...at the DNC, I think my head will explode.
Is there some reason every newscaster and pundit covering this event doesn't think we all get this already?
Anyone else still think with Obama making a surprise appearance last night that he's not trading, to an extent, on his race? Pretty good symbolism for black Americans.
"The sweep of history could be overwhelming in itself: The previous evening Obama became the first black man to be a major political party's presidential candidate, his acceptance of the Democratic nomination coming on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080828/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_convention_rdp
Sorry to disappoint you Conan but you are going to continue hearing "historic" throughout the entire campaign. That's all Obama's candidacy is about. Truth be told, if the issue was foreign policy/national security, the dems would have nominated Clinton or Biden. If it was health care, it would have been Clinton. If it was the economy, it would have been Edwards. And if it the dems were pushing for the moronic nutjob vote, it would have been Kucinich. Obama is neither a master or even an apprentice in any as to any of these issues IMHO.
Countdown to someone calling me or Conan racists, 10...9...8...
It's the same companies who couldn't cover a single women's beach volleyball game without talking about who the U.S. Team (Kerri Ann Walsh and Misty May-Treanor) were married too. They didn't mention it for any male athletes, just these two and about also talk about how they really want to make babies so they may quite volleyball. I think the coverage of that event was about 12 steps back for gender equality.
Conan and Guido accuse Obama of "trading on his race" in 3 - 2 - 1.......
Oh wait. [}:)]
He gives a great speech... He was RIGHT on the Iraq War.... he is right on economics... he has more experience as a legislator than Hillary Clinton... and REAL honest-to-goodness non-koolaid drinking Republicans in Illinois have had a healthy respect for him over the years... and yes, Barack Obama was the FIRST African-American to serve as President of the Harvard Law Review... http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/
It IS historic. It would also be historic if Colin Powell or Condi Rice or.... JC Watts... had been accepting the nomination for prez on the Republican side.
But, then again, whenever the media actually TELLS THE TRUTH in this country and its flattering to a democrat, they're accused of being "liberal."
Cry me a river. [;)]
I'm impressed that this convention has managed the media expectations so well. Granted things started at a slow burn with Michelle's speech, but from a narrative perspective, they've really played the Clinton rift-and-subsequent-unification perfectly.
I tell ya, during the roll call yesterday, I got kinda teary. It was exceptional drama -- to have Hillary close off her own roll call vote and ask to nominate Obama by acclamation. But it wasn't cheesy, manipulative drama, it was the good kind: cathartic, purposeful, and well-crafted.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Anyone else still think with Obama making a surprise appearance last night that he's not trading, to an extent, on his race? Pretty good symbolism for black Americans.
"The sweep of history could be overwhelming in itself: The previous evening Obama became the first black man to be a major political party's presidential candidate, his acceptance of the Democratic nomination coming on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech."
Whaaaa???
Explain "trading on his race." I don't follow. I don't see any trading going on at all.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
...at the DNC, I think my head will explode.
Is there some reason every newscaster and pundit covering this event doesn't think we all get this already?
Anyone else still think with Obama making a surprise appearance last night that he's not trading, to an extent, on his race? Pretty good symbolism for black Americans.
"The sweep of history could be overwhelming in itself: The previous evening Obama became the first black man to be a major political party's presidential candidate, his acceptance of the Democratic nomination coming on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080828/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_convention_rdp
If you just vote for Barack Hussein Obama, then all you and your ancestors past racist, bigoted sins will be forgiven.
White Guilt will be expunged.
Promise.
He's our Redeemer!
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Anyone else still think with Obama making a surprise appearance last night that he's not trading, to an extent, on his race? Pretty good symbolism for black Americans.
"The sweep of history could be overwhelming in itself: The previous evening Obama became the first black man to be a major political party's presidential candidate, his acceptance of the Democratic nomination coming on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech."
Whaaaa???
Explain "trading on his race." I don't follow. I don't see any trading going on at all.
I and others who have been critical of Obama on here have been "reminded" time and again that Obama has never used his race to his advantage in the election or that race has not been an issue with him, nor that it has anything with him ascending to the spot he's got in the Democrat Party today. The symbolism of making a surprise "unscripted" appearance on the 45th anniversary of Dr. King's most noted speech was anything but coincidence.
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
Conan and Guido accuse Obama of "trading on his race" in 3 - 2 - 1.......
Oh wait. [}:)]
He gives a great speech... He was RIGHT on the Iraq War.... he is right on economics... he has more experience as a legislator than Hillary Clinton... and REAL honest-to-goodness non-koolaid drinking Republicans in Illinois have had a healthy respect for him over the years... and yes, Barack Obama was the FIRST African-American to serve as President of the Harvard Law Review... http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/
It IS historic. It would also be historic if Colin Powell or Condi Rice or.... JC Watts... had been accepting the nomination for prez on the Republican side.
But, then again, whenever the media actually TELLS THE TRUTH in this country and its flattering to a democrat, they're accused of being "liberal."
Cry me a river. [;)]
My head will explode next week if Romney is the VP pick and they keep talking about it being historical for a Mormon to share a ticket.
Instead of "Gritz & Fritz" it will be "Mick & The Mor
mon".
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
Conan and Guido accuse Obama of "trading on his race" in 3 - 2 - 1.......
Oh wait. [}:)]
He gives a great speech... He was RIGHT on the Iraq War.... he is right on economics... he has more experience as a legislator than Hillary Clinton... and REAL honest-to-goodness non-koolaid drinking Republicans in Illinois have had a healthy respect for him over the years... and yes, Barack Obama was the FIRST African-American to serve as President of the Harvard Law Review... http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/
It IS historic. It would also be historic if Colin Powell or Condi Rice or.... JC Watts... had been accepting the nomination for prez on the Republican side.
But, then again, whenever the media actually TELLS THE TRUTH in this country and its flattering to a democrat, they're accused of being "liberal."
Cry me a river. [;)]
My head will explode next week if Romney is the VP pick and they keep talking about it being historical for a Mormon to share a ticket.
Instead of "Gritz & Fritz" it will be "Mick & The Mormon".
A lot of evangelicals' heads will explode, too.
Evangelicals like other evangelicals -- unless they're Mormon, of course. Then they're cults.
[}:)]
Historic is an understatement. Monumental would be more appropriate. Unless you are lacking in the "mental" part.
The devil is into exploding heads.[}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Anyone else still think with Obama making a surprise appearance last night that he's not trading, to an extent, on his race? Pretty good symbolism for black Americans.
"The sweep of history could be overwhelming in itself: The previous evening Obama became the first black man to be a major political party's presidential candidate, his acceptance of the Democratic nomination coming on the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech."
Whaaaa???
Explain "trading on his race." I don't follow. I don't see any trading going on at all.
I and others who have been critical of Obama on here have been "reminded" time and again that Obama has never used his race to his advantage in the election or that race has not been an issue with him, nor that it has anything with him ascending to the spot he's got in the Democrat Party today. The symbolism of making a surprise "unscripted" appearance on the 45th anniversary of Dr. King's most noted speech was anything but coincidence.
It should be noted that the schedule for the convention was set on January 11, 2007.
http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/01/denver_to_host.php
Heck, Obama didn't even announce his candidacy until February 2007.
Obviously, this schedule was set well before Obama received a single vote in a single primary or caucus, and that's when Hillary Clinton was still considered the prohibitive favorite. The nominee always speaks on the final night of the convention.
So to say the selection of the date was to help Obama flies in the face of the facts, unless the DNC was somehow clairvoyant.
So, yes, I'd say it was a happy accident for him, considering that no one was positive who the nominee would be 20 months ago.
BTW, the "unscripted" appearance last night was not on the anniversary of the King speech. The anniversary is today. King's speech was on Aug. 28, 1963.
Conan, if you're going to allege some lame conspiracy or other "trading in" theories, you'd better have your facts straight or you'll look mighty foolish.
C'mon. You're a reasonably smart guy. I expect better of you. [V]
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
BTW, the "unscripted" appearance last night was not on the anniversary of the King speech. The anniversary is today. King's speech was on Aug. 28, 1963.
Conan, if you're going to allege some lame conspiracy or other "trading in" theories, you'd better have your facts straight or you'll look mighty foolish.
C'mon. You're a reasonably smart guy. I expect better of you. [V]
I'm blaming it on a defective calendar. I'm getting ready to head to Target to get a refund. [}:)]
Conan....pm me your phone number. The devil in me wants to hear what a head explosion sounds like.[8D]
I like BO's outfit for the evening.
(http://www.nypost.com/seven/08282008/photos/news006.jpg)
Should be a nice performance.
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
I'm impressed that this convention has managed the media expectations so well. Granted things started at a slow burn with Michelle's speech, but from a narrative perspective, they've really played the Clinton rift-and-subsequent-unification perfectly.
I tell ya, during the roll call yesterday, I got kinda teary. It was exceptional drama -- to have Hillary close off her own roll call vote and ask to nominate Obama by acclamation. But it wasn't cheesy, manipulative drama, it was the good kind: cathartic, purposeful, and well-crafted.
The Daily Show's "Look Who's Coming to Denver" coverage has been histerical. I loved Samantha Bee's nudge at Hillary's "I support Obama" speech. She even found the same orange pants suit. Priceless.
quote:
Originally posted by carltonplace
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
I'm impressed that this convention has managed the media expectations so well. Granted things started at a slow burn with Michelle's speech, but from a narrative perspective, they've really played the Clinton rift-and-subsequent-unification perfectly.
I tell ya, during the roll call yesterday, I got kinda teary. It was exceptional drama -- to have Hillary close off her own roll call vote and ask to nominate Obama by acclamation. But it wasn't cheesy, manipulative drama, it was the good kind: cathartic, purposeful, and well-crafted.
The Daily Show's "Look Who's Coming to Denver" coverage has been histerical. I loved Samantha Bee's nudge at Hillary's "I support Obama" speech. She even found the same orange pants suit. Priceless.
You think Stewie has been funny this week, wait til next week. Better material to work with......
CARL BERNSTEIN:assessment of the DNCC (from cnn.com):
"Barack Obama is getting the convention he wants, under extraordinarily difficult circumstances. The convention he is building reflects him and his priorities: it's thoughtful, not just red-meat; and he's in surprising control of the message, given the forces he's dealing with. Indeed, the convention-building and the message may be far more sophisticated and effective than we instant commentators were prepared to discern. Witness the opening night grousing on-air about the convention's supposed thematic absence, and aversion to instant butchery of the opposition."
Wait and we will see who hugs who next week....can't wait. The GOP puts on such a false front. It's fun just to see their shenanigan mentality.
FOTD will be ROTFLMAO!!!!
Hey FOTD, why do you refer to yourself in the 3rd person?
Obama or McCain = more of the same
Don't get me wrong, the fringe candidates are worse. Barr, Paul, Nader makes me ill to think about it.
quote:
Originally posted by KingMutt
Hey FOTD, why do you refer to yourself in the 3rd person?
Obama or McCain = more of the same
Don't get me wrong, the fringe candidates are worse. Barr, Paul, Nader makes me ill to think about it.
Friends of the Devil are third persons.....kinda like non theists.
I have been watching CSPAN because then I do not have to listen to all the self-important yakkers blabbing about stuff they have no idea about and are only guessing. I think they are being paid by the word for this week.
I listened to the second day on XM radio (POTUS channel 130) travelling thru Missouri. Even the supposed non aligned commentators could hardly keep their traps shut. They felt obligated to 'splain stuff to us morons. If you like it all explained, MSNBC and PBS are okay as long as you're ready for some appreciative remarks. If you aren't, then tune in Fox and watch them squirm with envy.
Conan, I'll never forget my high school government teacher telling us each day in the fall of 1968 that we were witnessing history being made. We had no reference point to really know, but he did. We just saw some rough and tumble politics that cost the country the chance to have enjoyed Humprhey rather than suffered through Nixon.
I don't think this is historical only because of his race though that is momentous. As a child I saw "whites only" drinking fountains here in Tulsa. Only disreputable women worked or asked for divorces in the early 60's. Now 45 years later both a minority and a woman are taken seriously as candidates for president.
I think for the first time in a decade people are starting to understand what has been happening. We've been lied to, stolen from, pandered to and mistreated in the name of patriotism, fear and greed. Some see it as coming from both parties and have turned away from them in disgust only to find they have little other choice. But others see it has having been one sided since one party controlled all branches government. I don't want revenge and I don't want to live my political life in Libertarian/Independent purgatory. I see this moment as an opportunity for all classes to recapture the promise they saw in America pre-911.
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
quote:
Originally posted by carltonplace
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
I'm impressed that this convention has managed the media expectations so well. Granted things started at a slow burn with Michelle's speech, but from a narrative perspective, they've really played the Clinton rift-and-subsequent-unification perfectly.
I tell ya, during the roll call yesterday, I got kinda teary. It was exceptional drama -- to have Hillary close off her own roll call vote and ask to nominate Obama by acclamation. But it wasn't cheesy, manipulative drama, it was the good kind: cathartic, purposeful, and well-crafted.
The Daily Show's "Look Who's Coming to Denver" coverage has been histerical. I loved Samantha Bee's nudge at Hillary's "I support Obama" speech. She even found the same orange pants suit. Priceless.
You think Stewie has been funny this week, wait til next week. Better material to work with......
CARL BERNSTEIN:assessment of the DNCC (from cnn.com):
"Barack Obama is getting the convention he wants, under extraordinarily difficult circumstances. The convention he is building reflects him and his priorities: it's thoughtful, not just red-meat; and he's in surprising control of the message, given the forces he's dealing with. Indeed, the convention-building and the message may be far more sophisticated and effective than we instant commentators were prepared to discern. Witness the opening night grousing on-air about the convention's supposed thematic absence, and aversion to instant butchery of the opposition."
Wait and we will see who hugs who next week....can't wait. The GOP puts on such a false front. It's fun just to see their shenanigan mentality.
FOTD will be ROTFLMAO!!!!
That's a big piece of self-love by Bernstein. Wow, usually he's got more substance and offers up something interesting.
Hey, Sarah Palin is the GOP's first vice presidential pick who's a woman.
It's historic!
(waiting for the sound of the blast)
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Hey, Sarah Palin is the GOP's first vice presidential pick who's a woman.
It's historic!
(waiting for the sound of the blast)
Sorry, Tulsa World already got a
"HA-BLAM" out of me this morning with their page 1 headline. Nice try though.
A head can't explode twice?
John McCain is the first Vietnam POW to run for president! It's historic!
The use of the term "historic" is not as nauseating as the people CRYING during a f'in political rally.
There's no person alive or dead that has ever been involved in politics that should evoke emotions like that in any person tethered to reality.
I don't live and die by who occupies the white house. No politician is that worthy of our admiration and emotional investment.
Get a grip folks.
People cry at weddings and funerals... folks at the republican convention shed tears at Ronald Reagan's speeches... and Obama supporters show emotion when a WONDERFUL POLITICAL SPEECH is delivered. It was inspiring for alot of us...
Go back to your hole, IPLAW.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
A head can't explode twice?
John McCain is the first Vietnam POW to run for president! It's historic!
About three times so far today.
As the devil correctly predicted, a monumental speech. One of the top political speeches in our country's history! HISTORIC!
"The record's clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush ninety percent of the time. Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush was right more than ninety percent of the time? I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a ten percent chance on change."...
What does it say about your judgement Conan?
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
The use of the term "historic" is not as nauseating as the people CRYING during a f'in political rally.
There's no person alive or dead that has ever been involved in politics that should evoke emotions like that in any person tethered to reality.
I don't live and die by who occupies the white house. No politician is that worthy of our admiration and emotional investment.
Get a grip folks.
IP's so tough that Old Yeller cried when he saw him.
I predict that they'll be some Republican boo-hooing next week at your rally. And even more on November 5.
I myself am curious to see what kind of political speech you get by stringing together a half a dozen moose-huntin' stories.
Slam of the day, "(Sarah Palin) forces every American to ask him/herself, why aren't
I running for president?" (//%22http://www.236.com/news/2008/08/29/lady_quayle_her_kids_are_named_8572.php%22)
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
As the devil correctly predicted, a monumental speech. One of the top political speeches in our country's history! HISTORIC!
"The record's clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush ninety percent of the time. Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush was right more than ninety percent of the time? I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a ten percent chance on change."...
What does it say about your judgement Conan?
At least we know where McCain stands. Pretty hard to tell for certain who a candidate is if they shy away from voting with an NV. Obama has had NV's on many of the wedge issues: children's healthcare (NV on a $160mm Coburn bill, tsk, tsk), abortion, energy, etc.
He's either been too busy seeking higher office whilst still collecting his $180K + paycheck from the Treasury for his Senate "work", or too afraid to leave a paper trail for where he stands on issues.
Why does this not trouble you? Why am I arguing with you about it anyhow? You got duped a long time ago and are recruiting other dupes.
What a dupe bag. [8D]
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
As the devil correctly predicted, a monumental speech. One of the top political speeches in our country's history! HISTORIC!
"The record's clear: John McCain has voted with George Bush ninety percent of the time. Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush was right more than ninety percent of the time? I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a ten percent chance on change."...
What does it say about your judgement Conan?
At least we know where McCain stands. Pretty hard to tell for certain who a candidate is if they shy away from voting with an NV. Obama has had NV's on many of the wedge issues: children's healthcare (NV on a $160mm Coburn bill, tsk, tsk), abortion, energy, etc.
He's either been too busy seeking higher office whilst still collecting his $180K + paycheck from the Treasury for his Senate "work", or too afraid to leave a paper trail for where he stands on issues.
Why does this not trouble you? Why am I arguing with you about it anyhow? You got duped a long time ago and are recruiting other dupes.
What a dupe bag. [8D]
Dupes....NO STUPES![:P]
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
The use of the term "historic" is not as nauseating as the people CRYING during a f'in political rally.
There's no person alive or dead that has ever been involved in politics that should evoke emotions like that in any person tethered to reality.
I don't live and die by who occupies the white house. No politician is that worthy of our admiration and emotional investment.
Get a grip folks.
IP's so tough that Old Yeller cried when he saw him.
I predict that they'll be some Republican boo-hooing next week at your rally. And even more on November 5.
I myself am curious to see what kind of political speech you get by stringing together a half a dozen moose-huntin' stories.
Slam of the day, "(Sarah Palin) forces every American to ask him/herself, why aren't I running for president?" (//%22http://www.236.com/news/2008/08/29/lady_quayle_her_kids_are_named_8572.php%22)
And anyone that does should be rounded up and sent packing. Just more evidence that some people think a political candidate can somehow save them. This goes for both sides.
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
People cry at weddings and funerals... folks at the republican convention shed tears at Ronald Reagan's speeches... and Obama supporters show emotion when a WONDERFUL POLITICAL SPEECH is delivered. It was inspiring for alot of us...
Go back to your hole, IPLAW.
How astute of you to compare Barry's speech to a funeral.
Do you wake up angry every day naturally?
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
Slam of the day, "(Sarah Palin) forces every American to ask him/herself, why aren't I running for president?" (//%22http://www.236.com/news/2008/08/29/lady_quayle_her_kids_are_named_8572.php%22)
Another article comparing Palin to Quayle, as if she is the one who thinks the U.S. has 57 states comprised of typical white people.
Here I thought it was historic because he was the first Presidential Candidate that was born in Hawaii. [8D]
Ip. There is no Barry. Your style of denigrate, slash, innuendo and spin is becoming history.
Just because you keep saying Obama has no experience, that Palin is qualified doesn't make it so. Bush had lots of experience. Experience in banking, oil, sports and a governorship. It didn't help much. Without the help of his connected father he couldn't successfully manage a Burger King. That's something he shares with McCain whose experience is mostly in failures. Failure to graduate from the academy out of the last quartile. Failure to return three fighter planes from what I read (he wasn't even qualified to fly them, daddy helped). Failure to adequately oversee S&L's in the 80's leading to an industry collapse which nearly ended his career in scandal. Earned him some history as part of the Keating Five. Failure to treat his wife decently which led to him cheating on her and divorcing her for a younger, richer wife (the Reagan's complained to him about his public mistreatment of his exwife). Some experience eh?
And how about Palin's experience? Gratuitously referred to as 2years (late fall 2006 to present) but somehow Senator Obama has only 153 days even though he spoke as a senator in the 2004 Dem convention? Nice spin. Of course he hasn't been a real executive like Palin who managed to sloppily involve herself with her sister's messy divorce that invited ethics investigations. There's some experience that most of us would have steered clear of.
Your name calling and spin is tedious. Support your candidates if you can. Play them up, they need it! When you guys slip off into the spin zone you sound pretty desperate.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Just because you keep saying Obama has no experience, that Palin is qualified doesn't make it so.
I agree that Palin has limited experience, but I also see that Obama has just as little. It's just that we bothered to put the person with limited experience on the bottom of the ticket.
quote:
Bush had lots of experience. Experience in banking, oil, sports and a governorship. It didn't help much. Without the help of his connected father he couldn't successfully manage a Burger King. That's something he shares with McCain whose experience is mostly in failures. Failure to graduate from the academy out of the last quartile. Failure to return three fighter planes from what I read. Failure to adequately oversee S&L's in the 80's leading to an industry collapse which nearly ended his career in scandal. Earned him some history as part of the Keating Five. Failure to treat his wife decently which led to him cheating on her and divorcing her for a younger, richer wife (the Reagan's complained to him about his public mistreatment of his exwife). Some experience eh?
I can't help you with your Bush derangement syndrome. He'll be gone soon and maybe you can move on?
quote:
And how about Palin's experience? Gratuitously referred to as 2years (late fall 2006 to present) but somehow Senator Obama has only 153 days even though he spoke as a senator in the 2004 Dem convention? Nice spin. Of course he hasn't been a real executive like Palin who managed to sloppily involve herself with her sister's messy divorce that invited ethics investigations. There's some experience that most of us would have steered clear of.
Again, Palin isn't running against Obama, McCain is.
Your subjective, selective recount of Palin's experience sounds a whole lot like the old politics of the past, distorting for political gain. I find it amusing that the only thing you choose to select from here past is that which you think is advantageous for you party.
Meet the new era of politics, same as the old politics.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Just because you keep saying Obama has no experience, that Palin is qualified doesn't make it so.
I agree that Palin has limited experience, but I also see that Obama has just as little. It's just that we bothered to put the person with limited experience on the bottom of the ticket.
quote:
Bush had lots of experience. Experience in banking, oil, sports and a governorship. It didn't help much. Without the help of his connected father he couldn't successfully manage a Burger King. That's something he shares with McCain whose experience is mostly in failures. Failure to graduate from the academy out of the last quartile. Failure to return three fighter planes from what I read. Failure to adequately oversee S&L's in the 80's leading to an industry collapse which nearly ended his career in scandal. Earned him some history as part of the Keating Five. Failure to treat his wife decently which led to him cheating on her and divorcing her for a younger, richer wife (the Reagan's complained to him about his public mistreatment of his exwife). Some experience eh?
I can't help you with your Bush derangement syndrome. He'll be gone soon and maybe you can move on?
quote:
And how about Palin's experience? Gratuitously referred to as 2years (late fall 2006 to present) but somehow Senator Obama has only 153 days even though he spoke as a senator in the 2004 Dem convention? Nice spin. Of course he hasn't been a real executive like Palin who managed to sloppily involve herself with her sister's messy divorce that invited ethics investigations. There's some experience that most of us would have steered clear of.
Again, Palin isn't running against Obama, McCain is.
Your subjective, selective recount of Palin's experience sounds a whole lot like the old politics of the past, distorting for political gain. I find it amusing that the only thing you choose to select from here past is that which you think is advantageous for you party.
Meet the new era of politics, same as the old politics.
Gosh, I feel like I could change a few names and regurgitate your post right back at you! I get it. You don't like Obama, doubt you like any Dem on general principles.
I did like McCain before he shifted on some basic beliefs. Back when he really was a maverick. This pick for VP is mystifying. I get the feeling he may not be listening to others and thinks he can just slip this by as genius. Chauncey Gardener genius. He may have been betrayed by his generation's mores rather than by his age. No woman I have spoken to thinks it is anything but patronizing and condescending.
I would have listed more about Palin but there is so dang little she's done. At least Obama has been able to do the amazing resume puffing job somewhat better.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Gosh, I feel like I could change a few names and regurgitate your post right back at you! I get it. You don't like Obama, doubt you like any Dem on general principles.
I did like McCain before he shifted on some basic beliefs. Back when he really was a maverick. This pick for VP is mystifying. I get the feeling he may not be listening to others and thinks he can just slip this by as genius. Chauncey Gardener genius. He may have been betrayed by his generation's mores rather than by his age. No woman I have spoken to thinks it is anything but patronizing and condescending.
I would have listed more about Palin but there is so dang little she's done. At least Obama has been able to do the amazing resume puffing job somewhat better.
I liked James Trafficant...but just because of his hair.
I think taking on your own party and kicking it in the donkey is a great resume builder, as well as taking a stand against 300+ pork projects totally over 200 million dollars in her state. She served on the Alaska Oil Commission and quit after blowing the whistle on her own party for ethics violations. Right in line with McCain of old.
Palin consolidated the base with conservatives and possibly peels off independent women voters on the fence. I don't really think Hillary voters were the target, but if a few take the bait then so be it.
My wife is elated that she was chosen. In fact, at dinner last night, every woman at the table was happy with the pick and loves the idea of a conservative woman who has a strong personality. You may be asking the wrong women.
[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Gosh, I feel like I could change a few names and regurgitate your post right back at you! I get it. You don't like Obama, doubt you like any Dem on general principles.
I did like McCain before he shifted on some basic beliefs. Back when he really was a maverick. This pick for VP is mystifying. I get the feeling he may not be listening to others and thinks he can just slip this by as genius. Chauncey Gardener genius. He may have been betrayed by his generation's mores rather than by his age. No woman I have spoken to thinks it is anything but patronizing and condescending.
I would have listed more about Palin but there is so dang little she's done. At least Obama has been able to do the amazing resume puffing job somewhat better.
I liked James Trafficant...but just because of his hair.
I think taking on your own party and kicking it in the donkey is a great resume builder, as well as taking a stand against 300+ pork projects totally over 200 million dollars in her state. She served on the Alaska Oil Commission and quit after blowing the whistle on her own party for ethics violations. Right in line with McCain of old.
Palin consolidated the base with conservatives and possibly peels off independent women voters on the fence. I don't really think Hillary voters were the target, but if a few take the bait then so be it.
My wife is elated that she was chosen. In fact, at dinner last night, every woman at the table was happy with the pick and loves the idea of a conservative woman who has a strong personality. You may be asking the wrong women.
[;)]
One of us is. But women are inscrutable beings and I suspect they don't really tell us the truth. [;)]
I think Obama did some donkey kicking in his party too. He unseated established Clintonistas then made them like him. He voted counter to his party leaders and contemporaries on Iraq and made them eat crow. If his skills were only in image making and Beatlemania I would agree that he isn't ready. You don't pull off the above with just reading "guerilla marketing".
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
But women are inscrutable beings and I suspect they don't really tell us the truth. [;)]
I never thought of that before. There is really no reason for them to, and now that you mention it we probably can't even handle the truth.
Thanks for the enlightenment. I have been getting it backwards all these years. I thought the reason men lie is that women ask so many damn questions.
[:D] I didn't say they lied. I said I suspect they don't tell us the truth. A razor thin difference that serves to keep both sexes in a tenuous alloy relationship. Separate elements bound together.
Cause they, God and history all know they don't need us. We suspect the same.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Ip. There is no Barry. Your style of denigrate, slash, innuendo and spin is becoming history.
Just because you keep saying Obama has no experience, that Palin is qualified doesn't make it so. Bush had lots of experience. Experience in banking, oil, sports and a governorship. It didn't help much. Without the help of his connected father he couldn't successfully manage a Burger King. That's something he shares with McCain whose experience is mostly in failures. Failure to graduate from the academy out of the last quartile. Failure to return three fighter planes from what I read (he wasn't even qualified to fly them, daddy helped). Failure to adequately oversee S&L's in the 80's leading to an industry collapse which nearly ended his career in scandal. Earned him some history as part of the Keating Five. Failure to treat his wife decently which led to him cheating on her and divorcing her for a younger, richer wife (the Reagan's complained to him about his public mistreatment of his exwife). Some experience eh?
And how about Palin's experience? Gratuitously referred to as 2years (late fall 2006 to present) but somehow Senator Obama has only 153 days even though he spoke as a senator in the 2004 Dem convention? Nice spin. Of course he hasn't been a real executive like Palin who managed to sloppily involve herself with her sister's messy divorce that invited ethics investigations. There's some experience that most of us would have steered clear of.
Your name calling and spin is tedious. Support your candidates if you can. Play them up, they need it! When you guys slip off into the spin zone you sound pretty desperate.
^^^ +1
... except that Obama had only won the Dem primary at the time of his 2004 Democratic convention speech... he then trounced Alan Keyes (who espouses similar views as a certain Mrs. Palin), and Obama captured over 70% of the vote... Obama was sworn in as a senator on January 4, 2005....
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Ip. There is no Barry. Your style of denigrate, slash, innuendo and spin is becoming history.
Just because you keep saying Obama has no experience, that Palin is qualified doesn't make it so. Bush had lots of experience. Experience in banking, oil, sports and a governorship. It didn't help much. Without the help of his connected father he couldn't successfully manage a Burger King. That's something he shares with McCain whose experience is mostly in failures. Failure to graduate from the academy out of the last quartile. Failure to return three fighter planes from what I read (he wasn't even qualified to fly them, daddy helped). Failure to adequately oversee S&L's in the 80's leading to an industry collapse which nearly ended his career in scandal. Earned him some history as part of the Keating Five. Failure to treat his wife decently which led to him cheating on her and divorcing her for a younger, richer wife (the Reagan's complained to him about his public mistreatment of his exwife). Some experience eh?
And how about Palin's experience? Gratuitously referred to as 2years (late fall 2006 to present) but somehow Senator Obama has only 153 days even though he spoke as a senator in the 2004 Dem convention? Nice spin. Of course he hasn't been a real executive like Palin who managed to sloppily involve herself with her sister's messy divorce that invited ethics investigations. There's some experience that most of us would have steered clear of.
Your name calling and spin is tedious. Support your candidates if you can. Play them up, they need it! When you guys slip off into the spin zone you sound pretty desperate.
^^^ +1
... except that Obama had only won the Dem primary at the time of his 2004 Democratic convention speech... he then trounced Alan Keyes (who espouses similar views as a certain Mrs. Palin), and Obama captured over 70% of the vote... Obama was sworn in as a senator on January 4, 2005....
Thanks. That's about a year earlier than Palin and at a Federal level.
quote:
He voted counter to his party leaders and contemporaries on Iraq and made them eat crow.
Come on...The guy wasn't in Congress when they voted to authorize the war. What he would or would not have done is speculation because he wasn't in Congress and didn't have the pressure of having to make that decision and be responsible to constituents, many of whom agreed with the need to go to war. At that time, he was a bystander in Illinois, nothing more.
As far as his vote on the surge he was DEAD wrong.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by USRufnex
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Ip. There is no Barry. Your style of denigrate, slash, innuendo and spin is becoming history.
Just because you keep saying Obama has no experience, that Palin is qualified doesn't make it so. Bush had lots of experience. Experience in banking, oil, sports and a governorship. It didn't help much. Without the help of his connected father he couldn't successfully manage a Burger King. That's something he shares with McCain whose experience is mostly in failures. Failure to graduate from the academy out of the last quartile. Failure to return three fighter planes from what I read (he wasn't even qualified to fly them, daddy helped). Failure to adequately oversee S&L's in the 80's leading to an industry collapse which nearly ended his career in scandal. Earned him some history as part of the Keating Five. Failure to treat his wife decently which led to him cheating on her and divorcing her for a younger, richer wife (the Reagan's complained to him about his public mistreatment of his exwife). Some experience eh?
And how about Palin's experience? Gratuitously referred to as 2years (late fall 2006 to present) but somehow Senator Obama has only 153 days even though he spoke as a senator in the 2004 Dem convention? Nice spin. Of course he hasn't been a real executive like Palin who managed to sloppily involve herself with her sister's messy divorce that invited ethics investigations. There's some experience that most of us would have steered clear of.
Your name calling and spin is tedious. Support your candidates if you can. Play them up, they need it! When you guys slip off into the spin zone you sound pretty desperate.
^^^ +1
... except that Obama had only won the Dem primary at the time of his 2004 Democratic convention speech... he then trounced Alan Keyes (who espouses similar views as a certain Mrs. Palin), and Obama captured over 70% of the vote... Obama was sworn in as a senator on January 4, 2005....
Thanks. That's about a year earlier than Palin and at a Federal level.
Again, you two are still arguing as if Obama is running against Palin. Both camps are trying to pad their resume's, at least for the republicans they don't have to do that with the guy running for president.
Nah, they are spending more time and effort hiding his record! (90% boys, 90%.)
I don't think republicans have to make an effort at this point other than to say that his resume is paper thin. The Obama camp isn't providing the American people with any substantive information to challenge that charge.
Obama's going to have to provide all of us with a meaningful recount of specific accomplishments or experiences that prove he's ready to take the helm. He may do that in the debates, but up to this point there has been very little forthcoming.
And I agree that Palin must do the same. I just find it disconcerting that the guy running for president has worry about it.
For democrats, his experience isn't a concern, as Palin's is not with republicans. The ones who do care are the ones on the fence and both sides have to make their case.
If Obama is really as tremendously experienced as the dems say he is, the polls are strangely not reflecting it, even after that spectacle in Denver the race is within a few points.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
I don't think republicans have to make an effort at this point other than to say that his resume is paper thin. The Obama camp isn't providing the American people with any substantive information to challenge that charge.
Obama's going to have to provide all of us with a meaningful recount of specific accomplishments or experiences that prove he's ready to take the helm. He may do that in the debates, but up to this point there has been very little forthcoming.
And I agree that Palin must do the same. I just find it disconcerting that the guy running for president has worry about it.
For democrats, his experience isn't a concern, as Palin's is not with republicans. The ones who do care are the ones on the fence and both sides have to make their case.
If Obama is really as tremendously experienced as the dems say he is, the polls are strangely not reflecting it, even after that spectacle in Denver the race is within a few points.
I don't think total experience is quite as important to Dems as quality of experiences and an ability to learn from them. The polls don't necessarily reflect the non-aligned concern over a lack of experience. What people say on polls is not very reliable. Its race, fear of unknown, and a host of other intangibles.
When talking about resumes, I was actually referring to McCain's people being as fearful of his experience in "bipolar" stands as Obama handlers are of a thin resume. Is he a maverick when he has voted with Bush 90%? Was he for reproductive rights before he was against them? Did we attack Iraq for oil or for defense? Drill or no drill?
One sitting in the middle waiting for definitive answers to issues can get pretty confused.
Obama has his share of "refined" stances as does McCain.
* Iran was a "tiny country that didn't present a threat, now it's a "grave" threat.
* He was going to accept public financing and then decided against it.
* He promised IMMEDIATE removal of troops during the primaries and now will "consult" the commanders on the ground before any pull out.
* He was called the DC handgun ban constitutional in 2007 and unconstitutional in 2008.
* He is critical of our current energy policy but voted for the Bush/Cheney energy plan.
* In 2007 he said he was NOT in favor of nuclear power plants, now he is.
* He said that he was going to meet with dictators "without precodition", now he's backtracked on that.
**** too many more to list
Anyways, it's inevitable that both will move towards the center as the campaign goes on. I just think Obama has a lot further to travel than Senior Juan...
http://www.maniacworld.com/horrible-Obama-blooper.html