Why Didn't Pastor Manning Vote for Obama?

[black elk speaks]

I can't get enough of this guy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZwng4om ... re=related

It's time for change...oh, boy! And how!

did he say that he voted a couple of times?

[GabonX]

BO, hypocritically seems to think that his campaign of higher taxes to spread the wealth is the best way to secure a strong economy and fairness and equality for all people. If this is the case, then why is it that he is now suggesting to keep the economy on life support by keeping the bush tax cuts in place for the next two years? If these tax cuts are supposed to be good for an ailing economy, why does he think that they are not appropriate for a strong economy? And also, why is it that poverty in black americans has mostly been steadily decreasing over the last 30 years if republicans have had the presidency for 20 of those years?

Does he want to keep the Bush tax cuts in place now? It was one of his major campaigning points that he was going to abolish them. A link would be much appreciated.

[DaGip]

I can't get enough of this guy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZwng4om ... re=related

It's time for change...oh, boy! And how!

did he say that he voted a couple of times?

This is a good one too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-HK_VT8 ... re=related

I'm thinking Ron Paul didn't get a fair shake at that polling station!

[black elk speaks]

BO, hypocritically seems to think that his campaign of higher taxes to spread the wealth is the best way to secure a strong economy and fairness and equality for all people. If this is the case, then why is it that he is now suggesting to keep the economy on life support by keeping the bush tax cuts in place for the next two years? If these tax cuts are supposed to be good for an ailing economy, why does he think that they are not appropriate for a strong economy? And also, why is it that poverty in black americans has mostly been steadily decreasing over the last 30 years if republicans have had the presidency for 20 of those years?

Does he want to keep the Bush tax cuts in place now? It was one of his major campaigning points that he was going to abolish them. A link would be much appreciated.

Is the wall street Journal credible enough, or is that too conservative for the socialist readers of this forum?

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/11/23/obama-aides-suggest-rollback-of-bush-tax-cuts-could-be-delayed/

Again, I ask... if these tax policies are good for an ailing economy, why not for a stable or strong economy?

[Snorri1234]

I think you are making some assumptions here that are false. first, there is a disproportionate number of fatherless black youth in america. That tells me that they are abandoned by their fathers due to a lack of responsibility. This fails to instill a level of responsibility in the minds of children. Based on your comments regarding the same scenario for whites, I wholly agree. TOO MANY people abandon their families. Its a sad statistic whatever your race.

The fatherless statistic is not because of people being black, it is because of people being poor. Black people are just far more likely to be poor, so it is logical that they are more likely to leave their kids behind. And yes, it is a vicious cycle where kids who never knew their father grow up to abandon their own kids themselves. The culture in the poor areas is affecting all this.

It just so happens that we are talking about black americans in this thread and why they voted for BO. Which leads to my thoughts on socialism.

How on earth would that lead you thinking about socialism the way you do?

Here in the states, we get something like 13 weeks of unemployment benefits, I think... though, they are now going to raise that, i think. when I lost my job last year, I made it a point to be aggressive. I got a business license so that I could take small jobs as I searched for a new job. no belly aching, no handout... just me. I contracted with a company short term, and was hired full time in 30 days. This is because the benefits of unemployment are lean. were they not lean, I might still be looking for a job with no impetus to secure an income that is suitable to my lifestyle. I have a friend now who is unemployed. he spends so much time frustrated with the broke dick "system" of inefficient bureaucracy when he could be seeking opportunities for work that it makes me wonder why bother.

Here in the socialist republic of the netherlands (at least, according to you) only people who actually cannot find a job due to circumstances get unemployment benefits. 25-year olds who are healthy and able must seek a job even if they don't want to work.


Then again, you have no idea how hard it is for someone who isn't young and healthy to find a job. People in their forties, despite being able to work and shit, are rejected for positions because they are too old. Employers just don't want someone who will certainly stick with them at that age.

The key to solving unemployment is creating a system where people are able to study for new jobs. People are generally not lazy, it is just that they need options. Someone who is fired when they are 45 probably needs reeducation to get another job.

[black elk speaks]

I think you are making some assumptions here that are false. first, there is a disproportionate number of fatherless black youth in america. That tells me that they are abandoned by their fathers due to a lack of responsibility. This fails to instill a level of responsibility in the minds of children. Based on your comments regarding the same scenario for whites, I wholly agree. TOO MANY people abandon their families. Its a sad statistic whatever your race.

The fatherless statistic is not because of people being black, it is because of people being poor. Black people are just far more likely to be poor, so it is logical that they are more likely to leave their kids behind. And yes, it is a vicious cycle where kids who never knew their father grow up to abandon their own kids themselves. The culture in the poor areas is affecting all this.


I never said that only black people abandon their families. Its amazing to me... with programs like the NAACP and the United Negro College Fund and affirmative action in this country that people do not already have opportunities? Given all the opportunities and help that is already there, why do you think that they lag so far behind when it comes to poverty (7% for whites vs 25% for blacks?) Are you saying that not only do we need to lead the horse to water, but that we have to force him to drink it too? The situation in Iraq is destined to fail and for no other reason (i think) than that the people there were not in a position to fight for their own liberation. Likewise, if an African American is unwilling to take advantage of the opportunities that are available to them, then they will remain in poverty. I wish that I had half of the avenues that blacks do in this country for self betterment.

It just so happens that we are talking about black americans in this thread and why they voted for BO. Which leads to my thoughts on socialism.

How on earth would that lead you thinking about socialism the way you do?

Because BO wants more and more socialist programs for people.

Here in the states, we get something like 13 weeks of unemployment benefits, I think... though, they are now going to raise that, i think. when I lost my job last year, I made it a point to be aggressive. I got a business license so that I could take small jobs as I searched for a new job. no belly aching, no handout... just me. I contracted with a company short term, and was hired full time in 30 days. This is because the benefits of unemployment are lean. were they not lean, I might still be looking for a job with no impetus to secure an income that is suitable to my lifestyle. I have a friend now who is unemployed. he spends so much time frustrated with the broke dick "system" of inefficient bureaucracy when he could be seeking opportunities for work that it makes me wonder why bother.

Here in the socialist republic of the netherlands (at least, according to you) only people who actually cannot find a job due to circumstances get unemployment benefits. 25-year olds who are healthy and able must seek a job even if they don't want to work.
heaven forbid that you should have to work to sustain yourself.

Then again, you have no idea how hard it is for someone who isn't young and healthy to find a job. People in their forties, despite being able to work and shit, are rejected for positions because they are too old. Employers just don't want someone who will certainly stick with them at that age.

right... because I have never gotten a new boss that was 40 or 50 years old. My father in law, once he retired from the Military, at age 50, currently contracts his expertise to serious energy facilities around the world. He worked hard his whole life, he still works and no one doubts his knowledge and experience in his field.

The key to solving unemployment is creating a system where people are able to study for new jobs. People are generally not lazy, it is just that they need options. Someone who is fired when they are 45 probably needs reeducation to get another job.
and tax payers should pay for this? how about you do the responsible thing and pay your own way... I will pay mine.

[GabonX]

The fatherless statistic is not because of people being black, it is because of people being poor. Black people are just far more likely to be poor, so it is logical that they are more likely to leave their kids behind. And yes, it is a vicious cycle where kids who never knew their father grow up to abandon their own kids themselves. The culture in the poor areas is affecting all this.

If BES had said "Black people are just far more likely to be poor" he would have been called racist for it. The last election has shown that more than half of the country was willing to hire a black man to be their president and less than 10% of the population is black. This means that there is oppurtunity and that the black community is not as oppressed as some say it is. This is 2008 not 1958.

People are generally not lazy

I think you need a reality check on this one.

[mpjh]

I thought black people voted for Obama so he could be president, same reason white people voted for him, same reason brown people voted for him, and etc. for all the colors of the rainbow.

[GabonX]

I thought black people voted for Obama so he could be president, same reason white people voted for him, same reason brown people voted for him, and etc. for all the colors of the rainbow.

I think you're right. Thank you for your valuable contribution.

[black elk speaks]

I thought black people voted for Obama so he could be president, same reason white people voted for him, same reason brown people voted for him, and etc. for all the colors of the rainbow.

[GabonX]

I feel like singing kum bi ah. Who wants to hold hands?

[black elk speaks]

I feel like singing kum bi ah. Who wants to hold hands?

i think it will help...

[sammy324]

If a white person chooses to vote for a white man instead of a black man, based soley on race, he is racist. Shouldn't it be that if a black person votes for a black candidate over a white candidate, based soley on race, isn't he a racist?

In general, blacks have gone 90% for democrats in the last few election cycles. Is it remotely possible that the 3-4% jump came because blacks increased their turnout and voting percentage only because blacks had an historic opportunity to vote for a black man?

I don't even think it's a bad thing that blacks vote for a black candidate. Identity politics is common, and unreasonable to expect it to be otherwise. But with all the hyping of Obama and the Obamedia about, "I don't look like all the other people on your money," or the countless stories talking about how (white) people won't/didn't vote for Obama because of his race, it seems like a double standard that there has been little scrutiny over the blacks who were not voting for McCain because of his race.

I obviously can't get into his mind, but I find it odd that Colin Powell chose to endorse Obama, when he has little history of supporting candidates with records and stances remotely close to Obama's liberal policy choices. Of course, everyone took Rush Limbaugh out of context when they decided to go crazy over his pointing out of the same thing. To quote, as well as I remember, he said, "I would like someone to point out for me any white, super-liberal candidates Powell has supported."

I notice that no one decided to attack/defend/recognize me for my two cents, which actually related to the original thread topic. Apparently I need to flame/troll/pretend to be a racist in order to get a response around here. Well then, I'll try.

ALL BLACK PEOPLE ARE RACIST!! THEY ONLY VOTED FOR BHO BECAUSE HE'S BLACK!! THEY DIDN'T VOTE FOR MCCAIN BECAUSE HE'S WHITE!!! AAARRRRRGGHGHHHH.

Okay, so maybe not all. But some, possibly many. There are almost certainly a number of blacks who would have not voted otherwise, who came out only to vote for Obama. If the race were a traditional white Republican male vs. white Democratic male, they would not have voted. Like I said, I don't really care why anyone voted. It's your right to go in and vote for whomever, for whatever reason. Maybe some hormonal college dudes voted for Palin because she's sexier than any candidate in recent memory. Whatever.

But for anyone to scream RACIST at any white person for voting against BHO, he should remember that it swings the other way, and it is equally racist for a black person to vote against John McCain.

[nagerous]

Right I recognise your point, but my main point is, there has never been a black presidential candidate before and you're neglecting African-American history if you are going to critque black people for voting for a black man.

55 years ago, African-Americans didn't even have basic civil rights in some southern states, 155 years ago they were slaves, so the chance to have a black President is a huge step up for their race as a whole. Who in their right mind would not vote against this chance for proper change. It has always been the white man in American history who has reigned supreme and hence the chance to change things and make the nation more diverse is of course going to be taken. That is why it is not racist.. in comparison to the white man voting McCain only because they don't want a black leader.

What did bother me however, was the fact that propostion 8 was passed in California, including a lot of African-Americans voting for it even when they were voting for Obama as well. This makes me want to call African-Americans more homophobic than racist in truth.

[Gold Knight]

I believe that the vote went for Obama basically becuase there was nothing else worth voting for. As much as Republicans say McCain was nothing like Bush (and I do support most Repub views...), they were fairly the same on most accounts even if he said they were going to be different. If you were going to vote for a third party canidate, you might as well have not voted because there was no possibility of any of them winning and everyone knew it, so your valuable one minute in a booth was better off looking at the primary canidates...

As for presidential elections as a whole, I feel that America just really doesnt care that much anymore. If we really wanted to make a decision that would affect our country, we should be more focused on who we vote for in the legislative branhc than the executive, as they are more in charge of the decisions of this country than the president. Im sick and tired of everything blamed on Bush. Yes, he is an absolute jackass, but so are most of the members of Congress (who might I point out have been a majority of Democrats over the past years ) who were the ones who passed all of the laws and acts that have taken place over the past 8 years.

The problem to me is that anyone is actaully QUALIFIED to be a president would not in his right mind run for president because they arent dumb enough to put themselves on a national stage and know no matter what they did that some people somewhere were going to be unhappy with their decisions. We get the people who are looking for their own legacy and purpose in the world who are just guinea pigs of the people who actaully have a thought in their mind of how to run this country.

Overall, Obama was the best pick of what we had to choose from, but in my opinion, that isnt saying he is all that great. He's a great speaker, but beyond that, he has yet to prove that he can run a country or even a campaign. The fact that it was as close as it was with McCain who even the Repubs didnt even like shows that Obama didnt do anything spectacular to win the campaign, the fact that he didnt blow him out with the 1st 1/2 hour of voting should be a dissapointment...

[black elk speaks]

Every time I hear someone say that voting for third party is a waste of time, I feel sick. Voting for a third party is the only way that real change is going to come to America. The fact that third party candidates aren't allowed to participate in debates is a disgusting display of how republicrats have the monopoly of power in america.

Ron Paul would certainly have been a much better candidate than McCain and he would have likely beaten Obama on Nov 4 as well. There is nothing fancy about him. His ideas aren't new. they are just well founded in the tradition of American government and that just means smaller government. I was pulling for McCain, I wish he would have won. But when he voted for the fucking bailout, I just couldn't vote for him. As it was written, and as it is being implemented, it was an abuse of power, just like the next one will be.

But more on the topic of BO and his election to the highest office. the fact that 15 percent more blacks came out to vote for a black candidate is telling of a racist trend in america. if they wouldn't come out for white candidates, but will come out for black candidates, that is a racial bias. I can't come to any other conclusion.

[chaosfactor]

I doubt you have ever voted BES, You might have changed your diapers, maybe..

[black elk speaks]

I doubt you have ever voted BES, You might have changed your diapers, maybe..

Pay no attention to the stalker... he is just annoying.

[chaosfactor]

Are You afraid BES? Have you got chaosfactor on your case, surely this will good for the fame you are trying to seek.. Do Not rest now You F'ucktard.

[OnlyAmbrose]

Seems like there are two simple reasons:

1) Blacks generally vote for Democrats

2) They came out in greater numbers because his election would be a historic moment for the black community.

[black elk speaks]

Seems like there are two simple reasons:

1) Blacks generally vote for Democrats

2) They came out in greater numbers because his election would be a historic moment for the black community.

See... thats the thing. is that not racist? Meaning, that is was motivated by race?

[Snorri1234]

Seems like there are two simple reasons:

1) Blacks generally vote for Democrats

2) They came out in greater numbers because his election would be a historic moment for the black community.

See... thats the thing. is that not racist? Meaning, that is was motivated by race?

How is motivated by race inherently racist? Were the black people who followed MLK racist because they were more enthusiastic than some white people?

Really, the only way your argument would be possibly valid if this was not an historic moment. If a black president was nothing out of the ordinary. Racism implies that one thinks his own type of skincolor makes him (and everyone else with that skin-color) better than the rest. This is not the case with these voters. They do not think Obama is better because of his skincolor, hell otherwise other black candidates would've gotten their near full support too. They were motivated by the simple fact that this guy was in their eyes better.


And anyway, you are assuming they voted for him because he's black or because this was historic or whatever. But since the 7% or so increase in votes for democrat can be seen in nearly every demographic in the US this election, it doesn't seem to hold much water. There is not a doubt in my mind that Obama still would've won if he was white. I'd even say that the increase in percentage would also have been seen. At one hand you have a charismatic, young (well not really old) handsome bloke with a nice smile and words like "hope" and "change" and on the other hand you have an old, often uncharismatic dude with a shitty grin and on the fucking republican ticket. Bush and his little friends have severly lowered the popularity of the republicans in the last 5 or 6 years. McCain was simply not enough. Why would you be suprised at this when you know several people (who nearly all used to vote republican) have shifted to either democrat or third parties?

This had nothing to do with racism, it had to do with logical consequences of what happened previously in politics and who were running.

[Snorri1234]

I never said that only black people abandon their families. Its amazing to me... with programs like the NAACP and the United Negro College Fund and affirmative action in this country that people do not already have opportunities? Given all the opportunities and help that is already there, why do you think that they lag so far behind when it comes to poverty (7% for whites vs 25% for blacks?) Are you saying that not only do we need to lead the horse to water, but that we have to force him to drink it too?

Clearly you have no idea about how this world works.

Saying black people have opportunities is completely correct. However, you fail to consider the fact that there are so many factors that lead people to not grasp those opportunities. Things like going to underfunded schools where bad education means that most kids can't get into college, peer-pressure, poverty itself is a reason why people do not escape poverty easily. The extra pressure that poor kids get means they are likely to stay poor. If a 14-year old girl has to take care of her little brother and sister because her mom is working two jobs to pay for her three kids and daddy left or got shot or is in jail, do you expect her to also study hard? (on her own ofcourse, because the schools teach nothing and she probably can't afford books anyway)

MeDeFe quoted in a previous thread that about only 0.02% of people have shifted from one social class to another. How many people do you know who have become very rich without support from rich parents? How many friends in college did you know who got there through hard work and determination compared to the amount of people there who just had rich enough parents? To actually get out of poverty without financial help (like funding for better schools or a taxbreak so that people can take care of their families) is unbelievably hard if you are not very determined. Sure, you can argue that they don't deserve it, but then you are ignoring the fact that plenty of people don't deserve it either but get it anyway.

As for the bolded bit, because they have always been behind due to starting from the bottom and because they have been very much discriminated against untill very recently.

It just so happens that we are talking about black americans in this thread and why they voted for BO. Which leads to my thoughts on socialism.

How on earth would that lead you thinking about socialism the way you do?

Because BO wants more and more socialist programs for people.

Yeah, but I was asking why it led to your thoughts.

heaven forbid that you should have to work to sustain yourself.

Work is good, but getting a job after being fired is not that easy.

Then again, you have no idea how hard it is for someone who isn't young and healthy to find a job. People in their forties, despite being able to work and shit, are rejected for positions because they are too old. Employers just don't want someone who will certainly stick with them at that age.

right... because I have never gotten a new boss that was 40 or 50 years old. My father in law, once he retired from the Military, at age 50, currently contracts his expertise to serious energy facilities around the world. He worked hard his whole life, he still works and no one doubts his knowledge and experience in his field.

Wow, you completely missed the point there. You point out the exact proffessions where being old is actually no problem. However, what do you think the 45 year old dude who works in a cubicle will hear when he applies for a new job?

Bosses are generally positions where a lot of experience is wanted, as are military advisors and a few other jobs. But those jobs aren't exactly a-plenty, and you need the actual experience. But a desk-job in some big firm or so doesn't require experience. And in that case employers will want young, because old people will have less time in their life to bring profit to them. (If you hire a dude at 50 he will work for 15 years after which you will have to pay his pension. If you hire a dude at 25, he will work for 40 years after which you have to pay his pension. What do you think they prefer?)

The key to solving unemployment is creating a system where people are able to study for new jobs. People are generally not lazy, it is just that they need options. Someone who is fired when they are 45 probably needs reeducation to get another job.
and tax payers should pay for this? how about you do the responsible thing and pay your own way... I will pay mine.

Yes, certainly tax-payers should pay at least part of this. Not everyone is smart enough to keep money on the aside for reeducation if they happen to lose. Do you have a fund which will provide you food + money for another education when you unexpectedly get fired?

[DaGip]

Can a mod please lock this thread, as it might lead to race flaming, and I don't want that to happen.

Thank you

[Night Strike]

Can a mod please lock this thread, as it might lead to race flaming, and I don't want that to happen.

Thank you

Done.