I find it curious that all of a sudden conservatives are up in arms about Obama's 'lies' and Obama's past when they voted George W Bush into office twice. Even after all these years I can't quit believe that the coke snorting drunken incompetent son of a bunch of oil and business tycoons running with a corrupt draft dogging evil motherfuckher like Cheney got elected.

Now they complain about a candidate who has the best credentials in 50 years as if they are experts in presidential vetting.

Seriously....Let be real here. I almost have to laugh whenever I see an anti-Obama thread. Not that Obama should be exempt but that the hippocracy is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Yup, it sure is. Like that hypocrisy in your post.

The last eight years, folks like you have been making comments like the hyperbole in your first paragraph.

And you're surprised to be seeing the same things directed at your candidate?



Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

You assume, as you so often do, much.

I know people who voted for Gore and Kerry, but have absolutely no intention of voting for Obama. I know people who voted for Bush who have no intention of voting for McCain.

I think it's funny how you always whine about Bush, as if we would be impressed that Obama is a better candidate than someone who isn't even running...

I can understand the pro-Bush/anti-McCain mentality (i.e. "He's just not conservative enough for my tastes"), but what's their reasoning behind voting for both Gore and Kerry, yet not voting for Obama? I'm not even trying to debate anything, I'm just curious as to whether or not you know why exactly they feel this way.

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

Its 2008... you really need to get over it.
Gore lost, fair and square.
Kerry lost fair and square.

Obama has no credentials. It sucks but its what y'all opted for and once again you're just gonna have to deal with it.

I agree with you Danny. And in addition, most of the "lies Obama has told" are actually lies themselves. The conservatives voted for Bush, one of the most dishonest Presidents we've ever had, and then they lie about Obama. I'm used to it by now. Aren't you?

Well, they don't like him.

Without exception, those who aren't voting for him point out his lack of experience. He's only been a Senator for 3-1/2 years, and he's spent the last year and a half campaigning for the Presidency.

One of my left-leaning friends says that, had Obama been a Governor instead of a Senator, he'd vote for him. At least, that way, he'd have some experience being the "point man" in a government...

Won't make any difference though, if experience was a big thing with a significant number of Dems then Hillary would have won.

And I totally and completely refuse to believe that many people who voted for Kerry and/or Gore will vote for McCain anyway. Some may stay home but they are not going to vote for someone diametrically opposed to everything they like just because of experience

And the point man is rarely the commander. He's just the most likely to be shot.

So you think Obama is the best candidate in 50 years and then follow with:

Yes, please let's be, for just one minute!

Obama's causal, dismissive attitude toward the will of the people troubles me.

Case in point, concealed carry. The legislatures in 40 of the 50 states have enacted some form of concealed carry legislation.

But Obama dismisses the will of the people in 80% of the states out of hand, calling for a federal ban on concealed carry.

This cavalier attitude toward state's rights is troubling.

And yes, McCain displayed a very similar attitude with regard to the immigration bill he co-authored.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

But i don't know; when it comes down to the actual principle of "state's rights" and federalism, immigration would fall under the jurisdiction of the federal government in relation to the policy and dealing with the illegals; the state has no right to set its own policy. Obama on the other hand just feels like treading into everything he can.

Pols do that sometimes. We live in a Republic, our reps are supposed to think in terms of what is in our best interests rather than strictly follow our expressed will. (That's one reason why we have a Senate as I understand it, though even Congresspersons are not supposed to be entirely ward heelers.)

As an aside, WHY are gun rights so important to conservatives? Are that many people really going to vote for a guy who is very likely to continue policies that are rather clearly screwing things up just because he's in favor of concealed carry? If having a gun on you at all times is so important to you may I respectfully suggest that you seek a safer lifestyle?

It's not the gun itself, it's the nanny-state mentality that something is too dangerous for the peasantry to own, so the state will take it from them for their own good.

Also, in Barack Obama's case, it's the dishonesty involved. Barack has a well-established record of supporting gun bans, including calling for a ban on all semi-automatic firearms.

But try and find one word about that on his official campaign website. There's not a peep.

Matt

__________________
De duobus malis, minus est semper eligendum

When has Obama called for a federal ban on concealed carry? Are you referring to the check-yes-check-no petition that everyone constantly seems to use as undeniable evidence of Obama's radical gun control views? If not, to what exactly are you referring?

__________________
"The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.”
- George Will

Then again, I never said anything like that.

Do you believe that people who voted for Bush will vote for Obama?