The McCain Thread

[Heretic]

You've just changed the question that people are asking. Someone wanted to know what the OBAMA CAMPAIGN smeared Palin with.... not some lefty nuts.

I answered that question. Obama was in the lead...and the party in the lead never fights dirty.

However, only an idiot would think that BOTH parties didnt keep in contact with the nuts on their side and appreciate their work. Republicans love when Ann Coulter makes stuff up off the top of her head, and Democrats love their bloggers that convince thousands that Palin didnt gie birth to her son. Its a scratch my back kind of thing. Obama himself didnt say it...but its totally naive to think that he wasnt in the loop

 

[The Battousai]

okay, so the accusation has since changed to palin spending her entire career trying to ban harry Potter. The initial accusations i saw werent quite so broad.

Obama FIRST came out against attacking families when his wife was critisized for her comments about America. When asked, he had no choice but to continue that thought.

I swear, i wish one of you could think of ONE smear against palin that you thought was out of line...and didnt laugh your pants off upon hearing. All I keep hearing is "she deserved it" and all of that nonsense. Heck, were even to the point of refuting the very existence of left wing kooks!

Well, I didn't watch every news channel every day of the campaign, so...

 

[Gilpesh]

okay, so the accusation has since changed to palin spending her entire career trying to ban harry Potter. The initial accusations i saw werent quite so broad.

:facepalm

Obama FIRST came out against attacking families when his wife was critisized for her comments about America. When asked, he had no choice but to continue that thought.

:facepalm

I swear, i wish one of you could think of ONE smear against palin that you thought was out of line...and didnt laugh your pants off upon hearing. All I keep hearing is "she deserved it" and all of that nonsense. Heck, were even to the point of refuting the very existence of left wing kooks!

:facepalm




Congratulations on proving that you have no clue what people are talking about.

 

[Heretic]

Thats real funny...but i notice you still cant think of a single unfair smear that was spread about Palin. Because all smears against her, no matter how untrue or hurtful were funny, because shes a republican, and deserves it.

 

[Gilpesh]

Thats real funny...but i notice you still cant think of a single unfair smear that was spread about Palin. Because all smears against her, no matter how untrue or hurtful were funny, because shes a republican, and deserves it.

Unfair smears....


Her having an affair, Trig not being her baby, being a MEMBER of the AIP, banning *insert book here* (because the only thing that happened according to the librarian was Palin asking about taking books off the shelves), etc....



But you were charged with naming the unfair smears that the OBAMA CAMPAIGN SPREAD about her and McCain. You didn't, you won't, and you just come up with conspiracy theories about how clearly Obama is in league with the crazies...

 

[Heretic]

Um...Im not dodging the question. You charged me to come up with unfair smears that the Obama campaign came out with, and I said that there were none. Repeatedly asking me the same question doesnt make me wrong...the answer is still THEY DIDNT. they were in the lead so there was no need to attack.


But you dont honestly think the the democrats and their wack job attack dogs arent in bed together do you? Clearly the republicans and their far right idiots are in league. You dont really think that Bush (or McCain) wasnt up to the elbows with the people that made stuff up about their enemies do you? Of course they were! Obama was too. They all are.

 

[The Battousai]

Um...Im not dodging the question. You charged me to come up with unfair smears that the Obama campaign came out with, and I said that there were none. Repeatedly asking me the same question doesnt make me wrong...the answer is still THEY DIDNT. they were in the lead so there was no need to attack.


But you dont honestly think the the democrats and their wack job attack dogs arent in bed together do you? Clearly the republicans and their far right idiots are in league. You dont really think that Bush (or McCain) wasnt up to the elbows with the people that made stuff up about their enemies do you? Of course they were! Obama was too. They all are.

This is just like McCain saying he knew where Bin Laden is.

Do you have ANY proof of your claim?

 

[Gilpesh]

they were in the lead so there was no need to attack.

Ah.... they attacked McCain alright... but it was um... on actually important things.

But you dont honestly think the the democrats and their wack job attack dogs arent in bed together do you? Clearly the republicans and their far right idiots are in league. You dont really think that Bush (or McCain) wasnt up to the elbows with the people that made stuff up about their enemies do you? Of course they were! Obama was too. They all are.

Oh... how's the aluminum foil hat treating you?




To blame Obama or McCain for EVERYTHING that the nuts say is hilariously bad. Although toward the end of the campaign the feelings that McCain and Palin were messing with... were nudging those crazies to more action... and that is what brought on Lewis' comments about them playing with fire.

 

[Heretic]

This is just like McCain saying he knew where Bin Laden is.

Do you have ANY proof of your claim?

I dont need proof to say that both parties have attack dogs. if you are really saying that the democrats dont have operatives whos job is to go out and smear the other side then youre just...completely out of it.

This is where I have to PROVE that democrats arent completely and totally noble, while the republicans have been bashed for any number of things with no evidence and thats okay. I will assume thaat you are not guilty of ever saying a bad word about a republican that you didnt posess proof of, like any of the accusations against Palin...or the variety of things against the dark lord Sa...I mean Cheney.

 

[The Battousai]

Until you have proof, no one's going to take you seriously (unless they already share your viewpoint).

There's no point in arguin this any more.

 

[Heretic]

Until you have proof, no one's going to take you seriously (unless they already share your viewpoint).

There's no point in arguin this any more.

Why do I need proof that there is such a thing as Democratic attack dog operatives??? This is stupid. You know it, I know it, everyone knows that both parties deal with this on a regular basis. I guarantee thaat you would support the idea that republicans have their psychos who go out just to smear the enemy (Ann Coulter is one). Yet somehow Democrats would never do such a thing, and all attacks made of republicans are fair and well deserved.

Your partisanship is borderline kool aid drinkingly bad.

 

[The Battousai]

Okay - I'm a cultish partisan because I don't trust one person's account on the internet...

 

[Heretic]

Okay - I'm a cultish partisan because I don't trust one person's account on the internet...

No, youre a cultish partisan because you refuse to admit that the democratic party has operatives who job is to smear the republicans. Ever read the Huffington Post? Think the democrats dont have contact with those people? Of course they dont...that would mean they are involved in smears, and the democrats would never think of doing wrong.

 

[The Battousai]

:facepalm

 

[Heretic]

:facepalm

I'll take that as you saying "yes, i believe that the democrats would never be involved with any attack dog smear group".

I also expect you to come to the defense of anyone who claims that republicans have any connection whatsoever to people like Pat Robertson or Ann Coulter. Those people are just rogue operatives who are in no way advised or in contact with the republican party.

 

[Kelly]

Its not whether or not each party smears the other, they all do it.....it is "how much", "who do they use to do it" there are all kinds of surrogate groups out there on both sides. Usually with any smear, there is a bit of truth. The other question is, how much truth there is to it.

As far as this campaign, McCain's age, lack of substance in his message, choice of running mate, etc. Obama's choice of associates, lack of experience, etc....were all fair game in a campaign.

How these issues are used in ads, spoken about by the candidates and their surrogates etc, can be seen as smears. Depends on whos side you are on.

Most political historians that I've heard and read do not put this campaign in the category as a nasty campaign, by any means.

One of the big differences I saw in this campaign than others was how much of a factor bloggers were in getting out very little substance in helping people make a decision, but a hell of alot of **** throwing. It was amazing how many people actually believed some of this stuff, and still believe it because they read it on a blog.

 

[rdh007]

One of the big differences I saw in this campaign than others was how much of a factor bloggers were in getting out very little substance in helping people make a decision, but a hell of alot of **** throwing. It was amazing how many people actually believed some of this stuff, and still believe it because they read it on a blog.

I don't believe blogs.


But I got this e-mail forwarded to my by a friend...

 

[Kelly]

I don't either, and YES I received a number of emails from different groups......but they did have a large impact, IMO.

 

[Marx]

Thats real funny...but i notice you still cant think of a single unfair smear that was spread about Palin. Because all smears against her, no matter how untrue or hurtful were funny, because shes a republican, and deserves it.

There were several unfair smears about Palin. And no, she didn't deserve them. But I would hope that you would condemn the 'palling around with terrorists', 'who is the REAL Barack Obama', and the numerous screams of 'traitor', 'kill him', and 'treason' that Palin just stood by on the stage and did nothing to stop.

No, youre a cultish partisan because you refuse to admit that the democratic party has operatives who job is to smear the republicans. Ever read the Huffington Post? Think the democrats dont have contact with those people? Of course they dont...that would mean they are involved in smears, and the democrats would never think of doing wrong.

Both parties have people who smear the other side.

 

[JLBats]

okay, so the accusation has since changed to palin spending her entire career trying to ban harry Potter. The initial accusations i saw werent quite so broad.

WHAT?

Obama FIRST came out against attacking families when his wife was critisized for her comments about America. When asked, he had no choice but to continue that thought.

Oh my God, if you want us to give Palin the benefit of the doubt on one smear, could you please do the same for Obama?

I swear, i wish one of you could think of ONE smear against palin that you thought was out of line...and didnt laugh your pants off upon hearing. All I keep hearing is "she deserved it" and all of that nonsense. Heck, were even to the point of refuting the very existence of left wing kooks!

 

[Kelly]

Why don't the two of you, rise to the occassion and simply agree that it happens on both sides. Seems like the intelligent thing to do, because smears DO happen on both sides.......its called.....politics......and its only for the big boys and girls......and all 4 involved have said that there is smearing involved, and they knew it going in..........and if you can't take it, don't get into it.

 

[Heretic]

I had no problem with the reverend wright smears, as that is one of Obamas closest advisors and biggest influences.

However, that nonsense like "Obama wont wear a flag pin" and "Obama wont say the pledge of allegiance". What idiots were believing that? That stuff was over the line...I can call out the republicans. I do it all the time. But both sides did have their attack dogs. Its the way politics works. gather a wetworks team to do the dirty work, and then plead ignorance while standing by and letting it happen. It happens in all campaigns (the worst this time being Dole accusing her oponent of being "godless" when that opponent was a sunday school teacher).

 

[The Major]

I had no problem with the reverend wright smears, as that is one of Obamas closest advisors and biggest influences.

That might not have worked since Obama's character didn't reflect any of Wright's controversial views. Maybe he does in private, but he seems to get along with the white community very well in public. He's never done anything that I know of his career that shows racism or anger at America, either. That type of discipline, if he does have it, is valuable for a leader in government.

I don't think Wright was particularly wrong in being angry with America, though.

The country has done many bad things in the past with minorities that it needs to address.

Wright grew up in a world far more racist then today, as well.

 

[Kelly]

That might not have worked since Obama's character didn't reflect any of Wright's controversial views. Maybe he does in private, but he seems to get along with the white community very well in public. He's never done anything that I know of his career that shows racism or anger at America, either. That type of discipline, if he does have it, is valuable for a leader in government.

I don't think Wright was particularly wrong in being angry with America, though.

The country has done many bad things in the past with minorities that it needs to address.

Wright grew up in a world far more racist then today, as well.

I agree, he doesn't seem to be angry at America. But the fact that his wife is just not, proud of America.......does make me question what they talk about at the dinner table.

 

[Heretic]

I didnt say whether or not Obama hates America...I said his close relationship with Wright is fair game for a campaign to criticisize.