I don't expect all republicans or even all mormons to get behind Barack. I do know for a fact that many republicans and mormons are supporting him because McCain is an exact replica of Bush, who has a 20% approval rating, which no one wants. Also because I have heard them say they support him.
But I never expected to see anything like this. I found this on a blog. I have so many issues with this video that I MUST post about it.
This video is a 13 minute attack against Barack Obama which is attempting to illustrate how he may be unfit to run for presidency.
I was first shocked to see that their first attack was at his name. Barack's full name being Barack Hussein Obama, was named directly after his father who was a muslim from Kenya. As the video describes this they show a disturbing picture of his father (hold on to your skirts everyone)... studying at a desk with a book. How terrible huh?
The video makes the connection that all three of his names are muslim, and muslims tend to be terrorists and the US is in a war on terror. First of all, Barack had no choice over his name. Ann Coulter, a screaming republican, calls him B. Hussein Obama. Probably to manipulate it just enough to make him sound more like Osama bin Laden, or to sound more muslim. Ann's response for that remark is "that's his name, B. Hussein Obama". No.... his name is Barack Obama. I don't believe in Jesus Christ, but even I know that it would be disrespectful to go around saying J. Christ. I'm sure Ann wouldn't like that too much, or any other screaming Republican. To make this part of the video look even more appaling and juvenile, they show pictures of muslims with decapitated heads. I just can't explain any further how disrespectful this is.
The video goes on to explain a Cuban flag with a picture of Che Guevara on it hanging in a Houston campaign office. At first even I was saying to myself "what the hell?" But it takes no longer than a second and the intelligence of a magot to find the truth of the matter. Barack's official statement regarding the matter was:
"This is a volunteer office that is not in any way controlled by the Obama campaign. We were disappointed to see this picture because it is both offensive to many Cuban-Americans -- and Americans of all backgrounds -- and because it does not reflect Senator Obama’s views. Barack Obama has been very clear in putting forward a Cuba policy that is based on one principle: freedom for the Cuban people." -- Obama Campaign.
AND
"The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign."
I really don't think I need to explain this further.
Barack is also criticized for not wearing a flag lapel pin on his coat. Hmmm, I didn't know that was a requirement for running for president.... oh, right, it's not. This may seem odd at first, but again, do some research people. Barack was quoted saying this regarding the matter.
"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin because it has become a substitute for "true patriotism" since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks... 'I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testament to my patriotism.'"
Barack was yet again criticized, this time for the incident of not putting his hand over his heart at a ceremony where the national anthem was sung. I'm not sure as to why he didn't do that. I couldn't find an accurate reason. But I did find many sources who say this is an outdated custom and it’s not required. Even George Bush Sr. has been caught not doing it.
Then there's the popular attack about Barack’s Pastor and wife making questionable remarks. People can complain about things that people other than Barack has said all they want. I think the most important thing to remember is that Barack didn’t say any of the questionable remarks. This video is not judging Hilary by what her husband did in office, so why is it judging the actions of others against Barack? I personally don’t even see anything wrong with the remarks made. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and everyone knows that. Why do republicans have to nit pick at these simple opinions?
Barack's Paster said “Barack knows what it is like to be a black man living in a country that is controled by rich white people.” This statement is actually very true. This country was founded by rich white people, it has been run by rich white people, and when Barack becomes president, it will be ran by rich black AND white people!
The video goes on to spend about two whole minutes out of the mere 13 on other remarks that Barack's pastor made.
I really do try to keep my sources objective. Whenever I see a documentary that may have been put out by someone from a particular political party, I always watch the documentary put out by the counter part. For example, I watched An Inconvenient Truth, by Al Gore (liberal). A very good and well made movie, very accurate and credible as well. I then watched the Great Global Warming Swindle (conservative), which was so POORLY made, and included sources and testimonies that were made up! I also watched Farenheit 911 by Michael Moore (liberal), which contained accurate information. I then watched Farenhype 911 (conservative) which was mind numbingly boring, and spent most of the movie disrespecting my intelligence by first (respectably) showing pictures and clips from 911 that had nothing to do with Moore's documentary. It was only there to get the emotional support of the viewers. Then the video went on to attack Moore personally! It barely made any come back to what Moore had originally said. Ugh...
Anyway, this all relates to this video on Barack. The video is by far the worst one yet. It is full of partial editing and cuts out the whole story, the whole quote, or the whole video. It gives unsuspecting viewers a partial representation of Barack. This is just sad, because I know many mindless republicans will view this and then think Barack is bad.
And to clarify, I watched the biography of Barack. You should too. It's about 45 minutes and is quite objective. The video this post is about is so far off it's not even funny. It's just lame.
12 comments:
Have you read Dreams from My Father? My mom (who has always voted Republican until now- I am delighted!) recommended it to me (since she knows I am on the dark side-haha) and it is fabulous. In the newest edition he talks about his name a little and really all throughout (haven't finished yet) his voice is so refreshing and brilliant. I will admit that I liked Hilary but wasn't ever opposed to Obama at all. After reading his own words though, he is definitely a man I can get behind.
OMG I seriously HATE this video! I hate people emailing it to me and I hate seeing it on people's blogs! I think it is the most ignorant video ever made.
And what the crap - just because his father was Muslim and he has a Muslim name automatically makes him a terrorist, right? Freaking ridiculous. And that's just one issue I have with this video - I could go on and on about this...
Yes, I am Mormon and a registered republican but I also have half a brain cell and that's why I'm voting for Obama :)
I encourage everyone to do their research and not vote any party just because you're that party - seriously, ask yourself, what are these candidates going to do to fix our freaking country?!
Here's my opinion on a couple of your points:
People look at the people Obama associates with to try and determine his character. They do this because his resume is short, almost non-existant. In his 1 year as a senator, he didn't accomplish much, if anything. He went to his pastors' church for 20 years. To think this has not affected his character or the decisions he makes would be an incredibly naive thought. The video was pretty retarded though (no offense to any dis-abled people) and I am ashamed to be politicaly associated with those who created and distributed it.
The video did not need to speak to the actions of Bill while in office to discredit Hillary, everyone knows full well that he's a moron. The fact that she is married to him discredits her more than adequitly.
Eric
I think the funniest thing that Mormons can say about Barack, is things relating to judging his character in regards to his church or pastor, when so many Mormons were pulling so hard for Mitt to be president. Could you imagine if Mitt was in McCain's shoes right now? I guarantee you that no Mormon would like, or understand, if everyone judged Mitt on being associated with a sexist, discriminate, and homophobic society.
Yes, the extreme leftists would go there, but not out of necessity due to a lack of other references to judge his character. If Obama had a resume of similar depth to that of Romney, the pastor would be brought up momentarily, but larger issues regarding his political career would drown out and downplay that association. In regards to Romney being judged as a Mormon, I doubt he would dis-associate himself with the church to become more centrist, as Obama did with his church.
Eric
I don't think so. First of all, people in the public eye are judged CONSTANTLY regardless of their reputation and/or resume.
Also, Obama can leave his pastor and that church and still be a Christian. Christian churches, besides Mormonism, are ran differently. Believers choose which church they join by the pastor, or whatever they are called. So, when Obama's pastor said things Obama disagree's with, Obama leaves to find a different pastor. Still a Christian.
And I don't believe Barack left his pastor to become more "centrist", I believe he did so because he disagreed with what his pastor said. Like I have said before, Obama adapts. He's not afraid to change things that aren't going right. Shows good character if you ask me. And I bet if he stayed, conservatives would criticize him for that too, if not even more so. He was pretty much in a loose loose situation due to something he didn't even say.
If Mitt left the Church because his Bishop said some weird things, he would be leaving Mormonism all together. Mitt can't leave or disagree with what his Bishop says. If he did leave, he wouldn't be Mormon anymore. However, I bet Mitt would just swallow it and agree with what his Bishop said to appease all the other Mormons.
The difference is that 1) The coments made by Obamas pastor were not unusual for him, or new in any way. Obama had listened to this for 20 years. Before leaving his flock, Obama tried to dismiss the ramblings by relating him to a crazy old uncle that nobody takes seriously. When that didn't fly, he decided to leave.
2) Most christian churches have only one pastor, and the docterine taught is his/her interpretation only. If people don't agree with that interpretation, they find another church that conforms more with their individual beleifs (or in this case, one that will cater to more voters). This says to me if he is willing to flip on his religious beliefs, why not anything or everything else(as he is doing daily)? Yes, still a christian, but the definition of a christian varies widely. If Romneys bishop said some weird things, he would only need to refer the matter up the chain (stake pres, etc). One bishops wierdness doesn't alter the doctrine of the church as a whole.
3)Yes, presidential candidates are judged constantly. They should be, they are applying for the most important paying job in the world.
Obama was in a lose lose situation because he put himself there. His decision doesn't show adaptation, it shows a lack of conviction in his belief system of 20 years. If he's not sure what he believes religiously, philisophicaly, fundamentaly, or (as recent events have shown) politically because the media put pressure on him, he does not have the experiance, maturity, or tenacity it takes to lead the greatest nation this earth has ever seen.
Eric
1) Cool. Fine by me.
2) I still don't believe that Christians finding new pastors to align more with their character, is flipping on their religious beliefs. Obama is still a Christian and still believes in the bible just like he did when he was listening to "Uncle Crazy".
I still don't see any difference between the different personalities of a pastor compared to the different personalities of bishops. Bishops get up all the time in sacrament meetings and start "advising" their ward to do things that aren't doctrine at all.
3) First of all, I really don't believe that America is the greatest nation this earth has ever seen anymore. Middle class Americans are having to decide whether they can buy gas to get to work or groceries.
I have no doubt in my mind that Barack is sure what he believes in religiously, fundamentally, and philosophically.
Did you know that Mitt used to be pro-choice? And now he's not. He changed his mind. He actually changed his mind a few times about it.
But you know what? That's fine by me. I used to be totally republican. And I changed my mind too. The point is, people are allowed to change their mind on important political views. To me, that shows the ability to have an open mind. This presidential election has had a great influence on my political views as well. When Obama was first announcing that he was going to run for office, I was republican, and didn't think America should have a black president. But once I started researching the candidates, I changed to liberal. I think those who have an open mind, and can decide to vote for the best, and not just because it's whoever is running for their party, are the smartest ones. It really bothers me that republicans are only going to vote for McCain because he's republican. It bothered me when Mormons wanted to vote for Mitt just because he's Mormon. One of my LDS friends out here actually prayed for Mitt to be president. Then those SAME Mormons criticize Obama for changing his mind, when Mitt did the exact same thing. To me, pulling the "flip flopping" card is an idea borne of desperation.
Just one last note though, not to be pulling that same card, I just want you to be aware that just as many people accuse McCain of flip flopping as they do Obama. It's a double sided sword that won't accomplish anything, except petty name calling.
If you don't believe me, here's what McCain has flip flopped about:
"McCain, until recently, was pushing for a reform law that would require conservative groups to reveal their financial donors. But, after fielding protests from evangelical Christians and antiabortion activists, McCain decided a year ago to strip out the provision.
McCain in 2000 assailed Bush's proposed tax cuts as a sop to the rich, and a year later, with Bush in office, he voted against those cuts, declaring that "the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle-class Americans." But two years ago, he switched sides and voted to extend tax cuts for the wealthy.
McCain in 1999 said that, "even in the long term," he would not support the repeal of Roe v. Wade because "thousands of young American women would be performing illegal and dangerous operations." But two years ago he said that he now favored repeal because "I don't believe the Supreme Court should be legislating in the way that they did on Roe v. Wade."
McCain in 2000 was incensed when a pair of Texas businessmen, Sam and Charley Wyly, bankrolled some Bush-friendly TV ads that distorted McCain's record. McCain declared at the time that their "dirty money" did not belong in national politics. But two years ago, McCain decided that their dirty money belonged in his campaign; he took $20,000 and allowed them to chair a McCain fund-raiser. (McCain later had to give back the money, because, it turns out, his new friends are reportedly under federal investigation.)
McCain, who has long deplored negative politics, defended John Kerry in 2004 when the Democratic candidate's war record was being impugned by the Swift Boaters. But today, one of McCain's top advisers is GOP hardball specialist Terry Nelson, who has worked as a consultant with one of the principal Swift Boaters. Nelson also produced the notorious `06 TV ad that implied, in the Tennessee Senate race, that the black Democratic candidate cavorted with white women.
McCain has voted against a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, but last fall, regarding his own state, he supported an Arizona referendum that would have banned gay marriage.
McCain in 2006 suggested that creationism was not a fit topic for the schoolroom: "I respect those who think the world was created in seven days. Should it be taught as a science class? Probably not." But he suggested the opposite in 2005 ("all points of view should be presented"), a year ago he was a keynote speaker at a confab sponsored by the Discovery Institute, a prominent creationism advocacy group."
Just so you're aware now that McCain is a flip flopper too.
In regards to this comment made about Romney "I doubt he would dis-associate himself with the church to become more centrist"
He did in fact distance himself from the church and in my opinion for the purpose of reaching a larger group of voters. It always bothered me that he was so reluctant to discuss being Mormon. It is a religion you live everyday, not just on Sundays and to claim it won't influence his decisions seems ridiculous to me. I would have respected him more if he would have been open about being Mormon instead of minimizing it.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/10/eveningnews/main3604153.shtml
Why didn't you think America should have a Black president? Just curious.
Because I WAS a racist republican, like my parents raised me to be.
Yeah, it's sad because I'm positive a lot of people think that way, even our closest friends who wouldn't dare say it out loud.
I overheard someone say that they weren't surprised I was voting for Obama - why? Because I'm half Black? Pissed me right off.
Post a Comment