Why I support Obama ---The World View

I think both Edwards and Obama will be great presidents. Although I think Edwards is probably a bit more progressive than Obama (his rhetoric certainly is, but not sure about what will actually happen if Obama becomes president) I think that Obama should be president because I believe that the world's view of the USA will DRAMATICALLY change the minute Obama is elected. Not the case with Edwards.

The world does not like the USA now. I am a dual citizen of the USA and Canada, and I do a lot of traveling -- they do not like you and generally believe that you are a country of self-centered, warmongering, conservative, walmart shopping, overweight, uncultured, xenophobic white people. If we elect a black man named Obama, what do you think that says about us to the men and women in the middle east? They can see a man who looks a bit more like them, they can sympathize with us more. Europe and Asia and Canada will also see that the stereotype of America right now is not true.

To reiterate, I like both Edward's and Obama's policies very much, I may even like Edward's a bit more (though you all need UNIVERSAL health care and his plan is simply not that even though he and some others think its sooo progressive...believe me, it's not, thats another story though...) I think the difference in their politics is not enough to overshadow the HUGE difference in our reputation that will come about if Obama is elected. It will completely change the way others view us, and the way we view ourselves.

I don't dislike Obama at all but I'm wholeheartedly behind Edwards. You make an excellent point - not one to change my support of Edwards, but one which is good commentary about the world view. I don't see it happening, but an Edwards-Obama/Obama-Edwards ticket would be the bomb, IMHO.

They ought to mind their own business.

requests of their masters and posting and spewing for Obama also. He is the worst thing that ever happened to this country. And as he goes along people will see it. The MSM can not keep this person's records and non-accomplishments silent forever. It is bound to escape.

The are afraid of bush....hell Obama came right out and said he wanted to bomb Iran. He misses the crucial votes to fund health care for veterans, so seniors can negotiate for lower prescription rates, to give military more time between deployments. But he showed up and voted for a request for the republicants to build a statute.

Mystery is key to his success. Who is behind the curtain?

WHO is the worst thing for America ?

He is the worst thing that ever happened to this country.

I'm actually a Canadian medical student who is absolutly fascinated by American politics. Half of my extended family lives in the USA and I feel an interest in what's going on.

I'm just calling it as I see it. No matter what you say, another white man leader with a southern accent looks different to the world than a black man named Obama.

"He is the worst thing that ever happened to this country."

Just. Damn.



Peace:thumbsup:

but a small thing about the comaprative health care plans. As I understand it, the Edwards plan is supposed to be a transitional one that culminates in single-payer universal health care, while Obama's is somewhat less progressive in that it envisions a permanent role for a private payer system. Edwards proposed his plan because he doesn't think it possible to take on the "health insurance" industry head-on.

because I have not heard him say anything about doing away with HMO's...and you NEED to completely do away with them. They should not exist. I cant believe that they do it's pretty crazy...health care profits! Yeesh!

I think he just doesn't want to sound like Hillary did not long ago...I do respect her very much for trying to get uni. health care. Also, I hate the word "single-payer"...I don't know if it just sounds weird or what.

and one of HRC's remarks was that her being the first woman president also embodies a huge change. No doubt about it. That fact alone does indeed mark a huge change.

Not that it matters that much, as we are the citizens and the ones affected by who is selected, but I'm curious how the world would react to HRC being the candidate? I'm sure they would applaud our finally moving into the new millennium by having a woman on the ticket, but does the world view HRC as part of our baggage? I know Bill was hugely popular worldwide, but I wonder if they view the whole Clinton-Bush 20 years of White House history as many of us do...i.e., wanting a new name in there.

edit: Sorry, I meant for this to reply to the original post.

I think that it would also be very representative of a huge change. However, from what I gather most of the world does not see the United States as predominantly sexist. I think the largest stereotype right now is American racism/xenophobia. People see the united states as "Let's wage war on those that are different than us!! DOWN WITH ISLAM!! FEAR THE BROWN MAN"

NAYs ---10
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Byrd (D-WV)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Murray (D-WA)
Wyden (D-OR)


On the other hand, the story in the House is a bit different.

---- NOES 171 ---

Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Baird
Baldwin
Bartlett (MD)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blumenauer
Boucher
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brown (OH)
Brown, Corrine
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carson
Clay
Cleaver
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duncan
Engel
Eshoo
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hinchey
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kind
Kucinich
LaHood
Langevin
Lantos
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lynch
Mack
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Michaud
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Ney
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Otter
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Rohrabacher
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sabo
Salazar
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanders
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sherman
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Wexler
Woolsey
Wu
Wynn
Young (AK)

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll414.xml

You're quick...I didn't think any of the prez candidates voted nay...

:banghead:

:hi: :banghead:

But frankly, class issues are so important to me that I'm not willing to settle for less than the best leader we can get in that area. World opinion is important, but not as important as what happens here on our own soil. And what needs to happen is a real focus on issues of class, a real commitment to getting out of Iraq, and the best health care plan we actually have a chance of passing. That's what Edwards is all about.

Obama's fear and terrorist speeches and Republican support. He rarely steps out to support things Americans want.

Yes..Obama has trashed the Constitution regarding his religious cronyism and Police State legislation.

I sometimes see him as a Colin Powell like candidate which the media like more than the voters.

to elect someone that close to his immigrating ancestor.

Though I think any of the Democrats will be a refreshing change in this area. Even if they voted for the war, they have the sense now not to escalate it. The repuke candidate, besides being the same old white man, will have to overcome a presumption he is likely to continue in the Chimp's ravages.

Considering there is not that much difference between the candidates.

Obama is the best way to tell the world the US is leaving the Chimp policies behind.

elected an African American woman named Condoleezza Rice.

Over the long term, and even over the relatively short term, America's standing in the world will depend on substance, not image. And in Condoleeza's case the bloom would be off the rose in a matter of days. As for Obama, it's a bit harder to predict, as it would be, to be fair, for John Edwards.

Bottom line: we'd better strive to select the best person for the job. Image will follow substance, and it will do so in relatively short order.

I too do a bit of traveling and I live in the UK. May I give a point of view from my perspective across the Atlantic?

First off.......not everyone hates Americans or America. In fact, a lot of people like Americans and America A LOT. Most British and Europeans are smart enough to hate American policy and to separate policy from American Citizens. They do not generally think Americans are self centered, etc....but they do worry about America's fascination with religion and our President's tendency to go around poking other countries with a sharp stick.

The British and many Europeans are just as xenophobic as Americans......and they are smart enough to realize this. I would say racism here in the UK is just as bad as it is in the States only directed against slightly different groups. I have seen rabid racism & xenophobia against people from the Mid East as well as Eastern Europeans.

I don't think any one Democratic candidate or his or her policies will affect world opinion of the States much more than any other.........if I had to predict which one of the top 3 would maybe have an edge over others in the field it would probably be Clinton because of name recognition regarding Bill Clinton and the fact that he is much respected here. At this point any change of leadership will do. I don't think a person's color will make anyone sympathize with us any more, in fact I think that argument is ludicrous.

I'll support any Candidate that gets the nomination and be happy to see the backside of the Bastard Bush. My guess is that it will take decades to repair the damage to America's international reputation and it will only be repaired if foreign policy becomes consistent. It won't because whether we like it or not, each Administration only lasts for 4 to 8 years and then it changes all over again.

There's a lot of problems with certain areas of American Foreign Policy that need to change regardless of which party is in power and it's not going to change any time soon. I haven't seen a Democratic Candidate yet who would change some things about Foreign Policy in the Mid East, particularly concerning the Palestine/Israel situation. Until that problem is addressed head on and US practices and funding change it's going to continue to fester.