Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Online

Posts: 157


Re: Do I have this straight?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So Bucco, I have a question. You seem to dig up the dirt (whether true or false) on Obama. Let's hear some on McCain. After all, you said you're not really a McCain supporter. Do you see any shortcomings there?
___________________________________________

yep sure do. Can start with age for sure; that is an issue even though we dont like to bring it up out loud but it is thus the VP choice for him becomes important.

Next, he has been a guy who will "cross the aisle" but he has a lot of "baggage" as a result of that and I think is a bit callous right now.

I wish he could present himself as well as Sen Obama for sure.

He has become, not only callous, over the years but despite not being one in his early years he is now a Politician.

A McCain presidency would need top flight advisors to tackle the economy.

On the issues, they both will tell you whatever will get your vote.

Just for the record...I was a Democrat for years and years and very active. I left that party in about 1973 or so and the reason would make an entire new thread :) I have never voted a straight party line in any election as I think that is lazy. In 2004, I looked to the Democrats for a viable alternative and they gave us John Kerry, who I just could not support. I was hoping for more from both parties this year and am very dissapointed.

I tell you all that not because you care but so you dont consider that I am some strong advocate for any and all Republicans. I am much more conservative than liberal for sure but put my country well ahead of any party affliations.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Oh and also for the record, EVERYTHING I have mentioned about Sen Obama is verifiable very easily. I just shared some of his aides and that is readily available, all true and credible. Most, if not all, of his background stuff is verifiable.

I did not include any of the stupid stuff you hear (I probably receive two to three emails a week on Sen Obama), but there is some really incredible stuff out there but most is not easily verified.


I added this because you seem to think that I am making up stuff or something..I am not and woud welcome anyone to show me the error of my ways !

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

you have convinced yourself that there is no threat thus there is no threat....

Nope, just no one has convinced me yet there is a threat.

....Sen Obama's MUSLIM advisor (DID YOU KNOW HE HAD ONE) resigned just last week because of his ties to a fundamental Islam group.

Personally, I hope every Christian politician in the world has a Muslim advisor in today's climate and the more fundamentalist, the better (just be sure and keep that person far away from security data). The more we can get into the head of our enemy, the better chance we have of battling that enemy.

....Sen Obama has an official blogger. His name is Sam Graham=Felsen who is a contributor to the SOCIALIST VIEWPOINT and publicy says he believes in class warfare. He helped found the SOCIALIST WORKERS ASSOCIATION

Do you have the link for this blog? Would love to read it but too lazy to look.

...Your link was rather old to the Communist Pary of America

March 2008 isn't that old, but it does show the CPUSA's feelings about Republicans and that's all I was really trying to point out.

....One of his co campaign managers is Jessie Jackson Jr who during he SC primary said that Sen Obama was "acting too white" ! Not racist though,huh?

Definitely racist, definitely inexcusable. But, then, Jesse Jr. has also said his father is too white. The child has no respect and needs a good mouthful of soap. (Really not making light of the comment, it is racist and wrong.)

Yeah, I know we discussed this in PMs but figured it only fair I go public since the post is now back (I do wonder how it disappeared for me before).

This Is GREAT!!
 

I'm really pleased that so many of us watched the "Saddleback Show" last night. It will be one of the few times between now and election day when each of us can see each of the candidates answering unscripted questions, not making stump speeches, and definitely not being defined by what their handlers say, the interpretations of the media, or some of the offensive and really dumb ads currently being broadcast.

I watched the whole 3-hour show in its entirety. I made it a point to not only listen to the candidates' answers, but look at their faces and expressions while being questioned. Oh, there were a few things said by both candidates that I don't necessarily agree with, but nothing that would cause me to be terribly unhappy if either one was elected President.

I respect John McCain and tend to believe that what he says can be believed. That's a big difference from many other candidates for political office. At times I wished Obama would have responded with the certainty of McCain. I say that even though I think all would agree that we would value thoughtfulness as an important personal trait of anyone sitting in the White House.

While McCain has been in the Congress for many years, I don't think his experience makes him significantly better qualified than Barack Obama. Both have spent their entire lives in the employ of one agency of government or another. Neither of them have ever held a job in the private economy. Neither of them have ever had to manage and motivate large groups of people with disparate interests. Neither of them have been in positions where their decision and their decision alone would affect the lives of millions of people. In that sense, both of them will have to do some OJT if they are elected.

McCain is older and more experienced in government. However, he has experienced difficulties managing his campaign staff and financing. Obama is almost certainly the smarter of the two and has done what is broadly viewed as a great job of running a 21st century political campaign without utilizing negative tactics. Neither have made it very clear who their key advisors will be if they are elected. Both have endured criticisms for a few people that they had relied on during their campaigns. Bottom line: the management skills of both candidates remain an open question, as is who "the administration" will actually be for both candidates. I surely hope that question gets some clarity before election day.

On the question of leadership, neither candidate has been in much of a position to lead and motivate people. Both have organizations which can "turn out" large groups for campaign events. Between the two, Obama seems to have distinguished himself in motivating large, even huge groups of people. He seems to have gotten an entire generation of Americans re-awakened and involved in the political process. How wonderful for all of us. The crowds of foreign residents who turned out to see and hear him speak during several stops on his recent European tour was amazing. Certainly his political handlers could not have arranged those crowds. Has Obama awakened a large segment Americans to the political process? Are the crowds that turned out in Europe an expression of their interest in a change in the role the U.S. wil play in the world? Could Obama extend that enthusiasm throughout America and the world if he were elected, ala John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan? I don't have the answer to that question, but that's surely something to consider when we enter the voting booth in November.

Politically, Obama will have a greater opportunity to create the change that is the basis of his campaign than will McCain. Obama wil work with a Congress controlled by his own party. McCain would have attempt to promote his platform with a Democratic Congress. It's possible that McCain would have to work with a Congress which could actually over-ride his veto of legislation. While McCain is widely respected, by his own description he is a bit of a political maverick and would never win the "congeniality award". So our choice seems to be one candidate that will actually be able to get things done politically, which carries the risk that he might get some wrong things done. The other candidate will have his difficulties accomplishing much politically, particularly if his VP represents the far right and if he were to populate his administration with those from the far right of the political spectrum. This contrast makes for an interesting choice on our part--a lot of risk that some things will get done that might not turn out so well, or not much of a chance that anything meaningful will be accomplished legislatively.

Maybe the most important comments made by both candidates had to do with the type of people they might consider for nomination to the Supreme Court. While I tend to agree with McCain's definition of the proper role of the Supreme Court, the justices he admires were for the most part the most strident opponents of many of the legal decisions that have been so important to our country in the past several decades. If McCain could unilaterally appoint 2-3 replacements, I'd be very concerned. But with what is certain to be a pretty heavily Democratic Senate, he'll have to nominate candidates that are somewhere more towards the middle of the jurisprudence spectrum, so what McCain says now regarding candidates he might nominate isn't very meaningful given the political process they would have to survive in order to be confirmed. I think we need to pay a lot of attention on who Obama might nominate because his choices stand a much better chance of approval in the judiciary committee and confirmation by the full Senate. I'll be watching that one. I wouldn't want a Supreme Court canted heavily to the liberal side any more than I want a far right wing majority on the Court.

Some of the questions regarding when life begins and stem cell research were a little irritating to me because those issues don't seem to compare in importance to many of the economic, social, health and foreign relations problems facing our country. I recognize that the questions were framed by the pastor of an evangelical megachurch and that those issues are important to many of his members and other evangelicals who lean to the far right. But in my opinion, those issues pale in importance in the grand scheme of how the U.S. should be governed and how important problems facing us are resolved.

These candidates both have positive and admirable qualities. I know who I will vote for--after reading all this, you probably know too. But as I said at the outset, and unlike some recent presidential elections, I wouldn't be unhappy with either candidate.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

:agree: :agree:
YOUR LONG SAGA IS INTERESTING BUT IS SO GRADE SCHOOL IN KNOWLEDGE OF POLITICS.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Obama is almost certainly the smarter of the two and has done what is broadly viewed as a great job of running a 21st century political campaign without utilizing negative tactics.
__________________________________________________ ______________

I am not sure what campaign you have been watching. No, Sen Obama engages in no negativism but his campaign sure does. Blaming Sen McCain's comments for the escalation in Georgia (NOT Sen Obama but his aide...Susan something or other on CNN)....calling various folks racists during the primary (NOT Sen Obama but his campaign)....saying using his name was unfair (NOT Sen Obama but his campaign), etc.
He is using old tactics to run his campaign...use the word CHANGE and keep your hands clean allowing your staff to do the dirty work. He is running at a time when we are in a unpopular war, struggling economy thus ANY Democrat should be winning and using that word. Sen Obama is not the genius you make him out to me but I am sure your measure of intelligence ("Obama is almost certainly the smarter of the two") is right on.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

The irony is that posts regarding Sen. Obama far outnumber posts regarding Sen. McCain. That seems to indicate a significant lack of information about Sen. Obama overall - both in him personally and professionally.

It really doesn't seem like there is an anti-Obama sentiment as much as there is an anti-"Trust Me" sentiment. In the land of the seasoned, Trust is earned, and Sen. Obama has had difficulty winning support from many due to this anti-"Trust Me" sentiment. It may be easy for many to follow a charismatic person wherever the charismatic person goes - definitely a trait of of the young and not-often-burned. Others want reliability to mesh with the charisma (me, for one) and truly want to see if we are missing something by not viewing the person with rose-colored glasses.

I spent a good deal of my life as a negotiator, and "No" really means "Yes, but..." to me. I'm looking for that reliability factor, combined with backbone, and the charisma means nothing other than slick salesmanship.

From the events over the last 8 months, it appears that the presidential race is really Sen. McCain versus the Democratic National Committee (with Sen. Obama being the designated "face" on the poster). I have witnessed many times Sen. McCain demonstrating "backbone" and being his own person, much to the dismay of the Republican National Committee and the current administration. So far, all I've seen of Sen. Obama is as an actor following the DNC-prescribed script, and never once taking a tack in the slightest from what the DNC dictates.

I'm hoping that Sen. Obama's supporters show me where I've missed Sen. Obama as being his own person, rather than as the Charlie McCarthy to the the DNC's Edgar Bergen. If there are going to be two males on the ballot, then I'd like the election to be won by a MAN rather than a parrotting spokesperson for a elitist committee concerned with its power ratio. If Sen. Obama is truly that kind of formidable MAN, please help provide the steak where there's only been sizzle. If we didn't want to know, we wouldn't challenge this much. We like to believe, but must be shown there is something adult to believe in.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I don't agree with this statement at all. The information is all out there. IMHO Republicans fear Senator Obama, and not for the reasons given. I think they fear him because they know he's going to win. Again, just my opinion. ;)

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

I don't agree with this statement at all. The information is all out there. IMHO Republicans fear Senator Obama, and not for the reasons given. I think they fear him because they know he's going to win. Again, just my opinion.
__________________________________________________ _________________-

1. He should win going away ! With the conditions as they are and the other party in the White House for 8 years, this should be, even now, a runaway ! I think Sen Clinton said a number of times...he cant win.

2. Read TODAYS Washington Post...an article about the bias in reporting on her own newspaper...This substantiates STEVEZ' post.

3. There are so many reasons NOT to trust Sen Obama and I hope that either it all gets on the table and he goes down in flames, OR it gets on the table and he is able to credibly respond to it. He just seems to sweep anything off about him as if it should never be asked.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

And you are entitled to your opinion.... as I.

After all these months the only thing I know about Sen. Obama is that he is not his own person. He comes across as a "developed" candidate by the DNC in the same way that a professional baseball franchise "develops" a minor leaguer and presents him in prime-time. Just ONCE it would be refreshing to see him as an independent person instead of a DNC-created figure whose owes his entire being to the boardroom at 430 S. Capitol St. SE.

He may indeed win the presidential election, and all the folks who will be chanting "we won" will be in for a surprise to find the "we" is a select few who lunch at Old Ebbitt Grill. Even Sen. Obama wouldn't be in the "we won" bunch as he is the messenger, not the message.

Nobody fears Sen. Obama. There have been prior presidents in the hip pocket of someone or some group, and even the present officeholder is often accused of that. Having another one won't destroy the country should the DNC succeed, but the "change" will only be in who gets lobbied and who doesn't. That's why parties have national headquarters and where platforms undergo modification.

So, this is election is not about the two candidates, but instead one maverick versus a political machine.

You are known by the company you keep...
 

A valid candidate preference test: "You are known by the company you keep."

I would not want to have anything to do with the infamous company Mr. Obama keeps. Many are anti-American, racist radicals with strong Socialist/Communist predispositions.

Please spare us a President who has kept that sort of company for the majority of his adult life - and yes, his parents and relatives ARE important. They influenced him during all of his PRE-adult life. Be careful not to be so dismissive of these facts.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

----------------------------------------------

Ok try this one on for size...one of the most shameful adds I have ever seen.

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/..._party_att.php

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

Cologal: What is so shameful about that ad? No lies there.

It Bears Repeating...
 

We can haggle on until Election Day about which candidate knew whom decades ago, whether one is too old and sick, whether one takes care of his family, how many houses they own, and yadda-yadda. The bottom line decision that we will all have to make is...

If you are satisfied with America as it is and wouldn't be upset if we continued on the same course for another four years--vote for John McCain. If you are willing to take the risks that a younger, less experienced candidate might provide the leadership necessary to begin to create real change--vote for Barack Obama.

I really don't think it gets much more complicated than that.

P.S. The political advisors of both candidates have advised them that negative advertising works. But I sure wish they would begin to concentrate on the issues. I suppose I also wish that at least we could begin to discuss the issues here as well, rather than posting and then arguing about things that have nothing at all to do with the problems facing America and which candidate is more likely to be able to address them.

Re: Do I have this straight?
 

It is a lie that the man in Kenya is Obama's brother. He is at most his half-brother a son of the man who left Obama as a young child.