Jump to content

Barack Obama Elected President!


Max

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

Okay why is hillary not being able to use the coffee machine in a convient store news? Was it a slow news day or what? Is it just me or does the media continously try to make hillary look stupid? An I said this months ago but why is every hillary picture so crazy looking? :lol: I truly believe the male dominated media is being sexist towards her.imo I'm not just talking about right now but since the beginning of this year's campaigning.

Its funny how I was talking about faux news yesterday and they are actually treating hillary better than all the news networks put together, but we all know what thats about. :rolleyes: My jaw is literally dropping watching bill O' interview with hillary and he's actually letting her answer questions and not getting too defensive. :lol::o:o:o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well bush has a 71% dissaproval rating yet a certain news channel that shall remain nameless keeps saying his presidency wasn't all that bad. But I guess it wouldn't seem that bad to them considering this is the same group that is making billions off people paying high gas prices, yeah, the economy is great for them so why wouldn't they approve of bush. :angry::rolleyes: If it wasn't for the lower and middle class they would be poor so I really don't understand why they don't want to share the wealth, which is why I will never be a republican, they want to keep the less fortuanate down so they can keep getting richer and richer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Im so over these primary elections. I wish it would end already. Its a shame that Hillary and Barack are fighting bc they have the same goals; just different means of getting there. They should be working together, not against each other and ultimately what they are doing is the Republicans dirty work. When it comes time for either of them to go up against McCain, his camp has months worth of negative press and buzz against them that he can use and Hillary and Obama are the ones that laid it all out there. Both are making the other look negative and the Republicans are loving it as they couldnt ask for anything better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

(AP) -- Conservative Christian leaders who believe the word "evangelical" has lost its religious meaning plan to release a starkly self-critical document saying the movement has become too political and has diminished the Gospel through its approach to the culture wars.

art.evangelicals.gi.jpg

The declaration encourages Christians to uphold traditional marriage, as in this Massachusetts protest.

The statement, called "An Evangelical Manifesto," condemns Christians on the right and left for using faith to express political views without regard to the truth of the Bible, according to a draft of the document obtained Friday by The Associated Press.

"That way faith loses its independence, Christians become 'useful idiots' for one political party or another, and the Christian faith becomes an ideology," according to the draft.

The declaration, scheduled to be released Wednesday in Washington, encourages Christians to be politically engaged and uphold teachings such as traditional marriage. But the drafters say evangelicals have often expressed "truth without love," helping create a backlash against religion during a "generation of culture warring."

"All too often we have attacked the evils and injustices of others," the statement says, "while we have condoned our own sins." It argues, "we must reform our own behavior."

The document is the latest chapter in the debate among conservative Christians about their role in public life. Most veteran leaders believe the focus should remain on abortion and marriage, while other evangelicals -- especially in the younger generation -- are pushing for a broader agenda. The manifesto sides with those seeking a wide-range of concerns beyond "single-issue politics."

Among the signers of the manifesto are Os Guiness, a well-known evangelical author and speaker, and Richard Mouw, president of Fuller Theological Seminary, a leading evangelical school in Pasadena, California. Organizers declined to comment until the final document is released.

Don't Miss

* U.S. ignores religious oppression, panel says

They say more than 80 evangelicals have signed the statement, although only a few names have been released. A. Larry Ross, spokesman for the authors, said the theologians and Christian leaders involved are seeking to "go back to the root theological meaning of the term evangelical."

Some champions of traditional culture war issues are not among the supporters.

Richard Land, head of the public policy arm for the Southern Baptist Convention, said through a spokeswoman that he has not seen the document and was not asked to sign it.

James Dobson, the influential founder of Focus on the Family, a Christian group in Colorado Springs, Colorado, did not sign the document, said Gary Schneeberger, a Dobson spokesman. Schneeberger would not say whether Dobson had read the manifesto or had been asked to sign on.

Phil Burress, an Ohio activist who networks with national evangelical leaders, said that if high-profile evangelical leaders such as Dobson and Land don't support the document, "it's like throwing a pebble in the ocean" and will carry no weight.

But the drafters hope they can start a movement among evangelicals to reflect and act on the document. "We must find a new understanding of our place in public life," the drafters wrote. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

May 3, 2008, 10:18PM

Some blacks may stay home if Obama not on ballot

More becoming disenchanted with the Clintons after 'Judas' comment

Blacks have been the Democratic Party's most reliable bloc, giving about 90 percent of their votes to former Vice President Al Gore and Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., in the last two presidential elections.

In a close election this year, a black exodus from the voting booth could be costly to Democrats, particularly in the South, where blacks are a large proportion of the electorate.

INDIANAPOLIS — Many black voters are making it very clear: They're concerned that Sen. Barack Obama is going to lose the Democratic presidential nomination that they see as rightfully his, and if that happens, a lot of them may stay home in November.

"It would hurt me not to vote," said Charles Clark, an Indianapolis retiree. He's thinking about leaving the presidential box on his ballot blank this fall if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the Democrats' nominee.

"There was a heck of a push made so blacks could vote. I know that," he said. "But it would also be very unfair if they pushed Barack Obama to the side."

Michelle Moore, an Indianapolis housewife, is less gentle: "Hillary Clinton would not even still be in the race if Obama was a white man."

Her tough tone was common last week in this city's black community.

Why, people asked, is the Illinois senator's relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright being judged so harshly? Why won't Democratic Party officials acknowledge that Obama's in the lead and unite around him?

If Obama isn't the nominee, "there would be a significant number of African-Americans who would stay home.

They're not voting for (presumptive Republican nominee) John McCain," predicted David Bositis, a senior analyst at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, which researches black voting trends.

'Old South politics'

Todd Shaw, a University of South Carolina political science professor, agreed, citing a groundswell of black disenchantment with both Bill and Hillary Clinton.

They're particularly annoyed by Bill Clinton's performance during the South Carolina primary and by Clinton supporter James Carville's description of New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Latino, as "Judas" for endorsing Obama over Hillary Clinton.

"The comment plays very badly with African-Americans and Latinos," Shaw said. "They remind them of 'Look what we've done for you; you should stay in line.'

That doesn't sit well with voters of color. They view it as Northern machine politics or Old South boss politics."

Hunter Bacot, an associate professor of political science at Elon University in North Carolina, saw another piece of political history haunting black Obama backers.

"There's a sentiment among blacks that they've been taken for granted by the Democratic Party," Bacot said. "If Obama loses, it's as though their candidate's victory was overturned."

Hitting the ceiling

Several blacks in Indiana, which holds a crucial Democratic primary on Tuesday, said they could be seeing yet another effort by the white establishment to crush any black who's earned a powerful position.

"Here we go again," said Eddie Pryor, an Indianapolis retiree.

"It's like there's a ceiling for us," added Bangen Finley, an Indianapolis machinist.

But Jerry Mondesire, the president of the Philadelphia chapter of the NAACP and publisher of The Philadelphia Sunday Sun, a black weekly newspaper, said it's foolish for any Democrat to refuse to vote if his or her candidate isn't the nominee.

"It's a stupid way for Obama supporters to think and a stupid way for Hillary Clinton supporters to think," said Mondesire, a pledged Clinton delegate.

"It's a selfish and destructive way to think. I can't think of what the Supreme Court would look like if McCain were elected. Roe v. Wade could be diminished, and Brown v. Board of Education could be impacted."

Some black voters in Indiana acknowledge that they might come around even if Clinton wins.

"I am offended by Hillary Clinton. What's going on now is unwarranted," said Shirley Graham, an Indianapolis auto company worker. But she will vote Democratic in the fall.

"I am a Christian. I can't allow myself to have lingering bitterness," she said.

Michelle Moore, however, has made up her mind: Clinton is out. "Senator Obama is just not being treated fairly," she insisted. "You would think everything that Reverend Wright says is coming right from Obama's mouth."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

From CBS News:

Clinton Reminds Viewers: Journalist Was Once on Her Side

Posted by Fernando Suarez| Comments4

(CBS)

From CBS News' Fernando Suarez:

INDIANAPOLIS -- Hillary Clinton appeared on ABC’s "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" this morning in an interview filled with awkward moments and strange interactions between the two former colleagues (Stephanopoulos worked under President Bill Clinton for 4 years.)

The interview was billed as a “town hall” where Indiana voters would get a chance to ask Clinton questions. Minutes into the interview, Clinton decided to ditch her chair, preferring to stand and address the audience. What ensued was an awkward interaction between Clinton and Stephanopoulos when the ABC host was forced to ask a few questions from his chair while Clinton loomed over him. (In fairness to Stephanopoulos, oftentimes in seated interview settings the journalist and/or the guest have their microphone cord taped to the chair, restricting one's movement.)

Stephanopoulos tried to recover by standing alongside Clinton, but was forced to stand in a strange position as he remained tied to his chair.

After the first commercial break, the two were seated again, but within seconds Clinton decided she had had enough, forcing Stephanopoulos to stand, again.

The interview took another unpleasant turn when Stephanopoulos tried to pin down Clinton over her position on NAFTA, a trade program introduced by her husband during his presidency. Clinton has come out against the plan saying it was not good for American workers. Stephanopoulos said, “The Clinton administration didn’t do enough to address the downside of globalization and therefore failed the workers in Indiana and the workers of the West?"

Clinton clearly took offense to the tone of the question and while answering, decided to take a jab at the host.

"Well I believe, George, in the 1990s we had a booming economy that created nearly 23 million new jobs, more people were lifted out of poverty in any time in our near history. It was an economy that worked for everyone, not just the rich, the wealthy and the well connected, but there were underlying issues that we didn't understan fully. Now, you remember this, because George did work in that '92 campaign - George and I actually were against NAFTA - I'm talking about him in his previous life, before he was an objective journalist,” Clinton said to a visibly annoyed Stephanopoulos.

Some have speculated that Clinton prefers appearing on Stephanopoulos’ show because she can often turn a question around to include him as a former staffer for her husband.

Just four days before the Iowa Caucuses in late December Clinton appeared on "This Week" and implemented a similar strategy. When Stephanopoulos asked Clinton what qualified her to be commander-in-chief when reports indicated that she had never sat in on a national security meeting taking place at the White House Clinton responded, “You know, I can imagine what the stories would have been had I attended a National Security Council meeting. You were there. I think you can vouch for that.”

The remainder of the program consisted of a variety of quesitons on gas prices, foreign poliy and the economy. There were also a group of North Carolina voters being piped in via satelite who were also able to ask questions of Clinton.

Clinton’s interview on "This Week," comes as her opponent Barack Obama appeared on NBC’s "Meet the Press" this morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Sunday Talk: Obama Is Grilled on Wright

Nick Timiraos reports from Indianapolis on the presidential race:

Barack Obama defended the way in which he has distanced himself from former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. during an hourlong grilling before Tim Russert on Meet the Press on Sunday.

The Illinois senator was pressed to explain why he hadn’t done more to distance himself from Wright before his angry denunciation of the pastor’s attempt to defend himself earlier this week. Why hadn’t he made a cleaner break with Wright in March, Russert inquired, when Obama initially condemned Wright’s remarks but said he could not disassociate himself from his pastor.

Sunday TalkRussert also asked Obama why he had even waited that long because he had acknowledged Wright posed a problem for his campaign when he uninvited his pastor from delivering the invocation at his presidential announcement rally.

Obama said that Wright’s decision to dig in and defend his controversial remarks on race and America during his publicity tour earlier this week, which offered the Chicago cleric the chance to apologize for those same remarks, had been the last straw. Pressed to name what he had learned the the experience, Obama replied: “When you’re in national politics, it’s always good to pull the Band-Aid off quick.”

Obama also defended himself against charges that he might be open to attacks on his judgment for attending the church and appearing to stand by his pastor at first. “My commitment is to the church, not to the pastor,” he said. “I think that’s shared by millions of people who are going to church this morning.”

Russert wanted to know how Obama would prevent himself by being Swift-boated, where political opponents could raise questions about his patriotism for issues ranging from the Wright relationship to Obama’s rare wearing of a flag pin. Obama said he wouldn’t challenge his opponents’ patriotism and that he wouldn’t let people question his, pointing to his biography once again as an example that America was a great source of good for the world.

“This country defines for me what’s possible for — not just for me but so many people — who see this country as a beacon of good,” he said.

The conversation stayed on Wright for the first 15 minutes of the program, before moving onto the signature issue of the campaign in Indiana and North Carolina: gas prices. Obama has opposed a gas-tax holiday and criticized his opponents for pandering on the measure. The former state senator defended a 2000 vote to ease the state gas tax. “I voted for it,” he said. “Then six months later we took a look and consumers had not benefited at all. I learned from a mistake.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Thanks as always @alwaysAMC The remote was panned in the soap press at the time, especially Philip wandering around in the costume as well as some of the comedy.  I have to admit it didn't bother me, even though I knew how ludicrous the idea was of the Spauldings having a wedding at a theme park. I thought there were some fun moments and I did like the scene where Lucy got to cry and grieve over what Brent had done to her.  I think I was just glad to get away from the stories in Springfield, which were bad and getting worse.  There are a number of attempts at revamping the opening music in 1996. I'll be interested in what you think of them. I remember being glad they updated the photos but also noticing how cheap they looked. The show did need a new opening. Sadly, Rauch would instead just not even have an opening for over 5 years.
    • BTG: - Shelley Curtis first listed as Director on May 19   Another FOJulie director. 
    • It’s been awhile since I’ve seen a good soap cat fight so this was highly satisfying. Loved the Drew/Curtis scenes. Drew may not end up murdered but someone is going to try and kill him and it feels like it’s going to be much sooner than later. Who thought Dante ranting and raving for weeks on end would be good writing just to create angst between him and Gio. I really don’t think you needed to make Dante this fuc.king annoying.
    • I get what you're saying, in that this is what allows you to accept what you are watching, and that works for you. But for me, changing the traits of a character that much with a recast and new writing, then they are no longer the same character.  I am unable to accept that a villain is now just a nice dude because the show wants me to, I just cannot.  If they want a grey character, then they should write off the villain and *create* a new character who is grey.  I'll never accept that Sonny Corinthos is a nice guy, despite what GH wants me to think.  Same goes for the villains on DAYS. It's frustrating for me, and not enjoyable.  It occurs to me that I watch soaps to be entertained, and the current show is just making me angry and irritated. It's not fun for me.  I want to honor Drake to see John's story conclude, but there isn't much of interest to me anymore at all, so I'll probably stop following the show in a few weeks.
    • The wikipedia article doesn't explain much. I watched the Party of Five reboot, it was on Freeform in 2020.  It was five years ago, but I'll tell you what I remember: In the original Party of Five series , the parents died, and the five sibling orphans worked together to raise themselves with the older ones looking out for the younger, while managing the family restaurant.  The oldest child wants to have fun but ends up assuming the responsibility. In the 2020 reboot: The family were Mexican, the parents were undocumented, and the oldest child is an adult who could stay in the US for DACA.  In the reboot, instead of the parents dying -- in the first episode the parents were arrested by ICE and sent back to Mexico.   The five children were left in the U.S. to raise themselves with the older ones looking out for the younger, while managing the family restaurant.  The oldest child wants to have fun but ends up assuming the responsibility.  The teens go through teen stuff and the older ones explore careers.  The child daughter feels sad without her parents, and there is also a baby.  But the children were able to have periodic phonecalls with their parents in Mexico, which were very emotional.  The children hire an attorney to try to get their parents returned to the U.S.  The dad phones them to check on the management of the restaurant.  The younger children crave talking to the mom on the phone. The viewers also see how the parents are coping with the strain in Mexico:  the mom works as a nanny and the dad gets odd jobs-- they almost divorce, and the mom wants to stay in Mexico.  I think a few of the children got to take the bus to Mexico to visit their parents. The youngest child was a baby and the next-youngest missed the parents very much.  In the season one finale, it was decided that the youngest two would remain Mexico and live with their parents.  The older children remained in the USA and were following their dreams.  Season One finished airing just as the COVID epidemic began and everything shut down. The show was not renewed for Season Two.   That's all I remember.  It was good but very different from the original. Edit to add: Amazing how the world has changed in five years.  The reboot was filmed in 2019 during the first Tr*mp presidency, and aired in 2020.  The immigration situation was tense then, and that was explored in the series.  But it seems carefree in comparison to the real world today in 2025. Edit to add more thoughts.  I have no idea what would have happened in future seasons, since the five siblings were no longer a "party of five" at the end of Season One.   Supposedly the cancellation wasn't even announced until after the Season One finale aired.  But the season one finale was 90 minutes and wrapped up some lose ends, so maybe the producers anticipated a cancellation, and did that just in case? Perhaps if it there had been future seasons, the younger children would age and then return to the USA and the five would reunite? I don't know.
    • Probably not. Then again, if any character defined the final 25 years of GL it was Reva.
    • Please register in order to view this content

      The roles of Martin and Kat will now be played by Andre and Eva
    • Nope, we had taste, even in the 90s, and the richest family in town throwing a wedding at an amusement park was never cool. But, isn't funny that they're all back in Florida, but nobody mentions this is where Reva went nuts and drove off a bridge.  It seems like it might trigger some memories.
    • My rationalization (for whatever its worth) is that I'll give a pass to a character who has both been recast and is now written by a different staff (again, I'm under the assumptive that we all know right from wrong). One doubts the current writers want EJ to be a rapist, Julie to be prejudice, Philip to have one leg, or Xander to be a kidnapper.  But, that's what they inherited.  These are characters that resonate with the demo.  And, by soap justice standards, all evildoers receive justice, but doesn't always mean jail.
    • I’m up to May 16, 1996. Lucy/A-M are getting married and they were holding this big secret for weeks on where the location was… all to find out it’s going to be an ad for Universal Studios haha.  Probably was fun back in the 90s, but a bit cheesy looking back now. Although they were on a boat alone, at night, reminiscing about Brent, and A-M promised a tearful Lucy that “the worst is over, there is nothing to be afraid of anymore”… and right after, freaking JAWS comes out of the water to attack them on the ride. LOL. I’ve actually been on that ride and it was as scary in person as it was watching it, but that scene ended up being very cheesy given how serious it was supposed to be. Rick being there in Florida with everyone makes zero sense considering he doesn’t hang out with any of these people, but he’s clearly there because Phillip has shown up. Very plot-driven, but at least I’m getting old flashbacks of Rick/Phillip during this. But yeah, outside of the nuptials, this wedding and the Universal Studios trip (ad) turned out to be more about Phillip than anything. Skulking around in the Frankenstein costume, listening to everyone’s conversations about him, was… interesting. Rick dancing in the street by himself, while the other couples danced together, was pretty funny though. The nuptials were beautiful and I loved seeing A-M/Lucy finally get married. I loved how they mentioned Nadine a few times throughout, but especially during their nuptials. It was a nice touch. I still can’t believe Nick, Susan, Bridget and David weren’t there. I really love the Amanda/Alex rivalry. The digs they make at each other are so funny to me. Dinah and Roger have gone off the deep end with their hatred for each other. She’s making him think he’s going crazy by dressing up as Hart’s mother, gaslighting him into thinking untrue things. Now, he’s putting a drug in her drinks that should make her hallucinate and be psychotic. They both want each other dead, and I can’t imagine they’ll ever come back from this. Blake is now pregnant with twins, and the fear is that Rick is the father, or Rick and Ross are both fathers by split parentage between the twins. I don’t hate this storyline because it’s unique and also possible, which I didn’t realize until I googled it.  The storyline has been on pause for a bit while Rick is in Florida for the wedding, so I’m curious to see where this goes. Annie/Josh have also been on pause a bit given that Reva/Buzz/Alan are all in Florida. I’m sure when Reva gets back home, Josh will continue to lust after her while Annie grows more uneasy. Holly delivered Meg, their child with down syndrome, and she and Fletcher have had a rollercoaster of emotions about it, but overall pretty ‘slow’ and boring here. If I liked Fletcher more, I might care more. I found it really weird that Ben randomly decided to move away and go to boarding school because he felt like he’d be in the way, and Fletcher didn’t really seem to have a big problem with it. Seems more like the writers just didn’t want to deal with him and Meg together. Viviane just confided in Holly that Griffin is Gilly’s father, just as Griffin and Gilly held hands/locked eyes at the diner. Viviane is now trying to seduce Griffin, in hopes that it will make them stay apart. This whole storyline is gross. They’re really going to let a father/daughter get romantic before they know their true relations? And instead of just telling Gilly the truth, Viviane would rather try to cheat on her husband again with Griffin and ‘compete’ with her? This is awful. I’m also losing interest in Dahlia and Marcus. He just told her the truth about her mother, which upset Frank and got Marcus in deeper trouble. But yeah, I’m not really that invested in their budding relationship, especially since she’s still in high school. Oh and they just introduced cell phones on the show and it’s hilarious.  Blake pulls out her cell phone and answers with “Hi, I’m on my CELL phone”. “Yeah, I have a CELL phone” - it’s so funny. They finally updated the opening on May 2, 1996!  Which only covers half the cast, which tells me they will hopefully/finally have two separate openings. It was always weird to me that they could remove someone from the opening quickly, but never add someone new at the same time. The opening was getting so old that half of it was stock images that replaced people that left the show (Nadine, Eleni, Eve, Nick, Mindy, David, Tangie and then some shirtless guy I never could tell who it was). Reva has been on the show for over a year now and she was never in the opening until just now with the update. I can’t believe they let it go that long! Oh same with Annie and Dinah - both were on the show for like 16-17 months before they finally got in the opening.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy