PDA

View Full Version : Truth and Fiction about the Candidates



Doc Fluty
07-30-2008, 06:36 PM
Sorry to edit your post, Doc Fluty, but this needs to be at the top of this thread
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By a landslide vote of 1-0 (which is a 100% margin of victory for those who are counting), this thread is now called:

Truth and Fiction About the Candidates

...and it will be a home for posts and threads which are more or less along the lines of people claiming things about the candidates based on their own interpretation of events (which is to say opinion-based rather than news-based threads), and people disputing/debating/discussing the merits of those claims.

Sometimes threads will get merged into this one because they fit the definition. I might not be the only mod doing this, but when it is me, I'll do my best to be fair about it. To see the reasoning behind all this, please read posts 9-30 or so of this thread.

Thanks - D





============================================
============================================
Original post:
-------------






(IsraelNN.com) Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama's campaign seems to have purposely leaked the contents of the note that he placed in the Kotel, web magazine Israel Insider wrote Tuesday. While Israel's Hebrew newspaper Maariv came under fire for publishing the note, "it now appears that Maariv had collaborated with the Obama campaign in getting the 'private' prayer, with its 'modest' supplication to the Lord, out to the public, buffing his Christian credentials and showing his "humility

In a statement issued following the public outcry over the leak, Maariv said that "Barack Obama's note was approved for publication in the international media even before he put it in the Kotel, a short time after he wrote it at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem." A third newspaper, Haaretz, quoted Maariv as saying that "Obama submitted a copy of the note to media outlets when he left his hotel in Jerusalem."

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/127001

Now, though, it is being alleged that this was just what happened. Ma'ariv, the paper that published the prayer, says that "Barack Obama's note was approved for publication in the international media even before he put in the Kotel, a short time after he wrote it at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem." Ma'ariv's claim may have been backed up by Israel's most popular daily paper, Yediot Aharonot, which says that it too had a copy of the note but decided not to print it.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2052909/posts

PHX-SOXFAN
07-30-2008, 06:41 PM
not sure what this is, what it's talking about, or how it's relevant to any issue I care about.

Doc Fluty
07-30-2008, 06:54 PM
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/25/israeli-paper-publishes-obama-western-wall-prayer/

there you go.. and dont forget to read all of the people who are outraged about the invasion of privacy.

so basically Obama turned the Western Wall, Judaism's holiest site into a political prop (kind of like what he wanted to do with the Brandenburg Gate)... just to try to prove to some people that he prays to god and isnt a muslim...

ink
07-30-2008, 06:55 PM
Am I the only one who feels like the election is being run by the worst kind of tabloid reporting so far?? :sigh:

ari1013
07-30-2008, 07:05 PM
Congratulations! You've now managed to link to extreme rightwinged Israeli propaganda as well as extreme rightwinged US propaganda all in the same post.

Arutz Sheva is a complete joke.
And FreeRepublic.com is not a news agency.

ari1013
07-30-2008, 07:06 PM
not sure what this is, what it's talking about, or how it's relevant to any issue I care about.
Kotel is the Hebrew word for the "Western Wall" of the Temple Mount.

ari1013
07-30-2008, 07:09 PM
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/25/israeli-paper-publishes-obama-western-wall-prayer/

there you go.. and dont forget to read all of the people who are outraged about the invasion of privacy.

so basically Obama turned the Western Wall, Judaism's holiest site into a political prop (kind of like what he wanted to do with the Brandenburg Gate)... just to try to prove to some people that he prays to god and isnt a muslim...
I don't really buy it. This type of thing happens a lot. Israel's always trying to rebuild her world image. We're in a tough spot most of the time, with the world criticizing us for fighting Hamas after they shell our cities. Anything to get some good press for a change is definitely welcome.

Doc Fluty
07-30-2008, 07:23 PM
So the Israel national news, Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew newspaper Maariv and Israel's most popular daily paper Yediot Aharonot are just... lying?

DenButsu
07-30-2008, 07:57 PM
By a landslide vote of 1-0 (which is a 100% margin of victory for those who are counting), this thread is now called:

Truth and Fiction About the Candidates

...and it will be a home for posts and threads which are more or less along the lines of people claiming things about the candidates based on their own interpretation of events (which is to say opinion-based rather than news-based threads), and people disputing/debating/discussing the merits of those claims.

Sometimes threads will get merged into this one because they fit the definition. I might not be the only mod doing this, but when it is me, I'll do my best to be fair about it. To see the reasoning behind all this, please read the first 15 or so posts of this thread.

Thanks - D



=========================
=========================




People just aren't going to stop making "McCain did this slimy thing" or "Obama did that slimy thing" threads in here.

So I was thinking of a way to at least corral these into a manageable space, and thinking that maybe creating two threads, one for each candidate, for "fact checking". And by fact checking I mean it cuts both ways. If somebody posts a thread about "Obama/McCain lied about this", then what people usually do is try to either "fact check" the accusation that he lied (usually when they support the accused candidate), or "fact check" the accuracy of the candidate's statement (usually when they oppose him). Of course, this doesn't apply only to statements, but also campaign commercials, policy positions, gestures, biographical background, etc.


My hope:

I'm just tired of seeing 80% of the new threads be less news-oriented and more "here's another reason I don't like this guy"-oriented, and having main threads to merge the latter into might help keep the front page more issue based.

My fear:

These threads could just turn into cesspools of baiting/insults/flaming that would ultimately have to get shut down anyways, and cause more problems than they alleviate.


What do you think?


(Responses that aren't real responses/answers to this question will be deleted)

PHX-SOXFAN
07-30-2008, 08:04 PM
Kotel is the Hebrew word for the "Western Wall" of the Temple Mount.

great, and this causes them to spin this why exactly?:confused:

nice to see issues that don't matter and people don't understand are getting run with by the spinners as well as the usual talking points:rolleyes:

DenButsu
07-30-2008, 08:16 PM
If...

a) most people actually saw the contents of that prayer (they didn't), and

b) anybody actually cared about what he prayed about (they don't), and

c) there was any actual "controversy", either from the media (they tried, but failed) or from the Obama camp (he pretty much just said he didn't care too much and wasn't too surprised), ...

...then I might actually care at least about the impact of this story.

Thing is, it just has no legs, so I don't.

FearAD
07-30-2008, 08:35 PM
I think Barack should drop out of the election. What kind of man prays for direction and to keep him family safe? This guy is a freaking joke. Is this dude really married? Freaking loser.

Randy West
07-30-2008, 08:57 PM
I don't really think politics is sinking lower.............just feeding off the bottom for the moment

ari1013
07-30-2008, 09:10 PM
So the Israel national news, Haaretz, Israel's Hebrew newspaper Maariv and Israel's most popular daily paper Yediot Aharonot are just... lying?
INN = Arutz Sheva. They're sensationalists who are 100% behind Bush and the US Republicans.

As I said, I'm sure that Ma'Ariv and Yehidot Ahranot both had the info because they're looking to get good press. But leave it to Arutz Sheva to put a spin on it.

ari1013
07-30-2008, 09:12 PM
If...

a) most people actually saw the contents of that prayer (they didn't), and

b) anybody actually cared about what he prayed about (they don't), and

c) there was any actual "controversy", either from the media (they tried, but failed) or from the Obama camp (he pretty much just said he didn't care too much and wasn't too surprised), ...

...then I might actually care at least about the impact of this story.

Thing is, it just has no legs, so I don't.
Exactly. This has nothing to do with the Obama campaign. It has to do with a foreign leader coming to Israel and Israel needing the press.

ari1013
07-30-2008, 09:16 PM
So it would be a Rumor/Truth type of deal?

CubsGirl
07-30-2008, 09:27 PM
My hope:

I'm just tired of seeing 80% of the new threads be less news-oriented and more "here's another reason I don't like this guy"-oriented, and having main threads to merge the latter into might help keep the front page more issue based.

My fear:

These threads could just turn into cesspools of baiting/insults/flaming that would ultimately have to get shut down anyways, and cause more problems than they alleviate.


What do you think?


(Responses that aren't real responses/answers to this question will be deleted)

I ABSOLUTELY agree. I also think that banning moonman will help cut down on the threads since he was the one that made them seem okay. But this would definitely help, as long as we make a community effort to make sure they remain civil.

PHX-SOXFAN
07-30-2008, 09:52 PM
I think Barack should drop out of the election. What kind of man prays for direction and to keep him family safe? This guy is a freaking joke. Is this dude really married? Freaking loser.

I can think of one guy who prays for that and also openly said he "listens to God" for guidance when pondering the Iraq War. I don't care what people's religious/spiritual practices are, it only worries me when it affects the decisions they make based on "conversations with God".:speechless::speechless:

SmthBluCitrus
07-30-2008, 09:57 PM
Agree with CG. I think with moonman being gone, the number of "he said/did" threads are going to be drastically cut.

I'm not against a fact check style thread being up for both candidates though. I'd hesitate to call it fact check (naming rights with factcheck.org), but I don't think it's a bad idea.

Naturally, I think we'll see some baiting and flaming in there though. And, it'll probably need to be policed. But, that's just the way politics go. People get very emotionally invested in their political opinion, and the best recourse (for some) is to aggravate and irritate when they don't believe they can get their point across in any other way.

Chalk one up in the "yes" column from sbc :D

DenButsu
07-30-2008, 10:37 PM
So it would be a Rumor/Truth type of deal?

Yeah.

And SmthBluCitrus, I was basically trying to use the term "fact checking" as a polite, non-controversial way of saying "what McCain has lied about" and "what Obama has lied about".

Half - or maybe even more than half - of the problem of those bashing threads, imo, is just inflammatory thread titles. They'd have a lot less impact as the top line of a single post in a thread.

SmthBluCitrus
07-30-2008, 10:59 PM
Yeah.

And SmthBluCitrus, I was basically trying to use the term "fact checking" as a polite, non-controversial way of saying "what McCain has lied about" and "what Obama has lied about".

Half - or maybe even more than half - of the problem of those bashing threads, imo, is just inflammatory thread titles. They'd have a lot less impact as the top line of a single post in a thread.

Gotcha. Still sounds good to me.

PHX-SOXFAN
07-31-2008, 12:42 PM
In yet another example of premature arrogance from this administration:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/white-house-says-us-avoided/story.aspx?guid=%7B5E122AE2%2D51E7%2D40C3%2DB4A8%2 D6D1933A0D184%7D

This stuff is really going to hurt McCain, especially with tomorrow's employment reports, and another quarterly report yet to come before the election. he might want to ask GW's dad how to deal with this type of thing and what he would have done differently:speechless:

ari1013
07-31-2008, 02:09 PM
In yet another example of premature arrogance from this administration:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/white-house-says-us-avoided/story.aspx?guid=%7B5E122AE2%2D51E7%2D40C3%2DB4A8%2 D6D1933A0D184%7D

This stuff is really going to hurt McCain, especially with tomorrow's employment reports, and another quarterly report yet to come before the election. he might want to ask GW's dad how to deal with this type of thing and what he would have done differently:speechless:
What a crock. Real GDP fell and they're saying they avoided a recession? You say that after revised estimates make the number bigger, not smaller...

This administration can't even get their talking points straight any more.

PHX-SOXFAN
07-31-2008, 02:12 PM
What a crock. Real GDP fell and they're saying they avoided a recession? You say that after revised estimates make the number bigger, not smaller...

This administration can't even get their talking points straight any more.

I had a feeling you'd enjoy this one. I can't wait to see how they spin the unemployment rate tomorrow.

ari1013
07-31-2008, 02:22 PM
I had a feeling you'd enjoy this one. I can't wait to see how they spin the unemployment rate tomorrow.
Speaking of which, if jobless claims increase for a 7th straight month, that essentially means that we're still receeding. The old-school definition of a recession being at least "two straight quarters of negative growth" would imply that 6 months of increased unemployment should follow in the shortest possible recession.

Furthermore, inflation's already broken out of the upper bound of the safe zone (4%). If it hits 5%, that's a whole standard deviation away from the expected value, which indicates that inflation really is a serious problem -- thus forcing the Fed to deal with it as priority #1. And in that case, they forego any chance of shoring up the faltering employment levels.

We kind of hit the perfect storm here. The Fed's been forced to bail out the banks (mortgage crisis), the dollar (inflation crisis), and the workforce.

The only thing that can help us now is a serious influx of investment into the economy. And with corporations reluctant to do so these days, it's going to require some real fiscal intervention. Something like a revamped public works campaign like Roosevelt and Eisenhower each ran in the 1930s and 1950s respectively.

PHX-SOXFAN
07-31-2008, 03:28 PM
private investors are having a very difficult time obtaining commercial loans as well, so I agree with you that public spending is what it's going to take. The dems in congress are pushing for public spending to finance projects as the second economic stimulus, particularly obama.

as a person in the construction industry, I don't see anything besides this helping the situation. no private money is coming in to help. If a kick start is given from federal projects, private development will follow in those areas and markets.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-01-2008, 10:35 AM
The stimulus was a bandaid on a flesh wound:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080801/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/economy

tougher times ahead. As I said before, the next quarterly reports all come out before the election. Bad news for McCain.

ari1013
08-01-2008, 06:15 PM
51K is less than I was expecting, so that means the stimulus package did help out a bit. At the beginning of the year, my projections had us at a net loss of 500,000 jobs by the end of June. So we're doing a little better than I thought. That said, it also implies that this is probably going to be a slow ride to the bottom. 5.7% unemployment still isn't that worrisome just yet.

DenButsu
08-02-2008, 02:45 AM
I'm pretty sure I want to go ahead with something like this.

I was looking through the existing threads though, and it's not so easy to neatly categorize these things into "about McCain" or "about Obama" since sometimes they're really about both.

So then I was thinking about having one about "Issues/policies" and one about "Campaigning", but that's a pretty muddled picture, too. (When a candidate accuses the other of having a certain policy position in a commercial, is that a campaigning issue or a policy issue?).

So now I'm kind of thinking that maybe just one single thread where all the, for lack of a better term, "candidate bashing" threads can be merged into. Something like:

"Truths and fictions about the candidates"

There, people could hash out the serious issues such as whether juxtaposing Obama with images of Brittney and Paris is a) trying to make him look like a scary black man, b) just a little good old fashioned humor, c) trying to make him look like an airhead, or d) none of the above.

To restate where I'm coming from in a slightly different way:

My hope: It keeps the front page of the forum cleaner and helps to separate substantive discussion and debate from fluff.

My fear: It becomes the Election Center 2008 version of the Kobe Thread.

ari1013
08-02-2008, 09:02 AM
The Kobe thread was one of the things that made me sick of the NBA Forum. If it starts looking like that in here, it needs to be locked up, no questions asked.

DenButsu
08-02-2008, 11:44 AM
The Kobe thread was one of the things that made me sick of the NBA Forum. If it starts looking like that in here, it needs to be locked up, no questions asked.

Agreed.

But do you think the concept is even worth trying out, or bound to fail?

DenButsu
08-02-2008, 11:48 AM
There was a smoking area at my high school. A lot of parents didn't like that, but basically it was a realistic acknowledgment on the part of the administration that no matter what they did, kids were gonna smoke, so they might as well contain it to an area where the mess would be easy to clean up and the situation would be easy to monitor. Those are kind of the lines I'm thinking along. The creation of threads like that isn't going to stop, so is there a way they can be channeled into a more easily manageable situation?

ari1013
08-02-2008, 03:06 PM
There was a smoking area at my high school. A lot of parents didn't like that, but basically it was a realistic acknowledgment on the part of the administration that no matter what they did, kids were gonna smoke, so they might as well contain it to an area where the mess would be easy to clean up and the situation would be easy to monitor. Those are kind of the lines I'm thinking along. The creation of threads like that isn't going to stop, so is there a way they can be channeled into a more easily manageable situation?
That's exactly why all of the NBA mods supported having the Kobe thread way back in the day. Unless Wrigs cleared out the mod forum, you should still be able to dig back to find it (and even then, it simply would have moved to the secret porn stash forum ;) ). I'm pretty sure it was before you became an NBA mod.

ink
08-02-2008, 03:17 PM
I hope my use of the word "slimy" didn't add to the problem. :o Honest, it was my first time! I was also trying to make the point that many news outlets and editorialists are making: that Obama has a real conundrum on his hands dealing with the negative approach the McCain camp is taking. In fact, a lot of the Republican ads belong in this thread, because they are blithely distorting facts, knowing very well that the average voter will only have brief exposure to most issues. If they can register a nebulous negative impression of Obama, and they do it consistently enough, they can turn people off him without any substance at all.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-02-2008, 07:48 PM
The Kobe thread was one of the things that made me sick of the NBA Forum. If it starts looking like that in here, it needs to be locked up, no questions asked.

it cannot possibly end up like that. even the most hardcore left or hardcore right do not approach the homer level of the kobephiles. hannity is less passionate about reagan philosophy than the kobephiles are about kobe.

DenButsu
08-02-2008, 08:20 PM
it cannot possibly end up like that. even the most hardcore left or hardcore right do not approach the homer level of the kobephiles. hannity is less passionate about reagan philosophy than the kobephiles are about kobe.

But Lakers fans (and some impartial observers, as well) would say the same thing about Kobe haters.

And therein lies the crux of the dilemma.



Okay, let's make this real simple:

Do all of you think this idea should be tried or not?

Please just answer yes or no - you can explain why if you'd like, but you don't need to.

ink
08-02-2008, 08:23 PM
Do all of you think this idea should be tried or not?

Please just answer yes or no - you can explain why if you'd like, but you don't need to.

Yes.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-02-2008, 08:24 PM
But Lakers fans (and some impartial observers, as well) would say the same thing about Kobe haters.

And therein lies the crux of the dilemma.



Okay, let's make this real simple:

Do all of you think this idea should be tried or not?

Please just answer yes or no - you can explain why if you'd like, but you don't need to.

the haters would never have come about if it were not for the homers, fact. they only were created out of being repulsed by the actions of the homers

DenButsu
08-02-2008, 08:44 PM
Okay, okay, let's not make THIS into the new Kobe thread...

Just answer the question, please. :)

ink
08-02-2008, 08:46 PM
^Hey who did the painting in your sig?

DenButsu
08-03-2008, 10:28 PM
By a landslide vote of 1-0 (which is a 100% margin of victory for those who are counting), this thread is now called:

Truth and Fiction About the Candidates

...and it will be a home for posts and threads which are more or less along the lines of people claiming things about the candidates based on their own interpretation of events (which is to say opinion-based rather than news-based threads), and people disputing/debating/discussing the merits of those claims.

Sometimes threads will get merged into this one because they fit the definition. I might not be the only mod doing this, but when it is me, I'll do my best to be fair about it. To see the reasoning behind all this, please read posts 9-30 or so of this thread.

Thanks - D

ari1013
08-03-2008, 10:32 PM
Be sure to leave the redirects so people don't think their threads were simply deleted.

DenButsu
08-03-2008, 10:36 PM
Be sure to leave the redirects so people don't think their threads were simply deleted.

Yeah, good call. And since people have complained about me being too liberally biased, I may also seek agreement from Wrigley and/or conservative posters in here before merging right-slanted threads.

You lefties will just have to live with my sole judgment. :p

DenButsu
08-04-2008, 02:15 AM
Is McCain's "Messiah" ad racist?

David Gergen thinks so.

There aren't too many political commentators who people coming from both the right and left would agree are pretty objective, but Gergen fits the bill. He worked for the presidential administrations of Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton before becoming a political commentator on television. His views are widely respected by both Republicans and Democrats.

So when he says something like this, I think it's notable.

Basically, on This Week he said that the coded meaning of calling Obama "The One" is that he's being "uppity".

http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=VfXvK84MPqQ&feature=user

OnWisconsin2007
08-04-2008, 02:21 AM
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=bbcuqfaroe4&feature=user

I think this is a very interesting video. What McCain's camp is doing is hate/fear mongering, and, unfortunately, it may work on the idiots of the USA.

gcoll
08-04-2008, 04:15 AM
Is McCain's "Messiah" ad racist?
I don't see how.


There aren't too many political commentators who people coming from both the right and left would agree are pretty objective, but Gergen fits the bill. He worked for the presidential administrations of Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton before becoming a political commentator on television. His views are widely respected by both Republicans and Democrats.
Appeal to authority.

Basically, on This Week he said that the coded meaning of calling Obama "The One" is that he's being "uppity".
Uppity is a loaded word.

But why is it racist to call a black person arrogant? Is the word "hubris" less racist?

Obama has said some wicked stupid ****.

Just my own personal take. But the ad is calling Obama more than arrogant. It's calling him delusional. That's the main point of the ad. It's poking fun at the massive hype, that they allege he himself has bought into. It's not about trying to portray him as "different" or anything. They're trying to portray him as a jack ***.

And that's the message. It's the same thing as the celebrity ad. It's basically calling Obama over-hyped. That's what it all comes down to.

DenButsu
08-04-2008, 04:26 AM
Uppity is a loaded word.

That's Gergen's point: That the commercial has a loaded message.

DenButsu
08-04-2008, 04:29 AM
They're trying to portray him as a jack ***.

And that's the message. It's the same thing as the celebrity ad. It's basically calling Obama over-hyped. That's what it all comes down to.

gcoll, you said recently in a different thread that neither candidate is running a "slimy" campaign against the other, or something to that effect.

How in the world does this not qualify for that - and I mean by your interpretation of the ad's message, not mine or Gergen's?

McCain is just slinging mud now, pure and simple. After promising respect, he's running a dishonorable campaign.

gcoll
08-04-2008, 04:41 AM
gcoll, you said recently in a different thread that neither candidate is running a "slimy" campaign against the other, or something to that effect.
Yes. Neither one is taking any "cheap shots".


How in the world does this not qualify for that - and I mean by your interpretation of the ad's message, not mine or Gergen's?
I wouldn't call it a "cheap shot"...just a "shot"

The two ads are trying to draw attention to Obama's "lack of substance"...and that's not a cheap shot. I'd compare that to the constant "Bush = Mccain" type stuff.


McCain is just slinging mud now, pure and simple. After promising respect, he's running a dishonorable campaign.
Mudslinging? Sure. But I think there's a difference between taking shots at your opponent, and running a "slimy" campaign.


That's Gergen's point: That the commercial has a loaded message.
Well, the commercial is calling Obama "arrogant". The question I have is, why is that racist?

Christ. I've been calling John Edwards an arrogant douche for years....and not once have I been called racist for it.

DenButsu
08-04-2008, 05:04 AM
The two ads are trying to draw attention to Obama's "lack of substance"...and that's not a cheap shot. I'd compare that to the constant "Bush = Mccain" type stuff.

:laugh2: Wow, you really believe that?

You don't see the difference between comparing McCain to Bush - who ever since winning the primary in 2000 McCain has been a staunch supporter of, personally and in most policy areas, and many of whose policies McCain intends to continue if he becomes president -- and comparing Obama to Brittney Spears and Jesus and Paris Hilton and Moses?

Come on man, you have got to be kidding me. :rolleyes:

gcoll
08-04-2008, 05:10 AM
Wow, you really believe that?
Nope. Not anymore. Not since you laughed at me.


who ever since winning the primary in 2000 McCain has been a staunch supporter of
That's just not true.


and comparing Obama to Brittney Spears and Jesus and Paris Hilton and Moses?
No. I'm not saying it's the same thing. I'm saying it's the same level of negativity. In the terms of what kind of a "shot" it is.

It's not a cheap shot, if you can back it up. And it's not an assault on anyone's character. That would make it cheaper.

Claiming that Obama's campaign is built on hype, and celebrity status...is not a cheap shot. And it says absolutely nothing about his character.

Claiming that Mccain would be the same thing as Bush is not a cheap shot. It's also not an attack on his character.

I didn't mean that they are the same thing. They're not. They're both "shots". They are both meant to be negative. But, I wouldn't call either one particularly "slimy" or "dishonorable"

The one thing I'd consider "slimy" so far, is the "he didn't visit the troops" thing. "Went to the gym instead"...that's the one thing I'd object to so far.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-04-2008, 11:30 AM
No. I'm not saying it's the same thing. I'm saying it's the same level of negativity. In the terms of what kind of a "shot" it is.

It's not a cheap shot, if you can back it up. And it's not an assault on anyone's character. That would make it cheaper.

Claiming that Obama's campaign is built on hype, and celebrity status...is not a cheap shot. And it says absolutely nothing about his character.

Claiming that Mccain would be the same thing as Bush is not a cheap shot. It's also not an attack on his character.

I didn't mean that they are the same thing. They're not. They're both "shots". They are both meant to be negative. But, I wouldn't call either one particularly "slimy" or "dishonorable"

The one thing I'd consider "slimy" so far, is the "he didn't visit the troops" thing. "Went to the gym instead"...that's the one thing I'd object to so far.

obama saying that mccain=bush is not negative, 27% of the country actually think that would be a good thing, so that can't be negative. He also gives blatant examples of how mccain is like bush in their support for issues, that makes his claims fact based. I don't quite see where fact based comparisons of obama and paris hilton are, but I'm also not part of the 27%:D

PHX-SOXFAN
08-04-2008, 12:01 PM
Just want to throw this out there as well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/business/04lend.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

for those who lean on the $12/hour dolt causes the mortgage crisis philosophy(no names mentioned:speechless:) , that argument is being proven completely false. This is a much bigger issue than just people overextending themselves. The big finger is going to point directly at the lenders as these categories of foreclosures add up.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-04-2008, 12:07 PM
what a bunch of whiners americans are, this is all in their heads:rolleyes:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/worst-inflation-27-years-trumps/story.aspx?guid=%7B5A153311%2D54CC%2D4AEA%2DA26D%2 D09F2B841A4AE%7D

spin in W, rush, and hannity. Tell me how "our economy is strong"

KingJamsI
08-04-2008, 08:10 PM
I think Barack should drop out of the election. What kind of man prays for direction and to keep him family safe? This guy is a freaking joke. Is this dude really married? Freaking loser.

what?

think before you speak.

DenButsu
08-04-2008, 09:37 PM
what?

think before you speak.

He was being sarcastic - making fun of people who would try to use Obama's prayer as an opportunity to bash him.


I'm feeling like this thread wants to be merged into "Truth and Fiction" - any agreement from anyone on the right?

KingJamsI
08-04-2008, 09:56 PM
He was being sarcastic - making fun of people who would try to use Obama's prayer as an opportunity to bash him.


I'm feeling like this thread wants to be merged into "Truth and Fiction" - any agreement from anyone on the right?

ohhhh... that's why I always accompany internet sarcasm with this :rolleyes: ... because you never know...people will actually say things that dumb.

gcoll
08-04-2008, 11:22 PM
obama saying that mccain=bush is not negative
What about saying that Mccain is in the pocket of the oil companies? Is that "negative politics"?

I don't quite see where fact based comparisons of obama and paris hilton are
Again. It's Mccain alleging that Obama's campaign is built on hype, celebrity, and the press, and lacking on substance.

DenButsu
08-05-2008, 12:11 AM
What about saying that Mccain is in the pocket of the oil companies? Is that "negative politics"?

Again. It's Mccain alleging that Obama's campaign is built on hype, celebrity, and the press, and lacking on substance.

Here's the difference. In the McCain-oil connection, we can follow the money. There is concrete, factual evidence to link McCain to big oil, and McCain's policy positions to big oil contributions. It's perfectly clear: McCain started aggressively pushing offshore drilling, and in turn the oil companies started aggressively putting dollars into the RNC war chest. A > B. It's that simple, and there is objective proof of the connection.

In the Obama-Paris connection, THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN OBAMA AND PARIS.


And regarding your previous post, I wasn't laughing at you, I was laughing at the notion that linking McCain to Bush and linking Obama to Brittney/Paris/Jesus/Moses are even comparably close to the same level. And for the same reason I just described above - there ARE definitive connections between McCain and Bush - a LOT of them - and there are NO connections to Obama and the images that McCain is using in his attack ads.

gcoll
08-05-2008, 01:36 AM
In the Obama-Paris connection, THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN OBAMA AND PARIS.

Yes. I understand that. Mccain is not alleging an actual connection.


There is concrete, factual evidence to link McCain to big oil
So he is "in their pocket"?

If you believe something to be true, it isn't negative politics?

Mccain has received around 1.3 million from people affiliated with oil (Obama's campaign may have done some poor math). It picked up speed, when he came out for offshore drilling. Obama has received around $400,000 from people affiliated with oil. If what I read is to be believed.

Let's post the ad though. There are literally two shots of Brtitney and Paris, and it's with the "He's the biggest celebrity in the world"....the real attack on Obama in that ad, is the "no to offshore drilling" thing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHXYsw_ZDXg

Here's the "one" ad, which you can tell...is VERY racist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Id1IKJGVkvg


Here's Obama's "pocket" ad against Mccain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-x-uTnsqS6w

gcoll
08-05-2008, 02:17 AM
He was being sarcastic - making fun of people who would try to use Obama's prayer as an opportunity to bash him.


I'm feeling like this thread wants to be merged into "Truth and Fiction" - any agreement from anyone on the right?

Sure. This seems like a topic for "truth and fiction".....unless there's a "who cares?" section for this type of thing.

DenButsu
08-05-2008, 07:13 AM
Here's the "one" ad, which you can tell...is VERY racist.

Did you watch the video clip of Gergen's comments? He specifically gave the McCain camp credit for not having done anything overtly racist in their campaign. The argument that he was making was that racism was coded into the context of the commercial in a way that's not obvious to many people but is clearly transmitted to people of a particular mindset (a mindset that is racist or potentially prone to racism due to the person's background).

PHX-SOXFAN
08-05-2008, 10:44 AM
What about saying that Mccain is in the pocket of the oil companies? Is that "negative politics"?

Again. It's Mccain alleging that Obama's campaign is built on hype, celebrity, and the press, and lacking on substance.

if it's true it's not negative. McCain has taken large donations from oil companies, true. Again, what does this have to do with linking McCain and Bush, especially given his extensive support of Bush policies?

b1e9a8r5s
08-05-2008, 01:36 PM
if it's true it's not negative. McCain has taken large donations from oil companies, true. Again, what does this have to do with linking McCain and Bush, especially given his extensive support of Bush policies?


Well the truth is, that Barack Obama voted for the 2005 energy bill, which Dick Chenney had a major role in, and Hillary Clinton called the "Dick Cheney lobbyist energy bill", while McCain opposed it because it had unessecary tax breaks for oil companies.

ari1013
08-05-2008, 06:11 PM
Well the truth is, that Barack Obama voted for the 2005 energy bill, which Dick Chenney had a major role in, and Hillary Clinton called the "Dick Cheney lobbyist energy bill", while McCain opposed it because it had unessecary tax breaks for oil companies.
And both candidates have evolved by essentially swapping positions. No surprise.

Doc Fluty
08-05-2008, 07:32 PM
And both candidates have evolved by essentially swapping positions. No surprise.

yeah.. ari is about right... from drilling to global warming to iraq to immigration to just about everything these 2 have become the same guy...

so when people end up voting they will do it based only on:

age vs youth
black vs white
hope vs experience
republican vs democrat
old ideas vs new ideas
great taste vs less filling
Chiefs vs Raiders

no issue can be a factor when they mimic each other on damn near everything, the only real difference i can tell is the health care plans

gcoll
08-06-2008, 12:20 AM
if it's true it's not negative.
That's not true.

I would say that constantly bringing up Barack's middle name, would be "negative" and it's very true that that's his name.

I would say that an ad centered around Rev Wright would be "negative" although it is true that Obama considered him his "spiritual advisor"

I would say that an ad focused on race with the tagline "We've never had a black president.....why start now?" would be very negative. And it is true that we've never had a black president.

Just because something has truth to it...doesn't mean it's not negative. Especially when spin is involved. Like claiming that some campaign contributions mean that Mccain is in their pocket. That's not simply saying that they donated money to Mccain. It's saying that they control Mccain. It's very negative.


McCain has taken large donations from oil companies, true.
Actually. Oil companies are not allowed to donate money directly.

Mccain has received donations from people affiliated with oil. About $1.3 million. It accounts for about .9 cents, for every $100 Mccain has raised. Is that enough to make the claim that Mccain is "in the pocket of oil companies"??

Obama has received around $400,000 from people in the oil business. So I guess he's almost a third of the way to being in their pocket.


Again, what does this have to do with linking McCain and Bush, especially given his extensive support of Bush policies?
Both are meant to be negative comparisons.

Yes, Mccain has links to Bush.

But the link to Paris and Britney that the ad represents...is not a physical connection. It's making the claim that Barack Obama's campaign is empty, media hype. That it's a campaign built on celebrity.

I compared those comparisons.....because I figured both are meant to be negative, and I'd consider neither "slimy".

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 02:40 PM
Simple... She asks him "why do you want to be president?"

and he says.....


"America is, is no longer, uh, what it could be, what it, it once was," Obama said haltingly. "And I say to myself, I don't want that future for my children."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d667NAI9HIM

CubsGirl
08-07-2008, 02:40 PM
.....and?

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 02:43 PM
he's right. look at our relations abroad, economy, education system, health care.

is this offensive to you that he said this?

I take it your getting some sort of talking point from a fox blowhard or Rush. I happen to have heard Rush say he woke up this morning to see "Obama degrading our country to a 7 year old girl". I'm glad to see you jump on the talking point express. Too bad the clip clearly shows him speaking in a positive, hopeful tone.:clap::clap::clap:

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 02:48 PM
yes i did hear it on rush and i agree with it...

the guy always bashes America.. overseas and even to a lil girl... sometimes i dont know if im listening to him or rev wright

doesnt matter who brought it up.. Obama said it... and i dont know how you get a helpful tone out of that

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 02:52 PM
umm hes right...

he didn't "trash" america. Get over the fake patriotism talking point of the right. He was giving a positive message and, if you want to put words in his mouth, referring to prosperous times such as before this administration.

There is nothing wrong with his answer, it is perfectly in line with his message of change. He has never "trashed america" before and certainly didn't do it here. He is trashing the policies of this administration and it's chronies that have put us in this economic and foreign policy debacle. That is not trashing this country. That is giving a positive outlook to get out of the status quo. The same status quo mind you that most americans, except the 27% blowhard/Bush apologist, want changed. That's called a positive campaign message. And you directly regurgitating a Rush talking point just shows the cynical negative spin that the right feels must be put on everything that comes out of Obama's mouth. There was not a bit of anger or negativity in his tone. Look at your clip again. That is a man with a positive message.

have some original thought every once in a while instead of jumping on the Rush/Hannity spin and talking point express.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 02:56 PM
yes i did hear it on rush and i agree with it...

the guy always bashes America.. overseas and even to a lil girl... sometimes i dont know if im listening to him or rev wright

doesnt matter who brought it up.. Obama said it... and i dont know how you get a helpful tone out of that

I wrote "hopeful" not "helpful". This proves you not only can't interpret Obama correctly, but you can't read my sentences correctly. If Rush came in and read my post to you and gave it spin, would it have made more sense?:speechless:

Obama has never bashed america. Don't confuse bashing failed Bush and conservative policy by pointing out the status quo as "bashing america". Bashing america would be accepting this crap administration's policies and terrible results as acceptable. Keeping a positive tone and being hopeful is far from "bashing".

Keep the rush talking points coming, I've always got time to dismantle them

BG7
08-07-2008, 02:57 PM
I think this is worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGvxK660oFo

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 03:04 PM
first off.. ive never in my life watched hannity or oreilly.. just listen to rush on my way to work..

second... i watched the video of what he said (and it does matter that its to a 7 year old girl).. and i see rev wright.. i see him just like he did in berlin talking bad about the country...

when has he said something positive about america?

and im not spinning anything... if anything you guys spin stuff.. like what michelle said before... you guys always bring up what you think they "meant by it"... i take it for what they said.

shes said shes never in her adult life been proud of america untill now... you guys spin it...

i see it as a woman that earns $300,000 a year and ivy league grad.. just regurgitating rev wright.

it doenst matter who says it, if rush makes a point and agree with it.. so be it. you guys hear something from obama and agree with it.. do i accuse you of being on obamas tip?

his ego is out of control... you guys are just infatuated with his whole "hope" message that you dont care how bad this guy is turning out to be...

ink
08-07-2008, 03:09 PM
People are looking hard if they can find something negative in what he said. Obama is saying that he wants his country to live up to its great potential. So is the rest of the world that loves America. And there are lots of us. Criticism of failure (witness the last eight years) does NOT equal dislike for a great nation. You have a presidential candidate who knows his country can be better. Sounds like an honest person to me. America can be better. It has been in the past. That is a hopeful statement.

tomno00
08-07-2008, 03:10 PM
"America is, is no longer, uh, what it could be, what it, it once was," Obama said haltingly. "And I say to myself, I don't want that future for my children."

a true politician at work... never says what he wants to do, just bashes the other side....

BG7
08-07-2008, 03:11 PM
Well our country is morally in the dump for killing innocent Muslims in Iraq for no reason other than for greedy businessmen.

If Iran invaded us for no reason, we would be badmouthing them? America deserves to be badmouthed at this point, and Obama isn't really even badmouthing this country.

BG7
08-07-2008, 03:12 PM
"America is, is no longer, uh, what it could be, what it, it once was," Obama said haltingly. "And I say to myself, I don't want that future for my children."

a true politician at work... never says what he wants to do, just bashes the other side....

Where does he bash McCain here? or Bush?

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 03:12 PM
I think this is worse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGvxK660oFo

i watched that and had to look in the corner to make sure it wasnt the notoriously "biased" fox news...

msnbc huh?

anyway... i dont see how thats worse.. mccain is backed by every veteran organization out there... if he did vote on something a certain way, maybe he had his reasons... maybe the bills didnt give enough fund orwere laced with pork..

but how is this worse than obama openly critizing america in germany and to a 7 year old girl?

i dunno maybe you guys are right and im the blind one... cause it seems lately every time i see him hes either flip floppin (like on drilling) or just sounding like rev wright to me... and hopefully.. to the rest of america also

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 03:18 PM
People are looking hard if they can find something negative in what he said. Obama is saying that he wants his country to live up to its great potential. So is the rest of the world that loves America. And there are lots of us. Criticism of failure (witness the last eight years) does NOT equal dislike for a great nation. You have a presidential candidate who knows his country can be better. Sounds like an honest person to me. America can be better. It has been in the past. That is a hopeful statement.

exactly. the right wing blowhards like Rush and all his clones see it one way only and that is not how it was presented.

By the way, does anyone else find it hilarious that I called this out as Rush BS and busted this? Not to pat myself on the back, but it feels good to rip apart talking points simply by pointing out the fact that they come from a complete blowhard and spin artists who constantly twists facts and tells lies.

and if you need some lies pointed out, just go through my post history, I've called BS at least 3-4 times in the past few weeks alone, and I listen to him for about 30 minutes a week. I can't imagine how much crap I could call out if I listened to him in his entirety.:speechless: On second thought him and Hannity really only talk about a few things every show and just say them over and over regarding democrats, liberals, leftists (I love how they invent words like this too), Obama, michelle obama, pelosi, etc. I swear they are saying the same things every time I get in my car and listen

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 03:23 PM
phx... umm pat yourself on your back because you listen to the radio if you want too... but big deal.

just because YOU heard it on the radio doesn't mean everyone in here has heard it and that they and i cant discuss it. you act like just cause you heard it on the radio that its non-relevant.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 03:23 PM
but how is this worse than obama openly critizing america in germany and to a 7 year old girl?

obama did not such thing, provide me a quote where he says something bad about america, and do it without spin or negative interpretation. When talking to a 7 year old girl there should be no confusion about his tone which is clearly positive. Provide some original thought, comment, or analysis instead of regurgitating Rush talking points that are clearly false. you've been called out on it yet can't provide anything to deny.

Is this actually Rush using Doc Fluty as a screen name?

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 03:27 PM
phx... umm pat yourself on your back because you listen to the radio if you want too... but big deal.

just because YOU heard it on the radio doesn't mean everyone in here has heard it and that hey and i cant discuss it. you act like just cause you heard it on the radio that its non-relevant.

the fact that it comes from a blowhard like Rush who is notorious for spin, lies, and talking points makes it irrelevant. the fact that you regurgitate the same conservative character assassination talking points makes you an unoriginal voice and purely a mouthpiece.

Like I said, I'm not patting myself on the back. I'm just laughing at someone who acts like they are offended by something that is a Rush talking point that is spin and has no bearing. Do you not realize that you are just being given marching orders by a blowhard and spin machine and you just accept it as fact? You're not ashamed of this when someone calls you out on it, even though you present it like you saw it all on your own and are shocked and appalled by it?:speechless:

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 03:28 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XStLx-lfa2A

even hillary said he was looking down on voter

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 03:33 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XStLx-lfa2A

even hillary said he was looking down on voter

we've already gone over this and beat it into the ground. He did not "bash america". He gave a description of people's views of their politicians. Once agian, spin at it's best.

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 03:34 PM
do you watch the news?

if they had a piece on the local news and it showed your local mayor doing something you dont agree with... would you blame the local media?

or would you look at the VIDEO... and decide for yourself.

you are implying that i can not look in context of all the videos of obama, his wife and pastor say and that i cant on my own decipher my opinion about the guy.

doesnt matter who shows me the video or plays the speeches that obama says... i see what he says and i put it in context with what i see from his wife and associates and i make up my own mind.

thanks for passing judgment like you have any clue as to my entire viewing and reading habits. assuming that i get marching orders and follow them blindly.

BG7
08-07-2008, 03:37 PM
i watched that and had to look in the corner to make sure it wasnt the notoriously "biased" fox news...

msnbc huh?

anyway... i dont see how thats worse.. mccain is backed by every veteran organization out there... if he did vote on something a certain way, maybe he had his reasons... maybe the bills didnt give enough fund orwere laced with pork..

but how is this worse than obama openly critizing america in germany and to a 7 year old girl?

i dunno maybe you guys are right and im the blind one... cause it seems lately every time i see him hes either flip floppin (like on drilling) or just sounding like rev wright to me... and hopefully.. to the rest of america also

But McCain isn't supported by every veterans organization out there. Just because he says it, doesn't make it true. He's actually opposed by most of them.

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 03:38 PM
we've already gone over this and beat it into the ground. He did not "bash america". He gave a description of people's views of their politicians. Once agian, spin at it's best.

im done with you...everything is spin...

michelles statements, that he dint hear anything like that in 20 years with rev wright, obama overseas talking points, obamas flip fops on drilling..... were just gonna agree to disagree... your gonna go down in flames for the guy and thats admirable...

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 03:40 PM
do you watch the news?

if they had a piece on the local news and it showed your local mayor doing something you dont agree with... would you blame the local media?

or would you look at the VIDEO... and decide for yourself.

you are implying that i can not look in context of all the videos of obama, his wife and pastor say and that i cant on my own decipher my opinion about the guy.

doesnt matter who shows me the video or plays the speeches that obama says... i see what he says and i put it in context with what i see from his wife and associates and i make up my own mind.

thanks for passing judgment like you have any clue as to my entire viewing and reading habits. assuming that i get marching orders and follow them blindly.

I call it like it is and you just got caught directly regurgitating Rush's talking points on the same day he started them. Every other unbiased mind on here doesn't see a problem with what he said and actually see it as a positive statement of hope, not bashing. look yourself in the mirror and think about how you view the world, or just listen to Rush and let him tell you how you view it. you have a noted track record of following in line with him. I'll remember this and make sure to call out every regurgitated Rush talking point from here on out.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 03:45 PM
im done with you...everything is spin...

michelles statements, that he dint hear anything like that in 20 years with rev wright, obama overseas talking points, obamas flip fops on drilling..... were just gonna agree to disagree... your gonna go down in flames for the guy and thats admirable...

be done with me, just don't expect to be allowed to spit out Rush talking points and present them as your own without being called out on it.

Doc Fluty
08-07-2008, 03:50 PM
just don't expect to be allowed to spit out Rush talking points and present them as your own without being called out on it.

umm i didnt hide the fact where i first heard about his speech... and i first quoted from a news article, how did i act like this was my own thing???.. you act like you caught me doing something

all i did was put up a video WITHOUT my thoughts on it.. i didnt say ANYTHING

and show me one unbiased person in this whole election forum

you aint got to worry about me bringing up talking points anymore cause im not going through this with you again.. i end up arguing with the same 3-4 obama maniacs and they wont even acknowledge obama messing up if he came out and called us all racist for not voting for him.. you would just say.. hes right.

so have your fun and you 3-4 cats keep the hope alive and good luck

OnWisconsin2007
08-07-2008, 04:20 PM
Is Karl Rove going to be McCain's running mate? That'd be a good fit, IMO.

FearAD
08-07-2008, 04:32 PM
first off.. ive never in my life watched hannity or oreilly.. just listen to rush on my way to work..

second... i watched the video of what he said (and it does matter that its to a 7 year old girl).. and i see rev wright.. i see him just like he did in berlin talking bad about the country...

when has he said something positive about america?

and im not spinning anything... if anything you guys spin stuff.. like what michelle said before... you guys always bring up what you think they "meant by it"... i take it for what they said.

shes said shes never in her adult life been proud of america untill now... you guys spin it...

i see it as a woman that earns $300,000 a year and ivy league grad.. just regurgitating rev wright.

it doenst matter who says it, if rush makes a point and agree with it.. so be it. you guys hear something from obama and agree with it.. do i accuse you of being on obamas tip?

his ego is out of control... you guys are just infatuated with his whole "hope" message that you dont care how bad this guy is turning out to be...


It's amazes me how conservatives want this guy to be viewed as an Angry Black Man with the militant wife. I don't understand why it's so hard to see this guy as a man with a vision for the country. He seems to want to break down barriers.

There is nothing in this response that is remotely close to "God Damn America" and anything else Rev. Wright said. This country has issues, always had issues and always will have issues. That's the part of the Bush, Conservative, fundamentalist propaganda I abhor "America does no wrong". Killing innocent civilians is wrong, ignoring the Geneva Convention is wrong, $4 a gallon gas while you report $11.7 billion dollars in profit is wrong.

gcoll
08-07-2008, 05:28 PM
The only spin going on here, is when people say "he was being hopeful about the future"

no he wasn't. He was claiming that he doesn't want his children to grow up in today's America. That's a pretty negative view of America, no matter how you want to spin it.


If Iran invaded us for no reason, we would be badmouthing them?

What are the conditions, in international law, for a country to lose it's sovereignty?


I don't understand why it's so hard to see this guy as a man with a vision for the country.
As soon as he presents a vision......


He seems to want to break down barriers.
What does that mean?


$4 a gallon gas while you report $11.7 billion dollars in profit is wrong.
How? If oil is expensive....gas will be expensive. Oil companies will make a lot of money. I don't understand the problem.....

ink
08-07-2008, 06:12 PM
The only spin going on here, is when people say "he was being hopeful about the future"

no he wasn't. He was claiming that he doesn't want his children to grow up in today's America. That's a pretty negative view of America, no matter how you want to spin it.

No it's not. :eyebrow: America has really screwed up seriously in the last 8 years. There is no possible way to deny that. This is not a country at it's height.

Obama is being hopeful because he doesn't ACCEPT that America needs to be this way. It's ridiculous to say that a person is not allowed to speak the truth ... or that they're somehow "negative" for first stating the obvious, and then wanting to lead the country out of the mess it's in.

If I'm not mistaken, this was basically the message that Ronald Reagan won his first election on. He wanted to restore America to its former glory. Implicit in that idea was that America was not at its height. Reagan was criticizing America, just from a different perspective. He was clearly being critical. If a Republican can use that message and be a patriot, a Democrat can also use it and be a patriot too. No party has a monopoly on patriotism or love of country.

ari1013
08-07-2008, 06:37 PM
I don't really see what the big deal is. He's running to make America better. I'd hope that's why McCain's running as well.

Even Bush believes that what he's doing is for the betterment of the nation -- even if 77% of America disagrees with him.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-07-2008, 07:33 PM
The only spin going on here, is when people say "he was being hopeful about the future"

no he wasn't. He was claiming that he doesn't want his children to grow up in today's America. That's a pretty negative view of America, no matter how you want to spin it.


that's a negative view of this administrations policies domestic and abroad, backed by the facts, and an optimistic outlook for the future, nothing more.

keep putting words in his mouth conservative spin machines

gcoll
08-07-2008, 08:15 PM
that's a negative view of this administrations policies domestic and abroad
Where does he clarify "this administration's policies"?

ink
08-07-2008, 11:26 PM
Where does he clarify "this administration's policies"?

Why put such a fine point on it? If he wants to make America better, how is that a problem?

Yogi
08-07-2008, 11:30 PM
When I saw this, I thought Obama was with a 7 year old girl.

gcoll
08-07-2008, 11:35 PM
Why put such a fine point on it? If he wants to make America better, how is that a problem?
It depends on what he wants to do. What he considers a problem. And what in fact he considers "better"

Obama's basic world view is that America is fundamentally a flawed country, and that we need to follow a more European model. That's basically the gist of it.

Why make such a fine point on it? Because words have meaning. Obama made a big deal about this himself.

And stuff like this, does give insight into what type of views Obama holds.

America today...is not the type of country that Obama wants his children to grow up, and live in. You can't hold that position...and the "I love America" position. They contradict each other. And of course people will say "You're questioning his patriotism"...well, yes I am. But patriotism is not a universal positive. Patriotism is love of one's country...and if you want to fundamentally change it, why do you love it in the first place?

"Of course I love my wife. I just wish she looked, and acted differently."

Also. People say "He's just talking about Bush's policies"......I'd be willing to accept that. But where is it clarified? What makes you think that it's specifically about the Bush administration? Especially when weighed against other comments of Barack's, and of his wife.

ink
08-07-2008, 11:52 PM
It depends on what he wants to do. What he considers a problem. And what in fact he considers "better"

Definitely.


Obama's basic world view is that America is fundamentally a flawed country, and that we need to follow a more European model. That's basically the gist of it.

I think those are really flawed assumptions. :D I haven't read his second book, just his first (Dreams from My Father), but in that book I definitely saw a passion for his country. I can't recall one comment that suggested he wanted to follow a more European model. Does he want to be more worldly? Sure. Does he want to be less parochial? Sure. Nothing wrong with that.

I do get the (comforting) sense though that he's broad-minded about the values of other countries. I have no doubt that's why he is popular both at home and abroad.

Recently I went on a week long camping trip along the Washington coast (the Olympic peninsula). Amazing place. We were camped right beside this firefighter from Seattle who had been in NYC during 9/11. Very interesting guy. Also a small "d" democrat. He works heavy hours for short periods and then gets lots of leave time. He takes his two kids on trips around the world. He thinks Obama is pretty down to earth and doesn't have any fears about him. This guy had a lot of the same concerns as Obama does. Nothing radical at all. Just a guy who loves his country and wants it to improve.


Why make such a fine point on it? Because words have meaning. Obama made a big deal about this himself.

What do you mean?


America today...is not the type of country that Obama wants his children to grow up, and live in. You can't hold that position...and the "I love America" position. They contradict each other.

No they don't. America is based on some pretty lofty ideals. You can love your country and still be aware that it hasn't reached its promise yet. That shouldn't threaten people. It' like saying that you or I could improve ourselves. Who couldn't?

DenButsu
08-08-2008, 12:51 AM
Has moomman come back as a conservative or what?

"Hippies"?

"7 year girl"?



Both these threads go into Truth and Fiction unless I get any serious and well-argued objections from conservative posters/mods here.

gcoll
08-08-2008, 01:41 AM
What do you mean?
The value of words. And their meaning.

Obama gave a speech about it.



It' like saying that you or I could improve ourselves. Who couldn't?
No. It's not quite like that.

It's more like wallowing in self pity.

Obama's statements do not imply a strong nation, looking to improve upon itself. His statements imply a nation in need of serious repair.


No they don't. America is based on some pretty lofty ideals.
Yes. Our ideals were based on limited government, personal liberty, and self reliance. None of those are part of Obama's world view.


I think those are really flawed assumptions.
They aren't assumptions. They are what I've learned from listening to him speak. Obama is more of a "European socialist"...one of the reasons they love him over there. This world view has been reflected by he and his wife, in various speeches.

ink
08-08-2008, 02:02 AM
No. It's not quite like that.

It's more like wallowing in self pity.

Obama's statements do not imply a strong nation, looking to improve upon itself. His statements imply a nation in need of serious repair.

Why is it so hard to admit that the nation is in need of serious repair?

ink
08-08-2008, 02:12 AM
Yes. Our ideals were based on limited government, personal liberty, and self reliance. None of those are part of Obama's world view.

They aren't assumptions. They are what I've learned from listening to him speak. Obama is more of a "European socialist"...one of the reasons they love him over there. This world view has been reflected by he and his wife, in various speeches.


There are a lot of assumptions in that post.

- that Obama's values don't include personal liberty and self-reliance
- that a person ceases to have those values if he doesn't interpret them the same way your political persuasion does
- that the word "socialist" even means anything in the USA since it's so consistently misused. Remember, you were the one who said that "words had value". Well, they don't when they're misused like that.
- that you have some insight into what foreigners actually like about him.

DenButsu
08-08-2008, 02:46 AM
http://static.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/greenberg21.jpg

A nice, concise summary of the last 28 years of economics under different presidential administrations (and one possible future).

gcoll
08-08-2008, 04:42 AM
Why is it so hard to admit that the nation is in need of serious repair?
See. Then we'd need to get into the specifics of what is wrong, and what needs to be repaired.

I'm also talking on a societal level, as is Obama...and as does Obama.

that Obama's values don't include personal liberty and self-reliance
See. We'd have to get into some specifics there too.

that a person ceases to have those values if he doesn't interpret them the same way your political persuasion does
I wonder where Obama stands on the whole..."Liberty vs. Equality" thing.

that the word "socialist" even means anything in the USA since it's so consistently misused. Remember, you were the one who said that "words had value". Well, they don't when they're misused like that.
I didn't call him a socialist. He's not, in the sense of socialism. He's a "European Socialist". It's like quasi-socialism. Diet Socialism. Sometimes people like to call it "social democracy"

that you have some insight into what foreigners actually like about him.
I figured he'd be "up their alley"

gcoll
08-08-2008, 05:53 AM
I'd love to argue it.....but a fact is a fact.

DenButsu
08-08-2008, 05:56 AM
The main arguments I've typically heard are either that a) the deficit under Reagan was the fault of the Congress during that his term, and b) that the surplus under Clinton was really Reagan's doing... arugements which, although I'm not an economics expert, I have a hard time reconciling with each other.

sboyajian
08-08-2008, 08:20 AM
yes i did hear it on rush and i agree with it...

the guy always bashes America.. overseas and even to a lil girl... sometimes i dont know if im listening to him or rev wright

doesnt matter who brought it up.. Obama said it... and i dont know how you get a helpful tone out of that

what are you babbling about now? How did he bash America? Because he said it's not what it once was?

Well .. wake up sunshine.. it's not.

When our parents were kids, they could leave their doors unlocked. They could pick up a hitchhiker on the side of the road. They could let a complete stranger borrow $2 and that stranger would find a way to pay them back.

Nowadays if you left your door open, you'd get robbed. If you picked up a hitchhiker you might get killed. If you let a stranger borrow $2, he'd ask you if you had $2 more.

This country has definately gone down the tubes.. and some of us would prefer it be fixed.. sorry you obviously feel our country is at the top of it's game. If this is the top, then the game is over.

The Schmooze
08-08-2008, 08:40 AM
wow some of you people are completely out of your minds. Report for de-programming immediately.

...and seriously, gimme a ****in' break. He's talking to a 7-year old girl. He's not going to dive into our economy, or exit strategies for the war in Iraq.

All he's saying is he wants to improve the country(unless you want to keep things exactly the way they are...)

a presidential candidate that wants to change the world?!?!?! the NERVE of that guy!

sboyajian
08-08-2008, 09:11 AM
for the record.. anyone who doesn't think this country needs a change..

please see this thread: http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=257140

ari1013
08-08-2008, 09:33 AM
for the record.. anyone who doesn't think this country needs a change..

please see this thread: http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=257140
How about the guy that called 911 twice because Subway forgot to put sauce on his sandwich?

ari1013
08-08-2008, 09:34 AM
http://static.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/greenberg21.jpg

A nice, concise summary of the last 28 years of economics under different presidential administrations (and one possible future).
ouch!

ari1013
08-08-2008, 09:35 AM
The main arguments I've typically heard are either that a) the deficit under Reagan was the fault of the Congress during that his term, and b) that the surplus under Clinton was really Reagan's doing... arugements which, although I'm not an economics expert, I have a hard time reconciling with each other.
It's a great excuse, but realistically fiscal policy has about a 1-2 quarter lag and then the effects are felt for another 1-2 quarters.

The real reason Clinton was able to have a surplus is that he:
1. Cut the excess military spending (i.e. Star Wars) that Reagan and Bush had added when it was necessary to have vs. the Soviets.

2. Worked with a Republican Congress to overhaul welfare into a welfare-to-work system that saved billions.

PHX-SOXFAN
08-08-2008, 12:12 PM
It depends on what he wants to do. What he considers a problem. And what in fact he considers "better"

Also. People say "He's just talking about Bush's policies"......I'd be willing to accept that. But where is it clarified? What makes you think that it's specifically about the Bush administration? Especially when weighed against other comments of Barack's, and of his wife.

uh, this is pretty easy to see and clarify. It's called listen to his entire speeches. He goes over exactly what he thinks is wrong, and exactly what he would do to make it right. The areas he points out as wrong are Bush administration policies on Iraq, environment, healthcare, education, and economy. He gives his policies on all of those to contradict and lay out positive changes.

Just listen to things in their entirety, instead of spinning a few phrases to fit a talking point.

Doc Fluty
08-08-2008, 03:24 PM
this one was something new to me from Time

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1830590,00.html?xid=rss-politics-cnn

I think Obama is a lot of things... but not this

ari1013
08-08-2008, 04:04 PM
that's quite possibly the worst ad ever.

Doc Fluty
08-08-2008, 04:11 PM
i dont mind the ad.. its kinda funny.... least it puts a lil humor in the political scene. i really dont think that mccain meant to portray obama as the antichrist... just as a pop star

but for someto assume this guy is the antichrist is just ridiculous.

ari1013
08-08-2008, 08:30 PM
i dont mind the ad.. its kinda funny.... least it puts a lil humor in the political scene. i really dont think that mccain meant to portray obama as the antichrist... just as a pop star

but for someto assume this guy is the antichrist is just ridiculous.
As a political ad? Is that supposed to get people to vote for McCain? It's a terrible ad.

KaiserZr
08-08-2008, 09:00 PM
I don't believe he is the anti-Christ either. From what I have read in the Bible and from scholars research he doesn't fit the image or background.

BG7
08-08-2008, 09:25 PM
Wait. The McCain ad is saying that Barack Obama is "The One" aka Jesus Christ. So John McCain doesn't think Jesus is ready to lead as president of the United States?

DenButsu
08-08-2008, 11:30 PM
I'll merge this into the main thread about the Paris Hilton ad in about a day or so.

I found this to be a pretty interesting discussion about the whole concept of "celebrity" and who fits the description more accurately, McCain himself or Obama.

I never watch msnbc, so I don't know whose show this is. Obviously, though, he's taking the tack that McCain is being somewhat (or very) hypocritical by accusing Obama of being a "celebrity" when McCain in fact has more "celebrity-type-stuff" on his resume. But I think the three guests on the panel represent a wide enough range of views to keep the overall discussion pretty even-keeled.

Here's the direct video link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/26063129#26063129

gcoll
08-09-2008, 01:53 AM
That's Dan Abrams. He's a wicked big douche bag. I've only watched him once or twice, but I saw him on a day where he was talking about the DC handgun Supreme Court Case. He claimed that "if you want the right to bear arms, join the National Guard"...those words were in an e-mail, but he agreed with them, and echoed the point. Basically claimed that the second amendment gives the State the right to form militias, instead of giving the people the right to bear arms. Thus proving, that Abrams has no reading comprehension skills.

About his point. He misses the entire point of the "celebrity" accusation because....well, he's a moron. He's Dan Abrams. Mccain is not dogging Obama for being a celebrity. He's bagging on him for being JUST a celebrity.

It's a knock on the "celebrity" of Obama...and the accusation is that there is nothing behind it. Hence "is the biggest celebrity in the world ready to help your family?" (kind of a douche thing to say..but still). It then states "the REAL Obama" which clearly indicates that they are trying to draw a line between Obama the celebrity, and Obama the politician. Basically the message is "don't buy the hype".

Of course Abrams misses this point, because he does not have the ability to think, or comprehend simple statements. Like the 2nd Amendment for example. That whole first part of the 2nd amendment, with the "A well regulated militia being necessary...." confuses him.

A few of the panelists seemed to understand what the attack actually was. Abrams still didn't get it though. And the bald guy, and blonde chick...both seem to think that prior to this commercial, the only reason to vote against Obama was because he was black.


My personal opinion on the ad. It's a dumb ad. But the "celebrity" aspect of the thing got WAY too much attention.

DenButsu
08-09-2008, 02:49 AM
But the "celebrity" aspect of the thing got WAY too much attention.

Oh, come on. That was by design. That was precisely what drew such attention to the ad and while we're still talking about it. Ask anybody these two questions about the ad:

-Besides Obama, whose images were in it?
-What issues did McCain hit Obama on in it?

And 90% of people will be able to tell you the answer to the first but not the 2nd question. That's the whole point of the ad. The issues have nothing to do with it. It was only intended to leave the residual impression that Obama is a celebrity airhead. It was only a smear, nothing more.

So who lacks substance? I'm thinking McCain, since he's unable to effectively criticize Obama on any substantive issues, and has nothing left to do but try to chip away at his persona instead.

Same thing with the tire gauge crap. That was just a lie, a publicity stunt to dodge addressing Obama's real energy plan by making fun of something that actually isn't Obama's energy plan.

It's an issue dodge. If McCain really believes he's soooooooo superior on all the substantive dimensions of this campaign, like foreign policy, the economy, health care, the environment, energy policy, etc., then why isn't he hitting Obama on those?

Because that would be a losing campaign for sure.

gcoll
08-10-2008, 12:50 AM
Oh, come on. That was by design.
Perhaps.


So who lacks substance?

I'm calling "foul" on this one. You disqualify the substance of the celebrity ad, because you claim "that's not meant to be the lasting impression"...

you can't do that.


It's an issue dodge. If McCain really believes he's soooooooo superior on all the substantive dimensions of this campaign, like foreign policy, the economy, health care, the environment, energy policy, etc., then why isn't he hitting Obama on those?
I would ask the same of Obama.

Instead Obama seems content to play "class warfare" and use "scare tactics" in his ads.

Let's cut through the bull ****. What exactly do the Mccain attack ads allege? They allege that Obama is naive, and that he is all smoke and mirrors.

What do the Obama attack ads allege? They allege that Mccain is corrupt, and is "in the pocket" of big oil.

Which is the more serious allegation? Which is the more "personal" attack?

Also. Obama is a celebrity. The juxtaposition with Paris Hilton may be out of bounds.....but, the Obama ads seem dishonest. There is some fuzzy math going on. And there are some convenient things left out.

Like: Just showing the figures that Mccain has received from people involved in oil. They leave out the money Obama has received from these same people, and also leave out how much that money is compared to how much Mccain has overall. It's deceptive.

Like: Alleging that "101 million middle income households get nothing, while Mccain stuffs the pockets of big oil" you see....they are using some fuzzy math. I have no idea how they came up with this figure, but I'm sure it's deceptive.

ari1013
08-10-2008, 01:03 AM
is it really so bad being popular? this whole thing still seems like McCain's just jealous. Maybe McCain hasn't gotten any movie offers recently (I think Wedding Crashers was his last cameo), so he's taking out his frustration on Obama.

Who knows? More importantly, who cares?

ink
08-10-2008, 01:06 AM
is it really so bad being popular? this whole thing still seems like McCain's just jealous. Maybe McCain hasn't gotten any movie offers recently (I think Wedding Crashers was his last cameo), so he's taking out his frustration on Obama.

Who knows? More importantly, who cares?

No kidding.

johnnylee722
08-10-2008, 08:01 AM
Presidents and people running for president are going to be celebrities, whether they want to be or not.

ari1013
08-10-2008, 10:16 AM
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/jul/30/new-additions-to-the-redstate-store/

More on the anti-Christ meme

Doc Fluty
08-10-2008, 02:49 PM
politics is showbusiness for ugly people

Telios9
08-10-2008, 10:10 PM
theirs been a lot of talk about this on the internet lately so i want to know what you guys think


http://o.bamapost.com/

carson005
08-10-2008, 10:19 PM
Obviously

SwaggaIke
08-10-2008, 10:27 PM
Are we serious w/ this kind of ****? First him and his wife can't fist pound after a big moment, now Barack is the anti christ? The more and more his chances of winning the presidency increases, the more bull **** comes out.

Telios9
08-10-2008, 10:29 PM
heres another interesting article http://http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/obamaantichrist.htm

Telios9
08-10-2008, 10:30 PM
idk if i believe it but i think its interesting how many web sites if you search on Google there is that means there are ppl who believe this stuff

ink
08-10-2008, 10:31 PM
Desperate ...

DenButsu
08-11-2008, 01:53 AM
theirs been a lot of talk about this on the internet lately so i want to know what you guys think


http://o.bamapost.com/


heres another interesting article http://http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/obamaantichrist.htm


idk if i believe it but i think its interesting how many web sites if you search on Google there is that means there are ppl who believe this stuff

:eyebrow:

Please. I'm sorry, but that is some serious bu******.



The number one most effective way of spreading lies on the internet:


Well, I'm not saying it's true, BUT...

Well, I'm not saying I believe it, BUT...

I don't know if this is real or not, BUT...



Statements like the above are a thinly veiled ruse for distributing misinformation.


Don't you have enough confidence and conviction in your political beliefs just to be on the level, Telios9?

Why don't you just be honest and come out and say what you're REALLY saying in an accurate way such as:



"I hate Obama so much that I'm willing to perpetuate lies and disinformation about him in order to smear and damage his reputation unjustly so that it harms his chances of becoming president. Some of these lies include:
http://http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/obamaantichrist.htm
http://o.bamapost.com/"



No need to try to cover up your agenda with all the "now I don't really believe this..." BS.

It's already completely transparent.

ari1013
08-11-2008, 10:13 AM
idk if i believe it but i think its interesting how many web sites if you search on Google there is that means there are ppl who believe this stuff
wait a sec, you "don't know" if you believe it?

:laugh:

arkanian215
08-11-2008, 12:35 PM
yes i did hear it on rush and i agree with it...

the guy always bashes America.. overseas and even to a lil girl... sometimes i dont know if im listening to him or rev wright

doesnt matter who brought it up.. Obama said it... and i dont know how you get a helpful tone out of that

oh america is doing superb in the world. there is nothing worth arguing about in the upcoming election since there are no flaws and there is nothing to fix. we vote because it reaffirms our ability to exercise our liberties not because we can use it to make necessary changes in our government.:rolleyes:

RedSoxRok34
08-11-2008, 07:37 PM
obama is absolutely right here. america was begun as an experiment and democracy and freedom, and these days the government runs our lives for us and political correctness has more power in courts than the actual law.

DenButsu
08-12-2008, 12:29 PM
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=XonsU2B16_0

BG7
08-13-2008, 03:37 PM
I am really digging the new Obama ad. I think it's the best ad I've seen this election cycle.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1185304443/bctid1726720229

Then McCain continues his jackassery.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwKCATJ9_FY

Absolutely pathetic.

DenButsu
08-13-2008, 11:14 PM
I'm moving this one into truth and fiction...

gcoll
08-13-2008, 11:25 PM
Mccain needs to let the "celebrity" thing rest.

It's a back and forth of "Obama's a celebrity"...."Mccain loves oil companies"....it's silly.

But Mccain has crossed the line by bringing in Bono.

DenButsu
08-13-2008, 11:31 PM
The more I see all these ads, the more interesting to me the prospect of these debates becomes.

Seems like lately, in terms of media coverage, we've seen very, very little of the candidates themselves, and a lot of their commercials - which in turn means a lot of "the candidates as presented to the public by their opponents".

The conventions will counter that to a certain extent, because their speeches will dominate the airwaves when they give them. But even those are more orchestrated presentations of themselves.

After months of being bombarded by all these distorted images, I'm getting really curious about how things will play out when we finally get to see them standing side by side on stage, unfiltered.

Doc Fluty
08-14-2008, 12:58 AM
i really wish there were more than 3 debates... although i think they will both end up saying the same thing... hmmm nevermind then..

DenButsu
08-14-2008, 01:04 AM
i really wish there were more than 3 debates... although i think they will both end up saying the same thing... hmmm nevermind then..

Do you mean both candidates will say the same thing, or all three debates will consist of the same discussion? Or both?

If I remember corrrectly, one debate is focused on foreign policy while the other two are more general. I don't know if that will have the real impact of diversifying the content or not, though.

Doc Fluty
08-14-2008, 01:18 AM
i meant about how they are for the same pulling out of iraq and drilling and all the imporant things... they would just be repeating themselves...

cubfan23
08-16-2008, 11:44 PM
My friends family is a pretty religious family and I started talking to my friends mom about the presidential race. Now she said she wasn't sure about Obama because she may have thought he could be the anti-christ. She is not a racist person but mentioned that the anti-christ is to be of Muslim decent and she was concerned about a comment he made with something to do with a kingdom thing. But anyways I was just wondering what your thoughts are on this. I understand if you aren't religious and would call these comments ridiculous and she said that she was probably wrong but still... has Obama said any other comments that could be considered worrisome?

NotVeryOriginal
08-17-2008, 12:07 AM
How would the people who wrote the bible know that the Anti-Christ would be of Muslim descent when Islam wasnt invented until 500 years after the New Testament was written?

Also, you cant be racist against Muslims since Islam isnt a race.

Cadarn
08-17-2008, 12:07 AM
answering that question with specificity … is above my pay grade

gcoll
08-17-2008, 02:12 AM
Let's be honest, Obama is probably the devil.

Mr swag
08-17-2008, 07:56 PM
lol obama is a black grew who grow up with white people

there is nothing scary about the guy, people dont know him so when rumors come out people believe them

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=4fNgA5xLxao

SmthBluCitrus
08-17-2008, 08:33 PM
what's a black grew?

DenButsu
08-17-2008, 08:41 PM
answering that question with specificity … is above my pay grade

Fail (http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/9982/fail151lu0.jpg)

FanofCubs
08-29-2008, 07:14 AM
Obama has his thugs going after anyone that investigates his ties with the Annenberg group and his friendship with terrorist Bill Ayres who's biggest regret in life is that he didn't kill more people who were just trying to do a job.

Now he has his thugs going after WGN radio because they dared have someone on who has facts to back up people's claims about his thisclose friendship with the happy bomber.

And of course the thugs are whining about them daring to make their own programming decision and airing the Cubs game last night.

Everyone complains about Bush listening to phone calls between terroris but Obama threatens freedom of speech and they say nothing.

DodgersFan28
08-29-2008, 07:25 AM
Because its only Republicans who ever do bad things.

DenButsu
08-29-2008, 07:45 AM
"thugs" merged into "truth and fiction" .... inflammatory, sourceless, and imho baseless

RogerRomo
09-02-2008, 12:30 PM
I am not going to sit here and even say that Republicans don't lie, mispeak if your a democrat. That being said... How often do you hear about Sen. Obama mispeaking and it being brushed off as that when in fact it should be touted as an out and out lie? The link includes a list of his lies. Where theres smoke theres fire..

http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLies.htm

ink
09-02-2008, 12:42 PM
Posting smears doesn't help your cause dude. Not a credible web site, and most of the points made are half-truths at best. You seriously need to do better than this. Talk about the issues, don't just keep posting "scandal". Same goes for anyone who posts "scandal" about McCain or Palin.

LeoGetz
09-02-2008, 12:51 PM
Posting smears doesn't help your cause dude. Not a credible web site, and most of the points made are half-truths at best. You seriously need to do better than this. Talk about the issues, don't just keep posting "scandal". Same goes for anyone who posts "scandal" about McCain or Palin.

What?!? You mean theobamafile.com isn't a credible site? I just wrote a 45 page paper for school listing it as my only source. :(


I guess the pants on fire underwear pic they have should have been a clue.

PHX-SOXFAN
09-02-2008, 01:15 PM
What?!? You mean theobamafile.com isn't a credible site? I just wrote a 45 page paper for school listing it as my only source. :(


I guess the pants on fire underwear pic they have should have been a clue.

ANything that is still trying to say Obama is/was a muslim is a joke/fearmongering/trash.

Here's one of my favorites from the site:

"Obama, tells the crowd at fundraiser , "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution."

For the record, Obama is a "Senior Lecturer (on leave of absence)" at the University of Chicago Law School. He has taught Constitutional Law III: Equal Protection and Substantive Due Process, Current Issues in Racism & the Law, and Voting Rights & the Democratic Process."

Nice job splitting hairs. The guy taught constitutional law, get over it.

Here's another one that talks about him being muslim and it starts out with:

"In a small-town café in Pleasantville, Omaha, Obama was asked a question that typically only circulates on the Internet."

I'm from Omaha, lived there for the first 20+ years of my life and have no idea where pleasantville, omaha is. What a great find this is:rolleyes:

ink
09-02-2008, 02:36 PM
^
I can tell you where that came from. It's from another forum, and posting quotes from other forums is also against the rules. If you cite the source, you will be breaking PSD rules because it's a forum. If you don't cite the source, you shouldn't be posting the quote.

Post your own ideas and make your own arguments.

PUGS1688
09-02-2008, 02:39 PM
John McCain - Liar
Barrack Obama - Liar

FACT

CubsGirl
09-02-2008, 03:31 PM
Just an FYI, PSD has a ZERO TOLERANCE policy towards plagiarism. The first instance will be at least a two week ban, if not a permaban.

DenButsu
09-04-2008, 09:51 PM
Yeah, the McCains are, like, SOOOO in touch with us "regular folks".

Uh-huh.


Cindy McCain's $300,000 Outfit

One of the persistent memes in the Republican line of attack against Barack Obama is the notion that he is an elitist, whereas the G.O.P. represent real working Americans like Levi “F-in’ Redneck” Johnston.

It caught our attention, then, when First Lady Laura Bush and would-be First Lady Cindy McCain took the stage Tuesday night wearing some rather fancy designer clothes. So we asked our fashion department to price out their outfits.

Laura Bush
Oscar de la Renta suit: $2,500
Stuart Weitzman heels: $325
Pearl stud earrings: $600–$1,500
Total: Between $3,425 and $4,325

Cindy McCain
Oscar de la Renta dress: $3,000
Chanel J12 White Ceramic Watch: $4,500
Three-carat diamond earrings: $280,000
Four-strand pearl necklace: $11,000–$25,000
Shoes, designer unknown: $600
Total: Between $299,100 and $313,100

Wow! No wonder McCain has so many houses: his wife has the price of a Scottsdale split-level hanging from her ears.

(All prices except Laura’s shoes and Cindy’s watch are estimates, and the jewelry prices are based on the assumption that the pieces are real.)vanityfair (http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/09/cindy-mccains-300000-outfit.html)


And the Republicans persist in trying to peg the "elitist" label on Obama?!?
gtfoohwtmfbs.


I'm glad that Lynn Westmoreland finally came out and said (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/westmoreland-calls-obama-uppity-2008-09-04.html), in plain English, what the "elitist" rhetoric is REALLY all about:


Westmoreland calls Obama ‘uppity'

Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland used the racially-tinged term "uppity" to describe Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama Thursday.

Westmoreland was discussing vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's speech with reporters outside the House chamber and was asked to compare her with Michelle Obama.

"Just from what little I’ve seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity," Westmoreland said.

Asked to clarify that he used the word “uppity,” Westmoreland said, “Uppity, yeah.”

Other Democrats have charged that the Republican campaign to paint the Illinois senator as an “elitist” is racially charged, and accused them of using code words for “uppity” without using the word itself.

In August, Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) told reporters, “When I hear the word ‘elitist’ linked with Barack Obama, to me, that is a code word for 'uppity.' I find it extremely offensive and John McCain should know better.”

Political consultant David Gergen, who has worked in both Republican and Democratic White Houses, said on ABC’s "This Week" that “As a native of the south, I can tell you, when you see this Charlton Heston ad, 'The One,' that's code for, 'He's uppity, he ought to stay in his place.' Everybody gets that who is from a Southern background.”

The Obama campaign, asked about the quote, did not note any racial context.

“Sounds like Rep. Westmoreland should be careful throwing stones from his candidate's eight glass houses,” said Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor.

Campaigning against the first black major-party nominee has already created some problems for Republicans.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said that Obama's middle name – Hussein – is relevant to the public discourse surrounding his candidacy, saying in March that if Obama were elected, "Then the radical Islamists, the al Qaeda, the radical Islamists and their supporters, will be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on Sept. 11 because they will declare victory in this War on Terror."

At an April 12 event in his district, Kentucky Rep. Geoff Davis (R) said of Obama: “I’m going to tell you something: That boy’s finger does not need to be on the button. He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country.”


Just connecting the dots...

yaowowrocket11
09-04-2008, 09:54 PM
$600 shoes? What are the made out of? Diamonds??? :pity:

Wrigleyboy25
09-04-2008, 09:54 PM
Who the hell freakin' cares? She's a millionaire. She can have some nice clothes. She has nothing to do with a couple of idiots' comments.

moonman must have hacked an account.

What a joke.

Max Power
09-04-2008, 09:55 PM
I love watching both sides act like 10 year olds *****ing about the most mundane things.

Wrigleyboy25
09-04-2008, 09:56 PM
I love watching both sides act like 10 year olds *****ing about the most mundane things.
Truly unbelievable.

ari1013
09-04-2008, 09:57 PM
uppity? they're reviving Jim Crow talk now?

Wrigleyboy25
09-04-2008, 10:01 PM
Apparently CG is our resident Sarah Palin.

DenButsu
09-04-2008, 10:03 PM
Truly unbelievable.

I moved this into here at CG's request - and she's right, it should have gone here in the first place.

But let me explain why I think it's relevant:

One of the many attacks on Obama coming from McCain himself is that he is an "elitist". And another is that he's a "celebrity". So you know, McCain is the one who put those qualities on the table as issues, not Obama. If they're going to point fingers and level charges of elitism at Obama, they should have some damn solid footing from which to fire them. And if news comes out that exposes those attacks as hypocritical, then in my opinion, it most absolutely is fair game because it calls the validity and the merit of the charges into question.

Wrigleyboy25
09-04-2008, 10:04 PM
I moved this into here at CG's request - and she's right, it should have gone here in the first place.

But let me explain why I think it's relevant:

One of the many attacks on Obama coming from McCain himself is that he is an "elitist". And another is that he's a "celebrity". So you know, McCain is the one who put those qualities on the table as issues, not Obama. If they're going to point fingers and level charges of elitism at Obama, they should have some damn solid footing from which to fire them. And if news comes out that exposes those attacks as hypocritical, then in my opinion, it most absolutely is fair game because it calls the validity and the merit of the charges into question.
If Joan Rivers was alongside the stage with a red carpet asking Laura and Cindy what they were wearing, maybe you'd have some kind of outlandish point.

DenButsu
09-04-2008, 10:07 PM
If Joan Rivers was alongside the stage with a red carpet asking Laura and Cindy what they were wearing, maybe you'd have some kind of outlandish point.

I completely disagree.

Again and again the Republicans have attacked Obama as being "out of touch with regular Americans" and crap like that. And McCain himself has leveled those charges. Well, how "in touch with America" are people who own 7 homes and wear $300,000 outfits? He exposed himself to being scrutinized on these counts by manufacturing this as a "campaign issue" in the first place.

ink
09-04-2008, 10:09 PM
I completely disagree.

Again and again the Republicans have attacked Obama as being "out of touch with regular Americans" and crap like that. And McCain himself has leveled those charges. Well, how "in touch with America" are people who own 7 homes and wear $300,000 outfits? He exposed himself to being scrutinized on these counts by manufacturing this as a "campaign issue" in the first place.

Something about "those who live in glass houses" fits in here ...

The whole "in touch, out of touch" campaign crap has been laughable for exactly that reason.

Wrigleyboy25
09-04-2008, 10:09 PM
I completely disagree.

Again and again the Republicans have attacked Obama as being "out of touch with regular Americans" and crap like that. And McCain himself has leveled those charges. Well, how "in touch with America" are people who own 7 homes and wear $300,000 outfits? He exposed himself to being scrutinized on these counts by manufacturing this as a "campaign issue" in the first place.
Yeah, that family hasn't served on the board of charities, or adopted abandoned children. They are cold-hearted, rich, elitist bastards who have never served their country in any capacity.

Read up on Cindy before you decide to judge her on her god damn outfit.

DenButsu
09-04-2008, 10:09 PM
Something about "those who live in glass houses" fits in here ...

And maybe something about being able to dish it out but not take it, as well...

CubsGirl
09-04-2008, 10:12 PM
Apparently CG is our resident Sarah Palin.
:laugh:

downsos
09-05-2008, 02:19 AM
I was wondering if someone could help me. I was talking with a classmate today about politics and she said she wouldn't vote for Obama because he was Muslim. I know that is not true and tried to convince her but she would have none of it. I was hoping if someone could help me find some links stating that Obama is not muslim so that I can prove to her that she has been lied to.

I don't care to change her vote, I just want to give her all the facts before she does vote.

ink
09-05-2008, 02:25 AM
I was wondering if someone could help me. I was talking with a classmate today about politics and she said she wouldn't vote for Obama because he was Muslim. I know that is not true and tried to convince her but she would have none of it. I was hoping if someone could help me find some links stating that Obama is not muslim so that I can prove to her that she has been lied to.

I don't care to change her vote, I just want to give her all the facts before she does vote.

Obama's a Christian. Tell your friend this rumour is OLD.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/

downsos
09-05-2008, 02:33 AM
Obama's a Christian. Tell your friend this rumour is OLD.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/

I did tell her that, hopefully seeing this article will help her see the truth.

Thanks for the help!

SmthBluCitrus
09-05-2008, 01:21 PM
Obama's response to the Republican attack of being a community organizer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SwwO00aWqM)

I still say that this is a horrible attack line.

downsos
09-05-2008, 04:32 PM
Obama's response to the Republican attack of being a community organizer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SwwO00aWqM)

I still say that this is a horrible attack line.

I thought that was a great response.

Giannis94
09-07-2008, 07:38 PM
Hi, I found this error on fathead. I thoguht Mccain cant wave his hands because he got tortured in war. Please let me know if I am wrong. Thanks


Vinny



http://www.fathead.com/presidential-playoffs/?cm_re=left-_-ad3-_-default

FearAD
09-07-2008, 07:42 PM
I don't think he can raise them above shoulder level, like the touchdown signal.

He was beaten badly in Vietnam.

The photo of him shaking hands with Nixon is inspiring.

gcoll
09-07-2008, 07:46 PM
I thoguht Mccain cant wave his hands because he got tortured in war

He can't lift his arms above his head. He couldn't signal "touchdown!" in a football game.

SLY WILLIAMS
09-07-2008, 07:51 PM
The previous posters are correct. Both shoulders were broken and never fixed correctly. I dont think he can even put on his own t shirts. He can wave straight fwd and slightly up but he cant raise his arms over his head like most human beings. He took huge abuse as a pow. It isnt only his arms that were effected.

jdavis26
09-08-2008, 11:38 AM
Congratulations! You've now managed to link to extreme rightwinged Israeli propaganda as well as extreme rightwinged US propaganda all in the same post.

Arutz Sheva is a complete joke.
And FreeRepublic.com is not a news agency.

THE MEDIA IS NOT RIGHT WING BUD, ITS VERY LEFTIST

ari1013
09-08-2008, 11:57 AM
THE MEDIA IS NOT RIGHT WING BUD, ITS VERY LEFTIST
A. That had zero to do with my post. My post was about propaganda.
B. Leftist refers to an ideology of marxism. It might be liberal, but I doubt US media is leftist.

SmthBluCitrus
09-08-2008, 12:04 PM
Very interesting read ...


"I have known Sarah since 1992..."
From David Hulen in Anchorage --

The e-mail below has been bouncing around the Internet since Sunday. It was written by Anne Kilkenny of Wasilla - stay-at-home mom, letter-to-the-editor writer and longtime watcher of Valley politics. She's a registered Democrat. She was one of the delegates to the Conference of Alaskans in Fairbanks back in 2004. Her bio from the conference is here.

-----

Dear friends,

So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .

Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in common: their gender and their good looks. :)

I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the residents of the city.

-----

Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a "fiscal conservative". During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.

The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million.

(more) (http://community.adn.com/adn/node/130537)

ari1013
09-08-2008, 12:30 PM
I don't understand why food gets taxed in Red states. It's kind of weird taxing necessities.

In NY we paid high property taxes and a relatively high state income tax, but sales taxes were lower than most other states and they were far less encompassing. Furthermore, I now pay a "Personal Property Tax" on my and my wife's cars as well as on her jewelry.

SmthBluCitrus
09-08-2008, 12:34 PM
I don't understand why food gets taxed in Red states. It's kind of weird taxing necessities.

In NY we paid high property taxes and a relatively high state income tax, but sales taxes were lower than most other states and they were far less encompassing. Furthermore, I now pay a "Personal Property Tax" on my and my wife's cars as well as on her jewelry.

Interesting ... a tax on your wife's jewelry? Is that a yearly or one-time thing?

And, doesn't MO hit you hard on your vehicle tax for tags? Not having lived there, I wouldn't know ... but I've heard bad things. I have friends in Independence MO that keep their vehicle registered in Iowa.

ari1013
09-08-2008, 12:38 PM
Interesting ... a tax on your wife's jewelry? Is that a yearly or one-time thing?

And, doesn't MO hit you hard on your vehicle tax for tags? Not having lived there, I wouldn't know ... but I've heard bad things. I have friends in Independence MO that keep their vehicle registered in Iowa.
Annual. We pay "personal property tax" equal to one-third of one percent of the appraised value of any belonging worth over a certain amount. So her engagement ring and our vehicles qualify.

If there were any Jews on the other side of the river I'd move to Southern Illinois.

SmthBluCitrus
09-08-2008, 12:41 PM
Wow ...

TheLogical
09-11-2008, 08:24 PM
Well i've noticed in the recent debates between the Republicans and Democrats that the Republicans have been lying so much. The government was prepared to give Sarah Palin the money to build a million dollar bridge in Alaska leading to a town literally in the Boondocks. Sarah Palin said she didn't allow the government to do that, but she STILL took the money and spent it on Alaska.

Also the new McCain commercial can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3a_8VrY8Kk

Totally twisted the story around.

Also he claimed on a new commercial that Obama voted for a law that would teach sex-ed to kindergartners, Obama did vote for that, but the law was actually to teach sex ed for ages K-12 WHEN THEY WERE READY.

Also Sarah Palin, a one term governor said she was ready to run the country.


Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said Thursday that she didn't blink when Republican John McCain asked her to be his running mate, a surprise selection that shook up the presidential race.

"I didn't hesitate, no," she told ABC's Charlie Gibson in her first televised interview since accepting the Arizona senator's invitation to be on the Republican ticket two weeks ago.

"I answered him 'yes' because I have the confidence in that readiness and knowing that you can't blink, you have to be wired in a way of being so committed to the mission, the mission that we're on, reform of this country and victory in the war, you can't blink. So I didn't blink then even when asked to run as his running mate," said the 44-year-old Palin, a governor who has been in office less than two years.

Asked if she felt ready to step in as vice president or perhaps even president if something happened to the 72-year-old McCain, Palin said: "I do, Charlie, and on January 20, when John McCain and I are sworn in, if we are so privileged to be elected to serve this country, we'll be ready. I'm ready."

Gibson also read Palin a comment she made in her former church _ "Our national leaders are sending U.S. soldiers on a task that is from God" _ and asked whether she thought the United States was fighting a holy war.

Palin said she was recalling Abraham Lincoln's words when she made the comment and said: "I would never presume to know God's will or to speak God's words."

Asked if her son Track who is headed to Iraq was on a mission from God, she said she didn't know about that.

"I don't know if the task is from God, Charlie," Palin said. "What I know is that my son has made a decision. I am so proud of his independent and strong decision he has made, what he decided to do and serving for the right reasons and serving something greater than himself and not choosing a real easy path where he could be more comfortable and certainly safer."

Roadrunner.com

DenButsu
09-22-2008, 02:02 AM
Ratio of the day...

13:1

redbird89
09-26-2008, 05:58 PM
Sure makes John McCain sound like a scumbag.

The wife U.S. Republican John McCain callously left behind


By Sharon Churcher
Last updated at 1:45 AM on 08th June 2008

Now that Hillary Clinton has at last formally withdrawn from the race for the White House, the eyes of America and the world will focus on Barack Obama and his Republican rival Senator John McCain.

While Obama will surely press his credentials as the embodiment of the American dream – a handsome, charismatic young black man who was raised on food stamps by a single mother and who represents his country’s future – McCain will present himself as a selfless, principled war hero whose campaign represents not so much a battle for the presidency of the United States, but a crusade to rescue the nation’s tarnished reputation.

McCain likes to illustrate his moral fibre by referring to his five years as a prisoner-of-war in Vietnam. And to demonstrate his commitment to family values, the 71-year-old former US Navy pilot pays warm tribute to his beautiful blonde wife, Cindy, with whom he has four children.

But there is another Mrs. McCain who casts a ghostly shadow over the Senator’s presidential campaign. She is seldom seen and rarely written about, despite being mother to McCain’s three eldest children.

And yet, had events turned out differently, it would be she, rather than Cindy, who would be vying to be First Lady. She is McCain’s first wife, Carol, who was a famous beauty and a successful swimwear model when they married in 1965.

She was the woman McCain dreamed of during his long incarceration and torture in Vietnam’s infamous ‘Hanoi Hilton’ prison and the woman who faithfully stayed at home looking after the children and waiting anxiously for news.

But when McCain returned to America in 1973 to a fanfare of publicity and a handshake from Richard Nixon, he discovered his wife had been disfigured in a terrible car crash three years earlier. Her car had skidded on icy roads into a telegraph pole on Christmas Eve, 1969. Her pelvis and one arm were shattered by the impact and she suffered massive internal injuries.

When Carol was discharged from hospital after six months of life-saving surgery, the prognosis was bleak. In order to save her legs, surgeons

had been forced to cut away huge sections of shattered bone, taking with it her tall, willowy figure. She was confined to a wheelchair and was forced to use a catheter.

Through sheer hard work, Carol learned to walk again. But when John McCain came home from Vietnam, she had gained a lot of weight and bore little resemblance to her old self.

Today, she stands at just 5ft4in and still walks awkwardly, with a pronounced limp. Her body is held together by screws and metal plates and, at 70, her face is worn by wrinkles that speak of decades of silent suffering.

For nearly 30 years, Carol has maintained a dignified silence about the accident, McCain and their divorce. But last week at the bungalow where she now lives at Virginia Beach, a faded seaside resort 200 miles south of Washington, she told The Mail on Sunday how McCain divorced her in 1980 and married Cindy, 18 years his junior and the heir to an Arizona brewing fortune, just one month later.

Carol insists she remains on good terms with her ex-husband, who agreed as part of their divorce settlement to pay her medical costs for life. ‘I have no bitterness,’

she says. ‘My accident is well recorded. I had 23 operations, I am five inches shorter than I used to be and I was in hospital for six months. It was just awful, but it wasn’t the reason for my divorce.

‘My marriage ended because John McCain didn’t want to be 40, he wanted to be 25. You know that happens...it just does.’

Some of McCain’s acquaintances are less forgiving, however. They portray the politician as a self-centred womaniser who effectively abandoned his crippled wife to ‘play the field’. They accuse him of finally settling on Cindy, a former rodeo beauty queen, for financial reasons.

McCain was then earning little more than £25,000 ($46,000) a year as a naval officer, while his new father-in-law, Jim Hensley, was a multi-millionaire who had impeccable political connections.

He first met Carol in the Fifties while he was at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis. He was a privileged, but rebellious scion of one of America’s most distinguished military dynasties – his father and grandfather were both admirals.

But setting out to have a good time, the young McCain hung out with a group of young officers who called themselves the ‘Bad Bunch’.

His primary interest was women and his conquests ranged from a knife-wielding floozy nicknamed ‘Marie, the Flame of Florida’ to a tobacco heiress.

Carol fell into his fast-living world by accident. She escaped a poor upbringing in Philadelphia to become a successful model, married an Annapolis classmate of McCain’s and had two children – Douglas and Andrew – before renewing what one acquaintance calls ‘an old flirtation’ with McCain.

It seems clear she was bowled over by McCain’s attention at a time when he was becoming bored with his playboy lifestyle.

‘He was 28 and ready to settle down and he loved Carol’s children,’ recalled another Annapolis graduate, Robert Timberg, who wrote The Nightingale’s Song, a bestselling biography of McCain and four other graduates of the academy.

The couple married and McCain adopted Carol’s sons. Their daughter, Sidney, was born a year later, but domesticity was clearly beginning to bore McCain – the couple were regarded as ‘fixtures on the party circuit’ before McCain requested combat duty in Vietnam at the end of 1966.

He was assigned as a bomber pilot on an aircraft carrier in the Gulf of Tonkin.

What follows is the stuff of the McCain legend. He was shot down over Hanoi in October 1967 on his 23rd mission over North Vietnam and was badly beaten by an angry mob when he was pulled, half-drowned from a lake.

Over the next five-and-a-half years in the notorious Hoa Loa Prison he was regularly tortured and mistreated.

It was in 1969 that Carol went to spend the Christmas holiday – her third without McCain – at her parents’ home. After dinner, she left to drop off some presents at a friend’s house.

It wasn’t until some hours later that she was discovered, alone and in terrible pain, next to the wreckage of her car. She had been hurled through the windscreen.

After her first series of life-saving operations, Carol was told she may never walk again, but when doctors said they would try to get word to McCain about her injuries, she refused, insisting: ‘He’s got enough problems, I don’t want to tell him.’

H. Ross Perot, a billionaire Texas businessman, future presidential candidate and advocate of prisoners of war, paid for her medical care.

When McCain – his hair turned prematurely white and his body reduced to little more than a skeleton – was released in March 1973, he told reporters he was overjoyed to see Carol again.

But friends say privately he was ‘appalled’ by the change in her appearance. At first, though, he was kind, assuring her: ‘I don’t look so good myself. It’s fine.’

He bought her a bungalow near the sea in Florida and another former PoW helped him to build a railing so she could pull herself over the dunes to the water.

‘I thought, of course, we would live happily ever after,’ says Carol. But as a war hero, McCain was moving in ever-more elevated circles.

Through Ross Perot, he met Ronald Reagan, then Governor of California. A sympathetic Nancy Reagan took Carol under her wing.

But already the McCains’ marriage had begun to fray. ‘John started carousing and running around with women,’ said Robert Timberg.

McCain has acknowledged that he had girlfriends during this time, without going into details. Some friends blame his dissatisfaction with Carol, but others give some credence to her theory of a mid-life crisis.

He was also fiercely ambitious, but it was clear he would never become an admiral like his illustrious father and grandfather and his thoughts were turning to politics.

In 1979 – while still married to Carol – he met Cindy at a cocktail party in Hawaii. Over the next six months he pursued her, flying around the country to see her. Then he began to push to end his marriage.

Carol and her children were devastated. ‘It was a complete surprise,’ says Nancy Reynolds, a former Reagan aide.

‘They never displayed any difficulties between themselves. I know the Reagans were quite shocked because they loved and respected both Carol and John.’

Another friend added: ‘Carol didn’t fight him. She felt her infirmity made her an impediment to him. She justified his actions because of all he had gone through. She used to say, “He just wants to make up for lost time.”’

Indeed, to many in their circle the saddest part of the break-up was Carol’s decision to resign herself to losing a man she says she still adores.

Friends confirm she has remained friends with McCain and backed him in all his campaigns. ‘He was very generous to her in the divorce but of course he could afford to be, since he was marrying Cindy,’ one observed.

McCain transferred the Florida beach house to Carol and gave her the right to live in their jointly-owned townhouse in the Washington suburb of Alexandria. He also agreed to pay her alimony and child support.

A former neighbour says she subsequently sold up in Florida and Washington and moved in 2003 to Virginia Beach. He said: ‘My impression was that she found the new place easier to manage as she still has some difficulties walking.’

Meanwhile McCain moved to Arizona with his new bride immediately after their 1980 marriage. There, his new father-in-law gave him a job and introduced him to local businessmen and political powerbrokers who would smooth his passage to Washington via the House of Representatives and Senate.

And yet despite his popularity as a politician, there are those who won’t forget his treatment of his first wife.

Ted Sampley, who fought with US Special Forces in Vietnam and is now a leading campaigner for veterans’ rights, said: ‘I have been following John McCain’s career for nearly 20 years. I know him personally. There is something wrong with this guy and let me tell you what it is – deceit.

‘When he came home and saw that Carol was not the beauty he left behind, he started running around on her almost right away. Everybody around him knew it.

‘Eventually he met Cindy and she was young and beautiful and very wealthy. At that point McCain just dumped Carol for something he thought was better.

‘This is a guy who makes such a big deal about his character. He has no character. He is a fake. If there was any character in that first marriage, it all belonged to Carol.’

One old friend of the McCains said: ‘Carol always insists she is not bitter, but I think that’s a defence mechanism. She also feels deeply in his debt because in return for her agreement to a divorce, he promised to pay for her medical care for the rest of her life.’

Carol remained resolutely loyal as McCain’s political star rose. She says she agreed to talk to The Mail on Sunday only because she wanted to publicise her support for the man who abandoned her.

Indeed, the old Mercedes that she uses to run errands displays both a disabled badge and a sticker encouraging people to vote for her ex-husband. ‘He’s a good guy,’ she assured us. ‘We are still good friends. He is the best man for president.’

But Ross Perot, who paid her medical bills all those years ago, now believes that both Carol McCain and the American people have been taken in by a man who is unusually slick and cruel – even by the standards of modern politics.

‘McCain is the classic opportunist. He’s always reaching for attention and glory,’ he said.

‘After he came home, Carol walked with a limp. So he threw her over for a poster girl with big money from Arizona. And the rest is history.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html

Old news, I'm sure. You don't hear much about it, though.

I don't have a party. I haven't decided on either candidate, but this doesn't sound good.

Here's another article:
http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/articles/0301mccainbio-chapter5.html

The divorce was probably due as much to McCain being away 6 years than his "midlife crisis" or his cheating. I'm sure every politician has skeletons in his/her closet.

Interesting.