McCain/Palin 08

[ToucanSpam]

Like it or not, right now McCain/Palin are in the 'lead', so to speak. I know the whole 'margin for error' exists, and it makes perfect sense as to why they are in the lead, but it's also unbelievable. From what I have seen of Palin she is either incredibly STUPID or incredibly bad at interviews. For example, the interview with Charlie Gibson. I'm not going to post YouTube links, you can do that for yourself. For someone who is supposed to be smart, sharp, and on top of things, she certainly tanked this interview. She had no fucking clue what Gibson was talking about when he mentioned the Bush doctrine. That's just one of many fuckups.

Man, I can't wait until the debates. Specifically October 2nd. I really want to see Palin crash and burn.

[RobMoney$]

Dear Democrats,

Are you guys insane? You have about 7 weeks left to win this election. Where in the WORLD do you think you are going with this discussion on the Bush Doctrine? This game of semantics is not going to change ANYONES vote. Obama should NOT be trying to run against Palin. Obama should not be trying to run against Bush and his doctrine. Focus on MCCAIN! If you don't do that, Obama is going to lose. Stop getting distracted! Hit McCain on being too old, on how he has a hot temper, on being a Washington insider that had plenty of time to fix things by now, on not knowing much about the economy, on the ENTIRE ticket not being experts on the economy. You are running against McCAIN, not Palin or Bush.

You're Welcome.

Signed,
A disenfranchised fellow Democrat.

[ToucanSpam]

Dear RobMoney,

I see your points and CNN echoed the same sentiments a couple days ago. It is true, Obama is NOT running against McCain. Palin is not as important a piece of the puzzle as she or McCain thinks. And yes, Obama's campaign has WASTED a lot of energy in countering her statements and they have put out some rather sad attacks on McCain thus far. In my previous post I discussed Palin's bad interview with Charlie Gibson and how I was looking forward to the VP debate. I am hoping that she is silenced in the coming weeks because she is a major distraction and the Reps are using that to their advantage. One can only hope by October 2nd she will be nothing more than a laughing stock.

P.S.- I am incredibly impressed by your political discussions. I see you in a much different light these days. Much respect.

Signed,

A Canadian Who Should Be Paying Attention To His Own Political Crisis

[RobMoney$]

P.S.- I am incredibly impressed by your political discussions. I see you in a much different light these days. Much respect.

Signed,

A Canadian Who Should Be Paying Attention To His Own Political Crisis

Just because we may have differing opinions on politics, it's cool that some of us still can show each other some civil respect.

I'm looking at you Lambert.

Thanks for the compliment Touc.

[Bob]

Just because we may have differing opinions on politics, it's cool that some of us still can show each other some civil respect.

I'm looking at you Lambert.


mm, if he'd just stop being such a prick this feud could end

[ToucanSpam]

Actually if they both stopped taking personal shots while discussing particular political events/points and showed each other some form of mutual respect they would probably enjoy these threads more than what they are now.

[Knuckles]

Rob, how the hell did you go from being such a staunch Clinton supporter to backing McCain?

It doesn't make any sense buddy.

You certainly don't have to be in love with Obama but his policies are going to be much closer to Clinton's than McCain's.

You do see this, right?

[RobMoney$]

Because emporer Obama has no clothes and I've been shouting it since day one.

There are quite a bit of Hillary supporters who aren't buying into Obama-mania. Check the polls.

[Knuckles]

I want everyone to know this is not a personal attack on Rob. I've got much love for the Moneyman I just don't understand why he's backing the Republican party now.





There are quite a bit of Hillary supporters who aren't buying into Obama-mania. Check the polls.

I just don't get that. Hillary is backing him. She thinks it will be best for our country if he is elected instead of McCain.

Doesn't that mean anything to you?

[RobMoney$]

mm, if he'd just stop being such a prick this feud could end

Check the posts, Lamebert's taken personal shots at me over political debates which I have ignored. I could have gotten personal right back, but I haven't.

I criticize his being a liberal and a canadian, hardly personal.


It's funny but I've noticed that when the races get more intense, so do the insults. Yeahwho got downright nasty during the Dem. primary when Obama-Hillary was at it's height. Now that McCain has overtaken Obama since the RNC, Lambert is increasingly losing his temper.

That was kind of what I was getting at with my post to toucan.
It's nice that even though we disagree, we're mature enough not to let it degrade into a pissing contest.

[ThatGuy]

Although I'm all for Obama, I have to admit the choice of Palin was great! It took the heat off of McCain and put it on Palin. Watch the news on any station, when the dems get brought up it's all about Obama, when repubs get brought up it's all about Palin istead of McCain. She's on the cover of magazines everywhere! I can't wait for the debates to start so we can finally get to some real issues and cut through all of this hockey mom bullshit!!

[RobMoney$]

I want everyone to know this is not a personal attack on Rob. I've got much love for the Moneyman I just don't understand why he's backing the Republican party now.



I just don't get that. Hillary is backing him. She thinks it will be best for our country if he is elected instead of McCain.

Doesn't that mean anything to you?


No. What do you expect her to do, support McCain?


People in politics PUBLICLY support fellow party members they have historically been foes with all the time. I've seen it on the local level often. I'm intelligent enough to see through partisan politics.

Here in Philly, our Mayor Rendell was resigning to run for Governor of PA. He came out publicly and threw his support behind a fellow city dem. councilman named John Street, someone who he was eternally at odds with while running the city, but he was the Dem. nominee.
Sam Katz was the Repub. nominee and was someone who Rendell historically worked much better with in the past.

Party lines is party lines!

[Laver1969]

Because emporer Obama has no clothes and I've been shouting it since day one.

There are quite a bit of Hillary supporters who aren't buying into Obama-mania. Check the polls.

What exactly does the emporer/no clothes thing mean? Wouldn't even a mediocre Obama presidency be better than a mediocre McCain presidency?

Do you expect after Obama's elected him to say...ha ha gotcha. Isn't a naked democrat better than an old republican and a hot hockey mom?

[Knuckles]

No. What do you expect her to do, support McCain?


People in politics PUBLICLY support fellow party members they have historically been foes with all the time.

Do you think Hill wants to see McCain in office?

[Bob]

i wish people would get past the "hockey mom" thing and get to the "crazy fundie" thing, that's what i find more troubling about her (and i hate hockey moms!)

[RobMoney$]

What exactly does the emporer/no clothes thing mean?

Classic Hans Christian Andersen childrens tale.

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=YJHsl3rXNt8C&dq=the+emperor+has+no+clothes&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=YO_xTp4b4C&sig=eEy6BY6BGnJv0cdZ5Al_4h1c9AE&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=5&ct=result#PPP1,M1

[RobMoney$]

Do you think Hill wants to see McCain in office?

I doubt it.
My point is, what is she supposed to do at this point? Obama and her clearly don't get along, am I to believe that suddenly as soon as the primary was over that Hillary put it all behind her and is now in the Obama camp? They were simply trying to unite the party after a brutal primary which tore the party in two.
She has to do the right thing by her party and publicly support Obama.

[Knuckles]

I doubt it.
My point is, what is she supposed to do at this point? Obama and her clearly don't get along, am I to believe that suddenly as soon as the primary was over that Hillary put it all behind her and is now in the Obama camp? They were simply trying to unite the party after a brutal primary which tore the party in two.
She has to do the right thing by her party and publicly support Obama.

My question is why are you supporting McCain when his policies are soooo far away from Hill's?

It just doesn't make sense to me.

[QueenAdrock]

Check the posts, Lamebert's taken personal shots at me over political debates which I have ignored. I could have gotten personal right back, but I haven't.

I criticize his being a liberal and a canadian, hardly personal.

Brett Lame-bert


She's dating Brett Lambert, how clever could she be.

Shut the fuck up Brett Lambert.
Always fucking gloating and going on with your man-love for Obama.


Remember when you first started posting here and everyone seriously thought you were the "Special Kid" and thought you had Down's Syndrome or something. Then after a while we realized you weren't disabled at all and that you were just a douche-bag.

just like posing in front of big black cannons with a limp wrist doesn't make you a homosexual.

And that's just from 2 minutes of searching. Certainly none of those are personal. :rolleyes:
One of the reasons I love Brett so much is that he's a really nice guy. He's the kindest person ever and treats everyone with respect. If Brett is 'getting personal' and dishing out insults, the only thing that says to me is that guy must have started something first and laid it on pretty thick. It's not Brett's style to just go around insulting people for no reason. However, it is your style, Rob, seeing as how I never had any contact with you directly before that "She's dating Brett Lambert, how clever can she be" comment. You throw the first punch with quite a few people on this board, it's not just us. However, if you are turning over a new leaf, I'm glad to see you're trying to be more mature and step away from the petty put-downs though, maybe we can actually have a discussion without insults being thrown around.

[RobMoney$]

Include the dates I posted those. Shit's months old.
Nothing in the past 4 or 5 months easy.

I can find stuff Lambert posted YESTERDAY about me.


...and LOL @ you saying "Lame-bert" is personal.
and the "Cannon" pic isn't personal either, you guys posted it.

[QueenAdrock]

I wasn't aware that there was a ceasefire between when those things were posted and now. Well, good for you. I hope you can be held up to that standard. I'm sure if you do start to show Brett respect, he'll show it back to you.

Lame-bert may not be personal, but is it a petty attack? Sure. There's no 'mutual respect' in childish name calling.

[Knuckles]

LOL at this thread turning into BBMB politics.

You're not answering my question Rob! :D

[ToucanSpam]

I have no beef with either of you and I am of the opinion that Brett Lambert was robbed when he was left off of the list of Greatest Canadian ever. But I really think that if you two both just ease off of the personal stuff the political discussions would be more fruitful and readable. I am NOT blaming any particular person for the name calling/whatever, nor am I saying one is doing it more than others, nor am I willing to accept the 'he started it' explanation, but I hope you both employ the maturity I KNOW you both have. Politically we all do not have to share party lines but we can all agree that there should be a degree of etiquette used when we discuss our personal opinions on the major issues.


Actually, that goes for everyone, not just the immediately recognized offenders. We're all adults, we're all very smart people, so let's act like it.(y)


Love,

Patrick

[jennyb]

I am just outraged at this McCain fellow. :mad: Shame on him for thrusting the country into this tizzy over "Moose"olini! Diverting everyone's attention away from his lame, hot-tempered, militant, old ass and onto this woman who hasn't even left the country before a recent trip to Kuwait to visit troops she had only visited Mexico and Canada?! Yeah, wow. It's just gross that the country is falling for this load of bullshit (according to the 'polls' anyhow). Mister McCancer could kick the bucket and we're stuck with her at the wheel!? Boy he sure knows how to 'use' a woman doesn't he? Beginning with dating a stripper, cheating on his wife with a woman who has very deep pockets and political connections to further his career and now this. Get on out there and dance for the people Sarah! Charming.

So we've got, McCain who doesn't even know how to use Google but sure knows how to play dirty, and a woman who has no real first hand experience with foreign lands. Lovely. It's probably a good thing McCain can't use the internet, I bet he'd go OFF if he read half the shit people are saying online about him.

To me, a highly cultured and well traveled well educated Senator of 8 years who was president of the Harvard Law Review, became a civil rights lawyer and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for 12 years IS far better suited to handle our very delicate country of today and lead us into the future. He's in touch with the current state of affairs and has his finger on the true pulse of the nation. He's a family man who seems quite devoted to and respectful of his strong, admirable wife. Not to mention the simple feeling in my gut when I watch him conduct himself with such grace and presidential poise.

How you could even see this any other way is un-fucking-believable.

And yes, I am biased at this point. But I think you should be by now, we've got only 51 days and 13 hours to go. I went into this back in January as an ignorant zombie American with no opinion, and began to read and watch and have formed my opinion over the course of the year. I did vote for Hillary on super Tuesday but slowly but surely realized the hope and not hate that lies with Obama in charge. He has enormous ability to inspire and motivate positively. Obama even got me to empty my pockets when possible to aid his cause. It became pretty much a slam dunk in the Obama court.

I cannot wait for the debates. I wanna hear more from Mr. Biden and I hope he eats this Palin character alive.

I'm jennygirl and I approve this message...

[Laver1969]

Ok, I can tell this was pointed in my direction. All I have to say is that I was publicly supporting McCain on here weeks before he even choose Palin. So I'm not distracted by any shiny new object.

If anything I think you can use this statement to describe Obama-mania running wild over America. "Let's get out of Iraq, let's change as much away from Bush as we can get, let's support this person Obama who because that's what he says he's for, even though we know absolutely nothing about him".

Oh, and BTW, Obama's now realized he can't just get out of Iraq at the snap of his fingers and has changed the one political position that gained him the majority of his supporters in the first place, but it's human nature now that people have choosen a side in this fight they feel a need to defend their decision and their side to the end.

It wasn't pointed in your direction at all. Just at the nation in general.

The "get out of Iraq" wasn't what drew me to Obama. Although I like the idea of transitioning power to them and let them run their own country. I was just watching the democratic candidates and was prepared to support whoever was chosen. Hillary would have been just fine with me.

I was drawn to the democratic side of the fence because the republican side is sooo fucked up. And McCain doesn't represent any change from that. I have no faith that McCain will restore any diplomacy with foreign leaders. I have no faith in McCain will move towards better healthcare system. This is important to me because I see what my parents have to go through dealing with insurance.

Honestly, if there was a strong republican that truly represented change I would give them a listen. But McCain just isn't that candidate and Palin is just the shiny object that has created a lot of attention. She ain't gonna do anything.

[Laver1969]

I'm jennygirl and I approve this message...

*starts jen-ny jen-ny chant*

[saz]

Just because we may have differing opinions on politics, it's cool that some of us still can show each other some civil respect.


It's nice that even though we disagree, we're mature enough not to let it degrade into a pissing contest.









Fuck, don't tell me you're one of those idiots

:confused:

[ms.peachy]

My question is why are you supporting McCain when his policies are soooo far away from Hill's?

It just doesn't make sense to me.

I've kind of been wanting to ask you this too, Rob. I hear you putting forth a lot of what you say is 'wrong' with Obama, but I'm not hearing what you think is 'right' about McCain. Maybe you have elucidated this in a thread I haven't read or something, so I apologise if I have overlooked anything, but I am genuinely curious. Is it fair for me to ask of you to explain why it is you believe (if in fact you do believe) that McCain is the better choice, without using an argument as to why you believe Obama is not?


edited to add: I just read that back and I realise it could potentially be read as being confrontational, if one was so inclined to view it that way. I don't mean it to be - it's a genuine, honest question. I'm just trying to understand your point of view.

[Dorothy Wood]

I've kind of been wanting to ask you this too, Rob. I hear you putting forth a lot of what you say is 'wrong' with Obama, but I'm not hearing what you think is 'right' about McCain. Maybe you have elucidated this in a thread I haven't read or something, so I apologise if I have overlooked anything, but I am genuinely curious. Is it fair for me to ask of you to explain why it is you believe (if in fact you do believe) that McCain is the better choice, without using an argument as to why you believe Obama is not?


edited to add: I just read that back and I realise it could potentially be read as being confrontational, if one was so inclined to view it that way. I don't mean it to be - it's a genuine, honest question. I'm just trying to understand your point of view.


Rob doesn't like explaining his point of view, he just likes repeating catch phrases. "the emperor has no clothes" doesn't even mean anything. The Emperor's New Clothes is a cautionary tale about pretense, and being fooled by one's own pride. The emperor does all he can to avoid looking like a fool, and thereby shows himself to be a bigger fool.

I think Obama's got to be one of the least pretentious politicians I've ever seen, and certainly not a fool. If anything, McCain is the "emperor" and Palin is the "clothes" that's he's trying to pass off as credible to save his own pride, but therefore shows himself to be a hypocrite on issues of experience and personal freedom. Making him the biggest fool of all.

[ToucanSpam]

:confused:

You took three quotes out of context, congrats.

And everyone trying to shoehorn the emperor/new clothes analogy: please stop.

[saz]

ah no, i didn't take anything out of context.

[QueenAdrock]

I fail to see how they're out of context. Rob said today that it's great that he can have a political conversation without it degrading into incivility, when yesterday he was being disrespectful himself and calling people idiots.

[ToucanSpam]

ah no, i didn't take anything out of context.

I fail to see how they're out of context. Rob said today that it's great that he can have a political conversation without it degrading into incivility, when yesterday he was being disrespectful himself and calling people idiots.

The first two were directed at a specific individual and acknowledging the fact that there was a lack of respectful discussion, while the latter I don't even recognize. If I'm not mistaken it came before the first two.


Whatever, I'm not going to get into a debate over the arrangement of quotes designed to personally attack someone. I've already said my peace on this issue and I'm here to discuss the candidates politics, not engage in an internet flame war.

[DIGI]

Rob's just one of those people who has to be different. During the primaries, the majority was pro-Obama, Ron Paul, etc., he was up Hillary's ass. Now, since the dust has cleared from that and everyone's diggin Obama, he's sour and making the bold move to cross parties, just to be different. That, to me, is obvious since the only constant factors here are Obama supporters and Rob's need to be the black sheep. Especially, since McCain and Hillary are like polar opposites (good point). It would be a shame to possibly throw your vote away just so you can feel like you're at the back of the bus. (n)

[Documad]

To be fair, Rob has tried to explain his change of heart quite a few times in numerous threads. I haven't been satisfied with the answers, but Rob's tried to explain it to me several times in this forum and he's been patient about my skepticism.

Back when Rob (and I) were supporting Hillary, he seemed open to Obama if he was the nominee. But since then he took a strong dislike to Obama. He seemed to jump wholeheartedly in McCain's camp at the same time. I don't understand it because McCain and Clinton are far apart on issues that matter to me, but everyone doesn't have to vote on my issues. Perhaps Rob just likes the cut of McCain's jib.

Rob is an honest guy. I don't doubt his sincerity. I'm frustrated that I don't understand where he's coming from, but eh, I guess I have to live with that.

[ToucanSpam]

To be fair, Rob has tried to explain his change of heart quite a few times in numerous threads. I haven't been satisfied with the answers, but Rob's tried to explain it to me several times in this forum and he's been patient about my skepticism.

Back when Rob (and I) were supporting Hillary, he seemed open to Obama if he was the nominee. But since then he took a strong dislike to Obama. He seemed to jump wholeheartedly in McCain's camp at the same time. I don't understand it because McCain and Clinton are far apart on issues that matter to me, but everyone doesn't have to vote on my issues. Perhaps Rob just likes the cut of McCain's jib.

Rob is an honest guy. I don't doubt his sincerity. I'm frustrated that I don't understand where he's coming from, but eh, I guess I have to live with that.


I agree with the third section of this as well. I don't understand the connection beyond his dislike of Barack Obama. I am the first to concede that I fully do not grasp each major candidate's campaign promises, but the swift shift confuses me too.


His shift isn't enough to justify more pages and pages and pages of flaming. It's really tiring to read.

[saz]

The first two were directed at a specific individual and acknowledging the fact that there was a lack of respectful discussion, while the latter I don't even recognize. If I'm not mistaken it came before the first two.


Whatever, I'm not going to get into a debate over the arrangement of quotes designed to personally attack someone. I've already said my peace on this issue and I'm here to discuss the candidates politics, not engage in an internet flame war.

your reasoning is incredibly weak. rob asked and essentially called me an "idiot" in another thread, then the next day he's talking about civil respect and maturity. and what difference does it make if those remarks were directed at a specific individual? people should practice what they preach, and not be selective with being respectful or mature. it's not necessarily a big deal nor the end of the world, i don't hold anything against rob. i was just confused, that's all.

[ToucanSpam]

your reasoning is incredibly weak. rob asked and essentially called me an "idiot" in another thread, then the next day he's talking about civil respect and maturity. and what difference does it make if those remarks were directed at a specific individual? people should practice what they preach, and not be selective with being respectful or mature. it's not necessarily a big deal nor the end of the world, i don't hold anything against rob. i was just confused, that's all.

I'm pretty sure TODAY he said the first two quotes in an attempt to move on from previous assaults. Understand? Good. Now let's move on and not address this issue again. If we do I'm breaking out the cricket bat and there's going to be some ass paddling.

[saz]

oh, so a day can make a colossal difference then eh? sorry, but we can all address this issue as much as we like.

[ToucanSpam]

Go ahead, but this thread is supposed to be about politics.

[Knuckles]

If we do I'm breaking out the cricket bat and there's going to be some ass paddling.

Is that a promise big boy (http://bp2.blogger.com/_S56V-eCf0kQ/R0h8vLMIbMI/AAAAAAAAACM/XvIVXf89LYo/s1600-h/jake801.jpg)?

[ToucanSpam]

Is that a promise big boy (http://bp2.blogger.com/_S56V-eCf0kQ/R0h8vLMIbMI/AAAAAAAAACM/XvIVXf89LYo/s1600-h/jake801.jpg)?

Sure it is, but you'll have to take a number.

[Dorothy Wood]

jesus christ toucan, I don't think it's possible for you to get your tongue up rob's ass any farther. so STFU.

*flame*

[DroppinScience]

Toucan,

I give people respect if they actually respect me in return. Rob does not show me, nor anyone else on this board, any respect. His role is to be offensive, while everyone else is on the defensive. He'll have occasional spells of coming off as reasonable, but then will quickly relapse into grade school rhetoric of calling you a "fag," "idiot," "Obamatron," or whatever else comes to mind. I don't know about you, but if he calls me "Lame-bert," I'm not really going to play nice.

Oh yeah, and he doesn't ever read or watch anything that counters his opinion. Which would be all fine and good, except when he tries to refute something, he shows his lack of knowledge that becomes obvious to anyone who actually clicked the link. But this never phases him, he just soldiers on and insults you as if he hasn't been proven wrong and tries to claim the whole world is against him, which is a typical right-wing tactic.

[ToucanSpam]

I don't know why you would think that Dorothy Wood, I've stated quite a few times I disagree with his political views and I completely disagree with this pointless flame battle. I'm not going to get drawn into another argument with you because it's pointless and not relevant to the SUBJECT OF THE THREAD. Which happens to be the Republican candidates, just in case you're wondering. Not how to derive a cheap laugh from me desperately trying to get the thread back on track and act as peacekeeper between the clearly drawn party lines.

[DroppinScience]

I don't know why you would think that Dorothy Wood, I've stated quite a few times I disagree with his political views and I completely disagree with this pointless flame battle. I'm not going to get drawn into another argument with you because it's pointless and not relevant to the SUBJECT OF THE THREAD. Which happens to be the Republican candidates, just in case you're wondering. Not how to derive a cheap laugh from me desperately trying to get the thread back on track and act as peacekeeper between the clearly drawn party lines.

Dude, there's no need to keep the peace. The warring factions will eat you alive. ;)

[RobMoney$]

Damn a lot has been said since I last logged in.

First off, for those of you who may not be aware of the history of this MB, Toucan and I were bitter enemies at one point. I won't dig up the specifics because I think they should remain burried. I think we've both matured a bit since those days and we seem to be communicating on a civil, common ground. Especially in this forum. He recognized it and made a comment about it, and I returned the compliment. It's a major step foward and I'm glad that stuff is behind us.

Secondly, as for Mr. Sazi, here's the full comment I made:

Are you seriously under the assumption that Iran is no threat to Israel or the US? Do you really believe their nuclear program no longer exists?
Fuck, don't tell me you're one of those idiots who believe Ahmadinejad when he says their nuclear program is "for peaceful purposes" and thinks he was misinterpreted when he said Israel should be "wiped off the map"?

As you can see, I wasn't calling YOU an idiot. I was calling people who believed Iran's nuclear program to be for "peaceful purposes" as Ahmadinejad claims, to be idiots. I was basically saying "Please don't tell me you're in that camp of people" because I think anyone who buys that line is a dope.

There's a difference and I apologize if my text wasn't clear enough to my intent.


Third, since no one can understand how anyone can possibly support the anti-christ, McCain. I promise I will attempt to sit down and type out all my reasons.
Like Doc said, I have tried to be as open and honest as I possibly can be over this campaign and made my opinions public practically every day, but if you guys want a summary of sorts and an insight into my thinking, I'm happy to oblige. Give me a little time though. I know I told Doc I would do this before and never really got around to it so I guess it's over due. I want to try to be as clear as possible because I know it'll be scrutinized to death.
I know it will undoubtedly be torn to shreds by everyone, but I don't really care. I don't think anything any of you say will change my mind.

[Bob]

I don't know about you, but if he calls me "Lame-bert," I'm not really going to play nice.


"lame-bert" is kind of funny actually

[Laver1969]

Hey Rob,

I'll do my best to change your mind.

McCain's too old
He has a hot temper
He's a Washington insider that had plenty of time to fix things by now
He doesn't know much about the economy
And the ENTIRE ticket are not experts on the economy

Some may say this is plagiarized so I'll give cite the content as Rob's. :)

[RobMoney$]

Hey Rob,

I'll do my best to change your mind.

McCain's too old
He has a hot temper
He's a Washington insider that had plenty of time to fix things by now
He doesn't know much about the economy
And the ENTIRE ticket are not experts on the economy

Some may say this is plagiarized so I'll give cite the content as Rob's. :)


Ok, I LOL'd (y)

[Dorothy Wood]

I don't know why you would think that Dorothy Wood, I've stated quite a few times I disagree with his political views and I completely disagree with this pointless flame battle. I'm not going to get drawn into another argument with you because it's pointless and not relevant to the SUBJECT OF THE THREAD. Which happens to be the Republican candidates, just in case you're wondering. Not how to derive a cheap laugh from me desperately trying to get the thread back on track and act as peacekeeper between the clearly drawn party lines.

GO BACK TO CANADA, YOU PANDERING HIPPIE!


in all seriousness though, since when has a 10 page thread stayed on track? and why should it?

[QueenAdrock]

SETH'S HAIR!

[RobMoney$]

I am just outraged at this McCain fellow. :mad: Shame on him for thrusting the country into this tizzy over "Moose"olini! Diverting everyone's attention away from his lame, hot-tempered, militant, old ass and onto this woman who hasn't even left the country before a recent trip to Kuwait to visit troops she had only visited Mexico and Canada?! Yeah, wow. It's just gross that the country is falling for this load of bullshit (according to the 'polls' anyhow). Mister McCancer could kick the bucket and we're stuck with her at the wheel!? Boy he sure knows how to 'use' a woman doesn't he? Beginning with dating a stripper, cheating on his wife with a woman who has very deep pockets and political connections to further his career and now this. Get on out there and dance for the people Sarah! Charming.

I'm sure you would have been much happier if he had choosen an old Washington insider who brought absolutely nothing new to the table so the Dems could criticize him for being out of touch and not representing any new change.
McCain has a right to try to win this election too and he choose someone who he thought could bring something new to the table instead of someone stale, like Romney. Be honest, he blew Obama's VP choice out of the water. No one is inspired by Biden, he brings absolutely nothing to that ticket.

So we've got, McCain who doesn't even know how to use Google but sure knows how to play dirty, and a woman who has no real first hand experience with foreign lands. Lovely. It's probably a good thing McCain can't use the internet, I bet he'd go OFF if he read half the shit people are saying online about him.

What foreign experience does Obama have?

To me, a highly cultured and well traveled well educated Senator of 8 years who was president of the Harvard Law Review, became a civil rights lawyer and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School for 12 years IS far better suited to handle our very delicate country of today and lead us into the future. He's in touch with the current state of affairs and has his finger on the true pulse of the nation. He's a family man who seems quite devoted to and respectful of his strong, admirable wife. Not to mention the simple feeling in my gut when I watch him conduct himself with such grace and presidential poise.

How you could even see this any other way is un-fucking-believable.

Maybe you have your info confused Jenny, he was elected to the US senate in '05 and served exactly 143 days before he began campaigning for President. He initiated not one piece of legislation himself. He simply co-sponsored other people's initiatives. In other words, he rode on the coattails and hard work of others. He was groomed for this campaign ever since his days as a community organizer in Chicago.
He was in the Illinois State Senate for 7 years, from '97 to '04, but he was responsible for the South Side of Chicago. It's not like he was managing an entire state's budget, like a Governor would, like let's say Sarah Palin has done for the past 2 years.

And yes, I am biased at this point. But I think you should be by now, we've got only 51 days and 13 hours to go. I went into this back in January as an ignorant zombie American with no opinion, and began to read and watch and have formed my opinion over the course of the year. I did vote for Hillary on super Tuesday but slowly but surely realized the hope and not hate that lies with Obama in charge. He has enormous ability to inspire and motivate positively. Obama even got me to empty my pockets when possible to aid his cause. It became pretty much a slam dunk in the Obama court.

I've been posting regularly in this forum since this campaign began and I don't rememeber you ever posting anything in support of Hillary. Documad was the only other Hillary supporter I can recall, and even she seemed to be a reluctant Hillary supporter.

I cannot wait for the debates. I wanna hear more from Mr. Biden and I hope he eats this Palin character alive.

You're obviously entrenched pretty deep in your support of Obama, but I really don't understand why you think Biden is so great. I'm pretty confident that Palin can hold her own with him.

I'm jennygirl and I approve this message...

I respect the fact that you're so passionate about your candidate, but you'd probably gain more support if you avoided stuff like "McCancer,....
that's not cool.

[jennyb]

Obama has the support of the entire world that we affect so much with our policies... the world's opinion definitely hits me as important. Did you see the treatment he was given on his tour across the sea? Electing McCain at this point would be like giving the middle finger to the planet. I have such confidence in his intelligence and sophistication on a world stage. Having grown up partially in Indonesia and having family in Kenya certainly doesn't hurt IMO.

I wasn't passionate enough about Hillary nor politics in general at that point of my vote. Since then, clearly, given my post of earlier, I have gotten a little 'into it' and borderline obsessed! :o

Given the two choices, McCain or Obama, I'm merely sayin it's a no brainer. Obama is certainly not the messiah nor the most experienced Washington insider, and there's never going to be "The Perfect Candidate"... but Obama's experience and background thus far is far more appealing and 'new'.

Re: Biden, I'd like to know more. I think it's fair to argue the press is favoring Palin coverage. As I watch this CNN special on Palin right now (whom I know too much about already quite frankly) I anxiously await the CNN special on Biden. I saw a few speeches of his that came off as a pitbull without lipstick, so I'm curious to see how he debates Palin for the Obama cause.

...and you're right, "McCancer" isn't cool, but I said it in the heat of the moment, and on the BBMB I'm kinda preaching to the choir (and 1 or 2 like yourself) and more or less venting. But yeah, you called me out! I'm just sayin, Sarah Palin could VERY WELL end up as President given McCain's health record. Far more likely than Biden. Simply due to the age/health factor.

Anyhow, obviously all this hullaballo has my undies in a complete and utter bunch. I almost long for the days when I wasn't aware of all this. It's quite stressful to think about and read and stuff. But to sit within comfy confines of the US border and remain oblivious knowing things I know now, almost seems inhumane. I think it's great we're all talking about this. Regardless of what is said, let's all be aware. I'd love it if every board member came in here and stated their peace, no matter what it is...

[ms.peachy]

Third, since no one can understand how anyone can possibly support the anti-christ, McCain. I promise I will attempt to sit down and type out all my reasons.


I'm not sure if that was directed at me or not, but if it was, I do want to point out, I have never at any time said that I was not capable of understanding why anyone would support McCain, nor do I think of him as an 'anti-christ'.

In fact, in many "real life" conversations with my friends and colleagues here in the UK earlier this year, what I was saying to them was that although I firmly supported Obama, I did not think a McCain victory would necessarily be hugely disappointing. Because, what I felt at the time was that although I strongly disagree with McCain on many important issues, I felt that he was an honest man with a level of integrity I could respect. I did actually have high hopes that maybe, just maybe, this year we could have an election where the debate was elevated, where Americans could regard eachother with some intelligence, and not let things be so ugly.

Yes, I know - that was my own foolishness, I suppose. Having the audacity to hope, and all.

So at this point, the overwhelming feeling I am finding myself experiencing is genuine disappointment with John McCain. OK, so, I wasn't going to vote for him anyway, fair enough that he's not in it to please people like me. But I just don't see the man that I had thought he was anymore. When I see how he has now taken on the same group of advisors that were the camp that brought his chance down in 2000, who said such ugly things about his wife and his daughter, I think "How can I respect this man?" I can't help but wonder how his wife and his daughter feel privately about it. When his campaign manager says flat out "this race isn't about issues, it's about personalities" and he stays silent (which is tacit agreement, as far as I am concerned), I think "What does that say about what John McCain thinks of the American people?" When his selection for VP stands on a platform and in one smarmy swipe denigrates the work of the millions of Americans who work to improve their communities, generally for little or no pay, and he again says nothing, I simply do not know what to think. I can only feel saddened.

But like I said, I allowed that to happen, right? By being so stupid as to think this all could have been any other way.

[RobMoney$]

I'm not sure if that was directed at me or not, but if it was, I do want to point out, I have never at any time said that I was not capable of understanding why anyone would support McCain, nor do I think of him as an 'anti-christ'.


It wasn't directed at you at all. I guess it was pointed at the overwhelming majority of Obama supporters in this forum who are having trouble understanding my support for McCain.

You're one of the least confrontational Obama people here.


Although I firmly supported Obama, I did not think a McCain victory would necessarily be hugely disappointing. Because, what I felt at the time was that although I strongly disagree with McCain on many important issues, I felt that he was an honest man with a level of integrity I could respect. I did actually have high hopes that maybe, just maybe, this year we could have an election where the debate was elevated, where Americans could regard eachother with some intelligence, and not let things be so ugly.

I thought this was one of the most mature opinions I've seen offered here in a long time and it pretty much echoes my sentiment. Only I'm supporting the other candidate.
I would not be upset if Obama were to win, in fact I expect him to win. And I've said that on more than one occassion on this MB.
Like you, I wish more people could see through the campaign smear that McCain=Bush. McCain has a history of bucking his party and Bush on several issues.

[DroppinScience]

McCain has a history of bucking his party and Bush on several issues.

Well, only 10% of the time. Maybe that's good enough for you, but personally I'd be hoping for at least 50/50 to attain "maverick" status.

[Dorothy Wood]

Like you, I wish more people could see through the campaign smear that McCain=Bush. McCain has a history of bucking his party and Bush on several issues.


First, I'd like to say I feel the same as peachy. I was pretty pleased when McCain got the nomination, I used to like him. I don't think he's bucking his party at all now and that's what's concerning. His campaign is a circus and he's allowed that to happen. It's really disappointing.

[100% ILL]

Mcain/Palin The way I see it Mcain did the smartest thing to give himself the best chance of winning the election. I mean it's obvious Hillary had quite a following with women voters and Palin will give his ticket that edge. Also i think she does a good job of looking confident and strong while not wearing a pant suit.

But politics is always pretty much the same. We are better than them etc. It all pretty much boils down to the independant voters mostly. I mean if you're a Starbucks sippin, bi-sexual who is Anti- life you're gonna vote Democrat. And if you're a patriotic American who is Pro-life, and enjoys hunting you'll most likely vote Republican.

Who knows mabey Palin will shoot someone while on a hunting trip.

[Laver1969]

Well, only 10% of the time. Maybe that's good enough for you, but personally I'd be hoping for at least 50/50 to attain "maverick" status.

I did a check on factcheck dot org (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_john_mccain_voted_with.html) and found this.

"According to Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies, in 2007 McCain voted in line with the president's position 95 percent of the time – the highest percentage rate for McCain since Bush took office – and voted in line with his party 90 percent of the time. However, McCain's support of President Bush's position has been as low as 77 percent (in 2005), and his support for his party's position has been as low as 67 percent (2001)."

"Obama's votes were in line with the president's position 40 percent of the time in 2007. That shouldn't be terribly surprising. Even the Senate's Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, voted with Bush 39 percent of the time last year, according to the way Congressional Quarterly rates the votes."

[saz]

just because palin is a woman, doesn't necessarily mean that all women voters will flock to the mccain/palin ticket, considering that palin is a batshit fundamentalist redneck.

oh and yes, everybody who doesn't vote republican obviously drinks starbucks, is anti-life, bisexual, and isn't patriotic. only republicans are patriotic. :rolleyes:

[100% ILL]

just because palin is a woman, doesn't necessarily mean that all women voters will flock to the mccain/palin ticket, considering that palin is a batshit fundamentalist redneck.

oh and yes, everybody who doesn't vote republican obviously drinks starbucks, is anti-life, bisexual, and isn't patriotic. only republicans are patriotic. :rolleyes:


That wasn't an all inclusive list

[Bob]

I did a check on factcheck dot org (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_john_mccain_voted_with.html) and found this.

"According to Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies, in 2007 McCain voted in line with the president's position 95 percent of the time – the highest percentage rate for McCain since Bush took office – and voted in line with his party 90 percent of the time. However, McCain's support of President Bush's position has been as low as 77 percent (in 2005), and his support for his party's position has been as low as 67 percent (2001)."

"Obama's votes were in line with the president's position 40 percent of the time in 2007. That shouldn't be terribly surprising. Even the Senate's Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, voted with Bush 39 percent of the time last year, according to the way Congressional Quarterly rates the votes."

so if you read the graph backwards, mccain's maverick status is actually increasing!

[RobMoney$]

I did a check on factcheck dot org (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_john_mccain_voted_with.html) and found this.

"According to Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies, in 2007 McCain voted in line with the president's position 95 percent of the time – the highest percentage rate for McCain since Bush took office – and voted in line with his party 90 percent of the time. However, McCain's support of President Bush's position has been as low as 77 percent (in 2005), and his support for his party's position has been as low as 67 percent (2001)."

"Obama's votes were in line with the president's position 40 percent of the time in 2007. That shouldn't be terribly surprising. Even the Senate's Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, voted with Bush 39 percent of the time last year, according to the way Congressional Quarterly rates the votes."


These numbers aren't suprising to me at all. I'd expect McCain to alaign himself along party voting lines as it got closer to campaign time. That tells me that he's likely to buck traditional GOP positions BIG TIME once he gets voted in.
You also have to realize that for a fellow GOP'er to be as low as 67% is pretty drastic.

I'm more surprised that Obama voted with Republicans 40% in his 143 days in Senate. Consider that he voted "Present" 130 times and it's even more of an eye opener.

[DroppinScience]

These numbers aren't suprising to me at all. I'd expect McCain to alaign himself along party voting lines as it got closer to campaign time. That tells me that he's likely to buck traditional GOP positions BIG TIME once he gets voted in.
You also have to realize that for a fellow GOP'er to be as low as 67% is pretty drastic.

I'm more surprised that Obama voted with Republicans 40% in his 143 days in Senate. Consider that he voted "Present" 130 times and it's even more of an eye opener.

You're back pedaling. What makes you say he'll revert back to his more "maverick" days if he gets voted in? This is a big leap to take, especially when the Christian fundamentalists and other undesirables now have him in his pocket.

And what's so eye-opening about Obama voting 40% of the time with Bush? That means he's at least 50% more "change" than McCain. You defend McCain for committing more misdeeds and come down on Obama for doing less. How does this work?

[Laver1969]

I'm more surprised that Obama voted with Republicans 40% in his 143 days in Senate. Consider that he voted "Present" 130 times and it's even more of an eye opener.

I just found this...

John McCain: 407 votes missed (63.8%), 231 votes cast
Barack Obama: 290 votes missed (45.5%), 348 votes cast
Hillary Clinton: 206 votes missed (32.3%), 432 votes cast
J. Biden: 193 votes missed (30.3%), 445 votes cast

It looks like everybody misses a lot of votes. I wish I could miss work even 30% of the time like Biden.

[DroppinScience]

I just found this...

John McCain: 407 votes missed (63.8%), 231 votes cast
Barack Obama: 290 votes missed (45.5%), 348 votes cast
Hillary Clinton: 206 votes missed (32.3%), 432 votes cast
J. Biden: 193 votes missed (30.3%), 445 votes cast

It looks like everybody misses a lot of votes. I wish I could miss work even 30% of the time like Biden.

Yeah, and all these people are/were seeking the presidency/VP. It makes me wonder how many out of the 100 Senators show up to vote at any given time? Anyone know the averages?

[ToucanSpam]

You're back pedaling. What makes you say he'll revert back to his more "maverick" days if he gets voted in? This is a big leap to take, especially when the Christian fundamentalists and other undesirables now have him in his pocket.

And what's so eye-opening about Obama voting 40% of the time with Bush? That means he's at least 50% more "change" than McCain. You defend McCain for committing more misdeeds and come down on Obama for doing less. How does this work?


The statistics make the whole "maverick" persona look like a joke. While I don't trust statistics as much as the average Joe, it's a little frightening to see he voted on the side of G.W.B. a staggering 95% of the time last year. He certainly positioned himself well to get access to power.


There's nothing eye opening at all about Obama voting on the side of Bush 40% of the time, of course. There are bound to be particular issues where the two parties (even two individuals) are going to agree. As for the 'he's at least 50% more change than McCain' thing, I don't think that quite works out mathematically. If anything, based on the campaigns thus far, Obama is much more change.


...I have to wonder how much change is really going to happen with either of them in office...

[RobMoney$]

And what's so eye-opening about Obama voting 40% of the time with Bush? That means he's at least 50% more "change" than McCain. You defend McCain for committing more misdeeds and come down on Obama for doing less. How does this work?


Obama is a Democrat, he should be closer to 100% opposite of Bush.
McCain is a Republican, his voting record should reflect that by being more in line with Bush issues, meaning closer to 100% Pro Bush.

It's not very hard to grasp. I'm sure you've watched c-span or seen a Senate vote happen, right.
These things usually go right down party lines, which is why it's so important to have the majority representatives.
Obama voting pro-Bush 40% of the time is surprising to me. I would expect McCain to be around 80-90%, 67% is actually very surprising for a fellow party member to be as opposed as that.

[Bob]

These numbers aren't suprising to me at all. I'd expect McCain to alaign himself along party voting lines as it got closer to campaign time. That tells me that he's likely to buck traditional GOP positions BIG TIME once he gets voted in.

so you see a trend where, over the past 8 years, mccain's political positions have drastically increased to align themselves with bush's, and you choose to interpret this trend to mean that mccain's suddenly going to turn around and go back to the way he was in 2000? based on what?

[QueenAdrock]

I'd expect McCain to alaign himself along party voting lines as it got closer to campaign time.


So let me get this straight... you're trying to say he's voting against what he believes is right just to get votes? And you don't see anything wrong with that? As a senate member, he decides which laws are going to be passed, and he's just voting for political reasons and not following what he believes is best for America?

How is he a 'maverick' again?

[RobMoney$]

Based on the fact that it's pretty common tactic.
I'm sorry, but believing any different or that all politicians are less than honest is just being naive.

[QueenAdrock]

The president has a 77% disapproval rating (the highest in HISTORY), so wouldn't it be MORE popular and give him better ratings to go against Bush in the past few years? I mean, seeing as he's trying super hard to say that he's a maverick who thinks outside the box and reaches across the aisle, why wouldn't he just vote that way so he could point to his record and say "See? I don't agree with Bush." It seems that would be the more popular thing to do. To me, if he DOES vote with Bush, that shows that that's what he truly believes in. Voting with Bush is an attack against him; the Independent and moderate voters he's trying so badly to win over don't want to hear "McCain voted with Bush 95% of the time during the past few years."

Why such a shitty political move on his part? Just to get "the base"? The base isn't going to vote for a "liberal" like Obama either way. There's no reason to win them over. (It's not like he changed any minds of the truly conservative base during the primaries, either - they went for Romney and Huckabee.) Independents and middle-of-the-roaders are the ones who will decide this election, so it makes no sense as to why he'd be adopting the Bush Doctrine for political reasons. Seems more plausible that he'd adopt it because he believes in it.

[DroppinScience]

For better or for worse, Democrats in general have voted with the president more or less half the time (observe voting for the Iraq War, which had approximately half the Democrats joining the nearly 100% of Republicans). Unless your name is Dennis Kucinich, most Dems are going to be closer to 40-50% than they would be to zero. So no, nothing "eye-opening" there.

As for McCain, if he is/was a maverick, why would he choose NOW to align himself closer to the President? Yes, it's election season as you say, but Bush is at his most unpopular right now. This is terrible timing. And McCain is trying to sell to the public how he's promising to be much different than his predecessor in nearly every way. However, his record speaks to the contrary.

Your logic and your cognitive dissonance is also puzzling. First you say he is a maverick and will buck his party and president to do what he thinks is right. When it's proven that his record and rhetoric do not match, you just say: "You're being naive if you think politicians are honest." Which is a cop-out. Yet it is you who is being naive for buying into his rhetoric in the first place. You're aware that he's lying, but you're going to go and enthusiastically support him anyway.

If this is what you have to tell yourself in order to sleep at night, so be it.

[RobMoney$]

The president has a 77% disapproval rating (the highest in HISTORY), so wouldn't it be MORE popular and give him better ratings to go against Bush in the past few years? I mean, seeing as he's trying super hard to say that he's a maverick who thinks outside the box and reaches across the aisle, why wouldn't he just vote that way so he could point to his record and say "See? I don't agree with Bush." It seems that would be the more popular thing to do. To me, if he DOES vote with Bush, that shows that that's what he truly believes in. Voting with Bush is an attack against him; the Independent and moderate voters he's trying so badly to win over don't want to hear "McCain voted with Bush 95% of the time during the past few years."

Why such a shitty political move on his part? Just to get "the base"? The base isn't going to vote for a "liberal" like Obama either way. There's no reason to win them over. (It's not like he changed any minds of the truly conservative base during the primaries, either - they went for Romney and Huckabee.) Independents and middle-of-the-roaders are the ones who will decide this election, so it makes no sense as to why he'd be adopting the Bush Doctrine for political reasons. Seems more plausible that he'd adopt it because he believes in it.

You're kind of showing how young and naive you are with posts like this.

Yes, you can say he voted with Bush 95% of the time.
Or you can say he voted with his party 95% of the time and showed he was in line with their platform.
Bush is not the entire Republican party.
I think you would want to court the people in your own party first before you started trying to court disenfranchised liberal democrats.

You're only looking at it from your point of view and what you would have liked McCain do to gain your vote.

I'm not saying I agree with it, but that's politics and I understand how it works.
If you think Obama voting with Republicans 40% of the time wasn't an intentional ploy to paint him as a middle leaning dem in order to court stray Republican voters, you're blind.

[DroppinScience]

If you think Obama voting with Republicans 40% of the time wasn't an intentional ploy to paint him as a middle leaning dem in order to court stray Republican voters, you're blind.

Harry Reid voted with Republicans 39% of the time. Is he running for President?

[RobMoney$]

I forgot, you're 20something and have all the answers.

I apologize.

[QueenAdrock]

You don't have to court anyone in your own party if they're not going to vote for a Democrat, regardless. When it comes to winning over votes in the general election, the only way to do that is by appealing to the moderates and the Independents, they're the ones who swing the election.

If you're referring to courting to voters during the primary, well, there were people who were a lot more conservative than him that ran along side of him. Obviously, their even STRONGER approval of the Bush Doctrine didn't get them anywhere. They didn't capture the base, McCain did, because he tried explaining that he was "different" and a "maverick" (based on data from 2000, which did not coincide with what he said he was about then). So, he won the primaries by appearing to be more "moderate" than the others, and now he's trying to win the election by appearing to be more "moderate," too. Why vote lock-step with your party, then? If I was an Independent voter, you better believe I'd be worried about someone who voted with the unpopular Republican agenda 95% of the time, ESPECIALLY if he's trying to convince people that he's "bringing reform."

Either way, I'd rather sound young and naive than bitter and old, anytime. I always fear that I'm too pessimistic and showing my age, so hearing that I'm not, that's great. :)

[RobMoney$]

I don't mean to pee in your cheerios QA, but I was talking to Lambert when I said that.

LOL @ you guys answering each others posts though,
That's got to be the height of nerd-dom.

[DroppinScience]

I forgot, you're 20something and have all the answers.

I apologize.

You're 30-something and have none of the answers. :)

[Bob]

I forgot, you're 20something and have all the answers.

I apologize.

you know, you're only 36, you're not exactly a wizened elder yourself here. you've voted for what, 3 more presidents than the young'uns in here, and now you're james carville all of a sudden, you know what goes on behind the shadows?

i'm not saying i'm not naive to the political game, surely there's a lot i don't know but damn man, i'm not sure that the 10 or so extra years you have on us makes you an expert either?

[RobMoney$]

I NEVER tried to say I was an expert, far from it in fact.

But if you can't see through those numbers Laver posted about the voting record of Obama & McCain then I have to call it naive.
If you're under the assumption that politicians are these honest people who are representing the intrests of their constituents all the time and are working their fingers to the bone every minute they're in Washington to better the world, I'm going to call you naive.

And age has nothing to do with life experience.

[Documad]

You're kind of showing how young and naive you are with posts like this.

Yes, you can say he voted with Bush 95% of the time.
Or you can say he voted with his party 95% of the time and showed he was in line with their platform.
Bush is not the entire Republican party.
I think you would want to court the people in your own party first before you started trying to court disenfranchised liberal democrats.

You're only looking at it from your point of view and what you would have liked McCain do to gain your vote.

I'm not saying I agree with it, but that's politics and I understand how it works.
If you think Obama voting with Republicans 40% of the time wasn't an intentional ploy to paint him as a middle leaning dem in order to court stray Republican voters, you're blind.
As I understand politics, many things on the legislative agenda don't get put up for a vote because the potential sponsor knows it won't win a majority or won't win a veto-proof majority. There are some politicians who sponsor legislation knowing that it will not pass, just to make a political point, but that's not the norm. So we see a fair amount of legislation that both sides can agree on. They do head counts ahead of time, work with people in the other party, etc. Much important legislation has been on hold for the past 8 years because of Bush. We don't see national health care measures put up for a vote. We don't see legislation revamping labor laws. We don't see legislation to strengthen the ADA. You can see where I'm going.

For the past two years, democrats have a tiny edge, but not a veto-proof majority. This means that we pass noncontroversial bills, like "let's make June 22 national librarian's day." Obama and McCain and Bush can probably all agree on that. But then on other bills, like giving citizens assault weapons or whatever, McCain and Bush would agree and Obama would not.

I don't find Obama's 40% number at all surprising.

I also think that McCain's 90% number disqualifies him to be a maverick. Unless by maverick you mean that he has an unusually nasty temper for a politician.

[Documad]

So at this point, the overwhelming feeling I am finding myself experiencing is genuine disappointment with John McCain. OK, so, I wasn't going to vote for him anyway, fair enough that he's not in it to please people like me. But I just don't see the man that I had thought he was anymore. When I see how he has now taken on the same group of advisors that were the camp that brought his chance down in 2000, who said such ugly things about his wife and his daughter, I think "How can I respect this man?" I can't help but wonder how his wife and his daughter feel privately about it. When his campaign manager says flat out "this race isn't about issues, it's about personalities" and he stays silent (which is tacit agreement, as far as I am concerned), I think "What does that say about what John McCain thinks of the American people?" When his selection for VP stands on a platform and in one smarmy swipe denigrates the work of the millions of Americans who work to improve their communities, generally for little or no pay, and he again says nothing, I simply do not know what to think. I can only feel saddened.

But like I said, I allowed that to happen, right? By being so stupid as to think this all could have been any other way.

I'm quoting you only by example. Other people also said they were surprised at the recent change in McCain.

I was not surprised. I don't think the change was recent. In 2004, McCain wholeheartedly embraced Bush. He also pandered to the fundies. He sold his soul so that he could have this nomination. It was calculated. It was obvious. Yes, he's marginally better than Romney because at least we can hope that deep in his heart he still thinks that torture is bad policy, even though he buckled when it counted.

He's an old man, and he's had a complicated life. There is a lot to admire in his past. There was also a lot for him to be ashamed of.

[QueenAdrock]

I don't mean to pee in your cheerios QA, but I was talking to Lambert when I said that.

LOL @ you guys answering each others posts though,
That's got to be the height of nerd-dom.

Really? I could have sworn I was replying to this: You're kind of showing how young and naive you are with posts like this.

Wasn't that directed at me? :rolleyes:

Some people grow up a lot faster than others. Age has zero to do with life experience.

And I suppose you know through the limited things that we care to divulge about ourselves online that we have nowhere near the life experience that you do? Don't assume those kinds of things.

[Bob]

I'm quoting you only by example. Other people also said they were surprised at the recent change in McCain.

I was not surprised. I don't think the change was recent. In 2004, McCain wholeheartedly embraced Bush. He also pandered to the fundies. He sold his soul so that he could have this nomination. It was calculated. It was obvious. Yes, he's marginally better than Romney because at least we can hope that deep in his heart he still thinks that torture is bad policy, even though he buckled when it counted.

He's an old man, and he's had a complicated life. There is a lot to admire in his past. There was also a lot for him to be ashamed of.

don't worry, he doesn't mean it, he'll go back to being the good mccain after he wins the election, i can tell.

i can change him

[ToucanSpam]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/race-for-whitehouse/donors-back-obama-with-record-sums-amid-panic-over-palin-930868.html


"The New York Times continued its reporting on Mrs Palin's record in Alaska, revealing yesterday she had given the $95,000-a-year directorship of the Alaska Agriculture Division to a high school classmate, Franci Havemeister. The report said Mrs Palin, claims to be an enemy of "good ol' boy networks", but had also hired four other classmates."

Quick question, not naive, but how do we know Havemeister wasn't the most qualified?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/race-for-whitehouse/us-election-diary-truly-awful-waffles-the-near-russia-house-the-woman-they-had-to-gag-930867.html

A few funny things to think about. is it just me, or is SNL the only place with large enough balls to take shots like this at both parties? Either way it's always a treat to see them do their thing.

[Laver1969]

For the past two years, democrats have a tiny edge, but not a veto-proof majority. This means that we pass noncontroversial bills, like "let's make June 22 national librarian's day." Obama and McCain and Bush can probably all agree on that.

I hate to be a stickler here...but April 16th is always National Librarian Day. (http://www.holidayinsights.com/moreholidays/April/nationallibrarianday.htm) :D

But other than that one minor error you made some great points. (y)

[yeahwho]

.


McCain and Palin are stretching the truth over the smallest minutiae as we post on here every day. Let's be honest, they're lying to the American people (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=mccain%20ads&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn) about items that are not even policy issues. Is this what your looking for in an administration to run your Country and eventually affect your daily life?

I'm not even scratching the surface. If you scratch the surface just a little it begins to get ugly with this John McCain campaign. He may of been a war hero, it sure seems nutty for a POW to be wrapped up in petty bullshit, when will McCain stop with his phony ads and off policy character attacks? They've been proven nationwide on the front page of every major newspaper/media outlet to be lies. WTF? Is he nutty or just wanting to be called out as a liar everyday?

Does anybody realize how fucked up things are right now? I mean it's been a crisis every week for almost 8 years straight. The accumulative effect is beginning to be G force. Crazy Weather, Failing Banks, Treasury Notes on the Brink, Mistaken War, No Bid Contracts, Mortgage Crisis, Torture, First Amendment Rights Suppressed, Voter Suppression, No Habeus Corpus, I could and should go on and on, this administration has attacked us and our constitution.

Why would anybody who calls themselves an American want anything resembling the current disaster in their lives again?

[NoFenders]

Secondly, as for Mr. Sazi, here's the full comment I made:



As you can see, I wasn't calling YOU an idiot. I was calling people who believed Iran's nuclear program to be for "peaceful purposes" as Ahmadinejad claims, to be idiots. I was basically saying "Please don't tell me you're in that camp of people" because I think anyone who buys that line is a dope.

There's a difference and I apologize if my text wasn't clear enough to my intent.




You shouldn't have to apologize for that shit Rob. They do it every day.








:cool:

[NoFenders]

...I have to wonder how much change is really going to happen with either of them in office...


Not as much as they'd have us believe.








:cool:

[NoFenders]

Anyway, I guess I don't get to win $20 today. Maybe next time Dorothy.(y)










:cool:

[ToucanSpam]

You are making the cool smile unusable. Stop it. It's not cool. At all.

[DroppinScience]

A few funny things to think about. is it just me, or is SNL the only place with large enough balls to take shots like this at both parties? Either way it's always a treat to see them do their thing.

I think it's just you. Places like the Daily Show or Colbert Report always bash on both parties in their own ways. Other late-show comedians like Letterman or Leno daily take shots at Bush, Democrats, Republicans, etc. Whatever is ridiculous, comedians take shots at.

[ToucanSpam]

I think it's just you. Places like the Daily Show or Colbert Report always bash on both parties in their own ways. Other late-show comedians like Letterman or Leno daily take shots at Bush, Democrats, Republicans, etc. Whatever is ridiculous, comedians take shots at.

I meant comedy with skits, Brett Lambert! I apologize for not being more specific.

[NoFenders]

You are making the cool smile unusable. Stop it. It's not cool. At all.

unusable??

Are you kids like 12 or something???








:cool:

Here's another one.
:cool:

Fuckin kids. I tell ya. Unusable. LMAO!!

:cool:

Also, being cool on a message board is not my goal in life. Deal with it.

:cool:

[saz]

You shouldn't have to apologize for that shit Rob. They do it every day.

no sorry, i don't hurl insults because someone may see something differently. travesy and i are complete ideological opposites, and we've had some great discussions.

[Dorothy Wood]

Anyway, I guess I don't get to win $20 today. Maybe next time Dorothy.(y)






yeah, I don't have time to meet up. but you can still do the poll, document your interviews then have it notarized at the bank at belmont and broadway where you can also leave my money. I'll pick it up later.

[ToucanSpam]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/signs-that-palin-effect-is-wearing-thin-931811.html

Signs that 'Palin effect' is wearing thin

By Leonard Doyle in Washington
Monday, 15 September 2008


There are growing signs that the "Sarah Palin effect" is starting to wear off and that the Republican candidate John McCain has already peaked.

Democrats took heart from four national opinion polls which show that despite the phenomenal bounce caused by interest in Alaska's Governor Palin, Mr McCain now leads by an average of just 0.25 points, his smallest margin since the convention.

The latest polls come amid a flurry of critical news reports into Mrs Palin which reveal a large credibility about some of her claims to be a squeaky clean reformist. Senator McCain’s claims that his running mate had not sought special interest funding from Congress have been shown to be completely wrong.

It emerged yesterday that she asked US to fund $453 million worth of projects in oil rich Alaska for the past two years. Among the requests was $4.5 million for an airport serving less than 100 people on a Bering sea island and $9 million to help Alaska’s already hugely profitable oil companies.

Democrats quickly mocked the governor as "an earmark queen". The disclosures come on top of evidence that her administration also held onto more than $500 million in US federal funds for a much derided "bridge to nowhere" which she maintains she vetoed.

For two weeks the McCain campaign has wallowed in the media’s obsession with Governor Palin. A huge bounce in the opinion polls followed, with women especially declaring that they were changing their allegiance because they admired her so much.

But that appears to be changing as the focus of the election turns to the economy and especially the northern states. In Iowa new Des Moines register poll has Barack Obama with a comfortable lead of 12 points. He is also ahead in New Jersey, although it is not a battleground state.

Still across traditionally Republican Southern states the surge for the McCain campaign remains strong - he even has a 20 point lead in South Carolina.

In the final weeks of the race for the White House, both sides are stepping up the pace of attack on their adversary.

The traumatic events on Wall Street are expected to provide a focus for the final weeks of the election.

A cacophony of news greets voters every day, including video press releases, blogs, and attack ads on television, on top of newspapers and television. The Obama campaign is also spending tens of millions of dollars on advertising in an effort attempt to dominate the news agenda. The McCain campaign, with less money to spend, relies on cable news channels to give free air time to the attack ads it releases.

The Obama campaign was quick to seize on comments by John McCain in Florida yesterday, which it said portrayed him as fundamentally out of touch with American voters.

Speaking before a "town hall" meeting with supporters, the Arizona senator said that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong" before adding the caution that "these are very, very difficult times and I promise you we will never put America in this position again."

Within minutes of making the remarks, the Obama campaign was at work turning his words against him, preparing attack television ads and issuing talking points for officials who fighting the "ground war" across 50 states.


Obama has quite a bit of money to play with, it seems. If what the article says is true, he should be able to outshine McCain on major networks, etc.



Also, I bolded the thing about Palin because I thought it was incredibly stupid. There's also the 'bridge to nowhere' thing. Anyone know any more about that?

[NoFenders]

no sorry, i don't hurl insults because someone may see something differently. travesy and i are complete ideological opposites, and we've had some great discussions.

I guess it all depends on your defenition of insults. ;)










:cool:

[NoFenders]

yeah, I don't have time to meet up. but you can still do the poll, document your interviews then have it notarized at the bank at belmont and broadway where you can also leave my money. I'll pick it up later.


Very few can truely put their money where their mouth is. It's not a big deal. I understand.








:cool:

[funk63]

You have included 370 images in your message. You are limited to using 5 images so please go back and correct the problem and then continue again.

Images include use of smilies, the vB code [img] tag and HTML <img> tags. The use of these is all subject to them being enabled by the administrator.

[RobMoney$]

You have included 370 images in your message. You are limited to using 5 images so please go back and correct the problem and then continue again.

Images include use of smilies, the vB code [img] tag and HTML <img> tags. The use of these is all subject to them being enabled by the administrator.



Yeah, someone once crashed the entire BBMB by posting dozens of smiley faces in a single post. Shit broke the internet. Admins put a 5 smileyface limit in to fix the issue.

I shit you not.

[NoFenders]

Hey! I only use one. Sometimes two. But mostly one.

I really don't care what anyone thinks. It's personal, and it's not a crime. lol









:cool:

[ToucanSpam]

Yeah, someone once crashed the entire BBMB by posting dozens of smiley faces in a single post. Shit broke the internet. Admins put a 5 smileyface limit in to fix the issue.

I shit you not.

The banhammer was dropped too. Only a temporary one if I am not mistaken.


RobMoney address my articles. ADDRESS THEM.

[RobMoney$]

Sorry Touc, No time for playing political grab-ass with you all tonight.
There's an Eagles-Cowboys game I need to be getting ready for.

Go Birds!

Edit:
Ok, I'll just say that I told you I expected Obama to regain some ground towards the middle of the month as the RNC "bounce" settled down a bit. According to the polls, it's pretty much a tie right now. Pollsters will be switching to the "likely voter" reporting method soon and that could mean a drop for Obama seeing as Republicans typically turn out to the polls more than Dems do.

[kaiser soze]

Palin was going to sue the Federal Gov't over ANWR?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKwZNwdowa4&feature=related

http://www.adn.com/polarbears/story/413710.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSN2145097820080522

palin SAID SHE WOULD SAY NO TO THE V.P. POSITION

flip flopping lying piece of poo

Why would someone vote for a person who's heart isn't truly in it?

Suckers for palin

[Dorothy Wood]

Very few can truely put their money where their mouth is. It's not a big deal. I understand.




uhh, just because I was busy at work and had other plans doesn't mean I didn't "put my money where my mouth is". It means I'm not going to change my schedule to make a $20 bet with a stranger from the internet, even if we do live in the same city.

seriously, go do it. my bet stands. I trust you to be honest.

also, Treasure Island in lakeview isn't really an "average" grocery store and you know that. It's more like Whole Foods, and I'd venture to say that more-educated-than-average people shop there. Why don't you try it out at the Jewel instead?

[ToucanSpam]

http://www.salon.com/comics/knig/2008/09/17/knig/index.html


:D

[Documad]

Palin's husband has announced that he won't comply with a subpoena. It's a dumb political move for a ticket of maverick reformers. It's a dumb move unless Palin has something to hide. What would he know about troopergate anyway? Was he involved in his wife's decisions as governor? It seems that ignoring the subpoena is making this into a bigger story than his testimony would have been.

And now we know that McCain has no economic policy at all.

What a day!

[yeahwho]

I guess that transparency act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Funding_Accountability_and_Transparency_Ac t_of_2006) that McCain worked on with Obama, Coburn and Carpenter doesn't apply to maverick's.