OT: McCain a naughty boy?
This could spell the end to McCain. He is already viewed as not conservative enough by many on the right. The NY Times took a play right out of the republican/Rove playbook by waiting on this story. They release it now that McCain all but has the nomination sealed up. This could hand the Presidency to Obama/Clinton if more comes out and it turns out they had a romantic relationship. Wow. (Sorry AJM about the political diary, I know about your rule and if you want to pull this I understand)
0 recs |
130 comments
Comments
Obama:
by jparks77 on Feb 20, 2008 11:44 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Chelsea Clinton was at UNT today.
Like every other college in America, Obama is a rock star here at UNT as well. Things are looking up, if he somehow gets Texas it's over.
On the McCain front, most of the people here that are Rep. tend to go Huck rather than McCain, take that fwiw.
On the article, funny, in my Government class we were talking about public perception of politicians. And how in America if their is anything shady about somebody's past it can ruin their career. He's from Canada, (teaching US Govt, wierd) and said how people there don't give a damn about the candidates personal lives and care more about their policies.
Not the case here. We'll see what this does.
by sprite on Feb 21, 2008 12:10 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
That's weird
I do know that Obama had a rally in Dallas today at noon and I was very dissapointed that I couldn't make it.
by hiafex on Feb 21, 2008 1:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I really wouldn't have
by sprite on Feb 21, 2008 1:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I had no clue either,
by BHill on Feb 21, 2008 7:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The leftists are after Bill+Hillary
It must be nice for Bill, seeing every friend he ever made in a lifetime in the Democrat party stab him in the back in a rush to the slightly more leftist candidate.
Would say I fell sorry for him, but when rats are your friends, you deserve it.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 1:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Once again, thanx for your.....
by tklawless on Feb 21, 2008 7:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
and thanks
by Longhorn on Feb 21, 2008 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well apparently...
by RangerMoto on Feb 21, 2008 12:23 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I don't...
by benmor78 on Feb 21, 2008 12:25 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
You're right.
But as a conservative, Obama scares the shit out of me, so I will have no problem getting out and voting for McCain.
by tdi1985 on Feb 21, 2008 6:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Why does he scare you?
by brettgardner on Feb 21, 2008 8:26 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
First of all...
If for nothing else, her exposure to what it takes to run the country and to run national defense, and the fact that it will systematically be easier for the Clintons to establish a system for foreign relations, makes Hillary about a million times more qualified than Obama.
As far as what my ideology has to do with the situation, it was merely a comment on how McCain's lack of conservatism on a few issues would not get in the way of me voting for him over Obama.
by tdi1985 on Feb 21, 2008 9:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think not talking to Ahmadinejad
Even during the height of the Cold war we had a hotline to Moscow.
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 10:04 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah,
I'm sure that you're certain we could count on anything coming from Ahmadinejad
by ncrangerman on Feb 21, 2008 10:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The philosophy you are mocking
As would Reagan.
And Nixon (what a dumbass idea it was talking to China, right?).
by Brian Thomas on Feb 21, 2008 5:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I believe there is a difference
and sitting down with the leader of a country that is a holocaust denier, and believes that the State of Israel has no right to exist...
What was it that he recently said about Israel, oh yeah... the entire country is a "filthy bacteria".
by tdi1985 on Feb 21, 2008 6:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
by ncrangerman on Feb 21, 2008 6:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Keep your friends close, enemies closer
I repeat, the entire Bush 41 cabal has pronounced this policy of not talking to our enemies as stupid and counterproductive.
by Brian Thomas on Feb 21, 2008 9:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We talked to China
by DJCahill on Feb 22, 2008 6:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Another thing.
They are more like that welfare mother who always has her hands out for more.
by DJCahill on Feb 22, 2008 6:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nobody seemed to care
by lonestarJon on Feb 21, 2008 1:01 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Somebody delete this fucking diary
Meanwhile, I have never, never, seen a single negative story about Barack crack addict Obama EVER on any major mainstream media source, ever. In fact, every mainstream story touching Obama is nothing but disgusting ass-kissing.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 1:10 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
true
I'm guessing if he's not squeaky clean like he seems, we'll see before November...and it'll be huge but will it be enough to push the moderates to the other side?
by Walter Sobchak on Feb 21, 2008 1:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Squeaky Clean regarding Rezko
Obama just might be that politician that has completely cleared his closets of skeletons: use of cocaine and marijuana as a young man being the biggest one. I've said this many times: America is a forgiving nation. Air your dirty laundry and you'll be seen as forthcoming and honest and even gasp imperfect!
by RangerMoto on Feb 21, 2008 1:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He's a Democrat
Of course it's fine he did crack. It's fine if he does crack now. He could do three hookers in times square while smoking a rock for all the world to see. He's a Democrat.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 7:35 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Funny to hear a Rightie bring up.....
by tklawless on Feb 21, 2008 7:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, the current president
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 10:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
for poor people
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 10:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So its OK
Gotcha down.
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 10:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
duh
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 10:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I want a president
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 10:43 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You know
Yet every Republican better be spot fucking clean because the media is going to scour every inch of their life looking for an affair.
That's the absolute 100% double standard that people dont even question in American media today.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 1:23 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Yes, Shark

Usually your diatribes are cute and at least partially amusing, but c'mon, man. You're panicking. Just relax. I seem to remember Dems getting skewered for extramarital activities (Clinton, Condit, McGreevey), so please don't close your eyes and put your fingers in your ears to act like it never happened. It did, regardless of what you view as reality.
If you want to talk about reality, let's talk about Obama's 4.1% lead in head-to-head polls against McCain. Or would that upset you, too?
All hail Sharky, king of the trolls.
by ghtd36 on Feb 21, 2008 6:32 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Who?
The other two of those people I've never heard of, certainly not like Larry Craig. who I'd have never heard of either except he had an R next to his name. And we all know it's true.
I guess it's time to figure out this ignore thing again. I cant fucking stand you slc_ranger, and half the other fucking trolls in this thread, and Im not gonna listen to your shit.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 7:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Sounds like someone's getting a little worried about the prospect of an actual liberal in the White House.
Oh, noes!
by RCCook on Feb 21, 2008 7:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Concur...
The far right already doesn't like McCain, and to them cheating on your wife is worse than creating a 9 trillion dollar deficit. Even if the story isn't true (which it may not be) it will hurt McCain. I don't think any of these people will vote for the dem nominee obviously, but if some stay home instead of voting for McCain then that helps them.
I love all the talk of the liberal media who gave Clinton a pass on this shit too. That is all that was on the news for 2 years. I think the Times is playing dirty here. As someone else mentioned, they have been sitting on this for a couple months. Politics is a dirty game.
I should have known a certain right wing troll would hijak this thread. I apologize.
by slc ranger on Feb 21, 2008 9:41 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
McCain,
Just a month ago he received the "NY Slimes" endorsement. Was this story not already in the hopper?
Sleep in a snake bed, expect to get bit.
by ncrangerman on Feb 21, 2008 7:15 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Guess the Straight Talk Express....
by tklawless on Feb 21, 2008 7:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"Stabbing the base in the back"
His obligation is to the people of Arizona. It is attitudes like that that are symptomatic of what is so dicked up about our political system.
What a horrible, horrible idea, that if you are an elected official from one of the two prevailing parties, you owe it to the "BASE" to "tow the party line." Garbage.
The country needs less not more of politicians like John McCain on both sides of the aisle. He isn't nearly the maverick nor the pillar of integrity that he claims to be, but at least he isn't some party drone.
Anyone that is convinced the left or the right is correct about every single issue is a wee bit of an asshole.
by Brian Thomas on Feb 21, 2008 5:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The "base"
That's politics. I realize you and others here may not like it but that's the reality.
It's ideology. A belief system that is one's core and which is developed over time and experience. In my case it's about what I've learned to believe is right and best for my family, my fellows and my country. I am not trying to convince you that what is right for me, would be for you, but it's not something I am willing to compromise.
Some of you have strong ideology that is polar opposite of mine. You are partisan about it. I respect that.
What I have little respect for is those who try to claim the middle and whose "beliefs" will follow the prevailing winds or sound-bite of the day, thinking that by doing so they lay claim to some moral, ethical, intellectual high ground in which only the enlightened are truly able to discern the nuances of each and every issue.
Finally, I've no respect for anyone, who doesn't respect themselves enough to refrain from name-calling toward someone they've never met, nor really know anything about. Choose to engage me or not, at least act civil if you do.
by ncrangerman on Feb 21, 2008 6:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure I understand
IMHO, the base has picked the nominee -- at least on the Repub side.
by abc123 on Feb 21, 2008 7:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Great question
After his 2000 defeat McCain shifted left of the party seemingly to burnish his independent/moderate credentials. Always a media favorite he was even more popular with Dems and the everyday press when he stood in opposition to the Presidents policy.
As a result he has been largely helped by that media, the independents, moderates, and national security democrats in open primaries.
In closed primaries he was able to get Huckabee and Romney to split the conservative vote, locking up the moderate Republicans and picking up crossover voters who registered as R's on voting day (Florida).
Bottom line, he has failed to get a Republican majority of votes throughout, much less a conservative majority.
So my original point was that he should not be surprised that he finds himself in this position, because at the end of the day, the very people who lifted him up will willingly and eagerly tear him down. When it comes right down to it they will vote their ideology and party, and it ain't Republican.
He chose them over his partys' base constituency, and he's reaping the harvest.
by ncrangerman on Feb 21, 2008 7:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Then based on your response
So lets put GWHB, GWB, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Baker, Wolfowitz, Perle, Ashcroft and Ridge in a room and let them pick the nominee. That's a fantastic idea.
"It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another."
-- George Washington on the two-party system
by abc123 on Feb 22, 2008 8:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Meh. I hate long replies, but...
I repeat, a Senator from AZ is beholden to the people of his state, the people who elected him, not what blowhards like Rush and Hannity and Mel Martinez and Ed "The Chin" Gillespie decree from on high.
"That's politics. I realize you and others here may not like it but that's the reality."
Thanks, Teach, I'll jot that down in my trapper keeper. My point was that it shouldn't be that way, it doesn't work well that way, and that if we had 100 guys like McCain in the Senate we'd be alot better off.
"It's ideology. A belief system that is one's core and which is developed over time and experience. In my case it's about what I've learned to believe is right and best for my family, my fellows and my country. I am not trying to convince you that what is right for me, would be for you, but it's not something I am willing to compromise."
Fair enough. When you announce your mayoral candidacy for Superobviousville, gimme a shout. Full support.
"Some of you have strong ideology that is polar opposite of mine. You are partisan about it. I respect that."
Not too apparent that you do. Personally, I'm guilty of the same when it comes to neo/theo-cons. Otherwise, I'm pretty respectful. Ask Bdav or Jbmiknee.
"What I have little respect for is those who try to claim the middle and whose "beliefs" will follow the prevailing winds or sound-bite of the day, thinking that by doing so they lay claim to some moral, ethical, intellectual high ground in which only the enlightened are truly able to discern the nuances of each and every issue."
This paragraph of yours, I believe, couldn't be much more misplaced. Thing is, I, like most, would agree w/ that sentiment. But even the far right pundits like Hannity, Ingraham, and Rush aren't attaching that attribute to McCain. I haven't read that assertion anywhere credible.
McCain swings w/ the prevailing wind? Really? And the 2nd half of the paragraph doesn't even logically connect w/ the first. At all.
And complaining about others laying claim to the moral high ground?? Ncrangerman loves him some irony, he do.
"Finally, I've no respect for anyone, who doesn't respect themselves enough to refrain from name-calling toward someone they've never met, nor really know anything about. Choose to engage me or not, at least act civil if you do."
Well, there is one misunderstanding here. If you inferred from my post that I was specifically calling you an asshole, you are mistaken. I was speaking in broad terms (the left or the right), so, unless you are the type of person I described, one who believes (in your case) that the neo-conservative side is 100% in the right on every single issue, i wasn't referring deliberately to you. That said, it was fair enough to take it that way.
However, if you are one of those people (and they exist in equal measure on the left), then I stand behind my original assertion wholeheartedly. But I doubt you are that dogmatically blackandwhitey.
I also suspect that you, judging from your comments over these many months, hold a similar opinion about those who espouse progressive dogma. As in, they be assholish.
And if you have been paying attention, you'll have noticed that while I am combative, I'm not much for name-calling around here. I believe I have argued with you in a civil manner.
I gotta say, this whole concept that one side has to crush the other, that you are either w/ us or against us, this 51% tyranny that you seem to be in favor of, is really troubling. That may be the current reality and as you want it to be, but it's stupid. Partisan stupidity.
And FWIW, I'm a libertarian, dude. I have issues w/ both sides.
But blah blah, I've rattled on way too much.
by Brian Thomas on Feb 21, 2008 9:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
btw
lots of people do, lots of people don't - but it seems like people have more respect for people that just aren't pandering to the base but actually are that conservative or liberal.
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 10:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I know
Alas, both have betrayed me in the past. So I went with the safe but hard on the eyes boldification.
by Brian Thomas on Feb 22, 2008 12:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough,
I believe you've misconstrued some of what I've said but that's more about the difficulty in trying to communicate in short bursts, trying to hit high points, than anything else.
Essentially, I'm not here to convince anyone else concerning my own beliefs, I was simply adding my .02 to a current topic of interest.
Again, no one need agree but the experience here is smoother when we can agree to disagree with some modicum of respectfulness.
by ncrangerman on Feb 22, 2008 9:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
BT and me.....
by bdavison94 on Feb 22, 2008 11:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
And I'd also add that I don't recall you ever debating matters in a manner that wasn't well reasoned and thoughtful.
by Brian Thomas on Feb 22, 2008 12:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't really care
McCain hasn't been one of the family values douchebags out there, so I really don't care whether or not he hit a hottie.
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 7:41 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
seriously though
btw, never like to see sharky getting so mad, so anti -obama: there are reports that he puts fainters in his crowd. at 10 different rallies, he's made announcements like, "can someone get some medical attention over there, I think a woman has just fainted. Nothing to worry about folks, just give her some air, she's feeling a little faint." And each time, its the same announcement with the same words. I can see this happening in one or two instances, but more than that is a bit fishy. sort of like an elvis vibe.
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 8:13 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
A lot of old flabby
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 8:50 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
now hold on
and its one thing to be flabby, it's another thing to be john mccain right now. he isn't just old - he's ridiculously old. makeup can't even hide it. his neck flab is awful - I can't imagine what it's like on the rest of him
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 10:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But Kennedy
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 10:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
link?
by Chase Irwin on Feb 21, 2008 9:22 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
here
you could also google obama and fainting
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 10:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
also
and serious lack of foresight on the writers' part - nobody cares about these things and its not going to drive voters away from mccain, certainly not to obama.
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 8:17 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
I really couldn't
It really was a hit job.
by tdi1985 on Feb 21, 2008 8:25 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Really
That's gonna be so ugly. Hillary is gonna win Texas and Ohion and then sue to get Florida and Michigan and the shit's just gonna drag on and on and get uglier and uglier and nobody will get a majority and the Dems wont have a nominee by July..
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 8:51 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
President Obama
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 8:53 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll admit this
Really I had no respect for Hillary at all, she's a sure loser. I'm realistic unlike all the liberal clown on here who automatically think the Dems will win no matter what candidate.
McCain will still win either way though. Obama leading by 4 in a gallup poll means McCain is really up by 8.
Obama's going to have a shit tough fight beating Hillary though. And you're stupid party sure has some fucked up delegate rules to make sure nobody wins, ha. Stupid fucking Democrats. Party run by morons.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 9:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
As long
Neither of em is close to as stupid as the current President and his cabinet. At least the low grade morons currently running this country will be gone.
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 9:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
I expect to see $6-$7 gas soon as well, as ultra leftists continue to do their work.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 9:07 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hopefully,
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 9:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
I know my south american fund has been doing good lately, I have a feeling it's mostly oil shit..
But seriously, I expect very hard times soon. Seems every day you hear of a big plant closing down around here. And yeah, I read a big article in the DMN about how "expensive" natural gas is the only thing power companies can use for new electricity these days. They cant build coal or nuclear.
Electric bill going up..going to be blackouts, all these liberal policies just choking us now..
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 9:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And if you think the economy is bad now
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 9:18 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LNG plays like
You just worry about your doom and gloom and blackouts. Don't let reality get in your way.
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 9:24 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok
It's not really a matter of opinion. Blackouts are 2-4 years away in Texas according to TXU. And enmissions caps mean the end of all American industry.
Just go read up on how the EU, a shitty economy anyway, is struggling regarding Kyoto. I'm sure you dont know anything about it...
And all those industries just move to China, and net world pollution actually goes up. Liberals win again.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 9:30 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
As far as I remember hearing...
by tdi1985 on Feb 21, 2008 9:38 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
They kind of are
The funniest part of it all is that the USA has cut (or, slowed the growth of) emmisions more without kyoto than the EU has with. Unbelievable, see if that's ever reported in the liberal media.
I'm sure the USA will be the only country to abide by it. That was the whole point of all of this sham. It was a liberal plot to hurt America.
Canada surely isn't abiding by it, for example, they admit as much. And they're supposedly more liberal than us. A bit fishy, eh?
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 9:45 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
And btw,
Does it even matter? Of course not. We could have the ten coldest years in history in the next decade asnd it wouldn't matter a bit. Global warming proponents will literally freeze to death while delivering the message of their communist overlords, happily.
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 9:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's an article on it
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=22791
Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall in U.S., Rise in Europe
U.S. businesses outperform EU command-and-control restrictions
Written By: Drew Thornley
Published In: Environment News
Publication Date: March 1, 2008
Publisher: The Heartland Institute
Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the United States fell by 1.8 percent in 2006, compared to a 0.3 percent increase in emissions in the European Union (EU), according to newly released data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
The new data confirm the continuing success of market-oriented, voluntary greenhouse gas emissions programs in the U.S. versus European cap-and-trade mandates.
The stark difference occurred even though the two economies grew at a near-identical pace in 2006, roughly 3 percent for the year.
Consistently Strong U.S. Results
"It isn't just 2006 which saw a disparity," observed Chris Horner, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). "Under any relevant modern baseline, say 1997 when the Kyoto promise was made or thereafter, U.S. emissions have risen far more slowly than those of its noisiest antagonists whose model we are supposed to follow."
"For the past seven years for which we have data (2000-2006), the annual rate of increase for U.S. CO2 emissions is about a third of 1 percent, compared to more than 1 percent by the EU," Horner added.
"In what surely ought to confound the Europhiles in Congress, over the same period even the smaller EU-15 economy increased its CO2 emissions by more than 20 percent greater than the United States," Horner continued. "Why we are supposed to swoon over the prospect of paying billions to replicate their failure is beyond me."
EU Failures
While the European Union and environmental activist groups have frequently criticized the Bush administration for refusing to support the Kyoto Protocol, the 2006 data show the EU is failing to live up to its Kyoto promises. According to the European Environmental Agency, 13 countries of the EU-15 have increased emissions over the past 16 years.
Even in the United Kingdom, often cited as a greenhouse gas success story, recent data reveal emissions increased almost 20 percent over the past 20 years, after counting emissions from shipping, aviation, and the carbon content of imports.
"Even though global warming is nearly a religious commitment in Europe, greenhouse gas emissions are rising faster in the European Union than in the United States," noted Myron Ebell, CEI's director of energy and global warming policy.
"I think this shows that it's not easy or cheap to reduce emissions, contrary to what many proponents of cap-and-trade legislation here claim," Ebell said. "Mandatory controls are not working in the EU, so I think the rush in Congress to adopt their failing policies is foolish."
'All Pain, No Gain'
CEI Senior Fellow Marlo Lewis agreed. "As has been widely reported, EU governments allocated more emission credits than there were emissions to their large emitters so as to give domestic firms a competitive advantage vis-Ă -vis their counterparts in other EU countries," said Lewis. "I think the old-fashioned term for this is 'cheating.'"
Lewis continued, "One key fact that should be stressed is that gasoline prices in several EU countries exceed $7.00 a gallon due to high motor fuel taxes. Yet from 1990 to 2004, EU transport sector CO2 emissions increased by almost 26 percent. All pain for no gain."
by Sharky on Feb 21, 2008 10:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sharky, what is so great about
by AirJordan on Feb 21, 2008 12:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
AES
by Chase Irwin on Feb 21, 2008 9:52 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your "South American fund"
Is that code for the chimichurri Mom is going to nuke up for you later?
by Brian Thomas on Feb 21, 2008 5:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Hell yes
by Brian Thomas on Feb 22, 2008 12:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
article was weak
There's nowhere else for this to go but "away", where it should be since there doesn't seem to be anything other than some strange conjecture attributed to "former associates", which for all we know, could have been the Ozarka guy changing out McCain's water tank.
It certainly doesn't help McCain, but I don't think it hurts him. Republicans still won't vote for Obama, once Obama is confirmed as the candidate, we'll start seeing some of the Rove-ian attack strategies that have been so successful. And while, yes, Obama has already admitted a lot, I get the feeling that there's more there. Maybe he just went ahead and mentioned the really obvious stuff that he knew was going to be divulged simply by talking to his old friends.
It should be a good election. I am still going on the record as saying that the Democrats could have won easily if they had nominated a more moderate candidate that would have picked up more of the non-party-affiliated voters (maybe even just put Obama on as the VP), but I think they got too greedy.
Instead, it's the Republicans that went moderate with McCain.
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 11:34 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
did I say who will win?
I think it may come down to mainstream voters voting for someone that they feel is more like them. And, subsconsiously, I think people will shy away from the black man with the Muslim name and go with McCain (right or wrong...again, I'm not saying that this is a good way to vote). I think it's similar to subconcious racism in other areas as well. When all else is equal (or close to it), I think people tend to "go with their own", and race is obviously one of the easiest ways to segregate. I think it's similar to how Steve Nash won the MVP over Shaq a few years ago. I think the writers saw a white, short, ugly, scrappy PG and identified with him more than the big, plodding, black behemoth. Sure, everyone will say that race wasn't an issue, but I just have an inkling that it was a small issue that affected their decision without them even realizing it.
This theory does ignore, to an extent, the fact that minorities will overwhelmingly support Obama and turn out in large numbers. However, anytime candidates have depended on high minority turnout in the past, it hasn't turned out well.
Obviously, this country will eventually (maybe this year) see a minority President, but I think it may need to be a minority vs. minority presidential race for it to happen.
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 1:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You have brought this "subconscious
And your theory hasn't held up so far, either. Obama has KILLED Hillary among white men, and done very well w/ white women. Latinos, not so much, so there may be something there.
As for the Michelle Obama comment, I think you need to depucker a little.
And Obama may not be a centrist, but you'd have to be asleep to miss how he big he is scoring with independents and moderates.
by Brian Thomas on Feb 21, 2008 5:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
it has held up so far
Obama is doing pretty well at energizing the moderates, but after the initial infatuation of his speeches wear off, people will want to eventually know about his positions, which unless he changes his positions, cannot be shown to be anything short of extremely liberal.
Yeah, I may have been overreacting on Michelle, but it just sounded so "Jerry Springer" the way it came out.
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 9:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Obama is the only
I think you count him out at your peril. Clinton and Reagan were the last 2 presidents with his level of charisma.
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 1:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
absolutely
That would be the silver bullet for Republicans.
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 1:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
also
Experience and the ability to appeal to a majority on the issues (not just with your speeches) is probably more important in my opinion, something that Reagan definitely had and Clinton probably had to some degree.
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 1:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I still take charisma
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 1:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ability to inspire
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 1:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
by a bebop a rebop on Feb 21, 2008 1:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If it is...
Clinton v. McCain then McCain wins a close one.
by slc ranger on Feb 21, 2008 8:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd
by ncrangerman on Feb 21, 2008 8:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is true...
by slc ranger on Feb 21, 2008 9:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I could care less if McCain had an affair.
Even though there is no solid proof that he did at this point,it's all smoke and mirrors. Hey Clinton was sleeping with ever chubby little intern he could get his hands on. But I voted for him and I still think he was a great president, I would vote for him again. Come on now could you nuzzle up and be all hot after the ice princess, Hillary after all these years together. People are human to expect perfection from a president is ridiculous. Haven't a lot of presidents had mistresses in the past? So what if they have a little fun on the side as long as they do their job well it doesn't really matter.
by LAMuscleFag on Feb 21, 2008 2:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I don't blame him either
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 2:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ROFL
exactly!
by LAMuscleFag on Feb 21, 2008 2:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
well
He is her "baby's daddy", after all. Speaking of that comment, it will be interesting to see how (if he wins), Michelle adapts to the White House. She has to be one of the least classiest potential First Ladies ever, but my memory doesn't go that far back.
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 2:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How far back does
Don't underestimate Michelle Obama.
by jparks77 on Feb 21, 2008 2:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
nah
I don't know, introducing Barack as "my baby's daddy" just seemed to be really uneducated. Maybe I'm just overreacting based on just one comment? My wife and I were both kind of embarassed for her after we heard that a few years ago.
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 3:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nancy seemed
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 3:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
it's just slang...
This is a case of you not being hip, that's all. Has nothing to do with her 'stateliness'
by RangerMoto on Feb 21, 2008 3:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i know it's slang
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Her comments
However, Michelle Obama is highly educated and despite her desire to be accepted, I find her to be a genuinely warm person. I guess I'd rather have something real than have the image of something real.
Hopefully her public gaffs will be considered nothing more than lapses in political judgment instead of underlying character issues. I'm actually looking forward to her progression.
by jparks77 on Feb 21, 2008 3:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
good points
by willamos2 on Feb 21, 2008 3:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Cindy McCain
I guess if it gets too bad, they can always get her to stroke out, and he can get back to nailing the lobbyist.
by DJCahill on Feb 21, 2008 2:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep.
by Brian Thomas on Feb 21, 2008 10:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
YEP YEP she will cut it right off!
and then hold it up during a speech the next day and say "This is the proudest I have ever been of this penis in my adult life". Yeh I wouldn't mess with her. She's got him wearing a chastity belt for god's sake. I like Obama but he's got to pull her aside and tell her "Dear do me a favor would you please smile more and talk less." The bit about him stinking in the morning wasn't exactly that eloquent either.
by LAMuscleFag on Feb 21, 2008 3:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
well actually she would say..
"This is the first time in my adult life that I am proud of this penis!"
by LAMuscleFag on Feb 21, 2008 3:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
lol...
by tdi1985 on Feb 21, 2008 4:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LOLOL
Yeh she's guarding it like Fort Knox. But there is a part of me that thinks the "He's stinky" comment was to try women off the scent (no pun).
In all honesty and fairness Cindy McCain has her issues too. I don't think it's a bumper crop of first ladies, more like a bummer crop. One thing about Laura Bush is that she is a great first lady, eventhough her husband is a nimrod.
Thankfully it's not about the first lady but her husband so in the final analysis how much damage can they possibly do? Perhaps embarass us on the world stage but I can't imagine being any worse than it is now.
by LAMuscleFag on Feb 21, 2008 5:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
throw* women off the scent
by LAMuscleFag on Feb 21, 2008 5:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The classiest
It's funny... Giuliani, McCain and Thompson all have younger wives that act more attractive than they are.
by tdi1985 on Feb 21, 2008 6:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
sharky always rails against CNN
i get the feeling that hating iowa farmers has broad bipartisan support
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 10:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
ethanol is a great solution
by RangerMoto on Feb 22, 2008 1:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Are you kidding
by DJCahill on Feb 22, 2008 8:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
also
sounds about right
by ab03 on Feb 21, 2008 10:12 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Tell me the Truth
Have I become a politician?
by Clueless on Feb 21, 2008 10:55 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Get out more
by Clueless on Feb 22, 2008 12:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Slanderous
If this turns out to be true then McCain is more of a Democrat than I thought.
by kwellborn on Feb 22, 2008 10:46 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

by 

















