Your article is divisive, it does not support the facts. Senator Obama has written two books, for which he has won Grammy awards for. He has written extensively on the issues that concern our nation. To suggest that he is immoral and has no substance, is unfair. I encourage you to learn about the candidate.
how do two grammy books prove necessarily that he is moral and substantive? the problem with the candidate, is that what is known is limited, while what is coming to be more fully known about him is increasingly disturbing. also, it's the candidate's responsibility to sell himself. quite frankly, he's an inspiring speaker, but is there anything else?
The odd thing about what you are saying is that you really do not have a point. You want to claim that Obama has no substance but look at the candidates that the Republican side put up. Conservatives do not agree with the major accomplishments of McCain, so obviously you all are clinging to something other than his record. Initially, you thought your candidate was going to be Rudy Guiliani, in which case, you would have suspended belief in all the things that you claim dear to support him. Matt and most of the people taking shots at Obama are not innocent. They claim to only care about the issues, but that is what you rarely her them talk about. None of you would hold Billy Graham to the same standards you are holding Jeremiah Wright even thought he has said some anti-semitic things. You give him a pass because you want to see the good in him. But you want to attach Obama to as many negative things as possible because in spite of what he has demonstrated himself to be, you all ultimately want to think that he is a bad guy. Its sad that Christians do not even want to hear people trying to put forth positive messages. But in the end, despite Matt's predictions, Obama will have an impact. To compare him to a Gary Hart is a big error.
3 Comments:
Your article is divisive, it does not support the facts. Senator Obama has written two books, for which he has won Grammy awards for. He has written extensively on the issues that concern our nation. To suggest that he is immoral and has no substance, is unfair. I encourage you to learn about the candidate.
nona,
just an honest question:
how do two grammy books prove necessarily that he is moral and substantive? the problem with the candidate, is that what is known is limited, while what is coming to be more fully known about him is increasingly disturbing. also, it's the candidate's responsibility to sell himself. quite frankly, he's an inspiring speaker, but is there anything else?
Adam:
The odd thing about what you are saying is that you really do not have a point. You want to claim that Obama has no substance but look at the candidates that the Republican side put up. Conservatives do not agree with the major accomplishments of McCain, so obviously you all are clinging to something other than his record. Initially, you thought your candidate was going to be Rudy Guiliani, in which case, you would have suspended belief in all the things that you claim dear to support him. Matt and most of the people taking shots at Obama are not innocent. They claim to only care about the issues, but that is what you rarely her them talk about. None of you would hold Billy Graham to the same standards you are holding Jeremiah Wright even thought he has said some anti-semitic things. You give him a pass because you want to see the good in him. But you want to attach Obama to as many negative things as possible because in spite of what he has demonstrated himself to be, you all ultimately want to think that he is a bad guy. Its sad that Christians do not even want to hear people trying to put forth positive messages. But in the end, despite Matt's predictions, Obama will have an impact. To compare him to a Gary Hart is a big error.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home