FitzOfRage
Member
slidewinder said:
Made me think of this http://www.theonion.com/content/video/mccain_vows_to_replace_secret
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF Interim Thread of USA General Elections (DAWN OF THE VEEP)
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
Made me think of this http://www.theonion.com/content/video/mccain_vows_to_replace_secret
speculawyer
Member
avatar299 said:
avatar299 said:
OK . . . then how about we stop subsidizing oil by getting rid of all the troops sent to Iraq mainly to get control of oil, the navy which has been used to protect the persian gulf and keep the oil flowing, the subsidies for oil in the Bush/Cheney energy bill, the subsidies all fossil fuels get by not paying for the pollution they cause, the subsidies fossil fuels get by not paying for the climate change they cause, etc. ?
Oil is massively subsidized by the US taxpayers . . . how about we stop that? Well if not, how about we at least level the playing field by supporting electric cars.
Obama up by 5% in.... Montana?
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub.../election_2008_montana_presidential_election2
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub.../election_2008_montana_presidential_election2
So, how does everyone feel about FISA, faith-based, etc. now that you've been able to digest the news?
While I'm not particularly fond of the FISA decision myself (in fact, its pretty disgusting), I really do think Obama would be a lot more responsible. I do not say this as a means of being in denial or looking the other way. He would not be reckless like the current administration is. I take him at his word that he will be watching things closely. I'm still not happy that it is passing, however. But I do not see Obama as someone who will continue the fine act of pissing on our civil liberties behind closed, locked, boarded shut doors. Do you?
As for the faith-based initiatives, it's very smart. Notice how he's shifting the message away from things like abortion, and putting emphasis on poverty, social injustice, etc. Which is great. I wish that would be the main message of any campaign's faith-based initiatives instead of things like abortion, keeping gay people out of modern society and what the model family is supposed to look and act like. You have to give Obama credit for trying to figure out a way to connect with the fundamentalist evangelicals in this country.
As far as Iraq goes, he has to travel there. Plain and simple. It has been a while, so traveling around the world (including the ME) is necessary. McCain shouldn't be talking about it being nothing more than a "check box." The only way it wouldn't be a "check box" to McCain is probably if Obama went there on someone else's terms or advise, like McCain's. Kind of like those 10+ town hall meetings. McCain needs to stop acting like such a sissy.
While I'm not particularly fond of the FISA decision myself (in fact, its pretty disgusting), I really do think Obama would be a lot more responsible. I do not say this as a means of being in denial or looking the other way. He would not be reckless like the current administration is. I take him at his word that he will be watching things closely. I'm still not happy that it is passing, however. But I do not see Obama as someone who will continue the fine act of pissing on our civil liberties behind closed, locked, boarded shut doors. Do you?
As for the faith-based initiatives, it's very smart. Notice how he's shifting the message away from things like abortion, and putting emphasis on poverty, social injustice, etc. Which is great. I wish that would be the main message of any campaign's faith-based initiatives instead of things like abortion, keeping gay people out of modern society and what the model family is supposed to look and act like. You have to give Obama credit for trying to figure out a way to connect with the fundamentalist evangelicals in this country.
As far as Iraq goes, he has to travel there. Plain and simple. It has been a while, so traveling around the world (including the ME) is necessary. McCain shouldn't be talking about it being nothing more than a "check box." The only way it wouldn't be a "check box" to McCain is probably if Obama went there on someone else's terms or advise, like McCain's. Kind of like those 10+ town hall meetings. McCain needs to stop acting like such a sissy.
RE: Faith based initiatives. This is just another extension of the Dean 50 state strategy just demographic in nature rather than geographical. The Republicans have built an extremely strong based by appealing to the divisive aspects of religion (intolerance) and the Democrats for whatever reason just rolled over and let them have it. That Obama is forcing the Republicans to actually contest once unassailable ground by appealing to the best aspects of religion (charity) is a *good* thing no matter what your religionLOL beliefs may be.
i have no problem with his extension/modification of faith-based programs as i've seen a large number of churches expand social programs (at least concerning emergency food in NYC) his FISA stance - not so much. i don't believe in unchecked power used benevolently.
I was just coming to post that. WTF. :lolsyllogism said:
http://www.pollster.com/08-MT-Pres-GE-MvO.php
The only other two polls for Montana were in February and April, and Obama was behind by 8 and 5 respectively. So it certainly seems plausable that he could bounce up by five since then. But still. Montana. Wow.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
GhaleonEB said:
And that's a state Bill Clinton needsto work hard. Also Bill needs to be in Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Georgia.
Hillary needs to be in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Florida, and Michigan.
Bill Richardson needs to be in Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada.
If that happened there would be NO way Obama could lose.
SouthernDragon
Member
On FISA...
Didn't Obama say he disapproved of retroactive immunity? I do wish he had fought against it in the Senate, but I suppose he's busy. Eh. Again, disappointed, but I'm not going to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
As for the campaign financing deal, well... while I'd prefer he'd opt for public financing, there's the whole deal of the 527s. Since McCain refuses to reign them in, they'd be used to a much greater effect against Obama. Remember, these folks managed to get Bush elected instead of Gore.
Didn't Obama say he disapproved of retroactive immunity? I do wish he had fought against it in the Senate, but I suppose he's busy. Eh. Again, disappointed, but I'm not going to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
As for the campaign financing deal, well... while I'd prefer he'd opt for public financing, there's the whole deal of the 527s. Since McCain refuses to reign them in, they'd be used to a much greater effect against Obama. Remember, these folks managed to get Bush elected instead of Gore.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0708/RGA_raising_money_for_McCain.html#comments
I am SHOCKED that suddenly another loophole is discovered when the guy who helped write the campaign finance "reform" rules is running.
I am SHOCKED that suddenly another loophole is discovered when the guy who helped write the campaign finance "reform" rules is running.
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
Hitokage said:
I gaged this by the feigned outrage coming from McCain's camp which was really just thinly veiled fear. See also: "Checking a box" in Iraq/Afghanistan.
siamesedreamer
Banned
thefro said:
But that was 21 years ago!
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
siamesedreamer said:
And yet, his anger issues are probably the one thing McCain hasn't flip-flopped on.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Tamanon said:
So now whats worst?
Obama opting out of campagin finaince reform?
Or
McCain accepting it but breaking the spirt of the law by cheating and taking money like this?
speculawyer
Member
And all these tricks really start looking bad for McCain. It is like just a small number of very rich people are donating huge chunks of money to get their guy elected. That is not very democratic.Tamanon said:
It seems that a lot of the low level blue-collar GOPers have decided not to give much money now. Perhaps they've lost their jobs or they are just struggling to scape up enough money to fill the gas tank or feed the family.
I didn't say I had a problem with that. I had a problem with giving people money for things they are already going to buyspeculawyer said:
Diablos said:
Bullshit. it should be stopped. Obama can be just as much of an asshole as any other politician is. You people are crazy, completely willing to stand down for privacy if someone you've never met, but looks good on T.V asks for it.
He should be taken to the coals for that crap. Stop acting like a dick overseas and stop pissing on the fourth amendment
... Fucking wowDiablos said:
Go check up on George W. Bush circa 2000. "Compassionate conservatism didn't walk into the white house drenched in the blood of aborted fetus
speculawyer
Member
Well that is exactly what all those subsidies for oil are . . . they are giving people money for things they are already going to buy. Have the government pay massive amounts to the military to invade Iraq largely for oil and have the navy patrol the Persian gulf to protect oil tankers is giving people money to help them buy oil. I have problem with that. It is unfair subsidy that distorts the market. And then add in the uncaptured costs of pollution caused and climate change.avatar299 said:
See . . . I am a Libertarian, I want those unfair market aspects removed . . . or at least balanced out with tax credits.
TheClimaxan
Member
On FISA, I'm bothered by his stance on the compromise bill and I hope he revisits the decision. As I feel the telecoms should be held accountable to the furthest extent.
I'm not bothered by his stance on faith-based programs. A vast majority of these programs are set up to help those in need within the communities they are located. I'm against giving any group government money that discriminates in any way, but organizations like Urban Ministries do a tremendous service. I worked for a faith-based service organization for three years and we busted our asses to raise money. Money that went right back into the community to repair homes in some of the worst poverty I've ever witnessed. So based on Barack's sustained message of service, I would say his support of certain faith-based programs falls in line with statements he's made during his entire campaign.
Even though I disagree with him on FISA, it won't effect my vote in anyway. I'd rather have a few qualms with a President I respect, than live the rest of my life knowing that I voted for a third Bush term. That would be fucking terrible.
I'm not bothered by his stance on faith-based programs. A vast majority of these programs are set up to help those in need within the communities they are located. I'm against giving any group government money that discriminates in any way, but organizations like Urban Ministries do a tremendous service. I worked for a faith-based service organization for three years and we busted our asses to raise money. Money that went right back into the community to repair homes in some of the worst poverty I've ever witnessed. So based on Barack's sustained message of service, I would say his support of certain faith-based programs falls in line with statements he's made during his entire campaign.
Even though I disagree with him on FISA, it won't effect my vote in anyway. I'd rather have a few qualms with a President I respect, than live the rest of my life knowing that I voted for a third Bush term. That would be fucking terrible.
artredis1980
Banned
he voted FISA because the left will vote for him and will vote AGAINST McCain and the moderates will vote for him. Like it or not, most of US is right leaning and this is a typical right leaning issue.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
TheClimaxan said:
What would you consider the fullest extent?
Steve Youngblood
Member
FlightOfHeaven said:
Ignoring all the hyperbole about what a dramatic shift we've seen from Obama, I do think there's a little cause for concern. Individually, most of these things don't amount to much, and they certainly don't undermine his message substantially. However, some of these moves, even when rationalized pragmatically, do disappointingly paint him, when you add them all up, as just another politician trying to win an election as opposed to the leader of the new political movement.TheClimaxan said:
Again though, it's just knee-jerk reactions at this point that are causing some people to say that he's a sell-out, and it's disingenuous to argue that he's going down the slippery slope, but I do hope we don't continue to see this pattern emerging. His NAFTA stance in particular I found a little disconcerting. Not because I have any strong opinions about NAFTA, but just because both he and Hillary were going out of their way to appear against NAFTA during the Ohio primary narrative, and both were trying to paint the other as being the bad guy who secretly supported it. And now? He admits that the entire thing might have been just fiery rhetoric. That IS typical Washington politics.
artredis1980
Banned
maximum360
Member
Wow. Watching CNBC you'd think Obama is the antichrist.
Frank the Great
Banned
maximum360 said:
It's a finance channel. Why would people who make their money off the backs of workers support someone with socialist policies?
speculawyer
Member
WTF is this 'battle of Patriotism'? How stupid is that?
Both very legitimate statements. The problem with McCain's is that with his "Putting the country first" is that his Iraq war support doesn't follow it. The Iraq war isn't helping the American people at all . . . and it is costing billions. McCain's devotion to the Iraq war show me that he is putting the interests of the Iraqi people, the oil companies, and his ego invested in this war above the interests of the USA.
Both very legitimate statements. The problem with McCain's is that with his "Putting the country first" is that his Iraq war support doesn't follow it. The Iraq war isn't helping the American people at all . . . and it is costing billions. McCain's devotion to the Iraq war show me that he is putting the interests of the Iraqi people, the oil companies, and his ego invested in this war above the interests of the USA.
artredis1980
Banned
You know McCain is shit when even even Fox News rails against you
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07/03/mccain-undermines-own-message-says-obama-is-trustworthy/
McCain Backs Off Message, Says Obama is Trustworthy
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/07/03/mccain-undermines-own-message-says-obama-is-trustworthy/
McCain Backs Off Message, Says Obama is Trustworthy
artredis1980
Banned
Frank the Great said:
80% of wallstreet is contributing to Obama
DemConWatch thinks Obama's acceptance speech might be given at the Invesco Field at Mile High, which seats 75,000. Open to the public, of course.
http://www.demconwatchblog.com/2008/07/will-obama-accept-nomination-at-invesco.html
And McCain - who promised to run the "clean" campaign - is the first to go negative in an ad.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/new_mccain_swing_state_ad_atta.php
"It seems to me that the other candidate just discovered the importance of the Hispanic vote."
Of course, Hispanics support Obama 2:1 over McCain, so they don't seem to mind.
http://www.demconwatchblog.com/2008/07/will-obama-accept-nomination-at-invesco.html
And McCain - who promised to run the "clean" campaign - is the first to go negative in an ad.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/new_mccain_swing_state_ad_atta.php
"It seems to me that the other candidate just discovered the importance of the Hispanic vote."
Of course, Hispanics support Obama 2:1 over McCain, so they don't seem to mind.
I turned on MSNBC and saw the headline "Obama: Bush's third term?"
What the fuuuuuuuck.
Can someone tell me what Nanci Pelosi's "fairness doctrine" all about before I start calling her a facist pig? From what I heard, it seems like it's suppose to limit freedom of speech in the news media which is just all sorts of wrong.
What the fuuuuuuuck.
Can someone tell me what Nanci Pelosi's "fairness doctrine" all about before I start calling her a facist pig? From what I heard, it seems like it's suppose to limit freedom of speech in the news media which is just all sorts of wrong.
bob_arctor
Tough_Smooth
Steve Youngblood
Member
You know, I haven't really heard much about this one aside from complaints from the right that this is just a sinister attempt by Pelosi to get Hannity and Rush off the air.Odrion said:
speculawyer
Member
Mercury Fred
Banned
Agreed. We have a right to be lied to with disinformation by FCC license-holding news organizations.Odrion said:
- Status