bmags Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 06:37 PM) it's too bad this election is going to get nasty. i actually like Obama and won't really be all that disappointed if he ends up winning (even though i do have issues with some of his economic policies and increases in spending). well when you accuse Obama of wanting to teach kindergartners about sex, an out and out lie, you forfeit any possibility of a clean campaign. I used to think I liked McCain more than the other candidates, but now I'm not so sure. He's backtracked on anything he's accomplished the past 8 years, he's probably more of a warhawk than Bush, and quite possibly stupider. An unbelievable combination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 06:20 PM) well when you accuse Obama of wanting to teach kindergartners about sex, an out and out lie, you forfeit any possibility of a clean campaign. I used to think I liked McCain more than the other candidates, but now I'm not so sure. He's backtracked on anything he's accomplished the past 8 years, he's probably more of a warhawk than Bush, and quite possibly stupider. An unbelievable combination. Frankly I disagree. I think McCain isn't nearly as, well, how to put this politely, slow, as our current President. But I think that makes him more dangerous in a sense. Bush is just numb to so much it seems, it takes a complete disaster (katrina) to penetrate the bubble he's wrapped around his head, and that has helped give the other people in his administration (Cheney) such a chance to take control of things. John McCain isn't going to be like that. He knows what he wants to do. The problem is...the things he wants to do. He might well be more effective at getting them done than GWB is. And that scares me a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 09:15 PM) Frankly I disagree. I think McCain isn't nearly as, well, how to put this politely, slow, as our current President. But I think that makes him more dangerous in a sense. Bush is just numb to so much it seems, it takes a complete disaster (katrina) to penetrate the bubble he's wrapped around his head, and that has helped give the other people in his administration (Cheney) such a chance to take control of things. RSO isn't going to be like that. He knows what he wants to do. The problem is...the things he wants to do. He might well be more effective at getting them done than GWB is. And that scares me a lot. Fixed that for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 06:47 PM) Fixed that for you. Well, on that we'll disagree. I think bombing half the world is scarier than a capital gains tax increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 08:49 PM) Well, on that we'll disagree. I think bombing half the world is scarier than a capital gains tax increase. Ya think? I just don't think McCain is like that, contrary to what you think of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 9, 2008 -> 08:20 PM) well when you accuse Obama of wanting to teach kindergartners about sex, an out and out lie, you forfeit any possibility of a clean campaign. I used to think I liked McCain more than the other candidates, but now I'm not so sure. He's backtracked on anything he's accomplished the past 8 years, he's probably more of a warhawk than Bush, and quite possibly stupider. An unbelievable combination. oh my Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 As if the McCain campaign couldn't go any lower, they now tie Obama to things he's never said or done! The narrator's claim of "completely false" attacks on Palin comes from a FactCheck.org examination of Internet rumors about Palin, having absolutely nothing to do with Obama. And the Wall St. Journal report of opposition researches headed to Alaska -- as if researching your opponent were wrong -- was a reference to Democratic operatives, not the Obama campaign specifically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 Let's look at this F******* campaign that McCain has ran. For the past month, what ads has McCain ran that listed anything he would do? I haven't seen any (i'm in a battleground state) What ads were just shallow attacks on Obama not having substance? about half What ads were just completely FALSE, not politik misleading half truths, but categorically false ads about Obama? About half. What ads did Obama have on McCain? Two ads about how McCain would run the economy, using McCain's own words in political fashion. Whad ads did Obama do showing how Obama would run his presidency? About 3/4s. So, you all complain about how individual Obama supporters in workplaces and messageboards have annoyed you so much with Obama. Well I have the same complaint with McCain, except it's his actual campaign that is doing the sleaziest, most irresponsible ads I've seen. That Bush ad with the wolf? I hated it because I thought it was just scaring America to fall in line. BUt alternately, it had no falsehoods, and was implying that Bush will protect America. The Kerry windsurfing ad? Took actual things Kerry said and brought it against him. Hell the Willie Horton ad contained undeniable truths, but linked them in a political way to a candidate. Now McCain's ads are WORSE than Bush. Isn't that something? McCain, who wanted to run an honorable campaign about the issues, has not ran on the issues since June, has not even ran AGAINST Obama's issues, just Obama's character. And in the end, what does that show about McCain's character. This is Obama-Keyes pt. II. A man running a completely sleazy campaign. And I hope it sheds as much light on McCain's lack of character as it did on Keyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 10, 2008 -> 12:49 PM) And I hope it sheds as much light on McCain's lack of character as it did on Keyes. It wont. McCain's the Maverick and Palin is the Queen of the GOP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 I joke about this, but let's turn it around. Should Obama run an add saying McCain wants to reenact prohibition because he said he'd veto every beer? Absolutely not. This is what McCain is doing, but this latest ad is even worse because it's nothing Obama has said and done, but they HEAVILY imply it is Obama who has done it. In fact, I haven't seen Obama say anything about Palin that was false. THe only thing he's said about her was calling her out on the "bridge to nowhere" stuff which has been backed up by every major news organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 It'll be interesting to see McCain at the debates. He won't have "thanks, but no thanks" to hide behind. He will actually have to tell us what he thinks about actual issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 10, 2008 Share Posted September 10, 2008 CBS takes down McCain webad, suggests it's 'misleading' YouTube has removed a webad that casts Sarah Palin as the victim of sexism on the request of CBS, whose anchor Katie Couric was featured in the ad. “One of the great lessons of that campaign is the continued and accepted role of sexism in American life," Couric is quoted in the ad. In the original clip, she was talking about Hillary Clinton; the ad applies her words to Sarah Palin. Asked about the ad, CBS spokeswoman Leigh Farris said, "CBS News does not endorse any candidate in the Presidential race. Any use of CBS personnel in political advertising that suggests the contrary is misleading." YouTube's page displaying the ad now tells visitors, "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by CBS Interactive Inc." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 You know, I don't do nearly as much of the random nugget bashing McCain posting as some, ahem, others do...but sometimes you just crack up at one. "We're not going to spend $3 million of your tax dollars to study the DNA of bears in Montana," McCain said earlier this year, referring to a request from Montana for federal money to study the endangered grizzly bear. "I don't know if it was a paternity issue or criminal, but it was a waste of money. John McCain, bashing earmarks earlier this year. $3.2 million - Value of an earmark requested by the Governor of Alaska to study seal genetics. The problem of course...is that Bears are godless killing machines. Seals are happy and don't typically kill us. We should therefore understand their genetics better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 10, 2008 -> 12:00 PM) It'll be interesting to see McCain at the debates. He won't have "thanks, but no thanks" to hide behind. He will actually have to tell us what he thinks about actual issues. as opposed to this question is below my pay grade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Sep 10, 2008 -> 07:33 PM) as opposed to this question is below my pay grade? So you know mathematically somehow that life begins at conception? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nokona Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 I hate that bear line because it's the only way to properly keep population numbers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 QUOTE (Nokona @ Sep 10, 2008 -> 08:07 PM) I hate that bear line because it's the only way to properly keep population numbers Of course it is. But if you're going to make fun of one earmark... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Sep 10, 2008 -> 09:31 PM) You know, I don't do nearly as much of the random nugget bashing McCain posting as some, ahem, others do...but sometimes you just crack up at one. John McCain, bashing earmarks earlier this year. - Value of an earmark requested by the Governor of Alaska to study seal genetics. The problem of course...is that Bears are godless killing machines. Seals are happy and don't typically kill us. We should therefore understand their genetics better. Post of the year, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Wow. Even Fox News is criticizing. For a candidate who once railed against “stale soundbites, staged rallies and over-managed messages,” John McCain seems to have turned over a new leaf. Today marks the four-week anniversary since McCain held his last press conference (8/13 in Birmingham, MI) and three weeks since his last public town hall meeting (8/20 in Las Cruces, NM). McCain’s new campaign strategy: staged rallies with thousands of supporters. Since announcing Sarah Palin as his VP choice on August 29, McCain’s has appeared at 11 rallies with his new running mate where both members of the ticket delivered a 10-15 minute stump speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 11, 2008 -> 10:27 AM) Wow. Even Fox News is criticizing. but... but... but... unless you have small townhall meetings you dont get to meet the people. Amazing how his stances change when it's politically expedient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Sep 11, 2008 -> 10:32 AM) but... but... but... unless you have small townhall meetings you dont get to meet the people. Amazing how his stances change when it's politically expedient. The only way I see him/them do townhalls is if they hand select the questioners a la GWB. They couldn't dare risk someone actually asking Palin a tough question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Sep 11, 2008 -> 10:34 AM) The only way I see him/them do townhalls is if they hand select the questioners a la GWB. They couldn't dare risk someone actually asking Palin a tough question. I'm itching for Biden to find a way to make Palin explain the difference between Sunni and Shia during the debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Sep 11, 2008 -> 09:40 AM) I'm itching for Biden to find a way to make Palin explain the difference between Sunni and Shia during the debate. She has still over a month before the debate. She'll have the easy stuff down. The answer to that question is "Drill baby Drill". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 If under the Bush/ McCain Economy you lost your home in MI... you dont get to vote. Sorry. The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP’s effort to challenge some voters on Election Day. “We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed. State election rules allow parties to assign “election challengers” to polls to monitor the election. In addition to observing the poll workers, these volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they “have a good reason to believe” that the person is not eligible to vote. One allowable reason is that the person is not a “true resident of the city or township.” The Michigan Republicans’ planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being “true residents.” One expert questioned the legality of the tactic. “You can’t challenge people without a factual basis for doing so,” said J. Gerald Hebert, a former voting rights litigator for the U.S. Justice Department who now runs the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington D.C.-based public-interest law firm. “I don’t think a foreclosure notice is sufficient basis for a challenge, because people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.” As for the practice of challenging the right to vote of foreclosed property owners, Hebert called it, “mean-spirited.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts