![]() |
Quote:
So you agree that "firing" the chef was a lie! |
Quote:
honestly I dont care who runs the investigation as long as ALL people involved, especially subpoened, give it their all to cooperate and give all the information they possess and if they want it on videotape I dont care. I want the truth to come out, period. If he were to recuse himself and they get someone as qualified or more qualified than him that's fine but I want answers and I dont care who the investigator is as long as theyre qualified. With videotape and the right of the press to get all the information after the culmination it shouldnt matter. The GOP is just throwing up a smokescreen IMO, the legislature didnt have a problem with this guy 6 wks ago before she was on the ticket. Now they do? Whatever, they should want the truth as bad as, if not more than me, since they are our leaders! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
her contradictory quotes were clear Arles.
Her unwillingness to, all of a sudden, want to cooperate is shady beyond belief. |
Quote:
Easy or tough, she's done a grand total of one interview since the convention. The other three major ticket players have at least appeared on a Sunday morning show since their respective conventions. |
Quote:
Does not equal, Quote:
|
Funny quote from Tucker Carlson on what will happen if McCain wins:
Quote:
|
Quote:
I love how O'Reilly is equal to Charlie Gibson. But what about Russert or Schieffer or Brokaw or any number of other interviews. My guess is Obama's done hundreds of interviews over his career. Just out of curiosity, who would count as a "tough interview"? |
Quote:
You lost me after this part. :D |
RealClearPolitics - Articles - Into the Obama Tank for the Final Push
Quote:
|
If you can't handle the Charlie Gibson how can you handle Al Queda?
|
Quote:
Ummm, what? |
I think it means he's gonna make like Eric Dickerson.
|
Quote:
Obama has never really been tested in any interview and always been supported by the media members doing the interview (the Stephanopoulos one was ridiculous). I'm really worried about his first meeting with a major world leader if there's no teleprompter and he's pushed for tough answers. My fear is his response on the hotseat will make W look like a Rhodes scholar. It would be nice if we had some examples of him doing well under critical interviews before he took the White House. Biden's done it, McCain's done it and even Palin's done OK. Obama's been completely protected in nearly every interview. I wonder how he will do when he's asked to go outside the "media womb" as president. |
Quote:
Intrade tightened up a little today, McCain 51.4, Obama 47.8. |
Quote:
Just watched O'Reilly this lunch time. In response to an email criticising the Gibson interview with Palin he answered that the Gibson interview with Obama earlier this year was in very much the same vein. Is O'Reilly now in the Obama camp too? |
Wow, this smells of desperation. First, Obama's campaign rips McCain for not using a computer (because of his war injuries), then a 527/PAC puts this out:
Do people really think this kind of stuff will help Obama? Maybe if people didn't like McCain or there was some legitimate pattern in recent months of outbursts. But throwing a "hail mary" ad stating that McCain's time in a POW camp makes him "reckless, erratic and unfit to lead" seems in fairly poor taste. I can just see some on the left sitting in a room after meeting this POW in the ad saying "Hah, now we will swift-boat McCain like they did to Kerry". The problem is McCain lacks the negatives and context that made the Kerry ads effective. This is going to blow up in the left's face and allow McCain-Palin (once again) to play the victim and get all kinds of press while doing it. |
Quote:
|
That's a despicable ad. We'll see if Kerry has the stones to come out and criticize it.
|
Quote:
I was thinking of this the other day. I can remember the indignation felt by the Anti-Bush folks the day after the '04 election. The anger was papable. I'm hoping to see their response again this November, but only time will tell. I'm holding out hope, but I'm certainly not confident that McCain will win the day. I can't imagine it would be as bad, the Democrat reaction that is, as when Bush won in '04. Those were some rough days. The Democrats need more Michael Moore. Where is Michael when we need him anyway? |
Here's another gem for the night:
In the ad: "John McCain has even said 'social security is a disgrace'. I couldn't disagree more." Here's McCain's actual quote: Quote:
Looks like the gloves are off and I wonder if we'll see all the criticism from CNN/MSNBC/Networks on the POW ad, keyboard ad and social security ad like we did on the questionable ads McCain ran on Obama (IMO, esp the lipstick-pig one which was pretty unfair). I'll be interested to see if that happens this week. I hope they do criticize the Obama/DNC/527s for these ads, but I won't hold my breath. |
Quote:
Then why do you say: Quote:
O'Reilly chastised the emailer and responded that Gibson had had an equally tough interview with Obama - which your above statement would seem to dispute. I'm not sure I should boast about O'Reilly and I agreeing but he seems to support my contention that we really need to know a great deal more about Palin before seeing her enter the White House. Newt Gingrich was positively put out by this suggestion. Sometimes maybe even O'Reilly gets it right ;) Incidentally, following my own wish to know more about Palin I've just read the very long wikipedia page. If that page is correct, and there is always some doubt about wikipedia, she really should drop the "Thanks, but no thanks" stuff on the bridge to nowhere. It was more like Palin: "Vote for me and I'll build you two bridges" (on the campaign trail for governor) Congress: "Here's $422 million to help you build them, but, shssh, don't tell anybody" Palin: "Of course I won't. They think I'm against earmarking" Other candidate: "I want to amend this" Congress: "Damn, now everyone knows about it" McCain: "This bridge is a waste of money" Chorus: "The bridge is a waste of money, the bridge is a waste of money" Palin is elected governor. Palin: "Costs have risen, we need more" Congress: "No, find the extra yourself" Palin: "I'm not going to build the bridge, no one seems to like it anyway. Even McCain disapproves." Congress: "Then we want our money back" Palin: "I'm going to build a couple small roads to where the bridge would be." Congress: "They'd be useless. Roads to nowhere" Palin: "Yes, but I can legally keep the money and spend the rest on something else." Congress: "Bitch!" That's probably putting it over in a thoroughly bad light but it's much closer than "Thanks, but no thanks". Of course, wikipedia has been wrong before and could well be part of the anti-Palin media ;) |
Meh, neither of those ads are nearly as bad as the kindergarten/sex-ed ad McCain ran. The first one is fine, being a POW is indeed "not a good pre-requisite for a President" and having John McCain near that red button scares me as well. I don't like the social security ad due to the misleading "disgrace" line. Still, small potatoes compared to what the Republicans have done so far...
|
Quote:
That BS, Arles and I'm saying so because you usually make your points with a lot of logic. Forget about the Bush doctrine. I don't care about that. What was most important was the fact that Gibson asked her three times: "What three things would you change about the Bush Administration?" She talked about what she did in Wasilla. WTF? You are a VP candidate of the incumbent party that has dissolved this nation's strength, and you can't tell me three things you would change, without being massaged to the answer? Are kidding me? Obama has been far from in "media womb." The O'Reilly interview is about as tough as it comes. Why do you think McCain won't be on Mathews show? O'Reilly and Matthews use the same asshole interview technique. They ask a question, allow the interviewee to begin to answer, then constantly interrupt the interviewee with another question to disorient the person, distort the answer and make them look stupid. If you are not aggressive enough and continue your train of thought to completion, both O'Reilly and Mathews will win the argument. That's why there were so many ohhhs, and umms in that interview. If Obama had an interiview with Gibson, where its the normal question, then answer, then trick question then answer, Obama will do well. The guy has been a trial lawyer, a professor, an 8-year state senator, and U.S. Senator. But somehow he's new to a hostile interview? Be realistic, Arles. |
Quote:
What keyboard ad? Anybody got a link? BTW, I don't see an Obama approval on either the POW/SS ads. |
Quote:
For the record, he was also a community organizer. I've been repeatedly told that it's something to be proud of, so why you left it off that list is beyond me. ;) |
Quote:
Basically stated, the Obama campaign ran an ad about the fact that McCain doesn't use a computer for e-mail and that kind of thing. The ad was meant to paint him as being out of touch with the American public because most people have entered the electronic age. What they failed to mention or didn't know was that McCain has his secretary/aides do all of that because his war injuries inhibit his ability to use a keyboard. |
Quote:
I'll save everyone the trouble with the summary of this article: "In this horribly flawed and biased piece, we continue to pound home that the only reliable place for news is sweet, nurturing Fox" SI |
Quote:
I didn't think that was the ad you guys were talking about. Didn't the ad say he didn't know how to use a computer? There's a big difference between illiteracy and disability. |
All of this stuff is small potatoes to me unless Palin cooperates with the Troopergate investigation.
I hate 527's and wont watch their fucking ads from either side. Theyre basically all full of shit and bad for this country. Palin better answer the questions in Alaska though or that is an ad I'd push down America's throat. How we can have leaders (including W and Clinton) that wont answer investigator's questions and have it be 'ok' is beyond me. The 2 W Aides that are laughing in contempt at Congress' subpoenas?! AWFUL. Palin not cooperating and likely looking at her own subpoena?! UNACCEPTABLE. The list goes on and on for both sides. |
Quote:
To be honest, I never fully understood the who argument against Fox. I think that Fox is pretty open about which way it leans and has never pretended otherwise. Their 'fair and balanced' mantra often appears to be a phrase to mock their competitors' leanings more than anything legitimate claim. I think most Republicans would be much more accepting of the leaning of ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN if they just went ahead and admitted it at some level. |
Quote:
He's just not able to do so without pain, so why would he bother when he has people that are there to help him out? I have a parent with similar disabilities, so I suppose I sympathize with the situation. Both McCain and my parent would likely love to use the computer, but their health issues just don't allow it. |
Quote:
That was appalling, absolutely appalling. Even O'Reilly described it as an outright lie. Obama wants age-appropriate sex education for kids where parents can opt out for any reason they wish and the McCain campaign says that he wants sex education for kindergarten kids. Does no one else find this insulting? If you're going to run a negative ad then pick a weakness in your target and exaggerate it. Drive home your point about the weakness by writing it large. It sticks because the audience knows there's some truth to it. But putting out something that is so easily proved false treats the audience like idiots. "Neh, these guys won't know any better" it sneers. It's insulting and coming from someone who's going to change politics for the better .............nah |
Quote:
Actually they aren't Fair and Balanced right now. Its now "We Report, You Decide." I think I had the all time biggest laugh about Fox when they reported the "terrorist fist bump by Obama." :lol: This is Obama's "media womb." |
...but the GOP DOES think the audience are idiots, and I'm not sure that theyre wrong. Most 527's feel the same way I suppose with the trash they put on TV containing unsubstantiated lies and fear mongering. Both sides are guilty of running bad ads but the GOP's willingness to stretch the truth thus far is not a good thing (See Rove). I'll reiterate that the need for Palin to testify or give up ALL information so the investigation can come to it's rightful conclusion is very high on my integrity radar and I look forward to ads that show this in it's truthfulness, both the culmination and, for now, her change of tune and unwillingness to cooperate. Total horsecrap garbage.
|
Quote:
But you get my point. I don't think they've ever hid their leanings in any way. If anything, I think the reaction drawn from the liberal side happens because they're so outraged that FOXNews doesn't even try to hide their bias. |
DailyKos daily poll has Obama up by 4.
Daily Kos: 9/16 Daily Kos R2K Tracking Poll: Obama 48, McCain 44 |
Quote:
MBBF, I understand. I watch Fox, CNN, and NBC. My wife says I act like an old man watching news all day. But, I feel like its important to see all the different sides to be able to recognize the techniques that introduce bias. MSNBC and FOX seem the same to me, just opposite ends of the spectrum. I'll have to disagree with you on CNN, though. Lou Dobbs and Glen Beck are far from "in the tank" for Obama. Dobbs is pretty upset about immigration all the time and Beck is pretty funny. He's ignorant as hell and never has any basis to support his arguements but he's funny. |
Quote:
I find Beck to be much like Alan Colmes. They make for good comedy (for totally different reasons :) ), but they are the tokens thrown in on each network. |
I've never seen such a close-minded campaign from both sides. It truly is like a "Go Team!!" grudge match.
I wasn't going to vote since my guy would have had no chance anyway, but I think I might just throw a vote McCain's way because of the way the Obama campaign has been going. McCain isn't a good choice (although he couldn't be any worse that W anyway), but Obama seems like a snake oil salesman. I don't trust a word that comes out of his mouth, no matter how great of an orator he is. Yeah, I know I'm not adding anything to the discussion, but nothing I could say would change anyone's mind about anything. By the way, can anyone think of a campaign that hasn't had a fill-in-the-blankgate in it? |
Quote:
Wouldn't be more prudent to not vote, or vote 3rd party, if you feel that way? What has Obama done that makes him a "snake oil salesman?" I haven't term used in a while. |
Quote:
He's selling himself, not anything concrete as far as I can tell. Even his specifics aren't really specific-feeling. It's just the impression I've been getting more and more as this has gone along. At least with McCain, you'll get what you see, as subpar as it is. Bah. I shouldn't be in here with all of you polysci geniuses. ;) |
Quote:
"Specific-feeling?" :) j/k By the way, I consider myself more a polysci-savant. Geniuses like Arles, Flasch, and MBBF are beneath me. |
Quote:
Heh. You got me.:p |
Quote:
If you change the funding method you will destroy Social Security. Maybe it can be replaced by something better, but you can't change the funding without killing it. |
Quote:
Maybe it's the heartless economic conservative in me, but anyone who plans their retirement to include Social Security funds is trading in fool's gold. Best to assume that SS won't be there for you and be pleasantly surprised when you get something than the opposite. |
Quote:
Based on some of what you posted in the Recession thread, forgive me if I take anything you say about planning for retirement with a huge grain of salt. |
Quote:
I agree with the fool's gold idea, but hell, they sure as hell take it out of every check so I why shouldn't I expect it to be there when I retire? |
Social Security will be fine. Modest changes can make it solvent for decades. Medicare on the other hand is a huge problem.
|
Quote:
It doesn't change the fact that everyone should be planning for retirement without Social Security in mind. The sooner, the better. I didn't erase thousands of dollars of school debt by failing to budget wisely. |
Quote:
Do you not find it troubling that the announcement that she wouldn't cooperate came not from her or the Governor's office, but from the McCain campaign? |
LOL @ Obama, their explination for why Taheri lied was because he violated the Logan Act in another way!
RedState: Obama to McCain: Hey, we violated the Logan Act *completely differently* than the way you said! (Yes, its biased, but fairly well sourced) |
Interesting change in Pakistan. They've told the Pakistan military to attack any U.S. troops entering Pakistan. This likely tells us a couple of things.........
1. The government is still trying to rein in the people supporting the Taliban without pissing them off. 2. They likely won't have to worry about this situation anyway, as Pakistan has little, if any troop presence in the area being attacked. FOXNews.com - Pakistan Orders Troops to Open Fire on U.S. Forces to Stop Raids - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News |
Quote:
exactly. and if it's not going to be there, you bet your sweet ass i'm going to start a class-action lawsuit demanding fucking payback of all the money i've poured into it. and you know in this lawsuit-happy society i wouldn't be the only one. |
Quote:
Lawsuits and entitlements......just what we need more of in this country. :) |
Quote:
So we should believe Taheri over Obama, but not Putin over Bush? You believe what you want to. |
Quote:
hey i fuckin was forced to pay into that shit and told that it was essentially a government-sponsored pyramid-scheme and that i'd get mine someday. if they're going to fuck me over by taking it away (even if i budget for retirement without it and it's extra) you can be damn sure that i'm going to seek legal recourse to get mine back (note: i'm not speaking of myself personally, because TBH that sounds like a lot of work. but you know somebody somewhere will take action based on this idea). be different if people were given the option, but it was compulsory. |
Quote:
Um... no. We should believe Obama's campaign... which basically admitted it tried to influence the Iraqis to not do anything until Bush was out of office. |
Reading the AFP story that RedState cites is very confusing. There seem to be several contradictory paragraphs, and I can't make much out of it. I do agree, though, regardless of when the agreement is signed the Congress should have to ratify it. A treaty by another name is still a treaty.
|
Quote:
I don't disagree with your assertion at all. My point is that it's currently broken (though I do believe it could be fully funded if they put their mind to fixing it). People assume that because the federal government runs the system, that money is a given. The government is just like any other business......if they screw up the management of it, it won't be there whether you like it or not. I guess I don't trust them enough to keep it going. There's a reason why pension funds have disappeared from most private businesses. |
Quote:
What a joke. The Xinhua News Agency has Hu Jintao up big in China, also. |
Quote:
I was trying to present all sides of the polling data. :) |
Quote:
Please show me the "basically admitted" part because I don't see it. |
Quote:
It's a commissioned Research 2000 poll. I don't trust the numbers, but it's a respectable polling firm. |
Quote:
So is this is a reputable source and paper? From what I understand, is it more related to the expiration of a UN mandate and not wanting a crappy president to commit us to a new agreement that could span years when he's leaving office in a few months? If I were McCain OR Obama, I'd not want Bush negotiating our future presence with the Iraqis. |
John McCain invented the Blackberry!
Quote:
|
Quote:
In related news, Al Gore announces from his new 100 foot houseboat that the Blackberry wouldn't be worth sh$% if it weren't for the internet that he invented. |
Quote:
That is a different argument though. Saying they should do a Strategic Forces Agreement until after President Bush leaves office, even though the President is currently pushing for one, seems to be undermining the Administration, and seems to be against the text of the Logan Act. |
Quote:
AFP: Obama camp hits back at Iraq double-talk claim Quote:
I'm wondering how Democrats would have reacted if say, a Republican Senator told a country not to sign a treaty with President Clinton in mid 2000 and wait until after the election. |
Quote:
I agree, I just can't get exactly what's going on in the AFP story. I don't know if it's a translation issue or what, but the story makes contradictory claims and doesn't really come to a conclusion. Here's the relevant section. Quote:
Morigi is quoted in two paragraphs, but the controversial part is paraphrased. Why didn't that get quoted? It may be exactly as RedState describes, but this story is so poorly written it's hard to determine. |
Quote:
Can't speak for anybody else, but I don't think a President should be negotiating major agreements that don't require congressional approval his last year in office. |
Quote:
+1. Absolutely not. And that's the key point - Obama isn't saying "don't do it at all!" He's saying "don't do it without putting it up for review before congress." Which IMO is actually a very responsible and admirable thing to do. It's the way things should be done. |
Pretty funny stuff. Palin evidently dressed up as Tina Fey for Halloween last year......
FOXNews.com - Palin Finds Tina Fey's 'Saturday Night Live' Impression of Her 'Quite Funny' - Celebrity Gossip | Entertainment News | Arts And Entertainment Quote:
|
Quote:
Don't parse it. Quote:
I don't see how he's interfering with foreign policy by saying this. You've got to be kidding me. |
Quote:
It seems to me that even if that's your opinion, you take it up with the current administration, NOT the leaders of the other country involved in the agreement. |
Quote:
Totally agree with this. Congressional members and former presidents have no business discussing policy overseas by going around the conventional diplomatic channels. There's plenty of ways to get this done here at home. |
Funny, this didn't come up with McCain and Georgia.
|
Quote:
Says the person who is parsing it. You don't think it is interfering with foriegn policy by telling another country to hold back on signing an agreement with the US? Really? |
Quote:
I think the point is that the Dems have been stonewalled by Bush on this, he's basically told them to F-off, so by taking it public (who even knows what exactly he said to the Iraqi's word-for-word anyways - do we have it on tape?), the Dems (I would guess as a whole) hope to force Bush to do what is reasonable. |
Quote:
McCain never told Georgia to do anything vis-a-vis the US. The Logan Act is somewhat specific in that it talks about influencing a country's relations with the US. Quote:
|
Quote:
Heh. You sure liked the Research 2000 poll when it showed McCain with a 17 pt lead in North Carolina. Of course, Taz posted it as an R2K poll, whereas MBBF is trying to make it sound like Kos is calling people and doing the polling himself. |
Quote:
It seems to me Morigi (who is pretty poor as a PR person) is saying Obama's informing the Iraqis not to rush into the agreement wasn't meant to delay it. Which, to me, seems like a silly thing to say. It may not be a smoking gun, but it is something that should invite deeper investigation. |
I think I agree with both sides here. The Congress and politicians should deal with this with their current admin, in this case W....However, the current admin, W, should be willing to work with those that want to be involved, or help, or give their opinion. What happens when there is a breakdown in this communication, which is likely now (W is known for this)? Hmmm, not sure I know of the solution but when the sides arent working with eachother it leads to some options that maybe arent the best to have to choose from.
|
Quote:
you'd better hold both party's to this, 'it isnt what was meant' standard, sir. Not sure what I mean? flip back in this thread and read the last few pages where almost all explanations of everything were, 'that isn't what s/he meant'. |
Quote:
I wasn't talking about the Logan Act. I was commenting on MBBF's post. |
Except for the "that wasn't what s/he meant" in the past few pages have usually been backed up by the entire quote showing context.
In other words, try again. |
Quote:
Just getting the actual quote of what was paraphrased would likely clear it up a lot. |
Quote:
Ah, ok. That's fine. I don't agree with MBBF's post either, aside from the small exemption that Sens and Reps shouldn't be trying to influence relations between a foriegn government and the US by seperate discussions not authorized by the executive (which has been given power over the foriegn affairs realm by the Curtis-Wright decision). |
Quote:
that's BS of the highest order. When she didnt know what the Bush Doctrine was, the widely accepted one by Journalists in this country, she didn't know. So be it. I honestly dont care but the spin afterwards is disheartening and dishonest. When she says that Alaska produces 20% of this countries energy, she's wrong. So when the shit comes out, 'that's not what she meant' you have to have the standard the same for both parties. The list goes on and on of things that have been said over the past few weeks that are lies or attempts to get the country to assume things (Ie. the Aide saying she visited the military theatre in Iraq and Ireland) so you either are going to spin things in a way that you can backpedal by saying, 'that wasnt the intent' or youre going to go by what is said. If it's the latter than I'd ask you to hold the standard of ads and accusations to a much higher level than has currently been accepted. |
Boy, I've written and deleted at least a half dozen posts in this thread this morning. My snarkometer is off the charts today!
|
I find myself having to go through and delete some of my more pointed moments if nothing else than to save my blood pressure :)
|
![]() Don't know if this will mean anything in the polls, but I thought it was interesting. |
Quote:
I didn't make it sound like anything. Daily Kos posts the poll on a daily basis and the link I provided clearly states the source of the data. |
Quote:
McCain visited Georgia and told the government in private to do something that contradicted current U.S. foreign policy? I guess I missed that trip. |
Two national polls listed on RCP so far...
Rasmussen has narrowed to 48-47 in favor of McCain. RCP also has put up a Battleground poll showing a 48-44 McCain lead. However, that poll is several days old, covering Sept. 7-11 |
Quote:
so the RCP one would be before the "palin honeymoon" wore off (to coin a phrase for it) - we'll see I guess in the next one they post if that correlates to a loss in votes for the Republicans, or if people will hold their nose, or what? |
Quote:
McCain said he was in contact with the Georgian President several times a day. His Chief Foreign Policy advisor was a paid agent of the Georgians. He sent Lieberman and Graham to Georgia to meet with the President. His wife went to Georgia and met with the President. Given that McCain was publicly pushing a more confrontational line than the administration do you think he never mentioned it to the Georgians? |
http://www.gallup.com/poll/110416/Ga...Dead-Heat.aspx
Gallup poll just released, showing a 47-46 lead for McCain. They also mention that Obama did really well in Monday night polling, which could be a good sign, or it could be an anomaly. |
Quote:
I'd be interested in seeing the article mentioning that he was pushing a policy contrary to the administration stance. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:11 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.