Obama says he's outraged by former pastor's comments

lazymoon13

inmytree wrote:

did your wittle feeling get hurt...?

honestly, I don't have the time or resolve to explain to you how they are similar...it's not like you're going to change you mind..cuz in your eye Mc100years can do no wrong...

anyhoo...give this a read...

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/24/mccains-televangelist-ally-believes-god-damns-america/

again with the childish statements. is everyone here in high school? I thought pearl jam would have some older fans by now.

o but you dont have time to debate. just make immature one liners and scram. got it.

lazymoon13

inmytree wrote:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/24/mccains-televangelist-ally-believes-god-damns-america/

again, how is this similar to the wright situation? obama sat in that church for 20+ years. was his spiritual adviser, mentor, married him, close friend.

mccain is using hagee to get some votes. they are not friends.


and you see this as similar?

inmytree

lazymoon13 wrote:

again, how is this similar to the wright situation? obama sat in that church for 20+ years. was his spiritual adviser, mentor, married him, close friend.

mccain is using hagee to get some votes. they are not friends.


and you see this as similar?

ok, you win, they're not "similar"...Hagee's a saint...and Wright is the Devil...the Deviiiiillllll.....

but, I guess pandering to the religious right is a good thing...embracing a hate-monger to get votes is good thing...

kissing the ass of a hate-monger to get votes is not a big deal...

I guess seeking out Hagee AFTER he's made those hateful comments in not a big deal...

yeah, you're right they're not similar...

inmytree

lazymoon13 wrote:

again with the childish statements. is everyone here in high school? I thought pearl jam would have some older fans by now.

o but you dont have time to debate. just make immature one liners and scram. got it.

oh my, I guess you wittle fewwens did get huurt....

I'll try to do better, Mrs. Mature....:)

lazymoon13

inmytree wrote:

ok, you win, they're not "similar"...Hagee's a saint...and Wright is the Devil...the Deviiiiillllll.....

but, I guess pandering to the religious right is a good thing...embracing a hate-monger to get votes is good thing...

kissing the ass of a hate-monger to get votes is not a big deal...

I guess seeking out Hagee AFTER he's made those hateful comments in not a big deal...

yeah, you're right they're not similar...

seriously do you have the ability to act like an adult for one post?

hagee is not a saint, he's a worthless piece of shit. but mccain is using him for votes. THATS ALL. thats the extent of their relationship. end over done.

wright/obama relationship is much deeper and his speeches and hate are 10 times worse. but you see no issue with that?

inmytree

lazymoon13 wrote:

seriously do you have the ability to act like an adult for one post?

hagee is not a saint, he's a worthless piece of shit. but mccain is using him for votes. THATS ALL. thats the extent of their relationship. end over done.

wright/obama relationship is much deeper and his speeches and hate are 10 times worse. but you see no issue with that?

Here, I say it again:

me wrote:

ok, you win, they're not "similar"...Hagee's a saint...and Wright is the Devil...the Deviiiiillllll.....

but, I guess pandering to the religious right is a good thing...embracing a hate-monger to get votes is good thing...

kissing the ass of a hate-monger to get votes is not a big deal...

I guess seeking out Hagee AFTER he's made those hateful comments in not a big deal...

yeah, you're right they're not similar...

read it slowly...you may get it this time...

good luck...:)

lazymoon13

inmytree wrote:

Here, I say it again:

read it slowly...you may get it this time...

good luck...:)

I guess the answer is no, you are only capable of being a little kid. ok yes they are similar. wright/hagee are both hate mongers. feel better now?

now, whats NOT similar is the extent of the relationship with these with the candidates. you seem to think they are the same. which is very far from the truth.

may you will get it now. good luck.

inmytree

lazymoon13 wrote:

I guess the answer is no, you are only capable of being a little kid. ok yes they are similar. wright/hagee are both hate mongers. feel better now?

now, whats NOT similar is the extent of the relationship with these with the candidates. you seem to think they are the same. which is very far from the truth.

may you will get it now. good luck.

ok, let me get this straight...

A) you're upset at me because I'm not "mature"
I agreed wright/hagee are not "similar" <---your original assertion
C) you're attempting to present yourself as an "adult" yet act like a scolded child
D) now you're saying wright/hagee are similar but not similar


I guess attending church for 20 years = bad

Pandering to a hate-monger after the fact, knowing damn well that person is a hate-monger = good

listen...at this time and date, wright's a nut...plain and simple...

I wonder, of those who sat in the pews on many a sunday morning, and later found out there trusted spiritual adviser was fucking alter boys, how many of those folks do you blame for not "leaving" the church...

my point is, you really never "know" someone...but when you do "know" someone and embrace them for votes, that not good...

lazymoon13

inmytree wrote:

ok, let me get this straight...

A) you're upset at me because I'm not "mature"

no I'm not upset with you. more disappointed. all of your posts are very immature and condeseding. adults who like to debate important issues don't do that. get it?

inmytree wrote:

I agreed wright/hagee are not "similar" <---your original assertion

you now agree with me? since when?

inmytree wrote:

C) you're attempting to present yourself as an "adult" yet act like a scolded child

me calling you out being acting like a child has nothing to do with me acting like anything.

inmytree wrote:

D) now you're saying wright/hagee are similar but not similar

yes, and I CLEARLY stated why.

inmytree wrote:

I guess attending church for 20 years = bad

who said this?

inmytree wrote:

Pandering to a hate-monger after the fact, knowing damn well that person is a hate-monger = good

who said this?

inmytree wrote:

listen...at this time and date, wright's a nut...plain and simple...

so now that obama has disowned him, you hop on board. typical.

inmytree wrote:

my point is, you really never "know" someone...but when you do "know" someone and embrace them for votes, that not good...

scary and proves my point even further about bais around here. obama never really knew what wright was all about huh? wow.

inmytree

lazymoon13 wrote:

no I'm not upset with you. more disappointed. all of your posts are very immature and condeseding. adults who like to debate important issues don't do that. get it?

you now agree with me? since when?

me calling you out being acting like a child has nothing to do with me acting like anything.

yes, and I CLEARLY stated why.

who said this?

who said this?

so now that obama has disowned him, you hop on board. typical.


scary and proves my point even further about bais around here. obama never really knew what wright was all about huh? wow.

typical...

so many words and so little content...

maybe if you weren't so sensitive, your comprehension would be better...;)

lazymoon13

inmytree wrote:

typical...

so many words and so little content...

maybe if you weren't so sensitive, your comprehension would be better...;)

you've proved you maturity level time and time again. grow up man. or pick some new topics to debate. you seem to be in a little over your head on this section.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

inmytree wrote:

maybe if you weren't so sensitive, your comprehension would be better...;)

inmytree

lazymoon13 wrote:

you've proved you maturity level time and time again. grow up man. or pick some new topics to debate. you seem to be in a little over your head on this section.

thanks for the tip....

ha ha ha....:D

and the laugh....

chromiam

What a difference 6 weeks makes....

Abookamongstthemany

inmytree wrote:

really...?

I think you're making things up...

while some may see the support Obama receives as "bias", I see it as "a majority of people here support Obama"...

which creates a bias whenever people bring him up. You guys are not objective in your posts concerning him at all.

inmytree

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

which creates a bias whenever people bring him up. You guys are not objective in your posts concerning him at all.

I take umbrage with this remark...


perhaps the pot is calling the kettle black....hmmmmm....;)

Abookamongstthemany

inmytree wrote:

I take umbrage with this remark...


perhaps the pot is calling the kettle black....hmmmmm....;)

Really? How so?

I don't agree with the everything Nader has done. I don't like the stocks he's owned but I, myself, once had a 401k through fidelity and didn't check to see what it was going to. I already have explained my thoughts on unions inside non-profits and know that is a whole different dynamic that for profit employers. I posted some literature on the subject which no one responded to. Also, the two people who were supposedly organizing this union were fired by Nader for running a piece that he hadn't approved of yet...then all thisabout the union busting came out....it's not so clear cut. Plus Nader has given other of his organizations permission to start unions....so that point is moot. See, I actually look into the things people bring up and take them into consideration instead of giving unwavering support.

That being said Nader's platform best represents my own views. His work as a
consumer advocate and defender of the people has been more than impressive. People have drafted him to run for president based on his outstanding accomplishments. He doesn't have all these questionable instances where he has supported things like the war, nuclear power or financial institutes guilty of predatory lending.

His platform looks soooo much better to me compared to the other 3 candidates or any of the other 3rd parties...thus why he gets my support. And he gets my time as a volunteer and my voice whenever I speak highly of him because he deserves it and has proven to me that he is the kind of leader I'd like to get behind and I see him doing much more than just talking. He is a man who has proven time and time again that he wants to get things done. And against the odds, he has gotten things done....made some REAL change. It's there for anyone to read and become aware of.


These are most of my problems with Obama...not all of them, though. And from where I'm standing they are much more important than the things anyone here has brought up about Ralph Nader...no comparison:

http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5409414&postcount=21

Where have I been biased without giving a reason or explanation so I can address it now?

slightofjeff

SilverSeed wrote:

Thanks for grasping the question. Here: How could the superdelegates go against the will of the people that make up the democratic party?

Because the primary process is so spread out it's a fucking joke. I guarantee there are people who voted for Obama in Iowa 16 years ago or however long it was that the primaries started, who wish they hadn't after this shit came to light.

I'm not saying they'd be right to give the nomination to Hillary, but what if Obama is unelectable? What if tomorrow he gets caught raping kids at that polygamist compound? Are the superdelegates STILL bound to give Obama the nomination, even though a bunch of people were forced to decide before they found out Obama was a kid rapist?

Obviously, this is an exaggerated hypothetical, and I'm not even saying I believe the superdelegates SHOULD give the nomination to Hillary. I'm just saying the system is pretty screwed up ...

inmytree

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Really? How so?

I don't agree with the everything Nader has done. I don't like the stocks he's owned but I, myself, once had a 401k through fidelity and didn't check to see what it was going to. I already have explained my thoughts on unions inside non-profits and know that is a whole different dynamic that for profit employers. I posted some literature on the subject which no one responded to. Also, the two people who were supposedly organizing this union were fired by Nader for running a piece that he hadn't approved of yet...then all thisabout the union busting came out....it's not so clear cut. Plus Nader has given other of his organizations permission to start unions....so that point is moot. See, I actually look into the things people bring up and take them into consideration instead of giving unwavering support.

That being said Nader's platform best represents my own views. His work as a
consumer advocate and defender of the people has been more than impressive. People have drafted him to run for president based on his outstanding accomplishments. He doesn't have all these questionable instances where he has supported things like the war, nuclear power or financial institutes guilty of predatory lending.

His platform looks soooo much better to me compared to the other 3 candidates or any of the other 3rd parties...thus why he gets my support. And he gets my time as a volunteer and my voice whenever I speak highly of him because he deserves it and has proven to me that he is the kind of leader I'd like to get behind and I see him doing much more than just talking. He is a man who has proven time and time again that he wants to get things done. And against the odds, he has gotten things done....made some REAL change. It's there for anyone to read and become aware of.


These are most of my problems with Obama...not all of them, though. And from where I'm standing they are much more important than the things anyone here has brought up about Ralph Nader...no comparison:

http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5409414&postcount=21

Where have I been biased without giving a reason or explanation so I can address it now?

here we go again..

you say: "You guys are not objective in your posts concerning him at all"

which implies that everyone here, including me, is drinking Obama-aid and blindly following him...

I say: that's not the case with everyone...you tend to paint everyone who supports obama with the same brush...you use the phase "you guys" a lot...

respectfully, I take issue with that...that's all...

It just so happens, for me personally, I feel Obama is a better choice over Clinton, McCain, and Nader....and yes, he has some flaws...and yes, he's not perfect...but, for me, he's the best option, in my view, right now...