So much for Republican's family values.

[stephen]

Well, I don't understand disarming LAW ABIDING CITIZENS at all. Neither did our founding fathers, hence it is part of the Constitution. So his idea that you disarm people and leave them unable to defend themselves against criminals who care nothing about "laws" by definition is totally absurd to me. Any person who professes to be a supporter of MORE protection against civil liberties, as Obama professes, infractions doesn't try to take away my CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to bear arms and protect myself, my family, and possibly others. It's an oxymoron.

have our "founding fathers" ever been wrong (13th, 14th, 15th amendments ring a bell)? as i stated, i DO NOT SUPPORT his position on gun control...BUT realize that there is a bigger picture. there were 2 bills that he attempted to get past prior to him running for president...1 allowing citizens to only purchase 1 gun a month and 2 banning semi-automatic weapons. i'm not sure how many guns you feel you need a month to protect yourself/family/others? the semi-automatic bill...well that's a different story...one that i would never support. neither bill takes away from our constitutional right to bear arms...it just makes things more difficult.

Actually, he's clearly said he would pull troops out if elected. Therefore it would leave a war unfinished, a void that Terrorists/Dictators would fill, and only give us a repeat of the Clinton no-backbone-left-unfinished initial war in Iraq where we could have avoided 9-11 all together.

IRAQ WAS NOT THE CAUSE OF 9-11...afghanistan maybe, but not IRAQ. he did say he would pull troops out, but in a timely manner...MUCH LIKE WHAT THE TROOP WITHDRAWL PLAN WE HAVE NOW.

Wrong. He does want to implement tax changes that affect high wage earners as if that is going to resolve something. It won't. Look at it this way, the top wage earners comprise only 1% of ALL tax payers, yet they pay way more than 1% of all taxes. So you want to penalize high wage earners for making money, so you can give it to those of us that don't make that kind of money? How's that make sense? That's a Socialist idea, not a democratic one. Why not make it equal across the board and make it a consumption tax, ie. the fair tax? Rich people SPEND money to avoid paying income taxes on it. When you SPEND money, under a fair tax, they get TAXED. It doesn't matter if you're illegal, drug dealer, unemployed, or Donald Trump. You would PAY taxes which in turn would mean Trillions in revenue we DON'T SEE now. Why? Because those illegals, drug dealers, and unemployed DON'T PAY TAXES NOW. How can people not see that would net MORE revenue?

have you taken a look at the recent GDP numbers? those stimulus checks gave us a 3.3% increase in the GDP...a number we haven't seen in a while. check this out...you weren't given a stimilus check if you made over a certain amount (75k i believe), and you also weren't given the full amount based on your income. basically, by giving WORKING MIDDLE CLASS americans under the $75k income bracket an extra $600 in their tax return, has provided our economy a 3.3% increase in the GDP. PROOF POSITIVE that providing financial support to WORKING MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES WILL RESULT IN A POSITIVE CHANGE IN THE ECONOMY.

Wrong again. He does support Nationalized Health Care. Here is his own quote, from his own personal website:

"OBAMA: Well, look, I believe in universal health care, as does Sen. Clinton. And the point of the debate, is that Sen. Clinton repeatedly claims that I don't stand for universal health care. And, you know, for Sen. Clinton to say that, I think, is simply not accurate. Every expert has said that anybody who wants health care under my plan will be able to obtain it. President Clinton's own secretary of Labor has said that my plan does more to reduce costs and as a consequence makes sure that the people who need health care right now, all across America, will be able to obtain it. And we do more to reduce costs than any other plan that's been out there."

this is where obama's backbone becomes an issue. regardless of how obama words it, HE'S NOT FIGHTING FOR NATIONALIZED HEALTHCARE, and RIGHTLY SO. nationalized healthcare is what they have in Canada, where THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDES/PAYS FOR ALL HEALTHCARE. making healthcare more affordable still keeps the American people paying for it, but at a rate that they can afford. NATIONALIZED/FREE HEALTHCARE IS STUPID, and obama needs to make it more clear for people (who hear the wrong message)to understand that is not his primary objective....AFFORDABLE NOT FREE. the result of free healthcare is waiting list for critical operations, and that would just create a bigger issue within itself.

Yet he himself admits he doesn't want to make a decision as to WHEN "life" begins as a definition. This is the basic premise of abortion. So if you don't know when "life" begins, how can you say you're for or against?

once again...something that i don't agree with him on. abortion is a moral issue, and it's something that i'm against. either way it goes...i'll never do it, so i could careless what obama or mccain has to say on the issue...it's "win win" for me.

Not what I've read about his immigration views. From what I've seen, he wants to give licenses to illegals, free health care for illegals, and different forms of amnesty as part of his resolution.

yes, he has made statements on giving amnesty (not sure about licenses and healthcare), but think about it in terms of taxes. 12 million illegal people are here, taking citizen's jobs, and not even paying taxes. it's impossible to send 12 million people back home...but you can give them their "american dream" and make them pay taxes like the rest of us.

There's more to crime prevention than just gun control. It is a big part, but there's also: law enforcement, legal system, and prison system. Where does he stand or does he even have plans for any of the other parts?

i already mentioned his plans for law enforcement, and i'll admit i don't know a whole lot about what he intends on doing with the legal/prison system (both of which i don't intend on seeing in my life-time). funding is an issue within the smaller cities around the U.S. i've heard him specifically say that he wants to increase funding for LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT (keep them better equipped, pay for MORE police officers, etc.). it isn't ALL about gun control.

Yep, he wants to sit down with terrorists and dictators to "talk" about the problems. Right! That's going to work about as good as "talking" down a bully. You have to hand that bully a good a$$ whoopin before he will ever listen to anything you have to say. Obama doesn't want to do that. He wants to pacify that bully by sitting down and having tea and crumpets with them. Yeah, right. The same people that want to KILL YOU are going to come running to have tea and crumpets with you. Okie dokie. Makes perfect sense. This is one of the big problems I have with Obama. He's a pacifist.

you're right, you can't "pacify" a bully...but what country is REALLY bullying the U.S.??? NOT ONE. our military is only so big man...we can't turn EVERYONE into an enemy. like i said before, terrorism and dictatorship exist ALL OVER, and we can't fight it alone. we need to do a better job at strengthening our relationships with ALLIES, and gaining MORE ALLIES, so that when the time does come to kick a$$, we can get down to it. obama has a unique ability to talk, and make his speeches "connect" with people...so why not let him do it? once again...when dude went across the world, he was accepted with open arms, SOMETHING BUSH SENIOR ADMIRED...that's something that you republicans need to think more about...MAVERICKS AREN'T ALWAYS GUN-SLINGERS...