Some of you Dems - convince me not to be a nervous wreck if Obama wins

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

My DH brought up the time Obama spent in Pakistan as a youth when I commented on his pronunciation of "Pakistan" (while it may be right, it sounds pretentious to me). I had no idea, and still don't know if it is true. My DH sent me the following - can someone tell me whether it is accurate?

Pakistan was on the banned travel list for US Citizens at the time and all non-Muslim visitors were not welcome unless sponsored by their embassy for official business.

The would be only a few reasons a young Westerner of the Muslim faith would travel to Pakistan in 1981:

To Participate in Jihad, which is the duty of every "True Believer".

For religious education in a Wahabbi sect, Saudi funded, Madrassa.

In order to purchase drugs from the drug marketplace.

Pakistan was not a tourist stop nor the place to hang out with someone's family in 1981.

If true, it makes me uneasy.

This is as crazy as the theory that Sarah Palin faked her pregnancy to cover up her daughter's!

So its not true? He didn't go to Pakistan when it was on the US State Department's banned list? Or he didn't go to Pakistan but just said he did? Forget the Jihad-Wahabbi-Madrassa craziness, what about the trip?

I have no idea whether he went to Pakistan or not. But first of all, Earth to Crazy Person: OBAMA IS NOT A MUSLIM. And I'm sure there were Western Muslims who went to Pakistan in the 80s for none of the reasons you mention.

And, okay, I'll admit I don't have great knowledge the state of Pakistan in 1981 but I highly question that it was a place that Westerners would only visit if their intent was to foment trouble of one sort or another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're misrepresenting what this website says. It encourages people to post their opinions about McCain on blog and news sites, not participate in spamming.

Agreed. And I could not find anything about Obama's educational saga in the suggested cut and paste talking points.

My DH brought up the time Obama spent in Pakistan as a youth when I commented on his pronunciation of "Pakistan" (while it may be right, it sounds pretentious to me). I had no idea, and still don't know if it is true. My DH sent me the following - can someone tell me whether it is accurate?

Pakistan was on the banned travel list for US Citizens at the time and all non-Muslim visitors were not welcome unless sponsored by their embassy for official business.

The would be only a few reasons a young Westerner of the Muslim faith would travel to Pakistan in 1981:

To Participate in Jihad, which is the duty of every "True Believer".

For religious education in a Wahabbi sect, Saudi funded, Madrassa.

In order to purchase drugs from the drug marketplace.

Pakistan was not a tourist stop nor the place to hang out with someone's family in 1981.

If true, it makes me uneasy.

America has lost it. Seriously. Can you possibly imagine another reason for traveling to Pakistan? How about you and your college buddy are visiting your families over break? One lives in Indonesia, so you go there. Then you visit the friend's family in Pakistan because (gulp) his family lives there. This is what actually happened. Oh, and they went to India, too. Jeepers!

[Anonymous]

Back to the original question of why OP should not be a nervous wreck, here is an article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/08/david-brooks-sarah-palin_n_133001.html) giving David Brooks's evaluation of Obama (and, in passing, of Palin). I would think it should be more convincing than a Dem's arguments:

David Brooks spoke frankly about the presidential and vice presidential candidates Monday afternoon, calling Sarah Palin a "fatal cancer to the Republican party" but describing John McCain and Barack Obama as "the two best candidates we've had in a long time."

In an interview with The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg at New York's Le Cirque restaurant to unveil that magazine's redesign, Brooks decried Palin's anti-intellectualism and compared her to President Bush in that regard:

[Sarah Palin] represents a fatal cancer to the Republican party. When I first started in journalism, I worked at the National Review for Bill Buckley. And Buckley famously said he'd rather be ruled by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. But he didn't think those were the only two options. He thought it was important to have people on the conservative side who celebrated ideas, who celebrated learning. And his whole life was based on that, and that was also true for a lot of the other conservatives in the Reagan era. Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices. I think President Bush has those prejudices.

Brooks praised Palin's natural political talent, but said she is "absolutely not" ready to be president or vice president. He explained, "The more I follow politicians, the more I think experience matters, the ability to have a template of things in your mind that you can refer to on the spot, because believe me, once in office there's no time to think or make decisions."

The New York Times columnist also said that the "great virtue" of Palin's counterpart, Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden, is that he is anything but a "yes man."

"[Biden] can't not say what he thinks," Brooks remarked. "There's no internal monitor, and for Barack Obama, that's tremendously important to have a vice president who will be that way. Our current president doesn't have anybody like that."

Brooks also spent time praising Obama's intellect and skills in social perception, telling two stories of his interactions with Obama that left him "dazzled":

Obama has the great intellect. I was interviewing Obama a couple years ago, and I'm getting nowhere with the interview, it's late in the night, he's on the phone, walking off the Senate floor, he's cranky. Out of the blue I say, 'Ever read a guy named Reinhold Niebuhr?' And he says, 'Yeah.' So i say, 'What did Niebuhr mean to you?' For the next 20 minutes, he gave me a perfect description of Reinhold Niebuhr's thought, which is a very subtle thought process based on the idea that you have to use power while it corrupts you. And I was dazzled, I felt the tingle up my knee as Chris Matthews would say.

And the other thing that does separate Obama from just a pure intellectual: he has tremendous powers of social perception. And this is why he's a politician, not an academic. A couple of years ago, I was writing columns attacking the Republican congress for spending too much money. And I throw in a few sentences attacking the Democrats to make myself feel better. And one morning I get an email from Obama saying, 'David, if you wanna attack us, fine, but you're only throwing in those sentences to make yourself feel better.' And it was a perfect description of what was going through my mind. And everybody who knows Obama all have these stories to tell about his capacity for social perception.

Brooks predicted an Obama victory by nine points, and said that although he found Obama to be "a very mediocre senator," he was is surrounded by what Brooks called "by far the most impressive people in the Democratic party."

"He's phenomenally good at surrounding himself with a team," Brooks said. "I disagree with them on most issues, but I am given a lot of comfort by the fact that the people he's chosen are exactly the people I think most of us would want to choose if we were in his shoes. So again, I have doubts about him just because he was such a mediocre senator, but his capacity to pick staff is impressive."

[Anonymous]

My DH brought up the time Obama spent in Pakistan as a youth when I commented on his pronunciation of "Pakistan" (while it may be right, it sounds pretentious to me). I had no idea, and still don't know if it is true. My DH sent me the following - can someone tell me whether it is accurate?

Pakistan was on the banned travel list for US Citizens at the time and all non-Muslim visitors were not welcome unless sponsored by their embassy for official business.

The would be only a few reasons a young Westerner of the Muslim faith would travel to Pakistan in 1981:

To Participate in Jihad, which is the duty of every "True Believer".

For religious education in a Wahabbi sect, Saudi funded, Madrassa.

In order to purchase drugs from the drug marketplace.

Pakistan was not a tourist stop nor the place to hang out with someone's family in 1981.

Is this possibly referring to a Haj??? or Hajii??? and not JIHAD??? I'm no expert on Islam but I'm reasonably well educated and from the D.C. area so have known many muslims. Actual real people who were.... JUST LIKE OTHER PEOPLE! A haj IIRC is a pilgrimage to Mecca. It is something muslims should do at least once if they are physically and financially able. It would be similar to a christian going to Jerusalem. Is that a nefarious act? Should we be suspicious of christians who have been to the Holy Land? Please expand your world view to include the actual world.

If true, it makes me uneasy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
My DH brought up the time Obama spent in Pakistan as a youth when I commented on his pronunciation of "Pakistan" (while it may be right, it sounds pretentious to me). I had no idea, and still don't know if it is true. My DH sent me the following - can someone tell me whether it is accurate?

Pakistan was on the banned travel list for US Citizens at the time and all non-Muslim visitors were not welcome unless sponsored by their embassy for official business.

The would be only a few reasons a young Westerner of the Muslim faith would travel to Pakistan in 1981:

To Participate in Jihad, which is the duty of every "True Believer".

For religious education in a Wahabbi sect, Saudi funded, Madrassa.

In order to purchase drugs from the drug marketplace.

Pakistan was not a tourist stop nor the place to hang out with someone's family in 1981.

Is this possibly referring to a Haj??? or Hajii??? and not JIHAD??? I'm no expert on Islam but I'm reasonably well educated and from the D.C. area so have known many muslims. Actual real people who were.... JUST LIKE OTHER PEOPLE! A haj IIRC is a pilgrimage to Mecca. It is something muslims should do at least once if they are physically and financially able. It would be similar to a christian going to Jerusalem. Is that a nefarious act? Should we be suspicious of christians who have been to the Holy Land? Please expand your world view to include the actual world.

You are correct that Hajj is a pilgrimage to Mecca and one of the five pillars of Islam. But Mecca is in Saudi Arabia, not Pakistan. So I don't what that has to do with Obama going to Pakistan.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
You are correct that Hajj is a pilgrimage to Mecca and one of the five pillars of Islam. But Mecca is in Saudi Arabia, not Pakistan. So I don't what that has to do with Obama going to Pakistan.

Not to mention the question as to why anyone would expect Obama to go on the Hajj.

[Anonymous]

It was a trip he took on break with his college friend. They were visiting their respective families in Indonesia and Pakistan. What's the big deal?