Why do I get the feeling (opinions on Obama)

[Dphins4me]

   that more people are paying attention to what Obama isn't instead of what he is & has been in the past?

What he isn't?  Republican / George Bush.

What he?  Socialist, was a member of a church with a radical preacher who preached hate of America for around 20 Years & then expects us to believe he did not know what type preacher he was, known associate of a American born terrorist who still does not regret what he did in the past.

My question is to anyone:

Why is the fact he is not George Bush that big of a sway to make people overlook all this?

IMO, the public only looks at what effects them today.  Today the problem is the economy.  So all this stuff is lost on the public, plus Obama is buying votes with his tax the people more who pay the most already plan.

[Dave Gray]

Please make your thread titles descriptive.

[Defense54]

He is also saying the right things right now.  I love John McCain. I respect the man for everything he has done for this country.  However The republicans have done such a terrible Job this past 8 years, yes just not being one is enough at this point. I hope Obama realizes how many stars needed to align for him to get this chance, they seem to have. With the economy and the fuel prices, just enough things have gone wrong in this country at once for him to look Like a savor.

Lets be real. Alot of people are also voting for Obama for Racist reasons as well. But to me thats just not enough to Vote against him. Probably almost the same amount Isn't voting for him for the same reasons as well.

[bsfins]

George Bush's approval rating is somewhere in the 20's.....Obama's smart,well educated (and acts like he actually learned from that education) He's a 180 degree different from George Bush....

Fixed grammar

[Dave Gray]

I also reject the idea that he's a socialist. 

He does support some socialist-leaning principles, as do all democrats, but I think that "socialist" is just a scare word used by Obama's detractors.  Many citizens of this country support socialist ideas (social security, socialized medicine, government-run education, higher tax rates for the wealthy, etc.), but just don't know what it's called.

As for Reverend Wright, I just don't give a crap.  I think religion is totally damaging, and I'm the first to say "WTF" when I see politicians being involved in crazy religious stuff.  However, I can distinguish between what I consider harmless and that which I think will affect a leader's administration and ability to govern.  I'm not concerned about Wright or that church having any involvement in our government.  Do I think it's weird?  Hell yes.  But it's not an issue that I think will have anything to do with his ability to run our country.

I actually feel similarly about Palin.  She's on video getting blessed by some witch-doctor.  Totally weird.  But I'm not really worried that she'll have a witch-doctor in the White House, so I don't give a crap about it.

However, there are other cases (like with Bush) for example, where I think that his close ties to religion affected his judgment, was directly involved in his decision making, and had great influence on his administration.

That's the best I can describe it.

[Dphins4me]

He does support some socialist-leaning principles, as do all democrats, but I think that "socialist" is just a scare word used by Obama's detractors.  Many citizens of this country support socialist ideas (social security, socialized medicine, government-run education, higher tax rates for the wealthy, etc.), but just don't know what it's called.

  You are correct, the Dems & public do have those views.  View I personally do not support..

   The Gov has done a great job of getting the citizens of the US to believe security is more valuable than freedom.

[landlocked]

  However The republicans have done such a terrible Job this past 8 years, yes just not being one is enough at this point.  

I thought that we've had a Democratic congress the last 4 years,but let's blame it all on Bush.In my mind BOTH parties are in bed with big business and the oil companies in particular,but now that greed has come home to roost and the American people are pissed off they are finger pointing in public and probably having drinks together,laughing,and counting their money in private.

[Dave Gray]

I thought that we've had a Democratic congress the last 4 years,but let's blame it all on Bush.

The Dems have controlled Congress for less than 2 years.

[Dphins4me]

I thought that we've had a Democratic congress the last 4 years,but let's blame it all on Bush.In my mind BOTH parties are in bed with big business and the oil companies in particular,but now that greed has come home to roost and the American people are pissed off they are finger pointing in public and probably having drinks together,laughing,and counting their money in private.

  2 Years..  FYI The economy & everything was booming in '06.

Of course both parties are in bed with big business.    The public as a whole just thinks the Dems are for the little guy & the Dems know this.  They think big business & wealthy people should be taxed more & more.  While not knowing raising taxes on businesses only raises taxes on the consumers ( AKA The little people ) Taxing the people who invest & create jobs only means there is less money for job creation.

