Jump to content

Barack Obama Elected President!


Max

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

McCain Aide Blows Up at New York Times Over Freddie Mac Lobbying Claim

John McCain’s campaign manager said Wednesday that a report that his firm was paid $15,000 a month for several years — until last month — by Freddie Mac is “demonstrably false.”

“Mr. Davis has seen no income from Davis Manafort since 2006. Zero. Mr. Davis has received no salary or compensation since 2006. Mr. Davis has received no profit or partner distributions from that firm on any basis — weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, bi-monthly, quarterly, semi-annual or annual — since 2006. Again, zero. Neither has Mr. Davis received any equity in the firm based on profits derived since his financial separation from Davis Manafort in 2006,” said McCain campaign spokesman Michael Goldfarb.

“Further, and missing from the Times’ reporting, Mr. Davis has never — never — been a lobbyist for either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Mr. Davis has not served as a registered lobbyist since 2005.”

Tuesday’s report escalated a confrontation between the McCain campaign and The New York Times that flared up a day earlier, when the paper first reported that campaign manager Rick Davis was paid nearly $2 million over five years for defending both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae against stricter regulations.

McCain adviser Steve Schmidt responded to the earlier report by lashing out at the newspaper, saying it was “in the tank” for Barack Obama and had “cast aside its journalistic integrity and tradition.” Times editor Bill Keller defended the newspaper and its coverage in a written statement.

--------------------

I must admit that anything coming from the New York Times, whether it is critical of McCain OR Obama, is suspicious. I have studied and worked in both print and broadcast journalism for long time... what I see in the media today bears no resemblence to what I was taught in regards to news gathering, fact checking, and objective reporting.

Having said that, this story -- any basis in fact or not -- will be ignored by voters, just as the stories about Obama's ties to Biden's lobbyist son were. This crap erupts, the media tosses it about for a day or so -- just long enough to obscure the truly important issues of the day -- before fading away...

>>sigh<<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

You see, I totally took your tone as in "we" - on this thread - are only talking about same sex marriage and abortion. So, I sincerely apologize to you, cct. I wasn't going to call you out, btw. :)

But ITA that the media is more interested in sensationalized non-stories that the real issues facing the voters this year.

:lol::lol::lol: You crack me up, Golden. I'm really enjoying reading your posts, even though you're <shudder> supporting McCain.

Anyway. Not to horn in on the question you asked of Jess...

Do I think Obama is perfect? No. There's no politician that is, frankly. Do I agree with all of his policies? No. Again, there aren't many politicians that will match up with you 100% of the time. However, for me, he's pretty damn close to what I'm looking for in a President and that's why I'm voting for him.

But don't worry. When he's elected, you will become a believer. ;)

I saw that this morning Roman on CNN. How screwed up is that?!? Jeez.

There's a commentary from my local paper that I thought I'd share. I saw some posts on media exposure/questions of the candidates and it relates to that. Interesting read.

Candidates stick to the script

And I'm soooo happy to see we're back to some real issues this morning! :):)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Economic Fears Give Obama Clear Lead Over McCain in Poll

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...2303667_pf.html

The reason I don't buy what these polls say... This poll shows Obama up by 9 points over McCain -- more than any other poll. So, I decided to check it out as the facts behind the poll ARE readily available. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/polit...&s_pos=list

Net Leaned Vote for both "Likely" and "Registered" voters was for Obama by about 10 points in both categories. Interesting... But why? Well, these breakdowns of Registered Voters sampled tell the story...

901. Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as:

Democrat-38 Republican-28 Independent-29 Other-5 No op.-1

904. (IF NOT DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN) Do you lean more towards the:

Democratic Party-46 Republican Party-28 (VOL) Neither-24 No op.=2

And these categories go on forever... but it stands to reason that if you ask a majority that leans left, the are going to choose the left-leaning candidate. This is why the polls are a joke. There is absolutely no good way to really get a decent sampling of people. If they sampled an equal number of partisans from both sides, then left the balance to moderates, THAT might be useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

ICAM, Golden. You have to take all polls with a grain of salt IMO. But am I a little happy when I see my man declared "leading" McCain? Sure. Who wouldn't be. But you make a good point with this breakdown. I would be more interested to see a balanced poll with equal numbers of left and right leaning persons.

I know that this has been posted before, but there's a new article on the NRA going after Obama:

NRA Begins Push

Does the NRA really have an eight-figure budget devoted to tearing down Obama? And then there's this excerpt:

Hmmmm. I would be very interested in hearing Casey's viewpoint on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

A mist slowly spreads across the floor as Brian stands before the Alter of Obama, the greatness shining forth. Shielding his eyes from the blinding brightness with his left hand, he clutched his chest with his right hand -- all the while locked in a valiant but fruitless struggle to fight the power enveloping his body, washing over his skin with the radiating warmth of a soothing, sensual shower. Despite his attempts to resist, the seductive energy firing forth from The Almighty Change brought him ever so closer until he finally found himself lifted from the floor and carried forward as if swept up by a hurricane, ultimately absorbed into Him -- finally becoming one with He who simply IS -- the one known as Barack.

Ummm, nah. Don't think so, dude. :D

<<wipes sweat from brow, then gazes nervously about>>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If you didn't catch this on the CBS Evening News last night, the candidates talked about the issue of Climate Change:

Candidates On Climate Change

I'm at least happy to hear that McCain is taking the issue seriously. After 8 years of denial from the Bush Administration and his railroading of the EPA, it's time this issue got some attention.

They are both on paper as committed to joining international climate change efforts as well. Again, unlike the Bush Administration that basically thumbed it's nose to the international community with the Kyoto Protocol.

Thoughts? Golden? Casey? Roman?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm wondering what the basis of this man's comment is..What makes him feel that McCain could be dangerous in restricting gun rights? I have never heard anything to that effect before..

I dont think you want to know my views on global warming...this might open a really huge can of worms...I plead the 5th!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I would like to hear 'em, sure. Why not? What's the worst that can happen? It's not like I'm going to hunt you down in Georgia somewhere! Even though it's not that far from Daytona. Hmmmm..

Anyway, speak up! It's not like you to refrain from making some pretty bold statements. People expect that from you. B)B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • You are going to be so proud of me because I agree.  I kept thinking why is Sonny/Mo getting all the dialogue and gate keeping everyone's feelings when there are 3 other capable actors in these scenes?  Ned should have told Sonny to shut up lol. I am fine with Sonny getting a reaction, but he got 90% of the airtime for his reaction.  I don't even think it's mental health that's keeping his job.  MB wouldn't get this much time on screen if it was a pity thing.  Frank is too afraid to cut Sonny because of fan reaction.  I know there aren't any Sonny fans here, but I do think there are Sonny fans out there (besides me) lol.
    • I've been looking at the ratings during and after each head writer switch.  The ratings during Marcus' tenure (Oct 74 to April 75) were very good but at first not quite as high a Upton's (who was there six months prior. Marcus left when Mary Hartman was picked up as she was a creator and head writer). I've watched Marcus' interviews on Youtube; she discusses most of the soaps she worked on. She liked the money; she's not all warm and fuzzy about writing for them. She loved nighttime genres that gave her writing more flexibility than soapy dramas. But she was good at writing soaps.  By April 75, SFT was no.2 in the ratings behind ATWT. O'Shea was next (lasted 18 months) and in May 75, SFT high No. 1. When O'Shea left the show as still in the top five. O'Shea moved to OLTL in 77? but not as head writer so not sure why she left SFT. The Corringtons were the safest bet to keep long term. They needed to change direction by 1980 as the ratings were  dropping but still very solid 6s/low 20s share). They should have expanded the show to an hour and given the Corringtons some direction and more budget. One has to wonder about two people who were with the show for a long time: Mary Ellis Bunim was promoted to EP when she was about 28, amazingly and a woman! She as talented but she went through at 11 head writer changes if she started in 1974.  Here's her list of writers: Theodore Apstein (January 1974 – May 1974) 5 mo Gabrielle Upton (May 1974 – November 1974) 6 mo Ann Marcus (October 1974 - April 1975) 6 mo Peggy O’Shea (April 1975 – November 1976) 18 mo Irving Elman (with James Lipton) (November 1976 – Summer 1977) 9 mo Robert J. Shaw with Charles/Patti Dizenzo (August 1977 - Spring 78) 6-9 mo? Henry Slesar (Spring 78 to August 78) 3-4 mo? Corringtons (August 1978 to May 1980) 1 yr/9mo Linda Grover/John Porterfield (May 1980 to mid July 1980) 3 mo. Gabrielle Upton (July 1980 to at least through March or April) Harding Lemay April to June 81 writers' strike Don Chastain (Summer 1981 writers' strike - replaced by Ellis/Hunt Dec 81 or Jan 82) Then Fred Bartholemew comes in when Bunim goes to ATWT (Oct 81?) and he brings in Ellis Hunt for the NBC switchover, they lasted 11 months. Mary Stuart is the other mystery to me: how was she to work with? Did she instigate many of the writer firings? Was she not involved at all. No other P&G show went through this kind of frenetic change. (The Doctors might be a close second but wasn't on as long and not P&G).
    • I'm getting the sense that something happened between Anita and Dante Green that wasn’t exactly copacetic, to say the least. I wonder — did he promise her fame and fortune as a solo artist, and then attack her when she rebuffed his advances? I hope it’s not a long-lost child plot lurking out there for her. Maybe she left behind an sibling in poverty or something instead, back in Cabrini-Green/Chicago. It does seem like neither Tracy nor Sharon’s solo careers turned out the way they dreamed — both ended up singing at City Wineries. I still think Leslie is connected to the Duprees — maybe her mother is Sharon, and she's going after the Duprees because she believes she could’ve had their lifestyle if things had gone differently for her mom. She does have ties to Chicago. That said, I hope this is the last disguise from her toolbox for a while — I’d hate for that to get played out. But I do wonder if she’s going to use Nicole 2.0 to frame Nicole for something down the line? I’m all for giving Shanice more time on canvas, and I wouldn’t hate it if she and Andre became an item — someone who doesn’t mind being public, unlike Dani. Or I can see Doug finally getting fed up with their arrangement and turning to the nurse for some “relief.” Vanessa was, in a way, telling herself off in those scenes with Ted about his cheating. And I have to say, Keith Robinson’s Ted brings a broader range of emotion than Maurice Johnson’s did — though I think Ted 2.0 is benefitting from better writing than OG Ted, whose arc relied more on MJ’s charisma and physical presence. That said, as someone else pointed out, Keith looks like he’s drowning in the clothes they’ve got him in. Hopefully, they’ve got some better-fitted attire lined up now.
    • They are just right there in your face.  It's hard to not see Ciara's boobs at all times.  And simmer down camera man, this is a family show!! The high school stuff makes it weird.  Physically the actors all look fine together.  It just makes me think Doug needs to find friends his own age.   With Ari at least Doug was under the impression she was over 21. I liked JJ and Eve too lol!
    • Specifically that's Kat & she is, there's no other way to say it except like pulling off a band-aid. She's Chad's "#1 fan" IOW, basically, kinda sorta she's an albatross around Chad's neck.  Kat can turn any conversation into a discussion of Chad & what he ate for breakfast or the most minute of minute things about Chad Duell's life & times.  We hope she's not dangerous. We hope she's just boring. That Chad is not back has lit a fire under her. She's upped her number of posts, which all relate in some way to Chad. Now you know what there is to know about as I said Chad Duell's #1 fan.     
    • The Duh-prees - Count me in as someone who cannot stand Kat’s fashion. No one walks around town dressed like that. And those wigs? Completely immovable. We have incredible wig technology these days—can’t the show find something better? - Vernon’s sermons are total FF material. - It looks like they’re setting up a past drinking habit for Anita (with all the “drowning” references), and maybe even a rape/child plot? Also—remember when Dani was an alcoholic? Lol.   Ted / Nicole / Leslie - Some people are projecting way too much onto OG Ted. Sure, he had screen presence, but his line delivery was pure caricature. He wasn’t menacing or threatening—he was a joke. NuTed may be meek, a bit one-note, and smaller in stature, but his confrontation with Leslie on Friday worked. Also, let’s be real—Bill’s not scary either. Total softie. Couldn’t scare a fly. - The ATWT reference was cute, but wasn’t the Duncan storyline from the ‘80s? Are we supposed to believe Nicole was already practicing back then? Since she said it was her patients who watched… like others pointed out, God forbid she watched herself! - Also: I stand corrected on Leslie. I think she’s starting to make more sense as a character. She’s fearless and provocative—that’s what drives her. I actually loved her mirror scene where Nicole 2.0 made her debut.   The non-Dupree characters - You guys were a bit dramatic about Monday’s show. It just had too many unlikeable storylines crammed into one. That’s all. Also, I stand by what I said about Derek and Ashley—their storyline is totally rom-com coded, and I’m into it. - I’ve developed a soft spot for Doug!!

      Please register in order to view this content

      And I thought that Vanessa ripping into Ted had a subtle layer of self-reprimand to it   - I officially can’t stand André. I don’t buy him as a playboy at all. Same goes for Pamela with her transatlantic accent. It’s such a shame that this is the first character CML had to create… and this is what we got?
    • party pics and vids from Don Diamont's wife Cindy Ambuehl https://www.instagram.com/p/DJ9X--uxnF2/
    • You’re really starting to see panic in the other actors’ eyes as they watch him struggle to get through his lines. There is a shot in yesterday’s episode in which  Swickard is standing behind Mo while he drones on and on, and the younger actor is clearly doing everything he can to hide his “WTF” face.
    • Don posted May 12th for 16th anniv of his B&B debut, and Michele Val Jean replied on May 21st: https://www.instagram.com/p/DJknIr8y4ra/

      Please register in order to view this content

    • I just saw this & I liked it. Maybe you will like it too. You do not have to attend every argument you are invited to. It seems to me to be a suitable adage for today's internet.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy