2008 U.S. Presidential Election Mega thread

[KevinTBrown]

Overheard a bet between a (white male) comic book store manager and a(n African-American female) customer re the N-bomb.

Customer holds that it will be dropped sometime between now and the election. Question is, by who?

McCain?

Palin?

Palin family member?

Bill Clinton?

I bet McCain.

He took a lot of hits tonight, though the debate in the end was a tie. I think if Obama keeps hammering him and McCain keeps refusing to looks at Obama, Obama is going to ask why McCain why he's afraid to look at him....

McCain is going to blow. That's why he refused to even look over. He just tried to keep focused on his podium.

[kingdom2000]

A vice president that isn't talking to the press tonight, btw.

I get the feeling that McCain will cancel the VP debate deciding that the damage from the cancellation will be less then the damage if it occurs. On the other hand, if Biden is to "rough" on her, people will feel sympathy and that would score points for McCain. Sound silly but look at the defense of the "attacks" by the press for people.

For some reason they don't connect that if a candidate can't handle the press, its pretty damn clear they are not going to be able to handle foreign leaders and the stress of office.

[BnL]

*sigh*

I hate being right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec3aC8ZJZTc

Less than an hour after the debate ended......

That doesn't even make sense. Because Obama agrees with McCain on certain things...he's not ready to lead? Huh? Does that mean, by extension, that McCain isn't ready to lead, because he holds the opinions that Obama agrees with?

It's really striking how McCain kept talking about how bipartisan he is, and how he's willing to reach across to the aisle to get things done and Obama won't, yet he showed none of that capacity in how he conducted himself in the debate. He was divisive and snide and dismissive, even on topics that he shared common ground with Obama on. Yet Obama, on the other hand, demonstrated his openness by saying several times tonight, you know what, I agree with my opponent. And now he's being mocked for it by the McCain camp. WTF?

[Christopher Cross Is God]

nevermind, damn link wouldn't show up as a pic. argh!

[Samurai]

He has had years in state senate and then the federal senate, and he has been chairman of a senate foreign affairs body; he has managed to work with Republicans to get laws past; he successfully won a primary campaign against a more famous opponent, who was expected by all to win. And he does not have the same record of incompetence and corruption Palin has.

How is he less qualified and experienced?

Palin has just as many, if not more, years of elected service, and all of it was Executive experience, which counts for more than Legislative experience. They are 2 separate branches of government, with different roles, responsibilities, powers, and requirements.

Obama never once convened even a single meeting of his sub-committee on foreign affairs, so who cares if he was appointed leader of a non-existent group?

The only laws he worked with Republicans on were totally non-inflammatory, obviously unanimous bills, such as a bill to try and help prevent nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists. Wow, what BRAVERY, what COURAGE it must take for Obama to sign onto a bill with unanimous support! When has he even bucked his party when it really mattered? Ok, he voted for the telecom bill, but there were already far more votes to pass it than needed, so it didn't matter what he did, and it was a calculated move on his part anyway. But when has he stood up to the do-nothing, corrupt Democrats in Congress?

He won his primary? That's all the experience he needs to be President, huh? That and managing his campaign, right?

Sarah Palin has no incompetence or corruption in her record, unlike Obama, who has associated with known terrorists and racists for decades, taken money from the convicted Tony Rezko, supported his cousin in Kenya who is now raping and pillaging the country, and is a cog in the corrupt Chicago Democrat Machine.

So yeah, Sarah Palin has for more experience that actually matters, and a spotless record compared to the dirty Obama.

[section 8]

Overheard a bet between a (white male) comic book store manager and a(n African-American female) customer re the N-bomb.

Customer holds that it will be dropped sometime between now and the election. Question is, by who?

McCain?

Palin?

Palin family member?

Bill Clinton?

Maybe Clinton, but then he was the first black president, so it might not count.:biggrin:

[the4thpip]

That's pretty much what I thought. Which is also why Obama looked at John McCain and addressed him directly throughout much of the debate.

McCain did not once look in Obama's direction.

EDIT:
I thought Obama won slightly tonight and had some great jabs in ("I've got a bracelet too," the mention of the bomb-bomb-bomb Iran moment, bringing up the Spain gaffe, pulling out the Kissinger card). McCain didn't lose his cool and held his own, but he did seem agitated at times.

In the end, I don't think this changed anyone's minds, even the undecideds. Looking forward to the other debates.

I tend to agree. I also think that Obama won the first half that focused on the economy: the average viewer can grasp the fact that 300 billion can solve more problems than 18 billion.

I don't think there was a clear "hitting it out of the park" winning moment here, and McCain was in more desperate need for one, being behind in the polls.

McCain, the foreign policy pope, also used some fantasy name for the new Pakistani President Zardari. I liked the Kissinger moment. And I do believe McCain comes off as less truthful in the various fact checks.

Here is something I mentioned earlier in this thread: Science, reduced to sound bites, often sounds dumb:

MCCAIN: "You know, we spent $3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. I don't know if that was a criminal issue or a paternal issue, but the fact is that it was $3 million of our taxpayers' money. And it has got to be brought under control."

THE FACTS: A study regularly mocked by McCain as pork barrel spending could help ease restrictions on logging, development and even the oil and gas drilling that McCain wants to expand. Montana ranchers, farmers and Republican leaders pushed for the study as a step toward taking the grizzly bear off the endangered species list. Former Montana Gov. Judy Martz, a Republican and a McCain supporter, said the bear had been used to block the use of the state's abundant natural resources, when all along the animal was plentiful. "If it is going to remove it from the list, it is money well spent," Martz said.

[the4thpip]

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Seven of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's top aides defied subpoenas for their testimony Friday into possible abuse of power by the governor.



Palin's chief of staff, Mike Nizich, and six other aides failed to appear at a legislative hearing into whether Palin abused her power when she fired her public safety commissioner this summer.

State Senate Judiciary Chairman Hollis French, a Democrat, waited 30 minutes Friday before reading a statement that the witnesses could be found in contempt when the full Legislature convenes in January and that the investigation would go on "in a simple search for the truth."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080927/ap_on_el_pr/palin_troopergate;_ylt=AnvhzhdosZSHgpbVFgZZ.ewEtbA F

[the4thpip]

Time magazine is grading the debate. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080927/us_time/gradingthefirstpresidentialdebate;_ylt=Aro_Qo8APN2 Of7Ng7ZCC9KoEtbAF)

Overall, Obama gets an A- from them, McCain a B-

I liked this bit best:

Style: Cluttered, jumpy, and often muddled. Frequent coughing early on helped neither his arguments nor his image. Jokes about being deaf and anecdotes about Normandy and George Shultz seemed ill-advised - even his pen was old. His presentation was further hindered by his wandering discussion of the differing heights of North and South Koreans and his angry assertion about how well he knows Henry Kissinger. Fell into the classic politician's trap of inserting familiar stump speech applause lines into debate responses - which only works if done with enthusiasm and clarity (and if received by applause - a big No-No in Lehrer's auditorium, which the audience obeyed seriously and silently). Keenly aware of the grand, grave occasion, McCain wavered between respectful and domineering, and ended up awkward and edgy.

Grade: C-

[king mob]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080927/ap_on_el_pr/palin_troopergate;_ylt=AnvhzhdosZSHgpbVFgZZ.ewEtbA F

Yup, Sarah Palin's record is spotless.

[Charles RB]

Obama, on the other hand, demonstrated his openness by saying several times tonight, you know what, I agree with my opponent. And now he's being mocked for it by the McCain camp. WTF?

Silly BnL. Agreeing with a politician from the other party on something is just WRONG and WEAK - we're supposed to be furthering partisan ideologies, not actually running shit!


Sarah Palin has no incompetence or corruption in her record

My god. Have you actually been ignoring the entirety of news reports on Palin for the last month, a lot of which has been POSTED HERE, or are you directly lying to us even though we know about Palin because, again, the reports were posted here?

It's pathetic.

[Darrell D.]

In other news, it appears Race relations still have a ways to go in this country (duh).
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26872774/


Students and school leaders at a small Christian university expressed outrage Wednesday at the discovery of a life-size cardboard effigy of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama hanging from a tree on campus.

A custodian at George Fox University discovered the effigy early Tuesday and immediately removed it, President Robin Baker said. University spokesman Rob Felton said Wednesday that the commercially produced reproduction had been suspended from the branch of a tree near Minthorn Hall with fishing line around the neck.

The hanging of the effigy around the neck is seen as racist symbolism because it harkens back to lynchings of black men by white mobs, especially in the U.S. South, decades ago. Obama is aiming to become America's first black president.


I wish I could say I'm surprised, but I'm not.

[Arrogantcur]

Exactly! For Obama to address only the Moderator, that would be typical of a candidate, and Obama is not a typical politician.

Not only is it atypical, but tonight it was expected that the candidates address one another directly. That was no secret.

I get the sense that McCain continuing to talk about Obama in the third person was done just to piss him off. You know, "La la la, I'm ignoring you, I'm going to talk about you like you aren't even here..."

If it were me I would have said "Hey John! Are you afraid to talk to me or something?" But I don't know how that would play on Peoria. Probably not so good. *sigh*

Gods sake, if this is serious political debate in the US then I'm going to stop slagging off Question Time.

McCain is an idiot, anyone watching this who has a working brain should see thing but Obama needs to rip him apart & make him look thick as shite. McCain is lying his arse off but Obama isn't fucking him up.

For fucks sake America, you can't let McCain win!

I would have loved it if Obama were more aggressive as well. It's like I posted here before: McCain just keeps on slandering and insulting him. The time for civility towards McCain is long past, and Obama should give as good as he gets.

I also worry that the stupid voters, the ones who make their decision based on "who looked STRONGER?" instead of "who is SMARTER?", are going to believe that Obama is weak because he didn't attack McCain and because he allowed McCain to talk over him. In addition, I worry that there are enough stupid voters to hand McCain the win.

However, the CNN focus group showed that the undecided voters in that group did not respond well to attacks and negativity, so it is possible that by being such a jerkoff McCain is alienating people and Obama hopes to avoid similarly alienating them by not sinking to McCain's level. I hope that is the case...

And Question Time is great. Far too often the President has walked out and said "this is what I'm going to do" and then simply walked away without being willing--or being forced--to answer questions about what he's just said. It's like a royal decree from a monarch, which is quite ironic since I believe the whole point of the American Revolution was to get rid of that sort of thing.

I don't know as much as I'd like about UK politics, but is it accurate to say that you can't get away with that in England?

That doesn't even make sense. Because Obama agrees with McCain on certain things...he's not ready to lead? Huh? Does that mean, by extension, that McCain isn't ready to lead, because he holds the opinions that Obama agrees with?

It's really striking how McCain kept talking about how bipartisan he is, and how he's willing to reach across to the aisle to get things done and Obama won't, yet he showed none of that capacity in how he conducted himself in the debate. He was divisive and snide and dismissive, even on topics that he shared common ground with Obama on. Yet Obama, on the other hand, demonstrated his openness by saying several times tonight, you know what, I agree with my opponent. And now he's being mocked for it by the McCain camp. WTF?

That's U.S. politics for you. Bloody stupid, but lots of voters think that any admission that the other guy was right about anything is equivalent to waving a white flag.

[KevinTBrown]

Palin has just as many, if not more, years of elected service, and all of it was Executive experience, which counts for more than Legislative experience. They are 2 separate branches of government, with different roles, responsibilities, powers, and requirements.

Obama never once convened even a single meeting of his sub-committee on foreign affairs, so who cares if he was appointed leader of a non-existent group?

The only laws he worked with Republicans on were totally non-inflammatory, obviously unanimous bills, such as a bill to try and help prevent nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists. Wow, what BRAVERY, what COURAGE it must take for Obama to sign onto a bill with unanimous support! When has he even bucked his party when it really mattered? Ok, he voted for the telecom bill, but there were already far more votes to pass it than needed, so it didn't matter what he did, and it was a calculated move on his part anyway. But when has he stood up to the do-nothing, corrupt Democrats in Congress?

He won his primary? That's all the experience he needs to be President, huh? That and managing his campaign, right?

Sarah Palin has no incompetence or corruption in her record, unlike Obama, who has associated with known terrorists and racists for decades, taken money from the convicted Tony Rezko, supported his cousin in Kenya who is now raping and pillaging the country, and is a cog in the corrupt Chicago Democrat Machine.

So yeah, Sarah Palin has for more experience that actually matters, and a spotless record compared to the dirty Obama.

Just go away you bigoted, lying, idiot.

"Spotless record." It's bullshit and you know it's bullshit.


By the way, if Obama is so dirty as you say, why has the government gotten zero from Rezko about Obama? (Who's singing like a little birdie right now..... and you'd know that if you decided to take your head out of your ass once in awhile.)

Chicago may have its corruption problems, but so does the STATE of Alaska. Obama is a Senator; Palin is a governor. Last time I looked, Obama had little to do with Chicago politics (though he did come from Chicago, but he's not under investigation) and Palin had everything to do with AK's politics. (Of which, she's under investigation.)

Now then, if you want to talk about actual ISSUES here, do so. Otherwise, just stay the fuck out of here. Personally speaking, I'm tired of your stupid and inane distractions.


As for one issue coming up very soon: I cannot wait for the VP debates. Biden is going to hand Palin her head on a platter.

[K-DoG7p7]

its kinda funny that both McCain and Palin have a history of cheating on their spouse and they represent the "Family first / moral party"

[Darrell D.]

its kinda funny that both McCain and Palin have a history of cheating on their spouse

I heard about McCain, but Palin? Not the virtuous Hockey Mom!

[K-DoG7p7]

I heard about McCain, but Palin? Not the virtuous Hockey Mom!

http://thankyoudaddy.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/sarah-palin-cheated-on-her-husband/

http://www.236.com/news/2008/09/04/were_going_with_the_rumor_sara_2_8712.php <-- this is the oldest ive found

[KevinTBrown]

Time magazine is grading the debate. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080927/us_time/gradingthefirstpresidentialdebate;_ylt=Aro_Qo8APN2 Of7Ng7ZCC9KoEtbAF)

Overall, Obama gets an A- from them, McCain a B-

I liked this bit best:

Based on the grades they gave, McCain should be a C+. Breaking it down to numbers, it's A+ = 10, A = 9, A- = 8, etc.. Total score in the 5 catagories for McCain is 21, which is a 4.2 average and a C+.

But Obama's is accurate, with some rounding up. Total score of 38, making it a 7.6 average.



Overall, I still consider the debate a tie in the respect that neither got a knock-out. However, McCain's refusal to even look over at Obama just once will hurt him in the next debate. I truly hope Obama challenges him on that point.

Jim Lehrer did a decent job of asking questions, maintaining some control, but he could not get either candidate to fully engage one another. Obviously, Obama did more than McCain, but still not enough.

One debate down and Obama still looks and acts far more Presidential than McCain. And to many perception means more than words.

[KevinTBrown]

http://thankyoudaddy.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/sarah-palin-cheated-on-her-husband/

http://www.236.com/news/2008/09/04/were_going_with_the_rumor_sara_2_8712.php <-- this is the oldest ive found

Given that the National Enquirer was spot on where John Edwards was concerned..... That may (emphasis on the MAY) be something there.

[K-DoG7p7]

Given that the National Enquirer was spot on where John Edwards was concerned..... That may (emphasis on the MAY) be something there.

and that time .. it also took a LONG time before the mainstream media ran with it

[Arrogantcur]

Just go away you bigoted, lying, idiot.

Maybe the troll will go away if we all stop feeding it.

[Infra-Man]

Palin has just as many, if not more, years of elected service, and all of it was Executive experience, which counts for more than Legislative experience. They are 2 separate branches of government, with different roles, responsibilities, powers, and requirements.

Quality of experience > quantity of experience. Has Palin developed an informed opinion on national issues and foreign relations because of her executive experience? No, not at all.

It's clear she's in over her head on national politics and international relations and her lack of knowledge should disqualify her from being an old man's heartbeat away from the presidency.

Sarah Palin has no incompetence or corruption in her record...

No corruption? Troopergate (a potential abuse of power) and lying about the bridge to nowhere repeatedly aren't corrupt? Cronyism isn't corrupt?

And if we're talking about guilt by association, what about Palin's pastor who believes in witchcraft, was a witch hunter in Kenya who chased a supposed witch out of town for allegedly causing car accidents, and who laid hands upon Palin, asking Jesus to elect her governor and protect her from witchcraft?

And as for Palin's incompetence, Samurai...

Have

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1PXHqrSp58

you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvUsdmqGYV8

not

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xpb7z_PjbAs

been

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRHkYN3hXkw

paying

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTJXtwJn050

attention

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8__aXxXPVc

at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npUMUASwaec

all?

[Samurai]

Quality of experience > quantity of experience. Has Palin developed an informed opinion on national issues and foreign relations because of her executive experience? No, not at all.

It's clear she's in over her head on national politics and international relations and her lack of knowledge should disqualify her from being an old man's heartbeat away from the presidency.



No corruption? Troopergate (a potential abuse of power) and lying about the bridge to nowhere repeatedly aren't corrupt? Cronyism isn't corrupt?

And if we're talking about guilt by association, what about Palin's pastor who believes in witchcraft, was a witch hunter in Kenya who chased a supposed witch out of town for allegedly causing car accidents, and who laid hands upon Palin, asking Jesus to elect her governor and protect her from witchcraft?

And as for Palin's incompetence, Samurai...

Have

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1PXHqrSp58

you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvUsdmqGYV8

not

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xpb7z_PjbAs

been

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRHkYN3hXkw

paying

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTJXtwJn050

attention

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8__aXxXPVc

at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npUMUASwaec

all?

"Troopergate" is a partisan witchhunt by Alakan Democrats over a non-issue. Officer Wooten had a dozen citations against him, including drunk driving in his patrol car, threatening to kill his father in law, and TASERING A 10 YR OLD KID, his own stepson. Even Mike Gravel, as far left as you can get and no friend of Palin or Republicans at all, said he deserved to be fired and this was a non-issue. Anyway, Monegan was seeking earmarks (with Hollis French, the same Democrat running the partisan "investigation" against her when there is an independent and separate group that is supposed to handle matters such as this) behind the governors back and against her strict instructions not to, on at least 4 separate occasions. So he was offered another position, but refused it and quit. http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/16/palin-fires-back-in-troopergate-releases-memos-showing-insubordination/

And the "bridge to nowhere" is corruption? She supported it for a little while back when the costs were low, then the price kept rising, and she said "this isn't worth it, thanks, but no thanks" and redirected the partial funding toward other transportation needs. That sounds like fiscal responsibility to me, realizing costs were ballooning and killing the project because they got way too high. And if it's the earmarks you're upset about, Obama took nearly a billion dollars in earmarks in his short time in office, including $1 million for the hospital where his wife works (not to mention he reached #2 on the 20 year list of donations from Freddie and Fannie in just 143 days of work, 2nd only to Chris Dodd, whose committee was in charge of overseeing them)

And, there's no comparison between listening to and befriending a bigoted racist preacher for 20 years and 1 meeting with 1 guest preacher who didn't say anything controversial but may have some spotty history she didn't know about.

As for the "gotcha" questions by liberal MSM Obama-shills, who would NEVER ask Obama tough questions like that (look up the fawning puff piece Gibson did with Obama to compare), it's BS.

[the4thpip]

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows Barack Obama attracting 50% of the vote while John McCain earns 44%. This six-point advantage matches Obama’s biggest lead yet.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Sarah Palin is a fool and idiot. She couldn't even be on last nights after debate to discuss McCain's points. Because she's such a fool the party knows she'd fuck up mainstream and swing more of the party behind Obama. Many conservatives are calling for her to quit ..that she's too foolish to be there. Or in over her head.

I mean Samurai it must thrill you to know your VP used her forgien policy experince as being nieghbors to Russia. Or that she met a forgien leader and only the cameras from the media was allowed in for 29 seconds.

She's a fool . She claims she made decisions and the McCain camp can't even nail them down . In fact heres a piece where they got so mad when CNN pushed to know 'What decision did she make with the
National Guard ?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tSXi-uJjVQ

They at McCain central canceled the Larry King interview over this. Which makes me laugh.

[LtMarvel]

Troopergate was a bipartisan investigation until Palin was picked to be VP. Then the Republicans have tried to obfuscate. Note the change from promise of cooperation to refusing to testify at all levels...

And it is about abuse of power, not about the trooper.

[the4thpip]

My god. Have you actually been ignoring the entirety of news reports on Palin for the last month, a lot of which has been POSTED HERE, or are you directly lying to us even though we know about Palin because, again, the reports were posted here?

It's pathetic.

I'm guessing Sam's posts are going to get more and more absurd as McPalin's McCampaign keeps Mcimploding.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Troopergate was a bipartisan investigation until Palin was picked to be VP. Then the Republicans have tried to obfuscate. Note the change from promise of cooperation to refusing to testify at all levels...

And it is about abuse of power, not about the trooper.

Well as crazy and stupied as Palin is she'd pretty much piss the campaign away . Next Friday should be fun...how bad will she be ? Biden can coast ..he has no pressure really. The "Female Maverick" however is gonna have to sit in a room for a week and study hard.

[Evan Waters]

She's going to be very rehearsed, I imagine. Biden does still have the risk that he can't go after her personally too much, he can't appear mean, but I think if, like Obama, he stays on message and takes time to rebut any accusations she makes (and given the speech she gave the last time she was rehearsed, there will probably be a lot of attacks.)

[Charles RB]

Wow. Samurai actually tried to discount Palin's blatant public incompetence and corruption.

Now that's impressive partisanship, and by "impressive" I mean "dumb".

[SUPERECWFAN1]

She's going to be very rehearsed, I imagine. Biden does still have the risk that he can't go after her personally too much, he can't appear mean, but I think if, like Obama, he stays on message and takes time to rebut any accusations she makes (and given the speech she gave the last time she was rehearsed, there will probably be a lot of attacks.)

All Biden has to do is joke "In my nieghborhood I live next door to some jewish nieghbors...according to the logic you told Mrs. Katie Couric ....that means I have forgien policy experince with Israel now !"

Palin doesn't wanna get into attack games with Biden. She'll be cut down pretty well if Biden is mean enough. He can ask her what decision she made with the National Guard and ask her if she knows now what a Vice President does.

The McCain camp gotta know if she goes all attack dog on a proven politican he can rip her to shreds.

[KevinTBrown]

I'm guessing Sam's posts are going to get more and more absurd as McPalin's McCampaign keeps Mcimploding.

You're McCorrect.

[KevinTBrown]

She's going to be very rehearsed, I imagine. Biden does still have the risk that he can't go after her personally too much, he can't appear mean, but I think if, like Obama, he stays on message and takes time to rebut any accusations she makes (and given the speech she gave the last time she was rehearsed, there will probably be a lot of attacks.)

She was "very rehearsed" before talking with Katie Couric! :eek: And how did that turn out? She was flustered, couldn't put her words together, let alone string a sentance or two together.

It was Katie fucking Couric!!!!!!! Lobbing big ol' fat softball questions at her and Palin STILL came out of it looking even more lost.

Palin may start off strong in the debate, and I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt, but in the end she'll going to be ripped to shreds. All the McCain campaign can hope for right now is that she doesn't get TOO flustered and say something truly idiotic that is irreparably damaging. But, you know what, I think she will.....

[rick]

"Troopergate" is a partisan witchhunt by Alakan Democrats over a non-issue.


Interesting how this "Democratic witchhunt" is made up of a committee of 2 Democrats and 3 Republicans.


Funny that.

[Michael P]

This is opposed to the Arkansas Troopergate, which was totally not a partisan witchhunt by Arkansas Republicans over a non-issue.

[AaronJ]

Interesting how this "Democratic witchhunt" is made up of a committee of 2 Democrats and 3 Republicans.


Funny that.

Don't confuse him with facts.


As to the VP debate, I saw Biden on Countdown last night (man can that guy talk!) and he was asked directly by Olberman whether he would "take it easy" on Palin. His response was basically, "Absolutely not. I'm not going to do anything condescending like that."

I don't think Biden's going to go all pit-bull on her, but I do think he will be the eloquent, studied, strong debater and speaker which he always is. Let her bury herself, for the most part, but call her on her mistakes when she makes them.

That would be my advice anyway.

[JamesRitcheyIII]

Well as crazy and stupied as Palin is she'd pretty much piss the campaign away . Next Friday should be fun...how bad will she be ? Biden can coast ..he has no pressure really. The "Female Maverick" however is gonna have to sit in a room for a week and study hard.

Joe's gotta be careful with Suzy Homemaker, though--one carefully orchestrated tear from her could swing the pity vote. To those who don't watch CSPAN--Joe don't fuck around on the hill--he's both relentless and merciless. All most have seen is the friendly, faux-pas-spouting everyman/FDR Liberal. I've seen him barely subdued and threatening contempt of Congress ith State Department officials and Generals. I've heard him tell the truth, angrily--to the point of me screaming 'hooray' at the TV. He's a populist bulldog, not a former beauty queen with terrible math, and 'book-larnin' skills.

Swear to Gog--WE DO NOT NEED Vice President Barbie with Munitions Accessories. Zero offense against women in general, meant--half the female population would have been a better choice of running mate.

[K-DoG7p7]

Joe's gotta be careful with Suzy Homemaker, though--one carefully orchestrated tear from her could swing the pity vote. To those who don't watch CSPAN--Joe don't fuck around on the hill--he's both relentless and merciless. All most have seen is the friendly, faux-pas-spouting everyman/FDR Liberal. I've seen him barely subdued and threatening contempt of Congress ith State Department officials and Generals. I've heard him tell the truth, angrily--to the point of me screaming 'hooray' at the TV. He's a populist bulldog, not a former beauty queen with terrible math, and 'book-larnin' skills.

Swear to Gog--WE DO NOT NEED Vice President Barbie with Munitions Accessories. Zero offense against women in general, meant--half the female population would have been a better choice of running mate.

the very idea that a VP candidate would ever get a pity vote is disgusting.. last thing you need in charge is someone you pity

[AaronJ]

Swear to Gog--WE DO NOT NEED Vice President Barbie with Munitions Accessories. Zero offense against women in general, meant--half the female population would have been a better choice of running mate.

I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that it's higher than "half the female population." :)

But I agree with your assessment of Biden. OTOH, he's been in the Senate since what, the early 70s? He knows his way around a debate. And which tactics to use with which opponents.

[K-DoG7p7]

Joe biden has ahad 2 moments where he was totaly "Palin-it"..
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=186018&title=Joe-Versus-the-Volcano

And just a littlen note... Beretta is a manufacturer they do infact make Shotguns too.. not just pistols like Jon Stewart thinks :P

[Buzz Dixon]

Sarah Palin has for more experience that actually matters, and a spotless record compared to the dirty Obama.Don't say stuff like that in front of somebody capable of writing an involuntary commitment order on you.

[Tages]

"Troopergate" is a partisan witchhunt by Alakan Democrats over a non-issue.
Ah, yes, there's that infamously powerful Alaskan Democratic Party again.

Even Mike Gravel, as far left as you can get
You again fail to impress me with your abject failure to appreciate the finer nuances of the left-right political spectrum. If Gravel is as far left as you can possibly go, what the hell would be, I dunno', Earl Browder? So left he laps and becomes right?

And if it's the earmarks you're upset about, Obama took nearly a billion dollars in earmarks in his short time in office, including $1 million for the hospital where his wife works (not to mention he reached #2 on the 20 year list of donations from Freddie and Fannie in just 143 days of work, 2nd only to Chris Dodd, whose committee was in charge of overseeing them)
More of that infamous Republican moral relativism. "And if you think that's bad, the other guy did this, so, um, ours is OK."

And, there's no comparison between listening to and befriending a bigoted racist preacher for 20 years and 1 meeting with 1 guest preacher who didn't say anything controversial but may have some spotty history she didn't know about.
You have never quoted Wright as saying anything racist. Shall we repeat what was said the first time (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?p=6757315#post6757315)?

A definition of racism, it would seem, would be the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race (stolen from wiki, but it's an agreeable definition, n'est-ce pas?)

Accusing the U.S. gov't of creating HIV/AIDS does not involve race and isn't racist, and neither does accusing the CIA of importing drugs into black communities. It may be stupid (well, the CIA thing is less stupid), but it doesn't involve the definition of racism quoted above.

Calling the US "the US of KKA" doesn't fit the above definition, and in fact uses the KKK in a pejorative context, so if anything it is the opposite.

Saying that 9-11 was a consequence of America's actions in the world isn't racist. It doesn't involve race nor does it claim one race has natural superiority over another.

You have never cited a single quote from Wright that says he thinks black people should be given rights, power or privilege over non-black people. In fact, when I prompted you to do so, you gave me the old "well, you won't believe me anyway!" (http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=6757369&postcount=87) defense.

This is going to be another one of those things, like the Lancet, that you make a huge stink about until someone demonstrates that what you're saying is obviously untrue, whereupon you'll go quiet for a month or so, only to repeat the same discredited nonsense once you think we've forgotten and you have a fresh audience to persuade.

[Buzz Dixon]

In other news, it appears Race relations still have a ways to go in this country (duh).
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26872774/



I wish I could say I'm surprised, but I'm not.I can only hope it was done by somebody from off campus in a deliberate attempt to stir up controversy and/or discredit some one/some group on campus.

[Buzz Dixon]

She's going to be very rehearsed, I imagine. Biden does still have the risk that he can't go after her personally too much, he can't appear mean, but I think if, like Obama, he stays on message and takes time to rebut any accusations she makes (and given the speech she gave the last time she was rehearsed, there will probably be a lot of attacks.)The most devastating thing Biden could do would be to let her have all the time to talk about anything she wants.

[Buzz Dixon]

Joe biden has ahad 2 moments where he was totaly "Palin-it"..
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=186018&title=Joe-Versus-the-Volcano

And just a littlen note... Beretta is a manufacturer they do infact make Shotguns too.. not just pistols like Jon Stewart thinks :PC'mon, the Bretta is world famous as James Bond's gun. It's an easy mistake for anybody other than a gun buff to make.

[K-DoG7p7]

C'mon, the Bretta is world famous as James Bond's gun. It's an easy mistake for anybody other than a gun buff to make.

well that is true
most people when they think of handguns think of either the Beretta 92/M9 or the Colt M1911
but still.. when a guy says he has a Beretta shotgun.. you FACT CHECK!

[AaronJ]

C'mon, the Bretta is world famous as James Bond's gun. It's an easy mistake for anybody other than a gun buff to make.

And anyone is going to make loads of mistakes, if he speaks enough in public. That's just the nature of it, I don't care how smart or articulate one is.

OTOH, if people's problems with Palin's comments at this point were simple errors, or the occasional moment or two of being slightly flustered, that would be one thing.

The woman has absolutely NO clue what she is talking about. And she hasn't exhibited an ability to learn from her mistakes. She seems to, at times, be utterly incoherent.

Like I said, earlier: Get her talking about Jesus or shooting moose or something like that, and she can probably sound like a normal person (maybe hockey, too).

[Charles RB]

(well, the CIA thing is less stupid)

They've actually been caught dealing drugs for black budgets IIRC.

[Buzz Dixon]

"John McCain showed up without running mate Sarah Palin, which is a shame because she actually has a lot of experience with financial matters. You know, she lives right next to a bank.":eek: :biggrin: :rolleyes:

[the4thpip]

McCain said "horseshit" in debate (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/27/1216/62905/110/612142)

[AaronJ]

McCain said "horseshit" in debate (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/27/1216/62905/110/612142)

You know, I *thought* I saw/heard that. But then I just figured I was reading into it.

But he definitely said it.

Not that I personally care. But it does go along with the temperament issue. And also the fact, well, Obama was RIGHT. And he was still calling it horseshit.

[Tages]

They've actually been caught dealing drugs for black budgets IIRC.

I checked the wiki on CIA drug trafficking allegations and while the Kerry Committee report says that the CIA and State Dept. knew the contras were being financed largely with cocaine exports to the U.S., and the State Dept. under Reagan itself paid over 800,000 dollars to known drug traffickers, it didn't conclude that the CIA was importing drugs itself.

Then again, Gary Webb's articles for the San Jose Mercury alleging that the CIA did assist traffickers in getting their product into the U.S. were never decisively refuted, though officials more or less refused to investigate further into them, and an LAPD officer personally testified to the director of the CIA that he saw it occurring.

And...George H. W. Bush's head of the DEA Robert Bonner testified on 60 Minutes (http://www.csun.edu/coms/ben/news/cia/ven/60m.html) that the CIA had knowingly let one ton of cocaine get imported into Miami supposedly to gather intel on a Columbian cartel.

Wow. So, it's not even stupid.

I guess Samurai thinks calling people who speak the truth racists for doing it is ethical, constructive dialogue, then.

[Buzz Dixon]

You know, I *thought* I saw/heard that. But then I just figured I was reading into it.

But he definitely said it.

Not that I personally care. But it does go along with the temperament issue. And also the fact, well, Obama was RIGHT. And he was still calling it horseshit.Apparently not. From what I've read, closer analysis reveals it of "[Of] Course it is".

[Buzz Dixon]

When the details of this encounter fade, as they soon will, I think the debate as a whole will be seen as of a piece with Kennedy-Nixon in 1960, Reagan-Carter in 1980, and Clinton-Bush in 1992.

In each of those cases, a fresh, new candidate (although chronologically older in Reagan's case) had been gathering momentum at a time of general dissatisfaction with the "four more years" option of sticking with the incumbent party. The question was whether the challenger could stand as an equal with the more experienced, tested, and familiar figure. In each of those cases, the challenger passed the test -- not necessarily by "winning" the debate, either on logical points or in immediate audience or polling reactions, but by subtly reassuring doubters on the basic issue of whether he was a plausible occupant of the White House and commander in chief.

I think that's how this debate will be seen. Neither Obama nor McCain made any serious mistakes (except, perhaps, for McCain's churlish on-stage personal bearing); neither had any moments of surprising brilliance or rhetorical flash. McCain performed closer to the top of his debating range than Obama did.

But something similar could be said of the three previous encounters I mentioned. The challengers didn't necessarily "win," but they achieved something significant simply by debating as equals -- especially on national security issues. I think in the long run people will say that this is what happened tonight.I know I speak for millions when I say "UNLEASH SARAH PALIN!" :tongue: :wink: :biggrin:

[Infra-Man]

"Troopergate" is a partisan witchhunt by Alakan Democrats over a non-issue. Officer Wooten had a dozen citations against him, including drunk driving in his patrol car, threatening to kill his father in law, and TASERING A 10 YR OLD KID, his own stepson. Even Mike Gravel, as far left as you can get and no friend of Palin or Republicans at all, said he deserved to be fired and this was a non-issue. Anyway, Monegan was seeking earmarks (with Hollis French, the same Democrat running the partisan "investigation" against her when there is an independent and separate group that is supposed to handle matters such as this) behind the governors back and against her strict instructions not to, on at least 4 separate occasions. So he was offered another position, but refused it and quit. http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/16/palin-fires-back-in-troopergate-releases-memos-showing-insubordination/

So why has Todd Palin and five other witnesses (if I'm not mistaken) refused to testify in the bipartisan investigation after Sarah Palin said she'd cooperate with investigators?

And the "bridge to nowhere" is corruption? She supported it for a little while back when the costs were low, then the price kept rising, and she said "this isn't worth it, thanks, but no thanks" and redirected the partial funding toward other transportation needs. That sounds like fiscal responsibility to me, realizing costs were ballooning and killing the project because they got way too high.

Why does she repeatedly lie about refusing the project in the first place and keep claiming that she killed that project herself (pretty sure Congress killed that project, not her)?

And if it's the earmarks you're upset about, Obama took nearly a billion dollars in earmarks in his short time in office, including $1 million for the hospital where his wife works (not to mention he reached #2 on the 20 year list of donations from Freddie and Fannie in just 143 days of work, 2nd only to Chris Dodd, whose committee was in charge of overseeing them)

McCain had criticized earmarks from Palin
Three times in recent years, the Arizona senator's lists of 'objectionable' pork spending have included earmarks requested by his new running mate. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,5932587.story)

As for the "gotcha" questions by liberal MSM Obama-shills, who would NEVER ask Obama tough questions like that (look up the fawning puff piece Gibson did with Obama to compare), it's BS.

Well, apparently you didn't watch this clip I posted
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvUsdmqGYV8

The question was asked by an audience member at a McCain/Palin rally. Here's a transcript to go with the video:
Oil and coal? Of course, it's a fungible commodity and they don't flag, you know, the molecules, where it's going and where it's not. But in the sense of the Congress today, they know that there are very, very hungry domestic markets that need that oil first. So, I believe that what Congress is going to do, also, is not to allow the export bans to such a degree that it's Americans that get stuck to holding the bag without the energy source that is produced here, pumped here. It's got to flow into our domestic markets first.

So, hold on, are you saying that people at McCain/Palin rallies are "liberal MSM Obama-shills"?

[Infra-Man]

McCain said "horseshit" in debate (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/27/1216/62905/110/612142)

He's saying "Course not, course not," not horseshit. Had the headphones on when I reviewed the debate clip in question.

[JamesRitcheyIII]

I checked the wiki on CIA drug trafficking allegations and while the Kerry Committee report says that the CIA and State Dept. knew the contras were being financed largely with cocaine exports to the U.S., and the State Dept. under Reagan itself paid over 800,000 dollars to known drug traffickers, it didn't conclude that the CIA was importing drugs itself.

Then again, Gary Webb's articles for the San Jose Mercury alleging that the CIA did assist traffickers in getting their product into the U.S. were never decisively refuted, though officials more or less refused to investigate further into them, and an LAPD officer personally testified to the director of the CIA that he saw it occurring.

And...George H. W. Bush's head of the DEA Robert Bonner testified on 60 Minutes (http://www.csun.edu/coms/ben/news/cia/ven/60m.html) that the CIA had knowingly let one ton of cocaine get imported into Miami supposedly to gather intel on a Columbian cartel.

Wow. So, it's not even stupid.

I guess Samurai thinks calling people who speak the truth racists for doing it is ethical, constructive dialogue, then.

Oh, that's the tip of the proverbial iceberg--I have a friend, Ron, who literally flew Air America. In the late seventies/early eighties his particular expertise was making deals with Medellin when he came back to the states from Vietnam and flying the shit back himself from Central America--as a black operative in the CIA's employ. He was recruited from the Army Rangers after a dishonorable discharge (for shooting his Lieutenant in the ass--after he asked his men to burn a village full of women and kids--to Ron's credit), and flew several missions before that trafficking CIA Heroin.

Your tax dollars at work!

[kingdom2000]

Don't confuse him with facts.


As to the VP debate, I saw Biden on Countdown last night (man can that guy talk!) and he was asked directly by Olberman whether he would "take it easy" on Palin. His response was basically, "Absolutely not. I'm not going to do anything condescending like that."

I don't think Biden's going to go all pit-bull on her, but I do think he will be the eloquent, studied, strong debater and speaker which he always is. Let her bury herself, for the most part, but call her on her mistakes when she makes them.

That would be my advice anyway.

I agree. If he is too aggressive he will cause a sympathy backlash (which is pathetic but true). Also try to force followup questions to her responses. She essentially memorizes answers to probable questions, and usually reporters rarely ask for followup answers based on the response. As Couric shows though, when the questions go "off script" due to follow-ups, she gets immediatly lost and confused and you can literally see her go through the mental index of pre-prepaired reponses. The result is less then encouraging.

[Infra-Man]

*sigh*

I hate being right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec3aC8ZJZTc

Less than an hour after the debate ended......

Hold on... I don't get the point of the commercial. Obama admits that a person from the other party has correct assertions (showing bipartisanship, no less) and the question is "Is Barack Obama ready to lead?" followed by a "No?"

Seriously, ad guys. If you are doing an ad, do it right. The voice over at the end of the commercial should have said "John McCain has the right judgment to lead," or something like that. You repeat "right" and get across the message that McCain is right about issues facing Americans. The "Obama ready to lead" question is a non sequitur and poor messaging.

McCain should fire whoever put this commercial together for not being able to create a coherent message.

[AaronJ]

I agree. If he is too aggressive he will cause a sympathy backlash (which is pathetic but true). Also try to force followup questions to her responses. She essentially memorizes answers to probable questions, and usually reporters rarely ask for followup answers based on the response. As Couric shows though, when the questions go "off script" due to follow-ups, she gets immediatly lost and confused and you can literally see her go through the mental index of pre-prepaired reponses. The result is less then encouraging.

I agree wholeheartedly.

And I trust that if the Joe Biden I saw last night on Countdown is anything like the Joe Biden in the debate, there won't be much to worry about (except for Sarah Palin, of course).

[Corrina]

Most of the best 'gotchas' in political debates were not of the "I'm a liar" variety. They were mostly done in good humor but hit a truth (or what was thought to be a truth.)

Think Reagan's "well, there you go again." Got the point across, was funny, and made him look charming.

Lloyd Bentson's burn of Dan Quayle was nastier but that didn't affect the election much. (It did tend to mess up Dan Quayle's career--though is gaffes as VP didn't help.)

Abraham Lincoln used the same debating trick as Obama did tonight. "Yes, my esteemed opponent is right BUT......"

It was a way to attack while seeming likable.

[KevinTBrown]

the very idea that a VP candidate would ever get a pity vote is disgusting.. last thing you need in charge is someone you pity

"Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy: I knew Jack Kennedy; Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy."


Someone say "pity vote"...?

[KevinTBrown]

Most of the best 'gotchas' in political debates were not of the "I'm a liar" variety. They were mostly done in good humor but hit a truth (or what was thought to be a truth.)

Think Reagan's "well, there you go again." Got the point across, was funny, and made him look charming.

Lloyd Bentson's burn of Dan Quayle was nastier but that didn't affect the election much. (It did tend to mess up Dan Quayle's career--though is gaffes as VP didn't help.)

Abraham Lincoln used the same debating trick as Obama did tonight. "Yes, my esteemed opponent is right BUT......"

It was a way to attack while seeming likable.

Actually, the "you're no Jack Kennedy" comment is when things turned on Bentsen and got undecideds off the fence as to who to vote for.....

Unfortunately, and I'm ashamed to admit it, it made up my mind and I ended up voting for Bush that year because of the VP debate (I thought both GHWB and Dukakis were a "wash" and either could do the job).

My how times have changed for me..... sigh.

[Royal]

Dean: I hear there's a new vice presidental canidate coming in. Who wants to kill her?

(Everyone jumps up and down)

Kucinich: Hey Boss! Why don't we feed her to Biden?

Dean: Feed her to Biden? Holy Shit! That's too cruel!

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Actually, the "you're no Jack Kennedy" comment is when things turned on Bentsen and got undecideds off the fence as to who to vote for.....

Unfortunately, and I'm ashamed to admit it, it made up my mind and I ended up voting for Bush that year because of the VP debate (I thought both GHWB and Dukakis were a "wash" and either could do the job).

My how times have changed for me..... sigh.

Of course as history shows us has Gary Hart not fucked his political future up he likely could have won that year. Dukakis was a last resort by the party.

[KevinTBrown]

Of course as history shows us has Gary Hart not fucked his political future up he likely could have won that year. Dukakis was a last resort by the party.

Heh.

Imagine if infidelity were an issue in this year's election.....? :wink:

You think McCain would have a chance then?

[Buzz Dixon]

Infideility in the past is okay if you admit it was bad and promise not to do it again.

Infidelity now is bad but it's even worse if you deny it under oath then try to get others to help you cover it up.

Telling reporters to follow you around to see if you're committing infidelity is FLICKING STOOPID!!!!!

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Heh.

Imagine if infidelity were an issue in this year's election.....? :wink:

You think McCain would have a chance then?

Infideility in the past is okay if you admit it was bad and promise not to do it again.

Infidelity now is bad but it's even worse if you deny it under oath then try to get others to help you cover it up.

Telling reporters to follow you around to see if you're committing infidelity is FLICKING STOOPID!!!!!


It really didn't hurt Clinton as much even when he got busted in office. Many people would respond "As long as he does the job , its Hillary's and Bill's personal life ...we don't care."

Clinton was a southern bubba ...he pretty much indentified with a lot of America then. He ate lots of bad junk food , he was from the south , he had affairs , loved old rock music and he had a demeaner that translated to a lot of the workin class .

Bill skated thru ...it was those clemensy requests at the end of his presidency that gave him a low rating at the end.

[K-DoG7p7]

Infideility in the past is okay if you admit it was bad and promise not to do it again.

Infidelity now is bad but it's even worse if you deny it under oath then try to get others to help you cover it up.

Telling reporters to follow you around to see if you're committing infidelity is FLICKING STOOPID!!!!!
Infidelity is......... not a crime.. but it does say a lot about a persons character

[AaronJ]

Infidelity is......... not a crime.. but it does say a lot about a persons character

Under some circumstances, yes.

Under other circumstances, not so much.

[Michael P]

Infideility in the past is okay if you admit it was bad and promise not to do it again.

Infidelity now is bad but it's even worse if you deny it under oath then try to get others to help you cover it up.

Telling reporters to follow you around to see if you're committing infidelity is FLICKING STOOPID!!!!!

One would think Gary Hart's lesson would have spread.

[Briareos]

Obama doesn't believe in freedom of the press:

http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

[Briareos]

Obama said that Kissinger agreed with his idea to have meetings with Iran's president without preconditions. Uh except that Kissinger said he doesn't agree with that at all:

Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality."]Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality.

[KevinTBrown]

I just saw this bumper sticker at Obama's site tonight:

http://store.barackobama.com/v/vspfiles/photos/ST29153-50-2.jpg



Does McCain have a similar one to sell...?

[K-DoG7p7]

Obama is gay? what does his wife have to say about that?

[KevinTBrown]

Re: Kissinger (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/27/kissinger.iran/index.html?section=cnn_latest), emphasis mine:

The forum last week -- "The Next President: A World of Challenges" -- was co-sponsored by CNN and hosted former secretaries of state Warren Christopher, Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, James Baker and Colin Powell.


During the forum, Albright, who served in the Clinton administration, said, "I believe we need to engage with Iran." Kissinger, who served in the Nixon and Ford administrations, echoed the sentiment. He said he is "in favor of negotiation with Iran" at the secretary of state level.

"I always believed that the best way to begin a negotiation is to tell the other side exactly what you have in mind ... what the outcome is that you're trying to achieve so that they have something that they can react to," Kissinger said.

Obama did say: [Obama] added that those talks would come after "preparations, starting with low-level diplomatic talks."

Same thing, different way of saying it.

[KevinTBrown]

Obama is gay? what does his wife have to say about that?

More like he's not "blind" and sees people as people.

[Buzz Dixon]

Obama said that Kissinger agreed with his idea to have meetings with Iran's president without preconditions. Uh except that Kissinger said he doesn't agree with that at all:Which is true unless you count the fact that Obama wasn't talking about direct head-of-state talks but secretary-of-state level conversations, which is what Kissinger was referring to.

[Buzz Dixon]

Obama is gay? what does his wife have to say about that?This is not a snark question, but...how old are you? 'Cuz "black pride" pre-existed "gay pride" by I don't know how many years/generations. In fact, black activists were originally more than a little upset that gay activists had hijacked their slogan.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Which is true unless you count the fact that Obama wasn't talking about direct head-of-state talks but secretary-of-state level conversations, which is what Kissinger was referring to.

Its basically Kissinger trying to salvage something for McCain acting like an idiot on TV . We knew he'd do this. Obama won...and made McCain someone who doesn't talk to his own advisers or know what they said on TV.

[Buzz Dixon]

SIDEBAR: Somewhere right now, Dan Quayle is doing handsprings at not being the butt of dumb Veep jokes anymore.

[BnL]

This is not a snark question, but...how old are you? 'Cuz "black pride" pre-existed "gay pride" by I don't know how many years/generations. In fact, black activists were originally more than a little upset that gay activists had hijacked their slogan.

The slogan wasn't "hijacked." It's a very basic sentiment. And I think he was referring to the fact that the button has a rainbow flag in the center, instead of the usual American flag. It's clearly meant for LGBT supporters.

[JamesRitcheyIII]

Obama doesn't believe in freedom of the press:

http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

I see. So, sending letters is oppression, now--how insidious--and the racist republicans want to legalize libel.

I really can't wait until Barry puts all you fuckers in those internment camps the Cheney Shadow Government built to house minorities, The Gays and political dissidents.:biggrin:

[BnL]

Obama doesn't believe in freedom of the press:

http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem

Cute. Did you think that posting a partisan press release that is intentionally vague on the details to prevent the readers from drawing their own conclusions was gonna fly around here? What's ACTUALLY being done is that watchdogs are holding accountable opponents' ads that are promoting lies against Obama (including saying that he's Muslim, in order to stoke prejudice and fear), which is in violation of Missouri ethics regulations. That's not censorship of fair criticism. There's no threat of legal action. There's no "targetting." It is their legal right, not to mention their responsibility to the voters, to combat the lies.

[CutterMike]

Obama doesn't believe in freedom of the press:

http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EkkkVFulkpOzXqGMaj&style=Default+News+Style&tmpl=newsitem
Heh...

For the past eight years, every time the Bush (mis)administration pounded another nail into the coffin that they were building for the Bill of Rights, we've had to listen a seemingly-endless stream of right-wing politicos and pundits constantly parroting the line: "If you're not breaking the law, what have you got to be worried about?"

So, suck on it.

[FalconX2000]

Not only is it atypical, but tonight it was expected that the candidates address one another directly. That was no secret.

I get the sense that McCain continuing to talk about Obama in the third person was done just to piss him off. You know, "La la la, I'm ignoring you, I'm going to talk about you like you aren't even here..."

If it were me I would have said "Hey John! Are you afraid to talk to me or something?" But I don't know how that would play on Peoria. Probably not so good. *sigh*



I would have loved it if Obama were more aggressive as well. It's like I posted here before: McCain just keeps on slandering and insulting him. The time for civility towards McCain is long past, and Obama should give as good as he gets.

I also worry that the stupid voters, the ones who make their decision based on "who looked STRONGER?" instead of "who is SMARTER?", are going to believe that Obama is weak because he didn't attack McCain and because he allowed McCain to talk over him. In addition, I worry that there are enough stupid voters to hand McCain the win.

However, the CNN focus group showed that the undecided voters in that group did not respond well to attacks and negativity, so it is possible that by being such a jerkoff McCain is alienating people and Obama hopes to avoid similarly alienating them by not sinking to McCain's level. I hope that is the case...

And Question Time is great. Far too often the President has walked out and said "this is what I'm going to do" and then simply walked away without being willing--or being forced--to answer questions about what he's just said. It's like a royal decree from a monarch, which is quite ironic since I believe the whole point of the American Revolution was to get rid of that sort of thing.

I don't know as much as I'd like about UK politics, but is it accurate to say that you can't get away with that in England?



That's U.S. politics for you. Bloody stupid, but lots of voters think that any admission that the other guy was right about anything is equivalent to waving a white flag.

I was overall happy enough with Obama's debate performance, but he really missed a huge chance to nail McCain when the Arizona senator talked about him not visiting Iraq for so long, having less of a record and thus 'not understanding'.

He should have called McCain out on it. Told him he was obviously lying about being concerned at all with Obama's level of experience, because he would never have picked Sarah Palin otherwise.

[Eliseu Gouveia]

Obama camp seriously needs to start addressing this "does not understand" catchphrase.

[the4thpip]

SIDEBAR: Somewhere right now, Dan Quayle is doing handsprings at not being the butt of dumb Veep jokes anymore.

Maybe that will help him get over the depression of seeing Bush in office for 8 years. He must be going "and I was unqualified? Meee?" in his head over and over.

[king mob]

And Question Time is great. Far too often the President has walked out and said "this is what I'm going to do" and then simply walked away without being willing--or being forced--to answer questions about what he's just said. It's like a royal decree from a monarch, which is quite ironic since I believe the whole point of the American Revolution was to get rid of that sort of thing.

I don't know as much as I'd like about UK politics, but is it accurate to say that you can't get away with that in England?


Part of the problem you have is that you don't have something like the BBC which, for all it's flaws, provides an impartial view of politics I don't see from US television. Someone like Bush would have had to deal with actually answering tough questions on national telly & judging on the few times he has been interviewed in British TV (even a very soft ITV interview) he'd have been hung out to dry years ago.

[the4thpip]

Tina Fey is back:
http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/couric-palin-open/704042/

[Arrogantcur]

"Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy: I knew Jack Kennedy; Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy."

Speaking of which, the following part of one of PAD's recent posts made me laugh:

I was torqued to read "Newsday" attributing the Wall Street/Main Street thing to John McCain even though Obama said it twice before him. Hey, here's another thought: If McCain makes snide comments about a liberal voting record again, Obama can say, "You know who else had a liberal voting record? The Founding Fathers in voting for change. Now I know, Senator McCain, I know...you knew the Founding Fathers. You worked with the Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers were friends of yours, and I'm no founding father. But I'll do my best to live up to the example they set and the Constitutional freedoms they lay down...freedoms that your good friend, George Bush, has stampeded over.

PAD

:biggrin: :cool:

This is not a snark question, but...how old are you? 'Cuz "black pride" pre-existed "gay pride" by I don't know how many years/generations. In fact, black activists were originally more than a little upset that gay activists had hijacked their slogan.

I can't say I like admitting this, but when I saw the rainbow and the words "Obama" and "Pride" I thought "is this something that a McCain supporter cooked up to say that Obama is gay?"

See, unlike Novaya, I believe that Barack Obama does indeed care about gay people, bi, trans, etc. And I believe the majority of that demographic (or perhaps more accurate to say those three demographics) are likely to vote for him. And those people ought to have something with which to express their support. I'm just not sure that the design of this particular sticker is the best way to go, because the odds are that some of the more homophobic supporters of McCain WILL use it to make "Obama is gay" jokes, or start rumours. Not that this hurts, but it doesn't help.

The following slogan probably wouldn't ever be put on an officially released sticker, but I think it sounds cool:

"GAY FOR OBAMA!" :smile:

[JKCarrier]

I can't say I like admitting this, but when I saw the rainbow and the words "Obama" and "Pride" I thought "is this something that a McCain supporter cooked up to say that Obama is gay?"

Nope, it's from Obama's official site, and yes, it's aimed at LGBT folks:

http://pride.barackobama.com/

[Sabrinaset]

I can't say I like admitting this, but when I saw the rainbow and the words "Obama" and "Pride" I thought "is this something that a McCain supporter cooked up to say that Obama is gay?"

You weren't the only one; I thought the same thing as well.

[Buzz Dixon]

While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75-year old Texas rancher whose hand was caught in a gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually the topic got around to Sarah Palin and her bid to be a heartbeat away from being President .

The old rancher said, 'Well, ya know, Palin is a post turtle.'

Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him what a post turtle was.

The old rancher said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle.'

The old rancher saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain. 'You know she didn't get up there by herself, she doesn't belong up there, she doesn't know what to do while she is up there, and you just wonder what kind of dumb ass put her up there to begin with.
:tongue: :biggrin: :wink:

[KevinTBrown]

I can't say I like admitting this, but when I saw the rainbow and the words "Obama" and "Pride" I thought "is this something that a McCain supporter cooked up to say that Obama is gay?"

You weren't the only one; I thought the same thing as well.



Apparently people decided to go past my comment that was placed above the pic:

I just saw this bumper sticker at Obama's site tonight:

[KevinTBrown]

Obama maintains his 6 point lead over mcCain (50-44): http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

But just how accurate it is when approximately 45 million people are not part of the polling process remains to be seen....

[Infra-Man]

Polling data around Tuesday or Wednesday should be interesting. Those polls will include data from after the first debate.

[JamesRitcheyIII]

Part of the problem you have is that you don't have something like the BBC which, for all it's flaws, provides an impartial view of politics I don't see from US television. Someone like Bush would have had to deal with actually answering tough questions on national telly & judging on the few times he has been interviewed in British TV (even a very soft ITV interview) he'd have been hung out to dry years ago.

Actually, we do--it's called PBS. Although Republicans were installed to run and undermine it, somehow News Hour and BBC America are allowed to broadcast--and often provide insights lacking on cable news and status quo-affirming network news. They did manage to get rid of Bill Moyers--White House Press Secretary under LBJ, relentlessly critical of Bush--and one of the finest investigative reporters in human history a few years ago, and replace programming with stoopit oldies reunions, and Riverdance-type crap, but his show Frontline is still going under just as dedicated people. When you can find it--they keep moving it around.

I had DirecTV for a little while last year, and I found it odd, on a Rupert Murdock-owned satellite system, that the following would still be shown even after the service was cut off:
http://www.democracynow.org/
It's REAL liberal news!

[Arrogantcur]

Apparently people decided to go past my comment that was placed above the pic:

I'm only telling you what my initial reaction was, Kevin, before I saw your comment a second or two later.

I think human beings just naturally notice images before they notice words.

So just to clarify, I did realize that it came from the Obama campaign. I just didn't realize it immediately, is all. :smile:

[the4thpip]

Obama maintains his 6 point lead over mcCain (50-44): http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

But just how accurate it is when approximately 45 million people are not part of the polling process remains to be seen....

Well, the trends should be real even if the base rate isn't.

PRINCETON, NJ -- Barack Obama leads John McCain, 50% to 42% among registered voters in the latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking update for Thursday, Friday, and Saturday -- just one point shy of his strongest showing of the year.

[Paul McEnery]

Obama camp seriously needs to start addressing this "does not understand" catchphrase.

Easy enough, I'd have thought.

Do some stuff about average American income, gas prices, grocery prices. Talk about Mister thirteen cars and seven houses and the wealthy, wealthy heiress.

Who doesn't understand?

[the4thpip]

North Carolina switched to Obama today, giving him a bigger lead in the "no toss up" map at RCP:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10

[KevinTBrown]

North Carolina switched to Obama today, giving him a bigger lead in the "no toss up" map at RCP:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10

Expect Ohio to follow soon....

[Crowley]

North Carolina switched to Obama today, giving him a bigger lead in the "no toss up" map at RCP:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10

looking at that map if you factor all the states that the candidate have leads in (which includes for McCain Ohio and Florida currently) the score works out to:

Obama/Biden 301
McCain/Palin 237

I think the double wammy of Palin's follies and economic crisis have slammed the McCain campaign and they really need to pray that Palin doesn't continue to provide October surprises.

[Infra-Man]

I think the double wammy of Palin's follies and economic crisis have slammed the McCain campaign and they really need to pray that Palin doesn't continue to provide October surprises.

With the VP debate coming up, it could be three straight bad weeks for the McCain campaign.

[Grazzt]

North Carolina switched to Obama today, giving him a bigger lead in the "no toss up" map at RCP:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10

I wonder what McCain did to lose North Carolina. I mean, he had an 11 point lead, and now it's gone. Can anyone think up anything specific that did it?

[Arrogantcur]

All this optimism is making me nervous, if that makes sense.

[KevinTBrown]

I wonder what McCain did to lose North Carolina. I mean, he had an 11 point lead, and now it's gone. Can anyone think up anything specific that did it?

They had their fill of bullshit?


By the way, McCain attempts to gain credit for bail out deal (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14032.html).

Yeah. Right.

Going to claim credit for those principles that Obama outlined and are a part of the deal as well?

:rolleyes:

[KevinTBrown]

*sigh*

Posted without comment:

And this woman votes. (http://www.inquisitr.com/4084/this-woman-votes/)

[SUPERECWFAN1]

*sigh*

Posted without comment:

And this woman votes. (http://www.inquisitr.com/4084/this-woman-votes/)

The old guy behind her is so emberessed and ashamed he's covering his face and hiding. Letting idiot woman go on and her bf . About him not voting for blacks and the one claiming Barack is an Arab. Whats scary is the region is either West Virginia or Kentucky judgin from the video.

[rick]

Infidelity is......... not a crime.. but it does say a lot about a persons character

Really?

What does it say?

[Crowley]

*sigh*

Posted without comment:

And this woman votes. (http://www.inquisitr.com/4084/this-woman-votes/)

does anyone else hear Cletus from Simpsons?

[section 8]

Really?

What does it say?

Well Starting from Washington, working my way down the list, I'd say it says "Presedential Material"

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Well Starting from Washington, working my way down the list, I'd say it says "Presedential Material"

It worked for John Kennedy and Bill Clinton.

[section 8]

It worked for John Kennedy and Bill Clinton.

And Washington, and Jefferson,

"Once Ye go black thou never goest back" -Thomas Jefferson

[KevinTBrown]

Gallup has Obama ahead by 8 now:

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/tl5xazv3nucritnggvi34q.gif

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/b2qoamr6ykovebsob6c7sw.gif

Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/poll/110740/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Moves-50-42-Lead.aspx)

[mattx110]

Really?

What does it say?
They may be capable of caring about two people at the same time...

[KevinTBrown]

Tsk, tsk, tsk.....

Bad little Sarah Palin. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080928/ap_on_el_pr/palin_ethics)

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Tsk, tsk, tsk.....

Bad little Sarah Palin. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080928/ap_on_el_pr/palin_ethics)

Ok any bets on Palin mysteriously getting sick and missing the debate against Biden ? Because no way they throw her to a wolf like Biden with the ammo he has now !

[KevinTBrown]

Ok any bets on Palin mysteriously getting sick and missing the debate against Biden ? Because no way they throw her to a wolf like Biden with the ammo he has now !

I've got a bet, seriously, that her daughter has a "miscarriage" and needs to be with her.

[Alex L]

The old guy behind her is so emberessed and ashamed he's covering his face and hiding. Letting idiot woman go on and her bf . About him not voting for blacks and the one claiming Barack is an Arab. Whats scary is the region is either West Virginia or Kentucky judgin from the video.

I take it you watch the Daily Show (http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=168561&title=Indecision-2008---West-Virginia) too?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I've got a bet, seriously, that her daughter has a "miscarriage" and needs to be with her.

Thats to big to fake...but she could get sick and need to rush to her side. Biden on Monday should if he's on shows ...joke "I can't wait to debate Sarah Palin on ____ . I bet she'll be scared and call in sick !"

This pretty much traps Palin. If she and the McCain campaign do try an excuse for the female Maverick ....people will act like they are scared to debate . Biden needs to do this on Monday before the campaign thinks it up.

[Briareos]

Why is Obama having elected officals abuse their office and the taxpayers to promote his campaign:

http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1

This should pretty much end his campaign. Can you imagine if a Republican had law enforcement officers use their office for partisan purposes. Does anyone believe this goes completely against the 1st amendment?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Why is Obama having elected officals abuse their office and the taxpayers to promote his campaign:

http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1

This should pretty much end his campaign. Can you imagine if a Republican had law enforcement officers use their office for partisan purposes. Does anyone believe this goes completely against the 1st amendment?

Heaven forbid the not have truthful campaign ads. I mean we need people who produce lying ads to not get in trouble. Why discuss the issues ? We should attack his character ! Also LIE LIKE HELL !

[Alex L]

Video's not loading for me, so all I have to go on is that little synopsis blurb.

The Barack Obama campaign is asking Missouri law enforcement to target anyone who lies or runs a misleading TV ad during the presidential campaign.

How DARE he!?!

[Briareos]

Video's not loading for me, so all I have to go on is that little synopsis blurb.



How DARE he!?!

Of course it's in their opinion if it's misleading. The specific ad their targeting they haven't been able to say one word in proof that it is misleading.

[CutterMike]

*sigh*

Posted without comment:

And this woman votes. (http://www.inquisitr.com/4084/this-woman-votes/)

...You just know that, back in 1776, her great^n grandmother was saying, "We're in a war with England... What's the King's name...? ...And we're supposed to follow a general named George...?!!?"

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Of course it's in their opinion if it's misleading. The specific ad their targeting they haven't been able to say one word in proof that it is misleading.

This is basically in response to McCain's lying attack ads that many have joked about and what SNL ripped the shit outta McCain for. Which hit so close to home Fox News were crying like babies over it...

"Barack Obama wants Universial healthcare....for the entire Universe....including Osama Bin Ladin !"

"Is that right ?" Hammond as McCain.

"Well , Senator McCain ...Bin Ladin is in the Universe !"

"Mmm makes sense...I'm John McCain and I approve this message !"

:evilsmile:

[Alex L]

Of course it's in their opinion if it's misleading. The specific ad their targeting they haven't been able to say one word in proof that it is misleading.

Of course, if Obama gets to pull ads because they're misleading, the McCain campaign can pull Obama ads too, right?

[KevinTBrown]

Of course it's in their opinion if it's misleading. The specific ad their targeting they haven't been able to say one word in proof that it is misleading.

Yeah, how dare they actually provide FACTS to prove it's a lie...???

Silly boy.

:cool:

Of course, if Obama gets to pull ads because they're misleading, the McCain campaign can pull Obama ads too, right?

Yes, if they can provide FACTS to back it up.

[Briareos]

Of course, if Obama gets to pull ads because they're misleading, the McCain campaign can pull Obama ads too, right?

I don't want the government pulling ads because they're "misleading" that often is in the eye of the beholder.

[Michael P]

How dare Barack Obama insist that law enforcement officials enforce the law.

[Briareos]

Yeah, how dare they actually provide FACTS to prove it's a lie...???

Silly boy.

:cool:



Yes, if they can provide FACTS to back it up.

And your not scared one bit of having government officals being the sole decider of what the truth is? You never read 1984 did you?

[SUPERECWFAN1]

How dare Barack Obama insist that law enforcement officials enforce the law.

HEAVEN FORBID that...or we could have Al Franken make another call to Lorne Michaels so we get a sketch that has Fox News anchors cry . "They should do something about this !" :tongue:

[KevinTBrown]

I don't want the government pulling ads because they're "misleading" that often is in the eye of the beholder.

A little thing called "truth in advertising" is the law.

MO just happens to have the strongest laws on the books.



Afraid Johnny-boy won't be able to show any of his ads?

[Briareos]

I'm sorry what law says that the government is the sole decider of what the truth is? And if you really believe this is about removing misleading or false ads and not about silencing critics then your a fool.

[KevinTBrown]

And your not scared one bit of having government officals being the sole decider of what the truth is? You never read 1984 did you?

Again, if the FACTS are provided, they'll pull the ads.

Not if the government decides to do so.

It's not done "willy nilly" and without cause.

So cut the drama.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

And your not scared one bit of having government officals being the sole decider of what the truth is? You never read 1984 did you?

I think ya missed the entire point of the video. Their lying...its like if I ran attack ads on you ...claiming you were an athiest and that you would approve abortion !

Of course you'd be pissed and demanded they'd be removed. Common sense says said you would. If your running an election you want it to be fair and honest...let the facts fall where they may. The truth is there as they say !

[CutterMike]

Why is Obama having elected officals abuse their office and the taxpayers to promote his campaign:

http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1

This should pretty much end his campaign. Can you imagine if a Republican had law enforcement officers use their office for partisan purposes. Does anyone believe this goes completely against the 1st amendment?Bri -

Since this is the second time that you posted this, I am going to take the liberty of reposting my previous response:
Heh...

For the past eight years, every time the Bush (mis)administration pounded another nail into the coffin that they were building for the Bill of Rights, we've had to listen a seemingly-endless stream of right-wing politicos and pundits constantly parroting the line: "If you're not breaking the law, what have you got to be worried about?"

So, suck on it.

[KevinTBrown]

I think ya missed the entire point of the video. Their lying...its like if I ran attack ads on you ...claiming you were an athiest and that you would approve abortion !

Of course you'd be pissed and demanded they'd be removed. Common sense says said you would. If your running an election you want it to be fair and honest...let the facts fall where they may. The truth is there as they say !

Pubs don't care about the truth though....

distract, distract, distract.

[Michael P]

And your not scared one bit of having government officals being the sole decider of what the truth is?

Reality is the sole decider of what truth is. The government's just obliged by its own rules to pay attention to it and tell people who are lying in TV ads to stop.

And government officials do this every day. Like, say, when a drug has dangerous side effects, and they tell the drug company that the TV ad that tells people taking the drug will give them great erections had goddamned well better mention those side effects.

You never read 1984 did you?

More times than you, I'd wager.

[JKCarrier]

I'm sorry what law says that the government is the sole decider of what the truth is?

Um... all of them? How do you think the legal system works, if not by having "government officials", aka judges, decide what the truth is?

[Briareos]

Um... all of them? How do you think the legal system works, if not by having "government officials", aka judges, decide what the truth is?

Um no judges are suppose to decide the law. In trials it's the jury who decides what the truth is... (unless they specifically ask a judge for that).. And that is for matters of law and such. The founding fathers obviously never wanted government to interfer with a political debate...

[BnL]

And your not scared one bit of having government officals being the sole decider of what the truth is? You never read 1984 did you?

That's so rich coming from a neo-con Bush cheerleader. Where was this righteous indignation when the administration signed the Patriot Act into law, or when they circumvented FISA, or any other abuses of power that they engaged in?

Seriously, I hope you guys keep promoting this story. You'll lose. This is all in accordance with Missouri ethics regulations. The Democratic side is acting well within the law. All it's going to do is remind people of all of McCain's lying ads. They'll cheer that someone is finally going to hold the liars and law breakers responsible, which is their legal right to do. And they'll see once again how the Republican leadership is trying to cheat the system and trying to mislead the public by acting like the law doesn't apply to them. In other words, trying to accuse the Democrats of doing what they themselves are guilty of.

So please, post this story far and wide.

[Lester C.]

McCain is really making good choices that turn out in hindsight to be bad choices. Sarah Palin was initally a good choice that saw his numbers balloon to dizzing numbers. Then people got to know Sarah and bam he's down big time. A simular thing happened when he tried to back out of the debate.

[Kyuubi]

Then how were they ever good choices?

[Lester C.]

Then how were they ever good choices?

1. The Republican convention was huge. Over half a million more people saw McCain and Palin speak when compared to Obama. McCain went from having 7 percent of the White Women vote to having thirty something percent. In the polls he went from trailing Obama to leading Obama beyond the margin for error. So initially his choice of Palin as VP was a good choice. Then people found out she was a nut and that was that.

2. Had McCain been able to claim responsibility for the bailout after he quit the debate he would have looked very presidential. Having saving the economy from collapse and united Republicans and Democrats. Instead the bailout failed at last minute because of House Republicans and McCain looked like he was running scared.

Both choices of selecting Palin and quitting debate seemed sound and initially paid dividends. So they appeared to be good choices. Then both choices backfired on him and turned out to be bad choices.

[Kyuubi]

Then they were never good choices.


McCain didn't do his research and barely knew Palin.

Trying to cancel the debate made it look like he was afraid of debating Obama, or that he was trying to get the VP debate canceled.

[FalconX2000]

While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75-year old Texas rancher whose hand was caught in a gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually the topic got around to Sarah Palin and her bid to be a heartbeat away from being President .

The old rancher said, 'Well, ya know, Palin is a post turtle.'

Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him what a post turtle was.

The old rancher said, 'When you're driving down a country road and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, that's a post turtle.'

The old rancher saw a puzzled look on the doctor's face, so he continued to explain. 'You know she didn't get up there by herself, she doesn't belong up there, she doesn't know what to do while she is up there, and you just wonder what kind of dumb ass put her up there to begin with.

Tahahahahahahaha!:biggrin:



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26929679#26915873

A student McCain supporter looked enthusiastically towards the vice-presidential debate and said she believed it would be "a bloodbath".

....:biggrin: :evilsmile:

[the4thpip]

Then they were never good choices.


McCain didn't do his research and barely knew Palin.

Trying to cancel the debate made it look like he was afraid of debating Obama, or that he was trying to get the VP debate canceled.

So are you saying eating 4 pounds of chocolate and a pint of ice cream every day isn't a good choice even though it feels so good at the time? :eek:

[the4thpip]

FORT MILL, S.C. -- Fort Mill Mayor Danny Funderburk says he was “just curious” when he forwarded a chain e-mail suggesting Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama is the biblical antichrist. “I was just curious if there was any validity to it,” Funderburk said in a telephone interview. “I was trying to get documentation if there was any scripture to back it up.”

Funderburk apparently sent the e-mail from his business account at Gastonia Sheet Metal where he works as a business agent.

The e-mail, which has circulated in the last six months since Obama secured the Democratic nomination, claims the biblical book of Revelation says the antichrist will be in his 40s and of Muslim ancestry.

There is no such scripture. And Obama is not a Muslim. But that hasn’t stopped the e-mail.

The urban legend Web site Snopes.com first exploded the myth in March. Funderburk forwarded the e-mail this month.

When asked if he believed Obama was the antichrist, Funderburk replied, “I’ve got absolutely no way of knowing that.”

Funderburk said it “probably does give that impression” that he believed the e-mail was true “but that was not my intent.”

The mayor said it was a mistake not to include a subject line when he forwarded the chain e-mail.

“I am curious about current events and their connection to the Bible,” he said.

:rolleyes:
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/104/story/220041.html

[ShaunN]

Dear Friends,

Hi! Here is an article from Salon.com and its advice columnist, Cary Tennis. I thought that both the letter writer's problem and Tennis' response are quite interesting.

Sincerely,

Shaun

Sarah Palin is ruining my life
I rant about her; I can't stop thinking about her; I cannot stand to look at her; I'm possessed by her!
By Cary Tennis

Sep. 29, 2008 | Dear Cary,


I am a Democrat, a mother of three, and a full-time attorney. During the primaries, I was torn between Hillary Clinton, who I believed had the experience to be president (and really, really, really wanted it), and Barack Obama, who I believed was not only highly capable (albeit less experienced), but also the more sincere of the two and who inspired me on an emotional level that Clinton did not. In addition, as my kind friends pointed out to me, Clinton was carrying a lot of baggage in terms of her own scandals, not to mention Bill's little problems. So, in the end, I did what my heart really wanted me to do all along and voted for Obama. And then I totally checked out of the election. I've always disliked the pettiness of politics, the lies, the mudslinging, the arguments over meaningless minutiae, the parsing of personalities ad infinitum, etc. My perspective was, short of Obama being caught on video strangling his children with his own two hands, he had my vote, and thus I had no need to pay attention to all the nonsense that would occur in both campaigns prior to the election.


And then came Sarah. My reaction to her, and the way the Republican Party threw her in our faces, and the pandering and hypocrisy that was behind their decision to do so, was immediate, visceral, and indeed, vicious. I have crossed every line I believed should never be crossed in public discourse -- I have criticized not only her policies and her record, but her hair, her personal style, her accent, her abilities as a mother, etc. I've also begun to suffer personally and professionally. I bore my friends with my constant tirades against her, and am constantly distracted from my work by my need to continually update myself on the latest criticism, and indeed, ridicule, of her. In my hatred for her, I have begun to hate myself.


I don't want this woman ruining my life before she even gets a chance to ruin our country. How do I stop? Is there a self-help group for this?


A "Hater"*


*As Sarah Palin calls all those who disagree with her (New York Times, Sunday, Sept. 14, 2008)


Dear "Hater,"

I think what disturbs us about Sarah Palin is that she reminds us of the authoritarian personality. My guess is that she is also an ESFJ, or Extroverted Sensing Feeling Judging type, with a strong preference for sensing. Such a person prefers to acquire her knowledge from concrete objects and places instead of from abstract ideas. This would explain why she thinks being geographically close to Russia is a form of foreign policy expertise.

As an authoritarian type, she strikes us as a person who prefers power to reason. The people running John McCain's campaign seem to instinctively understand the uses to which such an impression can be put. Perhaps they know better than we do how deeply the American people long to be done with the problem of democracy, to yield to a powerful father-mother pair of authoritarians.

The very thing that appalls us about Sarah Palin -- her discomfort in the realm of reason -- is her main selling point. This is so mind-boggling that you have to take a minute to let it in. Take a deep breath. Read that sentence again. Face it: Sarah Palin represents what many people want: a retreat from reason; a regression to childhood.

Inarticulateness is the weapon of the authoritarian in this way: To speak clearly is to risk being understood and thus disagreed with. To speak clearly is to invite debate. To obfuscate and muddle is to avoid disagreement and debate and force the issue to one of power. The refusal to speak clearly is an invitation for issues to be resolved by power alone: I don't have to speak clearly because you have no choice in this anyway. I'm going to do what I'm going to do.

It can also be a trait, I think, of the sensing type who has not developed her weaker side. She has not learned to imagine how profoundly ludicrous it seems to the rest of us that physical proximity would constitute intellectual understanding.

Why does she get away with exercising her particular magic? Moms exercise power without explanation. We trust them because they are moms. We are children. So we trust them.

As we become adults, study the law and history and begin to run our own affairs, we become accustomed to sharing power by reasoning with each other.

Our intellectual disciplines allow us to agree or disagree about realities separate from ourselves. You are a lawyer. You are trained in the law. The law is built of ideas that we can agree about in a general way. We can agree what most laws mean. We can talk about them. One reason you are so appalled by Sarah Palin may be that every time she opens her mouth she repudiates this tradition.

When a person will not articulate her positions well or clearly, she is asserting a kind of power; it is not possible to predict what she is going to do. She does not allow us to know her. We generally do not let such persons make decisions for us. We do not like to give power to them.

But for some, they do appeal to a dark side, to something in us that desires to give up on reason, to have someone take over, to regress.

The shape this authoritarian has taken is the shape of the mother. We want to give Sarah Palin her due because she is a woman and a mother. A cynical trick has been played on us. She is a Trojan Horse.

Her refusal or inability to speak clearly also seems to devalue our own desire to speak clearly; if one does not speak clearly to you, then you cannot communicate with them; you are held off from them; you are excluded from their world. The only way to enter their world, therefore, is to follow them. There's no time for talk! Follow me! It's time to chase Putin out of our airspace! It's time to bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.

This is what frightens and angers us: The refusal to follow the rules of discourse, of language, even, implies that there is nothing to talk about. There is only action. There is only faith. There is only taking that hill.

This is my admittedly impressionistic take. Glenn Greenwald can talk about it much better than I can.

[Charles RB]

I've got a bet, seriously, that her daughter has a "miscarriage" and needs to be with her.

I'm trying to decide between staring in shock, laughing, or going "let's run a TV ad about that in Missouri and see if the Republicans are against Obama asking the police to pull lying ads then...".

Biden on Monday should if he's on shows ...joke "I can't wait to debate Sarah Palin on ____ . I bet she'll be scared and call in sick !"

This pretty much traps Palin. If she and the McCain campaign do try an excuse for the female Maverick

That would be brilliant.

[FalconX2000]

http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/picture-151.png

This looks like something out of a comic book.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Then they were never good choices.


McCain didn't do his research and barely knew Palin.

Trying to cancel the debate made it look like he was afraid of debating Obama, or that he was trying to get the VP debate canceled.

Basically all true ...McCain never knew Palin or looked into her well enough. She was a last minute hail mary throw. To lure the Clinton voters. Palin was : Young , Female , Republican . So what if she had little experince. McCain could argue he'd groom her !

She of course imploded in spectacular fashion and became such a nightmare their scared to have her talk on TV. She was meeting these forgien diplomats and the media was supposed to all smile and snap pics. Except they got scared and begged the media to do it in a rigged way...and once the media said "Fuck No , were leaving this bullshit.." ..McCain gave them 29 seconds to film...

The quitting the debate was a calculated ploy to ride in and act like the Maverick was gonna cast the deciding vote for the bailout package and help America. He could brag "I was there to make it happen..I rushed back to make it pass !"

Instead it blew in his face as the package approved before he got there. Then imploded once he walked into the fucking room. So in the end as many joke on shows ... John McCain was there when the bailout package imploded .

His calculated risk failed big time. Voters saw him as an egomaniac who wanted all the credit for it...and said FUCK YOU.

[Infra-Man]

http://washingtonindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/picture-151.png

This looks like something out of a comic book.

Check out the video that goes with that.

Obama's speech in the rain (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ctgw9VyV_0)

7:27ish ftw

EDIT:
Oh yeah... and 25:00-25:30 for the "Oh snap!"


EDIT EDIT:
http://i38.tinypic.com/167400j.jpg
http://i38.tinypic.com/2qcnpn9.jpg
http://i33.tinypic.com/2q1xhk0.jpg

[KevinTBrown]

I'm trying to decide between staring in shock, laughing, or going "let's run a TV ad about that in Missouri and see if the Republicans are against Obama asking the police to pull lying ads then...".



That would be brilliant.

Well, the other day at work we were discussing what excuses will be used to cancel the VP debate. (This was before it was definite that McCain would show on Friday.) There were some doozys to be sure.....

In the end, pretty much everyone, except the lone republican, said that something is going to pop unexpectedly to try to get the VP debate cancelled. The consensus being it'll be family related.



By the way, in thinking more about this, I don't think Biden is really going to go after Palin all that much. She's just way too inexperienced and she's going to mangle her answers horribly. All Biden will need to do is pressure her for clarification. What will she say then? "I'll back to you on that!" :confused:

The bloodbath won't be because Biden ripped her, it'll be because she wilts under the spotlight. It's one thing to speak at a gubernatorial debate in AK in front of a few hundred thousand; it's another to have tens of millions watching you on every freakin' channel and eagerly awaiting your next verbal faux paux.....

[Infra-Man]

Gallup has Obama ahead by 8 now:

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/tl5xazv3nucritnggvi34q.gif

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/b2qoamr6ykovebsob6c7sw.gif

Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/poll/110740/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Moves-50-42-Lead.aspx)

Damn. Wondering what the updated state-by-state tracking numbers will be like in the next few days. 538 had Florida in light blue over the weekend. Their numbers have yet to mark a potential shift in North Carolina numbers.

[section 8]

http://i38.tinypic.com/167400j.jpg
http://i38.tinypic.com/2qcnpn9.jpg
http://i33.tinypic.com/2q1xhk0.jpg
http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj142/iwatchu/magneto.jpg

Nice poses he could play Magneto

[Infra-Man]

Or Neo
http://i373.photobucket.com/albums/oo172/hvigilla/The-Matrix_bullet_time.jpg

Neobama? Magnetobama?

[section 8]

Or Neo
http://i373.photobucket.com/albums/oo172/hvigilla/The-Matrix_bullet_time.jpg

Neobama? Magnetobama?

DAMNIT that's even better, way to 1up me infra

I wish i had thought of that...and from now on I did.

[Infra-Man]

DAMNIT that's even better, way to 1up me infra

I wish i had thought of that...and from now on I did.

I only thought of that because of this image that pops up on Fark a lot:
http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s298/Scientivore/Politics/Obama/notthistime.jpg

[Adam C]

You never read 1984 did you?

No what happened? Please tell us with a detailed summary that isn't copied from Wikipedia.

[K-DoG7p7]

http://i38.tinypic.com/167400j.jpg
http://i38.tinypic.com/2qcnpn9.jpg
http://i33.tinypic.com/2q1xhk0.jpg

JESUS HAS COME BACK!!

bu seriusly.. those pictures are actually kinda awesome..

[the4thpip]

Seems that McCain's line how he is a maverick who keeps going against his own party is no longer working to lure in Democrats:

Obama is now supported by 12% of Republicans, McCain by 11% of Democrats. For most of the year, McCain enjoyed more crossover support than Obama (
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

[FalconX2000]

Check out the video that goes with that.

Obama's speech in the rain (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ctgw9VyV_0)

7:27ish ftw

EDIT:
Oh yeah... and 25:00-25:30 for the "Oh snap!"


EDIT EDIT:
-snip-
-snip-
-snip-

Almost makes me wish it had rained when Obama gave his aceptance speech.


Seems that McCain's line how he is a maverick who keeps going against his own party is no longer working to lure in Democrats:


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

You see, before this I was already pretty sure the reason why Obama had 'less' crossover support was because the Democrat ranks had swelled so much in the past few years thanks to Bush and the far right wing.

The impressive part is not that he's overtaken McCain in the percentage of party crossovers, but that he has done so even though 1% of Democrats is significantly bigger than 1% of Republicans.

[lucasb]

In the end, pretty much everyone, except the lone republican, said that something is going to pop unexpectedly to try to get the VP debate cancelled. The consensus being it'll be family related.

Palin will do fine in the debate. They'll simply fit her out with a wireless receiver so that more informed people behind the scenes can feed her the answers. It's not like they haven't done this before. Remember the square Mystery Bulge ™ under the back of Bush's jacket in the '04 debates? I'm sure the technology has been improved since then so that no such unsightly fashion faux pas will be visible in Sarah's outfit.

And those glasses make an ideal location for the speaker piece.

[Adam C]

Palin will do fine in the debate. They'll simply fit her out with a wireless receiver so that more informed people behind the scenes can feed her the answers.

Seeing as how she couldn't stand up to Katie Couric after being heavily coached, I can't see even this helping her out in the debate.

[KevinTBrown]

Palin will do fine in the debate. They'll simply fit her out with a wireless receiver so that more informed people behind the scenes can feed her the answers. It's not like they haven't done this before. Remember the square Mystery Bulge ™ under the back of Bush's jacket in the '04 debates? I'm sure the technology has been improved since then so that no such unsightly fashion faux pas will be visible in Sarah's outfit.

And those glasses make an ideal location for the speaker piece.

Yeah, I can see that happening....... :rolleyes:

If there's a noticable delay in her responses, odds are that'll be the case.

[FalconX2000]

Check out the video that goes with that.

Obama's speech in the rain (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ctgw9VyV_0)

...:eek:

That was in my mind, without a doubt the best rally Obama has ever held.

He was sharp, he spoke with fire and emotion and roused you up. This was the complete performance. He's not floating too much anymore. He's not soaring so high we have to squint or punching so softly the impression just flows off.

I would be surprised if a single undecided person at that rally walked away unsatisfied with Obama. He ripped through McCain, he pushed change by calling for 'an end to this nonsense'. He even made some great lines on the fly using the storm to his advantage.

Perhaps debate prep wasn't all the presentation techniques Obama worked on in private last week.

[AllisterH]

Ok, I have to ask.

What is it about Obama that causes this type of awe-like appeal. I watched that same video and all I got was "another campaign rally".

Why don't I get the messiah-feeling others get about Obama?

[Charles RB]

What is it about Obama that causes this type of awe-like appeal.

He's a very good man with speeches, and he's an optimistic and new which is a major contrast with his opponent and the last eight years.

Also, he sounds like he knows things, which is also a major contrast with his opponent and the last eight years.

[KevinTBrown]

He's a very good man with speeches, and he's an optimistic and new which is a major contrast with his opponent and the last eight years.

Also, he sounds like he knows things, which is also a major contrast with his opponent and the last eight years.

It's not just that he "sounds like he knows things", he does know things.

While most politicians can pile on the bullshit, Obama has (so far) been able to present the facts and, in terms of his tax cuts, real numbers.

[Charles RB]

It's not just that he "sounds like he knows things", he does know things.

That helps.

[the4thpip]

Especially when the other guy is, you know, not exactly a professor:



It's 3 a.m., a few months into 2009, and the phone in the White House rings. Several big hedge funds are about to fail, says the voice on the line, and there's likely to be chaos when the market opens. Whom do you trust to take that call?

I'm not being melodramatic. The bailout plan released yesterday is a lot better than the proposal Henry Paulson first put out -- sufficiently so to be worth passing. But it's not what you'd actually call a good plan, and it won't end the crisis. The odds are that the next president will have to deal with some major financial emergencies.

... We've known for a long time, of course, that Mr. McCain doesn't know much about economics -- he's said so himself, although he's also denied having said it. That wouldn't matter too much if he had good taste in advisers -- but he doesn't.

Remember, his chief mentor on economics is Phil Gramm, the arch-deregulator, who took special care in his Senate days to prevent oversight of financial derivatives -- the very instruments that sank Lehman and A.I.G., and brought the credit markets to the edge of collapse. Mr. Gramm hasn't had an official role in the McCain campaign since he pronounced America a “nation of whiners,” but he's still considered a likely choice as Treasury secretary.

And last year, when the McCain campaign announced that the candidate had assembled “an impressive collection of economists, professors, and prominent conservative policy leaders” to advise him on economic policy, who was prominently featured? Kevin Hassett, the co-author of “Dow 36,000.” Enough said.

Now, to a large extent the poor quality of Mr. McCain's advisers reflects the tattered intellectual state of his party. Has there ever been a more pathetic economic proposal than the suggestion of House Republicans that we try to solve the financial crisis by eliminating capital gains taxes? (Troubled financial institutions, by definition, don't have capital gains to tax.)

... At this point, one has the suspicion that a McCain administration would have us longing for Bush-era competence.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/opinion/29krugman.html

[Royal]

Almost makes me wish it had rained when Obama gave his aceptance speech.


Then it be this...

http://www.nothingtodoinla.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/purple-rain.bmp

[FalconX2000]

Ok, I have to ask.

What is it about Obama that causes this type of awe-like appeal. I watched that same video and all I got was "another campaign rally".

Why don't I get the messiah-feeling others get about Obama?

Hmm. Have you ever been inspired by a politician's speech?

[section 8]

Ok, I have to ask.

What is it about Obama that causes this type of awe-like appeal. I watched that same video and all I got was "another campaign rally".

Why don't I get the messiah-feeling others get about Obama?

I feel the same way.

The way McCain has been acting lately it's a no-brain-er in Obama's favor.
but i see nothing "Miraculous" about him

In fact I feel sorry for him, the sheep- er supporters have elevated him to such a level that would be difficult for him to live up to.

At this point people act as if he's going to cure cancer and end world hunger, rather than clean up Fuckhead-er Bush's mess and get things back to normal

I think He's the better choice, a good man, and a competent leader, but not the savior he's been made into.

[K-DoG7p7]

I feel the same way.

The way McCain has been acting lately it's a no-brain-er in Obama's favor.
but i see nothing "Miraculous" about him

In fact I feel sorry for him, the sheep- er supporters have elevated him to such a level that would be difficult for him to live up to.

I think He's the better choice, a good man, and a competent leader, but not the savior he's been made into.

how dare you talk that way about Jesus v2.0

[EdContradictory]

The only people I've ever seen consider or refer to Obama as "messianic" are those on the right trying to belittle his supporters or make themselves feel better about their shitty candidate.

[Paul McEnery]

Hmm. Have you ever been inspired by a politician's speech?

I watched New Frontier after the debate.

And had to struggle not to burst into tears at the end with Kennedy's speech.

[section 8]

The only people I've ever seen consider or refer to Obama as "messianic" are those on the right trying to belittle his supporters or make themselves feel better about their shitty candidate.

and then post a Youtube Video made up of clips of the "Messianic" canidate agreeing with McCain.

Sneaky fuckers.

[section 8]

Hmm. Have you ever been inspired by a politician's speech?

Does Chris Rock's Character in "Head Of State" count?

[KevinTBrown]

Words have power.

Paul brought up JFK's speech which, at the time, was arguably the best speech ever given by a President. It still moves people.

Obama has the same qualities in terms of speech-making.

Unlike most other politicians running for the highest office in the land, Obama truly is in touch with those who are middle-class. Up until 2003, when he got his book deals, he was just like everyone else financially speaking. Yes, he and his wife are attorneys, but they still had debts to pay, including college loans.

The reason why Obama resonates with people is because he's not fake when it comes to speaking from the heart. He knows the struggles, he's been there. And he's been there quite recently, too. He hasn't forgotten.

He may be lving a "rich lifestyle" currently, but what candidate doesn't when they reach this level? It's not "his money" anyway, but the campaign's. The only perk he really gets, outside of Secret Service protecting him, is a private jet.

Joe Biden is the same. Just take a look at the tax records he released after he was announced as Obama's VP choice. (Which reminds me: Where are the Palin's tax records???)

So to call Obama a "messiah" is a slap in the face of many people. He's just a man who knows full well what people who are classified as middle class go through to get through their lives.

[FalconX2000]

Does Chris Rock's Character in "Head Of State" count?

Chris Rock was great, but in my opinion Bernie Mac stole the show when he came on.:biggrin:


Oh, and I found this gem:

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/3460/sarahpalindecisionxs2.png (http://imageshack.us)

[Royal]

I don't know which Econos CNBC are talking to, but they're wrong.

[Calybos]

Ok, I have to ask.

What is it about Obama that causes this type of awe-like appeal. I watched that same video and all I got was "another campaign rally".

Why don't I get the messiah-feeling others get about Obama?

Well, you have to have been awake during the past eight years. People who are on fire tend to react very positively to a glass of water.

[Samuel Catalino]

JESUS HAS COME BACK!!

bu seriusly.. those pictures are actually kinda awesome..

So why isn't he saving people instead of running for President?

Junior has no style and no substance. And less experience than Bush when he first ran for President.

If you thought the country is bad now, when Junior takes over, we may actually look at the good old days of Clinton and Bush.

[Samuel Catalino]

Ok, I have to ask.

What is it about Obama that causes this type of awe-like appeal. I watched that same video and all I got was "another campaign rally".

Why don't I get the messiah-feeling others get about Obama?

Because Junior makes speeches like:

"We are the ones we have been waiting for."

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time.

Like other divas Junior actually believes he can do no wrong. All you typical white people from the 57 states of the U.S. please take note.

[K-DoG7p7]

So why isn't he saving people instead of running for President?

.
you can save more people as prez then as just a dude

[the4thpip]

So why isn't he saving people instead of running for President?

Junior has no style and no substance. And less experience than Bush when he first ran for President.

Dear Samuel,

we have known you to be a deluded idiot and a horrible judge of character for months now. After all, weren't you good friends with scum like Rick Olney once?
No need to remind us that you wouldn't know good people if you saw them.

Thanks for your attention,

Pip

[the4thpip]

Oh, and by the way: "Junior" is the guy who's been such a miserable failure in office for the past 8 years. Who grew up as part of an oil industry and politics elite. Who constantly had the old man to keep him out of trouble.
Obama grew up without his father, and probably was more of a man at 10 than Samuel Catalino will ever be, even if he lives to be 100.

[kingdom2000]

Ok, I have to ask.

What is it about Obama that causes this type of awe-like appeal. I watched that same video and all I got was "another campaign rally".

Why don't I get the messiah-feeling others get about Obama?

Obama doesn't particularily impress me. However, the reason is simple: after 8 years of Bush, people are desperate for the light at the end of the tunnel.

[AllisterH]

Hmm. Have you ever been inspired by a politician's speech?

Honestly, no....hell, ANY speech doesn't do much for me.

From MLK's "I have a dream" speech to even fiction like the speech given by the Earth president in B5 during the battle of the line (I've seen this speech regularly make the top of "best ever fictional speech list" a LOT) , I've never been moved by a speech.

Seriously, Paul, you wanted to cry after a CARTOON speech in New Frontiers? You're not just pulling my leg are you?:eek:

I hope Obama doesn't flame out like Carter though. Reading the 76 campaign, Carter was also seen as a very inspirational speaker and one that would transform the country...we saw what happened there...

There's a LOT of expectation based on his messanic appeal (and no, it's NOT just those voting against Obama that think he has messanic appeal) but similarly, Bush Jr. seemed to inspire the same fervent appeal at one point if you remember among the religious right...

[K-DoG7p7]

Seriously, Paul, you wanted to cry after a CARTOON speech in New Frontiers? You're not just pulling my leg are you?:eek:



Cartoon speech? its JFK's speech from when he got nomineted for prez.. ... but it was used in an animated movie to set the tone at the end..

[AllisterH]

Cartoon speech? its JFK's speech from when he got nomineted for prez.. ... but it was used in an animated movie to set the tone at the end..

I know that but it is a cartoon speech still.....

[AaronJ]

I hope Obama doesn't flame out like Carter though. Reading the 76 campaign, Carter was also seen as a very inspirational speaker and one that would transform the country...we saw what happened there...

Yeah, we do. Carter became President.

And I believe that your information on the '76 campaign is incorrect.

[K-DoG7p7]

I know that but it is a cartoon speech still.....

more like a slideshow in a animated movie set to JFK's speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t64veovYCQQ

[AllisterH]

Yeah, we do. Carter became President.

And I believe that your information on the '76 campaign is incorrect.

Hmm?

How is my information wrong on the '76 campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter#1976_presidential_campaign)? Doesn't that sound a LOT like the Obama campaign?

more like a slideshow in a animated movie set to JFK's speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t64veovYCQQ.

You see. I watch this again and again it does nothing for me. When Paul says this makes him want to cry, I'm honestly thinking Paul is jerking my chain here....

[Paul McEnery]

Honestly, no....hell, ANY speech doesn't do much for me.

From MLK's "I have a dream" speech to even fiction like the speech given by the Earth president in B5 during the battle of the line (I've seen this speech regularly make the top of "best ever fictional speech list" a LOT) , I've never been moved by a speech.

Seriously, Paul, you wanted to cry after a CARTOON speech in New Frontiers? You're not just pulling my leg are you?:eek:

You are aware that they use Kennedy's actual speech, right?

And yeah, I'm a sap for that speech, and I get a real sense that that was Darwyn's whole point in writing the book, to recreate that sense of time to give the speech back its context, and to remind us how much we've lost over the last 40 some years.

















Mind, I also got weepy at the end of Pete's Dragon, so what are you going to do.

[Michael P]

I know that but it is a cartoon speech still.....

No, it's a speech played over a cartoon. (Not that there's anything wrong with speeches from cartoons, as long as they're well-written.)

[Paul McEnery]

No, it's a speech played over a cartoon. (Not that there's anything wrong with speeches from cartoons, as long as they're well-written.)

Well exactly.

What, we're supposed not to be moved by cartoons and comics now?

Because to be honest, there were moments when I got sniffly earlier in New Frontier, too. Especially the bit where Superman bites it, Lois loses it, and Superman comes back.

Now, was I primed for this by the book, or would I have been even more of a blubberer if I didn't already know how it turned out?

[Michael P]

Well exactly.

What, we're supposed not to be moved by cartoons and comics now?

From what I'm getting from the zeitgeist, we're not supposed to be moved by anything.

Which is just one more reason why the zeitgeist sucks.

[AaronJ]

Hmm?

How is my information wrong on the '76 campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter#1976_presidential_campaign)? Doesn't that sound a LOT like the Obama campaign?

I don't need a link to a Wiki page written by someone anonymous. I was there, watching it as it happened. And the Carter campaign for President really had very little, if anything, in common with the Obama campaign, beyond what most Democratic campaigns have in common.

You see. I watch this again and again it does nothing for me. When Paul says this makes him want to cry, I'm honestly thinking Paul is jerking my chain here....

Some of us are moved by some of JFK's speeches, in that they, as Paul points out, define a different time, a different viewpoint altogether.

[KevinTBrown]

Because Junior makes speeches like:

"We are the ones we have been waiting for."

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time.

Like other divas Junior actually believes he can do no wrong. All you typical white people from the 57 states of the U.S. please take note.

Dear Samuel,

we have known you to be a deluded idiot and a horrible judge of character for months now. After all, weren't you good friends with scum like Rick Olney once?
No need to remind us that you wouldn't know good people if you saw them.

Thanks for your attention,

Pip

And deluded idiots everywhere take offense by you comparing them to Catalino.

[KevinTBrown]

McCain takes credit for bailout bill.... then it fails. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14088.html)

[Kevinroc]

McCain takes credit for bailout bill.... then it fails. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14088.html)

McCain and the GOP are already trying to blame this on Pelosi.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/gop-leaders-blame-innocuo_n_130310.html

[kingdom2000]

^ LOL. So basically its McCain's fault that its not up to whatever standards the republicans wanted. I know, he forgot the "no hurt feelings" clause. Those poor republicans and their hurt feelings.


Can you imagine how many books and dissections are going to come about that will dissect the Bush administration? Now that his policies and demolished trust has put us on the cusp of a 2nd Depression, he is now beyond all doubt the worst president in our history. The guy that was president for a like a week will be ahead of him.

There is quite literally not a single successful policy in his eight years. Every single one has led to disaster, most predicted ahead of time. I mean wow, it takes a special kind of incompetence to accomplish that. Even really stupid people tend to make a correct decision every now and then.

Can you imagine working in the White House right now? Thinking your future is safe and secure and as each fiasco mounts suddenly "I worked for Bush" is starting to look like something best not to ever mention. The books at least should be interesting as at this point they have no reason to not betray Bush as they will probably need the money.

[AaronJ]

Yes, it's Pelosi's fault, because she's a big meanie.

@_@

It's stunning that I am supposed to accept that a $700 billion bail-out was undermined by someone not being nice enough. Seriously?

[KevinTBrown]

Because everything goes better with bad 80's music: Sarah Palin's (nee Heath) '84 swimsuit competition. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSdFIDygFwM)

[the4thpip]

With less than a week to go before the crucial vice-presidential debate, GOP presidential nominee John McCain announced today that he was replacing his running mate, Alaska governor Sarah Palin, with a startled deer.

According to campaign insiders, the decision to select a hoofed mammal to replace Gov. Palin evolved after Sen. McCain watched his running mate's performance in a series of interviews with CBS's Katie Couric.

"Good Lord, a startled deer could do better than that," Sen. McCain reportedly said, prompting his aides to draw up a shortlist of startled deer.

The Arizona senator supposedly brushed aside concerns that a startled deer would wilt under the pressure of a televised debate, telling aides, "At least a goddamn deer won't go on about Alaska being close to Russia."

The McCain campaign said today that Sen. McCain's new running mate, Bucky the Red Deer, would not be made available to the press prior to the debate.

"Bucky is very much a work in progress," said McCain campaign manager Rick Davis. "Right now we're working on keeping him from bolting off the stage."

Bucky's opponent in the upcoming debate, Delaware senator Joseph Biden, appeared today to be trying to manage expectations for the high-stakes face-off with his four-legged rival.

"Bucky the Red Deer is articulate, bright and clean," Sen. Biden said. "That's storybook, man."

Elsewhere, former "American Idol" star Clay Aiken revealed that he was gay in an exclusive interview with Duh magazine.

http://www.borowitzreport.com/

[Corrina]

Yes, it's Pelosi's fault, because she's a big meanie.

@_@

It's stunning that I am supposed to accept that a $700 billion bail-out was undermined by someone not being nice enough. Seriously?

Not that I say this often but I agree with you.

Seriously, they won't pass the bill because Pelosi said something not nice?

What are they, five???

[AaronJ]

Not that I say this often but I agree with you.

I've marked this day in my calendar. :)

Seriously, they won't pass the bill because Pelosi said something not nice?

What are they, five???

Apparently, yes.

Honestly, I'm not even sure I support the bill in its present incarnation, as there are some things I am still not sure about. But voting against it because Pelosi criticized Bush (essentially)?

Even if that *were* the reason I voted against it, I would never admit something like that.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Not that I say this often but I agree with you.

Seriously, they won't pass the bill because Pelosi said something not nice?

What are they, five???

If the Republicans and John McCain seriously start spreading this and people end up really going to economic hell ...he needs to lose. Palin's idiocy is rubbing off on McCain to a point no one can belive. McCain took a gamble and felt he'd be a hero... instead he became the goat. And instead of taking it... he releases this ?

What a bunch of morons. They deserve to lose and its likely as more hell breaks loose economic wise....more run to Barack.

[Arrogantcur]

Not that I say this often but I agree with you.

Seriously, they won't pass the bill because Pelosi said something not nice?

What are they, five???

I can't speak for Congressional Republicans, but that sure seems to be John McCain's emotional age.

Remember what he repeatedly said about how the tone of this campaign would be very different if Obama hadn't turned down his request for town hall meetings?

McCain, evidently, considered this an unforgiveable slight. A justification to do his best to drag Obama's name through the mud. Something that made him so angry, perhaps, that he wouldn't look at Obama or address him directly during the debate. That might have been the reason. It's seems as plausible as anything else.

Ezra Klein writes (http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=09&year=2008&base_name=the_expectations_game) the following:

I hold John McCain's foreign policy in rather low esteem. It is wrong, yes, but just as bad, and maybe more dangerous, it is profoundly immature. It is a foreign policy built upon perceived slights, personal grievances, and pride. It is a foreign policy that would risk great power conflict because Putin didn't pass the potatoes quickly enough at last year's G8 luncheon reception.

Plus, I remember there being an exchange of letters between the two Senators long before either one decided to run for President. I'll have to look for the story and see if I can post a link here, but here's what I recall: McCain complained angrily over something Obama had said or done, and went on a rant about how Obama wasn't being sincere about something.

Eventually I think that the two of them made peace. But it just goes to show that, yes, McCain is five. And a spoiled five-year-old at that. :redface:

EDIT TO ADD:

I also wanted to share this quote from a weekly TV column at torontoist.com. It is written by Christopher Bird, better known as MightyGodKing:

Of course, you're not actually going to watch [the Canadian debate], because as luck would have it, the Americans have scheduled their vice-presidential debate for tonight as well, at the very same time even, and come on: we all want to see if Sarah Palin accidentally sets her podium on fire. (American networks, 9 p.m.)

:biggrin:

[AllisterH]

Er, if I'm reading this right, 46 Democrats ALSO said "Hell no" to this bill.

I don't think the Republicans are to blame since 46 democrats are not an insignificant minority...as House leader, Pelosi should've gotten all of her people inline as well (or is that the job of the whip?)

EDIT..my mistake..It was 96 Democrats that voted against it.

If Nancy Pelosi can't get another 13 votes to support Bush, why all the anger at the Republicans? The democrats BY THEMSELVES could've pushed through this vote if they all supported it or am I totally off my rocker here?

[Arrogantcur]

Er, if I'm reading this right, 46 Democrats ALSO said "Hell no" to this bill.

I don't think the Republicans are to blame since 46 democrats are not an insignificant minority...as House leader, Pelosi should've gotten all of her people inline as well (or is that the job of the whip?)

In a body that comprises 435 voting members, 46 does not seem like very many. Particularly not when compared to 182 Republican nays.

[kingdom2000]

The Dems nays are bad but the overwhelming amount of noes by Republicans is the worse part. Especially since they are claiming "hurt feelings" as the cause.

As for Palin, at this point I will be astonished if the VP debate occurs. McCain's team has to know the damage from cancelling the debate would probably be far less the allowing it to occur.

[kingdom2000]

It looks like Bush is going ahead with his own bailout plan without congress:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a9MTZEgukPLY&refer=home

The Federal Reserve will pump an additional $630 billion into the global financial system, flooding banks with cash to alleviate the worst banking crisis since the Great Depression.

The Fed increased its existing currency swaps with foreign central banks by $330 billion to $620 billion to make more dollars available worldwide. The Term Auction Facility, the Fed's emergency loan program, will expand by $300 billion to $450 billion. The European Central Bank, the Bank of England and the Bank of Japan are among the participating authorities.

which do you think will cause more economic damage? Congress passing the bailout that allowed at least some check and balances or flooding the market with $630 billion that will dramtically lower the value of the dollar and increase inflation.

At least know we know the real reason Republican's killed the bill. This way their rich friends get their cake and can eat it too, just like Bush and co. had orginially intended. It was going to happen either way but throwing on the illusion of restrictions would have been nice. Now you can forget about it.

[AllisterH]

Um, actual vote results on the bill...

the Republicans - voted 133 against the bill and 65 in favor.
the Democrats - voted 95 against the bill and 140 in favor of the bill.

Um, nope. I'm sorry but I know this is a "bash the republicans" forum but even if ALL the republicans had voted against the bill, the democrats could still have passed the bill without the republicans AT ALL.

How is this the republicans' fault:confused: This is the whole point in having a majority congress, you can simply ignore the other party if the president is on your side already....

[JeffreyWKramer]

And deluded idiots everywhere take offense by you comparing them to Catalino.

And here I thought I was the only one here that thought Sammy Catalitter was something of a dip.

[Arrogantcur]

Um, actual vote results on the bill...

the Republicans - voted 133 against the bill and 65 in favor.
the Democrats - voted 95 against the bill and 140 in favor of the bill.

Um, nope. I'm sorry but I know this is a "bash the republicans" forum but even if ALL the republicans had voted against the bill, the democrats could still have passed the bill without the republicans AT ALL.

How is this the republicans' fault:confused: This is the whole point in having a majority congress, you can simply ignore the other party if the president is on your side already....

Allister, I went to CNN's website, looked that the vote totals, subtracted the number you originally listed, which was 46, from the number of "nay" votes, which was 228, and came up with 182.

So I'm sorry I got it wrong, but I got it wrong because I trusted you had it right the first time and didn't bother to double-check.

EDIT: As for your original point, yes, they should have been able to get enough votes to do it without GOP cooperation. But when was the last time this batch of Democrats in Congress lived up to your expectations? Lots of people voted them in because they hoped that a Democratic majority would do something about Bushco. That didn't happen. Why? Because of logic like this:

PELOSI: I took [impeachment] off the table a long time ago. You can't talk about impeachment unless you have the facts, and you can't have the facts unless you have cooperation from the Administration. I think the Republicans would like nothing better than for us to focus on impeachment and take our eye off the ball of a progressive economic agenda.

:confused: & :mad:

[Samuel Catalino]

you can save more people as prez then as just a dude

Really? How?

[Samuel Catalino]

Obama doesn't particularily impress me. However, the reason is simple: after 8 years of Bush, people are desperate for the light at the end of the tunnel.

And the light at the end of the tunnel may be the headlight of an oncoming train.

[kingdom2000]

Everyone knows that Dems can't walk in lockstep with a gun point to their collected heads. But the one time people actually wanted Republicans to be republicans (ie act as a single unit as they have for the previous 7+ years) is the one time they decide to act more like Democrats.

[Samuel Catalino]

Everyone knows that Dems can't walk in lockstep with a gun point to their collected heads. But the one time people actually wanted Republicans to be republicans (ie act as a single unit as they have for the previous 7+ years) is the one time they decide to act more like Democrats.

That is an astute observation.

[Charles RB]

Dear Samuel,

we have known you to be a deluded idiot and a horrible judge of character for months now. After all, weren't you good friends with scum like Rick Olney once?

You mean like Doc Absurd once was? And many other people?


Mind, I also got weepy at the end of Pete's Dragon, so what are you going to do.

Last time I was almost crying was at the end of Wall-E when he seems to have lost all his emotions. If I hadn't been in a public cinema I probably would've started bawling.

[AllisterH]

Everyone knows that Dems can't walk in lockstep with a gun point to their collected heads. But the one time people actually wanted Republicans to be republicans (ie act as a single unit as they have for the previous 7+ years) is the one time they decide to act more like Democrats.

*LOL*

Ok, this is a good one.

Still, sorry about that arrogantcur. When I did the vote total, I read that 96 as a 46...

You know what's really scary? As a percentage, almost exactly 2/3rd of the republicans said hell no. But roughly 40% of the democrats ALSO said "stuff it" to Pelosi.

So the bill fails by 13 votes and yet the democrats apparently are focusing on the GOP to get those votes?

WTF!!!! You got massive revolt in your own goddamn party Nancy. Why the hell didn't you choose to get those votes from your own ranks. Is this woman serious?:eek:

[KevinTBrown]

*LOL*

Ok, this is a good one.

Still, sorry about that arrogantcur. When I did the vote total, I read that 96 as a 46...

You know what's really scary? As a percentage, almost exactly 2/3rd of the republicans said hell no. But roughly 40% of the democrats ALSO said "stuff it" to Pelosi.

So the bill fails by 13 votes and yet the democrats apparently are focusing on the GOP to get those votes?

WTF!!!! You got massive revolt in your own goddamn party Nancy. Why the hell didn't you choose to get those votes from your own ranks. Is this woman serious?:eek:

I'm curious to know how many of those 96 are up for re-election this year......

[AaronJ]

*LOL*

Ok, this is a good one.

Still, sorry about that arrogantcur. When I did the vote total, I read that 96 as a 46...

You know what's really scary? As a percentage, almost exactly 2/3rd of the republicans said hell no. But roughly 40% of the democrats ALSO said "stuff it" to Pelosi.

So the bill fails by 13 votes and yet the democrats apparently are focusing on the GOP to get those votes?

WTF!!!! You got massive revolt in your own goddamn party Nancy. Why the hell didn't you choose to get those votes from your own ranks. Is this woman serious?:eek:

Well, you're simplifying.

If it hadn't become obvious that they weren't going to get the votes, the final tallies would have been different.

[Buzz Dixon]

Basically all true ...McCain never knew Palin or looked into her well enough. I'm wondering when the election is done and everybody's writing their tell-all books if it will come out he asked several other people and they all turned him down...

[Buzz Dixon]

Ok, I have to ask.

What is it about Obama that causes this type of awe-like appeal. I watched that same video and all I got was "another campaign rally".

Why don't I get the messiah-feeling others get about Obama?Because we are so sick and tired of politics as-is that when anybody runs a campaign and platform that looks even the slightest bit grown up, we are stunned and amazed.

[Nick Soapdish]

By the way, in thinking more about this, I don't think Biden is really going to go after Palin all that much. She's just way too inexperienced and she's going to mangle her answers horribly. All Biden will need to do is pressure her for clarification. What will she say then? "I'll back to you on that!" :confused:

The bloodbath won't be because Biden ripped her, it'll be because she wilts under the spotlight. It's one thing to speak at a gubernatorial debate in AK in front of a few hundred thousand; it's another to have tens of millions watching you on every freakin' channel and eagerly awaiting your next verbal faux paux.....

I've heard it said and tend to agree. The only one that can mess it up is Biden. If he sticks his foot in his mouth at the wrong time and forcefully enough, he could give Palin a pass on her own idiocy.



You see, before this I was already pretty sure the reason why Obama had 'less' crossover support was because the Democrat ranks had swelled so much in the past few years thanks to Bush and the far right wing.

The impressive part is not that he's overtaken McCain in the percentage of party crossovers, but that he has done so even though 1% of Democrats is significantly bigger than 1% of Republicans.

You've got that backwards.

McCain getting 1% of Democrats is more impressive than Obama getting 1% of Republicans because of the number of voters in each party. The difference in percentage may be making up for that difference in numbers though.

McCain takes credit for bailout bill.... then it fails. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14088.html)

Actually, the speech that I heard had him blaming Obama and his partisan allies. Right before saying that now is not the time to look for blame.

Seriously, it was the next sentence.

I like all the quotes by his advisors about how he was keeping a low profile.

I'm curious to know how many of those 96 are up for re-election this year......

In the House of Representatives?

All of them. I guess some could be retiring, but I doubt that it's many.

Anyway, I'd concentrate on getting them reined in even though getting Democrats to agree is like herding cats. Even though it might be easier to just give some of the Republicans some lollipops.

[FalconX2000]

Honestly, no....hell, ANY speech doesn't do much for me.

From MLK's "I have a dream" speech to even fiction like the speech given by the Earth president in B5 during the battle of the line (I've seen this speech regularly make the top of "best ever fictional speech list" a LOT) , I've never been moved by a speech.

Seriously, Paul, you wanted to cry after a CARTOON speech in New Frontiers? You're not just pulling my leg are you?:eek:

I hope Obama doesn't flame out like Carter though. Reading the 76 campaign, Carter was also seen as a very inspirational speaker and one that would transform the country...we saw what happened there...

There's a LOT of expectation based on his messanic appeal (and no, it's NOT just those voting against Obama that think he has messanic appeal) but similarly, Bush Jr. seemed to inspire the same fervent appeal at one point if you remember among the religious right...

Then I completely understand.

more like a slideshow in a animated movie set to JFK's speech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t64veovYCQQ

You see. I watch this again and again it does nothing for me. When Paul says this makes him want to cry, I'm honestly thinking Paul is jerking my chain here....

I got a little misty eyed myself. And I've got a bit of trouble understanding Kennedy's accent.

[FalconX2000]

....why are you guys assuming this is a Democrat bill? From what I know, the bailout has always been a Republican idea. The Democrats in the Senate put the modifications they wanted on it.

So why is it the Democrats fault the bill didn't pass the House (Pelosi's fault I could agree with) when so many more Democrats voted for the bill than Republicans?

You've got that backwards.

McCain getting 1% of Democrats is more impressive than Obama getting 1% of Republicans because of the number of voters in each party. The difference in percentage may be making up for that difference in numbers though.

Actually, no I don't, though I understand the logic from your point of view.

Over the last several years, a significant number of independents and republicans have converted to democrat.

These new ranks feel they are likely to vote for a democrat in general, but are more likely to switch to a non-democrat when confronted with specific candidates. McCain has cultivated the maverick image for more than 2 decades and was an excellent candidate to draw these voters.

[Infra-Man]

Speeches are basically a piece of good writing that can be made great by an able speaker. If you can be moved by a good piece of writing (a good essay, for instance), you can be moved by a speech.

[Nick Soapdish]

Supposedly, it was initially tailored by Bush to the Democrats because they have the majority.

I'm not quite sure how the "give Paulson $700 B and don't ask questions" really plays into that.

From what I gather, the Democrats made modifications so that they could live with it and left stuff so that it wouldn't get vetoed. But I haven't heard any details on the bill - just vague statements about what it contained.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

I'm wondering when the election is done and everybody's writing their tell-all books if it will come out he asked several other people and they all turned him down...

Lets be honest...its VP. I can't see many turning down a shot to be in line possibly to be President. I think whoever is running his campaign . Whatever idiot is in charge he convinced John to pick a woman and get the Hillary Clinton voters. Plus everyone harped about John's age so by picking Palin he got someone young ! In case something bad happened.

It was a foolish strategy which echoes the McCain campaign the last 2-3 months. Everyone move is meant to make John McCain a serious Presidential frontrunner and each move has made him look foolish. From suspending his campaign to his campaign claiming that the reason the party voted against it was due to Pelosi being "mean".

McCain should FIRE whoever is in charge of his campaign and try to get someone who can actually run a campaign good for him. Instead of tricks and political ploys that fail.

[BnL]

Last time I was almost crying was at the end of Wall-E when he seems to have lost all his emotions. If I hadn't been in a public cinema I probably would've started bawling.

Thanks for the spoilers.

[Infra-Man]

Not that I say this often but I agree with you.

Seriously, they won't pass the bill because Pelosi said something not nice?

What are they, five???

Breaking news: House Republicans to issue statement declaring that Speaker Pelosi is a poopie-pants, adding "no backsies, black magic."

[Infra-Man]

Guess what clip we haven't seen from Katie Couric's interview with Sarah Palin?

Sarah Palin Can't Name Supreme Court Case Other Than Roe V. Wade (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/latest-palin-gaffe-cant-n_n_130395.html)

Today, the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz reported on potentially embarrassing clips of Sarah Palin being interviewed by Katie Couric that haven't yet been aired. The Politico has more information on one in particular:

Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing.

The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.

After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.

There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence.

Dood! C'mon. At least say "Brown v. Board which overturned Plessy v. Ferguson." Shit, buddy, that's eighth grade knowledge.

[C-Cool]

Guess what clip we haven't seen from Katie Couric's interview with Sarah Palin?

Sarah Palin Can't Name Supreme Court Case Other Than Roe V. Wade (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/latest-palin-gaffe-cant-n_n_130395.html)



Dood! C'mon. At least say "Brown v. Board which overturned Plessy v. Ferguson." Shit, buddy, that's eighth grade knowledge.

How could she forget Brown v. Board overturning Plessy v. Ferguson?

As a Nigerian-American (that's an African-American with knowledge of his past, culture, and ancestors from Nigeria) I must say that she is a moron if she forgot something that brought this country forward so far for so long. It's one of the cornerstones of the modern American society, and it's one of the best things any culture or country has done in this earth: a good chance at a proper education, no matter what creed.

Now this is getting ridiculous, and this had better be a lie. A big, stupid lie. Because that, my friends, goes against the American culture of today.

Oh, and there's a lot more beneficial and horrible Supreme Court cases that have given us lessons on the past and has shape our country into it's current state (beyond economic problems). To forget that is to not care for your history, and as a presidential candidate, this is something you never do, even if this country currently belittles intelligence like stupid high school students.

Country First, my A$$.

[LtMarvel]

or Bush v Gore....

[AaronJ]

or Bush v Gore....

HAHA! Good call. :)

Then again, I've been trying to *forget* that one since it happened.

[Infra-Man]

or Bush v Gore....

That's such an obscure Supreme Court case, and it happened oh so many years ago.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

Watching as they have a group of old people describe their feelings while they watch the debate and its clear...a couple of old people in that room are less than thrilled with the prospect of Sarah Palin as VP. One guy said "How dare John McCain think he can make us elect an in-adaquate(spellin sorry) person like Sarah Palin ?"

Of course there was one crazy lady yelling at anyone who dared claim McCain was wrong. Her funniest lines...

"She was govenor of Alaska !"

"So she was govenor of Alaska ..how long has Barack Obama been a Senator ... 2 or 3 days ?"

"Obama was interupting McCain !" (when many corrected her that Obama was trying to correct McCain on his issues...)

"He was interupting and interupted the moderator !"

(when one lady said she was scared of the prospect that McCain doesn't look well and could die leaving a crazy Sarah Palin in charge...)

"So , Barack Obama smokes and he'll die !"

'Fox News is Fair & Balanced !"

:tongue:

[EMeadow]

That's such an obscure Supreme Court case, and it happened oh so many years ago.

She should be able to remember Falwell v Flynt I think. :biggrin:

The other one I remember (though not the actual caste title) is the one that was made into the movie Gideon's Trumpet with Henry Fonda about always having legal representation.

[the4thpip]

I'm curious to know how many of those 96 are up for re-election this year......

Bailout was kryptonite for vulnerable House members

If you're an investment banker looking for someone to blame for the collapse of the Wall Street bailout, try this culprit: the voters.

A very useful analysis by Nate Silver's very useful blog FiveThirtyEight.com confirmed my hunch after a quick scan of the House vote against the bailout this afternoon -- almost everyone facing a tough reelection race voted no.

Only eight of the 38 members in competitive races Silver looked at backed the bailout -- or 21 percent. (Some observers would say there are more competitive races -- the Cook Political Report counts 54 -- but Silver used the races tracked by the Swing State Project blog.) That's even lower than the 32 percent support the plan got among House Republicans (or the 59 percent it got among Democrats). Five out of 18 vulnerable Democrats voted for the bill -- Jerry McNerney of California, Tim Mahoney of Florida, Jim Marshall of Georgia, Bill Foster of Illinois and Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania. Among vulnerable Republicans, only Chris Shays of Connecticut, Mark Kirk of Illinois and Jon Porter of Nevada voted yes.

Polling on the bailout has been inconsistent; depending on how questions are asked, you get different levels of support. It's more popular if you call it a "rescue plan" than a bailout, for instance. But clearly this flood of "no" votes among members trying to hang onto their jobs underscores some of the politics at play here. Spending $700 billion of taxpayer money on securities Wall Street cooked up to make huge profits doesn't seem like a winner at the ballot box on first glance -- apparently the people whose careers are on the line don't think it is, either.
from salon.com

I wonder how that one Socialist in the House (from Vermont I think?) voted on this rather Socialist measure. :tongue:

[the4thpip]

I'm wondering when the election is done and everybody's writing their tell-all books if it will come out he asked several other people and they all turned him down...

An exclusive look at people who turned down McCain when the call came:

http://www.autographdealer.com/images/MartinSheen442.jpg

http://www.etonline.com/media/photo/2008/02/40936/400_cher_080207_gty_57142506.jpg

http://scifipedia.scifi.com/images/thumb/7/71/Frank_Miller.jpg/270px-Frank_Miller.jpg

http://www.hollywoodrag.com/images/uploads/carrot_top_buff2.jpg

[KevinTBrown]

The landline vs cellphone question is finally raised about the polls: http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnews/20080929/ts_usnews/dopollsmissobamavoterswithnolandline