25
   

Who won the debate? Obama or McCain?

 
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 07:59 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre, Obama is plainly wrong, and ci and his co-debators also know it. It is disappointing that his defenders are just as dishonest as Obama and his staff is. What is disconcerting is that Obama never admits he has been wrong, but he weasels out of what he has said by explaining it away. I am going to start thinking of him as the slickster. He is a slick talker. I think Mr. Slickster would be a good name.

Another couple of points (among many) that needs examining in regard to the debate. Obama keeps asserting that he will wean us off of Middle Eastern oil in 10 years. How, nobody knows, including Obama apparently, because I have yet to hear of any practical means to do it to come out of his mouth. And he opposes more drilling, or has in the past. Also, nuclear, he claims to favor nuclear, but has voted against measures that would move nuclear along, so go figure that one. Of course McCain pointed it out, but the vast majority of people watching the debate is probably too dense to know what is going on.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 08:02 pm
@farmerman,
I imagine McCain would have the honesty to clarify what he meant to say, in regard to the 700B, fm. Some of the 700B we send out of the country for oil does go to states that don't like us. McCain has his weaknesses, but he doesn't intentionally try to deceive, as I think Obama does.
patiodog
 
  3  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 08:05 pm
@okie,
If there is no intentional deceit on McCain's part, what do you think of the wildly erroneous claims that earmarks have tripled in recent years?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 08:11 pm
@patiodog,
Yeah, McCain the straight talk express.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/06/mccain-earmark/
okie
 
  5  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 08:13 pm
@patiodog,
Look, I don't know, I never supported McCain until he was my only choice. I would think he should know? Is it a matter of definition? I have not gotten interested in earmarks to tell you the truth, because I have never looked at them as the primary problem, just a symptom of the problem. If he has it wrong, which I don't know, I will take your word for it, but having followed McCain for a number of years, my guess is he just is a little naive in regard to some things, but not a liar.

I always become frustrated when for example, the debate, the candidates were asked what would be your main policies following the financial crisis, what would you do, and immediately McCain launches into his sermon about earmarks and corruption, and government spending. Okay, John, that is a problem, but I am sitting there just hoping he would get off of that subject for once and address some of the other important issues relative to the economy.

I am left with a choice between mediocre and disaster, Obama being disaster.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 08:21 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Here's another McCain flip-flop on pork:
Quote:
Friday, September 12, 2008
Hypocrisy, pork, and earmarks...McCain was against Palin's pork spending before he was for it...

Wow...

Republican presidential candidate John McCain criticized two of his future running mate's hometown projects in broadsides in 2001 against congressional "pork-barrel" spending, records from the Arizona senator's office show.
---
But when Palin served as mayor of her hometown of Wasilla, outside Anchorage, she obtained about $27 million in federal "earmarks" during her last four years in office, according to the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

In a 2001 statement opposing a transportation spending bill McCain singled out for criticism about $3 million worth of those projects. McCain's list of "objectionable" spending included a $2.5 million road project for the town that then had a population of 5,500, as well as a $450,000 appropriation for an agricultural processing plant there.
---
"As mayor of Wasilla, Gov. Palin was forced to work within the current system to obtain critical funding for a growing city," the campaign said in a statement. [Editor's Note: So much for being a "maverick"...]
---
Palin already has been facing questions about her stump-speech claim to have said " 'Thanks, but no thanks' for that bridge to nowhere up in Alaska." Palin originally supported construction of the infamous bridge from Ketchikan to its airport on sparsely populated Gravina Island, but canceled work on the span in 2007 after the price tag increased from about $200 million to nearly $400 million and it became a symbol of congressional excess.



Amazing. The flip-flops just keep on rolling in from McCain-Palin...


okie
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 11:02 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Hey ci, how is Obama going to eliminate oil imports from the Middle East in 10 years? Before you answer that question, why shouldn't he include Venezuela? After all, they are a member of OPEC, and Hugo doesn't like us very much? He probably likes Obama pretty well, and vice versa, but that is beside the point. But whether Venezuela is included or not, it doesn't matter, the statement is rather fairy tale like, don't you think? Especially given the fact that Obama has not come up with anything concrete to replace the oil, either by increasing our own production or by replacing it with another energy source except by suggesting some vague expenditure on increasing wind and solar. Nuclear, he claims to favor, but votes against anything that moves nuclear development ahead. He may come out with a presidential edict that all cars will average more economy, and just like magic, I guess he figures that will solve the problem?

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist_chart/MTTIMXX2m.jpg
barackman28
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 11:12 pm
@okie,
I don't think you have listened to or have read Senator Obama's ideas on Energy.

It's quite simple. Alternative Energy sources. Green ones. Electric powered automobiles. windenergy. Solar Power. Those sources will free us from the use of Oil in ten years, according to Senator Om=bama
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2008 11:43 pm
@barackman28,
barackman28 wrote:

I don't think you have listened to or have read Senator Obama's ideas on Energy.

It's quite simple. Alternative Energy sources. Green ones. Electric powered automobiles. windenergy. Solar Power. Those sources will free us from the use of Oil in ten years, according to Senator Om=bama

Barackman, I don't know why I never understood it before? I guess I just wasn't listening very well. The answer is so simple, if I had only listened to Mr. Obama. Some of these problems seem to be so huge until I hear the solutions from Mr. Obama. He explains them with very simple solutions that just need to be said, and like magic, I am no longer worried. Thanks, Barackman, I feel much better.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 05:40 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Look, I don't know, I never supported McCain until he was my only choice. I would think he should know? Is it a matter of definition? I have not gotten interested in earmarks to tell you the truth, because I have never looked at them as the primary problem, just a symptom of the problem. If he has it wrong, which I don't know, I will take your word for it


Quote:
Earmarks Down, Not Up

McCain was way off the mark when he said that earmarks in federal appropriations bills had tripled in the last five years.

Quote:
McCain: But the point is that " you see, I hear this all the time. "It's only $18
billion." Do you know that it's tripled in the last five years?


In fact, earmarks have actually gone down. According to Citizens Against Government Waste, there was $22.5 billion worth of earmark spending in 2003. By 2008, that figure had come down to $17.2 billion. That's a decrease of 24 percent.

Taxpayers for Common Sense, another watchdog group, said in 2008 that "Congress has cut earmarks by 23 percent from the record 2005 levels," according to its analysis.


http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_debate_no_1.html

My take on McCain is that he just isn't very patient. He decides something, based on whatever information, and then sticks to it -- even if it turns out to be wrong. Or even if it becomes outdated. ("Record 2005 levels" sticks out for me -- I bet McCain has been saying this since 2005.)

I think his advisors/ campaign purposely lie more than he does. But I think he is fundamentally incurious, impatient, and impulsive -- none of which are good characteristics for a president, IMO.
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 06:06 am
@sozobe,
I'm amused by the bear DNA story McCain has been telling for years, since he voted for the bill containing it and his revision of the bill did not alter this earmark at all.

What I remember about the erstwhile Maverick McCain is that he bucked to the Republican trend on issues like the environment and campaign finance -- neither of which he can claim now. But he still wants to maintain his insider/outsider status, so he goes after something that wasn't a big issue for him in the past. Not that it'll matter in the course of the campaign, given our national attention span...
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 07:40 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

I always become frustrated when for example, the debate, the candidates were asked what would be your main policies following the financial crisis, what would you do, and immediately McCain launches into his sermon about earmarks and corruption, and government spending. Okay, John, that is a problem, but I am sitting there just hoping he would get off of that subject for once and address some of the other important issues relative to the economy.

I don't have many opportunities to agree with you, okie, so I'll take this one. When McCain went off about earmarks and spending in response to questions about the financial crisis I thought, wow, he knows a lot about this stuff. It's too bad that's not what this crisis (financial, not fiscal) is about. I thought he was making an excellent argument for himself to stay in the Senate and straighten that mess out.
0 Replies
 
Cliff Hanger
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 08:20 am
Well, I'll be darned. No wonder why my post is being ignored--
I looked for this topic when I got in the site and now it appears in order not to post about the same topic. Ha.

What's funny is-- as an Obama supporter I see all other Obama supporters say the same thing. McCain lies, distorts etc.

I think part of the problem with Obama not telling McCain he's lying is it's a temperment issue for Obama, he can't be seen as anything but level-headed.
okie
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 08:54 am
@Cliff Hanger,
Cliff Hanger wrote:

What's funny is-- as an Obama supporter I see all other Obama supporters say the same thing. McCain lies, distorts etc.

That is funny! I can't imagine why that would happen?
Cliff Hanger
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 09:03 am
@okie,
I don't know well enough to get the angle of your response-- but what I am saying is, the responses are practically verbatim, which isn't funny so much as a little bit disturbing.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 09:10 am
@Cliff Hanger,
And when Obama does this, is it funny rather than disturbing, or what is it?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 09:15 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

, I will take your word for it, but having followed McCain for a number of years, my guess is he just is a little naive in regard to some things, but not a liar.



McCain is naive but we are supposed to accept him as the experienced one? That seems a little odd to me.

McCain has a good heart, he just doesn't know what the hell he is talking about. Ok, but that doesn't make me want him as my president.
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 10:20 am
@parados,
The real question should be, "where's the old McCain?" With all his recent flip-flops, I haven't heard one conservative tell us where he stands on the major issues of our day.
barackman28
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 05:49 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You are absolutely right. Go to McCain's web site and you find nothing but doubletalk and old nostrums. Senator Obama's web site covers so much more in an intelligible and clear way. I have read it several times. One of the main points is that Senator Obama wants to free us from dependence from foreign oil in ten years by a massive campaign using alternative energy sources. We can do it.
0 Replies
 
OGIONIK
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2008 06:02 pm
@okie,
mccain cant even remember how many houses he has, period.

he was either lagging to avoid the question,a form of deceit. or hes senile.

you pick.

what was your choice?
0 Replies
 
 

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
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 05:12:53