Obamas Pastor; America is to blame for 9/11. radicals in my party agree

[Filuwaúrdjan]

They're just now starting to come out and they are scary as hell to working class whites.  These are Reagan Democrats and they're not gonna like what the good Rev is selling.

The white working class Democrats that don't fit into the Reagan Democrat model won't like it much either methinks.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The only thing we have to blame is not taking action fast enough. As soon as the '93 attack occured....Clinton could have prepared the nation and the world for the War on Terror, and hunted every Al Qaida cell they could find. Instead, it was treated as a police matter. It SHOULD have been a declaration of war...but it wasn't "BIG" enough. Eight years later, we knew we had an enemy so fueled by hate that they had indeed declared WAR. That's one thing I had trouble with a "President Gore" scenario....as I don't believe these Democrats who say he would have gone into Afghanistan. I think the most he would have done would have been to shoot a few missiles at Kabul....and he certainly wouldn't have created the Department of Homeland Security or passed the Patriot Act or conducted wiretapping.

That's why I am supporting John McCain, and that's why national security is my number one issue. The reason we haven't been attacked is VERY likely because of the things such as the Patriot Act that the Bush Administration has enacted...and if we get a President Obama...he's gonna tear that act to shreds...and risk America's security.

Also, I hate having people who ask "WHY" and that is one thing that gives me a disdain for liberal-minded people. There always has to be a reason for something...and nothing in their mind can ever just "happen". If the hurricane hits...it hits because it's mother nature...but to the liberals...there has to be some "present day underlying cause". If a terror attack happens...it's because the terrorists want us dead for reasons already known...but the liberals ask "WHY". I remember back in late June 2007, when there were attempted terror attacks in Scotland and the U.K, someone on the forum posted something to the effect of "Why would they attack Scotland if BLAH BLAH BLAH, ect ect"

I tried to relay to them...with terrorists...it is simple. THEY WANT US DEAD IF WE DON'T ADOPT THEIR ISLAMIC EXTREMIST VIEWS AND RELIGIONS. BY US...IT MEANS...ANYONE. Iraq, Germany, Scotland, Ireland, Spain, United States, ANYONE.

To ask "WHY" is dumb when we know the reason. "WHY DID WE INVADE IRAQ?" We invaded because it was 18 months after 9/11 and everyone knew Saddam was a threat. "WHY IRAQ IF THEY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11?" In the post-9/11 world, any and all threats had to be taken seriously. "WHY WERE THERE NO WMD's FOUND?" Saddam either moved them or the intel was bad.

The inability to ask questions and just react is what pisses me off so much about the so-called "conservatives".

As I have written here before, terror is not just an act. It's not like arresting someone for stealing your TV - action-reaction. Terror is a deep and personal ideology. Running around blowing up terrorists will NOT stop it. Understanding your enemy is not tantamount to agreeing with them. Knowing what drives them, I mean apart from the O'Reilly and Bush talking points, helps you fight them effectively. It's like a disease, for the most part the acts of terror are the symptoms of the illness, what drives it, is the ideology of terrorism.

Going all "John Rambo" makes everyone feel better - but doesn't solve the problem.

America wasn't to blame for 9/11 (especially not the innocent victims at the WTC, The Pentagon or in the planes), no more than the British commuters were to blame on 7/7 or my friend and the rest killed in Bali. BUT asking what drives people to consider this action valid and reasonable is sensible and reasonable. Just declaring them monsters and blowing them up like in an action film doesn't make the problem go away.

I'm getting increasingly worried about Obama and the working class white vote... this stuff isn't going to make things any easier.

[Smash255]

Obama should be even more forceful in repudiating his former pastor's views on race and so forth.  McCain should repudiate the visciously anti-Catholic, anti-gay and anti-Muslim views of John Hagee.

Hagee is not McCain's pastor, and McCain has no real association with him.  Wright married Michelle and Barack, and baptised their children.  Barack decided to join Trinity UCC because of Wright's message.

We have yet to hear George W. Bush repudiate the views of James "gays are child molesters" Dobson, Bob "Apartheid" Jones University, Pat "someone should nuke Foggy Bottom" Robertson, or Jerry "Gays caused 9/11" Falwell.

I dunno about Bush, but I think that John McCain has repudiated all of those folks at one time or another

He did repudiate those folks at one time, back when he was running in 2000.  Then he realized  blasting hate mongers may have cost him the nomination so this time around he sought out the hate monger vote.

[Democratic Hawk]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4443788&page=1

Im sorry to say this, but this garbage is what the majority of obama supporters agree. they dont blame the taliban or bin laden. they think the american governments actions in the middle east were partly to blame for 9/11 when terrorists invaded this country and murdered over 3000 people.

this is why obamas supporters vote for him. obama democrats love america conditionally. when george bush is president they bash everything he does. they never reach over and say actually thats a good policy. they just attack and attack.

There is no bigger 'hawk' among Democrats around here and I've endorsed Obama with great enthusiasm. Bush has been that abysmal, it has effectively killed any possibility of my having another 1972 moment! I'm not convinced that McCain wouldn't be a continuation of much the failed same

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And Obama's arent?

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Obama should be even more forceful in repudiating his former pastor's views on race and so forth. 

[Bay Ridge, Bklyn! Born and Bred]

A huge Y*A*W*N @ this topic

[agcatter]

It is to liberal Democrats.  They aren't the ones you need to worry about.  independents, working class Democrats, I would venture it's not such a yawner.

[opebo]

Only an idiot could fail to see that the motivation of the Resistance in attacking the US is anger over what the US has done to them.  They say it all the time, if anyone would listen.  Also you right wingers need to keep in mind that we have done them thousands of times (perhaps millions) more harm than the pinprick on 9/11, so you should feel happy.  Just think of the hundreds of thousands killed by our proxies - the Shah, the Isrealis, Saddam, the Sauds, plus the direct slaughters by american troops.  Not to mention the torture, the economic oppression, etc.  I'd say we're 'winning'.

[Franzl]

Only an idiot could fail to see that the motivation of the Resistance in attacking the US is anger over what the US has done to them.  They say it all the time, if anyone would listen.  Also you right wingers need to keep in mind that we have done them thousands of times (perhaps millions) more harm than the pinprick on 9/11, so you should feel happy.  Just think of the hundreds of thousands killed by our proxies - the Shah, the Isrealis, Saddam, the Sauds, plus the direct slaughters by american troops.  Not to mention the torture, the economic oppression, etc.  I'd say we're 'winning'.

while you are correct that most terrorists are reacting to perceived injustices, I despise your way of linking America to the root of all evil. The right-wingers' claim that they "attacked us because they hate freedom" is dumb, but the extreme left-wing position you support isn't proper. The terrorists over-estimate the role of America in their problems. They're responsible for a great deal themselves. You do like to attack the U.S. in any way you can.