That ad is great. McCain saying those words is classic, especially with the ad being released right after his "I am not George Bush" comment at the debate.

:D

The "You hate America" argument from the right is really getting tiresome.

I saw a TV commercial being used in California in regards to that ballot issue. They had a small child coming back from school. She walked up to her mom and asked her mom to guess what she learned in school today. I kid you not, the girl in the commercial said, "We had story time and I learned that a prince can marry another prince and that I could marry a princess!!!"

I really don't have a dog in this fight, but that's fearmongering to the point of absurdity IMO.

As is the 'why you should hate America' arguments from the left.

I think both are silly at best, but for one side to fail to admit that there are just as many idiots saying just the opposite is intentional oversight to the Nth degree.

I agree. I can't walk down the street without some liberal telling me why I should hate America.

Do you really believe that main-stream liberals are arguing for hating America? Seriously? Both sides point out flaws and mistakes that have been made or can be made by our country, but only the fringe of either side really gets into "hating" America.

No, I don't. I agree that the fringe on both sides are the only ones issuing the hate arguments. In this situation, you agree with me that KWhit's characterization of the mainstream on either side being the one making these kinds of statements is simply inaccurate. It's a generalization that has no basis in fact.

Jesus wept

I believe that Jesus was a really nice guy and little more, so you're talking to the wrong person here. I'm a heathen conservative.

Sure.

I think that the Republican party has more idiots, especially in the House of Representatives, than the Democrats. The district method of election in the House leads to a lot of Representatives elected on a platform heavily driven by moral/religious issues that have more basis in the Bible than in reality. I've got no problem with people who are devoutly religious, unless they do that to the point where they're voting based on what they believe morality is rather than what makes the most sense. The Bible should not be considered the only voice of reason in the world.

Similarly, there are some wacky reps from some inner city urban districts who have no business being elected. They are usually elected based on party more than any actual ability to be a U.S. Rep, much like the Republicans in the rural areas.

I challenge some of you to sit down and watch a House Committee meeting on C-Span and listen to some of the questions and issues being posed by some of these Representatives. After a couple of hours, you'll quickly begin to wonder who in the hell would even vote for some of these people.

The fringe? The Republican candidates themselves are the ones playing up the "real America" angle. And at least one Republican representative is in hot water about saying that liberals hate America and then lying about saying it. I guess Republican Representatives are the fringe now?


And I have no idea what you are talking about with the assertion that liberals argue why you should hate America.

Definitely worth a laugh... I wonder if he was thinking of his potential VP...

Yes, it's mostly perception. As KWhit demonstrated above, it's easy to go out and find the idiot that supports your assertion, but an overall view creates a much more even-handed view of the situation. As you correctly point out, the people introducing McCain or Obama are often State or House Reps who end up saying something to fire up their local base. The only problem is that locally directed rhetoric falls flat on its face when exposed to a national audience. They feel it's their moment in the spotlight and they often go overboard to a large degree hoping to make a big splash amongst the locals.

The scrutiny of each campaign stop thanks to the Internet and influx of 24 hour news channels only provides more examples of stupidity for people who would like to paint only one side of the argument. We could spend weeks finding all of the stupid things that State and U.S. Reps have said during this campaign. It shouldn't be all that shocking to regularly see this kind of thing unless you're deeply partisan and can't see the forest through the trees.

Did you seriously think that your above comment was appropriate under any circumstances?

And people wonder whether sexism (or racism for that matter) exists in this race. More proof that ignorance, not common sense and respect, governs our society...........

George W. Bush endorses John McCain (last night's SNL Weekend Update)

Pretty funny, especially near the end at Will Ferrell's "picture this face" with Tina Fey almost cracking up.

Say what you want to about Republicans, it's heartwarming how they've become such crusaders against perceived sexism this election season (or at least after Hillary lost). Maybe one day they'll get over the whole racism thing.

SNL was on fire last night.

Sarah Palin herself said female candidates shouldn't whine about sexism. She said, "Man, that doesn't do us any good."

And MBBF's statement about liberals arguing you should hate America is bizaare. I've never heard any liberal argue such a thing.

Criticizing America in any way means you hate it

I guess one of those idiots is Sarah Palin then with her 'real America' and 'Pro-America' talk?

Yes, they are VERY easy to find on the Right.

Criticizing those who say you hate America means you hate America.

Well, he could have been thinking about Barack Obama, and the fact that he may not even be a US citizen, much less a native born one.

Obviously, that's the only thing she can say. If she complains, we'll get responses like M!!! GO BLUE!!! where they call her one of several various names for raising a stink. She's in a no-win situation and most women are well-aware of her plight in that regard.

Sure, no liberal says 'you should hate America', but there are plenty of fringe left that would be more than happy to point out just how lousy this country is without any consideration of the positives that same country provides.

Under what circumstance of a respectable person does that ever ring appropriate? It's not ever appropriate.

Making points with no basis in logic means that you have no logic.

I think the entire selection of Palin was sexism. They hopped to get a bunch of disaffected Hillary supporters by tossing out a female VP. They basically figured that women would vote for anything with a vagina, and not actually on issues (like the fact that Palin and Hillary have very different stances on many major issues).

She's pandering to the base of idiots that I describe previously. Should this surprise you? Obama uses similar rhetoric in regards to class warfare when stirring up the far left that he feels more comforable with. If you can't see that, it's only because you agree with the leftist policies that Obama advocates. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but turning a blind eye to it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Except she said that before she was a VP candidate. She said that in criticism of Hilary Clinton during her Presidential run.

My favorite lines were "the race between the hot lady and the Tiger Woods guy" and the "So nice to meet you Mr President, I've seen you on tv"

SI

For someone that is apparently blind to this problem, what exactly has Obama said to state or imply that (my words) "America Sucks"?

Not really. I don't think they were deliusional enough to think she'd sell to the Hillary Clinton supporters. She was a token to the far right. There was at least an element of how "open minded" conservatives can be by choosing a woman.

I love how you twist things with every post.

I said the right's arguments that Dems/liberals hate America were getting tiresome. You then criticize me and say that only the fringe make those arguments. I bring up the fact that the actual Republican candidate for VP has made those arguments.

You ignore that and say that it's okay because she's pandering to idiots. And then you make some vague comparison to Obama and class warfare to "prove" that the left does it too.

I disagree with the assertion that adjusting the tax rates back to Clinton-era levels constitutes "class warfare."

That is MBBF's MO. Either ignore getting called out on something, or change/twist the definition of what he says.

He also makes the mistake of often trying to paint the opposing side in absolute terms. Just from the past couple of pages he's written:


When you have to try and bolster your positions by continually trying to completely marginalize or discredit another viewpoint, that usually points to an weakness in the thought process developing your viewpoint.

It's wrong. Cheney is the Dick. :)

Yes, that was my point, I say that in parody of (some) liberals, who throw out the world "lie" extremely, well, liberally.

I don't really think he's a liar.

I agree. The fact that your contribution to most threads is merely to personally attack me or my position is very telling.

Thank you for proving my point.

You're talking to the wrong person here. I support McCain, but I'll be perfectly honest that Palin has some fringe policies that I disagree with. I didn't defend Palin at all in regards to this situation you present.

As far as Obama goes, he's more than happy to support a class warfare position supported by the far left. I find his stance in that regard to be just as extreme as he wants everyone to believe that he's going to spend a large budget on social programs and wealth redistribution and expect the problems he's talking about to magically disappear. The problem is that his financial and social policies are an irresponsible band-aid that do little to fix the root issue. My only hope is that if he becomes president that he doesn't spend us into oblivion only to find out what most people already know won't work.

And you as well.

Well, if you read his acceptance speech, there's a lot of America sucks, but it's got a caveat of "America has sucked under George Bush".

The one thing that he's said that I would consider an "America sucks" message is his statements about the need to "fundamentally change this country". If he had restricted it to Washington, or politics, or government, it wouldn't annoy me as much. But to me, when you say that something needs fundamental change, it means it's fundamentally not working.

And if you want to expand it to those close to Obama, don't forget Michelle's "for the first time in my adult life I'm proud of my country" remarks.

Here's a link to the speech.
Text: Barack Obama's speech - International Herald Tribune

I see references that can be construed as "the current situation sucks", but nothing that intones America itself sucks.

Then earlier when I posted this:


You could have just said, "You're right."

:)

Obama has spent about $400 million on his campaign. That would feed a family of five in the Philippines for more than 2,500 years.

I don't know how much of that is the TV ads I constantly see in Idaho, but that's a far bigger waste of money than clothes.

Obama hates America so much that he wants to be its President.

I love the Cleveland Browns but they are fundamentally not working.

You can say something is not working and it has no connection to your patriotism. Patriotism is not unlike rooting for your favorite sports team. You can disagree with their decisions but, win or lose, still root for them. People assume that the Obamas were somehow rooting against America. Watching some of these rascist campaign trail videos could make someone ashamed.

I hear Iraq has an opening for a governmental spokesperson :)

Saying you need to fundamentally change something isn't necessarily America sucks. It could just as easily be viewed as our country is great but headed in the wrong direction.

I hate the fact that we've tortured and killed thousands of innocent people. That needs to be fundamentally changed.

Call it whatever the fuck you want.

It's official this election has gone into the gutter.