First Draft- Why Obama is not fit for the job

Page history last edited by PBworks 3 years, 3 months ago

VERY rough draft, this is just main ideas that obviously need a lot of editing.

mccain vs. obama.

-for war iraq

ths is a good thing becuase al queada still exists and if we dont kill them completely they will have time to re group. this would be hazardous to the american nation.

- against partial birth abortion.

not fair to kill something 6 months in as opposed to 6 weeks when it s not really developed

tax structure is ALOT better for the economy.

rish people with big businesses create jobs for the economy

ex i work for publix.

with the bush tax rates they create thousand of new jobs i.e. buying out of albertsons. they pay cash for everything they do

with obabma tax raises it would put publix in the 40 tax bracket allowing them to keep only 60 percent of their revenue which means that they cant expandd as fast.

with obabma tax increases your tax dollars go to giving illegal immigrants drivers licenses

no trust him because he is associate with reverand wright. and william ayers.

w.a. is political terrorist who bombed pentagon in 1970's who got

out of it because of a loophole of investigative mal-practice.

obamas foreign policy is weak. wants to meet with dictators with no previous conditions met. kim jung il (n. korea)

mamoud ak.( iran) this would be bad because n. koreas threatened s. kora with atomic weapons

and iran wants to blow israel off the map.

obama has no political experince . hasnt presented birth certificate, spent 8 yrs in state senate and passed ZERO bills. he voted present 100 times, didnt vote ye

yes or no on an issue just voted that he was

his middle class tax cute sounds great if he could do it, what he doesnt tell you is that while his time in sttate senate he voted 94 times to raise taxes on middle class families with the last vote for people who only make 42000 a year. thats not 250 like he advertizes. the middle class that he is talking about is the ghetto's and poor.

its not right to redistribute income for people who have accomplished the american dream and worked hard to give their families nice things through hard work.

A.c.o.r.n. look up definition. association community of reform now. this group is focused on registering low income people. democratic group who register and pressure banks to issue bad loans. they call it racist when banks deny loans. this is a main problem on why the housing market is so bad. and since housing is the major part of the economy this is one of the major reasons why our countries economic situation sucks.

lack of experience, no bills passed in state senate, only ONE is us senate. only spent 1 year in senate before announcing run for presidency. cant handle economic OR military crisis.

mccain. LOOK UP

spent 22 years in senate apprx.

had 130 bills passed.

srgt. jacob r lerner us army was in afghanistan stepped on an ied blew leg off hes in george washington university hospital in washington dc. after all this he says he would do it all over again and that its unfortunate what happened to him but he would go back and what we are doing over there is good and that we need to defeate terrorists no matter what.

PEER EDIT by Jesse Nevel:

Oh, I'm excited to help you write this essay! I have a couple suggestions for your (very) rough draft.

First, I'd recommend double-checking some of your facts. A lot of this seems like you're just regurgitating the main talking points of the McCain campaign. Any political campaign, Democrat or Republican, is going to twist the truth to discredit their opponent. It's a good idea to do a little bit of research on some of these points before just accepting them as reality.

For example, when you talk about partial birth abortion, it's important to look at the specifics of the bills Obama voted against and his reasons for doing so. Here's a quote from an interview Obama did with Christian Today:

"For example, I think we can legitimately say — the state can legitimately say — that we are prohibiting late-term abortions as long as there's an exception for the mother's health. Those provisions that I voted against typically didn't have those exceptions, which raises profound questions where you might have a mother at great risk. Those are issues that I don't think the government can unilaterally make a decision about. I think they need to be made in consultation with doctors, they have to be prayed upon, or people have to be consulting their conscience on it. I think we have to keep that decision-making with the person themselves."

When you talk about rich people with big businesses getting tax cuts and creating jobs for the economy -- "trickle down economics" -- you're defending an economic model which has never, ever worked. You refer to the Bush tax rates creating thousands of new jobs, but the unemployment rate has only increased during Bush's presidency.

On Reverend Wright William Ayers: Well, his affiliation with Ayers is pretty insignificant. I mean, Ayers hosted a "Meet the Candidate" party for Obama's first run for office in 95... and they both served on a committee focusing on education reform... and since then, they've had little to no contact. It's not like Ayers is one of Obama's close allies or advisers. Obama has publicly criticized Ayers's terrorist activities from 40 years ago and also pointed out that while Ayers was involved with the Weather Underground, Obama was only 8 years old. There's really no connection there.

And Reverend Wright was also denounced by Obama. You're playing a cheap guilt-by-association game when you try to discredit Obama for having attended a church where Reverend Wright was his pastor. What about McCain's pastor, John Hagee? This is a guy who said Hurricane Katrina was God's way of punishing New Orleans for its offensive level of sin. This is a guy who said that the Holocaust happened because Hitler was carrying out a divine plan to bring the Jews to Israel. This was McCain's pastor! Does this mean John McCain also believes these things? No.

You're correct that Obama is willing to meet with dictators. I don't see anything wrong with that. That's diplomacy. It's strong leadership. The leader of our nation should be willing to meet with foreign leaders -- allies and enemies alike. I suppose this is just an ideological disagreement we have.

I don't understand when you say "Obama has no political experience." He has NO political experience? Really? NONE? He's just some guy who decided to run for president and somehow managed to become the democratic presidential nominee? What you wrote about Obama passing zero bills is simply false. What you wrote about Obama voting "present" 100 times is true but that's just presenting a number with no context. I mean, Obama voted for 4000 bills. Most of the ones he voted "present" for were later modified. I'd suggest that you research Obama's legislative record when you start to write your next draft.

ACORN stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. What's wrong with registering low income people? More importantly, why are you attacking ACORN? Your essay is about Obama, not ACORN. Obama represented ACORN as an attorney over 10 years ago. They're not affiliated with each other in any signficant way anymore.

I look forward to reading your next draft.

-- Jesse Nevel

Numerous print media outlets reported that Sen. Barack Obama represented the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now in the 1990s in a lawsuit, but they did not report that the Department of Justice was also a plaintiff in the lawsuit with the League of Women Voters and others. The lawsuit sought to require the state of Illinois to implement federal law on voter registration. Can we please put this ACORN business to rest?

Someone who has fought in the Armed Forces has been trained to work as a unit. The soldier who is out of his unit has been conditioned to support his fellow soldiers (The Band of Brothers syndrome). His wanting to return to war has nothing to do with ideology, it is what he was trained to do. It becomes his entire life! If he questions the mission, he goes agains everything the US Army has trained him to do. That is some pretty expensive training, and I for one am glad he feels that way! He is a friggin' soldier - he damn well better have that attitude. Even though war is immoral and misdirected (at best), it is not his job to question, that's not what we pay him for.

Plus... explain to me what other job can prepare you for the President of the United States? POTUS is the kind of job that is nothing but "on the job training." There is no Leader of the Free World for Dummies... Roshi7

I'm not signed up to edit this one, but all I can say is that the peer edits seem to just be coming to Obama's aid. Keep up the good work and stand firm against the tide. The truth is not necessarily the word that you hear most often, or is spoken with the best intonation. I agree that you should be very wary of using campaign propaganda to support your claims, however, you should also take note that Jesse's counter claims are themselves campaign propaganda. You are onto an idea with great medicine behind it. You must put in the effort to build an ethos that insures that your ideas are taken seriously; not to be so easily dismissed by the puppets of the media so common in the university system (if I am pinning your audience correctly).

- Danny

Danny, the purpose of my peer edit was not to come to Obama's aid. I conceded that some of Deidre's points were truthful and boiled down to an ideological difference. Most of her basic information, however, was just plain wrong. I'm talking about information like Obama's legislative record -- that's pretty easy to research. That's not campaign propaganda. Give me one example of campaign propaganda from my edit. I have no problem with a critical perspective on Obama, but it's counterproductive to spread lies and misinformation.

- Jesse Nevel

Jesse, with all due respect, much of the evidence you supply in support of your counter-claims is in fact extremely biased. You quote Obama on abortion. For the Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright situations, the information you supply is that which is claimed by the Obama campaign or Obama himself. The reason that I call you and others out on such things is that His word (and oh yes, people treat Him with such reverence to merit a capital H) has been accepted as indisputable fact. I have seen evidence that shows that Obama's connections with Bill Ayers are strong enough to merit further inquiry; inquiry that has never happened. Ayers launched Barack Obama's first political campaign at his house.... Even if you dismiss THAT as the actions of a passing acquaintance, you must at least concede that there is reason for more attention than that which has been given to the situation.

But I digress. Don't cite Obama and call it fact. Perhaps we differ in our definitions of propaganda. Instead, would you rather us agree in calling it biased political language?

- Danny

Danny: I didn't get most of my information on Ayers/Wright from Obama, and I do not accept Obama's word as indisputable fact. Those are false assumptions. I mentioned the fact that Ayers hosted the launching of Obama's first campaign. I do not think that's a good reason for us to fear Obama or conclude that he somehow sympathizes with Ayers's involvement with the Weather Underground. It's not really an issue. And like I said, you can play that game with any candidate. Look at McCain/Hagee.

-Jesse Nevel

I agree, such is the nature of propaganda. I still, however, feel obligated to bring to your attention the fact that whether or not your information came directly from the obama campaign, it is the campaign line. The issued statement of the obama campaign has been parroted without question by nearly every media news source. And furthermore, the McCain/Hagee involvement, if you recall, is an old horse that has been ridden into the ground. I'm not ready to convict obama, I just think he deserves to have his past uncovered so that we can make that decision. There is enough there for me to want to know more. Apparently it is not enough for the media to consider further, but they have already proven themselves as Obama's loyal watchdogs.

By the way, the Ayers thing... not nearly my biggest beef with our good old buddy barack. I just want to make sure that he gets the same scrutiny of attention as everyone else. Sarah palin fires someone (who it was within her right and power to fire) and a brigade of lawyers and journalists ship off to Alaska. The possibility of terrorist ties of barack obama surfaces... and we get nothing but a line from the man himself. The investigation into it was limited at best. Even if you don't think its true, and are a staunch supporter of Obama, you should advocate that his past be delved into with great interest. If the media continues to treat him with kid gloves, how is he going to handle it when something doesn't go perfectly for him and they are forced to attack? He needs to get knocked around a little bit so that he isn't so surprised the next time it happens.

- Danny

You're suggesting that if a fact corresponds with the campaign line, it is automatically false. I would argue that it is automatically deserving of skepticism but that doesn't mean it's not true. I don't understand your point about the media's coverage of Obama vs. Palin. Palin was found guilty of abuse of power. A vice presidential candidate being found guilty of abuse of power seems pretty newsworthy to me. Endless hours of media coverage were wasted on the Wright controversy and the Ayers connection and the ACORN faux-fraud. The Hagee nonsense got barely any coverage. (And I'm not just talking about Fox News.) - Jesse Nevel

I respectfully disagree with your evaluation of my suggestions. I'm suggesting that if a fact corresponds with a campaign line that it is similar in meaning to the campaign line (with no commentary on the truth of it). I would also like to point out the strongly biased connotation with which you provide the information about specific cases in your last post. I am not here to tell you that you are wrong, I am here to point out ingrained bias. My distaste for the purposes of this discussion is not directed towards you, the democratic party or Barack Obama. I am only hear to decry the media. I hope that you can see how you have been swayed by the information you have seen, and that media sources are more often than not biased liberally. Even Diedre is biased (as am I), it just doesn't seem that the mainstream television media sources are the root of her bias. Mine for example is strongly swayed by talk radio. Even though I continue to listen to this heavily biased source (because I agree with the ideas), I keep in mind that the bias is there as not to be sucked in so deep as to not see the validity of the other side. I hope you might consider doing the same.

- Danny

i understand this is a very rough draft, and i agree with jesse that it seems like you pulled alot of your fact from a very biased source. i think it would be helpful if you at least said more about mccain so the readers have something to compare your statements against. you have all these claims about obama not being capable, about what he hasnt done and how little exposure he's had to politics, but to help support your causal argument, i think you should go into alot more detail about exactly what mccain has done. i dont want my edit to seem like im attacking you because you dont support obama (not that i think jesse is attacking you) but in order to really edit this rough draft would be to help you get the facts right.. which might or might not be in obama's favor. start formalizing your information. setting things up in a more organized way bulding up to yout main argumant following by alot of support, i think its always great to show the other guys side of the story too. goodluck! you chose a risky subject that is extremely open to alot of scrutiny. its hard to write about politics. right on :)

- marissa

It seems like you have a lot of information and opinions on this topic and I think that once you put it all together you'll have a great paper! -Mikaella

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Okay jesse.

you do know that obama donated 800k of his campaign money to acorn right?

so he does suppot them.

he addresssed them before he started his campaign saying he needs them and how they were on a mission to get him elected. its almost as if he is a dictator and these people were brainwashed.

they have registered 15000 fraudulent voters. who all were democrats.

The first bailout bill that got denied, one of the main reasons for that was because the democrats tried to sneak in over a million dollars for acorn.

it was later revised, the money was taken out and the bill was passed.

obama has no real VOTING record and thats a fact.

he only spent 174 days in the US senate before announcing his campaign.

Hevoted to raise taxes 94 times.

voted to raise taxes on "middle income" people making only 42k a year.

and the bottom line is raising minimum wage to 9.50 an hour is going to KILL the small businesses and inflate things.

and should we talk about the supreme court??

who could he possiblt appoint for the justices.

how about some liberal freaks who could possibly let criminals off on loopholes

putting the upper class in a 40% tax bracket is not going to help the economy. you watch more and more big business are going to take more jobs overseas for cost and tax purposes.

by doing that

and they will use offshore banks taking MORE money out of the economy.

Look at privately owned businesses, ex. charlie and millie's pizza.

imagine having to pay some idiots in the kitchen 9.50 to make pizza. hence forth pizza prices go up. simple as that. undert obama government is going to get to big, almost like a european government

where say you open a risky busineess it fails. it doesnt matter because you can always fall back on the government because its so large. it takes all the responsibility out of people by adding new social programs spending more and expecting less out of the people that already dont do shit and get things for free.

as for you thinknig that is a good idea for foreign policy?

by doing that only shows that we are a weak nation. dictators wanting to speak to us should give into OUR demands. we are the most powerful nation, or atleastt should be. we shouldnt be their bitch.

did you not see how just 3 days ago north korea threatened to blow south korea off of the map?

do you realize this would start ww3 if that happened. north korea has the largest military AND has nuclear weapons. they are run by a crazy communist dictator. yeah what a great idea to just let him be and do whatever he wants with there nuclear weapons.

keep in mind, 6 nuclear bombs but in 6 specific locations could end the fucking population on earth.

but noo. its okay they can have all of these weapons and play with them like they are fucking matchbox cars or something.

with obama and a domintating senate and house?

nancy pelosi claims dont be scared on electing all democrats we will be bipartisan just trust us. she has a 6% approval rating. she wont do anything thats not left off the fucking scale.

it was like pulling teeth to get her to finally agree to start off shore drilling. obviously we need oil. we ned to drill here, not buy it from over seas. and not have democrats in the senate to try tto put a $1 tax on every gallon of gas when it was already $4 a gallon.

as for the economy it was under democratic leadership to why we are on the housing mess.

that goes right back to acorn. putting pressure on banks to give loans to minorites and low income families who could never afford to pay them back.

9/11??

clintons fault.

his administration had a bunch of evidence knowing that something was going to be atleast attempted on this day. what was his action to prevent it?? NOTHING. bush inherited something clinton should have done something to prevent.

and back to william ayers??

do you not realize that he bombed the pentagon. and NYPD headquarters.

but he gets off on a loophole.

and obama hasn't been truthful about him

he said at first "oh he is just somebody in the neighborhood" which turns to "i dodnt know if his past when i was withhim"

how is that right??

that guy was a FUCKING TERRORIST. and got off.

after 9/11 he said al queida should have done more. he was shown in time magazine standing on a burning american flag.

bottom line is, obama just doesnt have good judgement. he doesn't have any experience from a NATIONAL persepctive. he has 8 years in the STATE senate.

so go run for govenor. not president.

so jesse. if you want a big goventment with social programs, europe might be better suited for you.

im sure you are well familiar with joe the plumber.

it is ILLEGAL and an invasion of privacy to use a political campaigns money to search and investigate a PRIVATE CITIZENS past and to smear him into the public.

Also, were you aware that obama accepted illegal funds and had to give them back...... to pakistan??

RESPONSE by Jesse Nevel:

Wait. Wait a second. Donating money to a voter registration drive is not illegal, it's not immoral, and it's not a sign of poor judgment. ... especially when the organization aims to register people in low income communities (who tend to support the Democrats) ... there's nothing wrong with helping to fund them.

You're demonizing ACORN without knowing the truth about how they operate. I know how ACORN works because... I worked for ACORN. Over the summer, I registered people to vote in Broward County.

We got paid hourly to register people and we had a quota we had to fill each day (20 registrations per day was the minimum). ACORN has a serious, intensive quality control department: at the end of each workday, every form is checked for possible signs of fraud. If something looks suspicious, our employer would call the number on the form to verify the person's identity. If the form turned out to be fraudulent, the employee would be fired immediately. I watched this happen once. And our boss emphasized, over and over and over: "FRAUD IS ILLEGAL. YOU WILL BE FIRED IF YOU COMMIT FRAUD."

Here's the thing: according to ACORN policy and according to the law, ACORN is required to send all registration forms to the Board of Elections, even the ones they have designated as being problematic. It is then the responsibility of the Board of Elections to discern the authentic forms from the fraudulent forms. That's why ACORN sent those fraudulent registration forms to the Board of Elections. It's the law. And furthermore, registering "fraudulent" voters is pointless because a person who doesn't actually exist cannot vote. Dead people can't vote. Seven-year-old girls can't vote. Mickey Mouse can't vote.

The sad thing about all the media attention given to ACORN is that it distracts people from the real electoral fraud occuring in states all over the country. It's just pathetic.

In fact, I'd say that's one of the biggest problems with your thesis on Obama: you're focusing on non-issues. The ACORN controversy, Ayers, Wright... these are irrelevant distractions that take away from the real issues.

And for the love of God, there is no mention of ACORN in the first bailout bill. I'd love to know where you read that. You should provide some evidence if you're going to be making claims like that. Here's a link to the full text of the original bill. Have fun.

"he only spent 174 days in the US senate before announcing his campaign." Obama was sworn in as a senator on January 4, 2005. He launched his campaign on February 10, 2007. I'm no math genius but I'm pretty sure that does not equal 174 days.

Obama did NOT vote to raise taxes 94 times. That's what McCain said. You're just repeating McCain's lies without doing your own research. Here's a non-partisan website that assesses the accuracy of the attacks made by each of the candidates. That site explains clearly why the claim that Obama voted 94 times to raise taxes is a bunch of bullshit.

The Obama campaign did not spy on Joe the Plumber. Not sure what you're talking about there.

As you went on, you started to thrown in a bunch of bizarre, unrelated issues like Pelosi... and 9/11? I don't even know why you brought that up. You're blaming Clinton's administration for failing to prevent 9/11. I disagree, but what does that have to do with your reasoning for why Obama is not fit to be president? Very strange and confusing.

Obama is not a perfect candidate. He should, in my view, be subject to as much criticism and scrutiny as any other candidate. After all, if he wins, he'll be the the leader of the most powerful nation in the world. We the people need to keep an eye on him and fearlessly voice our opposition if/when he does something we percieve to be wrong. Your essay will be stronger if you focus on points like your disagreements with Obama's tax plan instead of repeating the lies spread by the McCain campaign.

- Jesse Nevel