Who suffers?  The little guy, but its not direct taxation so it appears as if they are raising the taxes on the big guys.

Example:  Clinton's luxury tax on things like Yachting.   The idea was wealthy people would still purchase.  Well, they didn't & guess what happened?  Who were the people most effected?  The people who actually built the Yachts.  The little people.

[Dave Gray]

  2 Years..  FYI The economy & everything was booming in '06.

Decisions that are made have effects YEARS later.  It's not like the Dems that took over in 07 are responsible for the state of the nation that year.  You know that.  You're alluding otherwise, however.

[Dphins4me]

Decisions that are made have effects YEARS later.  It's not like the Dems that took over in 07 are responsible for the state of the nation that year.  You know that.  You're alluding otherwise, however.

 
Yes, I know that.  I was just wanting someone who supports Dems to say it.  I was unsure they knew that since they blamed Bush for the recession early in his admin.

[Defense54]

I thought that we've had a Democratic congress the last 4 years,but let's blame it all on Bush.In my mind BOTH parties are in bed with big business and the oil companies in particular,but now that greed has come home to roost and the American people are pissed off they are finger pointing in public and probably having drinks together,laughing,and counting their money in private.

Maybe..........but look at how fast the price of a barrel of oil came down. They had control over that all along. It took a crumbled economy to make them finally do it.

[run_to_win]

George Bush's approval rating is somewhere in the 20's.....

Yeah, about 2.5x that of Congress.

He's a 180 degree different from George Bush....

Yes, experience vs academia.

[run_to_win]

I also reject the idea that he's a socialist. 

He does support some socialist-leaning principles, as do all democrats, but I think that "socialist" is just a scare word used by Obama's detractors.  Many citizens of this country support socialist ideas (social security, socialized medicine, government-run education, higher tax rates for the wealthy, etc.), but just don't know what it's called.

People who have to pay for socialism tend to reject it while people who benefit from it tend to support it.  It's pretty much that simple.

Of course, the problem is that it doesn't make everyone middle class, it ends up making everyone poor.  People who were poor are still poor but now they have no chance of becoming middle class.


I wonder if taxes would be such an issue if everyone chose what they wanted to fund? 

For example, start everyone at the same tax rate:
- if you want to fund public schools then add 1%
- if you want to fund military then add 1%
- etc, etc, etc.

Another idea is to calculate taxes the same way they are now but allow people to determine where their money is spent.  If someone wants to give $0 to defense and instead give it all to social programs then that would be their right. 

It would be interesting to see how spending would change with either idea.  Would people still support certain ideas if it cost them additional money? 


The one problem is that people calling for higher taxes are usually in a position to pay additional taxes themselves ... but rarely do.  It's an issue that rarely led by example. 


Obama a socialist?  Nah - but he does have  the most liberal voting record in Congress.  He's much closer to being a socialist than Bush is to being a facist ... but that didn't stop many people throwing that term around.

[run_to_win]

Of course both parties are in bed with big business.    The public as a whole just thinks the Dems are for the little guy & the Dems know this.  They think big business & wealthy people should be taxed more & more.  While not knowing raising taxes on businesses only raises taxes on the consumers ( AKA The little people ) Taxing the people who invest & create jobs only means there is less money for job creation.

I love the way that democrats think they can punish big business into helping the "common man".  Rather than make ir favorable for business to stay they threaten to punish them if they leave.  If a company is already considering moving overseas to be more competitive then how is threatening them going to change anything? 

Who suffers?  The little guy, but its not direct taxation so it appears as if they are raising the taxes on the big guys.

Example:  Clinton's luxury tax on things like Yachting.   The idea was wealthy people would still purchase.  Well, they didn't & guess what happened?  Who were the people most effected?  The people who actually built the Yachts.  The little people.

Everett, North of Seattle, just had a large company that built yachts go out of business.  700+ workers are out of a job.  We really showed those rich people!