10-02-08 07:45 PM
291 ... 7891011 ...
tools
  1. BamaSteve's Avatar
    Typical...when there is no real substance to bring up against a candidiate; people resort to things like slips of the tongue to pounce on (such as the number of states in the U.S. example). I think it's MORE DUMB to actually boast about being 'smarter' than a person running for the highest office in the world...just because they misspoke from being mentally and physically drained on the campaign trail..it happens. There are more than enough examples of slips of the tongue on McCain as well.

    Now here's more of a tell-tale sign of REAL proof in inadequacy...what does it say about McCain's decision making; when the guy and his staff didn't even properly invest the time and thorough'ness of making the choice of his VP (the person he is trying to sell as being competent to be 2nd in command of the free world)...when all this stuff is coming out about her that even McCain and his staffers didn't know. If he's making these types of deficiency in his decisions NOW..think about if he became president. Scary.
    I'm not sure where you get all this stuff about mccain not knowing all of this stuff. Mccain and staffers have said they knew about all this. Besides, all of it is personal and just a last resort of attack because Palin scares the dems.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    09-03-08 10:20 AM
  2. wnm's Avatar
    Typical...when there is no real substance to bring up against a candidiate; people resort to things like slips of the tongue to pounce on (such as the number of states in the U.S. example). I think it's MORE DUMB to actually boast about being 'smarter' than a person running for the highest office in the world...just because they misspoke from being mentally and physically drained on the campaign trail..it happens. There are more than enough examples of slips of the tongue on McCain as well.

    Now here's more of a tell-tale sign of REAL proof in inadequacy...what does it say about McCain's decision making; when the guy and his staff didn't even properly invest the time and thorough'ness of making the choice of his VP (the person he is trying to sell as being competent to be 2nd in command of the free world)...when all this stuff is coming out about her that even McCain and his staffers didn't know. If he's making these types of deficiency in his decisions NOW..think about if he became president. Scary.
    I have no personal animus to Palin. If that's who McCain wants as his VP fine. I don't think she's qualified if you look at it from what McCain considers to be qualified. I think McCain's selection of her is relevant thusly: what reflects worse on McCain, that Palin was fully vetted and she was the selection, or that McCains's campaign did not fully vet her, but picked her anyway?
    09-03-08 10:39 AM
  3. Hi-Definition's Avatar
    I have no personal animus to Palin. If that's who McCain wants as his VP fine. I don't think she's qualified if you look at it from what McCain considers to be qualified. I think McCain's selection of her is relevant thusly: what reflects worse on McCain, that Palin was fully vetted and she was the selection, or that McCains's campaign did not fully vet her, but picked her anyway?
    I don't have anything personal against her either; because I don't personally know her. Just like the overwhelming majority of us don't personally know the candidates and their running mates...because the majority of us can simply go on the news, what others say (which includes the news).

    My point is that Obama, Biden and McCain have been through the "disinfectant" process of having anything and everything there is to know about them...being displayed out in the open before, during and after the primary process (both from within and outside their parties). So we know what there is to know about them. There are only 2 more months before the presidential election...way too short of time, and way too much importance that's riding on the line...for people to haphazardly cast a vote for a person like McCain who has picked someone like Palin.
    09-03-08 11:48 AM
  4. tp_cracker's Avatar
    First of all, I don't think we know everything about Biden and Obama. Maybe more about Obama after he finally started releasing his records after a year of people trying to get him to release them. McCain is pretty much an open book, which I really don't want to vote for, but I am actually voting for Vice President this year, not President, I don't like either president, but I despise Biden, he is scum in my opinion.
    09-03-08 12:22 PM
  5. Hi-Definition's Avatar
    You're missing the point. My point is that via the heated/engaged/battled/participated and all the other words ending in 'ed' that can be applicable to the democratic primary process this year....anything and everything that's relavant to a person running for the candidacy of the president of the United States...was brought out in the open (both from within and outside party members).

    As for Palin...give me a break. An overwhelming MAJORITY of the public didn't even know she existed until last Thursday night (August 28). McCain and the republicans were not as painstaking in the vetting process as they should have been for the person that's sought to be second in command next to the President.

    Of course Republicans can't recant their choice now, there's no turning back...so of course they'll defend her and say they knew everything about her that's needed to be know; and that's relevant to the political realm. If they admitted to anything that they expect, hound, hold other politicians to...they'd be all but admitting they have a weak case and a weak pick for America in Palin as VP.

    McCain has sided with Bush 90-92% of the time on votes on Bush-endorsed policies/bills; whereas Obama has voted about 5% of the time on those same ones. Therefore...If anyone's voting according to the VP this year; how can anyone that cares for themselves, their future, their children's future, the country and the world...how can they cast a vote for PALIN?!?!
    Last edited by Hi-Definition; 09-03-08 at 01:06 PM.
    09-03-08 01:02 PM
  6. jchatman1's Avatar
    McCain's act of desperation.
    hahahahaha
    09-03-08 01:08 PM
  7. BamaSteve's Avatar
    You're missing the point. My point is that via the heated/engaged/battled/participated and all the other words ending in 'ed' that can be applicable to the democratic primary process this year....anything and everything that's relavant to a person running for the candidacy of the president of the United States...was brought out in the open (both from within and outside party members).

    As for Palin...give me a break. An overwhelming MAJORITY of the public didn't even know she existed until last Thursday night (August 28). McCain and the republicans were not as painstaking in the vetting process as they should have been for the person that's sought to be second in command next to the President.

    Of course Republicans can't recant their choice now, there's no turning back...so of course they'll defend her and say they knew everything about her that's needed to be know; and that's relevant to the political realm. If they admitted to anything that they expect, hound, hold other politicians to...they'd be all but admitting they have a weak case and a weak pick for America in Palin as VP.

    McCain has sided with Bush 90-92% of the time on votes on Bush-endorsed policies/bills; whereas Obama has voted about 5% of the time on those same ones. Therefore...If anyone's voting according to the VP this year; how can anyone that cares for themselves, their future, their children's future, the country and the world...how can they cast a vote for PALIN?!?!
    Let me ask you this, does the appealing nature Palin make you nervous? Sure seems like it does.

    Second, where do you get this 90-92% figure? Last time I checked the President doesn't vote on anything. So, show me where you get those numbers from. Facts, show me facts.
    09-03-08 01:26 PM
  8. bjsgarda's Avatar
    Your assumption as to my source is baffling since you do not dispute the factual content. Your response changes the subject which was a response from a previous inquiry as to the distortions in the ad. I note that you do not assail the proposition that the ad did distort the facts to benefit McCain's point. BTW, while we are at it, (1) not all of McCain's ads are guilty of this and (2) some of Obama's ads are guilty of the same. Seems that all politicians do it (whether that is right or wrong is another question) but clearly no one should be making decisions on either candidate based on what they see in a political ad. Finally, if you are interested in a genuine discussion of issues and perspective, I am game but if you are only interested in spouting platitudes, party rhetoric and evasion, I am not interested.
    I didn't change the subject I just went through every one of your excuses from the spin machine. The add does not distort the facts about Obama nor does my responses.

    Finally 2 1/2 years is 900 days right. LOL
    09-03-08 01:41 PM
  9. BamaSteve's Avatar

    Finally 2 1/2 years is 900 days right. LOL
    No one seems to like to directly answer direct questions. Funny how that is isn't it?
    09-03-08 01:43 PM
  10. HAB_fan's Avatar
    Enough politics already. I hear enough about B. Hussein Obama in the mainstream press, please not in CB too!
    09-03-08 02:18 PM
  11. wnm's Avatar
    That is so lame.
    09-03-08 02:27 PM
  12. roninksb's Avatar
    I didn't change the subject I just went through every one of your excuses from the spin machine. The add does not distort the facts about Obama nor does my responses.

    Finally 2 1/2 years is 900 days right. LOL
    This is exactly the type of response that does not move the discussion forward in anyway. "Spin machine", can you manage to type a response that does not contain such pejoratives and respond to the substance.

    As to distortions in the ad, reasonable people can differ. I was asked for the basis of my statement that the ad did a fair job of distorting the facts and I gave you that. I honestly did not think that the purpose of the question was to get information that would compel you to agree. I thought your goal was to determine if I had a factual basis for my statement. If I had the impression that you wanted to be convinced, I would have demurred as I have no desire to do so. As I have said before, I am interested in intelligent discussion of the issues.

    Regarding the 2 and half years versus 900 days. This is a common device for distorting the impression of a time frame, if I say 30 months it seems longer than 2 and half years, if I say 900 days it seems even longer than 30 months but I am sure you know that. Remember, the statement and the subsequent question related to distortions not outright lies.
    09-03-08 02:28 PM
  13. Hi-Definition's Avatar
    Let me ask you this, does the appealing nature Palin make you nervous? Sure seems like it does.

    Second, where do you get this 90-92% figure? Last time I checked the President doesn't vote on anything. So, show me where you get those numbers from. Facts, show me facts.
    I get them just like where you get your knowledge, informations, facts, perceived facts from...the news/media. You weren't born with some divine knowledge and information of many things; let alone all things. None of us are.

    It's not like you personally know McCain, Obama, Biden, Palin...it's not like you're a senator or a politician yourself...so you go on what you read, hear, listen, see; just as I do and just as the MAJORITY of us do. And read what I said closely, I never said the President votes.

    The appealing part of someone's nature is relative to what one finds appealing. Everyone has their own definition of it.

    bjsgarda...you're definitely nothing more than a subservient listener and transcriptor for Rush Limbaugh; your words/terminology are plastered with evidence of it.
    Last edited by Hi-Definition; 09-03-08 at 02:32 PM.
    09-03-08 02:29 PM
  14. BamaSteve's Avatar

    Regarding the 2 and half years versus 900 days. This is a common device for distorting the impression of a time frame, if I say 30 months it seems longer than 2 and half years, if I say 900 days it seems even longer than 30 months but I am sure you know that. Remember, the statement and the subsequent question related to distortions not outright lies.
    Just typical...never able to answer a yes or no question with a simple yes or no...tisk tisk tisk
    09-03-08 02:32 PM
  15. BamaSteve's Avatar
    I get them just like where you get your knowledge, informations, facts, perceived facts from...the news/media. You weren't born with some divine knowledge and information of many things; let alone all things. None of us are.

    It's not like you personally know McCain, Obama, Biden, Palin...it's not like you're a senator or a politician yourself...so you go on what you read, hear, listen, see; just as I do and just as the MAJORITY of us do. And read what I said closely, I never said the President votes.

    The appealing part of someone's nature is relative to what one finds appealing. Everyone has their own definition of it.

    bjsgarda...you're definitely nothing more than a subservient listener and transcriptor for Rush Limbaugh; your words/terminology are plastered with evidence of it.
    No, you got that figure from Obama's acceptance speech. By the standards used to derive that number, I can say anything about anyone. Those numbers are not facts. Facts can be proven, which is something that undermines the democrats way to approach things. They use the popular media to deceive the dumb masses (and yes I spelled everything how I meant) who won't actually think about what is being said.

    You didn't directly say the President votes, but you want to say McCain sides with Bush 90-92% of the time. This would require having a statistical way to calculate these numbers, which there is none. This is just an arbitrary number that sounds good (or bad) but can't be proven by any means whatsoever. Besides, you could not get an accurate number based on McCain votes because most of the senate votes are unanimous.
    Last edited by BamaSteve; 09-03-08 at 02:38 PM.
    09-03-08 02:36 PM
  16. roninksb's Avatar
    Let me ask you this, does the appealing nature Palin make you nervous? Sure seems like it does.

