Fired up, ready to go!

Brother, please tell me why so I can hop on the train.Do not tell me because he is black.Do you really believe Senator Obama can win the election in the aftermath of 9-11?I wish I could be as optimistic as you are,but in politic one has to be pragmatic:The South will not vote for Obama,therefore he can not win.If he can not win the election what is the logic for the democrats to choose him to represent the party?I am not even sure Obama will have the vote of the minorities: jews, African American and Hispanics.

Hilary Clinton is a better choice.Yes ,we may not have a Collin Powell or a Condi Rice in the Cabinet ,but I am sure the majority of the poor will have health insurance;the economy will be in better shape so the poor could buy their own home, and start a small business.The troops will come home ,the budget deficit will be taken care of.There will be better schools in harlem and in the poor communities of the United States;women will be treated fairly in the work place.Blacks entrepreneurs will have a better chance to sell their services to the federal government.More afro americans and minorities will get acces to higher education.The minimum wage will be increased as before.What happened in New Orleans will not be repeated,we will have once and for all an energy policy to save the planet.We will have more police officers in our cities to combat crimes and violence.We will not invade a sovereign country because of its resources ,as said by Alan Greenspan.Our young men and women will not die in vain in an illegal and immoral war.

Be careful, choosing Obama you're helping Rudolph Giulliani win the election; during his presidency we will not have even a Collin Powell or Condi Rice in the cabinet ;young blacks will be targets for young racist police officers in the Street of our cities.

Rod,
In politic, these are the last things that count for me (Ethnicity and Gender). I don't really remember whether Obama is black nor Sen. Clinton is a Female.

What count to me, is how a candidate handles the issues. And as far as I am concerned, beside my conversative views on certain issues ( Gay marriage, abortion ect.) I strongly believe that Obama carries the right message that America need in this particular era.

When it comes to Sen. Clinton, I am really scared of the way she likes to escaping the issues. She is just feeling confortable of beeing the leading contender but refusing to go in depth of the topics. I strongly believe that she will not change much.

Since politic in American has become a family and the wealthy matter, of course Sen. Clinton will win. George Bush 1 handed over to his son, Clinton hands over to his wife.

Regarding Gulliani, there is no republican who can win this election. The candidate who win the Democratic primary will be in the White House, Whatever the race, gender, views ect. That is why this primary is critical for Dems.

I am sure that Senator Obama is speaking about the right issues.But you have to remember in politics one sentence pronounced at the wrong time in the wrong place can derail a campaign;this is the reason why Senator Clinton said that Obama is naive.Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton also were speaking about the right issues that concern most americans,but did they get the nomination during the previous primaries?

Sincerly ,I wish I were wrong about Senator Obama's ability to win the election,but I doubt he will be the choice of the democrats ,My candidate is Albert Gore ,but since he refuses so far to decalre his candidacy ,I support Hilary because among the democrats ,I think she has a better chance to win the election and to change the course of actions taken by Georges Bush during the last eight years.

You and I do not partake the same political ideologies , but,in spite of our differences,we can discuss the issues.Tell me why you are against gay mariage?Do you really think in this society somebody chooses to be gay?Do you really believe it is his or her will to choose this behavior?If your son or daughter were gay wouldn't you want he or she to enjoy the same rights as any other human being? Put yourself in his or her shoes.would you accept somebody to deprive you of your rights because of your sexual orientation?I know this phobia fo gay people will not be erased as long as people like you are not confronted with the legal ramifications and consequences of your behavior; for no matter what you said in the name of morality or religion you're discri minating agianst other human beings who have the same right to live their lives as you. Please do not go to religion or morality with this issue for you know very well what my objections will be.

As far as your view on abortions is concerned,I respect it although I do not partake it.You are denying a woman the right to control her own life.These children who are eating in the dump sites of Cite Soleil because their parents can not feed them are they living?This girl who was eating by a dog in the dominican republic because her parents were trying to find work in order to survive would it no t be better that she was never born?Maybe you have never see young boys and girls dying of malnutrition,tuberculosis,tetanos and malaria. I have seen these miseries and sufferings in the mountains of haiti.I have seen a proud woman selling herself in order to feed her children.Therefore I can not ,under any hypocrisy,tell any woman what to do with her body because I am not in her shoes.

It’s nice to read your posting. I always ask myself this question “Alex, if you were an US Citizen would you be a Democrat or a Republican?

I believe the answer would go positively to both directions, since both parties share some of the values that I cherish. And I definitely concluded that the left and the right wing just don’t exist. It’s just a metaphor or simply a camouflage to split the votes.

Conservatives and Liberal are just two different pictures but using the same material.

Rodham, to answer to your question I would start by evoking the fact that you jeopardize my rights while you defending the gay’s rights. I strongly believe that it is my right to appreciate what I want and reject what I don’t want.

This means, I reject the gays. I don’t like them and they will never have my support. Beside that, I know in what swiftness some folks will use the human right to defend the indefensible. That is to me the worst hypocrisy, in one hand to say you have the right to do so, on the other hand to smile at the wrong side of the mouth when seeing a homo misbehave. And clap the hands when an opponent is caught for homosexual.

Yes, I you say some homos are a result of malfunctioning, defect, disorder. They are born with the defect and unfortunately will have to survive like that. However, I think only quite a few of the homos are born like that.

The majority of them are doing it for being socially well placed, for a job, a promotion, to find a manger, a producer and so forth.

Were all born straight either with 1 stick or 1 triangle with vertical lips?

Here we are not discussing your right to like or dislike a person or a group of persons.Instead, we're discussing the right of a group of citizens to enjoy the same liberties recognized by the Constiuttion of their country as any other human beings.Would you accept any white man to tell you to stop having sex in order to discontinue the perpetuation of the black race?Do not tell me that my analogy is inappropriate unless you do not recognize the gays as human beings.

It doesn't matter whether you're white or black ,straight or gay if you're a delinquant ,a criminel , a thief you have to pay the consequences of your acts.I do not condone a delinquant like O.J. Simpson,I can understand his reactions in certain situiation.but I will not condone or condemn his acts just because he is black.

we're not all born either with a stick or a triangle with vertical lips , what about the misgender children; what about our brains; the hormones in our body; the chemicals do we have the same quantity and quality all the time.Those who practice homosexuality for the sake of social benefits or promotions should be condemned,but not all homosexuals are in this category?I know people .with limited faculties can not understand this problem,I have read the book :'Si le grain ne meurt " in my youth ,and the author convinced me that he was born homosexual.

I am not gay ,but if I were I would not like anybody to discriminate against me.I do not think homosexuality is a voluntary behavior in every human being who practices this style fo life.I would not dislike anyone in my family who is homosexual.I am not here to promote or condone homosexuality.I am defending their rights to enjoy the same liberties that straight people enjoy.I know certain people will think that I am gay ,I am not ,and if I were I would not be a closet gay,because I do not think it is anybody's business to tell me what my sexuality should be.Knowing that i would not dislike my child if he or she were gay I can not dislike any gay person who behaves decently.

This is my opinion ,I am not asking you to like them .I am just asking you to respect their rights.The same way you can not ask a white man or woman to like you ,but you have the right to defend your inalienable right to live your life.The hypocrisy is to condemnn racial discrimination and at the same time to practice another type of discrimination against gay people.We are not discussing taste here;we are discussing civil rights and liberties.

Alex


If you are living in the United States ,do not forget to watch the Oprah Winfrey's show tomorrow afternoon.By the way ,did you hear that Magic Johnson had just endorsed Hilary Clinton for President.I told you that the Afro Americans know that Senator Obama will not win the nomination of the democartic party and the general election.This is realpolitic my friend.

I know people .with limited faculties can not understand this problem,I have read the book

I didn't get this one Rod, can you explain please. I beleive it is not personal.

Knowing that i would not dislike my child if he or she were gay I can not dislike any gay person who behaves decently.

Rod, you hardly find one who behaves decently. Their bad behaviour is the only way for them to catch your attention.

I know that Magic Johnson has endorsed Sen. Hillary. I don't really talked about endorsements in my post, i just cited Oprah to explain my point

Nothing personal.to understand the problem of homosexuality you have to be open -minded and read the literature in "psychology today" .Those who are inhibited by gayphobia will always generalize that all gay people are indecent as if indecency were only found in gay community.Those who commit the most hainous crime are not gay.You have bad and good people in every sector of our society.

Endorsements count.When the AFL-CIO ,or any other big unions endorse a candidate ;do you know what that means?It means the candidate will receive contributions from the majority of the members and you know very well that money is necessary to win the presidency.Do not get the wrong impression ;I am not against Obama ;I do not think that he has a chance.That's all.Have a good day.

rasmussenreports.com Fri Sep 21, 10:14 AM ET


Senator Barack Obama (D) now leads former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) 47% to 42% in a hypothetical general-election match-up. The latest Rasmussen Reports national survey of the presidential race also shows Obama leading Republican former Senator Fred Thompson 47% to 41%.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/rasmussen/20070921/pl_rasmussen/obamamatchup20070921_1;_ylt=Ap_QgPwGPZNTUvQmewLSSlMlbuRF

Survey of 800 Likely Voters
September 10-11, 2007




Rudy Giuliani (R) vs.
Hillary Clinton (D)


Rudy Giuliani (R)

45%


Hillary Clinton (D)

46%




Fred Thompson (R) vs.
Hillary Clinton (D)


Fred Thompson (R)

43%


Hillary Clinton (D)

48%

Sign up for our weekly newsletter, and get updates emailed to you FREE!






http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/clinton_giuliani_remain_close_as_thompson_trails_clinton_by_five

Oprah rolls out red carpet for Obama
[url=javascript:;][/url]


[url=javascript:;][/url] [url=javascript:;]Enlarge[/url]
By Michael A. Mariant, AP



Presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., speaks to supporters during a campaign rally Saturday in Santa Barbara, Calif. Oprah Winfrey later hosted a celebration for Obama at her Montecito estate.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-09-09-obama-oprah_N.htm?csp=34

Alex,

Hillary is leading Obama among blacks.In the state of South Carolina which has one of the early primaries,Hillary is leading.
Remember that more than 70% of Democrats ,in that state.are black.

The next presidential election is crucial.Some say,as crucial as the election of 1932,when Roosevelt turned back the right wing tide ,and litterally saved the United States.

I believe that Obama will have his time ,but this is not the time.

I,for one,will vote for Hillary in the primary ,in my state.

Joel

I do not blame Oprah nor any black for supporting Obama at this stage of the electoral process.However, they have to be careful.If Obama does not receive the nomination of the democratic party ,and the minorities are not participating in the general election because of his defeat ,then they will have to blame themeselves for giving the election to Rudolph Giulliani or Fred Thompson.

I agree with your opinion concerning the importance of this election.If after 8 years of mismanagement of the economy;an illegal and immoral war;scandal after scandal in the federal government,the democrats can not win the presidency because of their division then it is time for progressive people in the United States to form a third party which is more in tune with the people needs and aspirations.The world is longing for new leaders with new ideas ;we can no longer afford to perpetuate the same old political ideologies.We have the knowledge to eradicate proverty, disease, analphabetisme ,unemployment in the world,only the traditional politicians can not adapt to the changes that are occuring.On one side of their mouth they're talking mondialisation, globalisation ;and on the other side it is isolationism, protectionism,military might etc.

Yesterday morning I was watching Georges Bush news conference.He refused to answer a question about an Israeli raid in Syria.How can we achieve peace in this world where some people do not have the same rights as others?One has to walk in the arabs' shoes to understand their frustations and angers.

Regarding the Arabs, i think this is a cause of which nobody from the west can change. You have to leave them the way they are.

I know that, many people through their supports to the Arabs just because of their anti western sentiments. But if you are close to the Arabs, you almost ask yourself whether the west is not right.

Arabs are racist, worst than the whites. I used to tell them, hey! I here you complaining for western countries discriminating you because of you Ethny or Religion, but you just worst with the black people for example.

Human Traffic,
There is a kind of slavery which exist in the arab world but no one talks about it. The trade of Human being. With their local agents, they buy people from Africa especially ( Ethiopia, Sudan etc.). Once those people reach the arab states, their passport are held, they work day and night, no relaxation, no dignity for a dust of money.
The worst, since it is difficult for them to have intercourse with their arabs girls, the whole family have to have sex with the poor African ladies working for them.

Imposing Style.
While when the Arabs are in your country, they almost ask you to change your culture, you religion, your lifestile to please them a miscrocosm. In our country their are free to do whatever they want. By in their countries you are to obey to any single of their habits. Why they can be free in the western world, and us slave in the Arab world.

Egocentrism:
For the Arab, only Arab is a human being, only a muslim is a saint, only their vision is the right one.

Traumatism:
I always tell them, that if in the christian world, people were forced by government law to practice what is written in the bible, Christian would be almost like a muslim with almost the same restrictions.
And if the arab states ease their islamic law, the muslims would be almost like the chistians.

Human rights,
I know you are a great human rights supporter Rod, can you imagine in 2007 some women are still not allowed to have an education? Can you imagine people stone you until death just because you fornicating? If you convert from muslim to another religion, you deserve death?

I may not like the way the western wants to solve the problem, but something need to be done. We cannot have all these people tied up just in the name of religion.

you are definitely right my friend. when a french woman goes to saudi arabia, she does not complain to put the veil on, but yet when an arab woman wants a licence in france, she wants to keep the burqua on for a photo-ID, therefore defeating the purpose of identification itself.
they are very racists and islo-centrique particularly in mauritania; but that does not change the fact that they are being mistreated and humiliated in gaza and the westbank by the ISRAELIS.
you see, the westerners are interested in dafour, not necessarily out of pure genuine humanism. it can as well be out of geopolitical interests. an independent christian dafour will be an ally of the west, and therefore would secure energy-interests of the west since the south of soudan is the main source of soudanese oil reserves.
I also find africans themselves to be racists toward the diaspora. sometimes, they see us as men without names, without tribes etc. in America, africans are afraid of african-americans, thinking that they are thieves.
to tell you the truth, I sometimes view modern africans as the ancestors of the guys who sold my ancestors into slavery.

I do not like much western hegemony, but I fear much more an islamic hegemony.
people do not realize that, but arabs had a history of castrating their african slaves for fear of having them seduce thei wives or daughters.

Alex,my brother you can not tell me about the prejudices of the arabs .I live it since I was a child.My point in mentionning the Israeli raid against Syria that President Bush refused to discuss in his press conference yesterday is exactly about human rights.I think we discussed this matter before :You find it legal for the jews to destroy any nuclear plant in the arabs countries, but you condemn a young arab who blows himself in a restaurant in israel to retaliate for the jews 'actions.

I understand that the Israelis have the right to defend their country ,but was there any agression by the Syrian that justifies such an action?Do the arabs have the right to prevent the israelis to develop nuclear arms?I f the world were to be governed by the laws of the jungle then one can not talk about peace and arms control.

yes I am against any form of violence .I do not have any admiration for the arabs particularly when one witnesses the atrocities in Sudan and Somalia ,but in ordrer to resolve the conflicts betwen the arabs and the israeli the government of the United States has to be neutral ,and it has to respect the sovereignty of the Arabs ,otherwise there will be no peace in the region.India has nuclear bombs, Pakistan has nuclear bombs.Why then Syria and all the other arabs countries are prohibited to develop such arms?Is there any legality in this policy.Isn't it a form of discirmination? When you oppress people; they have the right to defend themselves.

Rod i understand your point, but we need to go beyong that. As far as i know, Isreal doesn't vow to destroy any Arab except for defending itself from not being wipe off on the map.

It is a fact that Israel always use exagerated force to retaliate Agression from the Arabs. But one thing as know, most of the Arab countries just dream to destroy Israel.

Letting countries like syria, Lebanon, palestine, Iran and so one pocess a nuclear weapon literally translate a nuclear war.

When It comes to palestine, I also feel pity for them. They really suffering for not accepting to recognize Israel. I think the recognition of Israel would ease their situation but this is not their choices.

There are only two solutions to the problems,
- Palestine and Israel have to make a deal to accepting to leave together as two soveriegn states
- Remove Israel from the middle east to put it somewhere else in Europe or America (Which is impossible).

So it comes to the arabs states to take note of the fact and be guided accordinly

Did you see Senator Hilary Clinton this morning on "Face the Nation."?I am very impressed the way she is managing her campaign so far.It seems that she realized she will be the nominee for the democratic party;therefore it is time to start talking about the real issues :The war, the economy,foreign policy,health care,campaign financing.

on the question: "how do you plan to withdraw the troops from Iraq?" she said that during her first day in office she will gather her security staff and assess the situation because nobody knows what iraq will be in 15 months .The withdrawal will be done gradually,but there should be some troops left to protect the innocent people of iraq,our embassy staff and the american workers.

On the question :"What role if any your husband will play in your government;will it be a continuation of two for one as before?"She said :'We learned our lessons;my husband is well known all over the world he will travel to help our country."

Every day she looks more and more like the next president of the United states.I think this election is very important ;I will be very disappointed if the american people make the wrong choice.I can't wait for january 2009. to see Hilary Clinton takes the oath of office,

yes africans sold their conquered tribes into slavery just as europeans did to their own. who was selling those briton-slaves to the romans? the idea of white or black brotherhood is a very recent concept.
both in europe and africa, tribal brotherhood was the universal norm. so the fulani did not see the yoruba any more his brother than the anglo-xason saw the vandal as his. remember, herodotus refered to the britons as that other blond race.
in other words, the argument of the europeans would be moot joel. the bulgars used to sell conquered european girls to the turquish caliphate as sex slaves. did that make them traitors to their race? not at all, because the concept of kinship was not based on biology then, but rather on linguo-cultural characteristics.
I am not judging the arabs my friend. i am describing contemporary arab society.
joel, you have a tendency to overemphasize historical facts.
remember that one will generally not get credit on past riches!!!
one cannot go to a cardealership, claim to be an ex-millionaire and expect to be credited a mercedes bens.
joel, i am not in the business of romanzing africa or any other ancient civilization.

Alex

If you were in Georges Bush position what would you say;Hilary Clinton will win the election by a landslide?It is normal for the Republican president to say that any republican will defeat Hilary,but that does not mean it is true.I am not saying she will win not matter what;for one should not underestimate the machiavelism ,the power to influence an election by the conservatists and the press.I know pretty soon you will hear that Bill Clinton has a child somewhere or their daughter has done something wrong ,or any other scandal that can tarnish her reputation,but as I said before Hilary looks more and more like a president to me.

I would not be surprised to hear the tam tam of Ben Ladden and Al queida all over the united States next year in order to entice fear to the american electorate,but without an event like 9-11 or some killings of american troops somewhere in Lebanon or in Iraq I will bet on the democratic nominee even if the economy improves.

Habibi,

That is the second time you call me JACKOTI. What do you mean by that, young man? I don't have a clue. Tell me bro.

I remember to be named Alex Jacques.

I thought you were jackoti.

No Keen,

I am not romanticizing any ancient civilization.

What you got to remember "great civilizations" come and go.There is absolutely nothing exceptional with the Europeans.

Speaking about the arabs?
Keen ,if you ask most people who invented the "number system",algorythm (you being a mathematician) algebra,trigonometry etc.

What do you think they would answer?
They would say ,it was some European.
Myself ,I was taught that Isaac Newton invented Calculus.

Yesterday the New York Times published an aticle in order to salute the Arab scholar of the 9th Century :MUHAMAD IBN MUSA AL KHARIZIMI.
Al Kharizimi published the Treatise "ON THE HINDU ART OF RECKONING" which was translated in Latin in the 12th Century

This branch of mathematics called Algorithms,comes from the latin algorismus which itself is a corruption of the name of Al Kharizimi.

AL KHARIZIMI also wrote the book in Arabic called:"Hisab AL-JABR Wal Mugabalah (Book of Calculations ,Restoration and Reduction).

You know what branch of mathematics derived its name from the title of his book?
ALGEBRA (AL-JABR)

OH YES!
These branches of Mathematics weren't adopted in Europe until the 16th Century ,which made possible the so called Renaissance and later on the so-called Industrial Revolution.

Al Kharizimi books are still around.They were read by none other than Sir ISAAC NEWTON among others.

I wrote all that in order to say that we got to keep an open mind and to again say that there is nothing exceptionnal about the Europeans!