Political ThreadsThis section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:
It's starting to sound like the media has had enough of the McCain campaign spouting lies and half-truths as facts. The "bridge to nowhere" statement has been debunked as untrue, yet they keep saying it over and over...
Here's a gem, a McCain ad that's completely untrue yet McCain stands behind it. This is sleeze...I've lost all respect for the man.
I diagree the Bridge to Nowhere has been debunked. Who put a stop to the project, she did. She'll have to explain it this week with Gibson, lets hear what she has to say. We've heard what the media has to say, doenst she get a response?
Since you believe the Obama add is false, care to share your evidence?
She'll have to explain it this week with Gibson, lets hear what she has to say. We've heard what the media has to say, doenst she get a response?
I'd have to disagree with this. At least for another few weeks, I don't believe Palin will be seated for any interview where she really has to "explain herself" on the spot. I believe most if not all of her early interviews will be full scripted, with the interviewer there as nothing but a card reader for the McCain campaign.
While I truly despise the guy, I'd love to see Palin on The O'Reily Factor.
Jim, there's a huge difference between "comprehensive" sex education (before they can read!) and "age appropriate" sex education. Sex issues among very young children is a big issue, especially in city schools where the parents are often MIA.
As for the bridge to nowhere, she campaigned supporting the bridge and the people she thought it would help. It was only after Congress killed it that she turned to kill in locally. Even the Wall Street Journal agrees with this.
ABC News’ Teddy Davis and Lindsey Ellerson Report: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told Planned Parenthood Tuesday that sex education for kindergarteners, as long as it is “age-appropriate,” is “the right thing to do.”
“I remember Alan Keyes . . . I remember him using this in his campaign against me,” Obama said in reference to the conservative firebrand who ran against him for the U.S. Senate in 2004. Sex education for kindergarteners had become an issue in his race against Keyes because of Obama’s work on the issue as chairman of the health committee in the Illinois state Senate.
“‘Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners,’” said Obama mimicking Keyes’ distinctive style of speech. “Which — I didn’t know what to tell him (laughter).”
“But it’s the right thing to do,” Obama continued, “to provide age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in schools.”
I agree with you and think it's pathetic. The unfortunate thing is that these ads aren't targeted to intelligent people.
These ads are for two groups of people: the Kool-Aid Drinkers and the Ignorant.
These ads are for the same people that display their blatant ignorance by still calling him Barack Hussein Obama.
These are terms that show up in the top Google search terms that contain Obama:
obama antichrist
obama birth certificate
obama muslim
People making searches like these are the ones targeted by his ads.
JD, you'r way off base here. The people who are doing those searches don't need to be swayed by any media. They've already made up their mind about Obama. These ads are targeting people who don't pay attention to politics and who may have no idea who they are going to vote for.
As for calling him Barak Hussein Obama, what's wrong with that? It's his name isn't it? Why was it ok to call former Presidents by names like John Fitzgerald Kennedy or Franklin Delanor Roosevelt? What about actors? Should we call Malcolm Jamal Warner just Malcolm Warner? Just kidding about the last part.
Newsflash - negative ads have been around as long as there have been political ads. And it's not just the Republicans, although some here would have you believe that.
As for calling him Barak Hussein Obama, what's wrong with that? It's his name isn't it? Why was it ok to call former Presidents by names like John Fitzgerald Kennedy or Franklin Delanor Roosevelt? What about actors? Should we call Malcolm Jamal Warner just Malcolm Warner? Just kidding about the last part.
It's wrong when intended to draw attention to the fact that it's an Islamic name. Like when that dip%$%$%$%$ moring radio host Quinn says Barak HUUUSSSEEIINNN Obama, then mentions about how al Qaeda is out to kill us.
It's fearmongering and bigotry. I wonder how many even know what McCain's middle name is?
Quote:
Newsflash - negative ads have been around as long as there have been political ads. And it's not just the Republicans, although some here would have you believe that.
I'm not here to say that the Dems don't distort or go negative, but the GOP has taken it to an artform. It's like a relentless stream of complete BS, then blame the media for reporting it.
JD, you'r way off base here...
These ads are targeting people who don't pay attention to politics and who may have no idea who they are going to vote for.
Thus my claim that the ads are also for the ignorant. In my opinion, people that are completely swayed by smear ads, as opposed to doing some research on the subject before forming an opinion, shouldn't vote. There are too many options for gathering information about the candidates, even for the poor.
Thus my claim that the ads are also for the ignorant. In my opinion, people that are completely swayed by smear ads, as opposed to doing some research on the subject before forming an opinion, shouldn't vote. There are too many options for gathering information about the candidates, even for the poor.
You're right on there, JD. Many people can't tell you where candidates stand on the issues that are important to them. So, ignorance takes over and they vote for the one whose ads influenced them or they vote for who their favorite radio or tv personality tells them to vote for.
These ads are for the same people that display their blatant ignorance by still calling him Barack Hussein Obama.
Isn't that his full name?
Dwight David Eisenhower, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Lyndon Baines Johnson, Richard Milhous Nixon, Gerald Rudolph Ford, James Earl Carter, Ronald Wilson Reagan, George Herbert Walker Bush, William Jefferson Clinton, and George Walker Bush. That's all from memory witout a Google search. Historically, Presidents are identified by their full name--the recent exception being Harry S Truman who didn't have a middle name--the S stood for nothing.
If he wins, likely the oath of office will start out "I, Barack Hussein Obaba, do solemnly swear.....". It's a tradition that the full name is used.
Hillary Rodham Clinton is fine and dandy, and Barack Hussein Obama isn't? Why not?
The guy says he's a Christian. I'll take him at his word, although why it should matter is a mystery. I thought we put the religion of our candidates behind us by 2008
Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
You're absolutely right. In my haste to get the post up before having to do something at work, I didn't elaborate clearly.
Fortunately, spence knew what I meant and filled in the holes I clumsily left out. Which I appreciate.
I completely agree Mike. In 2008, religion shouldn't even be a second thought. Personally, I don't care the religion of a person as long as they do the job appropriately and with my best interests in mind. It has been a long time since that's happened though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike P
Isn't that his full name?
Dwight David Eisenhower, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Lyndon Baines Johnson, Richard Milhous Nixon, Gerald Rudolph Ford, James Earl Carter, Ronald Wilson Reagan, George Herbert Walker Bush, William Jefferson Clinton, and George Walker Bush. That's all from memory witout a Google search. Historically, Presidents are identified by their full name--the recent exception being Harry S Truman who didn't have a middle name--the S stood for nothing.
If he wins, likely the oath of office will start out "I, Barack Hussein Obaba, do solemnly swear.....". It's a tradition that the full name is used.
Hillary Rodham Clinton is fine and dandy, and Barack Hussein Obama isn't? Why not?
The guy says he's a Christian. I'll take him at his word, although why it should matter is a mystery. I thought we put the religion of our candidates behind us by 2008
Palin is not talking to the press, she is not taking questions. As McCain so eloquently put it "She knows who she works for". Other than 9/11, when will she take questions, from the press, after 11/2.
Obama was on O'Reilly....and we know about Bill "show me some homeless veterans" O'Reilly and where he stands. O'Reilly was tenacious, cornering Obama with loaded questions. Now, I'm not saying she has to lock horns with Olberman, but we are 2 weeks into the game and she is not taking questions. Where is that pitbull we hear so much about? I guess McCain keep his on the leash.
Can we all at least agree that apparently (only because their campaign wont address them) there are some legitimate questions that are a matter of public record that need to be answered. Legitimate Questions that have nothing to do with the paradox between her moral absolutes and her personal reality, but rather (at best) the half truths of her gubernatorial record polluting the minds of "middle america" audiences.
Why the blackout? I've always been told that Public Officials must clean shop first and on their own terms, rather than let others do that for them. As former Press Secretary Scott McClellan has mentioned: scandal and Lies must be decapitated at the onset, otherwise they will take a life of their own. This goes for both campaigns.
Palin was nominated 1 week ago, period. Sorry that she has to sit down with McCain and get familiar with his strategy and policies before getting in front of the media. Its called "being prepared" This "Palin wont talk to the Press" is the the kind of crap message spread once again. Gibson as access to her for two days and the message was that any topic is open. You're all so hypocriticial its sickeneing. She will deliver to the press, give it a week
You're all so hypocriticial its sickeneing. She will deliver to the press, give it a week
I hope so.
I want to see her be more than window dressing and a PR spokesman.
I understand she has to tow the company line, but I would like it if she at least will be upfront about how and where she differs. I would prefer a P and VP with slightly different takes on issues, it offers a more balanced ticket. It appears the Pubs' are tying to do that, but not if she just spouts PR and rhetoric. If she said hockey mom or small town one more time during the convention, I was ready to puke! (I get just as sick of Obama and 'Change', trust me)
She has an admirable life story, but let's talk about issues on the
1. environment (re-read her history, not good)
2. education (teaching creationism anyone?) I know her kids are in public schools, and that is admirable
3. abortion
4. Gay rights
5. The way on Iraq
6. Her take on the economy
7 her take on energy policy
I give a lot of credit for them to be 'out there' taking questions. Every chance alone being interviewed is a chance to either do a lot of good, or slip and say something wrong.
IF she hasn't starting making some rounds by mid- third week of the month, I start thinking they are trying to shelter her from that.
`
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
[QUOTE} Bryan, I agree those questions should be answered, but can you truly tell me what Biden's stance is on those?`[/QUOTE]
Sorry Jim,
had to step away from the computer for a few minutes.. I had read some stuff onthe issues last week... but I dont the time to back track to it to double check, correct me where wrong...
1. environment - Biden introduced or was involved with one of the first climate change acts in the 80's; I think I read somewhere about a national security and climate change initiative while on the Foreign relations committee (don't quote me though). He was actually pretty strong environmentally against the other Dems in the Primary.
2. education (teaching creationism anyone?) I know her kids are in public schools, and that is admirable; Biden has been pretty strong for smaller classes, more funding, college tax credits etc..
3. abortion - He's a pro choice
4. Gay rights - voted no on the constitutional ban on marriage
5. The way on Iraq - Originally voted for the war, not my favorite position of his
6. Her take on the economy - I think he lacks in this department, or at least I havent read anything on it...
7 her take on energy policy - Not sure Bidens 'take' on this; he has been pretty good at pushing for new energy sources and was pretty harsh on the big oil companies in the hearings recently... whats his plan? Honestly do not know... I like his take that we need to influence world changes in fuel use, not just our own...
But,
I'm a huge geek.
Hell Meet the press is one of my podcasts every week...
Like McCain, Biden's record is out there over 30 years.
Thats why I think it is more critical for Obama and Palin to get theirs out there clear and loud...
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
Palin was nominated 1 week ago, period. Sorry that she has to sit down with McCain and get familiar with his strategy and policies before getting in front of the media.
Wait...
They would pick her for Vice President of the United States of America, and she would then, AFTER the fact need to become familiar with his policies?
Thanks for highlighting, in no uncertain terms, why she was a purely political pick not in the interest of this great Nation.
They would pick her for Vice President of the United States of America, and she would then, AFTER the fact need to become familiar with his policies?
Thanks for highlighting, in no uncertain terms, why she was a purely political pick not in the interest of this great Nation.
-spence
Duh, yeah. Up until a week ago she was doing her job as governor of Alaska, doubt she had the time to become an expert on McCain. It was McCains job to be an expert on her. She didnt apply for the job, she was selected for the job. Unlike , well ALL the candidates, Biden included, she cant just neglect her duties as apparently a Senator can. I thinks its takes just a wee bit of transition to go from Governor to VP pick. Someone needs to run the state, someone needs to make decisions. Senators can just be absent. We have a 3 week transition in my company when people change jobs.
Bryan, I agree those questions should be answered, but can you truly tell me what Biden's stance is on those?
Let's be realistic here. There is no way that "any topic is open." If Gibson and, more importantly, ABC ever want an inside scoop like this again, Palin will be handled with silk gloves. I'd believe that ABC was given exclusive rights with certain conditions.
I perceive this as nothing but the campaign's marketing opportunity for Palin to hard Right Conservatives and stay-at-home moms. Kind of like the entire first half of her RNC speech where she talked about herself.
3 Things I guarantee you will see Palin doing:
Shooting a gun
Going to church
"Quality time" with her children
I don't want to know what she does while she's in Alaska. Or what her family looks like. I want to know how someone completely disassociated from the main 48 states thinks we can improve the economy; Why she thinks we're fighting God's war in the Middle East; how she thinks we should minimize our dependence on Oil (not just foreign). I don't believe that someone from Alaska, with Zero foreign policy experience, Zero national politics experience and only 2 years as a state governor has any clue about what the average American's needs are.
Also, Biden sat for interviews not even a week after being selected.
I don't believe that someone (insert State), with Zero foreign policy experience, Zero national politics experience and only 2 years as a state (Insert Senator) has any clue about what the average American's needs are.
How about for President??? (Sorry, had to throw RIJimmy a friekin bone there)
I'm sorry, but if you are an Obama supporter you can't throw the Experience thing out there for her....very hypocritical.
"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
How about for President??? (Sorry, had to throw RIJimmy a friekin bone there)
I'm sorry, but if you are an Obama supporter you can't throw the Experience thing out there for her....very hypocritical.
How is it hypocritical? Palin has 2 years experience as a state (disassociated from the continental US) governor. No experience in a national aspect.
Obama was a State Senator for 7 years, US senator for 4 years, sat on the committee of Foreign Affairs; Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Homeland Security and Government Affairs. He has made trips to the Middle East (before his presidential run) for the Foreign Affairs committee.
I certainly don't see how saying Palin has zero foreign affairs or national issues experience makes me look hypocritical.
If she were a war veteran, then it would be hypocritical of me?
Well, 1st of all he was a State legislator for 7 years....not a State Senator
2nd, he's been a senator since 2005....its 2008 that only works out to 3 years as a senator....and considering he spent most of 2008 as a presidential candidate i doubt if he hit those 3 years.
and he didn't even serve a year on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Homeland Security and Government Affairs committees. (joined them in 2007 and as stated before....been campaigning hard all 2008)
and its Hypocritical to spend the 1st part of the year saying that its not the experience of Obama, its that he represents "Change" and then as soon as somebody shows up w/ less experience start pointing that out as a fault.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD
How is it hypocritical? Palin has 2 years experience as a state (disassociated from the continental US) governor. No experience in a national aspect.
Obama was a State Senator for 7 years, US senator for 4 years, sat on the committee of Foreign Affairs; Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Homeland Security and Government Affairs. He has made trips to the Middle East (before his presidential run) for the Foreign Affairs committee.
I certainly don't see how saying Palin has zero foreign affairs or national issues experience makes me look hypocritical.
If she were a war veteran, then it would be hypocritical of me?
"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
1st of all, he succeeded Alice Palmer as State Senator of the Illinois 13th district. State Senate is part of the legislative branch. Just like how Senator McCain is a federal legislator.
2nd of all:
2005
2006
2007
2008
4 years. 2008 isn't finished. So 3.5. If you want to argue semantics.
3rd, I think there is a massive difference between not having nearly as much experience as the dinosaur McCain, and having absolutely no experience at all. While not much when you consider McCain has 25 years (since we aren't including 2008), it's still significantly more than someone who has none at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
Well, 1st of all he was a State legislator for 7 years....not a State Senator
2nd, he's been a senator since 2005....its 2008 that only works out to 3 years as a senator....and considering he spent most of 2008 as a presidential candidate i doubt if he hit those 3 years.
and he didn't even serve a year on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Homeland Security and Government Affairs committees. (joined them in 2007 and as stated before....been campaigning hard all 2008)
and its Hypocritical to spend the 1st part of the year saying that its not the experience of Obama, its that he represents "Change" and then as soon as somebody shows up w/ less experience start pointing that out as a fault.
Let's be realistic here. There is no way that "any topic is open." If Gibson and, more importantly, ABC ever want an inside scoop like this again, Palin will be handled with silk gloves. I'd believe that ABC was given exclusive rights with certain conditions.
....follow up your acclaimed reality TV show premier, with a sit down on 9/11. Political stagecraft at its finest.
The truth on the "Bridge" has been told, it's just that you guys don't want to listen. She was for the Bridge while running for Govorner, but when the cost estmate went through the roof, she killed it.
The left keeps bringing up total untruths like she banned books, she wants only Creationism to be taught in schools, She's against global warming, etc, It's all BS and it will doom the Obama campaign. "Lipstick on a pig", What a freakin joke.
The left keeps bringing up total untruths like she banned books, she wants only Creationism to be taught in schools, She's against global warming, etc, It's all BS and it will doom the Obama campaign. "Lipstick on a pig", What a freakin joke.
Then get her in an interview and end those 'untruths'
I know McCain's stances. I disagree with most of them, but at least I know him.
McCain was someone I really respect(ed)
lately though it has gotten worse, as I'm losing respect as he panders and panders and slings mud...
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
Hybrid Mode