    Second, where do you get this 90-92% figure? Last time I checked the President doesn't vote on anything. So, show me where you get those numbers from. Facts, show me facts.
    You have repeated this sentiment a number of times now, what is the basis for this conclusion? Do you have facts to back it up? Why do you conclude that the objections voiced regarding Palin are something other then genuine criticism based on the particular individual's assessment?

    Also, what is your understanding of McCain's voting record? And are you actually taking exception to the figure? Does it really matter to you if McCain voted with Bush 90 - 95% of the time? It seems to me that if you think that his votes are in line with the way you believe he should have voted then it really does not matter, right? Also, I believe that was the point of the original poster's statement, the precise figure was beside the point.
    Last edited by RoninKSB; 09-03-08 at 02:44 PM.
    09-03-08 02:41 PM
  17. bjsgarda's Avatar
    I have no personal animus to Palin. If that's who McCain wants as his VP fine. I don't think she's qualified if you look at it from what McCain considers to be qualified. I think McCain's selection of her is relevant thusly: what reflects worse on McCain, that Palin was fully vetted and she was the selection, or that McCains's campaign did not fully vet her, but picked her anyway?
    Obama has been running for president for the pass 18 months and their has a been a light vetting of him. The press has avoided all the tough questions about his relationship with Tony Resko, Bill Ayers, Rev Wright, Father Phlager. The Annaberg foundation which he ran was it successful in its main mission to change the Chicago public schools for the better? The project spent 100 million dollars. Where did those funds go? Was the Tony Resko housing deal with Obama ethical?

    What are the qualifications, experience and significant accomplishment ( legislative record, private sector and etc) of Barrack Obama? Name one time that Obama has ever gone against his party or the Chicago machine if he is a true agent of change. You wont be able to find one.

    The real reason is that the pick has scare Obama's campaign and has made the race a toss up. The Palin choice overshadowed Obama speech and selection of Joe Biden. If Obama had pick Hillary the campaign would have been over.

    The press gave him a pass during the primary and his campaign took advantage of the democratic party primary rules. Hillary's campaign to their credit was able to turn things around when they started questioning his record. Obama's remarks about small town americans didn't help either.

    It's amazing of all the sexist remarks that have been thrown out against Palin. The one I find most troubling is what kind of mother she could be to her new born son afflicted with down syndrome. The implication is that she should quit and take care of the child. What about her husband taking of the child when she is not around? Joe Biden tragically lost his wife before taking his US Senate seat and no one political pundit ever suggested for him to step down.

    Palin has
    Ran a business
    City Council experience
    Mayoral experience
    Governor experience

    Took on an incumbent Republican Governor (former US Senator) who had the party in his pocket and defeated him in the primary. Went on and defeated the democrat candidate former Governor. Has a 80% approval rating.

    Obama

    Ran the Harvard Law review

    Wrote 2 books

    Community Organizer

    Ran the Annaberg project through the University of Chicago which up to last week refused to release the records. Spent 100 million dollars...where did it go?

    Illinois State Senator for 6 years voting over 100 times present on tough votes

    US senator of 144 days and running for President

    Now comparing his experience as running a campaign operation of 2500 employees is like being a Governor of a state.
    09-03-08 02:44 PM
  18. BamaSteve's Avatar
    You have repeated this sentiment a number of times now, what is the basis for this conclusion? Do you have facts to back it up? Why do you conclude that the objections voiced regarding Palin are something other then genuine criticism based on the particular individual's assessment?

    Also, what is your understanding of McCain's voting record? And are you actually taking exception to the figure? Does it really matter to you if McCain voted with Bush 90 - 95% of the time? It seems to me that if you think that his votes are in line with the way you believe he should have voted then it really does not matter, right? Also, I believe that was the point of the original poster's statement, the precise figure was beside the point.
    I can't understand McCain's voting record, Senate votes are mostly unanimous. My point is that a lot of people don't like Bush, I do, but a lot don't. So what does the popular media and Obama do? They throw this arbitrary number up to make it sound like McCain is just like Bush. They play on the ignorance of voters. That is my point.

    Besides that, I can point out numerous things that McCain has opposed Bush on if that's what you really want. I don't care with how he views Bush, I like the conservative base. That and I'm not a fan of Marxists.
    09-03-08 02:49 PM
  19. Hi-Definition's Avatar
    Democrats as a whole feed on the 'dumb masses'?

    Are you sure about that man? Who is the one that took us into a war on false premise and empty promises and hope? Who is the one that repeatedly has to use scare tactics of war, attack and violence in order to mentally subdue the dumb masses? The last time I checked, this wasn't a democrat.

    Actually, not only did Obama state that percentage in his speech; he said it on other occassions outside of that speech; and others aside from Obama have said it as well. McCain has admitted in many interviews that he has sided with Bush-backed policies/bills on the level that he has said...90% of the time. And why are you bringing these intricacies into the discussion that don't need to be...sure no one quantifies these figures; especially if the person themselves knows how they are and how they vote; in order to be able to put a number on it themselves (i.e. McCain and even Obama). That's to their credit...at least they know themselves to be able to openly talk about it and give a percentage on the course of their actions when asked.

    See, proof is in the pudding. All I want to leave by saying is that this is an important election for those that don't already realize it; and for those that realize it but just don't realize it as much as it should be...this is a VERY IMPORTANT election. Be very careful and responsible with your vote. And give the Obama/Biden ticket a very even-handed, objective and fair look...just as one should with the McCain/Palin ticket.
    09-03-08 02:50 PM
  20. roninksb's Avatar
    Just typical...never able to answer a yes or no question with a simple yes or no...tisk tisk tisk
    Repeating the same statement without responding to substance is also a common rhetorical device to avoid engaging in debate on substance.

    Do you agree that the point of saying 900 days instead of saying 2 and half years was for the purpose of making it seem like a longer period of time or not? If not, what was the reason? For example, we don't refer a child as being 356 days old we say a year, so why go out of your way to say 900 days instead of 2 and half years? I would be interested in hearing you analysis, instead of parsing and attacking discrete phrases.
    09-03-08 02:52 PM
  21. BamaSteve's Avatar
    Repeating the same statement without responding to substance is also a common rhetorical device to avoid engaging in debate on substance.

    Do you agree that the point of saying 900 days instead of saying 2 and half years was for the purpose of making it seem like a longer period of time or not? If not, what was the reason? For example, we don't refer a child as being 356 days old we say a year, so why go out of your way to say 900 days instead of 2 and half years? I would be interested in hearing you analysis, instead of parsing and attacking discrete phrases.
    I'll be honest and straight forward and answer your question, unlike anyone else will do. YES, this is a sort of way to make the time seem longer. But a 10 year old can figure up what 900 days is. Can the average american describe what a capital gains tax is? Probably not, which is why Obama says he will lower them. So what, most small businesses don't pay these taxes. THAT IS DECEPTIVE. And in a sense saying 900 days is as well, but someone with half a brain can figure 900 days = 2 1/2 years. But unless someone has experience with business accounting or just knows, they don't know what the heck capital gains taxes are.
    09-03-08 02:58 PM
  22. bjsgarda's Avatar
    You have repeated this sentiment a number of times now, what is the basis for this conclusion? Do you have facts to back it up? Why do you conclude that the objections voiced regarding Palin are something other then genuine criticism based on the particular individual's assessment?

    Also, what is your understanding of McCain's voting record? And are you actually taking exception to the figure? Does it really matter to you if McCain voted with Bush 90 - 95% of the time? It seems to me that if you think that his votes are in line with the way you believe he should have voted then it really does not matter, right? Also, I believe that was the point of the original poster's statement, the precise figure was beside the point.
    The congress and the senate for the last two years is democratically control. The President either signs or vetos bills that come from Congress. Please tell me what bills that they were able to override when they were vetoed? Which bills of 90-95% were voted into law?

    McCain in his long experience as a congressman and senator has disagreed against many President's (Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush). McCain has gone against his own party leadership in both houses. McCain has always put the country first not he's own interests.

    When has Obama in his 2 years in Washington ever gone against his party or leadership? Then ask yourself when in his 6 years in the Illinois senate did he ever go against his party or leadership?
    Last edited by bjsgarda; 09-03-08 at 03:02 PM.
    09-03-08 02:59 PM
  23. BamaSteve's Avatar
    Can anyone name one issue that Obama has split with his party on?

    dang bj, you beat me to it...
    09-03-08 02:59 PM
  24. roninksb's Avatar
    I can't understand McCain's voting record, Senate votes are mostly unanimous. My point is that a lot of people don't like Bush, I do, but a lot don't. So what does the popular media and Obama do? They throw this arbitrary number up to make it sound like McCain is just like Bush. They play on the ignorance of voters. That is my point.

    Besides that, I can point out numerous things that McCain has opposed Bush on if that's what you really want. I don't care with how he views Bush, I like the conservative base. That and I'm not a fan of Marxists.
    Now we have something to talk about!

    Here's the thing, I think that McCain has acknowledged a similar number himself. That said, why does it matter? If McCain is proud of his voting record, if he has voted with his party and those votes have been in line with his principles then so what? Isn't the answer to that, Bush was right 90% of the time and it is that 10% that you guys who are thinking of voting for me should be looking at, i.e. those times he was wrong and I was right? Those moments that distinguish me from that really unpopular guy currently in the White House.

    One other thing I did not comment on before, after giving it some thought, I think that this process she is going through right now is pretty typical for any candidate that is relatively unknown (Ferraro and Quayle come to mind). All she has to do is weather the storm and she will be fine. We will all forget it in about 2 weeks anyway. The proof as to whether she is suited for the job will come from her. I still believe that in America anyone can be President (or VP), the issue is not necessarily years under the belt, times around the block or years in the Senate but temperament and ideas. Some of our Presidents have come from pretty humble beginnings. So I, for one, am more than happy to see what she's got.

    Finally, at the very least, she has added a new element of interest to an election cycle that has had an abundance of interesting moments.
    09-03-08 03:14 PM
  25. BamaSteve's Avatar
    Now we have something to talk about!

    Here's the thing, I think that McCain has acknowledged a similar number himself. That said, why does it matter? If McCain is proud of his voting record, if he has voted with his party and those votes have been in line with his principles then so what? Isn't the answer to that, Bush was right 90% of the time and it is that 10% that you guys who are thinking of voting for me should be looking at, i.e. those times he was wrong and I was right? Those moments that distinguish me from that really unpopular guy currently in the White House.

    One other thing I did not comment on before, after giving it some thought, I think that this process she is going through right now is pretty typical for any candidate that is relatively unknown (Ferraro and Quayle come to mind). All she has to do is weather the storm and she will be fine. We will all forget it in about 2 weeks anyway. The proof as to whether she is suited for the job will come from her. I still believe that in America anyone can be President (or VP), the issue is not necessarily years under the belt, times around the block or years in the Senate but temperament and ideas. Some of our Presidents have come from pretty humble beginnings. So I, for one, am more than happy to see what she's got.

    Finally, at the very least, she has added a new element of interest to an election cycle that has had an abundance of interesting moments.
    If McCain has acknowledged a similar figure, I do apologize. I was not aware of that. BUT McCain has broken with Bush on issues he believed in, has Obama ever broken with his party.

    My problem was based on the popular media making it up. If McCain said it, then so be, I was misinformed.
    09-03-08 03:22 PM
291 ... 7891011 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD