You can ACCEPT and UNDERSTAND someone who is DIFFERENT than you...everyone's DIFFERENT...

IF ONE CANNOT, one is making DISRESPECTFUL JUDGMENTS...and one is being SELF-RIGHTEOUS...

Everyone has a RIGHT to their own BELIEFS and OPINIONS...based on many different factors...

To ME, what MATTERS is IF he wants to UNITE the COUNTRY and to be a GOOD PRESIDENT...

What does it MATTER, Nia whether he is LABELED a "conservative" or a "liberal"..it didn't used to matter to me as much as it does NOW from reading HERE on the forum...

There REALLY seems to be a VIEW of BAD vs. GOOD and WRONG vs. RIGHT associated with these LABELS of PEOPLE..that I was NAIVE about..NO MORE...I truly DO believe in UNITY..everyone STRIVING to MAKE PEACE and to GET ALONG WITH EACH OTHER without worrying so much about the LABELS..everyone working towards THE GREATER GOOD OF SOCIETY...
*****************************************
Mimi,
I agree about the labels....."Liberal" does not equal bad and conservative does not equal good .... I did not mean that he needed to be LABLED a "conservative" democrat......just that I hope he acts like one....meaning his policies and programs are not the same old handouts and cuts etc. associated with liberal democrats .....If he wants to unite the American people,I would hope that the he will be more middle of the road as a president than he was as a senator. He does give the impression he will do that....but, Bush called himself a unifier (or something like that) in 2000.....so, who really knows....like I said before, I can not help being skeptical of politicians....even if they actually do have good intentions.

I don't have a problem w/ the idea of working toward the greater good for society.......Obama will not be able to please everybody but if he is elected I hope most of us will try to find the common ground as Americans for the next four years (same w/ McCain).


***********************************
you also said...
Quote:worry that he will use government money to bring back bad welfare programs

Why? He has said that this has been one of his MAJOR CHANGES in BELIEF. What would be the PURPOSE of bringing back BAD welfare programs?

Quote:and will care more about protecting civil rights

What's WRONG with protecting CIVIL RIGHTS? BOTH can be done... protecting CIVIL RIGHTS as well as our BORDERS.

Just wondering...

Trying to UNDERSTAND rather than FIGHT about differences in BELIEF..
*************************************

I understand that you are not trying to fight but to understand. I appreciate that. I usually stay away from talking politics w/ people because I have some mixed priorities (there is no label/party for me)...I have to sift thru all the info and read between all the lines to find a candidate I can support...and even then, I remain wary.

I know Obama says that he has different beliefs and plans for change when it comes to welfare and other programs...I would love to believe him. If he is elected, I am holding onto that hope that they are different and they can work.......but, when I look at his (relatively short) record and I read between the lines of his life,I choose to remain a little bit wary ....but, not to the point where I think he is wrong or bad, he just has some different priorities than I do.

I would never try to sway you from voting for him. I have several brothers and in-laws who will vote for him and I completely understand their reasons and respect that. He is the right candidate for them. That is why we have candidates (plural) and why we vote.

THANKS, NIA!!

Helpful responses...I see and understand EXACTLY what you mean and where you are coming from...

I do ENJOY hearing different perspectives..such as YOURS...

Hey Mimi, I thought of You (and Barack, LOL) when I read this...It's a very nice philosophy and I actually hold it deep in my own heart (My faith in mankind is too jaded to live it).....but,I understand it and I think it's a noble philosophy that the world would be much worse off without. So, for the sake of history, I am able to make peace with the idea of the pendulum swinging to the left.


[/quote]
Liberalism, philosophy or movement that has as its aim the development of individual freedom. Because the concepts of liberty or freedom change in different historical periods the specific programs of liberalism also change. The final aim of liberalism, however, remains fixed, as does its characteristic belief not only in essential human goodness but also in human rationality. Liberalism assumes that people, having a rational intellect, have the ability to recognize problems and solve them and thus can achieve systematic improvement in the human condition. Often opposed to liberalism is the doctrine of conservatism, which, simply stated, supports the maintenance of the status quo. Liberalism, which seeks what it considers to be improvement or progress, necessarily desires to change the existing order**************************

YES..according to THIS VIEWPOINT..I am a LIBERAL..ahhhh LABELS...this DEFINITELY describes the way I look at things...

Some..maybe many folks who understood this all better..will read this and say..DUH..

Mimi, I think this is one of the "fundamental" differences between liberals and conservatives. The liberals take this to the extreme and will "tolerate" anything, while the conservatives will accept the premise WITH the caveat that anarchy is the result if NO judgments are made between "good and evil."


I also suspect that YOU don't accept your premise as written.

For example, I doubt it you think that it's "okay" for someone to choose to commit adultery, especially when their spouse "does not think it's okay."

That is NOT a "disrespectful judgment," but it IS a judgment based on "right and wrong" behavior.

While anyone CAN hold any belief and/or opinion that they want to, that does NOT "automatically" mean that the belief or opinion is RIGHT.

I CAN "accept," for example, that someone is a "child of God" while at the same time "judging" their beliefs, opinions, and actions as being WRONG and in opposition to God's Standards of right and wrong.

I CAN accept someone's right to hold a belief or opinion and at the same time TOTALLY disrespect that OPINION as being false or in error.

And I suspect you do the same sort of thing all the time too.

FH when I said that we are all different, I meant no one person is like the other. Even if they are identical twins they are bound to want to differentiate themselves. I believe evil does exists as well. That's why we have pedophiles, abusers, murderers, so forth and so on. However one would think since our society is supposedly so much more advanced, how come we have some people who act like animals? How come we in this day and age have not learn to express ourselves without trying to attack someone else because their opinion isn't the same. This country is so much more diverse now than any other time. Yet I am afraid no matter who wins this election, because some people are overly invested in the outcome emotionally that there will be racial tension. If this happens no matter the color of any one's skin we all will be effected.

You raise some good issues for discussion here. I have to leave right now, so all I'll "toss out" there right now for you to think about is this as one source of this racial tension you speak about:

Black Liberation Theology.

That is what Obama embraced for at least 20 years as he sat under Rev. Wright's "tutelage."

Consider the divisiveness of that theology.

and abortionists.



Some opinions SHOULD be attacked. Racism should be attacked...as should those that support it. Abortion should be attacked...as should those that support it. YOU don't get to decide for others what horrors SHOULD be attacked. SOME people think that adultery, child abuse, sexual assault, etc are all just a matter of opinion. Ever hear of NAMBLA??? They truly believe what they espouse....should their horrid views not be attacked??? Abortion, when the Planned Parenthood sterilization is stripped away is just as horrible. They too should be attacked.




Any guess as to what racial group would riot if the election didn't go their way??? I seem to have missed the riots after JFK and Bobby Kennedy were killed. MLK...no missing those riots.

Race is not the important issue in this election for most. I think polls suggest 6% of whites will not vote for a black man. The issue goes way deeper than skin color. BA is likely to be elected...and IMHO, is unlikely to serve a full year in office...and it won't be because of the color of his skin.

Medc, you have an interesting perspective. I have to say though that JFK was a democrat. He was also a man born without much that made it to presidency so he could be empathetic to people that struggled. However he was not a black man. So the situations while similar,are not the same. Blacks rioted after MLK because they were all ready feeling injustice. However from all the racial tension I am seeing from both sides. I think if Obama wins it will be racial tension and if McCain wins it will be racial tension and the fact that democrats have felt over the last two elections prior to this one that they were cheated out of a win. Blacks in this country have always been seen as the under dog. So if Obama wins I think it will upset set the status quo to the point where a lot of people will be afraid because they will be afraid that they will have to reap what they and their ancestors have sowed. I think this is why people kept asking Obama if it is God's will for him to become president.

As far as the people that do heinous things, while it is saddening. We will all face judgment one day for our deeds. People commit terrible act everyday that have laws against said actions. My point is laws do not keep people from doing illegal things. Never have never will completely stop them. If it did then we would have no need for legal or justice systems. They are in place to make sure that the ones that break the laws have to pay for their crimes.

HUH??? Born without much??? are we talking about John F. Kennedy, son of Joe Kennedy, Sr??? (Harvard Graduate, finance and commodity speculator who earned fortunes????).

Ok maybe I miss spoke about JFK being able to be empathetic. That is besides the point what about the rest of my post? I am not trying to quiet you MEDC. I am saying you get more flies with honey than you do vinegar. If you are trying to get people to want to be able to see things from your point of view do you think talking down to them will get them to listen? Has that work for you before? If so when? You very well may have a good argument however presentation is everything. If you have a wonderful new product you are trying to sell, if you talk to people about why this product is so great and how they will benefit from it, vs saying this is the best product since sliced bread and whoever doesn't buy it, is just silly. Which way do you think will be more effective?

Let it go, Dig...gonna have to stick to the topic of the thread in order for it not to be locked.

When I want your opinion as to how to speak to people, I will be sure to ask for your learned guidance. For now, I will continue speaking in a fashion that has served me very well. I suggest that you do what works for you.

The flies and honey metaphor works very well though for those that support Obama. Flies to honey.

Medc aside from the JFK reference. What about the other statements I made? In regards to the tension regarding the race.

Yes Ma'am Mims. Sorry. We all have our short comings. No one is perfect. Whatever we do wrong we will all have to pay for the consequences of our actions. He who is without sin may cast the first stone. I am a sinner we all are. No one sin is any less or more than the other. Some hurt people more than others however they are all just as damning.

Revera I emailed you.

We're done!