The McCain Thread

[kainedamo]

the reason abortion is a contentious issue is that some believe you're killing a life and others don't. Obviously you don't have an absolute right to do anything you want if there is a conflict with one other's rights or life.

The problem is the woman's desire to control her motherhood conflicts with the fetus's desire to survive. The pro-abortion crowd says the fetus has no rights or isn't really alive, which is the point of contention.

Pay close attention, I'm not arguing whether or not you think the fetus has rights.....we'll disagree.

I despise the argument moral relativists use that NO mortal has the ability to hold any judgment on this issue. the argument is self-defeating, the person making that argument doesn't apply the self-defeating logic to himself and continues to protect a status quo that enforces a belief system that decides the abortion argument.

See, you're using the word enforce - I have to clarify, that Obama and no other Democrat wants to force people to get abortions.

[SentinelMind]

See, you're using the word enforce - I have to clarify, that Obama and no other Democrat wants to force people to get abortions.

By enforcing policies that take abortion issue out of the legislative branch and declare it a constitutional right, he's removing people decision whether abortion should be a practice society approves or accept, he's removing people's right to make an argument that life of those unborn should be protected,and removes people's ability to decide how they want to treat a life or death issue.

Let's see if I can give examples for you to understand.

Kaine, who are you to decide whether its right or wrong to fight a war in Iraq?

Kaine, who are you to decide whether slavery should be abolished? No one is forcing you to have a slave.

Kaine, who are you to decide issues relating to death penalty?

Regardless of how you feel about those issues, how would you feel if someone made argument you are no position to have an opinion on those issues and then pushed the status quo anyway?

[Mikelus]

Guys, seriously, I think is a waste of time to respond to someone who doesn't even understand the difference between scientific theories and religious beliefs.

Regarding abortion, is just controversy to get votes. In most advanced nations is not even a debate, once you give rights you don't take them back, it would be a terrible mistake for the US to ban abortion, I don't think a reasonable person would want to go back to the days of clandestine abortions. The problem with conservative people is that they idealized some "values" instead of being pragmatic, life is complicated, is not black or white, for some reason, the US is much more conservative than other advanced democracies.

[SentinelMind]

Guys, seriously, I think is a waste of time to respond to someone who doesn't even understand the difference between scientific theories and religious beliefs.

Regarding abortion, is just controversy to get votes. In most advanced nations is not even a debate, once you give rights you don't take them back, it would be a terrible mistake for the US to ban abortion, I don't think a reasonable person would want to go back to the days of clandestine abortions. The problem with conservative people is that they idealized some "values" instead of being pragmatic, life is complicated, is not black or white, for some reason, the US is much more conservative than other advanced democracies.

Some may argue the reason America is a super power with wealth, properity, justice, and freedom is because some of those conservative practices, institutions, and values. I sometimes don't understand why liberals want to badly for US to emulate countries that have worse economies and higher crime rate and deliquency.

[Franklin Richards]

Worse economies? Have you seen the news?

Higher Crime Rate? Compare the number of murders in the U.S. to the entire world. Especially violent crimes with guns.

Delinquency? What? Like kids writing their names on water towers?


:doom: :doom: :doom:

[kainedamo]

New McCain ad.

AHQwsxHiaY0

[UA-Archangel]

The president doesn't need to sit down with Chavez.

An ambassador would do just as well, and it's likely that has already happened.

[Mikelus]

Some may argue the reason America is a super power with wealth, properity, justice, and freedom is because some of those conservative practices, institutions, and values. I sometimes don't understand why liberals want to badly for US to emulate countries that have worse economies and higher crime rate and deliquency.

Sorry, but your comment is very ignorant, many conservatives think their country is the best in everything when is not the case. A lot of countries have less crime, less differences between the rich and poor, universal healthcare that works (France, Germany, Scandinavia....), a higher life expectancy, better infrastructures, etc. Google the information, you will discover how the USA is mediocre in many important statistics.

Maybe the problem with conservatives is their lack of knowledge. :o

[kainedamo]

The president doesn't need to sit down with Chavez.

An ambassador would do just as well, and it's likely that has already happened.

I think one got kicked out of Venezuela recently, lol.

The President meeting Chavez would go a long way to improving relations. It's the least the US could do considering the history there.

[UA-Archangel]

Sorry, but your comment is very ignorant, many conservatives think their country is the best in everything when is not the case. A lot of countries have less crime, less differences between the rich and poor, universal healthcare that works (France, Germany, Scandinavia....), a higher life expectancy, better infrastructures, etc. Google the information, you will discover how the USA is mediocre in many important statistics.

Maybe the problem with conservatives is their lack of knowledge. :o

Or perhaps conservative Americans value freedom more than security than others in the world.

Freedom means choice and risk.

[UA-Archangel]

I think one got kicked out of Venezuela recently, lol.

The President meeting Chavez would go a long way to improving relations. It's the least the US could do considering the history there.

Uh no.

It would just be handing Chavez a big propaganda stick, of how the US is willing to bend to Chavez's will.

The only ones a president should be willing to meet are those that are friendly to the US, or have a similar status to the US, like France, China, Russia, Canada, Britain.

[BMM]

Or perhaps conservative Americans value freedom more than security than others in the world.

Freedom means choice and risk.

Which is why they have been so quick to use fear mongering as leverage for political gain...

[UA-Archangel]

Which is why they have been so quick to use fear mongering as leverage for political gain...

Or quick to be try and get Americans to give it up, supposedly for security and better relations in the world.:cwink:

[SentinelMind]

Sorry, but your comment is very ignorant, many conservatives think their country is the best in everything when is not the case. A lot of countries have less crime, less differences between the rich and poor, universal healthcare that works (France, Germany, Scandinavia....), a higher life expectancy, better infrastructures, etc. Google the information, you will discover how the USA is mediocre in many important statistics.

Maybe the problem with conservatives is their lack of knowledge. :o

we're not the best at everything, but we have it pretty damn good.
We have a lower unemployment rate than France and Germany (which typically circulates around 7 to 9 percent....we just reached a recent peak of 6% in like 20 years....for some reason, we seem to have a lower suicide rate than France, Germany, and several other European countries.

I just think some of those features about our institutions that you like to criticize seem to be responsible for our higher living standards.

[UA-Archangel]

we're not the best at everything, but we have it pretty damn good.
We have a lower unemployment rate than France and Germany (which typically circulates around 7 to 9 percent....we just reached a recent peak of 6% in like 20 years....for some reason, we seem to have a lower suicide rate than France, Germany, and several other European countries.

I just think some of those features about our institutions that you like to criticize seem to be responsible for our higher living standards.

If I were from France, I'd commit suicide out of principle.

[kainedamo]

Uh no.

It would just be handing Chavez a big propaganda stick, of how the US is willing to bend to Chavez's will.

The only ones a president should be willing to meet are those that are friendly to the US, or have a similar status to the US, like France, China, Russia, Canada, Britain.


Why?

I mean, why not send a big positive message to a few supposedly "rogue" nations that the US is willing to improve relations? If meeting the Prez gives Chavez a propeganda tool in his own nation, who cares? What matters is the relations between the two nations. Posturing and arrogance are irrelevant.

[UA-Archangel]

Why?

I mean, why not send a big positive message to a few supposedly "rogue" nations that the US is willing to improve relations? If meeting the Prez gives Chavez a propeganda tool in his own nation, who cares? What matters is the relations between the two nations. Posturing and arrogance are irrelevant.

Then the president should meet with me, for all the real significance it would be worth.

That's why the US has a secretary of state, so that the US can meet with the little powers and not waste the president's time.

[kainedamo]

Then the president should meet with me, for all the real significance it would be worth.

That's why the US has a secretary of state, so that the US can meet with the little powers and not waste the president's time.

Repairing relations around the world is a waste of time?

[UA-Archangel]

Repairing relations around the world is a waste of time?

That's not the president's job.

That is the secretary of state's job.

The president is too busy running a country to be bothered with that.

[BMM]

Or quick to be try and get Americans to give it up, supposedly for security and better relations in the world.:cwink:

...so you agree with me. :o :woot:

[kainedamo]

That's not the president's job.

That is the secretary of state's job.

The president is too busy running a country to be bothered with that.

But the President meets up with world leaders all the time.

If the President thinks it is important, then they would make time.

[UA-Archangel]

...so you agree with me. :o :woot:

I'll agree with anybody who thinks the Dems would rather surrender than fight.

[UA-Archangel]

But the President meets up with world leaders all the time.

If the President thinks it is important, then they would make time.

He meets with those on friendly terms or have good reasons to do so.

There is nothing good to be gained to be liked by Venezuala.

[UA-Archangel]

However, if Chaves stopped acting like a dork and started being friendly towards the us and established, through proper channels, good relations...

Then the president might have 15 minutes to spare.

[SentinelMind]

The responsibility of the leader of a country is to manage and protect that country....not to win a popularity contest with other countries that have interests that conflict with ours. Having a good relationship (we're talking countries here.....not siblings)....with other countries is a good goal if its consistent with our own interest, but it should not a priority if it is againts our own interest.

[sinewave]

I'll agree with anybody who thinks the Dems would rather surrender than fight.

surrender to who?

[UA-Archangel]

surrender to who?


Where shall I start?

Vietnam, Russia, Venezuala, Iran, Canada, Antarctica, Ellesmere Island.

The list goes on.

[sinewave]

Where shall I start?

Vietnam, Russia, Venezuala, Iran, Canada, Antarctica, Ellesmere Island.

The list goes on.

i was looking for a serious answer, but i guess i expected too much.

[BMM]

surrender to who?

Spain.

[sinewave]

Spain.

makes sense. i love their rice. :dry:

[comicgirl]

Obama mocks McCain's call to fire SEC chair
http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photo/_new/080919-obama-530a-hmed.hmedium.jpghttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26779387/





Sniff-Sniff...........phew,Desperation - The New Fragrance by John McCain....




Oh, John McCain of 2000, I miss you.

[Gilpesh]

I :heart: The Daily Show

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8932/circulartalkexpresswe9.jpg

[comicgirl]

McCain Running Scared; Cancels Interview With Larry King/CNN


http://bloggerinterrupted.com/2008/09/mccain-running-scared-cancels-cnn-interview-with-larry-king

[StorminNorman]

Yes - because when I think of fierce interviewers, I think Larry King. :huh:

Is it possible he canceled for a large number of actual reasons? :huh:

[jaguarr]

Since God isn't a registered voter to the best of my understanding, I think the people should be able to make that decision and make arguments on whether abortion should or shouldn't be acceptable, and it shouldn't be thrown down by others who proclaim "no one is qualified to decide...........except us"

The people HAVE made a decision. It's called Roe vs. Wade.


My contention is he's making the argument no one else is qualified to decide, whereas he's deciding.

Then McCain is ALSO making the argument no one else is qualified to, as he's also deciding. So, again, what is your point? You're beating Obama up for the same things McCain could be beat up for, really. In the end, it comes down to an ideological difference and which stance you agree with personally. But don't make up B.S. reasons to bash Obama on the subject; just own the fact that you disagree with his stance and be done with it. Considering the audience he had to answer that question in front of (The Saddleback Crowd), there's no good answer Obama could have come up with in those folks' eyes other than "all abortion is bad", which is what they want to hear out of their candidates. Given the circumstances, his answer was actually rather smart and, frankly, quite humble. The difference between the two is that one wants people to be able to make their own decisions regarding the issue without government interference, the other wants government to regulate what choices people have with regards to their own bodies.

jag

[jaguarr]

Yes - because when I think of fierce interviewers, I think Larry King. :huh:

Is it possible he canceled for a large number of actual reasons? :huh:

I seem to remember the McCain Campaign's official reason for McCain canceling with King was because Campbell Brown treated Tucker Bounds unfairly by asking him reasonable questions and calling him out when he tried to B.S. her.

jag

[Mikelus]

Most of the best places in the world to live are European, Western Europe has a better quality of life, transport, better health care, higher life expectancy, etc. The USA has higher poverty rates than Western Europe, violence, crime, etc, etc.....

McCain is becoming a real joke, what a disgrace. Obama went to Fox and McCain is afraid of Larry?! :whatever:

[danoyse]

I did just read that McCain will be appearing on Letterman on 9/24.

[sinewave]

Most of the best places in the world to live are European, Western Europe has a better quality of life, transport, better health care, higher life expectancy, etc. The USA has higher poverty rates than Western Europe, violence, crime, etc, etc.....

McCain is becoming a real joke, what a disgrace. Obama went to Fox and McCain is afraid of Larry?! :whatever:

how dare you suggest that the USA! is inferior in any way to any other country! :dry:

[danoyse]

how dare you suggest that the USA! is inferior in any way to any other country! :dry:

I'm leaving the US in two weeks, and I can't wait. :woot:

(I'll be back a week later, though)

[jaguarr]

I did just read that McCain will be appearing on Letterman on 9/24.

Let the "I was a POW" Counter betting pool commence!

jag

[sinewave]

I'm leaving the US in two weeks, and I can't wait. :woot:

(I'll be back a week later, though)

if we let you back in! :cmad:

[The Senator]

Where shall I start?

Vietnam, Russia, Venezuala, Iran, Canada, Antarctica, Ellesmere Island.

The list goes on.

Funny how the Democrats were the ones to send us into Vietnam and get us entangled in that mess, and its funny how the Republicans were the ones to get us out of that mess. So blaming the Democrats for "surrender" in Vietnam is not only historically inaccurate, but absolute fiction.

Russia? The Democrats do not want to surrender to Russia. They want to avoid reigniting the Cold War while we stretch our military beyond its limits in Iraq and Afghanistan. They want to avoid a showdown with a ruthless dictator-- you know, that guy they call "Vladimir Putin." I hear he's a real ass hole. OH-- and that Russia has nuclear weapons and might not be afraid to use them.

Venezuela? No Democrats want to surrender to Venezuela. If anything, the majority of Democrats want us to end our relationship with Venezuela, our most prominent relationship: THE OIL TRADE. But the funny thing is, we won't be able to do that if we have a president who is more focused on keeping us on oil than moving us towards sustainable alternative energies.

Iran? The Democrats would rather sit down and put all of our options on the table before we decide to drop the bomb on another country which has NOTHING to do with this so-called "war on terror." The Democrats want to avoid a perceivable nuclear holocaust in the Middle East by negotiating with Iranian officials and ensuring that the nuclear program the Iranians are pursuing maintains a peaceful use. Meanwhile, John McCain does not want to meet with these people, he thinks sanctions and threats are going to do the job. But sanctions aren't going to do a damn thing, considering the Iranian government is fairly wealthy and can trade with other entities if it must. And threats? The Iranian government, especially Ahmadinejad, wants us to attack. They want to scapegoat us and our relationship with Israel to ignite the next World War-- one fought with nuclear arms, with Israel at the center.

Yeah-- the Democrats, in modern times, want us to stop this global penis measuring and actually show some humility and diplomacy in our foreign policy. Because this "bomb first, never ask questions" mentality isn't working for us, and it will not work for us in the foreseeable future with ANY of those countries mentioned above.

Talk about scapegoating a political party with no basis to your accusations.

[The Senator]

I did just read that McCain will be appearing on Letterman on 9/24.

But he's not a celebrity, mind you. :whatever:

[Franklin Richards]

"he'll put a boot in your ass."


:doom: :doom: :doom:

[Gilpesh]

Maher just decoded McCain's blink Morse code:

"I really don't know anything about the economy but.... THE OTHER GUY IS BLACK! I'm running against a black man! If you vote for him, there will be a BLACK PRESIDENT!"

:hehe:

[Hobgoblin]

That's not the president's job.

That is the secretary of state's job.

The president is too busy running a country to be bothered with that.

Isnt one of the President's titles also First Diplomat?

I'll agree with anybody who thinks the Dems would rather surrender than fight.

Wait wait wait. Havent Democrartic presidents also "started" several wars?
-Wilson got us into WW1.
-Roosevelt got us into WW2.
-Truman got us into Korea (Eisenhower got us out).
-Kennedy was at least concerned about Vietnam, and Ford (eventually) got us out.
-Clinton sent troops to Somalia and Kosovo.
-Reagan pulled us out of Beirut after the barracks bombing.

Of course, after listing all of that, I expect Democrats wont be called surrender monkeys as much as war mongers. :rolleyes:

[Franklin Richards]

That's not the president's job.

That is the secretary of state's job.

The president is too busy running a country to be bothered with that.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xZwrteFNic4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xZwrteFNic4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


:doom: :doom: :doom:

[The Senator]

If I were from France, I'd commit suicide out of principle.

That is an incredibly moronic comment, thank you for adding such an insightful philosophy to this thread. :whatever:

[The Senator]

can we please stop turning every thread into a debate on abortion? Seriously-- I thought we set aside a thread for that topic.

[BMM]

I did just read that McCain will be appearing on Letterman on 9/24.

That could be interesting.

[Marx]

can we please stop turning every thread into a debate on abortion? Seriously-- I thought we set aside a thread for that topic.

There is an abortion thread. I'll bump it for those who might not have seen it.

[danoyse]

But he's not a celebrity, mind you. :whatever:

No, not at all. Did you hear Andrew Sullivan's comments about him on Bill Maher tonight?

Letterman has not been kind in recent weeks to McCain or Palin, so this could get interesting.

[Hobgoblin]

can we please stop turning every thread into a debate on abortion? Seriously-- I thought we set aside a thread for that topic.

Yes, lets stay on topic.

[The Senator]

No, not at all. Did you hear Andrew Sullivan's comments about him on Bill Maher tonight?

I was only semi-paying attention to Bill Maher tonight, so I don't recall what he said.

[danoyse]

I was only semi-paying attention to Bill Maher tonight, so I don't recall what he said.

Sullivan said that he's known John McCain for a long time--although he doesn't know this current incarnation that's running for President--and said that he hangs out with more celebrities and high rollers than anyone else in Washington.

He also called Sarah Palin "a farce" and the idea of either of them in charge is terrifying.

And this was the conservative person on the panel tonight.

[Hobgoblin]

Sullivan said that he's known John McCain for a long time--although he doesn't know this current incarnation that's running for President--and said that he hangs out with more celebrities and high rollers than anyone else in Washington.

He also called Sarah Palin "a farce" and the idea of either of them in charge is terrifying.

And this was the conservative person on the panel tonight.

He was in Wedding Crashers, too. So its not like he's a celebrity in his own right. Not like that empty rock star, Barack Obama. :cwink:

[Mr Sparkle]

UA Archangel seems really uninformed.
I mean, I'm not being an ass here he just see,s genuinely uninformed, I speak as a fellow foreigner out of concern more than derision.

[danoyse]

He was in Wedding Crashers, too. So its not like he's a celebrity in his own right. Not like that empty rock star, Barack Obama. :cwink:

McCain's also hosted SNL. Guess there were no elitists in that cast.

[UA-Archangel]

i was looking for a serious answer, but i guess i expected too much.

With the exception of Ellesmere Island, it was a perfectly serious answer, if you knew the history of the US.

[UA-Archangel]

Isnt one of the President's titles also First Diplomat?

First diplomat to first-rate countries, sure.

Venezuala is not exactly a first rate country



Wait wait wait. Havent Democrartic presidents also "started" several wars?
-Wilson got us into WW1.
-Roosevelt got us into WW2.
-Truman got us into Korea (Eisenhower got us out).
-Kennedy was at least concerned about Vietnam, and Ford (eventually) got us out.
-Clinton sent troops to Somalia and Kosovo.
-Reagan pulled us out of Beirut after the barracks bombing.

Of course, after listing all of that, I expect Democrats wont be called surrender monkeys as much as war mongers. :rolleyes:

Modern Democrats ain't your grandfather's democrats.

[UA-Archangel]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xZwrteFNic4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xZwrteFNic4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>


:doom: :doom: :doom:

So, aside from the comedy aspect, most presidents take a fair amount of time off.

[UA-Archangel]

That is an incredibly moronic comment, thank you for adding such an insightful philosophy to this thread. :whatever:

Anything I can do to be helpful.

[UA-Archangel]

can we please stop turning every thread into a debate on abortion? Seriously-- I thought we set aside a thread for that topic.

When you do a topic on a presidential candidate's beliefs and qualifications, abortion is a perfectly valid sub-topic to discuss.

[UA-Archangel]

UA Archangel seems really uninformed.
I mean, I'm not being an ass here he just see,s genuinely uninformed, I speak as a fellow foreigner out of concern more than derision.

I know well enough.

Disagreements is not due to a lack of knowledge on my part.

[souvlaki]

This been posted yet?


McCain camp rebuffs Fox request

John McCain's campaign is rejecting a demand from Fox News that they remove the voice of correspondent Major Garrett from a new web video.

In the video, called "Nothing New," Garrett notes Obama's refusal to take a stance on the bailout of insurance giant AIG.

An attorney for Fox wrote in a cease-and-desist letter to McCain's campaign, obtained by my colleague Michael Calderone, that such usage was unacceptable.

"As Mr. Garrett is a nonpartisan news correspondent covering the Obama campaign for Fox News, it is highly inappropriate, among other things, of your campaign to use him in your ad," wrote Dianne Brandi, a senior vice president for legal and business affairs at the cable station.

McCain counsel Trevor Potter, however, wrote back in a letter sent tonight that the campaign would not alter the video.

"We respectfully disagree with your suggestion that the Nothing New ad somehow portrays Mr. Garrett (who is not even identified) as anything other than a nonpartisan news correspondent covering the campaign," Potter wrote in a letter obtained by Politico.

The upshot of the back-and-forth is that it ensures more people will likely see a video which the campaign launched on a busy, news-filled day and isn't spending money on to broadcast on TV. If, that is, McCain's campaign can get it back up on YouTube. The old link is now dead due to "a copyright claim by Fox News Network LLC."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/McCain_camp_rebuffs_Fox_request.html

Why piss off the only news station that is supportive of you? I don't get it.

[kainedamo]

They've managed to piss off fox - wow :wow:

[Superman]

This been posted yet?



http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/McCain_camp_rebuffs_Fox_request.html

Why piss off the only news station that is supportive of you? I don't get it.I doubt this will piss off FOX. If anything this is just what they both want. Fox puts on this act that they don't like the ad and McCain puts up an act of defiance and they both get what they want. McCain gets the ad seen by more people and Fox gets to look "Fair and Balance".:whatever:

[kainedamo]

Narrator in new McCain ad says "Iraq Obama" instead of Barack Obama...

Aq7DGTggpx0

It's towards the end. Maybe I'm just nuts but it definately sounds like 'Iraq Obama'.

[rdh007]

I'm sure they'll start calling him Hussein soon. They've got nothing to offer and they're desperate.

[Hobgoblin]

Narrator in new McCain ad says "Iraq Obama" instead of Barack Obama...

Aq7DGTggpx0

It's towards the end. Maybe I'm just nuts but it definately sounds like 'Iraq Obama'.

The speaker didnt enunciate the B very well, but he said Barack.

[jaguarr]

Hey, guys, did Spain surrender to us, yet?

jag

[Superman4ever]

A reformer, huh? A "Mavrick (http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/3499/idjuthc0.png)", even!


The Picture McCain Doesn’t Want You to See

http://static1.firedoglake.com/28/files//2008/09/mccainhat.jpg

Remember this great post bmaz did last week? Remember this really damning picture of McCain celebrating his birthday with Charles Keating, the villain of the last big taxpayer bailout of unrestrained Republican greed? Here's the article where bmaz got that photo (download the whole pdf from The Phoenix Gazette, September 12, 1993).

Apparently, that's a picture and an article that have been all-but buried, until bmaz got a hold of it.

I guess McCain didn't want any proof out that there he's been helping big money rip off taxpayers for his entire career.

And that he looks like an idiot doing it.

Tell us again, Senator McCain, about your integrity and independence from the fat cats and lobbyists who cooked the laws that created this financial fiasco, or about your fitness to lead us out of it. I'm all ears.


Page 4 of the Gazzette can be found here! (http://static1.firedoglake.com/28/files//2008/09/mccainkeating.pdf)

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/19/the-picture-mccain-doesnt-want-you-to-see/

[jaguarr]

LMAO! WTF is he wearing on his head in that picture, Supes? :funny:

jag

[lazur]

A reformer, huh? A "Mavrick (http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/3499/idjuthc0.png)", even!



Page 4 of the Gazzette can be found here! (http://static1.firedoglake.com/28/files//2008/09/mccainkeating.pdf)

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/09/19/the-picture-mccain-doesnt-want-you-to-see/

So because Keating was at his birthday party, it means McCain was helping 'big money rip off taxpayers for his entire career.'

Does this then mean that because Obama was associated with a terrorist, he is also a terrorist?

I'm not understanding the 'connection' in either scenario. Perhaps you could help me to understand since McCain was cleared of any wrong-doing. And thanks in advance...

[Marx]

Hey, guys, did Spain surrender to us, yet?

jag

Not that I am aware of...but if John McCain has his way... :whatever:

[SentinelMind]

The people HAVE made a decision. It's called Roe vs. Wade.

So when Obama was referring to higher paygrade, he meant the US Supreme Court? :huh: And a body of nine justices hardly represents "the people".



Then McCain is ALSO making the argument no one else is qualified to, as he's also deciding. So, again, what is your point? You're beating Obama up for the same things McCain could be beat up for, really. In the end, it comes down to an ideological difference and which stance you agree with personally. But don't make up B.S. reasons to bash Obama on the subject; just own the fact that you disagree with his stance and be done with it. Considering the audience he had to answer that question in front of (The Saddleback Crowd), there's no good answer Obama could have come up with in those folks' eyes other than "all abortion is bad", which is what they want to hear out of their candidates. Given the circumstances, his answer was actually rather smart and, frankly, quite humble. The difference between the two is that one wants people to be able to make their own decisions regarding the issue without government interference, the other wants government to regulate what choices people have with regards to their own bodies.

jag

My point isn't about disagreement over abortion, its about Obama gave a cop out answer is inconsistent with his own practices. If you support abortion, ok, but be consistent in your position and the logical implications of that principles, that's what law is all about. If Obama had just been consistent, he should have just said he doesn't think life begins at conception or that if he personally believes life begin at conception, its still not a reason to ban abortion. Instead he pretends he's giving a hands off approach to the issue, which is the best way to assert the status quo that you want to protect.

McCain says he's personally pro-life but he's been consistent in saying he thinks that should be decided by states and that the people should decide, just like he thinks gay marriage should be decided by states. He's pretty much federalist on those controversial social issues and to best of my knowledge never pushed forth a national-sized mandate on those issues.

[rdh007]

So because Keating was at his birthday party, it means McCain was helping 'big money rip off taxpayers for his entire career.'

Does this then mean that because Obama was associated with a terrorist, he is also a terrorist?

I'm not understanding the 'connection' in either scenario. Perhaps you could help me to understand since McCain was cleared of any wrong-doing. And thanks in advance...

Until we all agree (and follow through on that promise) to stop bringing up Ayers and Keating, this sort of thing will have to continue.

[Superman4ever]

wJThPjvscFs&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/20/85055/0190/606/604527

Lobbyists are good...decent people!

[Superman4ever]

Economists choose Obama more than 2 to 1 over McSame. (http://econ4obama.blogspot.com/2008/06/other-list-mccains-economists.html)

[sinewave]

With the exception of Ellesmere Island, it was a perfectly serious answer, if you knew the history of the US.

then i can't take you seriously, because you sound like a moron.

[Superman]

wJThPjvscFs&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/20/85055/0190/606/604527

Lobbyists are good...decent people!Only the ones running his campaign are "good decent people", All the others are bad people.:whatever:

[danoyse]

SNL's Weekend Update had a funny dig at McCain tonight when reporting about his aide saying he was responsible for the Blackberry. Amy Poehler said "the aide then handed his Blackberry to McCain, who attemped to withdraw $20 from it."

:lmao:

[Gilpesh]

Dan, too bad we have to wait another week for Fay's Palin again.

[ShadowBoxing]

McCain - "Is Obama really giving tax cuts to pedophiles?"
Aid - "Well technically we can't say for sure how many people are pedophiles, so it would be factual to claim at least one or two pedophiles would receive tax cuts"

[danoyse]

I doubt Tina Fey is going to show up for SNL every week though. Isn't "30 Rock" filmed in LA?

I'm sure we'll see her after the debate.

[Gilpesh]

I heard she is doing it next week and possibly the week after.

[The Senator]

Does this then mean that because Obama was associated with a terrorist, he is also a terrorist?.

It seems to be the sort of connection conservative-leaning posters here, as well as the McCain campaign, is trying to make. If McCain hadn't been so vicious in his criticisms against Obama's associations, then maybe this wouldn't be an issue.

I personally agree that a candidate's past associations should not be relevant, unless that candidate's associations have played a crucial role in this campaign. Ayers, Liddy and Keating are unimportant because they are not prominent surrogates, if they could even be considered surrogates.

However, if someone else is going to point out one candidate's associations, then I feel it is our civic duty to point out the opposition's associations. Bringing up Jeremiah Wright, for example, should be rightfully countered with Todd Palin. Fair is fair.

[danoyse]

Nice. :up:

I wonder if Obama will make up for the appearance he missed last week, or if they'll get McCain to appear.

[Shifty]

I doubt Tina Fey is going to show up for SNL every week though. Isn't "30 Rock" filmed in LA?

I'm sure we'll see her after the debate.

30 Rock is filmed in NY, but the Emmys are on Sunday and her show has the most nominations.

[The Senator]

Nice. :up:

I wonder if Obama will make up for the appearance he missed last week, or if they'll get McCain to appear.

Well, if Obama appears, that means he's an arrogant celebrity.

If McCain appears, that means he's 'reaching out to voters.'

[danoyse]

Well, if Obama appears, that means he's an arrogant celebrity.

If McCain appears, that means he's 'reaching out to voters.'

I would love for that to happen, because everyone will remind McCain that he hosted SNL a few years back. :up:

[comicgirl]

Yes - because when I think of fierce interviewers, I think Larry King. :huh:

Is it possible he canceled for a large number of actual reasons? :huh:with less than 2 months to go????????? You tell me, guy:grin:

McCain Confuses National Guard and Army.....and Palin's Son

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/giant-gaffe-mccain-confus_b_127918.html


......WTF???!?.....someone check his meds, STAT!!!

[UA-Archangel]

The people HAVE made a decision. It's called Roe vs. Wade.

And people can always make another decision and change their minds.

[Marx]

Nice. :up:

I wonder if Obama will make up for the appearance he missed last week, or if they'll get McCain to appear.

John McCain did appear at the opening of SNL.





(Well...a Darrel Hammond inspired John McCain appeared. :cwink:)

[Marx]

with less than 2 months to go????????? You tell me, guy:grin:

McCain Confuses National Guard and Army.....and Palin's Son

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/giant-gaffe-mccain-confus_b_127918.html


......WTF???!?.....someone check his meds, STAT!!!


:facepalm:

[Mr Sparkle]

And people can always make another decision and change their minds.

then they should put it to a vote so the people decide :up:
and not the politicians and judges.
and everyone OVER the age of 45 is excluded from the vote.
(because having kids over that age is dangerous for the kid)
then, the PEOPLE would be able to decide what is best for them.

:yay:

[UA-Archangel]

then they should put it to a vote so the people decide :up:
and not the politicians and judges.
and everyone OVER the age of 45 is excluded from the vote.
(because having kids over that age is dangerous for the kid)
then, the PEOPLE would be able to decide what is best for them.

:yay:


Then you agree, regardless of your actual position on abortion, that the politicians and judges who originally decided on behalf of the people, were wrong.

Democracy is democracy, everybody of the age of majority gets a say.

[jaguarr]

So when Obama was referring to higher paygrade, he meant the US Supreme Court? :huh: And a body of nine justices hardly represents "the people".

No. Again, the question was "When do you think life begins?", not "Do you think abortion is wrong?". Saying that particular question was above his pay grade was a nuanced way of saying that was something only God could answer. Considering that Obama is a constitutional lawyer, had the question been "Do you think abortion is wrong?" he probably would have referenced the Fourteenth Amendment.


My point isn't about disagreement over abortion, its about Obama gave a cop out answer is inconsistent with his own practices. If you support abortion, ok, but be consistent in your position and the logical implications of that principles, that's what law is all about. If Obama had just been consistent, he should have just said he doesn't think life begins at conception or that if he personally believes life begin at conception, its still not a reason to ban abortion. Instead he pretends he's giving a hands off approach to the issue, which is the best way to assert the status quo that you want to protect.

He didn't give an answer that's inconsistent with his own practices. Obama is pro-CHOICE...meaning that he doesn't feel it's his or the government's place to decide what a woman can or can't do with her body, and saying that deciding when life begins is not his judgment to make, either. His answer is actually VERY consistent with his stance on the subject. VERY.


McCain says he's personally pro-life but he's been consistent in saying he thinks that should be decided by states and that the people should decide, just like he thinks gay marriage should be decided by states. He's pretty much federalist on those controversial social issues and to best of my knowledge never pushed forth a national-sized mandate on those issues.

Uhhh....McCain has bounced all over the damn place on the subject of abortion. He's the one who's highly inconsistent when it comes to that subject and he's managed to alienate people on both sides of the aisle with some of his takes on it. Sorry.

And people can always make another decision and change their minds.

It's called the Fourteenth Amendment. Read up on it. :)

jag

[UA-Archangel]

It's called the Fourteenth Amendment. Read up on it. :)

jag

Nothing is locked in stone. There is always the possibility that another amendment could be added that overturns prior amendments.

If there is the possibility that activists could convince the supreme court, or congress to overturn the second amendment, than there's no reason to believe that the fourteenth is somehow written in stone. :)

[The Senator]

Nothing is locked in stone. There is always the possibility that another amendment could be added that overturns prior amendments.

If there is the possibility that activists could convince the supreme court, or congress to overturn the second amendment, than there's no reason to believe that the fourteenth is somehow written in stone. :)

The Fourteenth Amendment will NEVER be overturned. And there will never be an amendment to the Constitution which would overturn abortion. There is not enough support in the Senate for such an amendment to pass.

[Matt]

The Fourteenth Amendment will NEVER be overturned. And there will never be an amendment to the Constitution which would overturn abortion. There is not enough support in the Senate for such an amendment to pass.

Even if there were, it wouldn't change. Why would any Republican want to get rid of their ace in the hole?

[Marx]

Even if there were, it wouldn't change. Why would any Republican want to get rid of their ace in the hole?

Exactly.

[jaguarr]

Nothing is locked in stone. There is always the possibility that another amendment could be added that overturns prior amendments.

If there is the possibility that activists could convince the supreme court, or congress to overturn the second amendment, than there's no reason to believe that the fourteenth is somehow written in stone. :)

I think jman and Matt have sufficiently handed you your own ass over the subject. :)

jag

[rdh007]

Even if there were, it wouldn't change. Why would any Republican want to get rid of their ace in the hole?

I've seen good, honest people I respect vote for Bush because of that. It sickens me.

[jaguarr]

with less than 2 months to go????????? You tell me, guy:grin:

McCain Confuses National Guard and Army.....and Palin's Son

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/giant-gaffe-mccain-confus_b_127918.html


......WTF???!?.....someone check his meds, STAT!!!

No, no, no. Under the Bush Doctrine, the National Guard is now the new Army. The National Guard is no longer the first defense for our own soil, they are overseas in a foreign land being utilized as an occupying force, which is what the Army is for. So, the National Guard is the new Army. Duh! All I know is that, if I was in the Boy Scouts at the moment, I'd be worrying about being deployed to Iraq at the rate the Republicans are going.

Yeah, okay, McCain is falling apart at the seams.

jag

[Superman4ever]

Has anyone seen the McCain SNL skit?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/21/63316/4624/805/605329


:D

[ShadowBoxing]

Has anyone seen the McCain SNL skit?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/21/63316/4624/805/605329


:D
Yeah, it was funny.

[SentinelMind]

No. Again, the question was "When do you think life begins?", not "Do you think abortion is wrong?". Saying that particular question was above his pay grade was a nuanced way of saying that was something only God could answer. Considering that Obama is a constitutional lawyer, had the question been "Do you think abortion is wrong?" he probably would have referenced the Fourteenth Amendment.

Perhaps that's how he would have answered, but I fail to see how Fourteenth Amendment has anything to do with abortion.



He didn't give an answer that's inconsistent with his own practices. Obama is pro-CHOICE...meaning that he doesn't feel it's his or the government's place to decide what a woman can or can't do with her body, and saying that deciding when life begins is not his judgment to make, either. His answer is actually VERY consistent with his stance on the subject. VERY.

If there is any doubt in your mind as to when life begins, wouldn't it make sense to err on the side of life? You're openly admitting that you think you could be killing life but are not sure about. Don't you want a leader who is 100% he's not terminating a life, who's not gray on this life and death issue?

There is only two logical possibilites: (1) Obama believes life doesn't begin at conception....or (2) that it does, but its not still reason enough to ban abortion. If you are unsure as to when life begins, you have to then admit you think its possible you are terminating a life when carrying out an abortion. Of course, as a politician who's trying to appeal to religious voters, he's not going to come out and say life doesn't begin at conception or that its ok to terminate a life before its born. So he gives this cop-out "who am I to decide" answer, but then supports a status quo that allows millions to decide the issue. He's trying to angle that no one has the authority to make a moral argument about abortion, and then continues to protect a status quo. It's hypocrisy at its finest.



Uhhh....McCain has bounced all over the damn place on the subject of abortion. He's the one who's highly inconsistent when it comes to that subject and he's managed to alienate people on both sides of the aisle with some of his takes on it. Sorry.

I'll admit he's not a pro-life crusasder, but only thing I've heard is him saying he's personally pro-life (he's ok with some exceptions) but that it should be a state's right issue.

[jaguarr]

Has anyone seen the McCain SNL skit?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/21/63316/4624/805/605329


:D

Haha! I don't watch SNL anymore because it sucks, but they've done a great job with their opening skits the last two weeks. Daily Kos made a good point about this skit, too, to the McCain Campaign: once SNL has parodied your campaign tactics so effectively it might be time to try something else because no one who's seen that SNL skit is going to take you seriously anymore with the over the top ads.

jag

[jaguarr]

Perhaps that's how he would have answered, but I fail to see how Fourteenth Amendment has anything to do with abortion.


:lmao:

Okay, I'm done discussing this with you.

jag

[SentinelMind]

:lmao:

Okay, I'm done discussing this with you.

jag

hmm..well, I'm glad we've all seen the light. :cwink:

[Mr Sparkle]

Then you agree, regardless of your actual position on abortion, that the politicians and judges who originally decided on behalf of the people, were wrong.

Democracy is democracy, everybody of the age of majority gets a say.

it get's tricky because Roe Vs Wade was about a "right" that was previously denied and not voted on.
so you'd have to agree that the mere fact that Roe vs Wade existed ( in your view) was wrong from the beginning.
cuz things tend to come full circle on ya like that :cwink:

[ShadowBoxing]

UA-A, our Democracy is not majority rule.

[sinewave]

I've seen good, honest people I respect vote for Bush because of that. It sickens me.

ditto. i remember almost having to chew my own tongue off at a family gathering before the '04 election when i overheard my father-in-law and his good friend discussing their opinions on the candidates and who they would vote for and both agreed they liked bush over kerry due to their stances on the "moral issues", i.e. abortion and gay marriage. i just wanted to scream, "is this war moral to you?!?" they're good people, hell, my father-in-law is one of the warmest, most giving people i've ever met, but it's a shame that people like that can be swayed by a wedge issue like abortion, when i know for a fact they'd side with the democrats on basically every other issue.

[Marx]

DEMS SEIZE ON MCCAIN'S 13 CARS
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/21/dems-seize-on-mccains-13-cars/





(So that's 7 houses, 13 cars...)

[Superman]

ditto. i remember almost having to chew my own tongue off at a family gathering before the '04 election when i overheard my father-in-law and his good friend discussing their opinions on the candidates and who they would vote for and both agreed they liked bush over kerry due to their stances on the "moral issues", i.e. abortion and gay marriage. i just wanted to scream, "is this war moral to you?!?" they're good people, hell, my father-in-law is one of the warmest, most giving people i've ever met, but it's a shame that people like that can be swayed by a wedge issue like abortion, when i know for a fact they'd side with the democrats on basically every other issue.
Ask them how long have they been waiting for the republicans to actually do something about the "moral issues" that they are so worried about. Haven't they figured out yet that just because the republicans say they want to end Roe vs Wade doesn't mean that they are actually going to do anything about it?

It's just a wedge issue for the republicans to get votes with. They no more want to get rid of Roe vs Wade than the Dems do. They had control of the White House and Congress for over 6 years and they did nothing to end Roe vs Wade.

People who want to reverse Roe vs Wade are just being used by the republicans.:o

[StorminNorman]

DEMS SEIZE ON MCCAIN'S 13 CARS
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/21/dems-seize-on-mccains-13-cars/





(So that's 7 houses, 13 cars...)

Ugh - between this, the houses, the fact McCain can't look up porn on the interweb, Obama being a muslim, Obama being a citizen of Kenya, etc. etc.

I am getting to the point where I really, really can't wait for this election to be over.

At least then we could have the fun with race riots or assassination attempts. :up:

[ShadowBoxing]

At least then we could have the fun with race riots or assassination attempts. :up:
That's not even remotely funny. Don't joke about that.

[Marx]

Ugh - between this, the houses, the fact McCain can't look up porn on the interweb, Obama being a muslim, Obama being a citizen of Kenya, etc. etc.

I am getting to the point where I really, really can't wait for this election to be over.

At least then we could have the fun with race riots or assassination attempts. :up:

I'm hoping the issues take the forefront of the conversation once the debates start...

[Matt]

Anyone watching 60 Minutes? McCain interview is on right now. He's not doing so horrible right now. He's actually giving straight answers, not dodging questions.

[StorminNorman]

That's not even remotely funny. Don't joke about that.

:whatever:

[StorminNorman]

I'm hoping the issues take the forefront of the conversation once the debates start...

I'm hoping - not expecting. :csad:

[ShadowBoxing]

:whatever:I know you think you're being snarky and clever, but that's not...not even slightly.

[StorminNorman]

I know you think you're being snarky and clever, but that's not...not even slightly.

Is it NOT a valid point? Is it wrong for me to bring up the fact that after this hell of an election we have equally hellish problems facing the President - because it's exactly what the reality is.

If Obama does not win this election, it is very possible we will face race riots - for months now we have been hearing enlightened educated people write about how if Obama doesn't win this election its a proof of racism. African American Communities will be upset and outraged.

If Obama does win the election we have the ever present threat of a racist extremist with a gun.

Its a wonderful "****ed if you do, ****ed if you don't" situation - the only fitting conclusion to such a painful, disgraceful, disappointing Presidential election run by two people I don't want to see lead this nation.

[ShadowBoxing]

Is it NOT a valid point? Is it wrong for me to bring up the fact that after this hell of an election we have equally hellish problems facing the President - because it's exactly what the reality is.

If Obama does not win this election, it is very possible we will face race riots - for months now we have been hearing enlightened educated people write about how if Obama doesn't win this election its a proof of racism. African American Communities will be upset and outraged.

If Obama does win the election we have the ever present threat of a racist extremist with a gun.

Its a wonderful "****ed if you do, ****ed if you don't" situation - the only fitting conclusion to such a painful, disgraceful, disappointing Presidential election run by two people I don't want to see lead this nation.
The fact that you'd even entertain the thought of men getting assassinated or people rioting is atrocious. I have no allusion about the history of events in this country, but it strikes me as those who want to harp on things like "assassination" or "race riots" are just attempting to create some self-fulfilling prophecy. It reminds me of when national news networks run stories like "terrorist could [should] attack nuclear facilities and destroy an entire state".

[StorminNorman]

The fact that you'd even entertain the thought of men getting assassinated or people rioting is atrocious. I have no allusion about the history of events in this country, but it strikes me as those who want to harp on things like "assassination" or "race riots" are just attempting to create some self-fulfilling prophecy.

So I should stick my head in the sand and pretend that every day is wonderful, that no evil people walk the world and the future is sure to be a better time?

Please - come on, I am far to intelligent than that. Do I want either to happen? Of course not, but am I going disillusion myself in hopes that if I don't believe it can ever happen - it won't? No. I left that sort of thinking in Elementary School.

[ShadowBoxing]

So I should stick my head in the sand and pretend that every day is wonderful, that no evil people walk the world and the future is sure to be a better time?

No but you shouldn't joke about it as if it's some matter of fact topic, like the weather. Guess what, massive Hurricanes are real too, but I'd consider a comment like "hey at least if the hurricane hits us, we'll have an interesting weekend" pretty offensive too. For some of us the idea of a dead President, McCain or Obama, really hits home, and it's not a topic to be treated lightly especially when our history has been tainted by it in the past.

[StorminNorman]

No but you shouldn't joke about it as if it's some matter of fact topic, like the weather. Guess what, massive Hurricanes are real too, but I'd consider a comment like "hey at least if the hurricane hits us, we'll have an interesting weekend" pretty offensive too. For some of us the idea of a dead President, McCain or Obama, really hits home, and it's not a topic to be treated lightly especially when our history has been tainted by it in the past.

If I offended you fine, it wasn't my intention - but I am not going to apologize, nor do I think I was out of line.

To borrow from your example - I live on the Gulf Coast in Florida and have to deal with Hurricanes yearly, I wouldn't be at all offended by that statement.

[fifthfiend]

So I happened across this:

http://www.contingencies.org/septoct08/mccain.pdf

"Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation."

Oh man, good times.

[danoyse]

Anyone watching 60 Minutes? McCain interview is on right now. He's not doing so horrible right now. He's actually giving straight answers, not dodging questions.

I was watching the closing ceremonies at Yankee Stadium. :csad:

[ShadowBoxing]

I watched them too.

[danoyse]

I was at the game on Thursday night--we brought my 8-month-old nephew just to take his picture at the old stadium. I got one of him with Jeter in the background. Saw a lot of people doing the same thing.

[ShadowBoxing]

I'm a Red Sox fan, but it's sad to see the stadium Ruth built go.

[danoyse]

I'm a huge Yankees fan (obviously), but I would feel the same regarding Fenway, considering its history. People were actually peeling paint chips off the walls on the way out on Thursday night.

It's going to be so weird going to the new stadium next year.

[jaguarr]

How can you people talk about Yankee Stadium when we are at war with Spain?!!! :huh:

jag

[jaguarr]

How can you people talk about Yankee Stadium when we are at war with Spain?!!! :huh:

jag

[danoyse]

How can you people talk about Yankee Stadium when we are at war with Spain?!!! :huh:

jag

Well, I can't see Spain from the Bronx, so I'm not sure what's going on there...

[Marx]

How can you people talk about Yankee Stadium when we are at war with Spain?!!! :huh:

jag

Well, I can't see Spain from the Bronx, so I'm not sure what's going on there...

:funny:

[gap5ewl]

How can you people talk about Yankee Stadium when we are at war with Spain?!!! :huh:

jag

It's the same reason why we talk about Paris Hilton when we're at a war with Iraq. :o

[jaguarr]

Well, I can't see Spain from the Bronx, so I'm not sure what's going on there...

Haha! :D

jag

[Mr Sparkle]

I was watching the Emmy's
am I the only one with a girlfriend here?

[ShadowBoxing]

I saw Colbert get snubbed for Rickles, so I turned it off. Bastardos.

[redfirebird2008]

Anyone watching 60 Minutes? McCain interview is on right now. He's not doing so horrible right now. He's actually giving straight answers, not dodging questions.

He was doing fine up until the part where he busted out with the dead soldier's dog tags and said, "This is what being President is all about." That was shameful pandering in my opinion.

[Hobgoblin]

I'm a huge Yankees fan (obviously), but I would feel the same regarding Fenway, considering its history. People were actually peeling paint chips off the walls on the way out on Thursday night.

It's going to be so weird going to the new stadium next year.

It would be nice if people had that kind of sentiment here in Chicago. I think if Wrigley were to be torn down, the South Side would arrive en mass to pee on the rubble. :cmad:

So I should stick my head in the sand and pretend that every day is wonderful, that no evil people walk the world and the future is sure to be a better time?

Please - come on, I am far too intelligent for that. Do I want either to happen? Of course not, but am I going disillusion myself in hopes that if I don't believe it can ever happen - it won't? No. I left that sort of thinking in Elementary School.

There you go, I fixed it for you, intelligent one. :hehe: And your quote about assassinations and riots was tasteless.

[Mr Sparkle]

yeah, it's weird how no one was concerned about riots when Bush won the first time.
I guess it's cuz the white folk aren't dangerous or nothing like the coloreds are.

Jeeeeeesh I live in THIS world, THIS is the world I live in.

[Mr Sparkle]

yeah, it's weird how no one was concerned about riots when Bush won the first time.
I guess it's cuz the white folk aren't dangerous or nothing like the coloreds are.

Jeeeeeesh I live in THIS world, THIS is the world I live in.

[UA-Archangel]

The Fourteenth Amendment will NEVER be overturned. And there will never be an amendment to the Constitution which would overturn abortion. There is not enough support in the Senate for such an amendment to pass.

Yet.

[The Senator]

Yet.

No. There will never be enough members of Congress to support a full ban on abortion.

There needs to be sixty-six Senators in order to pass a constitutional amendment banning abortion. There are roughly forty-five Senators who consider themselves "pro-life" in the current Congress, and that number will decrease after November by at least two, if not upwards of six.

There simply aren't enough votes, and there never will be sixty-six votes in favor of a constitutional amendment banning abortion. And even if such an amendment did pass, it would be protested and sent to the Supreme Court, where the decision will be in the Court's hands (as it should anyway, considering it was a Supreme Court decision which made abortion legal throughout this country). And it would not reach the minimum number of states needed to ratify such an amendment anyway, considering such an amendment would need the support every state John Kerry won in 2004... and I just don't see that happening.

Hell, Congress is likely to be controlled by Democrats for at least another decade, and there is absolutely no chance that the Democratic-controlled Congress will allow such an amendment to get onto the Senate floor for a full vote. It isn't going to happen, it NEVER will happen.

[bunk]

He was doing fine up until the part where he busted out with the dead soldier's dog tags and said, "This is what being President is all about." That was shameful pandering in my opinion.

That bothered me too. It doesn't even make sense. Talking to the mothers of soldiers who've passed is what being President is about?

[danoyse]

I saw Colbert get snubbed for Rickles, so I turned it off. Bastardos.

It's OK, did you hear what Colbert said in the press room afterwards:

http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/21/stewart-and-colbert-raise-spirits/

He was also asked who he would cast to play John McCain and Sarah Palin (the questions in the press room are not necessarily very smart) and he recommended Don Rickles as McCain. As for Palin, Colbert said he could play her “because I too have absolutely no business being vice president.” Ouch! And that’s coming from a (faux) conservative commentator.

:lmao:

[ShadowBoxing]

Yeah, it's funny.... Better luck next year.

[Marx]

MCCAIN AIDE: NYT NOT A LEGIT NEWS SOURCE
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13733.html





(Look's like they are keeping up the fight against the 'elite media'. :whatever:)

[jaguarr]

Damn you, Zapatero!!!!!!! :cmad:

jag

[Marx]

Damn you, Zapatero!!!!!!! :cmad:

jag

Well, you know...all of those Mexican countries... :hehe:

[Marx]

MCCAIN WOULD BANISH WH POLITICAL OFFICE
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13710.html





(Karl Rove's comments against John McCain are making a little more sense now.)

[Raiden]

MCCAIN AIDE: NYT NOT A LEGIT NEWS SOURCE
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13733.html





(Look's like they are keeping up the fight against the 'elite media'. :whatever:)

I guess McCain would consider the Fox-owned Wall Street Journal to be a "legit news source", then. :whatever:

[danoyse]

I guess McCain would consider the Fox-owned Wall Street Journal to be a "legit news source", then. :whatever:

And the NY Post.

[Marx]

And the NY Post.

You cannot forget the Post! :oldrazz:

[sinewave]

Ask them how long have they been waiting for the republicans to actually do something about the "moral issues" that they are so worried about. Haven't they figured out yet that just because the republicans say they want to end Roe vs Wade doesn't mean that they are actually going to do anything about it?

It's just a wedge issue for the republicans to get votes with. They no more want to get rid of Roe vs Wade than the Dems do. They had control of the White House and Congress for over 6 years and they did nothing to end Roe vs Wade.

People who want to reverse Roe vs Wade are just being used by the republicans.:o

good point. maybe i'll mention that if the topic of the election comes up in the near future.

[sinewave]

MCCAIN WOULD BANISH WH POLITICAL OFFICE
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13710.html





(Karl Rove's comments against John McCain are making a little more sense now.)

that's nice to hear. i have a feeling he'll regret picking palin as his running mate because things like this make it apparent that he's trying to draw in more moderates and independents but then when you look at his age and the fact that the far-right palin would take over for him in the unfortunate event of him passing on during his presidency, that's going to scare a lot of people off.

[jaguarr]

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/09/22/jpinkerton_0922/

September 22nd, 2008 1:30 PM Eastern
McCain Will Win If He Takes on Illegal Immigration

Let’s not kid ourselves: John McCain’s campaign is behind, and he is running out of time. But there is still hope, if McCain will embrace an issue that’s been neglected: Illegal immigration.

It’s not McCain’s fault that he is behind. Indeed, he is running remarkably well in what so far has been a remarkably bad Republican year. McCain was smart to abandon his flirtation with the Greenhouse Gas Greens and instead to follow Newt Gingrich’s pro-growth advice on the “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” agenda. And McCain made a great base-energizing choice in vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

But it still might not be enough to put McCain over the threshold, given the weakened economy, the feeling that America is on the wrong track, and the natural sense that, after eight years of a Republican in the White House, it’s “time for a change.” And did I mention the Wall Street meltdown? Once again, McCain has shown sharp populist-political instincts; the Arizonan is much more animated and energetic than Barack Obama in describing the crisis, but the reality that Americans are being asked to commit a trillion or more dollars to fix Wall Street will surely weigh heavily on the party that holds the White House.

And so it’s a miracle that McCain is only a couple of points behind — according to the RealClearPolitics polling average. But while a couple of points might be a small margin, plenty of candidates have lost by small margins. Some Republicans talk hopefully, albeit cynically, about the “Bradley Effect” that will help McCain, but it is also the case that Obama is likely to have a much better voter-turnout—some call it vote fraud—operation to boost his chances.

The presidential candidates are looking forward to Friday’s debate in Oxford, Miss., which is supposed to be about foreign policy and national security. But you can bet that Obama will do his best to pivot the discussion away from national security, back toward the economy. Obama is likely to say, for example, “Senator McCain, thanks to the Bush-McCain war policy, we are deficit-spending $12 billion a month on roads, bridges, and schools for Iraq, while Iraq piles up a huge oil-price-spike surplus. We need that money right here at home, not over there.” And that sort of American-nationalistic talk will play well, especially as Americans absorb the news that foreign banks will be beneficiaries of the big Wall Street bailout.

So what to do?

One Republican has a good suggestion: At Friday’s debate, McCain should make a pivot of his own, connecting foreign policy, national security, and domestic policy—and thus get back to illegal immigration. Marc Rotterman, a Republican media strategist who has worked in local, state, and national races for the past 30 years, is direct: “Insert the issue of border security, and American Sovereignty, into the debate. In a time of war, border security is national security. Not only will McCain energize his Republican base,” Rotterman predicts, “he will also be more likely to capture Reagan Democrats, and Hillary Clinton Democrats, in key swing states.” But what about the Hispanic vote? “Plenty of Hispanics support tougher border security,” the North Carolinian responds, “and the issue of crime, drugs, and gangs impacts all voters.”

But of course, McCain has supported “comprehensive immigration reform” in the past, working with the likes of Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) to give amnesty to tens of millions. How then could McCain swing around on immigration, from a dovish stance on borders to a hawkish stance? Rotterman answers by recalling the revised opinion of the Republican presidential nominee: “Senator McCain has already stated, ‘First, we must secure the border.’”

By making border security a national security issue, “McCain would be highlighting Obama’s extreme left wing view—that illegal aliens are entitled to driver’s licenses.” And that’s unacceptable to most Americans, who recall that 16 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were in possession of fraudulent driver’s licenses, allowed them to get on passenger aircraft to kill 3,000 Americans.

“This is an underlying issue that has not been highlighted by either candidate,” Rotterman continues. “What the average American family wants is border security by a date certain.”

Indeed, there’s already legislation, the “Fence By Date Certain Act,” spearheaded by Rep. Peter King (R-NY), ranking Republican on the Homeland Security Committee; it calls for a fence to be built by June 30, 2009. This Fence by Date Certain Act has gained 56 sponsors, even with zero help from the Bush Administration, the Democratic Congressional leadership, or the Republican Congressional leadership.

“The American people, by a wide majority, inherently trust Senator McCain with the security of this nation,” Rotterman concludes. “By combining border security and national security, he plays to his strength as the next Commander in Chief of the United States.”

Hmmm...

jag

[Mr Sparkle]

wouldn't that reverse a stance he held not 2 years ago? making him the king of all flip floppers?

[jaguarr]

wouldn't that reverse a stance he held not 2 years ago? making him the king of all flip floppers?

That's kind of what I was thinking when I read the article. He'd just get called out for reversing his stance on yet ANOTHER issue, all the name of just getting elected. I think this could be used against him to great effect if he pursued it.

jag

[sinewave]

By making border security a national security issue, “McCain would be highlighting Obama’s extreme left wing view—that illegal aliens are entitled to driver’s licenses.”

Hmmm...

jag

that's not true, is it?

[jaguarr]

that's not true, is it?

Yeah, actually it is, and if he doesn't soften his stance on it it could hurt him. Gray Davis lost California for a similar stance on that very same issue.

jag

[The Senator]

Let me get this straight:

As the economy is about to go under, as gas prices are surging back to record highs, as millions of Americans are losing their jobs, as we continue to fight a war which most Americans are against, as we continue to make provocative statements towards countries such as Iran, Russia, and Spain (!), as we are approaching a crucial point in our history where we need to get off of all forms of oil, as we face a health care crisis... the Republicans are going to take the non-issue of illegal immigration and are not only going to try to put it at the forefront of the campaign, but they're going to do so by forcing McCain to turn his back on the stance he held two years ago when he SPONSORED a bill with a fairly moderate approach to illegal immigration reform? :huh:

The GOP is INSANE.

[jaguarr]

Let me get this straight:

As the economy is about to go under, as gas prices are surging back to record highs, as millions of Americans are losing their jobs, as we continue to fight a war which most Americans are against, as we continue to make provocative statements towards countries such as Iran, Russia, and Spain (!), as we are approaching a crucial point in our history where we need to get off of all forms of oil, as we face a health care crisis... the Republicans are going to take the non-issue of illegal immigration and are not only going to try to put it at the forefront of the campaign, but they're going to do so by forcing McCain to turn his back on the stance he held two years ago when he SPONSORED a bill with a fairly moderate approach to illegal immigration reform? :huh:

The GOP is INSANE.

Yup. I saw an article headline on Google News that has since disappeared (am trying to find it) that said McCain's already started bringing up immigration again in his speeches. Why is it that Republicans are forever in search of that ultimate wedge issue rather than just addressing the damn issues at hand that really need attention?

jag

[The Senator]

Yup. I saw an article headline on Google News that has since disappeared (am trying to find it) that said McCain's already started bringing up immigration again in his speeches. Why is it that Republicans are forever in search of that ultimate wedge issue rather than just addressing the damn issues at hand that really need attention?

jag

I think it is because wedge issues tend to be more personal to some people. Issues such as gay marriage, abortion, and illegal immigration appeal to someone's social beliefs. It riles them up when they hear about two queers tying the knot in San Francisco. It riles them up when they hear about an evil Mexican searching for better opportunities-- er, excuse me, stealin' er jerbs! :cmad:

Many voters aren't capable of understanding issues such as economic reform, alternative energies, or the Bush doctrine. But they know what "gay marriage" and "illegal immigration" are, and they surely have strong stances towards those issues. Bucktooth B. Redneck doesn't care about ethanol subsidies, but he certainly cares if Adam and Steve can get married, or if Julio Sanchez wants to seek better economic opportunities for his family.

[jaguarr]

This country has been taken over by the retards and morons, jman.

jag

[The Senator]

This country has been taken over by the retards and morons, jman.

jag

Considering we have gotten rid of elitist morons and retards such as Rick Santorum and George Allen, I can only hope that we are on a long "retard and moron purge" within the electorate.

[Marx]

wouldn't that reverse a stance he held not 2 years ago? making him the king of all flip floppers?

That's kind of what I was thinking when I read the article. He'd just get called out for reversing his stance on yet ANOTHER issue, all the name of just getting elected. I think this could be used against him to great effect if he pursued it.

jag

Let me get this straight:

As the economy is about to go under, as gas prices are surging back to record highs, as millions of Americans are losing their jobs, as we continue to fight a war which most Americans are against, as we continue to make provocative statements towards countries such as Iran, Russia, and Spain (!), as we are approaching a crucial point in our history where we need to get off of all forms of oil, as we face a health care crisis... the Republicans are going to take the non-issue of illegal immigration and are not only going to try to put it at the forefront of the campaign, but they're going to do so by forcing McCain to turn his back on the stance he held two years ago when he SPONSORED a bill with a fairly moderate approach to illegal immigration reform? :huh:

The GOP is INSANE.

Come on, guys. It's only called flip-flopping when a Democrat does it. When the Republicans do it it is called tweaking their beliefs. Haven't you figured out this little game yet? :whatever:

[The Senator]

Come on, guys. It's only called flip-flopping when a Democrat does it. When the Republicans do it it is called tweaking their beliefs. Haven't you figured out this little game yet? :whatever:

Actually, you're right.

Sort of like how Mitt Romney supported gay marriage and abortion rights, then changed his views a year before he ran for president. That was an "evolution" of his political beliefs. Same thing with Sarah Palin, supporting the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it.

But when Barack Obama claims he is against off shore drilling, then says he might be open to the idea... that is a flip flop.

[Knives]

MCCAIN AIDE: NYT NOT A LEGIT NEWS SOURCE
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13733.html






(Look's like they are keeping up the fight against the 'elite media'. :whatever:)

Of course he's bashing them becuase they did thier job and reported FACTS. FACTS which he did NOT refute, even as he bashes the paper.

[sinewave]

Yeah, actually it is, and if he doesn't soften his stance on it it could hurt him. Gray Davis lost California for a similar stance on that very same issue.

jag

yeah, i remember the flap over this when spitzer wanted to issue licenses to illegal immigrants last year and clinton wouldn't speak out against it. obama should have learned his lesson from that.

[Marx]

Actually, you're right.

Sort of like how Mitt Romney supported gay marriage and abortion rights, then changed his views a year before he ran for president. That was an "evolution" of his political beliefs. Same thing with Sarah Palin, supporting the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it.

But when Barack Obama claims he is against off shore drilling, then says he might be open to the idea... that is a flip flop.

Exactly man.

[sinewave]

Yup. I saw an article headline on Google News that has since disappeared (am trying to find it) that said McCain's already started bringing up immigration again in his speeches. Why is it that Republicans are forever in search of that ultimate wedge issue rather than just addressing the damn issues at hand that really need attention?

jag

because they realize their stances on the real issues go against what the majority of the american voters want. they're looking out for the rich only and have to lie and squirm to get the ignorant lower and middle-class voters to side with them. that's my theory anyway.

[jaguarr]

Found the other article:

http://www.necn.com/Boston/Politics/McCain-Obama-took-a-hike-on-immigration-reform/1222097218.html


2 hours 38 min 40 sec ago
McCain: 'Obama took a hike' on immigration reform

(NECN) - Addressing the crowd at an Irish American town hall meeting in Scranton, Pennsylvania, Republican presidential candidate John McCain spoke on his history of reaching across the aisle in the Senate to work for appropriate immigration reform.

McCain worked with Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy, a Democrat, on this proposal.

"We cannot have a continuing situation were there are 12 million people in this country illegally and broken borders," McCain said.

McCain then offered the three main parts of the proposal:

-- "Having our borders secured, we must secure our borders secured not just from illegal immigration -- but also because we have to stop the flow of illegal drugs."

-- "We have to give people a path to citizenship, based on the principal that they cannot have priority over anyone who came to this country legally or waited to come to this country legally."

-- "A temporary worker program that is truly temporary, that has to do with a tamper prove biometric documents."

McCain called the working relationship with Kennedy a fragile one, that sometimes forced him to make a tough stand against his constituents.

"To preserve that fragile coalition, I sometime had to take votes which were not popular; Senator Kennedy took votes that were not popular. Senator Obama took a hike," McCain said.

He then said that Obama supported an amendment that could have ended a temporary worker program in America.

At
the end of McCain's speech, he shook hands with Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman, who could be heard lauding McCain's dig at Obama.

"Take a hike," Lieberman said. "That was (inaudible)!"

*Lieberman ended his comment with a huge smile and a fist pump, but the word he said -- if any -- was inaudible.

Listen to the joke McCain opened with by Clicking Here.


So, yep. They're warming up and fine tuning their immigration talking points before Friday.

jag

[Marx]

Found the other article:



So, yep. They're warming up and fine tuning their immigration talking points before Friday.

jag

Anything to distract voters from the real issues in this election. :whatever:




(I'm waiting for the GOP to invoke gay marriage and abortion...again.)

[Gilpesh]

McCain can't type because of POW injuries... but can grill on the Rachel Ray show?

:whatever:

[The Senator]

McCain can't type because of POW injuries... but can grill on the Rachel Ray show?

:whatever:

Well, uh, you see, holding a spatula and tongs don't require any, um-- I mean, typing is so, uh--

HE WAS A POW! HOW CAN YOU QUESTION HIM???! :cmad:

[Knives]

McCain conference call BACKFIRES:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13747.html

Good to see they have no idea of what the hell they are talking about. Morons.

[sinewave]

McCain conference call BACKFIRES:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13747.html

Good to see they have no idea of what the hell they are talking about. Morons.

man, they're desperate!

[kainedamo]

Here guys, I'm looking for a collection of links from news sources that are all about McCain's ads lying.

[Marx]

Here guys, I'm looking for a collection of links from news sources that are all about McCain's ads lying.

Have you tried any of the 'elite media' websites? You know - CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, Huffington Post, Politico, Washington Times, New York Times, (or the newest member) FOX News?

[jaguarr]

McCain conference call BACKFIRES:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13747.html

Good to see they have no idea of what the hell they are talking about. Morons.

:lmao: Steve Schmidt is the Grand Marshall of the Lying Jackass Parade. :D

jag

[redfirebird2008]

:lmao: Steve Schmidt is the Grand Marshall of the Lying Jackass Parade. :D

jag

No, that would be his mentor, Karl Rove.

[Marx]

No, that would be his mentor, Karl Rove.

No no no Firebird...Karl Rove was LAST YEAR's marshall! Geez man, get it right! :cmad:

[jaguarr]

Here's another one. I'm seeing these stories about this conference call gone wrong popping up all over the place, all of a sudden. I think the McCain Campaign's contentious relationship they have chosen with the press is biting them in the ass:

http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/09/22/mccain-aide-blows-gasket-rips-new-york-times/

McCain aide blows gasket, rips New York Times
By Jimmy Orr | 09.22.08

There are many ways to get things done in the world of diplomacy. You can kill ‘em with kindness, or you can just try to kill ‘em.

On a conference call today with reporters on the topic of the New York Times, John McCain strategist Steve Schmidt chose option B.

It’s not as though Schmidt and the New York Times were once like Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston – the two never took long walks in the park, giggling about ponies, gumdrops, and having kids. There’s a festering history. And today marked another chapter.

The wheels fell off

The call started off fine. Then came a question about a story in the Times this morning about McCain campaign manager Rick Davis’s former high-paying job as a lobbyist with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It’s a particularly touchy subject, in light of the recent government takeover of the two mortgage firms and the subsequent hard-hitting McCain campaign ads attempting to tie Obama to the mess.

Schmidt spotted the opportunity to take a swipe at the Times like a running back sees a hole in the defensive line.

“Let’s be clear and be honest with each other about something fundamental to this race, which is this: Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not — by any standard — a journalistic organization,” Schmidt said. “It is a pro-Obama advocacy organization that every day attacks the McCain campaign, attacks Senator McCain, attacks Governor Palin and excuses Senator Obama.”

And another thing

Schmidt said the New York Times has basically given Barack Obama a free pass in regards to the Senator’s records, statements, and any of his “deceitful” campaign spots.

“It is an organization that has made a decision to has cast aside its journalistic integrity and to advocate for the defeat of one candidate … and advocate for the election of another candidate,” he said.

Sports

Why’d he do it? Everyone seems to be using the sports analogy of “working the refs.” If he complains enough, the other media organizations will back down and play equalizer. You know, like a bald Phil Jackson.

Or maybe more like a bald Lou Pinella. Former Bush Press Secretary Ari Fleischer compares it to baseball anyway.

“I think Steve was accurately reflecting the views of his campaign,” Fleischer wrote in an email to The Vote blog. “Just about every Republican campaign feels that way about the media from time to time. Dealing with the press is sometimes a little like pitching in baseball – everyone once in a while you have to throw high and inside and hope it results in better coverage next time. Sometimes it does, most often, it does not.”

John Kerry

The Huffington Post’s Sam Stein summons the ghost of the 2004 campaign in a piece titled, “McCain was for the NYT before he was against it.”

For a party that rails against the New York Times, the Republicans sure depend on the Grey Lady to score political points. Since the end of the primary, John McCain’s campaign has sent at least 60 emails to its rapid response list that reference the New York Times.

NYT responds

By the way, the Times – not surprisingly – hasn’t cowered and apologized. Instead, the executive editor released a standard statement.

“The New York Times is committed to covering the candidates fully, fairly and aggressively,” Keller wrote. “It’s our job to ask hard questions, fact-check their statements and their advertising, examine their programs, positions, biographies and advisers. Candidates and their campaign operatives are not always comfortable with that level of scrutiny, but it’s what our readers expect and deserve.”

When the Christian Science Monitor is making you look like a ginormous dick, you've got a problem.

jag

[StorminNorman]

At this point I wish there was a way for both tickets to lose.

McCain's campaign of idiotic, irrelevant, false political ads have eliminated any enthusiasm the pick of Sarah Palin brought me. I don't know what happened to the McCain of old - and I will admit he still may have that vintage McCain as a leader and not a candidate - but i find it hard to support this man.

It would be impossible if Obama's campaign hasn't proven itself to be equally hypocritical, equally disgusting, equally out of touch PLUS the joy of promising all sorts of government spending, all sorts of government growth that scares the willies out of me.

Hooray for 4 more years of incompetent leadership in Washington!

[Visionary]

I think they both need a long nap.

[The Battousai]

At this point I wish there was a way for both tickets to lose.

McCain's campaign of idiotic, irrelevant, false political ads have eliminated any enthusiasm the pick of Sarah Palin brought me. I don't know what happened to the McCain of old - and I will admit he still may have that vintage McCain as a leader and not a candidate - but i find it hard to support this man.

It would be impossible if Obama's campaign hasn't proven itself to be equally hypocritical, equally disgusting, equally out of touch PLUS the joy of promising all sorts of government spending, all sorts of government growth that scares the willies out of me.

Hooray for 4 more years of incompetent leadership in Washington!

:o:o:o

[jaguarr]

Okay, seriously...WTF? :huh:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/campaign.wrap/

McCain says Obama missing in time of crisis

(CNN) -- Sen. John McCain on Tuesday charged that Sen. Barack Obama is showing a lack of leadership by staying "mum" on the financial crisis -- an accusation that the Democrat's campaign called "laughable."
Sen. John McCain says Sen. Barack Obama is not ready to lead.

Sen. John McCain says Sen. Barack Obama is not ready to lead.

McCain's campaign released a television ad Tuesday that builds on McCain's argument that Obama is not ready to lead.

"In crisis, experience matters. McCain and his Congressional allies led," an announcer says in the 30-second spot.

"Obama and his liberal allies? Mum on the market crisis," the announcer says.

Words beside a picture of Obama read "no leadership" as the announcer says, "A risk your family can't afford."

In response to the ad, the Obama campaign charged that McCain is the candidate who has not shown leadership.

"This ad is laughable. If you believe John McCain, George Bush and the Republicans in Washington have led on reforming Wall Street and restraining CEO pay, I've got a bridge in Alaska to sell you," said Obama-Biden spokesman Bill Burton.

In the past week, Obama has been inching up in the national polls. CNN's latest average of national polls shows Obama leading McCain by 5 points.
Don't Miss

Earlier this month, McCain passed Obama in the national polls for the first time and held onto his lead for six days.

But as the financial crisis unfolded, Obama again took over the lead.

Polls show more voters think Obama would do a better job handling an economic crisis than McCain. Video Watch how economic woes boost Obama »

This week, McCain has been trying to convince voters otherwise. He points to the fact that he immediately outlined a plan to deal with the financial crisis following news of the government's rescue efforts.

Obama did not lay out a specific plan because he said he did not want "partisan wrangling" to interfere with the government's rescue efforts.

On Monday night, McCain told voters that when it comes to the financial crisis, Obama has been "missing in action."

"One week after this crisis began, Sen. Obama has still not offered any plan of any kind. In time of crisis, when leadership is needed, Sen. Obama has been MIA, my friends -- that means 'Missing in Action,' " McCain said at an event in Media, Pennsylvania.

"The truth is we don't have time to wait for Sen. Obama to recover from his paralysis in the face of this crisis. Congress must act and act quickly."

Obama has said several times since the recent Wall Street crisis began that, in meetings with top economists, he was encouraged not to roll out a specific plan for fear of overly politicizing the work of Congress on a government bailout of financial firms.

Recently, though, he has proposed several principles for the plan -- including limiting pay for executives of businesses that are bailed out by the government and making sure the effort includes a detailed plan for the money to be repaid.

On Monday, Obama laid out a basic, six-point plan for overseeing Wall Street. It included cracking down on market manipulation and expanding oversight of businesses that borrow money from the government.

Meanwhile, the candidates will soon have to shift their focus from the economy to foreign policy -- the topic of Friday's presidential debate.

McCain and Obama will face off in Oxford, Mississippi, in the first of three presidential debates. Their running mates will debate next week in St. Louis, Missouri.

Obama is reportedly going to Florida for "debate camp" -- traditional preparation that includes a sparring partner playing the role of his opponent.

McCain's prep is more on the fly: He spent several hours Sunday at his campaign headquarters working with aides, and he spent several hours in a Pennsylvania hotel Monday afternoon doing the same.
advertisement

He will follow this "squeeze it in" prep schedule Tuesday as he campaigns in Ohio, and Wednesday around meetings with world leaders in New York.

Not until Thursday afternoon and Friday in Mississippi are McCain aides planning to hunker down and devote all the candidate's time to debate prep.

Does McCain not even read the paper? Obama has been bashing the holy **** out of McCain over the financial meltdown and talking about the situation in a very nuanced way, saying that it has to be handled just right and that he didn't want to politicize things at a crucial time when the first priority is getting the economy and the market stabilized. :huh:

jag

[Marx]

Okay, seriously...WTF? :huh:



Does McCain not even read the paper? Obama has been bashing the holy **** out of McCain over the financial meltdown and talking about the situation in a very nuanced way, saying that it has to be handled just right and that he didn't want to politicize things at a crucial time when the first priority is getting the economy and the market stabilized. :huh:

jag

John McCain is not in the business or truth or fact. You should know this by now Jag...

[lazur]

At this point I wish there was a way for both tickets to lose.

McCain's campaign of idiotic, irrelevant, false political ads have eliminated any enthusiasm the pick of Sarah Palin brought me. I don't know what happened to the McCain of old - and I will admit he still may have that vintage McCain as a leader and not a candidate - but i find it hard to support this man.

It would be impossible if Obama's campaign hasn't proven itself to be equally hypocritical, equally disgusting, equally out of touch PLUS the joy of promising all sorts of government spending, all sorts of government growth that scares the willies out of me.

Hooray for 4 more years of incompetent leadership in Washington!

In all honesty, the only explanation I can think of (and this is no excuse, and could very well be wrong) is that McCain just isn't keeping tabs on his campaign messaging. It sounds like some people in his campaign have carte blanche to do whatever they want.

It's the only explanation I can reasonably come up with for why the McCain of old was much more honorable than what we're seeing today.

Not that Obama is any more honorable, mind you...

[sinewave]

Okay, seriously...WTF? :huh:



Does McCain not even read the paper? Obama has been bashing the holy **** out of McCain over the financial meltdown and talking about the situation in a very nuanced way, saying that it has to be handled just right and that he didn't want to politicize things at a crucial time when the first priority is getting the economy and the market stabilized. :huh:

jag

what's with that "Obama and his liberal allies" ********? i'm really sick of the republicans and their talking heads using "liberal" as a backhanded insult. you can almost picture them sneering when they say it. yet being "conservative" is patriotic? what a stupid double-standard. newsflash, we're in this economic mess because of conservatives and their love of deregulation. also, conservatives seem to be against innovation, which this country used see as an american ideal. plus, you know, their stance against equal rights for gays, which seems pretty unamerican to me. ok, rant over.

[jaguarr]

John McCain is not in the business or truth or fact. You should know this by now Jag...

Yeah, I know, but...Jesus Christ...the economy and Wall Street is pretty much all Obama's been talking about for the past week. To say he's "missing in a time of crisis" on the issue and not paying attention to it is borderline retarded.

jag

[Raiden]

Yeah, I know, but...Jesus Christ...the economy and Wall Street is pretty much all Obama's been talking about for the past week. To say he's "missing in a time of crisis" on the issue and not paying attention to it is borderline retarded.

jag

McCain is just spouting lies all over, and hope that some of them will stick and voters will eat it up. If failed, he can always resort back to his POW stories.

[Marx]

McCain is just spouting lies all over, and hope that some of them will stick and voters will eat it up. If failed, he can always resort back to his POW stories.

I didn't know he ever stopped using the POW story? :huh:

[sinewave]

In all honesty, the only explanation I can think of (and this is no excuse, and could very well be wrong) is that McCain just isn't keeping tabs on his campaign messaging. It sounds like some people in his campaign have carte blanche to do whatever they want.

It's the only explanation I can reasonably come up with for why the McCain of old was much more honorable than what we're seeing today.

Not that Obama is any more honorable, mind you...

or maybe he sold out those ideals that made him an honorable man back in the day, just for a shot at the big brass ring. just sayin...

[jaguarr]

McCain is just spouting lies all over, and hope that some of them will stick and voters will eat it up. If failed, he can always resort back to his POW stories.

Yeah, but...this is like pointing at someone standing right in front of you at a party and exclaiming to everyone else around you "He's not even in this room!". :huh:

jag

[Superman]

Okay, seriously...WTF? :huh:



Does McCain not even read the paper? Obama has been bashing the holy **** out of McCain over the financial meltdown and talking about the situation in a very nuanced way, saying that it has to be handled just right and that he didn't want to politicize things at a crucial time when the first priority is getting the economy and the market stabilized. :huh:

jagWhat the hell? Obama has been out there every day since this all started last monday detailing what he thinks should be done point by point.

All McCain has done is blame Obama for this mess. :whatever:

[sinewave]

What the hell? Obama has been out there every day since this all started last monday detailing what he thinks should be done point by point.

All McCain has done is blame Obama for this mess. :whatever:

these liberals are ruining washington!]

[Superman]

Well after a week of nothing but blaming Obama, McCain finally comes out and talks, and takes a few questions, about the economy.

Anyone see it? What did you think?

[Superman4ever]

Wow a LOT of news today:

McCain conference call BACKFIRES **UPDATED W/BONUS VIDEO**
by atomicskunk
Mon Sep 22, 2008 at 03:00:51 PM PDT

Grampy McSame is angry. Really angry. You see apparently, they've had it up to here with the liberal media calling them liars, while at the same time giving Obama a free ride. So campaign strategists Steve Schmidt and Rick Davis convened a conference call to register their outrage at the MSM for this unfair treatment and to highlight their criticisms of Senators Obama and Biden, Problem is.....the media ain't buyin' it. At least not Ben Smith from Politico:

Sen. John McCain’s top campaign aides convened a conference call today to complain of being called “liars.” They pressed the media to scrutinize specific elements of Sen. Barack Obama’s record.

But the call was so rife with simple, often inexplicable misstatements of fact that it may have had the opposite effect: to deepen the perception, dangerous to McCain, that he and his aides have little regard for factual accuracy.

Follow me below for the details......

* atomicskunk's diary :: ::
*

Camp McCain is mad as hell:

“Any time the Obama campaign is criticized at any level, the critics are immediately derided as liars,” Schmidt told reporters.

Hmmmmm...what's that they say about ducks and walking and talking and stuff?

But as he went on to list a series of stories he thought reporters should be writing about Obama and Biden, in almost every instance he got the details wrong.

What a surprise! Almost every instance! Schmidt goes on to list a series of discredited repug talking points:

• Biden's son was a lobbyist for the credit card and banking industry (he wasn't, he was a consultant for MBNA)

• Obama began his career raising money for William Ayers (not true and Ayers never contributed to Obama)

• Obama surrogate accused Sarah Palin of being a Nazi sympathizer (Robert Wexler called Pat Buchanan a Nazi sympathizer and said Palin endorsed Buchanan)

Asked about the series of errors, McCain aides could not provide evidence to back up Schmidt’s assertions.

Wow! Yet another surprise? Who woulda thunk it?

One McCain aide, Michael Goldfarb, said Politico was “quibbling with ridiculously small details when the basic things are completely right.”

Another, Brian Rogers, responded more directly:

“You are in the tank,” he e-mailed.

Ahhhh...yes. How perfect.

