Obama Campaign wants to silence critics

What I see are a whole lot of right wingers who wish to have four more years of the Bush chaos. It's an amazing site when all around us, our economy has gone to pots, and the war in Iraq has not brought "real" democracy to the Middle East - or gotten rid of the terrorists. While millions lose their jobs and homes, and most everybody else pays much more for food and fuel, they want more of the same. I didn't realize until now that we have masochists for a political party in the US; choke our country to death, because we haven't suffered enough through Bush's incompetence.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

What I see are a whole lot of right wingers who wish to have four more years of the Bush chaos.

Hey CI!

Bush isn't running for president and McCain isn't the same as Bush.

You cite gloom and doom, but you offer no proof.

2 Replies

@H2O MAN,

H2O MAN wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

What I see are a whole lot of right wingers who wish to have four more years of the Bush chaos.

Hey CI!

Bush isn't running for president and McCain isn't the same as Bush.

You cite gloom and doom, but you offer no proof.

McCain in his own words:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnb2IrsU1Cg&NR=1

0 Replies

@parados,

I posted excerpts and links to articles about the Obama campaign's heavy handed approach to dealing with critics most of which related to Obama and Ayres. Perhaps you could show where they did not?

I have been trying to/mostly debating THAT in this thread you know despite the efforts of several to divert from that topic. If you want to discuss the merits of Obama's relationship with Ayres, let's go to the Election 2008 thread and do it there.

This one is focused on whether it is appropriate for the Obama campaign to try to silence the media and/or individuals in their effort to protect Obama from criticism and accusations.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

Quote:

Bush isn't running for president and McCain isn't the same as Bush.

Oh yes he is, just more batshit crazy, and here is the proof.

According to a Congressional Quarterly(subscription needed) analysis of Senate votes on issues President Bush expressed “an explicit, stated opinion,” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) voted with President Bush 100 percent of the time in 2008 and 95 percent of the time in 2007. Despite his record, McCain’s supporters try to deny that a McCain presidency would be a third Bush term in terms of pushing similar policies.

Quote:

Barack Obama (June 3): It's not change when John McCain decided to stand with George Bush 95 percent of the time, as he did in the Senate last year.

The claim is true. According to Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies, in 2007 McCain voted in line with the president's position 95 percent of the time " the highest percentage rate for McCain since Bush took office " and voted in line with his party 90 percent of the time. However, McCain's support of President Bush's position has been as low as 77 percent (in 2005), and his support for his party's position has been as low as 67 percent (2001).

Democrats are, of course, attempting to make the case that a vote for McCain is a vote to continue the policies of Bush, whose approval ratings are, to put it charitably, not a political asset for McCain.

Is 95% "Significant"?

As for whether voting with Bush 95 percent of the time last year is "significant," that's a matter of opinion that we leave to readers to determine for themselves.

When doing so, they may wish to consider that Obama's votes were in line with the president's position 40 percent of the time in 2007. That shouldn't be terribly surprising. Even the Senate's Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, voted with Bush 39 percent of the time last year, according to the way Congressional Quarterly rates the votes.

The McCain campaign points out that Obama told a local TV interviewer recently that "the only bills that I voted for, for the most part, since I've been in the Senate were introduced by Republicans with George Bush." Obama was actually wrong about that. In 2006 he voted alongside the president 49 percent of the time, and in 2005, the year before Democrats took control of the Senate, Obama voted with the president only 33 percent of the time.

Also, Obama voted in line with fellow Senate Democrats 97 percent of the time in 2007 and 2005, and 96 percent of the time in 2006, according to CQ.

And so . . .

So to sum up, McCain has indeed voted to support the unpopular Bush 95 percent of the time most recently, but less so in earlier years. And Obama has voted pretty close to 100 percent in line with fellow Democrats during his brief Senate career.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_john_mccain_voted_with.html

1 Reply

@kuvasz,

From your same article

Quote:

The claim is true. According to Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies, in 2007 McCain voted in line with the president's position 95 percent of the time " the highest percentage rate for McCain since Bush took office " and voted in line with his party 90 percent of the time. However, McCain's support of President Bush's position has been as low as 77 percent (in 2005), and his support for his party's position has been as low as 67 percent (2001).

And since most votes taken in the Congress over the last two years were uncontested votes including votes to adjourn, suspend rules, yadda yadda, you'll find that Obama voted more than 90% of the time 'with the President' too when he showed up to vote at all which was extremely rare.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Are you a complete twit? Read the following words from factchecker.com and tell me again that the CQ was reporting on

Quote:

votes taken in the Congress over the last two years were uncontested votes including votes to adjourn, suspend rules,

when it states that Mccain's Senate votes were on issues President Bush expressed “an explicit, stated opinion,”

What the **** is wrong with you? You can not even read.

2 Replies

@kuvasz,

Quote:

What the **** is wrong with you? You can not even read.

Foxy can read but she has a hell of a time discerning what's real from what's not.

0 Replies

@kuvasz,

Dunno whether I'm a complete twit, kuvasz, but I'll stand by my statement within the context in which I made it. The 2007/08 Congress has not been much to get much of anything of significance passed, so really the issue is pretty well moot anyway.

2 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Dunno whether I'm a complete twit, kuvasz, but I'll stand by my statement within the context in which I made it. The 2007/08 Congress has not been much to get much of anything of significance passed, so really the issue is pretty well moot anyway.

Translation: I was completely wrong, but am too stiff-necked to admit it.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Yes, you posted 'articles' (to use the term loosely) that dealt with Obama and his critics. There was no meat however on the Obama/Ayres issue itself. That means when you raised the issue about Obama/Ayres you had nothing to support it other than the fact that someone that is accused of making stuff up or flat out lying said it.

There is nothing there to substantiate any claim about Ayres/Obama and you have presented nothing.

Whether the accusation has any validity goes to the core of the issue of Obama disputing there claims.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

So does that include the budget votes you were going on about?

0 Replies

Perhaps people should call Routers News Agency and have the democratic national convention taken off the internet for spreading liberal fabrications!

Routers is putting up videos 10 Obama to 1 McCain... Even the McCain videos have Obama in them...

Obama is “pushing lies, distortions, and manipulations about McCain…” they should be silenced! Enough liberal dominated media!

1 Reply

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEeHl0h3NBo

0 Replies

@RexRed,

You probably won't get far, unless you email Reuters.

Smile

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLC35S-CSA0&feature=related

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

You probably won't get far, unless you email Reuters.

true

0 Replies

Obama Campaign wants to silence critics

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know