Anti-Obama emails

[scooterbug44]

Yet another ridonkulous anti-Obama e-mail just hit my inbox.

Find it hilarious that among the things they are criticizing him for are voting along party lines, signing a bill for campaign finance reform, wanting health care, wanting the minimum wage to be a "living" wage, and thinking that the Guantanamo detainees should get habeus corpus.

Of course they also discount his ability to inspire and charisma by saying Hitler has charisma too. :roll:

How much of a factor do you think these repeated false emails are/how much do you think they are hurting him? Quite a few voters seem to believe the malarkey they contain - that Obama is a Muslim etc.

[Gypsea]

Yet another ridonkulous anti-Obama e-mail just hit my inbox.

Find it hilarious that among the things they are criticizing him for are voting along party lines, signing a bill for campaign finance reform, wanting health care, wanting the minimum wage to be a "living" wage, and thinking that the Guantanamo detainees should get habeus corpus.

Of course they also discount his ability to inspire and charisma by saying Hitler has charisma too. :roll:

How much of a factor do you think these repeated false emails are/how much do you think they are hurting him? Quite a few voters seem to believe the malarkey they contain - that Obama is a Muslim etc.

Mailers have worked for the last two elections. Just ask John McCain about the 2000 election. :angry:

[jdarg]

If my father were alive, he would say what he always said when I would ask him questions about stuff like this:

"It's a tacky world".

[scooterbug44]

I know, just curious about how people think it affects the Sheeple voting habits, as WAY too many people seem to believe this crapola! :bang:

[Gypsea]

I know, just curious about how people think it affects the Sheeple voting habits, as WAY too many people seem to believe this crapola! :bang:


It affects the sheeple way to much! :eek:

[TooFarTampa]

If my father were alive, he would say what he always said when I would ask him questions about stuff like this:

"It's a tacky world".

I love this! :lolabove:

I know, just curious about how people think it affects the Sheeple voting habits, as WAY too many people seem to believe this crapola! :bang:

There are sheeple on both sides ... the main issue is that Repubs have been far more organized as a party in recent years in getting their talking points to the masses. Meanwhile, the Democrats can't find their A$%^&es ... much less talking points ...

:rolling: I actually typed "Demoncrats" above, and after fixing it wondered why no one ever seems to use that word!

[Smiling JOe]

I cannot believe that people actually read political spam emails.

[scooterbug44]

I cannot believe that people actually read political spam emails.

I like to know the rumors that are circulating - hence my Sowal addiction! :blush:

It's of major concern as exit polls are showing people voting a certain way because they believe that crap!

[Smiling JOe]

Oh, I believe that people believe them, so obviously someone is reading them. If that weren't the case, no one would send them.

[hnooe]

I think this is the year of seeing through campaign b.s in general.....educationally, in America, we are still "dumbing down," but politically the masses are "smartening" up !! Ok if that is not a word then the American public are now more aware of politricks now, more than ever....

[Rita]

.

I cannot believe that people actually read political spam emails.

Occasionally there are posts on SoWal.com that remind me of political spam e-mails. They have a better chance of staying on here than in my inbox. Though I usually skim enough to get the overall idea.

I haven't gotten any for some time. Maybe it's because we nipped it in the bud with the worst offenders, so they know not to keep us on their list.


.

[jdarg]

Don't forget politifact.com (thanks forever to ToofarTampa)- check all rumors for all candidates! It's such a fun site!

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/

And remember, if the e-mail reeks of crap, it probably is crap.

Here is a fun one from an e-mail entitled "Obama thinks the national anthem should be 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing'...." read the whole hilarious (and pathetic) e-mail here :

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/459/



"As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as taking sides," Obama said. "There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression. And the anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all? It should be swapped for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing.' If that were our anthem, then I might salute it."
(You can read the full text of the e-mail here (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/obama-explains-national-anthem/).)
But Obama never said it. It's satire written by syndicated columnist John Semmens, whose columns are posted on the Web site The Arizona Conservative. The above quote was part of a short item Semmens wrote in October 2007, imagining a rationale for the oft-emailed photo of Obama not having his hand over his heart during the national anthem . (We wrote about the anthem issue previously here, which was part of a chain email falsely claiming Obama refused to say the pledge of allegiance (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/169/).)


OMG!!!:floor:

[30A Skunkape]

In a world where far too many sheeple tolerate Pepsi products, it warms my heart to know that a Coca-Cola man will be answering the phone at 3AM:clap:

[jollyroger]

When discussing these emails with people who buy into them I am often give them a link to a website or two (ex. Snopes). The amazing thing is that they are able to read a full spam letter, but are totally unable to read a paragraph or two disproving said spam. The most common responses I get back are that "It's too long," or "I cant read it.":roll:

[traderx]

My guess is that such emails will help Obama because they will be seen as unfair and one-sided. Americans love political debates but not one-sided attacks. I wonder if Obama's frequent reminders of McCain's age will haunt Obama? BTW, the spam emails I get are never interesting. They all have to do with.....oh nevermind. Not fit to print here. :funn:

[MissCritter]

You mean your email didn't imply that Obama is the anti-Christ? One that I received did. If only voter registration required and IQ test. Puh-lease, people! :blink:

[6thGen]

Oh, what the hell.

Find it hilarious that among the things they are criticizing him for are voting along party lines,

Well, he is the one saying that he can bring the party together.

signing a bill for campaign finance reform

Unconstitutional idea that had severe unintended consequences of more money and less transparency, but it's a wash since McCain wrote the damn thing.

wanting health care

Subsidized by the state and the young and healthy. Although it's not my choice of options, tort reform brought insurance premiums down 35% in Texas. Hard to keep the trial lawyer donations coming in with that though.

wanting the minimum wage to be a "living" wage,

If he cared about the "working man" he'd do away with the minimum wage entirely.

and thinking that the Guantanamo detainees should get habeus corpus.

Again, something I'm against but it's a wash.

Good to check in again.

[seagrovegirl]

An old dear friend handed me an email (spam) that she printed and brought with her to my house. I read part of it and handed it back to her and told her "that kind of Sh** po'd me. She became defensive and I explained to her it was spam with no facts to back it up. She responded, "oh, you must be for Obama?" I was able to explain to her that this was SPAM....not to be believed or passed around, regardless of whom I choose to vote for. Some people are so gullable....and she is a worldly chick....astonishing!

[Gypsea]

Oh, what the hell.



Well, he is the one saying that he can bring the party together.



Unconstitutional idea that had severe unintended consequences of more money and less transparency, but it's a wash since McCain wrote the damn thing.



Subsidized by the state and the young and healthy. Although it's not my choice of options, tort reform brought insurance premiums down 35% in Texas. Hard to keep the trial lawyer donations coming in with that though.



If he cared about the "working man" he'd do away with the minimum wage entirely.



Again, something I'm against but it's a wash.

Good to check in again.

Now where have we heard that before ~ a uniter, not a divider? :idontno:
My hope is that either McCain or Obama will actually be able to pull that one off!

[6thGen]

Now where have we heard that before ~ a uniter, not a divider? :idontno:
My hope is that either McCain or Obama will actually be able to pull that one off!

No doubt. I was against it then as I am now (along with "Compassionate Conservatism" and many other issues). Bipartisanship is very, very rarely a good thing. The more that politicians fight amongst themselves, the less damage they do, but they still save face with their constituents and donors.

[aleonard]

An old dear friend handed me an email (spam) that she printed and brought with her to my house. I read part of it and handed it back to her and told her "that kind of Sh** po'd me. She became defensive and I explained to her it was spam with no facts to back it up. She responded, "oh, you must be for Obama?" I was able to explain to her that this was SPAM....not to be believed or passed around, regardless of whom I choose to vote for. Some people are so gullable....and she is a worldly chick....astonishing!

I think this is the part that distress me the most. People I love and respect buying into something in an email and not doing the research on it. Bottom line- people believe what they want to believe, no matter the source.

[Gypsea]

No doubt. I was against it then as I am now (along with "Compassionate Conservatism" and many other issues). Bipartisanship is very, very rarely a good thing. The more that politicians fight amongst themselves, the less damage they do, but they still save face with their constituents and donors.

OK, so you don't believe its a good thing to get the best minds that we have on both sides of the isle to make decisions that would be best for the American people as a whole but for the infighting to continue so that they can save face and give donors and constituents whatever they want no matter how crazy. Wow!!!! What a country!

[6thGen]

OK, so you don't believe its a good thing to get the best minds that we have on both sides of the isle to make decisions that would be best for the American people as a whole but for the infighting to continue so that they can save face and give donors and constituents whatever they want no matter how crazy. Wow!!!! What a country!

Best minds that we have? Are you serious? McCain-Feingold. Sarbanes-Oxley. NCLB. Do you want me to go on? This is bipartisanship at work .

[Gypsea]

Best minds that we have? Are you serious? McCain-Feingold. Sarbanes-Oxley. NCLB. Do you want me to go on? This is bipartisanship at work .

Our founding fathers did a pretty good job of it!!!! :D

[6thGen]

Our founding fathers did a pretty good job of it!!!! :D
From Washington's farewell address

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

[Gypsea]

From Washington's farewell address

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind, (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight,) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in Governments of a Monarchical cast, Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And, there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

On this we can agree. :wave: