Quantcast The Red and Black
College Media Network

The Red and Black

Search the Archives

 

Obama not fit to lead the United States

Abstract:
As I talk to my more liberal friends and fellow students, they mention how excited they are to vote for Barack Obama. Each time I ask them why they are voting for him, the response includes something about a need for change in D.C., how exciting he is or what great policies he has....

  • Displaying 1 - 42 of 42

J Anne Baker

posted 10/14/08 @ 5:51 AM EST

Mr. Wilson wrote: "With only eight years in the Illinois Senate and four years in the U.S. Senate, what has Obama achieved that voters can be proud of?"

Let's put that into perspective with Sen. McCain: 26 years in Congress AND the Senate -- six times as long, able to get on veyrpowerfulcommttees -- but has Sen.McCain made that much impact, in comparison? Did he rise to the top in four years, to become a leader? Sen. Obama is a once-in-a-generation leader whose rise to the top is not accidental. He is able to persuade, to lead, to inspire. And because he has NOT been in the Senate as long as Mcain, he's not tied down to old promises, old ways of thinking. Rad his books and you discover a keen mind, a man willing to deprive himself of wealth to help others, a man smart enough to assemble a fine team of advisors, whose campaign has been run as steadily and finely as he will go on t manage the country. In contrast, mccain flails around, has had to fire many of his campaign advisors, and has made a sorry spectacle of himself by selecting a wholly incompentant running-mate who actually declared she had been found innocent of any misconduct, including ethical standards--a blatant lie. She abused her power and is half a heartbeat from being president. Sen. McCain is a hero. That does not make him a great leader. I'm 65, a white English teacher who lived in Arizona. Sen. McCain recently addressed a crowd as "my fellow prisoners." A good man, McCain let his advisors and his clueless pitbull in heels ruin his reputation by inciting violence. We do need a steady hand on the tiller -- and that steadiness is not in Mccain's hand. Sen. Obama has shown patience under fire that is remarkable. God bless America, and God bless those who do not allow prejudice to color their choice this November. Go past the hate and lies. I used to be a republican, until I lived in Arizona.
Post a reply to this comment

lattesolare

posted 10/14/08 @ 6:57 AM EST

Did you mean the erratic Mc Fellow Prisoner not fit to lead the United States?
Post a reply to this comment

Let's take a look..

posted 10/14/08 @ 7:18 AM EST

"With only eight years in the Illinois Senate and four years in the U.S. Senate, what has Obama achieved that voters can be proud of?"

I'd be careful in drawing attention to how many years someone has been serving in politics if you wish to make a point about inexperience. As you well know, it is MUCH easier to make that argument about Mrs. Palin, and that argument is much more compelling. Just because Palin or McCain say the word "maverick" doesn't mean it's true. To me, every time I hear one of them say that, it sounds empty, much like "change" from Obama sounds empty to you.

"Leadership is about taking tough stands, even if it hurts you politically in the future. That means explaining what your views are on controversial issues."

Good statement, and very true. McCain, by himself, would not be the worst choice for our country (don't get me wrong, I believe Obama is a better choice any day, but read on). His record, for the most part, shows him to be fairly moderate and I believe that the answer 9 times out of 10 is in the middle, not to the far left OR the far right. BUT (and here's the kicker) when McCain chose Palin to 1) naively shore-up the Clinton women voters and 2) rightly so shore-up the Conservative base, any inkling I might have had to be okay with McCain in the White House flew right out the window. Yes, we do not vote for the #2 on the ticket, but this case is a little different. McCain has had cancer before, and not just once, and is up in his years. The possibility of his 2nd in command becoming 1st is not a stretch of the imagination. So back to my point, I see why you say that leadership is about taking tough stands, even if it hurts you politically in the future. Perhaps you say this because you see how McCain's stances on things are hurting him now? The newest polls show Obama up anywhere from 5-7 points. If you really are a believer in your statement, then you can appreciate that maybe McCain has upset his Conservative base in the past and (gasp) now some of them are ready for (get ready for it) Change.

And while I'm writing a novel anyway, I will just address one more point, in the form of a question: (If you're not a Republican/Conservative), please tell me exactly what is wrong with a "liberal voting record?" - Is that not what Democrats are looking for when they analyze their candidate? Come on. Obama wouldn't be running as a Democrat if he didn't have a liberal voting record. I've spoken with many of my friends and we're all a little confused as to why this point is brought up time and time again by Republicans. But I can tell you, I WANT him to have a liberal voting record. Yes, one that is a little more to the moderate end of things would also be preferred, but I do not agree with Conservative ideology, therefore I do not want to vote for someone with a right-leaning record.

Oh and, what exactly has Obama done to show his lack of courage? Just wondering. Because if we're judging courage on whether someone served in a war, that's pretty closed-minded and I'm sure many males at this school would be offended to be called a wimp just because they are getting an education rather than fighting in a war they may/may not believe in.
Post a reply to this comment

John

posted 10/14/08 @ 8:51 AM EST

Bbbuutt McCain, bbbbut McCain!!!

3 quick responses, and none of them offer anything actually in support of the messiah. And you Obama sheep are still just playing along, spouting "hope" and "change" instead of real answers.
Post a reply to this comment

richard

posted 10/14/08 @ 9:32 AM EST

Someone please tell me why two out of every three economists favors Obama.

http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12342127

Also, Obama has said he is not going to have enough money to do all this stuff right away. Do you not listen to the man? He has been honest about what are cuts and what are credits. It is all open to the public which is how WSJ found it in the first place.
Post a reply to this comment

But wait

posted 10/14/08 @ 1:28 PM EST

Originally posted by

richard

 Someone please tell me why two out of every three economists favors Obama.

http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12342127

Also, Obama has said he is not going to have enough money to do all this stuff right away. Do you not listen to the man? He has been honest about what are cuts and what are credits. It is all open to the public which is how WSJ found it in the first place.



Your website says that it is no means a scientific research, but if hundreds of Economists, including 5 nobel prize winners have signed off that Obama's tax plan is bad idea. I think I agree with that over a little internet survey.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2008/10/hundres-of-econ.html
Post a reply to this comment

Mansfield

posted 10/14/08 @ 2:57 PM EST

Originally posted by

richard

 Someone please tell me why two out of every three economists favors Obama.

http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12342127

Also, Obama has said he is not going to have enough money to do all this stuff right away. Do you not listen to the man? He has been honest about what are cuts and what are credits. It is all open to the public which is how WSJ found it in the first place.


Warren Buffett runs circles around your economists.
Post a reply to this comment

Powell

posted 10/15/08 @ 8:38 AM EST

Isn't Buffet endorsing Obama? I'm pretty sure that he is...
Post a reply to this comment

sorry

posted 1/28/09 @ 4:31 PM EST

You should actually read this article and see how skewed the poll is. Its completely democratic. Maybe if they polled ALL economists you would have a point.... but thats quite impossible if you knew statistics. Biased... I think so... definitely the wrong demographics.

Originally posted by

richard

 Someone please tell me why two out of every three economists favors Obama.

http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12342127

Also, Obama has said he is not going to have enough money to do all this stuff right away. Do you not listen to the man? He has been honest about what are cuts and what are credits. It is all open to the public which is how WSJ found it in the first place.
Post a reply to this comment

yay

posted 10/14/08 @ 9:35 AM EST

God bless you, Mr. Wilson
Post a reply to this comment

elizabeth harper

posted 10/14/08 @ 9:53 AM EST

I am Eliabeth Harper and i am 15 years old. I watch every thing I listan to every side of the story. I may not be able to spell but i can read. I would like to say even thow my vote dont count that i would vote for John because he may be old but he is wise
Post a reply to this comment

A concerned citizen

posted 10/14/08 @ 10:07 AM EST

No one has told America why McCain should be president either. I feel that if you're going to tell why Obama shouldn't be President, tell why McCain (or another candidate) should.
Post a reply to this comment

ted simmons

posted 10/14/08 @ 10:45 AM EST

I almost completely disagree with Mr. Wilson's piece, but I give him credit for producing a calm, somewhat rational argument. He ought to school some of the freaks that are shouting "terrorist" and such at McCain / Palin rallies.
Post a reply to this comment

Katy

posted 10/14/08 @ 11:27 AM EST

For many of us, the vote for Obama/Biden is not necessarily a vote for them, but a vote against giving Palin any chance of EVER becoming president. You talk about Obama's inexperience? What about hers? And yes, she's only the nominee for 2nd in command, but she would be a 72-year-old's heartbeat away from being president. This might also be fine if McCain were a young 72-year-old man, but he's not. He acts old, he comes off as old, he's been treated for cancer, and he has admitted to being computer illiterate. How can we have a president who's computer illiterate? I don't think that Obama is the second coming or anything, in fact, I might choose McCain over Obama were it not for Palin.

I also wonder how anybody can talk about increased spending when good ol' W has spent more on his senseless wars than Obama would spend on his programs. And how can you talk about tax cuts when W has cut taxes for the wealthiest 1%? Fairer taxes are needed and neither of them of them will do that. Flat-tax is the only really fair tax there is as it would tax everybody equally. The truth is that neither of these people is going to do anything drastically different than anybody has before them, so we might as well just sit back and watch it happen.
Post a reply to this comment

Shep

posted 10/14/08 @ 2:33 PM EST

Originally posted by

Katy

 For many of us, the vote for Obama/Biden is not necessarily a vote for them, but a vote against giving Palin any chance of EVER becoming president. You talk about Obama's inexperience? What about hers? And yes, she's only the nominee for 2nd in command, but she would be a 72-year-old's heartbeat away from being president. This might also be fine if McCain were a young 72-year-old man, but he's not. He acts old, he comes off as old, he's been treated for cancer, and he has admitted to being computer illiterate. How can we have a president who's computer illiterate? I don't think that Obama is the second coming or anything, in fact, I might choose McCain over Obama were it not for Palin.

I also wonder how anybody can talk about increased spending when good ol' W has spent more on his senseless wars than Obama would spend on his programs. And how can you talk about tax cuts when W has cut taxes for the wealthiest 1%? Fairer taxes are needed and neither of them of them will do that. Flat-tax is the only really fair tax there is as it would tax everybody equally. The truth is that neither of these people is going to do anything drastically different than anybody has before them, so we might as well just sit back and watch it happen.


I have a few issues with the statements you made:

1) Palin is the VP, and would therefore only become pres. should McCain die...which is no guarantee. Obama on the other hand is guaranteed to become President if he wins the election. The experience McCain has is of greater value than the risk that Palin would become Pres. Even so, she has EXECUTIVE experience, and would bring a fresh view compared to those who have LEGISLATIVE only experience.

2) Your tax comments really made me scratch my head. In our country we are taxed based on brackets. You make more you pay more. Therefore is all taxes were cut by say 10%, then the people who pay more money in taxes would receive a greater portion back (10% or $100 = $10 vs. 10% of $50 = $5). In our country the top 5% pay over 53% of the taxes (http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/incometaxandtheirs/a/whopaysmost.htm). You are begrudging them getting a bigger portion back from Uncle Sam when they are putting in a greater portion than you are.

I believe that your flat tax idea is a good theory, but would make for a poor practice. Under this plan, those who are in the lower tax brackets would be paying the same rate as those in the higher brackets on important items such as food, clothes, etc. This would cause them to have a great financial burden.

3) The "senseless" wars you speak of will always cost more than a healthcare plan. Cruise missiles cost $1 million each, which medical treatment costs a fraction of that. These "senseless" wars are expensive, in both financial and human terms, but have we been attacked since?


The purpose of our government is to provide for life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. The President can suggest whatever policy he/she desires, but it is up to the house and the senate to pass them. The President does have direct power over our military, and I would feel infinitely more comfortable with McCain's finger on the button than Obama.
Post a reply to this comment

Busted

posted 10/14/08 @ 11:50 PM EST

Originally posted by

Katy

 For many of us, the vote for Obama/Biden is not necessarily a vote for them, but a vote against giving Palin any chance of EVER becoming president. You talk about Obama's inexperience? What about hers? And yes, she's only the nominee for 2nd in command, but she would be a 72-year-old's heartbeat away from being president. This might also be fine if McCain were a young 72-year-old man, but he's not. He acts old, he comes off as old, he's been treated for cancer, and he has admitted to being computer illiterate. How can we have a president who's computer illiterate? I don't think that Obama is the second coming or anything, in fact, I might choose McCain over Obama were it not for Palin.

I also wonder how anybody can talk about increased spending when good ol' W has spent more on his senseless wars than Obama would spend on his programs. And how can you talk about tax cuts when W has cut taxes for the wealthiest 1%? Fairer taxes are needed and neither of them of them will do that. Flat-tax is the only really fair tax there is as it would tax everybody equally. The truth is that neither of these people is going to do anything drastically different than anybody has before them, so we might as well just sit back and watch it happen.


