This is the Presidential Campaign Thread.

Barack Obama Vs. John McCain.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by Toups

Why, if that isn't a ringing endorsement of the liberal press, then I don't know what is!! Of COURSE they won't tell you about Joe's unfortunate moments.

You're taking a big leap.....not even a jump to this conclusion.

I watch a couple of cable political shows here and there that are liberal but that doesn't mean they don't point out problems with the Democrats at times....anyway, it's besides the point since I don't really consider that news.....even though the actual news isn't much in the way of news.

I listen to newsradio every morning for the amount of time they claim it takes to bring me the world....though I don't think they've ever delivered on that claim. If there is a real bias on that station....it's conservative as they are always making Obama responsible for anything and everything. If there is a conclusion to leap or jump to......it might be that they don't have a problem with the other candidates.

You're taking a big leap.....not even a jump to this conclusion.

I watch a couple of cable political shows here and there that are liberal but that doesn't mean they don't point out problems with the Democrats at times....anyway, it's besides the point since I don't really consider that news.....even though the actual news isn't much in the way of news.

I listen to newsradio every morning for the amount of time they claim it takes to bring me the world....though I don't think they've ever delivered on that claim. If there is a real bias on that station....it's conservative as they are always making Obama responsible for anything and everything. If there is a conclusion to leap or jump to......it might be that they don't have a problem with the other candidates.

So McCain wanting to cancel the debates is Obama and the Liberal Media's fault.

I can't wait for November 5th.....some of this BS has really gotten old.

So McCain wanting to cancel the debates is Obama and the Liberal Media's fault.

I can't wait for November 5th.....some of this BS has really gotten old.

The thing about media and super analysts is they think they know what the average person is thinking and they keep assuming that people care about the things they say people do. Since the media with all its negativity tends to tap into the cynical side of viewers then I think it's more likely that people will look at McCain's effort to stall the debate as his trying to avoid it instead of as any great exercise of concern for the economy.....he said it was fundamentally sound several days ago.....but even if people missed that they do know that the situation didn't just arise today so what was he doing about it all week?

And I'll add this as well.....even though we may have given it some thought and concluded that both parties contribute to the mess.....McCain can't really tap dance away from it by claiming to be a reformer coming to save the day. Those low information voters to which the media refers at times are basic enough to associate the problems of the day with whoever is currently in office. It may not be Bush's fault or the Republican's fault but if half the people in the nation were asked....who do you think they'd blame it on?

Edited September 24, 200817 yr by Wales2004

McCain Loses His Head

Tuesday, September 23, 2008; Page A21

"The queen had only one way of settling all difficulties, great or small. 'Off with his head!' she said without even looking around."

This Story

-- "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"

Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama.

Channeling his inner Queen of Hearts, John McCain furiously, and apparently without even looking around at facts, said Chris Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should be decapitated. This childish reflex provoked the Wall Street Journal to editorialize that "McCain untethered" -- disconnected from knowledge and principle -- had made a "false and deeply unfair" attack on Cox that was "unpresidential" and demonstrated that McCain "doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does."

ad_icon

To read the Journal's details about the depths of McCain's shallowness on the subject of Cox's chairmanship, see "McCain's Scapegoat" (Sept. 19). Then consider McCain's characteristic accusation that Cox "has betrayed the public's trust."

Perhaps an old antagonism is involved in McCain's fact-free slander. His most conspicuous economic adviser is Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who previously headed the Congressional Budget Office. There he was an impediment to conservatives, including then-Rep. Cox, who, as chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, persistently tried and generally failed to enlist CBO support for "dynamic scoring" that would estimate the economic growth effects of proposed tax cuts.

In any case, McCain's smear -- that Cox "betrayed the public's trust" -- is a harbinger of a McCain presidency. For McCain, politics is always operatic, pitting people who agree with him against those who are "corrupt" or "betray the public's trust," two categories that seem to be exhaustive -- there are no other people. McCain's Manichaean worldview drove him to his signature legislative achievement, the McCain-Feingold law's restrictions on campaigning. Today, his campaign is creatively finding interstices in lws intended to restrict campaign giving and spending. (For details, see The Post of Sept. 17; and the New York Times of Sept. 19.)

By a Gresham's Law of political discourse, McCain's Queen of Hearts intervention in the opaque financial crisis overshadowed a solid conservative complaint from the Republican Study Committee, chaired by Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas. In a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, the RSC decried the improvised torrent of bailouts as a "dangerous and unmistakable precedent for the federal government both to be looked to and indeed relied upon to save private sector companies from the consequences of their poor economic decisions." This letter, listing just $650 billion of the perhaps more than $1 trillion in new federal exposures to risk, was sent while McCain's campaign, characteristically substituting vehemence for coherence, was airing an ad warning that Obama favors "massive government, billions in spending increases."

The political left always aims to expand the permeation of economic life by politics. Today, the efficient means to that end is government control of capital. So, is not McCain's party now conducting the most leftist administration in American history? The New Deal never acted so precipitously on such a scale. Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary. That non sequitur might be politically necessary, but remember that government control of capital is government control of capitalism. Does McCain have qualms about this, or only quarrels?

On "60 Minutes" Sunday evening, McCain, saying "this may sound a little unusual," said that he would like to replace Cox with Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic attorney general of New York who is the son of former governor Mario Cuomo. McCain explained that Cuomo has "respect" and "prestige" and could "lend some bipartisanship." Conservatives have been warned.

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?

You know who wrote this?

"liberal" washington Post Columnist George F. Will, one of the biggest CONSERVATIVE writers in the business.

You know who wrote this?

"liberal" washington Post Columnist George F. Will, one of the biggest CONSERVATIVE writers in the business.

No [!@#$%^&*]? George F. Will??? Are the Republicans defecting from their ticket? McCain has had problems attracting them since Day One and even after his pathetic attempt to get them back by selecting SP, they still aren't drinking the kool-aid. Well, most of them aren't anyway...

You know who wrote this?

"liberal" washington Post Columnist George F. Will, one of the biggest CONSERVATIVE writers in the business.

Should I be hurt that you don't read my posts because I posted this article yesterday morning?

Casey even responded and said something to the effect of thinking that McCain's temper would make him a good president. He listed presidents in support of his argument.

Now what I didn't say then was that all of them were no longer president when they were McCain's age. I don't mind taking heat on this but I won't say you can't teach an old dog new tricks since I have known some very sharp seniors.....including a 93 year old giving the occasional guitar lesson. I tend to think as a person gets older certain qualities magnify. One who is sharp and well read tends, to me, to try to maintain that.

I don't think I've ever looked at McCain and thought that he was a brilliant man and would make a fine president at any point since I first saw him.....and age hasn't made him more impressive at all to me.

No [!@#$%^&*]? George F. Will??? Are the Republicans defecting from their ticket? McCain has had problems attracting them since Day One and even after his pathetic attempt to get them back by selecting SP, they still aren't drinking the kool-aid. Well, most of them aren't anyway...

Okay so it's not just Roman....it's you too.....maybe it's everybody.

George Will might be over whatever ails him by the weekend.....I guess he was unhappy with McCain last weekend and it kind of carried over. Prior to that he didn't have much of an issue. All McCain has to do is drop a sugar cube in that glass and George will be singing the maverick song again.

Let's see here. And correct me if I'm wrong.

McCain wants to avoid the debates....

And Palin wants to avoid the media. Is that about right?

(And now we patiently wait for the spin, while hearing about Biden's latest bone-headed gaff).

The impression that I am getting is that McCain wants to focus on this historical issue and come to a resolution..

I dont think he said he wants to avoid or cancel the debate, just delay it. But Obama doesn't want to come together in a bi-partisan effort by suspending the campaign and debates...he wants to continue the partisan bickering..

Obama has avoided all of McCain's invites to participate in town hall style debates. Do you feel he was right in this?

BTW, Do you all know what the debate topic is for Friday? It's foreign policy!...why would Obama feel this is something that is front and center on American's minds right now..?

Should I be hurt that you don't read my posts because I posted this article yesterday morning?

Casey even responded and said something to the effect of thinking that McCain's temper would make him a good president. He listed presidents in support of his argument.

Now what I didn't say then was that all of them were no longer president when they were McCain's age. I don't mind taking heat on this but I won't say you can't teach an old dog new tricks since I have known some very sharp seniors.....including a 93 year old giving the occasional guitar lesson. I tend to think as a person gets older certain qualities magnify. One who is sharp and well read tends, to me, to try to maintain that.

I don't think I've ever looked at McCain and thought that he was a brilliant man and would make a fine president at any point since I first saw him.....and age hasn't made him more impressive at all to me.

But I posted it before you.

So there.

The impression that I am getting is that McCain wants to focus on this historical issue and come to a resolution..

I dont think he said he wants to avoid or cancel the debate, just delay it. But Obama doesn't want to come together in a bi-partisan effort by suspending the campaign and debates...he wants to continue the partisan bickering..

Obama has avoided all of McCain's invites to participate in town hall style debates. Do you feel he was right in this?

BTW, Do you all know what the debate topic is for Friday? It's foreign policy!...why would Obama feel this is something that is front and center on American's minds right now..?

*Roman whispers*

It was OBAMA who called McCain this morning and said they should issue a joint statement of bi-partisanship. It was AFTER that call that McCain suspended his campaign.

And, I'll ask again......if he's such a damn pro on FP, why does he want to cancel this debate? Can he not do two things at once? Aren't you also one of those who said neither Obama or McCain could do anything themselves about this crisis?

Guess you changed your tune once again, Casey.

And let me add....

70% of those polled at MSNBC feel the debate should NOT be cancelled.

McCain is running scared. He's afraid of debating Sen. Barack Obama and the GOP and McCain and Palin are very,very scared to have Joe Biden and Sarah Palin debate. Old man McCain wants to move Friday night's debate to Thursday 10/2 when the Biden/Palin debate is scheduled and move that debate to a later date. This just smacks of desperation. McCain is a loser for even asking for this. The Obama/Biden campaign should remain FIRM and state no postponement of EITHER debate. If McCain is too scared to show up for Friday night's debate then Obama can have the night for himself!!!

Also as far as the McCain/Palin campaign kicking out the press during their trip to meet foreign leaders, etc. That smacks of pure communism! Communists do NOT believe in freedom of speech or freedom of the press, but in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, BOTH are GUARANTEED in the CONSTITUTION!!!

Okay so it's not just Roman....it's you too.....maybe it's everybody.

George Will might be over whatever ails him by the weekend.....I guess he was unhappy with McCain last weekend and it kind of carried over. Prior to that he didn't have much of an issue. All McCain has to do is drop a sugar cube in that glass and George will be singing the maverick song again.

Wales, you know that I think you're the bomb. Honestly, I don't know how I missed your post the first time around. Please forgive me.

But I posted it before you.

So there.

I posted it yesterday morning and since this may be the only issue on which I can win on this board as the deck is stacked against me....looky here:

http://boards.soapoperanetwork.com/index.p...mp;#entry648878

Anyway I know that people probably miss a lot of posts since I have missed responding to quite a number of ones that I saw but then couldn't find when I went back....and I give up pretty easily.

Wales, you know that I think you're the bomb. Honestly, I don't know how I missed your post the first time around. Please forgive me.

How could I not forgive you? People that are the bomb have massive egos...uhm I mean hearts