Grampy McSame Super Secret Strategy Revealed:

Lie

When called on your lies (finally!), accuse the media of being in the tank for your opponent

Lie some more

Hold conference call to complain about being called liars and to lie some more

When called on your lies (finally!), accuse the media of being in the tank for your opponent

Rinse. Repeat.

Is it November 4th yet?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/22/1799/49510/376/606783

[Superman4ever]

McCain Loses his Head! Asked for Chris Cox's (Head of SECs) head. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/22/AR2008092202583.html?referrer=digg) :( Sexual innuendos not intended. OK, maybe a little! Double :( Poor Baby McSame.


Evangelical Leader Smacks McCain on Lack of 'Principle'. (http://coloradoindependent.com/8807/evangelical-leader-smacks-mccain-for-lack-of-principle)

CNN calls out McCain Lies: Obama DOES have a plan. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/22/cnn-calls-out-mccain-lie_n_128475.html)

[StorminNorman]

Wow a LOT of news today:



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/22/1799/49510/376/606783

Any article that begins: "Grampy McSame is angry." Isn't worth reading.

Daily Kos is utter trash - linking to stories from there is beneath everyone on this board but Kaine.

[kainedamo]

Someone is still hurt from being owned :o

[Mr Sparkle]

wow, you gotta admit, McCain is doing a lot of lying.
plus that look on Lieberman.....it's disturbing.

[StorminNorman]

wow, you gotta admit, McCain is doing a lot of lying.


Yes, and for this reason if the election today I could not pull the lever for McCain.

The actions of McCain and the hypocrisy of Obama are making the idea of wasting my vote on a third party candidate more and more appealing.

[StorminNorman]

Someone is still hurt from being owned :o
Give it up Kaine. You have failed to find proof of the hypocrisy you claimed I was guilty of.

[Superman4ever]

Any article that begins: "Grampy McSame is angry." Isn't worth reading.

Daily Kos is utter trash - linking to stories from there is beneath everyone on this board but Kaine.

http://www.planetsmilies.com/smilies/sad/sad0070.gif

I very much agree that the insult on McCain wasn't needed and trashy. However, if you soldier on they do make some interesting points.

[comicgirl]

Oooops.....Big John May Have Blown It..


NETWORKS REVOLT; McCain Bans Media from McPalin

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

[jaguarr]

Oooops.....Big John May Have Blown It..


NETWORKS REVOLT; McCain Bans Media from McPalin

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

From that link:

"Reporter Yells At McCain: Is This The 'No Talk Express?'"

:funny:

jag

[comicgirl]

From that link:

"Reporter Yells At McCain: Is This The 'No Talk Express?'"

:funny:

jagLOL.....I love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:hehe:

[Raiden]

From that link:

"Reporter Yells At McCain: Is This The 'No Talk Express?'"

:funny:

jag

I'm glad the press isn't going to take this BS lying down. If McCain doesn't want the "elite" media to ask Palin questions, then he shouldn't receive coverages that he coveted from them.

[gap5ewl]

Well there's always fox news.

[jaguarr]

Well there's always fox news.

Actually, they're pissed at the McCain Campaign, too.

jag

[ShadowBoxing]

Actually, they're pissed at the McCain Campaign, too.

jag
Well there's always the Christian Inspiration Network...

[jaguarr]

Well there's always the Christian Inspiration Network...

I don't know if they're pissed off at the McCain Campaign or not, but there have been some evangelical leaders starting to criticize McCain for lacking substance. :o

jag

[ShadowBoxing]

I don't know if they're pissed off at the McCain Campaign or not, but there have been some evangelical leaders starting to criticize McCain for lacking substance. :o

jag
Doesn't he realize FDR prayed his way out of the Depression?

[Excel]

That no-talk express video is classic :lmao:

Actually, they're pissed at the McCain Campaign, too.

jag

They are?

[Superman4ever]

Well there's always the Christian Inspiration Network...

Not for long.


Evangelical Leader Smacks McCain on Lack of 'Principle'. (http://coloradoindependent.com/8807/evangelical-leader-smacks-mccain-for-lack-of-principle)


They are?

Yes, but I can't find the source...there was an article about it the other day.

[Kelly]

I'm glad the press isn't going to take this BS lying down. If McCain doesn't want the "elite" media to ask Palin questions, then he shouldn't receive coverages that he coveted from them.

Yeah, it was a stupid thing to do, considering they let them into those things for about 30 seconds, and then just ignore the questions....so they might as well let the reporters in, because she wouldn't have had to answer questions anyway.

Besides, she has already done a few mainstream interviews anyway, it wasn't a big deal until they said no reporters.

But, on the other hand, its also kind of stupid that the reporters got mad in the first place because in instances like that, they never have their questions answered anyway.......so when its all said and done, who gives a ****?

[Gilpesh]

Besides, she has already done a few mainstream interviews anyway, it wasn't a big deal until they said no reporters.

She hasn't. A few usually means three or more... she's done two. Only two.

[Raiden]

She hasn't. A few usually means three or more... she's done two. Only two.

And no press conference.

[Gilpesh]

That too. I had forgotten that one.

But then again, Biden hasn't done one either.

[Superman4ever]

Oh Campbell, Campbell, Campbell!

sSNkloIFTQ0

I want! :cmad:

[Superman4ever]

I had no idea where to put this and I don't feel like starting a new thread and since this news is helping McCain:


Bush Administration will keep secret 'grim' Afghanistan report quiet until after election

A secret US intelligence report which says the political and military situation in Afghanistan is "grim" will be withheld from the public until after the election, a new report says.

Intelligence officials are finishing up the National Intelligence Estimate on Aghanistan, according to ABC's Brian Ross, "but there are 'no plans to declassify' any of it before the election," an official said.

Keeping the intelligence report under wraps would likely help Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). McCain has focused on what he sees as the success of the Iraq "surge," in which the US added troops to lessen violence. Attention to problems in Afghanistan would put the spotlight on President Bush's failures, which might rub off on the Republican presidential nominee.

"According to people who have been briefed, the NIE will paint a 'grim' picture of the situation in Afghanistan, seven years after the US invaded in an effort to dismantle the al Qaeda network and its Taliban protectors," Ross writes.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen told Congress last week the US is struggling to retain control.

"I'm not convinced we're winning it in Afghanistan," he said, adding, "we're running out of time."

"Absent a broader international and interagency approach to the problems there, it is my professional opinion that no amount of troops in no amount of time can ever achieve all the objectives we seek in Afghanistan," he said.

This aligns with the opinions of commanders on the ground. According to a report in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal, the US military expects the Taliban to launch a "winter offensive," which would mean a spike in violence in an area that has, at least for the recent past, been more quiet.

"I do think there will be an increase in violence by the enemy in order to maintain a general sense of insecurity," Brig. Gen. Mark Milley, deputy commander of the U.S. forces in eastern Afghanistan, told the paper. "The winter fighting season this year will be more violent than in previous years."

A spokesperson for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Vanee Vines, told Ross "it is not the [National Intelligence Director]'s policy to publicly comment on national intelligence products that may or may not be in production."

National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell has said that he doesn't believe intelligence estimates should be made public, though several have recently been released, including one that detailed the US intelligence community's position on Iran's nuclear program.

The National Intelligence Estimate reflects the consensus view of 17 government agencies.

[ShadowBoxing]

For those drooling over Campbell Brown, a new thread just for you in the Celebrities forum.

[Marx]

MCCAIN/PALIN MEETING WITH BONO CANCELLED
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/24/mccain-and-palins-meeting-with-bono-canceled/

[Raiden]

MCCAIN/PALIN MEETING WITH BONO CANCELLED
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/24/mccain-and-palins-meeting-with-bono-canceled/

Seems like Bono is treated like an ambassador or head of state sometimes whenever he has a meeting with a politician.

[kainedamo]

MCCAIN/PALIN MEETING WITH BONO CANCELLED
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/24/mccain-and-palins-meeting-with-bono-canceled/

Palin knows that meeting Bono doesn't count as meeting a foreign leader, right?

[Marx]

Palin knows that meeting Bono doesn't count as meeting a foreign leader, right?

Yes...but it would make her an expert on the music industry! :oldrazz:

[jaguarr]

MCCAIN/PALIN MEETING WITH BONO CANCELLED
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/24/mccain-and-palins-meeting-with-bono-canceled/

Even Bono doesn't want to meet her. :hehe:

jag

[Raiden]

Yes...but it would make her an expert on the music industry! :oldrazz:

Meeting Bono would be like seeing Ireland from your house, and makes you an instant expert on this foreign country. :hehe:

[kainedamo]

I'm so thankful that Palin was so heavily involved in the Northern Ireland peace process.

[Marx]

Meeting Bono would be like seeing Ireland from your house, and makes you an instant expert on this foreign country. :hehe:

I hadn't thought of that Raiden...a Bono meeting would equate to being an expert on the music industry AND Ireland. AND if that's the case...you know, Ireland is right next to the United Kingdom...which is a stone's throw away from continental Europe...and continental Europe can see Africa from its coast...Africa is currently having a genocide in Darfur...which is being fueled by Chinese ties to the Sudanese government...and we have borrowed money from China to pay for oil in the Middle East...

MY GOD! PALIN IS THE MOST QUALIFIED POLITICIAN IN THE WORLD! (Wait a minute...that meeting was cancelled...****...there went that argument!)





:hehe:

[jaguarr]

I hadn't thought of that Raiden...a Bono meeting would equate to being an expert on the music industry AND Ireland. AND if that's the case...you know, Ireland is right next to the United Kingdom...which is a stone's throw away from continental Europe...and continental Europe can see Africa from its coast...Africa is currently having a genocide in Darfur...which is being fueled by Chinese ties to the Sudanese government...and we have borrowed money from China to pay for oil in the Middle East...

MY GOD! PALIN IS THE MOST QUALIFIED POLITICIAN IN THE WORLD! (Wait a minute...that meeting was cancelled...****...there went that argument!)





:hehe:

She would have also been able to claim being an expert in humanitarian aid and working with multiple charity organizations.

jag

[sinewave]

She hasn't. A few usually means three or more... she's done two. Only two.

three, if you count people magazine.

[kainedamo]

I'm so thankful that Palin was so heavily involved in the Northern Ireland peace process.

I say heavily involved. What I mean is, she could see a U2 CD through the shop window.

[Marx]

She would have also been able to claim being an expert in humanitarian aid and working with multiple charity organizations.

jag

And charitable organizations involve some kind of financial dealings...and financial dealings are the reason why our economy is in the mess that it's in...so that makes her an expert on the economy!

I never even realized! :wow:

[Überlibran]

Holy crap! Breaking news on CNN that McCain wants to suspend his campaign and delay Friday debate to go back to congress and work on the economic crisis.

[sinewave]

And charitable organizations involve some kind of financial dealings...and financial dealings are the reason why our economy is in the mess that it's in...so that makes her an expert on the economy!

I never even realized! :wow:

that's like the type of logic they used to use on the old batman show from the 60's. :yay:

[Marx]

Holy crap! Breaking news on CNN that McCain wants to suspend his campaign and delay Friday debate to go back to congress and work on the economic crisis.

Wow...how incredibly transparent.

[Marx]

that's like the type of logic they used to use on the old batman show from the 60's. :yay:

:funny:

[sinewave]

Holy crap! Breaking news on CNN that McCain wants to suspend his campaign and delay Friday debate to go back to congress and work on the economic crisis.

sounds like he's trying to show up obama. maybe he's scared of debating him or he's underprepared.

[Comicfilmer]

Interesting. I'm not sure what to think of this.

[Marx]

sounds like he's trying to show up obama. maybe he's scared of debating him or he's underprepared.

Obama will have no choice but to oblige...or McCain will continue beating Obama (and all democrats) over the head with his 'Country First' sign. :whatever:

[The Senator]

Yeah... this isn't a political move at all :whatever: