Let me ask you a hypothetical:
If someone gets elected President saying he is a uniter and begins to murder the [insert favorite group of people here] in America, would you unite behind him for the sake of unity or would you oppose this man/woman with your dying breath?
The problem with claiming to be a uniter of the "people", it requires no leadership. You can not please everyone. The President would have to spend each morning searching the paper and television to grasp the latest polls, do a campaign-like bus tour across the country to make his "sales pitch", or "testing the climate" through townhall meetings before coming to any form of a decision. Is this how you define a Presidential leader? However there IS a vast difference between a Leader, and using your power as a bully dictator OVER the people you are suppose to serve.
Can either of you present any evidence of Obama claiming and/or campaigning to be a "uniter?" If you're going to respond, please just respond with actual evidence. Not excuses or insults, we've been there and done that to death already.
Thanks.
Obama campaigning on the stance of being a uniter, ok here are just a few right off the top:
"I think it is fair to say that I believe I can bring the country together more effectively than she can. I will add, by the way, that is not entirely a problem of her making. Some of those battles in the '90s that she went through were the result of some pretty unfair attacks on the Clintons. But that history exists, and so, yes, I believe I can bring the country together in a way she cannot do. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't be running."
--Barrack Obama
"I don't think there is anybody in this race who's able to bring new people into the process and break out of some of the ideological gridlock that we have as effectively as I can,"
--Barrack Obama
"There were a set of things that I can do that no other candidate can do. I can bring the country together around a working majority for change in a way that Sen. Clinton, for example, cannot. Rather than simply duplicate the elections of 2000 and 2004, where 47 percent of the country is on one side, and 47 percent of the country is on the other, and 5 percent are in the middle - all of them living in Ohio and Florida, apparently - I believe I can expand the political map, get people involved who haven't been involved before, get independents and Republicans to rally around a progressive, although nonideological, agenda. And I think I can do that more effectively than any of the other candidates in the race."
. . . "The skill sets that are required to move the country are not different from the skill sets that are required to move somebody across the table. It means listening to them, it means having very clear principles - what you're willing to fight for, where you're willing to compromise. And it means being willing to walk away from the table.
Those skill sets are the ones, I think, I am most confident I can apply ... where I think I have an edge over Sen. Clinton, who I think has a tendency - when confronted with somebody who doesn't agree with her - to demonize them or push them away."
--Barrack Obama with 'The Chronical'
sources:
Obama Says He Can Unite U.S. 'More Effectively' Than Clinton
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/dupboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4098655
Let's
HOPE for
CHANGE in the White House in 2012
