We need a candidate who walks away when he or she hears people with controversial views speak!

[Bjorn Against]

I am so glad that our media is focused on ensuring that our candidate does not associate with anyone who might have controversial views. It is just so disgusting that Obama would choose to listen to a man like Wright who may have held some opinions different than his own. We need to demand a candidate who will walk away whenever he or she hears someone who disagrees with them. If the last eight years have shown us anything, they have shown us that we need a President that lives in an echo chamber and never hears any alternative views on anything.

We can not have a candidate who would attend a church which criticizes US foreign policy. I mean if he had attended a church that spent their time wishing the rapture would come so that we could all experience the joys of Armageddon it would be one thing, but going to a church that would dare suggest that the rest of the world does not always love America ’s foreign policy? Well that is just beyond the pale.

Obama chose to attend the church that he did. Now he could have been smart and chosen a church that bashes gays, condemns women who want to control their own bodies, cheers on the bombing of other nations, and tells people they are going to burn in hell for all of eternity if they do not embrace the Republican agenda. If he would have chosen a church like that then he would have been the family values candidate, but no instead he had to attend a church that actually holds the absurd notion that it is worse to bomb people than it is to be gay. That means he hates America .

How dare Obama attend the services of a pastor with controversial opinions when he could have embraced the message of one of those completely non-controversial religious figures like John Hagee or Pat Robertson instead? If he would have just chosen to embrace the loving message of those who think that gays are going to bring Armageddon to this planet, then the media would be praising his values. But no, instead of embracing one of the loving homophobes he chose to listen to the message of a black man instead, and when a black man speaks our wise pundits in the media have made it clear that is a time in which candidates need to plug their ears and walk away.

But Obama did not plug his ears and walk away, he chose to listen even when he didn’t agree. We can’t have a candidate who is actually willing to hear the voices of people who don’t usually get heard in Washington , we need a candidate who will only listen to the voices of those beltway pundits who are never controversial and always right about everything.

There is just no way that the American people could tolerate Obama's associations when he is up against John McCain, a man who would NEVER even think about embracing anyone with views that the vast majority of Americans would find repulsive.



It is perfectly fine for our candidates to associate with people like Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, George Bush, Rush Limbaugh, Karl Rove, and all of their friends because none of those people has ever said anything that could be considered divisive. If someone goes to a black church and the minister makes controversial statements though, well then that is a national scandal.

God bless 'Murica.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. Awesome, MN Against Bush. Nailed it.

:thumbsup:

[JBoy]

2. Very well said! K&R.

[BuyingThyme]

3. Why can't we just skip the middleman and get a candidate with controversial views?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. Well said. K&R

[EffieBlack]

5. Hear, hear - now, off to the Greatest page you go!

[NC_Nurse]

6. Yep. Amazing isn't it? So many people seem to have that view...

:wtf:

[NanceGreggs]

7. Just FANTASTIC!

:kick: and REC'D!!!

:applause: :patriot: :applause:

[habitual]

8. he fades, he shoots, he SCORES!!!

you win 10,000 internets and a box of chocolates. Excellent point made very well!!!!

p.s. the "he" references aren't assuming you are male, just repeating the well known sports mantra.