Readers’ Responses to Our Question (66)

First I object the the use of the term "followers" instead we support Senator Obama. It is not a religious choice it is because he speaks to our "better selves". Meaning he has reawakened the desire to get actively involved in serving our country, contribute more to society, realize that we are our brothers keepers and that together we can accomplish much. Kind of like you extending a hand and we each work together to lift each other up.

Regarding all the additional junk posted on this site regarding him being Muslim - There is nothing wrong with being a Muslim however, Senator Obama is a Christian.

http://www.ucc.org/synod/video-archive.html

Do you believe that Barack Obama elicits religious fervor among his followers as some have suggested? Is this good or bad, and why do you think so?

B.Obama elicits fervor but I don't believe it has anything to do with religion. The people that follow him may be enamored by him but that won't elect him. I have listened to many speaches and I come away from them thinking - what has he done? what is he going to do. The present tense is only the fervor. That cannot run a country it may get people excited and fired up but in the end it won't be enough to provide and protect the American people. I also wonder if he is really excited about being and "American" himself. Not saying the pledge doesn't make or not make you a patriot but it is one way to show an outward sign of an inward pride. The fact that he doesn't say the pledge bothers me more than his fancy eloquent speeches that don't address real issues of today.

GaryD, I didn't make any assumptions. All I have to work with is the evidence you've provided here.

You don't like McCain but you'll vote for him won't you?

Thanks to the Post for their standard diversity of opinions. Of the four responses, three are overt messages of support for Obama and the fourth is an attack on Bush.

If the Post and other liberal outlets really have any faith in their political beliefs, then why do they have to stack the deck so strongly to their (partisan) side?

The fervor induced by "Obamamania" does seem to have some religious features to it. If one understands the social dimension of religion as a "re-ligio" or re-binding, then certainly Obama seems to be bringing groups in this country together that have previously been at a distance. If you consider the existential and hermeneutical functions of religion, Obama does seem to be offering an alternative lense - namely, 'hope' - with which to view the future and re-make sense of the world. This has powerful religious overtones. I'm not certain, however, that Obama fever can supply the transcendence that truly religious experiences require. Except, perhaps, that he invokes the sense that together 'we can' work to achieve that which is presently 'beyond' ourselves. In this regard, while I don't think Obama is attempting to be 'religious' in any way, I think he certainly taps into the religious impulses that lie deep within American culture.

Moody, Moody, Moody,

Time for show and tell:

I repeat again: Your references have been checked and none address the issue of the flaws in Islam. Again for your perusal, the first four flaws:

1. Believe in "pretty/ugly wingie" thingies and teach their children that such fictional things really exist.

2. Believe that the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis believe they are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

All possible kind of questions asked by non Muslims about Islam answered on below web sites:

ALL MISCONCEPTIONS AND FALSE MEANINGS ARE ANSWERED:

1-www.irf.net/irf/faqonislam/index.htm (on this site you will get all answers about Islam, CHRISTIANITY, JESUS, JUDAISM , ETHEISIM, HINDUISM and all other religions).
2-www.islamalways.com/
3-www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
4-www.jamaat.net/deedat.htm
5-www.islamtomorrow.com/yusuf.asp
6-www.justaskislam.com/index.php
7-www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/Q_LP/ (The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam)

Certainly Obama seems like a nice enough guy some one I'd cheerfully set down and have a beer with (If I actually drank beer). But then there are a lot of people in that category and I wouldn't vote for the overwhelming majority of them for city council let alone president of the United States. Obama, like it or not, simply lacks much in the way of relevant experience.

Blu
Why don't you say the real reason you don't like Obama?

Go ahead and say it. Maybe you will feel better once you get it out in the open. I think that it is something that should be discussed, and not hidden behind your objections that his website does not have enough flags.

Upon seeing the picture of Obama dressed in the Muslim attire,
I printed out a picture and then printed out another picture of Bush.

I pasted the head of Bush over Obamas.

When my husband came home, I popped the picture in front of his face and he had a look of utter shock! I think I know what a person having a stroke looks like now.

First thing out of his mouth, after the gasp, was:

"I couldn't believe it was true! Bush would never bring a seed
image of 911 back home. He has too much respect for our country."

He was right. I doubt even Bill Clinton would willingly put this attire on as a representative of (all of us). Some people maybe
over 911. I am not.

There are too many ducks in the pond....not to call Obama a duck.

1. The Muslims (ask the Danish) will force their will on any non-muslim. It is their duty. If cartoons set the Muslims into a frenzy....then why are they not IRRATE at an American wearing
their holy garb? Obama looks quite content....honored.

2. The TRINITY UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST in (Chicago) gave Louis
Farrakhan an award in December. The TRINITY UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST has been Obama's resident Church for 20 years. (study the
pastor preaching after 911).

3. Michelle Obama, at the UCLA rally, gave a very
uncomfortable speech relating to the on going racial divide for colleges. She stated she was
told to "wait her turn" and "her grades were not good enough". She urged the crowd to believe she was racially profiled. Yet, she is a Princeton graduate. Aren't we lucky just to get our kids into a trade school these days?

4. Michelle Obama finally being proud of America.
This statement was made twice at two different rallys. No mistake. The church Farrakhan and Michelle Obama go to, promotes the idealism that slavery still exist for the black man.

Wasn't it Obama that attacked McCain for stating we could be in Iraq for 100 years? Seems the wife of Obama, Michelle thinks we still owe her....100 years later. If we give her the country, will she then be happy?

5. Check all of the Obama Web Sites. You will not find one AMERICAN FLAG.

Upon seeing the picture of Obama dressed in the Muslim attire,
I printed out a picture and then printed out another picture of Bush.

I pasted the head of Bush over Obamas.

When my husband came home, I popped the picture in front of his face and he had a look of utter shock! I think I know what a person having a stroke looks like now.

First thing out of his mouth, after the gasp, was:

"I couldn't believe it was true! Bush would never bring a seed
image of 911 back home. He has too much respect for our country."

He was right. I doubt even Bill Clinton would willingly put this attire on as a representative of (all of us). Some people maybe
over 911. I am not.

There are too many ducks in the pond....not to call Obama a duck.

1. The Muslims (ask the Danish) will force their will on any non-muslim. It is their duty. If cartoons set the Muslims into a frenzy....then why are they not IRRATE at an American wearing
their holy garb? Obama looks quite content....honored.

2. The TRINITY UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST in (Chicago) gave Louis
Farrakhan an award in December. The TRINITY UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST has been Obama's resident Church for 20 years. (study the
pastor preaching after 911).

3. Michelle Obama, at the UCLA rally, gave a very
uncomfortable speech relating to the on going racial divide for colleges. She stated she was
told to "wait her turn" and "her grades were not good enough". She urged the crowd to believe she was racially profiled. Yet, she is a Princeton graduate. Aren't we lucky just to get our kids into a trade school these days?

4. Michelle Obama finally being proud of America.
This statement was made twice at two different rallys. No mistake. The church Farrakhan and Michelle Obama go to, promotes the idealism that slavery still exist for the black man.

Wasn't it Obama that attacked McCain for stating we could be in Iraq for 100 years? Seems the wife of Obama, Michelle thinks we still owe her....100 years later. If we give her the country, will she then be happy?

5. Check all of the Obama Web Sites. You will not find one AMERICAN FLAG.

I like Barack Obama a lot. I think he truly believes his own message of hope. Therefore, he has the rare ability to be able to speak to the masses and inspire all of us to believe in hope.
I feel the picture of Barack in the traditional Somalian Elder clothing is positive, because he shows him honoring his ancestry and ancient traditions.
HummingCreek

I like Obama.

I am utterly flabbergasted that liking a Presidential candidate, and feeling genuine affection and fondness for him, instead of Machiavellian utility, makes him a dangerious person, who is tricking people and using people. What cynicism!

Obama is a fine person, a fine candidate, and he will make a fine President.

I like that he is inexperienced. There is no experience that can prepare a person for being President.

I like that he does not wear a flag lappel pin. It is just silly flag jewelry, that right-wing people have foisted upon the rest of us. I don't have a flag lappel pin, and neither does anyone I know. Does that make me an evil or bad person? But what is more, if it became compulsory to wear such a pin, I WOULD NOT wear it. So what? How does that make someone bad?

And I like that Barak Obama does not place his hand over his heart when the pledge of allegiance is said. Do you know why? Because among the characters in the Senate and Congress, the Pledge of Allegiance is recited over and over again, in monotonous succession, to prove how patriotic they are; but in the real world, it is almost never said, and so in the real world, people do not have affected and artificial manners about how to stand and behave during the Pledge of Allegiance. I do not think this jettisoned affectation makes him a bad guy; I like him better because of it.

I want a President who is unaware of the fashion requirement for a flag lappel pin; who is unaware of required affectations for the Pledge of Allegiance, who thinks about other things, and does not dwell on what is utterly silly and trivial.

I won't be voting for any of the candidates I see today, that makes me sad.

The ignorance of the electorate actually alarms me however. Many of the republicans are claiming that Obama wouldn't put his hand over his heart to recite the pledge of allegience. This mistaken belief comes from a picture taken where Richardson and (?) were holding their hands over their hearts and Obama was not -- guess what, that picture was taken during the playing of the national anthem, NOT the pledge of allegience.

I was taught you are to stand during the anthem, nothing about hand-over-heart.

I won't be voting for Obama because I disagree with his policies, not because "he's a Muslim" or "hates America" or some other lying crap. If you believe the nonsense your party inserts into your head, both parties, then you are the problem.

Moody, Moody, Moody,

I repeat again: Your references have been checked and none address the issue of the flaws in Islam. Again for your perusal, the first four flaws:

1. Believe in "pretty/ugly wingie" thingies and teach their children that such fictional things really exist.

2. Believe that the long-dead Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis believe they are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

Hello again "reality challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

So Malaysia is voting and I see the Islamic "funs" are pushing for a theocracy.

And why aren't the basic flaws of Islam being discussed in your debates????? You would think at least the "pretty wingie thingie" connection would be a hot topic. Hmmm, I guess that would be more about the demons of the demented. Why don't you go to a few debates and ask??? Fear you say??? From what "allah" pray???

I still don't understand what the Obama Family finds Eccumenical in Partial Birth Abortion. They even sent out a Campaign Piece on losing this Constitutional right to pull a 9 month old Baby partially out of the Birthing Canal.. Drill a Hole with No anethesia in the Back of the Babies head and suck its Brains out again with no anethesia. and the Obama Clan Call Pro Lifers extremist! Love your Neighbor as yourself... Barack quoted recently! Hmmm How Does Abortion fit in That Category!

Try working with actual facts TJ rather than your own shallow assumptions and you might have an actual chance to understand a bit more about this current political silly season.

Frankly I don't care for any of the presidential choices still currently before us. Two leftist shills and a Republican who apparently wishes to be able to give the Sally fields speech at the end of his career in front of a leftist audience.

Try working with actual facts TJ rather than your own shallow assumptions and you might have an actual chance to understand a bit more about this current political silly season.

