The McCain Thread

[The Senator]

Good point. After all, I wouldn't want to be "punished with a baby."

Now, who said that?

I agree with Obama. Children are punishment for bad choices, such as unprotected heterosexual sex.

Which is another reason why it's great to be a homosexual.

[Marx]

In all honesty, I just can't see how any of the other people suspected of being on the "shortlist" trump Palin in any way. From a campaign stand point she is quite possibly the most perfect VP candidate ever.

You do have a point about Palin...I guess I just have a hard time seeing McCain picking her.

[Matt]

You do have a point about Palin...I guess I just have a hard time seeing McCain picking her.

In all honesty, so long as McCain is not a total idiot...I have a hard time seeing him NOT picking her. But that is a big if, I concede.

[LuiECuomo]

I agree with Obama. Children are punishment for bad choices, such as unprotected heterosexual sex.

Which is another reason why it's great to be a homosexual.

LOL at both of those comments! :D

[Marx]

In all honesty, so long as McCain is not a total idiot...I have a hard time seeing him NOT picking her. But that is a big if, I concede.

I wouldn't say that he is a total idiot...

[Matt]

I wouldn't say that he is a total idiot...

We'll see. Its not often that the perfect VP is thrown in your face. If McCain doesn't choose her, I will question his intelligence immensely.

[Marx]

We'll see. Its not often that the perfect VP is thrown in your face. If McCain doesn't choose her, I will question his intelligence immensely.

I agree that she would be a great candidate for him, but I think it may end up going to Romney or Huckabee. (More so Romney, Huckabee is too much of a bible thumper...even for the Republicans!)

[Matt]

I just don't see how Romney helps him that much. He does not bring any states to the ticket (I truly cannot see Romney turning Mass. red), and Palin will appeal to the conservatives who are weary of McCain more than Romney. Romney does however help a lot from a fund raising perspective (where McCain grealy suffers). That is the one thing I see him bringing to the ticket and all the money in the world doesn't matter all that much if he can't win.

[Marx]

I just don't see how Romney helps him that much. He does not bring any states to the ticket (I truly cannot see Romney turning Mass. red), and Palin will appeal to the conservatives who are weary of McCain more than Romney. Romney does however help a lot from a fund raising perspective (where McCain grealy suffers). That is the one thing I see him bringing to the ticket and all the money in the world doesn't matter all that much if he can't win.

But it makes them competitive in states that they might not otherwise have the funds to compete in. You know?

[The Senator]

But it makes them competitive in states that they might not otherwise have the funds to compete in. You know?

Which states are those? Romney will not win Massachusetts for McCain. They hate him there. The only state he could help win is Michigan, but I expect McCain to win that state regardless of who he picks as his running mate.

[Marx]

Which states are those? Romney will not win Massachusetts for McCain. They hate him there. The only state he could help win is Michigan, but I expect McCain to win that state regardless of who he picks as his running mate.

I'm mainly referring to Michigan. But with everything the Democrats have done over the course of this primary season, McCain might not need any help at all.

[StorminNorman]

I just don't see how Romney helps him that much. He does not bring any states to the ticket (I truly cannot see Romney turning Mass. red), and Palin will appeal to the conservatives who are weary of McCain more than Romney. Romney does however help a lot from a fund raising perspective (where McCain grealy suffers). That is the one thing I see him bringing to the ticket and all the money in the world doesn't matter all that much if he can't win.

Romney brings several things to McCain's ticket.

If you are looking at states, you can look at Michigan as a state Romney can help McCain turn.

If you are looking at issues, McCain's biggest weakness is the Economy - Romney's strength.

If you are looking at energy - Romney has Reagan-esque optimism where McCain doesn't.

Romney was also the candidate of choice by the Conservative Media, having him on the ticket will help town down criticism by the vocal conservative pundits and help rally that base.

Romney is really one of the best candidates McCain can pick at this point.

[Marx]

McCain Campaign: We'll win where Clinton did
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/09/mccain-campaign-well-win-where-clinton-did/

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/06/09/art.davisvideo.cnn.jpg

[hippie_hunter]

While McCain doesn't have a chance in California, he can really be a strong contender in the other states.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I'm voting for Obama, but felt sorry for this lonely thread.

[The Senator]

Considering McCain is down by 20 points in California and 15 points in Wisconsin, I don't think has a snowball's chance in hell of winning those states. Same thing with Connecticut. Michigan is a possibility, but Obama is starting to perform stronger there than he was a few weeks ago. Nevada is the true swing state of the lot, but really, is its five electoral votes all that impressive (and considering Bush won the state twice, would McCain really be 'changing the map')?

[Marx]

Considering McCain is down by 20 points in California and 15 points in Wisconsin, I don't think has a snowball's chance in hell of winning those states. Same thing with Connecticut. Michigan is a possibility, but Obama is starting to perform stronger there than he was a few weeks ago. Nevada is the true swing state of the lot, but really, is its five electoral votes all that impressive (and considering Bush won the state twice, would McCain really be 'changing the map')?

I would consider him winning California "changing the map." It's like you said though, he won't.

[DorkyFresh]

ZQ4eeQzDlgM

0zTN7a9O3KM

[Superman]

ZQ4eeQzDlgM

0zTN7a9O3KM

Nice. :up:

[Superman]

McBush is at it again.

On the same day he comes out with a new ad about his record on the environment he tells "Big Oil" that he wants to lift the ban on offshore oil drilling even though in 2000 he said he favored the ban.

Then he has the nerve to criticize Obama for proposing a gas windfall profits tax, despite saying last month he would consider the very same proposal.

This man has "Flip Floped" so much on issue after issue it's a wonder he doesn't have whiplash.:whatever:

[Marx]

McBush is at it again.

On the same day he comes out with a new ad about his record on the environment he tells "Big Oil" that he wants to lift the ban on offshore oil drilling even though in 2000 he said he favored the ban.

Then he has the nerve to criticize Obama for proposing a gas windfall profits tax, despite saying last month he would consider the very same proposal.

This man has "Flip Floped" so much on issue after issue it's a wonder he doesn't have whiplash.:whatever:

It's all going to come out in the wash.

[Superman]

It's all going to come out in the wash.I doubt it. This is the country that put Bush back in office in 2004. It wouldn't surprise me if the people bought the lies of McBush and the Republicans once again.

They say "You get the government you deserve" and boy did we get it, Right up the old wazoo. :whatever:

[souvlaki]

I doubt it. This is the country that put Bush back in office in 2004. It wouldn't surprise me if the people bought the lies of McBush and the Republicans once again.

They say "You get the government you deserve" and boy did we get it, Right up the old wazoo. :whatever:

It's also the same country that didn't elect Kerry in 2004 against an incompetent, sorry excuse of a President because he was a flip-flopper (well, there are quite a few reasons, but this was probably one of the biggest reasons). Kerry has nothing on McCain this election. Only two weeks into the general election and McCain has flip flopped on issues almost on a daily basis. It's starting to be plain embarrassing at this point.

[Marx]

It's also the same country that didn't elect Kerry in 2004 against an incompetent, sorry excuse of a President because he was a flip-flopper (well, there are quite a few reasons, but this was probably one of the biggest reasons). Kerry has nothing on McCain this election. Only two weeks into the general election and McCain has flip flopped on issues almost on a daily basis. It's starting to be plain embarrassing at this point.

I would be quite embarassed to be a part of his campaign right now.

[StorminNorman]

I doubt it. This is the country that put Bush back in office in 2004. It wouldn't surprise me if the people bought the lies of McBush and the Republicans once again.

They say "You get the government you deserve" and boy did we get it, Right up the old wazoo. :whatever:

You can't criticize anyone for lying when you call McCain "McBush", insinuating that McCain and Bush are the same or similar politicians - which is a lie.

That is the very definition of hypocrisy.

[souvlaki]

I would be quite embarassed to be a part of his campaign right now.

I'd be quite embarrassed to be a part of Obama's campaign if he somehow manages to blow it against this sorry excuse for a candidate. Hell, I'll be embarrassed as an Obama SUPPORTER.

[The Senator]

People who resort to mindless name calling on both sides of the political aisle are just as childish as those they criticize, Norm.

[StorminNorman]

People who resort to mindless name calling on both sides of the political aisle are just as childish as those they criticize, Norm.

I think if his name wasn't Superman I wouldn't care. :csad:

He is an insult to the name of one of my favorite fictional characters, as well as an American Icon.

[Superman]

I think if his name wasn't Superman I wouldn't care. :csad:

He is an insult to the name of one of my favorite fictional characters, as well as an American Icon.Oh poor baby, Get over it.:whatever:

[Marx]

McCain calls for construction of 45 new nuclear reactors
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080618/ap_on_el_pr/mccain

[StorminNorman]

:up: Good first step towards energy independence.

[Superman]

McCain calls for construction of 45 new nuclear reactors
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080618/ap_on_el_pr/mccainNice ideal but it will never happen. Just where does he plan on getting this $2 billion a year?

[Marx]

:up: Good first step towards energy independence.

Nice ideal but it will never happen. Just where does he plan on getting this $2 billion a year?

I think it's a good idea in theory...but I'm very concerned as to how it would be funded. Two billion dollars per year isn't exactly chump change. (Especially with the tremendous deficit this country already has.)

[The Senator]

Nice ideal but it will never happen. Just where does he plan on getting this $2 billion a year?

If he plans to cut earmarks, he should be able to find $2 billion a year easily.

I hope Obama comes up with a similar plan for us to reinvest in nuclear power.

[Marx]

McCain: Obama lying about public financing talks
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/19/mccain-team-obama-campaign-lying-about-public-financing-talks/

[Marx]

McCain visits flood zone
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/19/mccain-visits-flood-zone/

[Marx]

Cindy McCain: Families of candidates not fair game
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/19/cindy-mccain-families-of-candidates-not-fair-game/

[DACrowe]

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that McCain, the man who was tortured and held indef. in Vietnam for years supports torture in Gitmo and fascist policies that refuse giving people fair trials. I saw McCain call it one of the worst Supreme Court decisions in our history...damn them for holding up the Constitution and not rolling over and dying for executive power. But I guess he has a point. It sure is a lot worse than Dred v. Scott for example.

What a funny world.

[chaseter]

I think it's a good idea in theory...but I'm very concerned as to how it would be funded. Two billion dollars per year isn't exactly chump change. (Especially with the tremendous deficit this country already has.)
We just sent 165 billion for our troops in a useless war...there is money somewhere:o

[Marx]

We just sent 165 billion for our troops in a useless war...there is money somewhere:o

Of course there are always ways of getting money, but I don't believe that it should ever be at the expense of our troops.

Whether you supported this war or not, this President or not...the troops should never be without our gratitude and support.

[chaseter]

Of course there are always ways of getting money, but I don't believe that it should ever be at the expense of our troops.

Whether you supported this war or not, this President or not...the troops should never be without our gratitude and support.
I didn't say they shouldn't:huh: I just made the example that if we need money...we can get it. And look at how long they had been over there without proper support:o Hell, a lot of troops a couple of years ago had no body armor or helmets:wow: I think we should be getting them out of there instead of sinking money into a political pit. I don't think any person with half a brain would not support the war and at the same time not support the troops.

[Marx]

I didn't say they shouldn't:huh: I just made the example that if we need money...we can get it. And look at how long they had been over there without proper support:o Hell, a lot of troops a couple of years ago had no body armor or helmets:wow: I think we should be getting them out of there instead of sinking money into a political pit. I don't think any person with half a brain would not support the war and at the same time not support the troops.

I didn't mean to imply that you thought that. I'm just saying that money or support should never be taken away from the troops.

[chaseter]

I didn't mean to imply that you thought that. I'm just saying that money or support should never be taken away from the troops.
And I don't think anybody would disagree with you:cwink: But back to the original topic...McCain could easily get 2 billion a year and I am sure a bulk of that could come from investors.

[That'ssuper!]

I was for Obama for quite awhile, but after reading an article in which his high taxes may get oil companies to pull their investments from the U.S. it seems like a terrorfying reality that gas prices could be nine or ten dollars because of a more limited supply. I mean, there are so many other places that they can invest in and hardly have a thought about Americans in a failing market. Like letting them drill off the American coast will have serious reprocussions will the laws as strict as they are for environmental concerns. Most of the rigs are going to be 120-200 miles out to sea looking for oil, there is no way that the tourism will be disrupted, they won't even see the rigs. Rigs in the Bering Sea is the same kind which will be built in these coastlines, they won't falter. I am now for John McCain.

[Marx]

McCain closes cash gap with Obama in May
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080621/pl_politico/11241

[Marx]

Ties to Bush on offshore drilling may hurt McCain in the fall
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/19/bush.mccain.energy/index.html

[wolfboy]

I don't understand how anyone can vote for McCain. Republican or Democrat, he just seems like a rotten untrustworthy human being.

[DorkyFresh]

to a political noob, he is. however, he has a long, legitamate political and military history.....at least, pre-Bush.

[Arkady Rossovich]

Nice ideal but it will never happen. Just where does he plan on getting this $2 billion a year?

When President Obama ends the Iraq conflict,the money can go there.:hehe:

[jaguarr]

I was for Obama for quite awhile, but after reading an article in which his high taxes may get oil companies to pull their investments from the U.S. it seems like a terrorfying reality that gas prices could be nine or ten dollars because of a more limited supply. I mean, there are so many other places that they can invest in and hardly have a thought about Americans in a failing market. Like letting them drill off the American coast will have serious reprocussions will the laws as strict as they are for environmental concerns. Most of the rigs are going to be 120-200 miles out to sea looking for oil, there is no way that the tourism will be disrupted, they won't even see the rigs. Rigs in the Bering Sea is the same kind which will be built in these coastlines, they won't falter. I am now for John McCain.

Well, at least you don't scare easy. :huh:

jag

[StorminNorman]

Ties to Bush on offshore drilling may hurt McCain in the fall
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/19/bush.mccain.energy/index.html

...but most American's support offshore drilling. What a stupid artical. If Bush says the sky is blue - it doesn't mean America is going to reject McCain if he agrees.

[wolfboy]

to a political noob, he is. however, he has a long, legitamate political and military history.....at least, pre-Bush.

So why does he always make obvious hypocritical remarks? Definite legitimate. Of course he has political and military history. However, that history is one of poor performance. Political noob? Grow up.

[StorminNorman]

So why does he always make obvious hypocritical remarks? Definite legitimate. Of course he has political and military history. However, that history is one of poor performance. Political noob? Grow up.

Yes - because Obama hasn't show the slightest sign of hypocracy?

Its not like he has ALREADY gone against a promise he made about his campaign. Its not like he has been accepting the support and money of lobbyist and their ilk while criticizing those very practices. Its not like he has been associated with several people who have legitimate ties to racism, anti-semitism, anti-Americanism and true domestic terrorism.

How has McCain's history been that of poor political performance? He has been an incon of bipartisianship and a man greatly respected by both sides of the isle. Yes - he lost in 2000 to Bush, but that if you believe not gettign a Presidential nomination is a sign of political ineptness, you are not only mistaken - but an idiot.

[wolfboy]

I'm not talking about Obama or choosing sides like you are. Go campaign for McCain all you want here and throw childish name calling around. It suits your stance on McCain.

McCain winning nomination was no way an achievement to be impressed about.

[The Senator]

I'm not talking about Obama or choosing sides like you are. Go campaign for McCain all you want here and throw childish name calling around. It suits your stance on McCain.

McCain winning nomination was no way an achievement to be impressed about.

Yes, McCain winning the Republican nomination is something 'to be impressed about.' The man ran out of money at one point in the campaign, and as late as last fall, he was polling in fourth place nationally. He pulled a strong comeback towards the end-- perhaps the greatest comeback in modern political history. I am not a McCain fan, but even I am impressed that he defeated money machines such as Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani to win the GOP nomination.

[Marx]

I don't understand how anyone can vote for McCain. Republican or Democrat, he just seems like a rotten untrustworthy human being.

to a political noob, he is. however, he has a long, legitamate political and military history.....at least, pre-Bush.

So why does he always make obvious hypocritical remarks? Definite legitimate. Of course he has political and military history. However, that history is one of poor performance. Political noob? Grow up.

I'm not talking about Obama or choosing sides like you are. Go campaign for McCain all you want here and throw childish name calling around. It suits your stance on McCain.

McCain winning nomination was no way an achievement to be impressed about.

How about we all elevate the level of maturity in this conversation? DorkyFresh hardly meant that as an insult to you Wolfboy.

A little respect goes a long way! http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[wolfboy]

How do you know what DorkyFresh means? Respect should go both ways. I wasn't the first to imply insults.

[The Senator]

I think the arguing needs to stop on both ends. I'm sick and tired of people acting like children and spending a page insulting each other back and forth, rather than discussing the issues up for debate. Hell, didn't Matt warn people about this? It looks like it has yet to really take effect.

Maybe someone needs to be probated to get the message across...

[jaguarr]

How do you know what DorkyFresh means? Respect should go both ways. I wasn't the first to imply insults.

Your existence on this site will be one of anguish and perpetual angst if you don't learn how to chill out a little bit. Dorky's comments were hardly an insult. Trust me, you WILL get insulted on this site, without a doubt. If what Dorky wrote upset you (and I think you read more into it than what he ever intended by far), then you're probably going to have a nervous breakdown if you ever stray into Community. No need to be so combative, man.

jag

[jaguarr]

I think the arguing needs to stop on both ends. I'm sick and tired of people acting like children and spending a page insulting each other back and forth, rather than discussing the issues up for debate. Hell, didn't Matt warn people about this? It looks like it has yet to really take effect.

Maybe someone needs to be probated to get the message across...

I agree. Matt, give J. Manspice a couple days off to think about what he's done! :cmad:

jag

[The Senator]

I agree. Matt, give J. Manspice a couple days off to think about what he's done! :cmad:

jag

Ha! I could use a vacation. :o

[jaguarr]

Ha! I could use a vacation. :o

We're not here to cater to you! :cmad: Don't give him probation, Matt! :hehe:

jag

[Marx]

I think the arguing needs to stop on both ends. I'm sick and tired of people acting like children and spending a page insulting each other back and forth, rather than discussing the issues up for debate. Hell, didn't Matt warn people about this? It looks like it has yet to really take effect.

Maybe someone needs to be probated to get the message across...

Maybe. It looks like Matt may have to begin acting on his warning already.

[Marx]

So how 'bout that John McCain? He closed the cash gap on Obama in May and his ties to the offshore drilling idea could sink him in the fall...

[wolfboy]

Does DorkyFresh have a loyal legion that pops up do defend him despite him being in the wrong? It certainly seems that way. Buddy up all you want. My words are clearly less offensive. I'm not replying because I'm offended. This isn't even a matter of tossing insults back and forth. If you actually read what I wrote instead of blindly defending someone, you can see how level I was being.

[The Senator]

Does DorkyFresh have a loyal legion that pops up do defend him despite him being in the wrong? It certainly seems that way. Buddy up all you want. My words are clearly less offensive. I'm not replying because I'm offended. This isn't even a matter of tossing insults back and forth. If you actually read what I wrote instead of blindly defending someone, you can see how level I was being.

Uh, no, DorkyFresh doesn't have a loyal legion of supporters. However, the mindless bickering back and forth is pissing some of us off, and we'd rather it stop ASAP.

[Marx]

You know the thing that I found interesting about the article on McCain and the offshore drilling idea is that the article claims that his stance could cause him problems in California...am I missing something?

Who the heck actually believes that John McCain has a chance in California?

[jaguarr]

So how 'bout that John McCain? He closed the cash gap on Obama in May and his ties to the offshore drilling idea could sink him in the fall...

I'd say the offshore drilling is just the latest in a string of things that could potentially sink him in the Fall, but it's a nice example of how he panders to the lobbyists. What will be interesting to see is if he can sustain the cash influx. So far he's had one good month. Obama's been on a tear for months on end, now.



Does DorkyFresh have a loyal legion that pops up do defend him despite him being in the wrong? It certainly seems that way. Buddy up all you want. My words are clearly less offensive. I'm not replying because I'm offended. This isn't even a matter of tossing insults back and forth. If you actually read what I wrote instead of blindly defending someone, you can see how level I was being.

No, he doesn't have a loyal legion. I barely know the guy. You're just being overly sensitive and overreacting. Get over it. Welcome to The Hype! :)

jag

[The Senator]

We're not here to cater to you! :cmad: Don't give him probation, Matt! :hehe:

jag

Fine! Maybe I'll just go on a voluntary, non-probated vacation instead! :cmad:

[jaguarr]

Fine! Maybe I'll just go on a voluntary, non-probated vacation instead! :cmad:

No! :cmad:

jag

[The Senator]

You know the thing that I found interesting about the article on McCain and the offshore drilling idea is that the article claims that his stance could cause him problems in California...am I missing something?

Who the heck actually believes that John McCain has a chance in California?

:huh:

McCain has as good a shot at winning California as Obama does Texas. It's that kind of thinking and planning which could sink his campaign, especially if McCain is having problems in Georgia, Ohio and Alaska, of all places.

[Matt]

I think the arguing needs to stop on both ends. I'm sick and tired of people acting like children and spending a page insulting each other back and forth, rather than discussing the issues up for debate. Hell, didn't Matt warn people about this? It looks like it has yet to really take effect.

Maybe someone needs to be probated to get the message across...

I'm thinkin' you're right.

Does DorkyFresh have a loyal legion that pops up do defend him despite him being in the wrong? It certainly seems that way. Buddy up all you want. My words are clearly less offensive. I'm not replying because I'm offended. This isn't even a matter of tossing insults back and forth. If you actually read what I wrote instead of blindly defending someone, you can see how level I was being.

Take a couple days off to read up on my announcement. What Dorkyfresh said was not an insult and you perpetuated this argument. Furthermore, you brought anything on yourself by coming into the JOHN MCCAIN thread and talking about what a "rotten, untrustworthy, human being," and providing nothing to back such comments up. Read my announcement. Particularly the part on higher level of scrutiny and expectations of maturity and apply it when you come back in two days. Wolfboy needs to start acting like a Wolfman, otherwise he will not last long in this section of the Hype.

[Marx]

I'd say the offshore drilling is just the latest in a string of things that could potentially sink him in the Fall, but it's a nice example of how he panders to the lobbyists. What will be interesting to see is if he can sustain the cash influx. So far he's had one good month. Obama's been on a tear for months on end, now.
jag

That's true. I'm almost more curious to see how Obama's pulling out of public financing (and his vote for the FISA legislation) is going to affect his campaign. Some of the media are ripping him apart for his decision to abandon PF and there are some hard-left Obama supporters who are in an uproar for his FISA vote.

[Marx]

AP: McCain dogged by campaign missteps
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/21/ap-mccain-dogged-by-campaign-missteps/

[Matt]

AP: McCain dogged by campaign missteps
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/21/ap-mccain-dogged-by-campaign-missteps/

McCain had to court the far right in order to win the nomination. However, it will haunt him throughout the election.

[jaguarr]

That's true. I'm almost more curious to see how Obama's pulling out of public financing (and his vote for the FISA legislation) is going to affect his campaign. Some of the media are ripping him apart for his decision to abandon PF and there are some hard-left Obama supporters who are in an uproar for his FISA vote.

Personally, I have no problem with this pulling out of the public financing. I actually take issue with the fact that tax dollars are available to Presidential candidates for campaigning, really. I like them using fundraising dollars rather than my tax dollars. And the FISA thing is retarded; I don't think most of the people that are upset about it even understand what the hell it's about.

jag

[Matt]

I like public financing simply because, in theory, using it will ensure that special interest is not funding our candidates.

[jaguarr]

I like public financing simply because, in theory, using it will ensure that special interest is not funding our candidates.

In theory, yes, in practice, no (unfortunately). The system done be broke.

jag

[Matt]

In theory, yes, in practice, no (unfortunately). The system done be broke.

jag

It could use some tweaking, but Obama saying how great it is and how much he supports it while withdrawling from it because he happened to raise triple of what it would give him just stinks of hypocrisy.

[jaguarr]

It could use some tweaking, but Obama saying how great it is and how much he supports it while withdrawling from it because he happened to raise triple of what it would give him just stinks of hypocrisy.

I'd think he was an idiot if he willingly gave up an advantage like that, personally.

jag

[Matt]

Doesn't change the fact that the way he handled it stinks of hypocrisy.

[jaguarr]

Doesn't change the fact that the way he handled it stinks of hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy goes hand in hand with politicians; ALL of them. Why this constantly surprises you, Matt, is a constant surprise to me. :hehe:

jag

[StorminNorman]

I'm not talking about Obama or choosing sides like you are. Go campaign for McCain all you want here and throw childish name calling around. It suits your stance on McCain.

McCain winning nomination was no way an achievement to be impressed about.

If you are active in politics, siding against McCain is the equivilant of siding for Obama - that is unless you are one of the type of people that believes incorrectly that voting for a third party candidate does anything of value.

I would ask how you can criticize me of childish name calling when you are guilty of that very fault. I implied that if you believed a certain way that is, in reality, foolish - then you are a fool. I did not call you a fool. There is a difference, if ever so slight.

And yes - McCain's nomination was, I believe, a positive step for the GOP. For the first time you have a candidate that was not only not supported by the vast right and the religious right - but was actively campaigned AGAINST by those same parties. Its a step towards the center by the GOP - a very good sign. Meanwhile the DNC has been hijacked by the far left and has elected one of the most liberal and extremist candidates in a long time.

[StorminNorman]

So how 'bout that John McCain? He closed the cash gap on Obama in May and his ties to the offshore drilling idea could sink him in the fall...

Not at all. In fact his ties to offshore drilling should be the FOCUS of his campaign and exactly the sort of issue that could allow him and Republicans to ride into Washington.

[The Senator]

I'd think he was an idiot if he willingly gave up an advantage like that, personally.

jag

I agree. Obama has a huge financial advantage which has allowed him a chance to open up offices in all fifty states and become competitive in states most Democrats wouldn't have a shot at, like Alaska and Georgia. Forgoing public financing allows him to remain competitive in these states, and would force McCain to spend money he doesn't have in states he shouldn't have to defend. It is a fantastic advantage, and it would be a political disaster if he gave it up.

[StorminNorman]

Hypocrisy goes hand in hand with politicians; ALL of them. Why this constantly surprises you, Matt, is a constant surprise to me. :hehe:

jag

Hypocrisy by Obama SHOULD be a bigger issue than hypocrisy by most other politicians simply because his campaign was based around the idea that he was a different sort of politician. In fact thats the only leg his campaign had to stand on - he was change. If he is, as he is proving, to be nothing more than any other politician - his campaign as been a complete fraud and he should be called out for that.

[Marx]

It could use some tweaking, but Obama saying how great it is and how much he supports it while withdrawling from it because he happened to raise triple of what it would give him just stinks of hypocrisy.

It's like the article that I posted a little while ago - he chose winning over his word.

He should never have come out so strongly in his support of public financing if he even considered withdrawing from it in a potential general election.

It's all politics. That's what it amounts to. He a politician who wants to win, and he will do what he must to win.

[Marx]

Hypocrisy by Obama SHOULD be a bigger issue than hypocrisy by most other politicians simply because his campaign was based around the idea that he was a different sort of politician. In fact thats the only leg his campaign had to stand on - he was change. If he is, as he is proving, to be nothing more than any other politician - his campaign as been a complete fraud and he should be called out for that.

You've just described alot of the problem I have with him.

[Matt]

Hypocrisy goes hand in hand with politicians; ALL of them. Why this constantly surprises you, Matt, is a constant surprise to me. :hehe:

jag

It doesn't suprise me, but Obama is more open to attacks about hypocrisy because he is the one who spent his entire primary campaign by claiming he was the beacon of change and the opposite of "politics-as-usual." He put himself on too high a pedestal and that leaves him open to attack.

[Excel]

Barr is ****ing over McCain.

[Excel]

Barr is ****ing over McCain.

[Marx]

Barr is ****ing over McCain.

That's random...

[Matt]

I agree. Obama has a huge financial advantage which has allowed him a chance to open up offices in all fifty states and become competitive in states most Democrats wouldn't have a shot at, like Alaska and Georgia. Forgoing public financing allows him to remain competitive in these states, and would force McCain to spend money he doesn't have in states he shouldn't have to defend. It is a fantastic advantage, and it would be a political disaster if he gave it up.

Maybe, but it doesn't change the fact that he, as TheMarx's article said, chose to win over his word. He has proven that he is everything I have believed him to be for these past six months. There is no way I will vote for him now. And yes, though I'm sure certain posters will have snide comments, there was a chance, running mate and debate-pending, that I would have voted for him. Now he could nominate one of my boys such as Sherrod Brown or Mark Warner as his VP and I still won't vote for him. I've tried to buy into Obama, as frankly he is a very likable candidate and he makes you want to forego your beter judgement and vote for him. But now I just can't. He has proven that he is exactly what he claims to not be. The slippery, slimey, politican that every other politican (save a few) in this country is.

[Matt]

Barr is ****ing over McCain.

Read the announcement about maturity Excel.

I'm not sure Barr will be a factor. At least not to the extent the media would like to make him seem to be. He is no Ross Perot. Perot was able to take the ammount of votes he did because of basically limitless funds. Barr is not going to be able to run a nationwide campaign. I see him pulling in 2 or 3 % of the vote and any votes he takes away from McCain will be off-set by votes Nader takes from Obama.

[The Senator]

Maybe, but it doesn't change the fact that he, as TheMarx's article said, chose to win over his word. He has proven that he is everything I have believed him to be for these past six months. There is no way I will vote for him now. And yes, though I'm sure certain posters will have snide comments, there was a chance, running mate and debate-pending, that I would have voted for him. Now he could nominate one of my boys such as Sherrod Brown or Mark Warner as his VP and I still won't vote for him. I've tried to buy into Obama, as frankly he is a very likable candidate and he makes you want to forego your beter judgement and vote for him. But now I just can't. He has proven that he is exactly what he claims to not be. The slippery, slimey, politican that every other politican (save a few) in this country is.

:wow:

Stop the presses! Matt isn't voting for Obama!

:wow:

But seriously... I think it would be foolish beyond belief for a man of his financial stature to forgo the amount of money he would rake in, simply to accept public financing. If McCain was making as much money as Obama, he wouldn't forgo public financing (he said he wouldn't earlier this year before conveniently changing his mind)-- and he's the one responsible for recent public financing laws.

All this extra money makes him competitive in states Democrats typically don't win, and I'd rather take adding a Dakota or Georgia to the Democrats' electoral map over maintaining a campaign promise neither side firmly made.

[jaguarr]

Hypocrisy by Obama SHOULD be a bigger issue than hypocrisy by most other politicians simply because his campaign was based around the idea that he was a different sort of politician. In fact thats the only leg his campaign had to stand on - he was change. If he is, as he is proving, to be nothing more than any other politician - his campaign as been a complete fraud and he should be called out for that.

It doesn't suprise me, but Obama is more open to attacks about hypocrisy because he is the one who spent his entire primary campaign by claiming he was the beacon of change and the opposite of "politics-as-usual." He put himself on too high a pedestal and that leaves him open to attack.

Mmmm....really, the problem is that there are way too many people (you two included) that have taken his words of wanting to change Washington and not do "politics as usual" as meaning that he can't do ANYTHING remotely resembling something a politician should do when that really wasn't the point of his remarks. His intent was to point out that politics in Washington are corrupt, prone to very dirty games, incestuous and inbred due to a very closed system and network of individuals who all scratch each other's backs and cater to corporate interests and the interests of the wealthy, and that the people (particularly the middle class) aren't well represented in our current government. THAT is what he is trying to change. Whether he ultimately succeeds in not getting sucked into all the negativity or not remains to be seen but it does NOT mean that he can't address the issues or his competition, particularly when there are attacks on him. It seems to me that any time he makes a comment or strategic move, there are people coming out of the woodwork to hold him up to some idyllic magic standard they created in their minds about what he should or should not be doing based on his rhetoric even though they completely misunderstood what he was talking about in the first place.

jag

[The Senator]

Read the announcement about maturity Excel.

I'm not sure Barr will be a factor. At least not to the extent the media would like to make him seem to be. He is no Ross Perot. Perot was able to take the ammount of votes he did because of basically limitless funds. Barr is not going to be able to run a nationwide campaign. I see him pulling in 2 or 3 % of the vote and any votes he takes away from McCain will be off-set by votes Nader takes from Obama.

Polls show the only state Barr currently has a significant impact on is his home state of Georgia. As it stands, Obama and McCain are statistically tied. Given Barr's appeal in Georgia, McCain's lack of appeal to Georgia's conservative base, and Obama's popularity among the state's African American population, I would say that Barr will serve as a spoiler and Obama will come out on top in Georgia... thus handing the election to the Democrats...

[Marx]

:wow:

Stop the presses! Matt isn't voting for Obama!

:wow:

But seriously... I think it would be foolish beyond belief for a man of his financial stature to forgo the amount of money he would rake in, simply to accept public financing. If McCain was making as much money as Obama, he wouldn't forgo public financing (he said he wouldn't earlier this year before conveniently changing his mind)-- and he's the one responsible for recent public financing laws.

All this extra money makes him competitive in states Democrats typically don't win, and I'd rather take adding a Dakota or Georgia to the Democrats' electoral map over maintaining a campaign promise neither side firmly made.

I completely understand what you're saying Jman, but its the principle of the matter. He chose winning over his word.

He's a politician. Enough said.

[Matt]

Polls show the only state Barr currently has a significant impact on is his home state of Georgia. As it stands, Obama and McCain are statistically tied. Given Barr's appeal in Georgia, McCain's lack of appeal to Georgia's conservative base, and Obama's popularity among the state's African American population, I would say that Barr will serve as a spoiler and Obama will come out on top in Georgia... thus handing the election to the Democrats...

I don't think it'll go down that way. When Georgian conservatives are being hit by 527 ads on a daily basis saying "Voting for Barr = a vote for Obama," they will fall in line behind McCain. Gore and Democrats never had the balls to attack Nader. Republicans will have the balls to straight out say "Barr gives Obama the election."

[jaguarr]

I completely understand what you're saying Jman, but its the principle of the matter. He chose winning over his word.

He's a politician. Enough said.

Did anyone ever say Obama WASN'T a politician? I don't think even he has said that. :huh: I'm just amazed that there are so many people going "OMG! He' really a politician!!! OMG!" when he never claimed he wasn't. Again, people have this weird perception of this guy and have built him up (both people who are madly in love with him as well as people who hate him with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns) to be something he's really not and then act surprised when he turns out to be not what they had built him up to be in their own minds.

jag

[Marx]

I don't think it'll go down that way. When Georgian conservatives are being hit by 527 ads on a daily basis saying "Voting for Barr = a vote for Obama," they will fall in line behind McCain. Gore and Democrats never had the balls to attack Nader. Republicans will have the balls to straight out say "Barr gives Obama the election."

That's because Nader still had a level of credibility in 2000 and Democrats don't usually smear other candidates. (At least, not as good as the Republicans do.)

[Marx]

Did anyone ever say Obama WASN'T a politician? I don't think even he has said that. :huh: I'm just amazed that there are so many people going "OMG! He' really a politician!!! OMG!" when he never claimed he wasn't. Again, people have this weird perception of this guy and have built him up (both people who are madly in love with him as well as people who hate him with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns) to be something he's really not and then act surprised when he turns out to be not what they had built him up to be in their own minds.

jag

The point is that Obama has built this image of himself. The root of his campaign is based on the "I'm not like all the others" mumbo jumbo. He started this, it's only been amplified by overzealous supporters.

[The Senator]

I don't think it'll go down that way. When Georgian conservatives are being hit by 527 ads on a daily basis saying "Voting for Barr = a vote for Obama," they will fall in line behind McCain. Gore and Democrats never had the balls to attack Nader. Republicans will have the balls to straight out say "Barr gives Obama the election."

Now you're assuming that the RNC and their corresponding 527s will waste money on ads attacking Barr instead of Obama in what has become an unusual swing state. And while that isn't out of the realm of possibility, I don't see it happening.

Barr is such an interesting candidate, not just because he represents a threat to McCain, but because of who he is. He was a former Congressman from Georgia who was regarded as one of the more conservative members of the House. McCain lost Georgia during the Republican primary, by a lot if I remember correctly, which means there is probably a sizable chunk of the Republican base in Georgia which is still annoyed at his lack of conservative credentials. If Barr sells himself to Georgians, particularly on his very conservative record, he has the potential to steal enough would-be votes from McCain to make a difference. When you add to that Obama's GOTV efforts among African American and younger voters in this state, it becomes quite clear that McCain is going to have a huge problem in a state which he normally wouldn't have had to worry about.

At the very least, McCain will have to spend money here... which gives Obama a chance to spend money in another state, such as Missouri or Ohio, while McCain defends territory he shouldn't have to defend...

[StorminNorman]

Now you're assuming that the RNC and their corresponding 527s will waste money on ads attacking Barr instead of Obama in what has become an unusual swing state. And while that isn't out of the realm of possibility, I don't see it happening.


You are assuming that everyone with any sort of political influence in the state is an idiot.

Georgia is only in play if McCain can't win over the Republican base. Obama, by himself, can not win the state. So if the RNC and 527's can eliminate Barr's credibility, can eliminate Barr as a threat - McCain wins the state. Attacking Obama in Georgia does little good - attacking Barr in Georgia is key.

[Excel]

The only people who hold Obama to this ultra standard are those who wanna see him fall.

[StorminNorman]

The only people who hold Obama to this ultra standard are those who wanna see him fall.

Or those who have not played tea time using Obama-flavored Kool Aid.

[The Senator]

You are assuming that everyone with any sort of political influence in the state is an idiot.

Georgia is only in play if McCain can't win over the Republican base. Obama, by himself, can not win the state. So if the RNC and 527's can eliminate Barr's credibility, can eliminate Barr as a threat - McCain wins the state. Attacking Obama in Georgia does little good - attacking Barr in Georgia is key.

I am not assuming the Georgia Republican Party is run by idiots.

Though that would explain why Saxby Chambliss is in the Senate.

However, I do believe that the Republicans have nothing to gain by attacking Barr, a widely known, popular politician in his home state who trumps McCain's conservative credentials tenfold. People who know nothing of Barr will be sitting at home, watching an ad which says "Bob Barr is an idiot," causing them to ask "who the hell is Bob Barr?" before they go on to the internet and realize that Bob Barr is far more conservative than McCain. Meanwhile, those who were on the fence about voting for McCain discover a candidate who has taken their stance on the issues which matter to them, and they become more interested in voting for Barr than they were interested in voting for McCain in the first place.

I think McCain and the RNC need to keep the attention on Obama and act as if Barr is irrelevant. A McCain-Barr clash in Barr's home state could backfire and cost McCain more than it could help him.

[StorminNorman]

I am not assuming the Georgia Republican Party is run by idiots.

Though that would explain why Saxby Chambliss is in the Senate.

However, I do believe that the Republicans have nothing to gain by attacking Barr, a widely known, popular politician in his home state who trumps McCain's conservative credentials tenfold. People who know nothing of Barr will be sitting at home, watching an ad which says "Bob Barr is an idiot," causing them to ask "who the hell is Bob Barr?" before they go on to the internet and realize that Bob Barr is far more conservative than McCain. Meanwhile, those who were on the fence about voting for McCain discover a candidate who has taken their stance on the issues which matter to them, and they become more interested in voting for Barr than they were interested in voting for McCain in the first place.

I think McCain and the RNC need to keep the attention on Obama and act as if Barr is irrelevant. A McCain-Barr clash in Barr's home state could backfire and cost McCain more than it could help him.

McCain and the RNC only can only afford to treat Barr as irrelevant if he IS irrelevant. If Barr's support is significant enough that McCain is being harmed by it - they must attack.

There is no reason Georgia should be a purple state - I don't care what the numbers say now, there is no way Obama can beat McCain in a two man race in the state. I know it well, my father has huge ties to the state politically. The only way Obama beats McCain there is IF McCain is facing a three man race with Barr.

Eliminate Barr, McCain wins. Period.

[The Senator]

McCain and the RNC only can only afford to treat Barr as irrelevant if he IS irrelevant. If Barr's support is significant enough that McCain is being harmed by it - they must attack.

There is no reason Georgia should be a purple state - I don't care what the numbers say now, there is no way Obama can beat McCain in a two man race in the state. I know it well, my father has huge ties to the state politically. The only way Obama beats McCain there is IF McCain is facing a three man race with Barr.

Eliminate Barr, McCain wins. Period.

Unfortunately, I do not believe McCain will be able to successfully eliminate Barr as a candidate, and that any attempts by McCain to do such a thing will ultimately backfire on him. If Georgia is like any other southern state, chances are they will not take kindly to some outsider such as McCain slamming a fellow Georgian in his backyard. Such attacks will boost Barr's profile and will probably help him more than it will help McCain.

Combine Barr's threat to Obama's sweeping voter registration drives and GOTV efforts in this state, and you've already begun to hammer the nail into McCain's political coffin.

[StorminNorman]

Unfortunately, I do not believe McCain will be able to successfully eliminate Barr as a candidate, and that any attempts by McCain to do such a thing will ultimately backfire on him. If Georgia is like any other southern state, chances are they will not take kindly to some outsider such as McCain slamming a fellow Georgian in his backyard. Such attacks will boost Barr's profile and will probably help him more than it will help McCain.

Combine Barr's threat to Obama's sweeping voter registration drives and GOTV efforts in this state, and you've already begun to hammer the nail into McCain's political coffin.

You are acting as if Barr is a beloved figure in Georgia - he is not. Barr is a loose cannon waiting to explode, the guy is an idiot. He will do something silly and when he does, McCain will be able to eliminate him as a credibile candidate.

[jaguarr]

The point is that Obama has built this image of himself. The root of his campaign is based on the "I'm not like all the others" mumbo jumbo. He started this, it's only been amplified by overzealous supporters.

Oh, his more overzealous supporters haven't helped I agree, but I'd say his detractors have contributed to the distortion of Obama's intent quite a bit as well. ;)

jag

[Marx]

Oh, his more overzealous supporters haven't helped I agree, but I'd say his detractors have contributed to the distortion of Obama's intent quite a bit as well. ;)

jag

It's hard to distort his intent when he shouts it from atop his mighty pedestal. :cwink:

[jaguarr]

It's hard to distort his intent when he shouts it from atop his mighty pedestal. :cwink:

Apparently it isn't. ;)

jag

[Marx]

So how 'bout that John McCain? :funny:

[jaguarr]

So how 'bout that John McCain? :funny:

No, sir. I don't like 'im. Too flippy-floppy. :D

jag

[Mr Sparkle]

oh, I get it.
McCain never said he was going to change anything and seldom used the word "Hope" so he can lie about his energy policy, associate with anti-gay preachers, lie about his votes on investigating the actions of the government after Katrina, and a bunch of other things.

he can do it because he never said he wasn't a politician, and never implied that "politics as usual" would change, therefore apparently he gets a free pass, regardless of all the failings of his policies and the actions he has taken during the campaign.
not to beat a dead horse Matt, but you were NEVER going to vote for Obama acting like this "he chose winning over his word" deal had nothing to do with this.
in fact, if he had chosen his word over winning, you and others could complain that you need a Commander in chief who isn't afraid to do what it takes to win, blah, blah.
McCain has made as many, if not more mistakes during his run, and misrepresented his stance on hundreds of issues, and misrepresented his opponents stance as well.
yet again, this doesn't seem to be as discussed.

you know, it's weird, because If I was a neutral observer, seeing this from some foreign country (hahahahaha I guess I am) I'd have to say that race is playing a part in this somehow.

go fig.

[Matt]

You're hardly neutral though.

[The Senator]

You are acting as if Barr is a beloved figure in Georgia - he is not. Barr is a loose cannon waiting to explode, the guy is an idiot. He will do something silly and when he does, McCain will be able to eliminate him as a credibile candidate.

He's still loved in his home district, from what I've heard through the grapevine. And if that's true, then it shouldn't be difficult for him to boost his profile statewide.

[The Senator]

oh, I get it.
McCain never said he was going to change anything and seldom used the word "Hope" so he can lie about his energy policy, associate with anti-gay preachers, lie about his votes on investigating the actions of the government after Katrina, and a bunch of other things.

he can do it because he never said he wasn't a politician, and never implied that "politics as usual" would change, therefore apparently he gets a free pass, regardless of all the failings of his policies and the actions he has taken during the campaign.
not to beat a dead horse Matt, but you were NEVER going to vote for Obama acting like this "he chose winning over his word" deal had nothing to do with this.
in fact, if he had chosen his word over winning, you and others could complain that you need a Commander in chief who isn't afraid to do what it takes to win, blah, blah.
McCain has made as many, if not more mistakes during his run, and misrepresented his stance on hundreds of issues, and misrepresented his opponents stance as well.
yet again, this doesn't seem to be as discussed.

you know, it's weird, because If I was a neutral observer, seeing this from some foreign country (hahahahaha I guess I am) I'd have to say that race is playing a part in this somehow.

go fig.

With the exception of the race part, you raise valid points which I have noticed more and more as of late. Regardless of what Obama does, he will always be criticized by those who have admitted they dislike him with a passion. And every time McCain is brought up in his own thread, the topic seems gets changed to "Well, Obama doesn't have a plan," or "What does Obama plan to do differently?" as if that magically justifies what McCain stands for. I have numerous problems with Obama and some of his supporters, but seriously, some of his opponents are just as bad. They, too, throw out just as many outlandish assumptions as if they are fact, and present themselves as total extremists. It's getting a bit ridiculous.

[Matt]

It is no different than Obama supporters using "McBush" or "Well McCain does this," or "Everyone does it," argument. That is what this election will become.

And Sparkle, I'd thank you to not assume who I will and will not vote for. Last I checked you are not able to read my mind. I would've taken running mate and debates into account before I made a decision. This blew it. No matter how you spin this, no matter how stupid it would've been for Obama to keep his word, he did go back on a promise. Plain and simple and for someone who is meant to represent "change," that is unforgivable.

[Marx]

GOP worries that Barr could play spoiler in White House race
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080622/ap_on_el_pr/bob_barr

[The Senator]

It is no different than Obama supporters using "McBush" or "Well McCain does this," or "Everyone does it," argument. That is what this election will become.

Yeah, and the idiots who refer to John McCain as "McBush" or "McSame" have absolutely no leg to stand on, do they? The immense hatred towards both sides bothers me to no end. People have superficial reasons for being against both candidates, and the way they present themselves is absolutely childish sometimes.

[StorminNorman]

He's still loved in his home district, from what I've heard through the grapevine. And if that's true, then it shouldn't be difficult for him to boost his profile statewide.

Barr lost his seat in congress by losing his primary 2:1.

Also, you brought up the idea that Georgian's will reject McCain, an "outsider" criticizing Barr. McCain won't say a negative word about Barr, nor should he. That is the job of 527's and they will almost certainly be organized from within the state. It will be Georgians attacking Barr - not outsiders, or at least it will be sold (and bought) as such.

[The Senator]

Barr lost his seat in congress by losing his primary 2:1.

Also, you brought up the idea that Georgian's will reject McCain, an "outsider" criticizing Barr. McCain won't say a negative word about Barr, nor should he. That is the job of 527's and they will almost certainly be organized from within the state. It will be Georgians attacking Barr - not outsiders, or at least it will be sold (and bought) as such.

There's no hint that these 527s are planning on attacking Barr, just as there are no hints that Democratic 527s plan to attack Nader or Cynthia McKinney. I think you're living on a pipe dream.

Since it will take as little as 5% of Georgians to swing the state from McCain to Obama, I think you are underestimating the significance of Barr's threat. While I do not think there's enough evidence to suggest that the state will swing, I do believe that the amount of money Obama is willing to dump into the state on advertising and GOTV efforts will cause McCain's campaign to spend more money defending the state than he would plan. And yes, McCain will have to spend a significant chunk of money in this state promoting and defending himself, because voters are not going to be convinced to vote for McCain simply because a 527 is attacking Bob Barr. The 527 cannot advocate the election of John McCain; simply the defeat of Bob Barr. There will be a gap there which will need to be closed, especially among the strict social conservatives who can't stand Obama or McCain and would rather stay at home once Barr is exposed as a fraud.

[Matt]

I think you are putting too much stock in current Georgian polls, jman. I don't think it will be anywhere as close to purple as current polls indicate. I don't think it'll end up close enough for five percent to make a difference. Obama is still enjoying the post-primary grace period.

[The Senator]

I think you are putting too much stock in current Georgian polls, jman. I don't think it will be anywhere as close to purple as current polls indicate. I don't think it'll end up close enough for five percent to make a difference. Obama is still enjoying the post-primary grace period.

We'll see where we're at in a few months.

I'm currently putting stock in the demographics which make up that state, as well as the results of both the Democratic and Republican primaries. Moreover, I'm counting on the massive Democratic GOTV efforts to cause McCain to spend time and money campaigning in a state he shouldn't have to campaign in. I'm not counting on a win, just a distraction for the Republicans.

I think that could happen in a lot of states, including (but not limited to) the Dakotas, North Carolina, Montana, Alaska and Indiana. Georgia is just another such state.

[Mr Sparkle]

You're hardly neutral though.

really? why's that?

[Matt]

We'll see where we're at in a few months.

I'm currently putting stock in the demographics which make up that state, as well as the results of both the Democratic and Republican primaries. Moreover, I'm counting on the massive Democratic GOTV efforts to cause McCain to spend time and money campaigning in a state he shouldn't have to campaign in. I'm not counting on a win, just a distraction for the Republicans.

I think that could happen in a lot of states, including (but not limited to) the Dakotas, North Carolina, Montana, Alaska and Indiana. Georgia is just another such state.

McCain won't do the work in a state like Georgia, though. It won't be a distraction or an extra cost for John McCain. He will let 527s deliver the state for him. I read an article a few months back that claimed McCain's campaign will be unprecedented as he will not have the money that most modern Republicans have grown accustomed to and he will be very dependent on 527s and free press time.

really? why's that?

I'll let you figure that one out.

[Mr Sparkle]

It is no different than Obama supporters using "McBush" or "Well McCain does this," or "Everyone does it," argument. That is what this election will become.

And Sparkle, I'd thank you to not assume who I will and will not vote for. Last I checked you are not able to read my mind. I would've taken running mate and debates into account before I made a decision. This blew it. No matter how you spin this, no matter how stupid it would've been for Obama to keep his word, he did go back on a promise. Plain and simple and for someone who is meant to represent "change," that is unforgivable.


this election has become what people have made it into.
a man gets penalized because he used the words "hope" and "change" instead of sticking by the old standards of "job growth" even he didn't provide any, and "greatest nation in the world" until his head exploded.
mind you, no promises any politician ever makes are expected to be kept.
from Reagan to McCain whose stint as a soldier makes his stance on the GI bill ever the more baffling, whose experience as a soldier makes his stance on the Tax Cuts, the first time the US has received tax cuts instead of raises during war time by the way, all the more confusing.

nobody talks about that, though, nobody cares, they are too busy pointing and laughing at a man whose fatal flaw apparently is having charisma.
:huh:

and, excuse me for assuming I know the contents of your mind, really, pardon me for thinking that you weren't going to vote for a man you have repeatedly said "had no business" running for president:huh: I just don't understand how you thought debates and running mates were going to change your mind, unless he was running alongside the almighty.
of course, you seem to have no trouble addressing my neutrality on this.
it seems along with your mod-powers you were given a peek into MY mind.
again.

go figure.

ya have been using extreme words for the man, like "unforgivable" I don;t really know why, I find a man who is willing to screw over soldiers, a group he was once part of,not because it's right, but for political gain

"unforgivable"

a man who once spearheaded a sweeping immigration reform that included a path to citizenship, now when it's politically profitable, reverse his stance and talk of the most important issue as "securing the borders" (when he had previously said that was only a part, but the most important part was immigration reform) well, that to me seems about as telling of his character

that also seems "unforgivable" to me.

I wonder why it is though, that you so readily overlook these facts and simply focus on Obama with such vigor.

I wonder.

[Mr Sparkle]

I'll let you figure that one out.

don't tell me, tell us all. so we might know the insight into my views that you and only you seem to have.

[The Senator]

McCain won't do the work in a state like Georgia, though. It won't be a distraction or an extra cost for John McCain. He will let 527s deliver the state for him. I read an article a few months back that claimed McCain's campaign will be unprecedented as he will not have the money that most modern Republicans have grown accustomed to and he will be very dependent on 527s and free press time.

Ah, but here's the thing: By forcing 527s to campaign in states such as Georgia, the Dakotas, and North Carolina, that essentially limits their resources in swing states such as Missouri, Michigan and Ohio, where the media markets are more expensive. So, 527s can spend money in typical red states, but won't that essentially drain their resources in more important states?

Meanwhile, 527s can only attack, meaning they cannot directly endorse John McCain for President. So McCain will lose ground with voters in Georgia, North Carolina, etc. simply because a pro-McCain message isn't being promoted among the people who need to hear it most. On the other hand, Obama can spend money promoting himself not only in Georgia, North Carolina, etc., but in major swing states such as Missouri and Ohio. And at the same time, independent Democratic groups such as MoveOn.org can attack McCain in those very same states.

[Matt]

don't tell me, tell us all. so we might know the insight into my views that you and only you seem to have.

I'll be happy to explain what we (and probably countless others) both know to anyone who is curious via PM. I'm not going to bother arguing with you Sparkle as it is as pointless as arguing with a three year old.

[Matt]

Ah, but here's the thing: By forcing 527s to campaign in states such as Georgia, the Dakotas, and North Carolina, that essentially limits their resources in swing states such as Missouri, Michigan and Ohio, where the media markets are more expensive. So, 527s can spend money in typical red states, but won't that essentially drain their resources in more important states?

But as Norman said, it will not be the national groups. It will be state level 527s.


Meanwhile, 527s can only attack, meaning they cannot directly endorse John McCain for President. So McCain will lose ground with voters in Georgia, North Carolina, etc. simply because a pro-McCain message isn't being promoted among the people who need to hear it most. On the other hand, Obama can spend money promoting himself not only in Georgia, North Carolina, etc., but in major swing states such as Missouri and Ohio. And at the same time, independent Democratic groups such as MoveOn.org can attack McCain in those very same states.

We both know there are ways around the "can only attack," rule. You're right, they can. But overly negative attacks against McCain by Obama and MoveOn could easily alienate Georgian voters against Obama.

[The Senator]

this election has become what people have made it into.
a man gets penalized because he used the words "hope" and "change" instead of sticking by the old standards of "job growth" even he didn't provide any, and "greatest nation in the world" until his head exploded.
mind you, no promises any politician ever makes are expected to be kept.
from Reagan to McCain whose stint as a soldier makes his stance on the GI bill ever the more baffling, whose experience as a soldier makes his stance on the Tax Cuts, the first time the US has received tax cuts instead of raises during war time by the way, all the more confusing.

nobody talks about that, though, nobody cares, they are too busy pointing and laughing at a man whose fatal flaw apparently is having charisma.
:huh:

and, excuse me for assuming I know the contents of your mind, really, pardon me for thinking that you weren't going to vote for a man you have repeatedly said "had no business" running for president:huh: I just don't understand how you thought debates and running mates were going to change your mind, unless he was running alongside the almighty.
of course, you seem to have no trouble addressing my neutrality on this.
it seems along with your mod-powers you were given a peek into MY mind.
again.

go figure.

ya have been using extreme words for the man, like "unforgivable" I don;t really know why, I find a man who is willing to screw over soldiers, a group he was once part of,not because it's right, but for political gain

"unforgivable"

a man who once spearheaded a sweeping immigration reform that included a path to citizenship, now when it's politically profitable, reverse his stance and talk of the most important issue as "securing the borders" (when he had previously said that was only a part, but the most important part was immigration reform) well, that to me seems about as telling of his character

that also seems "unforgivable" to me.

I wonder why it is though, that you so readily overlook these facts and simply focus on Obama with such vigor.

I wonder.

Post of the day, by far :up:

While I understand Matt's dislike for Obama, I do believe that there has been a huge double standard when it comes to McCain. IN HIS OWN THREAD, there is little mention or criticism of the flip-flopping and backstabbing McCain has done not only as a politician, but as a veteran and a "maverick." This man has become a sell-out simply so he can impress the Republican base, many of whom still aren't satisfied with him and won't be until he starts declaring that he was visited by God halfway between his first divorce and his magical conversion to Baptism over a year ago. McCain changed his position on several issues, sometimes more than once; he had his own pastor problems; and his connections and utterances throughout his life trump that of Obama tenfold. Yet, Obama is the one being criticized, with no mention of McCain, in the McCain thread.

It seems rather excessive to me.

[Mr Sparkle]

I'll be happy to explain what we (and probably countless others) both know to anyone who is curious via PM. I'm not going to bother arguing with you Sparkle as it is as pointless as arguing with a three year old.

hahaha! what a pathetic cop-out.
so, you call me biased publicly, you apparently had no trouble doing that, and when asked to back up your argument you go on about the futility of arguing with me.

glad to know, at least YOU know when you're wrong.
and If arguing like me is like arguing with a three year old, then, it must be humbling to know a three year old could own you in a debate.

I'm just saying is all:cwink:

[Matt]

...yawn.

[The Senator]

But as Norman said, it will not be the national groups. It will be state level 527s.

Ah, but then, state level 527s are virtually non-existent in the Dakotas and Montana, and they are poorly funded in larger states such as Georgia or North Carolina, which also have fairly expensive media markets. As a result, national 527s are going to have to intervene, thereby limiting the resources available at the national level.


We both know there are ways around the "can only attack," rule. You're right, they can. But overly negative attacks against McCain by Obama and MoveOn could easily alienate Georgian voters against Obama.

And that's fine with me. I'm not counting on an Obama win in Georgia, I'm counting on the GOP, 527s and McCain having to spend more time and money in these states than they should, causing a distraction.

[Mr Sparkle]

...yawn.

wow, wit AND insight.
a true Renaissance man.

[Matt]

Ah, but then, state level 527s are virtually non-existent in the Dakotas and Montana, and they are poorly funded in larger states such as Georgia or North Carolina, which also have fairly expensive media markets. As a result, national 527s are going to have to intervene, thereby limiting the resources available at the national level.

But all this is operating under the assumption that McCain is actually threatened in these traditionally red states and it is not simply a post-primary bump. I'm willing to bet that following the announcement of a VP for McCain (so long as its a good one) or the Republican Convention, McCain will have the traditional dominant lead in most of these red states that Obama is supposedly putting in play.


And that's fine with me. I'm not counting on an Obama win in Georgia, I'm counting on the GOP, 527s and McCain having to spend more time and money in these states than they should, causing a distraction.

But my point is, they will not need to if Obama and groups like MoveOn overplay their hand.

[Cmill216]

Peoples, can we please discuss the Crypt Keeper's latest on-goings without the petty back-and-forth?

Thank you.

[The Senator]

But all this is operating under the assumption that McCain is actually threatened in these traditionally red states and it is not simply a post-primary bump. I'm willing to bet that following the announcement of a VP for McCain (so long as its a good one) or the Republican Convention, McCain will have the traditional dominant lead in most of these red states that Obama is supposedly putting in play.

Of course, this comes back to the make up of this election, and why it was a brilliant idea for Obama to forgo public financing. Never before has a Democrat been competitive in states such as Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska and Indiana. It doesn't make any sense why John Kerry or Al Gore didn't spend time campaigning in some of these states. Had Al Gore spent a few days and $10 million in a state like North Dakota, he could have won the 2000 election. These states, while red, are far more purple than people seem to think-- especially Montana, which has a Democratic governor and two Democratic Senators with extremely high approval ratings.

This is why it makes brilliant sense for Obama to campaign there. I read an article which suggested that the only reason why states such as Indiana haven't turned blue is because people have ridden it off as a "red state," thus preventing candidates from selling themselves to independents in those states. If Obama spends a week of his time in some of these smaller states, he could have a dangerous advantage against McCain. Yeah, the Dakotas and Montana only add to a collective 9 electoral votes, but if he won all three of those states, Iowa, and one Western state, he could win the electoral vote. Better still, if he wins Iowa and Indiana, he wins.

So, strategically, it makes a lot of sense for Obama to spend money in these states. It forces McCain and co. to spend money in states they shouldn't have to defend. And then, it draws resources from other states, which gives Obama an incredible advantage you cannot deny exists.


But my point is, they will not need to if Obama and groups like MoveOn overplay their hand.

Considering MoveOn has only released two ads in the past three months, and Obama one national ad, I do not think we have to worry about them "overplaying their hand" any time soon.

[Marx]

Can McCain claim the Ron Paul votes?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080622/pl_politico/11246

[Marx]

Tom Ridge not ruling out a VP run
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/22/tom-ridge-not-ruling-out-a-vp-run/

[chaseter]

Peoples, can we please discuss the Crypt Keeper's latest on-goings without the petty back-and-forth?

Thank you.
Crypt Keeper?

[Matt]

Tom Ridge not ruling out a VP run
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/22/tom-ridge-not-ruling-out-a-vp-run/

Bah, Ridge is just grandstanding. Though he had political ambitions, he killed any chance of getting elected to higher office by accepting the homeland security position where he essentially became the constant bearer of bad news for the American people. But now that I think about it former governor of PA (for a little bit anyhow) and Ridge's Lt.Governor Mark Schweiker of PA could make a good running mate. He's young, charasmatic, and handled both the 9/11 attacks and the Quecreek mine disaster very well. He was very popular when he decided not to run for governor in 2003 (most polls indicated he would've defeated Rendell easily). He could potentially deliver PA to McCain. Hmm, I doubt he is on anyone's radar though.

[Marx]

Bah, Ridge is just grandstanding. Though he had political ambitions, he killed any chance of getting elected to higher office by accepting the homeland security position where he essentially became the constant bearer of bad news for the American people. But now that I think about it former governor of PA (for a little bit anyhow) and Ridge's Lt.Governor Mark Schweiker of PA could make a good running mate. He's young, charasmatic, and handled both the 9/11 attacks and the Quecreek mine disaster very well. He was very popular when he decided not to run for governor in 2003 (most polls indicated he would've defeated Rendell easily). He could potentially deliver PA to McCain. Hmm, I doubt he is on anyone's radar though.

Pretty much anyone that has had any ties to the Bush Administration is a really bad idea for McCain.

[Marx]

Analysis: Three women who could join GOP ticket
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080622/pl_politico/11258

[The Senator]

Palin is totally laughable. She has virtually no experience as the governor of one of the five most insignificant states in the country. What has she done which proves she'd be worthy of the Presidency if McCain was unable to finish his term in office? She would only serve as a trophy Vice Presidential candidate, and most voters will see through such a charade.

Fiorina has no governmental experience whatsoever. I want to know what makes people think that a business executive has the right experience to be president or vice president of the United States. Fiorina could make a good cabinet official, perhaps Secretary of Commerce, but she is in no way qualified to be Vice President of the United States. Again, voters will see through such a tactic.

Hutchison is the only one of those three qualified for the position, but I wonder if she'll actually take it if offered. She has her sights set on the Texas governorship in 2010, and sources say she's been preparing for a run for quite some time. Plus, she won't help McCain in a swing state, as Texas will go to the Republicans.

While I'm sure McCain would like to pick a woman or a minority to siphon votes from the Democrats, I don't think there are many qualified choices who fit that model.

[Marx]

Palin is totally laughable. She has virtually no experience as the governor of one of the five most insignificant states in the country. What has she done which proves she'd be worthy of the Presidency if McCain was unable to finish his term in office? She would only serve as a trophy Vice Presidential candidate, and most voters will see through such a charade.

Fiorina has no governmental experience whatsoever. I want to know what makes people think that a business executive has the right experience to be president or vice president of the United States. Fiorina could make a good cabinet official, perhaps Secretary of Commerce, but she is in no way qualified to be Vice President of the United States. Again, voters will see through such a tactic.

Hutchison is the only one of those three qualified for the position, but I wonder if she'll actually take it if offered. She has her sights set on the Texas governorship in 2010, and sources say she's been preparing for a run for quite some time. Plus, she won't help McCain in a swing state, as Texas will go to the Republicans.

While I'm sure McCain would like to pick a woman or a minority to siphon votes from the Democrats, I don't think there are many qualified choices who fit that model.

I would agree Jman. I think his VP is ultimately going to be a guy. Probably Mitt Romney of Mike Huckabee. I just have a feeling...

[The Senator]

I would agree Jman. I think his VP is ultimately going to be a guy. Probably Mitt Romney of Mike Huckabee. I just have a feeling...

A lot of people say that McCain should try to fill the "gender" or "race" gap with his VP choice.

However, I think he should fill the "young Senator with a funny sounding name" gap by picking John Sununu, the junior Senator from New Hampshire. Sununu is young, somewhat experienced, and from a swing state. Sununu looks to be heading towards a brutal defeat this fall in his own re-election bid, so I don't see why he wouldn't accept if McCain offered him the position.

[StorminNorman]

He will end up picking Romney - just wait and see.

[Marx]

A lot of people say that McCain should try to fill the "gender" or "race" gap with his VP choice.

However, I think he should fill the "young Senator with a funny sounding name" gap by picking John Sununu, the junior Senator from New Hampshire. Sununu is young, somewhat experienced, and from a swing state. Sununu looks to be heading towards a brutal defeat this fall in his own re-election bid, so I don't see why he wouldn't accept if McCain offered him the position.

I think it would be blatantly obvious what he was trying to do. I honestly think it would backfire.

[The Senator]

He will end up picking Romney - just wait and see.

I guess that means Utah won't be a swing state then.

[StorminNorman]

I guess that means Utah won't be a swing state then.

And Michigan will come into play.

[The Senator]

And Michigan will come into play.

Well, recent polls suggest Obama could still win without Michigan. I do expect that state to turn red regardless of who is chosen as McCain's running mate, simply because the Democratic governor is one of the least popular in the nation, as is the Democratic-controlled legislature.

[StorminNorman]

Well, recent polls suggest Obama could still win without Michigan. I do expect that state to turn red regardless of who is chosen as McCain's running mate, simply because the Democratic governor is one of the least popular in the nation, as is the Democratic-controlled legislature.

You know how I feel about polls this early out :cwink:

[jaguarr]

Palin is totally laughable. She has virtually no experience as the governor of one of the five most insignificant states in the country. What has she done which proves she'd be worthy of the Presidency if McCain was unable to finish his term in office? She would only serve as a trophy Vice Presidential candidate, and most voters will see through such a charade.

Fiorina has no governmental experience whatsoever. I want to know what makes people think that a business executive has the right experience to be president or vice president of the United States. Fiorina could make a good cabinet official, perhaps Secretary of Commerce, but she is in no way qualified to be Vice President of the United States. Again, voters will see through such a tactic.

Hutchison is the only one of those three qualified for the position, but I wonder if she'll actually take it if offered. She has her sights set on the Texas governorship in 2010, and sources say she's been preparing for a run for quite some time. Plus, she won't help McCain in a swing state, as Texas will go to the Republicans.

While I'm sure McCain would like to pick a woman or a minority to siphon votes from the Democrats, I don't think there are many qualified choices who fit that model.

Fiorina damn near killed HP as one of the most inept CEO's in recent history. She shouldn't be anywhere NEAR any cabinet, let alone the VP slot. :down

jag

[The Senator]

You know how I feel about polls this early out :cwink:

Is that the line you'll give the week before the election, too? :cwink:

[StorminNorman]

Is that the line you'll give the week before the election, too? :cwink:

Only if I don't like them. :ninja:

[The Senator]

Fiorina damn near killed HP as one of the most inept CEO's in recent history. She shouldn't be anywhere NEAR any cabinet, let alone the VP slot. :down

jag

Apparently, some in the McCain camp must think she's qualified, considering they've not only given her a job on the campaign, but also because they're floating her name around as a potential VP.

And by qualified, I mean she has breasts and a vagina.

[jaguarr]

Apparently, some in the McCain camp must think she's qualified, considering they've not only given her a job on the campaign, but also because they're floating her name around as a potential VP.

And by qualified, I mean she has breasts and a vagina.


LMAO! Being an HP stockholder, I can only say that she does not impress me in any way, shape or form. She made some of the dumbest business decisions I have ever seen a CEO make and was generally loathed by the employees from everything I've heard from friends I have that work there. They regarded her as inept, arrogant, obnoxious and generally too big for her britches for no apparent reason whatsoever. She fits right in with McCain's campaign. :hehe:

jag

[Marx]

McCain calls for $300 million prize for better car battery
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/23/campaign.wrap/index.html

[Marx]

Apparently, some in the McCain camp must think she's qualified, considering they've not only given her a job on the campaign, but also because they're floating her name around as a potential VP.

And by qualified, I mean she has breasts and a vagina.

:hehe:

[The Senator]

McCain calls for $300 million prize for better car battery
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/23/campaign.wrap/index.html

What the **** is this, "American Inventor"? :huh:

[Marx]

What the **** is this, "American Inventor"? :huh:

I'm thinking it is McCain's newest theory on how to get elected - to host a new government game show mixing the ideas of "The Next Best Thing" and "American Inventor."

*cue overly cheesy game show music*

:funny:

[jaguarr]

What the **** is this, "American Inventor"? :huh:

I'm thinking it is McCain's newest theory on how to get elected - to host a new government game show mixing the ideas of "The Next Best Thing" and "American Inventor."

*cue overly cheesy game show music*

:funny:

It's like he WANTS Regis Philbin to win on the write-in ballot. :huh:

jag

[Marx]

It could be honest and thoughtful. You know, John McCain could always just be trying plug his "guest judge" spot!

:hehe:

[The Senator]

I'm thinking it is McCain's newest theory on how to get elected - to host a new government game show mixing the ideas of "The Next Best Thing" and "American Inventor."

*cue overly cheesy game show music*

:funny:

He could be the nation's next Drew Carey: Someone people only watched because there was nothing better on all the other channels, who gets a second shot at fame by hosting a game show people only watch because there's nothing better on all the other channels.

Hopefully, he'll live well past Bob Barker's retirement age :hehe:

[jaguarr]

If he puts Fiorina in a skimpy dress and has her turning letters or something I'm writing a complaint letter to the network.

jag

[Marx]

He could be the nation's next Drew Carey: Someone people only watched because there was nothing better on all the other channels, who gets a second shot at fame by hosting a game show people only watch because there's nothing better on all the other channels.

Hopefully, he'll live well past Bob Barker's retirement age :hehe:

You just might be onto something Jman! :cwink:

[Chris B]

Well, recent polls suggest Obama could still win without Michigan. I do expect that state to turn red regardless of who is chosen as McCain's running mate, simply because the Democratic governor is one of the least popular in the nation, as is the Democratic-controlled legislature.

As a MI resident, I'm skeptical that McCain will be able to carry the state. Granholm should've lost her bid for re-election in 2006, but still managed to pull it off. Granted, as far as a Republican candidate for President is concerned, McCain is better fit for the state than most, but the political climate makes me skeptical he'll win.

Plus, I think people overestimate the impact Romney as the hypothetical VP candidate would have here. Fact is, nobody is going to care that his Dad was governor. The only reason why he won the primary was because he played the political posturing game by saying that he would bring back automotive jobs, while McCain said that those jobs wouldn't be coming back.

[Marx]

John McCain distanced himself Monday from a top adviser who said another terrorist attack on the United States in this election year would benefit the Republican presidential candidate.

McCain disavows aide's terrorism comment
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-06-23-mccain_N.htm

[Raiden]

John McCain distanced himself Monday from a top adviser who said another terrorist attack on the United States in this election year would benefit the Republican presidential candidate.

McCain disavows aide's terrorism comment
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-06-23-mccain_N.htm

I think that top adviser will be looking for a new job soon.

[StorminNorman]

It was a stupid thing to say.

[souvlaki]

That reminds me:

"What do you see as the gravest long-term threat to the U.S. economy?"

McCain: Well, I would think that the absolute gravest threat is the struggle that we're in against Islamic extremism, which can affect, if they prevail, our very existence. Another successful attack on the United States of America could have devastating consequences.

I mean, seriously? And people wonder why he is compared to Bush.

[Marx]

That reminds me:

"What do you see as the gravest long-term threat to the U.S. economy?"

McCain: Well, I would think that the absolute gravest threat is the struggle that we're in against Islamic extremism, which can affect, if they prevail, our very existence. Another successful attack on the United States of America could have devastating consequences.

I mean, seriously? And people wonder why he is compared to Bush.

I agree Souv. Comparisons aren't all that hard to draw between the two.

[Cosmic]

Huffpost on Charlie Black (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/23/mccain-adviser-another-91_n_108671.html)

It wasn't just a stupid thing to say. It was a really horrible thing to say. It's not the sort of thing you can just apologize for. He knew what he was saying. It just shows that he's a truly evil and wicked person.

[StorminNorman]

My father knows Charlie Black, he has worked closely with Charlie Black, my father is friends with Charlie Black.

Charlie Black should of known better, it was stupid to say something like that in an instance where it would be reported.

To call him evil or wicked or even saying he was incorrect is stupid, however.

[StorminNorman]

My father knows Charlie Black, he has worked closely with Charlie Black, my father is friends with Charlie Black.

Charlie Black should of known better, it was stupid to say something like that in an instance where it would be reported.

To call him evil or wicked or even saying he was incorrect is stupid, however.

[jaguarr]

My father knows Charlie Black, he has worked closely with Charlie Black, my father is friends with Charlie Black.

Charlie Black should of known better, it was stupid to say something like that in an instance where it would be reported.

To call him evil or wicked or even saying he was incorrect is stupid, however.

Charlie Black is now a liability.

jag

[The Senator]

No, it is true: The Republicans would benefit from a terrorist attack, because most Americans are so incredibly misled that the only people who are capable of defending this country from a terrorist attacks are Republicans. If an attack occurred on American soil, voters would stick their tails between their legs and vote for the Republican Party, because they've been the ones associated with keeping this nation "safe" since 9/11 (nevermind the fact that Republicans controlled the government at the time). And, of course, they'll be willing to overlook the disaster in Iraq, the unraveling situation in Afghanistan, the miles of corruption and eight years of domestic policy distractions to elect McCain president and continue many of the failed Bush policies.

(And the ironic thing is, McCain and the Republicans would benefit even though an attack occurred under a Republican administration)

[Matt]

It was a ridiculously stupid thing to say...but...come on, its true. An attack on American soil would put the fear back into people, and they would run to the man who says "I'm gonna fight the terrorists!" as opposed to the man who says "I'm gonna sit down and try and talk things out." Are we so overly sensitive that someone cannot say the truth anymore? He isn't saying, "HEY TERRORISTS! COME ATTACK US SO MCCAIN CAN WIN!" He is saying a simple truth, a terrorist attack would change the political atmosphere, and yes, the change would favor McCain.

[Marx]

No, it is true: The Republicans would benefit from a terrorist attack, because most Americans are so incredibly misled that the only people who are capable of defending this country from a terrorist attacks are Republicans. If an attack occurred on American soil, voters would stick their tails between their legs and vote for the Republican Party, because they've been the ones associated with keeping this nation "safe" since 9/11 (nevermind the fact that Republicans controlled the government at the time). And, of course, they'll be willing to overlook the disaster in Iraq, the unraveling situation in Afghanistan, the miles of corruption and eight years of domestic policy distractions to elect McCain president and continue many of the failed Bush policies.

(And the ironic thing is, McCain and the Republicans would benefit even though an attack occurred under a Republican administration)

It was a ridiculously stupid thing to say...but...come on, its true. An attack on American soil would put the fear back into people, and they would run to the man who says "I'm gonna fight the terrorists!" as opposed to the man who says "I'm gonna sit down and try and talk things out." Are we so overly sensitive that someone cannot say the truth anymore? He isn't saying, "HEY TERRORISTS! COME ATTACK US SO MCCAIN CAN WIN!" He is saying a simple truth, a terrorist attack would change the political atmosphere, and yes, the change would favor McCain.

I'm still waiting for Bin Laden to reappear before the elections in November.

[jaguarr]

Mmm....initial reaction to another terrorist attack might be to swing people to McCain, but I think it would really depend on how Obama and the Dem's addressed it. If they demonstrated the drive and determination to find out who was behind it and hunt them down...smartly and without all the excess BS that came with the 9/11-related military actions (invading Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or catching the terrorists that were behind it, no matter how much spin the Republicans put behind it)...pointing out along the way that they'll go after the actual people who did the dirty deed, not things that are unrelated to it...and do everything in their power to catch and punish or eliminate the perpetrators...no mercy, no quarter...that might balance things right the f**k back out again with the voter base, to be honest. Especially if say...a certain General Clark was brought in as the potential Secretary of Defense if Obama got elected. Don't underestimate the ability of Obama's campaign team to spin whatever the Republicans throw at them and turn it right back around and use it against them. They've been exhibiting their black belt in political jiu-jitsu for quite some time, now, after all.

jag

[StorminNorman]

Charlie Black is now a liability.

jag

Absolutely.

[DorkyFresh]

the way i see it...another attack would just confirm that the Republicans AREN'T doing their jobs.

[souvlaki]

It was a ridiculously stupid thing to say...but...come on, its true. An attack on American soil would put the fear back into people, and they would run to the man who says "I'm gonna fight the terrorists!" as opposed to the man who says "I'm gonna sit down and try and talk things out." Are we so overly sensitive that someone cannot say the truth anymore? He isn't saying, "HEY TERRORISTS! COME ATTACK US SO MCCAIN CAN WIN!" He is saying a simple truth, a terrorist attack would change the political atmosphere, and yes, the change would favor McCain.

Or people would realize that we've had two major terrorist attacks during a Republican presidency and decide that they obviously are not doing as good of a job combating terrorism as they'd like us to believe. Really, it works both ways. This is where Obama's argument about Iraq always made more sense to me. He wants to reduce our troop numbers in Iraq so we can instead put the focus on Afghanistan, and Al Qaeda... where our focus should have been the whole time. Republicans like to talk like they are the better party to take on terrorism, but they haven't done a very convincing job of this since 2003. Sadly, most people wont see it this way though. I still have no clue how the Republicans have suddenly become the stronger party when it comes to combating terrorism.

[Cosmic]

Did anyone say it was untrue (aside from John McCain)? I'm saying that it is yes, evil, to consider terrorist attacks as political fodder. There's something deeply, morally, wrong with you, if you're considering how you can use slaughter of innocents to your best political advantage.

[lazur]

the way i see it...another attack would just confirm that the Republicans AREN'T doing their jobs.

That's kind of funny. If we have another terrorist attack, it's completely the fault of the Republicans. But if we don't have another terrorist attack, the Republicans get NO CREDIT AT ALL.

Do you always 'want your cake and eat it too'?

And for those calling for McCain's Top Advisor's head for saying what he said about another terrorist attack before the election, just keep in mind that HILLARY CLINTON said the SAME THING back in August, 2007. Funny how no one cares, though, since she's a Democrat and all. :rolleyes:

[lazur]

That's kind of funny. If we have another terrorist attack, it's completely the fault of the Republicans. But if we don't have another terrorist attack, the Republicans get NO CREDIT AT ALL.

Do you always 'want your cake and eat it too'?

And for those calling for McCain's Top Advisor's head for saying what he said about another terrorist attack before the election, just keep in mind that HILLARY CLINTON said the SAME THING back in August, 2007. Funny how no one cares, though, since she's a Democrat and all. :rolleyes:

And here's the story:



The following article from the New York Post highlights Hillary Clinton’s contrasting statements from the past in regard to using terrorism for political gain and her current concerns and the ramifications of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil before the next presidential election:



HILL: TERROR WOULD BE GOP BOOST
By GEOFF EARLE

August 24, 2007 — WASHINGTON - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday raised the prospect of a terror attack before next year’s election, warning that it could boost the GOP’s efforts to hold on to the White House.

Discussing the possibility of a new nightmare assault while campaigning in New Hampshire, Clinton also insisted she is the Democratic candidate best equipped to deal with it.

“It’s a horrible prospect to ask yourself, ‘What if? What if?’ But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world,” Clinton told supporters in Concord.

“So I think I’m the best of the Democrats to deal with that,” she added.

The former first lady made the surprising comments as she explained to supporters that she has beaten back the GOP’s negative attacks for years, and is ready to do so again.

[souvlaki]

And for those calling for McCain's Top Advisor's head for saying what he said about another terrorist attack before the election, just keep in mind that HILLARY CLINTON said the SAME THING back in August, 2007. Funny how no one cares, though, since she's a Democrat and all. :rolleyes:

Um... I'm pretty sure Clinton has had her fair share of complaints about fear mongering, especially around these parts. You obviously haven't been posting on this board often enough if you missed out on the endless debates about Clinton saying anything to win. This board wasn't around last August, and I dont remember the comments off hand, but if she did say something similar I can assure you quite a few people here would have attacked her for the comment just as they've attacked McCain's aide.

[The Senator]

That's kind of funny. If we have another terrorist attack, it's completely the fault of the Republicans. But if we don't have another terrorist attack, the Republicans get NO CREDIT AT ALL.

Do you always 'want your cake and eat it too'?

And for those calling for McCain's Top Advisor's head for saying what he said about another terrorist attack before the election, just keep in mind that HILLARY CLINTON said the SAME THING back in August, 2007. Funny how no one cares, though, since she's a Democrat and all. :rolleyes:

For me, the extent of the remarks matter more than which party the person who said them belongs to.

Of course, the person we're talking about is Charlie Black, because Charlie Black is the one in the news. We're not playing "let's find everyone who said similar remarks and give them a scolding!"

And most of us aren't even scolding the remarks. Most of us believe these remarks are true, that the Republicans will benefit from such an attack because many Americans will believe anything they hear in a time of crisis: Duct tape over your windows will save you from a biological attack; a color-coded alert system will save you from a terrorist attack; and Republicans are better on national security issues, so you better vote for McCain because the Republicans will be able to prevent future attacks!

Most voters who will vote solely on that reason won't even take the time to think about the fact that such an attack occurred under a Republican president, who has trampled on our constitutional rights to prevent such an attack from occurring, which should indicate that party has absolutely nothing to do with keeping this nation safe. I mean, this is a nation which approved of the job the president was doing by over 90% after 9/11, when all he did was tour ground zero and give a few inspirational words of advice. Tell me they won't do the same if another attack occurred.

Oh well.

[DorkyFresh]

That's kind of funny. If we have another terrorist attack, it's completely the fault of the Republicans. But if we don't have another terrorist attack, the Republicans get NO CREDIT AT ALL.

i believe we were never REALLY in danger of terrorist attacks...and even if we were, none the size of 9/11. it's very clear our government had a hand in the attacks, even if they supposedly didn't plan any of it. they, at the very least, knew that it was going to happen and stepped aside so that it did. i find it funny that Bush happened to be in the only place where they could use children as an excuse for their lack of action.

they knew 9/11 would happen and they did nothing to prevent it and possibly even encouraged it. if that doesn't spell "FAIL" then i don't know what does. don't give me this B.S. about how Republicans have been fighting so hard to prevent terrorist attacks on US soil. they have done more damage to our country and made it harder for Americans to prosper than the 'turrrrrrorists' ever could.

Do you always 'want your cake and eat it too'?
wtf???



anyway, as for Hilary Clinton saying something similar, she should have kept her mouth shut as well. to an extent, i agree with them both in saying that another attack would be an advantage to the Republicans (maybe), but no one in the political arena should be talking about who would benefit from another attack regardless of which party would recieve the benefits.

[souvlaki]

Yeah, after reading that, that was a lame comment to make as well. "If a terrorist attack happens next year, I'm the only Democratic candidate capable of handling it, and taking on the Republicans on this issue. So you better vote for me just in case." It's not the first time Clinton used fear to incite people to vote for her. That was pretty much the basis of her campaign for a while.

[Marx]

McCain advisor 'sorry' for terror comment
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/23/mccain.terrorism/index.html

[Marx]

McCain's 'EBAY Model' for jobs confounds many economists
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080624/pl_bloomberg/ajxbcbplynwy



Yes ladies and gentlemen of the Hype, McCain is serious. It was just the other day that he announced his grand plan for a 300 million dollar spectacular for the invention of the next automobile battery. Now, he is proclaiming that "1.3 million people living off of EBAY is evidence that the company is a model for job and economic growth!"

:huh:

The problem with that is, people selling items on EBAY doesn't grow the economy! And giving away $300 million to whoever creates the next great car battery isn't a wise decision either. (We only have trillions of dollars in debt, what's a couple hundred million more! :whatever:)

I'm telling you guys, more and more I am convinced that John McCain really has lost his mind!

[The Senator]

McCain's 'EBAY Model' for jobs confounds many economists
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080624/pl_bloomberg/ajxbcbplynwy



Yes ladies and gentlemen of the Hype, McCain is serious. It was just the other day that he announced his grand plan for a 300 million dollar spectacular for the invention of the next automobile battery. Now, he is proclaiming that "1.3 million people living off of EBAY is evidence that the company is a model for job and economic growth!"

:huh:

The problem with that is, people selling items on EBAY doesn't grow the economy! And giving away $300 million to whoever creates the next great car battery isn't a wise decision either. (We only have trillions of dollars in debt, what's a couple hundred million more! :whatever:)

I'm telling you guys, more and more I am convinced that John McCain really has lost his mind!

John McCain really has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to economics.

1a) He calls for the elimination of the gas tax and calls it "immediate relief" from the pain at the pumps. But that's not immediate relief-- it's a distraction. Most economists agree that suspending the gas tax will only save consumers $30-60, which is less than it costs to fill up most consumers' tanks one time. Which ultimately means that consumers won't save anything if the gas tax is lifted.

1b) And that doesn't even get into the fact that the gas tax pays for federal road, highway and infrastructure repairs. So by suspending the gas tax, the funds which go to repair our nation's deteriorating highways will disappear. But alas, this isn't as important as point 1, which is that lifting the gas tax will have an insignificant impact on consumers' wallets.

2) He discusses coming up with some sort of new-fangled car battery which will be more energy efficient. But he forgets the fact that the battery isn't the problem; it's the fuel. It's the fact that we're paying $4.30 a gallon for oil, which oil companies buy from other nations which sell it at outrageous prices, only to sell it to us for outrageous prices. But I'm straying off point: We have alternative energies! We have hydrogen, we have natural gas, we now even have prototypes which run on water! Many states have hydrogen and natural gas fueling stations; instead of giving someone $300 million for coming up with an amazing new car battery, he should be using that money to make natural gas and hydrogen available nationwide. He should be offering incentives for oil companies to get into these businesses. He's just buying time, and trying to appeal to the common man by saying "If you do this, you win lots of money!"

(Even though Bucktooth B. Redneck won't be able to build such a battery considering he never went to college and knows nothing about automobiles)

3) I still have yet to see how he plans to fix the mortgage crisis and how he plans to ease unemployment-- I mean, if we have $300 million to hand out to someone because they know how to build a car battery, why can't we put that much towards fixing these two crises? Why can't we put that money towards eliminating our debt we have to nations such as China and India, which now own our asses because the "fiscal conservative" elected to the Presidency eight years ago has helped spur one of, if not the largest deficit in our nation's history?

It's insane.

[Marx]

It's not right Jman. This man is an idiot when it comes to economics! He has admitted to knowing nothing about the issue...so he comes up with these crack-pot ideas and tries to pass them off as legitimate solutions! It honesty does make me sick.

And you're right, I have yet to hear anything of substance regarding the housing situation. But given his "solutions" on what he has already attempted to tackle, I'm quite afraid of what else he may try to suggest!

I think his "EBAY Model" was an attempt to help unemployment. :huh:

[Matt]

Does anyone else find it unsettling that we have to choose between a man with no plan and a man with a dumb ass plan?

[lazur]

Does anyone else find it unsettling that we have to choose between a man with no plan and a man with a dumb ass plan?

To use the phrase coined for the movie 'Alien Versus Predator' ...

No matter who wins, we lose.

And yes, it's very unsettling ...

[Matt]

To use the phrase coined for the movie 'Alien Versus Predator' ...

No matter who wins, we lose.

And yes, it's very unsettling ...

It is unsettling that we agree so much on this election as well, eh Lazur? :cwink:

[Superman]

To use the phrase coined for the movie 'Alien Versus Predator' ...

No matter who wins, we lose.

And yes, it's very unsettling ...

It is unsettling that we agree so much on this election as well, eh Lazur? :cwink::heart:http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/guus/liefde.gif:heart:


:cwink:

[The Senator]

It is unsettling that we agree so much on this election as well, eh Lazur? :cwink:

When you agree with him that homosexuals will rape their fellow soldiers if allowed to serve openly in the military, then you'll have a problem.

[Matt]

:hehe: That is such a ridiculous argument. Its kinda arrogant, in all honesty. Why even assume the gay man would want the straight man to begin with?

[Marx]

:hehe: That is such a ridiculous argument. Its kinda arrogant, in all honesty. Why even assume the gay man would want the straight man to begin with?

Because the "everything is about me" mentality goes hand in hand with arrogance.

[jaguarr]

It is unsettling that we agree so much on this election as well, eh Lazur? :cwink:

Maybe you can get jobs on eBay together. :hehe:

jag

[souvlaki]

So should we be concerned that John McCain claims he doesn't even know how to operate a computer?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/11/mccain-admits-he-doesnt-k_n_106478.html

[jaguarr]

So should we be concerned that John McCain claims he doesn't even know how to operate a computer?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/11/mccain-admits-he-doesnt-k_n_106478.html

Wait. He can't use a computer? Then how does he know so much about eBay? :suspicious:

jag

[Marx]

Wait. He can't use a computer? Then how does he know so much about eBay? :suspicious:

jag

Maybe he watched Dubya surf the innernetz! :hehe:

[jaguarr]

Maybe he watched Dubya surf the innernetz! :hehe:

I'm sure they were both under Cheney's direct supervision with "Kidsurf" installed.

jag

[souvlaki]

Wait. He can't use a computer? Then how does he know so much about eBay? :suspicious:

jag

I suspect his wife had to explain it to him... along with "the Google".

[jaguarr]

If you need a new national economy, you can find it onnnnnn eeeeeeBayyyyyyyy! *showtunes hands*

jag

[Marx]

I'm sure they were both under Cheney's direct supervision with "Kidsurf" installed.

jag

I suspect his wife had to explain it to him... along with "the Google".

If you need a new national economy, you can find it onnnnnn eeeeeeBayyyyyyyy! *showtunes hands*

jag

:lmao:

[souvlaki]

In all seriousness though, that's a pretty scary thought to know we may have a President in this day and age that doesn't even seem to have a basic understanding of the difference between a Mac and PC, let alone how e-commerce works.

[The Senator]

If you need a new national economy, you can find it onnnnnn eeeeeeBayyyyyyyy! *showtunes hands*

jag

1PDIBTS_xDQ

[Marx]

^That's hilarious! :funny:

[jaguarr]

1PDIBTS_xDQ

LOL! WTF?

jag

[The Senator]

^That's hilarious! :funny:

I wouldn't be surprised if McCain starts taking people to Six Flags to buy votes... considering he's trying to buy votes with his Magical Fantastical Super-Radical Car Battery $300 Million Ultra Fun Contest... this would just be the icing on the 'I'm old but at least I'm trying to be cool' cake...

[souvlaki]

1PDIBTS_xDQ

Bwahaha! OMG!!! Thanks guys... I needed a good laugh today.

[jaguarr]

I wouldn't be surprised if McCain starts taking people to Six Flags to buy votes... considering he's trying to buy votes with his Magical Fantastical Super-Radical Car Battery $300 Million Ultra Fun Contest... this would just be the icing on the 'I'm old but at least I'm trying to be cool' cake...

McCain just keeps giving me more and more reasons to vote for Obama just to keep his crazy, uninformed ass out of the White House.

jag

[Marx]

On a more seriousness note...no, wait a minute...nevermind, I can't take this serious.

John McCain has officially named his energy policy "The Lexington Project". (Oh yeah, and he invoked the 300 MILLION DOLLAR SPECTACULAR again.)

*proceeds to bang head against the wall*

McCain labels energy plan "The Lexington Project"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/25/mccain-labels-energy-plan-the-lexington-project/

[Raiden]

On a more seriousness note...no, wait a minute...nevermind, I can't take this serious.

John McCain has officially named his energy policy "The Lexington Project". (Oh yeah, and he invoked the 300 MILLION DOLLAR SPECTACULAR again.)

*proceeds to bang head against the wall*

McCain labels energy plan "The Lexington Project"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/25/mccain-labels-energy-plan-the-lexington-project/

So, who's going to pony up that 300 million for car battery? I have the feeling the taxpayers will be the ones who pay for all of it. :whatever:

[Marx]

I wouldn't be surprised if McCain starts taking people to Six Flags to buy votes... considering he's trying to buy votes with his Magical Fantastical Super-Radical Car Battery $300 Million Ultra Fun Contest... this would just be the icing on the 'I'm old but at least I'm trying to be cool' cake...

You know...by this point, I would be surprised if "The Six Flags Clause" isn't somewhere in the by-laws of the plan. :cwink:

[The Senator]

On a more seriousness note...no, wait a minute...nevermind, I can't take this serious.

John McCain has officially named his energy policy "The Lexington Project". (Oh yeah, and he invoked the 300 MILLION DOLLAR SPECTACULAR again.)

*proceeds to bang head against the wall*

McCain labels energy plan "The Lexington Project"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/25/mccain-labels-energy-plan-the-lexington-project/

You mean like the city in Kentucky? :huh:

Gross :csad:

[jaguarr]

On a more seriousness note...no, wait a minute...nevermind, I can't take this serious.

John McCain has officially named his energy policy "The Lexington Project". (Oh yeah, and he invoked the 300 MILLION DOLLAR SPECTACULAR again.)

*proceeds to bang head against the wall*

McCain labels energy plan "The Lexington Project"
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/25/mccain-labels-energy-plan-the-lexington-project/

Okay, the first comment on that page made me laugh:


How about the McExxon Project!


:funny:

jag

[souvlaki]

Cindy McCain: Adviser to the President on e-commerce, and "the google". *shudder*

Y'know, I always thought the jokes about his age were kind of a low blow. But really, he's showing his age way more than a person running for President should. I mean seriously, even my 78 year old grandmother can pay her bills and check her email on the internet. This is really a sad state of affairs.

[Marx]

You mean like the city in Kentucky? :huh:

Gross :csad:

Lexington is a great place Jman! I've been there many times. :yay:

[The Senator]

How about the "Distract America for another four years because we have alternatives such as hydrogen and natural gas which the United States could produce on its own but we won't because it might not benefit the oil companies Project?"


(Actually, it's too long. McExxon FTW!)

[jaguarr]

Lexington is a great place Jman! I've been there many times. :yay:

It's better than Salt Lake City! *raises conversation from the past from the dead and waits for LS to appear and talk about goat sex again*

jag

[The Senator]

Lexington is a great place Jman! I've been there many times. :yay:

Something tells me the Lexington Project will produce a car battery put together with rubber bands and car parts from McCain's neighbor's lawn.

[Marx]

How about the "Distract America for another four years because we have alternatives such as hydrogen and natural gas which the United States could produce on its own but we won't because it might not benefit the oil companies Project?"


(Actually, it's too long. McExxon FTW!)

That's entirely too long man! (Even for government acronyms...) :cwink:

[jaguarr]

Something tells me the Lexington Project will produce a car battery put together with rubber bands and car parts from McCain's neighbor's lawn.

If the inventor's name is McGyver I'm moving to Canada.

jag

[Marx]

Something tells me the Lexington Project will produce a car battery put together with rubber bands and car parts from McCain's neighbor's lawn.

Hey hey hey! Now let's be fair Jman...

If you're suping up a lawn mower, golf cart, or wagon - that would be worth a shot!

:funny:

[The Senator]

If the inventor's name is McGyver I'm moving to Canada.

jag

The moment the future of America's energy policy is decided on a reality series similar to "The Price is Right," I'm moving to Amsterdam!

[Marx]

If the inventor's name is McGyver I'm moving to Canada.

jag

McGyver could do anything Jag! (And usually with nothing more than rubber bands and paper clips.)

[souvlaki]

Y'know, screw serious conversations. I say we just turn the McCain thread into a joke thread. I'm enjoying this way more.

[The Senator]

Y'know, screw serious conversations. I say we just turn the McCain thread into a joke thread. I'm enjoying this way more.

We might as well. Everything the man says is becoming a joke anyway.

[Marx]

The moment the future of America's energy policy is decided on a reality series similar to "The Price is Right," I'm moving to Amsterdam!

The 300 MILLION DOLLAR SPECTACULAR is also called "American Inventor." Just because John McCain hasn't labeled it as such (yet) doesn't mean that's not where his policy currently is. We all may need to start packing!

[DorkyFresh]

nice to know he's announced the name of the project to the public. now if he would just tell us what the hell it is and how it will or won't work.

edit: just read the article....same ol' same ol', literally.

[jaguarr]

Y'know, screw serious conversations. I say we just turn the McCain thread into a joke thread. I'm enjoying this way more.

We might as well. Everything the man says is becoming a joke anyway.

McCain pretty much writes the material himself. :D

jag

[The Senator]

McCain pretty much writes the material himself. :D

jag

AND he's outlived George Carlin!

[Marx]

McCain pretty much writes the material himself. :D

jag

But the scary thing is that HE'S NOT JOKING when he spouts this crap!

[The Senator]

But the scary thing is that HE'S NOT JOKING when he spouts this crap!

It's okay, he's like America's lovable grandpa.

And if he gets Alzheimer's, he can sell the $300 million car battery to the Saudis and America will just give him a gwate big hug (or: 65% approval rating) for trying his best :up:

[The Senator]

But the scary thing is that HE'S NOT JOKING when he spouts this crap!

It's okay, he's like America's lovable grandpa.

And if he gets Alzheimer's, he can sell the $300 million car battery to the Saudis and America will just give him a gwate big hug (or: 65% approval rating) for trying his best :up:

[Marx]

It's okay, he's like America's lovable grandpa.

And if he gets Alzheimer's, he can sell the $300 million car battery to the Saudis and America will just give him a gwate big hug (or: 65% approval rating) for trying his best :up:

That or the crazy old uncle that just spouts pointless crap at the family get togethers.

[souvlaki]

It's okay, he's like America's lovable grandpa.

And if he gets Alzheimer's, he can sell the $300 million car battery to the Saudis and America will just give him a gwate big hug (or: 65% approval rating) for trying his best :up:

Yeah, Grandpa Simpson.

http://firstfriday.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/mccain.jpg

"We can't bust heads like we used to, but we have our ways. One trick is to tell 'em stories that don't go anywhere. Like the time I took the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So, I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now to ride the ferry cost a nickel, but in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on them. 'Gimme 5 bees for a quarter,' you'd say. Now, where were we? Oh, yes.The important thing was, I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn't have white onions, because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones."

[The Senator]

That or the crazy old uncle that just spouts pointless crap at the family get togethers.

His age and apparent mental incompetence are two things which put him on the same level as Ronald Reagan, America's favorite gwumpy gwampa.

[jaguarr]

His age and apparent mental incompetence are two things which put him on the same level as Ronald Reagan, America's favorite gwumpy gwampa.

Instead of Voodoo Economics we would get eBay Economics! Hooray for progress!

jag

[The Senator]

Instead of Voodoo Economics we would get eBay Economics! Hooray for progress!

jag

McCain's official slogan should be: Economics of the future, 15 years ago, today. :up:

[souvlaki]

I think this is the most life this thread has seen in a while (no pun intended).