Obama on religion and politics.

conraddobler · June 23rd, 2007, 10:20 AM

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/faith/

Man this guy nailed the issue IMO.

Absolute Zero · June 23rd, 2007, 11:22 AM

He seems to have a knack for that.

Linderbee · June 23rd, 2007, 11:27 AM

I think the main reason I'll be voting for him is because I trust him. After all these years of mistrust in our WH, I need someone I have faith in & can trust.

Amazing speech...watched the whole thing. He's an amazing orator.

D-Dogg · June 23rd, 2007, 12:22 PM

I have to say, Obama and Paul are the ONLY candidates out there that speak their minds.

There are things with both of them I disagree with but overall I agree with their mindsets of the role of government and the role of the people.

I'll be voting for Paul in the republican primary. If Obama makes it to the presidential general election, I'll probably vote for him. If he does not, I'm probably writing in Ron Paul.

But these voices need to be heard.

It helps B-RoK that he is one of the best speakers we've seen in a long, long time.

D-Dogg · June 23rd, 2007, 12:23 PM

BTW, this is a fantastic breakdown of how a religious man can be a politician.

Divide Et Impera · June 23rd, 2007, 12:24 PM

Donald:

Those are my top 2!!!

Kolo · June 23rd, 2007, 01:38 PM

If you don't want to listen to all 40+ minutes, here's the Cliff Notes version: legislation spawned by an individual legislator's sense of religious morality is fine, so long as that legislation comports with the DNC platform.

Absolute Zero · June 23rd, 2007, 02:52 PM

Ditto to you all!

How about an Obama Pres, Ron Paul VP ticket?

AZZenny · June 23rd, 2007, 03:10 PM

Ron Paul's John Bircher ties eliminate him for me, and I suspect, for Obama.

Kolo · June 23rd, 2007, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZZenny

Ron Paul's John Bircher ties eliminate him for me, and I suspect, for Obama.

So might the fact that apart from their similar desire to retreat from Iraq as quickly as possible, their political philosophies and positions have nothing in common.

conraddobler · June 23rd, 2007, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kolobotomy

So might the fact that apart from their similar desire to retreat from Iraq as quickly as possible, their political philosophies and positions have nothing in common.

The common theme to me is they are genuine in their intent, that's all I ask, I don't have to agree with everything just believe they know what they are doing and that I can live with the things I won't like.

Both are fine for me.

GWB scores a negative 12,000,000 on that scale IMO.

Divide Et Impera · June 23rd, 2007, 03:34 PM

cd:

EXACTLY!

Gimme a real, honest politician who truly represents the people (even with divergent philosophies - such as Paul and Obama) and I can get on board with that....

Kolo · June 23rd, 2007, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by conraddobler

The common theme to me is they are genuine in their intent, that's all I ask, I don't have to agree with everything just believe they know what they are doing and that I can live with the things I won't like.

Both are fine for me.

Not to belabor the point, but Paul is anti-abortion rights, disinclined to foreign trade and labor agreements, instintively anti-entitlement, anti-taxation, pro-border fence--Obama's the polar opposite in every case. They may be genuine (or maybe not in Obama's case), but they genuinely disagree on most issues.

Linderbee · June 23rd, 2007, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kolobotomy

If you don't want to listen to all 40+ minutes, here's the Cliff Notes version: legislation spawned by an individual legislator's sense of religious morality is fine, so long as that legislation comports with the DNC platform.

Ummm...No. Did you even watch it?

conraddobler · June 23rd, 2007, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kolobotomy

Not to belabor the point, but Paul is anti-abortion rights, disinclined to foreign trade and labor agreements, instintively anti-entitlement, anti-taxation, pro-border fence--Obama's the polar opposite in every case. They may be genuine (or maybe not in Obama's case), but they genuinely disagree on most issues.

First of all Obama stands for blasting earmarks into the light of day, anti corruption and a whole host of things much worse than simple spending and he's a smart man, I doubt he's completely going to want to bankrupt us and in some cases as with Clinton the most progress on the issue occured during a Dems term.

Contrast that to GWB who mouthed about small government and incinerated the budget.

Abortion is not a deciding issue for me, it's just a part of the basket of goods, I'd prefer that the candidate was pro choice but in Paul's case I understand his postion and I'm ok with it.

Paul's ideals are so radical in terms of government spending you have to somewhat discount what he'd realistically get done, I think as in Only Nixon could go to China and only Clinton could sign a welform reform bill, you have to live on a certain side of the fence to get the credibility to walk to the other.

I'd prefer my candidate shrank the government to almost nil but short of that if they can bring a new updated way of problem solving to the current system and they have integrity I'm on board over wolves in sheeps clothing every day and twice on Sunday.