Frankly I don't care for any of the presidential choices still currently before us. Two leftist shills and a Republican who apparently wishes to be able to give the Sally fields speech at the end of his career in front of a leftist audience.

Hello Daniel in the Lion's Den,

Thank you for your post.

I tend to think a bit more on politics as the US presidential primaries seem to be heating up right with the time of our general elections campaign. A blessing it is only two weeks from 24 February up to elections on 8 March 2008, but a very intense two weeks.

Like you, I do look at abilities and capabilites of a candidate and his party as a whole. Unfortunately, the Parliamentary system is different. We don't get to vote for our head of government directly. The party members did in their own party elections. But easier to remove a sitting prime minister than a president if there are untenable political problems by "voluntary" stepping down from office as "resignations".

George Bush Jr did not not seem to speak English very well? His father, Bush Sr. did once casually spoke of the "vision thing". Can't say much about fellows who are former members of Skulls and Bones and are Republi-klans. But Bush Sr is a better president methinks than his son. Of course this a foreigner's perspective.

I must say that Obama shows more grace under pressure than his rivals. There's possibilities in him as a reconciler and unifier. The last thing anyone need in this new century is the baggages of the old and to move forward.

The spectacle and circus of campaigning is already starting here. One of the parties in the opposition coalition, PAS, the sole Islamic politicl party in Malaysia with control of one state and the Wahhabi brand of Islam, with desire to implement an Islamic state in Malaysia, stated recently that they are, "not saying openly" on their desire for an Islamic state during this elections campaign. Aha! Political expediency!

There are too many things I agree with what the opposition coalition said about the previous government. But, having considered all aspects, I'm voting for the previous government's coalition. Lesser of two "evils". A slightly better tweedledee to the opposition tweedledum.

I have some "hope" and "faith" that Abdullah Badawi, badly falling in public popularity and perceptions of effectiveness as prime minister, (due to ineffectiveness, spinelessness, many political gaffes and challenges in the last year and this) would wake up after losing seats held by his coalition to the opposition in this upcoming general elections, and put in new blood in his Cabinet as he stated he would. Or his party UMNO would challenged his party and country's leadership.

If you are a Malaysian, you would never seriously vote for the opposition to helm the government, it being a coalition of DAP an ethnic chinese socialist and secular state minded political party; PAS the Islamic party into Islamic state/theocracy; PKR a liberal Malay-Muslim party among others.

Politics really makes strange bedfellows in Malaysia. It would never happen anywhere in the world where a political party (PAS) avowedly for an Islamic state align with a political party (DAP) avowedly for a secular state in a political coalition for elections.

When Malaysians vote for the opposition coalition, is is really to send a message, as protest votes, as dissent votes, to keep the ruling coalition from sleeping, from taking voters for granted, from assuming that their political hold and power on the nation is unchallenged.

Thanks and best regards

"J"

Do you believe Obama elicits religious fervor among his followers as some have suggested? Is this good or bad, and why do you think so?

Yes I believe Obama elicits fervor, and yes it can be classed as a type of religious fervor. Furthermore I think it bad, and the reason I say such can perhaps best be approached by discussing a problem I have had supreme difficulty in grappling with: the problem of not only truly accepting the concept of evolution according to Darwin, but imagining how a society would have to be constructed which has solved the problem of how ethically to get man to take evolution into his own hands.

So far human societies have at best managed to only "accept" evolution. We can see in the U.S. over the past hundred years that roughly speaking the right wing "accepts" evolution in the sense of a rough and tumble Darwinian world (hence the accusation leveled at the right of promoting social darwinism) but it of course does not accept evolution because it covers the process with religion to console the losers in a society riven by class, racial, etc. differences. But the left wing is no better. The left wing accepts evolution as science but in stepping out of religion and becoming more secular and accepting evolution it levels everyone and everything in a radical egalitarian manner which makes us ask if it is at all possible yet to really become secular, which is to say we easily imagine left wing varieties of secularism, but what exactly are the right wing varieties, and what would a world look like in which we have reliable left and right secularisms?

My belief is simple: American society will be oscillating for years to come between irrational forms of left and right wing politics because human society does not yet know how to ethically take its evolution into its own hands. As society steps away from God and into the theory of evolution we are faced with on one hand right wing trends which crudely emphasize racial superiority, etc. and on the other hand left wing trends which want to level everyone and everything which is of course ridiculous in the face of evolution which opens a gulf of potential difference much deeper than racial or sexual or class difference, etc.

Is it at all surprising that most atheists are left wing? What would a right wing atheist look like today? A right wing atheist today would no doubt be accused of something like fascism, and necessarily so because such a person would have dispensed with religion and would be looking at the raw differences between people and would be trying to overcome racial, sexual difference only insofar as getting into position to bring about a greater calculus of difference between people: one of raw ability and such ability aimed at only one purpose, ensuring that the human species is genetically improved.

So for years to come we can expect right wing trends to be cloaked in religion no matter if they are truly right wing and secular. In fact in the U.S. right wing trends are more secular than religious--it is something of a myth that the U.S. is a religious nation. The religion of the right wing has little to do with Jesus Christ. The left actually lives the values of Christ more than the right (the forgiveness, compassion aspect). But of course this means the left wing is shirking the responsibility of truly coming to terms with the concept of evolution! It means the left is becoming radically egalitarian in the face of what will open greater gulfs than any class or racial or sexual consciousness of the past!

The above is also why I reject both right and left wing politics in the United States. Neither party can articulate the great problems before us much less solve them. I expect fully that the right now will try to bring forth politicians such as Obama and we will have a war between inspirations--the secular one on one hand and the religious one on the other. And of course the real war will be between trying to keep some sort of right wing stability to culture in the face of a radical leveling which makes all difference and direction impossible to determine.

But there is one thing I will say: secularism makes little sense unless ethical varieties of such which are right wing are created. A perpetual left wing variety--as if overcome religion and we will perpetually be secular and left wing--is sheer senselessness. Society must create a right wing variety of secularism which is sheer meritocracy informed by biology as society increasing levels everything in a left wing direction. But once again, it must be ethical. How do we do such? I confess being unable to solve the problem. I just see right wing racialists, nationalists, etc. on one hand and left wing radical egalitarians on the other--and of course each totally incapable of really facing human evolution according to biology, each incapable of putting forth a society in which man takes his evolution into his own hands.

So yes to make a long story short do I find Obama to be harmful. He is positive in that he is a combination of races and he is of course intelligent, but he points in the same old direction of a left wing leveling of society and he does not seem very meritocratic to me. But of course the right is no better. I see from the right a continuing and crude social Darwinism covered by religious impulses.

Man just as far from Christ as taking evolution into his own hands.

This is for Jihadist,

When I look at a Presidential candidate, I do not really look at the promises he makes, nor all of the specific plans he (or she) might have to solve "all" of our problems. I look more at the type of person the candidate is. For example, I thought it was not a good sign when George Bush, the candidate, did not seem to speak English very well. I thought it was not a good sign when he projected himself, the son of an extremely wealthy and influentital family, as just a simple red-necky type of guy, with an "every-man" personae. I found in this, a basically deceptive person. This has turned out to be true.

Likewise, I am not all that interested in what kinds of solutions Obama has for our problems. All of that has to be worked out with the Congress; a better question is not what is he planning to do, but is he able to work with other people in a respectful way? When I ask this quesiton about Obama, I get a good feeling.

Likewise, on the subject of religion, Obama seems to be a traditional person in a way, but he also seems sophisticated in his relgious views, which seem complex and nuanced. In fact, he seems to be a fairly tradional, conventional, even conservative person in the way he lives his life and in the way he has done things up to now. But he is at the same time, intelligent, friendly, sophistocated, and kind. (Of course Republicans hate him, wouldn't you, if you were a Republican?)

I do not regard him with any kind of religious fervor; this is my cold assessment of him. He outshines all the other candidates, and towers above them. He is a good leader, because by definition, a leader is someone who can get people to follow him. President Bush is a poor leader, because no matter what he does, people will not follow him; he is well-known to be untrustworty; once a person has squandered their trust, as he has done, it is almost impossible to ever get it back.

I am astounded that these qualities of leadership, which he posesses, are turned around against him, as though being a good leader is a not a good thing. He is accused of not being patriotic because he does not wear the flag lapel pin. But I do not wear one; no one I know does. It is a silly piece of jewlry which most people do not posess, much less wear. ONly

Hello "reality challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

So Malaysia is voting and I see the Islamic "funs" are pushing for a theocracy.

And why aren't the basic flaws of Islam being discussed in your debates????? You would think at least the "pretty wingie thingie" connection would be a hot topic. Hmmm, I guess that would be more about the demons of the demented. Why don't you go to a few debates and ask???

Hello Fern,

Thanks for Obama's website for his substantive positions on issues.

It is really not a question of agreeing or disagreeing with Obama on his positions. His stance on issues are only tested when debated by his opponents as to how he defended them like all political campaigners.

I ask what Obama stands for substantively for as a foreigner, all I read and hear about him are matters raised on his performance record, his refusal to wear pins/labels etc as reported in news disseminated globally from the US by US media. And of course, his sparrings with Clinton.

The media love juicy, juicy bits to report on.

Christopher Hitchens - Religion poisons everything

Moi - Politics poisons everything

Never talk about politics or religion during a dinner party - sage Chinese advise.:)

Thanks and best regards

"J"

> Obama did make great, soaring and inspiring speeches on "hope" and "change", but what does he really stand for anyway, substantively?

I'm amazed at how many people repeat this canard when there's a simple answer - go to his website and read his substantive positions on many issues. If you disagree, fine, that's the way the game is played. I don't agree with all of his positions either but in general I agree with most. But I have to wonder what motivates people who repeat this.

To make it very easy: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

"Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

One simply must question your motives. Here you spend hours becoming an "expert" on everything from public speaking, Obama's thinking, the music of the West, etc. but you will not spend anytime reviewing the flaws of Islam. Considering you are the typical brainwashed Muslim, I guess this not too strange. We have tried to save you in the past and will continue to do so now and in the future so once again here is the Five Step Method for Deprogramming Islam:

Using "The 77 Branches of Islamic "faith" a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi as a starting point. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true "faith" (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.

"1. Belief in Allah"

"aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc." should be added to your cleansing neurons.

"2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."

Evolution and the Big Bang or the "Gib Gnab" (when the universe starts to recycle) are more plausible and the "akas" for Allah should be included if you continue to be a "creationist".

"3. To believe in the existence of angels."

A major item for neuron cleansing. Angels/devils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hittites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ugly wingy thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as fairies and "tinker bells". Modern devils are classified as the demons of the demented.

"4. To believe that all the heavenly books that were sent to the different prophets are true. However, apart from the Quran, all other books are not valid anymore."

Another major item to delete. There are no books written in the spirit state of Heaven (if there is one) just as there are no angels/"pwtfft"s to write/publish/distribute them. The Koran, OT, NT etc. are simply books written by humans for humans.

Prophets were invented by ancient scribes typically to keep the uneducated masses in line. Today we call them fortune tellers.
Prophecies are also invalidated by the natural/God/Allah gifts of Free Will and Future.

"5. To believe that all the prophets are true. However, we are commanded to follow the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) alone."

Mohammed spent thirty days fasting in a hot cave before his first contact with Allah aka God etc. via a "pretty wingy thingy". Common sense demands a neuron deletion of #5. #5 is also the major source of Islamic violence i.e. turning Mohammed's "fast, hunger-driven" hallucinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.

Accept these five "cleansers" and we guarantee a complete recovery from your Islamic ways!!!!

Jihadist, he has failed my political test by nature of being either a Democrat or a Republican.

Yes, the campaign can be amusing. When candidates have to play down to the level of the electorate we're saddled with (consider GaryD), it's a regular laugh riot.

Mr. James Under Bush the total per cent of taxes that the rich pay has increased somewhere between 5 and 10%. An actual tax rebate is one that goes to somone who actually is paying taxes which if you discount SS and Medicare/Medicaid no one making less than 30k a year is.

The current rebate is in fact nothing but a redistribution plan.

By the way if I return money to some to whom it belongs how have I redistributed it?

Again Obama is long on socialist agitprop and short on reality.

Hello TJ,

"Political test" as in having experience and solid record of performance and achievement in any field before entering politics or in politics itself (as a state assembly or member of parliament for the Parliamentary system, or as congressman, senator, governor etc for the American political system etc).

In gist, a "political test' is - Can he walk it like he talk it? On issues such as education, the economy, health, immigration, labour, trade pacts, the environment etc?

In fact, by your standards of "political test", when you stated, "An unfortunately large number of people will vote for the candidate that most effectively manipulates their emotions. I'd rather the hope button be pushed than the hate button, so go Obama.", so, Obama has flunked your "political test", no?

Ms. Hillary Clinton alluded about Obama:

"Now I could stand up here and say, let’s get everybody together, let’s get unified the sky will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing,”

“And everyone will know we should do the right thing, and the world will be perfect.”

No, Ms. Clinton did not mention harps and angels coming down with the light and the celestial choirs in the background.

Ms Clinton is going where angels fear to tread where Obama fans and followers are concerned. Does this mean she is anti-religious allusions and metaphors and not into religous-like fervour? We can only speculate and pontificate.

I never thought American election campaign is as entertaining as the Malaysian one, and more so than the latest Oscar awards ceremony in Hollywood.

Thanks and regards
"J"

Jihadist, Um.. what political test? This is American politics we're discussing.

I wish more people were capable of examining and understanding issues, and any given politician's stance on them, pragmatically . This isn't the case. An unfortunately large number of people will vote for the candidate that most effectively manipulates their emotions. I'd rather the hope button be pushed than the hate button, so go Obama.

Just the same, I won't be voting for him. I don't vote for Democrats or Republicans.

....and by the way Fern and TJ,

In have set such such stringent "religious test" for presidential candidates, and having determined that this candidate or that candidate is too religious or otherwise for the public good with some casualities along the way, is the "political test" being sidelined, subsumed, marginalised, forgotten, ignored on where the candidates stand on issues, what they intend to do, and whether they can really do it?

Thanks and regards
and goodnight (your time)

"J"

TJ and Fern,

I've tried to read a bit on what Osama stands for over the weekend that warrants the so-called almost religious "fervour" for him.

Obama did make great, soaring and inspiring speeches on "hope" and "change", but what does he really stand for anyway, substantively?

It would seem that Mitt Romney has a better substantive record as a public official than Obama if I read US reports on both candidates correctly.

Jokes asides about Ralph Nader, he did a lot in the public square. At least we are really clear on where he stand and stood for, never mind I never know for certain if Ralph Nader actually said:

Dissent is the mother of ascent.
or
Dissent is the mother of assent.

"Assent" or "ascent", Nader may force all candidates to be more clear on issues. That spoiler that, of feel good speeches. Not that there is anything wrong with with feel good speeches.

Remember Reagan and his "Morning in America again.." speech? It won him the presidential elections, did it not? Reagan the Great Communicator, gave as much "hope" for "change" as Obama the Great Orator is doing.

As for Obama's seemingly spotty and vague record as a congressman, so was John Kennedy's too. I could be wrong on both.

Thanks and best regards

"J"

I'd rather we be inspired to vote by a great orator with a message of hope than be frightened like children by an idiot with a message of death.

anon - hopefully you're wearing your lapel pin on a daily basis you dipstick hypocrite.....

Lapel pins and hands over hearts is a damn good nationalist disguise - symbols Bush and company have hidden behind for years while they did their dirty work. We expect much more of the same from McCain.

Flag lapel pins carry no weight and mean nothing, now that these symbols of unity have forever been disgraced by your nefarious neocon buddies in the White House. Actions speak much much louder than tin symbols my good friend .........

Good luck with that hollow tin man, John McCain.

> Since when do Americans vote for or want a President in the White House that refuses to say the pledge of allegiance or honor the American flag?

That claim is an attempt to swiftboat Obama. It's false. And such lies are just one more reason why we need Obama for president. Such lies motivate me to donate more money to his campaign.

It's time to to return to the ideals of America rather than support those who would tear the US down. It's time to return to the ideals upon which America was founded. It's time to build a true "City on a Hill" where we uphold truth rather than spread lies; where we build each other up rather than bearing false witness for political power. t's time for true patriots, those who honor our ideals to renounce smear and innuendo and uphold truth and honor.

Since when do Americans vote for or want a President in the White House that refuses to say the pledge of allegiance or honor the American flag?

That is enough to make me want to have his as* exported out of the USA. There is no question in my mind that he has his priorities fuc*ed up. Down with Obama!

Obama is not a true American if he cannot honor the American flag and what it stands for. He refused to the lapel pin of an American flag as well as refusing to put his right hand over his heart and recite the pledge of allegiance.

ENGLANDDAYDH - actually I'm being serious - you may have had a stroke and need to see a doctor.
You're postings do not make sense and indicate aphasia, a sign of stroke. Please seek treatment.

ENGLANDDAYAH - you're either aphasic or an enlightened Zen master - now which is it??

"Dissent is the mother of ascent"
- Ralph Nader

Ralph Nader for Malaysian prime minister!

Everyone is campaigning here - for or against Obama. Why not on Nader too. Not that he stands a spitting chance at the White House, but he's been doing good stuff longer than either Clinton or Obama:)

Vote for Nader to waste your vote and as spoiler for other candidates!

Between tweedledum and tweedledee, for consumer rights, for environment protection, for reduced defence spending, for reduced lobbyist clout and interests, for no sanctimonious talk on and about God, Ralph Nader for Malaysian prime minister!

Campaigning for our national general elections started on 24 February 2008. Elections will be on 8 March 2008.

Come Mr. Nader, you inspired us all these years!

We have fervour, we have passion, for the issues you're interested in!

Our country is a mess too!

Nader for Prime Minister of Bolehland!

(Err, "boleh" is Malay for "can" or "can do". A waggish reference on former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's slogan - Malaysia Boleh! Malaysia can!)

Regarding my comment on 'the eye of the needle' you will find that Johnny B. is correct in his interpretation from Wiki - although the so-called gate of Jeruselam referred to in this particular myth is just that - no proof exists other than hearsay and oral tradition.

The more accurate interpretation is just as it says in the parable attributed to Jesus, to wit: 'it's harder for a rich man to gain heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle'.... and in (earlier) Babylonian tradition the elephant replaces the camel.

As usual with Christian lore, it's borrowed from earlier traditions. You just can't make this stuff up - although biblical authors did just that with their so-called first person narratives........... the folks that believe the infallible accuracy of the bible as divinely inspired words from the lips of God, will probably vote for John McCain - and who could expect otherwise, absent Huckabee??

McCain may be a formidable challenge, although not based on his innate ability to lead or to comprehend the complexity of world affairs. Obama is head and shoulders above McCain intellectually - however, the extreme right will make every attempt to place their man where they want him - thus McCain replaces Bush and not an iota of difference exists between the two. The media continues to whitewash the latest McCain scandel - which is certainly not about sex, but it is about special political favoritism ala Keating, et al.

This is vintage McCain - as the perfect replacement for Bush. Hopefully the voting public can break well-worn habits this time around, and vote in their own best interests. Voting party is just as important as voting for individual candidates - no one should lose sight of this particular fact.

The GOP is united under the neocon banner and that has not changed..........

Don't assume anything, got it!!!!!!

"McCain is going to be a formidable challenge. His base is the same independents that have put Obama on put. Independents who did not want to be democrats or republicans. The charm of Obama wears off. Ask some who have already voted and have had a few weeks to think it over."

EXCELLENT POINT!

JBG, "Incidentally, just for the sake of useless trivia, the eye of the needle (wormhole to heaven) is generally believed to have been a low arched door leading through the walls of a city in which camels had to kneel down in order to enter, and all their baggage removed to allow them to fit through. Thus, preventing attack as a practical matter, and shedding worldly goods to enter in, in a metaphorical sense."

Negative,During the day the walls that surrounded a city were heavily guarded by guards, which sat on top of the walls. These guards viewed the gates or entrance to the city. The keyhole was used to streamlined entrance of the city at night and to keep entering of the city to a minimum; less guards needed, less people entered, keeping the city safe

JBG, "Incidentally, just for the sake of useless trivia, the eye of the needle (wormhole to heaven) is generally believed to have been a low arched door leading through the walls of a city in which camels had to kneel down in order to enter, and all their baggage removed to allow them to fit through. Thus, preventing attack as a practical matter, and shedding worldly goods to enter in, in a metaphorical sense."

Negative,During the day the walls that surrounded a city were heavily guarded by guards, which sat on top of the walls. These guards viewed the gates or entrance to the city. The keyhole was used to streamlined entrance of the city at night and to keep entering of the city to a minimum; less guards needed, less people entered, keeping the city safe

I suppose the post just below referring to electoral college results and Obama as democratic nominee makes an unfortunate point - the South will be expected to rally the anti-black vote big time. I see old white southern veterans every day of my life as part of my job, and they are not happy with the republican party or the war in Iraq.....this will be a significant factor in the upcoming election and no one is counting on this 'anomoly' among whites. Will they vote for Ralph Nader?? I think not...

This knee jerk projection may also fizzle big time based on the united strength of the black vote with an expected (but unpredictable) white cohort. The tide may finally turn electorally speaking, at least in some southern states.

Make no mistake - racism is alive and well in the South, but the numbers are dwindling. Meanwhile, we see in the news that the conservative right will be expected to attack Obama's patriotism next and we should not doubt that the well funded swiftboaters are lining up in anticipation. McCain will of course disavow any connection, he is such a gutless wonder (war hero my ass).

The man has no principles other than getting elected. Obama will need to combat this just the way we would have expected the Clinton campaign to handle smear tactics - anticipate and go for the jugular....exploit every McCain weakness, and there are plenty to pick from. Use neocon tactics for a change, as distasteful as they are.

I could easily have supported Edwards or Clinton, and will support Obama as well. The neocons are present and accounted for, and need a real ass kicking this time around. McCain belongs on the rubbish heap of old news...why mince words??

Should we trust our future to Bush lite?? And worse, because given the age factor I believe McCain is even more malleable and easily as character impaired as Bush - it's all about 'good vs evil' this time around. Imagine the Supreme Court in a few years with McCain?? Imagine Iraq and beyond - any doubts we'll extend the war to Iran?? This is the neocon end game nightmare in action and those that prize personal freedoms should be very alarmed.

Those that don't have the stomach to vote for 'good' can always vote for the ever-present Ralph Nader, monumental egoist that he is.

At the very least Obama creates a false sense of hope and security that he will never have the opportunity to fulfill.

He is a phony and has illusion of grander. Obama doesn’t fool mature individuals. I was talking with friends last night we all had the same sentiment about Obama, he is a phony that can't deliver what he promises.

We all also have the same plan about the election. If Obama gets the nominee we all will be casting our vote to McCain. We all also decided time to bring all our other friends on board with this plan.

Is there a difference between religious fervor and mob reactions? The question is not rhetorical. I can say that charismatic figures from Adolph Hitler to the Beatles ellicited fevered reactions from their audiences.

What strikes me as interesting, at least from a Jewish standpoint is how far from Jewish values his actual platform is. His is a platform meant to benefit the middle and upper classes, not the working class, not would-be immigrants desperate for survival, certainly not the poor, among whose number I was as a child. My own hope for the nomination was a Southern white Christian man, Edwards, who did speak to the needs of those in distress.

With Clinton and Obama left, my religious values, among which concern for those in need loom large are not much addressed in party platforms. Judaism holds that poverty must be eradicated because it is unjust, morally wrong. I don't get that from Obama. I get rhetoric.

I will say that he markets himself as a man-god, at times. I recall a tv add in which he was bathed in light, looming large above the multitudes, claiming that he was going to bring jobs back to America by taxing those who have sent them overseas. And the crowd cheered. Hope. Hope? If he were to do this, and, as he knows, he could not, the outcome would be soaring prices for everything we buy, since to whom would manufacturers' go to make up the lost profits? And, then, just for the sake of following Obama's yellow brick road, let's say, manufacturerers' started building plants in the US, as he wishes them to do. Prices would surge again. Finally, when Obama reaches his specious goal, these companies would hire US workers, who would unionize, etc. Your twenty-dollar shirt would then cost...?

Well, the bearer of hope endorsed this message. Obama's message is a message of image. In me, it awakens not hope but fear, fear that Americans can be so gullible.

At this point, I'm supporting Clinton because she best addresses the needs of the poor and the working class, takes a strong stance on the environment, and proposes a humane immigration policy.

If Obama does get the nomination, if I is elected president, I can only hope that he will lean a bit more to the left, to those who are in need of substantive change, the workers, the poor, the Native Americans, immigrants, etc. They have hope. It's all they've ever had. What they need now is help.

Is there a difference between religious fervor and mob reactions? The question is not rhetorical. I can say that charismatic figures from Adolph Hitler to the Beatles ellicited fevered reactions from their audiences.

What strikes me as interesting, at least from a Jewish standpoint is how far from Jewish values his actual platform is. His is a platform meant to benefit the middle and upper classes, not the working class, not would-be immigrants desperate for survival, certainly not the poor, among whose number I was as a child. My own hope for the nomination was a Southern white Christian man, Edwards, who did speak to the needs of those in distress.

With Clinton and Obama left, my religious values, among which concern for those in need loom large are not much addressed in party platforms. Judaism holds that poverty must be eradicated because it is unjust, morally wrong. I don't get that from Obama. I get rhetoric.

I will say that he markets himself as a man-god, at times. I recall a tv add in which he was bathed in light, looming large above the multitudes, claiming that he was going to bring jobs back to America by taxing those who have sent them overseas. And the crowd cheered. Hope. Hope? If he were to do this, and, as he knows, he could not, the outcome would be soaring prices for everything we buy, since to whom would manufacturers' go to make up the lost profits? And, then, just for the sake of following Obama's yellow brick road, let's say, manufacturerers' started building plants in the US, as he wishes them to do. Prices would surge again. Finally, when Obama reaches his specious goal, these companies would hire US workers, who would unionize, etc. Your twenty-dollar shirt would then cost...?

Well, the bearer of hope endorsed this message. Obama's message is a message of image. In me, it awakens not hope but fear, fear that Americans can be so gullible.

At this point, I'm supporting Clinton because she best addresses the needs of the poor and the working class, takes a strong stance on the environment, and proposes a humane immigration policy.

If Obama does get the nomination, if I is elected president, I can only hope that he will lean a bit more to the left, to those who are in need of substantive change, the workers, the poor, the Native Americans, immigrants, etc. They have hope. It's all they've ever had. What they need now is help.

Hmmm, "me wonders" that with all this "Obama is so great and bright and intelligent" talk is why Obama is not a Mormon or at least a Muslim??

Hillary ahead by 20 points when no one was paying attention and elections months away.
Obama beating McCain now by a few points means zilch.
McCain is going to be a formidable challenge. His base is the same independents that have put Obama on put. Independents who did not want to be democrats or republicans. The charm of Obama wears off. Ask some who have already voted and have had a few weeks to think it over.

Look at the voting patterns. The older democrats and the traditional democrats have not bought into the revival tent attraction of Obama charm. Oratory does not move the 50+year crowd. They have faced the fancy promises one too many times.

Economy tanking, country at war, Americans being shot at around the world, and the younger set wants to hand the reins to a first time senator. Sure, it will happen.

I suspect McCain wins by a landslide in electoral college. The democrats will have at least the next 4 years to run the autopsy. Plenty of time to blame Hillary for not giving up earlier. She should have not even bothered. And then there will be the other half of the democrats who will be thumping and blaming the second coming of McGovern.

Sure a few are going overboard, but with a charismatic figure like Obama that is to be expected. But if you listen to what he's saying, he's being very realistic about what a President Obama would face. He's not promising to heal the sick and give sight to the blind. But after years of listening to "be afraid, be very afraid", his message is a classic American "can do" message".

Our founding fathers and mothers, the patriots that fought the civil war, the "Greatest generation" all were fired up by "The Idea that is America" (a great book by the way).

The New England settlers wanted to create a "city on a hill". "We hold these truths to be self-evident" was not a message of fear but one of hope. Lincoln's appeal to the better angels of our nature was a positive appeal. FDR saying "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" speaks for itself.

Obama might or might not turn out to be a great President, but I think he has that potential. He has the potential to once again inspire America to better ourselves, to attack the problems we all face, to be part of a process of reorienting America to once again strive to implement the ideals that have been part of America since the beginning. His message is one of the messages of the great seal "E Pluribus Unum" - yes WE can.

Bush set the stage for a monumental defeat of all things republican and the concept of 'business as usual' in Washington. The Clinton era has been successfully tied to the Bush era in word, if not deed. Thus, it's over for Hillary and she knows it better than anyone. The media has already started writing her eulogy.

The momentum for Obama seems palpable - while that may prove to be a very good thing down the road, women should note that their chance at the presidency is very likely gone for at least 8 years - will Obama continue to surprise and nominate a woman as VP?? If so, that will be the next best chance for a woman as POTUS in the coming generation..........if he doesn't, it seems unlikely the baby boomers will ever get a chance to vote for a woman in this life time (unless it's a republican - how likely is that??)

Maybe that matters not, but just a practical consideration to ponder........

parker

a wise post and caution.

I myself don't hear Obama promising the Government is going to solve my problems (that would be pretty amazing, as no therapist has been able to do much).

In fact, the first quote on his website is that it's the People who must and can make changes if they believe they can, and govt's role is to go along with them

Even socialists like me know that, whereas Government is probably the best entity to fix our collapsing bridges, it has quite limited capabilities, as do "Messiahs" like some may think Obama is.

But he IS very smart, very accomplished, very respectful of other humans and other countries, and a bit of inspiration from someone who can speak his native language may not be an entirely bad thing.

When I watched Obama's speech to the Democratic Convention in 2004, I thought to myself that here was a person who would be quick to rise into the national limelight (not hard to predict). He really is a master orator, and our country seems to crave that--not, I think, for religious reasons but for many other reasons. We want to believe that we can work together to build something greater than one person could build individually. He ignites that belief, and by not defining the details, he allows us to dream big, and to not confront the ugly reality that a lot of the problems our country must confront were brought on by ourselves, not the government. Many people consider government some sort of "quasi-religious" rescue agent, and that appeals to us when an orator appeals to our collective need for being rescued.

I agree with Betsey that there are going to be some hard realities that won't be solved by oratory, but I hope Obama gets some clear-thinking problem solvers around him as advisors and cabinet, then he can talk all he wants to. I'll be glad the cowboy talk will be gone this time around.

Johnny B - those nominations won't be so easy after all. Maid Marion and Friar Tuck seem to be associated with Robin in his later incarnations with May Day celebrations in the deep woods of Sherwood Forest. Boy, I loved that tale as a kid - and all British Isles lore for that matter.

Mythically speaking, both Marion and Tuck may have been throw backs to earlier Pagan/druidic or even Gnostic days. Was Marion a mere paramour and earth mother, a white witch and sorceress, or another manifestation of our own biblical Mary - the virgin vessel and esoterically, the divine feminine side of God.

And was Tuck really Puck?? Said to be a de-frocked priest that love the ways of the world too much and loathed Church authority - clearly more a man for Dionysos rather than Apollo!

Perhaps what we need is more pantheism and less theism from our politicians these days....if we must have gods.

Honestly though, I can't see Oprah or Bill Richardson dancing around a May Pole with any enthusiam or facility, so these positions are still up for grabs in my mind........

I haven't gotten the sense that anyone thinks Obama is messianic or some kind of second coming. I just think that the past years under Bush have been so disastrous, so corrupt, and created so much despair over our government and political system that Obama's success is filling people with an immense sense of relief and restored hope. Many people see him as a kind of rock star and react to him the way teenagers did to the Beatles, swooning and fainting and generally working themselves into a worshipful frenzy. If we weren't coming to a close on one of the most reviled administrations in history I doubt he'd be getting the same kind of reactions. A tuna sandwich could easily be mistaken for caviar after having nothing but excrement to eat for a few years.

Give to the Rich

Betsy and Gary miss the reality of the last eight years. We HAVE HAD redistribution. It's just that instead of going from the Rich to the middle class and the poor, it has gone the other way. Guess the Rich know how to use the money better.

The Government IS going to have a Tax Policy folks, even if it Stops illegal and senseless multi-trillion dollar wars. Bridges will continue to fall down, and we won't let poor widows starve on the streets.

The question is indeed how the burden is distributed.

And only those who don't know how to read deny that the burden has been SHIFTED towards those with lower income in the last 25 years (since Reagan) instead of either staying the same or tilting towards our million/billionaires.

AND, Obama does induce fever, but it is NOT religious. It does NOT depend on God, Christian or otherwise.