OT: Elections/Politics thread, part 4

[Dave]

Since I base my opinion on the amount of times a candidate says "orgy," Obama clearly won in my book.

I was considering basing my vote on the candidate with the most bracelets, but that came out even

I wonder how many bracelets will be showing up at each campaign HQ? I heard Nader is going to look like Mr. T at his next appearance.

[XXXIV]

Missed all the greatness...But reading the deep insight or lack thereof....

Everyone sees what they want to see... I hope you all feel really good.

On to Victory!!!

[JackB1]

if anyone wants to know the facts:

http://news.aol.com/article/fact-checki ... 3?cid=3272

[JackB1]

That'd hold more water if the first half of the debate had anything to do with foreign affairs. In the part that actually HAD to do with foreign affairs, he got his hat handed to him. He *sounded* pretty good, I'll admit, in the economy half of the debate(I'd rather they had switched the foreign policy with the economic debates, rather than muddying the waters of one with the other). My only problem is that the underlying theme of his answers is that of pure ol' socialism, taxing the rich and giving it to the 'poor'. Robin Hood is a nice story, but shouldn't be implemented as a government policy.

McCain got his "hat handed to him" when they debated the Economy and that is the #1 issue with American's right now, so I'll let you have foreign affairs and I'll take the win on the economy, thank you very much!

[TheGamer]

Chris Matthews on Hardball seems to be hammering the point that McCain didn't look at Obama throughout the debate as if to not acknowledge his opponent. what do you guys think about that.

[XXXIV]

That'd hold more water if the first half of the debate had anything to do with foreign affairs. In the part that actually HAD to do with foreign affairs, he got his hat handed to him. He *sounded* pretty good, I'll admit, in the economy half of the debate(I'd rather they had switched the foreign policy with the economic debates, rather than muddying the waters of one with the other). My only problem is that the underlying theme of his answers is that of pure ol' socialism, taxing the rich and giving it to the 'poor'. Robin Hood is a nice story, but shouldn't be implemented as a government policy.

McCain go this "hat handed to him" when they debated the Economy and that is the #1 issue with American's right now, so I'll let you have foreign affairs and I'll take the win on the economy, thank you very much!

To quote Jim McKay..."Look at the Russian judge"

[JackB1]

Well, well...just heard via the news that Kissenger said that Obama grossly mischaracterized him about face to face meetings, and that McCain got it right.

not true...here are the facts:

OBAMA: "Sen. McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who is one of his advisers, who along with five recent secretaries of state just said we should meet with Iran — guess what? — without preconditions."
MCCAIN: "Dr. Kissinger did not say that he would approve face-to-face meetings between the president of the United States and (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad. He did not say that. He said there could be secretary-level and lower-level meetings. I've always encouraged that."
THE FACTS: Obama was right that Kissinger called for meetings without preconditions. McCain was right that Kissinger did not call for such meetings to be between the two presidents.
In a foreign policy forum on Sept. 15, Kissinger said: "I am in favor of negotiating with Iran." He went on to say, "I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level" and the U.S. should go into the talks with "a clear understanding of what is it we're trying to prevent. What is it going to do if we can't achieve what we're talking about? But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations. We ought, however, to be very clear about the content of negotiations and work it out with other countries and with our own government."

source: http://news.aol.com/article/fact-checki ... 3?cid=3272

[JackB1]

My only problem is that the underlying theme of his answers is that of pure ol' socialism, taxing the rich and giving it to the 'poor'. Robin Hood is a nice story, but shouldn't be implemented as a government policy.

So giving tax breaks to the rich and neglecting the poor is a better policy?

[JackB1]

I watched the CNN special with the former Secretaries of States, and Kissinger did agree with the others in regards to the face to face meetings. I think Kissinger is giving a bit of revisionist history on what he said.

He is. What he is saying now is not what he said then.

[RobVarak]

The Kissinger kerfuffle seems easy to untangle. Obama has said that HE will meet with those leaders without precondition. He amended that since with talk of "low level talks" trying to equate "preparation" with "preconditions" but the horse is well out of the barn.

McCain was right to correct him. Kissinger expressly said that he advocated talks but not at the Presidential level.

[JackB1]

Obama looks very black, for some reason.

Obama keeps calling McCain "John", I wonder if some will view it as disrespectful.

That's weird...I was thinking McCain looked very white

I didn't see any problems with Obama calling him "John" at all. They are both equal on the gov't depth chart. He called everyone by first names during the Dem. debates most times also. At least he didn't call him "Johnny Mac"

[TheGamer]

well if nothing else the McCain campaign is fast.
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Ec3aC8ZJZTc&co ... hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[pk500]

My score: Push.

Agree wholeheartedly. Neither made a critical mistake; neither gained a significant advantage. Both stayed on message very, very well.

But as Chuck Todd said on NBC, I thought both Obama and McCain really dropped the ball during the economic segment. That was very tepid from both guys, filled with talking points but few specifics. "Cut government spending," "give tax breaks to the middle class" -- this is all the same horsesh*t we've heard before the markets melted down. Neither of these guys seemed to have any sort of innovative solutions to the current financial crisis.

Take care,
PK

[pk500]

Chris Matthews on Hardball seems to be hammering the point that McCain didn't look at Obama throughout the debate as if to not acknowledge his opponent. what do you guys think about that.

No more disrespectful than Obama calling McCain "John."

It's pretty obvious from McCain's body language that he thinks Obama is a punk.

Take care,
PK

[Teal]

That'd hold more water if the first half of the debate had anything to do with foreign affairs. In the part that actually HAD to do with foreign affairs, he got his hat handed to him. He *sounded* pretty good, I'll admit, in the economy half of the debate(I'd rather they had switched the foreign policy with the economic debates, rather than muddying the waters of one with the other). My only problem is that the underlying theme of his answers is that of pure ol' socialism, taxing the rich and giving it to the 'poor'. Robin Hood is a nice story, but shouldn't be implemented as a government policy.

McCain got his "hat handed to him" when they debated the Economy and that is the #1 issue with American's right now, so I'll let you have foreign affairs and I'll take the win on the economy, thank you very much!

Well, I am so shocked you see it that way, Jack...truly shocked...

[Teal]

Well, well...just heard via the news that Kissenger said that Obama grossly mischaracterized him about face to face meetings, and that McCain got it right.

not true...here are the facts:

OBAMA: "Sen. McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who is one of his advisers, who along with five recent secretaries of state just said we should meet with Iran — guess what? — without preconditions."
MCCAIN: "Dr. Kissinger did not say that he would approve face-to-face meetings between the president of the United States and (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad. He did not say that. He said there could be secretary-level and lower-level meetings. I've always encouraged that."
THE FACTS: Obama was right that Kissinger called for meetings without preconditions. McCain was right that Kissinger did not call for such meetings to be between the two presidents.
In a foreign policy forum on Sept. 15, Kissinger said: "I am in favor of negotiating with Iran." He went on to say, "I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level" and the U.S. should go into the talks with "a clear understanding of what is it we're trying to prevent. What is it going to do if we can't achieve what we're talking about? But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations. We ought, however, to be very clear about the content of negotiations and work it out with other countries and with our own government."

source: http://news.aol.com/article/fact-checki ... 3?cid=3272

Nope. HERE are the facts, Jack.

Kissinger speaks:

Henry Kissinger believes Barack Obama misstated his views on diplomacy with US adversaries and is not happy about being mischaracterized. He says: "Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality."

The facts are further that Obama didn't say anything about anyone else meeting with Iran without preconditions...it's what he said HE'D do himself, and, by lumping Kissenger in with his comments, he totally fubar'ed anything Kissenger said in the most remote sense.

[Teal]

My only problem is that the underlying theme of his answers is that of pure ol' socialism, taxing the rich and giving it to the 'poor'. Robin Hood is a nice story, but shouldn't be implemented as a government policy.

So giving tax breaks to the rich and neglecting the poor is a better policy?

Our republic has no right to take money from people who have earned it, and give it to people who haven't. That is robbery, plain and simple, and there is no good policy that includes such ideology, insofar as government goes.

This whole 'tax cut for 95% of you' bullshit is just that...bullshit. You tax the hell out of rich people, and businesses, and McCain's right...they're going to move MORE businesses out of the country, not less, to avoid getting ass raped by ludicrous taxes. Wealthy people should never be punished for being wealthy. Wealthy people should never be robbed in order to 'level the playing field'. It's Socialism, and we are not a Socialist nation. We are not Communists. Ol' Chavez said recently that America should learn that 'socialism is the only salvation for the world'. Now that's dictator Chavez talking. You really want his way to be ours?

Don't pretend it's anything other than that. It is what it is. Man, if I had a business that went gangbusters after years of hard work, and it paid me rather handsomely for all that hard work, I sure wouldn't want the government coming in and stealing more than half of the spoils of that hard work because 'it isn't fair'. Hell yes, it's fair! I worked, and sacrificed, and scraped, and put in extra hours, and made this on my own-if they want it, they can do the same. I am NOT for government-mandated handouts. Never have been, never will be. I am a very generous person with what I have. But that's on my own time, with my own dime, at MY discretion. And that's the only way it works.

[TheGamer]

Chris Matthews on Hardball seems to be hammering the point that McCain didn't look at Obama throughout the debate as if to not acknowledge his opponent. what do you guys think about that.

No more disrespectful than Obama calling McCain "John."

It's pretty obvious from McCain's body language that he thinks Obama is a punk.

Take care,
PK

I think its more disrespectful not to look at someone when you're talking to them as opposed to calling someone by his/her given name. That's just me though.

If McCain thinks Obama's a punk, I think he'd be wrong.

[Teal]

My score: Push.

Agree wholeheartedly. Neither made a critical mistake; neither gained a significant advantage. Both stayed on message very, very well.

But as Chuck Todd said on NBC, I thought both Obama and McCain really dropped the ball during the economic segment. That was very tepid from both guys, filled with talking points but few specifics. "Cut government spending," "give tax breaks to the middle class" -- this is all the same horsesh*t we've heard before the markets melted down. Neither of these guys seemed to have any sort of innovative solutions to the current financial crisis.

Take care,
PK

That's easy. They prepared for a FOREIGN POLICY DEBATE. In a few weeks, when they do the ACTUAL economic debate (which I hope is half foreign policy, so as to give equal time to each), you'll probably hear the talking points you were after.

Furthermore, Lehrer's opening question was unanswerable-'Do you support this plan in congress?' There IS no plan! How in the f*** do you answer that question with any degree of integrity, not to mention respect toward Lehrer?

"What the hell are you talking about, Lehrer?" is about the only other thing either of them could've said...

[JRod]

Chris Matthews on Hardball seems to be hammering the point that McCain didn't look at Obama throughout the debate as if to not acknowledge his opponent. what do you guys think about that.

No more disrespectful than Obama calling McCain "John."

It's pretty obvious from McCain's body language that he thinks Obama is a punk.

Take care,
PK

It's been his style. I don't see what the point is. It's not like Gore "wimpering" after everything Bush said. Now people are upset because Obama called McCain by his first name. How our Democracy survived this long is beyond me.

PK, ya it was odd by McCain. What, if you look at Obama, your campaign is going to come to full stop? It's stupid debate antics.

[TheGamer]

My only problem is that the underlying theme of his answers is that of pure ol' socialism, taxing the rich and giving it to the 'poor'. Robin Hood is a nice story, but shouldn't be implemented as a government policy.

So giving tax breaks to the rich and neglecting the poor is a better policy?

Our republic has no right to take money from people who have earned it, and give it to people who haven't. That is robbery, plain and simple, and there is no good policy that includes such ideology, insofar as government goes.

This whole 'tax cut for 95% of you' bullshit is just that...bullshit. You tax the hell out of rich people, and businesses, and McCain's right...they're going to move MORE businesses out of the country, not less, to avoid getting ass raped by ludicrous taxes. Wealthy people should never be punished for being wealthy. Wealthy people should never be robbed in order to 'level the playing field'. It's Socialism, and we are not a Socialist nation. We are not Communists. Ol' Chavez said recently that America should learn that 'socialism is the only salvation for the world'. Now that's dictator Chavez talking. You really want his way to be ours?

Don't pretend it's anything other than that. It is what it is. Man, if I had a business that went gangbusters after years of hard work, and it paid me rather handsomely for all that hard work, I sure wouldn't want the government coming in and stealing more than half of the spoils of that hard work because 'it isn't fair'. Hell yes, it's fair! I worked, and sacrificed, and scraped, and put in extra hours, and made this on my own-if they want it, they can do the same. I am NOT for government-mandated handouts. Never have been, never will be. I am a very generous person with what I have. But that's on my own time, with my own dime, at MY discretion. And that's the only way it works.

I'm not well versed in taxing issues, but wouldn't it be a matter of the people who make the most money being taxed more by the gov't than those who make less to. If there is a situation where poor people like myself are supposed to be getting the money that is taken from the wealthy, I've really been missing out.

[Teal]

So giving tax breaks to the rich and neglecting the poor is a better policy?

Our republic has no right to take money from people who have earned it, and give it to people who haven't. That is robbery, plain and simple, and there is no good policy that includes such ideology, insofar as government goes.

This whole 'tax cut for 95% of you' bullshit is just that...bullshit. You tax the hell out of rich people, and businesses, and McCain's right...they're going to move MORE businesses out of the country, not less, to avoid getting ass raped by ludicrous taxes. Wealthy people should never be punished for being wealthy. Wealthy people should never be robbed in order to 'level the playing field'. It's Socialism, and we are not a Socialist nation. We are not Communists. Ol' Chavez said recently that America should learn that 'socialism is the only salvation for the world'. Now that's dictator Chavez talking. You really want his way to be ours?

Don't pretend it's anything other than that. It is what it is. Man, if I had a business that went gangbusters after years of hard work, and it paid me rather handsomely for all that hard work, I sure wouldn't want the government coming in and stealing more than half of the spoils of that hard work because 'it isn't fair'. Hell yes, it's fair! I worked, and sacrificed, and scraped, and put in extra hours, and made this on my own-if they want it, they can do the same. I am NOT for government-mandated handouts. Never have been, never will be. I am a very generous person with what I have. But that's on my own time, with my own dime, at MY discretion. And that's the only way it works.

I'm not well versed in taxing issues, but wouldn't it be a matter of the people who make the most money being taxed more by the gov't than those who make less to. If there is a situation where poor people like myself are supposed to be getting the money that is taken from the wealthy, I've really been missing out.

It's the endgame that Obama and people like him are after. And it's and endgame, thankfully, that Americans haven't let them have. Yet. You tax everyone the same percentage, and the wealthy are ALWAYS going to pay more taxes, by proxy...there's no damned need to increase the percentage that the wealthy pay-there should be no penalty for trying to better your life, and succeeding. And that's all a tax increase on the wealthy is...a penalty.

[greggsand]

Chris Matthews on Hardball seems to be hammering the point that McCain didn't look at Obama throughout the debate as if to not acknowledge his opponent. what do you guys think about that.

No more disrespectful than Obama calling McCain "John."

It's pretty obvious from McCain's body language that he thinks Obama is a punk.

Take care,
PK

Why is calling someone by their first name disrespectful? I can think of, oh, about 798 different ways to disrespect someone than call them by their given name???? Is it a "Janet, Ms Jackson if you're nasty" thing?

[Teal]

Interesting and enlightening video from 1991-McCain talking about out of control spending:
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FX7dszkjBeU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

[TheHiddenTrack]

The no eye contact thing really bothered me. And if he does that again during the next two debates it's going to be quite creepy.