Obama OR Clinton? (with the poll!)

[Jennifer5]

If anyone feels like this is stepping on another thread to much let me know and I'll figure out how to make it go away. :)

Out of these two, who would you choose? Regardless of which party you support.

[tpdncr4christ]

haha... it doesn't work well when only one person is voting.

[Jennifer5]

Sorry, my bad. :p

[BruceChris]

I got to the site more than 3 hours early, and the line was already more than two blocks long.

Hillary may have developed a reputation as a street fighter now and then, but at least she is OUR street fighter. Is it just my imagination, or has Obama developed such a clean image because he really couldn't be a street fighter, when we really need one?

Realpolitik, Bruce Chris

[Pablo Rafael]

I run around with a mainly Republican crowd. I have to say that I have heard more Republicans say they would like to vote for Barak Obama than for John McCain or Mitt Romney. I have never heard a Republican say they would vote for Clinton.

[Jennifer5]

I run around with a mainly Republican crowd. I have to say that I have heard more Republicans say they would like to vote for Barak Obama than for John McCain or Mitt Romney. I have never heard a Republican say they would vote for Clinton.
Yeah, I find that incredibly interesting. I know a lot of Republicans who have him as their first choice as well.

I'm excited to see what happens...

[pnggrad79]

I think the country still has a bad taste in its mouth about anything Clinton. I know there are die hard Democrats out there who thought Bill hung the moon, but I personally thought he was a grandstander. Plus I think he stabbed gay people in the back metaphorically speaking. Maybe people are just reticent to go with another Clinton when the first one is still fresh in our minds.

[Jennifer5]

I think the country still has a bad taste in its mouth about anything Clinton. I know there are die hard Democrats out there who thought Bill hung the moon, but I personally thought he was a grandstander. Plus I think he stabbed gay people in the back metaphorically speaking. Maybe people are just reticent to go with another Clinton when the first one is still fresh in our minds.

But really, wasn't he a big improvement from Bush Sr.?

That and I think that Hilary has been trying to make it pretty clear that things will be different, she stated that she was glad to have her family's support but she's running HER campaign and things are going to be her way, not her husbands....


But I do think that Obama is coming from a completely new place and that could bring incredible hope for our country. I think that the fact that so many republicians also really like him gives him a better chance and that that may mean that he has a better chance on being able to unite the country. I feel like he has very clear goals and that he has a clear plan of how to reach them.

I don't think that Clinton would hurt us, but I'm not sure that she could accomplish all that Obama could.

But one of the most important things, is that this year I feel like people will be choosing between two (or more) people that they actually like and agree with:agree:, unlike last election when many felt like they were having to choose the lesser of two evils. :disagree:

[Vanessa White]

I mean, I find qualities I like in both candidates, knowing in my heart that eventually I would need to choose one of them, since my candidate John Edwards bowed out. And from what I read on gay.com today, there are several of Edwards' gay strategists that are now supporting Obama. I voted on this survey for him, and will support him it looks like. I feel his passion more, real or imagined.

[BruceChris]

I was at Augsburg Sunday to see and hear Hillary's speech, and I saw a lot of strong and independent women that were there for the same reason. And it goes without saying that many of them were not straight.

I like her, I trust her, and I believe in her.

To be able to install tomorrow's government, you have to be able do it with the tools of today's politics. I know that Hillary can do this better than Barack. If Hillary gets a reputation as a street fighter in the process, I say good for her.

In 2016, Barack could run. He would still be younger then than Hillary is now.

Each has said that there is and should be a place for the other to serve in their administration. If one chose the other as their vice president, and they swapped places every 4 years, we could keep this up until 2024 ! (And Bill would get Soooooo jealous, I mean, Mad As Hell)

Well, a fella can dream, can't he?

P&L, BC

[Jennifer5]

I agree, both of them together would be the ideal...

I like Edwards, Clinton, and Obama... I think I'd be happy with any two that ended up there. :)

[tdogg]

I run around with a mainly Republican crowd. I have to say that I have heard more Republicans say they would like to vote for Barak Obama than for John McCain or Mitt Romney. I have never heard a Republican say they would vote for Clinton.

Ann Coulter says she would vote for Hillary over John McCain...it was slightly scary...since I'm supporting Hillary Clinton...:eek:

[BrianB]

I run around with a mainly Republican crowd. I have to say that I have heard more Republicans say they would like to vote for Barak Obama than for John McCain or Mitt Romney. I have never heard a Republican say they would vote for Clinton.

I never voted for McCain as a republican and I'm not about to start now. He panders way too much. Hillary's ideas for healthcare just scare me. Obama looks like my best choice of the front-runners.

[ladyinred]

I initially went with Hillary but would vote for Obama if he were able to win.I don't think we could lose with him either. He is promising.

[ladyinred]

The only thing I have against the republican contenders(not republican voters) They are too affiliated with the religious right. I don't believe that they can make things better. If we have another 4 years with one of their's I'd hate to see what would happen. Now if you had a repuplican contender like Ron Paul who had a possibility to win ,I might consider him.. There is no way I would give the religious right, one ounce of my support ,just because I think they are wrong, wrong ,wrong for America...

[Daniel]

http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid52256.asp

He's not out yet to his parents.....but it sounds like that is going to happen very soon.....

[Steven E. Webster]

Friends,

I voted for Obama in the Wisconsin primary today.

What I like about Obama--his membership in the mostly African-American UCC Church in Chicago. His work as a community organizer. He's not a baby-boomer (even though I am). I really think he can bring people together.

What I don't like about the Clintons: Don't Ask Don't Tell, DOMA, welfare "reform," NAFTA. I really, really had my hopes up about Health Care Reform the first time around--and Hillary & Bill blew it! I think she's capable of blowing it again. I don't think experience is the smart thing for Hillary to run on.

Steven Webster

[tpdncr4christ]

My only large reservation about Hillary is that if she is elected, that would mean that for the last twenty years the same two families would be ruling the country. I don't really like that... but I love her! :lol:

[Daniel]

http://www.towleroad.com/2008/02/exclusive-obama.html

So Senator Obama is placing ads in gay newspapers. My message to him.

Mr. Senator Obama,

Dignity and Respect is wonderful. Thanks. But I want more than that. I want Gay Marriage and I don't want DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell.

What are you going to do about these things? Because my very person is being disrespected by these matters. I've heard you say you are against Gay Marriage. So why are you hinting in this ad that we have a long way to go? Go where? I want Rights, not a road sign.

Sincerely yours,

Daniel at the Soulforce Forum


Are these papers going to simply take the cash and not hold this candidate's feet to the fire on these issues? And let's be clear, the other candidate is not offering much to our community either.

We need to hold these candidates accountable and not just accept the scraps they throw our way. It's not enough.

[Jennifer5]

http://www.towleroad.com/2008/02/exclusive-obama.html

So Senator Obama is placing ads in gay newspapers. My message to him.

Mr. Senator Obama,

Dignity and Respect is wonderful. Thanks. But I want more than that. I want Gay Marriage and I don't want DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell.

What are you going to do about these things? Because my very person is being disrespected by these matters. I've heard you say you are against Gay Marriage. So why are you hinting in this ad that we have a long way to go? Go where? I want Rights, not a road sign.

Sincerely yours,

Daniel at the Soulforce Forum


Are these papers going to simply take the cash and not hold this candidate's feet to the fire on these issues? And let's be clear, the other candidate is not offering much to our community either.

We need to hold these candidates accountable and not just accept the scraps they throw our way. It's not enough.

I agree! But I'm afraid that this is not going to be a big debate question or anything. I agree with you that it would be good to get a real opinion out of one of them, but I don't know if it's going to happen.

All in all, I very glad that you're trying at least. Someone needs to do it!:love:

[tpdncr4christ]

We need to hold these candidates accountable and not just accept the scraps they throw our way. It's not enough.

They'll keep just throwing scraps until the dogs are big enough to bite back. That's when they throw the steaks. :agree:

[nmwolfboy]

Both my first and second choice dropped out of the race, so either Hillary or Barack are my third choice to begin with. That being said, i find myself leaning toward Barack, though i think both are qualified and would do a WAY better job than the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Admittedly though, GWB has set the bar pretty low, but Clinton and Obama would be great candidates even if Shrub hadn't dropped the standard.

So far as their positions on lgbt issues, there really doesn't seem to be much difference. Compare Hillary's (http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/lgbt/) position paper with Barack's (http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/lgbt.pdf).

Whoever gets the Democratic nomination will get my vote in the Fall. i just hope there are some good Democratic candidates for the NM State Legislature on the ballot. My state senator and state representative are both far right wingers who need to be replaced with solid liberal Democrats!

Pax,
scott

[Steven E. Webster]

Both my first and second choice dropped out of the race, so either Hillary or Barack are my third choice to begin with. That being said, i find myself leaning toward Barack, though i think both are qualified and would do a WAY better job than the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Admittedly though, GWB has set the bar pretty low, but Clinton and Obama would be great candidates even if Shrub hadn't dropped the standard.

So far as their positions on lgbt issues, there really doesn't seem to be much difference. Compare Hillary's (http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/lgbt/) position paper with Barack's (http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/lgbt.pdf).

Whoever gets the Democratic nomination will get my vote in the Fall. i just hope there are some good Democratic candidates for the NM State Legislature on the ballot. My state senator and state representative are both far right wingers who need to be replaced with solid liberal Democrats!

Pax,
scott

Help me out here. Does Hillary mention the repeal of DOMA. One of the beefs that I have with the Clintons is that Bill signed DOMA into law. Barak says he'll push for repeal of DOMA and Hillary doesn't mention it. Am I missing something? (Maybe Hillary's position amounts to the same thing but just doesn't mention DOMA????)

Steven Webster

[nmwolfboy]

You're right Steven. Her position paper makes no mention of any position on the repeal of DOMA. i didn't catch that when i was doing my comparison - i must have still been half asleep!

Anyone else have a reference on her position re: repeal of DOMA?

Pax :dove:
scott

[Daniel]

You're right Steven. Her position paper makes no mention of any position on the repeal of DOMA. i didn't catch that when i was doing my comparison - i must have still been half asleep!

Anyone else have a reference on her position re: repeal of DOMA?


I found this after 20 seconds....

http://www.bilerico.com/2008/01/the_doma_difference.php

If no leading candidate is going to support marriage equality, then the very least we can ask and ought to ask of a candidate is that he or she support a full repeal of DOMA, which currently stands as the biggest legislative obstacle to marriage equality. Obama and Edwards, at the very least, support a full repeal of DOMA. Clinton, on the other hand, supports a partial repeal of DOMA that would leave an important section of the bill in place, which exempts states from recognizing any same-sex relationship that is "treated as a marriage" under the laws of any other state.

Also see...

http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2007/06/19/1


Hillary Clinton softens on DOMA?

published Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., continued her path toward acceptance by the LGBT community as she shifted her stance on the Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 bill signed into law by her husband that grants states the right not to recognize same-sex marriages or civil unions performed in other states.

Clinton's change on DOMA came to light when her advisers released the text of her candidate questionnaire for the Human Rights Campaign.

Her new stance may be an attempt to establish a separate identity from that of Bill Clinton, whose presidency was somewhat of a best-of-times, worst-of-times for LGBT Americans.

While the gay community's historic role in electing President Clinton propelled us onto the national political stage, his statutory legacies to the community were, alas, the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy and DOMA.

This year, all the Democratic presidential candidates favor repealing "don't ask, don't tell," while only Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich have come out in favor of full marriage equality.

DOMA contains two provisions -- one that gives states autonomy on marriage and one that prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages.

With the precision of a neurosurgeon, Clinton cut herself free of the second plank of the law while continuing to embrace the first plank, essentially saying that she would let states decide their own destiny on marriage but leave the door open for federal recognition of same-sex unions.

"Sen. Clinton believes that each state should make its own decisions regarding marriage or civil unions, but once a state legalizes such relationships, these relationships should receive full federal recognition and benefits," Ethan Geto, Clinton's senior national adviser on LGBT issues, wrote in an email to The Advocate.

"As several states have legalized gay marriage or civil unions, Sen. Clinton has come to believe that the restrictions imposed by DOMA on federal government recognition of same-sex relationships are unfair."
The position represents a marked departure from her comments to a group of about 40 LGBT leaders in New York in October during her Senate reelection campaign, in which she stood firm on the strategic importance of DOMA in helping to defeat the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would have constitutionally denied the right of marriage to gay and lesbian couples.

"One of the strongest arguments we had against the constitutional amendment, which kept Democrats and even some Republicans from voting for it, was DOMA -- that (the Federal Marriage Amendment) was not necessary; marriage has always been the province of states," Clinton said during that meeting.

"I feel very good about the strategy we took on DOMA," she added.
While cynics may roll their eyes at "strategy," and while many LGBT activists criticized Clinton for not being more supportive during the federal marriage debate, Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, has credited her as a strategic force in defeating the amendment in 2006.

Before the vote, Clinton called Solmonese and suggested that HRC conduct polling about the issue, which ultimately showed that while support for marriage equality had risen, voters were "enraged" that Congress would spend time debating the marriage amendment rather than the Iraq war.
Based on that data, HRC advised Democratic congressional leaders to argue during the floor debates that the GOP was ignoring the most pressing issues facing the nation.

Clinton's advisers seem keen to further delineate the distinction between Hillary and Bill on gay issues. Her new position on DOMA means that she now stands opposed to the two most damning pieces of legislation that are the legacy of her husband's presidency.

"This is a further manifestation of her personal commitment to equality and fairness as her guiding principles." (Kerry Eleveld, The Advocate)

Also



http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=16508

She repeated her call for a repeal of Section 3 of DOMA, because it prohibits the federal government from recognizing decisions made by the states in terms of enacting civil unions, domestic partnerships or, in the case of Massachusetts, full marriage rights.

“I think extending federal benefits is a very important step forward,” she said. “I don’t see why a same-sex couple in California, which has a domestic partnership law, should be able to take advantage of the Family Medical Leave Act if one of them is ill, while a couple in another state without such a law cannot.

“I would like to see federal benefits extended to same-sex couples that meet certain standards of commitment regardless of the state in which they reside. Too many couples cannot share life decisions, or jointly own property or take care of one another within a recognized legal framework. I want to change that.”

As I read Hillary, her intent would be and end run around the law, rending it worthless- that is- if the section she wants repealed could be accomplished. However, it must be pointed out that it is Constitutional for a State to recognize the laws of another State (something DOMA outlaws as far as Gay Marriage is concerned). So in THAT sense, DOMA is unconstitutional! Perhaps it is only a matter of time before this matter is taken to the high court. And God forbid that it should be stacked with another conservative.

[Daniel]

http://www.towleroad.com/2008/02/barack-obama-wr.html



Open Letter from Barack Obama to the LGBT community

I'm running for President to build an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all – a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters. It's wrong to have millions of Americans living as second-class citizens in this nation. And I ask for your support in this election so that together we can bring about real change for all LGBT Americans.

Equality is a moral imperative. That's why throughout my career, I have fought to eliminate discrimination against LGBT Americans. In Illinois, I co-sponsored a fully inclusive bill that prohibited discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity, extending protection to the workplace, housing, and places of public accommodation. In the U.S. Senate, I have co-sponsored bills that would equalize tax treatment for same-sex couples and provide benefits to domestic partners of federal employees. And as president, I will place the weight of my administration behind the enactment of the Matthew Shepard Act to outlaw hate crimes and a fully inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act to outlaw workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws. I personally believe that civil unions represent the best way to secure that equal treatment. But I also believe that the federal government should not stand in the way of states that want to decide on their own how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples — whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage. Unlike Senator Clinton, I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) – a position I have held since before arriving in the U.S. Senate. While some say we should repeal only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether. Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does. I have also called for us to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and I have worked to improve the Uniting American Families Act so we can afford same-sex couples the same rights and obligations as married couples in our immigration system.

The next president must also address the HIV/AIDS epidemic. When it comes to prevention, we do not have to choose between values and science. While abstinence education should be part of any strategy, we also need to use common sense. We should have age-appropriate sex education that includes information about contraception. We should pass the JUSTICE Act to combat infection within our prison population. And we should lift the federal ban on needle exchange, which could dramatically reduce rates of infection among drug users. In addition, local governments can protect public health by distributing contraceptives.

We also need a president who's willing to confront the stigma – too often tied to homophobia – that continues to surround HIV/AIDS. I confronted this stigma directly in a speech to evangelicals at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church, and will continue to speak out as president. That is where I stand on the major issues of the day. But having the right positions on the issues is only half the battle. The other half is to win broad support for those positions. And winning broad support will require stepping outside our comfort zone. If we want to repeal DOMA, repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and implement fully inclusive laws outlawing hate crimes and discrimination in the workplace, we need to bring the message of LGBT equality to skeptical audiences as well as friendly ones – and that's what I've done throughout my career. I brought this message of inclusiveness to all of America in my keynote address at the 2004 Democratic convention. I talked about the need to fight homophobia when I announced my candidacy for President, and I have been talking about LGBT equality to a number of groups during this campaign – from local LGBT activists to rural farmers to parishioners at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, where Dr. Martin Luther King once preached.

Just as important, I have been listening to what all Americans have to say. I will never compromise on my commitment to equal rights for all LGBT Americans. But neither will I close my ears to the voices of those who still need to be convinced. That is the work we must do to move forward together. It is difficult. It is challenging. And it is necessary.

Americans are yearning for leadership that can empower us to reach for what we know is possible. I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country. To do that, we need leadership that can appeal to the best parts of the human spirit. Join with me, and I will provide that leadership. Together, we will achieve real equality for all Americans, gay and straight alike.

I've bolded what I believe to the central issues.

Or course, Senator Obama is not up on the latest news. If he was, he would know that a recent study in NJ found that Civil Unions are inadequate and create a 'separate is not equal' situation.

http://www.queerty.com/report-nj-civil-unions-equal-second-class-status-20080217/

If the Senator wins the nomination and the Oval Office, we are going to have to educate the man on this issue. His beliefs on the matter are beside the point.

He says a lot in this message- a lot of it good. That said- I hear in it him trying to have it both ways, that is, an appeal to those who are against the very things he says he affirms. Is that politics as usual? You tell me!

[antiochian]

You would think that both candidates being members of oppressed groups, they'd be all to eager to give us LBTG folks our equal rights. It really pisses me off, but heaven knows they're better choices than McCain and Suckabee.

[Steven E. Webster]

You would think that both candidates being members of oppressed groups, they'd be all to eager to give us LBTG folks our equal rights. It really pisses me off, but heaven knows they're better choices than McCain and Suckabee.

Which oppressed group is that? The Yale and Harvard alumni associations? The American Bar Association?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Steven Webster

[Jennifer5]

This gives an incredibly clear answer... towards the end of the video, the "Hope or Nope" section, Obama is asked about gay marriage...

B1MGi12RspA

[keltic63]

I guess it's official. I've just received an email here at school claiming that Obama is the Anti-Christ! :eek::rolleyes::eek::rolleyes:




Lord, help us. :pray:

[Steven E. Webster]

I guess it's official. I've just received an email here at school claiming that Obama is the Anti-Christ! :eek::rolleyes::eek::rolleyes:




Lord, help us. :pray:

Keltic,

Can you share exactly what it says? I'm curious what their reasoning is.

Steven Webster

[keltic63]

Keltic,

Can you share exactly what it says? I'm curious what their reasoning is.

Steven Webster


here is the content of the email:


Ken Blackwell - Columnist for the New York Sun

It's an amazing time to be alive in America. We're in a year of firsts in this presidential election: the first viable woman candidate; the first viable African-American candidate; and, a candidate who is the first front running freedom fighter over 70. The next president of America will be a first.

We won't truly be in an election of firsts, however, until we judge every candidate by where they stand. We won't arrive where we should be until we no longer talk about skin color or gender. Now that Barack Obama steps to the front of the Democratic field, we need to stop talking about his race, and start talking about his policies and his politics.

The reality is this: Though the Democrats will not have a nominee until August, unless Hillary Clinton drops out, Mr. Obama is now the frontrunner, and its time America takes a closer and deeper look at him.

Some pundits are calling him the next John F. Kennedy. He's not. He's the next George McGovern. And it's time people learned the facts.

Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in the entire U.S. Senate. He is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders, or Mrs. Clinton. Never in my life have I seen a presidential frontrunner whose rhetoric is so far removed from his record. Walter Mondale promised to raise our taxes, and he lost. George McGovern promised military weakness, and he lost. Michael Dukakis promised a liberal domestic agenda, and he l ost.

Yet Mr. Obama is promising all those things, and he's n ot behind in the polls. Why? Because the press has dealt with him as if he were in a beauty pageant. Mr. Obama talks about getting past party, getting past red and blue, to lead the United States of America. But let's look at the more defined strokes of who he is underneath this superficial "beauty."

Start with national security, since the president's most important duties are as commander-in-chief. Over the summer, Mr. Obama talked about invading Pakistan, a nation armed with nuclear weapons; meeting without preconditions with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who vows to destroy Israel and create another Holocaust; and Kim Jong II, who is murdering and starving his people, but emphasized that the nuclear option was off the table against terrorists - something no president has ever taken off the table since we created nuclear weapons in the 1940's. Even Democrats who have worked in national security condemned all of those remarks. Mr. Obama is a foreign -polic y novice who would put our national security at risk.

Next, consider economic policy. For all its faults, our health care system is the strongest in the world. And free trade agreements, created by Bill Clinton as well as President Bush, have made more goods more affordable so that even people of modest means can live a life that no one imagined a generation ago. Yet Mr. Obama promises to raise taxes on "the rich." How to fix Social Security? Raise taxes. How to fix Medicare? Raise taxes. Prescription drugs? Raise taxes. Free college? Raise taxes. Socialize medicine? Raise taxes. His solution to everything is to have government take it over. Big Brother on steroids, funded by your paycheck.

Finally, look at the social issues. Mr. Obama had the audacity to open a stadium rally by saying, "All praise and glory to God!" but says that Christian leaders speaking for life and marriage have "hijacked" - hijacked - Christianity. He is pro-partial bi rth ab ortion, and promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who will rule any restriction on it unconstitutional. He espouses the abortion views of Margaret Sanger, one of the early advocates of racial cleansing. His spiritual leaders endorse homosexual marriage, and he is moving in that direction. In Illinois, he refused to vote against a statewide ban - ban - on all handguns in the state. Th ese are radical left, Hollywood, and San Francis co values, not Middle America values.

The real Mr. Obama is an easy target for the general election. Mrs. Clinton is a far tougher opponent. But Mr. Obama could win if people don't start looking behind his veneer and flowery speeches. His vision of "bringing America together" means saying that those who disagree with his agenda for America are hijackers or warmongers. Uniting the country means adopting his liberal agenda and abandoning any conflicti ng beliefs.

But right now everyone is talking about how eloquent o f a sp eaker he is and - yes - they're talking about his race. Those should never be the factors on which we base our choice for president. Mr. Obama's radical agenda sets him far outside the American mainstream, to the left of Mrs. Clinton.

It's time to talk about the real Barack Obama. In an election of firsts, let's first make sure we elect the person who is qualified to be our president in a nuclear age during a global civilizational war.

Subject: Kind of scary, wouldn't you think

Remember--God is good, and is in time, on time--every time.

According to The Book of Revelations the anti-christ is:

The anti-christ will be a man, in his 40's, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him a nd he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, will destroy everything. Is it OBAMA??

I STRONGLY URGE each one of you to repost this as many times as you can! Each opportunity that you have to send it to a friend or media outlet...do it!

If you think I am crazy..I'm sorry but I refuse to take a chance on the "unknown" candidate

[kara speltz]

Oh for God's sakes, I can't believe that people are calling Obama the anti-christ!!!!!

I came to support Obama from a position of first supporting Kacinich, then when he dropped out, Edwards, and finally Obama after Edwards dropped out. I was not an avid supporter of Obama.

However, his amazing speech on race clearly won me over. My family is interracial like Obama's and I believe that his understanding of racism is right on target.

I am now a strong supporter of Obama, because I do believe that he can bring at least some change to this corporate owned country. kara

[Vanessa White]

This is very disturbing to read. :(

[Steven E. Webster]

here is the content of the email:

Keltic,

Did Ken Blackwell write the last part,too, or was that added on by an anonymouse source.

Where in the heck in the Book of Revelation or anywhere else doe the Bible say that the Anti-Christ will be in his 40's and a Muslim???

Steven Webster

[keltic63]

Keltic,

Did Ken Blackwell write the last part,too, or was that added on by an anonymouse source.

Where in the heck in the Book of Revelation or anywhere else doe the Bible say that the Anti-Christ will be in his 40's and a Muslim???

Steven Webster

in the email, it looks like Ken Blackwell wrote it, but I'm guessing that it is an addition because it looks more like email info.

You know, I'm never into trying to guess what the book of Revelation means and applying it to present day situations. I just can't believe that this is where we are going in this campaign, even if this is a "fringe lunatic" email rant......

[Steven E. Webster]

in the email, it looks like Ken Blackwell wrote it, but I'm guessing that it is an addition because it looks more like email info.

You know, I'm never into trying to guess what the book of Revelation means and applying it to present day situations. I just can't believe that this is where we are going in this campaign, even if this is a "fringe lunatic" email rant......

I think there are cynical operatives out there who think they can make things up about the Book of Revelation and fool the ignorant.

Steven

[matthewspeed]

I would vote, but not sure if I am voting for McCain or not. But if I don't vote for McCain, it would be Obama.

[kara speltz]

I would vote, but not sure if I am voting for McCain or not. But if I don't vote for McCain, it would be Obama.

OH MY GOD!!!! Are you serious?????

You would support McCain who says we could stay in Iraq another hundred years. Have you lost your mind? Four more years of Republican rule will surely bring this country down. Eight years ago we had a surplus - now we have the greatest debt in the history of our country.

The Iraq war was based on over 900 lies told to the American people by the Republicans.

I can't believe someone who says they are gay and is interested in nonviolence could make that statement.

kara

[matthewspeed]

Sorry, thats my thoughts Kara. I have decided to not get into debate about this. Just plain and simple, my choice.

[matthewspeed]

Kara,
I have been thinking about your statement. You don't seem to understand how I can feel the way I do politically and still be supportive of non violence. I hate violence. I hate war. I believe this war needs to end. That is the reason I have not made my final decision. My deciding factor is whether I feel McCain will make the right decisions concerning the war. I believe it is possible that Mc Cain would end the war a lot sooner than Bush surely would. But at the same time, I am upset at his words recently saying that if it takes 50 or 100 years to finish, we will remain in Iraq. Does that bother me? Certainly! But I also don't trust the Democrats. Pulling out too soon with out a valid plan could be just as dangerous. So, I am in a tug-of-war.

Also, I have always voted more conservatively. I am against high taxes, for smaller government, and a believer in capitalism (to an extent!)

Socially, I am also conservative in many respects. I am pro-life and always will be. These are my convictions that I hold to dearly and will not waver on. (the pro-life stance)

But here are my other concerns. My "Democrate" side, if you will.

1. Health care is in jeopardy- a solution is needed
2. Many "appointees" made by Bush need to go! We need qualified individuals, not "buddies" of the president.
3. Obviously, a new direction is needed. We need to get the "stubborn cowboy" mentality out of the office.

So I am weighing all sides. If we had another Ronald Reagan, that would be my choice, but we have not had that good of a Republican in office since Reagan was our president.

So, Kara, these are my thoughts and my convictions. I continue to weigh all facts.

[Jennifer5]

The anti-christ will be a man, in his 40's, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him a nd he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, will destroy everything.
This is just one of those statements that turns my stomach.
I love Barack's quote....

"In the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about Hope."

However, his amazing speech on race clearly won me over. My family is interracial like Obama's and I believe that his understanding of racism is right on target.
I do agree that that speech was amazing... and it did fill me with hope and joy to finally hear someone put into words, how I feel about the topic, but I've been kind of upset about many people's opposite reaction.


Socially, I am also conservative in many respects. I am pro-life and always will be. These are my convictions that I hold to dearly and will not waver on. (the pro-life stance)

But here are my other concerns. My "Democrate" side, if you will.

1. Health care is in jeopardy- a solution is needed
2. Many "appointees" made by Bush need to go! We need qualified individuals, not "buddies" of the president.
3. Obviously, a new direction is needed. We need to get the "stubborn cowboy" mentality out of the office.

So, Kara, these are my thoughts and my convictions. I continue to weigh all facts.

I'm not sharing my own political opinions here (you can easy find those for youself if you wanted to), I wanted to just comment on what you stated.

I really do admire that you clearly are not one to just vote the party line, but that you actually look at the facts.

So, my question to you would be... if you had to choose between supported 'pro-life' or health care what would it be? Does it have to be one or the other?
...because I don't think being pro-life is anything to do with politics this year and I think it's going to remain up to the individuals for a while, we don't see any laws being made regarding that. However, where we end up with health care or not, is definately an issue in this election... so, just consider that part :love:

[Steven E. Webster]

Matthew,

"Pro-life" is a loaded term. It implies that your opponents are "anti-life."

I think most people who believe that women have some right to choose in matters of reproduction are not "anti-life." They may even oppose abortion in most or even all cases.

At what point do we empower the government to step in and tell a woman that she must carry a fetus to full term? Always? Sometimes? Never?

I think the question gets way more complicated than simply "Pro-life" or "Pro-choice" or any other labels one might fling around.

When does life begin? I can't believe that it happens at the moment of conception. Sometime before birth maybe. Not easy questions, not easily decided. When do we empower the government to make those decisions?

Moral choices are often very complex. That's why we leave alot of choices up to individuals to decide without the interference of government.

Steven Webster

[BlueGirl]

Will someone please tell me why so many gay people, especially lesbians, are for Obama instead of Hillary?

With heterosexual Democrats, I figure it's probably because she's a woman but what is it with gay people?

BlueGirl

[Vanessa White]

In Hillary, I appreciate her strength, her tenacity, her commitment to families and children, and her years of experience. However, I feel a deeper passion from Barack and his words; maybe he is just good at speeches, but he has never taken contributions from special interests, and he has helped the poor populations in urban areas, specifically Chicago. Also, Barack has a specific statement on his website about addressing the needs of the LGBT community; Hillary doesn't even mention it openly, and when I sent an email to his campaign about it, I got a response.

I just got a canned email from her campaign stating that they don't respond to emails due to the volume, which is realistically true, but I feel like she is ignoring us at times. I have huge admiration for her as a strong woman, but I need more about what we need as a community for equality.

[matthewspeed]

U Dog and Steven,

Great points. I probably should have explained my view of pro life in more detail. First of all, I feel that abortion should not be used as a means for birth control. I do feel that regardless of what stage the fetus is at during pregnancy,it is life. Whether the fetus is a few days, weeks or months, it is life and to end that would be immoral. The beginning stages of life is just as valid as the full 9 months. But in saying that, if a mothers life is at stake, it could never be up to anyone else whether that baby should be aborted or not. The mother has the right at that stage, to make the decision. No one can make the determination to "which" life should be spared. Also, I could never fathom having a 9 or 10 year old molested girl to carry a full term pregnancy. There are always grey areas. But most abortions are not due to that reason. A lot of abortions are performed as a means of birth control with the poor and the minority population. Many, if not most proponents of ending abortion understand these grey areas. It would be cruel to force a young child or a dying mother to go through the birth process.

Also, I am aware that just because someone is a Democrat, does not necessarily mean that him or her are not pro life. I want to make that distinction. It is a fact, however, that most Republicans are against abortion. Also, I do realize that Roe vs Wade may never be overturned. Limiting the number of abortions should be a main focus as well as attempting to end the procedure.

I feel that abortions should not take place in clinics, rather, in the hospital. Each abortion should be determined on a case by case analysis. To have abortion clinics readily available for any women to come in off the streets is not the way to go.

I believe abortion IS a health care issue.

I have also know women who have had abortions. The guilt is incredible. The regret of having done the procedure haunts them year after year. I realize I am not a woman and I can never say I understand what a woman goes through during the abortion process, and they have my full empathy. I can't imagine a womens turmoil through the whole process. But at the same time, I also have to think about the unborn child. He/she has a right to life as well.

[BlueGirl]

Socially, I am also conservative in many respects. I am pro-life and always will be. These are my convictions that I hold to dearly and will not waver on. (the pro-life stance)

Matthew, how can you or any other male think you have the right to make decisions for someone else about something that you will never be faced with yourself?

So much of what I have heard said on this site by some sounds like the religious fundamentalists' mentality. The fundamentalists think that being gay is "immoral" too and therefore, think they have the right to tell us what we can and can't do with our bodies and our lives. I see no difference in that or someone else, especialy a male, trying to tell a woman who is pregnant what to do concerning her own body and all that's involved afterward.
There are some things that the government nor anybody else has any right to meddle in, things that should be left between the individuals involved and God. The personal sex lives of consenting adults is one of them and abortion is another. I don't think the government should have anything in it except to see that everything is on the "up and up", just as with any other health care facility and that it's done in a way that won't cause pain to the fetus. They do feel pain if they're far enough along.

If a baby is forced on parents who don't want it, do you think it will get the love and care that it should have? Don't you realize that there are already children that are being abused because they're not wanted?
And I'll ask you the same thing I'm going to ask any other pro-lifer if I ever get the chance, if abortion is outlawed as you pro-lifers want it to be, how many unwanted babies are YOU going to take to raise and take care for?

BlueGirl

[kara speltz]

Will someone please tell me why so many gay people, especially lesbians, are for Obama instead of Hillary?

With heterosexual Democrats, I figure it's probably because she's a woman but what is it with gay people?

BlueGirl

There are numerous reasons for me. To start with I used to be a Bill Clinton supporter, til he came up with DADT. Then this man who can't keep his pants zipped had the audacity to sign a "Defense of Marriage Act." He could defend marriage by keeping his pants zipped, but no he had to blame us. Lastly, I don't trust Hillary to act differently than Bill on these issues. Particularly because she can't even acknowledge that she made a mistake in supporting the Iraqi war. That's a trait she shares with George Bush and it's a trait that says she'll be more like him than she'll acknowledge.

Lastly, and most importantly is Obama's understanding and comprehension of the state of affairs when it comes to racism. We have stuck our heads in the sand for far too long. I truly believe that, largely due to the fact that he is interracial and that his mother was white working-class, he understands race & class better than Hillary ever could.

His speech on racism, gave me hope for the first time in years that we could move past this issue, if we acknowledge the mistakes and the offenses that have been a result of racism. The fact that he could talk about how devastated and confused white working people are, because they know they haven't made it and they feel like they're to blame. That again was just such a wisdom that I've rarely heard before. Class & race are intrinsictly entwined and Obama appears to understand that connection.

I haven't felt hopeful about a politician is a very long time. And I believe STRONGLY in the power of hope. It is an absolute necessity for those committed to nonviolence.

kara

[Jennifer5]

Matthew, how can you or any other male think you have the right to make decisions for someone else about something that you will never be faced with yourself?
Good point... how would all the men out there like being told whether they could get a visectomy, or being told that they HAD to?

[Jennifer5]

Abortion thread......

http://www.soulforce.org/forums/showthread.php?p=53984#post53984

[Vanessa White]

However, it is now Hillary for me all of the way. Our primary is less than one week away, and I ordered my yard sign today, so I hope it comes in time to flash it loud and proud.....

I also ordered buttons for myself, my partner and our daughter to all wear proudly.

She is the answer, I firmly believe it. I just needed to be ready. :love:

[Jennifer5]

However, it is now Hillary for me all of the way. Our primary is less than one week away, and I ordered my yard sign today, so I hope it comes in time to flash it loud and proud.....

I also ordered buttons for myself, my partner and our daughter to all wear proudly.

She is the answer, I firmly believe it. I just needed to be ready. :love:

So, may I ask.... what changed your mind?

[Vanessa White]

The experience, hands down.

I find more confidence in her years of knowledge and experience than Barack. That was definitely the deciding factor for me.

[BeyondBlessed]

Well, I believe I stated in the other thread that I support Barack. My state's primary is May 6 and I've already voted. The main issue for me was the Iraq war. Obama's history of opposition to it, even though he wasn't a senator so he couldn't vote against it, tells me that he shares my ideology and Hillary is willing to sell-out. Health care is another issue where Hillary has sold out, considering the bold position she took on it as first lady and what happened to her in the senate once she got some of their money.

[Sere-Kun]

Is Obama for or against gay marriage/gay rights? I hope we don't get another homophobe in the White House! Now I'm scared!

[Jennifer5]

Is Obama for or against gay marriage/gay rights? I hope we don't get another homophobe in the White House! Now I'm scared!

What I hear is that he supports gay rights, but he is not clear on what the means.... so I'm clear about where he stands on gay marriage.


I really need to get ready for bed... so I can't watch check right now, but I'm pretty sure that it was at the end of this video that the issue is finally addressed a little bit....
B1MGi12RspA

[Steven E. Webster]

Is Obama for or against gay marriage/gay rights? I hope we don't get another homophobe in the White House! Now I'm scared!

None of the remaining candidates supports complete marriage equality. Both Obama and Clinton seem to support something like civil unions or equality without the term "marriage."

Obama's denomination (the United Church of Christ) and Obama's retired pastor support LGBT equality.

I think we are safe on the Federal level as long as Republicans don't have enough control in Congress to pass an anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment.

My clear preference for Democratic nominee is Obama. I cast my vote for him in the Wisconsin primary.

I see on AOL news today that Hillary is now backed by Richard Mellon Scaife--a bad man in my book. Scaife has financed the very anti-gay Institute on Religion and Democracy that supports bad anti-LGBT policies in the United Methodist, Episcopal and Presbyterian churches.

I don't know that having Scaife's support reflects negatively on Clinton. I don't believe in "guilt by association."

Steven Webster

[inca nitta]

Kara,
I have been thinking about your statement. You don't seem to understand how I can feel the way I do politically and still be supportive of non violence. I hate violence. I hate war. I believe this war needs to end. That is the reason I have not made my final decision. My deciding factor is whether I feel McCain will make the right decisions concerning the war. I believe it is possible that Mc Cain would end the war a lot sooner than Bush surely would. But at the same time, I am upset at his words recently saying that if it takes 50 or 100 years to finish, we will remain in Iraq. Does that bother me? Certainly! But I also don't trust the Democrats. Pulling out too soon with out a valid plan could be just as dangerous. So, I am in a tug-of-war.

Also, I have always voted more conservatively. I am against high taxes, for smaller government, and a believer in capitalism (to an extent!)

Socially, I am also conservative in many respects. I am pro-life and always will be. These are my convictions that I hold to dearly and will not waver on. (the pro-life stance)

But here are my other concerns. My "Democrate" side, if you will.

1. Health care is in jeopardy- a solution is needed
2. Many "appointees" made by Bush need to go! We need qualified individuals, not "buddies" of the president.
3. Obviously, a new direction is needed. We need to get the "stubborn cowboy" mentality out of the office.

So I am weighing all sides. If we had another Ronald Reagan, that would be my choice, but we have not had that good of a Republican in office since Reagan was our president.

So, Kara, these are my thoughts and my convictions. I continue to weigh all facts.

OH MY GOD!!!! Are you serious?????

You would support McCain who says we could stay in Iraq another hundred years. Have you lost your mind? Four more years of Republican rule will surely bring this country down. Eight years ago we had a surplus - now we have the greatest debt in the history of our country.

The Iraq war was based on over 900 lies told to the American people by the Republicans.

I can't believe someone who says they are gay and is interested in nonviolence could make that statement.

kara

I see that these days, there is a high social pressure, which says that if you are a person of color, an immigrant, or have a non-heterosexual orientation, you shouldn't vote Republican, only Democrat. I always found this to be puzzling, because any person is a unique individual and when individuals make their voting choices, he or she is voting for a candidate whose values they share on the individual level.

[BeyondBlessed]

None of the remaining candidates supports complete marriage equality. Both Obama and Clinton seem to support something like civil unions or equality without the term "marriage."

Obama's denomination (the United Church of Christ) and Obama's retired pastor support LGBT equality.

I think we are safe on the Federal level as long as Republicans don't have enough control in Congress to pass an anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment.

My clear preference for Democratic nominee is Obama. I cast my vote for him in the Wisconsin primary.

I see on AOL news today that Hillary is now backed by Richard Mellon Scaife--a bad man in my book. Scaife has financed the very anti-gay Institute on Religion and Democracy that supports bad anti-LGBT policies in the United Methodist, Episcopal and Presbyterian churches.

I don't know that having Scaife's support reflects negatively on Clinton. I don't believe in "guilt by association."

Steven Webster

I agree on Scaife, he led the way on the Bill Clinton witch hunt, but I'm really not sure he had much to do with his newspaper's endorsement of Hillary. He's made substantial contributions recently to the RNC.

If he did have anything to do with the Tribune's endorsement of Hillary, it was probably with a malicious motive.

[Vanessa White]

Hillary showed her strength here last night..... seems like it was a 10 point margin in her victory. Her campaign raised over 3 million dollars last night after her speech alone. I am so excited and energized that she seems ready to take it all the way. :love:

[keltic63]

Hillary showed her strength here last night..... seems like it was a 10 point margin in her victory. Her campaign raised over 3 million dollars last night after her speech alone. I am so excited and energized that she seems ready to take it all the way. :love:

(it's shake'n'bake) and I helped!



There was much talk of how she was outspent here, yet managed to win. Even this morning on public radio, there was discussion of the money situation, and how Hillary has just a fraction of what Obama has left for campaigning in the next states' primaries.

you could feel the energy emanating through the crowd that stood behind Hillary last night, you could see it on her face, and it was so exciting to watch that speech! I hope it energizes her campaign and leads her to the White House.

[Vanessa White]

Me too!!!!

Keltic and I, from what the analysis said on CNN last night, are pretty much in Hillary territory; much of the state was her strength, except for Philadelphia and Lancaster area...

I am hoping that my Hillary Clinton yard sign is here before the end of the week. Wow, "For the Bible Tells me So" and a HRC sign in one week....

I can hardly contain myself......:lol::love: