This is the Presidential Campaign Thread.

Barack Obama Vs. John McCain.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by Toups

I dont believe in Global Warming....:::ducks:::: :::runs::: :::hides as guest in this thread:::::

Seriously...I just don't see it. The farmer's almanac, for example..is calling for a twenty year cooling period and many scientists believe this will happen as well.. Just this week the Northeast US is experiencing record cold temps.. I just dont believe the planet is getting hotter..

With that being said..Do I believe that humans have polluted the planet?...Yes

Do I believe we should be more concious of the enviornment?...Of course...

But I am worried about the tornado that is supposed to hit Pine Valley, PA in October. That is not really a normal weather pattern for this time of year...

I'm shocked. Horrified. Flabbergasted.

Honestly, Casey. I can't say that I - or probably anyone else that has been reading this thread - am very surprised that you believe that. Really.

But ya know, there are some of your friends on the right that believe Global Warming is an issue.

Global Warming 101 - As seen through the eyes of fellow Republicans

I can't believe I just posted a link to a conservative web site. That has to be a first for me.

It is interesting how you're basing your entire argument on the Farmer's Alamanc.

I'm shocked. Horrified. Flabbergasted.

Honestly, Casey. I can't say that I - or probably anyone else that has been reading this thread - am very surprised that you believe that. Really.

But ya know, there are some of your friends on the right that believe Global Warming is an issue.

Global Warming 101 - As seen through the eyes of fellow Republicans

I can't believe I just posted a link to a conservative web site. That has to be a first for me.

It is interesting how you're basing your entire argument on the Farmer's Alamanc.

It's not just the farmer's almanac...I have other sources..LOL..I can post some if you would like..

This quote is from my hero Neal Boortz..

Sorry .. I'm still a skeptic. In no particular order here are just a few of the reasons why I'm not buying this man-made global warming scare:

The United Nations is anti-American and anti-Capitalist. In short .. I don't trust them. Not a bit. The UN would eagerly engage in any enterprise that would weaken capitalist economies around the world.

Because after the fall of the Soviet Union and worldwide Communism many in the anti-capitalist movement moved to the environmental movement to continue pursuing their anti-free enterprise goals. Many of the loudest proponents of man-made global warming today are confirmed anti-capitalists.

Because the sun is warmer .. and all of these scientists don't seem to be willing to credit a warmer sun with any of the blame for global warming.

The polar ice caps on Mars are melting. How did our CO2 emissions get all the way to Mars?

It was warmer in the 1930s across the globe than it is right now.

It wasn't all that long ago that these very same scientists were warning us about "global cooling" and another approaching ice age?

How much has the earth warmed up in the last 100 years? One degree. Now that's frightening.

Because that famous "hockey stick" graph that purports to show a sudden warming of the earth in the last few decades is a fraud. It ignored previous warming periods ... left them off the graph altogether.

The infamous Kyoto accords exempt some of the world's biggest CO2 polluters, including China and India.

The Kyoto accords can easily be seen as nothing less than an attempt to hamstring the world's dominant capitalist economies.

Because many of these scientists who are sounding the global warming scare depend on grant money for their livelihood, and they know the grant money dries up when they stop preaching the global warming sermon.

Because global warming "activists" and scientists seek to punish those who have different viewpoints. If you are sure of your science you have no need to shout down or seek to punish those who disagree.

What happened to the Medieval Warm Period? In 1996 the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a chart showing climatic change over a period of 1000 years. This graph showed a Medieval warming period in which global temperatures were higher than they are today. In 2001 the IPCC issued another 1000 year graph in which the Medieval warming period was missing. Why?

Why has one scientist promoting the cause of man-made global warming been quoted as saying "we have to get rid of the medieval warming period?"

Why is the ice cap on the Antarctic getting thicker if the earth is getting warmer?

In the United State, the one country with the most accurate temperature measuring and reporting records, temperatures have risen by 0.3 degrees centigrade over the past 100 years. The UN estimate is twice that.