***Slow Clap***

I could not agree with you more. I was a toss-up vote between McCain and Obama, until Palin was announced as VP. In fact, I was planning to vote for Barr, but now I am dead set on Obama.

Nice choice Palin was, huh? Probably cost the election.
Post a reply to this comment

That Guy

posted 10/14/08 @ 12:00 PM EST

I love how you point out that we can't afford Obama's tax cuts, but McCain's cuts would cut tax revenue more than Obama's--AND McCain has already come up with one multi-billion dollar plan to buy bad mortgages (something that should drive anyone with any sense about economics up a wall). Frankly, I'm not voting for Obama as much as I am voting against McCain--anyone who has spent 26 years in the Senate and is still functionally retarded about almost every public policy issue does not deserve to lead our nation.
Post a reply to this comment

Dapper Dan

posted 10/14/08 @ 12:35 PM EST

Hey! It's that virgin again! It's that guy who talked about abstinence-only education being the only way to teach sex-ed.

VIRGIN! Have you ever held a job to know what it was not like to suck on mama's teet?
Post a reply to this comment

enough already

posted 10/14/08 @ 12:54 PM EST

Dear Red and Black,

The more of Greg Wilson's work I read, the more I am convinced that he is a complete idiot, constantly spouting off the same right-wing rhetoric that his parents were feeding him just months ago before he moved to the "big city" and started his university education. If you would like to be taken seriously as a purveyor of news, it might be a good idea to have your columnists who opine on the election be old enough to have actually voted in one. Greg, the "experience" horse has already been beaten to death, and the only people who really seem to care are people like you who can't really think of any other reason to hate Obama. There is a huge difference between experience and qualification. While Obama may lack the experience of being a prisoner of war (how that would qualify one to govern I am still unsure) or a governor (of a populous smaller than Gwinnett County), I fail to see how that should cut short the incredible qualifications that this man has.

We've tried electing the kind of president that "you feel like you could have a beer with," and we can all see where that has gotten us. Let's face it...that office was not intended for regular men. In a country of 300 million, we have one president. Seems to me like we should be actively looking for the best of the best, not a personality or skin color that you can agree with.
Post a reply to this comment

Tre

posted 10/14/08 @ 1:00 PM EST

Originally posted by

enough already

 Dear Red and Black,

The more of Greg Wilson's work I read, the more I am convinced that he is a complete idiot, constantly spouting off the same right-wing rhetoric that his parents were feeding him just months ago before he moved to the "big city" and started his university education. If you would like to be taken seriously as a purveyor of news, it might be a good idea to have your columnists who opine on the election be old enough to have actually voted in one. Greg, the "experience" horse has already been beaten to death, and the only people who really seem to care are people like you who can't really think of any other reason to hate Obama. There is a huge difference between experience and qualification. While Obama may lack the experience of being a prisoner of war (how that would qualify one to govern I am still unsure) or a governor (of a populous smaller than Gwinnett County), I fail to see how that should cut short the incredible qualifications that this man has.

We've tried electing the kind of president that "you feel like you could have a beer with," and we can all see where that has gotten us. Let's face it...that office was not intended for regular men. In a country of 300 million, we have one president. Seems to me like we should be actively looking for the best of the best, not a personality or skin color that you can agree with.


If being a prisoner makes you qualified, hell, Charles Manson has been in prison for DECADES now.
Post a reply to this comment

come on

posted 10/15/08 @ 1:42 AM EST

Originally posted by

enough already

 Dear Red and Black,

The more of Greg Wilson's work I read, the more I am convinced that he is a complete idiot, constantly spouting off the same right-wing rhetoric that his parents were feeding him just months ago before he moved to the "big city" and started his university education. If you would like to be taken seriously as a purveyor of news, it might be a good idea to have your columnists who opine on the election be old enough to have actually voted in one. Greg, the "experience" horse has already been beaten to death, and the only people who really seem to care are people like you who can't really think of any other reason to hate Obama. There is a huge difference between experience and qualification. While Obama may lack the experience of being a prisoner of war (how that would qualify one to govern I am still unsure) or a governor (of a populous smaller than Gwinnett County), I fail to see how that should cut short the incredible qualifications that this man has.

We've tried electing the kind of president that "you feel like you could have a beer with," and we can all see where that has gotten us. Let's face it...that office was not intended for regular men. In a country of 300 million, we have one president. Seems to me like we should be actively looking for the best of the best, not a personality or skin color that you can agree with.



Calling people idiots doesn't give you credibility. Way to ruin your somewhat decent argument! His articles are WAY better researched and presented than the radical "I hate Palin" crap appearing in the opinions section twice a week.
Post a reply to this comment

John Boy

posted 10/14/08 @ 12:59 PM EST

This is for everyone who is voting for Socialism (whether you realize or not). I just graduated in May from the University and I still sit here with no job. And now, I'm playing the waiting game. If America chooses Socialism, I will refrain from putting any real efforts to my job search and just mooch of every single one of you and let your hard work go to putting me in a house and food on my table and paying all of my healthcare costs (since some people think that those are inalienable rights of man). While I can just sit at home and watch TV and all you Socialists work and work and work. I just wanted to thank y'all for giving me no incentive to make anything of myself. I'm loving this cradle to the grave coverage that America thinks it wants. Wow, you people are really working for a better America. God, I love mooching off people. Especially those who work so hard to barely make ends and then are taxed up the wazoo so people who I aspire to be like don't have to hold a decent job and can just let big brother pay for everything. That's the American Dream, right?
Post a reply to this comment

Daryl

posted 10/14/08 @ 1:03 PM EST

Originally posted by

John Boy

 This is for everyone who is voting for Socialism (whether you realize or not). I just graduated in May from the University and I still sit here with no job. And now, I'm playing the waiting game. If America chooses Socialism, I will refrain from putting any real efforts to my job search and just mooch of every single one of you and let your hard work go to putting me in a house and food on my table and paying all of my healthcare costs (since some people think that those are inalienable rights of man). While I can just sit at home and watch TV and all you Socialists work and work and work. I just wanted to thank y'all for giving me no incentive to make anything of myself. I'm loving this cradle to the grave coverage that America thinks it wants. Wow, you people are really working for a better America. God, I love mooching off people. Especially those who work so hard to barely make ends and then are taxed up the wazoo so people who I aspire to be like don't have to hold a decent job and can just let big brother pay for everything. That's the American Dream, right?


You don't have a job cause you're a lazy fuck! Fuck you, turd basket!
Post a reply to this comment

K

posted 10/14/08 @ 8:44 PM EST

Originally posted by

John Boy

 This is for everyone who is voting for Socialism (whether you realize or not). I just graduated in May from the University and I still sit here with no job. And now, I'm playing the waiting game. If America chooses Socialism, I will refrain from putting any real efforts to my job search and just mooch of every single one of you and let your hard work go to putting me in a house and food on my table and paying all of my healthcare costs (since some people think that those are inalienable rights of man). While I can just sit at home and watch TV and all you Socialists work and work and work. I just wanted to thank y'all for giving me no incentive to make anything of myself. I'm loving this cradle to the grave coverage that America thinks it wants. Wow, you people are really working for a better America. God, I love mooching off people. Especially those who work so hard to barely make ends and then are taxed up the wazoo so people who I aspire to be like don't have to hold a decent job and can just let big brother pay for everything. That's the American Dream, right?


Go ahead and try it. It will be a nice surprise when you realize that you can't be on welfare if you're unemployed. You have to work or go to school fulltime. Welfare can of course be abused, but new government laws have started to crack down on it.

Furthermore, welfare technically includes scholarships, so if you were on HOPE at all then you've contributed to the welfare state. It's a good thing we all worked to help you get through school for free just so you could bitch about it.
Post a reply to this comment

Evan Chambers

posted 10/14/08 @ 1:08 PM EST

I'm trying to decide whose columns offend me more.

Zaid normally comes off a whiny, unapologetic, and incredibly offended by the world around him. I get the feeling that he doesn't care that 95% of Red and Black readers think he's a douchenozzle.

But Greg. Greg is a different animal. He doesn't get the exposure of a weekly column, so he has to make up for it by sounding extra faggadocious when he gets an opportunity to write. As a result, he comes off as acting as if he's morally and intellectually superior. Sadly for him, he's not. His inability to process two sides of an argument shows he's intellectually slower than a good majority of students on this campus.

Everytime he writes he gets his chastity belt all bunched up and starts spouting off what he read in Sean Hannity's latest newsletter.


I mean come on, the chuckledouche looks like a retarded version of Winnie the Pooh.
Post a reply to this comment

buzzkill

posted 10/14/08 @ 3:06 PM EST

Originally posted by

Evan Chambers
I mean come on, the chuckledouche looks like a retarded version of Winnie the Pooh.


haha, chuckledouche.
Post a reply to this comment

Rick

posted 10/14/08 @ 2:30 PM EST

The mere mention of "he admitted his employer health care mandate would cost at least $150 billion' shows that you are making an effort to spin figures into support for a particular candidate. No matter who leads, the money will be spent because government and support for the citizens of this country is not cheap! The issue is not the price tag of running a country, but which candidate will spend the money most wisely. Obama might be "inexperienced", but this could imply that he is not schooled in the "old ways" of government. Brainstorming new approaches and new ideas certainly can't hurt us! I say that we should give him a chance; things can't get much worse than they were the past seven years!
Post a reply to this comment

Mansfield

posted 10/14/08 @ 2:47 PM EST

The last 8 years.

Oh, and Sarah Palin.
Post a reply to this comment

Anon

posted 10/14/08 @ 3:43 PM EST

Amen to this article. I f-ing hate obama!
Post a reply to this comment

Class of '98

posted 10/14/08 @ 3:58 PM EST

Good article.

Unfortunately, those who typically vote Democrat are not intelligent enough to distinguish between rhetoric and track record.

Facts don't matter to them. "Change" is all they want to hear and all they need to hear. Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
Post a reply to this comment

K

posted 10/14/08 @ 8:50 PM EST

Originally posted by

Class of '98

 Good article.

Unfortunately, those who typically vote Democrat are not intelligent enough to distinguish between rhetoric and track record.

Facts don't matter to them. "Change" is all they want to hear and all they need to hear. Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.


I don't see that at all at this university. Have you ever been to a meeting of Young Dems? They're well informed on the issues. They know where Obama stands and agree with his positions. Yes, he is great at making speeches and says change a lot - but honestly, why would anyone vote for him based on that? It's his positions they agree with and if he's charismatic and a good speaker then that's just an added bonus. I'm sick of people dismissing an entire generation of voters and thinking we are incapable of finding out what a politician believes in and what his plans are for his administration. To call all Democrats sheep is just such a gross generalization that has no support whatsoever.

And I can't believe you quoted a Pussycat Dolls song as your closer.
Post a reply to this comment

Disgusted

posted 10/14/08 @ 4:01 PM EST

God, you all make me sick.
I literally felt nauseous reading all of this back and forth bullshit, but kept on reading because I was fascinated to see what some idiot would say next.

I'm not going to say who I'm voting for, but God Bless. People who reply, whether for McCain or Obama are just making themselves look like jackasses.

Grow up already and leave people be to make and form their own opinions!
Post a reply to this comment

Class of '98

posted 10/14/08 @ 4:05 PM EST

RICK:

Things can't get much worse than the last 7 years? Have we been attacked by terrorists? Unemployment in this country is among the lowest in the world (MUCH lower than Europe), and believe it or not, the economy has boomed for the last decade, until 3 weeks ago.

Things can't get much worse? Things can get MUCH, MUCH worse my friend.
Post a reply to this comment

Jay

posted 10/14/08 @ 8:06 PM EST

Originally posted by

Class of '98

 RICK:

Things can't get much worse than the last 7 years? Have we been attacked by terrorists? Unemployment in this country is among the lowest in the world (MUCH lower than Europe), and believe it or not, the economy has boomed for the last decade, until 3 weeks ago.

Things can't get much worse? Things can get MUCH, MUCH worse my friend.


Uhh ... the economy most certainly did NOT "boom" in this past decade. Are you crazy?
Post a reply to this comment

K

posted 10/14/08 @ 8:55 PM EST

Originally posted by

Class of '98

 RICK:

Things can't get much worse than the last 7 years? Have we been attacked by terrorists? Unemployment in this country is among the lowest in the world (MUCH lower than Europe), and believe it or not, the economy has boomed for the last decade, until 3 weeks ago.

Things can't get much worse? Things can get MUCH, MUCH worse my friend.


In Europe, they get insane benefits when on unemployment so that rate doesn't reflect the poverty and stigma that is attached to poverty in the U.S. People there can afford to take time off to find a new job, not like here. Just because we haven't been attacked doesn't mean a single thing. We weren't from 1993-2001, but would you say the Clinton administration was perfect? We are creating new enemies everyday in the Middle East by continuing the war and anti-U.S. sentiment is rising. Things can ALWAYS get worse, but that doesn't mean that the Bush administration was a success. Proof of this is our public school system is devastated by No Child Left Behind. This is one of the principal failures of his administration.
Post a reply to this comment

jeremiah

posted 10/14/08 @ 7:23 PM EST

Obama has been in office for almost twenty years and Illianois has lower taxes than almost any other state! Bush made 9/11 happen on purpose for political gain so we could invade iraq and mccain AGREED with him. its a proven fact PLEASE check your facts beofore voting for another DUMB REPUBLICAN!
Post a reply to this comment

Normal person

posted 10/14/08 @ 11:59 PM EST

Originally posted by

jeremiah

 Bush made 9/11 happen on purpose for political gain so we could invade iraq and mccain AGREED with him. its a proven fact PLEASE check your facts beofore voting for another DUMB REPUBLICAN!


Did you really just say that??
Wow, there is no hope for some people...
Post a reply to this comment

Mike

posted 10/15/08 @ 1:43 PM EST

I can't believe some of the complete fabrications I find on here. Bush made 9/11? Did Rosie read the R&B? Come on students, open your eyes. Get off the mantra of "change" and look at a record. At this point in the campaign, both candidates usually come towards the middle to attract the independents (as they are the ones that usually swing an election). Judging by the records however, McCain is more aligned with this country (center-right) when compared to Obama's far-left liberal voting record. If you happen to be one of those far-left loons, then by all means vote for him. I just hope that the 80% of this college campus that is infatuated with "hope" "change" and public speaking credentials can open their eyes long enough to see that this election is serious and needs a true, distinguished, experienced leader with a proven track record. In other words, don't throw the country to the curb by voting for Obama. I can only begin to tell you how he will kill the economy by raising taxes, killing job growth and fueling protectionism. I mean these ALWAYS work to spur growth...For those Obama supporters that don't understand that, ECON 2105 and 2106 are offered here, sign up. Please.
Post a reply to this comment

graham

posted 11/05/08 @ 11:55 AM EST

Ok im not a racist, but what has Obama done to deserve this presidence? The answer is nothing at all, he has no idea what hes getting himself into with this. The only reason that he won was because some poor welfare blacks decided to vote for the black guy for once in there life. I can promise you that blacks who have never voted in there life voted this election just because of race. And i can tell you now that there not going to like him in the end because of all his dumb ass ideas about raiseing taxes and getting out of the middle east. And the silly whites that voted for him are just the dumb people of america that have no idea what there doing and live life to piss others off and Obama piss's PLENTY OFF!!!!!!!!!!
Post a reply to this comment

Tired of ignorant sore losers

posted 11/05/08 @ 5:44 PM EST

Originally posted by

graham

 The only reason that he won was because some poor welfare blacks decided to vote for the black guy for once in there life. I can promise you that blacks who have never voted in there life voted this election just because of race. And i can tell you now that there not going to like him in the end because of all his dumb ass ideas about raiseing taxes and getting out of the middle east. And the silly whites that voted for him are just the dumb people of america that have no idea what there doing and live life to piss others off and Obama piss's PLENTY OFF!!!!!!!!!!



I can't believe how ignorant your post is. People of all different ethnicities came out to vote more than ever before in this election. The race card is not applicable for you. Sure there are people who voted for him because he is black. There are also people who didn't vote for him or voted McCain because they didn't want to see a black man in office. America, unfortuanately, is NOT colorblind (yet). And as for your "silly whites" comment, are you serious? Just because they voted for Obama, a black man, they must have done it purely out of the enjoyment of pissing people off? Get real.


I am okay with voters who are disappointed with the outcome of this election because they thought McCain was the better choice. But this sheet IGNORANCE and unsupported HATRED makes you look ridiculous.

I am so glad that Obama has won this election despite ill-spirited people like yourself.
Post a reply to this comment

lscott70

posted 11/05/08 @ 12:22 PM EST

Now wait a minute I thought It was Un_American to poor mouth the president. Oops my bad, I've just been told only that law was amended November 4, 2008.
Post a reply to this comment

DJ Johnny D

posted 11/05/08 @ 3:36 PM EST

Oh Greg, if you can't help but be so fat, you should at least try to be more jolly!
Post a reply to this comment
  • Displaying 1 - 42 of 42

Post Your Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.

 

 

Advertisement

Poll

Hmm, what to make of Kentucky vs. Georgia:
Submit Vote

View Results



Advertisement