The McCain Thread

[hitmanyr2k]

No! Service means citizenship!

In Starship Troopers yeah lol, but in America hell no. If I'm old enough to be trained to defend my country in battle I'm old enough to vote...it's as simple as that :cwink:

[Whirlysplat]

In Starship Troopers yeah lol, but in America hell no. If I'm old enough to be trained to defend my country in battle I'm old enough to vote...it's as simple as that :cwink:

So you are not old enough to vote now. Is that what you're saying

[EdRyder]

Dont they fine you like $50 bones if you dont vote in Australia? "Compulsory voting" ,I think we should do that.

[StrainedEyes]

So you are not old enough to vote now. Is that what you're saying

What are you talking about?

If someone is old enough to be sent to war then that same person should be old enough to vote. Which is how it is in America, which is what hitmanyr2k is talking about.

[Hobgoblin]

Dont they fine you like $50 bones if you dont vote in Australia? "Compulsory voting" ,I think we should do that.

I'm not sure thats a good idea either. People wont bother being informed before voting, they will randomly vote for anyone just to avoid the fine.

[Whirlysplat]

What are you talking about?

If someone is old enough to be sent to war then that same person should be old enough to vote. Which is how it is in America, which is what hitmanyr2k is talking about.

In the U.K you can go to war at 16 our voting age is 18. It's rare it happens these days but it can.

[EdRyder]

I'm not sure thats a good idea either. People wont bother being informed before voting, they will randomly vote for anyone just to avoid the fine.

They have that in Australia. 1-2% of voting is called the donkey vote, where people are uninformed in politics or may be informed but have "no preference" for either candidate. The have a third "no preference" punch.

I say we dont fine Americans the first time.First timers can avoid the fine by taking a six hour course on democracy.Equivalent to driving school.

[Schlosser85]

There are plenty of well-informed young people and plenty of stupid "Joe Six Pack" middle aged people who vote for who they can "have a beer" with. Denying an entire age range the right to vote because of stereotypes and generalizations is wrong.

[Whirlysplat]

There are plenty of well-informed young people and plenty of stupid "Joe Six Pack" middle aged people who vote for who they can "have a beer" with. Denying an entire age range the right to vote because of stereotypes and generalizations is wrong.

That joe six pack may wel have life experience. Working for 20 or 30 years does that.

[Gilpesh]

Especially when that young age group is going to lean toward the candidate you don't like Whirly.

[Hobgoblin]

They have that in Australia. 1-2% of voting is called the donkey vote, where people are uninformed in politics or may be informed but have "no preference" for either candidate. The have a third "no preference" punch.

I say we dont fine Americans the first time.First timers can avoid the fine by taking a six hour course on democracy.Equivalent to driving school.

Sounds nice, but it also seems like a lot more bureaucracy. All that for people who wont get anything out of it anyway?

I like the "no preference" idea, but if thats the case, why bother making them come in the first place? Other than just increasing revenues, which people would scream and cry about. There should be a "screaming and b****ing" tax. :hehe:

[Whirlysplat]

They have that in Australia. 1-2% of voting is called the donkey vote, where people are uninformed in politics or may be informed but have "no preference" for either candidate. The have a third "no preference" punch.

I say we dont fine Americans the first time.First timers can avoid the fine by taking a six hour course on democracy.Equivalent to driving school.

Donkey Punch? Only in Australia would that be a voting option.

[lazur]

Ahhhahahahaha! How very scientific of you. :lmao:

jag

Nope, not scientific at all, but very revealing about just how uniformed those who are voting for Obama really are. Then again, people on this forum who support Obama are informed and still choose to support a candidate who changes his position on a regular basis and who knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy or the economy. Yet, because he gives a good speech, telling everyone what they want to hear, he's the one to vote for.

Just my two cents. I really, honestly cannot see why anyone would vote for Obama other than for the reason that he's a Democrat. On the critical issues, he's wrong.

[StrainedEyes]

Nope, not scientific at all, but very revealing about just how uniformed those who are voting for Obama really are...

I'd love to read your reported findings.

[Whirlysplat]

Especially when that young age group is going to lean toward the candidate you don't like Whirly.

Nah, the young just have hardly paid tax, probably have little stake in society etc. So when they say someone who has paid a mortgage and taxes for as long time shouldn't vote, because he is Joe Six Pack or their dad in another; state it's ironic.

[jaguarr]

Nope, not scientific at all, but very revealing about just how uniformed those amongst lazur's circle of acquaintances who are voting for Obama really are, according to lazur.

Fixed. :up:

;)

jag

[The Senator]

Nope, not scientific at all, but very revealing about just how uniformed those who are voting for Obama really are. Then again, people on this forum who support Obama are informed and still choose to support a candidate who changes his position on a regular basis and who knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy or the economy. Yet, because he gives a good speech, telling everyone what they want to hear, he's the one to vote for.

And which conservative blog says this?

[Schlosser85]

a candidate who changes his position on a regular basis

Like John "I support deregulation/we need more oversight", "Maverick/votes with Bush 90% of the time" McCain?


and who knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy or the economy


Like Sarah "I can see Russia" Palin?

[Gilpesh]

Nah, the young just have hardly paid tax, probably have little stake in society etc. So when they say someone who has paid a mortgage and taxes for as long time shouldn't vote, because he is Joe Six Pack or their dad in another; state it's ironic.

Joe "six pack" picked Bush... there goes your entire argument.

[kainedamo]

What do you guys think about McCain wanting to tax health benifits?

[Bill]

I've talked to a multitude of my daughter's teenage friends, most of whom support Obama, but know absolutely nothing about the man other than that their parents like him and he's a good looking, smooth-talking politician. Beyond that, they know nothing about the issues or why they'd vote for him.

On the other hand, those who are McCain supporters tend to listen to talk radio and/or form an opinion based on actual knowledge of what's going on. Granted, there are still a few McCain supporters who know nothing about the issues, and who would vote (if they were 18) based purely on their parents' choice, but for the most part kids at 18 years of age are casting a vote for a politician they know nothing about. In my test 'sample' the lack of knowledge of a candidate was by far much greater for those who like Obama than McCain.

If they're listening to talk radio, especially some of the extreme right-winged pablum on the AM band, then they certainly aren't basing an opinion on knowledge of what is actually going on.

[Marx]

Nope, not scientific at all, but very revealing about just how uniformed those who are voting for Obama really are. Then again, people on this forum who support Obama are informed and still choose to support a candidate who changes his position on a regular basis and who knows absolutely nothing about foreign policy or the economy. Yet, because he gives a good speech, telling everyone what they want to hear, he's the one to vote for.

Just my two cents. I really, honestly cannot see why anyone would vote for Obama other than for the reason that he's a Democrat. On the critical issues, he's wrong.

Your 'centrist' insight continues to amaze me. If you want to support a candidate who abandons the independent support that gave him the nomination in favor of appeasing the Republican base and Religious Right, you are certainly free to do so. If you want to support a candidate who claims to be a 'maverick' but votes with the President more often than not, you are certainly free to do so. If you want to support a candidate who has become the very thing he condemned in 2000, then you are certainly free to do so.

Just my two cents. I really, honestly cannot see why anyone would vote for McCain other than for the reason that he's a Republican. On the critical issues, it is John McCain...who is wrong.

[StrainedEyes]

I don't remember seeing this before-

McCain talking about his lack of eye contact during the debate.
ixcR6Ggy4Io

[Gilpesh]

This just in: McCain spouts more verbal diarrhea to cover for his disdain of Obama...

[Marx]

I don't remember seeing this before-

McCain talking about his lack of eye contact during the debate.
ixcR6Ggy4Io

'I did it for the american people...that's why I didn't look at him.'

:whatever:

[Hobgoblin]

John McCain on using the word "Go-k"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/02/18/MN32194.DTL


McCain Criticized for Slur
He says he'll keep using term for ex-captors in Vietnam

C.W. Nevius, Marc Sandalow, John Wildermuth, Chronicle Political Writers

Friday, February 18, 2000

(02-18) 04:00 PDT Greenville, S.C. -- Editor's Note: This article was published on Feb. 18, 2000. In 2008, at least three national web sites posted links to it. As a result, it appeared in the list of SFGate's Most Read articles.
Arizona Sen. John McCain refused to apologize yesterday for his use of a racial slur to condemn the North Vietnamese prison guards who tortured and held him captive during the war.


"I hate the gooks," McCain said yesterday in response to a question from reporters aboard his campaign bus. "I will hate them as long as I live."

McCain, a former Navy pilot who spent five years in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp, was questioned about the language because of a story last month in the Nation magazine reporting his continued use of the slur.

Since then, reports of McCain's language have been circulating on Internet chat sites and e-mails among Asian Americans, many of whom find the the term offensive and inappropriate for an elected official.

McCain's appeal to voters has been as a wartime hero and a feisty politician who speaks his mind and damns the consequences. But his comments on the eve of the key South Carolina primary show the candidate's vaunted "straight talk" in another light.

"The use of a racist slur can't be acceptable for any national leader, regardless of his background," said Diane Chin, executive director of the San Francisco-based Chinese for Affirmative Action. "For someone running for president not to recognize the power of words is a problem."

While McCain's words may have little effect in conservative South Carolina, where few Asian Americans live, they could come back to haunt him in other states.

"Historically, straight talkers who say things off the top of their heads eventually hang themselves with those sorts of remarks," said Bruce Cain, a political scientist at the University of California at Berkeley.

"While it might not hurt him now, Democrats are not going to have any hesitation about using this stuff to string him up later."

TERM FOR HIS CAPTORS

McCain made no apologies yesterday.

"I was referring to my prison guards," McCain said, "and I will continue to refer to them in language that might offend some people because of the beating and torture of my friends."

McCain made it clear that his anger extends only toward his captors. As a senator, he was one of the leaders of the postwar effort to normalize U.S. relations with Vietnam.

Campaign officials do not expect the controversy to hurt McCain, either in tomorrow's South Carolina primary or later in the campaign.

"If people understood the context, they wouldn't be upset," Mike Murphy, a senior adviser to the campaign, said last night.

But the racial slur used by the senator has a long, painful history that is felt by many Asian Americans.

The word was first used in 1899 by American soldiers fighting Filipino insurgents. During the Korean War, the term was aimed at Koreans and Chinese. It was directed at the Vietnamese when Americans were fighting in Vietnam. It is now used as a slur toward any Asian or Pacific Islander.

The Arizona senator prides himself on running an open campaign. He is surrounded by reporters, television cameras and tape recorders perhaps more than any presidential candidate in history. Reporters are given full access to the candidate between each campaign stop on a customized bus purposefully dubbed the "Straight Talk Express."

The bus, which also carries his top staff and often his wife, Cindy, is crammed with network anchors and local newspaper reporters, who endlessly engage McCain in what amounts to a news conference on wheels.

The comments are usually recorded and always on the record.

Sometimes the questions are pointed and serious. Sometimes they are not.

McCain has declared on his bus, "I hate the French." He often begins meetings with Californians joking, "I hate Californians," noting that they steal Arizona's water and lure his constituents away in the summer.

MCCAIN'S IMPRISONMENT

But those comments are clearly in jest. Yesterday's were not.

McCain was captured after his A-4 Skyhawk was shot down over Hanoi on Oct. 26, 1967. During the time he was held, he was brutally tortured by his captors, finally reaching the point where he was unable to resist signing a "confession."

McCain and his fellow prisoners suffered terribly in the prison camp. In the crowd at yesterday's rally in Greenville was retired Adm. Robert Fuller, who was in prison with McCain at the infamous "Hanoi Hilton."

Fuller, who lives in Jacksonville Beach, Fla., spoke informally of the despair of living in single cells, where the only form of contact was by an ingenious code devised by the prisoners. Fuller said prisoners were sometimes tortured for as many as six days. When they returned, he said, the others would send messages of support by tapping on the wall.

"They would be put in ropes for six days, and they would confess," Fuller said. "When they came back to their cell, guys would tap on the wall, `We love you. I wish we could give you a hug.' "

The horrors of the past cannot be an excuse for hurting people in the present, said Guy Aoki, president of the Media Action Network for Asian Americans, an anti-defamation group.

"If Sen. McCain had been captured by Nigerians, could he call those people `n' and think he wasn't going to offend everyone who is black?" Akoi asked. "We can all feel for what he went through, but if that's his level of sensitivity, I'm very disappointed."

McCain usually treats his experience as a prisoner of war as a terrible time in his life, but a period he has moved beyond. At times, he even uses it as a punch line for jokes.

At a pancake breakfast recently, he said he had gone with his daughter to the MTV Music Awards, "and that was the greatest assault on my senses since I was in prison."

Yesterday's comments made it clear that McCain had neither forgotten, nor forgiven, his captors.

"I will call right now, my interrogator that tortured me, a g-k," McCain said. "(I can't believe that) anybody doesn't believe these interrogators and prison guards were cruel and sadistic people who deserve the worst appellations possible."

McCain said he does not consider the comment an epithet.

"G-k," he said, "is the kindest appellation I can give."

[jaguarr]

'I did it for the american people...that's why I didn't look at him.'

:whatever:

Pretty much. What a dick.

jag

[jaguarr]

John McCain on using the word "Go-k"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/02/18/MN32194.DTL

I like how, not only does he refuse to stop using it or apologize to anyone that might be offended by it, he and his campaign managers try to find ways to make it okay for him to keep using it. WTF? :huh:

jag

[Hobgoblin]

I like how, not only does he refuse to stop using it or apologize to anyone that might be offended by it, he and his campaign managers try to find ways to make it okay for him to keep using it. WTF? :huh:

jag

I'm honestly amazed at how much more I distrust a potential McCain Administration every day. Every day its something.

[Gilpesh]

Back then I allowed it, it seemed like a perfect reason to be racist against (the certain) people that held him as a POW.... but now with him crying sexist each time someone sneezes in Palin's direction.

Yeah, better hold yourself to that standard or you're just putting lipstick on a pig... and might I say, that isn't your color Senator McCain.

[SentinelMind]

'I did it for the american people...that's why I didn't look at him.'

:whatever:

No, he says he was busy concentrating at the material in front of him, the moderator, and other audience to focus looking at Obama intensely himself. What else can he say that will satisfy his critics...."I'm sorry for not looking at Obama more"?

[Gilpesh]

Sentinel... that excuse would actually make sense if McCain didn't shake Obama's hand. HE DIDN'T EVEN LOOK AT HIM THEN.

[jaguarr]

No, he says he was busy concentrating at the material in front of him, the moderator, and other audience to focus looking at Obama intensely himself. What else can he say that will satisfy his critics...."I'm sorry for not looking at Obama more"?

If he'd left out the B.S. rhetoric of "I was focusing on the American people!" line, I might be more inclined to believe him, but that line was gratuitous and rang as disgenuine and undermined everything he'd said up to that point. McCain doesn't know when to stop talking and that's a good half of his problem.

jag

[ShadowBoxing]

This whole election is just destroying McCain's reputation. I kind of wonder if he loses if he'll even seek re-election for his Senate seat. I think he probably won't.

[Bunker]

What exactly is Obama's healthcare plan? Is it universal like he said it was going to be during the primaries?

[ShadowBoxing]

No, Hillary was for universial. Obama plan still leaves many uninsured.

[Superman]

John McCain on using the word "Go-k"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/02/18/MN32194.DTLJust what we need. Another president with a grudge against a foreign country.

Didn't we just go though this crap already with Bush and Iraq?:whatever:

[Schlosser85]

The problem with McCain excusing his unapologetic use of the word "go*k" by saying he's only directing it at his prison guards is that it's a derogatory term against a whole race of people. It's like thinking it's ok to use the word "n*gger" because you were tortured by a guard who happened to be black, and expect any other black person to be ok with it. If he called them brutal or vicious or cruel or evil or inhuman, or any choice swear words he wanted, that would be entirely understandable. But for him to use "go*k" singles out their race as a reason to insult them, not their behavior.

[StrainedEyes]

A2Obuh4vqxE

[Marx]

No, he says he was busy concentrating at the material in front of him, the moderator, and other audience to focus looking at Obama intensely himself. What else can he say that will satisfy his critics...."I'm sorry for not looking at Obama more"?

Ok Sent...whatever you say. :cwink:

As Jag said, I might have believed him had he not used the 'I was concentrating on the american people' line. It reeks of total BS.

[redfirebird2008]

Devastating article from Rolling Stone about McCain as the Make-Believe Maverick:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

[Fading]

No, he says he was busy concentrating at the material in front of him, the moderator, and other audience to focus looking at Obama intensely himself. What else can he say that will satisfy his critics...."I'm sorry for not looking at Obama more"?

Ok, so why didn't he atleast look at Obama when the debate was over and they were shaking hands? He wouldn't even look at him then. Personally it's not a big deal to me anymore as I'm not going to try to even fathom a reason why he would refuse to, but you can't really excuse him either as he had ample opportunities to. Plus what's it say when he can't look the person he debating/negotiating with in the eye, some ppl find that an insult.

Also doesn't help that I've seen McCain look ppl in the eye in the past while debating bills. He's proven he can, and IMO it's even worse to think that unless he's intensly focused on the issue at hand that he can't do whatever it is properly.

[demento]

Devastating article from Rolling Stone about McCain as the Make-Believe Maverick:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain
Brutal.

Love this line comparing McCain to W:
"In one vital respect, however, the comparison is deeply unfair to the current president: George W. Bush was a much better pilot."

:)

They are remarkably similar, aren't they? Ignorant, inept, nepotistic, corrupt, self-serving... the main difference (piloting skills aside) being McCain's severe anger-management issues.

[dnno1]

A2Obuh4vqxE
That was pretty funny. Especially this part:
XQ16FBfWXdU

[Gilpesh]

Devastating article from Rolling Stone about McCain as the Make-Believe Maverick:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

:dry: :dry: :dry:


Wow... it's even worse than I thought...

[Superman4ever]

Devastating article from Rolling Stone about McCain as the Make-Believe Maverick:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

I was just about to post this. Fantastically brutal article.

It's long but well worth the read.

[Schlosser85]

Yea, that article really chews McCain up and spits him out, doesn't it.

[The Senator]

It's Over: Why Bill Ayers Won't Save John McCain
Howard Wolfson, The New Republic obviously, this will be of a liberal bias




Perpetually fretting Democrats will not want to accept it. The campaigns themselves can't afford to believe it. Many journalists know it but can't say it. And there will certainly be some twists and turns along the way. But take it to a well capitalized bank: Bill Ayers isn't going to save John McCain. The race is over.

John McCain's candidacy is as much a casualty of Wall Street as Lehman or Merrill. Like those once vibrant institutions, McCain's collapse was stunning and quick. One minute you are a well-respected brand. The next you are yelling at the messengers of your demise as all around you the numbers start blinking red and stop adding up.

McCain's road was difficult to begin with: the President of his party has had record-low approval ratings for two years and the number of Americans who say the country is heading in the wrong direction is stratospheric. He also had the misfortune to be pitted against an exceptional candidate running an extremely well-executed campaign.

Still, before Wall Street's collapse Senator McCain was ahead. His approval ratings remained high, his VP pick had generated excitement and interest, and his campaign operatives were capable, on any given day, of winning news cycles and giving their opponents fits. And then the underpinnings of American capitalism begin to sink -- and with them sunk McCain.

An election dominated at its inception by the war in Iraq is now overwhelmingly focused on the economy. More than half of voters in polls say that the economy is their top concern and Senator Obama enjoys double digit leads among voters asked who can better fix our economic mess. Put simply, there is no way Senator McCain can win if he continues to trail Senator Obama by double digits on the top concern of more than half of voters.

State polls are beginning to reflect this. If the election were tomorrow, Obama would win all of the states John Kerry carried and add Iowa, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, Ohio and Florida. Barack Obama is campaigning in Indiana, which last went for a Democrat in 1964 and North Carolina, which has gone for a Democrat only once in thirty-four years. At the same time John McCain has pulled out of Michigan and Sarah Palin has been forced to visit Nebraska.

This dynamic is very unlikely to change. John McCain's goal in the first debate was to discredit Senator Obama as a credible Commander in Chief and elevate the issue of foreign policy and national security. He didn't come close. Absent a domestic terror attack the economy will remain the number one issue in the race, and there is little Senator McCain can do to make up his gap with Senator Obama on it. Oh, Senator McCain will try to make issues of Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko and Rev. Wright, and that might hurt Senator Obama around the margins -- but it will not prevent him from winning. The economy is simply bigger than the rogues gallery that John McCain is conjuring up.

Why is this? Why won't the swiftboat tactics work this year?

Its easy to lose sight of it in the day to day coverage, but the collapse of Wall Street in the last weeks was a seminal event in the history of our nation and our politics. To put the crisis in perspective, Americans have lost a combined 1 trillion dollars in net worth in just the last four weeks alone. Just as President Bush's failures in Iraq undermined his party's historic advantage on national security issues, the financial calamity has shown the ruinous implications of the Republican mania for deregulation and slavish devotion to totally unfettered markets.

Republicans and Democrats have been arguing over the proper role of government for a century. In 1980 voters sided with Ronald Reagan and Republicans that government had become too big and intrusive. Then the economy worked in the Republicans' favor. Today the pendulum has swung in our direction. Republican philosophies have been discredited by events. Voters understand this. This is a big election about big issues. McCain's smallball will not work. This race will not be decided by lipsticked pigs. And John McCain can not escape that reality. The only unknowns are the size of the margin and the breadth of the Democratic advantage in the next Congress.

[jaguarr]

It's Over: Why Bill Ayers Won't Save John McCain
Howard Wolfson, The New Republic obviously, this will be of a liberal bias

...and Sarah Palin has been forced to visit Nebraska.

:lmao:

jag

[souvlaki]

MCCAIN INEXPLICABLY BLAMES OBAMA FOR MARKET FALL.... I knew McCain was desperate, but I didn't expect him to get this ridiculous. From McCain's speech in New Mexico this afternoon:

"Even after [Obama] refused to lift a finger to prevent this crisis, when the crisis hit, he was missing in action. He didn't start making calls to round up votes until after the rescue bill failed in the House and the markets crashed. We continue to see the price of delay today as the markets continue to fall. Today the Dow has fallen below 10,000. And yet, members of his own party said they felt no pressure to vote for the bill."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_10/015055.php

[jaguarr]

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_10/015055.php

"Even after Obama refused to lift a finger to prevent this crisis..."

LOL! WTF? :huh:

jag

[kainedamo]

"Even after Obama refused to lift a finger to prevent this crisis..."

LOL! WTF? :huh:

jag

Yeah, man! It's all on Obama didn't ya know :o

[Schlosser85]

"Even after [Obama] refused to lift a finger to prevent this crisis, when the crisis hit, he was missing in action. He didn't start making calls to round up votes until after the rescue bill failed in the House and the markets crashed. We continue to see the price of delay today as the markets continue to fall. Today the Dow has fallen below 10,000. And yet, members of his own party said they felt no pressure to vote for the bill."


Do McCain and Palin just get more ridiculous with each passing day, or is just me? What did McCain, the proud deregulator, do to prevent this crisis? This has nothing to do with Obama, and McCain knows it perfectly well.

The Straight Talk Express. LMAO!

[redfirebird2008]

Methinks it's more the fault of McCain's history of economic de-regulation including with his buddy Charles Keating. But yeah, let's blame a 20 year crisis on a person who was still in college at the time this mess started. Wonderful idea, McNasty.

[Gilpesh]

The Straight Talk Express. LMAO!

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

:heart: Daily Show :heart:

[Bunker]

Devastating article from Rolling Stone about McCain as the Make-Believe Maverick:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

"George W. Bush was a better pilot."

:lmao:

BURN.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Whatever happened to the Straight Talk Express?

I miss the Straight Talk Express.

Of course, to use it now...would be a lie, so atleast he's being honest.

[jaguarr]

This is the new Straight Talk Express:

http://www.valueacceleration.com/images/titanic.jpg

jag

[souvlaki]

This is the new Straight Talk Express:

http://www.valueacceleration.com/images/titanic.jpg

jag

Well, since we are talking about the "straight talk express" I guess this picture is finally relevant enough for me to post:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v429/xiu_xiu/palin_train.jpg

I always pictured the "straight talk express" looking like the one next to McCain.

[Superman]

Devastating article from Rolling Stone about McCain as the Make-Believe Maverick:

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain


"George W. Bush was a better pilot.":huh:

You know I've never gave it much thought but he's right. Bush never crashed 3 jets while he was in the ANG.

It just kills me that McCain is getting away with this fairy tale that he was some kind of "Ace Pilot" in nam.:whatever:

[Superman]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v429/xiu_xiu/palin_train.jpg

:lmao::applaud

[Superman]

It's Over: Why Bill Ayers Won't Save John McCain
Howard Wolfson, The New Republic obviously, this will be of a liberal bias

Perpetually fretting Democrats will not want to accept it. The campaigns themselves can't afford to believe it. Many journalists know it but can't say it. And there will certainly be some twists and turns along the way. But take it to a well capitalized bank: Bill Ayers isn't going to save John McCain. The race is over.

John McCain's candidacy is as much a casualty of Wall Street as Lehman or Merrill. Like those once vibrant institutions, McCain's collapse was stunning and quick. One minute you are a well-respected brand. The next you are yelling at the messengers of your demise as all around you the numbers start blinking red and stop adding up.

McCain's road was difficult to begin with: the President of his party has had record-low approval ratings for two years and the number of Americans who say the country is heading in the wrong direction is stratospheric. He also had the misfortune to be pitted against an exceptional candidate running an extremely well-executed campaign.

Still, before Wall Street's collapse Senator McCain was ahead. His approval ratings remained high, his VP pick had generated excitement and interest, and his campaign operatives were capable, on any given day, of winning news cycles and giving their opponents fits. And then the underpinnings of American capitalism begin to sink -- and with them sunk McCain.

An election dominated at its inception by the war in Iraq is now overwhelmingly focused on the economy. More than half of voters in polls say that the economy is their top concern and Senator Obama enjoys double digit leads among voters asked who can better fix our economic mess. Put simply, there is no way Senator McCain can win if he continues to trail Senator Obama by double digits on the top concern of more than half of voters.

State polls are beginning to reflect this. If the election were tomorrow, Obama would win all of the states John Kerry carried and add Iowa, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, Ohio and Florida. Barack Obama is campaigning in Indiana, which last went for a Democrat in 1964 and North Carolina, which has gone for a Democrat only once in thirty-four years. At the same time John McCain has pulled out of Michigan and Sarah Palin has been forced to visit Nebraska.

This dynamic is very unlikely to change. John McCain's goal in the first debate was to discredit Senator Obama as a credible Commander in Chief and elevate the issue of foreign policy and national security. He didn't come close. Absent a domestic terror attack the economy will remain the number one issue in the race, and there is little Senator McCain can do to make up his gap with Senator Obama on it. Oh, Senator McCain will try to make issues of Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko and Rev. Wright, and that might hurt Senator Obama around the margins -- but it will not prevent him from winning. The economy is simply bigger than the rogues gallery that John McCain is conjuring up.

Why is this? Why won't the swiftboat tactics work this year?

Its easy to lose sight of it in the day to day coverage, but the collapse of Wall Street in the last weeks was a seminal event in the history of our nation and our politics. To put the crisis in perspective, Americans have lost a combined 1 trillion dollars in net worth in just the last four weeks alone. Just as President Bush's failures in Iraq undermined his party's historic advantage on national security issues, the financial calamity has shown the ruinous implications of the Republican mania for deregulation and slavish devotion to totally unfettered markets.

Republicans and Democrats have been arguing over the proper role of government for a century. In 1980 voters sided with Ronald Reagan and Republicans that government had become too big and intrusive. Then the economy worked in the Republicans' favor. Today the pendulum has swung in our direction. Republican philosophies have been discredited by events. Voters understand this. This is a big election about big issues. McCain's smallball will not work. This race will not be decided by lipsticked pigs. And John McCain can not escape that reality. The only unknowns are the size of the margin and the breadth of the Democratic advantage in the next Congress.



I like what he said but I'm not going to call it over till it's over. Alot could happen in 30 days. :csad:

[The Senator]

I like what he said but I'm not going to call it over till it's over. Alot could happen in 30 days. :csad:

Like McCain could call Obama a terrorist... oh, wait, that's what his supporters are already saying, and what his people are already implying:

Attendee at McCain rally calls Obama a 'terrorist'
CNN


Some supporters of the Republican ticket stole a share of the spotlight at Monday campaign rallies with controversial attacks aimed at Barack Obama.

In Albuquerque, New Mexico, John McCain pushed his campaign’s most recent line of attack against Obama: that the Democratic nominee represents a relatively unknown risk. “All people want to know is: What has this man ever actually accomplished in government? What does he plan for America? In short: Who is the real Barack Obama?” Someone in the crowd responded by yelling: “Terrorist!” The crowd roared, and McCain seemed startled, but it is unclear whether he actually heard what the man shouted. He did not respond to the attack.

And before GOP VP nominee Sarah Palin entered a campaign rally in Estero, Florida, Lee County Sheriff Mike Scott took aim at “Barack Hussein Obama.”

“On November 4, let’s leave Barack Hussein Obama wondering what happened,” he said. As the crowd cheered, he gave a forceful salute.

The McCain-Palin campaign immediately distanced itself from Scott’s remark. “We do not condone this inappropriate rhetoric, which distracts from the real questions of judgment, character and experience that voters will base their decisions on this November,” said campaign spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt.

In March, McCain rebuked conservative radio talk show host Bill Cunningham for repeatedly referring to the Illinois senator as “Barack Hussein Obama” while warming up the crowd at a campaign event in Cincinnati, before the Arizona senator took the stage.

[Bunker]

I can honestly see Obama getting shot.

[Gilpesh]

I can honestly see Obama getting shot.

Thanks to McCain's tactics... I mean, it isn't like he sold out the US while he was held captive right? Right? ..... right? :csad:

[ShadowBoxing]

I can honestly see Obama getting shot.
It's a risk even harmless white guys like Reagan face. Although, if a man shoots Barack for being a 'terrorist' I'll hold McCain personally responsible and I hope he rots in one of our prisons for it.

[Knives]

It's a risk even harmless white guys like Reagan face. Although, if a man shoots Barack for being a 'terrorist' I'll hold McCain personally responsible and I hope he rots in one of our prisons for it.

Agreed.

[redfirebird2008]

It's a risk even harmless white guys like Reagan face. Although, if a man shoots Barack for being a 'terrorist' I'll hold McCain personally responsible and I hope he rots in one of our prisons for it.

It's not just McCain. It's his strategists like Steve Schmidt (Rove's protege). Everyone in his campaign would be deserving of blame due to the fact that they are all involved in planning and implementing the "he's a terrorist" strategy. Anything to win. McCain is not an honorable man, regardless of what the media tells you. He's used nepotism and corruption constantly in his life to claw his way to the top of the ruling class in this country. An honorable man doesn't allow someone at his political rally to call a fellow Senator a terrorist.

[The Senator]

If Obama is assassinated before the presidential election, then he will become far more powerful in death than he would have when he was alive. There is no doubt in my mind that a skeptical public will look at the McCain campaign and try to tie him to his death; and something tells me that from the ashes of Obama's death, Hillary Clinton will rise to become the Democratic nominee, with Biden as her running mate, and would crush the electoral map come November 4 (assuming the election went on as previously planned).

Just a hypothesis... but I feel it is likely none the less.

[Excel]

I have been petrified for Obamas safety forever; I was on edge during the entire acceptance.

IF He is shot/killed prior to election day, I would agree with Jman that Biden should remain vp and Hillary become the nominee.

That said, I would not put any serious blame on John McCain.

[Excel]

I have been petrified for Obamas safety forever; I was on edge during the entire acceptance.

IF He is shot/killed prior to election day, I would agree with Jman that Biden should remain vp and Hillary become the nominee.

That said, I would not put any serious blame on John McCain.

[Knives]

Someone, of course, made this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtx97MR08Cg

:woot:

[redfirebird2008]

I have been petrified for Obamas safety forever; I was on edge during the entire acceptance.

IF He is shot/killed prior to election day, I would agree with Jman that Biden should remain vp and Hillary become the nominee.

That said, I would not put any serious blame on John McCain.

McCain's campaign is actively riling up paranoia among their base that Obama is a terrorist "Manchurian Candidate."

[Arc-Light]

:pal::lmao:

[redfirebird2008]

Someone, of course, made this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtx97MR08Cg

:woot:

John McPenguin...:hehe:

I've got a better idea for him. Maybe he should be in the next Batman movie instead of running for President! :woot:

[Matt]

If Obama is assassinated before the presidential election, then he will become far more powerful in death than he would have when he was alive. There is no doubt in my mind that a skeptical public will look at the McCain campaign and try to tie him to his death; and something tells me that from the ashes of Obama's death, Hillary Clinton will rise to become the Democratic nominee, with Biden as her running mate, and would crush the electoral map come November 4 (assuming the election went on as previously planned).

Just a hypothesis... but I feel it is likely none the less.

I have been petrified for Obamas safety forever; I was on edge during the entire acceptance.

IF He is shot/killed prior to election day, I would agree with Jman that Biden should remain vp and Hillary become the nominee.

That said, I would not put any serious blame on John McCain.

Under party rules, once the VP is officially nominated, they take the place of the nominee if something were to happen prior to the election. Being as Biden sought the nomination himself, I doubt he would just step aside to let Clinton has the position.

But yeah, if Obama died, then Democrats would win in a land slide.

[Fading]

There are several things I will never understand. What goes thru a murderers mind, how he can justify killing (outside of self defense or the defense of another that is). What goes thru a pedofiles mind. How ppl can judge others based on skin color. To a much lesser extent (not near as bad as what I just mentioned), but why attacks like these even work when dealing with politics.

4 years ago they questioned Kerry's military service. Obama is currently being called a terrorist, saying he's palling around with terrorist, being hated on because ppl think he's a muslim, etc. Part of me actually thought McCain might have been an ok guy in real life, but this race really is showing the worst of him. He can't hang on the issues so he resorts to tactics that stop just short of hate speech. Yet his base is energized by this and screaming at rallies that he's a terrorist.

If any Dem were to ever question McCain's service tho there would be a public lynching. If Obama questions Palin it would be bullying.

[Fading]

Someone, of course, made this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtx97MR08Cg

:woot:

LOL. Now if only we could get Palin to come out dressed like Catwoman.

I can honestly see Obama getting shot

I hope not. I'm going to remain hopefully and probably naive and say he won't. I'm sure there are white supremacists who would love to, but security around a president has been upped significantly. Plus, part of me would love to believe we've moved past shooting things we don't agree with, even tho I know that's not true and I'm deluding myself.

[StrainedEyes]

It's extremely dirty. I hope someone at the 'town hall' tomorrow asks McCain why he is trying to paint Obama as a terrorist.

[The Senator]

Under party rules, once the VP is officially nominated, they take the place of the nominee if something were to happen prior to the election. Being as Biden sought the nomination himself, I doubt he would just step aside to let Clinton has the position.

But yeah, if Obama died, then Democrats would win in a land slide.

Well... Clinton would be on the ticket, regardless of whether Biden moves or not. There's no doubt in my mind that she would be left off.

And actually, having Clinton serve as his running mate would give Biden a chance to step aside in 2012, and allow Clinton to seek the presidency as the sitting Vice President. Biden won't be able to run a national campaign at 69.

But... this is all wacky hypothesis, hopefully.

[The Senator]

It's extremely dirty. I hope someone at the 'town hall' tomorrow asks McCain why he is trying to paint Obama as a terrorist.

Questions that pointed won't be asked.

[StrainedEyes]

Questions that pointed won't be asked.

What good is live tv! :cmad:

[Matt]

Well... Clinton would be on the ticket, regardless of whether Biden moves or not. There's no doubt in my mind that she would be left off.

And actually, having Clinton serve as his running mate would give Biden a chance to step aside in 2012, and allow Clinton to seek the presidency as the sitting Vice President. Biden won't be able to run a national campaign at 69.

But... this is all wacky hypothesis, hopefully.

I agree Clinton would be the logical VP. I don't think Biden would step aside though, unless he found the stresses of the Presidency too much to take (LBJ-style). McCain has ran a national wide campaign at 72, I'm sure Biden could do it at 69. Plus he would have the advantage of being incumbent.

[Matt]

It's extremely dirty. I hope someone at the 'town hall' tomorrow asks McCain why he is trying to paint Obama as a terrorist.

I don't think Brokaw would let that through :cwink:

[The Senator]

I agree Clinton would be the logical VP. I don't think Biden would step aside though, unless he found the stresses of the Presidency too much to take (LBJ-style). McCain has ran a national wide campaign at 72, I'm sure Biden could do it at 69. Plus he would have the advantage of being incumbent.

Biden has had two strokes and is obviously aged. I just don't see him doing it in four years.

[Knives]

Someone at a Palin rally shouted for Obama to be KILLED:

CLEARWATER, Fla. -- "Okay, so Florida, you know that you're going to have to hang onto your hats," Sarah Palin told a rally of a few thousand here this morning, "because from now until Election Day it may get kind of rough."

You betcha. And the person dishing out the roughest stuff at the moment is Sarah Palin.

"I was reading my copy of the New York Times the other day," she said.

"Booooo!" replied the crowd.

"I knew you guys would react that way, okay," she continued. "So I was reading the New York Times and I was really interested to read about Barack's friends from Chicago."

It was time to revive the allegation, made over the weekend, that Obama "pals around" with terrorists, in this case Bill Ayers, late of the Weather Underground. Many independent observers say Palin's allegations are a stretch; Obama served on a Chicago charitable board with Ayers, now an education professor, and has condemned his past activities.

"Now it turns out, one of his earliest supporters is a man named Bill Ayers," Palin said.

"Boooo!" said the crowd.

"And, according to the New York Times, he was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and our U.S. Capitol,'" she continued.

"Boooo!" the crowd repeated.

"Kill him!" proposed one man in the audience.

Palin went on to say that "Obama held one of the first meetings of his political career in Bill Ayers's living room, and they've worked together on various projects in Chicago." Here, Palin began to connect the dots. "These are the same guys who think that patriotism is paying higher taxes -- remember that's what Joe Biden had said. "And" -- she paused and sighed -- "I am just so fearful that this is not a man who sees America the way you and I see America, as the greatest force for good in the world. I'm afraid this is someone who sees America as 'imperfect enough' to work with a former domestic terrorist who had targeted his own country."

"Boooo!" said the audience.


What a class act that McCain/Palin ticket!

[redfirebird2008]

Biden has had two strokes and is obviously aged. I just don't see him doing it in four years.

McCain's had cancer 4 times and is obviously aged. Now don't you REALLY wonder why the hell this man was running for President at such a crucial time in history? Oh wait, nevermind, you already know the answer. "Country First" my ass. It's always been about Johnny Mac and it always will be. It's his world and the rest of us are just along for the ride.

[Fading]

Someone at a Palin rally shouted for Obama to be KILLED:



What a class act that McCain/Palin ticket!

Wow...so someone shouts to kill Obama and Palin continues with the speech that set the guy off to say that as if nothing happened? At a McCain rally someone shouted Obama was a terrorist and McCain kept going. It's pathetic that the crowd shouts this stuff, and even more pathetic that the McCain/Palin ticket practically encourage it by saying lies like, "Obama pals around with terrorists" which encourages the crowd.

ATM I am leaning Democrat obviously, but honestly I could be either. If the Republican ticket provided me with something better than the Dem ticket then I'd be all over it. However atm the republican base is really putting me off. Not all, some very good republicans out there. It's just on other boards you hear hate speech about Obama's ethnic background, and you see things like this, and hear talk about how Dem's are weak and want to negotiate with terrorists.

[redfirebird2008]

Questions that pointed won't be asked.

Especially not with Brokaw, who is in the tank for McCain, filtering the questions. Guaranteed there will be questions about either Ayers, Wright, or Rezko but nothing about McCain's scandals of the past.

[Überlibran]

Especially not with Brokaw, who is in the tank for McCain, filtering the questions. Guaranteed there will be questions about either Ayers, Wright, or Rezko but nothing about McCain's scandals of the past.That's one thing I'm worried about as well. Tom Brokaw's journalistic integrity has been pretty much left to the wayside recently, especially with that misleading, weeks-old poll he quoted the week before on Meet The Press, his 'envoy missions' between the McCain Campaign and MSNBC, and his pretty obvious 'concern trolling' when it comes to the Obama campaign.

[Gilpesh]

And he has also just come out and said it... that he's a 'friend' to McCain. If Obama was half the scumbag McCain is, he would have already done the pre-debate calling the moderator out.

[Schlosser85]

if obama was half the scumbag mccain is, he would have already done the pre-debate calling the moderator out.

qft

[kane9321]

I hope obama brings up the Keating 5 scandal..to bury McCain once and for all

[StrainedEyes]

Especially not with Brokaw, who is in the tank for McCain, filtering the questions. Guaranteed there will be questions about either Ayers, Wright, or Rezko but nothing about McCain's scandals of the past.

I sincerely hope that is not the case. If it is, I hope the media picks up on it immediately.

[jaguarr]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/us/politics/07health.html?em

October 7, 2008
Business Cool Toward McCain’s Health Coverage Plan
By KEVIN SACK

American business, typically a reliable Republican cheerleader, is decidedly lukewarm about Senator John McCain’s proposal to overhaul the health care system by revamping the tax treatment of health benefits, officials with leading trade groups say.

The officials, with organizations like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and the National Federation of Independent Business, predicted in recent interviews that the McCain plan, which eliminates the exclusion of health benefits from income taxes, would accelerate the erosion of employer-sponsored health insurance and do little to reduce the number of uninsured from 45 million.

That is largely the argument made in recent days by Mr. McCain’s opponent, Senator Barack Obama, who has revived a dormant campaign debate over health care with an intensified attack on the McCain plan. Conscious that the issue plays well with swing voters, Mr. Obama devoted a speech on Saturday to characterizing Mr. McCain’s plan as “radical” and a “Washington bait and switch,” and he has reinforced the message in four television advertisements.

That has set off a furious back-and-forth between the campaigns, with the McCain campaign countering that Mr. Obama’s plan also would undermine employer coverage by mandating that medium and large companies either provide insurance for their workers or pay a tax. The payments would help subsidize a new government health plan for low-income people, and some economists believe it would entice workers away from their employer-sponsored coverage.

Mr. Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, opened his assault two weeks ago by telling crowds that Mr. McCain “wants to tax your health benefits.” He did not explain that Mr. McCain, the Republican nominee, would offer tax credits in exchange to cover the increased liability for many Americans.

Over the weekend, Mr. Obama more accurately characterized the McCain plan as a swap but one that would work to the detriment of millions. Middle-class families, he said, would “watch the system they rely on begin to unravel before their eyes.”

The business leaders said that was also their fear. Despite steady declines this decade, employers still provide coverage to 62 percent of Americans younger than 65. Surveys show that they want to continue doing so to attract and maintain a productive workforce.

The business leaders forecast that Mr. McCain’s free-market approach would impose particular burdens on small businesses and old-line manufacturers that are already struggling.

“To some in the business community, this is very discomforting,” said R. Bruce Josten, executive vice president for government affairs at the Chamber of Commerce. “The private marketplace, in my opinion, is ill prepared today with an infrastructure for an individual-based health insurance system.”

Health economists are ideologically divided over Mr. McCain’s plan. Analysts who support it project that it might provide coverage to 25 million people, while critics predict that the number of newly insured would peak at five million and then decline.

Though Mr. McCain says his plan would not add to federal spending, the Tax Policy Center has estimated that it will cost at least $1.3 trillion over 10 years. And while right-leaning economists emphasize that the plan would provide a tax cut for the average American, opponents respond that certain high-earners will face an increase and that some in the middle class may break even only by reducing their coverage.

The centerpiece of Mr. McCain’s plan is the elimination of the provision that has, since 1954, excluded the value of employer-sponsored health benefits from a worker’s taxable income. The exclusion can be worth thousands of dollars for some workers.

In its place, Mr. McCain would offer all Americans income tax credits of $2,500 per person or $5,000 per family for heath coverage, regardless of how they bought it.

Mr. McCain would not change the ability of companies to deduct health benefits as a business expense on their corporate income taxes. And advisers have said he would continue to exclude the value of health benefits from the payroll taxes that finance Social Security and Medicare.

The income-tax exclusion benefits 162.5 million Americans but costs the federal government $145.3 billion in foregone revenue, second only to the tax break for retirement account contributions, according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.

Still, the exclusion has encouraged the pooling of workers into large purchasing groups that tend to lower costs. And with group coverage, no one can be denied coverage, everyone pays the same rates and the healthy and wealthy essentially subsidize the sick and the poor. Consequently, it is often more expensive to buy equivalent coverage as an individual, partly because insurers pass along the administrative costs of weeding out unacceptable risks.

The exclusion has long been criticized as unfair because the 18 million people who buy health insurance on their own are not entitled to it. Critics also say that it is most valuable to those in high tax brackets with the costliest health plans, that it contributes to job-lock, and that the subsidization of group insurance encourages people to buy more coverage and consume more health care than they need, driving up health spending.

Mr. McCain and his health advisers argue that replacing the tax exclusion with tax credits for all would encourage consumers to shop more deliberately, stoking competition in the marketplace and lowering premiums. He would allow them to shop for policies across state lines.

“It will help to change the whole dynamic of the current health care system by putting individuals and families back in charge and forcing insurance companies to respond with better service at lower cost,” Mr. McCain wrote recently in The New England Journal of Medicine.

For some workers, depending on their tax bracket and insurance costs, the new tax credits would exceed the value of the tax exclusion, making the swap profitable. But with the average employer-sponsored family policy costing $12,680 this year, other workers would find the exchange a losing proposition. They would either have to spend more, reduce their coverage or persuade employers to make up the difference.

Officials with eight business trade groups contacted by The New York Times predicted the McCain plan would raise costs and force some employers to stop providing health benefits.

A recent survey of 187 corporate executives by the American Benefits Council and Miller & Chevalier, a consulting firm, found that three-fourths felt the repeal of the tax exclusion would have a “strong negative impact” on their workers. Only 4 percent said they would provide additional pay to fill any gaps.

John J. Castellani, president of the Business Roundtable, an association of leading chief executive officers, said his group instead supported extending the tax exclusion to those who bought coverage on their own.

“One of the things we don’t want to do,” Mr. Castellani said, “is jeopardize 170 million Americans who do get insurance through their employers.”

A number of business officials are worried that Mr. McCain’s tax credits would lure young and healthy workers into the individual market to take advantage of cheaper, less-generous policies. That, they say, would leave employers to cover an older and sicker pool of workers, forcing up premiums.

Workers who found that they had less buying power with the tax credits than with the tax exclusion could be expected to pressure employers to raise salaries or benefit subsidies, the business officials said.

“There are huge questions about the $5,000 per family being an insufficient amount in terms of being able to purchase the same coverage,” said Mr. Josten with the Chamber of Commerce.

Helen B. Darling, president of the National Business Group on Health, a coalition of 300 companies, agreed that many workers would face a net loss. “The last thing you want to do to the average working person, especially when you’re bailing out big financial companies, is take something they hold near and dear partially away,” Ms. Darling said.

Economists forecast that the problem would worsen over time because Mr. McCain, according to advisers, would index his tax credits to overall inflation. Health insurance premiums have grown four times faster than inflation since 1999.

James A. Klein, president of the American Benefits Council, said concern that the tax credits would not keep up with inflation was a primary reason his 280 member companies “take a very dim view” of repealing the tax exclusion.

Mr. McCain theorizes that if the government’s subsidization of health care is capped, consumers will cut back on their use of the system, slowing the growth in spending. But critics worry that he overestimates his ability to control health costs, and that a growing number of people will find they cannot obtain traditional coverage.

jag

[Marx]

ATTENDEE AT MCCAIN RALLY CALLS OBAMA A 'TERRORIST'
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/06/attendee-at-mccain-rally-calls-obama-a-terrorist/





:whatever:

[StrainedEyes]

ATTENDEE AT MCCAIN RALLY CALLS OBAMA A 'TERRORIST'
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/06/attendee-at-mccain-rally-calls-obama-a-terrorist/





:whatever:

Someone at a Palin rally yelled that Obama should be "killed".

[Marx]

Someone at a Palin rally yelled that Obama should be "killed".

:facepalm

Why am I not surprised...

[StrainedEyes]

:facepalm

Why am I not surprised...

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/06/in_fla_palin_goes_for_the_roug.html

[StrainedEyes]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/weekinreview/05schwartz.html?no_interstitial

They don't think John McCain is a Maverick. :csad:

[Lightning Strykez!]

CLEARWATER, Fla. -- "Okay, so Florida, you know that you're going to have to hang onto your hats," Sarah Palin told a rally of a few thousand here this morning, "because from now until Election Day it may get kind of rough."

You betcha. And the person dishing out the roughest stuff at the moment is Sarah Palin.

"I was reading my copy of the New York Times the other day," she said.

"Booooo!" replied the crowd.

"I knew you guys would react that way, okay," she continued. "So I was reading the New York Times and I was really interested to read about Barack's friends from Chicago."

It was time to revive the allegation, made over the weekend, that Obama "pals around" with terrorists, in this case Bill Ayers, late of the Weather Underground. Many independent observers say Palin's allegations are a stretch; Obama served on a Chicago charitable board with Ayers, now an education professor, and has condemned his past activities.

"Now it turns out, one of his earliest supporters is a man named Bill Ayers," Palin said.

"Boooo!" said the crowd.

"And, according to the New York Times, he was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, 'launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and our U.S. Capitol,'" she continued.

"Boooo!" the crowd repeated.

"Kill him!" proposed one man in the audience.

Palin went on to say that "Obama held one of the first meetings of his political career in Bill Ayers's living room, and they've worked together on various projects in Chicago." Here, Palin began to connect the dots. "These are the same guys who think that patriotism is paying higher taxes -- remember that's what Joe Biden had said. "And" -- she paused and sighed -- "I am just so fearful that this is not a man who sees America the way you and I see America, as the greatest force for good in the world. I'm afraid this is someone who sees America as 'imperfect enough' to work with a former domestic terrorist who had targeted his own country."

"Boooo!" said the audience.

It saddens me that this woman is going out like this.

Sarah
Satan

:down

[Lightning Strykez!]

That's one thing I'm worried about as well. Tom Brokaw's journalistic integrity has been pretty much left to the wayside recently, especially with that misleading, weeks-old poll he quoted the week before on Meet The Press, his 'envoy missions' between the McCain Campaign and MSNBC, and his pretty obvious 'concern trolling' when it comes to the Obama campaign.

For some reason I didn't know that Brokaw as a Republican. Is Jim Lehrer a Democrat?

[Überlibran]

For some reason I didn't know that Brokaw as a Republican. Is Jim Lehrer a Democrat?I dunno. He says he's unaffiliated and he seems to do a pretty good job of being balanced in his reporting, so it's hard to determine where he leans. That's a sign of a pretty good journalist, who are a rare and dying breed.

[Comicfilmer]

Anybody catch the Early Show this morning? I saw it before heading to work and they had the country singer who wrote that "Raising McCain" song on. He was outside and surrounded by a huge crowd of Obama supporters all carrying enormous signs. He sang his song and everyone looked at him all straight-faced, then after they all started chanting for Obama. It was epic.

[jaguarr]

Anybody catch the Early Show this morning? I saw it before heading to work and they had the country singer who wrote that "Raising McCain" song on. He was outside and surrounded by a huge crowd of Obama supporters all carrying enormous signs. He sang his song and everyone looked at him all straight-faced, then after they all started chanting for Obama. It was epic.

LMAO! Okay, I need to see video of this. :D

jag

[Raiden]

It saddens me that this woman is going out like this.

Sarah
Satan

:down

Palin has definite sank to a new low, and I hope she will eventually be brought down by the scandals that surrounded her.

[Marx]

And so it begins!

:whatever:

I just saw an ad by 'The Committee For Truth In Politics' that is saying Obama doesn't support the protection of babies!

*cue overly dramatic, scream of horror with a slight southern accent*

'OBAMA KILLS BABIES!'



This election continues to p*** me off! :cmad:

[Marx]

GINGRICH: MCCAIN FACING THE 'CRISIS OF HIS CAREER'
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/07/mccain-facing-the-crisis-of-his-career-gingrich-says/





(It's kinda hard to break from the economic bailout when you 'suspend' your campaign to go back to Washington to work on it and 'save the day', then claim success for the original version of the bill...before it failed, and then you cast your vote for the second version that passed. John McCain seperating himself from the economic bailout? Good luck with that. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif)

[Raiden]

And he has also just come out and said it... that he's a 'friend' to McCain. If Obama was half the scumbag McCain is, he would have already done the pre-debate calling the moderator out.

So Ifill just wrote a book about race and politics and were questioned by McCain about her neutrality, but Brokaw (who's a self-described friend of McCain) doesn't get his own bias questioned by Obama? I think Brokaw should've be replaced, same as if the moderator were a "friend" of Obama.

[Marx]

So Ifill just wrote a book about race and politics and were questioned by McCain about her neutrality, but Brokaw (who's a self-described friend of McCain) doesn't get his own bias questioned by Obama? I think Brokaw should've be replaced, same as if the moderator were a "friend" of Obama.

Tom Brokaw is a very well respected journalist, as is Gwen Ifill. Neither of them should be replaced. They are BOTH more than capable of being objective and fair.

[Comicfilmer]

Tom Brokaw is a very well respected journalist, as is Gwen Ifill. Neither of them should be replaced. They are BOTH more than capable of being objective and fair.

I agree.

[Überlibran]

I agree. I think he's capable of it, but after he quoted that misleading poll on MTP apropos of nothing, I'm starting to look at him a little askance. We'll see tonight.

[SentinelMind]

Tom Brokaw is a very well respected journalist, as is Gwen Ifill. Neither of them should be replaced. They are BOTH more than capable of being objective and fair.

:up: I concur.

[StorminNorman]

McCain lost this election when he voted for the horrendous-pork ladened Bailout bill.

[StorminNorman]

It saddens me that this woman is going out like this.

Sarah
Satan

:down

No - its sad that McCain's campaign hasn't used a similar attack strategy earlier on Obama. Instead of simply flat out lying about various bills and what not - using the message that Obama doesn't see this country the same way Average Joe does is the exactly how he should of been attacked. The number of circumstantial evidence supporting that stance is outstanding - Ayers, Wright, Michelle's comments, his statements about being ashamed of American's not knowing other languages while in other countries, his comments about guns and religion.

While personally I don't think Obama agrees with Bill Ayers, his political opponents absolutely should attack him on the issue. Palin did a good job with it, IMO.

[SentinelMind]

John McCain shouldn't be the one raising the Bill Ayers, Reverend Wright stuff.....it should be a shady 527 group. John McCain should be selling the Lexington Project, nuclear energy, oil drilling, how he'd drastically cut budgets, size of federal government...give a radical opinion on the Fed. He can't win just attacking Obama on not being patriotic enough.

[Marx]

No - its sad that McCain's campaign hasn't used a similar attack strategy earlier on Obama. Instead of simply flat out lying about various bills and what not - using the message that Obama doesn't see this country the same way Average Joe does is the exactly how he should of been attacked. The number of circumstantial evidence supporting that stance is outstanding - Ayers, Wright, Michelle's comments, his statements about being ashamed of American's not knowing other languages while in other countries, his comments about guns and religion.

While personally I don't think Obama agrees with Bill Ayers, his political opponents absolutely should attack him on the issue. Palin did a good job with it, IMO.

John McCain is in no position to attack Obama for 'not seeing America the way average people do'. And Palin is in no position to invoke Reverend Wright when she gets prayed over to protect herself from witchcraft. Not to mention she says everything is a 'mission from god'.

They're behind, and their pathetic attacks look hypocritical and desperate.

[Visionary]

Nah, he likes it dirty, especially now that he's behind in the polls. I expect McCain to call Obama everything in the book, I expect him to be a very naughty old man tonight.

[Überlibran]

No - its sad that McCain's campaign hasn't used a similar attack strategy earlier on Obama. Instead of simply flat out lying about various bills and what not - using the message that Obama doesn't see this country the same way Average Joe does is the exactly how he should of been attacked. The number of circumstantial evidence supporting that stance is outstanding - Ayers, Wright, Michelle's comments, his statements about being ashamed of American's not knowing other languages while in other countries, his comments about guns and religion.

While personally I don't think Obama agrees with Bill Ayers, his political opponents absolutely should attack him on the issue. Palin did a good job with it, IMO. You do realize that all this 'claiming he pals with terrorists', 'is not a real american', 'hates our troops' is riling up the racists, right? All the 'he's a terrorist', 'kill him', 'treason' responses the campaign has evoked by going nasty like this is not without it's consequences.

[redfirebird2008]

Stormin, no one is more out of touch with normal Americans than John McCain. The man has benefited from nepotism his entire life, both from his grandfather and father's prominence as well as his father-in-law's prominence. Every single job he's ever had has been due to nepotism. If that's what average Americans are used to, then I'm Batman.

[The Senator]

No - its sad that McCain's campaign hasn't used a similar attack strategy earlier on Obama. Instead of simply flat out lying about various bills and what not - using the message that Obama doesn't see this country the same way Average Joe does is the exactly how he should of been attacked. The number of circumstantial evidence supporting that stance is outstanding - Ayers, Wright, Michelle's comments, his statements about being ashamed of American's not knowing other languages while in other countries, his comments about guns and religion.

While personally I don't think Obama agrees with Bill Ayers, his political opponents absolutely should attack him on the issue. Palin did a good job with it, IMO.

So, you agree that Obama should be attacking Sarah Palin on her husband's ties to the Alaskan Independence Party, as well as her own bat****-crazy pastor?

[redfirebird2008]

Her pastor is crazy. Claims we need to get rid of the Jewish bankers and replace them with "good Christians with integrity." Sarah Palin was right next to him when he said this to her congregation.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/d7-qzz8_7RE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/d7-qzz8_7RE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Gilpesh]

And according to her rules of disagreement... she hates Jews just as much as her pastor.

[redfirebird2008]

And according to her rules of disagreement... she hates Jews just as much as her pastor.

Precisely. She was also in attendance 2 weeks ago when another speaker stated that terrorist attacks on Israel were God's judgment for their "non-belief" in Christ. If this were Obama, his campaign would be over. The double standard on this issue is hilarious.

[Gilpesh]

Wooooooooow, she really hates Jews.

[jaguarr]

McCain just lost the Florida vote.

jag

[Raiden]

Her pastor is crazy. Claims we need to get rid of the Jewish bankers and replace them with "good Christians with integrity." Sarah Palin was right next to him when he said this to her congregation.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/d7-qzz8_7RE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/d7-qzz8_7RE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Why don't they run this video repeatedly like they did with the Wright video?

[Gilpesh]

Why don't they run this video repeatedly like they did with the Wright video?

Palin is white... and doesn't have a funny name... and isn't a dirty liberal.

[Überlibran]

McCain just lost the Florida vote.

jagNot unless it gets in the news, and it seems like they're ignoring this.

[redfirebird2008]

Why don't they run this video repeatedly like they did with the Wright video?

Because there's a double standard going on. Period. Somehow the white right wingers like Sean Hannity are appalled by the comments of Iran's president but they have no problem when a white Christian church is spouting off similar BS. And make no mistake, claiming that terrorist attacks are God's "judgment" or "punishment" for Jews not believing in Christ is actually pretty similar to Hitler's "excuse" for trying to wipe out the Jews.

[Shifty]

McCain's troubles started when he canceled on Letterman. Maybe the witchdoctor said to go on Letterman to break the curse.
http://www.popeater.com/television/article/letterman-mccain-feud-over-soon/203609

[souvlaki]

Not unless it gets in the news, and it seems like they're ignoring this.

That really irritates me. We had to hear about Rev. Wright ad nauseam for nearly a month and here we have proof of Palin actually in church when these ridiculous things are said and nothing.

[Hobgoblin]

Rolling Stone magazine just published an article on the life of John McCain. I dont know how reliable it is but its an interesting read.

Make Believe Maverick: The Real John McCain
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

[redfirebird2008]

Rolling Stone magazine just published an article on the life of John McCain. I dont know how reliable it is but its an interesting read.

Make Believe Maverick: The Real John McCain
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain

Most of it is actually stuff I've known about him for a while now. The media never reports it because he gives them BBQ picnics at his ranch and pampers them on the campaign trail. This is a man who has not held a job in his entire life without some form of nepotism involved. His entire political career was built on his father-in-law's contacts...some of which were very dirty, including the mob. We all know his military career is one of nepotism and underachievement.

[Hobgoblin]

Most of it is actually stuff I've known about him for a while now. The media never reports it because he gives them BBQ picnics at his ranch and pampers them on the campaign trail. This is a man who has not held a job in his entire life without some form of nepotism involved. His entire political career was built on his father-in-law's contacts...some of which were very dirty, including the mob. We all know his military career is one of nepotism and underachievement.

Every single person here? Ok.

[redfirebird2008]

Every single person here? Ok.

McCain himself admits he was a screwup during his time in the military. Or do you want to deny his official story? Graduated 5th from the bottom of his class, admitted to being a "rebel," both his father and gradfather were 4-star admirals in the Navy...

[Hobgoblin]

McCain himself admits he was a screwup during his time in the military. Or do you want to deny his official story? Graduated 5th from the bottom of his class, admitted to being a "rebel," both his father and gradfather were 4-star admirals in the Navy...

I'm just posting info that people may not know. Its a quick overview of his life all in one place. It doesnt hurt to have it here.

[Comicfilmer]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up McCain's gay sweater.

http://www.pensitoreview.com/2007/07/14/john-mccains-gay-sweater/

By the way - anybody else find the "straight-talk express" to be blatantly homophobic?

[redfirebird2008]

I'm just posting info that people may not know. Its a quick overview of his life all in one place. It doesnt hurt to have it here.

Oh, sorry. I think we have a misunderstanding. My original post was trying to lend credibility. I was more responding to your statement that you weren't sure how reliable it is. I should have been clearer. I was not trying to say it was a bad idea of you to post it. It's a great article and I'm glad you did post it. I should have only quoted the part where you were saying you weren't sure about its reliability. Much of it has been reported over the years by reputable sources, that's all I was trying to get at with my first post.

[StorminNorman]

You do realize that all this 'claiming he pals with terrorists', 'is not a real american', 'hates our troops' is riling up the racists, right? All the 'he's a terrorist', 'kill him', 'treason' responses the campaign has evoked by going nasty like this is not without it's consequences.

So? John McCain shouldn't make campaign moves based on the responses of white trash.

Palin is white... and doesn't have a funny name... and isn't a dirty liberal.

Yes - because there is nothing the media hates more than liberal politicians...:huh:

Most of it is actually stuff I've known about him for a while now. The media never reports it because he gives them BBQ picnics at his ranch and pampers them on the campaign trail. This is a man who has not held a job in his entire life without some form of nepotism involved. His entire political career was built on his father-in-law's contacts...some of which were very dirty, including the mob. We all know his military career is one of nepotism and underachievement.

I think anyone calling a man who gave amazing sacrifice for his brothers in arms one of "underachievement".

[redfirebird2008]

n/m.

[Gilpesh]

Yes - because there is nothing the media hates more than liberal politicians...:huh:

Um... Fox news? Hello?

That's where Wright got most of the screentime... and that's where people hate liberals.

[StorminNorman]

John McCain is in no position to attack Obama for 'not seeing America the way average people do'. And Palin is in no position to invoke Reverend Wright when she gets prayed over to protect herself from witchcraft. Not to mention she says everything is a 'mission from god'.

They're behind, and their pathetic attacks look hypocritical and desperate.

Yes - Palin IS in position to make the statements. It would then be up to Obama to pull that card.

Stormin, no one is more out of touch with normal Americans than John McCain. The man has benefited from nepotism his entire life, both from his grandfather and father's prominence as well as his father-in-law's prominence. Every single job he's ever had has been due to nepotism. If that's what average Americans are used to, then I'm Batman.

Neither of these men are in touch with the needs of normal Americans - but thats not the point. The reality of who is more like average American is irrelevant - all that matters is that Obama has provided more proof of such a difference on camera and a well run campaign could of hung Obama with it.

So, you agree that Obama should be attacking Sarah Palin on her husband's ties to the Alaskan Independence Party, as well as her own bat****-crazy pastor?

If he thought it would be successful? Yes. I don't think anyone is going to care about her husband's ties to an Alaskan Independence Party but the bat****-crazy pastor may be effective if there is footage as explosive as Wrights.

[StorminNorman]

Um... Fox news? Hello?

That's where Wright got most of the screentime... and that's where people hate liberals.

Since when does one news station mean the media as a whole?

[Gilpesh]

Since when does one news station mean the media as a whole?

Since when did I say the media as a whole?

I guess I just assumed Fox, because they are the ones that played it the most. So, my bad for any confusion.

[Marx]

Yes - Palin IS in position to make the statements. It would then be up to Obama to pull that card.

It is hypocritical for Sarah Palin to call out Barack Obama over Reverend Wright when she gets prayed over to protect herself from witchcraft.

[StorminNorman]

It is hypocritical for Sarah Palin to call out Barack Obama over Reverend Wright when she gets prayed over to protect herself from witchcraft.

Its only relevantly hypocritical if it is known.

[redfirebird2008]

It is hypocritical for Sarah Palin to call out Barack Obama over Reverend Wright when she gets prayed over to protect herself from witchcraft.

Oh, Marx. The witch thing is nothing. Watch this:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/d7-qzz8_7RE&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/d7-qzz8_7RE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

So much for preventing that second Holocaust, eh McCain/Palin? Another pastor at her church said that terrorist attacks on Israel are judgment from God because Jews don't believe in Jesus.

[Hobgoblin]

Oh, sorry. I think we have a misunderstanding. My original post was trying to lend credibility. I was more responding to your statement that you weren't sure how reliable it is. I should have been clearer. I was not trying to say it was a bad idea of you to post it. It's a great article and I'm glad you did post it. I should have only quoted the part where you were saying you weren't sure about its reliability. Much of it has been reported over the years by reputable sources, that's all I was trying to get at with my first post.

Ah, gotcha. No problem then.

[Schlosser85]

So? John McCain shouldn't make campaign moves based on the responses of white trash.



Like Joe Six Pack? They pander to the dumbest among us.


I think anyone calling a man who gave amazing sacrifice for his brothers in arms one of "underachievement".


And then voted against funding them when they came home....yea he's just made of honor. :whatever:

[souvlaki]

McCain didn’t mention Ayers’ name during the 90 minutes of Tuesday’s forum. His top aides suggested afterward that, going forward, the candidate wouldn’t focus on the former domestic terrorist nor invoke the name of Obama’s controversial pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14382.html


So... what else can McCain do at this point? Personal attacks are not working, and he's losing on the issues.

[StrainedEyes]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14382.html


So... what else can McCain do at this point? Personal attacks are not working, and he's losing on the issues.

That's what Sarah "Gotcha Journalism Barracuda" Palin is for. That says that McCain won't say those things, but Palin will definitely still go around trying to turn Obama into a terrorist.

[lazur]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14382.html


So... what else can McCain do at this point? Personal attacks are not working, and he's losing on the issues.

He's hardly losing on the issues. He's losing on charisma and articulation and youth.

[StrainedEyes]

He's hardly losing on the issues. He's losing on charisma and articulation and youth.

The only issue he won on last night, according to all of the CNN polls I watched afterwards, was "Who do you think will better handle terrorists?". Otherwise, Obama took it all.

But, yes, McCain does come off like a grumpy old guy.

[kainedamo]

He's hardly losing on the issues. He's losing on charisma and articulation and youth.

Polling shows that by and large people believe Obama is stronger on the economy. So, yes, McCain is losing on the issues.

[redfirebird2008]

He's hardly losing on the issues. He's losing on charisma and articulation and youth.

Nah, he's losing on the economy right now. All Republicans are. Like it or not, the public typically blames or gives credit to the guys in power when things go bad or good. I know the Republicans are blaming the Dems in Congress, and it's definitely true the Dems in Congress deserve a huge chunk of the blame...but most people also realize Bush has been the President for almost 8 years and the Republicans controlled Congress for 6 of those years. Even if this entire thing is actually Clinton's fault or the current Democratic Congress' fault, the public will blame the majority party over the last decade. I personally feel that both sides are equally to blame. I love it when one points out corruption in Congress on one side, meanwhile the person pointing out such corruption is also corrupt in the same way.

[Fading]

I'm not a fan of Bush, and he has done wrong, but I also realize everything isn't his fault. However at the same time I don't blame ppl who do think along those lines. You have a man in charge for 2 terms, during which we go from a surplus to a bad financial crisis. Of course it's a problem that's slowly built up, and Bush probably did rush it along some. However ppl are going to see that and wonder why during 8 years nothing was done to slow it. Why under a former oil company man's leadership gas prices more than doubled.

I'm not blaming everything on Bush, but a lot of ppl do. McCain has a problem with being painted in the same light as Bush. IMO that's every bit as big of an obsticle as his age, or as Palin. Most ppl want to see what makes McCain different from the man in charge during all of these bad events.

IMO McCain hasn't done enough to distance himself from Bush, his age, Palin, his championing of the bailout, his ever changing stances, etc. It's like trying to dig deeper to get out of a hole.

[Schlosser85]

McCain is losing on the issues. Having voted with Bush 90% of the time means that in the public's mind he is linked to all the problems of the Bush Administration. Also, his longtime support of deregulation is likewise associated with being part of the reason for the current economic crisis.

And why do you think Palin is trying to brand Obama a terrorist, trying to make huge stories out of his "lipstick on a pig" comment, hiding behind the "sexism" card, and scapegoating the "gotcha" media for Palin not being able to answer questions coherently? Because the McCain-Palin campaign doesn't have a leg to stand on as far as actual issues, and they know it.

[Raiden]

Nah, he's losing on the economy right now. All Republicans are. Like it or not, the public typically blames or gives credit to the guys in power when things go bad or good. I know the Republicans are blaming the Dems in Congress, and it's definitely true the Dems in Congress deserve a huge chunk of the blame...but most people also realize Bush has been the President for almost 8 years and the Republicans controlled Congress for 6 of those years. Even if this entire thing is actually Clinton's fault or the current Democratic Congress' fault, the public will blame the majority party over the last decade. I personally feel that both sides are equally to blame. I love it when one points out corruption in Congress on one side, meanwhile the person pointing out such corruption is also corrupt in the same way.

I agree. The party in power likes to take the credit when things are going well, but when economy tanked, foreclosure soared, and we are stuck in two wars with no end in sight, I think people have the right to blame it on a party who has occupied WH for the last 8 years and Congress for the 6 two years ago. Dems obviously do share the blame for some of the ills in this country, but GOP imo is more responsible due to their executive and legislative majority in much of the last 8 years.

[redfirebird2008]

I agree. The party in power likes to take the credit when things are going well, but when economy tanked, foreclosure soared, and we are stuck in two wars with no end in sight, I think people have the right to blame it on a party who has occupied WH for the last 8 years and Congress for the 6 two years ago. Dems obviously do share the blame for some of the ills in this country, but GOP imo is more responsible due to their executive and legislative majority in much of the last 8 years.

Dems have controlled Congress the last 2 years (well, almost 2 years). There's been a lot of corruption pointed out against the likes of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd with Fannie and Freddie. However, the Bush administration has pushed for de-regulation in a time when we know corporations are cheating more than ever (Enron anyone?). The first 6 years of his administration, the Republicans pushed through de-regulation laws. And hell, Clinton signed a de-regulation law in 1999 and actually it is the major one that people are saying actually started this mess. But who wrote it? McCain's economic adviser Phil Gramm.

[Marx]

COMMENTARY: WHY AYERS IS RISKY FOR MCCAIN-PALIN
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/martin.townhall/index.html

[Marx]

Dems have controlled Congress the last 2 years (well, almost 2 years). There's been a lot of corruption pointed out against the likes of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd with Fannie and Freddie. However, the Bush administration has pushed for de-regulation in a time when we know corporations are cheating more than ever (Enron anyone?). The first 6 years of his administration, the Republicans pushed through de-regulation laws. And hell, Clinton signed a de-regulation law in 1999 and actually it is the major one that people are saying actually started this mess. But who wrote it? McCain's economic adviser Phil Gramm.

They have a slim majority with the power to overrule nothing. Their 'control' is only symbolic...nothing more.

[Mikelus]

But, yes, McCain does come off like a grumpy old guy.

And he's a "socialist" too! :eek: [paranoid mode off]

McCain wanting to buy "bad mortgages" (another bailout) is a huge turn off for conservatives, he's digging himself up deeper and deeper. :meanie:

[Mikelus]

But, yes, McCain does come off like a grumpy old guy.

And he's a "socialist" too! :eek: [paranoid mode off]

McCain wanting to buy "bad mortgages" (another bailout) is a huge turn off for conservatives, he's digging himself deeper and deeper. :meanie:

[redfirebird2008]

They have a slim majority with the power to overrule nothing. Their 'control' is only symbolic...nothing more.

This is true. It is looking like they will be expanding their power significantly on November 4th. Taking over the executive branch and gaining more seats in both the House and Senate. They will have their chance to prove themselves.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

The Economy is what really spurred this on.

When the economy crashed the party....McCain really shot himself in the foot a couple times.

[The Senator]

You want to know which of McCain's responses truly bothered me last night? It had nothing to do with him using the phrase "that one," or awkwardly telling Tom Brokaw that he wouldn't be the next Treasury Secretary, or repeating talking points against Barack Obama which have been proven false several times before last night's debate. It was McCain's promise that the federal government would purchase every single home loan that citizens have been unable to pay back, and that would be his solution to the subprime mortgage crisis we have been experiencing for roughly a year now.

Does everyone see that? John McCain, the candidate who is supposedly against expanding government, who has repeatedly discussed cutting spending for entitlements and earmarks, who has cited Reagan as a reason why cutting the size of the federal government works, wants to purchase EVERY. SINGLE. LOAN. which has been foreclosed upon over the past several years.

Did you think creating the department of Homeland Security was a huge expansion of government under a Republican president? Then how on EARTH can this NOT be of the same magnitude, if not greater? Do you realize how large of a bureaucracy is needed to do something like this? Do you realize how much of our non-existent federal dollars will have to go to create an agency-- even if it is a temporary agency-- to purchase the thousands of foreclosed loans in order to solve this problem?

If this is John McCain's plan, then those who have lost their homes in the past year or so had better get comfortable living in their tents. Because this problem will not be solved quickly if this is the route he plans to pursue.

[Lightning Strykez!]

You want to know which of McCain's responses truly bothered me last night? It had nothing to do with him using the phrase "that one," or awkwardly telling Tom Brokaw that he wouldn't be the next Treasury Secretary, or repeating talking points against Barack Obama which have been proven false several times before last night's debate. It was McCain's promise that the federal government would purchase every single home loan that citizens have been unable to pay back, and that would be his solution to the subprime mortgage crisis we have been experiencing for roughly a year now.

Does everyone see that? John McCain, the candidate who is supposedly against expanding government, who has repeatedly discussed cutting spending for entitlements and earmarks, who has cited Reagan as a reason why cutting the size of the federal government works, wants to purchase EVERY. SINGLE. LOAN. which has been foreclosed upon over the past several years.

Did you think creating the department of Homeland Security was a huge expansion of government under a Republican president? Then how on EARTH can this NOT be of the same magnitude, if not greater? Do you realize how large of a bureaucracy is needed to do something like this? Do you realize how much of our non-existent federal dollars will have to go to create an agency-- even if it is a temporary agency-- to purchase the thousands of foreclosed loans in order to solve this problem?

If this is John McCain's plan, then those who have lost their homes in the past year or so had better get comfortable living in their tents. Because this problem will not be solved quickly if this is the route he plans to pursue.


Good points, all. :up:

[redfirebird2008]

You want to know which of McCain's responses truly bothered me last night? It had nothing to do with him using the phrase "that one," or awkwardly telling Tom Brokaw that he wouldn't be the next Treasury Secretary, or repeating talking points against Barack Obama which have been proven false several times before last night's debate. It was McCain's promise that the federal government would purchase every single home loan that citizens have been unable to pay back, and that would be his solution to the subprime mortgage crisis we have been experiencing for roughly a year now.

Does everyone see that? John McCain, the candidate who is supposedly against expanding government, who has repeatedly discussed cutting spending for entitlements and earmarks, who has cited Reagan as a reason why cutting the size of the federal government works, wants to purchase EVERY. SINGLE. LOAN. which has been foreclosed upon over the past several years.

Did you think creating the department of Homeland Security was a huge expansion of government under a Republican president? Then how on EARTH can this NOT be of the same magnitude, if not greater? Do you realize how large of a bureaucracy is needed to do something like this? Do you realize how much of our non-existent federal dollars will have to go to create an agency-- even if it is a temporary agency-- to purchase the thousands of foreclosed loans in order to solve this problem?

If this is John McCain's plan, then those who have lost their homes in the past year or so had better get comfortable living in their tents. Because this problem will not be solved quickly if this is the route he plans to pursue.

LOL, the conservatives are furious at him. Limbaugh was saying today, in reference to McCain's campaign being dead, "We're going to have to drag him across the finish line." Mr. Anti-Spending busts out with a socialist position on national TV.

No wonder his campaign does not want to talk about the economy. Every time they do, they make complete fools of themselves. Whether it's Phil Gramm ("Americans are whiners") or McCain himself ("The fundamentals of our economy are strong...let's buy up all the bad mortgages!"), they simply don't get it and don't have any kind of plan.

[redfirebird2008]

New gaffe for McCain. Look for this to be YouTube fodder pretty soon. In a speech today, he referred to all Americans in the following way:

"Across this country, that's what I've been telling my fellow prisoners..."

PTSD maybe?

[jaguarr]

New gaffe for McCain. Look for this to be YouTube fodder pretty soon. In a speech today, he referred to all Americans in the following way:

"Across this country, that's what I've been telling my fellow prisoners..."

PTSD maybe?

LMAO! I can just hear Olbermann now, going "Does John McCain consider America a prison? What does that bode for his Presidency if we make him the warden? And is it Un-American to think of America in this way?"

:funny:

jag

[Matt]

You want to know which of McCain's responses truly bothered me last night? It had nothing to do with him using the phrase "that one," or awkwardly telling Tom Brokaw that he wouldn't be the next Treasury Secretary, or repeating talking points against Barack Obama which have been proven false several times before last night's debate. It was McCain's promise that the federal government would purchase every single home loan that citizens have been unable to pay back, and that would be his solution to the subprime mortgage crisis we have been experiencing for roughly a year now.

Does everyone see that? John McCain, the candidate who is supposedly against expanding government, who has repeatedly discussed cutting spending for entitlements and earmarks, who has cited Reagan as a reason why cutting the size of the federal government works, wants to purchase EVERY. SINGLE. LOAN. which has been foreclosed upon over the past several years.

Did you think creating the department of Homeland Security was a huge expansion of government under a Republican president? Then how on EARTH can this NOT be of the same magnitude, if not greater? Do you realize how large of a bureaucracy is needed to do something like this? Do you realize how much of our non-existent federal dollars will have to go to create an agency-- even if it is a temporary agency-- to purchase the thousands of foreclosed loans in order to solve this problem?

If this is John McCain's plan, then those who have lost their homes in the past year or so had better get comfortable living in their tents. Because this problem will not be solved quickly if this is the route he plans to pursue.

Yeah...I don't like that either.

[redfirebird2008]

LMAO! I can just hear Olbermann now, going "Does John McCain consider America a prison? What does that bode for his Presidency if we make him the warden? And is it Un-American to think of America in this way?"

:funny:

jag

America is a prison. We're all being held captive by the greedy jerks running some of the biggest corporations in the country. They are dragging our economy, and consequently we as a people, straight to hell. It's all about greed.

[Anita18]

New gaffe for McCain. Look for this to be YouTube fodder pretty soon. In a speech today, he referred to all Americans in the following way:

"Across this country, that's what I've been telling my fellow prisoners..."

PTSD maybe?
Oh snap! :lmao:

America is a prison. We're all being held captive by the greedy jerks running some of the biggest corporations in the country. They are dragging our economy, and consequently we as a people, straight to hell. It's all about greed.
It's kind of a prison. I want to leave because of the entire debacle that is Bush, but like Jon Stewart has pointed out, American is really the only country where you can do what he (and Stephen Colbert) can do without any fear of reprisal.

Damn you America and your freedom of speech! :cmad:

LOL Rick Sanchez on CNN just replayed the "Barack Hussein Obama" and the "Terrorist! Kill him!" clip. I love just how incredulous he is about this whole thing. :funny:

[Lightning Strykez!]

LMAO! I can just hear Olbermann now, going "Does John McCain consider America a prison? What does that bode for his Presidency if we make him the warden? And is it Un-American to think of America in this way?"

:funny:

jag

Perhaps it means that John is no longer proud of his country...for the first time in his adult life. :whatever:

[redfirebird2008]

And HERE'S JOHNNY, my fellow prisoners!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JYFm5kK4f1k&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JYFm5kK4f1k&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[jaguarr]

And HERE'S JOHNNY, my fellow prisoners!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JYFm5kK4f1k&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JYFm5kK4f1k&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

LMAO! He didn't even blink. Had no idea what he just said. Scary part is, no one else on stage did either. :o

jag

[Jokers_Wild]

The only thing that could give McCain new life is either a major misstep by Obama, or a major terrorist attack on the US. I hope this doesn't happen.

[Marx]

NYT EDITORIAL: MCCAIN-PALIN HAVE SUNK INTO 'RACE-BAITING AND XENOPHOBIA'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/08/inyti-editorial-mccain-pa_n_132907.html





(I believe the saying is 'the s*** is about to hit the fan!' And it should! This campaign is beyond disgusting! :cmad:)

[Raiden]

And HERE'S JOHNNY, my fellow prisoners!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JYFm5kK4f1k&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JYFm5kK4f1k&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

:lmao:

[Superman]

Well it looks like McCainCo has sunk even lower than I thought they would. Cindy McCain was in Ohio today using Obama's middle name everytime she talked about him.

It's one thing for the fools at Fox to do it but this is disgusting.:whatever:

[jaguarr]

So, McCain's the Great Bi-Partisan Uniter who reaches across the aisle to get things done but he won't even shake Obama's hand after a debate? Okay. :huh:

jag

[Marx]

So, McCain's the Great Bi-Partisan Uniter who reaches across the aisle to get things done but he won't even shake Obama's hand after a debate? Okay. :huh:

jag

The catch to his 'maverickness' and being a 'bipartisan savior of the United States' hinges on whether or not he likes you. :cwink:

[jaguarr]

The catch to his 'maverickness' and being a 'bipartisan savior of the United States' hinges on whether or not he likes you. :cwink:

Then John McCain is a douche.

jag

[Anita18]

Well it looks like McCainCo has sunk even lower than I thought they would. Cindy McCain was in Ohio today using Obama's middle name everytime she talked about him.

It's one thing for the fools at Fox to do it but this is disgusting.:whatever:
:lmao:

This is just getting better and better. McCain die-hards won't care a whit, but I think the sane, undecided voters will look at this and be :wow:

[Marx]

Then John McCain is a douche.

jag

I can't disagree with you there. :cwink:

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Didn't they just finish condemning the use of his middle name? The McCain campaign, that is.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Well it looks like McCainCo has sunk even lower than I thought they would. Cindy McCain was in Ohio today using Obama's middle name everytime she talked about him.

It's one thing for the fools at Fox to do it but this is disgusting.:whatever:

No one is paying her Stepford Cuckoo looking ass any attention. :dry:

[StorminNorman]

(I believe the saying is 'the s*** is about to hit the fan!' And it should! This election is beyond disgusting! :cmad:)

Fixed.

[Raiden]

Well it looks like McCainCo has sunk even lower than I thought they would. Cindy McCain was in Ohio today using Obama's middle name everytime she talked about him.

It's one thing for the fools at Fox to do it but this is disgusting.:whatever:

There's nothing wrong with his middle name Hussein, but the way McCain and Palin are using it, they are making it sound like it's demonic or something. This is fear-mongering at its worst.

[jaguarr]

No one is paying her Stepford Cuckoo looking ass any attention. :dry:

:lmao: I like the way she shrunk away with her hands behind her back when Obama went to shake her hand last night (because McCain wouldn't). The look on her face just screamed out "You....you want me to....touch....a black man? Really?" :funny:

jag

[Raiden]

:lmao: I like the way she shrunk away with her hands behind her back when Obama went to shake her hand last night (because McCain wouldn't). The look on her face just screamed out "You....you want me to....touch....a black man? Really?" :funny:

jag

McCain's display of lack of respect toward Obama has been nothing less than despicable.

[Marx]

McCain's display of lack of respect toward Obama has been nothing less than despicable.

Thankfully, it isn't going unnoticed either.

[Gilpesh]

Thankfully, it isn't going unnoticed either.

Especially by that one *points over at Jag*

[Marx]

Especially by that one *points over at Jag*

I just think it's great that the media, as well as Barack Obama and Joe Biden are all calling them out on this nonsense. It's pathetic...not to mention dangerous.

[Raiden]

I just think it's great that the media, as well as Barack Obama and Joe Biden are all calling them out on this nonsense. It's pathetic...not to mention dangerous.

I agree with that one. *points at Marx* :oldrazz: j/k

Anyway, I do think it is highly offensive, combining with Palin's assertion that Obama is a terrorist and them keeping trying to use Obama's middle name like he's with Al Queda or something.

[Gilpesh]

I just think it's great that the media, as well as Barack Obama and Joe Biden are all calling them out on this nonsense. It's pathetic...not to mention dangerous.

*from the cheap seats* "Terrorist!"

[Marx]

*from the cheap seats* "Terrorist!"

I'm happy to inform you that you've just won the prize! The person with the most vocally enthusiastic phrase wins a special trip to a staff meet and greet! We like to call it 'the backstage pass'. This might take a while so if you'd like to say a few farewell words to your friends and family... :ninja:

[kainedamo]

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/08/campaign.wrap/index.html

CNN) -- Sen. John McCain on Wednesday attacked his rival as a candidate whose words cannot be trusted, telling voters "what Sen. Obama says today and what he has done in the past are often two different things."


Sen. John McCain, with Gov. Sarah Palin, says he's been "fighting for change " his whole career.

1 of 2 "Who is the real Sen. Obama?" McCain asked at a rally in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, continuing his campaign's newest line of attack against the Democratic presidential candidate.

"We have all heard what he has said, but it is less clear what he has done or what he will do," McCain said.

Earlier Wednesday, Sen. Joe Biden slammed the McCain campaign's negative tone, saying the attacks on Obama are "beyond disappointing."

McCain tried to paint Obama as a candidate of empty promises, while telling voters, "You don't have to hope that things will change when you vote for me. You know things will change, because I have been fighting for change in Washington my whole career." Watch new McCain ad attack Obama »

In an admitted effort to turn the dominating narrative away from the nation's ailing economy, McCain's campaign has launched a new offensive against Obama's trustworthiness, and in the past few days, both campaigns have become more aggressive in their attacks.

Obama brushed off the latest jabs at a Wednesday rally in Indianapolis, Indiana, telling the audience, "I can take four more weeks of John McCain's attacks, but America can't take four more years of John McCain's Bush policies."

At an event in Tampa, Florida, Biden charged that McCain's campaign is trying to "appeal to fear." Watch what Biden says about McCain's attacks »

Obama's running mate said that his Republican counterpart, Gov. Sarah Palin, was raising "the most outrageous inferences."


Over the weekend, Palin accused Obama of "palling around with terrorists who would target their own country." She was referring to Obama's ties to William Ayers, a founding member of the Weather Underground, the 1970s radical group.

McCain's campaign on Wednesday sent out an e-mail with a statement from John Murtagh, who said his home was firebombed by the Weather Underground in 1971.

At the time, Murtagh's father was a New York State Supreme Court justice presiding over the trial of members of the Black Panther Party charged in a plot to bomb New York landmarks and department stores, according to the e-mail.

"Barack Obama may have been a child when William Ayers was plotting attacks against U.S. targets -- but I was one of those targets. Barack Obama's friend tried to kill my family," Murtagh said in the e-mail.

Obama and Ayers, now a university professor, have met several times since 1995, when both worked with a nonprofit group trying to raise funds for a school improvement project and a charitable foundation. CNN's review of project records found nothing to suggest anything inappropriate in the volunteer projects in which the two men were involved.

"Those attacks don't hurt Barack Obama or me. They hurt you," Biden told the crowd in Tampa. "Every single false charge and baseless accusation is an attempt to get you to stop paying attention to what's going on in this country. Beyond the attacks, what is John McCain really offering?"

Biden said McCain's campaign has become "erratic" and is "relying on political stunts instead of offering real solutions."

Americans aren't looking for an "angry man lurching from one position to another," he said.

After the McCain campaign raised Obama's past relationship with Ayers, the Democratic nominee's campaign retaliated on Monday with a 13-minute documentary Web video detailing the Arizona senator's involvement in the Keating Five scandal in the 1980s.


[b]Cindy McCain, McCain's wife, lashed out at Obama on Tuesday, telling a Tennessee newspaper that the Illinois senator has waged the "dirtiest campaign in American history."

"What I have found is that it's necessary to make sure the American people understand what we have to say, what we stand for as a husband and wife, and what we will do for the American people if we're lucky enough to be elected," she told The Tennessean.

Whatever Cindy is smoking, I want some.

[Gilpesh]

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/08/campaign.wrap/index.html



Whatever Cindy is smoking, I want some.

HEY! She was a pill popper... :o

[StorminNorman]

October 7, 2008, 3:24 PM
Reporter's Notebook: Seeing How The Other Half Lives
Posted by Dean Reynolds| Comments126


(CBS)
From CBS News' Dean Reynolds:

(NASHVILLE, TENN.) - After most of the previous 12 months covering Barack Obama's campaign for the presidency, it was interesting, instructive and, well, relaxing to follow John McCain for the last few days. The differences between the two are striking.

Obama is the big time orator, McCain is the guy who struggles with a teleprompter or even note cards strategically placed nearby. Obama's crowds are larger, more enthusiastic. McCain's events are smaller, but to my eye, better choreographed. And now with the addition of Sarah Palin to some of his events, McCain can boast of crowds that match Obama's in energy.

There is an urgency to the McCain campaign now that I don't think was there before. Due to the fact that he is running second, no doubt, but it may also be because McCain has a finishing kick. Whatever the case, he is sharper on the stump than he was before. (Though I would suspect a candidate running behind would want to schedule two or three appearances per day, instead of the one McCain usually does.)

It is true that McCain enjoys taking questions from the audience in town hall-style settings. That doesn't mean he is the master of that kind of forum, it just means he's good at it. He likes to converse with voters. Obama does it well too, but seldom achieves that intangible bond with the people that all politicians crave -- or fake.

Behind the scenes, where the public is not allowed, there are other differences.

Obama's campaign schedule is fuller, more hectic and seemingly improvisational. The Obama aides who deal with the national reporters on the campaign plane are often overwhelmed, overworked and un-informed about where, when, why or how the candidate is moving about. Baggage calls are preposterously early with the explanation that it's all for security reasons.

If so, I would love to have someone from Obama's campaign explain why the entire press corps, the Secret Service, and the local police idled for two hours in a Miami hotel parking lot recently because there was nothing to do and nowhere to go. It was not an isolated case.

The national headquarters in Chicago airily dismisses complaints from journalists wondering why a schedule cannot be printed up or at least e-mailed in time to make coverage plans. Nor is there much sympathy for those of us who report for a newscast that airs in the early evening hours. Our shows place a premium on live reporting from the scene of campaign events. But this campaign can often be found in the air and flying around at the time the "CBS Evening News with Katie Couric" is broadcast. I suspect there is a feeling within the Obama campaign that the broadcast networks are less influential in the age of the internet and thus needn't be accomodated as in the days of yore. Even if it's true, they are only hurting themselves by dissing audiences that run in the tens of millions every night.

The McCain folks are more helpful and generally friendly. The schedules are printed on actual books you can hold in your hand, read, and then plan accordingly. The press aides are more knowledgeable and useful to us in the news media. The events are designed with a better eye, and for the simple needs of the press corps. When he is available, John McCain is friendly and loquacious. Obama holds news conferences, but seldom banters with the reporters who've been following him for thousands of miles around the country. Go figure.

The McCain campaign plane is better than Obama's, which is cramped, uncomfortable and smells terrible most of the time. Somehow the McCain folks manage to keep their charter clean, even where the press is seated.

The other day in Albuquerque, N.M., the reporters were given almost no time to file their reports after McCain spoke. It was an important, aggressive speech, lambasting Obama's past associations. When we asked for more time to write up his remarks and prepare our reports, the campaign readily agreed to it. They understood.

Similar requests are often denied or ignored by the Obama campaign aides, apparently terrified that the candidate may have to wait 20 minutes to allow reporters to chronicle what he's just said. It's made all the more maddening when we are rushed to our buses only to sit and wait for 30 minutes or more because nobody seems to know when Obama is actually on the move.

Maybe none of this means much. Maybe a front-running campaign like Obama's that is focused solely on victory doesn't have the time to do the mundane things like print up schedules or attend to the needs of reporters.

But in politics, everything that goes around comes around.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/07/politics/fromtheroad/entry4507703.shtml

[The Battousai]

CNN) -- Sen. John McCain on Wednesday attacked his rival as a candidate whose words cannot be trusted, telling voters "what Sen. Obama says today and what he has done in the past are often two different things."


:wow:



[B]CAPTAIN IRONY!!!

[Raiden]

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/08/campaign.wrap/index.html



Whatever Cindy is smoking, I want some.

"Dirtiest campaign in history"? I guess Cindy McCain is not aware that her husband's campaign has been accusing Obama of being a terrorist, an Islam (by constanting referencing his middle name), and just about anything under the sun. Whatever Obama did is much tamer by comparison.

[jaguarr]

Especially by that one *points over at Jag*

Whatever. I'm still not shaking your hand.

jag

[StorminNorman]

Show me where someone from the McCain campaign has accused Obama of being a terrorist or being Islamic?

Using Obama's actual middle name is not the same.

Also - I would disagree with Cindy, HER husband is running the dirtiest campaign ever - Obama is merely the SECOND most.

[StorminNorman]

Duplicate!

[Gilpesh]

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/07/politics/fromtheroad/entry4507703.shtml

Yeah. McCain's always been a lot better with the media. Nice article :up:

[Anita18]

Show me where someone from the McCain campaign has accused Obama of being a terrorist or being Islamic?
Palin referenced Obama's connection to Bill Ayers as him "pallin' around with terrorists." Despite the fact that Obama was only 12 when Ayers was being investigated for his infamous activities.

I think that's close enough. :oldrazz:

[StorminNorman]

Palin referenced Obama's connection to Bill Ayers as him "pallin' around with terrorists." Despite the fact that Obama was only 12 when Ayers was being investigated for his infamous activities.

I think that's close enough. :oldrazz:

Hardly.

Ayers IS a terrorist, while Obama may of been 12 when Ayers attacked this country, it was within the last decade that Ayers made comments about "wishing he did more". The man is not a reformed soul here, he is a terrorist, an enemy of this country and proud of it. Palin referencing that is simply her making reference to a true weakness of Obama - not dirty politics. Not in the slightest.

[ShadowBoxing]

Hardly.

Ayers IS a terrorist, while Obama may of been 12 when Ayers attacked this country, it was within the last decade that Ayers made comments about "wishing he did more".
That comment did not mean "I wish we had bombed more sh**", if you read it IN CONTEXT you'd realize he was talking about the American people in general and referring to the fact that they had not done enough to stop the Vietnam War before it claimed so many lives. He was not condoning terrorist actions, he was reflecting on their failure to stop the war in a timely fashion.

[Gilpesh]

Ayers made comments about "wishing he did more".

Norm, you don't think that's out of context at all?

I think he had said after it, that what he had meant was... maybe if people had done more during Vietnam, maybe American wouldn't be in the position it is now... with a foreign policy of "HAI GUZ WUT U DOIN THERE???!!!?!? STOP".

[StorminNorman]

That comment did not mean "I wish we had bombed more sh**", if you read it IN CONTEXT you'd realize he was talking about the American people in general and referring to the fact that they had not done enough to stop the Vietnam War before it claimed so many lives. He was not condoning terrorist actions, he was reflecting on their failure to stop the war in a timely fashion.

Norm, you don't think that's out of context at all?

I think he had said after it, that what he had meant was... maybe if people had done more during Vietnam, maybe American wouldn't be in the position it is now... with a foreign policy of "HAI GUZ WUT U DOIN THERE???!!!?!? STOP".

Bill Ayers: "I've thought about this a lot. Being almost 60, it's impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful? ... I don't think so." - 2004

[Gilpesh]

Bill Ayers: "I've thought about this a lot. Being almost 60, it's impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful? ... I don't think so." - 2004

Yes, and you should have used that quote to show he was the bad guy that he is first... :oldrazz:

I'm not defending Ayers as a person, just that quote from Ayers that was out of context.

[Anita18]

Palin referencing that is simply her making reference to a true weakness of Obama - not dirty politics. Not in the slightest.
Then I guess we'll have to disagree about what she really wanted to get across with that statement. To me, using the term "pallin' around" purposely tried to paint Obama as someone who's best buds with a domestic terrorist. She could have used the term "associated with" to forge some kind of personal connection without having to get all dramatic about it. Merely pointing out a connection is not dirty politics, but using the phrase "palling around" when there hasn't been any evidence of a close friendship is.

From what I gathered, Obama and Ayers worked together on several committees and Ayers contributed money to Obama's campaign. Since they were both prominent figures in Chicago simultaneously, I do not find their association particularly unusual. It's not like Obama threw dinner parties in which he and Ayers concocted domestic terrorist schemes over apple pie.

Oh, and what's this?

"Obama's friend tried to kill my family." :whatever:

http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/08/mccain-camp-sends-out-statement-from-ayers-victimobama%e2%80%99s-friend-tried-to-kill-my-family/

[StorminNorman]

Then I guess we'll have to disagree about what she really wanted to get across with that statement. To me, using the term "pallin' around" purposely tried to paint Obama as someone who's best buds with a domestic terrorist. She could have used the term "associated with" to forge some kind of personal connection without having to get all dramatic about it.

But why should she? She is not Obama's supporter - this is Obama's opponent. She is a person who actively wants to ensure Obama does not win - using anything but harsh rhetoric would be counter-productive.

From what I gathered, Obama and Ayers worked together on several committees and Ayers contributed money to Obama's campaign. Since they were both prominent figures in Chicago simultaneously, I do not find their association particularly unusual. It's not like Obama threw dinner parties in which he and Ayers concocted domestic terrorist schemes over apple pie.

Oh, and what's this?

"Obama's friend tried to kill my family." :whatever:

http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/08/mccain-camp-sends-out-statement-from-ayers-victimobama%e2%80%99s-friend-tried-to-kill-my-family/


Obama and Ayers had a professional relationship Obama himself called "friendly" - they met several times. If Obama was truly offended and outraged by Ayers past actions, there are ways he could of been a leading Chicago figure and not associate with the man.

Again - this is a credible attack by the McCain campaign and is far different than Raiden's original post.

[Schlosser85]

Obama's friend tried to kill my family


This person trotted out by McCain does not truly believe this, anymore than McCain and Palin do.

[WorthyStevens]

Another glass house broken by McCain.


WASHINGTON - Barack Obama has his William Ayers connection. Now John McCain may have an Iran-Contra connection. In the 1980s, McCain served on the advisory board to the U.S. chapter of an international group linked to ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America.
The U.S. Council for World Freedom aided rebels trying to overthrow the leftist government of Nicaragua. That landed the group in the middle of the Iran-Contra affair and in legal trouble with the Internal Revenue Service, which revoked the charitable organization's tax exemption.
The council created by retired Army Maj. Gen. John Singlaub was the U.S. chapter of the World Anti-Communist League, an international organization linked to former Nazi collaborators and ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America. After setting up the U.S. council, Singlaub served as the international league's chairman.
McCain's tie to Singlaub's council is undergoing renewed scrutiny after his campaign criticized Obama for his link to Ayers, a former radical who engaged in violent acts 40 years ago. Over the weekend, Democratic operative Paul Begala said on ABC's "This Week" that this "guilt by association" tactic could backfire on the McCain campaign by renewing discussion of McCain's service on the board of the U.S. Council for World Freedom, "an ultraconservative right-wing group."
In two interviews with The Associated Press in August and September, Singlaub said McCain became associated with the organization in the early 1980s as McCain launched his political career. McCain was elected to the House in 1982.
Singlaub said McCain was a supporter but not an active member.
"McCain was a new guy on the block learning the ropes," Singlaub said. "I think I met him in the Washington area when he was just a new congressman. We had McCain on the board to make him feel like he wasn't left out. It looks good to have names on a letterhead who are well-known and appreciated.
"I don't recall talking to McCain at all on the work of the group," Singlaub said.
McCain has said he resigned from the council in 1984 and asked in 1986 to have his name removed from the group's letterhead.
"I didn't know whether (the group's activity) was legal or illegal, but I didn't think I wanted to be associated with them," McCain said in a 1986 newspaper interview.
Singlaub does not recall any McCain resignation in 1984 or May 1986. Nor does Joyce Downey, who oversaw the group's day-to-day activities.
"That's a surprise to me," Singlaub said. "This is the first time I've ever heard that. There may have been someone in his office communicating with our office."
"I don't ever remember hearing about his resigning, but I really wasn't worried about that part of our activities, a housekeeping thing," said Singlaub. "If he didn't want to be on the board that's OK. It wasn't as if he had been active participant and we were going to miss his help. He had no active interest. He certainly supported us."
A news article and two documents tie McCain to the council in 1985, a year after he says he resigned. The group's Internal Revenue Service filing in 1985, covering the previous year, lists McCain as a member of the council's advisory board. In October 1985, a States News Service report placed McCain, Rep. Tom Loeffler, R-Texas, and an Arizona congressman at a Washington awards ceremony staged by the council.
On Tuesday, the McCain campaign addressed the resignation by saying the candidate disassociated himself from "one Arizona-based group when questions were raised about its activities."
Taking an opportunity to attack the Obama-Biden ticket, the McCain campaign added that as a House member and later as a senator, McCain fought against communist influence in Central America while Sen. Joe Biden tried to cut off money for anti-communist forces in El Salvador and Nicaragua.
The renewed attention over McCain's association with Singlaub's group comes as his campaign steps up criticism of Obama's dealings with Ayers, now a college professor who co-founded the Weather Underground in the 1960s and years later worked with Obama on the board of an education reform group in Chicago. Ayers held a meet-the-candidate event at his home when Obama first ran for public office in the mid-1990s.

In McCain's case, he was a House member and a board member of Singlaub's council when, as a new congressman, he voted for military assistance to the Nicaraguan Contras, a CIA-organized guerrilla force. In 1984, Congress cut off military assistance to the rebels.
Months before the cutoff, top Reagan administration officials ramped up a secret White House-directed supply network run by national security advisers Robert McFarlane and John Poindexter. The operation's day-to-day activities were handled by National Security Council aide Oliver North, who relied on retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Richard Secord to carry out the operation. The goal was to keep the Contras operating until Congress could be persuaded to resume CIA funding.
Singlaub's private group became the public front for the secret White House activity.
"It was noted that they were trying to act as suppliers. It was pretty good cover for us," Secord, the field operations chief for the secret effort, said Tuesday in an interview.
The White House-directed network's covert arms shipments, financed in part by the Reagan administration's secret arms sales to Iran, exploded into the Iran-Contra affair in November 1986. The scandal proved to be the undoing of Singlaub's council.
In 1987, the IRS withdrew tax-exempt status from Singlaub's group because of its activities on behalf of the Contras.
Peter Kornbluh, co-author of "The Iran-Contra Scandal: A Declassified History," said the Council on World Freedom was crucial to diverting public attention from the Reagan White House's fundraising for the Contras.
Singlaub and the council publicly urged private support for the Contras, providing what Singlaub later called "a lightning rod" to explain how the rebels sustained themselves despite Congress' cutoff.
In October 1986, the secrecy of North's network unraveled after one of its planes was shot down over Nicaragua. One American crewman, Eugene Hasenfus, was captured by the Nicaraguan government. At first, Reagan administration officials lied by saying that the plane had no connection to the U.S. government and was part of Singlaub's operation.
"I resented it that reporters thought it was my plane. I don't run a sloppy operation," Singlaub told The AP.
In an interview last month, Downey, the full-time employee of Singlaub's council, said she has a clear memory of McCain resigning in 1986, but not earlier.
"It was during the time when the U.S. Council had been wrongly accused of being owners of the Hasenfus plane downed in Nicaragua," said Downey. "A couple of days after that, I was in Washington and called home to get messages from my mother. I returned that call and a staff person wanted to ask for the resignation of Congressman McCain."
When Hasenfus was shot down, McCain was in the final month of his first campaign for the Senate seat he still holds.
McCain's office responded quickly. McCain said he had resigned from the council in 1984. Further, McCain said that in May 1986 he asked the group to remove his name from the letterhead. McCain's office produced two letters from 1984 and 1986 to back his account.
The dates on the resignation letters in 1984 and May 1986 coincided with McCain election campaigns and increasingly critical public scrutiny of the World Anti-Communist League, the umbrella group Singlaub chaired.
In 1983 and 1984 for example, columnist Jack Anderson linked the league's Latin American affiliate to death squad political assassinations.
The Latin American affiliate was kicked out of the league. At the time, Singlaub told the columnist the Latin American affiliate had "knowingly promoted pro-Nazi groups" and was "virulently anti-Semitic."
"That was putting it mildly," Anderson wrote in a Sept. 11, 1984, column on alleged death squad murders, an article that appeared two months before the U.S. election day.
Two weeks after Anderson's column, a letter from McCain addressed to Singlaub asks that the congressman's name be taken off the board because he didn't have time for the council. Singlaub told AP that "certainly by 1984," he had purged the World Anti-Communist League of extremists. Singlaub complains that American news media wrote that the league hadn't gotten rid of extremist elements and tried to tarnish the league's credibility, "making something evil out of fighting communism."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081007/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_iran_contra

[Anita18]

But why should she? She is not Obama's supporter - this is Obama's opponent. She is a person who actively wants to ensure Obama does not win - using anything but harsh rhetoric would be counter-productive.

Again - this is a credible attack by the McCain campaign and is far different than Raiden's original post.
I didn't say that they weren't allowed to make such accusations and word them in such a manner - you simply claimed it was "not dirty politics." I think it is, and I believe many in the voting public are also interpreting it the way I am.

[StorminNorman]

I didn't say that they weren't allowed to make such accusations and word them in such a manner - you simply claimed it was "not dirty politics." I think it is, and I believe many in the voting public are also interpreting it the way I am.

But its NOT dirty politics - dirty politics is McCain making an ad using Obama talking about McCain economic policies and indicating he is insulting Palin. Dirty politics is Obama making an ad linking McCain to Rush Limbaugh's comments about immigrants.

This is simply smart politics.

[Anita18]

But its NOT dirty politics - dirty politics is McCain making an ad using Obama talking about McCain economic policies and indicating he is insulting Palin. Dirty politics is Obama making an ad linking McCain to Rush Limbaugh's comments about immigrants.

This is simply smart politics.
As I said, we'll have to simply disagree on what is and isn't dirty politics. :oldrazz:

[BobJM]

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/10/09/america/NA-POL-US-Elections.php

From today

[The Senator]

But why should she? She is not Obama's supporter - this is Obama's opponent. She is a person who actively wants to ensure Obama does not win - using anything but harsh rhetoric would be counter-productive.

Obama and Ayers had a professional relationship Obama himself called "friendly" - they met several times. If Obama was truly offended and outraged by Ayers past actions, there are ways he could of been a leading Chicago figure and not associate with the man.

Again - this is a credible attack by the McCain campaign and is far different than Raiden's original post.

Oh sweet Jesus, Norman, I honestly thought you were better than this.

Do you honestly believe that Obama's friendship with Ayers will have any affect on his abilities to govern this country? Do you think that Ayers is secretly giving advice to Obama to blow up monuments and landmarks within the United States?

I have been wary of Obama's connections in the past, particularly his relationship with Reverend Wright. But Steven Ayers, to me, is a non-issue. It has ZERO relevance to this campaign or how Obama will act when he is commander-in-chief. Not to mention, the attacks Ayers was involved with occurred four decades ago, Ayers has since reformed, and Obama has rejected his association with Ayers on several occasions.

This is a NON-ISSUE. Why doesn't McCain focus on the issues the American people care about, such as the economy? You know, actually talk about those issues and offer solutions instead of some political act where he suspends his campaign, frantically heads to Washington (after spending a day giving interviews with the oh-so-liberal media, by the way), and takes credit for a bailout bill which he barely had any influence on?

Christ, the American people could care LESS about Bill Ayers right now. Had they, then the polls would have reflected this. Ayers has been a talking point on at least two occasions, and both times this "scandal" has had ZERO impact on the polls. In fact, it hasn't affected "swing states" such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin which McCain needs to win in order to win this election. It hasn't affected states such as Virginia and North Carolina, where McCain has fallen behind (by double digits in Virginia, no less). It isn't impacting Florida, Ohio, or Minnesota-- states where McCain once led but has now fallen far behind.

The American people care about the ISSUES they face, such as our failing economy and national security. Issues which McCain and Palin have tossed aside in favor of a filthy mud-slinging match about something which NO ONE cares about.

Give it a rest.

[BobJM]

Bill Ayers is a domestic terrorist, which means he planned attacks intended for American soil. How is his friendship with a presidential candidate not relevant?

[The Senator]

Bill Ayers is a domestic terrorist, which means he planned attacks intended for American soil. How is his friendship with a presidential candidate not relevant?

Because those terrorist attacks occurred four decades ago in a completely different time under a completely different set of circumstances? :huh:

[BobJM]

So in four decades from now, granted he's still alive, you'd be fine with Bin Laden chilling with a presidential candidate?

A terrorist is a terrorist. He may not be as radical now as he was then, but Obama's friendship with Ayers is definitely is not acceptable.

[The Senator]

So in four decades from now, granted he's still alive, you'd be fine with Bin Laden chilling with a presidential candidate?

A terrorist is a terrorist. He may not be as radical now as he was then, but Obama's friendship with him definitely is not acceptable.

:whatever:

Detonating a pipe bomb at a post office (which is the equivalent of what Ayers did) is not the same thing as coordinating the hijacking of four major airplanes and the subsequent destruction of the tallest buildings in New York City which resulted in the loss of 4,000 lives, nor is it equivocal to blowing up several embassies and killing hundreds in the process, or blowing up a train in Madrid and killing hundreds more, or blowing up a subway train in London killing over fifty, etc.

They are simply not the same.

[ShadowBoxing]

So in four decades from now, granted he's still alive, you'd be fine with Bin Laden chilling with a presidential candidate?

A terrorist is a terrorist. He may not be as radical now as he was then, but Obama's friendship with Ayers is definitely is not acceptable.
There's a world of difference between a sixties anti-war protester who uses small explosives on vacant buildings and a man who flies our own planes into buildings filled with thousands of people. Bill Ayers' actions shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath as Osama.

[BobJM]

I understand both executed attacks on complete opposite sides of the spectrum, but both used violence to achieve their own ends. Is Ayers a "nice" terrorist for being so kind as to only blow up buildings?

And who's to say that Ayers wasn't planning a massive attack before he went underground and ended his radical actions?

[Überlibran]

So in four decades from now, granted he's still alive, you'd be fine with Bin Laden chilling with a presidential candidate?

A terrorist is a terrorist. He may not be as radical now as he was then, but Obama's friendship with Ayers is definitely is not acceptable.There is no friendship between Obama and Ayers. I don't understand why people can't comprehend this. They worked on charity boards along with other people, he comes from a rich, influential family so he was active in Chicago politics. Of course they crossed paths and were friendly with each other. It wasn't like they hung out and chilled and were totally BFFs.

[ShadowBoxing]

I understand both executed attacks on complete opposite sides of the spectrum, but both used violence to achieve their own ends. Is Ayers a "nice" terrorist for being so kind as to only blow up buildings?
Do you condemn Civil Right's workers during the fifties and sixties, like the members of SNCC and SCLC? I think, as Americans, it's much different when our country protests very clear abuses of power by our own Government than when an outsider tries to destroy us quiet literally. Ayer's was making a statement about the war, and he wasn't about to kill anyone doing it. While his actions might have been rash and foolish, he's no different than many of his time who participated in riots, campus demonstrations and protests. I think if you'd studied what they had to endure during Vietnam you'd be a little more sympathetic to his actions. Is what he did right in a legal sense, absolutely not, however that doesn't mean he was a bad person or deserves to be lumped in with real National Security threats.
And who's to say that Ayers wasn't planning a massive attack before he went underground and ended his radical actions?
The Weathermen were no such group. They wouldn't have even had the capabilities.

[ShadowBoxing]

Furthermore, as many have pointed out, they are only associated because of their shared interests, not because they are actually close person friends. I know a lot of crazy ass Mofo's too, ya know.

[BobJM]

I don't sympathize with people blowing up buildings. Americans riot against the war in Iraq. If tomorrow someone blew up a post office, would you think "Well we've got it pretty tough these days , I'm sure he's a good guy"?

[BobJM]

Obama accepted money from him. I don't care what the actual dollar figures are, he accepted money.

So don't go saying they only share the occasional head-nods when they walk by each other.

[StrainedEyes]

This whole Ayers thing is so ridiculous. The man worked with Obama on community projects, education reform, distributing grants and fighting against poverty. He supported his move to the Senate, and is now a college professor.

Yes he was a political activist who blew up statues 30 years ago, but when Obama knew him he was just trying to make his community better. They shared that in common.

Ayers is not some kind of advisor, he has no influence on Obama's policy or view of our country.

[ShadowBoxing]

Obama accepted money from him. I don't care what the actual dollar figures are, he accepted money.

So don't go saying they only share the occasional head-nods when they walk by each other.
Do you care McCain accepted 1.3 million dollars from Charles Keating (as opposed to the what...four hundred somethingorother Obama got from Ayers)?

[The Senator]

I don't sympathize with people blowing up buildings. Americans riot against the war in Iraq. If tomorrow someone blew up a post office, would you think "Well we've got it pretty tough these days , I'm sure he's a good guy"?

If that person turned out to be an active member of his or her community forty years from now, donating valuable time and efforts to important causes, then I certainly wouldn't hold anything against him/ her. Yes, Ayers did a downright awful thing. But enough time has passed, and Ayers was not indicted on terrorist charges, which is all the more reason to consider this entirely irrelevant.

[The Senator]

Obama accepted money from him. I don't care what the actual dollar figures are, he accepted money.

So don't go saying they only share the occasional head-nods when they walk by each other.

Four hundred dollars is chump change. I have donated that much money to political campaigns in the past two years.

[Knives]

This whole Ayers thing is so ridiculous.

Yes it is. But its the absolute LAST thing the republicans have left. This is thier only hope. Turn Obama into a scary black terrorist who is going to blow us all up. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic. So they'll keep puking out these ******** talking points and whatever else Fox news of the McCain campaign tels them they should be talking about, becuase this is the only thing they have. And they'll use it, even if it's to thier own demise.

[StrainedEyes]

Did anyone watch the McCain/Palin interview with Hannity today? Ugh, I could barely watch it.

[Überlibran]

Obama accepted money from him. I don't care what the actual dollar figures are, he accepted money.

So don't go saying they only share the occasional head-nods when they walk by each other. OMG, I donated to Obama too!! He totally made me godmother to his kids for that! :cwink:

[Marx]

I always find it interesting when the people who condemn Barack Obama for his relationships with Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers are the same ones who defend John McCain's ties to Charles Keating and the US Council for World Freedom (aka Iran-Contra.) And they are also the same people who defend Sarah Palin being prayed over to protect herself from witchcraft and her husband's ties to the Alaskan Successionist Party.

Why is that?

Charles Keating was convicted. Ayers turned himself in and was not convicted.

The US Council for World Freedom (Iran-Contra) got controversial when it became the public face of a covert operation to fund Contras without congressional approval. John McCain was a member of this organization until 1984. Yes yes I know, the controversy didn't become public until after that but the basis for it (US Embassy hostage situation) happened in 1981. This organization was also affiliated with the 'World Communist League.'

Reverend Wright is a 'radical' but Palin's assertions that everything is a 'mission from God' and feeling the need to protect herself from witchcraft are acceptable? What about her husband's ties to the Alaskan Successionist Party that believes Alaska should succeed from the US?

I love how this whole 'guilt by association' game only applies to Barack Obama and anyone who isn't a Republican. :whatever:

[Überlibran]

I always find it interesting when the people who condemn Barack Obama for his relationships with Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers are the same ones who defend John McCain's ties to Charles Keating and the US Council for World Freedom (aka Iran-Contra.) And they are also the same people who defend Sarah Palin being prayed over to protect herself from witchcraft and her husband's ties to the Alaskan Successionist Party.

Why is that?

Charles Keating was convicted. Ayers turned himself in and was not convicted.

The US Council for World Freedom (Iran-Contra) became controversial when it became the public face of a covert operation to fund Contras without congressional approval. John McCain was a member of this organization until 1984. Yes yes I know, the controversy didn't become public until after that but the basis for it (US Embassy hostage situation) happened in 1981. This organization was also affiliated with the 'World Communist League.'

Reverend Wright is a 'radical' but Palin's assertions that everything is a 'mission from God' and feeling the need to protect herself from witchcraft are acceptable? What about her husband's ties to the Alaskan Successionist Party that believes Alaska should succeed from the US?

I love how this whole 'guilt by association' game only applies to Barack Obama and anyone who isn't a Republican. :whatever: Don't forget his relationship with G. Gordon Liddy! :yay:

I think you're right about a double standard when it comes to the two politcal parties. I've heard other folks call it the IOKIYAR (It's OK IF You Are Republican) syndrome.

[Marx]

Don't forget his relationship with G. Gordon Liddy! :yay:

I think you're right about a double standard when it comes to the two politcal parties. I've heard other folks call it the IOKIYAR (It's OK IF You Are Republican) syndrome.

The US Council for World Freedom also has ties to (former) Nazi collaboraters and ultra-conservative death squads in Central America. But that's ok because...it's John McCain...a Republican...who puts his 'country first'.

[redfirebird2008]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KjxzmaXAg9E&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KjxzmaXAg9E&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Marx]

Has anyone heard about the newest song snafu for the McCain campaign? This time, it involves the Foo Fighters and their song 'My Hero'.

The band just released a statement...



"This isn’t the first time the McCain campaign has used a song without making any attempt to get approval or permission from the artist. It’s frustrating and infuriating that someone who claims to speak for the American people would repeatedly show such little respect for creativity and intellectual property. The saddest thing about this is that ‘My Hero’ was written as a celebration of the common man and his extraordinary potential. To have it appropriated without our knowledge and used in a manner that perverts the original sentiment of the lyric just tarnishes the song.”

Ouch.

[jaguarr]

Has anyone heard about the newest song snafu for the McCain campaign? This time, it involves the Foo Fighters and their song 'My Hero'.

The band just released a statement...



Ouch.

You do NOT f**k with The Grohl.

jag

[Marx]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KjxzmaXAg9E&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KjxzmaXAg9E&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

The McCain campaign speaks to the ignorance of America. Am I saying that all of his supporters are ignorant? Absolutely not. I see the people in this video as hardcore conservatives that couldn't see the center if their lives depended on it. I strongly believe that there are many well informed supporters of John McCain. I just feel that with every passing day, this campaign is getting more and more desperate. And in that desperation, they are using lies to prey on fear. Unfortunately, those lies and fear tactics are working on some people. Your video illustrates that perfectly.

[redfirebird2008]

The McCain campaign speaks to the ignorance of America. Am I saying that all of his supporters are ignorant? Absolutely not. I see the people in this video as hardcore conservatives that couldn't see the center if their lives depended on it. I strongly believe that there are many well informed supporters of John McCain. I just feel that with every passing day, this campaign is getting more and more desperate. And in that desperation, they are using lies to prey on fear. Unfortunately, those lies and fear tactics are working on some people. Your video illustrates that perfectly.

Nah, the right has been pushing these ideas for months upon months. McCain's campaign has little to do with it outside of recent events.

[ShadowBoxing]

Here is a good one for you Marx...the interviewers bias annoys me, but I like the end of the video. His response is very Palinesque.
PUJBJSEHzh0

[Marx]

MCCAIN DOES NOTHING AS CROWD CALLS OBAMA A 'TERRORIST'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/06/mccain-does-nothing-as-cr_n_132366.html





(As if that weren't enough...there is also a clip of someone yelling 'treason' in response to Palin's mischaracterization about Obama saying 'all our troops are doing are air raiding villages and killing civilians'. Despicable. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif)