[BartSimpson]

EmperorLiam wrote:

I dated a muslim woman for 3.5 years, I know more about Islam than you can shake a stick at.

No, you dated someone who was fallen away from islam because she was being allowed by her family to court an infidel.

And I can shake a stick at an awful lot about islam even though لغتي العربية ليست كما يجب

[dog77_1999]

Iowa Republicans are social conservatives first. It shows with Huckalbee and Romney up in front. However, if the Republicans are to win Guliani will need to be the winner. Anyone else is too similar to Bush (I can't see the difference) and will lose.

Obama's strong victory is a testimant to how terrible Hillary has managed her campaign. That girl flip flops each time she hears the latest poll numbers.

Ron Paul showed good numbers, and beat out Guliani. However, him being excluded in the next televised debate will hurt him. I don't understand why he was, but I don't make the rules. At least he has enough money. And if he survives to win the Republican nomination, it'll be interesting to see how electable he is.

[WBenson]

BartSimpson wrote:

EmperorLiam wrote:

I see Democrats winning either way in the end...

With Barack Hussein Obama as the Democrat nominee I think we could get a dead Republican to carry the November election.

Oh no, not a Hussein!!!! That's an islamo-fascisticite name!!!

Unfortunately, I think too many people would indeed fall for that. Another forum I'm on has someone who insists he's a Muslim.

Quote:

NOTHING about them is above or beyond scrutiny and ANY question about them is therefore valid and deserves to be addressed elsewise they should not be running for this office.

Unfortunately, you're right about the fact that they will be scrutinized for things that they neither did nor chose. That has nothing to do with validity or whether or not it "deserves to be addressed." Validity doesn't matter in elections, though, which is the sad part. Hopefully, Obama won't see a need to let the shameful few make him address his name.

Hillary's maiden name is Rodham! Rods can be used to hurt people, and hams aren't kosher! She's pro-violence and anti-semitic!!

[WBenson]

dog77_1999 wrote:

Ron Paul showed good numbers, and beat out Guliani. However, him being excluded in the next televised debate will hurt him. I don't understand why he was, but I don't make the rules. At least he has enough money. And if he survives to win the Republican nomination, it'll be interesting to see how electable he is.

He beat Giuliani because Giuliani didn't campaign in Iowa.

If he survives to win the Republican nomination, the Democrats will be cheering.

To be in the debates at this point, you have to be polling at a level above bottom-feeder.

[BartSimpson]

Barack Hussein Obama will have to address the name issue because a lot of people are going to wonder at why a supposed Christian is running around with a name that sounds very muslim. Even if the matter never gets brought up in the politically correct media, I guarantee you it will be discussed on the net, in emails, in coffee shop conversations, and etc.

And it is not a matter of people 'falling for it' as there is nothing to fall for. The man has a muslim name and it is a valid question as to if it is just a name or a profession of faith to some degree or another.

If Obama addresses and satisfies the questions then fine. But if he continues to evade and parse his answers to the question the demands for answers will get louder as the convention date approaches.

Also, for many Christians the UCC that Obama associates with isn't much of a Bible or even God believing church. If there was one Christian denomination that a muslim could belong to and argue that it didn't violate his muslim faith, the UCC would be it.

[WBenson]

BartSimpson wrote:

And it is not a matter of people 'falling for it' as there is nothing to fall for.

Yes, there's a lot to fall for. Most whisper campaigns that emphasize his middle name as a negative do it to trick voters into believing that he's a Muslim. Things don't go around that say "Barack HUSSEIN Obama" for any other reason.

I generally only like to define a person by their faith when they openly do so (like Huckabee, who actually said that his faith "defines him.") though.

I think Huckabee is trying hard to be "the Christian candidate," and opposed to Obama, the "'Muslim' candidate," he might actually be able to go a long way. Hopefully that's not the complete distance from Hope to Washington, though.

Hopefully the US will eventually move past candidates having to drag churches behind them into office one day, and politicians will take the Tony Blair model with regards to faith. Have it as much as you want, but shut up about it.

[BartSimpson]

WBenson wrote:

BartSimpson wrote:

And it is not a matter of people 'falling for it' as there is nothing to fall for.

Yes, there's a lot to fall for. Most whisper campaigns that emphasize his middle name as a negative do it to trick voters into believing that he's a Muslim. Things don't go around that say "Barack HUSSEIN Obama" for any other reason.

I generally only like to define a person by their faith when they openly do so (like Huckabee, who actually said that his faith "defines him.") though.

I think Huckabee is trying hard to be "the Christian candidate," and opposed to Obama, the "'Muslim' candidate," he might actually be able to go a long way. Hopefully that's not the complete distance from Hope to Washington, though.

Hopefully the US will eventually move past candidates having to drag churches behind them into office one day, and politicians will take the Tony Blair model with regards to faith. Have it as much as you want, but shut up about it.

I appreciate your opinion. My opinion is that Obama will have to address this, like it or not.

[dog77_1999]

WBenson wrote:

dog77_1999 wrote:

Ron Paul showed good numbers, and beat out Guliani. However, him being excluded in the next televised debate will hurt him. I don't understand why he was, but I don't make the rules. At least he has enough money. And if he survives to win the Republican nomination, it'll be interesting to see how electable he is.

He beat Giuliani because Giuliani didn't campaign in Iowa.

If he survives to win the Republican nomination, the Democrats will be cheering.

To be in the debates at this point, you have to be polling at a level above bottom-feeder.

A quick note that Guliani visted Iowa more than Ron Paul did.

Anyways, both canidates should get a larger portion in New Hampshire where is consists of economic conservatives. I can see Guliani winning or coming in a close second.

[WBenson]

BartSimpson wrote:

I appreciate your opinion. My opinion is that Obama will have to address this, like it or not.

Unfortunately you're probably right.

[EmperorLiam]

"Also, for many Christians the UCC that Obama associates with isn't much of a Bible or even God believing church. If there was one Christian denomination that a muslim could belong to and argue that it didn't violate his muslim faith, the UCC would be it."

The UCC is highly un-centralized, easily one of the most liberal denominations. I don't think muslims would jive with the whole gay ministers thing though.

Muslims only real disagreement with Christianity is about Jesus being the son of god. Now Unitarians are an obvious choice for Muslims, since they don't beleive in the Trinty nonsense. Then theres the Unitarian Universalists, which actually have no real beliefs to conflict a muslims.


Obama isn't even black, he is a mulatto, his mom was as white as white gets.

[Kjorteo]

Questioning Obama's name of all things is the very definition of a fourth-grade tactic. Could it still happen? Sure, probably. But if it does, all that means is that we as a nation have a mental age of 10.

[Dogmeat]

Kjorteo wrote:

Questioning Obama's name of all things is the very definition of a fourth-grade tactic. Could it still happen? Sure, probably. But if it does, all that means is that we as a nation have a mental age of 10.

Honestly, I think it's more like evidence that Obama's opponents have no ammunition against him and are panicking.

Here in Australia during the election in late 07 the Liberals showed what I thought were clearly signs of increasing desperation (the ear wax thing was detailed a while back in the cartoons). I knew they had lost it completely when one of their prominent members started circulating fake fliers claiming to be from a muslim group congratulating Labor for supposedly supporting the Bali bombers. They were caught and it became just one of a long string of controversial election moves on their part.

The relevance? What happened is that all these mud slinging campaigns affected the party negatively, people just got fed up as a nation and many people changed their votes over it. I think we will see the same desperation among the Republicans in 08, more and more as the election date draws near, and the incidents will probably have the exact same result. This whole middle name thing (and the even less intelligent "Osama" wordplay) is just the beginning if you ask me.

[CanadianJeff]

"Questioning Obama's name of all things is the very definition of a fourth-grade tactic. Could it still happen? Sure, probably. But if it does, all that means is that we as a nation have a mental age of 10."

I hate to point this out to you but the moment that "The Internet is a series of tubes" was even allowed to be spoken in the house or the senate is the day that the leaders of this country acheived just that. Why the hell didn't someone just stand up and tell the man off. If it had been me in the place that day I would have litterly walked down onto the floor and made to escort the man aside so I could educate him that the "internet is NOT a series of tubes you idiot stop listening to the lobyists."

For fun.

"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE" Just the speach with no tacky add-ons.

[Lunchbox]

The name issue seems to be a huge if. Look how the whole Obama going to terrorist school thing that Fox News just blew up back in their face. Nobody with any sense talks about it now. In the old days, statements like that would ruin a candidate. Look at how Kerry backed down against the Swiftboat ads that were complete fabrications, instead of pushing the truth back. Or how instead of saying, that, "Yeah, I worked a lot to get the internet established in America," Al Gore screwed himself over by saying nothing to the "invented the internet rofl," crowd. Then there was McCain and his horrible crime of adopting, *gasp*, a brown baby. Unfortunately, whether I agree with Bart about the fact that his name SHOULD be taken into account or not, it's unarguable that there will be people that will bring it up as an "issue." When or if it comes into a huge debate, Obama can only hurt himself by doing nothing when it comes up. And then if he does get a win on the issue, it can be a huge boost to

Also, Bart, think about it. I've gone to church almost every Sunday all of my life. I have staunch atheist beliefs, and I only do it to make my mother happy. I've also known plenty of Catholic School kids who were atheists who only claimed to be Christian in order to stay in school. In terms of facts, it's a bit shaky, but if it does come up, Obama has to tread that ground lightly, and get ready for anything.

And JJ brought up a very good point as well. While Rudy seems to be tossed around like a hot potato about his stances then and now, and whether he's too left or centrist to be elected, guys like Huckabee just seem to be coasting through. Anything tossed at him seems to just slide right off of him, and he comes out looking better, because he's a southern, Christian guy. It's going to be interesting to see how the race will work if he doesn't end up winning first or second overall.

[CommanderSock]

Obama will win if the young "non galloped" swing voters come out in force like in Iowa. He seems to have stricken a chord with the general public, he seems a lassaize-faire type fellow who will surround himself with the right people. Almost reminds me of an animated Harper. Truth be told, alot of America's "older" generation (Bart Simpson) will question his name, throw fits, debate his religion, all in all Fox News rhetoric. But in general the "urbanites", the educated, the younger generation, will support Obama as Iowa has already shown.