LETTER: Letter writer misinformed in Obama criticisms

Posted by

in Opinions

Wednesday, August 27. 2008

Comments (12)

Dear Editor:

I’m writing in response to the letter from Alex Rebitch, “Letters praising Obama offer more of the same, old rhetoric,” The Madison County Journal, Aug. 21. First, let me say I’m glad to see a letter from a UGA student. More people of all ages should pay attention to what’s going on in our government as well as who wants to be elected to office. This country needs more informed voters.

However, regarding some of the opinions Mr. Rebitch expressed, I’m afraid he’s misinformed. I can’t address the opinions he expressed about other students. It sounds like the student population reflects the general population in that too few people care about politics and our government. But I want to address a number of other statements. First, he says, “Obama is a talented speaker but he lacks the experience needed to run the country,” and “McCain, while older, has more experience with foreign affairs then (than) Obama does in his pinky finger.” The president doesn’t “run the country.” He heads a bureaucracy that runs our country and is seen as the leader of our country. He has many advisors and all things considered it’s more important to have an intelligent and articulate president that uses good judgment than someone that’s served many years in government that doesn’t function very well. When Ronald Reagan was elected to office, his only experience was as the governor of a state and as an actor. Everyone seems to think he did an OK job.

Mr. Rebitch says, “Liberals such as her (Ms. Massey) still argue Iraq is an unwinnable war, despite recent reports that the situation there is improving.” Just because we hear reports that “the situation is improving” it doesn’t mean the war is winnable. The most important thing to remember is that we never should have started the war. The basis for the war was a lie and Barack Obama had the good judgment to oppose the war from the start.

Last, I have to address Mr. Rebitch’s statement, “They all blame Bush for the state of the economy and even gas prices. The president has very little influence over the matter.” The president doesn’t directly control the price of gas but his energy policy plays a major role in determining the price of gas.

President Bush has been in office for almost eight years (six of those with a Republican majority). His administration never pushed for more fuel efficient vehicles, never promoted development of alternative fuels or developed alternative energy programs. The lack of action by the Bush administration has a lot to do with the price of gas. And if additional off shore drilling is part of the solution why didn’t they push for it eight years ago. If they had maybe the price of gasoline wouldn’t have hit $4 per gallon.

From what he says in his letter, it sounds like Mr. Rebitch is just repeating what he hears on Fox news. Mr. Rebitch, you need more than one source for news.

From what he says John McCain is offering more of the same policies that President Bush has given us for the last four years. This country desperately needs a change. I’m supporting Barack Obama.

Sincerely,

Ed Gilmore

Carlton

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

#1 Anonymous on 08/27/08 at 03:59 PM [Reply]

As far as the drilling debate goes, have you ever heard of ANWR? They've been pushing to drill for oil there for years. Democrats keep blocking their effots.

#2 Anon E. Mouse on 08/28/08 at 07:28 AM [Reply]

Mister Obama says he's different from the "politians", he's going to bring change. He hasn't told us what changes he's going to make, nor how he thinks he is going to make them. Politians have promised that they will be different, that they will fix what is wrong with the government ever since the second person decided to be a politian. But they never do. And Barack Hussein Obama is exactly more of the same. He is "different"...hmpf. He said he was going to oppose the NAFTA like laws to protect American jobs. When the Canadian Prime Minister was upset by this, Mister Obama's campaign manager told the Prime Minister not to worry, it was all just empty campaign talk, that Mister Obama wouldn't do it after he was elected. Change? Same old crap. Mister Obama ran commercials where he "approved this message" telling everyone how his poor mother had to raise him alone...never hinting that he had a step-father there to help raise him. Another attempt to mislead the public to gain simpathy and support that he doesn't deserve. Just like all of the other politians. Some people would consider it an out right lie. I do. How about you? And how about that missing father and the, whoops, forgotten about step father? Muslims, both of them, and there's nothing wrong with that. BUT Mister Obama INSISTS that he is now and always has been a Christian. When someone becomes a Muslim, they change their name to a Muslim name. But I see that Mister Barack Hussein Obama didn't change his name to a NON-MUSLIM name. Hmmm...I wonder about that. And you can really count on Mister Obama to stick with you through the hard times...just like he did with his former pastor. One week he says he can no more put him away than he could a family member...and then, suddenly, just a week later he is admitting how bad his judgement about people really is, since he had known this pastor for YEARS and only now finds out that his "almost family" pastor isn't such a great guy after all. And you want THIS guy to have control of the nuclear arsenal??? And not to pick on her, but do you REALLY want a First Lady who is quoted publicly as saying she has NEVER had any pride in the United States of America? Now THAT, at least IS a change. I've never heard ANY OTHER potential first lady say anything even remotely like that. Oh, but that was his wife, not Mister Obama...wasn't it. So...again, exactly what are those changes Mister Obama is planning? If any of you KNOW what they ACTUALLY are, you might want to share with the class. Mister Gilmore, I know McCain isn't such a great choice either...but at least he IS a TRUE American Patriot, regardless of anything else. And he knows the consequences of war all too well from first hand experience. Or do you want someone sending your son, daughter or some other family member to war without having the experience to decide if its worth the cost? I truly hope that you and all of the others that have fallen for Mister Obama's fakery and smooth talk of empty promises will take a moment and look hard and deep enough to see the house of cards he's built before its too late for us all. I know most people won't, they want to believe the lies because Mister Obama is telling everyone exactly what they want to hear. Open your eyes, open your minds, think it through and do the right thing. Please. For all of our sakes.

#3 Anon E. Mouse on 08/28/08 at 10:54 AM [Reply]

This country does need change. And Barack Hussein Obama has promised change. But what exactly is he going to change? And exactly how does he intend to effect these changes? Obama talks a lot, and he's very convincing. But if you start to look deeper, there's nothing there but more empty promises. There are no specific answers because he has no REAL answers.

Obama is just more of the same old political hogwash that he claims to reject. Take, for instance, his stand against laws which take jobs away from the American worker and put them in other countries. Regardless of how you feel about that situation, his campaign actions prove that he can't be trusted. When the Canadian Prime Minister objected to Obama's stance, Obama's campaign manager reassured the Prime Minister that it was all just campaign promises, that when Mister Obama is president he won't stand in the way of those jobs moving to Canada, that Mister Obama was just telling the American people what they wanted to hear so he could get elected. Change? Sounds like more of the same to me.

To hear Mister Obama's television commercials, you are lead to believe that he was raised by a "single mother", alone and struggling to raise her son right! The ad is intentionally misleading people in order to gain sympathy and support. No credit is given to his stepfather. Actually his stepfather is not even mentioned. Intentionally. Change? From dishonest politicians to...more dishonest politicians?

Mister Obama knows that it is unpopular to be Muslim in this country right now, so he insists repeatedly that he is now and always has been a Christian. With a Muslim name. Barack Hussein Obama. His father is Muslim. His stepfather is Muslim. Muslim converts change their names when they convert to the Muslim faith. Barack Hussein Obama doesn't feel the need to change his obviously Muslim name to a non-Muslim name. If he is so strongly Christian, would he not wish to demonstrate that by rejecting such a non-Christian name? But he wouldn't want to CHANGE, I suppose. Hmmm...makes me wonder.

Barack Hussein Obama can't be trusted. He doesn't stick to his word. He has proven that he is a poor judge of character. He professed to be so close to his (now former) pastor that he said that his pastor was like family. He could no more put his pastor away than he could family. How long did that last? Now he claims that this same person that he knew so well and loved so dearly is not the man that he believed him to be! And after years and years of knowing his pastor, in just a matter of weeks he realized that he didn't know him after all! He sure did CHANGE on that topic. Maybe this is the CHANGE that he keeps referring to?

Have you EVER heard of ANY prospective First Lady talk negatively about her country? Mister Obama's wife was quoted as saying that she has NEVER had any pride in her country. I assume she was referring to the United States of America, but perhaps she feels that some other country is "her" country? Imagine that! A First Lady who has NO pride in the United States! That certainly IS a CHANGE, isn't it?

John McCain would not be my first choice for President of the United States, but given the choice between him and Mister Obama, it seems obvious who is the better man for the job. Mister Obama has never fought in a war and yet would be the decision maker who could send you, your sons, daughter, grandchildren, or friends to fight and die. At least John McCain knows the price you pay when you go to war. Mister McCain already paid that price.

It would be nice to see positive change in our government leaders, but beware this promise of change that Barack Hussein Obama keeps offering. You may just get what you ask for, and you might not like what you get!

#3.1 Anonymous on 08/28/08 at 10:47 PM [Reply]

You sound so versed in your smears of Obama. So I see
you too have been brainwashed by the Right Wing of
the Republican party or you are a bigot (or both)
You people just dont get it, do you?
Are country is heading in the wrong direction and
McCain will continue to steer it in that direction
with no real good ideas on anything.
Do you want your children to grow up suffering
in this economy, where billions of dollars a month
go overseas (Iraq) while we struggle.
If you vote for McCain, watch what happens. Just
like under Bush, we will struggle economicaly and
will be looked down upon by the rest of the world
militarily (we were looked up to prior to 2003)
Think about it real hard.
We need change now.....don't be stupid....
Vote Barack Obama.

#3.1.1 Anonymous on 08/29/08 at 09:45 AM [Reply]

I didn't write the above posts, but most of the issues posed by these "smears" have yet to be effectively addressed. Everytime these issues are presented you either hear the same old Republican-brainwashed-talk radio-Fox news excuse or else the Democrats try to paint McCain as being Georige W. Bush. How about telling us exactly how Obama plans on bringing about these changes? Just having a different guy in office is not the answer.

#3.1.2 Anonymous on 08/29/08 at 12:15 PM [Reply]

And now we see one of Barack Hussein Obama's minions jump to the attack with insults because they have no defense against the truth, accusing someone of SMEARS who is merely posting FACTS, because they can't refute the truth. The TRUTH is that the country IS NOT heading in the right direction but that same truth is that Obama is nothing but MORE OF THE SAME. Every promise he has made has been empty, every mention of CHANGE is a diversion from his lack of any substantial idea as to exactly WHAT he can or will do if elected president. The person in the previous post wants you to think that Obama has all the answers...which by the way is exactly what Obama wants you to believe as well...but yet AGAIN has nothing but EMPTY promises of CHANGE to imply that if Obama is elected that HE is going to "save us all". Sorry chief, but Jesus Christ already took care of that a bit over 2000 years ago, and let me tell you...Obama is NOT the second coming. I won't resort to calling the person from the previous post stupid or brain-washed. I think it is blatantly OBVIOUS (to everyone who is NOT stupid or brain-washed by Obama's vague promises) exactly who is and who is not stupid.

So, to paraphrase the previous message's warning, go ahead...BE stupid...vote for Barack Hussein Obama...and watch your country and your future go down the drain.

#3.1.2.1 Anonymous on 08/29/08 at 06:02 PM [Reply]

They will not answer the questions because Obama has yet to feed them the lines. Just like they could not refute my post about America's true problems, which are immorality and lack of personal responsibility. But, hey, if we had personal responsibility and morality in America, that would put the Democratic Party out of business, wouldn't it?

#3.1.3 Anonymous on 09/02/08 at 06:03 AM [Reply]

Accusing someone of being a bigot because they don't agree with you is a typical response of someone who IS a bigot. Nothing was mentioned about ethnicity, only facts about the candidate's behavior and campaign actions. Yet you accuse someone of being a bigot. That fairly DRIPS of YOU supporting Obama based on ethnic choice, rather than looking at the FACTS. Bigot indeed. If you want to see one, try looking in the mirror.

#4 Kathy W on 09/01/08 at 02:39 PM [Reply]

You folks are quite amusing! My comments would be:
#1 - George W Bush has no military experience (certainly no combat experience), so it's a little lame to use Obama's lack thereof as a "conservative" reason not to vote for him.
#2 - Anybody who speaks in terms of "EVERY" (as in: EVERY thing Obama says is not true, EVERY person who does not agree with that is stupid, etc. etc. - pick one -) is really not somebody I care to listen to.
#3 - Questioning Obama's religious beliefs is really not relevant. That is a very personal and private matter for each individual, it is supposed to be kept separate from State, and it would be a good "Christian's" God who would say, "Judge not, lest ye be judged". Whether or not a person is moral has nothing to do with his or her religion. (And really, to imply that his name tells you anything about his personal feelings, beliefs or capabilities is, well, to use one of your favorite words.....stupid.)
But, have fun anyway!

#4.1 Anonymous on 09/02/08 at 06:49 AM [Reply]

Not to offend, Kathy, but I don't think it will be amusing a year from now. And since you are trying to be thoughtful about these posts…

#1. George W. Bush isn't up for election so his military experience is only of importance at this point as a measure against the experience of the current candidates. But, his lack of military experience could easily be the reason our military is still fighting in an unpopular war and in that regard, Barack Obama's similar lack of military experience is not exactly helpful for his campaign.
#2. You are right about the word "EVERY" being improperly used as a global term, however it is obviously being used to display the writer's feeling that they can believe nothing that they hear from Obama's camp. I'm quite sure others feel the same way about what comes from the McCain camp, and others feel the same way about anything they hear from either camp. Even things that normally would be accepted at face value are doubted when so much of what is said leaves one with more questions than answers.
#3. Obama's religious beliefs are relevant, actually. Everyone has a right to their own religious beliefs and if the person in the presidency holds beliefs that are in opposition to your own, that has a direct influence on your vote. His choice IS personal, but his choice is NOT private as he is running for the office of President of the United States of America, and that makes it relevant to everyone who votes. So unless he is agnostic, then your reference to the separation of church and state is meaningless, as religious beliefs often have influence over decisions made by the President. Also, as it is a known behavior of Muslim converts to change their name to show the world that they believe in the Muslim faith, that person's change of name does indeed reflect his personal feelings and beliefs. The writer was implying that if someone with a Muslim "sounding" name was a Christian, they should change their name from that to a more "Christian" name. But everyone knows that the Christain faith does not usually require a change of name (unless your become Pope). And I believe it was the person replying that was using "stupid" and "bigot", not the initial message poster, which didn't resort to calling names until they responded to what amounts to an attack. I don't think the implication that Obama is moral or immoral was made in regard to religious belief, it appears that his religious beliefs were an entirely different and separate reason that the writer does not want to vote for him.

As for "judge not, lest ye be judged"...how else are you going to decide who to vote for if you don't use your best judgement? Actually, I hope EVERYONE "judges" in a well thought out, logical manner, who they believe the best candidate is, instead of relying on stereotypes, emotional "knee-jerk" reactions or ethinic reasons. If you don't judge which is the better candidate, your only option is not to vote at all. I don't believe that was the intent of the verse. But, I'll let you be the judge of that.
;-)

#5 Kathy W on 09/02/08 at 02:32 PM [Reply]

I will still find these blogs amusing a year from now. (You didn't ask me why I found them amusing.)
I was responding to everyone in general, not just one writer, so it doesn't matter who said what. After reading the comments, those were the thoughts I had.
You are 100% incorrect in your statement that Obama's religious beliefs are relevant. It may be relevant to you, but it is not to me. I am agnostic. (So discussing anything to do with religion with me is really a waste of time, but you didn't know that, did you?) I do not judge people in order to decide who to vote for. I consider what's important to me and my family and my world, and whoever comes closest to addressing those issues in a way that pleases me, that is who I vote for. There's no judgement of the person involved there. His/her religion doesn't matter to me, his/her name doesn't matter to me, and EVERY word that comes out of his/her mouth does not have to make me happy.
Now just as before, these are my opinions. I'm allowed to have them, and since they are mine, you really shouldn't try to correct them. I stated nothing as "fact".
But I do agree that I shouldn't have quoted the "judgement" thing, 'cause you're right. I really don't know what that's supposed to mean so I shouldn't be using it. Thanks for pointing that out.
Thanks.

#5.1 Anonymous on 09/03/08 at 09:13 AM [Reply]

The postings my be amusing, I suppose, depending on one's point of view. And no, I didn't ask why you found them amusing, because I didn't and don't think that your reason for amusement is relevant to me. Please feel free, if you like, to explain what you found amusing, but I don't need to know. Being agnostic, you say you don't find religious beliefs to be relevant, but I would think that you might change your mind about that IF someone who is elected made decisions that you oppose based on those religious beliefs. So I have to say that I can't accept that religious beliefs are irrelevant regardless of YOUR religious beliefs or lack thereof. I also disagree with you about "judgement". I suppose you can use which ever definition of the word that you like, but if you "evaluate" something or someone, in effect you ARE making a judgement. I believe that "judge not, lest ye be judged" means don't hold yourself in higher esteem or consider yourself better than someone else, lest ye be viewed thru the same criteria. Its not a command to not use good "judgement". :-)

And I wouldn't DREAM of trying to deny you your opinions. However, if you post them in a public forum, then anyone has the right to express their opinion also, and they have the right to attempt to "correct" your opinions if they disagree with them.

Regardless, its NOT a personal attack, and no offense was intended.

Add Comment

Name
Email
Homepage
In reply to
Comment: E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.

Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above:
Phone*

What is seven minus seven?
: Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry
: Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

LETTER: Letter writer misinformed in Obama criticisms

MadisonJournalTODAY

LETTER: Letter writer misinformed in Obama criticisms

Recent Stories

Recent Comments

Sister Sites

Archives

Community

Keyword Tags