29
   

FINAL COUNTDOWN FOR USA ELECTION 2008

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:15 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:

Ash and Fox have both freely admitted that some McCain ads have been over the top and less than honest as have some Obama ads. Perhaps you could acknowledge that we have both said that politicans lie and that includes McCain. And perhaps you could join the truth squad here and admit that your guy has been less than truthful in some of his campaign rhetoric also.


Which Obama ads do you think have been untruthful? And are they to the degree which McCain's vile ads have been? I doubt you can show that they are.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:17 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:

perhaps you could join the truth squad here and admit that your guy has been less than truthful in some of his campaign rhetoric also.


That will never happen!


Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:18 pm
@H2O MAN,
Probably not, but hope springs eternal.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:18 pm
Palin lies again today about the bridge to nowhere - she didn't tell Congress 'thanks, but no thanks' at all, yet claims she did - and also about Obama's tax plan.

Quote:
Campaigning on her own, the Alaska governor also said Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama "wants to raise income taxes and raise payroll taxes and raise investment income taxes and raise business taxes and raise the death tax.

"But John McCain and I know that's not the way you grow the economy," she added.

In fact, independent groups such as the Tax Policy Center have concluded that four out of five U.S. households would receive tax cuts under Obama's proposals.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080915/ap_on_el_pr/palin;_ylt=Akuk_zIJOe5_95Ti2rOcDmGs0NUE

That's what's known as a 'lie.' A direct falsehood. Not that any of you right-wingers care one bit if Palin is lying about Obama's tax plan. You probably like that she is doing so. Honesty means little to nothing to you guys. I guess Honor doesn't either, even though McCain likes to go on about it.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:19 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Guardian mirrors my views about this old guy who struggle hard to occupy the WH.
Slinging mud to hide the real dirt.

The McCain-Palin ticket has developed an interesting campaign strategy. They don't want the public to see their plans to dismantle social security, Medicare and the system of employer-provided healthcare. To distract people from these policies that will directly affect their lives they are taking politics to new lows.

Among the highlights for the cesspool two is the nonsense that Barack Obama was calling Sarah Palin a barnyard animal when he used the old expression "putting lipstick on a pig". Then John McCain told us that he approved of an ad calling Obama a sexual pervert.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/sep/15/uselections2008.republicans
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:28 pm


American's need protection from Obama's plan to raise taxes.
Obama's tax plan will trash our fragile economy, something American's don't need.

0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:28 pm
@Foxfyre,
I believe that the vote in November will be close. My inclination is to believe that the GOP ticket will prevail, and that that we will pick up some seats in the Congress. Perhaps not, there's a long road ahead and much could still happen to alter what I see as the current trends.

Unlike the opposition here, I have faith in the American People to see past extravagant promises and make sensible choices for themselves. Nor do I believe that an opposition victory signals the end of life as we know it. The voters may very well choose the wrong candidate in terms of what the nation needs, but that's the nature of democracy. The People, acting through their votes and self-interest decide who shall lead the nation for a limited time.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:29 pm
Obama has been addressing McCain's lies and his attempt to jack the 'change' mantra this election -

Quote:
"But now suddenly, John McCain says he is about change, too. He even started using some of my lines. Suddenly he says he wants 'to turn the page.' He had an ad today that he started running that he and Gov. Palin would bring the change that we need. He had this in an advertisement. Sound familiar? Let me tell you something, instead of borrowing my lines he needs to borrow our ideas," Obama said.

He followed up with s dig on lobbyists, saying "if you think those lobbyists are working day and night for John McCain just to put themselves out of business, well then I've got a bridge to sell you up in Alaska."


http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Obama_If_you_believe_that_Ive_got_a_bridge_in_Alaska_to_sell_you.html?showall

Yeouch

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:41 pm
@Asherman,
Let me wish you that your inclination gets fulfilled and not be like American DREAM( NOT DREAMS OF AMERICAN) which has never been fulfilled.

" I have faith in the American People "
May I ask which sort of Americans. There are at present Pro Bush's regime and his party while others are dead against.
This is not UNITED STATES OF AMERICA but
DIVED STATE OF AMNESIA
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:41 pm
@Foxfyre,
Actually I've admitted no such thing, because I refuse to be drawn into a pissing contest over conflicting claims of biases and lies by the media and campaigns. All campaigns are biased, all campaign rhetoric is spin maximized, and so far as I can determine that is without exception.

Has McCain misspoken, been mistaken in his statements, taken out of context? Yes, he has. Has McCain's campaign, and some of his supporters taken out of context, or added spin to inconsequential aspects of Democratic ticket? Yes, they have, and the candidate is to some degree complicit..

Has Obama misspoken, been mistaken in his statements, taken out of context? Yes, he has. Has Obama's campaign, and some of his supporters taken out of context, or added spin to inconsequential aspects of the GOP ticket? Yes, they have, and the candidate is to some degree complicit.

These antics are par for the course in our election campaigns, and though they seem to be effective, they are ultimately only a distraction.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 12:54 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:

No Cyclop, Fox News has repeatedly been judged to be within a range of acceptable objectivity to the same degree as USA Today, US News and World Report, ABC, and a few others. Fox tilts a bit right; the others all left but to same same degree of center. What I'm referring to are the blatantly biased sources that make no pretense of objectivity--Salon.com, Daily Kos, Huffington Post, National Enquiror, and some others.


From today's US News and World Report -

Quote:
John McCain's Journey From Maverick to Liar
September 15, 2008 12:14 PM ET | John Aloysius Farrell | Permanent Link

There is a good reason why John McCain's campaign is having some trouble with truthiness these days.

McCain's claim to be a "maverick" rests on the liberal positions he took during the days when he openly fought with Republican leaders and the party's conservative base.

Because he cannot very well motivate Republicans by reminding them of the times he and they have quarreled, he has to distract and dissemble.

Think of the breaks that McCain has made with Republican orthodoxy.

He joined liberal Russ Feingold and pushed for campaign finance reform"conservatives loathed it.

He was a soldier with Al Gore in the fight against global warming"the oil industry and free market think tanks opposed them.

He and Ted Kennedy helped write a humane immigration bill"the GOP nativists despised him.

He joined with Bob Byrd and six other Democrats to kill a Senate Republican plan to pack the federal judiciary"abortion opponents were furious.

He sided with Tom Daschle's Democrats and voted against the Bush tax cuts"the antitax groups fumed.

He took on House and Senate Republicans who were trying to bring pork barrel spending to their states"the GOP majority went ballistic.

And he aligned himself with liberal groups like People for the American Way, when denouncing the clout of "evil" evangelical political leaders.

Actions like these endeared McCain to left-leaning journalists and independent voters who were alarmed by the influence of GOP social and religious conservatives. Even though he was voting with his fellow Republicans 85 percent of the time, McCain built a reputation as a maverick.

Yet, as they prepared for the 2008 presidential race, McCain's advisers knew they would have to woo those conservatives. And so they launched what they called "McCain 2.0" in 2007.

When Jon Stewart asked McCain last year, "Are you going into crazy base world?" the celebrated maverick acknowledged, "I'm afraid so."

McCain flip-flopped on the Bush tax cuts. He abandoned immigration reform. He reached out to Jerry Falwell and other religious conservatives.

It wasn't enough. And so, in a move that even one of his longtime advisers conceded (in a remark captured by an open microphone) was disturbingly "cynical," McCain gave the base Sarah Palin.

Palin was a smart pick. She juiced up the faithful and pleased the preachers, and the hoopla of her nomination eclipsed the inherent flaws of McCain 2.0.

But time moves on, and the Palin balloon has lost a little air as Americans have discovered she is a politician"given to flip-flops, fibs, abuse of power, wasteful spending, and the rest of the familiar roster of venal sins that come with the territory.

The focus is moving back to McCain, who has still not resolved the contradictions of his candidacy.

Is he truly a maverick who, like his self-proclaimed hero, Teddy Roosevelt, will govern as a progressive? Or will he be beholden, as folks like James Dobson and Rush Limbaugh insist, to the conservative base?

So far, the main "maverick" actions that McCain has promised as the next Republican president are to trim nonmilitary Democratic spending and continue the Iraq war. You can't get more conventional than that.

And even that message has been somewhat undermined by disclosures that Palin was a champion of those costly federal earmark projects she has lobbied for in Alaska"where, you know, you can see Russia.

At this point, McCain has taken the obvious way out"launching a series of distracting attacks on Barack Obama, with slim regard for truth.

The ads have spurred a backlash, the consequences (or lack) of which may well decide the election.

For 18 months, Obama has wagered all his chips on the (quaint? idealistic? brilliant?) idea that the American people are tired of the same old sleazy and divisive politics. McCain has now chosen to bet against him.

And we are the cards.


http://www.usnews.com/blogs/john-farrell/2008/9/15/john-mccains-journey-from-maverick-to-liar.html

Cycloptichorn
McGentrix
 
  3  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:10 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Laughing

Was that a followup to foxfyre's comment "What I'm referring to are the blatantly biased sources that make no pretense of objectivity"?

Not a good followup, merely proving her point.
Foxfyre
 
  3  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:14 pm
@McGentrix,
McG (and everybody else looking in) please cast your straw poll vote:

SEVEN WEEKS TO GO

Does anybody get a clear sense of who is most likely to win in November yet? Or is it too close to call?
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:19 pm
@Foxfyre,
Hope: McCain wins

Reality: Too close to call.

Who knows what the numbers will be. Polling data is worthless for actual results. McCain is not running the campaign he should be and Obama has a lot more moon bats spreading his propa... I mean message over the internet where the real news is these days.

It all depends on who actually votes.
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:27 pm
@Ramafuchs,
"Let me wish you that your inclination gets fulfilled and not be like American DREAM( NOT DREAMS OF AMERICAN) which has never been fulfilled."

What? This sentence makes no sense to me.

"May I ask which sort of Americans. There are at present Pro Bush's regime and his party while others are dead against."

Our system is founded upon the proposition that each citizen is free to believe whatever they wish. There are some, even here, who would like to force their own opinions on the rest of society. That's a view that is profoundly at odds with the fundamental values of our system, but it is a view that is never-the-less protected. In a pluralistic society, the range of opinion on almost any matter of significance is very, very wide. We have different convictions about what is important, and the means of achieving even the most agreed upon objectives and goals. Finding unanimity on almost anything is within our system almost an impossibility.

If our system was something close to a pure democracy, the United States would cease to be an effective government. Personal and special interests cancel one another out, and partisan conflict would ham-string any effective government policy or action. We tried something similar with the Articles of Confederation that utterly failed to provide effective government during and immediately after the War for American Independence.

A strong, effective central government is a necessity, but such a government poses the risk of tyranny and suppression of individual liberty. Our solution to that problem is contained in the Constitution. We have a representative government, where our political representatives are charged with managing our national interests. The Legislative Branch holds the purse strings, and is charged with passing legislation to insure some uniformity between the interests of the various states. The Congress, representing the differing interests of the States, individuals and interest groups, is continually divided and obstructive to radical change, no matter how evident the need might be. The Executive Branch, headed by the President is intended to make decisions and act in a timely manner to circumstances facing the nation with the primary focus being on security, foreign policy, and the national economy. The Judicial Branch mediates between the other two branches, and interprets what Constitutional principles are to be applied to specific, narrow questions. It's a cumbersome and cranky system, but it has resulted in the glory of the our nation.

The Will of the People is most notably expressed in who they choose to represent them in their local, state, and federal governments. They vote for that Party or candidate they feel best represents their personal interests. The voters can be misled, but their vote is decisive in determining who will represent them. The majority rules, though we have a system that weights and balances to insure that the interests of small and scattered populations are not overwhelmed by large population centers or states. That's the Electoral College, in case you're interested.

The Will of the People is even more fundamentally expressed in the countless choices that each citizen makes every day. Our citizens pursue their own interests. They want to be secure in their own religious beliefs and that their own moral/ethical codes should be secure. They want to own property and build their personal/family wealth. Their want to pursue their own ideas about what constitutes "happiness" without being dictated to by anyone else here, or in the world. They don't want to give up rights and privileges they've long become accustomed to. These and other commonalities can be found throughout our society, and in aggregate those values, expectations, and desires make up "The Will of the People". No popularity poll, or political movement completely captures the American Will, because it is always diverse and dynamically shifting.

The American Dream is that each individual is free and at liberty to pursue their own interests. Unfettered individualism is just another way of creating the chaos of anarchism, an approach that is destructive of the security and predictability of government that is necessary for liberty to thrive.

0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:30 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

Laughing

Was that a followup to foxfyre's comment "What I'm referring to are the blatantly biased sources that make no pretense of objectivity"?

Not a good followup, merely proving her point.


US News was one of the sources she deemed 'as objective as Fox News.'

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:41 pm
More lies by Palin in the Troopergate investigation.

Quote:
Fired Official: Governor Sarah Palin Did Not Tell the Truth to ABC
Walt Monegan Says He Was Called to Gov.'s Office Over a "Private Family Matter"


By RHONDA SCHWARTZ and JUSTIN ROOD

September 15, 2008"

"She's not telling the truth when she told ABC neither she nor her husband pressured me to fire Trooper Wooten," said Walt Monegan, the Alaskan official whose dismissal by Sarah Palin is the focus of a state investigation known as "Troopergate". "And she's not telling the truth to the media about her reasons for firing me."

In an exclusive interview with ABC News.com, former Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan said he resisted pressure by the First Couple to re-open an old case against a state trooper, who was in a hotly contested divorce and custody battle with the Governor's sister Molly.

Alaskan lawmakers are investigating whether Palin and her husband used the power of the Governor's office to conduct a personal vendetta against their former brother-in-law, whose behavior during the 2005 divorce was described by the Palin family as " threatening."

In a 20/20 interview, Palin told ABC's Charles Gibson she dismissed Monegan for poor job performance and that neither she nor her husband pressured Monegan to fire State Trooper Wooten. "We never did. I never pressured him to hire or fire anybody," Palin said.

But Monegan told ABC News.com he was summoned to a meeting with Todd Palin in December 2006, shortly after Sarah Palin became governor.

"I was called to her Anchorage formal Governor's office to talk with Todd Palin about an issue that was a private family matter," recounted Monegan. Todd became "upset," Monegan recalled, when told the allegations had already been investigated and the case would not be re-opened.

"When Sarah later called to tell me the same thing, I thought to myself, 'I may not be long for this job.'" But, Monegan said, he stood by his position. "I held the public trust. As Chief, I was responsible."

Governor Palin initially agreed to "cooperate fully" with the Alaska state legislative investigation but since being chosen as John McCain's running mate both she and her husband have refused to testify voluntarily. Friday the legislature issued a subpoena for Todd Palin.

Monegan said he tried to persuade the first couple to drop the matter. "As a cop for 35 years I'm pretty familiar with issues that come up in divorce cases," and said his argument to both Todd and Sarah was, "if this was so egregious, why didn't you bring it up sooner? Why did you wait until several years later?"

Monegan, who gave sworn testimony behind closed doors for nearly eight hours last week, said he also provided the State's investigator with copies of e-mails he received from the Governor in which she referred in disparaging terms to her former brother-in-law.

"This is not a 'he said she said' situation. Others were contacted by Todd and Sarah as well," according to Monegan, who said he was confident the investigation would find adequate documentation to corroborate his testimony.


The former Public Safety Commissioner also strongly defended his job performance in response to Palin's complaints about his work to ABC's Gibson.

"After two years he wasn't meeting the goals I wanted met in that area of public service, there were a lot of things we were lacking and a lot of goals weren't being met." Palin said on 20/20.

"No goals were conveyed to me by the Governor at any time," said Monegan.

"All of the Commissioners who worked for the Governor would say the same. She was preoccupied with her pipeline proposal," Monegan said. "All of us were waiting to hear what goals she would set for our departments."

Monegan said the Governor never sat down to talk with him about public safety priorities. "She met with us perhaps four times," he said, "and half the time the Governor was busy on her Blackberry. In one meeting she took a phone call and left the room, directing us to talk to her aide."

The only goals that were set for his department, said Monegan, "we incorporated through the Department of Public Safety Strategic Plan, which we ran past her, she approved and we posted on our website."

The former Commissioner said under his leadership the department was pursuing several new initiatives, but that efforts were slowed down by union contract negotiations.

Monegan stressed he was not upset and did hold any animosity toward his former boss. "I like the lady," said Monegan. "I bear her no animosity, I admire her intelligence and initiative. I wish I could respect her more for her integrity."

Meanwhile the Governor has requested her own investigation of Monegan's dismissal by the State Personnel Board and Anchorage attorney Thomas V. Von Flein has been retained to represent the First Couple in the state legislature's investigating committee.

When asked how he came to represent the Palins, Von Flein told ABC News he could not reveal who hired him due to attorney client privilege but that "he worked through word of mouth."

Von Flein said he questioned the validity of the legislature's subpoena power and expressed his concerns that the committee's investigation had become "a highly politicized investigation conducted in secret " reminiscent of "the McCarthy era."


http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5804703&page=1

What a bunch of Bullshit on the part of the Palins. There exists ample evidence showing that she pursued a vendetta against her ex-brother in law, and fired those who wouldn't comply with her vendetta. This is not the sort of action that we want to see in someone being considered for the VP spot.

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:46 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
My, how things have changed in eight short years.



Today, he lies about everything, constantly. And he's hired the same Bush people who created those negative ads against him to create the negative ads against Obama.

Pathetic

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:47 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Oh sure it is, but what you posted was a blog entry by someone who has other blog entries as:

"McCain's Faustian Bargain"
"The Hockey Mom Is Home or Away?"
"Barack 'Pollyanna' Obama Versus Sarahcuda Palin"
"McCain Speech: I, Me, Mine"
"The Republicans Think We're Redneck Dolts"
"Palin-drama: Is Teen Marriage Best for the Coming Child?"
"Democrats and Labor: A Beautiful Friendship"
"White Voters and the Fall of the Democratic Party"

Objective? Laughing Laughing

Didn't you just go after someone else's source as being a rapid partisan?
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Reply Mon 15 Sep, 2008 01:49 pm
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

Oh sure it is, but what you posted was a blog entry by someone who has other blog entries as:

"McCain's Faustian Bargain"
"The Hockey Mom Is Home or Away?"
"Barack 'Pollyanna' Obama Versus Sarahcuda Palin"
"McCain Speech: I, Me, Mine"
"The Republicans Think We're Redneck Dolts"
"Palin-drama: Is Teen Marriage Best for the Coming Child?"
"Democrats and Labor: A Beautiful Friendship"
"White Voters and the Fall of the Democratic Party"

Objective? Laughing Laughing

Didn't you just go after someone else's source as being a rapid partisan?


Well, it was clearly marked as an opinion piece. And, did you mean a 'rabid' partisan?

Tahiri's problem is that he makes up facts and reports them as facts. There's a big difference between this and an opinion piece.

Cycloptichorn
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/09/2021 at 05:23:44