There are about 160,000 glaciers around the world. Most have never been visited or measured by man. The great majority of these glaciers are growing, not melting.

Side-looking radar interferometry shows that the ise mass in the West Antarctic is growing at a rate of over 26 gigatons a year. This reverses a melting trend that had persisted for the previous 6,000 years.

Rising sea levels? The sea levels have been rising since the last ice age ended. That was 12,000 years ago. Estimates are that in that time the sea level has risen by over 300 feet. The rise in our sea levels has been going on long before man started creating anything but natural CO2 emissions.

Like Antarctica, the interior of Greenland is gaining ice mass.

Over the past 3,000 years there have been five different extended periods when the earth was measurably warmer than it is today.

During the last 20 years -- a period of the highest carbon dioxide levels -- global temperatures have actually decreased. That's right ... decreased.

Why did a reporter from National Public Radio refuse to interview David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma studying global warming, after his testimony to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee unless Deming would state that global warming was being caused by man?

Why are global warming proponents insisting that the matter is settled and that no further scientific research is needed? Why are they afraid of additional information?

On July 24, 1974 Time Magazine published an article entitled "Another Ice Age?" Here's the first paragraph:

"As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age."

Hey ... I could go on. There's much more where that came from. But I need to get ready to go on the air. Just know that many of the strongest proponents of this "man-made" global warming stuff are dedicated opponents to capitalism and don't feel all that warm and fuzzy about the United States.

boortz.com

Edited September 24, 200817 yr by Casey008

The founder of the Weather Channel, calls Global Warming "the biggest scam in history"

I will believe a meterologist before Al Gore about climate and weather..

Link to article

Ok. I'm done..I wanted to avoid the "can of worms" I mentioned before

I think is definitely a case, Greg, where we will have to agree to disagree..

Edited September 24, 200817 yr by Casey008

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.

Either that or the poll is representative of the public. The goals isn't to get a samplw that is 50/50, it is to get a sample that is representative of the public as a whole.

I doubt that poll is correct either, but I believe it is also the same poll that was touted over by some when it was McCain 54 to Obama 43 after the convention.

I imagine the poll is either voting age, or registered voters, but not likely voters and that is the reason why it is so much different than others. Edited to add, most people do identify themselves as Dems. Unfortunately from my point of view, they are also unlikely to vote.

What is troublesome to me as a Obama supporter is the demographics in these polls. It shows McCain ahead, and comfortably so, among demographic groups that traditionally are more likely to vote. If you look at the undecided, they seem to be the groups that I would expect to vote R, regardless of the candidate or election. JMO.

Edited September 24, 200817 yr by Jess

Why, you'll find nobody as fair and balanced as me, Jess! >>Brian pounds the table with his fist<< How DARE you suggest otherwise! Why, I have NEVER been so insulted in all my years...

Are you kidding? Do the heaps of posts the last couple of days making fun of Biden look like I'm being non-partisan? Jess, I make no such an attempt! However, you won't have to look too far back to find me criticizing Bush or McCain. In that respect, I think I've been fair enough for someone who has decided how he is going to vote. Of course I'm not going to search out anti-McCain propaganda and post it here.

The question is, Jess, is there anything about Obama that actually DOES give you pause? You don't have to tell me what it is... but I'm wondering if there is any issue out there that you are privately concerned about...

No, not when compared to McCain. I did not like it when he launched scummy ads to get back at McCain.

I wish he had picked Hillary for VP only because she is a woman and I like her. I much much prefer Obama to McCain though.

By the way, nice post on the bias. :lol:

But, you know Jess, I don't know how solid McCain's Republican/conservative base is. There are some in the conservative media who are starting to turn on him.

Joe Biden just gave a rousing forteign policy speech. Wonderful job.

That is when he's at his best..........not running off at his mouth and saying stupid [!@#$%^&*].

Everyone can shoot me for bringing this up again but some pages back Casey made reference to a trial being set on that whole Berg nonsense and I still haven't seen or heard any reports from any of the major networks' news divisions that Obama is slated to testify....nor have I seen or heard mention of this.

And again shoot me for this.....but I don't have a problem with Biden at all. If I didn't look at this thread, I wouldn't know he said anything at all.

I get why some people think Clinton would have made a better choice but I don't see where she'd be a better fit for Obama.

Do I think the best two candidates in the country are running for President? No. I'm not sure who I think the best candidates would be but I do believe in this vast country there are two better candidates than McCain and Obama. I do, however, think that Obama is a better choice than McCain by a long shot.

When I hear elements of the media say that Obama needs to roll up his sleeves and prove that he relates to the people blah blah blah, it makes me wonder if they truly believe that McCain relates to all the people.....but then it depends on who they believe the people are and whether or not they've taken a good look at the face of America.

I think Obama matches up with the face of America in more categories than McCain.

Everyone can shoot me for bringing this up again but some pages back Casey made reference to a trial being set on that whole Berg nonsense and I still haven't seen or heard any reports from any of the major networks' news divisions that Obama is slated to testify....nor have I seen or heard mention of this.

And again shoot me for this.....but I don't have a problem with Biden at all. If I didn't look at this thread, I wouldn't know he said anything at all.

These two comments both speak to the MSM "ignoring" certain aspects of this election..The lawsuit against Obama and Biden's numorous gaffes. Do you think for one split second that if Palin put her foot in her mouth..it wouldn't be the headline of the day.?

I may be wrong, but even if a frivalous lawsuit was brought up on McCain, I believe it would get coverage...no matter how silly the charges..

Edited September 24, 200817 yr by Casey008

These two comments both speak to the MSM "ignoring" certain aspects of this election..The lawsuit against Obama and Biden's numorous gaffes. Do you think for one split second that if Palin put her foot in her mouth..it wouldn't be the headline of the day.?

I may be wrong, but even if a frivalous lawsuit was brought up on McCain, I believe it would get coverage...no matter what the charges are..

We haven't had a chance to HEAR her put her foot in her mouth......the McCain campiagnwon't let her have a damn PC!

two inetrviews, one with Gibsona dn one with Couric......and we are supposed to get her thoughts on things?

What?!

I'm going to remark on these first. Then on to Casey and the "fallacy" of Global Warming, according to him.

I imagine the poll is either voting age, or registered voters, but not likely voters and that is the reason why it is so much different than others. Edited to add, most people do identify themselves as Dems. Unfortunately from my point of view, they are also unlikely to vote.

What is troublesome to me as a Obama supporter is the demographics in these polls. It shows McCain ahead, and comfortably so, among demographic groups that traditionally are more likely to vote. If you look at the undecided, they seem to be the groups that I would expect to vote R, regardless of the candidate or election. JMO.

I can understand your concern, Jess. However, I really believe that Obama has inspired young people like no candidate has since RFK. And come election day, these will be the people that will determine the outcome. I think the tradition will be changed this time around.

But, you know Jess, I don't know how solid McCain's Republican/conservative base is. There are some in the conservative media who are starting to turn on him.

They've never been that crazy about a McCain presidency. He got a boost from SP because she plays better to the conservatives and Christians. But that's starting to wear off now.

Everyone can shoot me for bringing this up again but some pages back Casey made reference to a trial being set on that whole Berg nonsense and I still haven't seen or heard any reports from any of the major networks' news divisions that Obama is slated to testify....nor have I seen or heard mention of this.

Don't worry, I'm not going to shoot you. I haven't seen anything either. It just proves what utter bullshit it is.

I get why some people think Clinton would have made a better choice but I don't see where she'd be a better fit for Obama.

Do I think the best two candidates in the country are running for President? No. I'm not sure who I think the best candidates would be but I do believe in this vast country there are two better candidates than McCain and Obama. I do, however, think that Obama is a better choice than McCain by a long shot.

When I hear elements of the media say that Obama needs to roll up his sleeves and prove that he relates to the people blah blah blah, it makes me wonder if they truly believe that McCain relates to all the people.....but then it depends on who they believe the people are and whether or not they've taken a good look at the face of America.

I think Obama matches up with the face of America in more categories than McCain.

I love Hillary Clinton. I would have been very happy if she would have been on the ticket with Obama. Personally, I don't think she wanted to be VP, even if Obama would have asked her. And as much as I admire the woman, there would be a tremendous hurdle to overcome with her image to the average American. If you believe the polls, she has a much higher negative rating the positive. I'm not saying I agree with it, but it is a reality. The conservatives would have had a field day - not only with her, but her husband. They would have dug up every little thing on him that they didn't while he was President. You can take that to the bank.

We haven't had a chance to HEAR her put her foot in her mouth......the McCain campiagnwon't let her have a damn PC!

two inetrviews, one with Gibsona dn one with Couric......and we are supposed to get her thoughts on things?

What?!

You hit the nail on the head. I wonder how Casey will respond to this one......

We haven't had a chance to HEAR her put her foot in her mouth......

You're kidding right...her Bush Doctrine definition made it all the way to SNL. Do they even have anyone playing Biden??.. or Obama for that matter??

the McCain campiagnwon't let her have a damn PC!

Where did you hear that? That sounds kind of silly..

two inetrviews, one with Gibsona dn one with Couric......and we are supposed to get her thoughts on things?

What?!

I think Palin's interviews with Hannity and Gibson have had the highest ratings so far this year with election related coverage..(Behind Obama and O'Reilly)..She has done two very high profile interviews and is slated for another tonight..What "thoughts" from Palin have yet to be covered?

BTW, How many interviews has Biden done since the DNC?

Edited September 24, 200817 yr by Casey008

The founder of the Weather Channel, calls Global Warming "the biggest scam in history"

I will believe a meterologist before Al Gore about climate and weather..

Link to article

Ok. I'm done..I wanted to avoid the "can of worms" I mentioned before

I think is definitely a case, Greg, where we will have to agree to disagree..

I'm not going to dig too far into your can of worms, Casey. But I just have to say something.

First of all, citing John Coleman about the global warming "scam" is like citing Rupert Murdoch's claim of Kerry and the Swift Boat broadcasts. They are both firmly entrenched in GOP pockets.

Are there any credible, mainstream, non-biased organizations that agree with your opinion? I mean, I have an article from National Geographic that supports my position.

Global Warming - Fast Facts

Unless you would consider them biased?

We will have to agree to disagree, but I couldn't rebute your posts on this article without making my case as well.

Where did you hear that? That sounds kind of silly..

It's been talked about all over the news for weeks, the way the McCain campaign is keeping SP on a short leash (pun intended).

And this is from an excerpt that I linked to earlier from my local paper. The commentator is a moderate independent. If you would like a good read, go back and check it out.

As of Tuesday, the Democrats had a clock that had logged 40 straight days where McCain had not held a news conference.

It was as if McCain gave up his patented "straight talk" for an off-season Lent.

And Palin seemed to be taking notes from her boss. When she finally answered an impromptu question from the press in Cleveland last week, Newsweek noted it was the first time she had done so since her candidacy had been announced.

She has been awfully sheltered for a woman full of Bring-it-on bravado at the GOP convention. She may be a pit bull; but her handlers seem to have her on a short leash. And that's particularly scary, seeing as how this national newcomer, running alongside a 72-year-old, is the one we know the least.

McCain finally caved late Tuesday, agreeing to hold his first news conference in nearly six weeks. Still, this game of hide-the-candidate is so at odds with what helped the Arizona senator first rise to national prominence.

Biden has answered quite a few impromptu questions, sometimes sticking his foot so far down his mouth that it's coming out his ass.