Originally Posted by KiteRider (Post 209592)

Good point, and this is the key to why Obama's idea was so poorly constructed, because it is easy to misinterpret that his attitude applies to ALL people of faith. Specifically, Obama is addressing the puzzling question of why guns, religion and immigration play an exaggerated role in the politics of rural and small-town America.

As a person of faith, I consider my duty to my neighbor and my role as a steward of the environment to be as important to my politics as my desire to curb pornography and limit abortion. I don't think Obama was talking about me. I think he was talking about the significant minority that acts as if the display of the ten commandments in our public spaces is necessary for the survival of the republic.

As a gun owner and aficionado who agrees that there are good reasons to have 'gun-free' zones in the corners of our country that are experiencing gang-warfare, I don't think Obama was talking to me. Instead I think he was talking about the significant minority that acts like every person should have the right to own a fully automatic uzi.

Originally Posted by ERCougar (Post 209634)

Then he should say, "There are some people who..." To characterize small-town people the way he did is offensive. It's as offensive as if I said "Black people are violent and stupid" because it applies to applies to a few. I know Cali draws a distinction here, but I fail to see the difference in either degree or quality.

I think we all agree that he worded it poorly. But what else do we have to go on? Even in his apologies he hasn't limited his remarks to a smaller subset. Instead, he totally ignores the xenophobe gun-toter part of his statement, focusing on how sympathetic he is towards these people who turn to their religion. Unbelievably patronizing.

The problem I see here is that I think this is how he really feels about rural Americans. It's probably a consequence of lack of exposure, I don't know. I'm not sure it disqualifies from being president--I'm sure he's not the only one in politics who looks down on rural America. But really, let's be honest--I'm sure he doesn't hate small-town Americans, but he certainly feels a little superior.

Originally Posted by KiteRider (Post 209626)

Communism allowed the Soviets to fund their war at soldier's pay. Capitalism increasingly requires the American taxpayer to fund our war at contractors' rates, which are significantly more pricey than soldiers' pay.

Originally Posted by KiteRider (Post 209666)

What is the relationship between capitalism and no-bid contracts?

Does the price of contractor work in Iraq reflect a superior product (ie. productivity) or is it simply hazard pay? Do you really think our soldiers are better off because we pay a contractor $200/hr to spoon slop in the mess hall compared to a soldier doing the same thing?

Originally Posted by Cali Coug (Post 209497)

Not according to the polls. Now it is your turn to provide some links. Show me that the only people who don't care about this are Obama suck ups. Show me that everyone but Obama suck ups are offended by what he said. You keep throwing crap out there hoping it will stick. Back it up. You can start with his poll numbers after the bitter comment (both nationally and in Pennsylvania and even in Indiana and North Carolina which haven't yet voted where he holds a lead).

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute (Post 209688)

Provide some links? You mean other than your posts?

I'll retract my comments to say that nobody I know but Obama suck ups don't have a problem with it. I can admit when I am wrong.

I do appreciate the links you did provide. I'll take a look at them, though I did notice that you emphasized in another post this:



[/B]Nothing in that conclusion indicates that people who cling to guns and religion are bitter. That is what Obama said. How you can defend it is incomprehensible.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug (Post 209698)

I am not sure what you think you see in the post I emphasized. As is widely documented, the US is, overall, much more religious for its levels of prosperity than other nations in comparable positions. As I noted, however, within the US the general trend still holds that those from poorer backgrounds tend to be much more religious than those from wealthier backgrounds (which is why I gave you a link showing that to be true as well).