both believe in the same sun even though we may have disagreements about its composition? Do our disagreements make the sun any less the sun to either of us? What if your belief about the sun causes you to slather yourself with SPF 40, while my belief about the sun causes me not to wear any sunscreen at all. Does the way we react to the sun based on our own personal beliefs about it fundamentally change anything about it?

Adept Havelock
02-27-2008, 04:58 PM
Let me put it like this...

If I believe in the sun, and think that it's made of molten lava and fire, and you believe in the sun, but believe that it's made of superheated gasses and enormous chemical reactions, do we both believe in the same sun even though we may have disagreements about its composition? Do our disagreements make the sun any less the sun to either of us? What if your belief about the sun causes you to slather yourself with SPF 40, while my belief about the sun causes me not to wear any sunscreen at all. Does the way we react to the sun based on our own personal beliefs about it fundamentally change anything about it?

I find that a very interesting analogy. If you don't mind, I may borrow it in the future.

Rep.

Cochise
02-27-2008, 06:21 PM
Let me put it like this...

If I believe in the sun, and think that it's made of molten lava and fire, and you believe in the sun, but believe that it's made of superheated gasses and enormous chemical reactions, do we both believe in the same sun even though we may have disagreements about its composition? Do our disagreements make the sun any less the sun to either of us? What if your belief about the sun causes you to slather yourself with SPF 40, while my belief about the sun causes me not to wear any sunscreen at all. Does the way we react to the sun based on our own personal beliefs about it fundamentally change anything about it?

I agree on that final clause there, that what we believe changes nothing about what the truth is, the truth is true whether anyone believes in it or not.

I suppose one could say that every monotheistic religion ever in human history has believed in the same god, and in a simple way that's true, if the god they all believe in is the one god who ever was and is and will ever be in the universe, there can logically only be one of those. But it's not implicit that they are all the same, it could be that simply only one of those exists. I don't think it's a statement we can evaluate in a meaningful way.

I think the question is more meaningfully refined into, can both of these religions be true simultaneously? Certainly that is not the case.

The relationship between Judaism and Christianity is unique in that Christianity believes itself to be the completion of Judaism, and in a way I would consider myself to be a Jew - relating to spiritual Israel, although I am not an ethnic Jew. The primary difference is whether the messiah prophesied in the old testament has been sent. The differences with Islam split the log all the way in half from end to end, down to the very nature of who God is.

If we both believe in freight trains, and I believe they are made of steel and you think they're made of corn flakes, sure we both believe in trains, but if we step in front of the train, the truth of that belief will be evident and make all the difference in the world.

The only similarities as I see it are that a few of the same stories for whatever reason were also incorporated into the later text.

Baby Lee
02-27-2008, 06:46 PM
Let me put it like this...

If I believe in the sun, and think that it's made of molten lava and fire, and you believe in the sun, but believe that it's made of superheated gasses and enormous chemical reactions, do we both believe in the same sun even though we may have disagreements about its composition? Do our disagreements make the sun any less the sun to either of us? What if your belief about the sun causes you to slather yourself with SPF 40, while my belief about the sun causes me not to wear any sunscreen at all. Does the way we react to the sun based on our own personal beliefs about it fundamentally change anything about it?

I don't think you and Cochise are disagreeing at all.
I mean yes, Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions share the paradigm that there is a unitary creator with expectations regarding our response to his existence.
And yes, there is a possibility that this 'sun' God has a metaphysical composition that IS, and does not vary based on our particular beliefs.
But there's very limited operational utility in those two pieces of knowledge.
It doesn't alter the fact that when one or the other references 'the sun' they are referencing fundamentally divergent ideals. If one says 'let's build a Sun,' one person starts collecting lava and the other starts collecting combustible gases.

Logical
02-27-2008, 06:59 PM
I don't think you and Cochise are disagreeing at all.
I mean yes, Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions share the paradigm that there is a unitary creator with expectations regarding our response to his existence.
And yes, there is a possibility that this 'sun' God has a metaphysical composition that IS, and does not vary based on our particular beliefs.
But there's very limited operational utility in those two pieces of knowledge.
It doesn't alter the fact that when one or the other references 'the sun' they are referencing fundamentally divergent ideals. If one says 'let's build a Sun,' one person starts collecting lava and the other starts collecting combustible gases.


Some of us don't need to collect gas (right DEnise?).:D

Taco John
02-27-2008, 10:16 PM
You guys are taking it to the point of dogma. Dogma has nothing to do with God. I was merely referencing the Allah = God part of the equation. I understand that there are differences in dogma. That part is obvious. And the part that says only one of them can be right -- that's true, but that belies the part where both of them can be wrong. I don't know a whole lot about islamic divisions, but I do know there are at the least several dozens of sects of Christianity (probably hundreds), as well as Judaism. We could take the logic "in-house" and say that only one of them can be right. Likewise, they all could be wrong.

But that's a different argument than the one that I was making. God has hundreds of names. Not a single name changes God. Neither does a single piece of dogma. God is God regardless of our simple minds and foolish divisions.

Taco John
02-27-2008, 10:40 PM
If we both believe in freight trains, and I believe they are made of steel and you think they're made of corn flakes, sure we both believe in trains, but if we step in front of the train, the truth of that belief will be evident and make all the difference in the world.


This doesn't even apply. It's a simple matter to prove the composition of a freight train. You simply go to someone who creates freight trains for a living and ask them how they do it and what they use. Or better yet, go to a rail yard and touch a freight train yourself. We can exerience a freight train through every sense we have because they're physical, we can touch them, taste them, smell them, see them, ride them, and we can even build them ourselves if we were inclined. There's no religious subjectivity to frieght trains -- no dogma involved.

Mr. Kotter
02-28-2008, 07:57 AM
:spock:

I guess this thread proof that Obamamania is a religious experience.

LMAO

Mr. Kotter
02-28-2008, 08:57 AM
If there's a weakness to Obama, it's gonna be the suggestion that his conservative demeanor belies a overly liberal agenda. The opposition will have to make the case that, no matter how well he talks about listening to alternatives, when the rubber hits the road, the road is gonna veer wildly left. Even then, there's gonna be a sizable contingent that gonna respond 'well, we need to try something new, and the conciliatory demeanor is refreshing nevertheless.' The key is to find a few hot button issues that it's pretty clear that Obama will probably reliably veer hard left [with proof to back up the assertion] and hit those positions [and the effects thereof] hard. And it can't just be taxing and spending [those issues have already been exhausted by Bush], maybe abortion, maybe appeasement of rogue leaders, something more visceral and clearly left/right between the parties.

That, or unprecedented success in the WoT, say the unlikely event of the Iraqi street fawning over McCain.

BL's reply mirrors my own thinking. And it's why he's been able to overcome Hillary.

I think you misunderstand my take, this is simply an observation. I am PROUD that we are much much closer than ever before. I am just saying we shouldn't underestimate the pervasive nature of racism and sexism...

Ignoring their existence doesn't help the problem.

Me pointing out that it will have an effect on this election, does not in any way shape the outcome.



AusinChief's perspective should also be noted by the Obama campaign:

In each case, IMO it is middle class Independent minded white men who will hold the key to Obama's fate:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=180887