Support NeoGAF

[APF]

I fixed it for you.

Fair enough.


Triumph: is this the part where you start attacking me as a person, and calling me retarded? Because we can skip all that.

I find it curious that debunking a chain letter is the straw that broke your back. Bad hair day or something?

 

[Triumph]

Fair enough.


Triumph: is this the part where you start attacking me as a person, and calling me retarded? Because we can skip all that.

No, I reserve that for genuinely retarded people.

 

[APF]

ANYWAY

 

[mckmas8808]

That's not actually what the voter asked; the voter mentioned Bush suggesting there might be troops in Iraq for 50 years; McCain said, "hey 100 years would be cool with me if they're not being attacked--wouldn't it be fine with you?" Dems have erroneously labeled that as McCain being ok with 100 years of war, which obviously is a gross mischaracterization (ie Obama lied to smear him, just admit it and move on) of what he was trying to say. When asked by Rose how long he realistically felt troops would be in Iraq, and whether or not he sees a realistic possibility of a S Korea / Japan / Europe situation there, McCain said he didn't see a long-standing presence in Iraq due to the unique sociopolitical situation there. Again, none of this is hard to understand, neither point is contradictory, and neither is a "flip-flop" (I thought we were trying to get away from the politics of personal destruction, the failed politics as usual etc etc, but now you're literally trying to smear a combat veteran and war hero with charges of flip-flopping? Outrageous). One point is made about a hypothetical, one point is made about the realistic possibility of that hypothetical coming to pass.


Edit: oh and BTW the Charlie Rose interview is from before the "100 years" comment.

The thing is he keeps defending his comment. And when he defends his comment he gives it more legitimacy. He should just repeat what he said to Charlie Rose over and over. Why doesn't he do that?

 

[APF]

The thing is he keeps defending his comment. And when he defends his comment he gives it more legitimacy. He should just repeat what he said to Charlie Rose over and over. Why doesn't he do that?

Post his defense and I can respond better.

 

[siamesedreamer]

The nonpartisan taxpayer watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste is out with its newest Pig Book, an overwhelming detailing of all 11,610 pork barrel projects inserted in the current fiscal year's appropriations bills by individual members of Congress.

<snip>

According to the Pig Book ("The Book Washington Does Not Want You to Read"), New York Sen. Hillary Clinton is our new grand national oinker among presidential contenders for most pork barrel spending. She inserted a whopping 281 individual spending projects into bills for the benefit of New York interests at the cost of taxpayers everywhere.

That totals $296.2 million.

<snip>

He may also bring it up if his opponent is Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who may be a freshman senator but still isn't shy about inserting special earmarks into legislation cataloged by the taxpayer group's annual report. He accounted for 53 special earmarks, totaling almost $97.4 million.

What about McCain you ask?

The new national hero, on the other hand, for not inserting one penny of pork barrel spending is the Republican Party's presumptive nominee, Sen. John McCain of Arizona. As a longtime staunch opponent of such earmarks, McCain may be expected to raise the subject of such special spending if Clinton becomes his Democratic opponent in the fall's general election.

LAT

Do as I say, not as I do.

 

[PhoenixDark]

What about McCain you ask?



LAT

Do as I say, not as I do.

It's a distant second place so it's not hypocritical!

...

 

[tanod]

McCain may be expected to raise the subject of such special spending if Clinton becomes his Democratic opponent in the fall's general election.

If it was Obama, he'd defend himself by asking "why do you take PAC and special interest money?"

 

[grandjedi6]

What about McCain you ask?



LAT

Do as I say, not as I do.

Didn't Obama and Hillary just commit to no-pork for the year?

 

[tanod]

Didn't Obama and Hillary just commit to no-pork for the year?

No, but Obama fully disclosed all pork-barrel amendments he's put into bills. Hillary has refused to do so.

 

[siamesedreamer]

Didn't Obama and Hillary just commit to no-pork for the year?

Not sure. But, the #1 and #2 is among the candidates (not overall).

Gonna edit my post.

 

[ToyMachine228]

I'm going down to PA for a Visibility Rally next weekend and I can't help but feel good things happening in Pennsylvania for Obama. The gap's closing...And rather quickly.

 

[mckmas8808]

MSNBC: Barack Obama raises more than $40 million in March, his campaign says

Campaign says Obama had more than 442,000 contributors with more than 218,000 contributing for the first time last month.

Average contribution was $96

WOAH!!! That's nice. So I guess the Wright thing didn't hurt him at all!!

 

[electricpirate]

What about McCain you ask?



LAT

Do as I say, not as I do.

Just to keep in perspective before everyone goes crazy.

hilary has the 13th most pork of any senator

Obama has about the 75th most pork of any senator.

McCain is one of 5 senators with no pork.

And when has Obama made eliminating pork a major part of his policy to make him a hypocrite? He has pledged to reduce pork, which being in the bottom 3/4 of all senators is perfectly in line.

McCain's record is impressive no doubt. McCain respect +1 Obama respect Nuetral, Clinton respect -1


Edit: list by dollar of pork for those curious http://www.cagw.org/site/DocServer/Senate_-_dollar.pdf?docID=3024

 

[electricpirate]

Not sure. But, the #1 and #2 is among the candidates (not overall).

Gonna edit my post.

There was a bill on the floor to suspend earmarks for a year, all three voted for it, but the bill failed. Nothing paticularly brave, since the bill had a snowballs chance in hell of succeeding.

 

[User 10639]

Do as I say, not as I do.

What, did McCain promise to raise his pork barrel spending or something? Or did Clinton promise to be transparent about her pork? Because otherwise, I don't see any hypocrisy here.

 

[scorcho]

i love how you're constantly painting proponents of the opposite view as unrealistic or sanguine (see: UHQ debate). i believe what i consider as the lesser of two evils. i was against the war when it came out, thought at one point that we should make a concerted effort to 'fix' what we broke and turned on that decision once i realized how unrealistic that proposition was.

and i don't give a shit that you're not trying to change hearts and minds - don't selectively push or dismiss articles/polls/facts on the basis of whether it jibes with what you think is correct. that goes beyond this debate and points to why the majority of the shit you post is garbage. the vacuity and selectivity of your 'argument' is why no one should take your posts seriously. you're just a shell.

 

[human5892]

Just to keep in perspective before everyone goes crazy.

hilary has the 13th most pork of any senator

Obama has about the 75th most pork of any senator.

McCain is one of 5 senators with no pork.

And when has Obama made eliminating pork a major part of his policy to make him a hypocrite? He has pledged to reduce pork, which being in the bottom 3/4 of all senators is perfectly in line.

McCain's record is impressive no doubt. McCain respect +1 Obama respect Nuetral, Clinton respect -1


Edit: list by dollar of pork for those curious http://www.cagw.org/site/DocServer/Senate_-_dollar.pdf?docID=3024

I agree. I'm not a fan of McCain, but good on him for not contributing to pork. I'm also glad to see that Obama is low on the totem pole and seems committed to reducing it even further.

 

[scorcho]

What, did McCain promise to raise his pork barrel spending or something? Or did Clinton promise to be transparent about her pork? Because otherwise, I don't see any hypocrisy here.

hey guys! remember, the way to successfully combat SD, as i've come to realize over the last few days, is to use the very tools he uses back at him! they are -

1. claim you don't read right-leaning blogs and backhandedly question their veracity
2. dismiss dismiss dismiss! those who have a point of view opposite yours are obviously partisan or have an ulterior motive
3. use conjecture! when SD throws off a spurious 'point', argue back in the negative without facts or data
4. if SD throws 'data' or 'truthiness' back at you, claim you don't acknowledge those facts because that data has to be wrong, or that you are so right that the data doesn't matter
5. selectively answer random statements in the post! dismiss as much as you can and pick apart one or two statements to make it seem like you have a point, even if you don't

 

[thefro]

"Lifelong" Republicans who crossover to vote in the Dem Primary in IN will be challenged! They will have to sign an affidavit and state under oath that they are voting in good faith and that they voted for a majority of Democratic candidates in the last general election.

http://www.thetimesonline.com/artic..._news/doc7b559e29960e5db68625741f007d6dbd.txt

So sorry Rush, you lose!

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

This is so genius

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008804030466



Pics from the craziness yesterday in Bloomington
http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/htoxtras/galleries/e6bdc5ea586577fe.jpg
http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/htoxtras/galleries/6622e23c9b9f4d73.jpg
http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/htoxtras/galleries/446d03a892adc9bf.jpg
http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/htoxtras/galleries/95a6eddf381ebe80.jpg

There's also allotments of tickets in Indianapolis and at Purdue given away today... people were lined up at 7 pm for those. :lol Line in Indianapolis stretches around Monument Circle.

Ouch!

 

[3rdman]

I'm willing to concede there are arguments that can be made for our complete withdrawal and our washing of our hands of the whole debacle (most notably the costs). I don't necessarily agree with all of them, but they are what they are.

Now how about you? Are you willing to concede there are significant risks associated with such a move?

My purpose is not to get anyone to agree with me. I don't really care. The next president is going to do what ever they are going to do regardless of my posts on some random website. I'm playing more of the devil's advocate. This thing isn't as simple as many here would like to believe.

To be fair, even the most ardent advocates to end the war (Obama included) can't and won't simply "pull the plug". Hell, It'll take upwards of 2 years just to get all our equipment out of the region.

On the whole I do agree with you that "we owe them" stability but the reality is that our presence simply postpones the inevitable civil war that will occur once we leave anyways.

 

[Incognito]

pork can be good too, guys. in my view, "pork" shouldn't be universally condemned but egregious violators see: shelby, richard (R) Alabama should have to defend their requests. in public.

 

[User 10639]

"Lifelong" Republicans who crossover to vote in the Dem Primary in IN will be challenged! They will have to sign an affidavit and state under oath that they are voting in good faith and that they voted for a majority of Democratic candidates in the last general election.

http://www.thetimesonline.com/artic..._news/doc7b559e29960e5db68625741f007d6dbd.txt

So sorry Rush, you lose!

Same thing happened in OH, dude, and it didn't make a difference then.

 

[Odrion]

I think McCain has no pork only because he didn't know you could do that.

 

[Tamanon]

McCain is routinely ranked among the richest senators. But a prenuptial agreement has kept most assets in his wife's name. That arrangement served as a defense for McCain when the Senate ethics committee scrutinized a real estate deal involving his wife, her father and disgraced savings and loan owner Charles Keating Jr. McCain said at the time the separation of assets helped prove the deal didn't benefit him.

McCain himself reports little more wealth than when he started in politics. With his book royalties and radio-appearance fees donated to charity, McCain's Senate salary of $169,300 and Navy pension of about $56,000 are his only significant sources of income. He has accounts at two banks with his wife worth up to $15,000 each, according to his most recent financial disclosure report.

In contrast, Cindy McCain is a millionaire many times over &#8212; though the McCains haven't disclosed just how many times.

Weird setup. Taken from the politico.

 

[Beer Monkey]

In contrast, Cindy McCain is a millionaire many times over — though the McCains haven't disclosed just how many times.

What a fucking dirtbag she is. She's a multimillionaire but she stole drugs from her medical relief charity to feed her habit. She should have at least bought them on the black market like Limbaugh.

 

[backbreaker65]

Their is nothing wrong with earmarks as long as they don't build a bridge to no where. If a Senator is earmarking monies for his state(which she or he is supposed to do) for projects like research on some valuable commodity within the state or building roads ect... Pet project for the greater good is a good thing, but irresponsible spending and setting up cronies for fat checks is frowned upon.

Good for John McCain, maybe Arizona doesn't need anything thus no ear marks.

 

[maynerd]

http://armed-services.senate.gov/statemnt/2008/April/Cody 04-01-08.pdf

Today’s Army is out of balance. The current demand for our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan exceeds the sustainable supply and limits our ability to provide ready forces for other contingencies . . .

Current operational requirements for forces and insufficient time between deployments require a focus on counterinsurgency training and equipping to the detriment of preparedness for the full range of military missions.

Given the current theater demand for Army forces, we are unable to provide a sustainable tempo of deployments for our Soldiers and Families. Soldiers, Families, support systems, and equipment are stretched and stressed by the demands of lengthy and repeated deployments, with insufficient recovery time. Equipment used repeatedly in harsh environments is wearing out more rapidly than programmed. Army support systems, designed for the pre-9/11 peacetime Army, are straining under the accumulation of stress from six years at war. Overall, our readiness is being consumed as fast as we build it.

If unaddressed, this lack of balance poses a significant risk to the All-Volunteer Force and degrades the Army’s ability to make a timely response to other contingencies.

Someone tell me how staying in Iraq makes us safer.

 

[siamesedreamer]

the vacuity and selectivity of your 'argument' is why no one should take your posts seriously. you're just a shell.

That's fine. Its not like this board has ever been anything other than condescending and downright hateful to its tiny minority of right-leaners. Carry on...

 

[gkryhewy]

Obama May Get Carter’s Support
From Damilola Oyedele in Abuja, 04.03.2008

Former President of the United States, Jimmy Carter has hinted that he might cast his vote for Senator Barack Obama to aid his emergence as the candidate for the Democrats in America’s bid to elect a new President.
Carter, who is a Super Delegate from Georgia State, gave this hint at a media interaction after the Carter Center Awards for Guinea Worm Eradication in Abuja yesterday.
Carter, who was accompanied by his wife Rosalynn, did not profess a direct support for Obama but rather choose to make a veiled statement.
“We are very interested in the primaries. Don’t forget that Obama won in my state of Georgia. My town which is home to 625 people is for Obama, my children and their spouses are pro- Obama.
My grandchildren are also pro- Obama. As a Super Delegate, I would not disclose who I am rooting for but I leave you to make that guess," he said.

This is from Drudge.

 

[Particle Physicist]

This is so genius

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008804030466

"I was leaning toward Obama, but this sealed the deal for sure," he said.

over dave mathews?? :lol wow.

 

[electricpirate]

Their is nothing wrong with earmarks as long as they don't build a bridge to no where. If a Senator is earmarking monies for his state(which she or he is supposed to do) for projects like research on some valuable commodity within the state or building roads ect... Pet project for the greater good is a good thing, but irresponsible spending and setting up cronies for fat checks is frowned upon.

Good for John McCain, maybe Arizona doesn't need anything thus no ear marks.

Pork isn't the money that you get for your state, it's more about the money that you got for your state without a vote on it, slipping it into a really popular bill for example.

 

[VanMardigan]

I like reading this thread. I get info on all the candidates, links to polls, articles, blogs, etc. I get info on the delegate count and where things generally stand. It's a good thread until folks like scorcho derail the thread with stupid personal attacks. And then refuses to quit talking shit. Dammit, this thread needs better moderation.

 

[Cheebs]

This is from Drudge.

Jimmy Carter has been strongly implying he will cast his super delegate vote for Obama ever since 2007.

He refuses to come outright because he feels it would be wrong as a former president to go out on the stump for a candidate in the primary.

But yeah, Carter has been part of Obamania since the very early days. He and the Clintons haven't gotten along in a long time.

 

[gkryhewy]

Jimmy Carter has been strongly implying he will cast his super delegate vote for Obama ever since 2007.

He refuses to come outright because he feels it would be wrong as a former president to go out on the stump for a candidate in the primary.

But yeah, Carter has been part of Obamania since the very early days. He and the Clintons haven't gotten along in a long time.

My contribution has been diminished my the great diminisher. I leave chagrined.

 

[User 10639]

Jimmy Carter has been strongly implying he will cast his super delegate vote for Obama ever since 2007.

He refuses to come outright because he feels it would be wrong as a former president to go out on the stump for a candidate in the primary.

But yeah, Carter has been part of Obamania since the very early days. He and the Clintons haven't gotten along in a long time.

I wonder if a Carter endorsement would even have an impact, though. There's so much vitriol towards his presidency these days it's unbelievable.

 

[scorcho]

That's fine. Its not like this board has ever been anything other than condescending and downright hateful to its tiny minority of right-leaners. Carry on...

yes. it's the board's fault that you selectively quote and dismiss facts that goes against your beliefs. it's the board's fault that you're not consistent with how you represent your own viewpoints or those of others, even as you bitch about liberals doing the same.

have fun with playing the victim card. is it pretty?

one final note since i love how you misrepresent yet again - my problem is with how you argue your viewpoint, not the view itself. i'm perfectly fine with having a rational, civil argument on something. you've given shit to indicate that.

 

[Cheebs]

I wonder if a Carter endorsement would even have an impact, though. There's so much vitriol towards his presidency these days it's unbelievable.

His presidency? Yes. The man, hell no. He has more or less redeemed himself completely post-1980 to the public. He won the nobel peace prize a couple years ago too.

 

[User 10639]

His presidency? Yes. The man, hell no. He has more or less redeemed himself completely post-1980 to the public. He won the nobel peace prize a couple years ago too.

Ya think? I always thought that was one of the more, ah, controversial nobel peace prizes awarded, especially given that he was only the 3rd US president to recieve it (after TR and Wilson, IIRC.) I just wonder if people have sore thumbs about the whole Iran hostage crisis thing, even after his notable contributions to diplomacy post-1980.

 

[electricpirate]

It will probably hurt him with jewish voters, but help with many others.

 

[Tamanon]

It will probably hurt him with jewish voters, but help with many others.

Eh, I don't think it'll affect that much. Farrakhan would've hurt more. Carter only has bad feelings from the "Israel is always right" group.

 

[electricpirate]

True.
re Endorsements: I realized the other day that the endorsements of Jonathon Coulton and XKCD were a big part of what got me to start looking into Obama as a candidate, I'm such a nerd.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Obama should hire Ted Turner as the global warming czar instead of Al Gore. It'd be great to hear Ted talking about how in a few decades, earth will be doomed and humans will result to cannabalism.

 

[Lemonz]

 

[maynerd]

Why is she on the rise?! LAME!

 

[siamesedreamer]

i'm perfectly fine with having a rational, civil argument on something.

Well, lets's see...over the last twelve hours or so I've been called arrogant, ignorant, stupid, inelegant, and a 10 year old. I've even been mocked as being clairvoyent and sexy.

Gotta hand it to you though, at least you didn't call me a racist. Or is that already assumed?

 

[scorcho]

Well, lets's see...over the last twelve hours or so I've been called arrogant, ignorant, stupid, inelegant, and a 10 year old. I've even been mocked as being clairvoyent and sexy.

Gotta hand it to you though, at least you didn't call me a racist. Or is that already assumed?

well when one side refuses to offer a rational argument and completely ignores all my original points (for starters, see poll before you dismiss what i wrote), i figure there's no need for decorum. and now the strawman enters the ring!

i don't think you're a racist, and who said i was mocking your sexiness or your clairvoyance? the latter two are quite the traits to have.

 

[electricpirate]

Do we know the margin of error on the Gallup daily?

 

[Tamanon]

Generally it's 2%