Nope-Still Can't Vote For Obama

Even Knowing More About Him

Published on June 11, 2008 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Politics

I know very little about Obama and when I ask others, no one else seems to know either. So before we even consider to vote for him we should start at least getting to know the guy and his background don't ya think. So far this about sums up all I know about him and was sent to me by a friend.

LET ME SEE IF I HAVE THIS STRAIGHT:

HIS FATHER WAS A KENYAN, MUSLIM, BLACK - WE HAVE SEEN PICTURES OF HIS AFRICAN 'FAMILY'

HIS MOTHER IS A KANSAN, ATHEIST, WHITE-
WHERE ARE THE PICTURES OF HIS KANSAN, WHITE MOTHER AND HIS WHITE GRANDPARENTS WHO RAISED HIM?

HIS FATHER DESERTED HIS MOTHER AND HIM WHEN HE WAS VERY YOUNG AND WENT BACK TO HIS FAMILY IN KENYA

HIS MOTHER MARRIED AN INDONESIAN MUSLIM AND TOOK HIM TO JAKARTA WHERE HE WAS SCHOOLED IN A MUSLIM SCHOOL

HIS MOTHER RETURNED TO HAWAII AND HE WAS RAISED BY HIS WHITE KANSAN GRANDPARENTS

HE LATER WENT TO THE BEST HIGH DOLLAR SCHOOLS; HOW?

HE LIVES IN A $1.4 MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE THAT HE ACQUIRED THROUGH A DEAL WITH A WEALTHY FUND RAISER; HOW?

HE 'WORKED' AS A CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST IN CHICAGO - HAS NEVER HELD A PRODUCTIVE JOB. He has never even run a corner hot dog stand. Or met a payroll. Or managed anything besides his political offices and his speeches. And he wants you to believe that he should be CEO of the most powerful and complex nation in the world, and Commander In Chief of our armed forces???

THE PRESIDENCY IS NOT A CIVIL RIGHTS POST!

NOR IS IT SUBJECT TO AFFIRMATIVE ACTION SET ASIDES!

HE ENTERED POLITICS AT THE STATE LEVEL AND THEN THE NATIONAL LEVEL WHERE HE HAS MINIMAL EXPERIENCE

HE IS PROUD OF HIS 'AFRICAN HERITAGE' BUT IT SEEMS THAT HIS ONLY AFRICAN CONNECTION WAS THAT HIS AFRICAN FATHER GOT A WHITE GIRL PREGNANT AND DESERTED HER. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT SPERM CARRIED A 'CULTURAL' GENE. WHERE IS THE PRIDE IN HIS WHITE CULTURE?

HE GOES (for twenty years) TO A 'AFROCENTRIC' CHURCH THAT HATES WHITES, HATES JEWS, AND BLAMES AMERICA FOR ALL THE WORLDS PERCEIVED FAULTS AND THEN REPEATEDLY COVERS UP FOR THE PASTOR AND THE CHURCH

HE CLAIMS THAT HE COULD NOT CONFRONT HIS PASTOR BUT HE WANTS US TO BELIEVE THAT HE CAN CONFRONT NORTH KOREA AND IRAN, RIGHT!!!

YEAH, I THINK I SEE HOW HE COULD BE A UNITER AND BRING US TOGETHER. I THINK THE HOPE IS THAT HE HOPES NO ONE WILL PUT THE PIECES TOGETHER!

Comments (Page 5)

KFC Kickin For Christ

on Jun 13, 2008

Thanks Doc. You're exactly right. So far, no one has proven anything written here is a lie. I can clearly see the bias line drawn down the middle of the sand.

Again, I'm not out to get Obama. It may look that way because I'm posting some not so positive stuff but I really knew very little about him and nobody could give me info until I started looking closer on the net and his own books.

I also see people getting all excited about nothing. They're all excited about this man who promises change. Ok. But what is this change? Nobody knows. I'm thinking this is NOT going to be a good thing.

What I'm seeing repeatedly is his words do NOT match his actions and I think we all should pay attention to this. We need to take off the rosy glasses and do a bit of squinting. Something just doesn't meet the eye.

KFC Kickin For Christ

on Jun 13, 2008

Also KFC, I know you used it as a comparison but African causes affect the lives of millions of impoverished people. If Obama shows any interest in that continent, he would be the first President to do so.

What's going on over there breaks my heart. It really does. Actually when I saw the price tag attached recently to these primaries it made me angry because if they really wanted to do a good thing they could have taken the millions/billions of dollars and invested it in people all over the globe who are hurting.

I have a girl named Ellen I support monthly with money and letters who lives in Uganda. I support World Vision and Compassion and would love it if every JUer could take a child to support. It's no more than $35 a month for one child depending on which organization you support.

Now, I wouldn't have a problem with Obama's Africian/black interest, but it's, from what I see, not a healthy interest as President. Maybe he should go over there to be an Ambassador or humanitarian worker, and leave the Presidency to one who has America's best interest at heart. I'm just wondering if he isn't just using the position as President to further his own agenda that he and his wife seem to have concerning Africa and the black causes.

Smoothseas

on Jun 13, 2008

So, he's limited to what he would get in case of divorce, but you don't think being married to a multi-millionaire grants him access to quite a load of cha-ching pre-divorce? After all, it's called "How to Marry a Millionaire," not "How to Marry THEN DIVORCE a Millionaire."

If you look back at my original quote I was mostly just joking but also trying to stress that the smear crap is mostly irrelevant because @#$% flows both ways and what actually matters is the issues.

Unfortunately since the GOP has brought things so far to the right and into another age of the robber baron that they really can't disuss the true issues of the day.

Dr Guy

on Jun 13, 2008

Unfortunately since the GOP has brought things so far to the right and into another age of the robber baron that they really can't disuss the true issues of the day.

Actually, that would be the democrats. They brought up these issues. Now that the primaries are over with, the republicans have just started asking the same questions.

Smoothseas

on Jun 13, 2008

Whe

Actually, that would be the democrats. They brought up these issues. Now that the primaries are over with, the republicans have just started asking the same questions.

Its actually mostly the bloggers and zealots on talk radio and spin tv that bring in the smear. These people aren't democrats or republicans...they are sheep.

KFC Kickin For Christ

on Jun 13, 2008

Actually, that would be the democrats. They brought up these issues. Now that the primaries are over with, the republicans have just started asking the same questions.

This is true. The Republicans up until this point really didn't have to do much. Hillary's camp and Obama's camp were going at each other and the Republicans were on the sidelines. Now that will, of course, change as the two face off with each other.

Let the fun begin.....NOT!

lulapilgrim

on Jun 14, 2008

If McCain is to win, he's got to get the Christian vote and McCain seems to understand that becasue he's already met with Catholic leaders in an effort to cadge their support.

He talked about the "stark contrast" between himself and Obama. On life issues, he said be believes the unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness apply to the unborn and if elected he would maintain that commitment...while Obama voted against the ban on late-term abortions.

He said he would defend marriage but wants that taken up with the states first. Music to my ears was that IF a radical judge rules all states must recognize Massachusetts homosexual "marriage" laws, then he'd be in favor of a Constitutional amendment.

On marriage, when push comes to shove, he doesn't impress me as having the character to stand on the traditional side of marriage. In other words, he'd cave in to political expediency.

Smoothseas

on Jun 14, 2008

If McCain is to win, he's got to get the Christian vote and McCain seems to understand that because he's already met with Catholic leaders in an effort to cadge their support.

He needs more than just the "christian" vote not to mention many...maybe most christians do not base their vote on the abortion issue alone...if at all.

Civil marriage and religious marriage are two very different things. I respect your opinion about marriage as a whole but why is it that the GOP has to try to CHANGE state constitutions to deny CIVIL marriage?

In any case the civil marriage issue is mostly benign this election. The GOP will not have enough seats in congress to push the issue anywhere so anything done about it would be in the form of potential civil law suits that may make it to the Supreme Court Lvl. They may try to include the issue in specific states but that is mostly about get more reps out of bed and into the voting booth.

Personally i can't muster up the courage to vote based on the abortion issue since the same vote leads to the taking of innocent life as well.

SanChonino

on Jun 14, 2008

Gotta love it. The truth comes out!

KFC Kickin For Christ

on Jun 14, 2008

oh please SC. Be serious. Just read her 1985 thesis from Princton and leave the cartoons for the kiddies.

Cedarbird

on Jun 14, 2008

I'm voting for Ralph Nader.

Also, I think I'm going to research Islam and we'll see exactly how evil a religion it is, because from what I remember of my ninth grade study of religions, there's nothing in the basic beliefs of Islam that says, "kill all Americans and anyone who doesn't believe in the Koran."

That'll be a fun game. Maybe I'll write an article with my findings.

lulapilgrim

on Jun 14, 2008

maybe most christians do not base their vote on the abortion issue alone...if at all.

No maybe about it. (

This is a sad truth....and that's why the abortion mills have been busy ever since 1973. This Catholic though knows the Church regards abortion as well as embryonic stem cell research as "intrinsically evil", a sin against the Commandment of God, "thou shalt not kill." As for Obama, he heartlessly voted to deny health care for babies born alive who survived an abortion. That's evil and on that one issue alone, Christians should not vote for him. Human life is sacred and direct attacks on innocent life are never morally acceptable.

I respect your opinion about marriage as a whole but why is it that the GOP has to try to CHANGE state constitutions to deny CIVIL marriage?

If you'll check, I think you'll find it was not Republicans, but Democrats in states such as Vermont, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and California who demanded same-sex civil unions which grant the same legal benefits as civil marriage.

In any case the civil marriage issue is mostly benign this election.

Last month, in California we learned civil unions is not enough...the California Supreme Court decided to redefine marriage to include homosexuals. This means starting June 17, homosexuals from all over the country can go to California, get married, and go back to their home state...and guess what...file a federal lawsuit demanding that their state recognize them as married.

Oh ya, this could very well force the candidate's position on homosexual "marriage".

It's mainly GOP conservatives who recognize that it takes a state constitutional amendment defining the institution of marriage as between a man and a woman as the only way to keep traditional marriage, traditional.

Smoothseas

on Jun 14, 2008

Yes it was but what i was referring to are the states that have suggested or initiated attempts to rewrite their own states constitutions so that they may say same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. Mass, Vt, and Ca. simply passed laws which have since been challenged in court. They did not attempt to rewrite their states constitution. There is a huge difference...It's called circumventing the judicial system.

That is correct as it should be. What do you suggest? Eliminating the countries judicial system or do you think rewriting a state's or the US Constitution is more appropriate? I can't wait until a case gets to the U.S Supreme Court so voters can finally start concentrating on the real issues of the day.

Smoothseas

on Jun 14, 2008

Gotta love it. The truth comes out!

And I thought he was from Jackass Flats, Nv.

lulapilgrim

on Jun 14, 2008

It's called circumventing the judicial system.

What?

The country always had marriage law as between a man and a woman..that is up until

activist judges over stepped their bounds and started (unconstitionally)legislating law from the bench.

Now, as a result, same-sex "marriages" have been demanded of the people. The only remedy for those who want traditional marriage is a state constitutional amendment.

With state lawsuits galore, same-sex "marriage" is bound to end up before the US Supreme Court...and this will then be the time if traditional marriage is to be retored, for a federal marriage amendment.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!